The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.2003052841, 69+.1 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 28, 2003 CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROOM 130 S. GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO NOON - SITE VISIT - Meadows Trustee Unit 2 and 470 N. Spring - Site visit on your own. 5:00 I. Roll call II. Approval of minutes III. Public Comments IV. Commission member comments V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) VI. Project Monitoring 1, b 635 W. Bleeker - monitoring (10 minutes) 428 E. Hyman - monitoring (10 minutes) VII. Staff comments: Certificates of No Negative Effect issued (Next resolution will be #13) VIII. OLD BUSINESS 5:20 A. Meadows/Trustee Townhomes Unit 2 Minor Development - continued public hearing 0,-Â«44 ~4>--, r~k-: FLC_ 1 1 +4 5:50 B. 320 W. Hallam, Conceptual (continued public hearing) 3-0 - 4-/ 3 6:05 C. 311 S. First - continued public hearing (continue to June 11) D. 432 W. Francis - continued public hearing (continue to June 11) IX. NEW BUSINESS 6:07 A. 470 N. Spring, Conceptual - Public Hearing X. WORKSESSIONS 7:07 A. 28 Smuggler Grove :30 XI. ADJOURN PROJECT MONITORING Jeffrey Halferty 428 E. Hyman (former Sportstalker Store) 213 W. Bleeker (Schelling) 101 E. Hallam (Gorman), with Neill 216 E. Hallam (Frost/Auger), with Mike 735 W. Bleeker (Marcus), with Teresa 922 W. Hallam 110 W. Main (Hotel Aspen) 118 E. Cooper (Little Red Ski Haus) Neill Hirst 434 E. Main (Hills) 409 E. Hyman (New York Pizza building) 205 S. Third 1 101 E. Hallam (Gorman), with Jeffrey 635 W. Bleeker 110 E. Bleeker Mike Hoffman 950 Matchless Drive (Becker) 216 E. Hallam (Frost/Auger), with Jeffrey 513 W. Smuggler (Harman) 633 W. Main (Dart) 920 W. Hallam (Guthrie) 640 N. Third Teresa Melville 232 W. Main (Christmas Inn) 323 W. Hallam (Rispoli) 513 W. Bleeker 735 W. Bleeker (Marcus), with Jeffrey 515 Gillespie (Bone) 501 W. Main Street (Christiania Lodge) Valerie Alexander 216 E. Hallam (Frost) 533 W. Francis (Gibson) 232 W. Main (Christmas Inn) Derek Skalko . 135 W. Hopkins 302 E. Hopkins 501 W. Main Street (Christiania Lodge) CONCEPTUAL APPROVALS WHICH HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL: HPC Legal Procedures (Submit affidavit of notice for PH - conceptual) Swear In Staff presentation Applicant presentation Board Questions and Clarifications PH opened and closed Board Comments Applicant Comments Motion MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Joyce A. Allgaier, Deputy Planning Director-- FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 21 Meadows Road, Unit 2, Trustee Townhomes At-The-Aspen Meadows- Minor Development- Public Hearing continued from May 14,2003 DATE: May 28,2003 SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting exterior changes to Unit 2, one of the Herbert Bayer designed buildings know as the "Trustee Townhomes" at the Aspen Meadows. The entire group is listed on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures," and therefore any alterations to them must receive HPC approval and must comply with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and Aspen Municipal Code. The applicant was scheduled for review on May 141 but volunteered to continue the hearing in order to make some clarifications and simplifications to the proposal with staff. The proposed alterations are adding one new window on the front fagade at the lower level, eliminating the original staircase on the front faGade, moving the original entry door forward and modifying the already remodeled entry wall, relocating non- historic windows on the north and south endwalls, and modifying non-historic windows on the rear of the unit. Staff recommends approval o f the application with conditions. APPLICANT: Victoria Smith, owner, represented by William Lukes, Architect. PARCEL ID: 2735-122-39-002. ADDRESS: 21 Meadows Road, Unit 2 of the Trustee Town homes At-the-Aspen Meadows, A Condominium, City of Aspen, Pitkin County Colorado. ZONING: Aspen Meadows SPA. MINOR DEVELOPMENT The proced~re for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is 1 transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The IIPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. Staff Response: Recently. the HPC has been contemplating new tools to analyze the appropriateness of proposals to alter historic structures. The following questions are likely to be the center of future discussions, and may be helpful for HPC to at least reference for this project (note that the questions do not serve as formal decision making 1 criteria at this time): 1. Why is the property significant? 2. What are the key features of the property? 3. What is the character of the context? How sensitive is the context to changes? 4. How would the proposed work affect the property's integrity assessment score? 5. What is the potential for cumulative alterations that may affect the integrity of the property? Ths townhouse is significant as an example of housing designed by Herbert Bayer, an internationally important artist, and is noteworthy within the context of the campus of the Aspen Institute, known as the Aspen Meadows. Please refer to the attached history about Bayer. The owner has added more research to this application since the May 14th submittal, and may be able to bring Ellie Brickham, who worked with Bayer during the completion of this townhomes. to the HPC meeting. According to Heritage Aspen's website, "Walter Paepcke founded the Aspen Institute in 1950, after the success of the Goethe Bicentennial in Aspen. Originally called The Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies. the Aspen Institute was loosely structured on the Great Books Seminars at the University of Chicago. The central idea was that participants would come together to study different facets of the humanities in an atmosphere free from the distractions of the city. The summer programs were designed to incorporate intellectual discussions, through classes and lectures, as well as spiritual pursuits through music and festivals. Interest in these programs was so high that the Institute came to include sepvate entities for music, in the Aspen Music School and Festival, as well as science, in the Aspen Center for Physics." 2 The townhomes were built in 1965-1966 as short term accommodations for individuals associated with the Institute. Each of the 8 units were identical when constructed as simple two story forms with a low pitched roof and an integral carport. Natural wood shakes covered the front and rear facades, and painted white siding was used in the area of the carport and endwalls. Relatively small, mostly vertically oriented windows were used on all elevations. Detailing was spare. Much of the townhomes' significance lies in their character as a group and their relationship to the rest of the Meadows campus, a very important modernist work. They are located very close to the health club, restaurant, and gardens, which are also designated, but have privacy because of their placement along the edge of the campus and the dropping topography in this area. In staffs opinion, the front facades of the units are the area of most concern in terms of historic preservation. The rear of the units, while visible from other areas of town, do not impact one's experience of the campus, and if these units are to be allowed similar expansion or alteration potential as other designated homes in Aspen, are the least sensitive area for new construction to take place. The townhomes were only officially added to the historic inventory in the mid 1990' s. There have been a number of alterations made to the units before and after that time, particularly at the back. Overall though, they maintain a strong visual relationship to each other. Staff does not agree with the applicant's suggestion that the property could currently be de-listed, but her assessment that broad characteristics of the units tie them together, rather than some of their more minute details, is arguably true. The group still maintains integrity today because no additions have altered their roof[ines, and the exterior materials and color scheme have been retained. The architect and owner have spent a significant amount of time researching Bayer' s design and the status of the other units, and have proposed changes that are within the ,. original design "vocabulary. Prints of the original architectural drawings will be available at the meeting for HPC to review. Since the May 14& memo, some o f the alterations that staff had concerns with have been eliminated and clarification has been provided about which features are original and which are not. Staff has no concerns with modifying the already remodeled entry wall to make an enclosure for meter boxes and trash, relocating non-historic windows on the north and south endwalls, and modifying non-historic windows on the rear of the unit. Adding one new window on the front fagade at the lower level is an idea that is addressed in the following guideline: 3 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. 3 Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining feature. Greater tlexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls. Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. This window is on a key fÂ£wade, however, it does not cause a large increase in the amount of glazing on the wall and is a change that has been allowed on other units. Staff can support tlie addition o f the window. The other two elements that affect historic materials are eliminating the original staircase oil the front fagade and moving the original entry door forward. With regard to the entry door, the guideline is: 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. u Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and tlanking sidelights. Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later tillie, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. u If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original entrance on the primary facade must remain operable. While the front door is in its original location, previous approvals have been granted that moved the adjacent wall plane forward and left the door in with a "recessed" character. Arguments could be made that the best way to maintain the integrity of the entry feature is to leave it where it is, or that Bayer's original concept was to have a flush wall plane at the back of the carport. Staff leans towards the latter idea and would recommend allowing the door to be moved as requested. The actual replacement of the door needs to be discussed. The proposal to delete the staircase is difficult because it is an original feature and in many ways it is important to the front fa~ade and helps to tell the story of how the units were first used. The applicant makes a strong point for how this particular feature causes safety concerns. Only a few units still retain the stair to the upper floor. With some reservations. staff could support its removal, but would welcome discussion of any alternatives, including the installation of a gate at the bottom. 4 00 00 DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: â€¢ approve the application, â€¢ approve the application with conditions, â€¢ disapprove the application, or â€¢ continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Minor Development for 21 Meadows Road, Unit 2 of the Trustee Town Homes At-the-Aspen Meadows. A Condominium, City of Aspen, Pitkin County Colorado, be granted with the following conditions: l. HPC and the owner should discuss any other alternatives to the removal o f the staircase. 2. HPC and the owner should discuss whether the existing door itself is original or not and whether it may be replaced. 3. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 4. This condition of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # , Series of 2003." Exhibits: Resolution # , Series of 2003 A. Staff memo dated May 28,2003 B. Relevant Guidelines C. Biography of Herbert Bayer from the Aspen HPC historic context paper entitled "ASPEN'S 20 TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE:MODERNISM." D. Application 5 Exhibit B - Relevant Guidelines Treatment of Windows 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. o Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining feature. Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls. Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. Replacement Windows 1 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade. o Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character-defining facade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. Treatment of Doors 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. o Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. u If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original entrance on the primary facade must remain operable. Replacement Doors 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. A historic door from a similar building also may be considered. Simple paneled doors were typical. Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. New Additions (Staff is referring to the mechanical enclosure as an "addition") 10.3 Desigd a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. 6 0000 0 0 0 0 o A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. 3 An addition that seeks to imply all earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. o An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. u An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. u Art addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. 3 A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. o Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. o Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. o Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. o For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. o The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. Lighting 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. o The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. o All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. u Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. 7 Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. o Do not wash an entire building facade in light. o Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. u Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. 3 Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. u Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights-of-way. Mechanical Equipment & Service Areas 14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street. When it is feasible, screen service areas from view, especially those associated with commercial and multifamily developments. This includes locations for trash containers and loading docks. Service areas should be accessed off o f the alley, if one exists. 8 00 0 0 0 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT FOR 21 MEADOWS ROAD, UNIT 2 OF THE TRUSTEE TOWNHOMES AT-THE- ASPEN-MEADOWS, A CONDOMINIUM, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2003 Parcel ID #: 2735-122-39-011 WHEREAS, the applicant, Victoria Smith, has requested Minor Development approval for 21 Meadows Road, Unit 2 0 f the Trustee Town homes At-the-Aspen Meadows, A Condominium, City o f Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Aspen 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. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a Development Order; and WHEREAS, the procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC reviews the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie in her staff report dated May 28,2003 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended the application be approved with conditions; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on May 28,2003, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of_ to THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the I-IPC approves Minor Development for 21 Meadows Road, Unit 2 of the Trustee Town homes At-the-Aspen Meadows, A Condominium, City of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: l. HPC and the owner should discuss any other alternatives to the removal of the staircase. 2. HPC and the owner should discuss whether the existing door itself is original or not and whether it may be replaced. 3. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 4. This condition of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 28th day of May, 2003. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to Content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Jeffrey Halferty, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk HERBERT BAYER EXHIBIT C Herbert Bayer (b. 1900- Austria, d. 1985- Santa Barbara, California) was an artist of many disciplines. He apprenticed with architects in his native country Austria, and in Germany, starting at the age of 18. In 1921 he entered the most rel<nowned art and th design school of the 20 century, the Bauhaus in Weimar, Germany. The Bauhaus, which existed from 1919 to 1933, was begun in a spirit of social reform and 1 .vr represented a rejection of many design ideas that --- ...Â·7 preceded it. "From skyscrapers to doorknobs, A*.1 - modern design was born, really, at the Bauhaus. The ideas of the Bauhaus shaped whole cities, changed architecture, modified the nature of furniture design ~~ and transformed the essential implements of daily life." 1 Boyer was named the head of the typography workshop at the Bauhaus in 1925 and was ultimately Herbert Bayer one of three masters named by director Walter Gropius, the other two masters being the gifted Josef Albers and Marcel Breuer. In 1928, Bayer left the school and established his own studio in Berlin, then becoming the art director for Vogue magazine. As Nazism gained strength in Germany, Bayer fled the country and immigrated to New York City in 1938. There, he had his first show with the -Museum of Modern Art, and began to work as art director for corporations and ad agencies. By 1946, all of his work was for Walter Paepcke at the Container Corporation of America and Robert O. Anderson at the Atlantic Richfield Corporation, both of whom had an interest in Aspen and the establishment of the Aspen Institute. Walter Paepcke brought Herbert Bayer to Aspen in 1946 to serve as the design consultant for the Institute, a role in which he served until 1976. Bayer was offered the chance to design a planned environment, where the goal was total visual integration. On April 1, 1960, Bayer received a license to practice architecture in Colorado, without examination. He had no formal training in the discipline, so he generally worked in association with another firm, particularly 7 -, -""*-40- 1' p. 1-* 4,2~~Id0 with Fritz Benedict. The Sundeck on Aspen Mountain (1946, since demolished) was the first of his designs that was ever built. At the Institute, Bayer designed the Seminar Building The Sundeck, 1946 and it's sgraffito mural (1952, the first building on the grTinds), Aspen Meadows Guest Chalets (1954, since demolished and ' Beth Dunlop, "Bauhaus' influence Exceeds It's Life," The Denver Post April 20,1986. reconstructed), Central Building (1954), the Health Center (1955) Grass Mound (1955, which pre-dates the earthwork" movement ./. in landscape design by 10 years and was one ~ 4- ' :,4 o f the first J environmental sculptures in the country), the J : ' ."I- .... Marble Sculpture Garden (1955), Walter 1 , '. r , Paepcke Memorial Building (1962), the . J Institute for Theoretical Physics Building ~Â·L...1-.-~ (1962, since demolished), Concert Tent Aspen Institute Seminar Building, 1952 (1964, removed in 2000), and Anderson Park (c. 1970.) Bayer also led the design for the mil&,9 'Â·.12-** rehabilitation of the Wheeler Opera House ~ 1 4. (1950-1960), designed two personal residences lei'3~ 4-1-44 on Red Mountain (1950 and 1959), and other ~~:*2'~I~2.q: 2- - : r homes in Aspen, including those still in ~ b"Â¢2 64*ki. existence at 240 Lake Avenue (1957) and 311 ~~ North Street (1963). M.11.-.Ill//- 60.&-3.4-- il 4,~11 I - Â·EO*ilii '' a...1 FIL~' ria/1- -,7,1-$017494= EF"ll Aspen Meadows Health Center, 1955 The period during which most of Bayer's architecture was designed is confined ...1 to 1946-1965. Important characteristics of his .* buildings were simplicity and the use of basic geometrical shapes and pared down forms. He was heavily influenced by Bauhaus and The Marble Sculpture Garden. 1955 International Style principles. Color was an important component to some of his work, and he often used primary red, blue and yellow graphics. /':<f/ Bayer believed in the concept of designing the total human environment and that art should be incorporated into 4 - lk' all areas of life. He drew logos and posters for the Aspen 1 .21- "I r T,j.. El O ir |~~'17$ Skiing Company, and even designed signs for small Aspen -7.zli g-. Â·-amli.Idk~[.i..1- businesses. He provided the paint color schemes for certain Victorians that Paepcke's Aspen Company decided should c<0 ~. ~ be saved in the 1940's. A strong blue color, known locally (144*14'_r _ + Y.-- as "Bayer Blue" was one of his selections and can still be ~ it:1A22.r~13.-2~ seen on the former Elli's building (101 S. Mill) and otlier locations in town. His choice of a bright pink for Pioneer Buyer 1*lint scheme Park (442 W. Bleeker) and a bold paint scheme that once existed on the Hotel Jerome will also be remembered. Bayer spent 28 years living in Aspen and was one of the first artists to make his home here. A Rocky Mountain News article from 1955 stated "Even in competition with millionaire tycoons, best-selling novelists, and top-ranking musicians, Herbert Bayer is Aspen's most world-famous resident.'52 During his years in Aspen, he resided at times at 234 W. Francis, a Victorian home in the West End, in an apartment in a downtown commercial building, 501 E. Cooper Avenue, and in his home on Red Mountain. Bayer moved to Santa Barbara for health reasons in 1975 and died there ten years later, the last surviving Bauhaus master. Notable among Bayer's many achievements include his credits in ,#' SKI 1, Â«57 typography. He designed the "universal" type font in 1925 and was .4.:-6 credited with "liberating typography and design in advertising and "' y Â·-~ creating the very look of advertising we take for granted today."3 Much ~* m;A'SPEN of modern print design reflects his ideas. He was the inventor of E.:Â·ikettÂ·- photomontage. Bayer created the "World Geo-Graphic Atlas" in 1953, U *46,4, 44Â·2= which was described as one of the most beautiful books ever printed in this country by the Atlantic Monthly and the greatest world atlas ever Poster, 1946 made in the United States by Publisher's Weekly. Bayer created the famed "Great Ideas of Western Man" advertisement series for the Container Corporation of America and had more than 50 one-man exhibitions of his artistic works. His paintings are represented in the collections of at least 40 museums. He spent six decades of his life working as a painter, photographer, typographer, architect, sculptor, designer of graphics, exhibitions, and landscapes. His last work was the 85 foot tall, yellow articulated wall sculpture at the Denver Design Center, which can be viewed from I-25, near Broadway in Denver. Bayer founded the International Design Conference in Aspen in 1950 and was named a Trustee of the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies in 1953. He was the Chair of the City and County Zoning Committee for five years and was very concerned with the issues of sprawl. Bayer promoted increased density in town, put the original tree protection ordinance in place, and helped institute the ban on billboards. 2 Robert L. Perkin, "Aspen Reborn: Herbert Bayer Changing the Town's Face," The Rocky Mountain News Septemt*r 27, 1955. 3 Joanne Ditmer, "Schlosser Gallery Host to Major Bayer Show/Sale," The Denver Post October 1,1997, p. l OG. 4 i PICTURES . 1. VIEW OF NEW TOWNHOUSE 1 AND TOWNHOUSE 21 2. VIEW OF TOWNHOUSE ROAD 3. FRONT ENTRANCE TOWNHOUSE 21 4. VIEW OF SEVERAL TOWNHOUSES FROM THE MEADOWS LODGING MEADOW 5. UNIT 61 ENTRANCE ' 6, EXTERIOR STAIRCASE, UNIT 21 K . MEMORANDUM TO: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Victoria Smith, Owner RE: 21 Meadows Road, Unit 2 Trustee Townhomes at the Aspen Meadows - Minor Development - DATE: May 20,2003 As you requested, this is a brief summary of our May 15th meeting, a list of the proposed changes to non-historical elements of the townhouse and an inventory of exterior changes made to the eight original units. MEETING AND REVIEW OF ORIGINAL BLUEPRINTS As we agreed after reviewing Bayer' s original plans, the proposals I have made affecting the east, northern and southern exposures, as well as the storage units, windows and gate on the western exterior, involve no historical alteration. The units' architecture is not wonderful, not by Bayer, and my proposal only adds to the overall improvement of the individual unit consistent with Bayer's overall plan, which is important historically as part of the Aspen Institute campus. The units individually would probably be delisted, considering the variety and extent of owner renovations, before and after the HPC listing. As a renovator, it is almost impossible to be consistent with other units, considering the hodge-podge changes to the old units and the massive nature of the new units. The important "vocabulary" is how the units are seen as a whole, as part of the campus, particularly from the Meadows lodging. The units are similar in size, shell, exterior treatments, carports, etc. Individual changes to doors, windows, extensions, are not read, as I've tried to show in the pictures. I think it would be a good idea of the commissioners could visit the town homes before the meeting, to get a sense of polyglot nature of the individual units. . My proposal conforms to Bayer' s design for the western exterior by cleaning it up - bringing the front door, storage and gate into alignment as a sheer fagade, and eliminating the staircase which is a privacy, security, landscaping and light problem. With the other exteriors, I have eliminated non-historical windows and otherwise tried to correct light, ventilation and design problems created by past renovations. The exterior staircase presents severe security and privacy problems, as well as blocking light for the downstairs bedroom and interfering with landscape enhancement. Visitors cannot find the front door. Instead, they climb the exterior steps to my bedroom. Asked to go to the front door, they descend exterior southern steps to the living area terrace. Therefore, the bedroom and terrace doors have to be locked at all times and the blinds drawn to insure security and privacy. The Trustee townhouses are located in a busy area - Meadows deliveries, health club, the lodging units, the restaurant, parking for all the above. I have proposed plans including Bayer' s original sheer fagade, and elimination of the staircase as a security hazard, retaining his terrace. BAYER' S ARCHITECT' S BLUEPRINTS No windows on east, north or south exteriors except for bathroom ventilation, a single northern window to be preserved, and windows or doors to a southern patio, not extant. WINDOWS PROPOSED Plan suggests no changes in original windows except bathroom/entry level window, which would be removed or replaced. WEST EXTERIOR/ENTRY Bump out storage and front door so that western and southern "white" exteriors are again sheer, or flush. Similar to Unit 61, approved a couple years ago. INVENTORY OF PRESENT FRONT EXTERIOR BY UNIT There is a great variety in treatment due to owners expanding the units into the carport area, for either another bedroom or increased outdoor storage space or both. Consequently, some front doors are flush with the storage walls, some are recessed. All owners have retained the white siding around the carport and the shingled exterior in front of the bedrooms with a terrace at the second level. Half the owners have eliminated the staircase, some owners have retained the "half-terrace", some have extended it across the front exterior. My proposal is most similar to Unit 61, with extended storage and a flush front door, without their addition of a second "front door" in the storage unit. TOWNHOUSE HISTORY Herbert Bayer was a member of the Bauhaus art compound, founded in 1919 in Weimar by Walter Gropius. Gropius espoused "a start from zero" after World War I. All things bourgeoisie were anathematic, all architecture was devoted to 'the wcrkers". Thus, in a series of theoretical manifestos, omamentation, hiaorical references, color, masonry and generosity in proportions or scale, inside and out, were rejected. The hallmarks of Bauhaus design viere sheer facades without windows, flat roofs, smaillow- ceilinged rooms without elaboration, no non-utilitarian windows, and no environmental sensibility. Bayer came to Aspen to assist Walter Paepcke fabulous vision of the future Aspen. Bayer, a commercial artist, had assisted and impressed Paepcke with his commercial campaign for the Container Corp, which Paepcke headed. Their first project in Aspen was to repaint all the homes in the West End, according to Baver's color schemes. This was a failure, despite the offer of free paint. However, they went on to design the dynamic and lovely Aspen Institute Campus. The townhouses were the last piece of the design. and were meant to supplement the Meadows lodging units for trustees, visiting guests and employees. Cash was short and Bayer's Bauhaus design preferences were revered as the height of the European avant garde. So, the eight units, planned and executed by a hired architect according to Bayer's sketches, ended up as small, hotel-like, or "workers "' units, with uniform sheer facades, few windows, mostly flat roofs and rentable in parts by access of an outside stairs. Spartan interiors, plumbing, electrical work, insulation, and building materials were all done on the cheap, as the Institute expanded in other ways. In fact, the first lodging units had to be destroyed, later recreated by the present Meadows units, because of these problems. Over the next forty years, the trustee owners negotiated unrestricted ownership of the units, so that they could sell to non-trustees, and nullified the original deeds' requirement that the units be available to the Institute for rental every summer. Improvements to the "workers" or transient, housing began within the "shell" constraints of the original design, mostly to open up the units to the superb western views and to make interiors more functional as family homes. 94 + . 414 41:, , - R.. 64141 1, 14. . 0 .1 4 .211.11 4, 1 . 0 Â¥/*it e ffÂ· Â» celâ€¢Â· . 1 1 1 1 1 111111.'. 1 1 !111 . , 1'*111 : -I- . ..111. :11 ; 11, -- 't r 9 - 4, . . 4.- . ~- ,12, ji ., . A.V . 1-1,%- A p ~~- ~ 41 4, 1% K j i â€¢ ,Â· tr ' i il"l .. I .5 ./ ./ Ill. 1 . . i- 11,/M I *IJ - ~ T n.~* ' Â·â€¢ 151'+ Â· 4 . 4 S 2 .40:, , 41 1-1 .. f .. 1-, . 4/~1.' . 11./.- lue . n IT 4 - 1 114'' - .' I . 114 Ill 1 0,4.- ' ' I 11â€¢Â·I'.'.0.2#Mr.7%. ./.*~...# :9~I' 1Â·I '1 0,: ~ / 4;ila'*1111'UN. 1 ' 11:.: 04 ~Mnâ„¢L;'Per .3 - I I -11Â·. -I'J . 11 - 111...111~111111 111 Â§, 4% . ../. i 1- 1.1 11.- -1 .1.1.1 .1 4 L i i I -: 0 2 3, 1 .; ~ 24:;4 .*ted 1 D ....Mi. 1 1 L ,, 1 , kill 1 C d . .440 . t.*44 ./ :~M#Qk 1 J 1 . . 1, 11:;{1 1.1 , 4, ' . Pr .1 . . 18 1 3 - L, ..1 PA# /6 11....... . .~ W . 1Â· ~0* ..A...k - .flf 1 . , *Mâ€ž . 44 . 14..,41,4 ~ i. I -...... '*4141 Â·11 1 .Irm- . I I .in~' - . 1 M . la . 14 ..# 1 3,1. 1 1, Â· J . HZ 't.~1 ff/;41 Kt ~ p N.,7, r,j~'f vj.410 ......AM '6.4:tr~All '& * # I. .Ir > 4 , A .9- .d 4|~ 1.1 i 14 .:, 4~.L t.: ' '?,;I'l' '. A*:* ::'- /. I â€¢., 4~ 4 I I'.,rp. 4. 1â€ž 44191Â¥ *,4 A-*Di J . .4 ..9 . . + .T..W Â¥ 1 I - I ..... . 1 -2.- .9, 1 + 4- . F ~ h 4 . 1 .. t rt . %~'' 7~t.4,1 ; .r.? 't.~ 11,,? 413.1 4 2.1 ..1,%:4 .. r. .1 .h - .7 1.41*,6.%g.,% 04 1 , ' Â· 4.t . A * . I'+ I + k , 3- , 11 ... I ..1- Â· 14 .4 Â» .- d . tl W~ ' I i 4 7 1 'I ' er Â¢ 9. '' 6 .-'.D 507>91. . 64*pw'.4 11.. !34~1.441.4 2,44*J 4 'Ittll ) 9/ r 4.* . 8 4, I. 6.* 64 0 . \ i. 1,94 9 . .. IF d .1 1 .4 6/4 ' ' 4.1 -1 :Â· Â· ~ ~ ~ ~t ./.1 17* . 4 , ~ 1 1118 -1 1 . 1 931 % A 31 1%, 0.4 i, 4, /1,"h-. - f '1 04, 1~ 1 4 0*.a '>sÂ£~2*~~L 4 V 24 6, ~, - . M. 4 Tq.0.10%. Â» 4, .r'* . . 4. 1 -4 I . ..$ I I + . ;1,114 . - I 411% $~Il.1. 111 n - i : 1 t. . â€¢t ' . 11 Ill:1 _ =14- E %11 1 1/6. ~I~ A'Â·*#-,Â·,;,0,g.. '1111 ;1;11914111Â¢1'J'.1 1 3 Qi.*A l I I I ' 11||111Â·lili. 3~4|ji~ 5 1 1 1 ,~" | ' '~541.~Il, H" '~6*''A40 11:1111.1.1 41+ 4 .1- 1 1 1 1111.11.1.1111.1111,11111 lilli. 1.11. ..1 1 1 , 1 ' 4, 11 Â· 1 DI Â· 1,1111Â·Â·Â· 1 1'â€¢ 1,1,1,1 11'b 1 ~ 11 01 ' .I, i Â·Â· Â·Â·Â·,Â· Â· Il' ' Arld,1. I ,Â· 1 ,: 1 1 1... 11 1,11.11 11111 li I i 1 1 .1111'k. 1111111 111'11~1:r.1 1 111 11 . 1 11. *11, 11,10,11,01~1 1 1 *I A 1 1 . . 1 1 '11 11~ . 1. 1 1 r 41 1 le Â· Â· Â· 1 1. 1 11 1 1 1 . 11 1 . 11.11111111.111'r 1.- 111 111 1111111111 Il Il Â·' I"/ I'l Il ,Â· Â·Â·11 1 I h.Â· M, 1Â· i .."i. ;; ' df,lit ' 1 101 11'"PI,JI,flpÂ»11.1.1,lili 1. 4.111, " 1,1.1- 4'P.rl 7.111:111't 11 lili '11 111 4.11,1.. lili 1,1 1, 1 1 11.11 1 17, '1 - 9.1, 1-<045* Â· :iÂ·,01: .,; ,'-, ~ I .All'!' %* 1&- . :11.. 1 . 111'11.11 11 111 111,111,111 ~11 ~ '7~. I 1.1111 1,Â·'14:8"22. i ,4- ' '. '.' . , .. M.. 'M"lÂ·Â· 4 , lilli' '1 1. ' I 1Â»110.1 ; 41. '1111 11 1.0 1.111.1111.1 " 11"P'J.fall'I 1, 1 Â·Â· 1/U . 111: 1 44%11.1111 ;.111&14'i' 2 1,1, 1 VK T,rl Il'I 'Ill,Ill~ :#1'1111;1111111 r , 11#19.*1~.Ii':11~ 1114jl'~1 11:1:111. 1 . 11 1 161,111,1 1 ...:F: , v :,4,ziu,~ :,111 1 lilli. 2'Vt :" P~' u u %1**4@U '':'~'% ': Â·1! Iii,~,1 .11 1,11'WI .. r '.A,Va :lit 1 lilli â€ž 1.1 ' 1 111.1, lilli '111111111 Gl~ 4,441~: . ..11111111 1.111.911"1 1 f. 4111 ...11,0 1.= f' 11.1.i i 4 iii Ill Â¢11% if ~{i :# I.1~..4 fF %1111'lbli full.E='!ilat 1 1'; All 1 '11 1.. .. 1 1 ,#4804.. #9 ' 'i, 11. I i'~ ~, i.~ , 1; A,-9Â·!Mil/&$4Â£Â· ?,tÂ·'Â· .*!1144 ..:fl ~!I. 111' 11 11 1 .1 1.311.11?1 1 $ '11/8.547.1~m'.,.28;Â·k' 4?/ -V, 11 I i , Ii. â€ž 1.11 , 111~11 111111 111. 111. Ii"ll,11 1 11,1 - 1 1 11 1,//il 111% 112.1 - 1.1.. 1 , 11 41111.11 1111 11 111 1.. 1. 11111 1 1111 . 1 "1 1 11 .1 ' 41 111 044.11 4%4 1 1 . / * , . ./ 11 1 . 4 rl' 1 4 4.li~ ~ M.49 : 'I. i," i ..4. dam .v 1 â€¢ v** t f,1.1, *.9 ,4 3 241 '~| b.bu . Â·r- *j Â¢6-2 2Â·~ mi ., 341 4 'Fl .1 ..~1 1 .-L- c ; /.4. 3* Q ,@& 'F ,MT" L 1 0 .2 ./ : '#1'' 2 4*R ,â‚¬, d. .44 i.' - - 1/ - I ./. ii h L ..Al 1- 1. , . -Me.~4 .1 9/f 1 444 .1 : 1 -1 .. 4 I 'JIL . 6 4 4 .4 . I .- -L ..~,C:. 1#,1 f. m 4',-44~ -1//WI 'f. ., -/'#. â€¢ I.V- -, N .. Â¥. Â·Â·Â·ft,Â·th :iii Â· _L- . 11Â·/ 1, ., . i .L -4 - 1 - I . .~.1 . ~ 22.19$4â‚¬.,4471.4 f.*S . 4 â€¢11~p 4 . '.1. 1/. w. I.9 0.Â· ~1~1,14 3. h . 2. . 9K .MEM , d , h 1 ' 1,111~. 4 216Â· :~71.i~44 â€ž,â€žâ€ž 1.12Â· i. 011'Â®11'~brs# .~diF24,TE* 44,1.!<IMIbC,,1,0-W<#4:1,?14,36*Â£/W- 4 ..'- -'" I Ar' 'Â£ li .4* Mi #:. 1 44' le=,e~ / , --2*24*4*Wri ~red'/444:743~ 7,,4.0 \ U .=-5/1 ; .. . .CT. 45. _-- 6 7//2 1*: 4 't , -1 '. 'I , 1 'Ue'. 4 11 L ..3.1.81.6 &91> - - d ////Ct'â€¢1Â¢4.%.* ./.21"* 6,1 ~' i r, Â¥f~ . fi . M '" ~,9 //3//:, Af/61&1 :. ./imina.t *:Fe- E i . - - "i--"I-I 111-/,LI i.% ...40 %- ~.- -.~ ...........Im -,- 4 *' VI.Fil'-I.IT r -:~ .' - 7 1.Li , . .AÂ¥ - 4 , ~L i# - '~ ~'/.1117 'r 1/111 1 11111 4.2.1 1'944,1 1 '11% riâ€ž1,~9*IM#& ' 47*94tti<&401*#*I/1:'ruiti~~~r *~1;0.' ' *< 'f lin.,i 1 11 1 + :' 111 ' + .. ' ,4 l.,4 :'' t.r4 .11 : .. 1. . -.4*6'* MO i. r 1 *44'0%*M-WNÂ»)@*G'*W/*0*1~& L ' i. p '1 4/.'I -' ; Â·Â·Â·;.4.116 r '-141 61 i ~i 5.-t?'rl:r: 0 L It .d/&12:41 Â¢ 1: 't 111 1 97'll. 1:ISA!.1 El- I li-- R,1 1 1# 4 1 11 111 , IL:' 1'' 1 -Trl f-I:';11,1 b~., 1., . 1. Â· 2 4 .41 W.1 I'lipi,4. 4, 1 ; &.111!1~11,11 ' h'ilrâ€žk Â· 111111111.lilli 1 1..,1,1,1~ .2 11 1 1. y 1 ,/' i . .-4.45 '2 , 1 4 4 2/* & 3*Â». A.M.' -,1 4 - 1 1 . - 1111!16.- -. , *4*11+ 11 IIi'~I - - L>i,12*.i<Â«74* -U : I : 1. * : 54'. :. : 42. i.'lak l=F71* .0/ .r, ' l 7 --1111.1 0.11 : 111 11 --/m, 1 . 1 . .6~, ''1 1:i~\?NILÂ· ~ t.iu U,0.,*~', .ih .., 11~1 1 , lili 1. 0 , li Â¢ d. W 4'.' AN ...: , , . ''- 4 -4,45 74"'~- ~ p - 'Â· ,#41â€ž111-,;,1., ~Â§01 1 444}~t'' f . 11 , . I ,/ \ 74*"*t.,- ... J i 1 4. , [1 IL r , L. dillill'll'll'll'llill'IM....JN.....idill//1/1 , 1 t. -44 .2-.70' 53/1.P ~65,~ I 1-#IN,tal-Agulf& ., telÂ·~ C , A JÂ· . ,~m.Pn\LAI~ - -- <2 . *4 $ fr 2 .Fisi'D,1, * ./ ' 6 . '62 1.12 1-1,4.~ . 316% 1. 1 1. - 4/*:;it,,3-*"157%.Tr"rm/- " 1 lic 'IMIMMI'llfihillill r.:FrW /,9 4/~I,L.47 I . Li/:imii.. /4 ~P/*4 . T 70 11 .L 4/.le/961144Â¥1 1- /f, ' r r,._.Ua -f ~ Â£ fliz' 1 J' 1 1"~t ~1 ~ .. - . .liwIL --- :,i. 1 ./Ing& 5/04_...,112*1.-t WA 7' i mill, 1 1 . 1 1 '14 11 ve- 7,41.~ 1 '40 1 .4 1.119"#44Â£WNII<1rin --i I t.-' 1*ill. ,#~ 1 - 1 I -1 1 &15 1.91 i rkÂ· 4 , lilli 11 m 9 - 1.-- - I'll '111$.- Mth JB'd,1 .11 lIT + 111.[,1 11 MIll:!1. - 1 2%4 EZLâ„¢?7' - 2..i - - 1 - . 1 k It 11 r. , i.2 1,1 11. = '...1. T -I.;. C - I-"I'l'Â£---Il . - -- -1-] pilimeish // .1-/ . .. fAr-- ,<t'lls/)19'Welw,4/lihwhhm.*I' I'll' I. rg I '4 . I Â£, 1 ': F"//m# MW ...<.". - ... .F ... J. 1 2'1~ i * .' i 1-1 , 111.- -e./. . .V- #,1 . J . . t .Â· I 1 7.9 m= .Au I , 1 .tu .1. lily. .Â·LA ' - 1. .&4. I J f# E# I ./9/.& 1 1/* 4 1 1 9 .1'JI. ..1.419*i I. ..1. I . 1/--- t# 1 r. 1 11*14.1 1.tly,1,4,11 1 ---1 I / JV 461. -- ..I-/.i' .i.-9 ."111 L. 1,1,1:'.,Ii/*Emi-- 2. I'll *r /1/ ;/gll./.difiljl Â·Â· i . 41 1 10|111~J~% 1 121 :m- 1 - 01-I-. ./rl//r .f*iq" I/' il :iÂ·hk~I' . 1~ fÂ» 114 2 1. _ . . & 1.61Â» '11 p I 21"16.~~.91* 1 . .1 * '4 ./f).Fr" . k 111,11 4% 6 41. .4 '111 -lk f 4â€¢ Ik .; ,\4 ,~ ~ 1.45 ,/0 ~i ~b{2: 2'1~3 ,- '~~ 0--. 4 --Im~-1 --14 - 4 0 1 ....., I I. i'bal.=/.-6 f. i 'll'VT - I Mill'/0#1/.......... IiÂ·14 :1% . . t..M-. 1% - '.2 4 **J 4 931/'' t ... * 4 i /1 i.*,3 'C,1~ -, *dirrif .#42 liliA Z.!~ 4 9 .7 1 $ 511/ .~ Ila Dir . il, . , 1..1 4 3774 ' .4. 9,4, 0 -2 --- 'i* r, 14 , ..43,0*flle#*0% id:le/46. . r ':- 72, '4 *n , $ 4. .256 9,4'-Â£"4'~~~~" All 14 '4*4#W' 4 . : 1 5- . 1- 41 4 1.1 1 :.443.r,. 41[:.hil eltlii- I 3~ AU MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning DirectohAA FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 320 W. Hallam Street- Major Development Review (Conceptual) and Variances- Public Hearing Continued from April 23,2003 DATE: May 28,2003 SUMMARY: The subject property is a 3,000 square foot parcel that was created as the result of a recently approved historic landmark lot split. It contains a Pan Abode home built in 1966. The application proposes an 826 square foot addition to the rear of'the 600 square foot Pan Abode home. Conceptual approval, a 1.5' side yard setback variance for the east side yard to accommodate a window bay on the addition; a 3.6' side yard setback variance for the west side , yard for a lightwell, a rear yard setback variance of 2.5' and a combined front and rear yard setback variance of 3.5' to allow the addition to be pushed back from the historic cabin are requested, along with a waiver of the one required on-site parking space. At the April 23rd meeting, the applicant was asked to provide some restudy of the plate height and ridge height of the addition to ensure compatibility with the historic resource. These dimensions have been reduced by l' and 1' 8" respectively. Staff finds that conceptual approval should be granted, along with the requested variances. APPLICANT: Judy Haas, owner, represented by Derek Skalko, 1 Friday Design Collaborative. PARCEL ID: 2737-073-14-001. ADDRESS: 320 W. Hallam, Lot P, Block 42, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential). CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residence. MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, is as follows. Staff reviews the subTittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a 1 recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: Recently, the HPC has been contemplating new tools to analyze the appropriateness of proposals to alter historic structures. The following questions are likely to be the center of future discussions, and may be helpful for HPC to at least reference for this project (note that the questions do not serve as formal decision making criteria at this time): 1. Why is the property significant? 2. What are the key features of the property? 3. What is the character of the context? How sensitive is the context to changes? 4. How would the proposed work affect the property's integrity assessment score? 5. What is the potential for cumulative alterations that may affect the integrity of the property? The property is significant as an example of housing built early in Aspen's history as a ski town, at a time when economy and simplicity were desirable. Kit homes like this one were inexpensive and quick to build. Although the structures were machine produced, they still reflected the same American West iconography of the older true log structures in town. The Pan Abodes simulated traditional log construction and referenced its important details. Key features of Pan Abodes are that they are typically single story, with a low-pitched gable roof. They sometimes have deep eaves, and usually have exposed rafter tails. The flat surface of the machine shaped, tongue and groove logs are central to the building's character. Window openings are spare and usually horizontally proportioned, and wood trim is used to finish out the window openings. The building plans are simple rectangular forms, with smaller additive elements. Detail and decoration are minimal. This particular Pan Abode stands in a neighborhood where there is a reasonably strong Victorian context, including the two Victorian era homes to the west and one across the street. Historic cottonwoods sti~ line this side of the block. The small scale of this home, its materials, and low pitched roof form are anomalies on the block, however this modestly sized building is in no way 2 intrusive. A small addition can be reasonably made to the structure without a negative impact on the character of the area. There are no apparent alterations to this Pan Abode from its appearance in 1966. An addition constructed behind it, and distanced from it with a connector should not negatively affect the Pan Abode's integrity score. Any architectural changes permitted to happen to the historic house itself will need to be carefully weighed to insure that integrity is not compromised. The project represents a build out of all but a small amount of square footage allotted to the site, so no significant projects would be anticipated to affect this site in the future. Design Guideline review The lot split approval for this property established some parameters that affect the current application. In recognition of HPC having granted a 500 square foot FAR bonus for the future redevelopment of this home and the adjacent Victorian, the Pan Abode became a designated historic structure and cannot be demolished. The maximum floor area for all construction on the Pan Abode lot was set at 1,500 square feet. A 2' west sideyard setback variance and a 2' combined sideyard setback variance were granted to accommodate the Pan Abode's existing location. The building is slightly crooked on the lot. Although the site plan included in the HPC' s drawing set shows the Pan Abode square to the lot lines, the architect intends to maintain its skewed placement. A revised drawing will be required. The applicant may request approval to lift the building to install a new foundation in the exact same location, based on feedback from the selected contractor. If this is the case, the request will be made at Final review. Planned alterations to this historic home are the replacement of the existing window units, in- kind replacement of the roof, and installation of a skylight on the western roof slope. All three of these are issues that should be addressed at Final, not Conceptual review, however, staffs initial comments are that if window replacement is determined to be appropriate, the new units must carefully match the existing dimensions and muntin patterns. No alterations to these characteristics would be appropriate. Skylights have not been allowed on primary roof slopes of historic structures in the past, and the one that is proposed may be in conflict with the design guidelines. A one story addition with a more steeply pitched gable roof is planned for the rear of the Pan Abode, linked to it with an 11 foot long, one story connector. The connector meets the back of the cabin where a window is currently located, so no significant amount of wall surface will be removed as part of the new addition. The walls of the connector all held back from the corners of the existing building to maintain the integrity of it's plan form. Staff finds that the location and nature of the connector piece meet the design guidelines. The addition is no wider than the Pan Abode, and is rectangular in shape. Any discussion of the proposed materials and detailing of the addition will be reserved for final review. Staff 3 anticipates some debate over a skylight along the ridgeline, as well as an area of glazing that the architect has added to the front gable end of the addition since the last meeting. The only aspect of the height, scale, massing and proportions of this proposal which was in question at the last meeting was the roof proposed for the addition. The architect has dropped the plate height on the addition by l' and modified the roof pitch slightly to take 1' 8" off of the ridge. The steep gable roof pitch was selected to respond to the forms that are typical around this block. A list of the design guidelines relevant to Conceptual Review is attached as "Exhibit B." Having reviewed the model at the last meeting, and the drawings provided in the packets, staff finds that this project is in compliance with the HPC guidelines as well as the City's "Residential Design Standards." SETBACK VARIANCES The setback variances needed are a 1.5' side yard setback variance for the east side yard to - accommodate a window bay on the addition; a 3.6' side yard setback variance for the west side yard for a lightwell, a rear yard setback variance of 2.5' and a combined front and rear yard setback variance o f 3.5' to allow the addition to be pushed back from the historic cabin. The criteria, per Section 26.415.110.C ofthe Municipal Code are as follows: HPC must make a finding that the setback variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Finding: The applicant is intruding only slightly into the east yard setback. A variance for the lightwell on the west side is only needed if it is larger than the minimum size required by the Building Code. Staff finds that the variance on the east for built in shelves is not unreasonable in size, provides some visual interest to the east wall, and creates a feature that distinguishes the character of the new architecture from the old. The lightwell is a necessary part of the basement expansion. The rear yard and combined front and rear yard setback variances are important in that they allow the addition to be set back as far as possible on the lot, creating a cushion of space around the historic house. Staff recommends the variances be approved. 4 ON-SITE PARKING VARIANCE The applicant requests a waiver of the one on-site parking space required of this project. Per Section 26.415.110.C, parking reductions are permitted for designated historic properties on sites unable to contain the number of on-site parking spaces required by the underlying zoning. Commercial designated historic properties may receive waivers of payment-in-lieu fees for parking reductions. 1. The parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district. Staff Finding: Only one on-site parking space is required by the Code for this one bedroom house. Providing it would eat up valuable space on the ground plane and could result in part of the addition being pushed up into a second story, which would not be desirable when the single story character of the Pan Abode is so key. Staff recommends the space be waived. The owner will be able to park on the street. DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: â€¢ approve the application, â€¢ approve the application with conditions, â€¢ disapprove the application, or â€¢ continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC grant conceptual approval and variances for 320 W. Hallam Street, Lot P, Block 42, City and Townsite of Aspen, with the following conditions: l. HPC approves a 1.5' side yard setback variance for the east side yard to accommodate a bay window on the addition, a 3.6' side yard setback variance for the west side yard if it is needed for the lightwell, a rear yard setback variance of 2.5' and a combined front and rear yard setback variance of 3.5' to allow the addition to Â·be pushed back from the historic cabin, and a waiver of one parking space. 2. An application for Final approval must be submitted within one year of Conceptual approval* 5 RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # , Series of 2003." Exhibits: Resolution # , Series of 2003 A. Staff memo dated May 28,2003 B. Relevant Design Guidelines C. Application 6 "Exhibit B: Relevant Design Guidelines for 320 W. Hallam, Conceptual Review" New Additions 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. c] A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. o An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. o An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. o An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. o An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. o A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.5 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments that may exist on the street. o Some roof lines and porch eaves on historic buildings in the area may align at approximately the same height. An addition should not be placed in a location where these relationships would be altered or obscured. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. o An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. o A 1-story connector is preferred. o The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. o The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. o Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. o Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. 7 o Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. o Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. o Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. o For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 8 WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated May 28,2003, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended that the project be approved with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on May 28,2003, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application was consistent with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and other applicable sections of the Municipal Code and approved the application with conditions by a vote of_ to _. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants Major Development (Conceptual) and Variance approval with the following conditions: l. HPC approves a 1.5' side yard setback variance for the east side yard to accommodate a bay window on the addition, a 3.6' side yard setback variance for the west side yard if it is needed for the lightwell, a rear yard setback variance of 2.5' and a combined front and rear yard setback variance of 3.5' to allow the addition to be pushed back from the historic cabin, and a waiver of one parking space. 2. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written ~-* request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 28th day of May, 2003. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Jeffrey Halferty, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) AND VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 320 W. HALLAM STREET, LOT P, BLOCK 42, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2003 PARCEL ID: 2737-073-14-001 WHEREAS, the applicant, Judy Haas, represented by Derek Skalko, 1 Friday Design Collaborative, has requested Major Development Review (Conceptual) and Variances for the property located at 320 W. Hallam Street, Lot P, Block 42, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. The property is listed on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures;" and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code States that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for approval of setback variances, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.415.110.C of the Municipal Code, that the setback variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district; and WHEREAS, for approval of parking reductions, HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.415.110.C of the Municipal Code, that: 1. The parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural chqracter of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district; and 320 Oak Lane ..9 P Aspen, CO 81611 1 frid a y Phone: 970.544.0695 Fax: 970.920.7822 . d e s i g n collaborative To: The Aspen Historic Preservation From: Judy Haas, Owner 320 W. Hallam St. Commission Derek Skalko, Principal 1 Friday Design Collaborative Fax: Date: May 20 2003 Phone: 970.920.5090 Pages: 1 Re: 320 West Hallam Street - Pan Abode CC: Dear Amy & Members of the Commission, Since our first conceptual hearing held April 23'd, the design of the project has been revisited to address the concerns brought forth by the commission. I have taken these comments to heart and have reduced the overall height of the proposed addition by approximately 1'-8". I say approximately due to the fact a structural variation of 3" needs to be accounted for. This has been accomplished by reviewing the following two areas. First, the original plate heights were called out at 10'. The plate heights have been reduced by 12" to lessen the difference between the existing Panabode and the new construction to 6". We would like to maintain this height in order to properly tie into the existing interior elevation of the Panabode. The second condition reviewed in the design was the slope of the gabled roof of the proposed new construction. The first go around had a slope of 11/12. The slope has been reduced to 10/12 thus reducing the ridge height an additional 8", all together lessening the height of the structure by 1'-8". I would like to point out the average height of the surrounding contextual structures is 25'. The proposed new construction would rise to a maximum height of 19'-6": 5'6" less than the neighboring buildings, and a modest 6'-3" higher than the ridgeline of the Panabode structure. We feel this difference is acceptable due to the care in separating the existing and new constructions. We would also like to emphasize the lack of visible impact the new construction will have on the existing streetscape and surrounding properties. Modeled perspective diagrams have been included depicting how little of the new construction will actually be visible from the street fagade. Thank you very much, Derek Skalko Principal, 1 Friday Design Collaborative a judy hass resid. 320 west hallam street aspen colorado 1 1 I.1 r alleÂ·Â· t.'0â€¢ado 320 oak Ill .. ... Â·Â·'loi.U... Itt. 1 309 069% , I , 0 970 :A// view as approaching from 200 block: west hallam street a . existing panabode 12'-91' ht. b . proposed addition 19'-0" ht. c . adjacent victorian 25' ht. d . adjacent corner home 25' ht. . 1 -491.r 2, 1- -~<*~"~~**X L \1211 23 \ -1 x view as approaching from 400 block: west ballam street \ 1-- -f< 1 C r. overhead view: massing relationship of context JUDY HAAS RESIDENCE 320 west hallam street I aspen I colorado HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONCEPTUAL REVIEW DIRECTORY INDEX DINNER: JUDY HAAS A.O -R SHEET / -TACT REFERENCE /FAR CALCULATIONS May 28th, 2003 po box 330 LOT LINE AD.USTMENT PLAT aspen, colorado 81612 SURVEY A.0 VICINITY MAP - 520 F'IEST HALLAM PROPERTY te[ 410 .425. 6545 tel (studio) 4-10 .425. 5530 AI5 PROPOSED SITE AND TOPOeRAPHIC PLAN Fox 410.425.8840 FQD EXISTING HISTORIC CONDITIONS DOCUMENTATION AR.I LOWER i MAIN LEVEL PROPOSED PLANS 92 PROPOSED ROOF PLANS E CONTEXT ELEVATION DESISNERS: ONE FRIDAY DESIeN COLLABORATIVE, LLC. AB.1-5.2 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS derek m. skalko; principal designer A4.1 EUILDINe SECTIONS judy haas, project designer A]O.I INDOPN 4 DOOR SCHEDULE 320 oak lane aspen, colorado 01611 te! 410.504.0645 Fax 410.420.7822 STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS: PATILLO ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS; ING, JIm romeo; professional engineer consulting structural engineers i -715 grand avenue glenwood spr'ings, colorado 51602 tel q-10.445.4645 d Eax q-10.445.4421 a GENERAL CONTRACTOR: y design collaborative, llc. \1 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS Â©ka k o haas 1 Zoning: Rb Lot Area: 3000 962. FE EAE 35*EME Maximum Allowable Floor Area: 1500 58â€ž FT. Ll [1-]Unl-JLLEJL11 Gross Area (sÂ¥) lfUENPAEMWMfe6%fekl-rm JIT[-0 lit]LillidILI[lidLI 1100 NkNeW#*N96+NU+196*4499#91 â€¢ Main Level 111 1 1 11' ~' 1 nÂ»trrn'TryÂ«-21 (Included: pan-abode 1,3-75 11 1 - 4 main level addition) I rl i Â·-- .1,1 '--&----4- -r--111 1 1 Â»Â»171 . LIlli LeveJ 600. ' (6.1 percent of toier level (45.6 Govntable) countable towards FAR) TOTALS 1,426.6 ~ '2'5-IREETIP)'P 1- 1,426.6 < 1500 - FAR Is OK NotesÂ· e The lop// eval (600 sq Ft In pk/i) corelsti of a sq. footoge of nail area 20' x 30 x qÂ·-6Â· M depth. The 10â€¢,ar level 0,90 contcha o light wall of 3' x Â¢I'-6- x 6'6Â· In dapth, br~,gly the total ,Â·011 surfa,/ crea of the to,ier level to 5,515.5 sq feet of surface <rea. OF this total. the Ught well crea c,d 6- of panneter craa orot// the struiture /111 be c~Â¥>osed, trhgyq the /4/sure per-can#ge to 4 755 sq. n., â€žhkh counts for 2.196 '*pos,e to be usacl ago~,s~ FAR- m ... lil iiI 11 ... UHL HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT El\,NER'S CERTI FI CATE SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION PLAT COLORADO D[IS 1â‚¬REBY SUBDIVIDE AND REPLAT THIS REAL PROPERTY UNDER THE MME ~~O ntu ED lk =LrZIV-'UDISTTIA~Es& '~~0~f A TWAi &!Z?YIHE RECORD 0-R rifY UIL,t#ALi TT~ 1~~1~iT7'1&%~yL HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION, EXECUTED THIS __ DAY OF ______. 2002. LOTS N, 0. & P. BLOCK 42, TIE ESTATE OF MARGARETE A Ull CI TY & TOWNSI TE OF ASPEN, BY, BY ---1&-O-*.-PtatioÂ£-At,Rcit:t:Trot-- -,Ir-GEW,74Â£050AAE-ACPRCYCAT:TNE PI TKI N COUNTY, COLORADO STATE [F COL[Â»2AI]O ) >59 COUNTY [F PITKIN ) lâ‚¬ FOREGOING OvIRÂ·S CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS _ DAY OF UTATE-'-REâ€¢61,0: r~TON UN- AS PERSON#IL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE WITIâ‚¬SS MY HAND IND OFFICIAL SEAL. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES, STATE C~ _____.___> NOTARY PUBLtC >SS COUNTY OF _---_) THE FOREGOING OWKERÂ·S CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS ___ DAY OF 2002 IV .U-]E GRANT AS PERS[Â»AL REPRESENTATIVE [* TI CEYâ€¢!f OF MIRGARETE â€¢ ulÂ«_ WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. MY COMMISSION EXPIRESâ€¢ 0 0. SET VICINITY MAP TI TLE CERTI FI CATE ALLEY BI now .t:G SCALE - DO ... 4 1 INCH = 10 FEET TIâ‚¬ LÂ»IDERSIGED, A DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF- STEWART TITLE IF ASPEN. INC PLAT NOTES .a 32 REGISTERED TO DO BUSINESS IN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO DOES HEREBY CERTIFY THIT TIÂ·â‚¬ PERSONS LISTED AS OVERS ON THIS PLAT 00 ,{1. D FEE SIMPLE TITLE TO THE WITHIN ?LI MiT&%,~?~rocke!~:~dh~i~- ZT-hIEUS BM~n;f~4~fs smAI NY'%.9....O/.*183:"#%/.P.t#16=me= 0/*...AFQ:11:426.cord.nce .th 0 5 10 13 20 ON THIS PLAT ARE TRUE, THIS CERTIFICATE IS NOT TO BE CONSTRLED AS AN ABSTRACT Co-4-I Resclut- Â»-erÂ· 32 (Sern of 2002). and tlÂ·/ Subav,sk)r, Ex/fiptiOn OF TITLE. NCR AN OPINION OF TITLE. NOR A GUARANTEE [F TITLE. AND IT IS u<DERSTOOD A,-,e-nt r,cor-d -th th, Pitkb, Co-ty Cler-k on,1 Recor-r 05 1*,c,ption LOr AND AGREED THAT STEWART TITLE OF ASPEN. INC. NEITIER ASSIâ‚¬S NOR WILL BE CHARGED f - -3:7. :~65 Mere/*-2//9Â£556/41Â°0Â£52 - SET C[*2 WITH ANY FINANCIAL OBLIGATION CR LIABILITY WHITS[IVER ON ANY STATEMENT i CONTAINED HEREIN t- 1./. cs cov-ents 'Irollr-, th~ sc~. â€ž DATED_-_______._-0 2002 i a . -... , TITLE 2,T" 3.000 'c,-,re foot k,t Clot P) A -tltled to 1.500 "Iri firt of FAR floor arw. fiE~-717[2-~ ASPEN. INC. f th, 6.000 iliary Foot lot (Lot N and 01 * mati~ to 3.000 1,),or, Fe,t of FAR / <40' 620 E. HOPKINS AVE. Acer Grl. .. ASPEN. COLORAD[] 81611 j I STATE Cr COLORADO) FEE:Ea~&*iNEEkEEWbe:aMEEi'- i ..4 )SI ELEC & COIM ~ COUNTY OF P]KTIN ) EASDENT 6. LOT m 324 PO 829 THE F'CREGO]NG T]TLE CERT]FICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS - -. 4.1No F,th,r kma-08 of tW tor- -plit,/ -r/0, 1,~It be per/tt,d nor -1 4 i DAY [Â¥ __ _ ________.2002 BY __--_--______ AS ______-_. Or STEWART '*Nt-al .rUIng -Its b. kult. -ess apptlcolot. "-ovats cr, ok'taln. c--suant TITLE OF- A#07, TiC to thi Asper, Lof,/ 01/ Co- e effect ot th, thi of opplicatky, f WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL_ MY CO-ISS[[N EXPIRESâ€¢ 51â€¢11 â€ž/1 d-,lop-nt or, the *plet// gropertls -Al cor,forâ€ž to th, 06â€¢,/ns,0/ul / 3556022Â£:â‚¬92:Â£3556.St:GEED i AOTAR?-POBERI- the Lan,01 Use Coce to reqcest vortrces Fron t- "'/ â‚¬r,cl rec~reaer, ts of the / Ze-~ 0/trct Fr" " 'r,/ty -th th, cutherity to -ar and -ce' up,-1 -Ih ric,-st, Â£7+Istor. Pre-rvat- C.-ds- Res,Mutk,n Â»-*r 32. Ser-5 of 20(2. effectÂ»ely k LOT P opprov/cl c 300 sI.er, Foot FAR borus Col//ody r/n/ct// n t~ FAR twts i Istoblished L-~-r mt. -2.- obove). 0 1Â· -st *de yord -tback vort.,c, fc,- t- : LOT . DEBOAE+TEâ‚¬EZEGFE~-.:EEZE:Z 0* 3.000 SQJ-T ./- SUR\EYE]R' S CERTIFICATE /ast,rfroit of th/- 1/./a. 2 2Â· ./st -d, yard -tback verâ‚¬v</ for t- Pan Abo,l. - A SURVEY WAS PERFORMED UNDER MY DIRECTION AND SUPERVISION OF TIâ‚¬ HEREON DESCRIBED LOT N AND 0 : N 00689 ACRES â€¢/ 1, DAVID W. MIBRIDE. HEREBY CERTIFY THAT IN JUE 2002 AND lilY 2002. and 8 2' ccablr,- 1- yard "tbeck vw,â€¢eâ„¢:, fcâ€¢- th, Pon Aboo- 2 1 7.70-ner anal Fut-/ 0--rs oF th, Pon Abod- Etruct-, ~ocit/01 0,1 Lot P. Block 42. Oty 6,000 SOFI â€¢/- i 2/ CMME;. NU~11 '2 Eâ€¢~11 L]w ~r'ViTKIN Z[K~'TYDT~LE. ~C ES. TITLE COMMITMENT ORDER 11 PCT-17086L. DATED MAY 20.2002 ARE ACCURATELY SHOWN ON THIS MAP. 09/ TMI/te 0/ AN/n .Inot ip,Ay For i ld/ng //IM te //ell Ind itruct-, Tâ‚¬ CONTROL SURVEY PRECISIC}4 IS GREATER THAN 1:10.000 WITH AN ACCURACY TO 0.001 0* It Ily th'e. an /,rement reached . recoorit,on of Oout not 'pecin:'lly . /*char,ge &1377 ACRES i/- hr) 1-/CÂ·, approval of a SOO squar, Foot hoor arec bon,rs 6, port of thls lot *plt 0- AN ACRE AND IMT TIâ‚¬ SURVEY WAS DCÂ»â‚¬ IN ACCCRDANCE WITH CRS 1973 TITLE 38 / k I IRTICLE 32 IX WINID rmll TIVE TO TEI ~~2 1&12*= tl:C~Zle:e;:2't..1, 17 t~P~qt~:1 -05#K~~T Â£Â£* p . ..cr SPED THIS _ DAY y _-________. 2002 i I BAY,16-93-â‚¬8â‚¬11Â£-1?iriL#â‚¬ 9. Wit-, t--ty <30) oloys of t" "cordation of this pket. th' appaccr,t /QU "tab ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS.INC Fron th, Clty Ene-,rag D,p-ta-t /ncroach-nt li.wri For t- 5-,r/ -croicâ€¢-nts / , 210 S. GILENA ST. 0. r,to th, Publk Rn. (t.0 sh,ch. th, Fence. ord ck,-0 t.r) i = :?& ASPEN. CO- 81611 " C".6. 1 2% Cm IOUEN, . " CI TY CE]UNCI L APPROVAL '32.1 407 THIS PLAT [r TIâ‚¬ LM_ HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT SUBDIVISION WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY 34.-4 1 0 $'J/09Â· ~a3G.*'2Â£3#Epiati:a~)M-WiÂ·-m-mn-- 244 - 41Â· - W. - N~ 11~CL SIGFED THIS ... DAY Cr _____.__. 2002 104. ATTEST* --I -:,/. i ACCe:-REARMAOD--,In,f------------- IATHRPR-riaf<-crff-eaae i i m. 1 i.= CI TY ENGI NEER' S APPROVAL LEGEND & NOTES , f THIS PLAT OF THE UÂ·L HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT SUBDIVISION WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER CF TIE CITY Cr ASPEN. THIS _____ DAY Cr ______________. 2002. 4. 1 FOLID SLACY ~OUâ‚¬NT REGAR WI TH CAP AS NOTED i â€ž . tiff-E,Rfikifi--Nick 7Â»- SPIKE OR P-K MIL SUR'.EY CONTR[1 0{1 . U- .a V. N (270-009 Cl wUMI i (60.00, â€ž POSTED ADDRESS IS ~304 AND 320 EST HALLIN ST.- . COMMUNI TY DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL TITLE tIORMATION WAS ~~ ~~ M~~~ TITLE [F ASPEN. INC. ... DATED SEPT. 19. 2002 SET 02. THIS PLAT OF T,â‚¬ Ui HISTORIC LINIMARK LOT SPLIT SUBDIVISION WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY Tf DIRECTOR Cr T+â‚¬ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN Dy O SET CORIER IC 4 REBAR W/RED CAP CAP 16129 E- 1 THIS _ DAY [i- ___--_---_____. 2002. -70 -WE Ot,0,3 - n SEE SICET 2 FOR ILL St*?VEY FIELD ,â‚¬ASIRE,â‚¬ITS â€ž cyâ€ž.. DWIfI.- XEM-,Wi-QUES- . .ED: E ... ... CLERK AND RECORDER' S ACCEPTANCE CIX. 0,10 1 GUTTER . CT'./. i~ ~t,t~E~~f-1----TA-Z~MOFiE{pl~'&&5~:Jf:?ff~N:Ify& w:TTYÂ· . .U = CLERK-iND-ECORDER. SILVIA -~~S 344 Wint> STREET PREPARED BY INDEX ASPEN SURVEY ENGI NEERS, I NC. ACC[*201 Â£ TO CCU-00 LAW YO.1 1,157 COIâ‚¬,CE ANY LEGAL ACTI [Â»1 210 S. GALENA STREET DASED LFED, AN, DEFECT IN hil S /LAT WITâ€¢,1 w TIRELE Â¥EARS Af TER VOI SHEET 1 SITE FLAN. CERTIFICATES & PETES. VICINITY MAP FI.T DI SCO./. SUCH ./ECT 1 N 21 E'ENT. li~Y ANY ACT[ M IASED ASPEN. C[1[ 81611 SHEET 2 Iâ€¢PROV[1â‚¬NT SLAVEY. EXISTING CONDITIONS PIOâ‚¬/AX ( 970) 925-3816 LF C,1 NM DE r[CT I N â„¢1 S PL AT I CD,â‚¬NCELB 1â‚¬~ TI- TOI Â¥EARS E-MAIL daveeasper*,focom F.1, 1/ DATE / hâ‚¬ CERTIFICATI [Â»4 Dowil Iâ‚¬/Â£* SHEET 1 OF 2 job e 321 55â€¢ ANC 7. 2002 REVISED +03-02 Â®0 4,~L r. UHL HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION PLAT N A 94â€¢r< SCALE SEY ALLEY B~OCK 2 t ]NCH â€¢ 10 FEET * - D. 1 0 5 10 IS 20 * ' cs ~r m 40 - -3.U/%496 ~I - lOT ~ ! AP 4 1 - .j DeD , --4 1 ELEC & COIL i %24114 -, 6.. LOT N . i i i !1 1 i 22 / i 1 PArto LOT o i i â€¢ i l LEGEND & NOTES ik j / O FOUND SlÂ®.CY IOUENT REBAR M TH CAP AS NOTED 2 /0/ e SPI KE M P-K fal L SUNT CONTH[1 VICT{*14 Â£07 p .-0 POSTED ADDRESS IS * 304 IND 320 IST Hâ€¢L-LAN ST â€¢ . ... y -*- M RE FENCE 1 h 'S -8- BOD FENCE / ecÂ· O UTILITY BOX .c e UN Â® ELECTRIC TRANSFORIâ‚¬R - ciri .ou~Ir ! 4494 : S '-2 -Â· / SET CIRNER ,Â«1 4 RE,IR WITH RED CAP 16129 11-9-02 . LOT 1 0 j~ ~ ; ~ 1~ TITLE MORMTION WAS FURNISBED BY, PITKIN COUNTY TITLE. INC: 2*â€¢,5/, I CO-ITIâ‚¬IT NCI PCT-17086L ...99/.2-9,4GS - DATED JUNE 27,2002 43. 4 , a.Â· ~ ~ i ' 54Â»I -- i ~~E coN[FER TREE CALIPER SIZE AS NOTED 4 - 7 .b . . / ~ DECIDUOUS TREE CALIPER SIZE AS NOTED VEt. CAP - 7 / 8%-#So,!â€¢.64,M RECORD re, T.â‚¬ 1939 OF-FlCAL â€¢AP Cr TIC PIAE ,-2!r i 1 i i - - c~ 20â€¢ 0 6-jr ~ : L 3999..41 4 - ...X= i <N 75,09'11Â·W> llc ... -0 21& ~ VALVE ~ 28. SET - rL .C . CDÂ£ WU :.:=*L 1 - ... .U CC'k ./ f / I MPROVEMENT SURVEY GU"C* . 1*2 - TWEST ...= 44LLA~f PI TKI N COUNTY. COLORADO LOTS N. 0, & P, BLOCK 42. CITY & TOkNSI TE OF ASPEN, STREET PREPARED BY ASPEN SURVEY ENGI NEERS, I NC. ACC[*D,16 TO COLDWBO LAW YEÂ», WIT COIâ‚¬NCE ANY LEGk ACTIC, 210 1 GALINA STREET ......... 0.-ECT IN TMI S PLAT / TH, I T./I .... ./TER ./. 11 IT DI SCOMIRED $1Â£/ IEFICT 1 H ..... *I ./ ACTI C,1 ./. ASPEN. Cll[1 81611 PIOâ‚¬ /FAX C 970) 923-3816 A Irr KIECT ] â€¢ TIÂ« S PLAT IC COOâ‚¬NCI 1,â‚¬RE THAN TOM YEARS E-MAIL deveeaspen-fo-com e r./ ./ DATE .. .. CERTIFICATICÂ», SIOVâ€¢ 1â‚¬XIÂ»L Job M 321 55 NOV. 25 2002 C SHEET 2 OF 2 /4 ..27Â·<74 4%00, UHL HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION PLAT 34 0.. = Gal.k SCALE , SE' ALLEY 1 INCH = 10 FEET - - tak sci B - DED 0 5 10 15 20 =T . 40 . r Â£07 / - .40~ 4 - .i 2 DED . . 8 i /2 3 i LOT N .le, i j i 1 il . \\L i 1 - i -------i i Â¥81 U .4 1 PATIO 1 2 LOT 6 0 4 0 E LEGEND & NOTES 654 ih i j O F[kIND SUINCY IOUâ‚¬NT REBAR W TH CAP AS <TED . SyahÂ· /41 i 4 SPI KE [8 P-K MIL SUR,Â£Â¥ CONTR[1 VICT-* PErSTED ADDRESS IS - 304 IND 320 47 fILL- 57. - *D'Â»â€¢Mt -8. ~OOD /ENCE j & - W RE FENCE r"jFL<22#WQ)9 O UTILITY BOX 44 4 1 008 ~ ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER CITY 100â‚¬NT ! i - Â· i SET CMâ€¢CR In 4 REBAR wITH RED CAP 16129 11-8-02 . . LOT Q ! ~ ~ â€¢ 1~ TITLE INFORMATION WAS FLRNISED BYâ€¢ P]TKIN COCITY TITLE. INC. 7$ 1*b -~,e,r 4 ~ / DATEF ANE 27,2002 829â€ž440 ae. 4 . Ae,Â· i i COMMITMENT NCI PCT-17086L . ~* CONIFER TREE CALIPER SIZE AS NOTED 2 ~ DECIDUOUS TREE CALIPER SIZE AS NOTED Â· r / - iu / ~0*S,~N~C~~&* RECORD ~ROM Tâ€¢â‚¬ 1959 FICAL MAP V TIC P. . --1 i i 5 - i i OWL, . i i . 5999 .41 i . i 04 75009'11 6 . - r. rET . C -C C' 0/ . '0Â£ U.. ST./ Vâ€¢Â£/ - Er./ -u 44. f 66174* I MPROVEMENT SURVEY IVENpr 44Â£Â£4~4 CITY & TORSI TE OF ASPEN, LOTS N, 0. & P, BLOCK 42, STREET PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PREPARED BY - ASPEN SURVEY ENGI NEERS, I NC. ACC[*01 /6 TO C[1.-CÂ»~DO ..Av ....T CrÂ»OCE Arf LECAL ACTI 01 21 0 1 GALINA STREET lâ€¢SED lF'DI AWY DCFECT 1 â€¢ THI S PLAT M THI I TIEE Â¥EARS AFTER YOU ASPEN. COL[1 81611 FIRST DISCIF.ERED SUCH 1[fECT 1 N I C.ENT. MY ANY ACTI M 'SED U'CÂ»,1 -rf DEFECT I N THI S PLAT I CO,DE[-0 ,Â«RE TI- TEN YEARS PEOâ‚¬/FAX (970) 925-3816 E-MAIL daveeosper.Ir,focom F.. ill ./[ Er T....T, FI CAT! c. S,ow, )â‚¬REL* SHEET 2 OF 2 Job na- 32155 hov 25 2002 â€¢PE, ~:L- d I a 1 y i . desgn collaborative, Ile 320 oak lane aspen colorado 81611 phone(970),309.0695 fax (970) .920.7822 8-mall derek@,tudlabarchltects.net 494* "m.4 O 2003 ONE FRIDAY DESIGN â€ž COLLABORVE LLC, THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THS DOCUMENT IS THE I - COUABORATME ...... NO PART OF PROPERTY OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED OR COMED WrrHOUTTHEFRICRWRITTEN i PERMISSION OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN COLLABORATIVE L.L.. ONE FRIDAY DESIGN COLLABORAmE LLC. SHALL- REL,IN ALL CO,-ON LAW STATUTORY N THIRD ST AND All OTHER RESERVED FIGHTS, COPYRIGHT 2003 / Â·Â·: '*4@.Wr Ur,?M .r':7&1.3: I 3% 1%*4 + 99.4&9 1 1 NPRf: 1 1 19 ON0039 N L -0 - 0 /'.- i i }dE E*% 3t: I m i B - Re. Cor,-dion ilausdate: Ellm MAP Sheet I / 1 3VICINITY MAP : 320 WEST HALLAM STREET A- SCALE: NO SCALE REPRESENTED eouep!Sabl seeH Xpnr 320 Hallam Street pu3 19eM - uedsv Jo *1!0 19 INÂ¥11Â¥H M W FRANCIS ST This map/drawing/image isa graphical representallon anae f r i ...B,â‚¬ le.Â£ . E------------------------------------------------------1 designcollaborative,Ilc. 320 oak lane ' Em Fol i aspen colorado 81611 phone<970.309 0695 3 1 ENTRY i f a x (970) . 920. 7822 Dft- BEDROOM ' ~-mall KITCHEN /.-0 / 1% derek@studiobafchltact5.net T F-Tr L/ | COLLABORATIVE L.L C O 2003 ONE FRIDAY DESIGN 1 1 1 THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON T}iS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN .E El COUABORANVE L.L.C. NO PART OF -- -------- --i- THIS INFORMIVION MAY BE USED oR ====== 1 1111~ 1 Q ]1 i' 11 -1 il U b 11111111 1111111111 11 1~ J~ I 11 1~ ~: 1~ U 1 ~ ~ 111 n 1 COPIED WIHOUT THE PRjOR WRmEN PERMISSION OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN DESIGN COLLABORATIVE LLC. SHALL AND All OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS. - - COLIABORAIVE Llt ONE FRI RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STAnrTORY COPYRIGHT 2003 r - - --1------------- -- ---- ---- -------- -3 1 LIVING AREA em!2- i r R 93 L 21-1 EXISTING PLAN - PANABODE LilEXISTING WEST ELEVATION - (HALLAM STREET) 5-EXISTING-SQUIMELEMATION I \C:~3/ SCALE : 1/4Â· = 1'_oÂ· \A-HIÂ§,/ SCALE : 1/4Â· = 1Â·-0 A-HIS SCALE : 1/4Â· = 1'-0Â· NORTH m I R CO '...AIZ ./MI 11 1 11 1 f f f T 1 I e l 1 /1 Consh,Iction h- dete- -."&. Ld-JEXISTING EAST ELEVATION - ( ALLEY VIEW) 8--3 EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION RM& CONDITIONS 221EXISTING_BOOE_PLAN - PANABODE m,Iâ€ž~Iw* ui- A TET A-HIS SCALE : 1/4' = 1'-0Â· \~~.~/' SCALE : 1/4Â· = 1,-0Â· A-HIS SCALE . 1/4- = 1'-0 ShaeÂ¢ # A-HIS Judy Haas Residence puE' jseM - uedsv Jo 40 r f (r ti + f~ f d '23 49 i a des gn collaborative,llc. 1 1 1 -I"'I=--Ill<-- 1 320 oak lane aspen colorado 81611 m 1 Ir r -----------7 r phone (970). 309. 0695 . .t . 0 - - -Â«r.) fax (970) . 920. 7822 / 1 ....11 U- \ , l 18 Rk/â€¢ 10'-6 1â€¢2' *k@*tudlobarchllect6.net / 1 1/ , fÂ¥81 STAR MECHANICAL- / r.-.11. n 5 1 . \71 / O 2003 ONE FRIDAY DESIGN ---- - COLL.AlORATn/E L.L.C. -' ~- THEINFORMATION ANDDESIGNâ€¢,TENT -'- CONTAINED ON Ttls DOCUMENT IS THE C PROPERTY OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN BEDROOM 1 -REL JIP' - ,-2\ COLLABORAm. L.L C. NO PART OF LIU i=. - - -, COPIED WrrHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN THIS INFORMATION MAYBE USED OR PE#UAISSION OF Or. FRIDAYDESIGN COUABORATIVE L.LC. ONE FRIDAY 1- p - 5---* i DESIGN COLLABORATM LLC. SHALL 141 ---I j RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AK ALL OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, COPYRIGHT 2003 '1 6 0 1 ----- / 1 1 --1. - - - - - 1 \ 1 1. 1 1 BATH CLOSET L. ' ~ L/' MECHANICAL 061- ~-=L== - ~3 7-7 Dif: 4, 1 1 11 1 1 1 'i 1 it 1 1 1 CE , 4, 4 ~ C 13 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL PLAN -~~~ ~2.~ SCALE : 1/4Â· = 1,4Â· 2 L.MA f 60 1 Cool Ka, \317 7 ff 28 (/63 /74) f) f Of 1 11 1 1 1 Â«17//1 Â»10Â« 1 1 3 21.â„¢e -a~*- -# C --,7 0 1 -_-1 1 1 111-1110 I STÂ« li 1 [La \1- (13 1 1 L.-21-1 ENTRY- 11 ~| CLOSET 1 4.% 1 1 ~. L.1 C====~5~ -rÂ·*=41 2 LIVINe AREA -~= KITCHEN -~<D 022~ 1 0 (31 A / \ 1~ rEh,Rrr.1*5~~~h Â«4481 . EEZI 1,7 ,-U -1 :'.'44>/ 1 - ' 7 f 1129 i I!(mil - -' = Lib==N- 1 ~, f il 1--la JÂ® GATHERINS AREA L__ 4.....en--- K TCHEN ISLANIb /1 A = I i Il 1 -4 1 ON I----il'' 7 u---~ Â· M2.-885* L/ U./ DINING AREA : . I I BRIDGE . 1.- An \ 11 /1 WASH | ORÂ¥ | e REF \\ 11 -/ 1--T--7---- ------------- - C *- 7 -#Ti* I 1--1 0 â€¢ _ Â»,r z -rÂ· m - ic--=Â·~7 7I--Ir-1 -- -/ An# 3 0 R. 1 0 Col.'"cbon -uedate: i i i ~~ED PLANS 1 1 11 1 1 1 320 HALLAM STREET Shed# l~Â·' f21 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLAN (3, 4, 4 ' ~2.~ SCALE : 1/4Â· = 1 '4Â· ~ J J A-2. I E eouep!Sekl seeH Pnr pu3 ~/~ 12ldesHVO~P! 0 f ee tic 1 , O. 1 .4.1 .41' Â»417 1 r d 7 ' -Eh '' 1% ,~j a 4 4 li 1 f design collaborative,llc. 320 oak lane aspen colorado 81611 phone (970) , 309.0695 Tax (970) .920.7822 IXISTING 1 11'111 1~ dBrek@8tudlobarchltects.net ' riP t ' -14 1 , s 10 SNIM 'Ell- --â„¢1 1 1 1 1. 11 1 â€¢ ...Ill 1 1 1 kt f~ 1 ' I li r j 1.1 1 F 1 1 jin 1 11 11 1 PIN 11 0 2003 ONE FRIDAY DESIGN 6 I i! 1 ' Ckl I ' 1 il| .K~OStD> 5/â€¢ COU.ABOW/E L.L.C. 1!'/ .,------==~ 1 1 1 Ill .El./ .0 SE APPLIED 0-11 ' , I '' I PROPERTY OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN OVER TO' CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THEE ;26h 1 H' THE INFORMAnoN AND DEs,~~ .rr~,n COLLABORATIVE L.L.C. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED OR COPIED WITHOUT THE PRIORWRITTEN 1 7...2 ..Pr 1 1 1 ~ 1 111 111 11 11 11 11 PERMISSION OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN COLABORATIVE LL.C ONE FRIDAY DESIGN COLLABORATME LLC. SHALL- RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY Ill ~'1111 111 1 1 111 1 1 AND ALL OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, CEPAR 911"SLES COPYRIGHT 2003 .... VENT " 1 % e Hi 1 \ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 11 1 I '1) 1 1 '1 1 1 It 1 - i 1 - - -4-L 'Ah /1 h PROPOSED IROOF PLAN / CD 1 41 e. / d / LI T[-r v 1 11 1 ) 1 1 1 L 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 1 1 1 1 / J 1: I Iii 1111111 11 11 1 "1 1 1 U 1 1 -MO 550 55 1 1 - 1 9 1 1.-1 1 ucion 1 111 ' |SSue date & CONTEXT EL ATION PROEED ROOF PLAN Sheet ' (23 PROPOSED CONTEXT ELEVATION: 320 WEST HALLAM STREET A-2.2 pl1313/Iattt~i~10 eoue ! SeeH pnp f r i 1 1 n f f design collaborative.llc. 1 1 & T.C. KAL-+NAL SKÂ·rL,ell 320 oak lane f ELEV. 114'-6' CAPPROX J aspen colorado 81611 1 M . Ul W .... M | 1 1 r/. RIDE BEAM phone (970) . 309.0695 fax (970) .920. 7822 MI 1 111 1 1 11 4 1'~ it 1 i derek@'tudiobarchltect..net 1 11: 1 111 1 IIi 1 1 1 1 1 Ill 1 1 Ill COLLABORATIVE L.L.C. 0 2003 ONE FRIDAY DESIGN | | q â„¢E INFORMiilli AND DESIGN ITITINT 0 1 1 1 1 1 ~ E~ TIEMAIN GABU PROPERTY OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN CONTAII. ON THI DOCUMENT IS THEE , I B.EV. 101'-3Â· COLLABORATIVE LLC. NO PART OF lilli 1 1 Ill 11 1 11111'11111 1 i TO. PLATE 'ININS DUMP-OUT THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED OR 1 11 1 .1.1.11 '' .1.11 1,1121 1 1:1 ~ ~ -----+EEWiaB'y COPIED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN TO PLATEE BADGE Lor,1 PERMISSION OF ONEZ FRIDAY DESIGN 1 14 14. . F 95// I COUABORAIVE L.L.C. ONE FRIDAY RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY DESIGN COLLABORAIVE LLC. SHALL 1 -1'51: 1-" ~ I ~I : Â· ~~ j I AND ALL On{ER RESERVED RIGHTS. laNOM'Â°1=0.1'1 aN'M A..5, 1 U11 FI- 1441 64 COPYRIGHT 2003 0 UL-4 P~}a, = I' Â·:f.242-EÂ·-w~]2.2 idill - _i~ 1 TO. PlriD. MAIN LEVEL- 2 ELEV. 100Â·-0- 11 1 /1 3 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION - ADDITION SCALE : 1/4 = 1'-0Â· 11 11 1 T.O. CO~. LO~ER LEVEL Â¥ B.EV. 84Â·-â€¢1' . 7 , h , -2% 1 4, 4 A T.. KAL-rt/L SKÂ·rLIGHT 1-U_-1-U-Lid_L]L U L Im U L Il 'Li.01_L____1____1____1____1_1 1 1 E-T777-7-1 -Il.,......3 1-LdULLL-[Lili [_[11171 - i alat Jtv,kiJU*Lf------T-----T---T---T---11-7---â„¢-'-3-1 - _ 6 TO RIOSE eEAM r ELEV. 118Â·-4- (AFâ€¢FROXJ IFIFF'Â»Eli 11 li li If Il Il I-[ Il Il It~frl~rf~tr~rfffrifÂ¥fff~777Â¥~fr'fmlt~rf~fr~M'll lili iTI 6 TO. PLATE PORCH CUTBACK 7 ELEV. 115'-2 1/2' IlE ' IF"i[[-- i 99Â£9 11 -11 1.11 111111 Illill Ullil lilli Il 1117 11--;-14 41,1_ILLELILILL[LUU11I-LELL - Eli_LI_I UL.[1.1121371 Ii-- 4~|UÂ·,!1.1 Â©Il HL] Il UU Il LIUII Hil Il lilill HII li lli Il lilill lilill 1,11.11 Ill LUL-111111_UUUMUUULL MOM Â·1*-WA, 5,U}fr95151,1 T.O. PLATE MAIN IABLE :t ELEV. 104Â·-9 - 8 r i 1 ~ I_ i j m " " I In I ~ t I I Il'b"'~' ~ Il)''A'ill 1 lilli ~ ; 1 :11 111 1 14 1 1, Ely- T/.//./1.2/1/6/ HleH Â· ELEV, 102'-8 3/4- 4 86 '0* L 525/ 2925-F 11 .F7 lei i .1/ 1 :r I ITY N Ct 'Â¥ â€¢â€¢01'- I W E Ki 111 ..lA* 1 1 , 96 411 \ 1"./ 1 1 11 +05 11 1 1".'45 1 ~ 1 nua *alf , ; 1=41 1' ) 55'EM - 1 ELEV. 100'-O' -rl------- 411 elli 0 1===zz= I:1[ 11- 9 fO ~ P 0,411 ~L/ 1 ~ r=Ed Il'1241 Cor,stÂ·dion imsuedate ATe. COND. LIGHT~â€¢ELL SASE Inawing â„¢e: 7 ELEV. 41'-10- ADDITION ELEVATIONS 2 HALLAM STREET AT.O. Cohil. 10/1/R LEVE Sheet #: 221PROPOSED-WESTELEMATION - ADDITION A-3.1 SCALE: 1/4' =1-0Â· ADD eouep!sekl seeH Apnr 10849 LUBIIBH OZE p'.13 1seAA - uedsv Jo x}!O 5'-51' Ro. 1 - 9 4 | | ~~~\~ PROPOSE TO RE,e/E EXISTING FLLE 1 -4-1-- ' PROPOSE TO ADS> SKILIeHT TO ROOF= y I T./. KAL-VIAL SKILIGHT PROPOSE TO IPLACE EXISTI 7 ELEV. Ill'-e' W'PROXJ design collaborative, lic. 1-- PROPOSE TO 11Â·PROVE EXISTIN5 PASO/4 -~ - ----41&M*E~kox, 320 oak lane - _ t _ 1 TO. PLATE PORCH OUTBACK ~~~~~~~-WEe73â‚¬45-inÂ· aspen colorado 81611 12 phone(970).309. 0695 107 -1 F'RCPOSE TO MAINTAIN EXIST[Ne r,11â‚¬)OM f a x (970) . 920 . 7822 Â¢9 mail LOGATION AND SIZINS WITH les RACED derek@studlobarchltects n- 1 18-i CLAD OR r,000 'INDO,6 01' MA.E=loTLEZER /1 TO BEE DETERMINED MA.LION PATTERN TO MATCH EXISTIN6 CONDITIONS Â© 2003 ONE FRIDAY DESIGN PROPOSE TO REPLACE EXISTINS STAIRS COU-ABORATIVE LL.C. TO. PLATE MAIN BADLE ITH MORE APPROPRIATE HISTORIC SOLUTION m,-Ey = 2 Z --*~Â¥2i~Z~ _//7= | THEINFORMATION ANDDESIGNNIENT 112929// 1 1 CONTAINED ON THS DOCUMENT IS 1}Â·â‚¬ ---*-go.IOI-y 2629-fD< /..=21_LE i PROPERTY OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN (33 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION PAN-ABODE - HALLAM ST. FACADE PERMISSION OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN COUABORATIVE L.L. C. NO PART OF â„¢IS INFORMATION MAY BE USED OR COPIED WrrHOUT â„¢'PRIOR WRITTEN ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~29.~ COPYRIGHT 2003 COLLABORATIVE LLC. ONE FRIDAY DESIGN COLLABORATIVE LLC. SHALL SCALE: 1/4' = 1'-0' RETAIN ALL- CO~ON LAW STAILITORY AND ALL OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS. L.1 1- .1 . 1-1,1-d 1 -1 1 -1 1+L __--_____ . r.0. PLMO. MAIN LEVEL ~~~ ~ ~ FL-------=2~____-_-_-___-iJ ~ - PROPOSE TO REEâ€¢eVE EXISTNe FLUE 11 11 11 ,/-------2--r----PRO~OSE TOREPLACE EXISTING ROOF 1 11 1 11 1 11 11 PROPOSE TO ltâ€¢PROVE EXISTINS FASCIA 11 1 1 B ll i I ll- 1Â· 111111 1 1 111 I 1.11 1 11 ! 111-Ultil- [El|| 1 â‚¬11~ 1'0'OSE mwaNmINS .,ocÂ»4 CD C LOCATION IND SIZINS VITH UPIRIOED 0 + Ill geg 1 TO. GONG. LorER LEVEL CLAD OR WOOD ,â€¢1,4/0,6 BÂ¥ MNFACT\RER 7 ELEV. eq'-4 TO BE DETERMINED râ€¢ULLION PATTERN To Â·-*=-~~'~=21-==7-li----7-~-Â·Â·====E=UIInE~ MATOH ExISTINe CO*PIT-loNS PROPOSE TO REFINISH PAN-IB/DE STAIN EMB 2112.ROPOSED-NORTH-ELEVATION (FACING ALLEY) - ADDITION af El SCALE : 1/4' = 1'-0" u, E g 0 -E a. (43 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION PAN-ABODE 2 I.:2 E.2-5=Eii'=1:4' >Â· 2 b 3 (9 11 7 /2 + f f i T 0 I-~Da~KilaST'Z~WT'~U~W' 1 F/g , Ii]TH 7'-C ONTERIOR DIMENSION AT LOW SIEME) Ed CoÂ»ECTION El-EFENT. C.0-ECTOR PIECE TO Ti E 4 46-m.7- D - Â· ---- 9--Â·Â·---5r-Â·Â·Â·Â·--rr---LIEAr-J CONIPITIOB TO EDOSTÂ»46 STINGT~*22 / LO/IERED T.O. KAL-MAL SKYLIGHT ~ __,_--~â‚¬9~ZCTZ=t=z:~put 44 INTO EXIST116 PAN-Aeo[PE ROOF CCIOITION DUE a.24 -6 - ---tp --==f==-- In; TO BUILDINS CODE 1Â·Ele,fr MIHI,1,Â·19 4 FOR LEAST T O RIPeE ae*1 AMCUIT OF INP,CT TO PENDI,6 ICE al,LCU' 011-,pirc]4 1 FE~]*c=z=#1~ RE,eâ‚¬ EXIST,Ne ELECTRICAL eoXES 4 METERS | ~4 t>'M~t====Â·-Ar----~1,---=-1.11 STfLE Of= ruloolt TO REMAIN CONSISTENT ITH ALL- Milk . 31111 22'Il':iI.il'*-im-M=tz=ZE=t' To MOREE AST,ETICALL-Â·r DEES,â€¢~ABLE LOCATION 1, %1674#4-'41[1â€¢AC~EL.,..ZdltkIEUtt~ 1â€¢p~GE Exien,e .NDo,4 .â„¢ L,ReeR ,-0â€¢, Ilift##dit==le,At=ii ,---__6 4 lics=2Ulll5Eelll' I T O. PLATE MAIN 6,â€¢e LE 7 ELEV. 101.-5. I T.0 PLATE DIN[MI N//.OUT - 1 4 r O PLATE BRIDGE H- r mev. 105'-8 3/4Â· 3 sraers,r . ELEV. 108Â·-aÂ· ICI | 1 1-0. PLATE BRICÂ»E LOM (53 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION PAN-ABODE - ALLEY FACADE 5'5r. \25/ SCALE : 1/4' = 1'-0" f) I T. O. PL)â‚¬'. MAIN LEVEL./ BRIC),E -EUEV 00 -O _~--- pilopose Â·ro ADD s,crue,rr To RooF 1 I r~--------------- ---------J' - PROPOSE TO REMOVE EXISTIÂ«5 FLUE - - PROPOSE TO REPLâ€¢<LE E.>USTI* ROOÂ¥ 11 11 11 4- J $ 11 1 1 *TrerrrÂ·r 1 1 1 I i i t:*10-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i I Mil 1 1 Construc~on / PROPOSE TO MAINTAIN EXISTINS â€¢UNDOâ€¢N i:suedate: -- /0./$~2(.ll6t1gell- BASE T ELEV. 91'-10~ LOCATION AND SIZIN65 WITH UPIRADED ./.4 Tile: 1 | CLAD 062 WOOD 1100â€¢6 81' H.LFACTURER ADDITION ELEVATIONS _ A T+O, ColÂ©. L.CÂ»ER LEr/!El- TO BE DETERMINED 222-1-===================YJ --'VEEqJell/ 2 HALLAM STREET Sheet /. (23 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION ( FACING HALLAM STREET) - ADDITION -zi - A-3.2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0Â» /63 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION PAN-ABODE ADD SCALE : 1/4' = 1'-0' d a 9 Â»9 - ===-** ~ des on conaborative, Uc. 320 oak lane 1 1 aspen colorado 81611 phone (970) . 309.0695 01 7/. KAL-MAL SK/LISHT f a x (970) . 920. 7822 7 ELEV. M W,PROIJ .-m.it 1 1 1 ../. RIDGE lieÂ»1 d~rek@mtudlob~rchitacts.net 1 NIXIIXIWIII! 7 ELEV. 10-4' (AFâ€¢PROXJ .. . .. . .~. . .. . .. . .~ , COUABOFINE LLC. O 2003 O~EFRIDAYDESIGN THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS TIE NOTE. ALL DIPEIGIONS 1 +EIGHTS FOR PROPERTY OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN COLLABOF~TVE LLC. NO PART OF PAN-ABOOE SECTIONS TO RE ViaWFIEED ~ ~ * ~ - ~ ' ~ ' ' ~ ~ ~ ' ~ â„¢IS INFORMATION MAY BE USED OR IN FIELD BY GONâ„¢tAGTOR Â· COPIED V~THOUT THE PROR WRn-TEN â€¢k T.,p. PLATE MAIN 6IELE PERMISSION OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN * I/<~INIFe DUMP-OUT COU.ABORATME LL.C. ONE m]DAY DESIMRATIVE LLC. SHALL RETAIN ALL- COMMON LAW STATUTORY .. - 7 7 - -22 EJE] F~E 7 -* TO. PLATE eGUP6E H16H AND ALL OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS. 2 ' ~ . i :~~|| | 1 LIVIS ARE.* ~ ELEV. 108Â·-8 8/4, COPYRIGHT 2003 \ Ul 10 \\ liE] FEEN C /' ~ GATHERING AREA . ~~ BRIPâ‚¬,5 i i -lu-111 STAIR MUC> 3 -I ~ VANITY TI 8.1.â„¢ 2 All I - -~ 1 @32 \ [=] L EE E -11 / ' I 1 16. 2LUI - // . 1 0....Â©. MAINI LE~nEL -4 1 I I 1 I I II II jII II t ,Â¢4 E-, u, iâ€ž,0:1 I : II fl 1 1 II InI-I'lilit I -Eltqui f Fl< / ELE'.IDC]Â·-Oâ€¢ r-=-1 1 c-j - -----------1 I Mlilli : 1 /11 111 I S P lilli BEDROOM -as F. lilli / - 1 \11 Ill / = 2 1 Nlili' U==1*21 1 1,~ CO 11 1 /1 3 LONG AXIS SECTION: AA (ENTIRE PROJECT) 11 1 E SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0- - _ 0 TO. GONG. LOPER LEVEL (0 7 ELEV. eq'-1' - ro I .n ~ Sh '11 4 /071.47,/1.2W --7Â¢ Â·r.o. RIBÂ»E BEAM 1 ELEV. lieÂ·-4Â· CAPPROXJ 1 ( .a. 0 I2 107 1 NOTE: All_ DIMENSIONS I HEIGHTS FOR .. h ~ f PAN-~[3005 SECTIONS TO BE VERIFIED NOTE. ALL DIFIENSIONS 4 +2161Â·{TS FO~ . 4 | IN FIE12 5Â¥ 00,m~GTOR | 1[31 ~ - FAN-Ae/PE SECT!/Fe I LIN< BET)â‚¬EN 8 CONSTRUCTION / EXISTINe CONDITIONS i Te leÂ© U.... r - lill. 7 TO BE Vâ„¢FIEP IN FIELD er CONTRAGTOR .T. F'LATE MAIN See I rn= f ELEV. 108'-9 I Mkmt,ININS 81--our Â»<**43 7-~-1 2, 1.0. PLATiE EAN '/0DE Y mev. lab'-6 3/4' W.I.F.) 5 KITCHEN Â¥ El.EV. 10-71-2Â·1VJ,FJ 1 7-11 A T.O. PLATE Ble/IE HIGH 7 06 T.0. ,~ATE Illoam Lort _ _MWL 13 *EN TO-1/H Iel 9 ELEEVÂ· 0&4. WIJ BR SE CLOSET eATHERING AREA ~ & Hon 5 T.O. PLPO. MAIN LEVEL/ BRIC>SE Y Fl FV. 100'4 6 T.O. M./O F//4 ABODE - 6 T.O. f=Lt. MAIN L.Eva./ BRIPIE - -, 7 ELEV. WO--r Nip=j - 11 /1 f EL=v. tooÂ·-0Â· ~ \ --.. . - ----- 5 -- U 11 5 6 11 1 I S Ji~ STAIR I 11 1 I CLE] :17;RD:371%1:,I:=749%2~~r ~--~ - 5 -f- RADIANT FLOORPACK TO BE DETERMINED I J Rev. UPON DISCUSSION M/ ENGINEER 1 1 -CI BEDROOM CLOSET Con-uction 11 ----- %98 ; T.O. GONC. LIMLL BASE 1â€¢sue date: LL--- - - - f ELEY. Il'-lo. BUILDING SEGIONS _ 6 r/. CONS. LOMER LEVEL 320 HALUM STREET L 7 ELEV. 84'4 Sheet# f 2 3 CROSS SECTION: BB (PAN ABODE) (3>CRoss SECTION: CC (BRIDGE) /4hCROSS SECTION: DD (ADDITION) A4.1 SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0 M.1 SCALE : 1/4- = 1'-0Â· Ml SlE W4=1â‚¬ A-4.1 eouep!Seh~ seeH Xpnr pl13 1seAA - uedsÂ¥ Jo 40 d a SPECIAL CASE CUSTOM ,!NIPOFâ€¢16 - SCALE 1/4.. 1'-0- JUDY HAAS RESIDENCE: 320 KEST HALLAM STRIZET VVINDOM SCHEDULE y SYMBOL ROUSH OPENING EAD HEIBHT FRO PETAILS TYPE MANUFACTURER MODEL NOTES 0 T.O. FOND. PER IN X H SITUATED FLOOR JAMIB SILL HEAD IUMBER design collaborative,llc. E) 0 T I 320 oak lane 2-Bi. 101-46. A-1 2'-11 3/4" x 5-5 3/4Â· 5'-O- FROM T.O. F LO RL CLAD UNIT - CASEMENT PELLA 3565 - CASEM aspen cororado 81611 L 1-72 1.179.4. A-2 2'-11 3/4" x 5'-5 3/4 8'-0- FROM T.OF LO R L CLAD UNIT - GASEMENT PELLA 3565 - GASEM phone (970) . 309.0695 417. 429~ 4 r. .7 6 fax (970) 920. 7822 8 2'-5 3/4" x 2'-5 3/4- 8'-3- FROM T.O. P FO. M IN A . LVL. CLAD UNIT - FIXED ELLA 2Â°12q- FIXED . lilli derek@;tudlobarchit~cts net 6 4'-2 3/4" x 4'-2 3/4Â· 8'-3" FROM T.O. P PNP. M IN A . LVL. CLAD MUL-LED UNIT - 22) FIXED/ (2) *NING PELLA (4)-2525 (2) 2525 FIXED 4 (2) 2525 A-1NG: SEE ELEVS p 2'-6 3/4Â· x q'-0- cl'-3' FROM T.O. P M IN A .LVL. CUSTOM: REF TO DRAMINS: A-10.1 EFCO CUSTOM-MULLED AIO.1 - EFGO 403 SERIES - ANODIZED ALUM. FIN H 1 -r,tr i lf-7-11 IK 1 - r 1 E--1-F--71 E 0,-4 I/2' x Â¢1'-0" 41'-3" FROM T.O. P FO. M IN AD . LVL. CUSTOM; REF TO DRAP411146: A-10.1 EFOO CUSTOM-MULLED AIO.1 - EFGO 403 SERIES - ANODIZED ALUM. FIN COLIABOIWnVE L.L.C. lin 11 . 1 1,1 11 0 2003 ONE FRIDAY DESIGN F TRIANSLE: AIO.1 BOTTOM OF FRA Ne Rl E ISTS. CLAD UNIT - FIXED PROFILLIT CUSTOM-CHANNE REFER TO Alo.1 FOR LAYOUT (SIZE V.151 THE INFORU"N AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE -/IREki22-7'Irn 6 2-41/4' x 3'-0- 3'-9 FROM T.O. P YO. M IN . LVL. CLAD UNIT - FIXED PELLA CUSTOM SLAZINS TO BE COMPATABLE PV BAS APPLIANG PROPERrY OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN ir-i" x a'-O- 8'-3- FROM T.O. P )ID. M IN A .LVL. KAL-+IAL PANELINe SYSTEM KAL-PNAL CUSTOM REFER TO AID.1 FOR KAL-FNAL LAYOUT PERMISSION OF ONE FRIDAY DESIGN COULABORATME L.L.C. NO PART OF H 6'-0" x 6'-1- 7'-3 FROM T.O. P Fe. ID>GE VL. KAL-NAL FANELING SYSTEM KAL-MAL CUSTOM REFER TO AIO.1 FOR KAL-MAL LAYOUT THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED OR COPIED VTTHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN J 11 0- x 1'-0" q'-3Â· FROM T.0. P Pal. M IN .LVL. KAL-+IAL PANELINS SÂ¥STEM KAL-MAL CUSTOM REFER TO AID.1 FOR KAL-MAL LAYOUT DESIGN COLLABORATME LLC SHALL COUABORATIVE LL.C. ONE FRIDAY RETAIN ALL COANON LAW STATUTORY ASSEMBLY-OUSÂ·rOM Rol,16+Â·1 OPENINGS TO BEV d. F. K 2'-5 3/4" x 12'-1 3/4 15'-3-FROM T.O WD. M IN A P. LVL. CLAD MULLED UNIT - (4) FIXED/ (1) INS F~ELLA (5)-2429 (4) 2424 FIXED 4 0) 2qzq AriNINS: SEE ELEVS COPYRIGHT 2003 AND ALL- OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, L 6'-3 3/4" x 2'-1 3/4 10'-3" FROM T.O. IN A LVL. CLAP MULLED UNIT - (3) FIXED PELLA (9)-2525 8) 2525 FIXED>: SEE ELEVATIONS M 4'-O x IR'-O" SKYLIGHT LOGA AS I MCA ED ON LAN KAL-AAL PANEL-INe SYSTEMI KAL-RAL CUSTOM REFER TO PLANS Â¢ ELEVATIONS FOR LAYOUT V. F. 6'R.O. Re. 11'-1â€¢ 2 Â»FFII PAN-A 1'-10" x 4'-10' (V.I.F) 6'-10' FROM T.O. .F. PAN ABO E NOOD MULLED UNIT - FIXED/ AFNNI Pm-LA CUSTOM -MOO[> REFER TO Alo.1 FOR LAYOUT (SIZE V.I.FJ FAN-5 5'-5" x 4'-10- (V.I.FJ 6'-10' FROM T.O. E. PAN ABO E MOD MULLED UNIT - FIXED/ ANNI PELLA CUSTOM - WOOD REFER TO AIO.1 FOR LAYOUT (SIZE V.I.FJ PAN-C 4'-2" x 2'-10 W.1.19 6'-10 FROM T.O. F. PAN ABO E FUOD MULLED UNIT - (2) CASEMENT I CUSTOM - MOOP REFER TO AIO.1 FOR LAYOUT (SIZE V.[PJ ~ TR~NSLU~ENT~ ~ 11 1 1 1 KAL-"LL T T-11 PAN-D 5'-lo 3/4Â» x 5'-6 7/6 6'-10' FROM T.O. .F. PAN ABO E WOOP M.ILLED UNIT - (2) CASEMENT PEL..LA (2)-3565 (2) 3565 MULLED WOOD CASEMENT - SEE El.EVS L.MEMILIZI PAN-E 2'-2 x 2'-2" (V.I.FJ 6'-10- FROM T.O .F. PAN ABO E VIOOD CUSTOM UNIT - AFININe PELLA CUSTOM - ~4009 REFER TO AIO.1 FOR LAYOUT (SIZE V.I.F.) PAN-F 4'-4" x 2'-10" (V.I.F.) 6'-ID- FROM T.D. .F. PAN A[30 E WOOD PULLED UNIT - (2) CASEMENT PELLA CUSTOM - WOOD REFER TO AIO.1 FOR LAYOUT (SIZE V.IFJ PAN-6 5'-6. x 2,-Er' SKYLISHT LOCA AS I DICA ED ON LAN KAL-+IAL PANELINkS SYSTEM KAL-MAL CUSTOM REFER TO PLANS 4 EL_EVATIONS FOR LAYOUT V..F. .~ IT .O. f 0 KALÂ«AL â„¢ANSLUCENT PANELING SYSTEM m a fr... fl /1110 1/-4 .UPÂ¥ HAAS RESIDENCE: 320 FEST HALLAM STREET POOR SCHEDULE SYMBOL ROUeH OPENING HEAD THICKNESS LEAF DIMENSION MANUFACTURER HANDING MODEL NOTES MXH HEIGHT HARPMARE MATERIAL- STYLE IN X H NUMBER 5'-8, e. i E-.52-1'~~~~'~-~-~ : Ea . Eat 002/A 3'-5 X 1'-1Â· -1'-1. PASSAeE LUMIGITE CUSTOM T.B.D. 3-4- X -1'-0" T.B.P. RH CUSTOM: LUMIGITE INTERIOR PIVOT POINT DOOR 002/5 2'-10" X 7'-1" 11-1. PASSASE MAPLE SOLID 1 3/4 2'-8" X -7'-0- TB.D. LH 003/A 2'-10" X -1'-1" 1'-1. PRIVACY MAPLE SOLID 13/4 2'-5" x 7-0 T.B.J. LH 0038 2'-6. x -1'-IÂ· 1}-4. PASSA62 6,LAZINS EURO-6L TB.D. 2'-5" X 1'-0' TB.D. RH CUSTOM: EURO el_ASS SHOMER DOOR 005/A 3'-2" X 1 1'-1- SECURITY MAPLE SOLID 13/4" 3'-0- x -7'-0 T.[3.D. RH CHECK FOR F]RE RATING REQUIREMENTS 1 4.-2. R.Ov 2,-2. /0 ..___dzE.E. 101/A 3'-0 5/4- X 7-1- 1,-1. PASSASE GLAD FRENCH 1 7/3 3'-0' X E'do" PELLA RH 3662 PELLA GLAD FRENCH DOOR MITH 6LAZINe Ea Ea i "PE=-3 :V-PR 1,771==1~ 102/3 2'-doÂ· X 1'-3 1-3* FASSAaE MAPLE SOLID 13/4- 2'-5- X -7'-0 T.B.D. SLIDIN INTERIOR SLIDING TRACK DOOR 102/A 2'-ID' X -1'-3 -1'-3. PRIVACY MAPLE SOLID 1 3/4- 2'-5- X 7Â·-0 TB.D. LH 103/A 2'-5- X 7'-3- 1-3. PRIVAOÂ¥ MAPLE SOLID 13/4" 2'-6" X 1'-0 T.B.P. SLIDI POCKET INTERIOR SLIDINe POCKET DOOR 104/A 2'-10- X -1'-1" 7-1. PASSADE 6LAZING EUFKO-(SL T.B.D. 2'-q" X -1'-0- TB.D. RH CUSTOM: EURO GLASS SHOFER DOOR IOWA 2'-8" X -1'-3' -7'-3. PRIVACY MAPLE SOLID 3/4 2'-6 X -7'-0" T.B.D. SLIDIN INTERIOR 5LIDIN6 TRAGIC DOOR loS/A q'-0- X 1'-3Â« 1'-3. SECURITY MAPLE FRENCH TB.D. (3) 3'-0. X -7'-0 GUANTUM FOLDI TFKAGÂ·K QUANTUM 3 PANEL FRENCH FOLDIN16 TRACK NOTE: ALL EXISTING PAN-ABODE MINDOVe TO BE REPLACED BY SIZE AND MULLION 110/A q'-oÂ· x bÂ·-3 8'-3. SECUFEI 17 MAPLE FRENOH T.B.D. (33 3'-O. X 8 -O- QUANTUM FOLDI TRACK QUANTUM 3 PANEL FRENCH FOLDINe TRACK LAYOUT AS INDICATED. ALL ROUSH OPENINSS liB/A 3'-0 3/4- X 8Â·-3 8'-9. SECURITY CLAD FRENCH 1-1/8- 3'-O" X 21'-O- FELLA LH 3696 EXTERIOR CLAD FRENCH DOOR MITH GLAZING TO BE VERIFIED BÂ¥ CONTRACTOR 4 AINDOR (2) 3'-0- X -1'-0 1138 6'-0" X 7'-3' -1'-3. PASSACE MAPLE SOLID 13/4. TED. DOU[3 SLIDING INTERIOR DOUBLE SLIDING TRAGIC POOR MANUFACTURER IN FIELD Con*uction 'Sue date: 1-3-SPECIALCONDITION-WINDOWS 621QQQRAWINDOW SCHEDULES: 320 WEST HALLAM STREET SCHEDULE WEW & DOOR ~ SCALE : 1/4- = 1'-0Â· ~Alo.~f SCALE: NO REPRESENTATIVE SCALE Sheet# - 10.11 f eouep!Sahl seeH Xpnf pu31seM - ue SV JO '4!0 luell H OZE EG Ea Ea ~EXHIBIT~-~ j5't 1 L--J Re: Young's request to expand their historic house at 470 .- Spring St. I own the lot at 701 Gibson, which is North, across and above the Young's lot on Spring St. My house is the one that is most effected by this undertaking to expand this historic house to the North. The Young's and I have met to discuss how to best solve the biggest problem, which is that any skylight, or window on the north side of the expansion will be opposite my decks and greatly impact the night views. Mr. Young suggested that I work with his architect to find a solution. We visited by telephone and agreed that all the skylights and all the windows on the north elevation would be removed, except for a possible projected element on the north elevation that would have a shielded window facing East. He was to send me an email or fax showing the modifications and then a letter to you. To date I have not received this information, and therefore I have to assume that it is not forthcoming. Therefore, by this letter, I request that the review board, as a part of any approval for this expansion include a statement (to run with the land) that: 1) there shall never be any skylights in the addition and, 2) that there shall never be any unshielded windows on the north elevation except to allow for one East facing window in a projection on the north elevation. Should a statement as noted above be included, then I will not oppose this expansion. However, should a statement, such as noted above not be included as a part of any approval or variance, then please consider this letter as my official request / notice of appeal to any decision that would allow the proposed expansion to proceed. This appeal that is hereby being requested, is on the issues of: setbacks, FAR, historic preservation, density, separation of elements (new vs. historic), finish floor height, drainage, and appropriateness. Please allow the Young's the opportunity to request that the above stated condition be made a part of their submission, so that this can move forward without any opposition. Should they not concur, then I request that you read this letter aloud at the hearing and make it a part of the record. May 23,2003 Thank You, Bill -1â‚¬ CO MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Directok~A FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 470 N. Spring Street- Major Development Review (Conceptual) and Variances- Public Hearing DATE: May 28,2003 SUMMARY: The subject property is located in the Oklahoma Flats neighborhood and contains a Victorian era home which was moved to the site in the 1960's. The application proposes an addition to the rear (north side) of the historic home. Conceptual approval, a 500 square foot floor area bonus, a front yard setback variance of up to 25 feet to accommodate the existing location of the house and the proposed location of the garage, a rear yard setback variance of up to 14' to accommodate a portion of the new addition, and a north sideyard setback variance of 8'6" are requested, along with a variance from one of the Residential Design Standards related to garages. Staff finds the proj ect to be generally compatible with the historic resource, but recommends the application be continued for restudy in order to more completely address some of the design and variance standards. APPLICANT: Dennis and Andrea Young, owners, represented by Lipkin Warner Design Partnership. PARCEL IN: 2737-073-08-002. ADDRESS: 470 N. Spring Street, Lot 2, Block 4, Oklahoma Flats Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, along with a metes and bounds parcel on the southerly side of said lot. ZONING: R-30. CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residence. MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) The procedure {or a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is 1 transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: Recently, the HPC has been contemplating new tools to analyze the appropriateness of proposals to alter historic structures. The following questions are likely to be the center o f future discussions, and may be helpful for HPC to at least reference for this proj ect (note that the questions do not serve as formal decision making criteria at this time): 1. Why is the property significant? 2. What are the key features of the property? 3. What is the character of the context? How sensitive is the context to changes? 4. How would the proposed work affect the property's integrity assessment score? 5. What is the potential for cumulative alterations that may affect the integrity of the property? The property is important as an example of housing built during the mining era. It was moved to the current location, and a number of alterations to the building apparently occurred after that time. Some information about the footprint and design of the house as it was originally constructed is available. Key features of the property are that the original roof and building walls on the front portion of the house are intact. There is some original siding, trim, windows, and doors. This house stands in a neighborhood where the 19th century context has been eliminated. Only one other designated cabin is within the vicinity. Most of the adjacent homes are new construction and are significantly larger than this one. The proposal before HPC will create an addition linked to the back of the original house. Very little of the existing building fabric will be removed. Restoration work is envisioned for the Victorian. Therg is no potential for expansion beyond this application. 2 Design Guideline review Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. The 470 N. Spring Street site has many complexities due to encroachments that were created by the 1960's relocation, and the limited size of the lot. The owner is in the process of acquiring a portion of the area where the garage will be sited from a neighbor. This will of course be a condition of approval. A list of the design guidelines relevant to Conceptual Review is attached as "Exhibit B." Only those guidelines which staff finds the project may be in conflict with, or where discussion is needed, will be included in the memo. In general, staff finds the design to be very well done, and in character with the Victorian home. There are a few aspects of it that may need to be re-visited, however. The addition will provide living space and a garage. The guidelines state: 8.3 Avoid attaching a garage or carport to the primary structure. o Traditionally, a garage was sited as a separate structure at the rear of the lot; this pattern should be maintained. Any proposal to attach an accessory structure is reviewed on a case-by-case basis. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. o Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. o Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. o Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primaryÂ· structures is recommended. and 14.18 Garages should not dominate the street scene. See Chapter 8: Secondary Structures. Because there is living space that is integral to the function of the house above the garage, detaching the n,w addition from the Victorian is not practical. It might be possible to slide the staircase element (the "connector") that joins the two buildings back from the street, so that there is more of an appearance of separation between the two buildings, however this will result in the CO removal of the north side of what is understood to be a historic addition to the house. While this would generally be concerned a negative impact, the public view of this north wall is already eliminated in the project, so moving the stair should be discussed as an option in order to better address the design guideline's intent to create detached accessory buildings. The addition has been placed to the rear of the historic house, but it projects in front of it along the west fagade. There are limited options to address this circumstance due to the constraints of the property, other than reducing the size of the addition or eliminating some of the program in that space. One way to soften the conflict in this area may be to slide the garage level back on the site, and reconfigure the entry that is shown on the east side. This would provide some recess to an area of the addition that may be out of character with the Victorian (namely the garage doors), and will help the project to better meet design guideline 14.8, and a Residential Design Standard that will be discussed below. SETBACK VARIANCES The setback variances needed are a front yard setback variance of up to 25 feet to accommodate the existing location of the house and the proposed location of the garage, a rear yard setback variance of up to 14' to accommodate a portion of the new addition, and a north sideyard setback variance of 8'6". The criteria, per Section 26.415.110.C ofthe Municipal Code are as follows: HPC must make a finding that the setback variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Finding: This lot is unusually small, particularly for this neighborhood, which has a minimum standard lot area of 30,000 square feet. The development will butt up against the north and east property lines, and come close to the west lot line. The property owner to the east has submitted a letter in support of the application. The owner to the north has expressed a desire to see windows and skylights eliminated along that side of the project. (Note that that owner's home sits uphill from this one.) No one will be directly impacted by variances granted along the west, or street side of the site. With regard to the neighbor's request that all windows and skylights be eliminated on the north fagade, there should be some discussion as to whether losing these windows will create an appearance that is out of character with the Victorian. That wall will be visible from the street. Perhaps "dumIÂ¥" windows or some other feature could still be included so that the exterior appearance of the building remains acceptable to HPC. This should be dealt with at the 4 Conceptual level so that the neighbor can be more comfortable with the variances under discussion. As the Commission is aware, setback variances are one of the benefits offered to owners of historic properties in order to address the requirements placed on them to retain and maintain a historic building. Staff finds that there is no other location on the property where any expansion can be accommodated, and that, because there is no on-street parking in the immediate area, that cars must be contained somewhere on the site. Staff supports the granting of the setback variances. FAR BONUS The applicant is requesting a 500 square foot floor area bonus. The following standards apply to an FAR bonus, per Section 26.415.110.E: 1. In selected circumstances the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a. The design of the project meets 81! applicable design guidelines; and b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building and/or c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; and/or d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; and/or e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; and/or g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. 2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor area. 3. The decision to grant a Floor Area Bonus for Major Development projects will occur as part of the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan, pursuant to Section 26.415.070(D). No development application that includes a request for a Floor Area Bonus may be submitted until after the applicant has met with the HPC in a work session to discuss how the proposal might meet the bonus considerations. Staff Response; The applicant previously met with HPC for a worksession to discuss this project, as required by the review standard. The outcome of that conversation included a redesign of the roof form on the addition and the elimination of a glass "monitor" on the roof. 5 Staff finds that these changes have improved the project's relationship to the historic resource significantly. There are some areas where the design guidelines could be complied with to a greater extent, as described above. With those alterations, if the board agrees that they would improve the project, staff could support an FAR bonus, with the condition that as much restoration work as can be feasibly and accurately completed on the Victorian, and which is visible from the street, be undertaken. The proposal includes mention of a reworking of the non- historic front porch, and reconfiguration of windows on existing non-historic additions to make them more compatible with the Victorian proportions. These are all positive changes. Staff also recommends discussion of the removal of the skylight on the roofplane over the front of the house, and the replacement of the multi-paned window unit on the west side of the old house with a double hung window (the window opening and trim on that unit appear to be original.) Abandoning the parking area and curb cut that exists along the side of the front porch was mentioned at a previous meeting, and should be done, along with a revegetation of the area. Staff believes that these are restoration changes that would directly benefit the historic character of the house as it is viewed by the public. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS The project requires a variance to a Residential Design Standards related to the garage. All residential development must comply with the following review standard or receive a variance based on a finding that: A. The proposed design yields greater compliance with the goals of the Aspen area Community Plan (AACP); or, B. The proposed design more effectively addresses the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to; or, C. The proposed design is clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. Standard: PARKING, GARAGES AND CARPORTS. The intent of the following parking, garages, and carport standard is to minimize the potential for conflicts between pedestrian and automobile traffic by placing parking, garages, and carports on alleys, or to minimize the presence of garages and carports as a lifeless part of the streetscape where alleys do not exist. 1. For all residential uses, parking, garages, and carports shall be accessed from an alley or private road if one exists. 6 2. For all residential uses that do not have access from an alley or private road, the following standards shall be met: a. On the street facing fagade(s),the width of the living area on the first floor shall be at least five (5) feet greater than the width ofthe garage or carport. b. The front faGade of the garage or the frontmost supporting column of a carport shall be setback at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the frontmost wall of the house. Response: Standard 2b is the one in question. As proposed, the garage has no setback from the western wall of the house. Staff has suggested the possibility of slipping the garage back on the site, which will improve, but not totally eliminate the need for this variance. In order to build a garage that has the depth necessary to park a car, some relief from this standard is needed. DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: â€¢ approve the application, â€¢ approve the application with conditions, â€¢ disapprove the application, or â€¢ continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC continue the application with the following direction: 1. Consider sliding the staircase element that j oins the house and addition back from the street, so that there is more of an appearance of separation. 2. Consider sliding the garage level back on the site, and reconfigure the entry that is shown on the east side. This would provide some recess to an area of the addition that may be out o f character with the Victorian (namely the garage doors), and will help the proj ect to better meet design guideline 14.8, and the Residential Design Standards . 3. Study ways to maintain some detail on the north wall of the addition while addressing the neighbor' s concerns. 4. Formalize as much restoration work as possible within the application, including a commitment to rework the non- historic front porch, reconfigure windows on existing non-historic additions to make them more compatible with the Victorian proportions, removal of the skylight on the roofplane over the front of the house, replacement of the multi-paled window unit on the west side of the old house with a double hung window, 7 and abandoning the parking area and curb cut that exists along the side of the front porch along with a revegetation of the area. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to continue 470 N. Spring Street to a date certain." Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated May 28,2003 B. Relevant Design Guidelines C. Architectural Inventory Form D. Application 8 "Exhibit B: Relevant Design Guidelines for 470 N. Spring Street Conceptual Review" Secondary Structures 8.3 Avoid attaching a garage or carport to the primary structure. o Traditionally, a garage was sited as a separate structure at the rear of the lot; this pattern should be maintained. Any proposal to attach an accessory structure is reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Building Additions 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. o Such an addition is usually similar in character to the original building in terms of materials, finishes and design. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. o A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. o An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. o An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. o An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. o An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. o A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. o An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. o A 1-story connector is preferred. o The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building, o The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. 9 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. o Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. o Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. o Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. o Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. o Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. o For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, comices and eavelines should be avoided. Driveways & Parking 14.17 Design a new driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. o Plan parking areas and driveways in a manner that utilizes existing curb cuts. New curb cuts are not permitted. o If an alley exists, a new driveway must be located off of it. 14.18 Garages should not dominate the street scene. See Chapter 8: Secondary Structures. Guidelines to consider with regard to the FAR bonus Windows 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. o Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. o Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. Porches 5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form and detail. o Use materials that appear similar to the original. o While m~ching original materials is preferred, when detailed correctly and painted appropriately, alternative materials may be considered. 10 o Where no evidence of the appearance of the historic porch exhts, a new porch may be considered that is similar in character to those found on comparable buildings. Keep the style and form simple. Also, avoid applying decorative elements that are not known to have been used on the house or others like it. o When constructing a new porch, its depth should be in scale with the building. o The scale of porch columns also should be similar to that of the trimwork. o The height of the railing and the spacing of balusters should appear similar to those used historically as well. Architectural Details 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features should be based on original designs. o The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a misrepresentation of the building's heritage. o When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence, develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and maintains similar scale, proportion and material. Roofs 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. o Flat skylights that are flush with the roof plane may be considered only in an obscure location on a historic structure. Locating a skylight or a solar panel on a front roof plane is not allowed. o A skylight or solar panel should not interrupt the plane of a historic roof. It should be positioned below the ridgeline. 11 I . OAHP1403 Official eligibility determination Rev. 9/98 (OAHP use only) Date Initials COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Determined Eligible- NR Determined Not Eligible- NR Detemlined Eligible- SR Architectural Inventory Form Determined Not Eligible- SR (page 1 of 4) - Need Data Contributes to eligible NR District Noncontributing to eligible NR District 1. IDENTIFICATION 1. Resource number: 5PT.229 2. Temporary resource number: 470.NSP (470.NS) 3. County: Pitkin 4. City: Aspen 5. Historic building name: 6. Current building name: 7. Building address: 470 North Spring Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 8. Owner name and address: Dennis & Andrea Young PO Box 133 Aspen, CO 81612 11. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6 Township 10 South Range 84 West NW W of NE bi of SE M of SW 1/4 of Section 7 10. UTM reference Zone 1 3 ;3 4 3 3 6 OmE 4 3 3 9 5 5 0 m N 11. USGS quad name: Aspen Quadranale Year: 1960, Photo Rev. 1987 Map scale: 7.5' X 15' Attach photo copy of appropriate map section. 12. Lot(s): 1,3,4,5,6,7 Block: 4 Addition: Year of Addition: 13. Boundary Description and Justification: Site is comprised of Lots 1,3.4,5, 6, & 7: Block 4 of the Oklahoma Flats Subdivision of the Citv of Aspen. Assessors office Record Number: 2737-073-08-002 This description was chosen as the most specific and customarv descrintion of the site. 111. Architectural Description 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): Irregular 15. Dimensions in feet: Length x Width 16. Number of stories: Two Story 17. Primary external wall material(s) (enter no more than two): Wood Horizontal Sidinq 18. Roof configuration: (enter no more than one): Gable Roof 19. Primary external roof material (enter no more than one): Asphalt Roof 20. Special featurg (enter all that apply): Porch Reseurce Number: 5PT.229 Temporary Resource Number: 470.NSP Architectural Inventory Form (page 2 of 2) 21. General architectural description: A lame mining era wood frame structure, on a concrete foundation. A qable end faces east with a single double hung window in the clable end and a deep bay on the lower level. The bav has a hipped roof: a single arched double hung window (with a window Dane pattern in the upper sash) in each of three facets of the bay: and a wood lattice base connecting to the qround. A cross aable extends to the left and a shed roof porch infills the corner. The shed roof is an extension of both qable roof shapes with onlv a slight change in pitch. A slopina qable roof form extends forward and covers a series of steps up to the porch level. The porch roof and extension are supported bv both turned and square posts with scroll brackets and a decorative frieze board. - A low balustrade wraps the edge of the porch. The typical two entry doors, with transoms, exist with a pair of large double hunqs occupyinq the remainder of the wall under the porch roof. A hipped roof addition extends off the rear, with a shed roof portion and another set of covered steps, some contemporary windows have been added, but minimallv on the visible sides. 22. Architectural style/building type: Late Victorian 23. Landscaping or special setting features: Several lilac and honevsuckle in front vard: two crabapples along white picket fence in front vard: cottonwoods scattered alonq north property line: historic cottonwood at southwest property corner: 'grove' of historic cottonwoods in back yard. 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: none IV. Architectural History 25. Date of Construction: Estimate 1880's Actual Source of information: Based on building style 26. Architect: Unknown Source of information: 27. BuildedContractor: Unknown Source of information: 28. Original owner: Unknown Source of information: 29. Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): Earlv hipped roof addition at rear. Structure placed on new foundation, covered steo "additions", misc. window alterations, dates unknown, all Dre 1990. 30. Original location X Moved Date of move(s): V. Historical Associations 31. Original use(s): Domestic 32. Intermediate us&(s) 33. Current use(s): Domestic Reseurce Number: 5PT.229 Temporary Resource Number: 470.NSP Architectural Inventory Form (page 3 of 3) 34. Site type(s): Residential Neighborhood 35. Historical background: This structure is reoresentative of Asoen's minina era character. The building has the characteristics of typical mining era structures such as: size, simple plan, and front qable / porch relationship 36. Sources of information: Pitkin Countv Courthouse records; Sanborn and Sons Insurance Maps: 1990 and 1980 Citv of Aspen Survey of Historic Sites and Structures VI. Significance 37. Local landmark designation: Yes No X Date of designation: Designating authority: 38. Applicable National Register Criteria: A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history; B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; X C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Qualifies under Criteria Considerations A through G (see Manual) Does not meet any of the above National Register criteria 39. Area(s) of significance: Architecture 40. Period of significance: Late 1800's Silver Minina Era 41. Level of significance: National State Local X 42. Statement of significance: This structure is sianificant for its Dosition in the context of Aspen's mining era. It describes the nature of the life of an uDDer class familv or individual during that period. as well as the construction techniques. materials available and the fashion of the time, 43. Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: New foundation and related alterations have interfered with the original context of the structure. and added details, Basic form, pattern and massing are intact. VII. National Register Eligibility Assessment 44. National Register eligibility field assessment: Eligible Not Eligible X Need Data 45. Is there National Register district potential? Yes No X Discuss: 0 If there is National Register district potential, is this building: Contributing Noncontributing 46. If the building is in existing National Register district, is it: Contributing __ Noncontributing Resource Number: < 5PT.229 Temporary Resource Number: 470.NSP Architectural Inventory Form (page 4 of 4) Vlll. Recording Information 47. Photograph numbers: Rll: F37 Negatives filed at: Aspen/Pitkin Communitv Development Dept. 48. Report title: Citv of Aspen Update of Survey of Historic Sites and Structures, 2000 49. Date(s): 6/29/2000 50. Recorder(s): Suzannah Reid and Patrick Duffield 51. Organization: Reid Architects 52. Address: 412 North Mill Street, PO Box 1303, Aspen CO 81612 53. Phone number(s): 970 920 9225 NOTE: Please attach a sketch map, a photocopy of the USGS quad. map indicating resource location, and photographs. Colorado Historical Society - Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1300 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866-3395 4 19. 2003 9:54AM LIPKIN WARNER DESIGN No.0066 P 2 W. D. Budinger 728 East Francis St. Aspen, CO. 81611 May 12, 2003 Mr. David Warner Upkin Warner Design 23400 Two Rivers Road Unit 44 Basalt. CO 81621 Re: Dennis Young Proposed Addition Dear Mr. Warner, We are neighbors of Dennis Young. Our property and residence abuts three ofthc four sides of Mr. Young's property. We have reviewed the sketches you sent on May 5 showing a proposed addition to the north side of the Young residence. This letter is to advise you that we have no objection to the project as shown. We are aware that the Young residence is extremely small and that something need# to bc done to make it morE livable. The plans you sent appear to be an elegant compromise between the need for more space, the need to preserve historical oharacter and feeling and the Young's desire to minimize the impact on thc neighborhood. Sincerely, i / t i l// 9 /1. / \/Uk 1/ W. D. 1*1 - 79 l I. nfl , L V' LVVV v' I vi 1,1 L 1.1 A 1 Il " Milly LI\ UL O 1 UIN INU,JOO/ rÂ· L ; Dimensional Requirement Form (Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.) -roject: 1 of, Me /UU i A'op-1 pplicant: ,/0,ten>,-t- O,*6(*liâ€ža,Â© L }p ks-<00'lk LA->Ar,/761< Dis;*7 Project Location: 4 3-0 4. <4>r :vf~ St. Zone District: A-30 'd Â· Lot Size: 2/50-2- Lot Area: 2-t SO -2- (For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high wateb mark, easements, and steep sIopes. Please refer to the , definition of Lot Arda in the Â·Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: 0 Proposed: D Number of residential units: Existing: L Proposed: 1 Number ofbedrooms: Existing: ~-4- Proposed: 1- Pr9Posed % of demolition: 5 54 DIMENSIONS: (write n/a where no requirement exists in the zone distict) Floor Area: Existing: 1,â€¢55'S:914.Ilowable: 2/'211.& proposed: 2,9-39. 63 Height Principal Bldg.: Existing: 22-/c> Allowable: Proposed: cessory Bldg.: ' Existing: 20/* Attowable: Al / A Proposed: A,/A. , On-Site parking: Existing: 1 5 Required: 2 Proposed: 9 % Site coverage: Existing: : F/A Required: F /+ Proposed: __*4 % Open Space: Existing: W/,4 Required: NAâ€¢le Proposed: N <A_ Front Setback: Existing: /*'F' Required: 2 5 ' Proposed: C Rear Setback: Existing: i 812 "Required: /5' Proposed.. /'- 6' Combined 11 Front/Rear: Existing: tt/A Required: N/,4 Proposed: N /6 Indicate N, S, E, W Side Setbaâ‚¬k. 40.-1* Existing: -US'g' Required: /0' Proposed: -/5 '-7* Side Setback: r*,rrf k Existing: â‚¬'- 6" Required. /0/ Proposed: _ /'- 6' Combined Sides: Â£*Sting: 2414 Requ\red: W / A Proposed: A//A- t Existin0 non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroacbment licenses have been issued: 11.5 44AC-npak41MA414/Of- &858*0% 01/ %34 deâ‚¬*,92 i?il&..~~2 49499â‚¬) Variations requested (identify the exact vanances needed): 5-00 siuape .Pe 6944/: * HM-Ma tiale c - 11- 0 4 3 <55,1Â«,tfis/Jâ€¢ 9-,5'1 5#-bw~erd â€¢/3,0,Â·'MX5 I 75 - 9. 4 4 8 .m 23400 Two Rivers Rd. # 44 â€¢ P.O. Box2239 T 970 927-8473 .m LIPKIN WARNER DESIGN & PLANNING. LLC Basalt, Colorado 81621 F 970 927-8487 2.- d Young Addition 470 N. Spring St. HPC Packet Conceptual Review Packet Index 1-3 Project Description 4-6 Historic Resource Research 7 FAR Worksheet 8 Site Improvement Description 9 Vicinity Map 10-11 Improvement Survey 12-13 Site Plans 14 Site Photos 15 Streetscape Photos 16-19 Exterior Elevations 20-21 Floor Plans 6 HOUSE ORIGINAL LOCATION Corner of 5th and BLEEKER 1 1 f i 1 C ' 1. 18 0/01 1. ~ 1 - c r Â¥ 17 . 1 9.... 4 '. I - Ul . Â»2/0,7/,3/7 ~ 0 C)=-5 A r- D 9\\ 0 /1.-1 01 A.~e-0-u /yu/6- 63 ATA7%<O / 80 Â° Â«J Mrs,v â‚¬ 1 7-2- / A- cftl-,77.471/11,1 7=6111 /5202/>'L'/ S ' /79~3~ c E- 6>2Â·47,83't J'/5>272 /*28:z= ./702*,227*5,2551 .m - 23400 Two Rivers Rd. # 44 â€¢ P.O. Box2239 T 970 927-8473 TIPKIN WARNER DESIGN & PLANNING. LLC CJ Basalt, Colorado 81621 F 970 927-8487 Young Addition 470 N. Spring St. Lot 2, Block 4 Oklahoma Flats Project Description The Residence The Young Residence is located at 470 North Spring Street in the Oklahoma Flats section of Aspen. It is a relatively small one and a half story miner's Victorian house. There is a main structure with crossing gables and a front porch facing south. To the north there are multiple additions with a variety of roof shapes. House Moved We know from a contemporary newspaper article accompanied by a photograph that the house was moved in 1968 from Aspen's West End. In addition, we know from the building permit on file that the house was known then as the "Tagert House". A 1965 phone directory lists a W. C. Tagert as living at 535 West Bleeker. We found a biography and obituary in the Heritage Aspen archive from which we learned that William Tagert and his wife Cora lived in Aspen from at least 1895. The House's Original Location (?) An isometric drawing of Aspen dated 1893 shows a house at 535 West Bleeker with some similar familiar features to the house now in Oklahoma Flats. A 1904 map of the city, which includes building footprints, shows presumably the same house. We have found no other documentation for this lot, and we have not found anything that confirms the house depicted in these renderings is actually the Tagert house of 1968. There is no verifiable documentation for the existing house prior to 1968. The most recognizable feature of the isometric rendering is a gabled structure with two windows facing west and additions to the main volume to the south. If indeed this is the same house, it indicates that it was rotated 180 degrees when moved to its new location. 1968 Changes A 1968 newspaper photograph shows the house as its being moved from the West End. In this photograph the building has no south porch or south window bay. We conclude that the somewhat frilly (neo) Victorian south porch and the south window bay are both 1968 additions. The south bay looks to be an historic artifact. The porch seems less authentic. Unfortunately, the newspaper photograph shows nothing of the other three sides. When the house was moved it was set on a new foundation with basement. The house now probably sits higher above the ground than it did originally. The somewhat crazy stair configuration on the west, which is part of today's tangle of northern additions, we guess, was added in 1968 to account for the new ground floor height elevation. Historic Parts of North Additions 01.Project Description.HPC.lwdp.doc Page 1 4/24/2003 DI P .m 23400 Two Rivers Rd. # 44 â€¢ P.O. Box2239 T 970 927-8473 CJ LIPKIN WARNER DESIGN & PLANNING, LLC Basalt, Colorado 81621 F 970 927-8487 As for the rest of the north, the only section that may be historic is the part below the hipped roof. By pealing away some of the interior finishes we have found mostly new construction but also parts that seem to be older. The east wall when exposed shows modern framing. The north wall appears to have modern framing with older vertical planks connected to the top and bottom plates. The west wall is made of old planks with plasterboard and drywall on either side. The west wall seems to be lacking any discernable structure. The east and west walls have been internalized by additions to either side. The north wall is an exterior wall but it has a new window and new siding. Preserving the Historic Resource Our approach to preserving the historic quality of this house is three fold. First we propose to restore parts of the original miner's Victorian volume. We intend to remove portions ofthe modern additions on the west, which extend beyond the original structure's facades. This will also help to emphasize the original entrance on the south. On the east we will reconfigure the reversed shed roof to a regular shed roof, which will be more sympathetic to the original shapes. We will remove the modern bay window on the west and replace it with windows of more historic proportions. With the guidance of HPC we will remove the modem ginger bread detailing on the south porch. Second, although the additions to the north are at best compromised in their historic significance, they none the less represent a common practice of adding rooms with lower roof forms to the back of a main structure. We will leave the north additions as they are with the above exceptions and add a connector that overlaps only the west corner of the wall below the hipped roof. New Construction to the North The new addition we are proposing is located to the north for three reasons. First, the north side is furthest from the historically significant portions of the original structure. Second, the north side seems to have very little discernable original building remaining and so by adding here we are minimizing contact with the historic structure. Third, the lot configuration is such that expansion is only possible to the north. Space Between Connected Buildings The new addition is conceived as a distinct building form not meant to compete with the original. The two will be separated by a minimal connector. Building Height This northern migration, it should be noted, is limited in that the "flat" of Oklahoma Flats ends right here on this side of the house. The new addition runs directly into the side of the steep embankment, which defines the Oklahoma Flats boundary. Since there is no more opportunity to expand horizontally the new addition rises vertically. Nonetheless the new addition measures 24 feet at its highest point. The original structure measures 9 inches higher. Scale The streets in Oklahoma Flats are narrow and residential. In fact, most of the new houses, which have replaced the smaller ones ofjust a few years ago, seem out of scale to the quaint streets, which remain. This is not the case with the Young Residence. This small Victorian on its new foundation is reminiscent 01.Project Description.HPC.lwdp.doc Page 2 4/24/2003 DI P .m 23400 Two Rivers Rd. # 44 â€¢ P.O. Box2239 T 970 927-8473 I'PKIN WARNER DESIGN & PLANNING. LLC CJ Basalt, Colorado 81621 F 970 927-8487 of the demolished houses that use to populate Oklahoma Flats. The new addition is of similar scale and does not overpower the site or the street, particularly as it recedes into the hillside. Garage Included Parking on the street is nonexistent and to park openly on site appears sloppy and congested. To alleviate this condition the new addition is using the ground floor as a garage. There is no other access point for a garage on the site. To minimize the garage's impact on the street it is of small scale, it is set back from the historic building and a "porch" screens it in front. The look is more of a carriage house than a modern day garage. Original Historic Use We think it is important that the original structure not only maintain its historic use but also its historic functions. To this end, the south side of the historic house is being revamped as the main entrance. The addition removes the west side stair and door, which had become the de facto way in. Of no less importance, the new structure does not replace the main internal functions of the original. Facing the street are the kitchen and stair hall, and the living room and dining room remain in their original location. The attic room remains as a bedroom. Work At Home The new addition has, as described above, a garage and above that a modest master bedroom. In front of the master bedroom, facing the street is a study where one can work at home. We think it is an important point that so many of the homes in Aspen are not lived in much of the year. However, the Young's are active participants in the community and Aspen is their home. This house with its additions is not large and it is meant to represent a modest upgrade to today's lifestyles without sacrificing the beauty and scale ofthe town they love. A Little More Space Despite the restraint used in designing these additions we do request some help from the HPC for FAR considerations. Hindered somewhat in this respect by including the garage, the Young's need 500 square feet of bonus FAR to complete the project. The scale of each new room is modest and in no way approaches anything close to "monster' status. The proposed project is meant to rehabilitate the historic building that the Young's are proud to own and anxious to preserve. Thank You, David Warner Dennis Young Andrea Young 01.Project Description.HPC.lwdp.doc Page 3 4/24/2003 DI P .m 23400 Two Rivers Rd. # 44 â€¢ P.O. Box2239 T 970 927-8473 LIPKIN WARNER DESIGN & PLANNING. LLC m. Basalt, Colorado 81621 F 970 927-8487 Young Addition HPC Conceptual Review FAR Bonus Allowable FAR = 2,241.60 site sqft{per survey} 2,195 + 607 (80%) {per R-30} Existing + Addition Total FAR = 2,739.63 = [409.20 + 1,116.63 + 1,213.80] HPC Bonus = 498.03 required to meet Zoning FAR Basement Level FAR = 409.20 = (.343) 1,193.01 Square Footage: gross = 1,193.01 = 1,100.46 {Victorian} + 92.55{addition} Wall Surface: gross = 1,089.85 = [2(48 + 28.75)] 7.1 {wall height} Wall Surface: exposed = 373.37 = [40 + 43.75 + 28.75 + 16.25)] 2.9 {wall height} Factor = .343 = 373.37 / 1,089.85 Main Level FAR = 1,116.63 = (.843) [1,699.59 - 375] {garage bonus} Square Footage: gross = 1,699.59 = 1,048.25 {Victorian} + 651.34{addition} Wall Surface: gross = 2,039.09 = [1,317.22 + 721.87] Victorian = 1,317.22 = [2(44) + 29.25 + 16.75)] 9.83 {wall height} Addition - 721.87 = [2(26) + 24 + 11.5)] 8.25 {wall height} Wall Surface: covered = 318.56 = [162.28 + 127.51 + 22.16 + 6.61] Factor = .843 - [1.0 - (318.56 / 2,039.09)] Upper Level FAR = 1,213.80 = [(.972) 826.95] + 410.00 Square Footage: gross = 1,256.45 = 410.00 {Victorian} + 826.95 {addition} Wall Surface: Addition = 944.00 = [2(26 + 33)] 8.00 {wall height} Wall Surface: covered = 26.00 = [15 + 11] Factor {addition only} = .972 = [1.0 - (26.00 / 944.00)] 01.FAR.HPC.CR.lwdp.doc Page 1 4/22/2003 Apr.25. 2003 3:18PM LIPKIN WARNER DESIGN No.9837 P 2 Dimensional Requirement Form (Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.) roject: 10(4 44 ACU ,-6'ovi . Applicant. 142 Fl>,1 (**opw-5:, L i f k.4,~ A) Arvfâ€¢A' flisi.Pl Project Location: 4 51-0 4 <Epr ;Mp 51- I Zone District: A-BO Lot Size: 2,002- Lot Area: 21 SO -2- (For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep sIopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: 0 Proposed: D Number of residential units: Existing: L Proposed: 1 Number ofbedrooms: Existing: 1,71- Proposea: 1- Proposed % of demolition: D /o DIMENSIONS: (write n/a where no requirement exists in the zone distict) Floor Area: Existing:A,%5*21Allowable: 2,14(.9 Proposed: 2,9-39~ 63 Height ncipal Bldg.: Existing: 2.2-/0 Allowable: Proposed: ..ccessory Bldg.. ' Existing: _1726__Allowable: N,/ A Proposed: N~/A- On-Site parking: Existing: \ 5 Required: 2 Proposed: 9 % Site coverage: Eatisa*& .;N/A kequird. 8 2~_Proposed. N /A % Open Space: Existing: W~* Required: N/A Proposed: N/A Front Setback: Existing: /*V' Required: 25' Proposed: O Rear Setback: Existing: 8-w Required: /5' Proposed. / '- 60 Combined , Front/Rear: Existing: H/A_Required: N/,4 Proposed: N /6 Indicate N. S. E. W Side Setback: 50-th Existing: -454 *' Required: /O' Proposed: -/5 '-7 * Side Setback. n,rtk Existing: 44- 6" Required: /6/ Proposed: /9 6, Combined Sides: Eiisting: /4/4 Required: M~A Proposed: N/A- Existin# non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroacbment licenses have been issued: Il.S *Awroacliw.ct @260 -01, C.W 139 â‚¬:.,wt- ~4-,AlÂ¥ 49495â‚¬'~ Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): 52>0 ave *.dr 6.-4/9 4,-:t. Â»94&:* p-AL-:AAâ€¢ 9/11-1'.k ) râ‚¬'514â€¢.dia< ~/t'bn *21â€¢'A.rd,/ 5-rn,ks .m 23400 Two Rivers Rd. # 44 â€¢ P.O. Box2239 T 970 927-8473 LIPKIN WARNER DESIGN & PLANNING. LLC .. Basalt, Colorado 81621 F 970 927-8487 Young Addition 470 N. Spring St. Improvement Survey Lot Line Adjustment Existing Improvement Survey The current improvement survey included in your package was developed and used in a settlement agreement with the Young's and their neighbor, the Budingers that outlines a change in the property line. The change is an extended property parcel added in 2002 through adverse possession to the north, which increased the property's size and FAR, and required a lot line adjustment. This line is identified on the LWDP site plan as "new property line from adverse possession". The survey does not include pending changes being proposed in this Conceptual Review packet, as identified on LWDP site plans. The pending design if approved will required a new lot line adjustment, adjusted as required for the new HPC approved addition. This adjustment is identified on the LWDP site plan, noted as "proposed property swap" (that maintains current lot size and FAR allowances). In addition an easement will be required to access the new addition, also identified on said site plan. Settlement Agreement with Neighbor In addition to the parcel agreement stated above the settlement also stipulates neighbor's approval towards future development that extends into said parcel. Owner's Intent The owner's goal is to get approval from HPC first before obtaining a new lot line adjustment. This will allow the Young's to finalize the existing agreement with their neighbor, and thus obtain new approvals with the Planning Department to complete all necessary approvals for a Construction Permit. Lot Line Adjustment A new lot line adjustment is required to allow the development to legally manifest. Once HPC has approved the scope of the new development the neighbor will then review and approve the change. This will trigger a new lot line adjustment approval process with the City Planning Department. This process will work concurrently with the HPC's approval process. Ideally the client would like to finalize the lot line adjustment after HPC final review approval. Request The owner requests the HPC to proceed with their approval process by acknowledging the pending improvement survey and lot line adjustment. We would like this included in the Final Review's "Conditions ofApproval" for the project. 01.Lot Line Adjustment.HPC CR.lwdp.doc Page 1 4/23/2003 R-14, i" A /4 4 \JEIEdÂ»-- t? GEORK RD WILLOW BY WAY 470 8 0 ~ N. Spring \ /NOOD (n \ /60Ek L Hallam Z 111,11"9 2 GILLESPIE AVEN Lake 4 8 p -5 5 NA F 487 m _R . 7 % MF NCIS 1. LONE-Â» 44Â¢19> 8. HAROLD ROSS A '~ 9. COWENHOVEN CT 0 - elb f 10 LUKE SHORT CT r 12 7 11.FREE SILVER CT 11 13. E FRANCIS ST PlppY,% ~> 12. WILLIAMS RANCH DR a. ed Brick d> CO 2 A. rick SoIl ll,E w 1 .24 4 0 0 4 0 '0 + O 4 Rio G,ande Palt 3 AWMU C EC 0 7 0 RE ~~~43 9// rpE a 84 *ST '~:â‚¬>:*f *be# 0 W H PKIN 0 E HOPKINS AVE Jo AVE E IN ST % 4,4 4 6/4 0 7//42 / Ha 2. ALPINECT 1. ROBINSON RD O 0.40 3, MAYFLOWER CT 4. CIRCUIT AVE - 5 SKIMMING LANE 2 * 4 ubey Pa 2 & 64 /10Â«N e EAN N T 62 TrAVE OPER VE G/ / BERT ST 4/ 4 -,CO SNA 7 G on, Hole w Pa/.g Q Â·ir*Po 11/ATERSAV ~ 2 4 0 4 r ASPEN GROVE RD 3 6 4 L_,1 F 0 16 D ~5 4 74 U. 6.0 B\VE WESTVI DR 0 076 + 14 'f.< I. ,//1 4111 i i 6. LACET COURT 7. UTE COURT ././1./' â€¢,1 .0/ d, -84 SVO (20* 11 OB d HaMOd Bo I \93 ' 8 SMUGGLER MTN RD 4652 NORTHWAY DR hi NDN Na V DK 311 elai# 1. A M J 'Â·0Â·Â·6221** f *MT#%rM#4 0 1 R 1 Â£51 rd L Egb Ur* 1 K. L. . 1 46 & Â· *1~184*773226 43 90 4 4 1- CDR 1~--0~ *LJL~,~0&~~B~FRY-'24-5-' (4 rÂ»J ~ 2,6.8 r *,NE;-Eâ€¢ 7-Â· 4/PN.ger 64 40--1------' Â£/6/077.Â· ELIC ~ 0 N. 0, pa 0 lilli 11'll tb 1 516 614 61% 610 608 606 604 Got 600 534 532 530 528 626 524 52 5210 518 516 514 -31% 510 508 806 50430300 334 .0.H _ -I .- -.i.- .i-I- - - I--- -.--* - -i-- - .-il--. i--I- -.--- Il-i.- - I--- W. BLEEKER 0 (68) (6031 . 9 fin 6/5 677 611 -505.1 607 6.(1~m 60/ C ~27 525 5-2 57 55 z:99 95 573 5// 9]9 507 505 503 54 0 C 71 1 - --1 l \ 7191 -7-7 2 7-7 fr--i~ R L jilL-7 , LE-41 W 1 12 1 b -2 DI XI -\ o i- INSE;/1 Z 116 215#D -â€¢Gr T- [3/X< to Z 1--1 tzi . L_J i ;717 t--4- BE.KI -1, 4 10 0 1 22.1- 0 0 09 b -p -1 CD: 6- LU 00< 0 ' 2 < t~ 1 k 5 I & G H. /:t ~ 8 1 C G H ~ L N / D O% I-3 --1 E] 1 - 246x 74 0 92 3331 r- 4 %1/nu M 17-4- 'f / X =01 - > 24 30 0 0 - / 510*4./i % k:- 0 121 lul 42-81 R><19 b <r i / 11.1 1/ x I. xI, 1 1 y 0. R Q. R. 8. % X K 1 04 M N. la~e 04 - 1 f R. 6. 4 10 , i - r-- / i if - 7-71 7-1 0-: n % - h /0 / --- [73 1 I2 N -- 1 h e 2% / -D 1 Zz, [7; _1 2 - 5 l__i \ ~7-71 , ~id / ' CZEL_ -* 1 -3 x / K . 1.--IEZZi Ot:24 4,1 4 2 4 5>v. 7 33*ee E Gro. 0 F:, 22.01/ el//0 , F,2 8'. A umr 6,4 6,2 60 608 606 004 602 600 63â‚¬ 63%'zOzf-357-3325' 337 322 52<7-318 076 3747 372' 37~7309314 56'4' 4Ffâ‚¬t!~z?H 433- g /.4 . T Â¥4. PIPE F,9 Box d. _ ja . =======.=== ========-==== 8/1 9/1 tm ZIi 00/ 801 00/ 601 901 , 1. 0 ( 4/ 65 ) 2 B.1. / BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT -1 1 [2~CITVBMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiI~~TOLORADO ADDRESS 470 0-*r<Al CONSTRUCTION ~ GENERAL OF JOB Lot 2, Block 4 Oklahoma Flats PERMIT WHEN SIGNED AND VALIDATED BY BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES THE WOR4-~ESCRIBED BELOW. CLASS OF WORK: NEW O ADDITION 2 ALTERATION El REPAIRO MOVE 0 WRECI OWNER NAME Marvin Moriarity ADDRESS Aspen, Colorado PHONE 925-2964 LICENSE LICENSE NAME (AS LICENSED) By owner CLASS NUMBER INSUI 1 96 5 322., fi_- P/-far,.beÂ·Â·-t-2*,C ADDRESS ----- PHONE- SUPERVISOR ~ 7*fr~<22 1 \N C- rE '14 :53 ej C*<-Â· 62143*16..,1_ FOR THIS JOB NAME 1 - DATE CERTI i LEGAL ' // PX ~ DESCRIPTION LOT NO. 2 BLOCK NO. 4 /, ADDITION Oklahoma Flats LIC. i SURVEY ATTACHED ~~ DESIGN f' Tagert house to be moved f BY None BY , as constructed / PE No. AREA (S.F.) HEIGHT NO. ~N.~OTAL OCCUPANCY,Â·/ AT GRADE 2700 (FEET) 21' STORIES UNITS--- _GROUP Res. DIV. : BASEMENT UN~ ~. GARAGE SINGLE ~ ATTACHED ~ TOTAL TYPE FfRE DOUBLE Il DETACHED Il ROOMS 9 CONSTR. Wood ZONE ' DEPTH 1 4 FIRST 5IZE 3PACING SPAN AGENCY AUTHORIZED DA BELOW K BY GRADE ~ FLOOR EUILDING EXTERIOR r- RE\/IE W j FOOT \NG ~ f+ / t 9 CEILING SIZE ZONING EXTERIOR CONC. 2 FDN. WALL A // ROOF PARKING THICKNOS ~ MAS'Y .0 1 ''' PUBLIC HEALTH THICK r-1 CAISSONS m ROOFING SLAB LJ & GR. BEAMS U MATERIAL 1 MASONRY ABOVE ABOVE ABOVE ENG:NEERING EXTERIOR THICKNESS IST FLR 2ND FLR 3RD FLR. WALL STUD SIZE ABOVE ABOVE ABOVE & SPACE IST FLR, 2ND FLR 3RD FLR. REMARKS C0 NOTES TO APPLICANT: 9 FOR INSPECTIONS OR INFORMATION CALL 925- 7336 -, FOR ALL WORK DONE UNDER THIS PERMIT THE PE PA',IT TEE ACCEPTS FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR VALUATION COMPLIANCE WITH THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, THE COUNTY ZONING RESOLUTION OR CITY ZONING ORDINANCE, AND ALL OTHER COUNTY RESOLUTIONS OR CITY ORDINANCES WHICHEVER OF WOR K ~1,400.00 APPLIES. SEPARATE PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING AND HEATING, SIGNS, PLAN TOTAL FEI SWIMMING POOLS AND FENCES. PERMIT EXPIRES 60 DAYS FROM DATE ISSUED UNLESS WORK IS STARTED. FILED T P C> C- REQUIRED INSPECTIONS SHALL BE REQUESTED ONE WORKING DAY IN ADVANCE. DOUBLE CHECK ALL FINAL INSPECTIONS SHALL BE MADE ON ALL ITEMS OF WORK BEFORE OCCUPANCY IS PERMITTED. FEE - CASw 3 $14.00 5 THIS BUILDING SHALL NOT BE OCCUPIED UNTIL A CERTIFJCATE OF OCC~ANCY HAS BEEN ISSUED. ~ BUILDING DEPARTMENT h .-U! PERMIT SUBJECT TO RE VOCATION,,OR SUSPENSION FOÂ¥~IOLATION Qi ANY LAWS GOVERNING SAME. SIGNATURE / 4/7 -72~ i A A it OF 1/1 APPLICANT: 442214% 1 â€ž/ ./ Flej-1 i V \e- /\ PERMIT NO, LICENSE 4 RECEIPTS CLASS A-AOUN THIS FORM IS A PERMIT ONLY WHEN! VALIDATED HERE cu ~ 9/17/6~ 8A-170 FOUNDATION CONTRACTOR DEBIT B . OUDINGCR PARCEL REC~7}c,1 1*=a *Woll #- 1//- it,~ h r *1/4 '-34 Â·Â· D Â£ 2 317$6' 22 I â„¢-- O :*:-/ s***4 r-1-Â·-Â·f~~*~~~t~~lr--Â·-16 D l...- he:A-â€ž,0 e /<77 61 - 1 - TO * Colk LOT., ILL' RMP 04LDTRalk! /â€¢ r--luâ€žA- U SUI~51271,SUDFICATE . 4 TI 4- ~9*%:ir =w=/#Uum'*ant- 31 IM m~ahalharmid.m-*, #2Ksanl~==ty. i o 0 1 0 t 2 *44 - LOT 2. BLOCK 4 0 aq..~1Â«Â»IA G 3 ./&.Ir/'.A: fr -- 4,3 5 r -1; /./,30 â€¢ /,m Fir-%../....#'*"./41./.r,ii::irat r R.."rfLI- 1 11"101 Al-PINE 3/JIVEN, De an X] '14â€¢.. I . 00 MAYRO/,I'" LS____. 6 - eu,Â©/crn),re cefron:w-c, <g 1 1 *#/5 15 Reack b mpttfi criturr 1)Vu nint Â® â€¢t. 5 un.4.#rr/StÂ»&Â·257~Â»-eÂ° peclerecp rpo~orrÂ£ g M A Â° D â€ž crl Â® 2 k, 01 4nlts aJM:*NO, 11*A tÂ¥â€¢ Uct, REE-RE*K- e" o al Le.,16+ . Â·. G -h Alfie SunÂ¢*yi, k =4== .....â„¢ ...â€žn ....al mr :UY I rf?.Sl s,Clb +Gal:Q.,1 PIP,0'00'I_I--t 'Â¥-c~. 2~9~ SPRING STREET z 02:577 .7 34 24 474555 h. f Page: 13 of 24 111 li 1 al li 1-11 ill ill'll li I'll 11/08/2002 02:571 -LVIA CAVIS PITKIN COL. TY CO R 121.00 0 0.00 I $ 1 ./ ix 19# 7 1 143: e 394:ZE -#r.** Budinger Property 04'Â·Â· J fre.- - - 91. 6 AN & - . 1 - - 40 h J: Li 4444'52>i-2 1. Gl ' / M:. N.46.!COâ€¢'07*15 5,40' /Es #* 5 55- 54'82," 6 10.507 -2, a. . N -42157- 5Â·44* 57':Oy W -5.921 -#-126/60% -Coritested -~00.0- ... 14~Â·-9- f..... e Parcel -1<- -9 607 62 #lf-11 4 - J -1 . - 62Â·200. rPLANTER 22-"-7514'L'' 589 -~ 0 - -. r ::i: Z. . - --, ~ 1 Â£ .. Young Property . GAS 1 + 11 1 1 .11 j i- .- tid .. -i 1=z:./~# i ; / CO I '. *. r /;/ir T,NO STORY / / Ul 107 . /1 L. ..._ / U 4/7 i ti 0 1 fri) 9 1 0 - 0/ / 17/ 1 / ' //1/ -6 + 1/ / 9, k â‚¬01 zi LOT 2, BLOCK 4 / /~~// / / / /=ti CHIMNEY u OKLAHOMA / / I fill pr. FLATS U 'lul u O Â·rnru Â© 6 21 E Ill ENCROACHMENT NFOO 1 --40-00-_499 0 V-1 EL l-Li @ EASEMENT Bk 340 109298 ~02 CHIMNEY / / 26.55/ ZE 7-4 1% V' 3.2 1 1 0 CO 5-7 Z 0% - . N74Â°30'00"W 60- 00 Iit'Daf,/ - ~ 9 4 ./.4. ... 0 32:*19:*:*22:'*23*9*1 ..iSS*Sm@R*:Em~:4 )444444*>4%%Â¥SS:~SS, ... , Â»: **:*;*RM~*0*:i*& .:*WmtÂ¥$66$56:%%%::%* :~**i@iÂ¢#:MA:R::2 ..........4 0 *$90**$$$85$$$$9 ~0 - *~ r , Al <V000*0000000$00004$04'4< . *IRÂ¥:4:,24*:i:!SN â€¢4 4&5Xt>Xâ€¢Â»>SÂ»SÂ» ......, . 24=2.3.:*:34 SESSS:::7 . P ts:Â¥:F . ... ./Ilinila;AV1~,8/1;94,24*/tioA,42'dil*lam/4/0 46009 . ,~ 4. 00 ~4*~'4~fl~'4~*4404**4**Ill***v.4 1... 0 0 ... 0 . L *i:*24*0 'il!1!lililil'111'1. it!1111'*fil,111*# 1-- EXISTING- Vt"' / t1tl#jll!llIil*i1If FROFERTY -~ f/,fit>Â»/,/o<0~0<iki'Â« 1,1,11!11,1,1/11*/1,1, / *i'*iI!li:/$itliliI$ili/ 111#1*111,1,111Â£1*1*111. lf--7 2111:1&14!41!11101Â¢10/11 't I/I#I!!f//l!l!/!#!I!I! 4/,/1/1/1 rÂ«Â« ruil/,fli'iii 1 V//// Yi///. ,l;lililll ililli -7777 i /1/1. "11111111 bdif:fic 29643 1 ilt'llifililill'!1, 1 :111/5/1/'11/i,Â·,lil# ,; .1, iff,1,1,1,1111,1/11 'i/i#!1!1/1!1/1//fj!1111, Ailâ€¢31!2111$111*111'jii. Â·.,..I,Jilitililfijl l.l,.91Â·hirN:144141;1 1 hi fill *fedmi~*5* i'lli ~U~F~FROFOSED /ill,7 fj i f ? t/N AU /1 ilillf: ti:Ii' LOT LINE 1/ Ifi i lit ADJUSTMENT (~>0,~~~//',--453Â¢>â€žÂ«.,~,v>. :lili f ' ilitilill/'1 1 'illit 1 *1lllll 1 15; :11/*1*1111?li,11. 2/13/Â«600~042 SCALE 1:10 /// / / 1 ~2/// 1 // / / 1 4, co / 0 / I 1 il 1 1 ), ell li / / 9433 i lilli tA j, 1)\ '5 - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1/ 1 /1 /fij\/\ ) I 1 1 b'i i 1 4. '2/4Â·ve'tÂ·- ' L -)Â£ 1 1 /( / 4 4/ C V ' 1 F / hi l i.,---= / " / / ff-~- --fl -/TV- ' 1- / 11 , '1 /f 1 11 1 + i I T.#Z#.#*#.'***7)**F*#+M*:4 6 S / / 1 1 1 : , I 1 1 / // 3 - 4-] 1 ./ j f i j)i Of' 1 1 1 i t / -16\E\N--'00' 1 1 1 - EXISTING / / ~ %-.4/ < ADD\BON 1//\ VICTORIAN --) / E i / / b 1 1 (-m /1 / i J il' / / 2 3, .#i , 1 t 1 .\ r:. It , h/\ 1 , I / / 5 // 9-3 ~ 1 , -- - L.-th -8 - . l. 1 ,1 , 1 1 , I . I k I . il-4 , WEST STAIRS TO BIZ 1.1 1 REMOVED f // / 1 / + 11111111111} ......111111111 1~Â·Â·â€¢ - 1 r 1 / EXISTING . < ExISTNG 1 1 /1 DRIVE 6 -Â·F \ GUEST < ~ / :FAKE,111<3 ~ ' FAFF ING' ~ 1 1 1 1 / / / N. SPRING STREET YOUNG ADDITION - SITE FLAN , SCALE 1:10 j Q . .|-/1 . 4. 4 4 qf â€¢ ' 4 .i. 11 - ' f ' rk: y air. . 1 3 4':' r C., .46-4 1 Sk,;6.:id t . .:F 1. : 2.W . . ... I . ./ . * I 1 11 ht' 1 0 . *,F y . 4 Je,Lk * Â· IX+9 Â·Â¢4 &4+ 1,- , 0 I i. 4.4 I '.16 *k4.11.14 4- .1- ..Â· * 91:' p.. .1 *1' # r.r '74 4 ~.~ 2 -ki,fi'â€¢ .. 4.... I /,w L '1 : 44 ' -- 1 1\ . 1 J -,â€ž4,- L.rÂ· .~ I. - , V .k . 9 ... . 47-.I-I- - F -- -- ,- - .2 *2 4.4 i A *9*ill 4, f + I O /-/ Â·Â·i? , 14 .. .â€ž.e,Â£ I t 1 , . 81 /f. - tp'. P j. .4 4'* 1 1. . D . .-,1 V . 9..4 - 4 47 ..lipli 2. - 5 #. .. . I k... I. 391%<..t i -, ./. * .a L: ....2 -1.6.....dj< - 16 . I. f /4 r- 04//2 h <60//fym ' Â¥> t .. .CÂ» 1 *A- â€¢-411. r ////-7/ -7 *Â· 2'jal=/ 1 .1 1~ A- 9.4 41Arit e<3. .,_- .1 1/1 , P' 9 -*'~* i.*t.;ib ~ 3 1 â„¢,il!*19- - ' tr' - 6 .-t: 9 % r*f~ '- C \11 2 . 9. 1 1/1 . ., ; -6 - -2 405* - , 1-1 -11 I 8* Â¢ . . .//1 4 - /2 #Wa , mt . . . 2 -61A- , , 9 6. .05.7 '- e .. â€ž .* - 1 %11 , 1,. 1.10&=-4 ./.27 ' 154 - L..1.-3,2/01..;.7 â‚¬ -,44. , ' -..*.I...Ill..........& f Al'll-'- rE- '1 7 1Â£'-0 I ....1 - . 1 .1:'' 9 -- . I 1 r. . . ,*k " . 11'll, , , 2.74 64. Â·Ck i-_ L. I, '* ir I Ir. I. ... ilk I 1 .4 4 4%. :itt i ~. - t'.3 - 4 6 + 'Â· I . 3 k ....'* â€¢amÂ·..t-. - ' J.1 4 1 elb- ~ 2 i ...., 1 4- 41////////FF# 4 45 4 /Me)< 4 :~ : AL,~4Â· 59~ *<~~4' ;~ 4 33*14;944 -14~*3/h . 70 . 4/%]i.' Â·, j: /-Â« , r. ~ ~19,9, L , '22 . - 1 , i :114216*4 3*<65"/2/ Ir Â·Â· t . - .4, 1 ..0. - U 1 r 'P %71,17 '4 4 . 4 , ,g~ NA , N . . ---r . 0 - 0, 24 -4 7 +10* + . 1 --I I . 1 . 1 :4 1 & 2.4..Logi , -, rk ~Arrc . 4 A t. 1.5 611'..: - ' '12, -Ill-2 --- I *.n,z -3 4- *. :. a====CE~ - i d Vill/'ll./.0/ *.til-tli' i ir. f / 1/1 I t Ill -ir th # P -4. 1~ ...11.--, 311 - 7 Â·M: 6~ 'INS:i:,1 t . *.,,. V- 6 *. I ~ Â· 08*8:* 4ifT i /*'. a..A, 4VA R ..1 ~ ..4 -'* . - - ..ry L. . I .r I .= Afl.-1 ...C.Â£ * â€¢~ 4*43Â· ' Â«14 9 â‚¬ 16.1 . . 4.4 . e -a.qiâ€¢ F .4,6~ 11 . , :4-a :9,72- . - + AL/*Gi/Fir. ~ ''~t .: . ; i % /44. %*. ,â€ž 472'.1 04;et, L . -. .1 -~17Â¢.~., , I ..1/8, 'CL!. 'r, L! r :.V,p3. - '. .424 ...Â¥% I .1%' 71....P....9*/9/In#044*41*ir.le.&Trl.:1*13///I'i"/ Â·- re',9 ; Â¥? Â·f'~~2 ' ' - ' . 3//1/F %f o '1 10 , f .3,?1 tr ' 4 --W- F 51/ .. DP 44 N . - , i .1 4~ g <*1 , e.ri~cid 9 1 . r. . 4 , 1...d/&4 /:-: -1/1 :931Â»7 - -4 ..614 --- '21, 4 2 1. Â· ..' ./ , ~6*S~r , .* 1 , t 99)<*'fi~.D. i 7 1 . 4. IA' r . . P.: 1 . '. ' I . 1 -7t\Â© '.i ~, I A % . dr 1 4.4 . 4 1 :. % 2. ,!r *9 l 'If .,JIN, 4 td : 'tvt, - . I ' h, ,. ' ; .4 11 . 4 ..C 1, 6 1 , e. 0. .. "44 . Â·pÂ·l ./. . 4 1 't , , (**Itt ' ; 4 ' -'' 1 INLE. 1 -0-* 1.JE-1 5 IllIL-1, i i .r i' 1 2-. dbkft,i . . .1 1 .L ~ 2 1 k 4 -12,1,0 ill! \Iii 1 ////~// 1~ 14Â£, 9 1.43 -1.-ti ..AN'~& ** m 14. I 1- lit . -, -- ,-r .2., al. 1 1 - L_.L. 1 , a 1*1 / . . ..0 *.Ir Y Â·- 1 4"0136* ArÂ¥..7 .rl. I. 1 're 4 9 1 .1, f . t- n . i * lilli/9 a.- - .-lili W . 7 I I. /'24 1.44 i \ 3 Â·uill'r rl - 41 - r .1 1.15 f ' 3141- 0 -24 3~'MRN,- .g.* - _21 "2 + *,"6 1 .2-==LIE .1 = f . , *...-./5~Ip* 2 e .4--- 1.-- :22=11% fl- 1 r r f - .- -1 : r 6- A Â· i .,4 +W; ilit.:0 + - ' 1,,-7,â€ž:6- 4~ 4- L-..P . - - 44 ws,-41 _1 tw-%P 'i-*.. * I:. 2 ./ L.. i.4 - .- - A. L \8. DF Â· ../ P .1 Ii:# f#.Ir, 1 1 4. j 4,0 .. ./ . :- 4 " 41* ./ 7 . , 1 I .. 'i . tj, .. i , . '1 .i I i. 0 -- Â¥ i- I ... - ..4 0 Ul 1 1,6~tee- ... - - 47,1/4/ . ; 'bri. - . ' . 74* , k *11 u * ' 42. - ' -Â«ta '1 f .44* i '* 52 -Â»7 f . 4 : 1 ~ ti 1,Â® Kv -#...,Ii' - 4, w. . 1 2 4 L . *.4 -1 1 1 Il - r 1. 5 -46. ./ 4 i j - A- 39 .i .,- 1 r.: ' 37 Â·4 -- 1 ' - /1,11 - 1 . fr,2 91 1 4 9 'in ....ewlii --I- I .-.Il , I ... '' t. . *Af f 1Ei~234/4//FL --- -- 1 9 ~~~4 . I 9 ' -40,74~W> -r" Â«. 1 'r_ 1 W*-4-- ir ./ 4*, 1-- L 0., . , Â·,r ,u-m'p -U Â· 1 1- . .., 1 '.4,!.--,3.. 1.1:*dul. 3 9 m - . - r. '1 , Vâ€žâ€ž-7. 42-*~i,~ 1 A. - -- 3*Â·, -5, Trk. a Â· i Â·10â€¢ Â·- Â· .- - A. A L \, D li /vi - =21- 1 --I--- /b J..in'//"//""/////"""//"""/6 1~ 60#AUG-aity-} L, /##f Â»187Â» c i , FEE, Â¥n P R ,+1676 (2 I C i.:-<4-I~1'~1211 -- -"11 U , 1 Ii- --,- - 1 72.9 98 r dor ~- 1......ai-Il rillif-1 112Im7. --- - \ 4 - 1 Ilill ----- 1,---11=:-7.Ali-11 -4--..11'FI--111-'1112-99*,1.t- -Â· e it~ .1 --1 i, IT-- - 1 IM V . * I '. - h-4-/I+-.J . I~*~~~~ ~~~~.~~P!#l~ 1 _~ i ---- ---- - ! i 0 '971 5}\\11 kÂ·Â· - ..CL 1 It - 1 1.41' 1 :Â·i,4.,~ --Â·i-44774'Â·:Â·FÂ¢.9,/t '11.'11.1 42. n - \N-(M-Dowi> - Â¥5 168+ <6 - - I 4 ' ~li I |ill|~!ill'~!:Ii,1 1 1-4Â·[lt.=1201-.lili-11'Il-IL[.2]14 -L -._Lu:f -," - :-j Â£.9.1~1!.J. ~l,j.c --i- i A, *A~ w INTJOW 1 , /*AE)94 2:11,2- 1 1 0- 1 .,At It 1 FrAL ki _ 0~ , I ~ 4,1 ~ 64 1 - -- - ---------------*.-----.- " - - ~ 'ii; i ~4L 111 11 2 11 1 1 It 1 i '< 1 I i ./.--I 14.6 31-1.-1- 1 11 ..1-~ 4-1 *4*1=@-' fidi~4,7Â©Rz<i'-~i/kt, Â· _. 1 -+ , -_._ , ; lt'.. 11,2-4 6- 7 ,- lili -. 1/.I h----------7-7--------------1 -New-*[ConnectorNon-Historic Historic WEST ELEVATION EXHIBIT Y [=] 1 51-re 3 . gutin/* EdNeâ€¢-u Cza TEÂ» n'â‚¬7Â» L --r 41*M)"I,4 4 ..4 0. .- . . Â·>41:' . 'SI.//,j,W Â·'Â·:EmEPjÂ·- :Â·' G. ~ '~ f..1 T.r 1 - Â· Â·.Â·.. PME"T::...,, \ . ..54./I.-~.~Â·Â·-Â·.Â·-i . 0/Â«,4 j ~@;96*i '1Â·7â‚¬.449'>Nt<'.1 Â·z.,.... .. NORTH ELEVATION SCALE 3/16" = 1 10" *BUST)%*14- dezeuwa Fe-, Fnâ‚¬7-â€¢a u 1 I. .:V . . . . Ily. 1 1 k . .*f 'Lak-- - -4 4 ***n 4*~&F: 3 1Ed .y 1'.1 -k=â€¢r. :-4~4 1 ~-r- ' 1 W=?9*> -UE -4-4--cr'Â«t ,- *. ~i|It|i.-WL=-â‚¬4 ---4 1%: 4 1 >7 3 A ..f?U.:1 .1 1 3#.Â· i NORTH ELEVATION SCALE 3/16" = 1'-0" -WUS[Wi+ CACRUGA FEY-> . - / 14Â« 1 .- 1- - .1 1! ,Â·' 11 -Â·.6. s 1 ' ......':.A'"*"m.*....--::I . r 1, 1 . . k 0 1 EVATINCe ptip gob F - 1 1 1-~ t.-} 1 ----------i------2--t:.r:17'-7-N-- TU - ~----- 1 1 '1 1 Ii.--11 - --- -- --W ~-1 U 1 U -1 -.---*-- -*. ------ ---.---------- -. -. - ---- --, =Eff##ggi-:. -- *- -Er--Z- .1 1 - ./ 11 1914 - , r.4!--,I ...+I.....1 1 14 il u ii i? 4 IT 1 d d 111 111[- .y .1 ,1 6 ... 111 1 \ 1 P -PL.v: f *,=1-1 + -Â· + lili b i -- 141 -1 - t.+--,-4-- 11 . I J.*E,1 i I -T x il ' -- l6===21.11 1%41 1 1--3Â§2*.-99<NeÂ«,5..7 --1 9.- - 41 -.6#X.5: A 1 1Li . f 1 . --11 I //Â» 4- r!' - 1-1 i i- [~11 17'-2DP Â·il . A /1 1 19. til" i 9 . C..4 M. 54 t 'T 'L i ' Historic Non-Historic bonnectot New EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" -*US71/94- given uo-A re) '79â‚¬774 C 401Â· . 4.4 --4- ..Â·-- :...:411 4 - h // Pr 3 ./*.'. -- . ,' I .,&% p -*4. ~~i~~1@.'Ill . \ ,1 1,1 / 1 /1 - n##t .,Al . -rl=r:+ "17'51*'~ *=â€¢=4 -Friz p i< . 1 +=D:/*11&*r'.-i J g1-r I - ; 1111 -1 J. r W 41 09 i i j -- I P 4. 92. - , 4 ('4 - ~2 avir y 77 - -14, 1 0 9. /22; i.:- 11; 2,4?1=% ./iÂ· res *: _ . U -r'- 7- - 3 31) 4â‚¬44 21 1 - ~Â·'Iii , le Pmpt I. I 7 11] 1 t' 2--I- ---4 4 -Illf ''llilill V . 1 I.1.: 611 i 1. 1 - 1- 11 1 1 -. .... .' 411-9.. SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE 3/16" = 1'-0" 7-11" 12'-9" 9 5'-4" 1,3'-3111, 1 1 1 f 101.5 3/r , - - 0- - - - - 0 0 -1 U U L_ 99 .. . Â¥ p V . 1 41 1 OFFICE POWDER 2 GARAGE ED Fle Fl EXISTING E VICTORIANI 1 103 7 1 1-- 1 . til = , F_ _ ~ D ROONÂ¢ 11 1 -1 , S 111 1 00 m \420 31. - 240 1, 1.0 02 m .20 h 21'-9 1/2" / 4 -11\1 /5 -73 0 MAIN LEVEL FLAN SCALE 3/16"=15-0" 101/2'.~,4L 23'-611 20' , 1 * 1 7-11'~ 9 18'-1" , I * - lill. --*%.- -ii-- u u " IL -f-- 1 TZ j 11~11 / N! / MASTER I l' i il 4 / BEDROOM -1 - 111 1-- 1-4 1 1 341 1 ~ ~'CLOS Â§Tj - 1 fr i 1 1 /' R 1 .1 I k ' 1171 I 03 | 9 | A A -1-1 I h k I tr-hi 9/1 1 1-1 ~ r J 1 =Uy' 1 1 // 1.==43-f~1 - 1 ---- 108.5 ------ 1 OUG 1 1 1 =-2 -- .- U 1 1 1 13Â«I 1 OFFICE / 1 \ 7- -- ---9 --1 1----1 \ 1 1 1 i \ 1 .F 1. .1 rE--- 7 \ F \\\ T i. _ - - - ~f~ ROOF AaOVE ROOF OF /2/ B'-31/2" / ADDITIONI EXIETING VICTORIAN UFFER LEVEL FLAN SCALE 3/16%=1'-0" 13'-31/2" 2511â‚¬- 1 - 21'- III?C Worksession 5/28/03 â€¢ 28 Smuggler Grove Project Overview This structure is a Miner's Cottage type structure and is not currently listed on the historic inventory. The building was moved onto the site, from its original location, thought to be near the existing Chart House. It seems to be in its original configuration, though may of the original finish materials have been replaced. The window openings are consistent with an original pattern, though the window units are not historic. The building receives a passing score on the new scoring sheet, based on current information. Research on its original configuration is ongoing. We are requesting that the HPC consider the designation of the property as a historic landmark. If the Board supports the designation, the redevelopment of the site, as proposed, will require the use of many of the HPC's benefits. We will request a landmark lot split, a floor area bonus, and set back variances for the resulting historic house lot. The lot is currently restricted by its location in the R-15A zone district, by unusually large set back requirements and a number of utility easements. While the HPC can provide variances for the historic house lot, we need to go through a PUD process to gain relief from the set back requirements on the newly created lot. And the support of the HPC in this process will be valuable. The site is located on Smuggler Grove, a small dead end street on the east side of Aspen. , This area contains a variety of building types and sizes on a variety of lots. In the R-15A zone district, the side and rear yard set backs are 10', and the front yard set back is 25'. This is a small lot in the broader context of the zone district and the front yard set back, in particular, has a serious impact on the site. It appears that few of the other buildings on this street comply with the 25' set back requirement. See the attached site plan drawing for the proposed location of the historic hpuse and the setback issues. The current house has a 1,142 sq ft foot print, with a full basement. The total floor area on the existing site is 3,625.25 sq ft. The proposal is to add a small addition to the rear of . the historic house using approximately 415 sq ft. Additional square footage will be used in the required light wells. The site plan also indicates the location of the proposed one story addition. Worksession Goals At this worksession we would like some feedback from the HPC on the following: 1. The landmark designation 2. The lot split as essentially described in the site plan, with floor area distribution. 3. A comfort level with the requested set back variances and size and location of the addition. 4. A comfort level with supporting the PUD process for relief from set back requirements on the newly created site. 412 North Mill Street PO Box 1303 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 920 9225 v Â· 970 920 7723 f ' vkr@rof.net . 1 Project Statistics 1 Lot Area 7,377 sq ft. FAR Calculations 3,625.6 sq ft allowable, based on single family calculation Existing FAR 1,142 sq ft above grade Proposed Distribution All numbers are approximate Total Available Floor Area 3.625.6 sq ft Lot A - with historic house Lot area 4,186.1 sq ft Existing FAR 1,142 sq ft Proposed Addition 415 sq ft Approximate light well contribution 358 sq ft Total Proposed 1,912 sq ft Deduct for FAR bonus 500 sq ft Total floor area used on Lot A 1.412 sq ft Lot B - new Lot area 3,390.9 sq ft Proposed FAR 2.213.6 sq ft Existing Set Backs Minimum 10' Sides and Rear Minimum 25' front and Rear A 5' utility easement runs along the property line on each side A 10' utility easement runs along the rear property line. We are researching the possibility of vacating the utility easements, but until that is accomplished, these easements cannot be invaded by the structure. A.* L 4.4 6 ilk.0 2-.eâ‚¬.44&a- ///1/~~~.: --:Â£;804â€¢-r. 4 i . de , F 3 0//FILd't. 7/.909*0~AF)30* 9,1.06 ~i. 14* / 2. 1-1. A mir . .6 -r lm./4 . k I I . -$/ 31'Â· t. 1 -li 11 1 1 4'k --- 11.42 ~ rd - 1 }81 6 - . %$ . i..=LI' I ./ 0 .4//03 7 ' f ),I Â·Â· I-. 0 - 7 *10< ' fi4,0 K 4.1 - ,, ;. 3 cÂ¥â€¢ 4.i. = 4 .4 -,4 ' #4 . .r . D. 1 . .. 0. SMUGGLER GROVE ROAD C/) / 0 / W 0(4 E-1 2-1 ALUM CAP 2376 / _ ~ , T GRAVEL PARK/NG IE U ER k EASH-1 / N 79*41 '00-W BASIS OF BEARINGS 04 4 0 0 0 U 91.26 4 Nt'4Â· 97 /2 - 97.6 <2 il \ Â·kA ALUM CAP 2376 7 - , 7~U \ \ 0 CLE-ANOUT ~ \ 97.8' _ RU\T 12.3 - 6. *s- E e 'G 0 - 0. - ---4 - g ---- 0 - - - - 98 -' O .. 7.7' / / WINDOW WELL 97.9 FIRST FLOOR - 100.0 LTYPICAL) U 14.8''f . 64 = C TBM LOT 2 I . 377 ~0 .FT.-/- AREA 7 v 6 0. \ L. .n 0 9. 04 NOUSE 11 1 TH BASEMENT . 1 - 4. 61 - /< I O 7- 1 1/2 STORY WOOD FRAME 5 51 \ 0 1 34.8. BAN SHED n /6. 2 1 g8. Li 7.3 UD .2 \ L ' i -le ew GARDEN ~ 1 \0 Ul \L\TY EASEMEN \ ' ' ~~~ l n...... ... . .... n... .. . . .. O S 80'26'01-E 104.00' ., 4 YEL CAP z Â·,r. 15710 4 14 - 1 AB,/~ ~ Â· ~ct ,-'- 6,0 .'14- i ~ 6; f. i.Ki .442'44<9-f-f-''- - ~- . *,4.z~f.. '..i.t~Â·~:f. Â·: .tboyÂ·fÂ· FFEIN. 412 North Mill S lorado 81612 puÂ·inumuids Ala . 1 FILL 6 OZG Â· n Â§136 016 0Â£6 50 UTILITY EASEMENT \ S '19' 1 -W 76.20' N d RT H -f- - - - - I.- Crcul k Â·9 - 1 1' 4 9 - 10 1 81' 0 A 1 - 3 3 -9 2 9,14 71 V 9- r O I-- 1 3> fu 09 .--... 0 i 0 d) -- I -- 4 -1 u-zz e 3? P 2 -, 1 \ 1 0-1 1> 0 P r 6% 0 \ 1 1. E- - 'C- \ . A .< 44 1 \ i 1 I - i X-. , -....W 1 *.- 1 I r-- I .0 0 9 -1 1 1 1> / L . rl: ell /7 9 0 i -1 . . 0 0 g -- 1 .* / / t - . _w I -4 .-- , 2 --* li 0 . 41 -1 - 0 --1 Ul me - - -1 ~ 28 Smuggler Grove Â· HPC Worksession ) Proposed Site Plan REID â€¢ ARCHITECTS \ 5/20/03 / 412 North Mill Street â€¢ PO Box 1303 â€¢ Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 920 9225 v 0 970 920 7723 f â€¢ vkr@aspenwave.net 11/OL 331 60 N " 4 179 169 â‚¬â‚¬1 SAct,=- --11 iDD St 7 *9';'0- - "4 -\ 1,+ T lâ‚¬ AOK- 1,434