HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20260527AGENDA
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMISSION
May 27, 2026
4:30 PM, City Council Chambers -
3rd Floor
427 Rio Grande Place
Aspen, CO 81611
I.ROLL CALL
II.MINUTES
III.PUBLIC COMMENTS
IV.COMMISSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS
V.DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
VI.PROJECT MONITORING
VII.STAFF COMMENTS
VIII.CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ISSUED
IX.CALL UP REPORTS
X.SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS
XI.SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT
XII.OLD BUSINESS
XII.A
Resolution #10, Series of 2026
500 W. Francis St. – Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major
Development Conceptual Review, Relocation, and Benefits.
500WFrancis.StaffReport.pdf
HPC Resolution # 10 , Series of 2026.pdf
Attachment A_Application.pdf
Attachment B_Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Staff Analysis.pdf
Attachment C_Relocation Criteria Staff Analysis.pdf
1
1
XIII.NEW BUSINESS
XIV.ADJOURN
XV.NEXT RESOLUTION NUMBER
Attachment D_Benefit Criteria Staff Analysis.pdf
Attachment E_Combined Referral Comments.pdf
Attachment F_HPC Minutes from March 11, 2026.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
STAFF REPORT
TO: Aspen’s Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Gillian White, Historic Preservation Officer, Principal Planner
THROUGH: Dan Folke, Planning Director
MEETING DATE: May 27, 2026
SUBJECT: Resolution #10, Series of 2026
500 W. Francis St. – Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness
for Major Development Conceptual Review, Relocation, and
Benefits.
__________________________________________________________________
INTENDED OUTCOME:
The request of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is to consider the following
land use code review processes:
• Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development (Section 26.415.070(d))
• Relocation (Section 26.415.090)
• Benefits – Variations (Section 26.415.110(c))
• Benefits – Floor Area, Lightwell Exemption (Section 26.415.110(f)(5))
The HPC is the final review authority of these requests, however, the Certificate of
Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual Review is subject to City Council
call up procedures.
The intended outcome for this request is to maintain the integrity of the historic
resource, the historic preservation program, and align with Aspen’s Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines and applicable code sections to the extent possible.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The purpose of this report is to provide the HPC with details on the request for a
Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual Review and
associated requests so the HPC can make an informed decision. Per Land Use Code
(LUC) Section 26.415.070(d), the HPC may approve, disapprove, or approve the
application with conditions. The HPC may also continue the application to obtain
additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny.
3
Overview of Project:
The applicant proposes to demolish non-historic portions of the historic carriage house,
construct a new two-car garage, connect the resource to the new garage via a transparent
linking element, temporarily relocate/lift both historic resources to build a subgrade
addition and install a new foundation, and restore the resources to match historic photos.
The applicant is also requesting benefits for the preservation work, including variations to
setbacks and a floor area benefit via a lightwell exemption.
Staff Recommendation:
The proposed conceptual development plan does not strictly meet all of the applicable
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, but it does meet the majority of applicable
guidelines. While the applicant proposes to remove non-historic additions and restore the
resource, the addition of a new structure resulting in more massing does change the
context of the site. As this is a corner lot, staff understand the difficulty in meeting all
applicable guidelines and review criteria.
Fig. 1. Aerial image showing the subject property outlined in yellow.
4
DISCUSSION:
Background:
Built in 1884, 500 West Francis Street is developed with a single-family residence and
carriage house and is a locally designated historic landmark. The subject site is a 6,000
square foot lot located in the West End neighborhood in the Medium Density Residential
(R-6) Zone District.
The subject site is part of a previously approved historic lot split via Council Ordinance
#19, Series of 2007, which the HPC recommended for approval through HPC Resolution
#14, Series of 2007. The HPC Resolution also approved setback variations and a 500
square foot floor area bonus. The previous property owner’s intention at the time was to
split the lot to restrict additional development on the subject site as a way to best preserve
the historic character and integrity of the historic resource. The 500 square foot bonus
was awarded to the neighboring vacant lot to encourage additional development on that
lot and prevent it on the subject site.
Prior HPC Meeting Summary:
This proposal came before the HPC on March 11, 2026, for the first conceptual public
hearing. At this meeting the HPC gave the applicant team direction including asking the
applicant to restudy the garage to make it more differential from the resources, look into
the connecting element more as it relates to the removal of the existing window, and the
HPC asked the applicant to update the design to align with code requirements regarding
the floor area bonus criteria. The applicant has since updated their application to reflect
the previous meeting and direction provided by the HPC. Design revisions include
keeping the carriage house as a free standing structure, reducing the size and changing
the connecting point of the linking element, and design changes to the new garage.
Staff Comments:
Staff find that the proposal is an appropriate preservation project that preserves the
main resource on the site with limited alterations. The historic carriage house will see
the most change should this proposal be approved. While staff find that the proposal
meets the majority of the applicable Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, the HPC
will want to discuss the applicants changes to the garage structure materiality and the
connecting element to ensure the previous direction was implemented as the HPC
intended.
Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual Review - Section
26.415.070(d)
The proposal is consistent with several applicable Historic Preservation Design
Guidelines as noted in the attached analysis.
Main Resource:
The alterations proposed to the exterior of main house are limited to a new foundation,
5
the proposed synthetic roof material, and the addition of a connecting element to the
garage structure. The existing foundation will need to be replaced if the relocation is
approved; details of this are included in the relocation section of this staff report. A
subgrade addition is proposed as part of this work.
As the applicant has revised the design to keep the carriage house detached, the
applicant now has a single connecting element from the main resource to the new
garage. The applicant has proposed a connecting element that is minimal in width and
transparent in materiality and requires minimal removal of historic material as much of
the siding is being retained within the connector. The updated design includes a
reduction to the number of mullions and the roof will now be transparent. Additionally,
the applicant has lowered the point of attachment to avoid removing the existing
window.
The proposed roof material for the historic resource is a composite shingle that tries to
replicate an historic wood shingle. While the guidelines state that historic material
should not be replaced with synthetic materials, staff understand the difficulties in
roofing material options as it intersects with insurance requirements. The proposed
Enviroshingle material has similarities to historic wood shingles in its dimensions and
striations, however, the durability and reflectivity remain questionable as the product
has not been tested over time; there is potential for the reflectivity to lessen over time
due to weathering.
Apart from this work, the applicant is proposing only necessary repairs and restoration
based on historic photos for the main house; if any replacement is required then the
applicant is to work with Staff and HPC monitor for review and approval. The applicant
has stated they will provide a full preservation plan at final review.
Carriage House:
The applicant is proposing to remove a non-historic addition from the existing carriage
house, bringing the structure back to its original footprint per Sanborn Maps. The
applicant has agreed to involve staff and monitor during selective demolition; should
historic framing reveal evidence of previous design iterations, staff and monitor will
discuss options with the applicant in an effort to best restore the carriage house to its
historic condition.
Garage:
The proposed garage structure is only one-story in height, and is significantly setback
from Francis Street. The applicant has updated their design to better differentiate the
garage from the historic resources, as directed by the HPC at the first conceptual
hearing. The updated design includes a vertical siding that is darker in color and the
roof has been updated to remove the overhang. The proposed plans including the
6
garage structure are based on floor area calculations that take the lightwell floor area
bonus into account.
Staff analysis of the applicable Design Guidelines is included with this staff report as
Attachment B.
Relocation - Section 26.415.090
The applicant is requesting relocation approval to allow for a basement to be excavated.
The extent of the relocation will involve lifting the main resource and the carriage house
without any lateral movements, so the resources will remain in their original location once
placed back on the new foundations. Although this is not the same as underpinning, it
does provide an outcome similar to what is noted in Guideline 9.1. The engineering report
provided does not speak to why underpinning is not possible. Should the relocation be
approved, removal of historic foundation material and a new foundation will be required;
the applicant has stated they will reuse the existing historic material as a veneer on the
new foundation wall. Following commissioner comments from the previous conceptual
hearing, the applicant has provided more information as to how the stone will be salvaged,
cut, and repurposed as a veneer. This approach has previously been approved by the
HPC.
The applicant has provided a preliminary relocation plan outlining proposed methods and
intends to provide detailed plans including load calculations prior to permit. The HPC has
previously discussed when this requirement should be submitted; should the
relocation be approved, the commission is asked to discuss what they deem
appropriate. Staff are recommending a condition to require the detailed relocation
plan at Final Review by the HPC. Additionally, the HPC should discuss the amount
of financial assurance they would like to require for the proposed relocation if
approved.
Staff analysis of the applicable relocation criteria is included with this staff report as
Attachment C.
Benefits – Section 26.415.110
The applicant has requested two forms of historic preservation benefits available in the
code, variations to dimensional standards and a lightwell exemption that results in a
floor area bonus.
The applicant has requested variations to the side, combined side, and rear yard
setbacks in five areas. Three of the five requested variations are proposed as a means
of memorializing the existing location of the historic resources; the main house sits
within the side yard setback and the carriage house sits within the side yard and rear
yard setbacks. A portion of the carriage house is actually off property into the alley; an
encroachment license is in place for this portion of the structure. Staff are supportive of
7
the variation requests related to memorializing the existing locations of the historic
resources. There are two setback variations requested for the proposed subgrade
space. The first subgrade variation requested is for the east wall of the basement and
the applicant has updated this variation request following HPC feedback; the new
subgrade space remains outside of the setback and only extends into the setback to
match the footprint of the main resource. Staff are supportive of the proposed east side
yard subgrade setback variation. The second variation request for the subgrade space
relates to the rear yard setback, where the applicant is proposing to extend the setback-
to-setback basement 5’ into the rear yard setback. The applicant’s reasoning for
needing the rear yard setback variation is to avoid additions above grade, however, the
property has no available floor area that would allow for additional massing above
grade. The applicant also notes the need to align the subgrade space with the garage
for ease of constructability for the new foundation. Staff believe that a setback-to-
setback basement which is approximately 3,500 square feet is more than a reasonable
amount of space needed to accommodate modern living. Given that the rear yard
variation request is unnecessary for reasonable use of the property and does not
enhance or mitigate an adverse impact to the resources, staff are not supportive of the
subgrade rear yard setback variation.
Per Section 26.415.110(c) of Aspen’s Land Use Code, dimensional variations are
allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more
consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be
required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. Per this code section, the
HPC must make a finding that the requested variations are similar to the pattern,
features and character of the historic property and/or enhance or mitigate an
adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the
historic property.
In addition to the variation requests, the applicant has requested a floor area bonus via
a lightwell exemption that would result in an additional 435 square feet of floor area. Per
the floor area bonus portion of the benefit code section, where the lightwell exemption
lives, the granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is
contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of
the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic
preservation practices. The applicant is proposing to remove non-historic additions on
the carriage house to align the footprint with Sanborn Maps, add a two-car garage
structure to the site, add a connecting element from the main resource to the garage,
and repair/restore existing historic material on the main house, including restoring the
back porch, and carriage house as needed. To be considered for a floor area bonus, it
must be demonstrated that the project meets the criteria noted in Section
26.415.110(f)(1)a-d of the land use code, included in the attached staff analysis of the
8
benefit criteria. As one of the criteria requires any existing outbuildings on site to remain
as free-standing structures, the applicant has updated their proposal to maintain the
carriage house as a standalone structure. Staff find that the floor area bonus criteria are
met.
In addition to the general floor area bonus criteria, there is specific criteria for the
lightwell exemption that requires that the lightwell “is internalized such that it is entirely
recessed behind the vertical plane established by the portion of the building façade(s)
closest to any street(s), the light well is screened from view from the street by building
walls or fences, and any addition that is made to the affected resource simultaneous or
after the construction of the light well is entirely one (1) story.” Staff find these lightwell
criteria met.
Staff analysis of the applicable benefit criteria is included with this staff report as
Attachment D.
Referral Comments:
Staff referred out the application to other City departments for comments on the updated
application. The aggregated referral comments for both the first application and the
updated application are included in Attachment E. Some of the feedback may have
already been incorporated into subsequent application revisions.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommend approval of HPC Resolution #10, Series of 2026, with the following
conditions and details:
1. Should any concerns come up during the course of construction that result in
deviations from the proposed plans and methods of preservation/restoration,
Applicant is to work with Staff and HPC monitor to review potential changes.
2. Potential non-historic elements proposed to be replaced/replicated, such as the
front door, will require Staff and HPC monitor review and approval.
3. Financial assurance for the relocation of the resource in the amount of $30,000,
or an amount deemed appropriate by the HPC, is required at the time of permit
submittal.
4. Applicant will provide full details of the relocation including structural design and
construction methodology for Final Review by the HPC.
5. The request for side and rear yard setback variations to memorialize the existing
locations of the historic resources are approved as follows:
a. A rear yard setback variation of 10’ for the carriage house, resulting in a
rear yard setback of 0’.
b. An east side yard setback variation of 5’ for the carriage house, resulting
in an east side yard setback of 0’
9
c. An east side yard setback variation of 1’-11” for the main house, resulting
in an east side yard setback of 3’1”.
d. A combined side yard setback variation of 5’, resulting in a combined side
yard setback of 10’.
6. The requested subgrade setback variation for the east side yard is approved as
depicted; the new subgrade wall is only approved within the setback when
aligning with the footprint of the main resource.
7. The requested subgrade setback variation for the rear yard is denied.
ATTACHMENTS:
HPC Resolution #10, Series of 2026
Attachment A – Application
Attachment B – Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Staff Analysis
Attachment C – Relocation Criteria Staff Analysis
Attachment D – Benefit Criteria Staff Analysis
Attachment E – Combined Referral Comments
Attachment F – HPC Meeting Minutes from March 11, 2026
10
HPC Resolution #10, Series of 2026
Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION #10,
(SERIES OF 2026)
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
GRANTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MAJOR
DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTUAL REVIEW, RELOCATION, AND BENEFITS FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 500 WEST FRANCIS STREET, LEGALLY
DESCRIBED AS PARCEL A:UNIT 1, QUARK CONDOMINIUMS, ACCORDING TO
THE CONDOMINIUM PLAT RECORDED FEBRUARY 21, 2008 IN PLAT BOOK 86
AT PAGE 63 AND AS DEFINED AND DESCRIBED IN CONDOMINIUM
DECLARATION RECORDED FEBRUARY 21, 2008 AS RECEPTION NO. 546660.
TOGETHER WITH AN UNDIVIDED 50% INTEREST IN THE COMMON AREA.
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO AND PARCEL B: UNIT 2, QUARK
CONDOMINIUMS, ACCORDING TO THE CONDOMINIUM PLAT RECORDED
FEBRUARY 21, 2008 IN PLAT BOOK 86 AT PAGE 63 AND AS DEFINED AND
DESCRIBED IN CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED FEBRUARY 21, 2008
AS RECEPTION NO. 546660. TOGETHER WITH AN UNDIVIDED 50% INTEREST IN
THE COMMON AREA. CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY,
COLORADO
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-10-010; 2735-124-10-011
WHEREAS, the applicant, FRANCIS ASPEN INVESTMENTS LLC, represented by Kim
Raymond Architecture + Interiors, has requested HPC approval for Certificate of Appropriateness
for Major Development Conceptual Review, Relocation, and Benefits, for the property located at
500 West Francis Street; 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 Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development, the HPC
must review the application, a staff analysis report, and the evidence presented at a hearing to
determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design
Guidelines per Section 26.415.070(d) 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 requested Benefits, the HPC must find the application meets the
requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110; and
11
HPC Resolution #10, Series of 2026
Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance
with the applicable review standards and recommended approval with conditions of a Certificate
of Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual Review; and
WHEREAS, the HPC reviewed the project on March 11, 2026, and considered the application,
the staff report, and public comments, and voted to continue the item to the May 27, 2026 HPC
meeting to allow the applicant time to revise their design; and
WHEREAS, the HPC reviewed the project on May 27, 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 #10, Series of 2026 by a vote of X to X (X-X).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
Section 1: Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual Review:
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Historic Preservation Commission hereby grants a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major
Development Conceptual Review with the following condition:
1. Should any concerns come up during the course of construction that result in deviations
from the proposed plans and methods of preservation/restoration, Applicant is to work
with Staff and HPC monitor to review potential changes.
2. Potential non-historic elements proposed to be replaced/replicated, such as the front door,
will require Staff and HPC monitor review and approval.
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. Financial assurance for the relocation of the resource in the amount of $30,000, or an
amount deemed appropriate by the HPC, is required at the time of permit submittal.
2. Applicant will provide full details of the relocation including structural design and
construction methodology for Final Review by the HPC.
Section 3: Benefits:
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Historic Preservation Commission hereby grant approval for the requested variations and floor
area bonus benefits as follows:
1. The request for side and rear yard setback variations to memorialize the existing locations
of the historic resources are approved as follows:
a. A rear yard setback variation of 10’ for the carriage house, resulting in a rear yard
setback of 0’.
b. An east side yard setback variation of 5’ for the carriage house, resulting in an
east side yard setback of 0’
c. An east side yard setback variation of 1’-11” for the main house, resulting in an
east side yard setback of 3’1”.
12
HPC Resolution #10, Series of 2026
Page 3 of 3
d. A combined side yard setback variation of 5’, resulting in a combined side yard
setback of 10’.
2. The requested subgrade setback variation for the east side yard is approved as depicted;
the new subgrade wall is only approved within the setback when aligning with the
footprint of the main resource.
3. The requested subgrade setback variation for the rear yard is denied.
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.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 27th day of May, 2026.
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content:
__________________________________ ____________________________________
Luisa Berne Kara Thompson
Assistant City Attorney HPC Chair
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Mike Sear
Deputy City Clerk
13
1
April 10th, 2026
Gillian White, HP Officer
Historic Preservation Commission
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: 500 W Francis
Dear Gillian and Members of the Commission,
The special nature of this historic home has been at the forefront of our minds as we continue to work with
Gillian and Dan after our first hearing. Also, the sentiments of the commissioners have been considered at
length as we have developed our new plan for your review. Following is a summary of the changes we have
made and our thought process in arriving at this new proposal by reviewing the guidelines and the Land Use
Code.
As you are aware, there are nearly 100 pages to the Historic Preservation Guidelines, it is a huge amount of
information to keep in mind as each new project comes before you. To that end, let’s start with a quick review of
the principles of the guidelines overall and then of Chapter 10, Building Additions.
As outlined in the introduction to the guidelines on page 12, under “Selecting A Preservation Approach”, there
are several preservation strategies outlined: Preservation, Restoration, Rehabilitation, and Adaptive Use.
Sometimes a combination of strategies is the path that leads to the best outcome for the historic resource. We
are using a combination of these methods to: 1. Preserve and repair the Victorian; 2. Restore the appearance
of the historic home as documented by photographs to replicate missing details and remove the non-historic
materials from the home and carriage house; 3. Rehabilitate the home and carriage house to contemporary
use while preserving significant historical details and features.
It is our belief that in Rehabilitation, “returning a property to a state which makes a contemporary use possible”,
means to bring it up to the typical living standards of the other homes in its neighborhood, being new
construction or remodeled homes. Standards of what is normal and expected have changed as much as the
architecture over the decades and it is our job to keep the historic character while adjusting to meet the needs of
the modern family.
Chapter 10 Additions- Introduction
“Many historic buildings in Aspen, including secondary structures, were expanded over time as the need for
more space occurred. Typically, the addition was subordinate in scale and character to the main building. The
height of the addition was usually lower than that of the main structure and was often located to the side or rear,
such that the original building retained its prominence. The addition was often constructed of materials that were
similar to those used on the original structure. This tradition of adding onto buildings is appropriate to continue.
It is important, however, that a new addition be designed in such a manner that it preserves the historic
character of the original structure.
Keeping the size of the addition small and subordinate, in relation to the main structure, helps minimize its visual
impacts. An addition must be set apart from the historic building and connected with a one-story linking
element. This creates a break between new and old construction and will help maintain the perceived scale and
proportion of the historic resource.”
The key points to take away from this introduction is the appropriateness of putting additions on historic
resources and that the “addition must be set apart AND be connected” with a linking element to set the new
construction apart from the historic resource.
14
2
It is in the spirit of these basic principles of the historic guidelines that we have designed our new proposal. We
think you will agree that we have met the guidelines that were in question previously. Below we will address the
changes we have made and how this proposal meets the guidelines.
1. The biggest change you will see is that the historic carriage house is now free standing, not connected
to the house or the garage addition; returned to its original footprint.
2. The new two-car garage addition is now more distinguishable from the historic resources after a
change of materiality and roof detailing.
a. Siding is now a darker color and vertically oriented
b. Garage roof now features a zero-overhang as opposed to replicating the carriage house’s
dimensional overhangs as we did before.
3. Substantial changes to the proposed one-story linking element have been made:
a. Is now narrower (total of 6’-0” wide), aiding in compliance with HP Guideline 10.9: “minimize
the width of the connector”.
b. Is more transparent:
i. Reduced number of mullions per the request of Commissioner input
ii. Original flat roof replaced by skylight, aiding in perceived mass and transparency
c. Lowered connector’s roof to avoid conflict with existing window.
i. This window can now remain in place, a concern of Commissioners at prior hearing
4. The new sub-grade foundation on the east side of the historic home now jogs 11” inward to be set
entirely within the setback line beyond the footprint of the historic home.
5. Lightwell egress improved by re-configuring evergreen plants; another concern of Commissioners.
Chapter 10: Building Additions
We are only addressing the sections of this chapter that are pertinent to our current discussion here. The rest of
the sections of this chapter are discussed in detail in the original summary letter attached below.
New Additions
10.3: Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is
maintained.
We have changed the siding on the garage addition to address the concerns of some of the commissioners that
the garage is not ‘different enough’ from the historic resources. There was some confusion on this topic at the
hearing, but we gathered that the consensus was that making the addition too modern may not be appropriate
for this particular lot… and that drawing undue attention to it would not be the best outcome.
The guidelines seem to add confusion to this topic; 10.3 says “an addition that imitates the primary building’s
historic style is not allowed”, but 10.6 states that “on a corner lot departing from the form of the historic
resource may not be allowed.”
Nonetheless, we feel the new proposed form and materiality balances the guidelines appropriately and responds
to Commissioner feedback.
The garage addition remains subordinate in scale to both the elevated two-story home and the two-story
carriage house.
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.
This has not changed, the Queen Anne Victorian is still the predominant structure on the property, and the
carriage house blocks the view of the new addition as viewed from Fourth street.
15
3
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.
This guideline is not completely applicable to our project as we are proposing a single-story addition behind the
two-story buildings. This guideline does address the design aspects of the required connecting link as mentioned
in the beginning of Chapter 10, New Additions.
The connector link that connects historic to new construction is a transparent corridor, well recessed from the
street facing sides of the historic resource. Our connecting element is just that, a transparent corridor that is
recessed from the corners of the historic resource and is only 6’ wide.
We have altered the link to make it even more transparent. It was asked if there could be fewer panels; we
reduced the number of panels from 4 to 3. We also lowered the roof by making it a skylight so the thickness of
the construction of the roof is as minimal as possible. The additional benefit of this move is that we are now able
to retain the existing window above the link.
To reduce the amount of historic siding to be removed on the rear of this building, we are keeping the exterior
siding inside of our linking element, removing just enough material to attach the two walls and allow entrance to
the home through a cased opening. Residents will be literally stepping through the historic wall by stepping on
the foundation stones to enter the home.
Section 10.9 addresses the connecting links with a few more details; all of which are met by the design of the
proposed link. The link must be one story; no usable space (including decks) is allowed on the roof; the
connector must connect underneath the eaves of the historic home; the connector must be a minimum of 10’
long; the width is minimized being just a passage between the historic home and the proposed addition; the
original corners of the historic resource must be visible; the connector may not be as wide as the resource and
there is not a street facing door proposed on the link.
10.6: Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
The garage will maintain the same form as noted above, but the siding will be turned vertical and will be a
composite material attached as a rainscreen to distinguish it as a building of this time. The small scale of the
new rainscreen will make this new material visually compatible with the historic wood siding. The detailing of the
roof will also be more contemporary by removing the overhangs and giving the classic gable form the modern
detail of minimalism, no trim, no overhangs. This approach meets the standard for a new addition by having the
form and fenestration be complimentary to the historic home with the materials being the differentiator. As
aforementioned, this guideline does note that on a corner lot departing from the form of the historic may not be
allowed.
The fenestration on the garage remains the similar proportions to the house; being vertically oriented like the
double hung historic windows. The new windows will be casements.
STONE FOUNDATION
The other issue that was of concern to some of the members of the commission is the treatment of the stone
foundation.
It was asked if there was any way to keep the foundation and create a basement around or below it. The short
answer is NO. There is not a way to keep the rubble of a failing foundation and build below it.
There is however a means of construction that has been demonstrated to work very well on historic foundations
throughout the West End of Aspen, that has been approved by the HPC for decades. This method entails
carefully removing the foundation stones AFTER photographic documentation of the appearance has been
recorded. These stones are taken to a mason that has experience in handling historic stone, and he will cut the
16
4
stones into a thick veneer that will be re-applied to the new concrete foundation. The layout and the grouting of
the historic stones will match the original, even the corner stones will be maintained.
Below is a typical detail of the re-application of the stone onto the new concrete foundation wall.
Please note, veneer thickness is limited by the ability of the sole plate to extend out over the new foundation wall.
IRC R602.3.4 limits this “cantilever ” to 1/3rd the depth of the stud wall above, which is ±1 ¾”.
HISTORIC SIDING TO REMAIN
HISTORIC SKIRT BOARD TO REMAIN
HISTORIC WATER TABLE TRIM TO REMAIN
HISTORIC 2x4 STUDS TO REMAIN
NEW 2x6 STUDS SISTERED TO
2x4s
± 2" MAX
METAL FLASHING w/ DRIP EDGE
CONTINUOUS AIR SEALER
5/8" TYPE X GYPSUM WALL BOARD, TYP.
NEW SOLE PLATE, TYP.
BASEBOARD, SEE BASEBOARD DETAILS
CONTINUOUS AIR SEALER
5" BLOWN IN INSULATION (R-35)
HISTORIC SHEATHING TO
REMAIN
NEW SILL PLATE ON SILL SEAL, TYP.
NEW FINISHED FLOOR
NEW 1 1/2" CONCRETE TOPPING w/ RADIANT
NEW PLYWOOD FLOOR SHEATHING
HISTORIC STONE CUT TO VENEER
THICKNESS
NEW SETTING BED (BOND COAT), 3/8"
NEW SCRATCH COAT & LATH (1/2")
NEW FOUNDATION WATERPROOFING
NEW CONCRETE FOUNDATION WALL,
RE: STRUCTURAL PLANS
NEW FLOOR STRUCTURE, RE;
STRUCTURAL PLANS
INTERIOR EXTERIOR
17
5
Below are photographs of this process on the historic home that was preserved and rehabilitated at 530 W
Hallam. In the photos you can see the original foundation on the historic home. Then you see the home up in
the air, with no foundation. The final photo is of the preserved home sitting on a new concrete foundation with
the historic stones re-applied. The details and dimensions of the adjacent materials to the stone foundation
remains as built historically. This is a very time consuming and arduous process, but one that we feel is very
important to the best preservation outcome.
530 W Hallam shows the entire process. 223 E Hallam shows the result.
530 W Hallam
Close up of foundation and relationship to waterboard above it
18
6
530 W Hallam: prior to the rehabilitation work in 2017- stone foundation shown
530 Hallam: suspended in the air during construction; no stone foundation.
Note: we no longer cut the siding for relocation; they are numbered, removed and then returned to their original locations without being destroyed
19
7
530 W Hallam after rehabilitation and preservation. House set back on concrete foundation
with the original stone applied as a veneer to look just as it did historically.
223 E Hallam after rehabilitation with addition behind…. This historic home was also picked up, given a
new concrete foundation with the original stone replaced to its historic appearance in every detail.
20
8
BENEFITS
Turning to the Land Use Code, in the chapter on Historic Preservation, Section 26.415.110 Benefits
“The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain, preserve and
enhance their historic properties.” “Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners
of historic properties are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are
a valuable community asset, and their continued protection is the basic premises supporting the creation of
an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country.”
Section 26.415.110(f)(1) discusses the floor area bonus benefit, and ALL the criteria that need to be met.
Outlined here are those criteria and how we meet them:
(1)a. Historic building is key element of property and primary entry to structure, and the addition is
incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building
This criterion is met.
(1)b. If applicable, historically significant site and landscape features from the period of significance
of the historic building are preserved; and the applicant is undertaking multiple significant restoration
actions, including but not limited to, re-opening an enclosed porch, re-installing doors and windows
in original openings that have been enclosed, removing paint or other non-original finishes, or
removing elements which are covering original materials or features;
This criterion is met as we are using photographic evidence to recreate the ridge cresting, re-opening
the back porch and replacing the guardrail; remove all of the non-historic building from the carriage
house and mill new siding to match the historic on the newly exposed historic walls, repairing all of
the ornamental trim.
(1)c. The project retains a historic outbuilding, if one is present, as a free-standing structure above
grade;
We realized that we had missed this criterion. Now we have made the carriage house completely
freestanding, rehabilitating it to its original footprint and historic appearance as closely as possible. We
do not have photos of all the historic walls, but we are hoping the framing will give us more direction
on those walls. The Sanborn map and historic framing define the footprint.
(1)d. The applicant is electing a preservation outcome that is a high priority for HPC, including but
not limited to, creating at least two (2) detached structures on the site, limiting the amount of above
grade square footage added directly to a historic resource to no more than twice the above grade
square footage of the historic resource, limiting the height of an addition to a historic resource to the
height of the resource or lower, or demolishing and replacing a significantly incompatible non-
historic addition to a historic resource with an addition that meets current guidelines.
We now have two detached structures; the amount of the above grade square feet being added to the
historic home is about a quarter of the size of the main level of the historic home; the garage addition is
one-story, very subordinate to both the home and the carriage house; we are demolishing all of the
non-historic additions to the carriage house and keeping it as free-standing.
Section 26.415.110(f)(5): Separate from the floor area bonus described above, on a lot that contains a
historic resource, HPC may exempt wall exposed by a light well that is larger than the minimum required for
egress from the calculation of subgrade floor area only if the light well is internalized such that it is entirely
recessed behind the vertical plane established by the portion of the building façade(s) closest to any street(s),
the light well is screened from view from the street by building walls or fences, and any addition that is made
to the affected resource simultaneous or after the construction of the light well is entirely one (1) story.
21
9
As discussed at the last meeting, these criteria are met; we combined the egress for multiple bedrooms into
one larger lightwell that is completely screened from Francis by the historic home and screened from Fourth
by a planter with evergreen shrubs; and the small garage addition and connecting link are entirely one-story.
Having met all the above criteria, we are requesting the benefit of this section; exemption of the exposed wall
area in the lightwell in the calculation of our sub-grade floor area calculations.
SUMMARY OF VARIANCE REQUESTS AND BENEFITS
Variations requested to make the historic location of the home and carriage house legal
1. 5’-0 variation for the East side yard to keep the carriage house and home in their historic locations.
a. As requested, we jogged the foundation along the east setback line so only the foundation
below the historic home is outside the setback line, the remainder is inside the setback.
2. 5’-8” rear yard variation to keep the carriage house in its historic location.
Variances requested as benefits for the Preservation and Rehabilitation work being performed on this property:
1. 5’-0 variation for the rear yard setback for the below grade living space.
2. Exposed wall area exemption from floor area calculations as describe above.
Section 26.314.040 outlines the 3 standards applicable to variations. We believe we meet all three of these
standards
1. The variance is consistent with the purposes, goals and objectives of the Municipal Code. The code
states that the City is committed to help owners in the preservation of historic properties. The granting of
the requested variances helps in the preservation of this property by allowing the resources to remain in
their historic locations. Also, by adding most of the additional floor area needed on the property below
grade, it has no impact on the character of the historic resources, the lot or neighborhood.
2. The requested variances are minimal; requesting to make legal the setbacks where the resources are
encroaching into setbacks and asking for the basement to extend to the five-foot rear yard setback only
subgrade; which has structural implications at the garage if the foundation system has to change mid
span of the concrete slab.
3. The hardship on this property comes from the need and desire to have the best preservation outcome
for this iconic home. By granting the variance for more square feet below grade in the rear yard
setback, there is far less impact to the resource than making a larger addition above grade.
This is a much better preservation outcome that does not convey special privilege to this property. In
fact all of the projects that this firm has brought before this commission over the years that have asked
for this benefit have been granted this benefit; so denying it here, where all of the standards have been
met to qualify, is actually denying a privilege (bonus) that has been granted to many other similar
projects in the West End by the HPC.
We believe the amount of preservation and rehabilitation work being proposed for this property and the
demonstration of how this proposal meets all the Historic Preservation criteria to qualify for a bonus and
all the Land Use Code standards to qualify for a variance, this property merits receiving these two
variances.
22
10
Section 26.415.110.C.2: Va riations. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated
properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than
what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards.
(2) In granting a variation, the HPC must make a finding that such a variation:
a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or Enhances or
mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic
property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district.
The variation request enhances the integrity of the property by aligning with the historic character of
district. It allows for below grade floor area to remain unseen while maintaining minimal and similarly
scaled footprints of secondary structures behind the primary resource. By obtaining this variance, there
poses no adverse visual impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic
property.
SUMMARY
The further study of the HP guidelines, working with Gillian and Dan and the feedback from the commissioners
have guided the design of our revised proposal. The best preservation outcome is to remove non-historic
additions, and when necessary to add on very modest elements that will not detract from the historic fabric of the
property or the neighborhood. By adding the subordinate garage with the required linking element that easily
distinguishes it as new is a great way to rehabilitate this historic property for modern living. The separation of the
carriage house as a free-standing structure add to the best preservation outcome for the community.
The restoration of the original detailing and removing elements of trim that obscure historic details will add to
the full rehabilitation effort.
Thank you for working with us to preserve and rehabilitate this stunning property into a home that will be
treasured for the next hundred plus years.
Respectfully
Kim
Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors
OUR ORIGINAL SUMMARY LETTER IS BELOW FOR REFERENCE
23
1
Nov 24th, 2025
(UPDATED 2.18.26)
Gillian White, HP Officer
Historic Preservation Commission
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: 500 W Francis
Dear Gillian and Members of the Commission,
We are thrilled to bring a very special project to you today. The iconic Victorian located at 500 W Francis has
been purchased by a lover of historic homes, and he is excited to restore this home to bring it back to the
historic grandeur it held when first constructed in 1884/5 for Ola M Case. The home has been owned by
several people over the decades. More recently, the home was owned by the noted physicist Murray Geil-Mann.
Geil-Mann stayed in the home while visiting Aspen to participate in the Physics Institute; when he was away in
the winters he rented it to groups of ski instructors from Aspen Highlands, among other tenants. As with many of
these historic homes, if we could hear the stories held within their walls.
The historic integrity of this home is surprisingly strong. There have been few alterations made to the house, and
the changes that were made were in large part repair and replacement efforts. Most of the windows on the
primary resource are original, with only a few having been replaced. The carriage house has had more extensive
work performed on it. We do have good photographic evidence to bring this home and the carriage house back
to their historic appearances.
The 1898 Sanborn Map depicts this historic landmark neighboring two other structures to the west, both of
which were removed or burned down sometime prior to the 1960s. 500 Francis lot then tripled in size becoming
one 9,000 square foot lot. In 2007, the 9,000 square foot lot was split into one 3,000 sq ft. lot one 6,000 sq ft.
lot. Furthermore, the two historic structures were condominiumized at the time of the lot split into two separate
units.
Our proposal will bring vibrancy back to this historic home by restoring the exterior to look as good as new
“1884/5 style”. The photos we have obtained will direct this restoration work. Please see the photos and our
24
2
drawings showing how we plan to recreate the ornamental pieces that are missing and remove items that have
been altered or added. A complete preservation plan will be provided at our final HPC meeting.
To make this single -family home meet the needs of the 21st century, we will be expanding the basement below
the resources, withholding any above grade visual impact. A glass link will be added to connect the primary
home to an addition that encompasses a mudroom and a two-car garage. The mudroom portion of the
addition will also act as a link between the historic carriage house and the garage massing.
The historic carriage house will be downsized to its original footprint by removing non-historic elements that
have been added onto it since its conception. By removing of the non-historic portions, we will be exposing all
four corners of the original building, solidifying its perceived Sanborn Map footprint. The decision to add a
separate garage massing instead of putting large garage doors on the carriage house is a much better
preservation method.
The garage massing will match the roof height and pitch of the carriage house to the east, completely screening
it from view from Fourth Street. Proposed landscaping to the south of the garage will aid in screening the
addition from Francis Street.
The garage addition is set back 93 feet back from the Francis St reet (72ft from property line) and is well behind
the rear wall of the primary dwelling, making it subordinate to both the home and carriage house.
There is a small addition to the non-historic aspect of the carriage house that might have been a free-standing
shed on the property at one time. Since it is not the same size or in the same location as the shed as depicted on
the Sanborn maps, we are unsure of the origins or the age of this small addition, so we are proposing the
removal of it from the property.
Looking at the survey, you can see that the primary resource is close to 5ft side yard setback line, but entirety of
it does encroach into the setback. The carriage house is sitting even further east, with a portion of it encroaching
into the alley and City right of way. There are currently revocable encroachment licensees in place for the areas
of non-conformity. After deliberation with HP planners and City engineers, we have determined that the existing
structures are best to remain in their historic locations.
See the survey and provided site plans to see the historic locations and the relationship of the setbacks and the
proposed addition.
The subgrade expansion will be carefully coordinated and carried out by shoring/bracing the existing resources
and excavating and pouring foundations beneath the buildings. This “relocation” will likely require the historic
homes be lifted slightly off the original foundations to create safe separation. However, we feel that the best
preservation practice includes leaving the buildings in place in this case, so the resources will be placed back
down onto new foundation in their historic locations/elevations.
The stone that currently makes up the existing will be salvaged and re-used as a veneer to be applied to the new
concrete foundation. This will be detailed in the Preservation Plan.
We are excited to restore this beautiful property in a way that supports modern living while fully respecting and
preserving the historic fabric of the building, including its significant west yard. This project offers a rare
opportunity to revitalize one of Aspen’s most beautiful remaining Victorian homes. The home was recently
painted and had some basic maintenance performed by the new owner to protect this precious community
resource until we gain approval for our proposed work.
25
3
Historic Preservation Guidelines
A condensed summary of the sections that pertain most to this project is listed below for your convenience:
Chapter 2: Building Materials
The historic finishes will be restored/repaired as necessary. The addition will have horizontal siding to be
complimentary, yet of this time. No historic materials will be covered or removed.
Chapter 8: Secondary Structures
The carriage house is being restored to the original footprint as determined by the Sanborn map and initial
forensic demolition. The addition to the carriage house will have a linking element to the rear (west) of the
resource, and will have walls inset from the corners of the wall to which it attaches. It is single-story and is similar
in size to the carriage house. The link and addition will be subordinate to the 2-story carriage house, which will
screen it from view on Fourth.
Chapter 9: Excavation, Building Relocation & Foundations
Both resources will remain in the historic locations. The stone foundation will be saved and repurposed to be
used as the veneer on the new concrete foundation to retain the original appearance.
Chapter 10: Building Additions
The small addition of a single-story garage, connected by a small glass linking element from the home to the
linking element behind the carriage house, leave both the home and the carriage house as the primary elements
on the lot. The garage is subordinate to both buildings and completely screened from view from Fourth Street
and set back 72’ from the front property line, with landscaping partially screening it. The simple gable roof is
complimentary to the historic architecture. See diagram below (Chapter 8).
The following information will address in detail all the guidelines and how we have addressed each one that is
applicable to this project.
Chapter 1: Site Planning & Landscape Design
1.1: All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or
district.
The historic home and carriage house will remain in their original locations. The large yard to the west of the
home will be maintained on the front ¾ of the lot. A new garage element will replace the non-historic addition
to the carriage house and will extend towards the west. This modest addition will be screened from view from
Fourth Street by the historic portion of the carriage house. The view from Francis will be partially screened with
some modest landscaping. The face of the garage addition is set back 72’ from the front property line, so it will
have no impact on the visual integrity of the historic home. In fact, the southern-most plane of the garage is still
behind the north wall of the historic home by 9’-6”.
1.2: Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches.
This lot does not have one of the historic ditches
1.3: Remove driveways or parking areas accessed directly from the street if they were not part of the
original development of the site
The alley will be used to access the new garage, with other utilitarian uses being on the alley side of the
development or in the portion of the lot on the side yards; screened from view.
From the photos we have learned that the carriage house was altered at some point between 1894 and 1963,
allowing it to be used as a garage which was accessed from Fourth Street. The proposed driveway is off the alley
to preserve the pedestrian friendly environment of the West End.
The new garage will be set back to the 5’ setback line. With the removal of the non-historic portion of the
carriage house, the new addition will reveal the NW and SW corners of the historic building. See Site Plan
1.4: Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact.
The new driveway will be 5’-0’ in depth to connect the alley to the garage and will consists of concrete and
pervious pavers.
26
4
1.5: Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces.
The historic hierarchy of spaces will be maintained. A new straight concrete walkway leading to the front porch
will be provided, and updated landscaping that complies with later HP Guidelines will restore the spatial
hierarchy.
1.6: Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential
projects.
The new concrete walk will be in the same location as the original, and three feet wide. This will replace the
existing flag stone pavers on site today.
1.7: Provide positive open space within a project site.
There will be positive space around the home as we will maintain the large yard to the west.
1.8: Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process.
Stormwater mitigation plans have already been in discussion with project engineer and City engineers. R&R
Engineers has coordinated the use of the City stormwater pipe, located on Francis, to aid in the mitigation effort.
Stormwater plans will be provided as requested.
1.9: Landscape development on AspenModern landmarks shall be addressed on a case by case basis.
Not applicable (not an AspenModern project)
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.
No built-in furnishings are being proposed near the historic resources. Any features that are being proposed are
directly adjacent to the linking element and addition. They are set behind the back plane of the historic home
and will have landscaping aid in screening them from Francis Street. They will be screened by the link from
Fourth Street. This patio will consolidate the outdoor features into one relatively small area that will not be
intrusive to the integrity of the property.
1.11: Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and
shrubs.
We have worked with Parks and the Fire Department to determine that the large evergreen trees are too close to
the historic home and are causing damage and create a wildfire hazard. These trees are being removed. The
tall aspen trees are not historic and will be saved if possible. If not, new trees will be planted in such a manner
as to not screen the view of the historic resource from Francis Street.
1.12: Provide an appropriate context for historic structures.
Landscape plans that follow the Historic zoned landscaped template will be provided for the final hearing.
1.13: Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic
structures are inappropriate
The landscape proposed for this residence will be very minimal. The over-grown lilac will be removed at the time
of construction, and a new, smaller version may be planted at another location. The large evergreen trees that
are very adjacent to the historic resource and hiding if from view from the western side of the lot will be
removed. They are not healthy due to being too close together and are a fire hazard being too close to the
home. Low plantings and minimal flower beds will be proposed.
1.14: Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting.
There will be modest lights on the front porch and on the door to the carriage house. There will be no path
lighting. Exterior lighting plan to be provided at final.
27
5
1.15: Preserve original fencing.
The original metal fences will be preserved on Fourth and Francis Streets. There is currently a different metal
fence on what was once the neighboring property. It is a little bit different but appears to be historic. We plan on
keeping this section of fence to show the historic progression of the lot. Fences will be stored off-site during
construction.
.
1.16-20: New Fences
No new or additional fences are to be proposed
1.21-23: Retaining Walls
There are no existing retaining walls being restored, nor are there any new retaining walls being proposed.
1.24: Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations
Not applicable
1.25: New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its built
features.
The existing patterns of setbacks and siting of structures will be maintained, as historic resources are not to be
relocated.
28
6
1.26: Preserve the historic circulation system.
With the addition of the discretely located garage, vehicular circulation will be minimized (cars are typically
parked adjacent to the right of way yard outside the carriage house). By adding a garage, separation of
pedestrian and vehicle circulation is enhanced.
1.27: Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site.
Existing old growth trees to the west will have to be removed, as aforementioned… but existing Aspen trees
within the west side yard setback will try to be saved. In coordination with Parks, we will determine best shoring
and foundation pouring methods to preserve one if not more of those trees. Trees that will be removed because
of the redevelopment will be mitigated by planting of new trees (of same or similar species). These new trees will
not block the view of the historic resource from Fourth Street.
Chapter 2: Building Materials
2.1: Preserve original building materials.
The wood finishes on the primary resource believed to be historic and are in decent shape. As such, they will be
restored and repaired (if needed) in place. Apart from the few siding boards required to be removed to carry out
the relocation effort, all the siding will remain in place. The boards that are removed, will be numbered, stored
and replaced to the same locations. This eliminates the need to cut a hole in the boards to run the steel beams
for the lifting.
The siding on the carriage house is believed to be original and will also be restored in place. The carriage
house will not require siding to be removed for relocation but exposing the corners of the northwest and
southwest walls will require either new siding to be replicated, or siding used from non-historic additions to be
used on those portions of historic wall.
There is ample photographic evidence of the decorative detailing that has been damaged or removed over the
years. We propose using these photographs to repair and /or replace all these decorative elements.
Only boards that are beyond repair will be replaced. On the carriage house, where the historic material has
been removed and buried by the newer additions, we will mill new wood to match the historic. If we can salvage
historic wood that has been buried, we will use it on the newly exposed walls of the Carriage house.
2.2: The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically.
All materials will be finished as they would have been historically. Wood to be painted and stone veneer that is
the foundation now, will be used face the new concrete foundation; this will result in the detail of wood to stone
at the foundation to look the same as it did historically.
2.3: Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary
surfaces.
There will be no replacement of materials proposed. The stone foundation will be repurposed as a veneer on the
new concrete foundation. It will look the same as the original, being the same stones; the natural color and
same grout system. Mockups will be provided to the monitor and staff.
2.4: Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials.
No synthetic materials will be used on any part of the historic resources. Existing materials will be repaired in
place as necessary. If new wood is needed on the newly exposed carriage house walls, new wood will be milled
to match existing.
2.5: Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate.
No historic materials will be covered with new materials.
2.6: Remove layers that cover the original material.
29
7
There are no known layers of materials covering original materials, unless the carriage house siding is covering
old siding. If that is the case, we will determine the condition of the historic material with HP staff and monitor
and determine if removal is appropriate/sufficient.
Chapter 3: Windows
3.1: Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
Many of the windows in this home are still the historic ones. These will be restored either in place or removed,
repaired and replaced by an expert in these methods.
3.2: Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall.
All of the historic windows will remain in their original locations except one window on the alley side of the
home. This window opening will be turned into a doorway that opens into the glass link that will connect the
home to the garage linking element.
3.3: Match a replacement window to the original in its design.
Where a window may need to be replaced, it will be a double hung to match the original. This is the case for
the front and East side windows on the main level.
3.4: When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original.
Any replacement windows will be wood, just as the historic windows.
3.5: Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
We will use the historic framing to guide the size of the replacement windows. If the historic framing is either gone
or too disturbed to distinguish, we will use old photographs to help figure out the correct size if necessary.
3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window.
We will find a replacement window with the same or very similar profiles for the sash and frames.
3.7: Adding new openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed.
No new windows are proposed for any part of the historic home. The carriage house has some newer
windows; the framing around these windows will be studied to see if we can determine the size of any
original windows; which will then be replaced. It is the alley side that has two non-historic windows. These will be
replaced with windows more in line with what would have been historic. See photo below.
30
8
3.8: Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than replace a historic window.
Storm windows may be considered at some point. We will work with staff and monitor on the execution of
the details. These storm windows would be added to the interior.
Chapter 4: Doors
4.1-3: Preserve historically significant doors.
The existing front door does not appear to be the original. We will use the historic photos to replicate this door
as closely as possible. The jamb could be original, more detailed investigation will happen when we can start
the careful demolition process. If it is, we will restore it and weather stripping will be added for energy efficiency.
The back door cannot be seen in any of our photos. This door will be examined for authenticity at the time of
construction. We will work with staff and monitor on its restoration or replacement.
4.4: When replacing a door or screen door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or
a door associated with the style of the building.
The new front door does not appear to have ever had a screen door, thus there will not be one added now. The
front door will be re-built to look as closely as possible to the photo of the front of the house.
4.5: Adding new doors on a historic building is generally not allowed.
There are no new doors proposed for the primary historic home. On the alley side, where we are proposing the
glass connecting link, we are removing a non-historic window and replacing it with just an opening in the wall to
connect to the link. We will use just the existing door openings on the carriage house and rebuild historic
looking doors for those two locations.
4.6: If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, use a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry
door.
The new constructed, historic looking door will be made of wood and match the frame design and character of
the door in the historic photos. It will be painted as historic doors were typically.
4.7: Preserve historic hardware
We do not believe any of the hardware on exterior doors is original.
Chapter 5: Porches and Balconies
5.1-2: Preserve an original porch or balcony. Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details.
There has been little change to the front porch of this home. From photos we will restore the trim elements that
have been altered or covered and repair the rest. The upper balcony historically had baluster in the small
opening in the railing wall facing east. We will replace these.
The back porch will have the more recent addition of a wood screen removed and the original railing will be
replicated. These will be detailed in the Prese rvation Plan that is to be provided at the final HPC hearing.
31
9
5.3-4: Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate.
N/A
5.5: If new steps are to be added, construct them out of the same primary materials used on the original, and
design them to be in scale with the porch or balcony
The steps to the front porch will be rebuilt to match the historic photograph. The existing steps and the wood
floor are not historic. A new concrete foundation can be seen under the porch; and the flooring is T&G, which
was not available in the late 1800’s. These will be replaced with wood that has a historic look. The skirt trim
around the porch will be replaced with the wood lattice as seen in the historic photo and the wood steps will be
rebuilt. This will be more detailed in the preservation plan at the final HPC hearing.
5.6: Avoid adding handrails or guardrails where they did not exist historically, particularly where visible from the
street.
There were no handrails on the front porch historically, so we will not add any now. The back porch is higher off
of grade, but we the historic photo shows no railing there either. This will not get handrails either, unless the
building dept. requires them for life safety. If so, we will work with staff and monitor to make it a very simple
design that will not detract from the historic, nor be confused as historic.
Chapter 6: Architectural Details
6.1: Preserve significant architectural features
This beautiful home has had some of the original detailing removed over the decades. Fortunately, there are
good photographs at our disposal to use in the restoration of these details. The cresting detail on the ridges
have been removed. These will be restored. The wood lattice below both porches will be replaced also. The
opening at the upper-level balcony, the trim at the porch roof and the railing at the back porch to replace the
lattice that has been added.
6.2: When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage
to the original material.
N/A
6.3: Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced
All the details on the home were originally wood, so we will use wood to restore the various details. Including,
but not limited to, the cresting along the ridges, as mentioned above.
There are currently two brick chimneys on the home, but only one shows in the historic photo. It could be that we
just can’t see the second one, so we will investigate to verify that both are historic. If not, we intend to remove
the non-historic one. The other will be repaired as needed. The chimney brick on the lower roof of the home is a
different color than the one on the main north/south ridge. It doesn’t appear to be the original chimney. The
framing under this chimney will inform the decision to rebuild a historic one or remove it. These items will be
detailed in our Preservation Plan, to be submitted at the Final HPC hearing. The final decision may have to wait
until we have a permit and can do some investigative demolition. See photos on net page.
6.4: Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original designs.
The railing at the back porch will have to be reconstructed with the aid of the photographs. It looks to match the
details of the front porch, which will help in the restoration of the guardrail.
6.5: Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts.
The photographic evidence will eliminate any guesswork in our preservation.
32
10
Chapter 7: Roofs
7.1: Preserve the original form of a roof.
There are no changes proposed for the original roof form. Repairing any deteriorated materials at eaves, etc will
be done in place.
7.2: Preserve the original eave depth
No change to the eave depth will occur.
7.3: Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices
There are no skylights proposed for the roof of this home.
7.4: New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color.
The existing chimney will be used for some of the new venting. Any other vents will be placed discreetly and
painted a dark color so as not to detract from the look of the building.
Plumbing vents, etc. that penetrate the roof, will be placed on the back side of the east/west ridge or the west
side of the back gable.
7.5: Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional
The existing historic chimney(s) will be maintained and repaired as needed.
7.6: A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character.
The work proposed for this project does not include adding any new dormers. That stated, a small dormer was
added to the original front porch sometime between 1884-1963. It was likely added to divert snow from falling
directly on the entry steps at the front porch or onto someone that was walking beneath the porch overhang. It is
a safety feature.
We are proposing to keep this dormer for four reasons:
1. Safety of the occupants of the home in the winter months to divert snow away
from the entry steps and sidewalk.
2. This will allow us to leave a gutter off of the front fascia of the porch roof, so we won’t be covering any
of the details as seen in the photo below; the interesting trim will remain visible.
3. This small dormer has been on the home long enough to have gained historic significance on its own
merit.
33
11
4. Also, this small dormer is very much in proportion with the rest of the home; matching the scale and
slope of the secondary dormer on the upper story above. It is in line with the front porch roof, but well
below the main ridges of the home. It does not detract from the original style.
Chapter 7 Continued: Materials
7.7: Preserve original roof materials
The existing wood shingles are not the original, so removing them will not be removing historic materials. We
will preserve all historic substrate that is found within the roofing build up. Although the existing shingles are old,
there is photographic evidence that the primary home had a new shingle roof installed at some point. The side-
by-side photos from 1894 and 1965 show the newer roof with larger metal flashing beneath the wood shingles
in the valleys.
34
12
A smaller detail that appears to be above the wood shingles can be seen in the historic photo. The ridge
cresting can also be seen in this photo and that it was removed in the newer photo, likely when the new shingles
were installed.
With the concern of fire safety and the difficulty in obtaining insurance for homes, we are proposing the use of a
synthetic shingle that is similar to the original shingles in both style and physical qualities; albeit not the same
material. The enviro-shingles are the same thickness and widths of historic cedar shingles and maintain the
same 5” exposure. These shingles have a matte finish when they have been in the sun for a few months. These
shingles come in any color, so we will use a “weathered cedar shingle” color for this home. A sample of the
color and finish after being in the sun for some time will be provided by the final HPC hearing. The color has
been matched to a piece of very old cedar shingle.
7.8: New or replacement roof materials should maintain or restore the character of the historic roof
The use of synthetic shingles is “of a design, scale, color, texture and composition” that is most akin to wood
shingles. They are visually compatible with the historic features. We are not proposing a material that is different
in character like metal or asphalt, as these materials are very different in character than the original wood
shingles. As noted above, the synthetic shingles are modeled after historic shingles in size, texture, exposure and
color of old shingles. (not new cedar)
The flashing will be metal and in scale with the roof material. Drip edges will be minimized to the extent possible
while still doing the job correctly.
7.9: Avoid using conjectural features on a roof
We have good photographic evidence of the ornamental detailing on the roof and will use these photos in
creating and implementing the preservation plan.
7.10: Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent possible
We will locate downspouts to be away from the front of the home as much as possible. The retention of the
small entry dormer will remove the need for gutters and downspouts on the front porch completely.
Chapter 8: Secondary Structures
8.1: If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved
This property does have a significant secondary outbuilding; a carriage house that is on the alley and the east
property line. This carriage house will be retained and rehabilitated. It can be seen in the earliest photo we have.
The Sanborn map shows that there was a smaller, detached shed also on this lot and another on the lot just to
the west. The smaller sheds have no historic significance.
8.2: Preserve a historic secondary building as a detached structure
The position and orientation of the carriage house will remain as seen in historic photos and the Sanborn map.
The carriage house is currently detached from the main home. But an addition to the original carriage house
has destroyed the historic fabric and footprint, with no delineation between historic and newer construction. A
small structure that appears to be very old was pushed up against this newer addition and converted into the
bathroom for the small apartment. It is impossible to say if it was the original shed or not. It does not appear to
be the same size as the one shown on the Sanborn map. The removal of this shed and the non-historic addition
is part of the ‘best practice” for preservation of what is known to have been the original carriage house. By
removing the indistinguishable addition, the confusion of historic and add-on will be eliminated.
A small, single-story addition with a linking element to the rear (west) side is proposed in its place. The link will
leave both corners of the newly exposed west wall expressed. In fact, to the north of the link, 8’ of the original
structure will be exposed to view from the alley and renovated. This will define the historic footprint from every
angle, while providing a needed connection for modern living to the garage and the main house. See diagram
at the end of this chapter.
35
13
8.3: Do not add detailing or features to a secondary structure that are conjectural and not in keeping with its
original character as a utilitarian structure
The detailing of the carriage house, which is minimal, will be restored to its historic look with the photographic
evidence that has been obtained and with the guidance of the historic framing. It will continue to look like an
utilitarian building.
8.4: When adding on to a secondary structure, distinguish the addition as new construction and minimize
removal of historic fabric.
When the non-historic addition is removed, a linking element will be added to the west of the carriage house
with a lower, flat roof. Further to the west of this link, a simple, single-story garage is proposed. The new gable
roof line on the garage will be the same slope as the shed roof section of the carriage house, so it won’t be
visible from Fourth Street. This also makes it compatible with the resource. The north wall of the new garage is
set back five feet from the alley and the northerly façade of the carriage house, which further screens it from
view. The creates a smaller mass.
The linking element is set “in” from the corners of the carriage house and the new garage. This offset aids in the
distinction of the different elements; 3 ½ feet of the new garage and 8 ½ feet of the newly exposed carriage
house west wall are visible from the alley. The linking element as viewed from the alley is over 1o feet long
between the two building elements. This reduces the mass of the garage in relationship to the carriage house,
making it subordinate to the two-story building.
The flat roof over the linking element will help the new garage appear to be a separate building behind the
main house as viewed from Francis. The link from the new garage to the historic home will be a continuation of
the flat roof that links the garage to the carriage house… a 2-way link. As mentioned above, the mostly glass
link will be perceived as a covered breezeway behind the home and west of the rear of the carriage house. Only
6’ wide and 12’ long, it is truly a link from the home to the new addition.
The siding on the new garage will be compatible with both the home and the carriage house. We are proposing
a 5” wide synthetic, horizontal siding under the gable roof and a Cementous panel under the flat roof. Having a
different material on the linking element on the north and south sides will be help distinguish the historic
resource from the new construction more readily. It also breaks up the massing.
We believe this approach with a linking element and a small garage being added to the 2 -story carriage house
is the best preservation method. Altering the historic carriage house to force a garage into it would be as
inappropriate as the current addition. We believe there is ample space on the lot to allow for this addition and
to renovate the resource.
8.5: Preserve the original building materials, or match in kind when necessary.
The new siding, as needed for the carriage house will be milled to perfectly match what is historic. If we can
determine that there is any historic siding on the addition, we will use it first and then get more milled to match.
It appears this may be the case.
8.6: Preserve original door and window openings and minimize new openings
In 2007, the windows and doors were altered considerably on this building. We will use the historic framing to
discern what was historic. We have not yet found great photos of this entire carriage house; just ones that show
the roof line, the location and part of the east corner. We will work with staff and monitor during forensic
demolition to determine the best route forward regarding windows on this building. There is one photo that
shows a garage door that was added to the building in the late sixties or early seventies. This was not historic
and will not be replaced.
8.7: If a new garage door is added, it must be compatible with the character of the historic structure
A 2-car garage door will be added to the new addition that will be trimmed out to look like two smaller doors,
to preserve the small scale of fenestration appropriate on a carriage house.
36
14
8.8: Adaptation of an obsolete secondary structure to a functional use is encouraged
This secondary structure will be used as a guest suite for the main home, adapting it from barn/carriage to guest
suite, maintaining the character defining elements of a historic secondary structure that will be a primary use in
the new home.
12'-6" GLASS ELEMENT
NEWLY EXPOSED WALL
6 5/8"10'-7 1/4"7"
5'-9 5/8"
NON-HISTORIC ELEMENT
TO BE REMOVED
FOOT PRINT OF HISTORIC
CARRIAGE HOUSE
NEW GARAGE
FLAT ROOF LINK BETWEEN PRIMARY RESIDENCE TO THE
LINKING ELEMENT BETWEEN THE PROPOSED GARAGE AND
THE CARRIAGE HOUSE
LINE OF BACK OF HISTORIC HOMERIDGERIDGELOWER
SHED ROOF
37
15
DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR NEWCONSTRUCTION
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
With much attention to the safety of the resources, the architects, house mover and structural engineers have
developed a strategy to support and protect the buildings while the lot is excavated. The plan for the home and
carriage house, after removing the non-historic elements, is to stabilize and lift them straight up. The home will
be lifted off of the existing foundation. The historic siding that may be affected by this move will be numbered
and stored to be replaced to the same locations. This will eliminate the need to cut holes in the historic
materials. This method has been successfully done on the past few homes we have moved.
After lifting the home, the stone foundation will be carefully taken apart so the same stones can be replaced
onto the new foundation as a veneer.
The structural engineer will be deeply involved throughout the process. The completely detailed document along
with the required financial bond will be provided prior to submitting a building permit.
9.2: Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case -by-case basis
The primary home and the carriage house will be lifted straight up and set back on the new foundation in the
same historic locations. As mentioned, we firmly believe this is the best preservation method as it enables the
property to be adapted for contemporary lifestyles while keeping the original appearance and character of the
home and carriage house.
The neighborhood has a number of historic homes, all of which have been altered and remodeled over the
years, some having followed the guidelines for preservation, others not so much. This lot will have the least
amount of visible alteration as seed from the public rights of way. There will also be very little disturbance of the
historic materials. Those removed will be protected and replaced to their original locations. The addition of the
small garage at the back is in keeping with the historic pattern of smaller buildings located along the alley.
9.3: Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation
Both historic resources will be placed back in their same, historic locations.
9.4: Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade
The survey of the property has located the elevation of the existing finished floor at the front and back porches of
the home. We will build the new foundation to enable setting the buildings down at the same elevations. The
carriage house does not appear to be completely level as it sits right at grade. We will use one of the existing
corners to establish the existing elevation to which we will return the carriage house upon the new foundation.
9.5: A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation
The existing sandstone foundation will be carefully removed from the building and used as a veneer on the new
concrete foundation. The end result will be a home that looks just like it did when first constructed with the
relationships of stone to grade and waterboard trim being the same. We will document the cut of the stone and
grout before beginning the careful demolition of the stone and construction of the basement.
9.6: Minimize the visual impact of lightwells
The lightwells that are proposed for this project do not face either Fourth Street or Francis. There is one large
lightwell behind the resource that is completely screened from Francis by the home and from Fourth with
landscaping and a decorative planter. One of the other required lightwells is on the west side of the new garage
on the northerly side of the lot and will be screened with evergreen shrubbery from Francis. It is located nearly
100’ from Francis Street.
38
16
We are also proposing a lightwell on the west side of the historic structure that faces the yard to the west of the
home that is set 22 feet behind the front façade of the home. This lightwell will also be screened from view from
Francis with landscaping appropriate for zone B. See the site plan for lightwell locations and screening.
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 lifting of both the resource buildings will be done by Bailey House Movers, who has been moving historic
homes in Aspen for the past 60 years. It is a family run business, now on the third generation of house movers.
9.8: Proposals to relocate a building to a new site are highly discouraged
These buildings are not being relocated to another site.
Chapter: 10 Building Additions
10.1: Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right
As noted above, there is one existing addition to the historic home that is compatible with the period of historic
significance. The small dormer at the entry porch is of the same style, size and shape of the original small
dormer on the southeast corner of the home on the second level. This dormer was likely added as a safety
measure to direct snow and rain away from the entry walkway. We believe this merits the preservation of this
element. We do not know when exactly it was added but is seen it in photos in the early 1960s.
10.2: A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed
The addition to the carriage house has no historic significance and we are proposing the removal of this
element. See Diagram of the location of this addition on page 14 of this document.
New Additions
10.3: Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is
maintained.
The proposal for this home is to add a new garage to the property. This garage will be connected to both the
home and the carriage house via linking element; a two-way link. See diagram on page 14.
The proposed glass and steel link from the westerly side of the rear of the primary home directly to the new
linking element on the carriage house has very little impact on either of the buildings. As noted, the carriage
house will be freed of the current addition and will be connected to the garage with a linking element that
expresses the full footprint of the historic building. The glass connection to the home will be fully transparent
allowing a view of the exterior wall that will remain inside the link. Please see the detailed description of the
addition to a secondary structure above at 8.2 and 8.4.
Additional details on the glass link: The opening from the home into the linking element will be at the same
location as an existing window that does not appear to be historic. The link is set in from the west wall of the
main home to leave the northwest corner exposed. The transparent nature of the glass walls will allow a view of
the historic wall inside the link, covering only the thickness of the two walls that actually connect to the house.
And at only 6’ wide, it is a very minimal link. The 12’ length of the link is defined by the existing distance
between the two historic resources.
The simple gable roof structure of the new garage is very compatible with the Victorian home and carriage
house. The gable is a basic form used throughout history, so it is not mimicking the Victorian style. Gable roofs
are a timeless architectural element. There will be no decorative trim, it will be very basic.
The materials on the new garage will be easily distinguishable from the historic, but also compatible. The
proposed garage will receive 5” wide, synthetic horizontal siding. The linking element that is not glass (between
39
17
the home and new addition) will be cementitious panels that will be a light color to fade from visual importance.
This will provide for a very defined break from historic to new construction.
10.4: The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as
viewed from the street
The home is still very much the visually dominant feature on the lot, with the addition at the very rear of the large
lot. The large side yard is a valuable asset to the property and is being maintained. The above grade addition is
one story. The removal of the nonhistorical element from the carriage house will restore the footprint of the
historic carriage house to make it distinguishable from the new addition. From Fourth Street, the addition is
completely screened from view by the carriage house. From Fr ancis Street, the front façade of the garage is 10’
behind the rear of the house and 72’ from the front property line. The single-story addition will also be screened
with landscaping.
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
This guideline is not applicable as we are proposing a single-story addition behind two-story buildings.
10.6: Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time
The proposed addition will distinguishable as new construction by considering all three aspects mentioned in this
guideline.
FORM, MATERIALS and FENESTRATION, where only two are required, we have addressed all three.
Form: The single-story garage will have a simple gable roof that is the same slope as the shed roof of the
carriage house. The classic gable form is complimentary to both the house and the carriage house but will not
compete with them.
Materials: the additions is compatible with the resource by having synthetic horizontal siding that is of a similar
scale to the wood siding on the home and carriage house. The detailing at the corners and windows/doors will
be more modern to show it to be a product of this era. We depart from the horizontal siding only on the north
and south sides of the linking element to allow for an even better distinction between historic and new. This
material is a modern product that will be a lighter color to be the least dominate of the elements, helping create
the distinction between historic and new.
Fenestration: The three windows in the garage will be of a vertical orientation; being casement not double hung.
The proportions will reflect the proportions of the historic windows on the home. The casement style windows are
of our time period.
Please note that the addition does not address Fourth St at all and is set well behind the rear wall of the historic
home. It is very subordinate to the historic fabric of the lot and to both the primary home and carriage house.
10.7: When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the street
The addition is completely removed from the streetscapes of Fourth or Francis.
10.8: When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the street
The new addition is much shorter than the elevated two-story Victorian home and shorter than the two-story
carriage house; the mass and scale of the addition are quite small in relationship to the buildings and the 6000
sq. ft. lot
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.
The proposed addition is shorter than both of the historic resources.
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
40
18
The garage addition is 72’ from the property line on Francis, nearly 100 feet from the road; 11’ behind the
north façade of the home and completely screened from view from Fourth Street.
10.11: Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building
A flat roof is proposed on the linking element to minimize the height and stature. The addition has a classic
gable roof to be compatible with the resources.
10.12: Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important
architectural features
The addition will not alter architectural details on either the primary home or the carriage house nor cover any
historic material. The historic west wall of the carriage house will be mostly exposed now in contrast to how it is
completely obscured from view now. The portion of the newly exposed wall receive wood siding milled to match
the historic material.
10.13-15 Roof top additions on flat roofed buildings
These three guidelines do not apply to this project.
Chapter 11: New buildings on Landmarked Properties
This proposal does not include a new building.
Chapter 12: Accessibility, Architectural lighting, Mechanical equipment, Service areas and Signage
12.1: Address accessibility compliance requirements while preserving character defining features of historic
buildings and districts
The proposed development is in compliance with all IBC requirements. The accessibility codes that are required
for commercial buildings will not be applicable, but all others will be complied with.
12.2: Original light fixtures must be maintained. When there is evidence as to the appearance of original
fixtures that are no longer present, a replication is appropriate
There are no original light fixtures to keep on these buildings.
12.3: Exterior light fixtures should be simple in character
The lighting will be dark sky compliant on both the historic resource and the new addition. A modest sconce will
be placed on the front and back porches on the primary home and the doors to the carriage house. The garage
will have a bit more modern lighting to distinguish it as contemporary, on the alley side. Please see spec sheets.
12.4: Minimize the visual impacts of utilitarian areas, such as mechanical equipment and trash storage
The mechanical equipment is being placed at the west side of the new addition and in the alcove created with
the linking element between the carriage house and the new garage, keeping it completely removed from the
historic buildings. The equipment will be screened from view from Francis with steel mesh that still allows the
required ventilation and setbacks and with landscaping.
12.5-9: Awnings and Signs
There are no awnings or signs to preserve on this property.
LAND USE CODE SECTIONS
Section 26.304
- Please note all the required forms for this application attached, and the pre-app summary letter.
- The posting and mailing will be done within the timelines outlined.
Section 26.410.030 Residential Design Standards; Single Family
- The proposed design meets all the Residential Design Standards in Section 26.410.030 of the LUC.
Please see the attached RDS form. I will outline a few of the contextually important ones for this project.
41
19
- The Victorian home and carriage houses will remain in historic locations.
- The new addition is single story, with a very minimal linking element to the home and carriage house.
- The new garage will be accessed from the alley with a two car garage door to look like two smaller
doors with the trim package.
- Required lightwells are set well back from the front façade of the historic home and
will be screened from view from both Fourth and Francis Streets. See details above.
Section 26.415.070(d) Historic Preservation – Major Development Certificate of appropriateness for major
development.
- This is a major development with a new addition being constructed behind the historic home and
behind historic carriage house, on the west side; a new large basement is also being proposed under
the house, carriage house and new garage.
- Information as outlined in this section will be presented to the HPC for both the Conceptual and Final
hearings.
- Please see all the required documents as outlined in this section for the Conceptual Design Hearing:
o scaled drawings and the survey
o supplemental visuals in the form of renderings
o this summary of how we meet all the Historic and Residential guidelines
o documents for the Land Use Application
o physical samples of exterior materials will be presented at the final hearing
o bond for relocation will be provided prior to building permit application
Section 26.415.080 Historic Preservation – Demolition
- We are proposing only the demolition of the non -historic addition to the west of the historic carriage
house. This addition has no architectural significance as noted. The small shed that was attached to the
non-historic addition is also slated for demolition as it has no historic significance and there is no solid
evidence that it was the shed that is shown on the Sanborn map in a different location.
Section 26.415.090 Historic Preservation – Relocation
- These resources will be lifted straight up during construction. Both will be protected and stabilized while
a new foundation is constructed below them.
- The structural engineer will have a detailed plan worked out to stabilize and brace the buildings for the
basement construction. All this documentation will be presented at our final HPC hearing.
Section 26.415.070(d) Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development
- This project meets the requirements to be a Major Development
- This is the first of the two required meetings before the HPC for approval
- Followed by a stop before City Council for the opportunity for a call up
- Then the final meeting with HPC
- Final set of plans with all required conditions noted on the plans will be submitted to the city as part of
our building permit submittal
Section 26.415.110 Historic Preservation – Benefits
“The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain, preserve and
enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable community assets is the basic
premises underlying the provision of special procedures and programs for designated historic properties and
districts.
Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties are an
important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a valuable community asset
and their continued protection is the basic premises supporting the creation of an innovative package of
preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country.
42
20
Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have been legislated
by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and historic Preservation Commission
(HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and maintaining their property.”
This balance of restrictions and benefits is unique in the Country and a strong incentive for property owners to
spend the additional time and expense to preserve these precious, historic buildings for our community.
Section 26.415.110(c)
BENEFITS:
This code allows for variations to density, dimensional requirements and can allow for a lot split that would
otherwise not be allowable, exemption of parking requirements, conditional uses, exemption from GMQS, floor
area bonuses and TDRs. This project is asking for just two benefits. First, the benefit of 3 setback variations; two
of them to legalize the location of the historic resources in their historic locations. The third is to allow the below
grade living space to extend to the 5’-0 rear yard setback line. Being below grade, it has no impact on the
historic fabric of the lot or the neighborhood.
The other benefit is the exemption for wall area exposed by a light well that is larger than the minimum required
for egress from the calculation of floor area.
1. The HPC may grant variances for development in front, rear or side yard setbacks.
REQUIRED SETBACKS FOR THIS ZONE DISTRICT (R-6) FOR A 6000 sq. ft. lot
Front yard 10’
Minimum side yard 5’
Combined side yard 15’
Rear yard 5’ for garage; 10’ for living space
Proposed Setbacks
- Front yard – no variation sought; front porch is 14’ from the front property line
- Side yard- The historic home is ±1’-11’ over the east yard setback (with the decorative window being
the furthest beyond the setback). We are requesting a variance for this portion of the historic home to
remain in its location. We are also requesting in this variance to include the subgrade portion of new
foundation wall, to stack below the historic home. The new east porch stair and railing (which will have
to be reconstructed) will also require inclusion in this variance.
The historic carriage house is within ±6 inches of the property line on the east side. We are requesting
a variance of the full 5 feet for the carriage house, which will account for portions of the primary
resource that also fall outside the 5’-0” setback. This side yard setback variance is to legalize the
historic location of the resources, and allow for the new subgrade walls to stack directly underneath
existing walls.
- Combined side yard setback- with the side yard variance above, no variance needed
- Rear yard – The carriage house is ±8” beyond the property line on the north side of the lot. The
proposed subgrade below is set at the 5 foot setback; so a 5 foot variance for this below grade space is
being requested. And a 5’-0” setback variance for the carriage house. The additional 8” the house
extends past the property line is to be remain in the revocable encroachment license #
539719/543900.
The below grade space has no impact on any of the neighbors. The HP guidelines suggest more below
grade space to minimize additions to the historic resources above grade. We believe this is a great
43
21
means of adaptive use of the historic home to allow it to fit the needs of a modern family with the least
amount of visual impact to the resources.
- The other benefit is the exemption for wall area exposed by the proposed lightwell. This lightwell serves
as egress for below grade bedrooms in lieu of utilizing multiple window wells around the perimeter.
This benefit requires the following conditions be met:
1. The lightwell is internalized such that it is entirely recessed behind the vertical plan of the
façade of the building closest to the street. Or in this case both streets, North Fourth Street and
West Francis Street.
2. The lightwell is screened from view of the street by building walls or fences.
3. Any addition that is made to the affected resource simultaneous or after the construction of the
lightwell is entirely one story.
The proposed project meets all three of these criteria as it is screened from Francis by the historic home;
screened from First street by a site wall / landscape feature; and the proposed addition to the property
is just one story.
Variations requested
1. 5’-0 variation for the East side yard
a. For the primary structure and the carriage house to remain in their historic locations.
b. For the new subgrade space/walls to stack directly underneath the walls above.
c. For the re-constructed east porch stairs and railing.
2. 5’-0” rear yard variation to keep the carriage house in its historic location.
3. 5’-0” variation for the required 10’-0” rear yard setback for the below grade living space that
encroaches into the garage setback.
4. Exposed wall area exemption from floor area calculations.
Section 26.314.040 outlines the 3 standards applicable to variations. We believe we meet all three of these
standards
1. The variance is consistent with the purposes, goals and objectives of the Municipal Code. The code
states that the City and HPC are committed to help owners in the preservation of historic properties. The
granting of the requested variances helps in the preservation of this property by allowing the resources
to remain in their historic locations. Also, by adding most of the additional floor area needed on the
property below grade, it has no impact on the character of the historic resources, the lot or
neighborhood.
2. The requested variances are minimal; requesting to make legal the setbacks where the resources are
encroaching into setbacks and asking for below grade space.
3. The hardship on this property comes from the need and desire to have the best preservation outcome
for this iconic home. By granting the variance for more square feet below grade in the rear yard
setback, there is far less impact to the resource than making a larger addition above grade. This is a
much better preservation outcome that does not convey special privilege to this property.
Section 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements
- Please see Architectural set for floor area calcs.
- The proposed development meets the dimensional requirements of this section for the R-6 zone district
for a single-family home regarding floor area and height limits.
Section 26.710.040 Medium-Density Residential R-6
- The single family home on a 6000 sq. ft. lot meets all the requirements of this section of code, save the
setback variations that are being requested as a benefit of preserving a historic home.
SUMMARY
The rehabilitation and preservation of both this grand Victorian home and the carriage house behind it have
guided every decision in our proposed plan. The best preservation is to remove non-historic additions, and when
44
22
necessary to add on very modest elements that will not detract from the historic fabric of the property or the
neighborhood. By adding the subordinate garage with a linking element that easily distinguishes it as new is a
great way to adapt this historic property for modern living.
The restoration of the original detailing and removing elements of trim that obscure historic details will add to
the full rehabilitation effort.
We feel that all the Historic Preservation Guidelines have been met in our proposal and are eager to see this
home restored to its historic grandeur. Thank you for your continued commitment to help the community and the
owners of historic properties save these community treasures. We appreciate your consideration of the huge
effort going into the rehabilitation of these two historic resources. Thank you.
Respectfully,
Kim Raymond
Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors
45
City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000
LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET
Certain development activities within the City of Aspen require land use review and approval.
This document describes the forms and processes required for a Land Use Application,
except for an application requesting a Certificate of No Negative Effect for a Historic
Property. Please use the No Negative Effect Application form available here.
The following forms should be filled out and included as part of a Land Use Application:
1. Land Use Application Form
2. Dimensional Requirements Form
3. Agreement to Pay Application Fees Form
4. HOA Compliance Form
5. Public Notice Affidavit (if required, is submitted prior to the Public Hearing)
6. Development Application Fee Policy
7. Development Review Procedures
8. Historic Preservation Review Procedures
Applications are reviewed based on the criteria in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code.
Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal code can be accessed here.
Additionally, certain applications require compliance with the Commercial Design Guidelines
or the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
Prior to preparing a land use application, applicants should obtain a Pre-Application Conference
Summary from the Community Development Department.
To schedule a pre-application conference, contact the Planner of the Day at:
planneroftheday@gmail.com or 970.429.2764
A preliminary consultation with the Zoning Officer, Building Department, Parks Department,
and Engineering Department is also strongly advised in order to determine code compliance
and to avoid changes to projects after the review process.
46
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
47
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):
48
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: _____________
49
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
50
51
52
53
LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET
City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICING REQUIREMENTS
The forms of public notice are required by the Aspen Land Use Regulations pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E): publication in the
newspaper, posting of the property, and surrounding landowners. You can determine whether your application requires notice, and
the type of notice it requires, from the matrix found in this application packet.
Following is a summary of the public notice requirements, including identification of who is responsible for completing the notice.
1. Publication - Publication of notice in a paper of general circulation on the City of Aspen is to be done at least
fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing. The legal notice will be written by the Community Development Department and will
place the notice in the paper within the appropriate deadline.
2. Posting - Posting of a sign in a conspicuous place on the property is to be done fifteen (15) days prior to the
hearing. It is the applicant’s responsibility to obtain a copy of the sign from the Community Development Department, to
fill it in correctly and bring proof to the hearing that posting took place (use attached affidavit).
3. Mailing – Mailing of notice is to be made to all owners of property within 300 feet of the subject development
parcel by the applicant fifteen (15) days prior to hearing. It is the applicant’s responsibility to obtain a copy of the notice
from the Community Development Department, to mail it according to the following standards, and to bring proof to the
hearing that the mailing took place (use the attached affidavit).
Notice to mineral Estate Owner. An applicant for surface Development shall notify affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty
(30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application for development. The applicant shall certify
that the notice has been provided to the mineral estate owners.
The names and addresses of property owners shall be those in the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more
than sixty (60) days prior to the date of public hearing.
Proof of notice must be provided at the public hearing.
54
LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET
City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
______________________________________________________________________________________, Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
______________________________________________________________________________________, 20_____
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
County of Pitkin )
I, ___________________________________________________________________ (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen,
Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of
the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
______ Publication of Notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general
circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is
attached hereto.
______ Posting of Notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department,
which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26)
inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the ________day of_________________________, 20_______, to and including
the date and time of the public hearing.
A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto.
______ Mailing of Notice: By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which
contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E) (2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners
of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and
addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than
sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is
attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
55
LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET
City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000
_____ Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted
prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood
outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was present to the
public is attached hereto.
_____ Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral
estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of
development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin
County. At a maximum, Subdivisions, PDs that create more than one lot, and new Planned Developments are subject to
this notice requirement.
_____ Rezoning or Text Amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended
incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether
such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement
of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses
of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall
be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public
hearing on such amendments.
Signature: ________________________________________
The foregoing “Affidavit of Notice” was acknowledged before me this _________ day
of ______________________________________________________________________, 20______, by _________________________________________________________________________________________________.
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My commission expires: __________________________________
Notary Public: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE:
• COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
• PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
• LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL
• APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
56
City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000
LAND USE REVIEW POLICY
LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET
The City of Aspen has established a review fee policy for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is collected
for land use applications based on the type of application submitted.
A flat fee is collected by Community Development for applications which normally take a minimal and predictable amount of staff
time to process. Review fees for other City Departments reviewing the application (referral departments) will also be collected
when necessary. Flat fees are cumulative – meaning an application with multiple flat fees must be pay the sum of those flat fee. Flat
fees are not refundable.
A review fee deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff time is required. Actual staff time spent
will be charged against the deposit. Various City staff may also charge their time spent on the case in addition to the case planner.
Deposit amount may be reduced if, in the opinion of the Community Development Director, the project is expected to take signifi-
cantly less time to process than the deposit indicates. A determination on the deposit amount shall be made during the pre-appli-
cation conference by the case planner. Hourly billing shall still apply. All applications must include an Agreement to Pay Application
Fees. One payment including the deposit for Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application,
made payable to the City of Aspen. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required fee.
The Community Development Department shall keep an accurate record of the actual time required for the processing of a land
use application requiring a deposit. The City can provide a summary report of fees due at the applicant’s request. The applicant
will be billed for the additional costs incurred by the City when the processing of an application by the Community Development
Department takes more time or expense than is covered by the deposit. Any direct costs attributable to a project review shall be
billed to the applicant with no additional administrative charge. In the event the processing of an application takes less time than
provided for by the deposit, the department shall refund the unused portion of the deposited fee to the applicant. Fees shall be
due regardless of whether an applicant receives approval.
Unless otherwise combined by the Director for simplicity of billing, all applications for conceptual, final and recordation of approv-
al documents shall be handled as individual cases for the purpose of billing. Upon conceptual approval all billing shall be recon-
ciled, and past due invoices shall be paid prior to the Director accepting an application for final review. Final review shall require a
new deposit at the rate in effect at the time of final submission. Upon final approval all billing shall be again reconciled prior to the
Director accepting an application for review of technical documents for recordation.
The Community Development Director may cease processing of a land use application for which an unpaid invoice is 30 or more
days past due. Unpaid invoices of 90 days or more past due may be assessed a late fee of 1.75% per month. An unpaid invoice of
120 days or more may be subject to additional actions as may be assigned by the Municipal Court Judge. All payment information
is public domain.
All invoices shall be paid prior to issuance of a Development Order or recordation of development agreements and plats. The City
will not accept a building permit for a property until all invoices are paid in full. For permits already accepted, and unpaid invoice
of 90 days or more days may result in cessation of building permit processing or issuance of a stop work order until full payment is
made.
The property owner of record is the party responsible for payment of all costs associated with a land use application for the prop-
erty. Any secondary agreement between a property owner and an applicant representing the owner (e.g. a contract purchaser)
regarding payment of fees is solely between those private parties.
57
City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURE
LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET
3
4 Staff Review of Development Application.
5
City Community Development Staff will review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project’s conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections.
A date for a public hearing on a complete application is scheduled before the
6 Board Review of Application.
8 Receipt of Building Permit.
2 The applicant shall be notified in writing whether the information is complete or if additional materials are required.
7 Issuance of Development Order.
1 Attend Pre-Application Conference.
58
City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURE
LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET
1. Attend Pre-Application Conference.
During this one-on-one meeting, staff will determine the review process applies to your development
proposal and will identify the materials necessary to review your application.
2. Applicant Shall Submit Land Use Application
Email the entire application as one pdf to cdehadmins@aspen.gov. Include the pre-app number in the subject line. If
more than 18 months has passed since the pre-app was issued, please reach out to planneroftheday@gmail.com for
an updated pre-application conference summary.
3. The applicant shall be notified in writing whether the information is complete of if additional
materials are required.
Staff will review the application materials. If additional items are needed, the applicant will receive a letter
indicating the application is Incomplete and the needed additional items. Once all required application items
are received, staff will inform the applicant the application is Complete. At this time, the land use review fee
is due.
4. City Community Development Staff will review the submittal material and prepare a report that
analyzes the project’s conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code
sections.
This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a
recommendation to approve, disapprove or approve with conditions for the recommendation.
5. Staff Review of Development Application.
Notice Once your application is determined to be complete, it will be reviewed by the staff for compliance
with the applicable standards of the Code. During the staff review stage, the application will be referred to
other agencies for comments. The Planner assigned to your case or the agency may contact you if
additional information is needed or if problems are identified. Staff will draft a memo for signature by the
Community Development Director that explains whether your application complies with the Code, and will
list any conditions that should apply if the application is to be approved.
Final approval of any Development Application that amends a recorded
document, such as a plat, agreement, or deed restriction, will require the applicant to prepare an amended
version of that document for review and approval by staff. Staff will provide the applicant with the applicable
contents for the revised plat. The City Attorney is normally in charge of the form for recorded agreements
and deed restrictions. We suggest that you not go to the trouble or expense of preparing these documents
until the staff has determined that your application is eligible for the requested amendment or exemption.
59
City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURE
LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET
6. A date for a public hearing on a complete application is scheduled before the applicable review body.
Notice of the hearing shall be provided as required in the Aspen Municipal Code. A copy of the required
Affidavit of Public Notice is included in the Application Packet.
7. Board Review of Application.
If a public hearing is required for the land use action that you are requesting, the Planning staff will schedule
a hearing date for the application upon determination that the application is complete. The hearing(s) will be
scheduled before the appropriate reviewing board(s). The applicant will be required to mail notice (one copy
provided by the Community Development Department) to property owners within 30 feet of the subject
property and post notice (sign available at the Community Development Department) of the public hearing
on the site at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing date. (Please see Attachment 6 for instructions.)
The Planning staff will publish notice of the hearing in the paper for land use requests that require
publication.
The Planning staff will then formulate a recommendation on the land use request and draft a memo to the
reviewing board(s). The public hearing(s) will take place before the appropriate review boards. Public
hearings include a presentation by the Planning staff, a presentation by the applicant (optional),
consideration of public comment, and the reviewing board’s questions and decision.
8. Issuance of Development Order.
If the land use review is approved, then the Planning staff will issue a Development Order, which allows the
applicant to submit a building permit application.
9. Receipt of Building Permit.
Once you have received a copy of the signed staff approval, you may apply for a building permit. During
this time, your project will be examined for its compliance with the Uniform Building Code. It also will be
checked for compliance with applicable provisions of the Land Use Regulations that were not reviewed in
detail during the land use case review. (This might include a check of floor area ratios, setbacks, parking,
open space and the like). Impact fees for water, sewer, parks, and employee housing will be collected as
part of the permitting process. Any document required to be recorded, such as a plat, deed restriction, or
agreement, will be reviewed and recorded before a building permit application is submitted.
60
Please see Section 26.415 of the Aspen Municipal Code for more detailed information.
3
4 A date for a public hearing on a complete
application is scheduled before the HPC.
5
City Community Development Staff will review
the submittal material and prepare a report
that analyzes the project’s conformance with
the design guidelines and other applicable
Land Use Code sections.
The HPC will review the application.
6 The HPC will approve, disapprove, approve
with conditions or continue the application
to obtain additional information necessary to
make a decision to approve or deny.
8 HPC decisions are final unless appealed by
the applicant or a landowner within three
hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as
provided in the Aspen Municipal Code.
9 For these applications, HPC is a
10 HPC assigns a member of the Commission
to be the “project monitor” for each project
they approve.
11 Before an application for a building permit
can be submitted, a final set of plans
reflecting any or all required changes by the
HPC or City Council must be on file with the
City.
12 Once a Development Order has been
received, a building permit application may
be submitted.
2 The applicant shall be notified in writing
whether the information is complete or if
additional materials are required.
7 Certain applications are subject to a call-up
review with City Council.1 Attend Pre-Application Conference.
LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET
City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000
HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW PROCEDURE
61
City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000
HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW PROCEDURE
LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET
1. Attend Pre-Application Conference.
During this one-on-one meeting, staff will determine the review process applies to your development
proposal and will identify the materials necessary to review your application.
2. Applicant Shall Submit Land Use Application
Email the entire application as one pdf to cdehadmins@aspen.gov. Include the pre-app number in the subject line. If
more than 18 months has passed since the pre-app was issued, please reach out to planneroftheday@gmail.com for
an updated pre-application conference summary.
3. The applicant shall be notified in writing whether the information is complete of if additional
materials are required.
Staff will review the application materials. If additional items are needed, the applicant will receive a letter
indicating the application is Incomplete and the needed additional items. Once all required application items
are received, staff will inform the applicant the application is Complete. At this time, the land use review fee
is due.
4. City Community Development Staff will review the submittal material and prepare a report that
analyzes the project’s conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code
sections.
This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a
recommendation to approve, disapprove or approve with conditions for the recommendation.
5. A date for a public hearing on a complete application is scheduled before the HPC.
Notice of the hearing shall be provided as required in the Aspen Municipal Code. A copy of the required
Affidavit of Public Notice is included in the Application Packet.
6. The HPC will review the application.
The report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City
of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The order of proceedings at the HPC meeting are as
follows:
(1) Applicant and public are sworn in,
(2) Staff presentation,
(3) Commission member questions,
(4) Public comments,
(5) Commission member comments,
(6) Applicant response/clarification,
(7) Commission motion and vote
62
City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000
HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW PROCEDURE
LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET
7. The HPC will approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain
additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny.
The application is a one-step review, and it is approved, the HPC will issue a Certificate of Appropriateness
and the Community Development Director will issue a Development Order. If the application requires
submittal for a final review, this is an additional application and materials must be prepared and submitted
according to the processes described. A project that receives final approval will be issued a Certificate of
Appropriateness and the Community Development Director will issue a Development Order.
8. Certain applications are subject to a call-up review with City Council.
For Major Development, Demolition, or Relocation, a resolution of the HPC action will be forwarded to the
City Council to allow them an opportunity to “call up” the decision if they feel there has been an abuse of
discretion or denial of due process. No building permit can be issued for construction of the project until the
thirty (30) day “call up” period has expired.
9. HPC decisions are final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300)
feet of the subject property, as provided in the Aspen Municipal Code.
10. For these applications, HPC is a recommending body.
Council will evaluate the application to determine if the review criteria are met. The Council may approve,
disapprove or continue the application to request additional information necessary to make a decision to
approve or deny.
11. HPC assigns a member of the Commission to be the “project monitor” for each project they
approve.
The monitor (and Staff) may periodically visit the site as work is under construction. If the applicant requests
a change to any aspects of the project change after the HPC approval, the applicant, Staff, and the project
monitor will attempt to address them without returning to the full HPC.
11. Before an application for a building permit can be submitted, a final set of plans reflecting any or all
required changes by the HPC or City Council must be on file with the City.
Any conditions of approval or outstanding issues which must be addressed in the field or at a later time
shall be noted on the plans.
12. Once a Development Order has been received, a building permit application may be submitted.
At this time the proposal will be reviewed for compliance with the Building Code and zoning regulations.
Fees for water, sewer, park dedication fees, and employee housing will be collected if due. Any document,
such as a plat, deed restriction, or other agreement which is required to be filed, must be recorded before
the building permit will be issued.
63
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PRE-25-125
DATE: 10/13/2025
PLANNER: Tillie Pines, (970) 309-0415, tillie.pines@aspen.gov, Harry Valentine-Wilson,
harry.valentinewilson@aspen.gov
REPRESENTATIVE: Milo Stark, milo@krai.us
PROJECT LOCATION: 500 West Francis
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-10-010
REQUEST: Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development, Relocation, Benefits
DESCRIPTION: 500 West Francis is a single-family residence is a AspenVictorian landmark
structure built in 1884. The property is a 6,000 square foot lot located in the West End
neighborhood in the Medium Density Residential (R-6) Zone District. The property legal
description is Subdivision: QUARK CONDO UNIT 1.
The property was once situated on a larger parcel of land; however, Historic Preservation
Commission (HPC) Resolution #14, Series of 2007 (Reception # 537084), approved setback
variances and a 500 square foot floor area ratio (FAR) bonus and recommended approval for a
historic landmark lot split. City Council approved the historic landmark lot split per Ordinance
#19, Series of 2007 (Reception #545757).
The applicant is proposing exterior restoration, the demolition of sheds and non-historic portion
of the carriage house, a subgrade basement, an addition and garage off of the historic carriage
house, and a linking element between the new addition and the historic resource.
Request for Variances
The applicant is requesting two variances to the setbacks. The first variance is to the side-yard
setback to the east for the structure and the carriage house to remain in their existing locations,
which are encroaching into the setback. The second variance is to the rear-yard setback to the
north for the carriage house to remain in the rear-yard setback, and for subgrade livable space.
The applicant is also seeking an exemption from Sec. 26.415.110.f.5 for the lightwell wall
exposure. The proposed variances are pursuant to the criteria in Chapter 26.314.
Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development
The proposed work meets the requirements for a Certificate of Appropriateness for major
development review. Major Development is a two-step process, where the project may be
approved, disapproved, or approved with conditions. HPC will use the Historic Preservation
Design Guidelines and the Land Use Code Sections applicable to this project to assist with their
determinations. Part of this process includes Notice of Call Up to City Council following the
Conceptual Plan Review hearing before the HPC.
64
Relocation of Designated Historic Properties
The subgrade basement development does not propose the physical relocation of the historic
structure, but the excavation will require “the same level of documentation, structural
assessment, and posting of financial assurances as a building relocation.” The relocation criteria
will be included in the review process for the appropriate protections stated in the Historic
Preservation Guidelines. Relocation review is subject to Notice of Call Up at City Council. After
review of this aspect of the project, Council has the authority to remand the decision back to
HPC for further consideration.
RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS:
Section Number Section Title
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.415.070(d) Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development
26.415.090 Relocation of Designated Historic Property
26.415.110 Historic Preservation – Benefits
26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements
26.710.040 Medium-Density Residential (R-6)
HELPFUL LINKS: - FIX COLORS
• Land Use Application (PDF)
• Land Use Code (PDF)
• Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (PDF)
REVIEW BY:
• Staff for Completeness and recommendations.
• HPC for public hearing at conceptual and final review
• Council for notice of call up
REQUIRED LAND USE REVIEW(S):
• Major Development involving Designated Historic Property
• Relocation of Designated Historic Property
PUBLIC HEARING: Yes, at conceptual and final review.
PLANNING FEES: $1,950 for 6 billable hours of staff time. (additional/ lesser hours will be
billed/ refunded at a rate of $325 per hour.)
REFERRAL FEES: Engineering: $5,350 for Board Review, Major (additional/ lesser hours will
be billed/ refunded at a rate of $325 per hour.)
Parks: $975 flat fee
TOTAL DEPOSIT: Due at Conceptual: $8,275
Due at Final: $1,950
APPLICATION CHECKLIST: Below is a list of submittal requirements for this review.
Please email the entire application as one pdf to cdehadmins@aspen.gov. Include PRE-
65
25-125 in the subject line. If more than 18 months has lapsed since this letter was issued,
please reach out to planneroftheday@gmail.com.
Completed Land Use Application, signed Fee Agreement, and signed HOA Compliance
form
Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).
Contained within a letter signed by the applicant, the applicant's name, address and
telephone number and the name, address and telephone number of any representative
authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.
The street address, legal description and parcel identification number of the property
proposed for development.
A disclosure of ownership of the parcel proposed for development, consisting of a current
(no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company or attorney licensed to
practice in the state, listing the names of all owners of the property and all mortgages,
judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel and
demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the development application.
An eight and one-half (8½) inches by eleven (11) inches vicinity map locating the subject
parcel within the City of Aspen.
Proposed and existing site plans depicting the proposed layout and the project's physical
relationship to the land and its surroundings.
A site improvement survey (no older than a year from submittal) certified by a registered
land surveyor, licensed in the state, showing the current status of the parcel including the
current topography and vegetation.
A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how the proposed
development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application.
Scaled elevations and/or drawings of the proposed work and its relationship to the
designated historic buildings, structures, sites and features within its vicinity.
An accurate representation of all building materials and finishes to be used in the
development.
Photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location, extent and
design of proposed work.
Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410, Residential design standards
or a written request for a variance from any standard that is not being met.
A written description and/or graphic illustrations of the building, structure or object
proposed for relocation.
A written explanation of the type of relocation requested (temporary, on-site or off-site)
and justification for the need for relocation.
A written report from a licensed engineer or architect regarding the soundness of the
building, structure or object, its ability to withstand the physical move and its
rehabilitation needs, once relocated.
A conceptual plan for the receiving site providing preliminary information on the
property boundaries, existing improvements and site characteristics and the associated
planned improvements.
If the applicant does not own the receiving site, proof from the site's property owner of
the willingness to accept the relocated building, structure or object.
Evidence that the applicant has or is seeking the necessary approvals to place the
building on the identified receiving site. If the site is outside of the city limits, verification
Exh. B
Exh. C
Exh. D
Exh. H
Exh. E
Exh. H
Exh. F
Exh. G
Exh. A
Exh. F
Exh. G
Exh. J
Exh. K
Exh. A
Exh. A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Mailing ListExh. I
Exh. L
66
that the building will be preserved on its new site through a formal action of the other
jurisdiction or a preservation easement.
Evidence of the financial ability to undertake the safe relocation, preservation and repair
of the building, structure or object; site preparation and construction of necessary
infrastructure through the posting of bonds or other financial measures deemed
appropriate.
Supplementary materials to provide an understanding of the larger context for the
relocated property and its impact on adjacent properties, the neighborhood or
streetscape.
FINAL
Final selection of all exterior materials, and samples or clearly illustrated photographs.
Samples are preferred for the presentation to HPC.
A lighting plan and landscape plan, including any visible stormwater mitigation features.
Engineered plans showing house can withstand relocation/underpinning
Preservation Plan
Depending on further review of the case, additional items may be requested of the
application. Once the application is deemed complete by staff, the applicant/applicant’s
representative will receive an e-mail requesting submission of the deposit. Once the
deposit is received, the case will be assigned to a planner and the land use review will
begin.
Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City.
The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon
factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal
or vested right.
67
68
104018430.2
ASSIGNMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
THIS ASSIGNMENT OF PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (“Assignment”)
made this 6th day of June 2025, by and between Dax T.S. Mitchell (“Assignor”), and Francis
Aspen Investments, LLC (“Assignee”).
INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS
The following provisions form a part of this Assignment:
A.Assignor entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement, with an effective date of
April 25, 2025, as amended (the “Agreement”), by and between Assignor and Ellen Valentine
(“Seller”), relating to certain land and improvements situated in Aspen, Colorado, as described in
the Agreement.
B.Assignee desires to purchase from Assignor, and Assignor desires to sell and assign
to Assignee, the Agreement and all of the rights, benefits and privileges thereunder.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the agreements and covenants
herein set forth, together with the sum of Ten ($10.00) Dollars and other good and valuable
consideration this day paid and delivered by Assignee to Assignor, the receipt and sufficiency of all
of which are hereby acknowledged by Assignor, Assignor does hereby ASSIGN, TRANSFER, SET
OVER and DELIVER unto Assignee all of Assignor’s right, title and interest in and to the
Agreement, including without limitation any amount paid thereunder as an earnest money deposit
and all of the rights, benefits and privileges thereunder, and Assignee hereby assumes and agrees to
perform all of the terms, covenants and conditions of the Agreement on the part of the Buyer therein
required to be performed, from and after the date hereof, but subject to all terms, conditions,
reservations and limitations set forth in the Agreement.
[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
69
104018430.2
EXECUTED as of the date first written above.
ASSIGNOR:
Dax T.S. Mitchell
_____________________________
Name: Dax T.S. Mitchell
ASSIGNEE:
FRANCIS ASPEN INVESTMENTS, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company
_____________________________
Name: Dax T.S. Mitchell
Title: President
70
Customer Distribution
Prevent fraud - Please call a member of our closing team for wire transfer
instructions or to initiate a wire transfer. Note that our wiring instructions will
never change.
Order Number: Q62018243-6 Date: 06/05/2025
Property Address: 500 W FRANCIS ST, ASPEN, CO 81611
For Closing Assistance Closers Assistant Closing Processor
Melissa Jones
533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE,
SUITE 102
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 315-1832 (Work)
(303) 393-4941 (Work Fax)
mejones@ltgc.com
Contact License: CO450818
Company License: CO44565
Marc Obadia
533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE,
SUITE 102
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 925-1678 (Work)
(800) 318-8202 (Work Fax)
mobadia@ltgc.com
Company License: CO44565
Scott Murray
533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE,
SUITE 102
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 925-1678 (Work)
(800) 318-8202 (Work Fax)
smurray@ltgc.com
Company License: CO44565
For Title Assistance
Land Title Roaring Fork Valley
Title Team
533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE,
SUITE 102
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 927-0405 (Work)
(970) 925-0610 (Work Fax)
valleyresponse@ltgc.com
Buyer/Borrower
DAX T.S. MITCHELL
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
Attorney for Buyer
POLSINELLI PC
Attention: BRENDAN MCPHERSON
900 W. 48TH PLACE, SUITE 900
KANSAS CITY, MO 64112
(816) 360-4107 (Work)
bmcpherson@polsinelli.com
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
71
Seller/Owner
ELLEN VALENTINE
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
Attorney for Buyer
POLSINELLI PC
Attention: EMILY WEMHOFF
900 W. 48TH PLACE, SUITE 900
KANSAS CITY, MO 64112
(816) 360-4257 (Work)
ewemhoff@polsinelli.com
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
Agent for Buyer
CHRISTIE'S INTERNATIONAL REAL ESTATE -
ASPEN SNOWMASS
Attention: JONATHAN FEINBERG
520 E DURANT AVE SUITE 205
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 379-3405 (Cell)
(970) 544-5800 (Work)
(970) 544-8185 (Work Fax)
oxbow@rof.net
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
Attorney for Seller
WAAS CAMPBELL RIVERA JOHNSON &
VELASQUEZ LLP
Attention: BEN S GENSHAFT
420 E MAIN STREET #210
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 987-6015 (Cell)
genshaft@wcrlegal.com
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
Agent for Seller
ASPEN SNOWMASS SOTHEBY'S INTERNATIONAL
REALTY
Attention: TERRY ROGERS
PO BOX 5000
50 SNOWMASS VILLAGE MALL
SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615
(970) 379-2443 (Cell)
(970) 923-2006 (Work)
(970) 923-2550 (Work Fax)
terry.rogers@sothebysrealty.com
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
ASPEN SURVEY LLC
Attention: MICHAEL LAFFERTY
210 S GALENA ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 925-3816 (Work)
michael@aspensurvey.net
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
Agent for Seller
ASPEN SNOWMASS SOTHEBY'S INTERNATIONAL
REALTY
Attention: GREG DIDIER
PO BOX 5000
50 SNOWMASS VILLAGE MALL
SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615
(970) 923-2006 (Work)
(970) 923-2550 (Work Fax)
greg.didier@sothebysrealty.com
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
1031 Exchange Buyer
ASSET PRESERVATION, INC.
Attention: LYLA FINCH
135 MAIN ST, SUITE 1 (POSTAL BOX 6)
WESTHAMPTON BEACH, NY 11978
(866) 394-1031 (Work)
(800) 282-1031 (Work)
lyla@apiexchange.com
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
Lender - New Loan
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.
Attention: KELTON ZIMMERMAN
2500 WESTFIELD DR., FLOOR 2-1
Elgin, IL 60124
kelton.zimmerman@jpmchase.com
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
1031 Exchange Buyer
JENNIFER A. PENDZICK
135 MAIN ST, SUITE 1 (POSTAL BOX 6)
Westhampton Beach, NY 11978
(866) 394-1031 (Work)
teamjennifer@apiexchange.com
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
72
Estimate of Title Fees
Order Number: Q62018243-6 Date: 06/05/2025
Property Address: 500 W FRANCIS ST, ASPEN, CO 81611
Seller(s): ELLEN VALENTINE
Buyer(s): DAX T.S. MITCHELL
Thank you for putting your trust in Land Title. Below is the estimate of title fees for the
transaction. The final fees will be collected at closing. Visit ltgc.com to learn more about
Land Title.
Estimate of Title Insurance Fees
"ALTA" Owner's Policy 07-30-21 Reissue Rate $11,643.00
Deletion of Standard Exception(s)$75.00
Endorsement ALTA 25 $1,500.00
Endorsement ALTA 17 $500.00
"ALTA" Loan Policy 07-30-21 Bundled Purchase Loan Rate $10,240.00
Endorsement Alta 8.1 $0.00
Endorsement ALTA 9 $0.00
Endorsement ALTA 4.1 $0.00
Endorsement ALTA 6 $0.00
Endorsement ALTA 22 $0.00
Tax Certificate $27.00
Tax Certificate $27.00
TOTAL $24,012.00
Note: The documents linked in this commitment should be reviewed carefully. These
documents, such as covenants conditions and restrictions, may affect the title, ownership and
use of the property. You may wish to engage legal assistance in order to fully understand and
be aware of the implications of the documents on your property.
73
Chain of Title Documents:
Pitkin county recorded 04/25/2023 under reception no. 694498
Plat Map(s):
Pitkin county recorded 02/21/2008 at book 86 page 63
74
Customer Ref-Loan No.:1102621105
Property Address:
500 W FRANCIS ST, ASPEN, CO 81611
1.Commitment Date:
05/16/2025 at 5:00 P.M.
2.Policy to be Issued and Proposed Insured:
"ALTA" Owner's Policy 07-30-21 Reissue Rate
Proposed Insured:
DAX T.S. MITCHELL
$12,550,000.00
"ALTA" Loan Policy 07-30-21 Bundled Purchase Loan Rate
Proposed Insured:
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., ITS SUCCESSORS AND/OR
ASSIGNS AS THEIR INTERESTS MAY APPEAR
$8,785,000.00
3.The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is:
FEE SIMPLE
4.The Title is, at the Commitment Date, vested in:
ELLEN VALENTINE
5.The Land is described as follows:
PARCEL A:
UNIT 1,
QUARK CONDOMINIUMS,
ACCORDING TO THE CONDOMINIUM PLAT RECORDED FEBRUARY 21, 2008 IN PLAT BOOK 86 AT PAGE
63 AND AS DEFINED AND DESCRIBED IN CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED FEBRUARY 21,
2008 AS RECEPTION NO. 546660. TOGETHER WITH AN UNDIVIDED 50% INTEREST IN THE COMMON
AREA.
COUNTY OF PITKIN,
STATE OF COLORADO.
PARCEL B:
UNIT 2,
QUARK CONDOMINIUMS,
ACCORDING TO THE CONDOMINIUM PLAT RECORDED FEBRUARY 21, 2008 IN PLAT BOOK 86 AT PAGE
63 AND AS DEFINED AND DESCRIBED IN CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED FEBRUARY 21,
2008 AS RECEPTION NO. 546660. TOGETHER WITH AN UNDIVIDED 50% INTEREST IN THE COMMON
AREA.
COUNTY OF PITKIN,
STATE OF COLORADO.
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule A
Order Number:Q62018243-6
75
This page is only a part of a 2021 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance. This
Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the
Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part
II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in
electronic form.
Copyright 2021 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.
The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing
as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the
American Land Title Association.
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule A
Order Number:Q62018243-6
76
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule B, Part I
(Requirements)
Order Number: Q62018243-6
All of the following Requirements must be met:
This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this
Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company
may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions.
Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured.
Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company.
Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or
both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records.
1.EVIDENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT THE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN TRANSFER TAX HAVE BEEN SATISFIED.
2.(THIS ITEM WAS INTENTIONALLY DELETED)
3.SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED FROM ELLEN VALENTINE TO DAX T.S. MITCHELL CONVEYING SUBJECT
PROPERTY.
4.DEED OF TRUST FROM DAX T.S. MITCHELL TO THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF PITKIN COUNTY FOR THE USE
OF JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. TO SECURE THE SUM OF $8,785,000.00.
NOTE: ITEMS 1-3 OF THE PRE-PRINTED EXCEPTIONS ARE HEREBY DELETED FROM THE MORTGAGEE'S
POLICY. ITEM 4 OF THE PRE-PRINTED EXCEPTIONS WILL BE DELETED UPON RECEIPT OF A
SATISFACTORY LIEN AFFIDAVIT.
NOTE: ALL PARTIES WILL BE REQUIRED TO SIGN THE LIEN AFFIDAVIT AT CLOSING.
REQUIREMENTS TO DELETE THE PRE-PRINTED EXCEPTIONS IN THE OWNER'S POLICY TO BE ISSUED:
A. UPON RECEIPT BY THE COMPANY OF A SATISFACTORY FINAL AFFIDAVIT AND AGREEMENT FROM
THE SELLER AND PROPOSED INSURED, AND AN IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT OF THE LAND, ITEMS 1-
4 OF THE PRE-PRINTED EXCEPTIONS WILL BE DELETED. ANY ADVERSE MATTERS DISCLOSED BY THE
FINAL AFFIDAVIT AND AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT WILL BE ADDED AS
EXCEPTIONS.
B. IF LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY CONDUCTS THE CLOSING OF THE CONTEMPLATED
TRANSACTIONS AND RECORDS THE DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, ITEM 5 OF THE PRE-
PRINTED EXCEPTIONS WILL BE DELETED.
C. UPON RECEIPT OF PROOF OF PAYMENT OF ALL PRIOR YEARS' TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS, ITEM 6
OF THE PRE-PRINTED EXCEPTIONS WILL BE AMENDED TO READ:
TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS FOR THE YEAR 2025 AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS.
5.ITEMS 7(A) AND 7(B) WILL BE DELETED FROM THE OWNERS POLICY.
77
Some historical land records contain Discriminatory Covenants that are illegal and unenforceable by
law. This Commitment and the Policy treat any Discriminatory Covenant in a document referenced in
Schedule B as if each Discriminatory Covenant is redacted, repudiated, removed, and not republished or
recirculated. Only the remaining provisions of the document will be excepted from coverage.
1.Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be
ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land.
2.Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records.
3.Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that
would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public
Records.
4.Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by
law and not shown by the Public Records.
5.Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the
public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date of the proposed
insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this
Commitment.
6.(a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that
levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public
agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown
by the records of such agency or by the Public Records.
7.(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the
issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water.
8.RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE DEED FROM THE CITY OF ASPEN
RECORDED JANUARY 31, 1888 IN BOOK 59 AT PAGE 328, PROVIDING AS FOLLOWS: THAT NO TITLE
SHALL BE HEREBY ACQUIRED TO ANY MINE OF GOLD, SILVER, CINNABAR OR COPPER OR TO ANY
VALID MINING CLAIM OR POSSESSION HELD UNDER EXISTING LAWS.
9.(THIS ITEM WAS INTENTIONALLY DELETED)
10.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF RESOLUTION BY THE ASPEN HISTORIC
PRESERVATION COMMISSION, NO. 14, SERIES OF 2007 RECORDED APRIL 27, 2007 AS RECEPTION NO.
537084.
11.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF RESOLUTION BY THE ASPEN HISTORIC
PRESERVATION COMMISSION, NO. 32, SERIES OF 2007 RECORDED JULY 30, 2007 AS RECEPTION NO.
540465.
12.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF ORDINANCE BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL,
NO. 19, SERIES OF 2007 RECORDED JANUARY 10, 2008 AS RECEPTION NO. 545757.
13.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION AGREEMENT
RECORDED JANUARY 10, 2008 AS RECEPTION NO. 545758.
14.EASEMENTS, CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON THE PLAT
OF 500 WEST FRANCIS STREET HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT SUBDIVISION RECORDED JANUARY
10, 2008 IN PLAT BOOK 86 AT PAGE 25.
15.EASEMENTS, CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON THE PLAT
OF QUARK CONDOMINIUMS RECORDED FEBRUARY 21, 2008 IN PLAT BOOK 86 AT PAGE 63.
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule B, Part II
(Exceptions)
Order Number: Q62018243-6
78
16.THOSE PROVISIONS, COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS, EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS, WHICH ARE A
BURDEN TO THE CONDOMINIUM UNIT DESCRIBED IN SCHEDULE A, AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT
RECORDED FEBRUARY 21, 2008, AS RECEPTION NO. 546660.
17.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF REVOCABLE ENCROACHMENT LICENSE
RECORDED JULY 9, 2007 AS RECEPTION NO. 539719 AND RECORDED NOVEMBER 7, 2007 AS
RECEPTION NO. 543900.
18.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN CERTIFICATE RECORDED
JANUARY 23, 2024 AS RECEPTION NO. 700103
19.CLAIMS OF RIGHT, TITLE AND/OR INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY BETWEEN THE BOUNDARY LINE AND
THE FENCE AS DEPICTED ON THE SURVEY PREPARED BY ASPEN SURVEY, JOB NO. 230212
WHETHER SAID CLAIMS ARISE BY ABANDONMENT, ADVERSE POSSESSION OR OTHER MEANS.
SAID DOCUMENT STORE AS OUR ESI 42250863
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule B, Part II
(Exceptions)
Order Number: Q62018243-6
79
ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance
issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
NOTICE
IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE
POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS
COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT.
THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION
OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF
THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF
THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED.
THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE
CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. .
COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY
Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions ,Old Republic National Title Insurance
Company, a Minnesota corporation (the “Company”), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is
effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the
specified dollar amount as the Proposed Amount of insurance and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been
met within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end.
COMMITMENT CONDITIONS
1. DEFINITIONS
2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Commitment terminates
and the Company’s liability and obligation end.
3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without:
4. COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND
The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or
other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The
Company is not liable for any other amendment to this Commitment.
5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY
i. comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements;
ii. eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or
iii. acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment.
“Discriminatory Covenant”: Any covenant, condition, restriction, or limitation that is unenforceable under applicable law because it illegally
discriminates against a class of individuals based on personal characteristics such as race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity,
familial status, disability, national origin, or other legally protected class.
(a)
“Knowledge” or “Known”: Actual knowledge or actual notice, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records.(b)
“Land”: The land described in item 5 of Schedule A and affixed improvements located on that land that by State law constitute real property. The term
“Land” does not include any property beyond that described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in any abutting street,
road, aavenue, alley, lane, right-of-way, body of water, or waterway, but does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land
is to be insured by the Policy.
(c)
“Mortgage”: A mortgage, deed of trust, trust deed, security deed, or other real property security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic
means authorized by law.
(d)
“Policy”: Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company
pursuant to this Commitment.
(e)
“Proposed Amount of Insurance”: Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Amount of Insurance of each Policy to be issued
pursuant to this Commitment.
(f)
“Proposed Insured”: Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment.(g)
“Public Records”: The recording or filing system established under State statutes in effect at the Commitment Date under which a document must be
recorded or filed to impart constructive notice of matters relating to the TItle to a purchaser for value without Knowledge. The term “Public Records”
does not include any other recording or filing system, including any pertaining to environmental remediation or protection, planning, permitting,
zoning, licensing, building, health, public safety, or national security matters.
(h)
“State”: The state or commonwealth of the United States within whose exterior boundaries the Land is located. The term “State” also includes the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Guam.
(i)
“Title”: The estate or interest in the Land identified in Item 3 of Schedule A.(j)
the Notice;(a)
the Commitment to Issue Policy;(b)
the Commitment Conditions;(c)
Schedule A;(d)
Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and(e)
Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and(f)
a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.(g)
The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the
Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed
Insured’s good faith reliance to:
(a)
The Company is not liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and
did not notify the Company about it in writing.
(b)
The Company is only liable under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment
included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured.
(c)
The Company’s liability does not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment
Condition 5(a) or the Proposed Amount of Insurance.
(d)
The Company is not liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any.(e)
The Company is not obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met
to the satisfaction of the Company.
(f)
80
6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT. CHOICE OF LAW AND CHOICE OF FORUM
7. IF THIS COMMITMENT IS ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT
The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the
Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services.
8. PRO-FORMA POLICY
The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma
policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure.
9. CLAIMS PROCEDURES
This Commitment incorporates by reference all Conditions for making a claim in the Policy to be issued to the Proposed Insured. Commitment Condition 9
does not modify the limitations of liability in Commitment Conditions 5 and 6.
10. CLASS ACTION
ALL CLAIMS AND DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS COMMITMENT, INCLUDING ANY SERVICE OR OTHER MATTER IN
CONNECTION WITH ISSUING THIS COMMITMENT, ANY BREACH OF A COMMITMENT PROVISION, OR ANY OTHER CLAIM OR DISPUTE
ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THE TRANSACTION GIVING RISE TO THIS COMMITMENT, MUST BE BROUGHT IN AN INDIVIDUAL
CAPACITY. NO PARTY MAY SERVE AS PLAINTIFF, CLASS MEMBER, OR PARTICIPANT IN ANY CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDING.
ANY POLICY ISSUED PURSUANT TO THIS COMMITMENT WILL CONTAIN A CLASS ACTION CONDITION.
11. ARBITRATION
The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Amount of insurance is $2,000,000 or less may be arbitrated at the
election of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration
rules at http://www.alta.org/arbitration
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Old Republic National Title Insurance Company has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on
the date shown in Schedule A to be valid when countersigned by a validating officer or other authorized signatory.
Issued by:
Land Title Guarantee Company
3033 East First Avenue Suite 600
Denver, Colorado 80206
303-321-1880
Craig B. Rants, Senior Vice President
This page is only a part of a 2021 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not
valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part II
—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.
Copyright 2021 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.
The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are
prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association.
The Company’s liability is further limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy to be issued to the Proposed Insured.(g)
Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment.(a)
Any claim must be based in contract under the State law of the State where the Land is located and is restricted to the terms and provisions of this
Commitment. Any litigation or other proceeding brought by the Proposed Insured against the Company must be filed only in a State or federal court
having jurisdiction
(b)
This Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment
and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to
the subject matter of this Commitment.
(c)
The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the
terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy.
(d)
Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company.(e)
When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy.(f)
81
Land Title Guarantee Company
Disclosure Statements
Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that:
Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the
clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least
one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that,
the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or
filing information at the top margin of the document.
Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters
which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for
recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title
Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents
from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued.
Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of
Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following
conditions:
No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or
agreed to pay.
Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given:
The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district.(A)
A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in
which the real property is located or that county treasurer's authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides
written instructions to the contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real
property).
(B)
The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of
County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor.
(C)
The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a
condominium or townhouse unit.
(A)
No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land
described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months.
(B)
The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and
material-men's liens.
(C)
The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.(D)
If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within
six months prior to the Date of Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include:
disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor;
payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any
additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company.
(E)
82
This notice applies to owner's policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface
estate, in Schedule B-2.
Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or
information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may
include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance
company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for
the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award
payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of
Regulatory Agencies.
Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing
protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction.
Note: Pursuant to CRS 24-21-514.5, Colorado notaries may remotely notarize real estate deeds and other documents
using real-time audio-video communication technology. You may choose not to use remote notarization for any
document.
That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the
surface estate and that there is substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other
minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and
(A)
That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's
permission.
(B)
83
Joint Notice of Privacy Policy of
Land Title Guarantee Company
Land Title Insurance Corporation and
Old Republic National Title Insurancy Company
This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company as agent for Land Title Insurance
Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company.
We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state
privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence
is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized
access to your non-public personal information ("Personal Information").
In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from:
applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web-based
transaction management system;
your transactions with, or from the services being performed by us, our affiliates, or others;
a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction;
and
The public records maintained by governmental entities that we obtain either directly from those entities, or from
our affiliates and non-affiliates.
Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows:
We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in
order to provide products and services to you.
We may share your Personal Information with affiliated contractors or service providers who provide services in the
course of our business, but only to the extent necessary for these providers to perform their services and to
provide these services to you as may be required by your transaction.
We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your
Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion.
Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action.
We regularly assess security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal
Information.
WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT
IS NOT STATED ABOVE OR PERMITTED BY LAW.
Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We
may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for
example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your
Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is
needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you.
Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy
policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration
84
Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction
thereof.
85
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
G.1.00
4/10/26
GENERAL
INFORMATION
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
CONTRACTOR
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
EVOLVE STRUCTURAL DESIGN
MECHANICAL ENGINEER
G.1.00 GENERAL INFORMATION
A.1.01 EXISTING SITE PLAN
A.1.02 PROPOSED SITE PLAN
A.1.04 EXISTING FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS
A.1.05 PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS
A.1.06 EXISTING GROSS FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS
A.1.07 PROPOSED GROSS FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS
A.1.15 TREE REMOVAL PLAN
A.2.01 EXISTING LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
A.2.02 EXISTING MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
A.2.03 EXISTING UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
A.2.04 EXISTING ROOF LEVEL PLAN
A.2.05 LOWER LEVEL DEMOLITION PLAN
A.2.06 MAIN LEVEL DEMOLITION PLAN
A.2.07 UPPER LEVEL DEMOLITION PLAN
A.2.08 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
A.2.09 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
A.2.10 PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL PLAN
A.2.11 PROPOSED ROOF LEVEL PLAN
A.3.01 EXISTING ELEVATIONS: SOUTH
A.3.02 EXISTING ELEVATIONS: WEST
A.3.03 EXISTING ELEVATIONS: NORTH
A.3.04 EXISTING ELEVATIONS: EAST
A.3.05 EXISTING ELEVATIONS: SOUTH (CARRIAGE HOUSE)
A.3.06 EXISTING ELEVATIONS: NORTH (PRIMARY RESOURCE)
A.3.07 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: SOUTH
A.3.08 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: WEST
A.3.09 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: NORTH
A.3.10 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: EAST
A.3.11 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: SOUTH (CARRIAGE HOUSE)
A.3.12 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: NORTH (PRIMARY RESOURCE)
A.4.13 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTION 6
A.4.19 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTION 12
ENERGY ONE
- -
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT/DESIGNER
FITZGERALD LANDSCAPING
CIVIL ENGINEER
R&R ENGINEERS
13
4
2
1
A7.1
LOCATION
KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTURE & INTERIORS
710 E DURANT AVENUE, W-10A
ASPEN, CO 81611
970-925-2252
ARCHITECT
500 W. FRANCIS ST.
ABBREVIATIONS
MATERIAL LEGEND
VICINITY MAP
PROJECT TEAMAPPLICABLE CODES PROJECT DATA
SHEET INDEX (CONTINUED)
SHEET INDEXSYMBOL LEGEND
PARCEL ID NUMBER:
ZONING:
LOT SIZE:
BLDG USE:
OCC. GROUP:
CONST. TYPE:
CLIMATE ZONE:
FIRE SPRINKLERS:
LAND USE CATEGORY:
TOWNSHIP:
RANGE:
SECTION:
273512410010
R-6
6,000 SQ.FT.
SINGLE FAMILY/DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL
V-B
7
YES
- -
- -
- -
- -
PLT.
S.T.D.SLOPE TO DRAIN
A
A.B.
A.F.F.
A.F.G.
A/C
ABC
ABS
ABV.
ACB
ACOU.
ACT
ADD.
AG
AHU
AL. or ALUM.
ALT.
ANL
ASPH.
AVG
AWG
B.M.
B.N.
B.O.
B.O.F.
B.U.
B/C
BD.
BLDG
BLK.
BLKG.
BM.
BR
BRG.
BRZ
C.A.P.
C.D.
C.I.P.
C.J.
C.O.
C.T.
CAB
CAM.
CCTV
CEM.
CER
CFM
CH
CKT. BKR.
CL or C.L.
CLG.
CLKG.
CLO.
CLR.
CMU
CNTRD.
COL.
COMB.
CONC.
CONST.
CONT.
CONTR.
CU
d
D.F.
D.G.
D.S.
D/W
DBL.
DEMO
DIA. or Ø
DIAG.
DIM.
DL
DN.
DR
E.A.
E.F.
E.J.
E.N.
E.W.
EA.
EL
ELECT.
ELEV.
EMC
EMT
ENT
EQ.
EQUIP.
EST.
EVAP.
EWC
EXC
EXH.
EXIST. or E
EXT.
F.A.
F.C.
F.C.O.
F.D.
F.E.
F.N.
F.O.
F.S.
F/G
FAB.
FACP
FDC
FDN.
FHC
FIN.
FL
FLG.
FLUOR.
FP
FTG.
FURN.
G.I.
GA.
GALV.
GAR.
GFCI
GFI
GL
GLB
GM
GM
GRC
GYP.
GYP. BD.
H.B.
H.C.
H.M.
H/C
HDBD.
HDW
HGT.
HOR.
HTR
HVAC
HW
HYD.
I.C.
I.D.
I.F.
ID
IG
IMC
IMPG
INCL.
INSUL.
INT.
J-BOX
JCT
JT.
K-D
KD
KO
L.E.D.
L.FT.
LAM
LAT.
LAV
LD.
LIN.
LINO.
LT.
LTG.
LVL
M.B.
M.H.
M.I.
M.O.
MAR.
MAS.
MAT'L
MAX.
MECH.
MED.
MFG.
MFR.
MIN.
MISC.
MOD
MTL.
MUL
N.I.C.
N.T.S.
NCM
NFC
NLR.
NO.
NOM.
O.C.
O.D.
O.H.
O.I.
O.R.
OAI
OH
OPNG.
OPPO.
P.C.
P.L.
P.LAM.
P.O.C.
PERP. or
PH or Ø
PL.
PLAS.
PLUMB.
PLYWD.
PORC.
PERF.
PREFAB.
PSF
PSI
PTN.
PVC
PWR.
Q.T.
QTY.
R
R.D.L.
R.D.O.
R.O.
R.O.W. or R/W
REF
REF.
REINF.
REQ'D.
RET.
REV.
RM
RMV.
S.C.
S.D.
S.O.V.
S/L
S/S
SC
SCHED.
SECT.
SES
SH
SHT'G.
SIM.
SPA.
SPECS
SPKR.
SQ. FT.
SQ. IN.
STC
STD.
STL.
SUSP.
SW
SYM
SYS.
T & G
T.B.
T.M.B.
T.O.
T.O.B.
T.O.C.
T.O.F.
T.O.J.
T.O.M.
T.O.S.
T.O.W.
T.S.
T.V.
TEL.
TH.
THD.
THK.
THRU
TLT.
TRANS.
TYP.
UNF.
UR
V.B.
V.I.F.
VA
VERT.
WC
WDW
WCT
WP
WT.
W/
W/O
WD.
W.I.
YD.
AMPERES
ANCHOR BOLT
ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR
ABOVE FINISHED GRADE
AIR CONDITIONING
AGGREGATE BASE COURSE
ACRYLONITRILE-BUTADIENE-STYRENE
ABOVE
ASBESTOS-CEMENT BOARD
ACOUSTIC
ACOUSTICAL CEILING TILE
ADDITION or ADDENDUM
ABOVE GRADE
AIR HANDLER UNIT
ALUMINUM
ALTERNATE
ANNEALED
ASPHALT
AVERAGE
AMERICAN WIRE GAUGE
ANGLE
BENCH MARK
BOUNDARY NAILING
BOTTOM OF
BOTTOM OF FOOTING
BUILT UP
BACK OF CURB
BOARD
BUILDING
BLOCK
BLOCKING
BEAM
BRASS
BEARING
BRONZE
CONCRETE ASBESTOS PIPE
CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
CAST IN PLACE
CONTROL JOINT
CLEAN OUT
CERAMIC TILE
CABINET
CAMBER
CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION
CEMENT
CERAMIC
CUBIC FEET PER MINUTE
CHANNEL
CIRCUIT BREAKER
CENTERLINE
CEILING
CAULKING
CLOSET
CLEAR
CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT
CENTERED
COLUMN
COMBINATION
CONCRETE
CONSTRUCTION
CONTINUOUS
CONTRACTOR
COPPER
PENNY
DRINKING FOUNTAIN
DECOMPOSED GRANITE
DOWN SPOUT
DISHWASHER
DOUBLE
DEMOLITION
DIAMETER
DIAGONAL
DIMENSION
DEAD LOAD
DOWN
DOOR
EXPANSION ANCHOR
EXHAUST FAN
EXPANSION JOINT
END NAILING
EACH WAY
EACH
ELEVATION
"ELECTRIC, ELECTRICAL"
ELEVATOR
ELECTRICAL METALLIC CONDUIT
ELECTRICAL METALLIC TUBING
ELECTRICAL NON-METALLIC TUBING
EQUAL
EQUIPMENT
ESTIMATE
EVAPORATIVE COOLER
ELECTRIC DRINKING COOLER
EXCAVATE
EXHAUST
EXISTING
EXTERIOR
FIRE ALARM
FAN COIL
FLOOR CLEAN OUT
FLOOR DRAIN
FIRE EXTINGUISHER
FIELD NAILING
FACE OF
FLOOR SINK
FIBERGLASS
FABRICATE
FIRE ALARM CONTROL PANEL
FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION
FOUNDATION
FIRE HOSE CABINET
FINISH
FLOOR
FLOORING
FLUORESCENT
FIRE PROOF
FOOTING
FURNISH
GALVANIZED IRON
GAUGE
GALVANIZED
GARAGE
GROUND FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER
GROUND FAULT INTERRUPTER
GLASS
GLUE LAMINATED BEAM
GRADE MARK
GATE VALVE
GALVANIZED RIGID TUBING
GYPSUM
GYPSUM BOARD
HOSE BIBB
HOLLOW CORE
HOLLOW METAL
HANDICAPPED
HARDBOARD
HARDWARE
HEIGHT
HORIZONTAL
HEATER
HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING
HOT WATER
HYDRAULIC
INTERCOM OUTLET
INSIDE DIAMETER
INSIDE FACE
IDENTIFICATION
ISOLATED GROUND
INTERMEDIATE METALLIC CONDUIT
IMPREGNATED
INCLUDE, INCLUSIVE
INSULATION
INTERIOR
JUNCTION BOX
JUNCTION
JOINT
KNOCK DOWN
KILN DRIED
KNOCK OUT
LIGHT EMITTING DIODE
LINEAR FEET
LAMINATE
LATERAL
LAVATORY
LEAD
LINEAR
LINOLEUM
LIGHT
LIGHTING
LAMINATED VENEER LUMBER
MACHINE BOLT
MANHOLE
MALLEABLE IRON
MASONRY OPENING
MARBLE
MASONRY
MATERIAL
MAXIMUM
MECHANICAL
MEDIUM
MANUFACTURING
MANUFACTURER
MINIMUM
MISCELLANEOUS
MODULAR
METAL
MULLION
NOT IN CONTRACT
NOT TO SCALE
NON-CORROSIVE METAL
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
NAILER
NUMBER
NOMINAL
ON CENTER
OUTSIDE DIAMETER
OVER HANG
ORNAMENTAL IRON
OUTSIDE RADIUS
OUTSIDE AIR INTAKE
OVER HEAD
OPENING
OPPOSITE
PRECAST CONCRETE
PROPERTY LINE
PLASTIC LAMINATE
POINT OF CONNECTION
PERPENDICULAR
PHASE
PLASTER
PLATE
PLASTIC
PLUMBING
PLYWOOD
PORCELAIN
PERFORATED
PREFABRICATED
POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT
POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH
PARTITION
POLYVINYLCLORIDE
POWER
QUARRY TILE
QUANTITY
RADIUS
ROOF DRAIN LEADER
ROOF DRAIN OVERFLOW
ROUGH OPENING
RIGHT OF WAY
REFRIGERATOR
REFERENCE
REINFORCED
REQUIRED
RETURN
REVISION
ROOM
REMOVE
SOLID CORE
SMOKE DETECTOR
SHUT OFF VALVE
SKYLIGHT
STAINLESS STEEL
SELF CLOSING
SCHEDULE
SECTION
SERVICE ENTRANCE SECTION
SHEET
SHEATHING
SIMILAR
SPACE
SPECIFICATIONS
SPEAKER
SQUARE FEET
SQUARE INCHES
SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASS
STANDARD
STEEL
SUSPENDED
SWITCH
SYMMETRICAL
SYSTEM
TONGUE AND GROOVE
THROUGH BOLT
TELEPHONE MOUNTING BOARD
TOP OF
TOP OF BEAM
TOP OF CURB
TOP OF FOOTING
TOP OF JOIST
TOP OF MASONRY
TOP OF SLAB
TOP OF WALL
TUBE STEEL
TELEVISION OUTLET
TELEPHONE
THRESHOLD
THREADED
THICK
THROUGH
TOILET
TRANSFORMER
TYPICAL
UNFINISHED
URINAL
VAPOR BARRIER
VERIFY IN FIELD
VOLT AMPERE
VERTICAL
WATER CLOSET
WINDOW
WAINSCOT
WEATHER PROOF
WEIGHT
WITH
WITHOUT
WOOD
WROUGHT IRON
YARD
VCT VINYL COMPOSITION TILE
JOISTJST.
ALL CODES REFERENCED ARE TO BE USED AS
AMENDED BY THE STATE OF COLORADO AND
LOCAL JURISDICTION.
- 2021 ASPEN ENERGY CODE
- 2021 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE
- 2021 INTERNATION MECHANICAL CODE
- 2021 INTERNATIONAL PLUMBING CODE
- 2021 INTERNATIONAL FUEL & GAS CODE
- 2021 IECC (INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE)
- 2023 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE
FINISH WOOD
WOOD STUD
BLOCKING
STEEL
STEEL STUD
FRAMED WALL
BATT INSULATION
PLYWOOD
CONCRETE
STONE
CMU
SAND
GRAVEL
GWB
COMPACTED SOIL
SPRAY-FOAM INSULATION
RIGID INSULATION
GRID LINE
BREAK LINE
MATCH LINE
REVISION
A-701
ELEVATION MARKER
SECTION MARKER
DETAIL CUT
DETAIL
1
A-501
ELEVATION
D01
W01
ROOM NAME
101
INTERIOR ELEVATION MARKER
ELEVATION NUMBER
SHEET NUMBER
SECTION NUMBER
SHEET NUMBER
DETAIL NUMBER
SHEET NUMBER
SHEET NUMBER
ELEVATION NUMBER
SPOT ELEVATION
DOOR MARK
WINDOW MARK
ROOM NAME AND NUMBER
1
A-301
1
A-201
11
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA 2,987 SQ FT
ALLOWABLE DECK (15% OF MAX FLOOR AREA): 448 SQ FT
FRONT SETBACK: 10'-0"
SIDE SETBACKS: COMBINED 15'-0"
REAR SETBACK: 5'-0" GARAGE, 10'-0" LIVING
MAXIMUM HEIGHT (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE): 25'-0"
500 WEST FRANCIS STREET
ASPEN, CO 81611
PARCEL ID: 273512410010
500 WEST FRANCIS STREET
LAND USE APPROVALS
86
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.1.01
4/10/26
EXISTING SITE
PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/257904
79037902
79017903 7902790
2
GRAVELPROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINEALLEYLOT 2
LOT 1
WEST FRANCIS STREETEDGE OF PAVEMENTNORTH FOURTH STREETEDGE OF PAVEMENT
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPED
ROOF
9" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"FLAT
ROOF
1/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF3" : 12"9
4
8
7
5 6
1
2
3
SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"
N
3/16" = 1'-0"
87
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.1.02
4/10/26
PROPOSED
SITE PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25GRAVELPROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINEPATIO
PATIO
NEW WALKWAY
(3'-0" WIDE BRUSHED CONCRETE)RAISED PLANTERSALLEYWINDOW
WELL HP1 HP2 HP3
LOT 2
LOT 1
WEST FRANCIS STREETEDGE OF PAVEMENTNORTH FOURTH STREETEDGE OF PAVEMENT
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPED
ROOF
9" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"FLAT
ROOF
1/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"1
2
3
NT 2NT 1 NT 3SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"
SKYLIGHT
OVER LINK FLATROOF1/4" : 12"LIGHTWELL
N
3/16" = 1'-0"
88
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.1.04
4/10/26
EXISTING FLOOR
AREA
CALCULATIONS
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
72 sq ft 72 sq ft55 sq ft 55 sq ft
22 sq ft 16 sq ft
1 32 4
W01D01 D02
W02
W06 W05W04HD4 W03HW2 HW3 HW4
HD2
HW9HD1 HW7HW6HW5D03W07W08PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINEHW1HW8
UNIT 1
1,023 sq ft
UNIT 2
843 sq ft
6 sq ft
STAIR
43 sq ft
DECK
82 sq ft
PATIO
(EXEMPT)
41 sq ft
EXT. STORAGE
(TO BE
REMOVED)PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINESETBACK LINE112 sq ft
DECK
30
sq ft 32 sq ft
STAIR
OPENING
HW21
HW13 H14
HW10 HW15HW16HD3W09
HW17HW18HW11 PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINEHW22
UNIT 1
882 sq ft
UNIT 2
205 sq ft
BELOW 30"27 sq ft
STAIR OPENING
13 sq ftSTAIR
BELOW 30"
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"SLOPEDROOF3" : 12"SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
SLOPED
ROOF
SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED FAR ELEVATIONS
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 EXISTING MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA PLAN
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING LOWER LEVEL FLOOR AREA PLAN
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"4 EXISTING UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA PLAN
89
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.1.05
4/10/26
PROPOSED
FLOOR AREA
CALCULATIONS
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
D31HD2HD1HW1D30
NW5
ND2W06 W05W04HD4W07D03HW9
D34
ND5
NW7 NW6NW8
NW1 NW2ND1 D32NW3NW4
HW7HW6HW5ND3
ND4 PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINEUP
HW2 HW3 HW4
HW8
486 sq ft
(-250 =236
236/2 = 118 sq ft)
1,199 sq ft
43 sq ft
DECK
82 sq ft
PATIO
(EXEMPT)414 sq ft
970 sq ft 24 sq ft
371 sq ft
536 sq ft
3 sq ft 2 sq ft
0 sq ft
278 sq ft
10 sq ft
69 sq ft
69 sq ft 133 sq ft
133 sq ft 71 sq ft
71 sq ft 133 sq ft
133 sq ft
500 sq ft
392 sq ft
29 sq ft
32'-1 5/8"
82'-8"
42'-7 3/8"
3"
2
4
1
5
6 7 8
9 10 1211
3
72 sq ft
12345678910
11
12
13
14
15
16
W12 D17W11
W15W14D16
D12
D14
D23D21
D25 D22D24
D19D15NDD26D11
D26
D10
W10
D21
ND D19142'-11"2
82'-8"342'-7 3/8"4
32'-1 5/8"
6
29'-3 1/4"
8
20'-5 1/8"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
LIGHTWELL SETBACK LINESETBACK LINESETBACK LINE9
10
11
12
3,712 sq ft
53"71 7/8"DECK
30
sq ft
HW21
HW17HW18
HW13 HW14
HW10HW11 D40D42D44
HW22
W09
D43 D41 HW15HW161'-1 7/8"SETBACK1'-6"1'-6"PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINE847 sq ft
UNIT 2
205 sq ft
BELOW 30"57 sq ft
STAIR
OPENING
BELOW 30"
13 sq ft
STAIR
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"
NOTE: 30" AREA CHANGE DUE TO PROPOSED UNDER-
RAMING REQUIRED FOR ENERGY CODE
NOTE: 30" AREA CHANGE DUE TO PROPOSED UNDER-
RAMING REQUIRED FOR ENERGY CODE
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"FLATROOF1/4" : 12"SKYLIGHT
OVER LINK
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA PLAN
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED FAR ELEVATIONS
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL FLOOR AREA PLAN
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"4 PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA PLAN
90
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.1.06
4/10/26
EXISTING
GROSS FLOOR
AREA
CALCULATIONS
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
W01D01 D02
W02
W06 W05W04HD4 W03HW2 HW3 HW4
HD2
HW9HD1 HW7HW6HW5D03W07W08PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINEUPUPHW1
HW8
UNIT 1
1,043 sq ft UNIT 2
857 sq ft
112 sq ft PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINESETBACK LINEMECH ROOM
CRAWLSPACE
CRAWLSPACE
HW21
HW13 H14
HW10 HW15HW16HD3W09
HW17HW18HW11 PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINEDN
DN
HW22
225 sq ftUNIT 1
968 sq ft SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"SLOPEDROOF3" : 12"SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
SLOPED
ROOF
SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 EXISTING MAIN LEVEL GROSS AREA
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING LOWER LEVEL GROSS AREA
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"4 EXISTING UPPER LEVEL GROSS AREA
EXISTING GROSS FLOOR AREA SUMMARY
EXISTING LOWER LEVEL GROSS FLOOR AREA = 112 sq ft
EXISTING MAIN LEVEL GROSS FLOOR AREA = 1,900 sq ft
EXISTING UPPER LEVEL GROSS FLOOR AREA = 1,193 sq ft
________________________________________________________
TOTAL EXISTING GROSS FLOOR AREA = 3,205 sq ft
91
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.1.07
4/10/26
PROPOSED
GROSS FLOOR
AREA
CALCULATIONS
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
HD2HD1HW1 NW5
ND2W06 W05W04HD4W07D03HW9
ND5
NW7 NW6NW8
NW1 NW2ND1 D32NW3NW4
HW7HW6HW5ND3
ND4 PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINEHW2 HW3 HW4
HW8
1,726 sq ft
422 sq ft
W12 D17W11
W15W14W10 PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
LIGHTWELL SETBACK LINESETBACK LINESETBACK LINE3,712 sq ft
HW21
HW17HW18
HW13 HW14
HW10HW11 D40D42D44
HW22
W09
D43 D41 HW15HW16PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINE968 sq ft
225 sq ft
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL GROSS AREA
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL GROSS AREA
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL GROSS AREA
PROPOSED GROSS FLOOR AREA SUMMARY
PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL GROSS FLOOR AREA = 3,712 sq ft
PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL GROSS FLOOR AREA = 2,148 sq ft
PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL GROSS FLOOR AREA = 1,193 sq ft
__________________________________________________________
PROPOSED EXISTING GROSS FLOOR AREA = 7,053 sq ft
92
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.1.15
4/10/26
TREE
REMOVAL
PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25GRAVELPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
WEST FRANCIS STREETEDGE OF PAVEMENTALLEYTREE PROTECTION & DRIPLINE EXCAVATION NOTES
1. ALL EXISTING TREES IDENTIFIED AS TO BE REMOVED WILL BE FULLY MITIGATED PER CITY OF ASPEN CODE AND REVIEW
2. CODE-SIZED TREES ARE TO REMAIN UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THIS PLAN
3. CONTACT THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND THE CITY FORESTER PRIOR TO ANY TREES REQUIRING REMOVAL DUE TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY THAT HAVE BEEN
DESIGNATED "TO REMAIN".
4. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DOCUMENT IS ON FILE AT ASPEN PARKS DEPARTMENT AND MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT THE PROJECT SITE.
5. ENGAGE A CERTIFIED ARBORIST TO ROOT PRUNE ANY TREE TO REMAIN THAT WILL HAVE EXCAVATION WORK WITHIN THE TREE'S DRIP LINE. ROOT PRUNING IS TO BE PER
THE CITY OF ASPEN'S STANDARDS AND THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR TEMPORARY TREE PROTECTION.
6. ALL EXCAVATION WITHIN THE DRIP LINE WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE VERTICAL EXCAVATION ONLY WITH NO OVER-DIGGING. EXCAVATIONS WILL BE SOIL STABILIZED IN A
MANNER THAT PREVENTS OVER EXCAVATION OF THE SITE.
7. ALL ROOTS SHALL BE CUT PRIOR TO FULL EXCAVATION USING A CLEAN, SHARP PRUNING SAW. ALL ROOTS WILL BE CUT FLUSH WITH THE EXPOSED SOIL LINE.
8. SIX INCHES OF MULCH ARE REQUIRED TO BE PLACED WITHIN THE ZONE OF VEGETATION PROTECTION. THE MULCH SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT A
LEVEL OF 6" DURING THE ENTIRE PROJECT.
9. IRRIGATION OF TREES IS REQUIRED THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE PROJECT. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE TREES ARE IRRIGATED AT A RATE
WHICH IS APPROPRIATE FOR PROPER HEALTH. CONSULT WITH CITY FORESTER OR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR WATERING SCHEDULE RECOMMENDATIONS. ADDITIONAL
WATERING WILL TAKE PLACE ALONG THE EDGE OF THE ROOT CUTTINGS. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE REQUIRED TO PLACE A BURLAP PROTECTION COVER OVER THE CUT
ROOTS. THE CONTRACTOR WILL IRRIGATION THE BURLAP WITH AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF WATER IN ORDER TO KEEP THE BURLAP MOIST.
10. ALL REMAINING TREES ON SITE TO BE MONITORED FOR INSECT, FERTILIZATION, WATERING AND OVERALL HEALTH AND VIGOR WHILE BUILDING IS UNDER
CONSTRUCTION BY A CERTIFIED ARBORIST. FOLLOW A WATERING SCHEDULE FOR ALL EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN AS RECOMMENDED BY ARBORIST. SOURCE OF WATER
PER CONTRACTOR BUT ENSURE ARBORIST RECOMMENDATIONS ARE IMPLEMENTED.
11. THERE WILL NO STORAGE OF MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT, OR ACTIVITY ALLOWED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION FENCING.
12. FOR PROTECTED WALKWAYS FOR FOOT TRAFFIC, GENERAL CONTRACTOR IS TO LAY DOWN 6" MULCH WITH 3/4" PLYWOOD OVER FOR TREE PROTECTION.
13. FOR PROTECTED WALKWAYS FOR MACHINERY & STAGING TRAFFIC, GENERAL CONTRACTOR IS TO LAY DOWN 6" BASE, 3/4" PLYWOOD, AND 6' MULCH FOR TREE
PROTECTION.
GENERAL NOTES
THIS PLAN SHOWS BOTH EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR CLARITY OF EXISTING SITE AND
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTIONS ACTIVITIES RELATED TO TREES.
NORTH FOURTH STREET SETBACK LINESETBACK LINE9
4
8
7
5 6
1
2
3
= DECIDUOUS TREES
= CONIFEROUS TREES
= EXISTING FENCE
= TREE PROTECTION FENCE
= DECIDUOUS TREE TO BE REMOVED
= CONIFEROUS TREE TO BE REMOVED
= TREE PROTECTION AREA
= EXISTING RESIDENCE FOORPRINT
= PROTECTED WALKWAY (FOOT PATH)
= PROTECTED WALKWAY (MACHINERY)
SEE TREE PROTECTION & DRIPLINE EXCAVATION NOTE 12
SEE TREE PROTECTION & DRIPLINE EXCAVATION NOTE 13
KEY
N
1/4" = 1'-0"
CITY OF ASPEN – TREE REMOVAL / DRIPLINE EXCAVATION SPECIFICATION SHEET
• A construction fence must be erected along the entire dripline of all trees on site and any tree canopy from neighboring prop erty.
This will serve as the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ). This fence is to be constructed in such a manner that the area inside th e
dripline is protected and must remain in place until final landscape improvements are made. AN INSPECTION OF THIS FENCE
MUST BE PERFORMED BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION OR DEMOLITION ACTIVITIES BEGIN. PLEASE ARRANGE THIS INSPECTION
WITH IAN GRAY, CITY FORESTER, AT 429-2031.
• No materials may be stored in the TPZ, including but not limited to, construction backfill, construction traffic, or any other
construction materials.
• No excavation, grading or trenching may occur within the TPZ without the consent of the City of Aspen Forester or his designee.
• No parking of vehicles or equipment and No dumping of any waste products may occur in the TPZ.
• Any roots cut during excavation shall be pruned with sharp loppers/pruners back to the soil line. The roots will further be
protected by burlap draped over the side of the excavation covering the exposed roots. This burlap shall be kept moist until the
excavation is backfilled.
• Site inspections shall be performed on a weekly basis, to ensure the above listed conditions are met.
• Any unapproved improvements or activities outside of those approved within this permit will be subject to mitigation in the f orm
of restoration.
• This permit must be posted on site during the construction process.
Drip Line Protection - City Code 13.20.020 (b)(2)(3): Recommended Trunk Protection System:
Irrigation Installation Guidelines
The design and layout of new irrigation systems shall follow the requirements of the City of Aspen Water Efficient Landscape Standards.
Wherever possible, new irrigation lines shall be installed outside of the driplines of existing trees. Mechanical trenching for new irrigation
installation shall not be used within the driplines of existing trees. This shall be restricted to hand digging in consultation with the City Forester.
Roots over 2” inches in diameter shall not be cut unless absolutely necessary upon approval from the City Forester. Trenches shall not exceed
6” inches in width. The minimum depth for main lines shall be 18” inches and 12” inches for laterals. Separate irrigation zon es for trees with
drip, bubbler or soaker-style delivery is recommended so quantities and rates may be appropriately controlled.
All trees adjacent to this construction project must receive supplemental watering on an as needed basis
depending on soil conditions and precipitation. The following chart may be used a guideline:
Tree Size Class Small Trees - x1 Weekly
10 gal/Inch
Medium Trees - x3 per Month
10 gal/inch
Large Trees - x2 per Month
15 gal/inch
Tree Trunk Diameter 1” 2” 3” 4” 6” 8” 10” 12”
14”
Deep Root Fork
2 gal/min
5 10 15
minutes
20 30 40
minutes
75 90
105
minutes
Deep Root Needle
2 gal/min
5 10 15
minutes
20 30 40
minutes
75 90
105
minutes
Soft Spray Wand
4 gal/min
3 5 8
minutes
10 15 20
minutes
38 45
53
minutes
Soaker Hose
2 gal/min
5 10 15
minutes
20 30 40
minutes
75 90
105
minutes
93
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.2.01
4/10/26
EXISTING
LOWER LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINESETBACK LINENORTHSOUTHEAST
WEST
NORTHSOUTH10
10
9
9
13
13
6
6
B
2
2
3
3
C
D
GG
I
12
12
A
F
H
J
8
8
E
7
7
4
4
5
5
11
11
1
1 #DrgID#LayID#DrgID#LayID2A.4.012A.4.011A.4.021A.4.022A.4.022A.4.021A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.041A.4.041A.4.041A.4.04#DrgID
#LayID
#DrgID
#LayID
2
A.4.05
2
A.4.05
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.23
1
A.4.23
MECH ROOM
CRAWLSPACE
CRAWLSPACE
N
1/4" = 1'-0"
94
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.2.02
4/10/26
EXISTING
MAIN LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
W01D01 D02
W02
W06 W05W04HD4 W03HW2 HW3
HW4
HD2
HW9HD1 HW7HW6HW5D03W07W08RE
W DR
RGFNORTHSOUTHEAST
WEST
NORTHSOUTHPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
ALLEYSETBACK LINESETBACK LINEUPUPHW1
HW8
10
10
9
9
13
13
6
6
B
2
2
3
3
C
D
GG
I
12
12
A
F
H
J
8
8
E
7
7
4
4
5
5
11
11
1
1 #DrgID#LayID#DrgID#LayID2A.4.012A.4.011A.4.021A.4.022A.4.022A.4.021A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.041A.4.041A.4.041A.4.04#DrgID
#LayID
#DrgID
#LayID
2
A.4.05
2
A.4.05
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.23
1
A.4.23
N
1/4" = 1'-0"
95
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.2.03
4/10/26
EXISTING
UPPER LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
HW21
HW13 H14
HW10 HW15HW16HD3W09
HW17HW18HW11 NORTHSOUTHEAST
WEST
NORTHSOUTHPROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINEDN
DN
10
10
9
9
13
13
6
6
B
2
2
3
3
C
D
GG
I
12
12
A
F
H
J
8
8
E
7
7
4
4
5
5
11
11
1
1 #DrgID#LayID#DrgID#LayID2A.4.012A.4.011A.4.021A.4.022A.4.022A.4.021A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.041A.4.041A.4.041A.4.04#DrgID
#LayID
#DrgID
#LayID
2
A.4.05
2
A.4.05
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.23
1
A.4.23
HW22
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"SLOPEDROOF3" : 12"SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
SLOPED
ROOF
SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"
N
1/4" = 1'-0"
96
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.2.04
4/10/26
EXISTING
ROOF LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25NORTHSOUTH
EAST
WEST
NORTHSOUTHPROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINELOT 2
10
10
9
9
13
13
6
6
B
2
2
3
3
C
D
GG
I
12
12
A
F
H
J
8
8
E
7
7
4
4
5
5
11
11
1
1 #DrgID#LayID#DrgID#LayID2A.4.012A.4.011A.4.021A.4.022A.4.022A.4.021A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.041A.4.041A.4.041A.4.04#DrgID
#LayID
#DrgID
#LayID
2
A.4.05
2
A.4.05
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.23
1
A.4.23
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPED
ROOF
9" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"FLAT
ROOF
1/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF3" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"
N
1/4" = 1'-0"
97
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.2.05
4/10/26
LOWER LEVEL
DEMOLITION
PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINESETBACK LINENORTHSOUTHEAST
WEST
NORTHSOUTH10
10
9
9
13
13
6
6
B
2
2
3
3
C
D
GG
I
12
12
A
F
H
J
8
8
E
7
7
4
4
5
5
11
11
1
1 #DrgID#LayID#DrgID#LayID2A.4.012A.4.011A.4.021A.4.022A.4.022A.4.021A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.041A.4.041A.4.041A.4.04#DrgID
#LayID
#DrgID
#LayID
2
A.4.05
2
A.4.05
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.23
1
A.4.23
MECH ROOM
CRAWLSPACE
CRAWLSPACE
N
1/4" = 1'-0"
98
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.2.06
4/10/26
MAIN LEVEL
DEMOLITION
PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
W01D01 D02
W02
W06 W05W04HD4 W03HW2 HW3
HW4
HD2
HW9HD1 HW7HW6HW5D03W07W08429 sq ft
NON-HISTORIC
AREA TO BE
REMOVED PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
ALLEYSETBACK LINESETBACK LINEUPUPHW1
HW8
10
10
9
9
13
13
6
6
B
2
2
3
3
C
D
GG
I
12
12
A
F
H
J
8
8
E
7
7
4
4
5
5
11
11
1
1 N
1/4" = 1'-0"
99
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.2.07
4/10/26
UPPER LEVEL
DEMOLITION
PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
HW21
HW13 H14
HW10 HW15HW16HD3W09
HW17HW18HW11 PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINEDN
DN
10
10
9
9
13
13
6
6
B
2
2
3
3
C
D
GG
I
12
12
A
F
H
J
8
8
E
7
7
4
4
5
5
11
11
1
1
HW22
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"SLOPEDROOF3" : 12"SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
SLOPED
ROOF
SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"
N
1/4" = 1'-0"
100
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.2.08
4/10/26
PROPOSED
LOWER LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
12345678910
11
12
13
14
15
16
W12 D17W11
W15W14D16
D12
D14
D23D21
D25 D22D24
D19D15NDD26D11
D26
D10
W10
D21
ND D19W/D W/D PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
MECHANICAL RM
LAUNDRY
BUNK ROOM
LIGHTWELLCLOSET
CLOSET
MECHANICAL RM
CLOSET
CLOSET
TV
TV
MORNING BAR
LINENSAUNA
STEAM
FP
FAMILY ROOM
THEATER OR MEDIA ROOM
LIGHTWELL
WINE
ROOMELECTRICAL AV / RMSETBACK LINESETBACK LINESETBACK LINEUP
CLOSETDRESSER
TV
NORTHSOUTHEAST
WEST
NORTHSOUTH10
10
9
9
13
13
6
6
B
2
2
3
3
C
D
GG
I
A
F
8
8
E
7
7
4
4
5
5
KK
1
1
9.5
9.5
12
12
11
11
0
0
F.1
F.2
G.1#DrgID#LayID#DrgID#LayID2A.4.012A.4.011A.4.021A.4.022A.4.022A.4.021A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.041A.4.041A.4.041A.4.04#DrgID
#LayID
#DrgID
#LayID
2
A.4.05
2
A.4.05
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.23
1
A.4.23
BEDROOM 3
BEDROOM 2
BEDROOM 1
SPA / GYM
BATH 1
BUNK BATH
BATH 2
GYM BATH
BATH 3
N
1/4" = 1'-0"
101
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.2.09
4/10/26
PROPOSED
MAIN LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
MILLWORK
CLOSET D31DWDW
HD2HD1HW1D30
NW5
ND2W06 W05W04HD4W07D03HW9
D34
ND5
NW7 NW6NW8
NW1 NW2ND1 D32NW3NW4
HW7HW6HW5ND3
ND4 NORTHSOUTHEAST
WEST
NORTHSOUTHGUARDRAIL
PANTRY
DINING
WC BUTLER'S
PANTRY
ART WALLPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
GARAGE
ENTRY
ALLEYSETBACK LINESETBACK LINEPATIO
PATIO
UPDN TRASHTRASHWINDOW
WELL
MUDROOM
LINKUP
ELEC.ELEC.LIVING
SITTING
HW2 HW3
HW4
HW8
FRZ
BUILT-IN
DBL.WALL
OVEN
REF
BROOM
HP3HP1HP2
10
10
9
9
13
13
6
6
B
2
2
3
3
C
D
GG
I
A
F
8
8
E
7
7
4
4
5
5
KK
1
1
9.5
9.5
12
12
11
11
0
0
F.1
F.2
G.1#DrgID#LayID#DrgID#LayID2A.4.012A.4.011A.4.021A.4.022A.4.022A.4.021A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.041A.4.041A.4.041A.4.04#DrgID
#LayID
#DrgID
#LayID
2
A.4.05
2
A.4.05
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.23
1
A.4.23
KITCHEN
LINEAR GAS FIREPLACE
LIGHTWELL
TR RAISED PLANTERSN
1/4" = 1'-0"
102
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.2.10
4/10/26
PROPOSED
UPPER LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
HW21
HW17HW18
HW13 HW14
HW10HW11 D40D42D44
HW22
W09
D43 D41 HW15HW16NORTHSOUTHEAST
WEST
NORTHSOUTH1'-1 7/8"
SETBACK1'-6"1'-6"PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
BUILD IN STORAGE IN
THIS SPACE- DRAWERS
BUILD IN STORAGE IN
THIS SPACE- DRAWERS
FIGURE
HANGING
TV
BEDROOM 1
W.I.C.PRIMARY
BEDROOM
PRIMARY BATHOFFICE
BATH 1
BALCONYGUEST
BEDROOM
SETBACK LINESETBACK LINEDN
10
10
9
9
13
13
6
6
B
2
2
3
3
C
D
GG
I
A
F
8
8
E
7
7
4
4
5
5
KK
1
1
9.5
9.5
12
12
11
11
0
0
F.1
F.2
G.1#DrgID#LayID#DrgID#LayID2A.4.012A.4.011A.4.021A.4.022A.4.022A.4.021A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.041A.4.041A.4.041A.4.04#DrgID
#LayID
#DrgID
#LayID
2
A.4.05
2
A.4.05
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.23
1
A.4.23
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"FLATROOF1/4" : 12"SKYLIGHT
OVER LINK
LIGHTWELL
N
1/4" = 1'-0"
103
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.2.11
4/10/26
PROPOSED
ROOF LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25NORTHSOUTH
EAST
WEST
NORTHSOUTHPROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
SETBACK LINELOT 2
10
10
9
9
13
13
6
6
B
2
2
3
3
C
D
GG
I
A
F
8
8
E
7
7
4
4
5
5
KK
1
1
9.5
9.5
12
12
11
11
0
0
F.1
F.2
G.1#DrgID#LayID#DrgID#LayID2A.4.012A.4.011A.4.021A.4.022A.4.022A.4.021A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.041A.4.041A.4.041A.4.04#DrgID
#LayID
#DrgID
#LayID
2
A.4.05
2
A.4.05
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
2
A.4.06
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.21
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.22
1
A.4.23
1
A.4.23
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPED
ROOF
9" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12" : 12"FLAT
ROOF
1/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
12" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
3 3/4" : 12"
SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPEDROOF12":12"SLOPED
ROOF
8" : 12"
SKYLIGHT
OVER LINK FLATROOF1/4" : 12"LIGHTWELL
N
1/4" = 1'-0"
104
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.3.01
4/10/26
EXISTING
SOUTH
ELEVATION
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
D C BEF AJIHG
T.O. HISTORIC MAIN LEVEL PLY
100'-0"
T.O. HISTORIC UPPER LEVEL PLY
110'-9"
T.O. HISTORIC BASEMENT "SLAB"
±91 3 7/8"
T.O. HISTORIC BASEMENT "SLAB"
±91 3 7/8"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION
105
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.3.02
4/10/26
EXISTING
WEST
ELEVATION
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
LINE INDICATES MOST RESTRICTIVE GRADE AT 30" OFFSET
T.O. HISTORIC MAIN LEVEL PLY
100'-0"
T.O. HISTORIC UPPER LEVEL PLY
110'-9"
T.O. HISTORIC BASEMENT "SLAB"
±91 3 7/8"
T.O. HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. CARRIAGE HOUSE LOFT PLY
104'-3 3/8"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING WEST ELEVATION
106
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.3.03
4/10/26
EXISTING
NORTH
ELEVATION
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
A B C D E F G H I J
T.O. HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. CARRIAGE HOUSE LOFT PLY
104'-3 3/8"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION
107
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.3.04
4/10/26
EXISTING EAST
ELEVATION
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
T.O. HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. CARRIAGE HOUSE LOFT PLY
104'-3 3/8"
T.O. HISTORIC MAIN LEVEL PLY
100'-0"
T.O. HISTORIC UPPER LEVEL PLY
110'-9"
T.O. HISTORIC BASEMENT "SLAB"
±91 3 7/8"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING EAST ELEVATION
108
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.3.05
4/10/26
EXISTING
SOUTH
ELEVATION
(CARRIAGE
HOUSE)
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
F AJHG
T.O. HISTORIC BASEMENT "SLAB"
±91 3 7/8"
T.O. HISTORIC BASEMENT "SLAB"
±91 3 7/8"
T.O. HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. CARRIAGE HOUSE LOFT PLY
104'-3 3/8"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION (CARRIAGE HOUSE)
109
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.3.06
4/10/26
EXISTING
NORTH
ELEVATION
(PRIMARY
RESOURCE)
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
B C D E G I
T.O. HISTORIC BASEMENT "SLAB"
±91 3 7/8"
T.O. HISTORIC BASEMENT "SLAB"
±91 3 7/8"
T.O. HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE PLY
96'-7"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION (PRIMARY RESOURCE)
110
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.3.07
4/10/26
PROPOSED
SOUTH
ELEVATION
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
D C BEF AKIGF.1G.1 F.2
HW11
HW1
HW12
HD1
HD1
T.O. HISTORIC MAIN LEVEL PLY
100'-0"
T.O. PROPOSED BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
T.O. HISTORIC UPPER LEVEL PLY
110'-9"
T.O. HISTORIC
MAIN LEVEL PLY
100'-0"
T.O. PROPOSED
BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
T.O. HISTORIC
UPPER LEVEL PLY
110'-9"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION
111
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.3.08
4/10/26
PROPOSED
WEST
ELEVATION
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
13 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 19.51211 0
LINE INDICATES MOST RESTRICTIVE GRADE AT 30" OFFSET
HW2
HW13HW14
HW3
HW4
HW22
NW5
T.O. HISTORIC MAIN LEVEL PLY
100'-0"
T.O. PROPOSED BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
T.O. HISTORIC UPPER LEVEL PLY
110'-9"
T.O. HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. CARRIAGE HOUSE LOFT PLY
104'-3 3/8"
T.O. PROPOSED BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION
112
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.3.09
4/10/26
PROPOSED
NORTH
ELEVATION
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
A B C D E F G I KF.1 F.2 G.1
W05 W04
ND2
HW6
HW5
T.O. PROPOSED BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
T.O. HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. CARRIAGE HOUSE LOFT PLY
104'-3 3/8"
T.O. CARRIAGE
HOUSE LOFT PLY
104'-3 3/8"
T.O. HISTORIC
CARRIAGE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. PROPOSED
BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION
113
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.3.10
4/10/26
PROPOSED
EAST
ELEVATION
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 139.5 11 120
HW8
HW17HW18HW21
HW10
HW19
HW9
HD4W06
W09
HD2
T.O. HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. CARRIAGE HOUSE LOFT PLY
104'-3 3/8"
T.O. HISTORIC MAIN LEVEL PLY
100'-0"
T.O. HISTORIC UPPER LEVEL PLY
110'-9"
T.O. PROPOSED BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
T.O. PROPOSED BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION
114
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.3.11
4/10/26
PROPOSED
SOUTH
ELEVATION
(CARRIAGE
HOUSE)
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
F AKGF.1G.1 F.2
W07 D03
NW3NW4
T.O. HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. CARRIAGE HOUSE LOFT PLY
104'-3 3/8"
T.O. CARRIAGE
HOUSE LOFT PLY
104'-3 3/8"
T.O. HISTORIC
CARRIAGE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. PROPOSED BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
T.O. PROPOSED
BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION (CARRIAGE HOUSE)
115
ISSUE
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.3.12
4/10/26
PROPOSED
NORTH
ELEVATION
(PRIMARY
RESOURCE)
DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 2735124100105/31/25
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
B C D E G I KF.1 F.2 G.1
HW16 HW15
HW5
HW6HW7
T.O. HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. HISTORIC
CARRIAGE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. PROPOSED BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
T.O. PROPOSED
BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION (PRIMARY RESOURCE)
116
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.4.13
4/10/26
PROPOSED
BUILDING
SECTION 6
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
K F AGF.1F.2G.1
19'-3 1/8"
1'-5 5/8"
1'-3"
6'-0"
LINKING
ELEMENT
15'-11 1/8"5'-0"
BETWEEN
DETACHED
BUILDINGS
LIGHT-
WELL
T.O. GARAGE SLAB
96'-3 1/4"
T.O. HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. CARRIAGE HOUSE LOFT PLY
104'-3 3/8"
T.O. PROPOSED BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
T.O. PROPOSED
BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTION 6
117
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
HP APPLICATION SET
REVISED HP APP. SET
REVISED HP APP. SET500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.4.19
4/10/26
PROPOSED
BUILDING
SECTION 12
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22524/10/26
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
11/29/25
2/18/25
4/10/25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 139.5 11 120
12'-1 5/8"
LINKING ELEMENT
LIGHTWELL
T.O. PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLY
99'-3"T.O. HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE PLY
96'-7"
T.O. CARRIAGE HOUSE LOFT PLY
104'-3 3/8"
T.O. HISTORIC MAIN LEVEL PLY
100'-0"
T.O. HISTORIC UPPER LEVEL PLY
110'-9"
T.O. PROPOSED BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
T.O. PROPOSED BASEMENT SLAB
83'-7 1/2"
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTION 12
118
119
Account: R020783
Parcel: 273512410010
Property Address: 500 W FRANCIS ST, ASPEN, CO
81611
Legal Description Subdivision: QUARK
CONDO Unit: 1
Property Type: DUPLEX CONDO
Acres: 0
Land SqFt: 0
Tax Area: 001
Mill Levy: 32.875
Subdivision: QUARK CONDO
Neighborhood: NORTH WEST END
Super Neighborhood: CITY OF ASPEN
4,800
800.0
Legend
1:
WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere
Feet0800.0400.00
Notes
500 W FRANCIS VICINITY MAP
Recreation Point
Trailhead
Camping
Backcountry Hut
Climbing
Point of Interest
River Feature
Athletic Field
Skate Park
Playground
Community Garden
Parking
Ski Lift
Trail
Trail
Path - Paved
Path - Unpaved
Recreational Road
Road
State Highway
Primary Road
Secondary Road
Service Road
Rivers and Creeks
Continuous
Intermittent
River, Lake or Pond
Parcel Boundary
Open Space
Open Space
Park
Nature Preserve 120
Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius
Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web
site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to
ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic
system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. The
information maintained by the County may not be complete as to
mineral estate ownership and that information should be
determined by separate legal and property analysis.
Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning
the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this
site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and
reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the
user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and
liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or
data obtained on this web site.
This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be
printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to
page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the
margins such that they no longer line up on the labels
sheet. Print actual size.
From Parcel: 273512410010 on 02/19/2026
Instructions:
Disclaimer:
http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com
121
318 FOURTH STREET LTD
HOUSTON, TX 77027
3433 WESTHEIMER RD #906
413 SMUGGLER LLC
LA JOLLA, CA 92037
2105 PASEO DORADO
430 WEST HALLAM LLC
BAL HARBOUR, FL 33154
256 BAL BAY DR
437 W SMUGGLER LLC
NEW YORK, NY 10022
510 MADISON AVE 18TH FL
504 WEST HALLAM LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
504 W HALLAM
513 SMUGGLER LLC
HONOLULU, HI 96814
1288 ALA MOANA BLVD #208
529 W FRANCIS LLC
WILMINGTON, DE 19809
200 BELLEVUE PKWY #525
533 W FRANCIS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
533 W FRANCIS ST
ADELMAN CAROL C TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
501 W SMUGGLER ST
ADELMAN KENNETH L TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
501 W SMUGGLER ST
ADLEY INVESTMENTS LLC
MIDLAND, TX 79702
PO BOX 2412
AGGER DAVID ALDEN REV TRUST
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94126
PO BOX 2129
AJAX FOMO LLC
HOUSTON, TX 77056
5151 SAN FELIPE ST #2000
ALTIERI FAMILY TRUST
NAPLES , FL 34102
380 10TH ST S #101
BLAICH JANET S TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
319 N FOURTH ST #A
BLAICH ROBERT I FAM TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
319 N FOURTH ST #A
BLUE MAGPIE LLC
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 1268
CLARKS ADDITION CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
317 N FOURTH ST
DEXTER WEST LLC
WASHINGTON, DC 20007
4725 DEXTER ST NW
EGGLESTON ROBERT H JR & TRACY H
ASPEN, CO 81611
434 W HALLAM
FINKLE MARITAL TRST
ASPEN, CO 81611
433 W SMUGGLER ST
FINKLE MARITAL TRST GST
ASPEN, CO 81611
433 W SMUGGLER ST
FRANCIS ASPEN INVESTMENTS LLC
DALLAS, TX 75219
4020 MAPLE AVE #525
JAX FAMILY LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
523 W SMUGGLER ST
LARNER GLEN & TRACY L
HOUSTON, TX 77027
3737 ELLA LEE LN
MAGGOS LAURA P
ASPEN, CO 81611
317 N 4TH ST
MCNANIE FAMILY TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
503 N 4TH ST
MD ASPEN HOLDINGS LLC
BETHESDA, MD 20814
4960 FAIRMONT AVE PH3
MONT MAISON LLC
OXFORD, MS 38655
PO BOX 2430
NAB W HALLAM STREET LLC
AUSTIN, TX 78735
2316 PORTOFINO RIDGE DR
122
NEISSER KATHERINE M DISCRETIONARY TRUST
CHICAGO, IL 60614
359 W BELDEN AVE
OXLEY DEBBY M
TULSA, OK 74119
1437 S BOULDER AVE #1475
OXLEY JOHN C LIVING TRUST
TULSA, OK 74119
1437 S BOULDER AVE #770
POPE CHRISTINE A L REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
540 W SMUGGLER ST
QUARK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
RAE FAMILY TRUST
AUSTIN, TX 78701
303 COLORADO ST #2050
REYNOLDS LORA
AUSTIN, TX 78746
913 CALITHEA RD
SACK KEN & SHERI
ASPEN, CO 81611
407 N 3RD ST
SHELBY LLC
DENVER, CO 80202
1615 CALIFORNIA ST #707
SHIELDS JOHN H II & PATRICIA P
PONTE VEDRA BEACH, FL 32082
1077 PONTE VEDRA BLVD
SMUGGLER AND NORTH FOURTH STREET DUPLEX CONDO ASSOCIATION
ASPEN, CO 81611
500 W SMUGGLER ST
SMUGGLER443 LLC
BALTIMORE, MD 21209
1427 CLARKVIEW RD #500
STANLEY GAINES B & VICKIE C
DALLAS, TX 75219
3915 LEMMON AVE #200
SUGAR MOUNTAIN TRUST
NEW YORK, NY 10165
60 E 42ND ST
SUNNY MOUNTAIN LLC
JACKSON, WY 83002
680 S CACHE ST #100-10820
SZ 420 W SMUGGLER ST MGMT LLC
AUSTIN, TX 78746
100 PASCAL LN
TISCHLER SALLY L
HEALDSBRUG, CA 95448
PO BOX 1804
TISCHLER SALLY MGMT TRUST
HEALDSBURG, CA 95448
PO BOX 1804
TWO SPRUCE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
520 W SMUGGLER ST
WEST END MANOR SUBDIVISON HOA
ASPEN, CO 81611
520 W FRANCIS ST
123
500 West Francis - Photos 1894
1 124
500 West Francis - Photos 1963
2 125
500 West Francis - Photos 1965
3 126
500 West Francis - Photos 1970
4 127
500 West Francis - Photos 1970
5 128
500 West Francis - Photos 1972
6 129
500 West Francis - Photos 1974
7 130
500 West Francis - Photos 1985
8 131
500 West Francis - Photos 1990
9 132
500 West Francis - Photos 1996
10 133
500 West Francis - Photos 2025
11 134
500 West Francis - Photos 2025
12 135
500 West Francis - Photos 2025
13 136
500 West Francis - Photos 2025
14 137
500 West Francis - Photos 2025
15 138
500 West Francis - Photos 2025
16 139
500 West Francis - Photos 2025
17 140
500 West Francis - Photos 2025
18 141
500 West Francis - Photos 2025
19 142
December 16, 2025
Milo Stark
Kim Raymond Architecture
501 E Hyman Ave, Suite 205
Aspen, CO 81611
milo@krai.us
RE: Historic Residence Lifting Plan
500 West Francis Remodel & Addition - Aspen, Colorado
ESD Project Number: 25.074C
As requested, Evolve Structural Design (ESD) has prepared the following information regarding the lifting of the
historic structure at the address noted above. The information below is based on design development
architectural drawings by Kim Raymond Architecture dated 11/5/2025 as well as our experience with projects of
similar scope and original structures of similar age and construction type.
Project Description:
The proposed project will involve a full remodel and addition to the existing house, which will include adding a
basement under the proposed building footprint and adjacent yard area. In order to add the new basement, a
micropile shoring wall will be installed around the property to allow excavation of the lot. To preserve the
historic structure while excavating the new basement, the existing house and carriage house will be lifted.
Shoring & Lifting Strategy:
In order to ensure that the historic building can withstand the lifting procedure, wall reinforcement and bracing
will be required. The specifics of the reinforcement will be determined once existing structural conditions are
verified.
The lifting will involve addition of LVL ledger/beams to exterior walls and threading steel beams under these to
lift the existing structure. The beams will be designed and positioned such that jacking up the beams will safely
lift the entire house. The jacks and support cribbing will bear on the micropile shoring wall in place around the
property (see the proposed lifting beam layout and support system is presented on the following page).
Bailey Home Movers will be engaged to assist with preparation and perform the lift.
Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact our office.
Sincerely,
Evolve Structural Design LLC
Christopher Bridges, P.E.
Project Manager
143
ISSUE
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
THIS SET PUBLISHED ON
Scale: AS NOTED
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT500 W. FRANCIS500 WEST FRANCIS STREETASPEN, COLORADO 81611PARCEL ID: 273512410010ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND
PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY
AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE
USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE
USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY
USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN
PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS
SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED
DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT
T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L
DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A.2.02
11/5/25
EXISTING
MAIN LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
DATE
5/31/25 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225211/5/25
1" ACTUAL
IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES
NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1")
EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL
HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR
REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL
LABELED SCALES.
11/5/25
1
2
3
45678910111
2
13
14
15
16
17DN
1
234
567
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16DN
RE
W DR
RGFNORTHSOUTHEAST
WEST
NORTHSOUTHPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
ALLEYSETBACK LINESETBACK LINE10
10
9
9
13
13
6
6
B
2
2
3
3
C
D
G
I
12
12
A
F
H
J
8
8
E
7
7
4
4
5
5
11
11
1
1 #DrgID#LayID#DrgID#LayID1A.4.011A.4.011A.4.021A.4.021A.4.021A.4.021A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.031A.4.041A.4.041A.4.041A.4.04#DrgID
#LayID
#DrgID
#LayID
1
A.4.05
1
A.4.05
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.06
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.07
1
A.4.08
1
A.4.08
1
A.4.08
1
A.4.08
N
1/4" = 1'-0"
FOOTPRINT OF HISTORIC STRUCTURE
FOOTPRINT OF HISTORIC STRUCTURE
LIFTING BEAM JACKING POINT
LIFTING BEAM, THREADED
THROUGH BLW LVL LEDGER - TYP
PROPOSED EXCAVATION SHORING
LVL LEDGER, ATTACHED TO
EXISTG STUDS - TYP AT BRG WALL
LIFTING BEAM - TYP
LVL LIFTING BEAM - TYP
LVL LEDGER, ATTACHED TO
EXISTG STUDS - TYP
144
Attachment B
HP Design Guidelines
Staff Finding
Page 1 of 5
26.415.070(d) Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development
For approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development, the HPC must
determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation
Design Guidelines.
**Criteria found as “Not Applicable” has 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.
1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes
its visual impact.
1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on
residential projects.
1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site.
1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process.
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.
1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly
landmark trees and shrubs.
1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures.
1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views
of historic structures are inappropriate.
1.14 Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting.
1.15 Preserve original fences.
1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the
landscape and its built features.
1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system.
1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site.
Staff Finding: The proposal maintains the location of the historic resources and
respects the historic context of the neighborhood. The perpendicular walkway is
existing, a new material is proposed but the pathway size and location will remain
the same. The site is maintaining positive open space that is existing. The applicant
has discussed stormwater plans with the Engineering Department with no concerns
noted. Currently, no built-in furnishings are noted on the plan set, however, these
may be included at final review and if so, will be located on the new patio off the
proposed garage structure. There are several large trees located on site within close
proximity to the main house; following conversations with the Parks and Fire, the
large evergreen trees on the west side of the house are to be removed to mitigate
fire risk and damage to the resource. No landscape lighting is proposed. The
existing historic fence is proposed to remain; the fence will be removed and stored
during construction. Staff find the above review criteria to be met.
145
Attachment B
HP Design Guidelines
Staff Finding
Page 2 of 5
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.
2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials.
2.5 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate.
2.6 Remove layers that cover the original material.
Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing to restore and repair existing historic
materials with the understanding that should anything need to be replaced it will
require staff and monitor review. Synthetic materials are not proposed apart from
the synthetic roof material. No original materials are proposed to the covered. Staff
find the above review criteria to be partially met.
Chapter 3: Windows
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building
wall.
3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design.
3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original.
3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of
the original window.
3.7 Adding new openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed.
3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than replace a historic
window.
Staff Finding: The applicant proposes to restore the existing historic windows. One
window will be removed to accommodate the proposed connecting element on the
rear side of the main house. Non-historic windows on the carriage house are
proposed to be replaced with more appropriate windows. Storm windows are not
currently being proposed. Staff find the above review criteria to be met.
Chapter 4: Doors
4.1 Preserve historically significant doors.
4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening.
4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general
historic appearance.
4.4 When replacing a door or screen door, use a design that has an appearance similar
to the original door or a door associated with the style of the building.
4.5 Adding new doors on a historic building is generally not allowed.
146
Attachment B
HP Design Guidelines
Staff Finding
Page 3 of 5
4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, use a storm door instead of
replacing a historic entry door.
4.7 Preserve historic hardware.
Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing to replace the existing front door; more
analysis is needed to determine if the door is historic. Any replacement proposed
will be reviewed by staff and monitor. No screen doors are being proposed. More
analysis of existing hardware is required to determine whether it is historic. Staff
find the above review criteria to be met.
Chapter 5: Porches and Balconies
5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony.
5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details.
5.5 If new steps are to be added, construct them out of the same primary materials used
on the original, and design them to be in scale with the porch or balcony.
5.6 Avoid adding handrails or guardrails where they did not exist historically, particularly
where visible from the street.
Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing to restore details of the front porch and
will restore the rear east porch to match historic photos. New steps are proposed for
the front porch to match historic photos. These elements will be details in the
preservation plan that will be provided at final review. Staff find the above review
criteria to be met.
Chapter 6: Architectural Details
6.1 Preserve significant architectural features.
6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced.
6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based
on original designs.
6.5 Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts.
Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing to replicate previously existing
architectural elements based on historic photos, including the roof cresting and
porch details. Much of the proposed restoration will be detailed in the preservation
plan to be provided at final review. Staff find the above review criteria to be met.
Chapter 7: Roofs
7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color.
7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional.
7.7 Preserve original roof materials.
7.8 New or replacement roof materials should maintain or restore the character of the
historic roof.
7.10 Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent
possible.
147
Attachment B
HP Design Guidelines
Staff Finding
Page 4 of 5
Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing to further study the existing chimneys to
confirm if both are historic. Some of the new venting will be located within the
existing chimney with additional venting being appropriately located on the roof. The
applicant is proposing to remove the existing wood shingles and replace with a
synthetic shingle. Staff find the above review criteria to be partially met.
Chapter 8: Secondary Structures
8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be
preserved.
8.2 Preserve a historic secondary building as a detached structure.
8.4 When adding on to a secondary structure, distinguish the addition as new
construction and minimize removal of historic fabric.
8.6 Preserve original door and window openings and minimize new openings.
8.7 If a new garage door is added, it must be compatible with the character of the
historic structure.
8.8 Adaptation of an obsolete secondary structure to a functional use is encouraged.
Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing to restore and repair the existing carriage
house, including removing non-historic additions to bring the structure back to its
historic footprint. The carriage house is currently used as a residence and will
continue to be used as a functional space. Staff find the above review criteria to
be 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.
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 Finding: The applicant is proposing to lift both resources to construct a
setback-to-setback basement with variations to encroach into the setback. The
resources are proposed to be set back in their existing locations on a new
foundation with the historic foundation material being salvaged and reused as a
veneer on the new foundation wall. The applicant is not proposing to underpin the
resources and has not provided information as to why this is not possible. The
applicant is proposing one large lightwell at the rear of the main house. Staff find
the above review criteria to be partially met.
148
Attachment B
HP Design Guidelines
Staff Finding
Page 5 of 5
Chapter 10: Building Additions
10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right.
10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed.
10.3 Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of
the primary building is maintained.
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.
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.
10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
10.7 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic
alignments on the street.
10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building.
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.
10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building.
10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure
historically important architectural features.
Staff Finding: A connecting element is proposed from the main house to the new
garage. The proposed garage addition is set back significantly from Francis Street
and is subordinate to the main house. Staff find the above review criteria to be
met.
Chapter 12: Accessibility, Architectural lighting, Mechanical Equipment, Service
Areas, and Signage
12.1 Address accessibility compliance requirements while preserving character defining
features of historic buildings and districts.
12.2 Original light fixtures must be maintained. When there is evidence as to the
appearance of original fixtures that are no longer present, a replication is appropriate.
12.3 Exterior light fixtures should be simple in character.
12.4 Minimize the visual impacts of utilitarian areas, such as mechanical equipment and
trash storage.
Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing mechanical equipment in the west side
yard setback, the proposed equipment location is compliant with applicable code.
The applicant is proposing minimal lighting limited to entry points on the property.
Trash will be located inside the garage. Staff find the above review criteria to be
met.
149
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: The applicant is proposing to lift both historic resources on site in order
to construct a subgrade space with requests for setback variations to extend the
subgrade space into the setbacks. The applicant has not provided reasoning as to why
underpinning is not possible for this project. The applicant is proposing to salvage
existing historic foundation stones and reuse them as a veneer on the new foundation
wall. The applicant has provided a preliminary engineering letter and plan and have
noted that they will provide a details plan prior to permit. Staff find that the above
standards have not been fully met and are proposing a condition of approval to
require the relocation plan and associated information be provided at Final
Review by the HPC.
150
Attachment D
Benefit Review Criteria
Staff Findings
Sec. 26.415.110. – Benefits.
**Criteria found as “Not Applicable” has been removed
C. Variations. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated
properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the
historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying
zoning's dimensional standards.
1. The HPC may grant variations of the Land Use Code for designated
properties to allow:
a. Development in the side, rear and front setbacks;
b. Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements
between buildings;
c. Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage;
d. Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of
commercial historic properties.
2. In granting a variation, the HPC must make a finding that such a variation:
a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property
or district; and/or Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the
historic significance or architectural character of the historic property,
an adjoining designated historic property or historic district.
Staff Finding: The applicant has requested variations to the side, combined side,
and rear setbacks in five areas. Three of the five requested variations are proposed
as a means of memorializing the existing location of the historic resources; the main
house sits within the side yard setback and the carriage house sits within the side
yard and rear yard setbacks. A portion of the carriage house is actually off property;
an encroachment license is in place for this portion of the structure. There are two
setback variations requested for the subgrade space that is proposed. The first
subgrade variation requested is for the east wall of the basement, which is proposed
to be located within the setback along the entire length of the property. The purpose
of the request is partially to align with the existing main house. The second variation
request for the subgrade space relates to the rear yard setback, where the applicant
is proposing to extend the setback-to-setback basement 5’ into the rear yard
setback. The applicant’s reasoning for needing the rear yard setback variation is to
avoid additions above grade, however, the property has no available floor area that
would allow for additional massing above grade. Staff believe that a setback-to-
setback basement is more than a reasonable amount of space needed to
accommodate modern living. Given that these variations are unnecessary and do
not enhance or mitigate an adverse impact to the resources, staff are not supportive
of the subgrade setback variation requests. Staff could be supportive of variation
that allows the east subgrade wall to go into the setback under the resource to be
151
Attachment D
Benefit Review Criteria
Staff Findings
consistent with the above grade resource wall that would then jog back outside of
the setback for the rest of the east side.
F. Floor area bonus.
1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500)
additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated
historic properties. The potential bonus is determined by net lot area such
that a three thousand (3,000)—five thousand nine hundred ninety-nine
(5,999) square foot lot is eligible for a maximum of a two hundred fifty (250)
square foot floor area bonus, a six thousand (6,000)—eight thousand nine
hundred ninety-nine (8,999) square foot lot is eligible for a maximum of a
three hundred seventy five (375) square foot floor area bonus and a nine
thousand (9,000) square foot or larger lot is eligible for a maximum of a five
hundred (500) square foot floor area bonus. Floor area bonuses are
cumulative. More than one (1) bonus may be approved up to the maximum
amount allowed for the lot. If a property is subdivided, the maximum bonus
will be based on the original lot size, though the bonus may be allocated
amongst the newly created parcels to the extent permitted.
On any lot where a historic property is permitted a duplex density while a
non-historic property is not, the increased allowable floor area that results
from the density will be deducted from the maximum bonus that the property
may receive.
To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that the project
meets all of the following criteria:
a. The historic building is the key element of the property, and the
primary entry into the structure, and the addition is incorporated in a
manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; and
b. If applicable, historically significant site and landscape features from
the period of significance of the historic building are preserved; and
the applicant is undertaking multiple significant restoration actions,
including but not limited to, re-opening an enclosed porch, re-installing
doors and windows in original openings that have been enclosed,
removing paint or other non-original finishes, or removing elements
which are covering original materials or features; and
c. The project retains a historic outbuilding, if one is present, as a free
standing structure above grade; and
d. The applicant is electing a preservation outcome that is a high priority
for HPC, including but not limited to, creating at least two (2) detached
structures on the site, limiting the amount of above grade square
footage added directly to a historic resource to no more than twice the
above grade square footage of the historic resource, limiting the height
of an addition to a historic resource to the height of the resource or
lower, or demolishing and replacing a significantly incompatible non-
152
Attachment D
Benefit Review Criteria
Staff Findings
historic addition to a historic resource with an addition that meets
current guidelines.
2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is
contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's
assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to
demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices.
3. The decision to grant a floor area bonus for major development projects will
occur as part of the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan, pursuant to
Subsection 26.415.070(d).
4. Floor area bonuses are only available for single-family, duplex or one
hundred percent (100%) affordable housing development. A property shall
receive no more than five hundred (500) square feet total. The award of a
bonus is project specific. At such time that more than forty percent (40%) of
an addition to a historic resource that was constructed as part of a project
which previously received a floor area bonus is demolished, the bonus may
be retained only if the proposed redevelopment is found to meet the
requirements of this Section.
5. Separate from the floor area bonus described above, on a lot that contains a
historic resource, HPC may exempt wall exposed by a light well that is larger
than the minimum required for egress from the calculation of subgrade floor
area only if the light well is internalized such that it is entirely recessed behind
the vertical plane established by the portion of the building façade(s) closest
to any street(s), the light well is screened from view from the street by building
walls or fences, and any addition that is made to the affected resource
simultaneous or after the construction of the light well is entirely one (1) story.
Staff Finding: In addition to the variation requests, the applicant has requested a
floor area bonus via a lightwell exemption that would result in an additional 442
square feet of floor area; this bonus is necessary to proceed with the proposed new
massing. A smaller addition could be built without the floor area bonus. Per the floor
area bonus portion of the benefit code section, where the lightwell exemption lives,
the granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent
upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the
merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic
preservation practices. The applicant is proposing to remove non-historic additions
on the carriage house to align the footprint with Sanborn Maps, add a new addition
to the carriage house, add an attached two-car garage structure to the site that is
attached to the carriage house, add a connecting element from the resource to the
carriage house, and repair/restore existing historic material on the main house,
including restoring the back porch, and carriage house as needed. Staff find that the
request for a floor area bonus does not meet all of the required criteria, as it is of
staff opinion that the applicant is not undertaking “multiple significant restoration
actions”. Some restoration actions are being proposed as noted above and are of
note. One of the criteria requires any existing outbuildings on site to remain as free-
standing structures; the historic carriage house is not being retained as a free-
153
Attachment D
Benefit Review Criteria
Staff Findings
standing structure given the addition of the connecting element to the main house.
Per code, all the criteria for a floor area bonus are required to be met.
While staff find that the criteria for the lightwell exemption are met, not all of the
required floor area bonus criteria are being met. Staff do see the benefit of having
one large lightwell as opposed to multiple lightwells surrounding the historic
resource, but this could remain the case without the floor area bonus being
awarded. Given that the required criteria is not met, staff are unable to
support the awarding of the floor area bonus for the lightwell exemption.
154
Memorandum
TO: Gillian White, gillian.white@aspen.gov
Community Development Department
FROM: Kyla Smits, kyla.smits@aspen.gov
Engineering Department
DATE: April 15, 2026
SUBJECT: Engineering Department Referral Comments
PROJECT: LPA-25-133, 500 W Francis HP Major Conceptual
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.
1. An updated Permanent Revocable Encroachment license for the historic structure that
encroaches into the Right-of-way will be required before Certificate of Occupancy.
2. A utility plan will be required for Final Review of HPC.
3. 500 W Francis is in an area that requires curb and gutter. A plan for street conveyance should be
planned for building permit.
4. A conceptual stormwater plan must be submitted for Final Review of HPC.
5. The fence must be located entirely on private property.
155
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gillian White, Historic Preservation Officer
FROM: Sophie Varga, Zoning Administrator
DATE: 05/19/2026
RE: Zoning Referral Comments – LPA-25-133, 500 West Francis Street
Please note that the project cannot proceed as designed without the Historic Preservation
Commission granting the requested exposed wall exemption for the lightwell. The exemption
provides an additional 435 square feet of floor area on the property. Clarification that the
development rights on the property are not set by the zone district, they are set by previous
approvals.
This property is subject to combined side yard setback regulations. Any side yard setback
variation should be associated with a combined side yard setback variation.
To be resolved prior to final hearing:
• Mechanical equipment must be screened if visible from the street per 26.575.020.e.5.
Please provide details regarding location, height, and materials of screening as part of
the final submission package.
• Provide updated survey with accurate lot size. The survey shows that the dimensions of
the lot are 100’x60’ but states that the lot size is 5,760.
• An outdoor lighting submission package needs to be provided at final.
To be resolved at permit submission:
• Deck area: the front porch is exempt due to the front porch exemption, not the patio
exemption. Existing and proposed deck should be clearly noted in the floor area tables.
The stairs to the eastern porch count towards deck.
• Sections will be provided for the areas shown as exempt attic space.
A variety of other requirements may be necessary for building permit submittal and zoning
review.
156
Memorandum
To: Gillian White
Historic Preservation
Community Development Department
From: Joseph Pewitt, joseph.pewitt@aspen.gov
Permit Coordinator
Parks & Open Space
Date: February 3, 2026
Subject: Parks Department Referral Comments
Project: LPA-25-133, HP Major - Conceptual
These comments are not intended to be exhaustive, but an initial response to the project
conceptual packet submitted for the purpose of the HP Major Conceptual Review. Other
requirements may be requested at time of permit.
Comments:
1. Landscape plans shall propose a minimum of three (3) new tree plantings within North
Fourth Street adjoining right-of-way. Tree spacing shall be a minimum of 20’ O.C.
a. Applicant shall coordinate proposed tree species and size selection with City
Forester prior to final hearing.
157
Parks and Open Space Building Permit Application Requirements:
1. Permit documents shall include accurate tree surveys for all sites dated within one -year
identifying locations of all trees four (4) inches or over identified by trunk diameter and
species; three (3) inches or over for native species as defined by Ch.13.20 .020(a).
2. Permit documents shall include tree removal plans, site specific tree protection and
preservation plans, tree mitigation plans, and irrigation plans. All Critical Root Zones to
be protected and preserved shall be accurately illustrated to scale on all plan sheets
with 1” of surveyed tree diameter at breast height equaling 1’ in radius of required Tree
Protection Zone. The protection and preservation plans shall indicate the location of all
protective zones and methodology for approval by the City Forester and prohibit
excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfills, storage of equipment,
and access over or through the zone(s) by foot or vehicle.
3. Permit documents shall include, and note, any proposed grade changes within critical
root zones of trees to be protected and preserved during site disruption.
4. Permit documents shall include the location of all site improvements including
subsurface improvements such as utilities, irrigation infrastructure, or foundation work.
5. Tree Protection Zones shall be erected at the limits of Critical Root Zones to be
protected and preserved throughout construction until a Certificate of Occupancy is
issued for all proposed sites unless otherwise approved by the City Forester.
6. Protection areas shall be established on site to protect existing natural resources as
appropriate, including trees not included in the definition set forth in 13.20.020(a).
7. A Development-Related Tree Removal / Critical Root Zone Excavation Permit shall be
submitted, reviewed, and issued by the City Forester upon completion of Parks & Open
Space building permit application review.
8. Tree Removal Permit issuance and Parks initial inspection are required prior to activity
occurring on site. Mitigation for removals must be met by the replacement of trees on
site, paying cash-in-lieu fees, or a combination of both, pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of the
City Municipal Code. The applicant shall explore potential planting sites around the
property to allow sustainable planting and full maturation of all trees planted.
158
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gillian White, Historic Preservation Officer
FROM: Sophie Varga, Zoning Administrator
DATE: 02/26/2026
RE: Zoning Referral Comments – LPA-25-133, 500 West Francis Street
Please note that the project cannot proceed as designed without the Historic Preservation
Commission granting the requested exposed wall exemption for the lightwell. The exemption
provides an additional 524 square feet of floor area on the property. Clarification that the
development rights on the property are not set by the zone district, they are set by previous
approvals.
This property is subject to combined side yard setback regulations. Any side yard setback
variation should be associated with a combined side yard setback variation.
To be resolved prior to final hearing:
• Mechanical equipment must be screened if visible from the street per 26.575.020.e.5.
Please provide details regarding location, height, and materials of screening as part of
the final submission package.
• Provide updated survey with accurate lot size. The survey shows that the dimensions of
the lot are 100’x60’ but states that the lot size is 5,760.
• An outdoor lighting submission package needs to be provided at final.
To be resolved at permit submission:
• Deck area: the front porch is exempt due to the front porch exemption, not the patio
exemption. Existing and proposed deck should be clearly noted in the floor area tables.
The stairs to the eastern porch count towards deck.
A variety of other requirements may be necessary for building permit submittal and zoning
review.
159
Memorandum
TO: Gillian White, gillian.white@aspen.gov
Community Development Department
FROM: Kyla Smits, kyla.smits@aspen.gov
Engineering Department
DATE: February 11, 2026
SUBJECT: Engineering Department Referral Comments
PROJECT: LPA-25-133, 500 W Francis HP Major Conceptual
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.
1. An updated Permanent Revocable Encroachment license for the historic structure that
encroaches into the Right-of-way before Certificate of Occupancy.
2. A utility plan will be required for Final Review of HPC.
3. 500 W Francis is in an area that requires curb and gutter. A plan for street conveyance should be
planned for building permit.
160
500 W Francis LPA - 25-133 Builidng Comment
Page Label: 16
File Name: Exhibit F - Building Plans (UPDATED).pdf All aspects of new construction
will need to comply with currently
adopted building and energy
codes, as well as any newly
adopted codes mandated by the
state for wildfire resiliency, at
time of permit application.
Specific time of application will
affect the codes applied to the
project for all applicable building
codes.
Exhibit F - Building Plans (UPDATED).pdf (3)
Page Label: 17
File Name: Exhibit F - Building Plans (UPDATED).pdf Be prepared to show energy
code compliance for your glass
connector, this will require more
than just U values on the
glazing. Assuming a steel frame
to house glazing units provide
the structure you will need to
show how you meet energy code
requirements for a steel framed
wall and thermal bridging and
compliant window to wall ration
for the entire home. Highly
suggest coordinating with plan
review staff on detailing for this
prior to submitting permit,
potentially prior to finalizing HP
approvals as this could affect
exterior design if not compliant
with window to wall ratio
requirements.
Page Label: 17
File Name: Exhibit F - Building Plans (UPDATED).pdf All altered elements of the
historic building are required to
comply with requirements for
new construction unless you
meet specific exceptions in the
existing building code. If not
complying with new construction,
be prepared to show how and
what exceptions you meet from
the existing building code.
6 87
All aspects of new construction will need to
comply with currently adopted building and
energy codes, as well as any newly adopted
codes mandated by the state for wildfire
resiliency, at time of permit application. Specific
time of application will affect the codes applied to
the project for all applicable building codes.NDHW3
ND
ND
HW4 HW4HW4HW4
HW4 HW4 HW4
ND
NDNDHW4HW4WEST
NORTHSOUTHF S R
WC BUTLER'SPANTRY PROPERTY LINEMUDROOM
GARAGE
LINKUP SETBACK LINEPATIO
UPDN ELECTRICALPANELCALELTRASH TRASH
LIVING
HP1 HP2 HP3
109 13687459.5 1211
1A.4.011A.4.021A.4.021A.4.031A.4.031A.4.041A.4.04LINEAR GAS FIREPLACE PLANTERS(RAIN GARDENS?)Be prepared to show energy code compliance for your
glass connector, this will require more than just U values
on the glazing. Assuming a steel frame to house glazing
units provide the structure you will need to show how you
meet energy code requirements for a steel framed wall
and thermal bridging and compliant window to wall ration
for the entire home. Highly suggest coordinating with plan
review staff on detailing for this prior to submitting permit,
potentially prior to finalizing HP approvals as this could
affect exterior design if not compliant with window to wall
ratio requirements.
6 75
All altered elements of the historic
building are required to comply with
requirements for new construction unless
you meet specific exceptions in the
existing building code. If not complying
with new construction, be prepared to
show how and what exceptions you meet
from the existing building code.
161
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 11TH, 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, Duncan Clauss,
Kim Raymond and Kara Thompson.
Staff present:
Gillian White – Historic Preservation Officer
Daniel Folke – Planning Director
Luisa Berne - Assistant City Attorney
Mike Sear – Deputy City Clerk
MINUTES: Mr. Moyer motioned to approve the minutes of 2/11/26. Ms. Pitchford seconded. Roll call
vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Ms. Severe, yes; Mr. Clauss, yes; Ms. Raymond,
yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 7-0 vote, motion passes.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
COMMISSSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS: Mr. Moyer said he had heard that there was a conversation
with City Council about the stalled projects in town. Mr. Folke noted that Ben Anderson, the Community
Development Director, and Bonnie Muhigirwa, the Chief Building Official, presented the topic to City
Council at the most recent Council work session. He said that it was a good conversation that focused on
reasons some projects can stall out and potential ways to address the issue. He described a few of these
potential options and noted that he would share the staff memo from the presentation with the HPC
members. There was some discussion about the limits of what the City can require a property owner to
do and how the timing of acting on building permits and vested rights.
PROJECT MONITORING: None
STAFF COMMENTS: Mr. Folke updated the HPC on their upcoming meeting schedule including a
potential joint work session with City Council on April 13th. He reviewed a few potential topics that could
be discussed at the work session. There was some discussion about these potential topics, and which
would be most important to prioritize.
CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None
CALL UP REPORTS: None
DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Ms. Raymond noted that she was conflicted on the agenda
item and would leave for that portion of the meeting.
SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS: Ms. Berne confirmed that public notice was completed in
compliance with the Code as needed for the agenda item.
Ms. Raymond left the meeting.
162
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 11TH, 2026
NEW BUSINESS: 500 W Francis St. - Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development
Conceptual Review, Relocation, and Benefits.
Applicant Presentation: Milo Stark – Kim Raymond Architects
Mr. Stark began his presentation by stating that contrary to other applications before them, this project
would not be proposing to add an abundance of above grade mass. Rather they are proposing to
remove 430 square feet of non-historic additions and add a modest garage and transparent connecting
element. He noted some of the history of the historic Victorian home and carriage house and listed a
few of the modifications that had occurred over the years, including the loss of its historic roof cresting
and replacement of historic doors and windows. He noted the changes to the carriage house as well. He
said that they plan to restore the Victorian and carriage house back to their historic conditions and listed
some of the restoration efforts.
Next, Mr. Stark noted that the removal of the non-historic additions to the carriage house will allow it to
be brought back to its historic mass and character and allow the creation of a modest two car garage. He
said this would be visually insubordinate to the main Victorian and located away from public views. He
described more of the garage’s characteristics and noted that it complies with the chapter 10 guidelines
for new structures and had been further reduced in height since the agenda packet had been published.
He then described their proposed T-shaped linking element that would unify the three structures into a
single-family home. It would be largely transparent, intentionally minimal in size and screened by
landscaping. He further described the linking element’s features and functionality.
Mr. Stark moved on to the relocation request and noted that the existing stone foundation has likely
reached the end of its serviceable life and would be inadequate for modern structural improvements.
He described their proposal to lift the historic resource in place to allow for the demolition of the
existing foundation, excavation and construction of a new foundation and subgrade level. He noted that
the existing historic stone foundation would be salvaged and used to create a stone veneer applied to
the new foundation wall in order to maintain the visual character. He then went over the large subgrade
living space and required egress window wells of which there would be two. He noted the location of
the wells and the reasoning behind their size.
He concluded by reviewing what had been presented so far and went over the various approval
requests, including the garage and linking element, required setback variations and the floor area bonus
benefit resulting from the large central lightwell exemption.
Ms. Berne informed the commissioners that since the reduction in height of the garage was not included
in the packet, nor reviewed by staff, it could not be considered in their discussion or decisions.
Ms. Surfas asked about the central lightwell and wondered if it would have a surrounding railing. Mr.
Stark noted that it would have a wall coming up about two feet and would then be screened by
landscaping and did not require a railing.
Ms. Thompson asked if they had opened any walls to investigate if any historic framing existed in the
carriage house. Mr. Stark said they had and noted that nominal lumber was found.
Ms. Thompson then addressed the historic roof pitch of the carriage house and asked if they plan on
keeping the existing pitch. Mr. Stark noted that it appears that at some point the roof pitch was
increased to allow for a garage door on the carriage house and without evidence of other framing, they
were proposing to keep the existing pitch.
163
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 11TH, 2026
Mr. Moyer noted that historically when an addition was put on a carriage house, it did not match the
existing roof pitch but rather stepped down to a lower roof leaving a small section of the existing wall
exposed, as noticeable in one of the historic pictures shown in the presentation. He asked if the
applicant would consider showing that wall section to restore the original character and two roof
sections. Mr. Stark said yes, they would consider it.
Ms. Thompson asked if they proposed changing how the grade of the lot meets the house or carriage
house. Mr. Stark said grading would most likely have to change to meet current stormwater
requirements. Ms. Thompson also asked how deep the green roof would be on the subgrade living
space that extended outside the footprint of the historic resource. Mr. Stark described the proposed pan
decks over the space and noted that the media would be 12-16 inches as required.
Mr. Moyer asked about the proposed veneer that was to be created for the historic stone foundation.
Mr. Stark said it would be about 2-3 inches, to which Mr. Moyer asked if it could be thicker. Mr. Stark
said it was possible but would reduce the amount of space for the new walls to sit on the new
foundation.
Ms. Thompson asked if the window on the north wall of the historic resource and proposed to be
removed for the linking element was historic. Mr. Stark said they did not believe so.
Mr. Moyer asked if they could eliminate the linking element by connecting the structures using the
subgrade space. Mr. Stark said that it would probably not work since they do not have a way of getting
up and down from the garage.
Staff Presentation: Gillian White - Historic Preservation Officer
Ms. White began her presentation by listing the requested approvals and noted the site visit that
occurred earlier that day. She reviewed the property’s location and history, noting the details of the
historic lot split that occurred in 2007. She then went over the scope of work proposed including the
demolition of non-historic additions, creation of a new garage addition to the carriage house, in place
relocation of both historic resources to build a setback-to-setback basement level and the restoration of
the historic resources. She also noted the applicant’s requests for setback variations and floor area
bonus via the lightwell exemption. She then listed the requested approvals and their associated reviews
and criteria and went over each as detailed in the staff memo. She noted that the proposed connecting
link, while not required by the guidelines or code, was a desire of the property owner. She noted that
while it was minimal in width and transparent in materials, its inclusion prevents the proposal from
meeting the floor area bonus criteria. She said that the HPC should discuss whether the connecting
element was appropriate and noted that a condition was included in the draft resolution that the
connecting link not be approved.
Ms. White then described the applicant’s proposals for the carriage house and composite roof materials
proposed for the historic resource and went over staff’s responses as detailed in the staff memo. She
then went over the requested setback variations that are in five locations. She noted that three of these
are proposed in order to memorialize the existing footprints of the historic resources and that staff was
in support of these requests. Next, she described the two requested subgrade variations, noting that
staff felt a setback-to-setback basement was more than a reasonable amount of space for modern living
and was not supportive of these variation requests given that they are unnecessary and do not mitigate
an adverse impact on the resources.
164
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 11TH, 2026
Ms. White then reviewed the requested floor area bonus via the lightwell exemption as outlined in the
staff report, noting that this bonus was necessary for the proposed new massing, but a smaller addition
would not require the bonus. She also reviewed the criteria that must be met to be considered for this
bonus and said that while staff find the criteria for the lightwell exemption to be met, not all of the
required floor area bonus criteria are being met, as outlined in the staff report. She noted that since the
required criteria are not met, staff are unable to support the floor area bonus for the lightwell
exemption.
Ms. White then went over the proposed relocation request to lift the historic resource and carriage
house in place to dig a new basement and create a new foundation. She noted that if the relocation is
approved, the existing historic foundation would be removed and applied as a veneer on the new
foundation walls as discussed by Mr. Stark. She concluded her presentation by noting that if the HPC
chooses to approve the resolution, staff have provided recommended conditions of approval that are
included in the agenda packet.
Mr. Moyer felt that the exiting historic limestone block foundation was irreplaceable and wondered why
Ms. White did not comment more on the proposal to cut them up to create a veneer for the new
foundation. Ms. White responded that in her experience, details of relocation have not been discussed
to that extent and when she has noted these details, they have been disregarded. She noted that if Mr.
Moyer felt that the stone should be reused in its entirety, that could be a condition of approval.
Public Comment: Laura Maggos noted that she is a neighbor of the project but said that she was here
speaking on behalf of another neighbor, Ms. Jan Blaich. She distributed copies of a letter from Ms. Blake
to each commissioner (pages 167 & 168 of the agenda packet). The commissioners took a moment to
read the letter.
Mr. Jonathan Fienberg stated that he was the applicant’s real estate broker and wanted to respond to
the letter from Ms. Blaich. He noted that the intent of the applicant is not to rent the property short
term but to fix it and bring it up to modern standards.
Board Discussion: Ms. Thompson started the discussion by noting that she appreciated that the
proposed development is much more minimal than they typically see. She said she was getting hung up
on a few things. One was the proposed removal of a small window to facilitate the linking element as it
was unknown whether it was historic or not. She was also not sure if the linking element should exist at
all given what they would like to see preserved if historic. She felt they should further discuss the roof
slope on the carriage house that was brought up by Mr. Moyer. She felt that recreating that element as
well as the removal of the non-historic roof gable on the porch above the front door would be examples
of more significant restoration efforts that would get them closer to potentially consider a floor area
bonus.
Ms. Surfas asked for some more details on the lightwell exemption. Ms. White further explained the
floor area calculations related to large lightwells that meet certain criteria and noted that it was more of
a floor area calculation exemption. Mr. Stark also explained the floor area calculations related to the
exposed wall area of the lightwell.
Mr. Moyer said that he was not opposed to the proposed roof material but was not in favor of the
connecting link to the main house. As for the foundation, he said he was dramatically opposed to the
removal of the historic foundation stones and cutting them up to make a veneer, as veneers can fall off
165
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 11TH, 2026
over time and cannot be replaced. He wondered if there was a technique that could be utilized to
maintain the stone foundation as is. He also felt that the proposed garage was too similar to the house
and the materials should be more differentiated. He was not opposed to the lightwell or the bonuses as
the floor area would be subgrade. He said he was not sure how to handle the proposed connecting link
from the garage to the carriage house. Related to the carriage house, he felt the roof form of the shed
should be restored to match the wall break between the two roofs shown in the historic photos. He also
addressed the public comment letter that was submitted and noted that any potential short-term rental
of the property was not in HPC’s purview.
Ms. Pitchford appreciated the restoration efforts on the main house but was struggling with the
connecting element and could not support it. She was also not in favor of increasing the floor area even
though it was subgrade.
Ms. White responded to clarify that the floor area bonus, while coming from the lightwell space, was
being used above grade. Ms. Thompson felt that the floor area was being used in the total floor area of
the project and not specifically above or below grade. Ms. White responded that if the floor area bonus
was not granted, the above grade massing could not be as big as proposed.
Ms. Pitchford also agreed with Mr. Moyer about the historic foundation block as it was part of the
historic material and framed the house. She felt it didn’t need to be demolished. She understood the
functionality of the proposed connecting element but did not feel it met the guidelines and that it
detracted from the project. She was also not in favor of the floor area bonus as well as the requested
setback variations for the subgrade space.
Mr. Clauss agreed with Ms. Pitchford about the restoration efforts as well as comments on the proposed
materials for the garage. He was also struggling with the proposed connecting element as by code they
could create a linking element between the garage and carriage house, separating those two. He also
said that the lightwell and floor area bonus made sense to him.
Ms. Severe did not like the proposed linking element and was also in favor of recreating the break in the
roof line on the carriage house as mentioned by Mr. Moyer. She noted that she had not seen stone
veneers weather well in other environments and felt the blocks should be preserved. She was also not in
favor of granting the floor area bonus as she did not think it was necessary. She did, however,
appreciate the preservation efforts and would be in favor of the composite roofing materials. She
commented that she always thought the historic fencing to be a signature piece of the property and
favored keeping it. She did mention that she would be ok with a linking element from the garage to the
carriage house, but not to the main house.
Ms. Surfas was in favor of the preservation efforts on the main house as well but felt the connecting
element from the historic house to the historic carriage house did not work and would be confusing to
someone walking by to distinguish. She felt the idea of a connecting element was to connect a new
addition to the historic house. She also felt a connecting element from the garage to the carriage house
would be ok. She was also in favor of the setback variation requests to memorialize the historic location
of the house and carriage house but would deny the other requests. She found the one central lightwell
a unique idea and felt it was better than multiple smaller ones scattered around the property. She said
that if they could utilize the lightwell without the floor area bonus, she would be in favor of that. She
was ok with the composite roofing materials, but did not see how the new garage, as seen from West
Francis, related to the historic property.
166
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 11TH, 2026
Ms. Thompson said that she had no conceptual issues with the lightwell being used as egress but noted
the criteria for the lightwell floor area bonus, as listed in Attachment D of the agenda packet and agreed
with staff that not all of those are met. She highlighted criteria C that states that the “project retains a
historic outbuilding, if one is present, as a free standing structure above grade.” She stressed that these
are not guidelines, but code criteria that she did not feel comfortable waving them for a floor area
bonus. She said that she may be ok with a connecting element without a bonus but felt the two issues
contradict each other. She felt it was either the linking element or the bonus but not both.
There was some agreement on this and that it was a choice that was ultimately up to the applicant. Ms.
Thompson did not feel the massing above grade was too large and was appropriate. She agreed with Mr.
Moyer that the form, fenestration and materials on the garage addition were currently very consistent
with the existing historic structures and that some differentiation was needed. Ms. Thompson also
understood Ms. Pitchford and Mr. Moyer’s comments about the foundation materials being used as a
veneer but felt HPC had historically approved of this method on other projects. She was struggling with
saying no for this project as it allows the applicant to build below grade, reducing the amount of square
footage above grade.
Mr. Moyer said that in his years on the commission, he could not recall an application that proposed this
method.
There was some brief discussion about what owners of historic properties should be allowed to do in
balancing livability of the property and preserving historic materials. Ms. Pitchford wondered if one
could dig out a basement without disturbing or destroying the historic foundation. Mr. Clauss felt the
precedent would be hard to reverse. The commissioners considered if they would want to require a
minimum thickness of the veneer.
Regarding the setback variation requests, Ms. Thompson agreed with staff. The other commissioners
also agreed. Ms. Thompson also thought a more detailed relocation plan than what was in the
application should be submitted before building permit but acknowledged that it would most likely need
to be reviewed again on site with staff and monitor once demolition uncovered the structural details.
There was consensus that the financial assurance bond amount related to the relocation should be
increased to $60K and a separate $15k bond be required for the carriage house.
Ms. Thompson wanted to confirm that the commissioners all felt that the roof form on the carriage
house should be restored to match the historic photo that was presented including the step down and
wall exposure. After an explanation of the existing framing in that area of the carriage house’s roof by
Mr. Stark, Ms. Thompson would agree with staff that if it is historic material in the reframed position
that it be left as is.
There was a brief discussion between the commissioners and Mr. Stark about the garage addition and
how it relates to the historic resource. Some commissioners felt, at least from the renderings presented,
that it looked too similar to the historic resource in materials and potentially color. There was some
more discussion on ways to better differentiate it, including potentially a change to the roof form or
siding orientation.
Mr. Stark brought up the floor area bonus section of the Land Use Code and noted that they had
prepared an alternative solution that would satisfy the code language. Ms. Berne noted that since staff
had yet to review or give comments regarding this option and that it was also not noticed in the agenda
packet, it would be inappropriate to discuss it at this meeting. She reminded the commission that only
167
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 11TH, 2026
information submitted to staff in a timely manner, reviewed by staff and included in the published
agenda packet, could be considered during this meeting.
Mr. Stark noted that he had heard varied feedback from commissioners regarding whether to pursue
the linking element or the floor area bonus and requested some clarity to move forward with. Ms.
Thompson said that it would be very easy for her to say yes to the floor area bonus if there was no
linking element. The rest of the commissioners agreed. Ms. Surfas said that it was the linking of the
historic main house to the historic carriage house that was the issue to her. She would be ok with a
linking element between the historic carriage house and the new garage, as that was what they typically
see and how the linking element is supposed to work. Ms. Thomspon said that keeping the two historic
structures detached was a high priority outcome for the Historic Preservation Guidelines.
There was some discussion about when the next available meeting date would be for continuance.
MOTION: Ms. Thompson motioned to continue the hearing to May 27th, 2026. Ms. Severe seconded.
Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Ms. Severe, yes; Mr. Clauss, yes; Ms.
Thompson, yes. 6-0 vote, motion passes.
ADJOURN: Ms. Thompson moved to adjourn the regular meeting. Ms. Severe seconded. All in favor,
motion passes.
Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk
168