Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.hpc.20260513
AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION May 13, 2026 4:30 PM, City Council Chambers - 3rd Floor 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 I.ROLL CALL II.MINUTES II.A Draft Minutes - 4/22/26 III.PUBLIC COMMENTS IV.COMMISSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS V.DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI.PROJECT MONITORING VII.STAFF COMMENTS VIII.CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ISSUED IX.CALL UP REPORTS X.SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS XI.SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT XI.A Resolution #09, Series of 2026 130 S. Galena St. and 523 E. Hopkins Ave. - Request for a Substantial Amendment, Relocation, and Planned Development Insubstantial Amendment minutes.hpc.20260422_DRAFT.docx 130SGalena.HPC Staff Report.pdf HPC Resolution #09 Series of 2026.pdf Attachment A_Application.pdf Attachment B_Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Analysis.pdf 1 1 XII.OLD BUSINESS XIII.NEW BUSINESS XIII.A Discussion of recent HPC / City Council joint work session XIV.ADJOURN XV.NEXT RESOLUTION NUMBER Attachment C_Relocation Criteria Staff Analysis.pdf Attachment D_Combined Referral Comments.pdf Attachment E_Council Ordinance #06, Series of 2025.pdf Attachment F_Site Plans and Elevations from Prior Approval.pdf TYPICAL PROCEEDING FORMAT FOR ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS (1 Hour, 15 Minutes for each Major Agenda Item) 1. Declaration of Conflicts of Interest (at beginning of agenda) 2. Presentation of proof of legal notice (at beginning of agenda) 3. Applicant presentation (10 minutes for minor development; 20 minutes for major development) 4. Board questions and clarifications of applicant (5 minutes) 5. Staff presentation (5 minutes for minor development; 10 minutes for major development) 6. Board questions and clarifications of staff (5 minutes) 7. Public comments (5 minutes total, or 3 minutes/ person or as determined by the Chair) 8. Close public comment portion of hearing 9. Applicant rebuttal/clarification (5 minutes) 10. Staff rebuttal/clarification (5 minutes) End of fact finding. Chairperson identifies the issues to be discussed. 11. Deliberation by the commission and findings based on criteria commences. No further input from applicant or staff unless invited by the Chair. Staff may ask to be recognized if there is a factual error to be corrected. If the item is to be continued, the Chair may provide a summary of areas to be restudied at their discretion, but the applicant is not to re-start discussion of the case or the board’s direction. (20 minutes) 12. Motion. Prior to vote the chair will allow for call for clarification for the proposed resolution. Please note that staff and/or the applicant must vacate the dais during the opposite presentation and board question and clarification session. Both staff and applicant team will vacate the dais during HPC deliberation unless invited by the chair to return. Updated: March 7, 2024 2 2 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APRIL 22ND, 2026 Chairperson Thompson opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission at 4:30pm. Commissioners in attendance: Roger Moyer, Jodi Surfas, Barb Pitchford, Dakota Severe, Kim Raymond, and Kara Thompson. Absent was Duncan Clauss. Staff present: Gillian White – Historic Preservation Officer Luisa Berne - Assistant City Attorney Mike Sear – Deputy City Clerk MINUTES: Ms. Thompson wanted the minutes of the 4/8/26 meeting to reflect the HPC’s request that the Parks Department come back with a more detailed brick plan for the Wheeler node. She then motioned to approve the minutes of 3/25/26 & 4/8/26 with the addition to the 4/8/26 minutes. Ms. Severe seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Ms. Severe, yes; Ms. Raymond, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 6-0 vote, motion passes. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None COMMISSSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS: Ms. Raymond suggested that the HPC hold a work session on roofing materials as it has been a common topic of discussion lately and the HP staff has seen a lot of requests for new roofs. She felt that the HPC could potentially come up with a few options that could be administratively approved going forward. There was some discussion about when the work session could be scheduled. Ms. Thomspon felt that the recent work session with City Council went well. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: None PROJECT MONITORING: None STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. White noted that there was going to be a City Council work session regarding updates on the Armory project to be held on May 4th, 2026. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None CALL UP REPORTS: None SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS: Ms. Berne confirmed that public notice was completed in compliance with the Code as needed for all agenda items. NEW BUSINESS: 620 W Bleeker St. - Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Minor Development Applicant Presentation: Grant Bankston – Charles Cunniffe Architects Mr. Bankston began his presentation by noting that a few members from the Aspen Historical Society were in the audience. He said that they were here today to request HPC’s approval for two maintenance and repair projects and he gave some context of the property and location. He noted that the first 3 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APRIL 22ND, 2026 request was to replace the entire roof of the main museum building. The request was to replace the existing cedar shingles with a new composite shingle product from EcoStar. He showed a sample of the product and went over some details and properties of it. He said that they felt the details of the product really go to preserving the historic character of the building. He continued describing the product and passed a sample around. He addressed staff’s concerns about the glossiness of the product but felt that this product had a more natural appearance than alternative options like EnviroShingle. He also described the advantages of this product over a traditional cedar wood shingle in terms of durability, sustainability and fire resistance. Next, Mr. Bankston detailed their request to repair portions of the historic porch railings that have been deteriorating over time. He noted that they would be repaired to match the existing railings. Mr. Moyer asked if the roof was currently leaking. Mr. Travis McDiffett, the facilities manager at the museum, said a significant hole was patched in 2024 that had been leaking. He did note that they are losing shingles in almost every windstorm. Staff Presentation: Gillian White - Historic Preservation Officer Ms. White began by reviewing some context and history of this historically designated property located in the West End. She noted that staff was not supportive of the request to replace the existing cedar shingle roof with the proposed synthetic shingle as it does not fully meet the applicable preservation design guidelines, given its reflectivity and dimensions. She did note that the sample she inspected on site was not the sample presented today, so there may be some differences. She said that staff have provided a few potential conditions of approval related to the roof material with one being that the material be the EnviroShingle that has been previously approved by HPC, another option for materials to be approved by staff and monitor and another to require asphalt shingles. She also noted that currently there does not seem to be a composite material option on the market that meets all applicable guidelines and some balance needs to be considered for each. Ms. White noted that staff felt the proposal to repair the damaged porch railings meets preservation design guidelines as outlined in chapter 5 and were supportive of the request. Public Comment: Jack Anderson noted that he was the Fire Chief for the Aspen Fire Protection District. He thanked the HPC for considering these types of modifications and that this has been a very big topic for the Fire Protection District in trying to build a more wildfire resilient community. He noted that properties with wood shingle roofs are basically non-defensible and that crews will drive right past them when defending a community from an approaching wildfire. He described how wildfires spread and noted that the best thing a homeowner can do for their property and the surrounding community is to have a non-combustible roof and siding. Board Discussion: Ms. Thompson felt that the restoration efforts to the porch railings were a no-brainer to approve. Mr. Moyer asked if the irrigation sprinkler system was such that it continuously soaked the railings. Mr. McDiffett said that it used to be, but a drip irrigation system was recently installed. The rest of the members agreed on the restoration of the railings. Ms. Thompson moved on to the composite roofing materials and there was some discussion about the properties and appearance of the proposed material compared to a traditional wooden cedar shingle. 4 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APRIL 22ND, 2026 Ms. Thompson suggested that a mockup with appropriate single widths be installed on site to be reviewed by staff and monitor. Ms. Severe agreed on the mockup and the use of the proposed material that was presented. Mr. Moyer noted that while he was not opposed to placing a synthetic shingle on any building, he did oppose when an applicant comes in requesting to replace wooden shingles and the HPC is presented with a shake product that has no dimensional or color relationship to the historic wooden shingles. There was continued discussion about the sample of the proposed material and its appropriateness. MOTION: Ms. Thompson motioned to approve Resolution #06 with the following conditions. The replacement of the roofing material to be the EcoStar product in Feathered Driftwood in the shingle version, with an onsite mockup showing the replacement shingle dimensions to match existing and this to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. She also added that if snow stops or downspouts were to be added, plans should be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. Ms. Raymond seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Ms. Severe, yes; Ms. Raymond, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 6-0 vote, motion passes. The commissioners took a two-minute break. NEW BUSINESS: 129 West Francis Street - Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Minor Development Applicant Presentation: Nicholas Valentino – NAV design LLC Mr. Valentino began his presentation, noting that this request is to create an opening and install a sliding bar door on a historic barn. He described the location of the historic secondary structure on the lot and noted that the proposed doorway would be on the inward facing façade and would not be visible from the right of way. He also noted that the historic framing and siding removed to create the doorway would be used to create the bi-parting sliding door to support the adaptive reuse of the building. He showed a few elevation drawings and pointed out the location of the proposed door. He also showed some pictures of the current barn / shed and said that the historic structure’s character and defining features would be preserved and maintained. Ms. Thompson asked if there was any window or other door proposed behind these sliding barn doors. Mr. Valentino said no that it would just be an uninsulated opening to add another access point to the space. Ms. Severe asked if they had thought of hanging the doors on the inside of the opening as she had seen that technique used on other barns. Mr. Valentino said that while that might be a possibility, it came down to the existing framing and a potential height issue on the inside. Ms. Surfas asked how wide the new opening would be, to which Mr. Valentino said it was intended to be about eight feet. Staff Presentation: Gillian White - Historic Preservation Officer Ms. White began her presentation by reviewing the request to install sliding barn doors on the south facade of the historic secondary structure. She then described the context and some history of the property. Next, she described the applicant’s proposal to remove existing historic framing and siding to 5 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APRIL 22ND, 2026 create a new opening and reuse the historic materials to create an externally mounted bi-parting sliding door. Ms. White referenced preservation guidelines 2.1 and 2.2 and noted that staff found these to be met as outlined in the staff memo. She also referenced guideline 4.5 and while noting this was not met, she pointed to a section of Chapter 8 of the Guidelines that speaks to rehabilitating or adapting it to a new use so that the building continues to serve a useful function. She further touched on guidelines 8.3 and 8.8 and noted that staff found these to be met as outlined in the staff memo. She finished her presentation by noting that while staff recommend approval of the request, a condition of approval was included in draft resolution to preserve the historic material as effectively as possible. Public Comment: None Board Discussion: Ms. Surfas was supportive of the plan to reuse the historic materials, but she would like to see it be a smaller opening if possible. Ms. Raymond was also supportive of the request but stressed the removal of the historic materials to create the doors be done carefully and in a way that someone could put the materials back together. Ms. Severe noted that she had seen this done on several historic barns growing up in Texas and said that it can be done successfully. MOTION: Ms. Raymond motioned to approve Resolution #07 with the condition that staff and monitor are kept apprised of the techniques used to cut the historic materials. Ms. Severe seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Ms. Severe, yes; Ms. Raymond, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 6-0 vote, motion passes. NEW BUSINESS: 920 East Hyman Avenue - Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Minor Development Applicant Presentation: Macklin Henderson – Garfield & Hecht Mr. Henderson began his presentation by introducing himself and Mr. Hal Reid. He noted that the request in front of HPC was to construct a new front walkway on the property. It would be a straight walkway, 48 inches wide and made of bluestone. He showed a rendering of the proposed walkway and noted that the bluestone material was a grey color and satisfied the historic preservation guidelines. He also noted that a previous application for a Certificate of No Negative Effect was denied because of the proposed width of the walkway. He said that the existing 36-inch-wide snowmelt would remain, and no additional snowmelt was proposed. Mr. Henderson noted that the existing walkway is not historic to the home and he went over the history of a previous 48-inch-wide serpentine walkway that existed before 2021. It was narrowed and straightened per an HPC resolution in 2021. He did note that the minutes from that meeting seemed to suggest that the straightening was the main concern of the commission back then. He then highlighted guideline 1.6 that states a walkway, in addition to other aspects, should be “generally three feet or less”. He noted that the owner’s proposal does satisfy the overall theme of that guideline. He did not feel that someone from the public walking by the property would notice the additional width. He then showed several examples of other walkways in town that are over three feet in width. 6 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APRIL 22ND, 2026 Mr. Henderson concluded by saying that the guidelines are about balance. He stressed the importance of proposed width to the owners, for easier access to the front of the house with young children and strollers. Mr. Reid noted that Mr. Hayden, before he left the City, had seen the material in person over a year ago and said it was appropriate and approved of it. Ms. Berne instructed the commissioners to disregard that information, as it was not part of the application in front of them. Staff Presentation: Gillian White - Historic Preservation Officer Ms. White began her presentation by noting that the request was to replace the existing walkway with a new material and widen it from 36” to 48”. She then reviewed the context of the property’s location and history. She showed photos of the existing walkway and proposed new walkway as shown in the application. She further detailed the proposed replacement and materials and noted that staff was unable to approve the request administratively as it was determined that it did not meet applicable guidelines. She then went over some of the details of the 2020 HPC resolution and as outlined in the staff report. She noted that staff felt the prior approval important as it included a condition to restudy the walkway and to utilize pavers of a historically appropriate size and material. Ms. White said that staff was unable to support the current request based on historic preservation guideline 1.6, as outlined in the staff report. She said that staff recommends denial of this Resolution, based on guideline 1.6 and prior HPC approvals related to the walkway. Ms. Raymond asked what pattern of the new proposed material would be appropriate. Ms. White said something more simplified. Ms. Pitchford asked if the proposed bluestone material was historically evident in Aspen. Ms. White said she had not seen anything that was historic. Mr. Henderson noted that the picture in the application of the proposed walkway was provided to show the pattern and does not represent the color. He said that the proposed bluestone material was a uniform darker grey color. Public Comment: None Board Discussion: Mr. Moyer wanted to note that when Aspen was constructed in the 1890s, materials used for building were what was available in the valley, namely limestone, locally made bricks, wood and other stone. He noted that bluestone is available in Pennsylvania and the Catskills and would not have been available in Aspen in the 1890s. Since it would not have been historically used in Victorian Aspen, he did not support the proposed bluestone material. He felt that since the guideline does not say a walkway has to be three feet, he was not opposed to the proposed width but stressed that it should be brick or limestone. Ms. Severe noted that the average stroller was about 32 inches and felt that while she wasn’t opposed to making the walkway wider, she did not see the need to make it more than the three feet as noted in the guidelines. She said that she was also opposed to the proposed bluestone material since it was not historic. 7 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APRIL 22ND, 2026 Ms. Thompson noted that during her time on HPC, they had only approved wider walkways when the resource was larger. She did not feel that 48 inches was appropriate for the scale of this resource. Ms. Pitchford agreed and felt there was no reason to go wider than 36 inches. She also did not see bluestone as historic material. In terms of the material, Ms. Thompson was not on board with the proposed patterning of the stone but felt that the HPC had approved similar materials when it was laid in a clean and simple pattern. Ms. Raymond agreed with other comments about the material and would also be ok with it if it were laid in a simple pattern, without the grout and in a monochromatic color. She said she was ok with the proposed width, as similar walkway widths exist in town. Ms. Surfas did not feel the guidelines gave much flexibility on the width of the walkway unless it was an Aspen Modern project, so she felt this proposal should stay three feet or less. She also did not feel the proposed pattering was historical and was not supportive of it. She agreed with Ms. Thompson and Ms. Raymond that if the bluestone material was of a light grey color, it could mimic grey concrete. There was a brief discussion about the use of bluestone and whether a proposed material should have been historically seen in Aspen or just appear like or be similar to something historic. The commissioners also discussed feedback for the applicant on acceptable patterns for the stone. MOTION: Ms. Thompson motioned to approve Resolution #08, Series of 2026 with the walkway width at 36 inches, the actual material and layout of the material to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor and direction to simplify the layout. Ms. Raymond seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, no; Ms. Severe, yes; Ms. Raymond, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 5-1 vote, motion passes. Ms. Pitchford was assigned as monitor on the 620 W. Bleeker St. project. Ms. Severe was assigned as monitor on the 129 W. Francis St. project. Ms. Surfas was assigned monitor on the 920 E. Hyman Ave. project. ADJOURN: Ms. Thompson moved to adjourn the regular meeting. Ms. Severe seconded. All in favor, motion passes. ____________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk 8 STAFF REPORT TO: Aspen’s Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Gillian White, Historic Preservation Officer, Principal Planner THROUGH: Dan Folke, Planning Director Ben Anderson, Community Development Director MEETING DATE: May 13, 2026 SUBJECT: Resolution #09, Series of 2026 130 S. Galena St. and 523 E. Hopkins Ave. - Request for a Substantial Amendment, Relocation, and Planned Development Insubstantial Amendment ______________________________________________________________________ INTENDED OUTCOME: The request of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is to consider the following land use code review processes: • Substantial Amendments (Section 26.415.070(e)(2)) • Relocation of Designated Historic Properties (Section 26.415.090) • Planned Development Insubstantial Amendment (Section 26.445.110(a)) The HPC is the final review authority for the above requests. The intended outcome for this request is to maintain the integrity of the historic resource, the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Program, and align with Aspen’s Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and applicable code sections to the greatest extent possible while supporting applicable community goals established in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP)1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is to provide the HPC with details on the proposed scope and staff analysis of the application against applicable sections of the Land Use Code so the HPC can make an informed decision. The HPC may approve, deny, or approve the 1 Aspen Area Community Plan PDF 9 application with conditions. The HPC may also continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Overview of Project: The applicant, the City of Aspen, is proposing to temporarily lift the structure at 130 S. Galena St. (“The Armory”, “Armory Hall”), to facilitate the construction of a new foundation and a deeper basement. The applicant is also requesting review of the proposed stage structure design in Connor Memorial Park and review of the updated streetscape along Galena Street. The application can be found in Attachment A. Staff Recommendation: Staff are supportive of and recommend approval for the proposed stage structure design and the alterations to the Galena St. streetscape. Although the new foundation proposed for the Armory is not necessary for the preservation of the resource, it is necessary to meet building code requirements for the intended use. Given this, staff are supportive of the request for relocation to construct a new foundation. The proposed relocation method of lifting an historic brick building of this size is unprecedented in Aspen’s context. There is inherent risk in taking this action within the redevelopment of Fig. 1. Aerial image showing the subject property outlined in yellow. 10 the building. The alternative, underpinning, also carries risk, as is the case with any relocation. The application includes justification for the desire to lift the building and for the resulting benefits that this method may bring to the project. The application also includes statements from engineering and relocation experts that support the proposed lifting method. In addition to the other aspects of this application, HPC is asked to review the applicant’s proposed relocation method of lifting the building. DISCUSSION: Background The full history of the Armory has been previously discussed and is not included within this staff report. In 2015, the City asked voters to choose the Armory building’s use for the next 50 years - either as a community center or City offices. The electorate provided direction via an advisory ballot question that the preference was a community use. On August 12, 2025, City Council adopted Ordinance #06, Series of 2025, approving the redevelopment of Armory Hall for community use as a food hall. The Ordinance noted that alterations to the approvals related to historic preservation were subject to the typical process for designated properties. Given this, the current application requires review by the Historic Preservation Commission. Substantial Amendments - Section 26.415.070(e)(2) Per the land use code, “All changes to approved plans that materially modify the location, size, shape, materials, design, detailing or appearance of the building elements as originally depicted must be approved by the HPC as a substantial amendment”. A substantial amendment review is required for the stage structure design and the proposed alterations to the Galena St. streetscape. The location, footprint, and Figure 2: 1904 Sanborn Map Figure 3: Photo of the Armory ca. 1910 11 height of the structure were approved through Ordinance #06, Series of 2025; the current land use request is to establish materials and form. The applicant has provided final proposed plans for the stage structure located in Connor Memorial Park. The form of the stage is proposed as a simple, steel framed, partially enclosed structure with a flat roof; the materials include a pre-patinaed copper siding and a painted steel roof. The proposed design thoughtfully relates to the design of the approved additions to the Armory (the new visitor center and the vestibule entry) and the new trash enclosure. The proposed stage structure utilizes a similar roof style and the same materials as the approved additions. Additionally, the proposed stage structure meets Guideline 11.6 which states that a new structure on a landmarked property should be recognized as a product of its own time. Figure 4: Rendering showing proposed stage structure design Figure 5: Rendering showing previously approved Visitor Center Figure 6: Rendering showing previously approved trash enclosure Figure 7: Rendering showing previously approved vestibule 12 The application also includes alterations to the Galena Street streetscape. In an effort to meet the City’s sidewalk design standards, the applicant is proposing to reconfigure the sidewalk to include a “bulb out” at the corner and increase the sidewalk width to the 8’ standard. Additionally, as the existing trees and vegetation need to be removed to facilitate the relocation, there was an opportunity to better design the landscaping and parking along Galena Street. Through discussion with the Parks Department and city staff, the updated proposal includes installing silva cells to ensure healthy tree growth, relocating the accessible parking space to align with the accessible entrance at the Visitor Center, and realign the tree locations. The proposed streetscape updates allow for improved accessibility and improved tree alignment to avoid blocking the view of the resource from the street. Staff find that the proposed scope meets applicable Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and supports the request. Full analysis of the project as it relates to the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines can be found in Attachment B. Relocation of Designated Historic Properties - Section 26.415.090 Per the Land Use Code, occasionally the relocation of a structure may be appropriate if it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make the historic resource significant. No above grade historic material is Figure 8: Previously approved Galena streetscape Figure 9: Proposed Galena streetscape 13 proposed to be altered or replaced. The temporary relocation will not alter the appearance or historic location of the resource; the request as depicted in the application has a limited impact on what makes the resource significant. The proposal includes adding an addition 12” to the existing basement depth. This increase in depth will result in additional foundation wall exposure within the large egress lightwell adjacent to Connor Memorial Park. The applicant proposes to potentially salvage material from the existing rubble foundation and reuse it to clad this additional exposure. To ensure appropriateness of the material, staff have added a condition to the resolution to require the review of the proposed material by staff and monitor. In order to approve a relocation request, it must be found that the proposal meets one of the four standards for the relocation of designated properties. Standard 4 is the only applicable standard in this instance, and states that “the relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties.” Staff find that although the temporary relocation is not necessary as a preservation method, a new foundation is needed to meet code requirements for the intended use as a community food hall. A successful relocation, regardless of the method, will not adversely affect the historic district or adjacent designated properties. The applicant has provided documentation including a letter from a licensed engineer stating that the resource is capable of withstanding the relocation. As noted in the application, the proposed method for the temporary relocation includes lifting the resource 5’ above finished grade by using a “unified jacking system” combined with a steel beam structure placed under the resource. The moving contractor is proposing a steel beam and oak cribbing plan as shown in Exhibit 3 of the application (Attachment A). The building is proposed to be lifted at approximately 98’-01/4” for the architectural elevation, lower than the sidewalk at the northwest corner of the building. Although Guideline 9.1 states that developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place may help to preserve the historic fabric, the applicant is proposing to utilize a lifting method. The applicant notes that this would result in a quicker project timeline. As this is an impactful public project and a Council priority, an expeditious timeline is a positive community outcome. If approved, this request would be one of the first large, multi-story, masonry resources to be lifted instead of underpinned in the Commercial Core. The success of this method for a multi- story, masonry resource has not been tested within the city. The underpinning method has been utilized for resources of similar size and of masonry construction with consistently successful outcomes. 14 Within previous applications for the Armory redevelopment project, the state of the existing historic brick was noted as being weak and deteriorating with areas of significant cracks and bulging. As the proposed lifting of the structure has potential to exacerbate these issues, staff requested that the applicant provide additional information related to the existing brick condition. The applicant provided a letter from Atkinson-Noland and Associates, an engineering firm with preservation expertise, which states the following: “The masonry construction of the Armory is in relatively good condition given the age of the building, with the exception of localized areas of material deterioration near grade, some masonry bulging, and minor cracking. These conditions should be addressed prior to lifting through remedial actions such as repointing and/or localized rebuilding of areas in poor condition, including areas adjacent to lifting points, and the installation of wall bracing at selected locations. The nature and condition of the existing connections between the walls and the floor and roof diaphragms, as well as the condition of the existing stone foundation, are currently unknown, however, and should be investigated during the preparation phase.” Based on this letter, staff recommend that the HPC consider a condition of approval requiring these areas of concern to be addressed and additional investigation be conducted prior to the relocation. State statutes require municipalities like the City to require its contractors to provide surety bonds for faithful performance and payment, providing sufficient financial sureties for completion of the project, in an amount not less than 100% of the contracted price for any public improvement contracts. The law does not require private developers to obtain these bonds. It is the City’s position that its performance and payment bonds provide sufficient financial assurances. In addition, as part of its standard capital project contract, the City requires contractors to carry general commercial liability insurance and professional insurance in the amount of $1 Million per an occurrence or $3M aggregate, at a minimum. If damage occurred at City property, these insurance policies may cover damages arising from any construction defect issues. Nonetheless, HPC may still require financial assurances in an amount deemed appropriate by the Commission, as is typically required for relocation requests. Should the HPC choose to require financial assurances, this will be included as a condition within the proposed resolution. The HPC is asked to discuss the request as it relates to applicable guidelines and code. It is appropriate to note that, as with any relocation, unanticipated issues can arise during the relocation process, and it has potential to adversely affect the historic integrity of the resource. 15 Staff analysis of applicable relocation criteria is included as Attachment C. Planned Development Insubstantial Amendment - Section 26.445.110(a) The proposed updates and alterations to previous approvals require an insubstantial amendment to the existing planned development to maintain an accurate representation of approvals. The request does not change the use or character of the development, is consistent with the projects original approval, does not require a variation, and does not request an increase to height or floor area; staff find the request meets applicable criteria to grant an insubstantial amendment. Referral Comments: Staff referred the application to other City departments for comments. Historic Preservation staff and Building staff provided comments noting that underpinning has been a successful method for the construction of new foundations for masonry resources similar to the size of the Armory and note that the lifting method for this type of resource has not been utilized within the city. The aggregated referral comments are included in Attachment D. Some of the feedback may have already been incorporated into subsequent application revisions. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend approval of the Substantial Amendment and Insubstantial Planned Development Amendment requests. The HPC is asked to discuss the appropriateness of the proposed lift versus underpinning. If the HPC approves the relocation request, they may consider asking for a financial assurance; the standard condition language is provided below. As previously noted, the city is required to have financial assurances in place for the project regardless. Additional conditions are provided below for consideration. 1. Financial assurance of $30,000 (or other amount deemed appropriate by the HPC) for the safe relocation of the historic structure onto a new basement foundation must be provided at the time of building permit submittal. 2. Material proposed to clad the additional subgrade wall exposure is to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 3. Prior to relocation work commencing, the applicant is to address structural issues noted by Atkinson-Noland and Associates through remedial actions such as repointing and/or localized rebuilding of areas in poor condition, including areas adjacent to lifting points, and the installation of wall bracing at selected locations. A plan to address these issues is to be submitted for staff and monitor review and approval. 4. During the relocation preparation phase, applicant is to conduct further investigation into the nature and condition of the existing connections between the walls and the floor and roof diaphragms, as well as the condition of the existing stone foundation. This is to be submitted to staff and monitor for review. 16 ATTACHMENTS: HPC Resolution #09, Series of 2026 Attachment A – Application Attachment B – Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Analysis Attachment C – Relocation Criteria Attachment D – Combined Referral Comments Attachment E – Council Ordinance #06, Series of 2025 Attachment F – Site Plans and Elevations from Prior Approval 17 HPC Resolution #9, Series of 2026 Page 1 of 4 RESOLUTION #09, (SERIES OF 2026) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING A SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT, RELOCATION, AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT INSUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 130 SOUTH GALENA STREET (THE ARMORY) AND 523 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE (CONNOR MEMORIAL PARK), LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS BLOCK 93, LOT K THROUGH M, AND BLOCK 93 LOT N AND O AND 22 ½ FEET OF LOT P, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2737-073-31-851 (130 S. Galena St./The Armory) 2737-073-31-885 (523 E. Hopkins Ave./Connor Memorial Park) WHEREAS, the applicant, City of Aspen, has requested HPC approval for a Substantial Amendment, Relocation, and Planned Development Insubstantial Amendment, for the property located at 130 South Galena Street (The Armory) and 523 East Hopkins Avenue (Connor Memorial Park), legally described as Block 93, Lot K through M, and Block 93 Lot N and O and 22 ½ feet of Lot P, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;” and WHEREAS, for approval of a Substantial Amendment, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report, and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070(e) of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for approval of Relocation, the HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.090; and WHEREAS, for approval of a Planned Development Insubstantial Amendment, the HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.445.110(a); and WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with the applicable review standards and recommended approval without conditions for a Substantial Amendment and Planned Development Insubstantial Amendment; and WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with the applicable review standards and provided recommended conditions of approval for Relocation; and 18 HPC Resolution #9, Series of 2026 Page 2 of 4 WHEREAS, the HPC reviewed the project on May 13, 2026, and considered the application, the staff report, and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval of HPC Resolution #09, Series of 2026 by a vote of X to X (X-X). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1: Substantial Amendment and Planned Development Insubstantial Amendment: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Historic Preservation Commission hereby grants a Substantial Amendment for the design of a stage structure in Connor Memorial Park and an updated design for the Galena St. Streetscape with no conditions. Section 2: Relocation: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Historic Preservation Commission hereby grants approval for the relocation request with the following conditions: 1. Material proposed to clad the additional subgrade wall exposure is to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 2. Prior to relocation work commencing, the applicant is to address structural issues noted by Atkinson-Noland and Associates through remedial actions such as repointing and/or localized rebuilding of areas in poor condition, including areas adjacent to lifting points, and the installation of wall bracing at selected locations. A plan to address these issues is to be submitted for staff and monitor review and approval. 3. During the relocation preparation phase, applicant is to conduct further investigation into the nature and condition of the existing connections between the walls and the floor and roof diaphragms, as well as the condition of the existing stone foundation. This is to be submitted to staff and monitor for review. Section 4: Material Representations All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 5: Existing Litigation This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 6: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. 19 HPC Resolution #9, Series of 2026 Page 3 of 4 Section 6: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a 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: 130 South Galena Street and 523 East 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 May 2026. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: __________________________________ ____________________________________ Luisa Berne Kara Thompson Assistant City Attorney HPC Chair ATTEST: 20 HPC Resolution #9, Series of 2026 Page 4 of 4 _________________________________ Mike Sear Deputy City Clerk 21 Page 1 | 9 Capital Asset Department May 6, 2026 Ms. Gillian White Community Development Department City of Aspen 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, Co 81611 RE: 130 S. Galena Street – Relocation of a designated property, Substantial Amendment to a Certificate of Appropriateness and Minor Amendment to a Planned Development Dear Ms. White: Please accept this application for Relocation of a Designated Historic Resource, Substantial Amendment to a Certificate of Appropriateness, and Minor Amendment to a Planned Development which requests approval to temporarily lift the resource above its present location as part of the foundation and basement work to be undertaken with the upcoming remodel of Armory Hall, approval of proposed parkway changes to Galena Street, and approval of the stage structure in Conner Park. Ordinance No. 6 (Series of 2025) was approved by city council on August 12, 2025, permitting the adaptive reuse of Armory Hall. The project is considered a priority project of city council. To accommodate the anticipated Assembly occupancy of the building and meet building code, a new foundation is required to support the building. Subsequent discussions with city council have resulted in an increased floor to ceiling height in the basement. As the design continues to be progressed and a contractor at risk has been added to the project team, means and methods to execute the design are being evaluated, resulting in the relocation request. Also, as the means and methods were further considered it became apparent that the street trees along Galena Street require removal, allowing redesign of the existing parkway which has been coordinated with both the Parks and Engineering departments. Finally, the stage structure, represented at the city council meeting in August 2025, is proposed to be formalized as part of this application. Background: 130 S. Galena Street sits at the northeast corner of S. Galena Street and E. Hopkins Avenue. The building’s footprint is 89.7 feet by 65.9 feet in size. The building is primarily constructed of brick and the building’s walls are comprised of three wythe brick construction. Some dressed stone, constructed of Figure 1: Galena Street parkway 22 Page 2 | 9 Peach Blow sandstone, is located at the base of the Galena Street facade and partially wraps around the north and south sides of the building. The rubble foundation, which is located below grade, needs to be replaced to meet building code and accommodate a new occupancy classification; the contractor evaluated a number of methods to install the new foundation and determined that lifting the building in place is the best option for maintaining structure integrity. The parkway currently contains a six-foot detached sidewalk and the planting strip is comprised of four deciduous trees, seasonal plantings, and intermixed brickwork. The general site plan of both Conner Park and the Hopkins parkway were approved by the ordinance. Land Use Approval Requested: Overall, the project is a site specific approval granted as a Planned Development; however, other accessory land use reviews are part of the approvals. A Substantial Amendment to the Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development granted on August 12th, is needed for modification of the streetscape and to approve the stage structure. Relocation is needed to lift the building, while Minor Amendment to a Planned Development memorializes changes to the site specific approval inclusive of the streetscape, stage structure and increased basement depth. All requests are to be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. • Relocation of a Designated Historic Resource, Sec. 26.415.090, allowing for the temporary lift of the historic resource. • Substantial Amendment of a Certificate of Appropriateness, Sec. 26.415.070(e)(2), for improvements to the Galena Street parkway and the stage structure. • Minor Amendment to a Planned Development, Sec. 26.415.110(e), for amendment to the site specific approval granted by City Council. Figure 2: Approved site plan 23 Page 3 | 9 Proposal: The applicant, through Wolfe House & Building Movers (Wolfe), is proposing to lift the building five feet in the air from a designated, below grade elevation. Wolfe is a nationally recognized building relocation expert, and has experience with moving many types of buildings, including brick buildings (Wolfe website). Uniformly lifting Armory Hall appears to be the safest method of construction due to the unknown condition of the interstitial layer of the wythe load bearing walls. The brick walls sit on a rubble footing. Underpinning, by digging pits along the perimeter of the structure and then installing a new foundation in sections, was also considered but with typical 6’-00” by 6’-00” pit sizes, sections of the building would be unsupported for portions of the work. Prior to the lift, the building’s occupants will be relocated, minor asbestos remediation will occur, the construction site will be secured, demolition within the basement will commence, and soil retention will be undertaken to prepare for the support and lift of the structure. Otherwise, all existing structure and components are expected to be preserved within the building to provide structural support for the lift. Wolfe will install cribbing piles and main and cross beam installations will occur above the piles but below the carry line. A hydraulic jacking system in each cribbing pile will allow for uniform lift of the building. Once lifted, the building will be maintained in place for a number of months until the foundation has been installed and basement deepened, at which point the building will be lowered onto the new foundation. Exhibit 2 provides detailed information related to the proposed lift but it is important to note that the beam system that will be installed to facilitate the lift is proposed below existing grade, with no impact to observable building materials. Basis for building lift: The unreinforced existing rubble foundation, which is completely below grade, must be replaced to expand the basement, meet seismic loads and current building code, address the new occupancy classification, and allow for the new poured in place concrete foundation to be constructed. The project team has evaluated a number of methods to install the new foundation and determined that lifting the building is the best approach. Lifting minimizes the potential of undermining the existing walls, reduces the risk of structural failure within any potentially compromised interstitial wythe of brick, utilizes the existing vertical load paths, allows for a true monolithic foundation, is safer for the workers performing the work, shortens the duration of construction, and is economically beneficial to the project that is being funded with taxpayer money. The project team’s rationale for lifting the structure vs. underpinning is supported with additional details below: • Continuous support: The building lift design utilizes a shoring system which ensures that the three wythe facades are continuously supported until the lifting structure has been installed. Underpinning utilizes a series of pits around the perimeter of the building and then the foundation is installed in sections, which will leave sections of the masonry walls unsupported as the new foundation sections are poured, introducing additional risk to the structure vs. lifting. When the basement was originally dug out for the Armory, it was underpinned with an approximate eight foot offset that did not touch the exterior brick walls. The current proposal Figure 3: Building lift photo courtesy of Wolfe website 24 Page 4 | 9 does take into consideration risk to those walls and the additional risk for the workers who are excavating and installing the new foundation. • Unknown condition of the interstitial layer creates risk with underpinning: Three wythe construction from this era often used inferior brick in the central wythe. Also, the Masonry Evaluation Report from Atkinson-Noland Associates suggests that there is minimal mortar in the middle wythe. The unknown condition of the interstitial layer creates risk when underpinning since unbonded brick might become unstable during the underpinning process. • Increased cold joints. Underpinning the building requires the foundation to be poured in short, (estimated at 4’-0” long) segments with corresponding 6’ foot unsupported pit sections to tie in the water proofing, requiring many more cold joints than a monolithic pour. The building lift strategy allows for a monolithic foundation that greatly reduces the number of cold joints which can create structural weak points and pathways for moisture penetration. • Vertical lift, no lateral movement: While completely supporting the masonry walls, a hydraulic jacking system will slowly lift the building as one unit. Generally speaking, an unreinforced masonry building, such as the Armory, is strongest supporting vertical loads. This unified jacking system takes advantage of the strength of the building and is used so that the jacks work in unison. • Placement and historic fabric: The resource will be returned to its original location once placed back on the new foundation providing an outcome similar to what is noted in Guideline 9.1., Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place may help preserve the historic fabric, as material above grade as well as above the carry line will not be affected. Underpinning the structure will preserve no more historic fabric than the building lift technique. • Existing foundation cannot accommodate an Assembly building classification. The existing rubble foundation cannot accommodate the required structural updates that the change in occupancy requires. This change elevates the Building Risk Category, which triggers IEBC requirements for compliance with current snow, wind, and seismic load standards – loads the existing foundations were not designed to resist. The change of occupancy also increases the design floor live loads, further compounding the demand on the existing foundation system. A structural review of the existing footings confirmed they cannot resist these increased demands in a code-compliant manner. As written in chapter 9 of the design guidelines, “installing a foundation that meets modern standards can be very beneficial to the long term condition of the building.” • Capability to withstand physical impacts of relocation. Although no downtown commercial brick resource has previously been proposed to be lifted, the city has approved relocation of many residential resources as well as the upcoming relocation of the Skier Chalet structures, so relocation of residential and commercial buildings is not uncommon. The project team has selected an experienced, national building mover that has successfully lifted thousands of buildings to execute the lift (Exhibit 4). A structural engineering firm has provided an extensive engineering report that verifies the building is capable to be lifted as required by land use code standard 26.415.090(c)(4)(1), “it has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation.” Multiple engineering firms with 25 Page 5 | 9 different specialties are coordinating aspects of the lift to provide a successful outcome (Exhibit 4, ANA letter). • Building’s location makes it a good candidate for lifting. Armory Hall, although downtown, is adjacent to public rights of way and Conner Park, providing adequate working space around the building for the lift rather than typical zero lot line construction in the downtown where building walls are often adjacent to each other or potentially share a party wall. • Past remodels add complexity. Most loadbearing masonry structures, like those referenced by building staff, have a simple exterior foundation, tracking beneath the perimeter walls, which makes for a less complex retrofitting situation. The 1990’s remodel and renovation of the Armory created a unique situation with the foundation where there are now multiple bearing lines; the historic exterior footers and the contemporary concrete walls set within the footprint of the structure. This creates a complexity with underpinning which increases risk for both the workers and the structure. Multiple layers of shoring would be required to simultaneously support the exterior and interior walls as underpinning progresses. The engineers have observed areas of existing undermined/unsupported rubble foundation which creates further complexity and challenges. The building lift approach allows the entire structure to be supported before any of the subgrade conditions are modified. Figure 4 and 5: Previous stabilization attempts with continued degradation Figure 6: Historic footer with soil excavated at a slope to maintain stability: 26 Page 6 | 9 • Public Welfare Considerations: As a city project, it is important to deliver a product that responsibly spends taxpayer dollars and considers potential public welfare impacts. Besides being a construction option that fully supports the building while constructing a new foundation, lifting the building will save taxpayer dollars with a shorter construction timeline of several months than manually digging pits and pouring a foundation in segments. Lifting the building provides a better foundation, as it will not be poured in sections. It is also a safer method of construction for the workers. A reduced overall construction timeline minimizes disturbance to adjacent neighbors, the public right of way, the We Cycle station, and the Aspen Saturday Market. Minimizing construction project timelines is a concern of the city’s and is a benefit to the public welfare. • Relocation Approvals: With a detailed, stamped engineering report provided as an exhibit to the original application, the report shows that the building can be appropriately lifted. Since 2022, fifteen relocation requests have been approved or are currently under review (Exhibit 5). These requests range from relocating an accessory structure to constructing a new basement foundation. Of the fifteen requests, three are approved or under review to vertically lift the resource, two are approved via underpinning the resource, and ten are approved for temporary or permanent relocation. Aspen has allowed relocations to occur. We recognize that the size, weight, and construction technique of Armory Hall is different than a stick built building and that the building department has not reviewed a building lift for this type of structure but the selected subcontractor is an expert in the field of lifting and moving buildings and the structural engineering report substantiates the ability to lift the building. Added Basement Depth: City Council has requested an increased floor to ceiling height of the basement, which is feasible with a building lift. The floor to ceiling height is proposed to increase by twelve inches. This added basement depth will only visually affect the east façade of the building as there will be a foot of additional exposed wall area in the egress well. This new, exposed wall area is proposed to be treated with dressed stone to match the existing non-historic sandstone that exists on the east façade and is proposed to be salvaged from the rubble foundation. The actual Floor Area of the Armory building is reduced based on the increased basement wall area and a reduction in the exposed wall area percentage when calculating below grade spaces. Overall, the change in Floor Area is still under the allowed amount in the ordinance (Exhibit 6). Galena Streetscape: As the existing street trees require removal to facilitate the construction associated with the project, it has provided an opportunity to reconsider the existing Galena Street parkway and meet adopted engineering standards for sidewalk layout and design. Commercial sidewalks are required to be eight feet wide and bulb-outs are required if one exists on the corner across the street. In this instance a bulb-out exists on the southeast corner of Hopkins and Galena Streets. To meet the city’s sidewalk layout and design standards (§ 4.5.2) and in coordination with the Parks department, an eight- foot concrete sidewalk is proposed along the Galena Street frontage as well as a bulb-out on the northeast corner of the intersection. Similar to areas on the opposite side of Galena Street, hardscape in the form of pavers are proposed in the former planting and brickwork strip. The number of deciduous trees replanted are reduced (from four to three) and the tree spacing has been modified. Two trees are centered in front of the two inner pilasters of the Armory’s facade while the third street tree will be placed in front of the one-story addition. Metal tree grates, using the same material as the decking around the spruce in Conner Park are proposed for each tree and the pattern is provided as a square grate. Exhibit 3 provides detailed information related to the proposed improvements. Proposed paver and grate materials, are the same materials that were submitted for monitor review in 2025 for continuity. 27 Page 7 | 9 Figure 7: Existing bulb-out across from Armory Hall (Hopkins) and parkways across the street (Galena) Figure 8: Proposed improvements Ordinance No. 6 (series of 2025), approved the footprint and dimensions of the stage structure in Conner Park. To provide some continuity between the stage structure and historic resource, materials used on the additions to Armory Hall are proposed for the stage structure. The structure is proposed to be mounted above a simple concrete slab, while the structure’s enclosure is pre-patinaed copper with a steel canopy painted to match the siding. Exhibit 3 provides detailed information related to the proposed improvements. Summary: Applicant believes the scope of work required for Relocation can be performed safely. The lifting of the building and setting it in its original location allows for the installation of a new, code compliant foundation that will ready the building to be safely occupied into the future. Per the intent of relocation, it is “the intent of this Chapter to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting.” This proposal temporarily lifts the building but will maintain the building in its original location. Figure 9: Conner Park stage structure 28 Page 8 | 9 All development involves some risk; however, the proposed temporary lift of Armory Hall has been thoroughly vetted through site visits, interdisciplinary coordination, and extensive engineering analysis confirming it can be safely executed by an experienced contractor. While lifting a brick building may be new to Aspen, Wolfe House & Building Movers has successfully relocated thousands of similar, as well as more complex, structures. Temporarily lifting the building is a practical solution that considers a range of pros and cons including the building’s existing complexity, cost reduction, shortening the construction timeline, and minimizing impacts to the public. With regard to the resource, although underpinning is one option, our team has evaluated the existing conditions and believe that the building lift is the best approach because it has the potential for the fewest problems. The letters and calculations provided demonstrate that lifting the building is an acceptable preservation method that will not adversely affect the integrity of the resource. The parkway improvements limit visual obstruction of the resource by removing seasonal plantings and by reducing the number of deciduous trees in front of the facade of the building. The design allows for a wider sidewalk and a bulb-out as required by the city’s engineering standards and provides more area for pedestrian maneuvering by providing pavers between the sidewalk and curb. This proposed condition is similar to other parts of the commercial core, where hardscape comprises most of the area between curb and property line. The request also includes materials/structure selected for the stage structure. By primarily using a pantinaed copper, it’s clear that the stage structure is a product of its time while the material selection and design relates to the approved additions to Armory Hall, providing continuity between the primary and accessory structures. The project team looks forward to discussing these requests at the public hearing in more detail and thanks you for your review of this application. Sincerely, Jen Phelan Jennifer Phelan Development Manager, City of Aspen Attachments: Exhibit 1. Review criteria Exhibit 2. Relocation report and associated plan set Exhibit 3. Galena Street and stage structure plan set Exhibit 4. Letters from Woulfe House & Building Movers dated April 14, 2026, April 29, 2026, and Atkinson Noland & Associates dated May 6, 2026 Exhibit 5: Approved relocations from 2022 through February 2026 Exhibit 6: Updated plans, sections and calculations Exhibit 7. Survey Exhibit 8. General land use packet 29 Page 9 | 9 Exhibit 9. Proof of ownership letter Exhibit 10. Vicinity map Exhibit 11. Fee waiver form Exhibit 12. Internal funds transfer form 30 Chapter 26.415: Historic Preservation – Building Lift (Sec. 26.415.090. – Relocation of designated historic properties) The intent of this Chapter is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. (c) Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: (1) It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or Applicant response: The subject building is a designated resource but is not proposed to be placed in a different location. It is proposed to be lifted, a new foundation will be installed and basement deepened, then the building will be lowered onto the new foundation at the building’s original location and elevation. (2) It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or Applicant response: The subject building is a designated resource but it is not proposed to be placed in a different location. There will be no change to the character of the Commercial Core Historic District or the property once the building is set on the new foundation. (3) The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or Applicant response: No economic hardship consideration is requested. (4) The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; Applicant response: The building will not be relocated to a different location but will be lifted in place and then lowered onto a new foundation at the Armory’s original location and elevation. The city has allowed various historic resources to be relocated or temporarily relocated, recognizing that relocation is a viable and sometimes necessary preservation method. In this instance the building is proposed to be slowly, hydraulically lifted to allow for a new foundation and deeper basement to be constructed. This allows for stabilization of the structure during construction of the new foundation rather than having sections of the building’s walls be unsupported if it were underpinned. Engineered plans have been provided with this request that states the ability to lift the building load. As the building will be in its original location after the lift, the proposed relocation will not diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties. Exhibit 1:Review criteria 31 And, additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: (1) It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; Applicant response: Engineering and stabilization plans for the lift and the shoring are included as part of this request. The engineering report confirms that the building is an appropriate candidate to be lifted. The relocation summary, engineering report and shoring design, included as Exhibit 3, outlines the methodology for preparing the site for the lift and confirms that the lifting frame steel beams can accommodate the gravity loads anticipated during the lift. (2) An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and Applicant response: The building is proposed to be lifted vertically, not moved to a different location so this standard is not applicable. (3) An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Applicant response: The request is for temporary relocation, allowing the building to be lifted vertically via a hydraulic jacking system, with no lateral move of the building. The building will be lifted in place, approximately five feet above a designated carry line that is below the lowest existing grade elevation. Shaw Construction, has determined this to be the best option to maintain the integrity of the building, as the building will be supported by the beam layout during the lift. Underpinning would create segments of the wall to be unsupported during excavation. Wolfe House & Building Movers is proposing a steel beam and oak cribbing plan as shown in Exhibit 3. The building is proposed to be lifted at approximately 98’-01/4” for the architectural elevation, lower than the sidewalk at the northwest corner of the building. The building lift has been evaluated by Wolfe House & Building Movers, relocation experts. Wolfe has determined that lifting the building is feasible and prefers that the interior structure remain intact during the lift to maintain current loads. Wolfe is a national company that has experience with various types of buildings, some more complex than the Armory, both nationally and internationally. Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Chapter 9: Excavation, Building Relocation & Foundations 9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place may help to preserve the historic fabric. •This activity will require the same level of documentation, structural assessment, and posting of financial assurances as a building relocation. Applicant response: Underpinning is not proposed – rather the building is proposed to be lifted so a code compliant foundation can be installed in place of the rubble 32 foundation. Once installed, the building will be lowered onto the new foundation in the same location and elevation as it currently sits. 9.2 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis •In general, on-site relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. •In a district, where numerous adjacent historic structures may exist, the way that buildings were placed on the site historically, and the open yards visible from the street are characteristics that should be respected in new development. •Provide a figure ground study of the surrounding parcels to demonstrate the effects of a building relocation. •In some cases, the historic significance of the structure, the context of the site, the construction technique, and the architectural style may make on-site relocation too impactful to be appropriate. It must be demonstrated that on-site relocation is the best preservation alternative in order for approval to be granted. •If relocation would result in the need to reconstruct a substantial area of the original exterior surface of the building above grade, it is not an appropriate preservation option. Applicant response: The building is proposed to be temporarily lifted in place and then lowered to its original location and elevation. To facilitate this lift, shoring design and an engineered report for the lift have been provided, both stamped by an engineer. The lift points are below sidewalk grade, so the facades above grade will not be impacted. 9.3 Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. •It must face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. In general, a forward movement, rather than a lateral movement is preferred. HPC will consider setback variations where appropriate. •A primary structure may not be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. •Be aware of potential restrictions against locating buildings too close to mature trees. Consult with the City Forester early in the design process. Do not relocate a building so that it becomes obscured by trees. Applicant response: The building is proposed to be maintained in the exact same location and orientation as currently exists once placed on the new foundation. 9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade. •Raising the finished floor of the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable if needed to address drainage issues. A substantial change in position relative to grade is inappropriate. •Avoid making design decisions that require code related alterations which could have been avoided. In particular, consider how the relationship to grade could result in non- historic guardrails, etc. Applicant response: The building will be relocated at its historic elevation above grade. 9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. •On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a miner’s cottage where there is no evidence that one existed historically is out of character and is not allowed. 33 •Exposed concrete or painted metal flashing are generally appropriate. •Where a stone or brick foundation existed historically, it must be replicated, ideally using stone salvaged from the original foundation as a veneer. The replacement must be similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints. •New AspenModern foundations shall be handled on a case by case basis to ensure preservation of the design intent. Applicant response: Similar to the existing below grade rubble foundation, the new foundation is below grade and will not be visible as the existing below grade brick wall will be placed on the new foundation. The dressed sandstone on portions of the building façade above grade will be maintained. Salvageable foundation materials will be used on the east facade. 9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells •Lightwells must be placed so that they are not immediately adjacent to character defining features, such as front porches. •Lightwells must be protected with a flat grate, rather than a railing or may not be visible from a street. •Lightwells that face a street must abut the building foundation and generally may not “float” in the landscape except where they are screened or on an AspenModern site. Applicant response: Not applicable, the light/egress well along the east façade was approved by city council and is not changing. 9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such buildings. •The specific methodology to be used in relocating the structure must be approved by the HPC. •During the relocation process, panels must be mounted on the exterior of the building to protect existing openings and historic glass. Special care shall be taken to keep from damaging door and window frames and sashes in the process of covering the openings. Significant architectural details may need to be removed and securely stored until restoration. •The structure is expected to be stored on its original site during the construction process. Proposals for temporary storage on a different parcel will be considered on a case by case basis and may require special conditions of approval. •A historic resource may not be relocated outside of the City of Aspen. Applicant response: Wolfe House & Building Movers specialize in relocating buildings. The company got its start in 1970 and has successfully completed thousands of moves and lifts of buildings such as museums, libraries, churches, hotels, and homes of all sizes. A letter from Wolfe, summarizing the means and methods of the lift and plans for lifting the structure are included in Exhibits 2 and 4. 9.8 Proposals to relocate a building to a new site are highly discouraged. •Permanently relocating a structure from where it was built to a new site is only allowed for special circumstances, where it is demonstrated to be the only preservation alternative. Applicant response: The building is not proposed to be located to a new site. 34 Historic Preservation Design Guidelines - Galena Street Parkway and Stage structure Chapter 1: Site Planning and Landscape Design Neighborhood and District Patterns 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. Applicant response: This standard is not applicable to the redesign of the Galena Street right of way adjacent to Armory Hall as the standard relates to a project site rather than the right of way. In the case of the stage structure, its location, footprint, and massing was approved by Ordinance No. 6 (Series of 2025) Streets, Alleys, & Ditches 1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. Applicant response: Not applicable, the street system is not changing and there are no ditches. Driveways & Parking 1.3 Remove driveways or parking areas accessed directly from the street if they were not part of the original development of the site. Applicant response: This standard is not applicable to the request as there is no driveway being proposed. 1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. Applicant response: This standard is not applicable to the request as there is no driveway. Yards, Walkways, and Patios 1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. Applicant response: This standard is not applicable to the request as the Armory is in the commercial core and not a residential setting. 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. Applicant response: The scope of the request includes improvements to the Galena Street right of way and the design/materials for the stage structure. A walkway is not part of the request. 35 1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site. Applicant response: Changes to the open space (or pedestrian amenity) is not changing with this request. The standard is not applicable. 1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. Applicant response: Stormwater design has been incorporated into the Armory Hall adaptive reuse project. 1.9 Landscape development on AspenModern landmarks shall be addressed on a case by case basis. Applicant response: This is not applicable as the Armory is not an AspenModern landmark. 1.10 Built-in furnishings, such as water features, fire pits, grills, and hot tubs, that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. Applicant response: The stage structure his located far enough away to not impair views of the resource. The hardscape proposed along Galena is at grade while deciduous street trees are proposed in three locations. Softscape Features & Plants 1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. 36 Applicant response: Applicant is proposing a modified streetscape for parts of the Galena Street right of way which is not part of the Armory site, none of the seasonal planting is historically significant. 1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. Applicant response: This standard is applicable to private property, not public right of way. The plantings associated with Conner Park and the Hopkins right of way have been approved. The design of the right of way is appropriate within the urban, downtown context. 1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. Applicant response: With regard to the right of way proposal, the sidewalk width is proposed to be expanded to meet engineering design standards (eight feet) with the balance of the affected parkway (six feet in width) anticipated to be hardscape in the form of pavers and metal tree grates. All of this is proposed at grade. Three deciduous street trees are proposed to replace the existing street trees. Site Lighting 1.14 Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting. Applicant response: Landscape lighting is not proposed as part of this application but is included in an Insubstantial Amendment that has been submitted. Fences 1.15 Preserve original fences. Applicant response: No fencing is proposed. 1.16 When possible, replicate a missing historic fence based on photographic evidence. Applicant response: No fencing is proposed. 1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution. Applicant response: No fencing is proposed. 1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type and style. Applicant response: No fencing is proposed. 1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street. 37 Applicant response: No fencing is proposed. 1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of important features of a designated building. Applicant response: No fencing is proposed. Retaining Walls 1.21 Preserve original retaining walls Applicant response: No retainage is proposed. 1.22 When a new retaining wall is necessary, its height and visibility should be minimized. Applicant response: No retainage is proposed. 1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will be reviewed on a case by case basis. Applicant response: Any grading associated with the sidewalk is to ensure ADA grades are met and minor in nature. Cultural and Designed Landscapes 1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations. Applicant response: Neither the Galena Street right of way or Conner Park are historically significant landscapes similar to the pedestrian mall, Aspen Grove Cemetery or Pioneer Park, which were individually designated. Conner Park was designated in conjunction with the Armory by local designation in 1974 via Ordinance No. 74. No significant features have been identified via an inventory form. 1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its built features. Applicant response: The soft and hardscape improvements proposed for Conner Park have been approved via Ordinance No 6 (Series of 2025). The material proposed for the stage structure is patinaed or painted metal, is the same material used on the vestibule entry on the east facade of the resource and the visitor center addition. This material is clearly a product of its time and will create some continuity with the additions to the Armory. 1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system. Applicant response: The soft and hardscape improvements proposed for Conner Park have been approved via Ordinance No 6 (Series of 2025). 38 1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site. Applicant response: The soft and hardscape improvements proposed for Conner Park have been approved via Ordinance No 6 (Series of 2025). Chapter 10: Building Additions, “this chapter presents guidelines for the construction of additions to historic structures. They apply to primary and secondary structures.” New Additions 10.3 Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. Applicant response: This stage structure is a detached accessory structure that is subordinate to Armory Hall and does not imitate its historic style. 10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. Applicant response: The resource is the visually dominant structure on the entire site. 10.5 On a corner lot, no portion of an addition to a one story historic resource may be more than one story tall, directly behind that resource, unless completely detached above grade by a distance of at least 10 feet. Applicant response: The stage structure is a standalone structure and only one story in height. 10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. Applicant response: By using patinaed copper and painted metal on a concrete slab, the stage structure is clearly of its time and does not mimic the historic form and materials of Armory Hall but does relate to materials used for the additions to Armoy Hall, creating continuity between both structures. 10.7 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the street. Applicant response: Ordinance No 6 (series of 2025) approved the footprint of the stage structure. 10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. Applicant response: Ordinance No 6 (series of 2025) approved the size of the stage structure. 39 10.9 If the addition is taller than a historic building, set it back from significant façades and use a “connector” to link it to the historic building. Applicant response: Ordinance No 6 (series of 2025) approved the location of the stage structure. 10.10 Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. Applicant response: Ordinance No 6 (series of 2025) approved the location of the stage structure. 10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building. Applicant response: Ordinance No 6 (series of 2025) approved the height of the stage structure and the roof form relates to the additions to the Armory. 10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. Applicant response: The stage structure is detached from the Armory. 10.13 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of the historic building. Applicant response: This standard is not applicable to the scope of the application. 10.14 Set a rooftop addition back from the street facing façades to preserve the original profile of the historic resource. Applicant response: This standard is not applicable to the scope of the application. 10.15 The roof form of a rooftop addition must be in character with the historic building. Applicant response: This standard is not applicable to the scope of the application. Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines General – Only the sections on Site Planning and Streetscape as well as Materials and Details relate to the scope of improvements proposed. Other sections: Alleyways, Parking, Building Mass, Height, and Scale, Street Level Design, Roofscape, Lighting Service and Mechanical Areas, and Remodel are not included. Site Planning and Streetscape 40 1.1 All projects shall provide a context study. Applicant response: The site plan and exhibits provide context for the right of way improvements, Armory Hall location, and park improvements. Photographs and elevations are included. 1.2 All projects shall respond to the traditional street grid. Applicant response: The orientation of Armory Hall will not change with the lift. The stage structure’s location was approved via Ordinance No. 6 (Series of 2025). 1.3 Landscape elements (both hardscape and softscape) should complement the surrounding context, support the street scene, and enhance the architecture of the building. Applicant response: No previously approved landscape elements will be changed within Conner Park, minor changes to the Hopkins Avenue parkway are proposed to accommodate changes to the Galena Street parkway and meet Engineering department’s Sidewalk Layout and Design standards. Parkway standards in the commercial core require an eight foot wide sidewalk and an intersection bulb-out if one exists across the street. The southeast corner of Galena and Hopkins includes a bulb-out, so one is now proposed on the northeast corner of the intersection. To match the urban, hardscape conditions on both Galena and Hopkins, the planting strip is removed and installed with pavers that are used along the Hopkins Avenue right of way. The existing street trees are removed and replaced with three new street trees with a slightly different spacing than existing for the northernmost tree. An iron street grate system surrounds the trees and provides continuity with some materials in Conner Park. 1.4 Where there is open space on a site, reinforce the traditional transition from public space, to semi-public space to private space. Applicant response: This standard is not applicable as no changes from the approved site plan related to public space is proposed. 1.5 Maintain alignment of building facades where appropriate. Applicant response: The orientation of Armory Hall will not change with the lift. 1.6 When a building façade is set back, define the property line. Review the context of the block when selecting an appropriate technique. Applicant response: No changes to the approved façade setbacks are proposed. 41 Materials and Details 1.22 Complete and accurate identification of materials is required. Applicant response: Materials and plantings are provided in the exhibits for the proposed Galena Street right of way improvements and the stage structure. 1.23 Building materials shall have these features: • Convey the quality and range of materials found in the current block context or seen historically in the Character Area. • Convey pedestrian scale. • Enhance visual interest through texture, application, and/or dimension. • Be non-reflective. Shiny or glossy materials are not appropriate as a primary material. • Have proven durability and weathering characteristics within Aspen’s climate. • A material with an integral color shall be a neutral color. Some variation is allowed for secondary materials. Applicant response: No changes to the Armory’s materials are proposed and the final material selections are either already approved or submitted as an Insubstantial Amendment for finalization. The hardscape proposed along Galena Street, references materials proposed in both Conner Park and the Hopkins parkway, providing continuity in the streetscape surrounding Armory Hall. The copper siding and painted metal proposed for the stage structure will relate to certain new materials used as part of the adaptive reuse of the Armory. 1.24 Introducing a new material, material application, or material finish to existing streetscape may be approved by HPC or P&Z if the following criteria are met: • Innovative building design. • Creative material application that positively contributes to the streetscape. • Environmentally sustainable building practice. • Proven durability. Applicant response: The materials introduced along the Galena streetscape reference materials proposed within Conner Park and the Hopkins parkway, creating continuity in the streetscape along the Armory. The proposed, more urban hardscape along Galena relates to the use of hardscape in the downtown core for the entire parkway. 1.25 Architecture that reflects corporate branding of the tenant is not permitted. Applicant response: No corporate branding is reflected in the architecture. 42 Planned Development Section 26.445.110, Amendments (e)Minor Amendment to a Detailed Review approval. An amendment found by the Community Development Director consistent with a Project Review approval and to be generally consistent with the allowances and limitations of a Detailed Review approval, or which otherwise represents an insubstantial change, but which does not meet the established thresholds for an insubstantial amendment, may be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission as applicable, pursuant to 26.445.040(b)(3) - Step Three. Section 26.445.040(b)(3), Step Three — Detailed Review with Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable. c. Standards of review: The proposed development shall comply with Section 26.445.070, Detailed Review. SEC. 26.445.070. DETAILED REVIEW STANDARDS. Detailed Review shall focus on the comprehensive evaluation of the specific aspects of the development, including utility placement, and architectural materials. In the review of a development application for Detailed Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission as applicable, shall consider the following: (a). Criteria: Compliance with Project Review Approval. The proposed development, including all dimensions and uses, is consistent with the Project Review approval and adequately addresses conditions on the approval and direction received during the Project Review. Applicant Response: Requests are consistent with approval granted via Ordinance No. 6 (Series of 2025) and propose approval of means and methods to install a new foundation for the building and additional basement depth which will not affect the exterior appearance of the building on street facing facades, an amended design for the Galena Street parkway that will meet engineering design standards, and design/ materials for the approved stage structure in Conner Park. (b). Criteria: Growth Management. The proposed development has received all required GMQS allotments, or is concurrently seeking allotments. 43 Applicant Response: The project is not seeking allotments and has met all GMQS requirements per section 6 of Ordinance No. 9 (Series of 2025), approving the rehabilitation of Armory Hall. (c).Criteria: Site Planning and Landscape Architecture. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: (1)The landscape plan exhibits a well-designed treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. Vegetation removal, protection, and restoration plans shall be acceptable to the Director of Parks and Open Space. (2). Buildings and site grading provide simple, at-grade entrances and minimize extensive grade changes along building exteriors. The project meets or exceeds the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and applicable requirements for emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. Adequate snow storage is accommodated. (3). Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into the landscape in a manner that enhances the site. (4). All site lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City's outdoor lighting standards. (5). Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in compliance with Title 29— Engineering Design Standards and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Applicant Response: The landscape plan for Conner Park and the Hopkins Avenue parklet have been approved subject to certain final materials under review by staff and the two HPC monitors. Site lighting is also being reviewed by staff and monitors. The Galena Street parkway is now proposed to be updated and will meet engineering design standards for the commercial downtown. An eight foot wide detached sidewalk is proposed as well as a pedestrian bulb-out at the Hopkins Ave. and Galena St. intersection. The landscape strip’s width is proposed to be six feet wide to accommodate the wider sidewalk with a reduction in the number of street trees, from four to three. Two trees are centered in front of the two inner pilasters of the Armory’s Galena Street facade while the third street tree will be placed in front of the one-story addition. Pavers matching those proposed for parts of Hopkins Ave and Conner Park are proposed in the landscape strip while metal tree grates are proposed for each tree. 44 The grate material matches the decking proposed under the spruce in Conner Park. Providing hardscape in the Galena right of way, complements the hardscape conditions along Galena Street as you walk towards the pedestrian mall. Site lighting will be reviewed under the building permit for meeting lighting standards while fixtures are reviewed by staff and monitors. Drainage will be updated, if necessary, based on the improvements in the right of way. (d). Criteria: Design Standards and Architecture. The proposed architectural details emphasize quality construction and design characteristics. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: (1). The project architecture provides for visual interest and incorporates present-day details and use of materials respectful of the community's past without attempting to mimic history. (2). Exterior materials are of a high quality, durability, and comply with applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. (3). Building entrances are sited or designed to minimize icing and snow shedding effects. (4). Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into structures in a manner that enhances the architecture. (5). All structure lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City's outdoor lighting standards. Applicant Response: Design, architecture and materials of the Armory have been approved through Ordinance 6 (Series of 2025) or are under review by staff and monitors. Applicant is proposing the park structure is mounted above a simple concrete slab, while the structure’s enclosure is pre-patinaed copper with a steel canopy painted to match the siding. This material is also used on portions of Armory Hall allowing for continuity between the two structures and also showcases the structure as a product of its time. Salvaged foundation sandstone will be used on the east facade for the increased basement depth, to match the non-hstoric sandstone. (e). Criteria: Common Parks, Open Space, Recreation Areas, or Facilities. If the proposed development includes common parks, open space, recreation areas, or common facilities, a proportionate, undivided interest is deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit 45 owner within the Planned Development. An adequate assurance through a Development Agreement for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a prohibition against future development is required. Applicant Response: This criterion does not apply to the application, as the application is for updates to an existing park that is owned and managed by the city. (f). Criteria: Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and improvements. Any new vehicular access points minimize impacts on existing pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of the Project Review and as otherwise required in the Land Use Code. These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements and to determine any required cost estimating for surety requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Applicant Response: The design was approved with bike racks, improved sidewalk infrastructure, and a location for We-Cycle off of the alley. It is anticipated that We Cycle will operate seasonally within two spaces located in the alley. There are a total of 6 parking spaces. In the winter months, the We Cycle station would be removed and the alley would contain 6 parking spaces. There are no new vehicular curb cuts on the property, and the site is anticipated to be accessed primarily by transit, biking, and walking. (g). Criteria: Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the proposed subdivision to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29— Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29—Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Applicant Response: Engineering design standards have been followed and the project is currently under review via the building permit. With the proposed changes to 46 the Galena streetscape, drainage is being reviewed to ensure that standards are met. Additionally, for the building lift, a structural engineering report has been developed outlining the ability to hydraulically lift the Armory. (h). Criteria: Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29—Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Applicant Response: Engineering design standards have been followed. This is summarized below: Domestic Water - The existing building is currently served by a water main operated by the City of Aspen Water Department, located along East Hopkins Avenue. Two water service connections are present near the southeast corner of the building. These connections may remain in place to serve the renovated and expanded building, or a new larger service may be needed for adequate fire flows to meet today’s standards. Sanitary Sewer - The site is currently served by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District main located along South Galena Street. An existing sanitary sewer service connection is situated at the northwest corner of the structure. There is also a main the runs in the alley. The proposed building addition will necessitate the relocation of the existing sanitary sewer service. This new service will connect in the alley, but the exact final location of the service will be determined during the design development phase. A grease trap may also be implemented given that there is a commercial kitchen. Electric - The structure is currently served by a City of Aspen transformer located within the enclosure to the north of the building. As part of the proposed improvements, a new three-phase transformer is planned to be installed between the alley and the building to accommodate future service needs. Gas - A gas service line and meter are located at the northeast corner of the building. The existing gas service will remain in place to serve the structure. 47 Communications - Existing telephone lines, internet, TV, and other communication pedestals and services are located at the northwest corner of the building. New pedestals will be installed between the alley and the building, and new services will be extended to the site as part of the proposed improvements. (i).Criteria: Phasing of development plan. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. Phasing shall insulate, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. All necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the Planned Development, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures shall be completed concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Applicant Response: Phasing is not proposed. This criterion does not apply to the application. 48 Shaw Construction c/o Robert Glover 300 Kalamath St, Denver, CO 80223 February 23, 2026 RE: Aspen Armory – Lift Plan Dear Mr. Glover, We have performed a site visit to the Armory, reviewed the information available pertaining to the Aspen Armory renovation project #24102, and have prepared the following lift sequence supported by engineer stamped layouts and calculations. Summary of Lifting Scope Wolfe House Movers’ (Wolfe) scope of work is limited and specific to lifting the 66’-2”x 90’-8” (overall) triple brick building on cribbing and steel to a temporary storage elevation 5’ above the existing elevation. Wolfe will support the building in the storage position while the foundation is replacement by others. This lift is to be completed using Wolfe’s normal means and methods for lifting masonry buildings. The building lift is to be performed with a Buckingham Unified Jacking system. Lifting Sequence: Prior to Wolfe starting work the soil retention, initial excavation, selective basement demolition, and machine access into the basement is to be completed. Once on site Wolfe will install the base of the supporting cribbing piles into designated locations supported by dirt shoring and/or excavation to the bottom of the new footer excavation. Pockets will be opened into the foundation as needed to accommodate the beam installation on top of the cribbing piles. Masons will support the beam pocket work to address any unseen conditions inside the masonry walls. Specific accesses, soil retention, and elevations have been designed to allow steel installation with minimal impact to the site and preserving the evergreen tree . Above the cribbing W14 wide flange “main beams” will be installed to support a series of W14 wide flange “cross beams” and wide flange“needle beams” every 32”-54” on the perimeter of the building, below the carry line. The carry line of the building is to be below the lowest existing grade elevation. Foundation stones and/or brick walls will be supported as needed to retain the above grade structure. Variation in the carry line to be packed out with wood shimming to the masonry above the beam locations to create a solid bearing point for the lift. After the steel is installed, per the engineer’s plan, the Buckingham Jacking System will be installed in each cribbing pile to engage the beam above with the design load. The building weight will be transferred from the foundation to the steel carriage and the Buckingham Unified Jacking Machine will be engaged to perform a smooth, uniformed lift of the building. The building will be lifted up in unison by the jack system to allow 12” of wood dunnage to be installed to support the steel beams while the jacking system is cycled and positioned to lift again. The process will be repeated until the storage height is reached. The building will be supported directly on the wood dunnage in the storage position for the duration of the foundation installation work. Exhibit 2: Relocation report and associated plan set 49 Lowering Sequence and Release: After the new foundation is prepared to receive the building, the lifting process will be performed in reverse to lower the building to the final elevation. The building will be held in the final position on the cribbing piles while the foundation is built up to and grouted tight to the masonry building above by others. Interior load points will be carried by temporary shoring as necessary to facilitate interior remodeling. Buckingham Shoring/Jacking posts will be placed under needle beams per engineer’s plan to allow steel headers to be installed directly under the masonry walls. After the building is secured on the new foundation and shoring/jacking posts the lifting beams and cribbing will be removed to allow the beam pockets to be infilled and grouted tight to the building above. Needle beams and shoring/jacking posts will be removed at a later date after the new permanent beams are installed. Specific Notes: No excavation shall be performed that will undermine supporting cribbing piles. Snow load, if applicable, shall be controlled for the duration of storage on steel and cribbing. Traffic protection to be in place to prevent accidental cribbing or steel impacts. Engineer plan to be reviewed and, if necessary, revised to accommodate final foundation design and unknown building conditions. Please reach out to us with any questions or comments. Sincerely, Robert Sauder Wolfe House Movers 10 Birch Lane, Bernville, PA 19506 Office: 610-488-1020 x110 Cell: 484-332-4101 robert@wolfehousemovers.com Information Reviewed: Raul Gawrys Architecture – City Hall Renovations Bidset dated 8.3.1994 (including revisions) Chen Northern, Inc – Geotechnical Recommendations, Proposed Aspen City Hall Renovation dated March 31,1992 CCY Architects -100-DD Drawings dated 2025.06.27 Rock Solid Solutions – Aspen Armory Temporary Shoring & Deck Micropiles dated 11/20/2025 50 REV DESCRIPTION DATE CHKENG DWG:SHT:THIS DRAWING CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION AND SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED OR USED FOR FABRICATION WITHOUT THE EXPRESS PERMISSION OF THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. THE INTEGRITY OF THE PRODUCT IS CONTINGENT UPON ADHERENCE TO THE PARAMETERS SPECIFIED IN THIS DRAWING. THE ENGINEER OF RECORD WILL NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY USE OR APPLICATION OUTSIDE OF THESE DEFINED PARAMETERS. DRAWINGS ISSUED FOR REVIEW ARE PRELIMINARY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION. NOTE: THIS DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SMITHWICK ENGINEERING, LLC HOUSTON, TX | CORPUS CHRISTI, TX | BATON ROUGE, LA WWW.SMITHWICKENG.COM INFO@SMITHWICKENG.COMAPPDWN OF A ISSUED FOR REVIEW 02-20-26 JAWC NSVK ASPEN ARMORY - ASPEN, CO 05SE-WHBM-ST-4207-01 BUILDING LIFT SUPPORT GENERAL NOTES 01 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS: [A]CCY ARCHITECTS, ASPEN ARMORY PERMIT DRAWINGS - PROJECT #24102, DATED 11/19/25 [B]WOLFE HOUSE & BUILDING MOVERS STEEL AND CRIBBING DRAWING - ASPEN, CO - REV #2, 12/02/25 SPECIFICATIONS: 1.ALL STEEL SHALL BE FABRICATED AND ERECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION (AISC) MANUAL 15TH EDITION. 2.ALL STEEL SHAPES TO BE MINIMUM 50KSI YIELD STRENGTH MATERIAL. REFER TO BOM FOR SPECIFIC GRADE REQUIREMENTS. 3.ALL BOLTS TO BE A325 HIGH STRENGTH BOLTS OR EQUIVALENT. 4.TIMBER CRIBBING TO BE STRUCTURAL OAK SOLID HARDWOOD AND IN GOOD CONDITION. 5.HYDRAULIC JACKS MUST BE IN SOUND CONDITION AND PROPERLY PACKED WITH WITH NO OIL LEAKAGE. EACH JACK IS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH A MANUAL SHUT OFF VALVE. 6.ESTIMATED WEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE: 2,500,00 LBS (1250 TONS) OPERATIONAL NOTES: 7.EXCAVATION - REMOVE SOILS AS INDICATED AND AS NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE THE INSTALLATION OF THE SUPPORTING STEEL AND CRIB PILES. THE LIMITS OF EXCAVATION AND ELEVATION SHOW IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY. 8.HOLES TO BE CREATED BY EITHER ONE OF THE FOLLOWING METHODS: CHIPPING, HAMMERING, CUTTING AND PRYING. 9.CRIB PILES - FIRST LAYER IS TO BE A SOLID MAT AS INDICATED. THE SECOND LAYER IS TO BE AS INDICATED PERPENDICULAR TO THE FIRST LAYER. THE CRIB TOWER IS TO BE LEVEL IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. 10.MAIN BEAMS- INSERT MAIN BEAMS LEVEL OVER CRIB PILES TO THE DIMENSIONS INDICATED AND WHERE INDICATED. 11.CROSS BEAMS - INSERT THE CROSS BEAMS LEVEL OVER THE MAIN BEAMS AS INDICATED AND WHERE ADDITIONAL FIELD CONDITIONS MAY DICTATE. 12.ENSURE ALL BEARING SURFACES ARE PROPERLY SHIMMED AND PACKED TO PROVIDE COMPLETE BEARING AS INDICATED. INFILL ALL MASONRY HOLES WITH NON-SHRINK HIGH STRENGTH GROUT TO ENSURE PROPER TRANSFER OF LOADS TO THE LIFT STEEL. 13.ENSURE ALL TIMBER GIRDERS ARE PROPERLY SHIMMED AND SUPPORTED AT EACH CROSS-BEAM INTERSECTION TO ENSURE PROPER TRANSFER OF LOADS TO THE LIFT STEEL. 14.SHIM PLAN TO BE FIELD DETERMINED DURING LIFT OPERATIONS BY SUPERVISOR. 15.THE BUILDING IS TO BE LOWERED ONTO A CRIB PILE SUPPORT SYSTEM LEVEL AT ITS FINAL ELEVATION. THE CRIB PILES, MAIN BEAMS AND NEEDLE BEAMS ARE TO REMAIN UNTIL CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW FOUNDATION ENABLES THEIR REMOVAL. ISSUE PURPOSE: REVIEW PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER: PATRICK BRENNAN DATE: 02/20/2026 PE LICENSE NO. 55527 THIS DELIVERABLE IS RELEASED AS "PRELIMINARY" FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN ABOVE, UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. IT IS NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION, PERMITTING, BIDDING, OR ANY OTHER PURPOSES NOT STATED HEREIN. STATE: COLORADO 51 REV DESCRIPTION DATE CHKENG DWG:SHT:THIS DRAWING CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION AND SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED OR USED FOR FABRICATION WITHOUT THE EXPRESS PERMISSION OF THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. THE INTEGRITY OF THE PRODUCT IS CONTINGENT UPON ADHERENCE TO THE PARAMETERS SPECIFIED IN THIS DRAWING. THE ENGINEER OF RECORD WILL NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY USE OR APPLICATION OUTSIDE OF THESE DEFINED PARAMETERS. DRAWINGS ISSUED FOR REVIEW ARE PRELIMINARY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION. NOTE: THIS DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SMITHWICK ENGINEERING, LLC HOUSTON, TX | CORPUS CHRISTI, TX | BATON ROUGE, LA WWW.SMITHWICKENG.COM INFO@SMITHWICKENG.COMAPPDWN OF A ISSUED FOR REVIEW 02-20-26 JAWC NSVK ASPEN ARMORY - ASPEN, CO 05SE-WHBM-ST-4207-01 BUILDING LIFT SUPPORT CRIB FLOOR PLAN & ELEVATION 02 4'-0" (TYP)4'-0" (TYP)6'-0"0'-6"0'-512" 51 2" x 6" x 48" HARDWOOD 51 2" x 6" x 48" HARDWOOD (SEE SHT 1, NOTE 4) 4' SQUARE OAK CRIB PILE (TYP @ 34 LOCATIONS) BILL OF MATERIALS ITEM QTY DESCRIPTION FT IN WEIGHT EA. (LBS) TOTAL WEIGHT (LBS) 1 34 CRIB PILES (C-1 TO C-34)WOOD (OAK)4/6/8 0 2 10 W14x211 (MB-1 TO MB-10)A992 50 0 10,550 105,500 3 22 W14x120 (CB-1 TO CB-22)A992 39 10 4,780 105,160 4 22 W14x120 (CB-23 TO CB-44)A992 45 0 5,400 118,800 5 54 W6x25 (NEEDLE BEAMS)A992 7 3 182 9,100 TOTAL EST WT (LBS):338,560 (AS SHOWN)(6' & 8' AS NEEDED)(6' & 8' AS NEEDED) ISSUE PURPOSE: REVIEW PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER: PATRICK BRENNAN DATE: 02/20/2026 PE LICENSE NO. 55527 THIS DELIVERABLE IS RELEASED AS "PRELIMINARY" FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN ABOVE, UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. IT IS NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION, PERMITTING, BIDDING, OR ANY OTHER PURPOSES NOT STATED HEREIN. STATE: COLORADO 52 REV DESCRIPTION DATE CHKENG DWG:SHT:THIS DRAWING CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION AND SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED OR USED FOR FABRICATION WITHOUT THE EXPRESS PERMISSION OF THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. THE INTEGRITY OF THE PRODUCT IS CONTINGENT UPON ADHERENCE TO THE PARAMETERS SPECIFIED IN THIS DRAWING. THE ENGINEER OF RECORD WILL NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY USE OR APPLICATION OUTSIDE OF THESE DEFINED PARAMETERS. DRAWINGS ISSUED FOR REVIEW ARE PRELIMINARY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION. NOTE: THIS DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SMITHWICK ENGINEERING, LLC HOUSTON, TX | CORPUS CHRISTI, TX | BATON ROUGE, LA WWW.SMITHWICKENG.COM INFO@SMITHWICKENG.COMAPPDWN OF A ISSUED FOR REVIEW 02-20-26 JAWC NSVK ASPEN ARMORY - ASPEN, CO 05SE-WHBM-ST-4207-01 BUILDING LIFT SUPPORT OVERALL CIRB & BEAM LAYOUT 03 N CRIB PILE & MAIN BEAM LAYOUT (PLAN VIEW) 50'-0"50'-0" 100'-0" 102'-9"81'-8"84'-10"90'-3" NOTE: ALL MAIN AND CROSS BEAMS TO BE SPLICED TOGETHER WITH A FULL MOMENT CONNECTION FOR CONTINUITY ALONG THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE BEAMS. ISSUE PURPOSE: REVIEW PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER: PATRICK BRENNAN DATE: 02/20/2026 PE LICENSE NO. 55527 THIS DELIVERABLE IS RELEASED AS "PRELIMINARY" FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN ABOVE, UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. IT IS NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION, PERMITTING, BIDDING, OR ANY OTHER PURPOSES NOT STATED HEREIN. STATE: COLORADO 53 REV DESCRIPTION DATE CHKENG DWG:SHT:THIS DRAWING CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION AND SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED OR USED FOR FABRICATION WITHOUT THE EXPRESS PERMISSION OF THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. THE INTEGRITY OF THE PRODUCT IS CONTINGENT UPON ADHERENCE TO THE PARAMETERS SPECIFIED IN THIS DRAWING. THE ENGINEER OF RECORD WILL NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY USE OR APPLICATION OUTSIDE OF THESE DEFINED PARAMETERS. DRAWINGS ISSUED FOR REVIEW ARE PRELIMINARY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION. NOTE: THIS DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SMITHWICK ENGINEERING, LLC HOUSTON, TX | CORPUS CHRISTI, TX | BATON ROUGE, LA WWW.SMITHWICKENG.COM INFO@SMITHWICKENG.COMAPPDWN OF A ISSUED FOR REVIEW 02-20-26 JAWC NSVK ASPEN ARMORY - ASPEN, CO 05SE-WHBM-ST-4207-01 BUILDING LIFT SUPPORT CRIB & MAIN BEAM LAYOUT 04 4'-6"8'-0"23'-0"20'-0"20'-0" N 20'-0"15'-8"20'-6"19'-0"21'-0"76'-2"12'-6"19'-0"18'-0"18'-0"18'-0"13'-3" 98'-9" 71 2"712"6'-0"4'-6"MB-1 MB-6 MB-7MB-2 MB-8MB-3 MB-9MB-4 MB-10 MB-5 C-2C-1 C-3 C-4 C-5 C-6 C-7 C-8 C-9 C-10 C-11 C-12 C-13 C-14 C-15 C-16 C-17 C-18 C-19 C-20 C-21 C-22 C-23 C-24 C-25 C-26 C-27 C-28 C-29 C-30 C-31 C-32 C-33 C-34 CRIB PILES ESTIMATED LOAD (KIPS) C-1 C-2 48.010 C-3 52.980 C-4 38.270 C-5 49.040 C-6 16.840 C-7 58.670 C-8 126.280 C-9 101.180 C-10 113.780 C-11 109.560 C-12 121.170 C-13 75.260 C-14 84.060 C-15 106.480 C-16 34.330 C-17 42.810 C-18 33.210 C-19 81.460 C-20 97.070 C-21 85.170 C-22 143.340 C-23 92.980 C-24 113.900 C-25 107.860 C-26 123.320 C-27 89.240 C-28 14.370 C-29 76.860 C-30 67.210 C-31 60.670 C-32 64.910 C-33 60.270 C-34 16.990 CRIB PILE & MAIN BEAM LAYOUT (PLAN VIEW) 3'-101 2" 21'-01 2" NOTE: LOADS ARE UNFACTORED (1.0D). * * NO COMPRESSION, UPLIFT EXPECTED. NOTE: ALL MAIN AND CROSS BEAMS TO BE SPLICED TOGETHER WITH A FULL MOMENT CONNECTION FOR CONTINUITY ALONG THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE BEAMS. ISSUE PURPOSE: REVIEW PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER: PATRICK BRENNAN DATE: 02/20/2026 PE LICENSE NO. 55527 THIS DELIVERABLE IS RELEASED AS "PRELIMINARY" FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN ABOVE, UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. IT IS NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION, PERMITTING, BIDDING, OR ANY OTHER PURPOSES NOT STATED HEREIN. STATE: COLORADO 54 REV DESCRIPTION DATE CHKENG DWG:SHT:THIS DRAWING CONTAINS PROPRIETARY INFORMATION AND SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED OR USED FOR FABRICATION WITHOUT THE EXPRESS PERMISSION OF THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. THE INTEGRITY OF THE PRODUCT IS CONTINGENT UPON ADHERENCE TO THE PARAMETERS SPECIFIED IN THIS DRAWING. THE ENGINEER OF RECORD WILL NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY USE OR APPLICATION OUTSIDE OF THESE DEFINED PARAMETERS. DRAWINGS ISSUED FOR REVIEW ARE PRELIMINARY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION. NOTE: THIS DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SMITHWICK ENGINEERING, LLC HOUSTON, TX | CORPUS CHRISTI, TX | BATON ROUGE, LA WWW.SMITHWICKENG.COM INFO@SMITHWICKENG.COMAPPDWN OF A ISSUED FOR REVIEW 02-20-26 JAWC NSVK ASPEN ARMORY - ASPEN, CO 05SE-WHBM-ST-4207-01 BUILDING LIFT SUPPORT CROSS & NEEDLE BEAM LAYOUT 05 N CROSS & NEEDLE BEAM LAYOUT (PLAN VIEW) CB-1 2'-15 16"4'-5" 4'-3" 4'-9" 4'-7" 4'-10" 5'-6" 2'-11" 4'-5" 4'-3" 4'-2" 4'-4" 4'-3" 4'-10" 4'-3" 4'-8" 4'-8" 4'-9" 4'-9" CB-2 CB-3 CB-4 CB-5 CB-6 CB-7 CB-8 CB-10 CB-9 CB-11 CB-12 CB-13 CB-14 CB-15 CB-16 CB-17 CB-18 CB-19 CB-20 CB-21 CB-22 4'-0" (TYP U.N.O.)3'-0"CB-23 CB-24 CB-25 CB-26 CB-27 CB-28 CB-29 CB-30 CB-31 CB-32 CB-33 CB-34 CB-35 CB-36 CB-37 CB-38 CB-39 CB-40 CB-41 CB-42 CB-43 CB-44 3'-4"12'-4"12'-2"ELEVATION VARIES1'-3 1116"NEEDLE BEAM CROSS BEAM MAIN BEAM CRIB PILE 5'-2" 5'-0"3'-2"3'-0"3'-0"4'-4"934"1'-4916"1'-1014"2916"1'-438"2'-478"2'-71316"1'-438"358"91316"1'-438"111316"3'-378"8316"8316"31116"1'-438"2'-31516"CRIB AND BEAM ELEVATION (TYPICAL)1'-2 12"0'-6 38"NOTE: ALL MAIN AND CROSS BEAMS TO BE SPLICED TOGETHER WITH A FULL MOMENT CONNECTION FOR CONTINUITY ALONG THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE BEAMS.3'-218"4'-218"ISSUE PURPOSE: REVIEW PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER: PATRICK BRENNAN DATE: 02/20/2026 PE LICENSE NO. 55527 THIS DELIVERABLE IS RELEASED AS "PRELIMINARY" FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN ABOVE, UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. IT IS NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION, PERMITTING, BIDDING, OR ANY OTHER PURPOSES NOT STATED HEREIN. STATE: COLORADO 55 February 20, 2026 Robert Glover Shaw Construction 300 Kalamath St Denver, CO 80223 Building: Armory Hall - Aspen, CO Service: Structural Calculations Subject: Jacking Beam Analysis and Cribbing Loading Robert, Smithwick Engineering has performed a limited structural analysis in support of the proposed building lift sequence [Ref. A] for the Armory Hall located in Aspen, CO. Supported by information collected on site and provided to us by Wolfe House Movers, the estimated building weight and load distribution was determined. The scope of this analysis is limited to the evaluation of the lifting beams (Main, Cross, and Needle), as well as estimating the reactions of the supporting cribbing piles. Smithwick Engineering has determined that the Main Beams, Cross Beams, and Needle Beams are adequate for the estimated building loads in both structural strength and deflection. Based on building load path and lifting beam layout [Ref. B], cribbing loads were also determined, refer to the Results and Recommendations section below. References Ref. A - Wolfe House Movers, ASPEN ARMORY - LIFT PLAN, Date - 2/17/26• Ref. B - Wolfe House Movers, LIFTING BEAM LAYOUT - Rev 2, Date - 12/2/25• Ref. C - CCY Architects, ASPEN ARMORY PERMIT DRAWINGS - Project Number 24102, Date -• 11/19/25 Ref. D - Smithwick Engineering - BUILDING LIFT SUPPORT - SE-WHBM-ST-4207-01, Rev A• Basis of Analysis The lifting beams were evaluated under the following assumptions and parameters: All steel design performed in accordance with AISC 360-22.• All steel assumed to be grade A992 (min. yield = 50 ksi).• Load combinations per ASCE 7-22.• Total floor level dead load (including ceilings and internal walls) estimated to be 30 psf.• Roof dead load estimated to be 50 psf.• Exterior brick walls estimated to be 3-wythe with an area load of 150 psf.• Building dimensions taken from permit drawings [Ref. C].• Interior floor supporting steel beams estimated as W14x176.• Interior floor supporting steel columns estimated as W12x50.• limited to dead loads only. Environmental loading (wind, seismic, etc.) has been excluded from• the analysis. Total structure weight is estimated to be 2,500,000 lbs (1250 Tons).• SE-WHBM-RPT-4207-02 Rev: 0 Smithwick Engineering, LLC - Lifting & Securement Specialists PO Box 1287, Portland, Texas 78374 info@smithwickeng.com | www.smithwickeng.com Page 1 of 6 56 Based on the provided permit drawings [Ref. C] and a site inspection, general material makeup and structure load path sequencing were estimated and or approximated. A total structure weight of 2,500,000 lbs (1250 Tons) was determined for the purpose of analyzing the proposed lifting beams. While the total weight is conservative, the intent is to ensure cumulative loading at the lower steel building framing columns are not underestimated. The outer walls of the Armory Hall consist of an approximate 3-wythe brick wall that supports the outer most tributary floor areas at the floor and roof levels. The inner tributary floor areas are supported by a steel frame that divides the interior floor into approximate 18'x18' areas. The majority of the internal floor gravity loading is carried by the steel framing columns that run down to the foundation below. For the lifting frame, as shown in the representative sketch in Figure 1, the Main Beams are supported by cribbing piles, Cross Beams are supported by Main Beams, and Needle Beams are supported by Cross Beams. The intent of the Needle Beams are to provide support to the structure in areas where a Cross Beam cannot directly support the structure or a load path point, like a column. Figure 1: Representative Lifting Beam Sketch Results and Recommendations Smithwick Engineering has determined that the proposed lifting frame steel beams are adequate for the estimated building gravity loads expected during the proposed lifting sequence [Ref. A]. Table 1 summarizes the beam's utilizations and maximum deflections. Table 1 Beam Utilization Max. Deflection [in]Result Notes MB-1/MB-6 12%0.2009 Pass MB-2/MB-7 28%0.0860 Pass MB-3/MB-8 29%0.0376 Pass MB-4/MB-9 27%0.0910 Pass MB-5/MB-10 14%0.0811 Pass CB-1/CB-23 32%0.3144 Pass CB-2/CB-24 25%0.3366 Pass SE-WHBM-RPT-4207-02 Rev: 0 Smithwick Engineering, LLC - Lifting & Securement Specialists PO Box 1287, Portland, Texas 78374 info@smithwickeng.com | www.smithwickeng.com Page 2 of 6 57 Table 1 (Cont.) Beam Utilization Max. Deflection [in]Result Notes CB-3/CB-25 12%0.1271 Pass CB-4/CB-26 17%0.1818 Pass CB-5/CB-27 30%0.2752 Pass CB-6/CB-28 11%0.1048 Pass CB-7/CB-29 11%0.0972 Pass CB-8/CB-30 11%0.1321 Pass CB-9/CB-31 31%0.2853 Pass CB-10/CB-32 11%0.1537 Pass CB-11/CB-33 11%0.1220 Pass CB-12/CB-34 10%0.1049 Pass CB-13/CB-35 21%0.1947 Pass CB-14/CB-36 20%0.1844 Pass CB-15/CB-37 12%0.1300 Pass CB-16/CB-38 10%0.1072 Pass CB-17/CB-39 21%0.1796 Pass CB-18/CB-40 20%0.1609 Pass CB-19/CB-41 12%0.1234 Pass CB-20/CB-42 11%0.1096 Pass CB-21/CB-43 24%0.2794 Pass CB-22/CB-44 33%0.3008 Pass NB (Multiple)92%0.1981 Pass Worst case shown Notes: -Refer to Smithwick Engineering drawings [Ref. D], for beam labeling and identification. -All Main Beam and Cross Beam span deflection ratios are greater than L/500. -All Needle Beam span deflection ratios are greater than L/180. Please note that this analysis is limited to the lifting frame steel beams. Wolfe House Movers are responsible for all the means and methods and site safety performed during the installation of the lifting beams and the lifting sequence. Feel free to reach out with any questions or comments regarding this analysis. We appreciate the opportunity to perform this work and are dedicated to assisting you in ensuring the structural integrity of the lifting frame beams during this lift operation. Regards, Patrick Brennan, PE Smithwick Engineering, LLC patrick@smithwickeng.com SE-WHBM-RPT-4207-02 Rev: 0 Smithwick Engineering, LLC - Lifting & Securement Specialists PO Box 1287, Portland, Texas 78374 info@smithwickeng.com | www.smithwickeng.com Page 3 of 6 58 Appendix A - Analysis Summary Results Lifting Frame Stress Distribution and Amplified Deflection Visual: Note: Deflections are amplified for visual purposes, refer to Table 1 of the main report for maximum member deflections. Main Beam Deflections: SE-WHBM-RPT-4207-02 Rev: 0 Smithwick Engineering, LLC - Lifting & Securement Specialists PO Box 1287, Portland, Texas 78374 info@smithwickeng.com | www.smithwickeng.com Page 4 of 6 59 Cross Beam Deflections: Needle Beam Deflections: SE-WHBM-RPT-4207-02 Rev: 0 Smithwick Engineering, LLC - Lifting & Securement Specialists PO Box 1287, Portland, Texas 78374 info@smithwickeng.com | www.smithwickeng.com Page 5 of 6 60 Cribbing Support Reactions Forces: Note: These reaction forces include a load factor of 1.4 for all dead loads as prescribed by ASCE 7-22 LRFD load combinations. SE-WHBM-RPT-4207-02 Rev: 0 Smithwick Engineering, LLC - Lifting & Securement Specialists PO Box 1287, Portland, Texas 78374 info@smithwickeng.com | www.smithwickeng.com Page 6 of 6 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 ARMORY HALL REMODEL February 13, 2026 Prepared by 22860 Two Rivers Road, Suite 102 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 | 970.925.8354 GALENA STREETSCAPE REDESIGN Exhibit 3:Galena Street and stage structure plan set 69 DN ARMORY HALL ASPEN, CO GALENA REDESIGN 4/16/26NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 10 20 40 1"=20'-0" DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-138770 | iii SITE PLANGalena St. Design Comparison Previously Approved DesignRedesign F Building Access Point ADA Building Access Point A C E H I G A E H I G LEGEND A B C D E F G H I Pedestrian Sidewalk Bulb-out Proposed Trees (Typ.) Tree Grates (Typ.) ADA Parking Bear Proof Trash/Recycling Newspaper Stand Stop Sign Street Light F C B D ARMORY HALLARMORY HALL HOPKINS AVE.HOPKINS AVE.GALENA ST.GALENA ST.PRIMARY STREET LEVEL ACCESS PRIMARY STREET LEVEL ACCESS VISITOR’S CENTER ENTRANCE (ADA)VISITOR’S CENTER ENTRANCE (ADA) 71 | viii GALENA ST ELEVATIONHeight Study 2.5 5 10 Street Tree Height: 25’ Ornamental Tree Height: 15’ TREE GRATE TREE GRATE TREE GRATE ENHANCED PEDESTRIAN STREETSCAPE AREA AMENITIES AMENITIES WALK BULB-OUTPARKINGADA PARKING WALK 72 | ix 5 10 20 LIMIT OF PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK Note: No new materials are proposed for the redesign. All materials for redesign have been approved for other parts of the project. MAINTENANCE AREA PROPERTY LINE Iron Age Deck - Rain Pattern Techo Bloc Blu ARMORY HALL HOPKINS AVE.GALENA ST.CONNER PARK SITE PLANMaterials Diagram LEGEND Pavers Concrete Site Amenity Iron Age Tree Grate TREE GRATE PAVER Note: tree grate only indicates material, updated design is on the site plan 73 | xiii SITE PLANPlanting Diagram 5 10 20 LIMIT OF PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK MAINTENANCE AREA PROPERTY LINE Deciduous Tree Ornamental Tree Perennial Bed ROW Planter Box Note: Planting here to remain the same as previously approved design. Note: Planting here to remain the same as previously approved design. ARMORY HALL HOPKINS AVE.GALENA ST.CONNER PARK LEGEND Fraxinus mandshurica DECIDUOUS Manchurian Ash Note: Tree species to be approved by City of Aspen Parks and Recreation Department and Aspen Forester. All other planting at visitor center is to remain as originally designed. 74 | xiv SITE PLANROW and Conner Park Tree Removal 5 10 20 MAINTENANCE AREA 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 LIMIT OF PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK Tree Mitigation (Estimated) Existing Trees to be Removed Existing Trees to Remain Tree TypeNo. Deciduous Deciduous Deciduous Deciduous Deciduous Deciduous Deciduous Size Notes 17.8” Ø 3.5” Ø 19.6” Ø 3.1” Ø 17.5” Ø 4” Ø 11.2” Ø 20.7” Ø Est. Value Species Updated Total Est. ValuePrevious Total Est. Value $11,699.64 $0 Green Ash Unknown $13,730.83 $0 Narrowleaf Cottonwood Unknown Narrowleaf Cottonwood Unknown $11,058.69 $0 $4,775.55 $3,981.13 Norway Maple Crab Apple Malus Evergreen Deciduous Deciduous Deciduous 19.5” Ø 6” Ø 19.7” Ø $13,730.83 $1,299.96 Blue Spruce Unknown $14,444.00 Green Ash Deciduous Deciduous Deciduous Deciduous Deciduous EvergreenEvergreen Deciduous 10.0” Ø 6.6” Ø 8.5” Ø 2.4” Ø 15.2” Ø 9.8” Ø 12.3” Ø $3,611.00 $1,769.39 $2,608.95 $0 $8,675.43 $102,407.71$91,123.33 Aspen Crab Apple Malus Green Ash Mountain Ash Green Ash $3,611.00 Southwestern White Pine Evergreen 6.9” Ø $1,769.39 Southwestern White Pine $5,642.19 Aspen *Note: Tree species data provided by City of Aspen Tree Inventory. All other information provided by the survey. PROPERTY LINE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 CONNER PARK ARMORY HALL HOPKINS AVE.GALENA ST.75 | xv Engineering Design Standard Standard Detail Of Silva Cell 76 DW LEGACY DESIGN® Legacy Design is the defining element of our practice. It is our commitment to an elevated level of design inquiry to arrive at the optimal solutions for clients. The process ensures that our projects reflect the critical issues facing the built environment and that they deliver measurable benefit to clients and communities. It is the foundation of the firm’s workshop culture and guides all projects. www.designworkshop.com 77 RE: CIVIL STAGE PLATFORM LINE OF OVERHANG ABV. STEEL FRAMING, RE: STRUCTURAL METAL SCREEN, PRE-PATINAED COPPER AS BASIS OF DESIGN PLATFORM WIDTH 13'-0"PLATFORM DEPTH12'-0"ACCESSIBLE WALKWAY, RE: LANDSCAPE A-438 3 A-438 4 A-4386 A-438 5 1 A-439 STAGE S.O.G., RE: STRUCT. STEEL FRAMING, RE: STRUCTURAL A-520 2 A-520 1 SIM. SIM. W2 SIM. STEEL COLUMNS BELOW, RE: STRUCTURAL METAL SCREEN BELOW, PRE-PATINAED COPPER AS BASIS OF DESIGN PLATFORM EDGE BELOW, RE: LANDSCAPE A-438 3 A-438 4 A-4386 A-438 5 1 A-439 1/4" / 12"MEMBRANE ROOF ROOF WIDTH 17'-0"ROOF DEPTH14'-0"1 A-439 MT-01 MT-05 MT-05 MT-05 MT-05 MT-01 MT-05 MT-05 1 A-439 MT-01 MT-05 MT-05 MT-05 MT-01 MT-05 MT-05 MT-05 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 02/17/2025 1/2" = 1'-0" 24102 PARK STAGE PLANS & ELEVATIONS A-438ASPEN ARMORYGMP SET 2026.02.17 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816111/2" = 1'-0" PARK STAGE PLAN -MAIN LEVEL 1 1/2" = 1'-0" PARK STAGE PLAN -ROOF 2 1/2" = 1'-0" PARK STAGE ELEVATION -SOUTH 31/2" = 1'-0" PARK STAGE ELEVATION -WEST 5 1/2" = 1'-0" PARK STAGE ELEVATION -NORTH 41/2" = 1'-0" PARK STAGE ELEVATION -EAST 6 MT-05 MT-01 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 78 6"8'-6"6"1/4" / 12" STAGE PLATFORM RE: CIVIL PRE-PATINAED COPPER SCREEN STEEL STRUCTURE BEYOND, RE: STRUCTURAL LOW SLOPED MEMBRANE ROOF A-540 1 SIM. CONC. S.O.G., FINISH RE: LANDSCAPE CONC. FDN, RE: STRUCT. STEEL STRUCTURE, PAINTED, RE: FINISH SCHEDULE 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 02/17/2025 1/2" = 1'-0" 24102 PARK STAGE SECTIONS A-439ASPEN ARMORYGMP SET 2026.02.17 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816111/2" = 1'-0" PARK STAGE SECTION 1 MT-05 MT-01 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 79 Shaw Construction C/O Robert Glover 300 Kalamath St, Denver, CO 80223 RE: Aspen Armory Lift Mr. Glover, It is my pleasure to write to you regarding the Aspen Armory Renovation project. After review of the structure and the renovation plans it is my professional opinion that the best, and safest, method of preserving the historic elements of the Aspen Armory Hall is to lift the structure during the foundation installation. Our plan is to secure the entire building onto a temporary foundation of steel and dunnage, and elevate the structure 5’ to a storage position during the renovation. After the foundation is prepared the building would be returned to the final elevation and the contractor would integrate the historic structure into the new foundation. The proposed building lift process allows for a less invasive excavation than would be required to underpin the building, limiting the potential for undermining the existing foundation as the new foundation is being built. In addition, once the building is secured to the temporary foundation and lifted, there is greater access for further excavation and new foundation construction. Our experience with lifting/moving masonry buildings and the engineering completed ensure the building can be lifted without incurring any structural deficiencies. The temporary supporting steel will be carefully installed through the walls below existing grade level ensuing the entire historic building above will be supported. During installation of the lifting steel, masons and tradesmen will be working alongside Wolfe to ensure the connections to the temporary foundation are sufficient for the duration of the lift. For loading and lifting the building we use a Buckingham Unified Hydraulic Jacking System under the steel. This system allows us lift and lower the building with the least amount of stress possible. We have successfully lifted and moved thousands of buildings in the 50 year history of the company, many of which were structurally equal or more challenging than this building. The attachments with this letter will showcase our efforts and expertise in lifting and/or moving similar structures. I have every confidence that when the Armory Hall is set on the new foundation, it will be structurally sound and will be best preserved having this new, complete foundation. Please take a moment to review some of the many projects on our website at www.wolfehousemovers.com/projects and there are a few videos at www.youtube.com/user/WolfeHouseMoving/videos. The equipment that we manufacture, sell, & use at can be reviewed at www.buckinghamequipment.com. We are committed to making this lift a smooth, safe, and successful project. If you have any further questions or concerns, please reach out to me and I will be happy to address them. Sincerely, Robert Sauder Cell: (484)332-4101 Office: (610)488-1020 x110 robert@wolfehousemovers.com 04/14/2026 Exhibit 4: Letter from Wolfe House and Building Movers 80 Specs x x x x ƵŝůƚϭϵϬϭ ϭϴΗdŚŝĐŬŽƵďůĞƌŝĐŬ ϯϮΖdĂůů DŽǀĞĚϭϬϬϬΖ dŚĞϭϮϭͲLJĞĂƌͲŽůĚ>ĞĞƉĞƌͲtLJĂƚƚ ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŝŶŚĂƌůŽƚƚĞ͛Ɛ^ŽƵƚŚ ŶĚ ŽƉĞƌĂƚĞĚĂƐĂĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŐƌŽĐĞƌLJ ƐƚŽƌĞĨŽƌƐĞǀĞƌĂůĚĞĐĂĚĞƐ͘WůĂŶƐĨŽƌ ĂůƵdžƵƌLJŚŝŐŚͲƌŝƐĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽŶ ŝƚƐĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐƉƵƌƌĞĚĂůŽĐĂů ĐŽƵƉůĞƚŽƌĞƐĐƵĞŝƚĨƌŽŵ ĚĞŵŽůŝƚŝŽŶ͘tŽůĨĞŵŽǀĞĚƚŚĞϮͲ ƐƚŽƌLJ͕ĚŽƵďůĞͲďƌŝĐŬďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĚŽǁŶ ƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚƚŽĂŶĞŵƉƚLJůŽƚƚǁŽ ďůŽĐŬƐĨƌŽŵŝƚƐŽƌŝŐŝŶĂůůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘ Historic >ĞĞƉĞƌͲtLJĂƚƚƵŝůĚŝŶŐ MovĞ $IBSMPUUF /$ 81 Daughters of Utah Pioneers Ogden, UT Specs: •49'x83' Triple Brick •Weighed 600 Ton •Moved on Dollies Above: The museum in the lifted position and foundation removal in progress for the dolly placement. Note how machines were able to navigate the space under the building once lifted. Center: Museum in transit, navigating around the block. Bottom: Museum in it's final location after the project was complete. 82 To Whom It May Concern; It is the position of Wolfe House Movers that the Aspen Armory located at 130 S Galena St, Aspen, CO is a good candidate to be lifted and supported during planned construction. We have reviewed historic documents, material data, and have spent considerable time onsite inspecting the building to understand the current materials and conditions. Smithwick engineering has designed the supporting steel to carry the load path from the ceiling to our proposed lifting points. Our lifting plan utilizes Wolfe’s means and methods to ensure the building will be properly prepared for the lift and that the lifting will be performed with a unified jacking system. Wolfe has lifted and moved many buildings of similar magnitude and it is our professional opinion that lifting/lowering the building is a viable and will preserve the historic fabric of the building. We welcome questions to our process and will be glad to address any concerns regarding the lift of the Armory. Similar projects can be viewed on our website www.wolfehousemovers.com. Respectfully, Robert Sauder Wolfe House Movers Office: (610)488-1020 x110 Cell: (484)332-4101 robert@wolfehousemovers.com www.wolfehousemovers.com 4/29/2026 83 Atkinson-Noland & Associates 607 S. Public Rd, Suite 110 Lafayette, CO 80026 303.444.3620 32 Old Slip, 10th Floor New York, NY 10005 917.647.9530 ana-usa.com MEMORANDUM May 6, 2026 Robert Glover Shaw Construction 300 Kalamath Street Denver, CO 80223 Re: Armory Hall Proposed Lifting ANA Job No. 25-200 Mr. Glover, We understand that lifting the Armory Hall Building has been proposed in order to replace the existing stone foundation walls with a new reinforced concrete foundation, after which the building would be lowered back onto its original location. We also understand that concerns have been raised regarding the potential impact of the lifting process on the existing historic masonry, and that underpinning has been suggested as a potentially more suitable alternative approach. The masonry construction of the Armory is in relatively good condition given the age of the building, with the exception of localized areas of material deterioration near grade, some masonry bulging, and minor cracking. These conditions should be addressed prior to lifting through remedial actions such as repointing and/or localized rebuilding of areas in poor condition, including areas adjacent to lifting points, and the installation of wall bracing at selected locations. The nature and condition of the existing connections between the walls and the floor and roof diaphragms, as well as the condition of the existing stone foundation, are currently unknown, however, and should be investigated during the preparation phase. The project team has engaged an experienced building mover with a successful track record of lifting numerous buildings of similar masonry construction and size, ensuring that the work will be performed by specialists familiar with the unique challenges of historic masonry structures. The proposed lifting plan is designed to raise the building uniformly, which is not expected to significantly alter the load path or increase stresses in the existing walls beyond what would be anticipated with a complex underpinning project. This uniform approach minimizes differential movement—a key risk factor in older masonry. 84 Memorandum Pg. 2 5/6/2026 Atkinson-Noland & Associates Based on the information available to date, we find no strong indication of factors that would prevent the successful lifting of the building or would impose a significant risk to historic construction. It is our professional opinion that, with the implementation of pre-lift remedial actions—such as localized masonry repairs and bracing—and strict adherence to the specialized lifting plan, the building can be successfully lifted and re-seated. Thank you for the opportunity to work with you on this matter. Please do not hesitate to reach out if you have any questions. Sincerely, Carlo Citto, P.E. Atkinson-Noland & Associates, Inc. 5/6/26 85 Exhibit 5: Approved relocations from 2022 through February 2026 Table 1: Relocation applications, 2022 – February 2026 2026 212 N. Monarch St. Temp, vertical lift of house, place on new basement foundation Under review - Conceptual 500 W. Francis St. Temp, vertical lift of house and carriage house, place on new basement foundation Under review - Conceptual 2025 504 W. Hallam St. Conceptual Approval Temp relocation of house, place on new foundation Resolution No. 10 (Series 2025) 406 W. Smuggler St. Conceptual Approval Relocate house on site, place on new basement foundation Resolution No. 11 (Series 2025) 325 W. Hopkins Ave. Final/Conceptual Approval Temp relocation of house, place on new basement foundation Resolution No. 14 (Series 2025) Resolution No. 11 (Series 2024) 2024 335 Lake Ave. Final Approval Underpin resource to dig crawl space Resolution No. 7 (Series 2024) 325 W. Hopkins Ave. Conceptual Approval Temp relocation of house, place on new basement foundation Resolution No. 11 (Series 2024) 2023 214 E. Bleeker St. Final Approval Temp lift of house, place on new basement foundation Resolution No. 6 (Series 2023) 205 W. Main St. Final Approval Relocate house on the site on new basement foundation Resolution No. 9 (Series 2023) 820 E. Cooper Ave. Conceptual Approval Temp relocation of house, place on new basement foundation Resolution No. 11 (Series 2013) 135 W. Francis St. Final Approval Underpin resource to build basement from crawl Resolution No. 13 (Series 2023) 2022 949 W. Smuggler St. Final Approval Relocation of an accessory structure Resolution No. 7 (Series 2022) 121 W. Bleeker St. Final/Conceptual Approval Temp relocation of house, new basement foundation Resolution No. 9 (Series 2022) Resolution No. 10 (Series 2021) 233 W. Bleeker St. Final/Conceptual Approval Temp relocation of house, new basement foundation Resolution No. 12 (Series 2022) Resolution No. 3 (Series 2022) 132 W. Hopkins Ave. Final/Conceptual Approval Relocate house onsite on new basement foundation Resolution No. 17 (Series 2022) Resolution No. 5 (Series 2022) 86 Z-200 BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 3344 55 66 B.4B.4 2 Z-300 1 Z-300 Z-201 1 Z-2002 Z-2012 1 11 AA EE6'-0"11'-0"6'-6"9'-6"9'-6"6'-6"11'-0"5'-8"X2X2 15'-3 3/4"20'-7"17'-7"17'-7"19'-2 1/4" ASSEMBLY SPACE MECHANICAL CRAWL SPACE LIGHTWELL LOCKER ROOMLOCKER ROOMSTORAGE STORAGE IT VAULT CORRIDOOR STORAGE STORAGE STORAGE STORAGE ASSEMBLY SPACE 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 02/17/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 DEMO FLOOR PLAN - BASEMENT Z-110ASPEN ARMORYGMP SET 2026.02.17 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 3/16" = 1'-0" BASEMENT PLAN - DEMOBASEMENT PLAN - DEMO 11 N REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION Existing Plans Exhibit 6: Updated plans, sections and calculations 87 Z-200 BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 3344 55 66 B.4B.4 2 Z-300 1 Z-300 Z-201 1 Z-2002 Z-2012 1 15'-3 3/4"20'-7"17'-7"17'-7"19'-2 1/4"11 AA EE X2X2 6'-0"11'-0"6'-6"9'-6"9'-6"6'-6"11'-0"5'-8"ADMIN LOBBY OFFICE OFFICE OFFICEOFFICEOFFICEOFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE STORAGE STORAGE STORAGEACCESSIBLE ENTRYRESTROOMRESTROOMOFFICE STORAGE STORAGE OFFICE STORAGE ENTRY VESTIBULE 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 02/17/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 DEMO FLOOR PLAN - FIRST LEVEL Z-111ASPEN ARMORYGMP SET 2026.02.17 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 3/16" = 1'-0" FIRST FLOOR PLAN - DEMOFIRST FLOOR PLAN - DEMO 11 N REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION Existing Plans 88 Z-200 BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 3344 55 66 B.4B.4 2 Z-300 1 Z-300 Z-201 1 Z-2002 Z-2012 1 11 AA EE X2X2 15'-3 3/4"20'-7"17'-7"17'-7"19'-2 1/4"6'-0"11'-0"6'-6"9'-6"9'-6"6'-6"11'-0"5'-8"CORRIDOOR OFFICE OFFICE OFFICEOFFICEOFFICEOFFICEOFFICE OFFICEOFFICEOFFICEOFFICEOFFICEOFFICE OFFICE OFFICE RESTROOM RESTROOM OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICESTORAGE STORAGESTORAGE CORRIDOOR FLEX SPACE 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 02/17/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 DEMO FLOOR PLAN - SECOND LEVEL Z-112ASPEN ARMORYGMP SET 2026.02.17 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 3/16" = 1'-0" SECOND FLOOR PLAN - DEMOSECOND FLOOR PLAN - DEMO 11 N REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION Existing Plans 89 Z-200 BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 3344 55 66 B.4B.4 2 Z-300 1 Z-300 Z-201 1 Z-2002 Z-2012 1 11 AA EE X2X2 6'-0"11'-0"6'-6"9'-6"9'-6"6'-6"11'-0"5'-8"15'-3 3/4"20'-7"17'-7"17'-7"19'-2 1/4" CORRIDOOR & FLEXIBLE OFFICE OVERFLOW SPACE OFFICEOFFICEOFFICEOFFICEOFFICEOFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICEOFFICE OFFICEOFFICEOFFICE OFFICEOFFICEOFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE STORAGE RESTROOM OFFICE 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 02/17/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 DEMO FLOOR PLAN - THIRD LEVEL Z-113ASPEN ARMORYGMP SET 2026.02.17 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 3/16" = 1'-0" THIRD FLOOR PLAN - DEMOTHIRD FLOOR PLAN - DEMO 11 N REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION Existing Plans 90 Z-200 BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 3344 55 66 B.4B.4 2 Z-300 1 Z-300 Z-201 1 Z-2002 Z-2012 1 11 AA EE X2X2 15'-3 3/4"20'-7"17'-7"17'-7"19'-2 1/4"6'-0"11'-0"6'-6"9'-6"9'-6"6'-6"11'-0"5'-8"SKYLIGHTSKYLIGHTSKYLIGHT ROOF ACCESS HATCH14" / 12"14" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"10" / 12"10" / 12" EXISTING NON-HISTORIC COVERED ENTRY ROOF SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 02/17/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 DEMO ROOF PLAN Z-114ASPEN ARMORYGMP SET 2026.02.17 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 3/16" = 1'-0" ROOF PLAN - DEMOROOF PLAN - DEMO 11 N REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION Existing Plans 91 BB MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" EXISTING 2ND FLOOR (DEMO) 109'-4" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. HIGH ROOF 139'-10" A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7B.4B.4AA EE EXISTING CRAWL SPACE IS BACKFILLED TO RUBBLE FOUNDATIONS EXISTING BASEMENT (DEMO) 89'-6" CORRIDOOR & FLEXIBLE OFFICE OVERFLOW SPACE OFFICEFLEX SPACE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE LOCKER ROOM ASSEMBLY SPACE OFFICE RESTROOMLOBBY ADMIN OFFICE MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" EXISTING 2ND FLOOR (DEMO) 109'-4" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. HIGH ROOF 139'-10" 3344 55 6611X2X2 EXISTING CRAWL SPACE IS BACKFILLED TO RUBBLE FOUNDATIONS EXISTING BASEMENT (DEMO) 89'-6" ASSEMBLY SPACE CORRIDOOR CORRIDOOR OFFICE OFFICE OFFICEOFFICEOFFICE OFFICE AIRLOCKLOBBY CORRIDOOR & FLEXIBLE OFFICE OVERFLOW SPACE ASSEMBLY SPACELOBBY 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 02/17/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 DEMO BUILDING SECTIONS Z-300ASPEN ARMORYGMP SET 2026.02.17 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 3/16" = 1'-0" N/S BUILDING SECTIONN/S BUILDING SECTION 11 3/16" = 1'-0" E/W BUILDING SECTIONE/W BUILDING SECTION 22 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION Existing Plans 92 BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 33 44 55 66 B.4B.4 11 AA EE X2X2 4,076 SF BASEMENT FLOOR AREA 1,966 SF CRAWL SPACE FLOOR AREA 230 SF CRAWL SPACE FLOOR AREA 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.9. 10. 11.12. 13. 14. 15. 16.38'-9 13/16"25'-6 23/32" 50'-6 21/32"5'-0 15/16"9'-7 7/8"19'-9 7/16"21'-1 3/4"19'-9 1/16" 3'-4"2'-1 3/8"3'-2"11'-0 3/4" 619 SF LIGHTWELL - DECK 37'-8 1/4"(NOTE: CEILING HEIGHT AT EXISTING CRAWL SPACE LESS THAN 6'-0, TO BE VERIFIED BY BLDG DEPT. AT PERMIT SUBMISSION) BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 33 44 55 66 B.4B.4 11 AA EE X2X2 5,834 SF FIRST FLOOR AREA 89 SF NORTH COVERED ENTRY - PATIO 32 SF WEST COVERED ENTRY - PORCH 767 SF SOUTH COVERED AREA - PORCH BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 33445566 B.4B.4 11 AA EE X2X2 5,926 SF SECOND FLOOR AREA BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 33445566 B.4B.4 11 AA EE X2X2 4,827 SF THIRD FLOOR AREA SUBGRADE WALL EXPOSURE CALCULATIONSSUBGRADE WALL EXPOSURE CALCULATIONS EXPOSED AREA AREA KEYAREA KEY SUBGRADE AREA 38'-9 3/4"9'-6"34'-3 1/4"4'-6 1/2" 1. 25'-6 3/4"9'-6"2. 5'-1"9'-6"3. 50'-6 3/4"9'-6"4. SUBGRADE AREA CALCULATION NOTES: 1. AREA BOUNDARIES FOR FULL HEIGHT SUBGRADE SPACE ONLY, CRAWL SPACES ARE EXEMPT. 2. SUBGRADE AREAS CALCULATED FROM INSIDE FACE OF STRUCTURE. * CALCULATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE AS THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT AND CONSTRUCTION TYPES ARE FINALIZED AND ARE DICTATED BY THE PD PROCESS 37'-8 1/4"9'-6"5. 3'-4"9'-6"6. 7'-6 3/4"9'-6"7. 9'-8"9'-6"8. 2'-1 1/2"9'-6"9. 3'-2"9'-6"10. 2'-1 1/2"9'-6"11. 11'-0 3/4"9'-6"12. 19'-9 1/2"9'-6"13. 19'-9"9'-6"14. 21'-1 3/4"9'-6"15. 25'-1 3/4"9'-6"16. EXPOSED: 325.5 SF 368.75 SF 242.75 SF 48.25 SF 480.25 SF 358 SF71.75 SF91.75 SF 31.5 SF20.25 SF20.25 SF30 SF 105 SF 188 SF187.5 SF200.75 SF239 SF SUBGRADE WALL EXPOSURE CALCULATIONSSUBGRADE WALL EXPOSURE CALCULATIONS LINE OF EXISTING FINISH GRADE 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. FLOOR AREA CALCULATION NOTES: FAR CALCULATED PER COA LAND USE CODE SEC. 26.575.020(d) - CALCULATIONS AND MEASUREMENTS AREA BOUNDARIES ARE LOCATED AT OUTSIDE FACE OF STRUCTURE. STAIRS & ELEVATORS ARE NOT COUNTED ON THE HIGHEST LEVEL THEY SERVE. COVERED ENTRIES/FRONT PORCHES ON STREET-FACING FACADES OF A STRUCTURE DEVELOPED WITHIN 30" OF FINISH GROUND LEVEL SHALL NOT BE COUNTED TOWARDS ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA. CALCULATION OF FLOOR AREA OF A BUILDING OR PORTION THEREOF SHALL NOT INCLUDE DECKS, BALCONIES, LOGGIAS, EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS, AND NON-STREET FACING PORCHES, GAZEBOS AND SIMILAR FEATURES, UNLESS THE AREA OF THESE FEATURES IS GREATER THAN 15% OF THE ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA FOR THE PROPERTY. COVERED PATIOS WITH OVERHANGS THAT EXCEED 4' COUNT TOWARDS DECK AREA. FLOOR AREA NOTESFLOOR AREA NOTES FLOOR AREA AREA KEYAREA KEY PORCH AREA DECK AREA CRAWL AREA 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 02/17/2025 1/16" = 1'-0" 24102 FAR CALCULATIONS - EXISTING Z-005ASPEN ARMORYGMP SET 2026.02.17 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 1/16" = 1'-0" BASEMENTBASEMENT 11 1/16" = 1'-0" FIRST FLOORFIRST FLOOR 22 1/16" = 1'-0" SECOND FLOORSECOND FLOOR 33 1/16" = 1'-0" THIRD FLOORTHIRD FLOOR 44 1/16" = 1'-0" ZONING - SUBGRADE AREAS - EXISTINGZONING - SUBGRADE AREAS - EXISTING REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION Existing Plans 93 UP UP B A.3 C C.6 D D.7 3 4 5 6 B.4 VB VA V1 V2 V3 13'-0"18'-7"34'-9"24'-3" A-2002 A-200 1 A-201 1 A-201 2 1 A-303 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-302 2 A-302 1 A-301 21 A E SHARED STORAGE 008 STORAGE 007 CATERING KITCHEN 006 STORAGE 005 COMMUNITY FLEX SPACE 004 ELEVATOR 02 MECHANICAL 009 WOMEN'S RESTROOM 003 MEN'S RESTROOM 002 PLANTER T.O.F.F. 89'-6" T.O.F.F. 89'-6" 92'-6" T.O. CRAWL SLAB CRAWL SPACE 140 FEC 15'-0"16'-0"24'-9 3/4"24'-2 1/4"17'-0"97'-0"90'-7" 006A 003A 002A 005A 001A15'-0"16'-0"66'-0"90'-7"7'-0 1/2" CRAWL SPACE HEIGHT NOT TO EXCEED 6'-0"66'-0"PLANTER - --- CORRIDOR 001 004A 008B 007A 008A 012A 013A 011A 009A 02ASTAFF TOILET 2 013 STAFF TOILET 1 012 STAFF LOCKER RM. 011 004B 009B 88'-6" T.O.F.F. - --- 1. FOR GENERAL NOTES RE: 1-CVR 2. ARCHITECTURAL 100'-0" = SITE 7917.15' 3. CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PERMANENT BENCHMARK PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 4. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. DIMENSIONS TO EXISTING BRICK WALLS ARE APPROXIMATE AND MUST BE CONFIRMED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. 5. CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PRESERVATION PLAN FOR EXISTING TO REMAIN & HISTORICAL FEATURES. 6. CONTRACTOR TO REFERENCE Z-SET FOR DEMOLITION PLANS, ELEVATIONS, AND CALCULATIONS. DEMO NOT TO EXCEED 40%. 7. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS AS REQUIRED BY SPECS. 8. ALL DIMENSIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS ARE GIVEN TO FACE OF STUD/CONCRETE U.N.O. 9. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. PLEASE REQUEST ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS AS NEEDED 10. RE: LANDSCAPE AND CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR EXTERIOR SITE CONDITIONS, UTILITIES, AND HARDSCAPE DESIGN 11. RE: FOODSERVICE DRAWINGS FOR KITCHEN EQUIPMENT LAYOUT, SPEC'S, AND ADDT'L FINISH INFORMATION 12. RE: A-500 SERIES FOR BUILDING ASSEMBLY TYPES (WALL, FLOOR, ROOF, CEILING, ETC.) 13. RE: A-600 SERIES FOR SCHEDULES (WINDOW, DOOR, FINISH, ETC.) 14. CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW PLACEMENT OF ELECTRICAL OUTLETS WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN. 15. RADON MITIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES. 16. AN APPROVED AUTOMATIC FIRE EXTINGUISHING (SPRINKLER) SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES (DESIGN BUILD). PLAN GENERAL NOTES 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A-110ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611N 3/16" = 1'-0" LOWER LEVEL PLAN 1 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 Council Approved Plans 94 DN DN DW DN UP B A.3 C C.6 D D.7 3 4 5 6 B.4 VB VA V1 V2 V3 15'-0"16'-0"6'-0"11'-0"6'-6"9'-6"9'-6"6'-6"11'-0"6'-0"13'-0"5'-7 3/4"12'-11 1/4"4'-7 3/4"17'-7"12'-6 1/4"5'-0 3/4"19'-2 1/4" A-2002 A-200 1 A-201 1 A-201 2 1 A-303 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-302 2 A-302 1 A-301 21 A E KITCHEN 2 106 KITCHEN 3 107 EGRESS STAIR 01 MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 BOH 103 ELEVATOR 02 KITCHEN 1 102 STOR 105 OFFICE 104 ENTRY VESTIBULE 100 VENDOR 1 101.1 VISITOR CENTER 110 OFFICE 112 STOR 111 TRASH ENCLOSURE TRANSFORMER OPEN TO BELOW VENDOR 2 101.3 ARCH 100'-0" T.O.F.F. DN 99'-0 1/2" T.O.F.F. ENTRY VESTIBULE 108 FEC-K FEC-K 99'-0 1/2" CORRIDOR 101.4 90'-7"97'-0"111A 01A 106A 108B108A 103B 103A 105A 104A 4.99%- --- 102A 02C 02B 112A W6.1W6W6W6.1W6.1W6 W1 W1 W1 W1 W1 W2 W4.3 W4.3 F2 - --- 1. FOR GENERAL NOTES RE: 1-CVR 2. ARCHITECTURAL 100'-0" = SITE 7917.15' 3. CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PERMANENT BENCHMARK PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 4. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. DIMENSIONS TO EXISTING BRICK WALLS ARE APPROXIMATE AND MUST BE CONFIRMED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. 5. CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PRESERVATION PLAN FOR EXISTING TO REMAIN & HISTORICAL FEATURES. 6. CONTRACTOR TO REFERENCE Z-SET FOR DEMOLITION PLANS, ELEVATIONS, AND CALCULATIONS. DEMO NOT TO EXCEED 40%. 7. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS AS REQUIRED BY SPECS. 8. ALL DIMENSIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS ARE GIVEN TO FACE OF STUD/CONCRETE U.N.O. 9. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. PLEASE REQUEST ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS AS NEEDED 10. RE: LANDSCAPE AND CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR EXTERIOR SITE CONDITIONS, UTILITIES, AND HARDSCAPE DESIGN 11. RE: FOODSERVICE DRAWINGS FOR KITCHEN EQUIPMENT LAYOUT, SPEC'S, AND ADDT'L FINISH INFORMATION 12. RE: A-500 SERIES FOR BUILDING ASSEMBLY TYPES (WALL, FLOOR, ROOF, CEILING, ETC.) 13. RE: A-600 SERIES FOR SCHEDULES (WINDOW, DOOR, FINISH, ETC.) 14. CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW PLACEMENT OF ELECTRICAL OUTLETS WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN. 15. RADON MITIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES. 16. AN APPROVED AUTOMATIC FIRE EXTINGUISHING (SPRINKLER) SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES (DESIGN BUILD). PLAN GENERAL NOTES 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A-111ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611N 3/16" = 1'-0" MAIN LEVEL PLAN 1 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 Council Approved Plans 95 UP DN UP DN B A.3 C C.6 D D.7 3 4 5 6 B.4 VB VA V1 V2 V3 A-2002 A-200 1 A-201 1 A-201 2 1 A-303 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-302 2 A-302 1 A-301 21 A E COMMUNITY LOUNGE 115 BILLIARDS 116 EGRESS STAIR 01 ELEVATOR 02 OPEN TO BELOW MECHANICAL ROOF SINGLE STORY VISITOR CENTER ROOF COVERED TRASH ENCLOSURE BELOW 110'-8" T.O.F.F. 110'-6 3/4" 113'-8 1/2" T.O. ROOF FINISH T.O. ROOF FINISH 97'-0"15'-0"16'-0"17'-0"32'-0"17'-0"90'-7" 13'-0"5'-7 3/4"12'-11 1/4"59'-0" - --- LIBRARY 117 117A 02D W7.1 W7 W7.1 W7 W4.3 W4.3 W4.1 W4.1 W4.1 W5 W5.1 W4.1 W4.1 W4.1 RD RD RD RD RDRDRD - --- 1. FOR GENERAL NOTES RE: 1-CVR 2. ARCHITECTURAL 100'-0" = SITE 7917.15' 3. CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PERMANENT BENCHMARK PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 4. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. DIMENSIONS TO EXISTING BRICK WALLS ARE APPROXIMATE AND MUST BE CONFIRMED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. 5. CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PRESERVATION PLAN FOR EXISTING TO REMAIN & HISTORICAL FEATURES. 6. CONTRACTOR TO REFERENCE Z-SET FOR DEMOLITION PLANS, ELEVATIONS, AND CALCULATIONS. DEMO NOT TO EXCEED 40%. 7. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS AS REQUIRED BY SPECS. 8. ALL DIMENSIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS ARE GIVEN TO FACE OF STUD/CONCRETE U.N.O. 9. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. PLEASE REQUEST ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS AS NEEDED 10. RE: LANDSCAPE AND CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR EXTERIOR SITE CONDITIONS, UTILITIES, AND HARDSCAPE DESIGN 11. RE: FOODSERVICE DRAWINGS FOR KITCHEN EQUIPMENT LAYOUT, SPEC'S, AND ADDT'L FINISH INFORMATION 12. RE: A-500 SERIES FOR BUILDING ASSEMBLY TYPES (WALL, FLOOR, ROOF, CEILING, ETC.) 13. RE: A-600 SERIES FOR SCHEDULES (WINDOW, DOOR, FINISH, ETC.) 14. CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW PLACEMENT OF ELECTRICAL OUTLETS WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN. 15. RADON MITIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES. 16. AN APPROVED AUTOMATIC FIRE EXTINGUISHING (SPRINKLER) SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES (DESIGN BUILD). PLAN GENERAL NOTES 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 MEZZANINE FLOOR PLAN A-112ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611N 3/16" = 1'-0" MEZZANINE PLAN 1 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 Council Approved Plans 96 B A.3 C C.6 D D.7 3 4 5 6 B.4 VB VA V1 V2 V3 A-2002 A-200 1 A-201 1 A-201 2 1 A-303 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-302 2 A-302 1 A-301 13'-0"5'-7 3/4"12'-11 1/4"4'-7 3/4"17'-7"12'-6 1/4"5'-0 3/4"19'-2 1/4" 21 A E BAR 200.1 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200 KITCHEN 4 203 KITCHEN 5 204 RESTROOM 202 BOH 201 ELEVATOR 02 15'-0"16'-0"6'-0"11'-0"6'-6"19'-0"6'-6"11'-0"6'-0"121'-4" T.O.F.F. OPEN TO BELOW 90'-7"97'-0"201A 202A 202B F2 202C 202D - --- 02E 203A 204A W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 W4.4 W4.4 W3.2 W3.2 W3.2 W3.2W3.2 W3.2 W4.2 W4.1 W4.1 W4.1 W4.2 - --- 1. FOR GENERAL NOTES RE: 1-CVR 2. ARCHITECTURAL 100'-0" = SITE 7917.15' 3. CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PERMANENT BENCHMARK PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 4. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. DIMENSIONS TO EXISTING BRICK WALLS ARE APPROXIMATE AND MUST BE CONFIRMED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. 5. CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PRESERVATION PLAN FOR EXISTING TO REMAIN & HISTORICAL FEATURES. 6. CONTRACTOR TO REFERENCE Z-SET FOR DEMOLITION PLANS, ELEVATIONS, AND CALCULATIONS. DEMO NOT TO EXCEED 40%. 7. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS AS REQUIRED BY SPECS. 8. ALL DIMENSIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS ARE GIVEN TO FACE OF STUD/CONCRETE U.N.O. 9. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. PLEASE REQUEST ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS AS NEEDED 10. RE: LANDSCAPE AND CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR EXTERIOR SITE CONDITIONS, UTILITIES, AND HARDSCAPE DESIGN 11. RE: FOODSERVICE DRAWINGS FOR KITCHEN EQUIPMENT LAYOUT, SPEC'S, AND ADDT'L FINISH INFORMATION 12. RE: A-500 SERIES FOR BUILDING ASSEMBLY TYPES (WALL, FLOOR, ROOF, CEILING, ETC.) 13. RE: A-600 SERIES FOR SCHEDULES (WINDOW, DOOR, FINISH, ETC.) 14. CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW PLACEMENT OF ELECTRICAL OUTLETS WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN. 15. RADON MITIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES. 16. AN APPROVED AUTOMATIC FIRE EXTINGUISHING (SPRINKLER) SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES (DESIGN BUILD). PLAN GENERAL NOTES 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A-113ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611N 3/16" = 1'-0" UPPER LEVEL PLAN 1 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 Council Approved Plans 97 B A.3 C C.6 D D.7 3 4 5 6 B.4 VB VA V1 V2 V3 A-2002 A-200 1 A-201 1 A-201 2 1 A-303 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-302 2 A-302 1 A-301 21 A E MECHANICAL WELL W/ INTERNAL ROOF DRAIN AND OVERFLOWMEMBRANE HIGH ROOF SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT EXISTING SLOPED ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN - NEW ROOF FINISH, STANDING SEAM METAL AS BASIS OF DESIGN 12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"TAPERED INSULATION SLOPED TO DRAINT.O. ROOF 140'-4" T.O. PARAPET 140'-4" T.O. PARAPET 141'-3 3/4" T.O. WALL CAP - ---12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12" 12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"14" / 12"14" / 12"RD RD RD RD RDRDRD 139'-10" RD - --- 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 ROOF PLAN A-114ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611N 3/16" = 1'-0" ROOF PLAN 1 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 Council Approved Plans 98 B MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" A.3CC.6DD.7 B.4 MEZZANINE 110'-8" VB VA 1 A-303 1 A-302 2 A-302 AE CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" CATERING KITCHEN 006 STORAGE 005 SHARED STORAGE 008 MECHANICAL 009 VISITOR CENTER 110 OFFICE 112 KITCHEN 2 106 MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 COMMUNITY LOUNGE 115 BAR 200.1 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200 VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" B MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" A.3 C C.6 D D.7B.4 MEZZANINE 110'-8" VBVA 1 A-303 1 A-302 2 A-302 A E CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200 COMMUNITY LOUNGE 115 VISITOR CENTER 110 COMMUNITY FLEX SPACE 004 MECHANICAL ROOF A-402 1 VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" CORRIDOR 101.4 STAFF LOCKER RM. 011 MECHANICAL 009 CORRIDOR 010 CRAWL SPACE COVERED TRASH ENCLOSURE 7'-0"228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. N O T FO R C O N S T R UC T IO N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 BUILDING SECTIONS A-300ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816113/16" = 1'-0" N/S SECTION @ VISITOR CENTER 1 3/16" = 1'-0" N/S SECTION @ CENTRAL STAIR 2 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 Council Approved Plans 99 B MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" A.3 C C.6 D D.7B.4 MEZZANINE 110'-8" VBVA 1 A-303 1 A-302 2 A-302 A E CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 STOR 105 BOH 103 KITCHEN 1 102 RESTROOM 202 KITCHEN 4 203 KITCHEN 5 204 COMMUNITY FLEX SPACE 004 WOMEN'S RESTROOM 003 MECHANICAL WELL VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" MEN'S RESTROOM 002 LIBRARY 117 MECHANICAL ROOF MECHANICAL ROOF CRAWL SPACE 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. N O T FO R C O N S T R UC T IO N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 BUILDING SECTIONS A-301ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816113/16" = 1'-0" N/S SECTION @ MECH WELL 1 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 Council Approved Plans 100 MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" 3456 MEZZANINE 110'-8" V1V2V3 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-301 2 1 CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" MECHANICAL 009 CORRIDOR 001 VISITOR CENTER 110 MECHANICAL ROOF VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" 103A W2 W7.1W7 W7 W7.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 01A 009A MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" 3 4 5 6 MEZZANINE 110'-8" V1 V2 V3 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-301 21 CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" CATERING KITCHEN 006 COMMUNITY FLEX SPACE 004 MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200 KITCHEN 4 203 BAR 200.1 BILLIARDS 116 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200 VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" - --- ENTRY VESTIBULE 108 MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 CRAWL SPACE - --- 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. N O T FO R C O N S T R UC T IO N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 BUILDING SECTIONS A-302ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816113/16" = 1'-0" E/W SECTION @ VISITOR CENTER 1 3/16" = 1'-0" E/W SECTION @ GALENA ENTRY 2 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 Council Approved Plans 101 MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" 3456 MEZZANINE 110'-8" V1V2V3 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-301 2 1 CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 ENTRY VESTIBULE 100 COMMUNITY FLEX SPACE 004 STORAGE 005 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200KITCHEN 5 204 MECHANICAL WELL VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. N O T FO R C O N S T R UC T IO N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 BUILDING SECTIONS A-303ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816113/16" = 1'-0" E/W SECTION @ VESTIBULE 1 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 Council Approved Plans 102 B A.3 C C.6 D D.7 3 4 5 6 B.4 VB VA V1 V2 V321 A E 5,745 SF LOWER LEVEL FLOOR AREA 77'-1 1/2"16'-0"13'-4"16'-11"14'-2"33'-11"15'-2"22'-8" 4'-9 3/4" 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 958 SF LIGHTWELL -DECK 9'-3 3/4" 7. 1,275 SF LOWER LEVEL CRAWL SPACE EXEMPT 8.53'-8 1/4"28'-11"23'-0 3/4"17'-0 3/4" CRAWL HEIGHT TO BE LESS THAN 6'-0" B A.3 C C.6 D D.7 3 4 5 6 B.4 VB VA V1 V2 V321 A E 6,769 SF MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA 130 SF NORTHWEST COVERED ENTRY - PORCH 210 SF NORTH COVERED ENTRY - PATIO 83 SF VESTIBULE COVERED ENTRY - PORCH 32 SF WEST COVERED ENTRY - PORCH 66 SF SOUTHWEST COVERED -PORCH 300 SF COVERED TRASH ENCLOSURE -PATIO 156 SF COVERED MULTI-USE STAGE - PATIO 1,225 SF PARK DECK OPEN TO BELOW 66 SF SOUTHEAST COVERED -PORCH B A.3 C C.6 D D.7 3 4 5 6 B.4 VB VA V1 V2 V321 A E 2,405 SF MEZZANINE FLOOR AREA OPEN TO BELOW B A.3 C C.6 D D.7 3 4 5 6 B.4 VB VA V1 V2 V321 A E 4,125 SF UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA OPEN TO BELOW FLOOR AREA CALCULATION NOTES: 1. AREA BOUNDARIES ARE LOCATED AT OUTSIDE FACE OF STRUCTURE. 2. STAIRS & ELEVATORS ARE NOT COUNTED ON THE HIGHEST LEVEL THEY SERVE. 3. COVERED ENTRIES/FRONT PORCHES ON STREET-FACING FACADES OF A STRUCTURE DEVELOPED WITHIN 30" OF FINISH GROUND LEVEL SHALL NOT BE COUNTED TOWARDS ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA. 4. CALCULATION OF FLOOR AREA OF A BUILDING OR PORTION THEREOF SHALL NOT INCLUDE DECKS, BALCONIES, LOGGIAS, EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS, AND NON-STREET FACING PORCHES, GAZEBOS AND SIMILAR FEATURES, UNLESS THE AREA OF THESE FEATURES IS GREATER THAN 15% OF THE ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA FOR THE PROPERTY. 5. COVERED PATIOS WITH OVERHANGS THAT EXCEED 4' COUNT TOWARDS DECK AREA. FLOOR AREA NOTES FLOOR AREA AREA KEY PORCH AREA DECK AREA CRAWL AREA SUBGRADE WALL EXPOSURE CALCULATIONS EXPOSED AREA AREA KEY SUBGRADE AREA 53'-8 1/4"8'-6"1. SUBGRADE AREA CALCULATION NOTES: 1. AREA BOUNDARIES FOR FULL HEIGHT SUBGRADE SPACE ONLY, CRAWL SPACES LESS THAN 6' IN HEIGHT ARE EXEMPT. 2. SUBGRADE AREAS CALCULATED FROM INSIDE FACE OF STRUCTURE. * CALCULATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE AS THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT AND CONSTRUCTION TYPES ARE FINALIZED AND ARE DICTATED BY THE PD PROCESS 77'-1 1/2"8'-6"2. 28'-11"8'-6"3. 9'-3 3/4"8'-6"4. 23'-0 3/4"8'-6"5. 17'-0 3/4"8'-6"6. 16'-0"9'-6"7. 4'-9 3/4"9'-6"8. 14'-2"9'-6"11. 33'-11"8'-6"12. 15'-2"8'-6"13. 22'-8"8'-6"14. EXPOSED: 383.75 SF 456.5 SF 245.75 SF 79.25 SF 655.5 SF 196 SF 152 SF 45.75 SF 134.5 SF 299.25 SF 129 SF 192.75 SF NOTES SUBGRADE WALL EXPOSURE CALCULATIONS 145 SF 13'-4"9'-6"9. 126.75 SF 16'-11"9'-6"10. 160.75 SF 6'-1 1/2"9'-6"10'-2" LINE OF EXISTING GRADE LINE OF FINISHED GRADE 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. N O T FO R C O N S T R UC T IO N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 1/16" = 1'-0" 24102 FAR CALCULATIONS - PROPOSED Z-003ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816111/16" = 1'-0" LOWER LEVEL 1 1/16" = 1'-0" MAIN LEVEL 2 1/16" = 1'-0" MEZZANINE 3 1/16" = 1'-0" UPPER LEVEL 4 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 4,125 19,044 Vestibule Covered Entry Porch Area (SF) 6,769 Southwest Covered Entry Porch Area (SF)66 66 83 377 6,769 4,125 14,037 2025.07.01 Council Approved Plans 103 UP UP BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 3344 55 66 B.4B.4 VBVB VAVA V1V1V2V2V3V3 12'-8"18'-7"34'-9"24'-3" A-2002 A-200 1 A-201 1 A-2012 1 A-303 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-302 2 A-302 1 A-301 2211 AA EE SHARED STORAGESHARED STORAGE 008 STORSTOR 007 PREP KITCHENPREP KITCHEN 006 STORAGESTORAGE 005 COMMUNITY FLEXCOMMUNITY FLEX SPACESPACE 004 ELEVATORELEVATOR 02 MECHANICALMECHANICAL 009 WOMEN'S RESTROOMWOMEN'S RESTROOM 003 MEN'S RESTROOMMEN'S RESTROOM 002 PLANTER T.O.F.F. 88'-6" T.O.F.F. 88'-5" 92'-4" T.O. CRAWL SLAB CRAWL SPACECRAWL SPACE 140 A-420A-420 22 A-406A-406 22 96'-8"90'-3" 006A 003A 002A 005A 001A W11 W11 W1 W11 W1W11 W11 W2 W12 W11 W11 W11 W11 W12 W12 W12 W12W11 W10 W10 W10 W12 W11 W11 W11 90'-3" CRAWL SPACE HEIGHT NOT TO EXCEED 6'-0" PLANTER CORRIDORCORRIDOR 001 008B 007A 008A 012A 013A 011A 009A 02ASTAFF BATHSTAFF BATH 013 STAFF TOILETSTAFF TOILET 012 STAFF LOCKERSTAFF LOCKER 011 009B W12 W12 W12 W12 W11 W11 W11 W12 W12 W11 W12 W12 W12 W11 W12 W11 SF01 18'-3 3/4"17'-7"17'-7"17'-7"19'-2 1/4"7'-5" A-200 37'-1"3"7'-0 3/4"/1A-456 /1A-455/1A-455 4'-10 3/8"2'-5 5/8" 3'-4 1/8" 2'-5 3/4" 2 1/4" /1 A-442 /1 A-443 1'-0"2 1/8"16'-2 3/4"2 1/8" 1'-0"6'-11"3 5/8" 3'-9 3/8" 6"22'-0 7/8"2 1/8" 1'-0"22'-10 7/8"4 1/8" 1'-0"2 1/8"12'-7 3/4"2 1/8"1'-0"16'-0"1'-0"4 1/8"16'-10 5/8"6"5'-7"3 5/8"40'-0 5/8"1'-0"15'-0"16'-0"65'-8"1'-0"4 1/8"16'-11 5/8"1'-0" 2 1/8"5'-3 1/4"6" 2'-7 1/4" 6" 5'-3 1/4" 6" 2'-0" 3'-3 1/8"4'-9"7'-11 3/4"6"4'-2 3/4" 1'-9 1/4" 6"11'-8 1/8" 10'-6"4 1/8"17'-0 7/8"6"58'-8 1/2"1'-1 1/2" 6'-6"6"1'-10"4'-3"2'-2"14'-5 1/4"9'-9 1/8"2'-1 3/4"2 1/8"1'-0"10'-2"2'-4"1'-0"2 1/8"14'-9 7/8"1'-0"6 1/2"10'-4"1'-6 1/4"10'-11"1'-3"14'-7 1/4"8'-10"10"3'-5 7/8"2 1/8"1'-0"11'-2"16'-0"40'-2"9'-8"15'-10"1'-6"6"6'-9 1/4" 3 5/8"9'-10"3 5/8"5'-0 3/4" 6"1'-11 1/4"1'-10 1/2"9'-11 3/4"6"6'-4 1/4"6" 5'-5 1/4" 1'-11 1/4" 1'-11 1/4" EQ EQ EQ EQ EQ EQ 2'-7 3/8"2'-7 3/4" 2'-7 3/8" 1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"1'-6"W3 W5 W1 W1 FEC FEC-K 004B 004C 004D 004E 004A SF04 ADA PUSH BUTTON DOOR OPENER. BUTTON TO OPEN BOTH DOORS ADA PUSH BUTTON DOOR OPENER. BUTTON TO OPEN BOTH DOORS W11 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W11 W11 W1 W1 W1 W1 W1 W1 W1 W1 W1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. FOR GENERAL NOTES RE: 1-CVR ARCHITECTURAL 100'-0" = SITE 7917.15' CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PERMANENT BENCHMARK PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. DIMENSIONS TO EXISTING BRICK WALLS ARE APPROXIMATE AND MUST BE CONFIRMED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PRESERVATION PLAN FOR EXISTING TO REMAIN & HISTORICAL FEATURES. CONTRACTOR TO REFERENCE Z-SET FOR DEMOLITION PLANS, ELEVATIONS, AND CALCULATIONS. DEMO NOT TO EXCEED 40%. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS AS REQUIRED BY SPECS. ALL DIMENSIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS ARE GIVEN TO FACE OF STUD/CONCRETE U.N.O. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. PLEASE REQUEST ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS AS NEEDED RE: LANDSCAPE AND CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR EXTERIOR SITE CONDITIONS, UTILITIES, AND HARDSCAPE DESIGN RE: FOODSERVICE DRAWINGS FOR KITCHEN EQUIPMENT LAYOUT, SPEC'S, AND ADDT'L FINISH INFORMATION RE: A-500 SERIES FOR BUILDING ASSEMBLY TYPES (WALL, FLOOR, ROOF, CEILING, ETC.) RE: A-600 SERIES FOR SCHEDULES (WINDOW, DOOR, FINISH, ETC.) CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW PLACEMENT OF ELECTRICAL OUTLETS WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN. RADON MITIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES. AN APPROVED AUTOMATIC FIRE EXTINGUISHING (SPRINKLER) SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES (DESIGN BUILD). PLAN GENERAL NOTESPLAN GENERAL NOTES 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 11/19/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A-110ASPEN ARMORYPERMIT 2025.11.19 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611N 3/16" = 1'-0" LOWER LEVEL PLANLOWER LEVEL PLAN 11 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION Proposed Plans 104 DN DN UP DN UP BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 3344 55 66 B.4B.4 VBVB VAVA V1V1V2V2V3V3 15'-0"5 1/2"10'-10 1/4"5 1/2"4'-2 3/4"1'-0"7"4'-5"4'-3 1/2"8 5/8"6"5'-5 7/8"1'-9"1'-9 5/8"6"2'-5 3/8"5'-5 3/8"6"3'-3"16'-3 5/8"5'-6"5'-6"4'-8"1'-0"12'-8"5 1/2" 5'-2 1/4" 2'-4 1/2" 3 5/8" 8'-0" 3 5/8" 1'-6" 5 1/2"19'-9 3/4"14'-5 3/4"5 1/2" 5'-0 3/4"5'-8 1/4" 3'-0 1/2"5 1/2"10'-0" A-2002 A-200 1 A-201 1 A-2012 1 A-303 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-302 2 A-302 1 A-301 2211 AA EE KITCHEN 2KITCHEN 2 106 KITCHEN 3KITCHEN 3 107 EGRESS STAIREGRESS STAIR 01 MAIN LEVEL DININGMAIN LEVEL DINING 101 BOHBOH 103 ELEVATORELEVATOR 02 KITCHEN 1KITCHEN 1 102 STORSTOR 105 OFFICEOFFICE 104 EAST VESTIBULEEAST VESTIBULE 100 VENDOR 1VENDOR 1 101.1 VISITOR CENTERVISITOR CENTER 110 STORAGESTORAGE 111 TRASH ENCLOSURE TRANSFORMER OPEN TO BELOW VENDOR 2VENDOR 2 101.3 A-422A-422 11 ARCH 100'-0" T.O.F.F. DN 98'-11" T.O.F.F. WEST VESTIBULEWEST VESTIBULE 108 A-400A-400 11 A-420A-420 33 FEC-K FEC-K A-410A-410 11 A-406A-406 33 98'-11" CORRIDORCORRIDOR 101.4 12'-8"18'-7"34'-9"24'-3"96'-8"01A 106A 108A 103B 103A 105A 104A W2W12W2 W2 W2 W1.X W1.X W11 W12 W1.X W1.X W1.X W2 W12 W12 W11 W12 W11 W12 W10 W2 W11 W12 W12 W12 W12 W11 W12 W12 W2W11 W12 W12 W12 W11 W11 W11 W16 W11 W11 W11 W11 W11 SF13 SF14 W6.1W6W6W6.1W6.1W6 SF10 SF11 W1 W1 W1 W1 W1 W2 F3 101A 101B 101C A-200 3 02B 111A 1'-0"6'-7"3'-10"6'-10 3/4"8'-9 1/2"8'-9 1/2"6'-11"3'-10"6'-10"6'-10 3/4"3'-10"6'-10 1/4"9'-0 3/4"8'-7 1/2"1'-6" 3'-3 3/16" 3'-3 13/16" 5 1/2" 7917.15 A-520A-520 11 A-520A-520 22 100'-0"LINE OF ROOF EDGE ABVLINE OF ROOF EDGE ABV5 1/2"14'-1"5 1/2"5'-2 1/2"10'-9 1/2"9'-1"11'-3 3/4"5'-5 1/2"7'-1 3/4"7'-1 3/4"5'-5 1/2"11'-3 3/4"7'-9"1'-0"6.97%90'-3"7'-0 1/2"15'-0"16'-0"65'-8"5 1/2"8 5/8"11'-6 5/8"3'-3 1/4"19'-9"11'-7 3/4"2'-8 1/8"10 5/8" 4'-11 9/16"6'-10 3/16" 5 1/2" 5'-0 3/4"8'-1 1/4" 6"9'-0"7" 1'-0"1'-0"14'-11 3/4"2'-4" 5 1/2" 7"16'-3"11 1/2" 1'-8 3/4"15'-1"6'-9 1/2"10'-5 3/8"3 5/8"9'-10"1'-10" 2 1/2" 2'-11" 2'-7 1/2" 9" 5'-10 5/8"11'-5 5/8"4'-6 1/8"6" 2'-5 3/4"1'-11 1/4" W1 W4.3 W4.3 02F 7916.06 A-415A-415 11 7916.06 LINE OF ROOF EDGE ABVLINE OF ROOF EDGE ABVLINE OF ROOF EDGE ABVLINE OF ROOF EDGE ABVW12 W12 KITCHEN CANOPY ABOVE 02C 100A 100B SF12 110A ADA PUSH BUTTON DOOR OPENER. BUTTON TO OPEN BOTH SETS OF DOORS ADA PUSH BUTTON DOOR OPENER. BUTTON TO OPEN BOTH SETS OF DOORS ADA PUSH BUTTON DOOR OPENER. ADA PUSH BUTTON DOOR OPENER. HISTORIC BUILDING ENTRANCE. FOR ADA ENTRANCES SEE VISITOR CENTER AND EAST VESTIBULE ADA PUSH BUTTON DOOR OPENER. A-202 1 A-202 2 A-202 3 A-2024 A-202 5 6'-0"2'-9 7/8"Z-400 2 EQEQ 1'-2"6"9'-3"2'-0"14'-1" EQEQEQ EQFLOOR DRAIN, RE: ENLARGED PLANS FOR LOCATION WITH TILE LAYOUT 8 1/2"8'-8 1/2" 8'-8 1/2"2'-7 1/2"3'-2"9 1/2"3'-7 1/2"1'-2" 1'-2"2'-6"1'-8 1/2"9"1'-0"2'-1" 8"OF DOORS8"EQEQEQ EQ 8"EQ EQ CANOPY ABOVE, RE: RCP EQ AEQ A EQ EQ EQ B EQ B EQ EQOF WDW 8"OF WDWEQEQ7'-3 7/8" 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. FOR GENERAL NOTES RE: 1-CVR ARCHITECTURAL 100'-0" = SITE 7917.15' CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PERMANENT BENCHMARK PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. DIMENSIONS TO EXISTING BRICK WALLS ARE APPROXIMATE AND MUST BE CONFIRMED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PRESERVATION PLAN FOR EXISTING TO REMAIN & HISTORICAL FEATURES. CONTRACTOR TO REFERENCE Z-SET FOR DEMOLITION PLANS, ELEVATIONS, AND CALCULATIONS. DEMO NOT TO EXCEED 40%. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS AS REQUIRED BY SPECS. ALL DIMENSIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS ARE GIVEN TO FACE OF STUD/CONCRETE U.N.O. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. PLEASE REQUEST ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS AS NEEDED RE: LANDSCAPE AND CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR EXTERIOR SITE CONDITIONS, UTILITIES, AND HARDSCAPE DESIGN RE: FOODSERVICE DRAWINGS FOR KITCHEN EQUIPMENT LAYOUT, SPEC'S, AND ADDT'L FINISH INFORMATION RE: A-500 SERIES FOR BUILDING ASSEMBLY TYPES (WALL, FLOOR, ROOF, CEILING, ETC.) RE: A-600 SERIES FOR SCHEDULES (WINDOW, DOOR, FINISH, ETC.) CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW PLACEMENT OF ELECTRICAL OUTLETS WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN. RADON MITIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES. AN APPROVED AUTOMATIC FIRE EXTINGUISHING (SPRINKLER) SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES (DESIGN BUILD). PLAN GENERAL NOTESPLAN GENERAL NOTES 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 11/19/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A-111ASPEN ARMORYPERMIT 2025.11.19 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611N 3/16" = 1'-0" MAIN LEVEL PLANMAIN LEVEL PLAN 11 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION The following items require approval from HP Staff and monitors, or HPC prior, to final building permit issuance: - Roof material - Hopkins Ave and Conner Park fenestration details - Hopkins canopy attachment - Vestibule canopy - Gutter and downspout locations and material - Snow clip layout and specification - Conner Park and Hopkins ROW materials - Galena Streetscape – tree removal, hardscape, and plantings - Building relocation Proposed Plans 105 UP DNUP DN T.O. MTL DECK 113'-3" BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 3344 55 66 B.4B.4 VBVB VAVA V1V1V2V2V3V3 A-2002 A-200 1 A-201 1 A-2012 1 A-303 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-302 2 A-302 1 A-301 2211 AA EE COMMUNITY LOUNGECOMMUNITY LOUNGE 115 BILLIARDSBILLIARDS 116 EGRESS STAIREGRESS STAIR 01 ELEVATORELEVATOR 02 OPEN TO BELOW MECHANICAL ROOF SINGLE STORY VISITOR CENTER ROOF COVERED TRASH ENCLOSURE BELOW 111'-0" T.O.F.F. A-420A-420 44 31'-0"65'-8"2'-4"15'-0"11'-9 25/32"4'-2 7/32"1'-0"5'-11 3/4"10'-0 1/4"8'-7 1/4"12'-10 19/32"19'-11 9/32"7'-2 7/8"90'-3" 10'-4"2'-4"40'-9 3/4"5 1/2"36'-3 3/4" W11 W11 W11 W1.X W1.X W1.X W12 W7.1W7W7.1W7 W4.1 W4.1 W4.1 W5 W5.1 W4.1 W4.1 W4.1 A-410A-410 22 A-400A-400 22 A-200 3 1'-0"20'-8 1/8"10'-10 1/4"42'-2"10'-10 1/4"3'-8 3/8" 1'-0"8'-8 1/2"2'-4"31'-0"1'-0"8'-1"11'-3 3/4"5'-5 1/2"5'-7 5/16"3'-0 7/8"5'-7 5/16"5'-5 1/2"11'-3 3/4"7'-9"1'-0"65'-8"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"R.D. O.D. 1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"1/4" : 1'-0"R.D. O.D. R.D. O.D. R.D. O.D. 1'-0"30'-3"11'-8 3/4"3'-5"14'-2"3'-5"16'-3 1/4"9'-0"1'-0" 49'-0" 90'-3"SLOPE 1/8":1'-0"1/8" : 1'-0"1/8" : 1'-0"5'-10"5'-10"O.D. R.D. LINE OF WALL BELOW LINE OF WALL BELOW LINE OF WALL BELOW COMMUNITY LOUNGECOMMUNITY LOUNGE 115 W4.3 W4.3 COMBINED OUTLET FOR OVERFLOW DRAINS FOR HIGH ROOF BELOW COMBINED OUTLET FOR LOW ROOF OVERFLOW DRAINS BELOW MECHANICAL CHASE MEZZANINE GUARDRAIL (44" AFF) KITCHEN CANOPY BELOW KITCHEN SIGNAGE PLUMBING CHASE MECHANICAL CHASE MEZZANINE GUARDRAIL (44" AFF) KITCHEN CANOPY BELOW KITCHEN SIGNAGE MEZZANINE GUARDRAIL (44" AFF) KITCHEN CANOPY BELOW KITCHEN SIGNAGE CANOPY ABOVE LUNCH COUNTER (UNOCCUPIED) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. FOR GENERAL NOTES RE: 1-CVR ARCHITECTURAL 100'-0" = SITE 7917.15' CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PERMANENT BENCHMARK PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. DIMENSIONS TO EXISTING BRICK WALLS ARE APPROXIMATE AND MUST BE CONFIRMED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PRESERVATION PLAN FOR EXISTING TO REMAIN & HISTORICAL FEATURES. CONTRACTOR TO REFERENCE Z-SET FOR DEMOLITION PLANS, ELEVATIONS, AND CALCULATIONS. DEMO NOT TO EXCEED 40%. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS AS REQUIRED BY SPECS. ALL DIMENSIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS ARE GIVEN TO FACE OF STUD/CONCRETE U.N.O. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. PLEASE REQUEST ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS AS NEEDED RE: LANDSCAPE AND CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR EXTERIOR SITE CONDITIONS, UTILITIES, AND HARDSCAPE DESIGN RE: FOODSERVICE DRAWINGS FOR KITCHEN EQUIPMENT LAYOUT, SPEC'S, AND ADDT'L FINISH INFORMATION RE: A-500 SERIES FOR BUILDING ASSEMBLY TYPES (WALL, FLOOR, ROOF, CEILING, ETC.) RE: A-600 SERIES FOR SCHEDULES (WINDOW, DOOR, FINISH, ETC.) CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW PLACEMENT OF ELECTRICAL OUTLETS WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN. RADON MITIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES. AN APPROVED AUTOMATIC FIRE EXTINGUISHING (SPRINKLER) SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES (DESIGN BUILD). PLAN GENERAL NOTESPLAN GENERAL NOTES 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 11/19/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 MEZZANINE FLOOR PLAN A-112ASPEN ARMORYPERMIT 2025.11.19 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611N 3/16" = 1'-0" MEZZANINE PLANMEZZANINE PLAN 11 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION The following items require approval from HP Staff and monitors, or HPC prior, to final building permit issuance: - Roof material - Hopkins Ave and Conner Park fenestration details - Hopkins canopy attachment - Vestibule canopy - Gutter and downspout locations and material - Snow clip layout and specification - Conner Park and Hopkins ROW materials - Galena Streetscape – tree removal, hardscape, and plantings - Building relocation Proposed Plans 106 DN DN BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 3344 55 66 B.4B.4 VBVB VAVA V1V1V2V2V3V3 A-2002 A-200 1 A-201 1 A-2012 1 A-303 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-302 2 A-302 1 A-301 2211 AA EE BARBAR 200.1 UPPER LEVEL DININGUPPER LEVEL DINING 200 KITCHEN 4KITCHEN 4 203 KITCHEN 5KITCHEN 5 204 KITCHEN BOHKITCHEN BOH 202 BOHBOH 201 ELEVATORELEVATOR 02 121'-4" T.O.F.F. OPEN TO BELOW A-420A-420 55 A-410A-410 33 201A 02E W1.X W12 W12 W11 W12 W12 W12 W11 W2.XW2.XW2.X W2.XW2.XW2.X W3.1W3.1W3.1W3.1W3.1W3.1 W3.2W3.2W3.2W3.2W3.2W3.2 W4.2 W4.1 W4.1 W4.1 W4.2 A-401A-401 11 A-200 3 LOUNGELOUNGE 200.3 DININGDINING 200.4 LOUNGELOUNGE 200.5 HOSPITALITYHOSPITALITY 200.2 RESTROOMRESTROOM 205 1'-0"22'-10 3/4"1'-10" 2'-9" 1'-10"11'-2"1'-10" 2'-9" 1'-10"11'-2"1'-10" 2'-9" 1'-10"5'-4"6"17'-4 1/4"7" 1'-0"6'-10 3/4"7'-1 3/4"11'-9 3/4"7'-1 3/4"7'-1 3/4"12'-1 1/4"7'-0 3/4"6'-4 1/4"1'-0"22'-10 3/4"1'-10" 2'-9" 1'-10"11'-2"1'-10" 2'-9" 1'-10"11'-2"1'-10" 2'-9" 1'-10"23'-2 1/4"1'-7"8'-6 1/2"6"16'-6 3/4"7'-1 3/4"6"7'-11 5/32"2'-4 3/32"14'-3 3/4"7'-10"6"1'-6 1/2" 6" 1'-9" 1'-9 3/8" 3 5/8" 1'-9" 1'-9 1/2" 3 5/8" 1'-9" 1'-9 1/2" 3 5/8" 5'-10" 3 5/8"7'-5 1/2" 3 5/8"7'-2 3/4"2'-0 5/8"3'-8"5'-11 55/256"6'-0"3'-4 5/8"7'-8 1/2"6"7'-7 1/4" 6"19'-4 3/4" 3 5/8"17'-0 1/4" 205A 205B 205C 205D10'-2"3'-4 5/8"7'-8"3'-4 5/8"4'-2 1/2"2"3'-9 1/4" /1 A-494 GUARDRAIL (44" AFF) A-202 1 Z-400 2 GUARDRAIL (44" AFF) 2'-8"10"FLOOR DRAINS. RE: ENLARGED RR PLANS & MEP DWGS 7'-11"3'-8"9'-0"3'-10"9'-0"2'-5"3'-8 1/2"4'-2" FLOOR DRAIN. RE: ENLARGED PLANS & MEP DWGS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. FOR GENERAL NOTES RE: 1-CVR ARCHITECTURAL 100'-0" = SITE 7917.15' CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PERMANENT BENCHMARK PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. DIMENSIONS TO EXISTING BRICK WALLS ARE APPROXIMATE AND MUST BE CONFIRMED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR TO ESTABLISH PRESERVATION PLAN FOR EXISTING TO REMAIN & HISTORICAL FEATURES. CONTRACTOR TO REFERENCE Z-SET FOR DEMOLITION PLANS, ELEVATIONS, AND CALCULATIONS. DEMO NOT TO EXCEED 40%. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS AS REQUIRED BY SPECS. ALL DIMENSIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS ARE GIVEN TO FACE OF STUD/CONCRETE U.N.O. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. PLEASE REQUEST ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS AS NEEDED RE: LANDSCAPE AND CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR EXTERIOR SITE CONDITIONS, UTILITIES, AND HARDSCAPE DESIGN RE: FOODSERVICE DRAWINGS FOR KITCHEN EQUIPMENT LAYOUT, SPEC'S, AND ADDT'L FINISH INFORMATION RE: A-500 SERIES FOR BUILDING ASSEMBLY TYPES (WALL, FLOOR, ROOF, CEILING, ETC.) RE: A-600 SERIES FOR SCHEDULES (WINDOW, DOOR, FINISH, ETC.) CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW PLACEMENT OF ELECTRICAL OUTLETS WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN. RADON MITIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES. AN APPROVED AUTOMATIC FIRE EXTINGUISHING (SPRINKLER) SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES (DESIGN BUILD). PLAN GENERAL NOTESPLAN GENERAL NOTES 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 11/19/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A-113ASPEN ARMORYPERMIT 2025.11.19 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611N 3/16" = 1'-0" UPPER LEVEL PLANUPPER LEVEL PLAN 11 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION The following items require approval from HP Staff and monitors, or HPC prior, to final building permit issuance: - Roof material - Hopkins Ave and Conner Park fenestration details - Hopkins canopy attachment - Vestibule canopy - Gutter and downspout locations and material - Snow clip layout and specification - Conner Park and Hopkins ROW materials - Galena Streetscape – tree removal, hardscape, and plantings - Building relocation Proposed Plans 107 BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 3344 55 66 B.4B.4 VBVB VAVA V1V1V2V2V3V3 A-2002 A-200 1 A-201 1 A-2012 1 A-303 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-302 2 A-302 1 A-301 2211 AA EE MECHANICAL WELL W/ INTERNAL ROOF DRAIN AND OVERFLOW MEMBRANE HIGH ROOF SKYLIGHTSKYLIGHTSKYLIGHT EXISTING SLOPED ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN - NEW ROOFING MATERIAL AND FINISH 12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"TAPERED INSULATION SLOPED TO DRAINT.O. ROOF140'-4" T.O. PARAPET 141'-4" T.O. WALL CAP 12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12" 12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"14" / 12"14" / 12"139'-10" EXISTING EXISTING12" / 12"SLOPE 1/4":1'-0"SLOPE 1/4":1'-0"SLOPE 1/4":1'-0"SLOPE 1/4":1'-0"SLOPE 1/4":1'-0"SLOPE 1/4":1'-0"5 1/8"3'-8"3'-6"5 1/8" 200.A200.A TYP. 18'-3 3/4"5'-1 1/2" 7'-2" 5'-3 1/2"5'-1 1/2"7'-2"10'-5"7'-2"5'-3 1/2"5 3/16"7'-0"5 1/16"1 1/2" / 12"OF STRUCT. BAY & SKYLIGHT COFFER (RE: RCPS) RE: DTLS FOR FRAME LCOATION CENTERLINE OF SKYLIGHT =GL C 141'-10" 140'-11 1/2" 140'-5 1/2" 141'-3 5/8" 200.B200.B200.C200.C 15'-0"16'-0"6'-0"11'-0"6'-6"9'-6"9'-6"6'-6"11'-0"5'-8"90'-3"31'-0"65'-8"30'-6 3/4" CLEAR16'-8" CLEAR 132'-6 1/4" EXISTING DORMER ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN - NEW ROOFING MATERIAL AND FINISH A-112A-112 11 A-112A-112 11 A-112A-112 11 A-112A-112 11 PROVIDE 18" EQUIPMENT RAIL BOTH SIDES, RE: MECH. FOR EQUIPMENT SPEC. AND MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS ROOF ACCESS HATCH MB-01 MB-01 MB-01 MB-01 WD-02 WD-02 EXISTING DORMERS TO REMAIN, NEW ROOFING 12'-8"5'-7 3/4"12'-11 1/4"4'-7 3/4"17'-7"12'-6 1/4"5'-0 3/4"19'-2 1/4" MECHANICAL SCREEN WALL 118'-0" SNOW RETENTION CLIPS SNOW RETENTION FENCING SNOW RETENTION CLIPS 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 11/19/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 ROOF PLAN A-114ASPEN ARMORYPERMIT 2025.11.19 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611N 3/16" = 1'-0" ROOF PLANROOF PLAN 11 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION The following items require approval from HP Staff and monitors, or HPC prior, to final building permit issuance: - Roof material - Hopkins Ave and Conner Park fenestration details - Hopkins canopy attachment - Vestibule canopy - Gutter and downspout locations and material - Snow clip layout and specification - Conner Park and Hopkins ROW materials - Galena Streetscape – tree removal, hardscape, and plantings - Building relocation Proposed Plans 108 BB MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 88'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. HIGH ROOF 139'-10" A.3A.3CCC.6C.6DDD.7D.7B.4B.4 MEZZANINE 111'-0" VBVB VAVA1 A-303 1 A-302 2 A-302 AAEE CRAWL SPACE 92'-4" PREP KITCHENPREP KITCHEN 006 STORAGESTORAGE 005 SHARED STORAGESHARED STORAGE 008 MECHANICALMECHANICAL 009 VISITOR CENTERVISITOR CENTER 110 KITCHEN 2KITCHEN 2 106 MAIN LEVEL DININGMAIN LEVEL DINING 101 COMMUNITY LOUNGECOMMUNITY LOUNGE 115 BARBAR 200.1 R2 F3 F2 F1 F2 R3 VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 98'-11" W11 R1 R1 RE: ROOF RCPS & SKYLIGHT DETAILS FOR CEILING FRAMING @ SKYLIGHT OPENING A-540A-540 77 A-541A-541 88SIM., OPH. A-530A-530 11 A-541A-541 88 A-541A-541 22 A-541A-541 22OPH. CANOPY. RE: DTLS, ELEVATIONS, & STRUCT. DWGS HYDRAULIC VERTICAL LIFT DOOR. RE: DTLS AND EXTERIOR OPENING SCHEDULE A-560A-560 33 LOUNGELOUNGE 200.5 LOUNGELOUNGE 200.3 F1 W12W12W11W1 W1.X F3 F4 W12 W11 W1.X W12 W2 W1 F1 W1 111A 110A02F 007A W1W1W1 W4.1W4.1W4.1 W4.2 W5.1W5W4.1W4.1 W4.2 W1W1 STORAGESTORAGE 111 8'-0"9'-1"11'-9 1/2"8'-0"8'-8"8'-0"8'-0"8'-0"5'-10 3/4"CRAWL SPACE19'-8"14'-0"SF10 BB MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 88'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. HIGH ROOF 139'-10" A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7B.4B.4 MEZZANINE 111'-0" VBVBVAVA 1 A-303 1 A-302 2 A-302 AA EE CRAWL SPACE 92'-4" MAIN LEVEL DININGMAIN LEVEL DINING 101 UPPER LEVEL DININGUPPER LEVEL DINING 200 COMMUNITY LOUNGECOMMUNITY LOUNGE 115 VISITOR CENTERVISITOR CENTER 110 COMMUNITY FLEXCOMMUNITY FLEX SPACESPACE 004 MECHANICAL ROOF R2 R1 F3 F2 F1 F2 W2 R3 R2 W1.X VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 98'-11" W1.X R1 W1.X R5 STAFF LOCKERSTAFF LOCKER 011 MECHANICALMECHANICAL 009 CORRIDORCORRIDOR 010 CRAWL SPACE COVERED TRASH ENCLOSURE A-541A-541 88 SIM. EXISTING DORMER TO REMAIN, TYP. A-541A-541 22A-541A-541 22OPH A-402A-402 11 A-559A-559 33 A-559A-559 11 W11 W1 F1 W1 W12W12W12W1 W11 F1W12W12 VENDOR 1VENDOR 1 101.1 F4 R1 R1 W2.X W2.X 8'-0"9'-1"8'-0"9'-0"5'-10 3/4"19'-8"12'-0"8'-0"8'-0"14'-0"004B004D004E SF12 W4.3 101C100B 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 11/19/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 BUILDING SECTIONS A-300ASPEN ARMORYPERMIT 2025.11.19 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 3/16" = 1'-0" N/S SECTION @ VISITOR CENTERN/S SECTION @ VISITOR CENTER 11 3/16" = 1'-0" N/S SECTION @ CENTRAL STAIRN/S SECTION @ CENTRAL STAIR 22 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION The following items require approval from HP Staff and monitors, or HPC prior, to final building permit issuance: - Roof material - Hopkins Ave and Conner Park fenestration details - Hopkins canopy attachment - Vestibule canopy - Gutter and downspout locations and material - Snow clip layout and specification - Conner Park and Hopkins ROW materials - Galena Streetscape – tree removal, hardscape, and plantings - Building relocation Proposed Plans 109 BB MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 88'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. HIGH ROOF 139'-10" A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7B.4B.4 MEZZANINE 111'-0" VBVB 1 A-303 1 A-302 2 A-302 AA EE CRAWL SPACE 92'-4" MAIN LEVEL DININGMAIN LEVEL DINING 101 STORSTOR 105 BOHBOH 103 KITCHEN 1KITCHEN 1 102 KITCHEN BOHKITCHEN BOH 202 KITCHEN 4KITCHEN 4 203 KITCHEN 5KITCHEN 5 204 COMMUNITY FLEXCOMMUNITY FLEX SPACESPACE 004WOMEN'S RESTROOMWOMEN'S RESTROOM 003 MECHANICAL WELL R5 F3 F2 F1 W1.X R3 W1.X VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 98'-11" F1 W1 R1 R1 W2 W2 F4R5W2 MEN'S RESTROOMMEN'S RESTROOM 002 MECHANICAL ROOF CRAWL SPACE A-540A-540 66 A-540A-540 1010SIM. A-541A-541 88OPH A-541A-541 55OPH 131'-8" COMMUNITY LOUNGECOMMUNITY LOUNGE 115 A-403A-403 11 RESTROOMRESTROOM 205 8'-0"8'-0"9'-0"5'-10 3/4"8'-0"8'-0"8'-0"8'-4"8'-0"8'-0"8'-0"8'-0"19'-8"W4.3 W4.3 W4.3 W4.3 W4.4 W4.4 205D 101C 100B 004B004E004D 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 11/19/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 BUILDING SECTIONS A-301ASPEN ARMORYPERMIT 2025.11.19 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 3/16" = 1'-0" N/S SECTION @ MECH WELLN/S SECTION @ MECH WELL 11 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION The following items require approval from HP Staff and monitors, or HPC prior, to final building permit issuance: - Roof material - Hopkins Ave and Conner Park fenestration details - Hopkins canopy attachment - Vestibule canopy - Gutter and downspout locations and material - Snow clip layout and specification - Conner Park and Hopkins ROW materials - Galena Streetscape – tree removal, hardscape, and plantings - Building relocation Proposed Plans 110 MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 88'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. HIGH ROOF 139'-10" 33445566 MEZZANINE 111'-0" V1V1V2V2V3V32 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-301 22 11 CRAWL SPACE 92'-4" MECHANICALMECHANICAL 009 CORRIDORCORRIDOR 001 VISITOR CENTERVISITOR CENTER 110 MECHANICAL ROOF R5 W2 R3 F2 VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 98'-11" W2 F1 W1 W2 W2 R5 103A W2 W7.1W7 W7 W7.1 W3.1W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 01A 009A SF13 A-540A-540 1111 A-540A-540 22 SIM. A-540A-540 33 ENTRY VESTIBULE BEYOND GUARDRAIL TO LIGHT WELL BEYOND SKYLIGHTS BEYOND, TYP. EXISTING DORMERS TO REMAIN, TYP. 113'-5 1/4" OPEN TO MAIN LEVEL CORRIDOR BEYOND W1W11W11F1 W12 NORTH STAIR SNOW RETENTION CLIPS SNOW RETENTION FENCING 8'-6"8'-0"9'-1"11'-9 1/2"MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 88'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. HIGH ROOF 139'-10" 3344 55 66 MEZZANINE 111'-0" V1V1V2V2 V3V32 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-3012211 CRAWL SPACE 92'-4" PREP KITCHENPREP KITCHEN 006 COMMUNITY FLEXCOMMUNITY FLEX SPACESPACE 004 MAIN LEVEL DININGMAIN LEVEL DINING 101 UPPER LEVEL DININGUPPER LEVEL DINING 200 BARBAR 200.1 BILLIARDSBILLIARDS 116 R5 W1.X F2 F3 F2 F3 VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 98'-11" WEST VESTIBULEWEST VESTIBULE 108 F1 W2 MAIN LEVEL DININGMAIN LEVEL DINING 101 R2R2R2 R2 F1 W1 W5 CRAWL SPACE A-530A-530 33 SIM. A-541A-541 1212 A-541A-541 1010 SIM.A-559A-559 66TYP. A-541A-541 77 EXISTING BRICK OPENING & STEPS TO REMAIN A-403A-403 33DININGDINING 200.4 KITCHEN 5KITCHEN 5 204 F4 F1 F2 W12W11 8'-0"9'-0"19'-8"8'-0"8'-4"14'-0"8'-0"106A 008B004A 02B 02E 103B 201A W3.1W3.1W3.1W3.1 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 11/19/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 BUILDING SECTIONS A-302ASPEN ARMORYPERMIT 2025.11.19 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 3/16" = 1'-0" E/W SECTION @ VISITOR CENTERE/W SECTION @ VISITOR CENTER 11 3/16" = 1'-0" E/W SECTION @ GALENA ENTRYE/W SECTION @ GALENA ENTRY 22 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION The following items require approval from HP Staff and monitors, or HPC prior, to final building permit issuance: - Roof material - Hopkins Ave and Conner Park fenestration details - Hopkins canopy attachment - Vestibule canopy - Gutter and downspout locations and material - Snow clip layout and specification - Conner Park and Hopkins ROW materials - Galena Streetscape – tree removal, hardscape, and plantings - Building relocation Proposed Plans 111 MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 88'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. HIGH ROOF 139'-10" 33445566 MEZZANINE 111'-0" V1V1V2V2V3V3 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-301 22 11 CRAWL SPACE 92'-4" MAIN LEVEL DININGMAIN LEVEL DINING 101 EAST VESTIBULEEAST VESTIBULE 100 COMMUNITY FLEXCOMMUNITY FLEX SPACESPACE 004 STORAGESTORAGE 005 MECHANICAL WELL R2 R5 F3 F2 F1 W1.X VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 98'-11" R3 W2 W2 A-541A-541 77 A-530A-530 33 SIM. RESTROOMRESTROOM 205HOSPITALITYHOSPITALITY 200.2 UPPER LEVEL DININGUPPER LEVEL DINING 200 VENDOR 2VENDOR 2 101.3 CRAWL SPACE VESTIBULE W1.XW12W12W12W12 F3 F2 F1 F1 W1 W11 19'-4"14'-0"5'-5 1/8"8'-0"9'-0"8'-4"10'-0"8'-0"101B W6.1W6 W6.1 W6 101A W6.1 W6 W3.2 W3.2W3.2W3.2W3.2W3.2 205C205B205A 100A 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 11/19/2025 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 BUILDING SECTIONS A-303ASPEN ARMORYPERMIT 2025.11.19 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 3/16" = 1'-0" E/W SECTION @ VESTIBULEE/W SECTION @ VESTIBULE 11 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION The following items require approval from HP Staff and monitors, or HPC prior, to final building permit issuance: - Roof material - Hopkins Ave and Conner Park fenestration details - Hopkins canopy attachment - Vestibule canopy - Gutter and downspout locations and material - Snow clip layout and specification - Conner Park and Hopkins ROW materials - Galena Streetscape – tree removal, hardscape, and plantings - Building relocation Proposed Plans 112 BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 33 44 55 66 B.4B.4 VBVB VAVA V1V1 V2V2 V3V32211 AA EE 5,728 SF LOWER LEVEL FLOOR AREA13'-0"16'-7"14'-0"33'-9"15'-0"23'-3" 4'-7 3/4" 1. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 890 SF LIGHTWELL - DECK 11. 1,312 SF LOWER LEVEL CRAWL SPACE EXEMPT 12.23'-8"17'-3 3/4" CRAWL HEIGHT TO BE LESS THAN 6'-0" 9'-6 3/4"28'-10 1/4"77'-9"3'-8"6'-2 3/4"7'-7 1/4"16'-0"38'-11 1/2"2. 3. 4.5. 6'-5 3/4" BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 33 44 55 66 B.4B.4 VBVB VAVA V1V1 V2V2 V3V32211 AA EE 6,787 SF MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA 130 SF NORTHWEST COVERED ENTRY - PORCH 229 SF NORTH COVERED ENTRY - PATIO 83 SF VESTIBULE COVERED ENTRY - PORCH 32 SF WEST COVERED ENTRY - PORCH 66 SF SOUTHWEST COVERED - PORCH 300 SF COVERED TRASH ENCLOSURE - FLOOR AREA 156 SF COVERED MULTI-USE STAGE - PATIO 1,266 SF PARK DECK OPEN TO BELOW 66 SF SOUTHEAST COVERED - PORCH BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 33445566 B.4B.4 VBVB VAVA V1V1V2V2V3V32211 AA EE 2,427 SF MEZZANINE FLOOR AREA OPEN TO BELOW BB A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7 33445566 B.4B.4 VBVB VAVA V1V1V2V2V3V32211 AA EE 4,081 SF UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA OPEN TO BELOW 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. FLOOR AREA CALCULATION NOTES: FAR CALCULATED PER COA LAND USE CODE SEC. 26.575.020(d) - CALCULATIONS AND MEASUREMENTS AREA BOUNDARIES ARE LOCATED AT OUTSIDE FACE OF STRUCTURE. STAIRS & ELEVATORS ARE NOT COUNTED ON THE HIGHEST LEVEL THEY SERVE. COVERED ENTRIES/FRONT PORCHES ON STREET-FACING FACADES OF A STRUCTURE DEVELOPED WITHIN 30" OF FINISH GROUND LEVEL SHALL NOT BE COUNTED TOWARDS ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA. CALCULATION OF FLOOR AREA OF A BUILDING OR PORTION THEREOF SHALL NOT INCLUDE DECKS, BALCONIES, LOGGIAS, EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS, AND NON-STREET FACING PORCHES, GAZEBOS AND SIMILAR FEATURES, UNLESS THE AREA OF THESE FEATURES IS GREATER THAN 15% OF THE ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA FOR THE PROPERTY. COVERED PATIOS WITH OVERHANGS THAT EXCEED 4' COUNT TOWARDS DECK AREA. FLOOR AREA NOTESFLOOR AREA NOTES FLOOR AREA AREA KEYAREA KEY PORCH AREA DECK AREA CRAWL AREA SUBGRADE WALL EXPOSURE CALCULATIONSSUBGRADE WALL EXPOSURE CALCULATIONS EXPOSED AREA AREA KEYAREA KEY SUBGRADE AREA 39'-0"9'-6"1. SUBGRADE AREA CALCULATION NOTES: 1. AREA BOUNDARIES FOR FULL HEIGHT SUBGRADE SPACE ONLY, CRAWL SPACES LESS THAN 6' IN HEIGHT ARE EXEMPT. 2. SUBGRADE AREAS CALCULATED FROM INSIDE FACE OF STRUCTURE. * CALCULATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE AS THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT AND CONSTRUCTION TYPES ARE FINALIZED AND ARE DICTATED BY THE PD PROCESS 77'-9"9'-6"6. 28'-10 1/4"9'-6"7. 9'-6 3/4"9'-6"8. 23'-8"9'-6"9. 17'-3 3/4"9'-6"10. 16'-0"9'-6"11. 4'-7 3/4"9'-6"12. 14'-0"9'-6"15. 33'-9" 16. 15'-0"9'-6"17. 23'-3"9'-6"18. EXPOSED: 355.5 SF 370.5 SF 275.25 SF91 SF 738.75 SF 224.75 SF 152 SF 44.25 SF 133 SF320.75 SF142.5 SF221 SF NOTESNOTES SUBGRADE WALL EXPOSURE CALCULATIONSSUBGRADE WALL EXPOSURE CALCULATIONS 164.5 SF 13'-0"9'-6"13. 123.5 SF 16'-7"9'-6"14. 157.5 SF 9'-0" LINE OF EXISTING GRADE LINE OF FINISHED GRADE 7'-9 1/2"9'-6"3. 74 SF 3'-8"9'-6"5. 2. 9'-6"6'-4 1/2" EXPOSED: 60.5 SF35 SF4. 9'-6"6'-4 1/2" 60.5 SF 9'-6"228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 11/19/2025 1/16" = 1'-0" 24102 FAR CALCULATIONS - PROPOSED Z-006ASPEN ARMORYROUND 1 RESPONSES 2026.05.15 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 1/16" = 1'-0" LOWER LEVELLOWER LEVEL 11 1/16" = 1'-0" MAIN LEVELMAIN LEVEL 22 1/16" = 1'-0" MEZZANINEMEZZANINE 33 1/16" = 1'-0" UPPER LEVELUPPER LEVEL 44 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION Proposed Plans 113 BB MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" EXISTING 2ND FLOOR (DEMO) 109'-4" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. HIGH ROOF 139'-10" CCDDAAEE EXISTING BASEMENT (DEMO) 89'-6" BB MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 88'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. HIGH ROOF 139'-10" CCDD MEZZANINE 111'-0" AAEE EAST VESTIBULE LOWER EAST VESTIBULE 3/16" = 1'-0"EAST ELEVATION COMPARISON ASPEN ARMORY2026.05.05 00 -50 3/16" = 1'-0" EAST ELEVATION AT LIGHT WELL - EXISTINGEAST ELEVATION AT LIGHT WELL - EXISTING11 3/16" = 1'-0" EAST ELEVATION AT LIGHT WELL - PROPOSEDEAST ELEVATION AT LIGHT WELL - PROPOSED 22 Proposed East Elevation 114 FOUND MAGNETIC NAIL W/ALUMINUM DISKSTAMPED "PLS 25947 ASEI" IN CONCRETECITY OF ASPENG.P.S.CONTROL MONUMENT NO. 5BENCHMARK ELEVATION = 7915.94'74.00'RIGHT-OF-WAYGALENA STREETASPHALT SURFACE75.00'RIGHT-OF-WAYHOPKINS AVENUEASPHALT SURFACEBLOCK 93BLOCK 87BLOCK 88BLOCK 94KLMNOWEST22 12' PCONNER CABINS & LOFTSCONDOMINIUMSS75° 09' 11"E 270.86'N75° 09' 11"W 270.86'N14° 50' 49"E 100.00' S14° 50' 49"W 100.00'97.88'22.50'30.10'30.10'30.10'30.10'30.10'30.10'30.10'30.10'30.10'30.10'22.50'97.88'S14° 50' 49"W 100.00'BASIS OF BEARING S75° 09' 11"ESAINT MARY'S CHURCH(LOTS A-I)S56° 12' 59"W 55.09'S14° 45' 55"W 878.97'FOUND MAGNETIC NAIL W/ALUMINUM DISKASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, FLUSH WITH GROUNDFOUND MAGNETIC NAIL W/ALUMINUM DISKSGM 38417, FLUSH WITH GROUND1' WITNESS CORNERFOUND MAGNETIC NAIL W/ YELLOW PLASTIC CAPILLEGIBLE, IN CONCRETEFOUND MAGNETIC NAIL W/ ALUMINUM DISK36417, FLUSH WITH GROUND0.6' WITNESS CORNERFOUND NO. 5 REBAR, NO CAP2" ABOVE GROUNDMAIN STREET21.01' RIGHT-OF-WAY ALLEYASPHALT SURFACE75.00'RIGHT-OF-WAYHUNTER STREETASPHALT SURFACEBLOCK 98BLOCK 99 SUBJECT PROPERTY17,298 SQ. FT. +/-0.397 AC. +/-CITY OF ASPENG.P.S.CONTROL MONUMENT NO. 2SET BRASS CAP IN CONC.L.S. 28643SET NO. 5 REBAR W/1.25" PLASTIC CAPL.S. 286433' WITNESS CORNERSET BRASS CAP IN CONC.L.S. 286433' WITNESS CORNERSET BRASS CAP IN CONC.L.S. 28643PROPERTY DESCRIPTION(PER TITLE COMMITMENTS)LOTS K, L, M, N, O AND THE WEST 22 1/2 FEET OF LOT PBLOCK 93CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADOIMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT/CITY OF ASPEN ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT COMPLIANT SURVEY OF:SHEET 1 OF 2ASPEN ARMORY & CONNER PARKLOTS K, L, M, N, O AND WEST 22 12' OF P, BLOCK 93, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPENSECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M.CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADOSURVEY NOTES1. DATE OF FIELD WORK: JULY 29, AUGUST 2 AND 5, 2013; NOVEMBER 16, 23 AND DECEMBER 20, 21, 2023; JANUARY 2, 10, 12 AND NOVEMBER 5 AND 6,2024. UPDATED FEBRUARY 12, 20252. DATE OF PREPARATION: JULY - AUGUST, 2013; NOVEMBER - DECEMBER, 2023; JANUARY AND NOVEMBER - DECEMBER, 2024. UPDATED FEBRUARY,2025.3. BASIS OF BEARING: A BEARING OF S75°09'11" E FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT A, BLOCK 93, MONUMENTED BY A FOUND MAGNETIC NAILWITH ALUMINUM DISK STAMPED "ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS" AND THE SOUTHEAST CORNER LOT I, BLOCK 93, MONUMENTED BY A FOUND FOUNDNO. 5 REBAR, NO CAP. AS SHOWN HEREON.4. BASIS OF SURVEY: THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PREPARED BY G.E. BUCHANAN, DATED DECEMBER 15, 1959, CITY OF ASPEN GPSCONTROL MONUMENTATION MAP PREPARED BY MARCIN ENGINEERING LLC, DATED DECEMBER 2, 2009; THE FOURTH SUPPLEMENT TOCONDOMINIUM MAP OF CONNER CABINS & LOFTS, RECORDED MAY 8, 2009 AS RECEPTION NO. 558701; VARIOUS DOCUMENTS OF RECORD AND THEFOUND MONUMENTS, AS SHOWN.5. THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BY SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC (SE) TO DETERMINE OWNERSHIP OR EASEMENTS OF RECORD. FORALL INFORMATION REGARDING EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY AND/OR TITLE OF RECORD, SE RELIED UPON THE ABOVE SAID PLATS DESCRIBED IN NOTE4 AND THE TITLE COMMITMENTS PREPARED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, ORDER NUMBER Q62016730 FOR LOTS K, L AND M OF BLOCK 93AND ORDER NUMBER Q62016731 FOR LOTS N, O AND THE WEST 22 12 FEET OF P, BOTH WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF DECEMBER 1, 2023 .6. THE LINEAR UNIT USED IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS PLAT IS THE U.S. SURVEY FOOT AS DEFINED BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OFCOMMERCE, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY.7. ALL RECEPTION NUMBERS REFERENCED HEREON ARE FOR DOCUMENTS RECORDED IN THE PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO CLERK AND RECORDER'SOFFICE.8. BASIS OF ELEVATION: AN ELEVATION OF 7915.94 FEET ON THE CITY OF ASPEN CONTROL MONUMENT GPS-5. THE CONTOUR INTERVAL IS ONE FOOT(1').9. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN ZONE X PER FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP PANEL NUMBER 08097CO354E WITH EFFECTIVE DATE OFAUGUST 15, 2019.10. PER THE COUNTY MAPPING, THE ADDRESS FOR LOTS K, L AND M IS 130 S. GALENA. NO ADDRESS IS LISTED FOR THE REMAINING LOTS.11. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DOES NOT APPEAR ON ANY OF THE MUD FLOW ZONE MAPS, ACCORDING TO THE 2014 CITY OF ASPEN URBAN RUNOFFMANAGEMENT PLAN AND IS OUTSIDE THE POTENTIAL GEOLOGICAL HAZARD ZONES, ACCORDING TO THE 2001 CITY OF ASPEN MASTER DRAINAGEPLAN (FIGURE ES-5).12. PER THE DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 31, 1891 A 4' EASEMENT JUST NORTH OF LOT K IS GRANTED FOR A STAIRWAY. NO STAIRWAY WAS FOUND ATTHIS LOCATION PER THIS SURVEY.13. THERE WAS APPROXIMATELY 3" - 6" OF SNOW ON THE SITE AT THE TIME OF THE 2023 - 2024 SURVEY.NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGALACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARSAFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTIONBASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TENYEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.GRK 33175.01 2/13/2025 G:\2023\33175 COA Armory\SURVEY\Survey DWGs\Working Base Map\33175-33007 Survey Base.dwgSURVEYOR'S STATEMENTI, GEOFFREY R. KELLER, HEREBY CERTIFY TO: CITY OF ASPEN, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANYTHAT THIS IS AN "IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT" AS DEFINED BY C.R.S. § 38-51-102(9) AND THAT IT IS A MONUMENTED LAND SURVEY SHOWING THELOCATION OF ALL SETBACKS, STRUCTURES, VISIBLE UTILITIES, FENCES, OR WALLS SITUATED ON THE DESCRIBED PARCEL AND WITHIN FIVE FEET OF ALLBOUNDARIES OF SUCH PARCEL, ANY CONFLICTING BOUNDARY EVIDENCE OR VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS, UTILITIES MARKED BY CLIENT AND ALL DEPICTABLEEASEMENTS DESCRIBED IN LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY'S, COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE FILE NUMBERS Q62016730 AND Q62016731, OROTHER SOURCES AS SPECIFIED ON THE IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT.THE ERROR OF CLOSURE FOR THIS PLAT IS LESS THAN 1/15,000.2/13/25______________________________________GEOFFREY R. KELLER L.S. #37997VICINITY MAPSCALE: 1" = 2000'SITE1 inch = ft.( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE03030603012015SOPRIS ENGINEERING LLC502 MAIN STREET · SUITE A3 · CARBONDALE CO 81623(970) 704 0311 · soprisengineering.comExhibit 7: Survey115 15.2"x28'NEWSPAPERSTANDTRACTION PAD (TYP).CURB LINEBEAR PROOF TRASH& RECYLINGCURB LINEBEAR PROOFTRASH CANXELXEL XEL XEL XELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLVALLEY PANXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOCONCRETE PAD WITH MONUMENTPARKING METER10.5"x15'15.4"X15'4-3.5"x10'3-3.5"x10'17.8"x25'19.6"x18'17.5"x20'11.2"x15'24.5"x30'12.2"x15'6.6"x10'3.1"x5'6.8"x15'8.9"x15'10.0"x15'19.5"x20'9.7"x15'8.5"x10'2.4"x5'31.3"x40'6-3.7"x10'UNKNOWN UTILITY MANHOLERIM ELEVATION = 7913.91'FF THRESHOLD ELV=7916.99'FF THRESHOLD ELV=7906.61'DRINKING FOUNTAINXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXELXELXELXTV XTV XTV XTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXTVXTVXTVXTVXEL XEL XELXELXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXELXELXELXELXELXEL XEL XEL XEL XEL XTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXUTXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXFOXGASEXISTING MULTI-LEVEL BRICK BUILDING1.3'0.3'0.1' OVERLAP0.4' OVERLAPMETAL LID FOR SUMP2" PVC PIPE (NORTH) INV=7905.17'2" PVC PIPE (EAST)=7905.99'AREA DRAINRIM=7906.35'SWEEP= 7905.50'AREA DRAINRIM=7906.45'SWEEP=7905.60'FLAGSTONE SURFACE (TYP.)BRICK PAVER SURFACE (TYP.)CURB LINEWOOD DECKTRASH COMPACTOR PADWOOD DECKCOV E R E D E N T R A N C E XEL XEL XELXELXELXELXELXELXELXEL XEL XEL XELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXELXFOXFO XFO XFO XFO XFO XFO XFO79157915 79147915 79167917791779087918 7918791 7XWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWLXWL XWLXWLXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAADJOINING BUILDINGADJOINING BUILDINGXGASXGASXGASXGASXGASXWLXWLXWLXWLXELXELXELXELXELXELXTVXTVXTVXTVXTVXFOXFOXFO6.9"X6'7"x15'5.6"X15'SEWER MANHOLERIM ELEVATION = 7914.11'24" PVC INVERT (NORTH) = 7902.97'24" PVC INVERT (SOUTH) = 7903.07'10" PVC INVERT (WEST) = 7904.53'10" PVC INVERT (EAST) = 7904.12'PARKING METERDOWN SPOUT2 DOWN SPOUTSDOWN SPOUTGENERATOR PADUTILITY PADBIKE RACK EXTENTSNOT A PERMANENT STRUCTURE7914CURB STOP LOCATED IN 2013UNABLE TO LOCATE IN 2024SEWER CLEANOUT LOCATED IN 2013NOT LOCATED IN 2024XSA XSA XSA XSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSA XSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSAXSASEWER MANHOLE AT HUNTER STREETRIM ELEVATION = 7916.54'10" PVC INVERT (SOUTH) = 7908.33'10" PVC INVERT (WEST) = 7908.15'BENCHIMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT OF:SHEET 2 OF 2ASPEN ARMORY & CONNER PARKLOTS K, L, M, N, O AND WEST 22 12' OF P, BLOCK 93, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPENSECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M.CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADONOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGALACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARSAFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTIONBASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TENYEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.GRK 33175.01 2/13/2025 G:\2023\33175 COA Armory\SURVEY\Survey DWGs\Working Base Map\33175-33007 Survey Base.dwg1 inch = ft.( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE010102010405SOPRIS ENGINEERING LLC502 MAIN STREET · SUITE A3 · CARBONDALE CO 81623(970) 704 0311 · soprisengineering.comEXISTING ELECTRIC MANHOLEEXISTING SEWER MANHOLEEXISTING FIRE HYDRANTEXISTING WATER VALVEEXISTING CURB STOPEXISTING GAS METEREXISTING ELECTRIC TRANSFORMEREXISTING ELECTRIC METER OR OUTLETEXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTALEXISTING CATV OR FIBER PEDESTAL OR HANDHOLEEXISTING SEWER CLEANOUTEXISTING LIGHT POLEEXISTING SIGNEXISTING LEGENDEXISTING CONTOUREXISTING CONTOUR INTERVAL7900EXISTING WATER LINEXWLXWLEXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINEEXISTING GASEXISTING TELEPHONEXGASXGASXGASEXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRICEXISTING CABLEEXISTING FIBER OPTICXUTXUTXUTXELXELXELXTVXTVXTVXFOXFOXFOXSAXSAEXISTING WOOD FENCEEXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE (TRUNK DIA" X DRIPLINE')EXISTING CONIFEROUS TREE (TRUNK DIA" X DRIPLINE')EXISTING EDGE OF VEGETATIONEXISTING BOLLARD2/13/25______________________________________GEOFFREY R. KELLER L.S. #37997EXISTING METAL FENCEEXISTING UTILITY MANHOLE (UNKNOWN)116 LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET Name: __________________________________________________________________________________ Location: ________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ (Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel ID #: ______________________________________________________________________________ PROJECT: Name: __________________________________________________________________________________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________________ Phone # : _______________________ E-mail: __________________________________________________ APPLICANT: Name: __________________________________________________________________________________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________________ Phone # : _______________________ E-mail: __________________________________________________ REPRESENTATIVE: EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM Exhibit8: General land use packet 117 City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET Project: __________________________________________________________________________________________ Applicant: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Project Location: ___________________________________________________________________________________ Zone District: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Lot Size: _________________________________________________________________________________________ Gross Lot Area:________________________________ Net Lot Area:_________________________________________ For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high-water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code. Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued: Variations requested (identify the exact variations being requested): 118 City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET Commercial net leaseable:Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of Lodge Pillows: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of Lodge Units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of residential units:Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of Free-Market residential units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of Affordable residential units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Proposed % of demolition: ________________ % DIMENSIONS: Write N/A where no requirements exists in the zone district. Floor Area: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Height Principal Building: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Accessory Building: Existing:_____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ On-Site Parking: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ % Site Coverage: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ % Open Space: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Front Setback: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Rear Setback: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Combined Front/Rear: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Indicate N, S, E, W Side Setback: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Side Setback: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Combined Front/Rear: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Distance between Buildings: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ 119 LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET TYPE OF APPLICATION ESA Review (Stream Margin, 8040 Greenline, View Plane, or Hallam Lake Bluff) Non Conformities Pre-Development Topography Temporary Use Accessory Dwelling Unit/Carriage House Dimensional Variance Growth Management Review Outdoor Vending Planned Development Review Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit Establishment of Zoning or Rezoning Subdivision Review Condominiumization Approval Documents Special Review Wireless Facilities Residential Design Standard Review Conditional Use Review Historic Designation Certificate of Appropriateness Minor Historic Development Major Historic Development (select one below) Conceptual Development Final Development Relocation (temporary, on or off-site) Demolition (total demolition) Substantial Historic Preservation Amendment Historic Landmark Lot Split Establishment of Transferable Development Rights (TDRs) Other City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEWS 120 City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 AGREEMENT TO PAY APPLICATION FEES LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and Property Owner Name: _____________________________________________________________________________ Address of Property: _______________________________________________________________________________ Representative Name (If different from Property Owner): _________________________________________________________ Billing Name and Address - Send Bills to: ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ Contact Email for Billing: ____________________________________________ Contact Phone for Billing: ____________________________________________ I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No.40, Series of 2018, as may be amended, review fees for Land Use applications and payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possi- ble at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no-payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay addi- tional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. 121 122 123 Exhibit 9: Proof of ownership 124 Exhibit 10: Vicinity Map 125 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FEE WAIVER POLICY PURPOSE Fee waivers to eligible individuals and organizations submitting for building permit or land use application may be considered upon filing a fee waiver request form to the Community Development Department. Approval of fee waiver requests may be made by the Community Development Director, according to the adopted fee policy of the City of Aspen. Costs for all building permit and land use applications, other than those waived by the Community Development Director, shall be paid as specified by the fee policy; prior to the issuance of building permits and at the time of submittal of land use applications. PROCESS Fees administered by the Community Development Department can only be waived by submitting a completed fee waiver form to the Community Development Director. The request shall contain a description of the project along with a statement expressing eligibility for fee waiver. The Community Development Director will review the request and give approval or disapproval in accordance with provisions set forth in this policy. The Community Development Director does not have the ability to waive fees administered by other City Departments or other organizations. All organizations and individuals seeking fee waiver MUST submit their written request to the City of Aspen Community Development Director prior to submitting the building permit or land use application. The approved fee waiver must then be presented at the time the building permit or land use application is submitted to the building or planning departments. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA General Fund Departments do not pay fees to the Community Development Department for building permits or planning applications, with the exception of Capital Projects. The fees waived for these projects will be tracked by the Community Development Department (journal entries are therefore unnecessary). In effort to keep paperwork and applications consistent, General Fund Departments shall still be required to submit the approved fee waiver with all applications for building and planning applications. General Fund Departments include: General Fund Departments FUND.DEPT General Fund Departments FUND.DEPT Non‐Departmental 001.00 Streets Department 001.41 City Council 001.03 Parks Department 001.55 City Manager 001.05 GIS Department 001.60 Personnel 001.06 IT Department 001.61 City Clerk 001.07 Special Events 001.70 City Attorney 001.09 Recreation Activities 001.71 Risk Management 001.10 Aspen Recreation Center (ARC) 001.72 City Finance Department 001.11 Ice Garden Operations 001.74 Community Development 001.13 Cons. Trust FD/Lottery 001.75 Engineering Department 001.15 *Capital Projects 001.90 Building Department 001.21 Asset Management Plan (AMP)001.91 Environmental Health 001.25 *Tabor Capital Projects 001.94 Police Department 001.31 Outgoing Transfers 001.95 Records 001.33 Communications 001.39 NOTE* Capital Projects are not exempt from fees 126 Fee Waiver Request Form City of Aspen Community Development Department This form should be completed and submitted to the Community Development Director for review. You will be notified when a decision has been made to waive or not to waive the fees regarded in this request form. For what fees are you requesting waiver? BUILDING PLANNING Applicant Name: Contact Ph.# Mailing address: E‐mail address: Project name & address: Fee Breakdown: BUILDING & PLANNING FEES Fee Description Original Fee Amount Requested Waiver Fee Description Original Fee Amount Requested Waiver Energy Code Fee REMP Fee Excavation Foundation Fee Zoning Review Fee Inspection Fee Planning Application Fee Permit Fee HPC Application Fee Plan Check Other: TOTAL OF FEE WAIVER REQUEST $ Reason for Waiver: General Fund Department Waived or decreased by City Council (specify ordinance or other decision document) Other—Please explain: Applicant Signature Date For office use only: Type of fees waived: Total fees waived: $ APPROVED DISAPPROVED Community Development Director Date 127 Date: Department: Amount Requested: Expense Account Number: Project / Task Number: Description: Requested By: Received By: Community Development Department INTERNAL FUNDS TRANSFER 128 Attachment B HP Design Guidelines Staff Finding Page 1 of 3 26.415.070(e)(2) Substantial Amendment For approval of a Substantial Amendment, the HPC must determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines . **Criteria found as “Not Applicable” have been removed Chapter 1: Site Planning and Landscape 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. 1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. Staff Finding: As the existing trees and vegetation need to be removed to facilitate the relocation, there was an opportunity to better design the landscaping along Galena Street. Through discussion with the Parks Department and city staff, the updated proposal includes installing silva cells to ensure healthy tree growth and realignment of existing tree locations. The proposed streetscape updates allow for improved tree alignment to avoid blocking the view of the resource from the street. Staff find the above review criteria met. Chapter 2: Building Materials 2.1 Preserve original building materials. 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. Staff Finding: No above grade historic material is proposed to be altered or replaced. The applicant proposes to potentially salvage material from the existing rubble foundation and reuse it to clad the additional foundation exposure due to the increased basement depth. To ensure appropriateness of the material, staff have added a condition to the resolution to require the review of the proposed material by staff and monitor. Staff find the above review criteria met. Chapter 9: Excavation, Building Relocation, and Foundations 9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place may help to preserve the historic fabric. 9.2 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. 9.3 Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. 9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade. 9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. 9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells. 129 Attachment B HP Design Guidelines Staff Finding Page 2 of 3 9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such buildings. Staff Report: The temporary relocation will not alter the appearance or historic location of the resource; the request as depicted in the application has a limited impact on what makes the resource significant. The resource will be placed back at its existing historic elevation with no increase to height. The applicant is proposing to lift the resource rather than underpinning. The applicant notes that this would result in a quicker project timeline. As this is an impactful public project and a Council priority, an expeditious timeline is a positive community outcome. If approved, this request would be one of the first large, multi-story, masonry resources to be lifted instead of underpinned in the Commercial Core. The success of this method for a multi-story, masonry resource has not been tested within the city. The underpinning method has been utilized for resources of similar size and of masonry construction with consistently successful outcomes. The proposal includes adding an addition 12” to the existing basement depth. This increase in depth will result in additional foundation wall exposure within the large egress lightwell adjacent to Connor Memorial Park. The applicant proposes to potentially salvage material from the existing rubble foundation and reuse it to clad this additional exposure. To ensure appropriateness of the material, staff have added a recommended condition to the resolution to require the review of the proposed material by staff and monitor. Chapter 11: New Buildings on Landmarked Properties 11.1 Orient the new building to the street. 11.6 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its time. 11.7 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. Staff Finding: The applicant has provided final proposed plans for the stage structure located in Connor Memorial Park. The form of the stage is proposed as a simple, steel framed, partially enclosed structure with a flat roof; the materials include a pre-patinaed copper siding and a painted steel roof. The pro posed design thoughtfully relates to the design of the approved additions to the Armory (the new visitor center and the vestibule entry) and the new trash enclosure. The proposed stage structure utilizes a similar roof style and the same materials as the approved additions. Additionally, the proposed stage structure is recognized as a product of its own time. Staff find the above review criteria met. Chapter 12: Accessibility, Architectural lighting, Mechanical Equipment, Service Areas, and Signage 130 Attachment B HP Design Guidelines Staff Finding Page 3 of 3 12.1 Address accessibility compliance requirements while preserving character defining features of historic buildings and districts. Staff Finding: The application proposes to relocate the accessible parking space to align with the accessible entrance at the Visitor Center and also proposes widening the sidewalk to meet standards. Staff Find the above criteria met. 131 Attachment C Relocation Criteria Staff Findings Sec. 26.415.090(c) – Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Finding: Staff find that although the temporary relocation is not necessary as a preservation method, a new foundation is needed to meet code requirements for the intended use as a community food hall. A successful relocation, regardless of the method, will not adversely affect the historic district or adjacent designated properties. The applicant has provided documentation including a letter from a licensed engineer stating that the resource is capable of withstanding the relocation. Based on the provided plans and letter from Atkinson-Noland, staff have provided recommended conditions of approval for the HPC to consider, as noted in the staff report and draft resolution. 132 Memorandum TO: Gillian White, gillian.white@aspen.gov Community Development Department FROM: Kyla Smits, kyla.smits@aspen.gov Engineering Department DATE: April 2, 2026 SUBJECT: Engineering Department Referral Comments PROJECT: LPA-26-006, 130 S Galena, Armory Relocation COMMENTS: These comments are not intended to be exhaustive, but an initial response to the project conceptual packet submitted for the purpose of the Historical Preservation Committee meeting. Other requirements may be requested at time of permit. Shoring 1. All temporary shoring in the Right-of-Way must follow Sec. 21.12.140 of the Municipal Code a. The earth retention fixture must be sacrificial and must be removed after subsequent structural elements are completed. b. The earth retention structure must be installed 5’ below any utilities. c. In no circumstance shall any encroaching fixture be within the first 7’ below grade. Sidewalk 1. Confirm ADA compliance can be met with the change in ADA parking spot. 2. A signage plan for the new parking alignment on Galena St. will need to be supplied at permit. 3. All sidewalks in the Commercial core must be 8ft wide. 133 MEMORANDUM TO: Gillian White, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Bonnie Muhigirwa, Chief Building Official DATE: 5/1/2026 RE: Building Referral Comments – LPA-26-020, Armory/130 S. Galena A structural plan for the lift and stabilization of the building was provided and reviewed by our third-party structural engineer and they had no comments or corrections on the proposed plans. This proposal to lift the structure strays from the underpinning technique typically used on historic masonry structure projects in Aspen. Underpinning has been successfully used to stabilize existing foundations and build new foundations under existing buildings for many years. Some examples include: the Brand Building, a two-story masonry building which added a full depth basement; the Paragon Building, a three-story masonry building which increased the depth of their basement; and the Kobey Building, a three-story masonry building with a deepened basement. As far as we are aware this lift will be the first in Aspen for a masonry building of this size in the commercial core, but the structural analysis indicates that it can be done safely and in accordance with building code standards. 134 MEMORANDUM FROM: Gillian White, Historic Preservation Officer, Principal Planner DATE: 04/10/2026 RE: Historic Preservation Referral Comments – LPA-26-020, Armory/130 S. Galena Please respond to the following/update the application as needed prior to the board hearing (will need the updated application at least 2 weeks prior to the meeting): 1. Response to Guidelines: a. Please remove any guidelines that are not applicable to the request. b. Please expand upon the response to the relocation guideline that states “The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method”. The current response does not speak to the reasoning as to why the new foundation is necessary/why relocation is needed for preservation. c. Please expand on your response to Guideline 9.5 regarding how the sandstone portions of the existing foundation will be maintained/preserved. d. Please expand upon response to Guideline 9.7, there is no response regarding the protection of historic openings and architectural details throughout the relocation process. 2. Please note that the Council approved ordinance did not approve the stage structure apart from the footprint of the structure being shown on the site plan; no elevations or details related to the stage structure were included in the approved plans. The HPC will be reviewing the structure in its entirety apart from its location and the size of the footprint. Please update application and to reflect this. 3. Please update the proposed paver material with a note that says “to match paver approved for Connor Park via Insubstantial Amendment” as it seems this should be the same as the other approved paver material. Happy to discuss if there is a desire to have a different paver color. The following details are flagged as not being supported by staff and are recommended to be updated or removed: 1. “Pixelated” design proposed for the tree grates is not consistent with the site or historic district character and is not appropriate. Staff recommend removing this element. 2. Please note that the HP Design Guidelines, state that “Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place may help to preserve the historic fabric”. 3. The application does not speak to how the state of the existing historic brick may impact the lifting of the structure or how the movers intend to facilitate the lift with this brick condition in mind. As the condition of the brick has been previously described as weak 135 and deteriorating with areas of significant cracks and bulging, staff will likely be noting this in the staff report as a potential concern. It may be beneficial to speak to this more within the application. 4. Overall, any relocation/lift of an historic resource is a risk and should be reserved as a last resort for the preservation of the historic resource. Staff will be noting this generally within the staff report as is typical for all relocation projects. A variety of other requirements may be necessary for building permit submittal and zoning review. 136 MEMORANDUM TO: Gillian White, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Owen Palcsik, Planner Technician DATE: April 1st, 2026 RE: Zoning Referral Comments – LPA-26-020 – 130 South Galena Street The following conditions of approval should be included in the resolution: 1. The height of the structure post relocation will be no taller than the existing structure. A variety of other requirements may be necessary for building permit submittal and zoning review. 137 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 RECEPTION#: 711259, R: $43.009 D: $0.00 DOC CODE: ORDINANCE Pg 1 of 34, 08/20/2025 at 02:44:51 PM Ingrid K. Grueter, Pitkin County, CO ORDINANCE #06 SERIES OF 2025) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING MAJOR PUBLIC PROJECT REVIEW, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT — PROJECT REVIEW AND DETAILED REVIEW, HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT — CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL REVIEW, GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW — CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL, ESA MOUNTIAN VIEWPLANE REVIEW, AND PARKING & TRANSPORTATION REVIEW, FOR THE FOLLOWING PROPERTIES: BLOCK 93, LOTS K THROUGH M, COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ASPEN ARMORY BUILDING; AND BLOCK 93, LOT: N AND LOT 0 & WEST 22 % FT. OF LOT P, COMMONLY KNOWN AS CONNER MEMORIAL PARK, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-073-31-851, Armory, 130 S. Galena St., Zoned Public (PUB) 2737-073-31-852, Conner Park, 525 E. Hopkins Ave., Zoned Park (P) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the City of Aspen, 427 Rio Grande Pl. Aspen, CO 81611 from City of Aspen's Capital Asset Management Department on behalf of the City Manager requesting approval for the following land use review approvals Major Public Project Review, pursuant to Chapter 26.500; and Major Planned Development Amendment — Project Review and Detailed Review pursuant to Chapter 26.445; Historic Preservation — Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development — Conceptual and Final Review, pursuant to Chapter 26.415; Commercial Design Review, Conceptual and Final, pursuant to Chapter 26.412 Growth Management Review pursuant to Chapter 26.470; and, Environmentally Sensitive Areas — Mountain View Planes; pursuant to Chapter 26.435 Transportation & Parking Management, Special Review, pursuant to Chapter 26.515; and, WHEREAS, the application for development proposes: Redevelopment of the Armory Building, a locally designated historic resource and is listed on the National Historic Register; and, WHEREAS, the proposed development has been informed by months of public outreach and feedback from community outreach sessions, surveys, and City Council work sessions; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department Staff reviewed the application for compliance with the applicable review standards; and, WHEREAS, the Development Review Committee, consisting of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, the Building Department, the Environmental Health Council Ordinance #06, Series of 2025 Page 1 of 2 138 Department, the Parks Department, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, and the Utilities Department provided referral comments to the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, On June 3, 2025, in a continued, noticed, public hearing, the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission through Resolution #04, Series of 2025' recommended denial in a unanimous vote, subject to a series of conditions that would benecessary to gain a recommendation of approval; and, WHEREAS, following discussion and direction in work session with City Council on June 161 2025, the applicant updated the application with design modifications in a submission received by Community Development on July 1, 2025; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has reviewed the application against applicable review criteria and finding that all criteria have been materially met, has recommended approval, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the request under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed, and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comments at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council reviewed the application at a regular meeting on July, 22, 2025andapprovedOrdinance #06, Series of 2025 in a four to zero (4 to 0) vote at First Reading; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council reviewed the application at a regular meeting on August 12, 2025, and approved Ordinance #06, Series of 2025 i-n-a 5 to 0 (5 to 0) to approve the request;• and, WHEREAS, theAspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVES THE FOLLOWING: Section 1: Major Public Project This project has been reviewed and approved subject to the procedures and criteria in Chapter 26-500 of the Aspen Land Use Code. Most importantly, this approval grants the ability for the project to pursue a combined review and approval for Planned Development, Major Amendment; Historic Preservation, Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development, and Commercial Design Review, as described in Sections 2-5, below. The specific project approval is granted per the initial application submitted on February 3, 2025, an update to the application submitted on February 18, 2025, and supplemental addition submitted July 1, 2025. Elements of these applications are included in Exhibit A to this Ordinance. Council Ordinance #06, Series of 2025 Page 2 of 9 139 Section 2: Planned Development — Major Amendment; Project Review The application included all required submissions per 26.445.080 and has been reviewed and approved subject to 26.445.050, Project Review Standards. The following dimensions and uses are approved by this Ordinance: Armory and Conner Memorial Park Property 17,298 sq. ft. Parcel Size Includes area for both 2737-073-31-851 & 2737-073-31-852* 4-6 On -Site Parking Spaces depending on season Parking in relation to seasonal changes to bike parking configuration) Transportation Bike Racks for up to 26 bikes and one, We -Cycle Station (seasonal)** See attached roof plan t Armory Building, Wall caps and Parapet: 41 feet, 4 inches Skylight curbs on Armory — 41 feet, 10 inches Visitor's Center: 13 feet 9 inches Maximum Heights Mechanical Screening associated with Visitor's Center: 18 feet New Eastern Entry Canopy: 13 feet, 9 inches Multi -Use Deck Canopy: 11 feet, 3 inches technical adjustments to height measurements may be approved at building permit review with a maximum of a 10% addition to any identified element. Armory Building — including new Visitor's Center Net Floor Area: 17,081 square feet Floor Area Net Leasable Area: 14,037 square feet technical adjustments to floor area and related dimensions may be approved at building permit review. North: 0 feet South: 0 feet Setbacks East: 5 feet West: 0 feet Considered jointly, per 26.480.020.0 While a We -Cycle Station is proposed for an on -site location, accommodating future needs of We -Cycle operation shall allow for alternative off -site location as deemed necessary by the City. Armory Hall Zone District Public (PUB) Land Uses Food Hall with multiple commercial kitchens, Meeting Space, Community Space, Visitor Center Conner Memorial Park Zone District Park (P) Land Uses Park: Multi -Use Deck, Raised Picnic Deck & Seating, Seasonal Farmer's Market, Communit Events, Landscaping Council Ordinance #06, Series of 2025 Page 3 of 9 140 Variations to 26.575.020.F.4 are approved to accommodate mechanical equipment in two locations: 1) on the visitor center and 2) within the mechanical bay at the rear of the main Armory roof structure, as depicted in Exhibit A. Section 3: Planned Development — Major Amendment, Detailed Review The application included all required submissions per 26.445.080 and has been reviewed and approved subject to 26.445.070, Detailed Review Standards, with the following conditions: 1) Individual lighting fixtures and signage shall be reviewed as part of the building permit process and shall be subject to the provisions of the Land Use Code at the time of building permit submission. 2) Modifications to exterior materials shall be evaluated by staff and assigned monitor(s) prior to and during permit review, as applicable. 3) Modifications to the approved site and landscaping plans shall be evaluated by staff and assigned monitor(s), and Parks and Engineering staff — prior to and during permit review, as applicable. 4) Changes that are of an insignificant or technical nature — related to 2) and 3) above, may be approved as part of building permit review, without further Land Use review. 5) Changes that are determined to be of a more significant nature shall be reviewed subject to the provisions of Planned Development amendments; 26.445.110. Section 4: Historic Preservation Certificate of Appropriateness for M4A'or Development; Conceptual and Final Review Important elements of the preservation and treatment of the Armory Building were included in both the original application submitted on February 3, 2025, an update to the application submitted on February 18, 2025, and supplemental addition submitted July 1, 2025. The project hasbeenreviewedundertheseapplicationcontentsandapproved, subject to Chapter 26.415 and the City of AspenHistoric Preservation Design Guidelines, with the following conditions: 1) A comprehensive historic preservation plan, detailing the treatment of the Armory Building, shall be included as part of the building permit submission. 2) A full repointing of the Armory Building shall be done prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy or Temporary Certificate of Occupancy, with proposed mortar and brick to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor(s). 3) Prior to permit submission, the applicant team shall work with staff and assigned monitor( s) to identify the roofing material for the Armory Building. 4) Prior to permit submission, the applicant team shall work with staff and assigned monitor( s) to identify the surface material(s) for the area in front of the Multi -Use Deck in Conner Park. Artificial turf shall not be used on the site. 5) Prior to permit submission, the applicant team shall work with staff and assigned monitor( s) on details of new fenestrations (Bay 2, Bay 5, and new opening next to vestibule), including a brick reveal of a minimum 1.5 wythes. 6) Prior to permit submission, the applicant team shall work with staff and assigned monitor( s) on details of canopy attachment. 7) Canopy over vestibule addition to be as thin as feasible, with focus on the canopy portion over the proposed fenestration. Council Ordinance #06, Series of 2025 Page 4 of 9 141 8) Canopies not to extend further than 5 feet 6 inches from the building fagade. 9) Canopies on Hopkins Ave. not to be wider than 11 feet 4 inches. 10) Bays two (2) and five (5) shall have a grass/paver transition from sidewalk, as detailed in provided renderings. 11) Prior to permit submission, the applicant team shall work with staff and assigned monitor(s) on details of the proposed gutter and downspout system, including location and materials. 12) A gravel border of a minimum width of one foot shall be located between the Armory Building and any landscape plantings. 13) This approval is conditioned in other details of the project submitted in the updated application on July 1, 2025. Modifications to details within the submission or to the specific conditions (#1-12 above) that are proposed during permit review or during construction are subject to evaluation by staff and assigned monitor(s) and review processes identified in Section 15 below. Section 5: Commercial Design; Conceptual and Final Review The application included all required submissions per 26.412.050 and has been reviewed and approved subject to 26.412.060. Many of the review criteria for Commercial Design are related to those for Planned Development and Historic Preservation in Sections 2-4 above. Should changes to the exterior of the building or site planning be proposed, they will be evaluated per Section 15 of this Ordinance (Future Changes to Project), below. Pedestrian Amenity (26.412.070 As the project is not pursuing demolition, it is exempt from meeting current Pedestrian Amenity requirements; and is expanding, not reducing areas that would be defined as Pedestrian Amenity. Second Tier Commercial Space 0pace (26.412.OU As the project is not pursuing demolition, it is exempt from meeting Second Tier Commercial Space requirements. In its existing condition the building, due to its internal vertical circulation connections, does not contain Second Tier Commercial Space. The proposed design maintains this condition. Section 6: Growth Management Quota System - The project is not triggering demolition and is not increasing Mitigation Floor Area. As a structure listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, the prcj ect is exempt from GMQS Requirements, per 26.470.070.D. Section 7: Transportation and Parking Management As the project is exempt from Growth Management Quota System requirements as described in Section 6 above, the project is additionally exempt from TIA requirements and TDM and MMLOS mitigation, per the adopted Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. However, the project as a public facility is subject to Special Review (26.515.080). 1) This approval allows for the removal of five existing off-street parking spaces from the alley. Three standard parking spaces and one ADA, van -accessible space shall be provided Council Ordinance #06, Series of 2025 Page 5 of 9 142 along the alley during We -Cycle's operation season. Five standard -parking spaces and one ADA, van accessible space shall be provided when We -Cycle is not in operation. 2) This approval allows for the removal of six existing on -street parking spaces on Hopkins Ave. to accommodate streetscape improvements. 3) The We -Cycle station that is currently located in the right-of-way along Hopkins Ave. shall be relocated to the alley as depicted in the approved site plan — or to an alternative off -site location in meeting the operational needs of We -Cycle Section 8: Environmentally Sensitive Areas - Mountain View Planes Review The modifications to the Armory and Conner Park have been reviewed and approved through the provisions of 26.435-050. Changes from this approval proposed during permit review, construction, or in the future that are subject to this section shall be reviewed per the provisions of Title26andSection15, below. Section 9: Parks Department Conditions of Approval: 1) A maintenance agreement shall be established as part of the master operator lease agreement between the Parks and Open Space Department and the Applicant/Ar-no Hall Lessee to clearly define year-round (summer and winter) maintenance and management responsibilities for Conner Memorial Park and the E Hopkins Avenue streetscape. 2) The Applicant shall adhere to the provisions of the Tree Preservation Plan for Conner Memorial Park Existing Blue Spruce as provided by the City of Aspen Parks and Open Space Department. a. Soil samples shall be taken prior to the submission of a building permit application to understand pH, micro and macro nutrient needs, salinity, and soil structure. Amendments to the soil shall be tailored to the results derived from the soil tests. b. Soil enhancements to improve microbial activity, build soil structure, increase organic matter, and improve pH levels can positively impact tree health and shall be applied before, during, and after construction according to the results of soil testing as mentioned above. 3) The Applicant shall coordinate tree planting species selections with City of Aspen Forester prior to the submission of a building permit application. 4) The Applicant shall coordinate Conner Memorial Park tree deck design, tree deck footer locations, and tree deck construction methodology with Landscape Architect, City of AspenForester, and a structural engineer prior to the submission of a building permit application. a. The Conner Memorial Park tree deck shall be strategically designed and constructed to minimize acute damage to structural root system, exposed surface roots, and long-term tree health. b. The tree deck and wood seating around the trunk must be designed to allow for an additional 30 years of growth. The opening should be no closer than 10" to the trunk of the tree at any given location. 5) The Applicant shall coordinate the design of irrigation infrastructure to maintain the East Hopkins Avenue streetscape and Conner Memorial Park with the Parks and Open Space Council Ordinance #06, Series of 2025 Page 6 of 9 143 Department prior to the submission of a building permit application. Section 10: Enineerin Department Conditions of Approval: These conditions are technical in nature and will be addressed fully at building permit, but as they have potential site planning and infrastructure capacity implications, they are included within the Ordinance. 1) Transformers a. The proposed 3 -phase transformer needs to have a primary cable in and out. Relocation of all secondary lines from the existing transformer to the proposed transformer are the responsibility of the applicant. There must be bollards placed around the transformer to prevent vehicles from hitting the transformer. An easement must be dedicated for this transformer. b. The existing single-phase transformer on the eastern side of the Conner Park property must be dedicated in an easement. The proposed parking spaces may not be over the transformer and must be clear of the easement. There must be bollards placed around the transformer to prevent vehicles from hitting the transformer. 2) Water a. Existing installations that are found to be noncompliant shall be required to comply with current Standards as equipment and/or infrastructure fails and needs repair (refer to Section 5.6 Ownership and Owner Responsibility for details). Existing installations that are found to be non -compliant through the course of other work shall be put on notice to comply with current Standards within a timeframe as agreed upon between the Water Department and customer. 3) Right -of Way and Stormwater a. A right-of-way treatment option will be permitted. Per the Mile High Flood District, hydrodynamic separators do not provide WQCV benefit. Another treatment system will need to be selected. Utility separation distances and crossings will need to be evaluated closely. b. The proposed inlet should be connected to a new main line via a lateral. We do not install storm pipes below curb and gutter. A lateral and main configuration will need to be installed. The existing inlet on Galena St. should be connected via a new lateral to the installed main. c. The existing inlet near Main St. frequently ices over and does not have capacity. The pipe capacity from the proposed inlet to the connection to Mill Street should be analyzed for capacity. d. Coordinate with the Parking Department about the relocation of the parking meters and parking signage along Hopkins Ave. and Galena St. e. This approval anticipates the need for a permanent, right-of-way encroachment license from the City of Aspen Engineering Department to accommodate the canopies and streetscape improvements along Hopkins Ave. f. For the anticipated construction in the right-of-way, the Armory project shall accommodate safe utility clearances for all earth retention systems, as required in Sec. 21.12,140. Limitations to Soil Stabilization Methods, and protection of landscape that is being maintained. Furthermore, the City hereby grants a perpetual, exclusive easement for any subsurface foundations, footer pads, or other structural elements of the armory Council Ordinance #06, Series of 2025 Page 7 of 9 144 foundation which encroach into any adjacent rights -of -way or Connor Park. 4) Confirm that the water fountain in Conner Park is remaining. Within the building permit submission, show the fountain on plans or provide an abandonment plan for the waterline. Section 11: Buildin2 Department Conditions of Approval: 1) As it has potential site planning and landscaping implications along the alley, any changestoproposedtransformersmustcontinuetomeettherequirementsoftheCityElectricUtilityandofthebuildingcoderelatedtotransformers' adjacency to existing or new structures. 2) As project moves to construction level detail, the project must continue to comply with minimum standards related to size and accessibility of the trash, recycling, and compost enclosure(s), per Titles 8 and 12 of the Municipal Code. Section 12: Environmental Health Conditions of Approval: 1) All food and beverage operators must apply for and obtain a retail food license with the Environmental Health and Sustainability Department by completing a retail food plan review application. 2) During the building permit process, the commercial kitchen layout and equipment specifications shall be submitted at that time for review. Section 13: Final PD Development ALFreement and Approved Plan Set Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.090, Documents & Deadlines and 26.490, Approval Documents; the Applicant shall prepare and submit a draft Development Agreement, and Planned Development Plan Set to the Community Development Department within 180 days following the dateoffinalapprovalofthisOrdinance. Community Development staff shall collaborate with the Applicant to finalize and record documents as applicable. Building permits may be applied for but not issuedpriortorecordingthedocumentsdescribedherein. I +Q. Section 14: Vested R*LyhL.. The project is granted statutory vested rights for a period of three years. d%.+ Section 15: Future Changes to the Projcet Significant changes to the project shall utilize the amendment provisions for Planned Development 26.445) provided by the City of Aspen's Land Use Code. If changes are proposed, the applicant shall work with the Community Development Department to evaluate the scale and scope of the changes prior to the submission of a building permit to determine if any further land use action is necessary to review and approve the proposed changes. Insignificant changes and changes of a technical nature may be approved by the Community Development Director as part of the building permit review process. Any necessary changes that occur during permit review or construction Council Ordinance #06, Series of 2025 Page 8 of 9 145 related to the treatment or preservation of the historic resource shall be evaluated by historic preservation staff and assigned monitor(s) per provisions of 26.415. Section 16: MaterialRepresentations All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented 1 - 0 i beforetheHistoricPreservationCommissionand/or City Council, are hereby incorporatea n such site development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 17: Existing Litigation This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 18: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED, as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of seen on the 22nd day of July, 2025. I'y of ATTEST: Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk Racl1ael Richards, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed, and approved by a 5 to 0 (5-0) vote on this 12thday of August 2025. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Katharine Joh n, City Attorney ATTEST: 09 Mik6e-- ear, Deputy City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: RachaeiRichairds, Mayor Exhibit A: Project Drawings — Site Plans, Elevations and Renderings, Floor Plans I Council Ordinance #06, Series of 2025 Page 9 of 9 146 147 a C C co p O w C O` j co (6 _ C+-0 a) C CL O O Uo 00 C C/3 4- O L i _ O d C O :3 -0 Q? c U C_ O + d CC C cuccO ` C6 O U U U O L6 O O 0 0 O 0 O U C a)+ d O C co a Un ocG r cocccm 0 U aCco p c c - NeC)o a) cc ) a- 0 co coUU M CD<m L' O N 0) cr) a}- Q OUCIIOC13UrIr 4 0 NQ coCA Cn - O: CLQ O a C 5 _a O Q a N a mu) E ' CD > cc0rQ za > a coOnAmOC1c CL Cu O z :i m m w m z 0 0 a a w ri m <C m w U N m m Q c 2 P 1a) U n w W J m cC r L 0 p J C m U 0 w LL C7 _ - - v -1 z O 0- O cc U) F- n > X I r W o i Yv o i i LLI- ---------- CL w -- C f— o i I I J I III I I omi uj 0 T'--- -- — w o qT .; , - J W C J FF ui O -- - CC < J LL z a z = fP- w Q c, c1G O j U w ; LU LU C z ¢- CLW W U U 1 LacO O tr i j z W X LU U3 F -^ Ico cc w U Q W 1 LC . J CL LL i - O:E i 0. Nr) .? GALENA ST. w co 148 Q c o o mo: W Ca Co Co n' ` co O J G H D LL W CD.> c> a) a) E o Q Q Y a) co E cz c n '- ECOcn oa cs r m- m- d.C) w.C) co a Q Q coo Q n a U) ca c a)" U O al aco C n o CCG Q Q Q a Z Co Z Cn Q C i` i` Z n Lr) m i` i` L 7-0 Q --o a) a) +. G i` Lo co O ` . O cc p m lf) Q U) N dT cn Q Z Q C Q C C O WQCC cna) coOUa C z O Q M Q) • C C+ m Q Q O to coQ) u) a) O C 4) O ca U m U r• CD U) a) c m 0 chW ca. 0) Oc) a) m co -0 C) E U a) U UCL m Q U c6 m d co CC/)).O Z` c cn 1 t•Q Nco a) n rmC< Ca)+ o wwCnm z Q Q w aa) m 0- QD. Q Q n c ' cn cc cO.` m wm OF-mCi m c Q ) 1- cc o Cl)a a)' a) ccs m cn Cm° a, c m n oC a m cu rn a) S c c Z O Y c ' o CS Qm ca w U c c L cwOco a) oco C c c ti o 0 o m o- d ;- cm nm U a) a c Q c co c a) m Q cn m m E o c a) o E 0 co a) () m a) a) a) b C Q m U r- c c a) 0 O co C) co 0 w Q to w m to Q 0 Q w m cnaIL W w Na a Q a. O 0 W T TT n m v7uj od) J F. O to CL f- m z a W 0 O H cs Z z u) T PEDESTRIANACCESS Q W NZa Q a w u K a Q z O O? x Q W- W cc w z y LU z,- C7 v - tie m n a a, z- 0 CF I ti b d 4, W M t- 1 LLo F. N W W LUW W U UJ Q La Q ZUJ in Q k W j LiJ- 0 coLU LL U 1 Q I V/ Q a Q z m Ul a Y a p a o z t Ii. w Q h a ? w Q 5 G Lu s W ti Z L% W Cf) •) a e Q Q cn Z WZ W , W Cn W (J] 2 W H U rQ CJ1 Q W 2 > CL C[ J I ' SIDEWALK i i i >• iElm EXISTING STREET PARKING TO REMAIN GALENA ST. 149 L L9LB 0:) 'N3dSV 'j-S VN31V!) S OE I OMIV N]cJSV U LU uw ca m CL u IL z LU uu U LL, < —) C,4 z D13111HVALU z C) 02 O C14 CL N q fz oawa: 11z01 OM- u O Him - - — ri 6 u z q pw3 Vo 0 0 5 zwF 0 2, -P PzonH!=-'o 'D jga no U" u H§T:d z 0 0 o u o u w 50:0mocl'-ZLuffgoo 0,05,'- Z. z 2w- 'z 12 r. P w-H-5-2, - M Q oxuo- 4 1 L';:! o 0 0 L! T,2M u f 8 u Eicrg u > T t V 5 2 u —'a LLI LL Ln 0 0 LU tn 0 a. Z 05 a. a. 1-1 1 ... I I ... j L ... I I .... 1—[ 1 1 L-1 —.1 1 ... i i...' I ... I - I z * ...... .. ... ... I ... ...... . .... i ..... . ........ ... .. T-71 .. ..... . ........ LU z dn .... : ..... ------- LD L _j LLI T-1 or ... ........ wz Z, .... .. ---- z . --- ----- U) t T.—l'i LF v CLIF= 0 7\ ... . ....... .............. I....- 0 .... .... t; 0z ...................... Z- 6 7, 133US VN31VE) Hinos 150 LMS 00 'N3dSV '-LSVNTIV!) SOEL AJOMV N]cJSV LJ C, u LLI Z LLI uLU co M > uLU _j 0- CLz W < u LLI o aj Lci D Z 3: LA CIAEn0 < u 0 siolj-l O 4 Ln IL r1l —j LL 7 151 L Mg 03 *N3dSV 'iS VN3-TVD S DE L LDAIOMIVNMSVai _j z uOmu LU u ca CL w> CL LLI a. z — J U, LL, z 0 5 L-L, Uw q LU C) < -11 " o 0 0 M0 < tn : 5 ( L w u IHVAO " 4 D IL LL o ol 6Nzw z -, g 0 uu C. o 0 Z 6 Z, UU op29z guol6z<' Z- Z40- ir V U, HER zod r,< 5 u 0z c LR w 0 0LLI ZIIE Au C, a Izs T a 4 o 3 E 6 z 0 m g 0 0 z u 2 'u Aowet 2 0riWamHMHZum u u z u 000 02 0 2 w 0; , zzutn z ow 2=w*wool U<O,UUU <Iauo Ui CO. A o I 1 I I i I 1 I 1 I ' \ I 152 l L9L9 07 'N3dS'd '1S VN31V9 S OE l A JOM V N WSV a > — w Z U m S1 11 HbrJl o jEL nFw_ Ln M0o z O ao fig° ° ONO N p = Q L O m q N 0 LU 9 JmN LL vu 2 N a CN P u rzw "9 a O P-. tg u Z w ° w J > O - w zemm O zQ°S ra-ZrZ '-a iLio ° °O sim Ssu r,°ww'ulhi -u n3 = Y° mQ taz I n zwO Znm xwKQgi 89m~ o Z° pSS zdip S3a w2,a" p. 9, 0L'vaZZ m$ 0 rc F 2w W ley,- 4 0 Bp LL w o Z~ zZgg BOo Aga , Lu F8w > a Tw Z VD jOQZZ-°SO000U'xj owawGoaoowoFww7 ZFz a z_dnvFi ~aZo~c v iwi-uZOa Fwu u>In Wrii r-Fj Fi Oal il> o °`~w ozswO°' °op,au u= 3&o Noolpzu u9 Q p Gsu mo G5?woz ioo°=z o f m D z?Ou°ZLLQOOOgISi 0ui''O ijj O1 i 111~g5 u jal y31000°UmZaOIZ-7 aum3uaosuuu"unu-..' n3 dZZ4zrcI-.Quw?aa-a N n v ri .a Ir of C- FZ d_I J' ll I I tll I I 1 I Q J•:i 1 611 I 1 I I I I I I I r! I I 1 i I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 t I I I II I i i I I I I II 1 1 III1 l 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 I . I I I I it f j 1 i 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I I i 1 I I 1 i I I 1 I i 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I i 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I N I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I i I I I i i 153 L 19LE OO'N3dSViS VN31VO S Of yz >_ m 0JOIAINVM3dSV u uj w ca a_ um 9 Lu zzC) Cl 0 3: 5 c adIHVACD 0- j z LLI _j j CL Q:: uj 0 CL 0CL _j D LL a 0 pw z66. 9.. 6ggHm'. r; 0 a Of gvg ZR< 'a E z 031, z '. g 51 - =I Z' 19, tg - ? T t E 9 ;.i N i Gif T 1 Eg mmMET !2 ig 23 ig U0 6 1, Z, z z z k<,o 00 HUE;@ z . 5 P80-. M'o W!OZd2 2 '--4O0z0tO60'6,-, uj0 0 21 9 it -LAO 2, go - azsR9R!Q a M-R-,tRi, jZ', O!'K H via< ti-ou m9 --z z Z, t 12 0 TZ 2-866OW3 .1 z z n - Rszq< vx !Z 0 3: 5 0 zt L'S IP-MI.02VO0 <0 - 0 _0 U <-3-EZER.80 2m. OmuUHUHmf Cd cs cc OU I (D OI I. ...... L --- -- --- -- -- ------ ------ E3 7 - ------ 0 Y a.... .... .. ...... . . .... ..... .. .... . .. ...... .. ...... 154 L19LBOO'N3dSV'IS VN3lV9SOEL z r N h AdIOMIV NDdSV 0 o x lil Q U m L u W U z 4 om J m R O w z 6 CL - m u F u w u m A. LnA33wo =, w o Q; >z F- ® CFyj Ct N N ]D a N p 2 cl C d a 2 _ C Lj- O w I I 1 I I I I I p i I I I I I z I I I 3Q I I I i II I zoo I I L*Z i I I a I I 1 I I I I I i I I 1 yl i ._«. I q I a I l aI t \ N I N a I ul tl I v1 r)..... 1 t..,...... ........ ........ ...... -- ... I i . M...,.......lMa«a, o nc I N I I / I / I......... 1.........................•• I I 1................................................................. . I I I I I , I I I I I 6 I o I I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I II I II II II I I II I I I I 155 l l9LO OJ 'N3dSV *IS VN3lVE) S OE L z AIOVMV N MSV F x u v w wca0 D w H " } al pWUmc' o aj c, =z pcL, — N g N I_ ulti, L, 1 L I G .. w it i G 00< OQ U O. T LU w Jz LLJ co W H J d < LL w p W O C= J cn w d W W co ~ F pQ J W J g w 0 Q Wa o_mz LL f o wUWmp z O cr z z a_ ¢Qa g O= p W g 0 C7aa.uofU) wcn o WzlQzypoogg>-j w m g o o o z WCL: zzzo o zzww W w p LL0= ui 2 0== J W J W cn p F p ¢ ~ ¢ w o Qzzl i u WaWpzo W U ILL 2 a_ 2 Icn Ico : Y ifo9 o o m o 0 0 0 0 0 o Q 004pC) z 00 QU i m a P W W c2 a'N X 0 N LLJ W L) N a c7 I O LLJ i I I W i 1 I ock: f II i t I I l I I I i i I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 i I 1 I I I I I I I .................... I I 1 I I I 1 I t I I l I I 1 I 1 I I t I Ii I I I{ l I I i 156 L MR 00 'N3dSV '-LS VN31W) S OE L N t50AJONNVN]dSV Ix u V) U W LU 03 z u CL IL0 u < u F- LLJ LLI > LU 0 ONVADD < X -i < Q ma Lm IE u ILLULLIV) LLI 7-- j L - -- ---- - -- -------- F w jw cn 0 w jLLJ 0 CO E Of CJCf) W01 w 0 w0 LL w C sL Z wCL In C9 w W cr- LLJF- w o,- 0 a_ W w w 0- a0 LL 0 z 0 Q Z w wL) W C9 L) z Z N a- CL 0 0 U U 0 z z U) W W w It L) co 0 L) CD w w 0 0 w 21 z 0 w zz x w0 ww C j W w LLj W 0 U) U) U) F- W5Z< w u Z WwwL' 0 LL z F<— IL0 wozo 2 U) I 0 0 U) C, Cj m co 00 0) 0 CD C') 157 LL9LB 00 'N3dSV '-IS 'VN31V9SM AdOMJV N]dSV CL D z W u u- LU Ili C., -Z '0 j z cp 0 2 F- SiO Eli I H :) 1 V A:):) a C14CD niH :5 'D T -" 4 uU, z 0 U Lo z J14 . ...... ...... z - i.:i:a rlrrrr rr ow t9 r .... ........... 0n ....... .............. i I_ 0u...... I -------------- J......... . ............ . .. .. : zc zo t - ------------ u------- 11 i^_+. 3 it uj of 0 z 0 ui II II z 158 LMS 0:)'N3dSViS VN91VD S OEL AJOMIV N]dSV LW a u LU u ;E 0u CL Ln II j 7 - 2 z u I-- u LLI u W, 0 " 2: co z o 02 3: I113 V A cl CL W D Lu < a- C-4 3: u 0 Ln o LL 159 t LM 00 'N3dSV'1S VN31V!) S DEL AIOMV N3cJSV CL z u ul- j z za 02 IS13111H3 l V A:) CD Ocli =3 a. Li J.- O I d, ia I IJ it rim E17, j" ii J.- g- 0; OLI) ....... .. ... 7 z 171- 11 00 ------- km 7 b) O C, E 0_ 1 - U FLU CaLn3 15 p 7O N d 160 U L t9tt ODMAVIS VN31V9SOE I z 0 MJOMVN3dSVu u LU W co M CL u CL z u I ILILIuln'I Lij CD uj o m z 02 V A c-:l IL txzj- IL a. LA z 9 mT zn! uLU 161 119LB 00 'N3dSV'J-SVN31VD SOEL AJOMIV N cJSV F- u u LLI D ca L 2 u CL D z u lu- u dij z In pro cli D C :: a CN Lnn :5 -D am c, lVACDLU w D LLI u Z z U<, LLI LU IL u n* W W4z w a------------ D 17m, ------- --------------------- 13-- — - — - — - — - — HiVd 31SIS 13 13 13 13 E 3 3 3 u : 7 I 13 3 3 E E3 r 1 13 13 3 3 M 3 3 3 E3 31 j _ 13 75 4 3 01 1 13 13 0 13 U 0 0 0 0 13 D 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 13 13 El 0 13 r3 o o o a o b o o o o OC3[300 Cookq 3 .. 21 013 1 ZI 0 0 13 ss 3:) 3v i?MI-U tI 1 30t 3 1 3 0 0 13 3 13 1 3 ui 13 I 13 13 13 0 13 13 13 E 3 wo 13 3 13 3 13 13 0 z 0 3: 13 0 D 13 w 13 N pow 13 131313 15 8 1 t 3 0 amu, 13 Z. II 0 l 0 z 930 13 0 E3 0 E 3 13 :3 13 -..,N 0 3 1 13 13 13 13 0 13lK130u u - El— - — - — — - — - — - — - — - — - M 93 0 13 13 13 13 3 11 133 cl 13 31 r Li 3 3 13 162 L MS OJ 'N3dSV''1S VN3WE) S OEluo J IOMV N]dSV m 0 gg Y . J m N O II '' & O L cmc u V z Q u m` In C ® 11 1LoLmU N C' z U (+e' Q U H l w 0 U 5= p i V /\ Wi ui n CO)N LIJ In U CL o 2 g u ry d P T r 1 r: U w w IL d z O U w U) z I II U w 2 O z z O H U w Ln z 163 11918 07 'N3dSV '1S VN31V'J S Of 1 Al IOW IV N dS`d w wtoto u N- yzki u C7 Lil 0CL o — 1 0 2 U. 51031dA UJ a En n U a N o 2 Z N Z CL Z umay m A OCL CL O a c 0 o_> LU N cam OW J u N d N I.I.. M w U N P 2 o L z° 0- 1 IL i f Y i 1 0 O 164 L M8 07'N3dSV '1S VN31V9 S OEl z A JOMV N]dSV f y Q wULLIco v Cl- a U CL D _ Q Z U. m C' r z LA - - --- ------ w a C, 0 r 3 . f*J&l , I W 0 QU LL LnLUW W0 QU LQL HD 0 to 165 LM8OO'N3dSV'1SVN31VE)SOEL z m N o ' o' Jl OMV N MSV W mar Q O Wom w w d v CL U ds a z CL w Y <U o vwi CL Ln w ULn a S1 11 H`dJl W andNNz3 a( Jy1 W` N d d/ rn P^ wW zw O U H vQ) u] H O z rF- F- zw WH zw U O v 73iiJ'? .', ifT i r11 p 11-r r '.. . E 166 LMS 03 'N3dSV,LSVNgW!) SOEL z A 101N JV NDdSV Ln Z. - LUm u CLIL u u LL, U LU > al z 0 LU g LLI < D EL Lu Lu u co 0 LU II itLU 0 I II w II II 167 u LON07'N3dSV'1SVN31V9SOE1 z r AIOMV N IdSV O o 0 a u v w 03Y U kl wVm0S13311 H d`dA <" 0 - 0 0 -zo Ng N 04 tl w 05; z O w w 0 O 2 w 0 W m O F- Q w ry F] cn § z cr- 0 0 DEEQ W W I-- LLJ w w u O N N 168 I MB OD 'N3d5V IS VN31V9 S OEL AdOMV N]dSV Wu IL 2 5a_ uj> - v C\j 070 < F- Lu 0 Ntn < A CL M, CLj 2: u 0 0 Lu X r) ui Lli i LLJ 0 = LLJ F- ril co 0 0 Z F- ui 0 Z rK LLJ Z r1f, < LL0LL LL C) F5 Of z a - Of < = 06 U) 0 D z CD z z C) CO Q LLJ W > I w 0 L.Li D z 0 c) D C-6 0 z z C/) NU) D Q w < 0-1 U) W- i < z LLI Q D W CD P C0 zWF- z j LU w x LU 0 Z) 3: FJ5 (D U) 169 l MS OD'N3dSV IS VN31V9 S OE z A JOMV N dSV o ° u w w J m U d Q z l o 51 11 H 0N W= 0u Zm o a 0 0 Ndla- rLn cli !2D ao = w w J w m O h OLi 0 OQ Z w Z Q O LL O w LL, U H O Z a. 0 Q = 06 z Z Z_ 0 w j J O} CD Z O D 06 W O Z Q n JC z U) Z U O w Y w U Q 0wMN N z A. U O a m u i C o i WLn w N wWWo NPJ J Z_ C/) J Q J U O w O 06 w cn m 170 LL9LB03' 13dSV'IS VN3lVE)SOEL z AJOMV NldSV Q w vw = v a Q Z f / ll" o a u r d V A QBLij o N o 1- N Z cl O D 3 ~ QC) 0 w C) W J W = cn _ m 0 0 Li Z O Q W oZ Z O L. L L.L U F<- O C/) Df Q = O w J Z Z FZ P U) Z w d 06 Z W w w 0 w O O U n— O wZ W U Z U w t- Z_ W 3 c5 CD Z J I W w C0 L- J i m o uO N N P x J ® d a WW Ln N J U Z J Q _J Q J U O W 0 w Q Q cry m 171 1 t91g 0:)'N3dSV 'IS V:I121V9 s OE Q) AIOMJV N]dSV F- u w CL ILo < U, j Lii q j < F- n D z 0 0 0 SiOIiIH :)J V AD 3 < " - : EL CD06 0 z ry WW> 0- 0 CL0 c) 0 0 z Z N LU < C/) - j 0 C) LLJ - C)f 0 CD LLJ -i WW wU) 0 CO Ir- z 0 Lrl 0 , zFo 11 u 30 CL uu w > Ln w i xLU Lu 0 z 0 z U) j ui Q 06 U 0 U) LIJ 0 Z Z o U) 06 0 - LLJ z U) 10 U) co 172 173 | ii SITE PLAN 5 10 20 Illustrative A D E V X E U S T N O WP Q R E I G L L H B J M K F C C LEGEND A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Light Well Patio Raised Planter, typ. Built-in Wood Seating, typ. Existing ADA Parking to Remain Bear Proof Trash/Recycling Newspaper Stand (relocated) Stop Sign (relocated) Street Light (relocated) Parking Meter (relocated) Proposed Drop-off Existing Tree, typ. Proposed Tree, typ. Roof Overhang, typ. Alley Parking Park Entrance Sign Raised Picnic Deck (accessible) Entry Plaza Permanent Bike Parking Multi-Use Deck Central Gathering Space 27’ Seasonal WeCycle Facility 1’ Gravel Band, typ. Raised Deck Access Stepping Pads, typ. LIMIT OF PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK MAINTENANCE AREA Building Access Point ADA Building Access Point PROPERTY LINE ARMORY HALL HOPKINS AVE.GALENA ST.DESIGN SUMMARY Lighting incorporated into wood seating Built elements to remain clear 4’ from road Maintain 30’ Sight Triangle at intersection Reclaim existing brick pavers for donation to City of Aspen for off-site reuse/repairs 1’-0” minimum gravel band at base of historic Armory building CONNER PARK PRIMARY STREET LEVEL ACCESS VISITOR’S CENTER ENTRANCE (ADA) LOWER LEVEL ACCESS ADA STREET LEVEL ACCESS 174 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' NOT F OR CONSTR U CTI O N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 24102 GRAPHIC EXTERIOR ELEVATION SOUTH Z-204ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.01 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION WOOD WINDOWS TO BE REPAIRED, RESTORED, AND REPAINTED 175 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' NOT F OR CONSTR U CTI O N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 24102 GRAPHIC EXTERIOR ELEVATION WEST Z-205ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.01 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION WOOD WINDOWS TO BE REPAIRED, RESTORED, AND REPAINTED 176 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' NOT F OR CONSTR U CTI O N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 24102 GRAPHIC EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS NORTH Z-202ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.01 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION WOOD WINDOWS TO BE REPAIRED, RESTORED, AND REPAINTED 177 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' NOT F OR CONSTR U CTI O N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 24102 GRAPHIC EXTERIOR ELEVATION EAST Z-203ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.01 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 178 MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" 3456 MEZZANINE 110'-8" V1V2V3 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-301 2 1 CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" COVERED TRASH ENCLOSURE VISITOR CENTER ADDITION MECHANICAL ROOF TRANSFORMER SKYLIGHTS MECHANICAL WELL 141'-3 3/4" VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" - --- 103A 113'-8 1/2" T.O. ROOF 112'-9" T.O. VESTIBULE ROOF B MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" A.3CC.6DD.7 B.4 MEZZANINE 110'-8" VB VA 1 A-303 1 A-302 2 A-302 AE CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" ENLARGED LIGHTWELL COVERED ENTRY MECHANICAL WELL ACCESSIBLE VESTIBULE ADDITION 141'-3 3/4"141'-3 3/4" VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" T.O. CANOPY T.O. CANOPY DETAILING OF CANOPIES TO BE COORDINATED WITH HPSTAFF AND MONITOR 112'-9"112'-9" 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. N O T FO R C O N S T R UC T IO N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A-200ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816113/16" = 1'-0" NORTH ELEVATION 1 3/16" = 1'-0" EAST ELEVATION 2 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION EXTERIOR MATERIAL SCHEDULE MARK MATERIAL DESCRIPTION BR-01 EXISTING BRICK C-00 CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE C-01 FINISHED CONCRETE - POLISHED AND SEALED GL-00 WINDOW GLAZING MT-01 WEATHERED COPPER - PLATE METAL MT-02 WEATHERED COPPER - BENT PROFILE MT-03 METAL WINDOW CLADDING MT-06 PAINTED METAL ROOF MT-08 METAL TRIM/FLASHING MT-09 STOREFRONT WINDOW FRAME ST-01 SANDSTONE VENEER WD-03 WOOD SHINGLE SIDING 2025.07.01 179 MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" 3 4 5 6 MEZZANINE 110'-8" V1 V2 V3 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-301 21 CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" COVERED ENTRY ACCESSIBLE VESTIBULE ADDITION SKYLIGHTS MECHANICAL WELL 141'-3 3/4" VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" - --- T.O. CANOPY T.O. CANOPYT.O. CANOPY DETAILING OF CANOPIES TO BE COORDINATED WITH HPSTAFF AND MONITOR 112'-9" B MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" A.3 C C.6 D D.7B.4 MEZZANINE 110'-8" VBVA 1 A-303 1 A-302 2 A-302 A E CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" SCREENED MECHANICAL ROOF VISITOR CENTER ADDITION 141'-3 3/4"141'-3 3/4" 118'-0" VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" 108A 113'-8 3/4" T.O. ROOF T.O. CANOPY DETAILING OF CANOPIES TO BE COORDINATED WITH HPSTAFF AND MONITOR 112'-9" 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. N O T FO R C O N S T R UC T IO N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A-201ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816113/16" = 1'-0" SOUTH ELEVATION 1 3/16" = 1'-0" WEST ELEVATION 2 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION EXTERIOR MATERIAL SCHEDULE MARK MATERIAL DESCRIPTION BR-01 EXISTING BRICK C-00 CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE C-01 FINISHED CONCRETE - POLISHED AND SEALED GL-00 WINDOW GLAZING MT-01 WEATHERED COPPER - PLATE METAL MT-02 WEATHERED COPPER - BENT PROFILE MT-03 METAL WINDOW CLADDING MT-06 PAINTED METAL ROOF MT-08 METAL TRIM/FLASHING MT-09 STOREFRONT WINDOW FRAME ST-01 SANDSTONE VENEER WD-03 WOOD SHINGLE SIDING 2025.07.01 180 B MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" A.3CC.6DD.7 B.4 MEZZANINE 110'-8" VB VA 1 A-303 1 A-302 2 A-302 AE CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" CATERING KITCHEN 006 STORAGE 005 SHARED STORAGE 008 MECHANICAL 009 VISITOR CENTER 110 OFFICE 112 KITCHEN 2 106 MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 COMMUNITY LOUNGE 115 BAR 200.1 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200 VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" B MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" A.3 C C.6 D D.7B.4 MEZZANINE 110'-8" VBVA 1 A-303 1 A-302 2 A-302 A E CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200 COMMUNITY LOUNGE 115 VISITOR CENTER 110 COMMUNITY FLEX SPACE 004 MECHANICAL ROOF A-402 1 VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" CORRIDOR 101.4 STAFF LOCKER RM. 011 MECHANICAL 009 CORRIDOR 010 CRAWL SPACE COVERED TRASH ENCLOSURE 7'-0"228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. N O T FO R C O N S T R UC T IO N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 BUILDING SECTIONS A-300ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816113/16" = 1'-0" N/S SECTION @ VISITOR CENTER 1 3/16" = 1'-0" N/S SECTION @ CENTRAL STAIR 2 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 181 B MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" A.3 C C.6 D D.7B.4 MEZZANINE 110'-8" VBVA 1 A-303 1 A-302 2 A-302 A E CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 STOR 105 BOH 103 KITCHEN 1 102 RESTROOM 202 KITCHEN 4 203 KITCHEN 5 204 COMMUNITY FLEX SPACE 004 WOMEN'S RESTROOM 003 MECHANICAL WELL VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" MEN'S RESTROOM 002 LIBRARY 117 MECHANICAL ROOF MECHANICAL ROOF CRAWL SPACE 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. N O T FO R C O N S T R UC T IO N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 BUILDING SECTIONS A-301ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816113/16" = 1'-0" N/S SECTION @ MECH WELL 1 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 182 MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" 3456 MEZZANINE 110'-8" V1V2V3 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-301 2 1 CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" MECHANICAL 009 CORRIDOR 001 VISITOR CENTER 110 MECHANICAL ROOF VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" 103A W2 W7.1W7 W7 W7.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 W3.1 01A 009A MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" 3 4 5 6 MEZZANINE 110'-8" V1 V2 V3 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-301 21 CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" CATERING KITCHEN 006 COMMUNITY FLEX SPACE 004 MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200 KITCHEN 4 203 BAR 200.1 BILLIARDS 116 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200 VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" - --- ENTRY VESTIBULE 108 MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 CRAWL SPACE - --- 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. N O T FO R C O N S T R UC T IO N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 BUILDING SECTIONS A-302ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816113/16" = 1'-0" E/W SECTION @ VISITOR CENTER 1 3/16" = 1'-0" E/W SECTION @ GALENA ENTRY 2 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 183 MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" 3456 MEZZANINE 110'-8" V1V2V3 2 A-300 1 A-300 1 A-301 2 1 CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" MAIN LEVEL DINING 101 ENTRY VESTIBULE 100 COMMUNITY FLEX SPACE 004 STORAGE 005 UPPER LEVEL DINING 200KITCHEN 5 204 MECHANICAL WELL VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2" 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. N O T FO R C O N S T R UC T IO N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 BUILDING SECTIONS A-303ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.02 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 816113/16" = 1'-0" E/W SECTION @ VESTIBULE 1 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 2025.07.01 184 BB MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7B.4B.4 MEZZANINE 110'-8" VBVBVAVAAA EE CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" UPPER LEVEL DININGUPPER LEVEL DINING 200 MAIN LEVEL DININGMAIN LEVEL DINING 101 COMMUNITY LOUNGECOMMUNITY LOUNGE 115 VISITOR CENTERVISITOR CENTER 110 CORRIDORCORRIDOR 001 VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2"7'-6"6'-6"1'-0"141'-10" 118'-0" 118'-2" 113'-9" 139'-10"141'-4" MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SKYLIGHT BB MAIN LEVEL 100'-0" LOWER LEVEL 89'-6" UPPER LEVEL 121'-4" T.O. TOP ROOF 139'-10" A.3A.3 CC C.6C.6 DD D.7D.7B.4B.4 MEZZANINE 110'-8" VBVBVAVAAA EE CRAWL SPACE 92'-6" KITCHEN 4KITCHEN 4 203 KITCHEN 5KITCHEN 5 204 RESTROOMRESTROOM 202 KITCHEN 1KITCHEN 1 102 MAIN LEVEL DININGMAIN LEVEL DINING 101 WOMEN'S RESTROOMWOMEN'S RESTROOM 003 BOHBOH 103 STORSTOR 105 VISITOR CENTER LEVEL 99'-0 1/2"MEN'S RESTROOMMEN'S RESTROOM 002 COMMUNITY FLEXCOMMUNITY FLEX SPACESPACE 004 118'-2" 118'-0" 141'-4"141'-3"7'-9"1'-0"8'-9"6'-6"1'-0"7'-6"141'-1"141'-4" MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. NOT F OR CONSTR U CTI O N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 3/16" = 1'-0" 24102 MECHANICAL HEIGHT VARIATION Z-012ASPEN ARMORYCD PROGRESS SUMMER 2025 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 3/16" = 1'-0" N/S SECTION @ NORTH MECH ROOFN/S SECTION @ NORTH MECH ROOF 11 3/16" = 1'-0" N/S SECTION @ UPPER MECH WELLN/S SECTION @ UPPER MECH WELL 22 REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 185 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. NOT F OR CONSTR U CTI O N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 24102 PERSPECTIVE VIEWS A-901ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.01 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611SOUTHEAST CORNERSOUTH FACADE NORTHWEST CORNERWEST FACADE REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 186 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. NOT F OR CONSTR U CTI O N DRAWN BY: CCY CHECKED BY: CCY HISTORY: 24102 PERSPECTIVE VIEWS A-902ASPEN ARMORYLAND USE APPLICATION UPDATE 2025.07.01 130 S GALENA ST, ASPEN, CO 81611NORTHEAST CORNERVISITOR CENTER ENTRY HOPKINS ENTRYCONNER PARK FACADE REV. #DATE DESCRIPTIONREV. #DATE DESCRIPTION 187