Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.hpc.20030827
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 27, 2003 CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROOM 130 S. GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO NOON - SITE VISIT - 2 William's Way 5:00 I. Roll call II. Approval of minutes -May 28, 2003 - June 25, 2003 - July 9, 2003- August 13, 2003 III. Public Comments IV. Commission member comments V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) VI. Project Monitoring VII. Staff comments: Certificates of No Negative Effect issued (Next resolution will be #18) VnI. OLD BUSINESS A. 470 N. Spring Street - Major Development (Conceptual), Continue Public Hearing to Sept. 10, 2003. B. 635 W. Bleeker Street - project monitoring - IX. NEW BUSINESS 5:30 A. 2 William's Way - Major Development (Conceptual) and On-site Relocation, Public Hearing X. WORKSESSIONS 6:30 A. Telluride Historic and Architectural Review Commission :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) 432 W. Francis - Minor Neill Hirst 434 E. Main (Hills) 409 E. Hyman (New York Pizza building) 205 S. Third 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 21 Meadows Road 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) 114 Neale Ave. Derek Skalko 135 W. Hopkins 302 E. Hopkins 501 W. Main Street (Christiania Lodge) 331 W. Bleeker 114 Neale Ave. CONCEPTUAL APPROVALS WHICH HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL: HPC Legal Procedures (Submit affidavit of notice for PH - conceptual) Swear In Staffpresentation Applicant presentation Board Questions and Clarifications PH opened and closed Board Comments Applicant Comments Motion MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 635 W. Bleeker Street- Project monitoring, landscape and lighting plan DATE: August 27,2003 SUMMARY: Construction of the project located at 635 W. Bleeker Street is nearly completed. HPC conducted a site visit on August 19th to discuss landscape and lighting plans that have just been received. The design and layout of the sidewalks and the installation of one ceiling mounted light on each porch have been accepted by HPC. The board elected to approve a fixture that was somewhat simpler than the applicant's original choice. In addition, HPC found that one landscape light per pathway would be acceptable, at most, but requested a different fixture that does a better job of concealing the light source be selected. Remaining items to be determined are the selection of the landscape light mentioned above, acceptance by HPC of the hot tub that has been installed along the west side of the property, and discussion about those aspects of the landscape plan that fall into the existing design guidelines. An updated landscape plan has been submitted, along with some photos to remind our group the degree to which this house was obscured by lilac bushes before the project began. Staff would also report that we have spoken with the Parks Department about the possibility of removing the large spruce tree planted sometime in the past in the City owned right-of-way, by the west porch. The Parks Department agrees that it is not an appropriate street tree, and is willing to entertain removing it if the property owner is amendable. The cost Would likely be shared. Attachments: A. Revised landscape plan B. Before photos C. HPC guidelines related to landscapes j Streetscapeand Lot Fiatures Chapter 1 Streetscape and Lot Features Policy: Historic landscapes and landscape elements that remain intact should be preserved. Additions to the landscape should be compatible with the historic context of the district or landmark property. ............................. , design elements. In some cases. these features Note: . have historic significance; in others, their designs A Right-of-Way permit from the . are still important because they can affect ones Engineering Department is required for ~ ability to interpret the historic structures. modifications within the public right-of- • way, including planting strips. sidewalks ~ The planting strips with shade trees and irrigation and irrigation ditches. No tree over 4 inches , 0 ditches were created in 1882 by the city, and . in catiper may be removed without a tree . private property owners were encouraged to removal permit from the Parks Department. ' plant their own shade trees. . ............................ Key Featirres of Lots Backgrolind o Plintino strips The character of historic structures is greatly planting strips are generally the band ot grass influenced bv the manner in which their sites are between the curb and the sidewalk. or between landscaped and streets are designed. At a block the street and front property line. Be aware that level, street parings. trees, lights and other this is City property, not private property, and furni:shings combine iIi streetscapes that are work in this area must be approved. A strip may important considerations in the historic districts. contain an irrigation ditch and a row of street trees On individual sites, the arrangement of trees and if it is wide enough to Support the root svstem. shrubberv and the use of fences are important 1 his coupling of planting strips and street trees p e pe 4 M/by r=,1-Ii# f mil ' t ¥:.- . »•.16- 2 :84€ ~ . tlia'E~ ,-* *er.·~,44~-~14<- '1. LI' Itj On indi:'tdimi sites, the urrangement of trees und shrubberw and Historir, Undseure featitnes, incititting treS~ IUWrt; tind tdir'.t:'44.7 the :,se of ·, uea are imm,rtant design dements. (Histaric virete contribute to Ute ch:inirier of jiti.teric preperti¢%% 111 Astit,1 .17311 Courte:u .. f A.;£en Histor:CW Society. date Unint,wn., shuuM be pregerred. City of Aspet Hi,toric l're,•'r<·.itio,1 l'.··.i·<·t l;.il,letint·. .: We 31{ ................ chaprer ! 1 - provides a rhythm along the block, as well as 4 '12£rm,.TIT//1/51/51 . -a- shade for petiestriars. This tradition should be continued. Placing paving materials in the 1 4 k planting strip should be avoided. 4 Sidewalks Generally, sidewalks exist only along Slain Street 4 and in the Comm:ercial Cor:e. These sidewalks, 1% 4 lk'E ::1'11~ ;which #vere ad©naliv boardi~,alks, are historicall> Illl2 significant elements that contribute to the area's - - 11- : : -· ¢ inviting atmosphere and provide spaces for 4 walking and personal interaction. - Fences - 4 4 1 .'.1.*ture tr,:'es .Irt? imptinatit r'hi+.r,t,y,¥tty q/~the histeric street.scupe Originally, wood picket fences enclosed manv 4 front yards. The vertical slats were set apart, wi th spaces between, and the overall h:eight of th:e fence was generally less than three feet. Wrought ¢ iron and wire fences also were used in early domestic landscapes. Where any of these early ~ fences survive, they should be preserved. .In a situation where the original fence is missing, a new fence may be used if it is similar in character to one seen traditionally. 0 . 0 Retaining walls Retaining vvalis rvere sometimes used on steep 0 slopes. Some of these wall:s survive and are 0 important character-defining features. Whenever feasible. they should be preserved. Private yard 0 TV1-lite most historic pl,int rriaterials h.lve been replaced over time, some specimens do survive. Common historic plants in Aspen from the 0 Uctorian era include lilaes,sweetpeas and yellow rose bushes. In Some situ:ations, the traditional 01 planting pattern has been retained even if new 0 plants have been planted. Mature trees on prir:ite , property must be retained unless approved by the Parks Department for removal. 0 Site lighting Craditional[>0 lighting within a site w.is mi~limal. An occasional garden light was seen, but porch 0 lights were usually the only exterior illumination. (For additional information. see the City's Lighting Sta.ndards.) 0 0 0 3./li...:.2 C,tv / 1-··ren h'i.•lunc Pr. rn·.,tivit /3,>:'<9 G:,;d,·itn,·s Streeticape and 63{ Features lrences < 1.1 Preserve original fences. • Replace only those portions that are -..el deteriorated beyond repair. Replacement f.*•17'~!~~ eleme.nts should match the existing fence. i /,1 41 t.'4*TTilll11011.1'.!dil.~; 1,?F~ .··1 1#/10#11,+17:1.* rk- · 4 ... Elflt,~t,ft:4:92:r..U 1.2 A new replacement fence should use ,| 11 *-i:··•#i¢~D~~ materials that appear similar to that of the TB /JJ..:i- 1~.fl.4.29 · original. • Any fence which is visible from a public flit:-~ / pt ·3: ,~~~ 701: -~26 *wel : right-of-way must be built of wood or i L t j -' iii :. i , .j 4-,.~*f4-·i.. « *'> U..- · - 1 wrought iron. Wire fences also mav be I considered. (irity:,tal *Mers. €ud?..13 thts Unif: shculd be UriN:772:i. • A wood. picket fence is an appropriate , replacement in most locations. A simple wire or metal fence. similar to traditional ....,0.--7, wrought iron." also mav be considered. -4>z**sel#~ • Ch:ainlinkisprohibited ands:olid "stockade 4 -·rte=~2352 ./-»- tences are only allowed in side and rear vards. 1.3 A new replacement fence should have a "transparent" quality allowing views into the ~ ' i i; r: 1 yard from the street. • A fence that defines a front yard is usual.ly & low to the ground and "transparent" in i nature. -j#imimao„mulail • On residential properties. a fence which is Privary>'nces may De uyed in i?i.#:i yards ami rdonfi amy. located forward of the frontbuilding facade may not be taller than 42" from natural grade. (For additional information, see the City of Aspen:s "Residential Design Standards '.) • A privacy fence mav be used in back vards and along alleys, but not forward of the front facade of a building. • Note that using no fencing at allis often the best approach. • Contemporan~ interpretations oftraditional fencesshould becompatible with thehistoric context. I 'lt'J :'f.'1··pe,1 fir,toric Pre.err.ition Da:Vi Guid.,/ines .ax„ n. Chapttr l r 1.4 New fence compon:ents should be similar ~ in scale with thos:e seen traditionally. ~ • Fence columns or piers should be 3% I proportional to th:e fe:n:ce selgment. 1.3 A side yard fence which extends between two homes should be set back from the street- hti- 1 3<imp \/ i faci.no facade. ¤ ~ • This setback should be significant enough I to provide a sense of open space between I ! i homes. 7*b# %.___ ..A 1.6 Replacement ornew fencing between side A :lihz wartifime,~ which ©rfenils ?39 trati?7; :74'u :49'fmes shof:;Al t,t* set yards and along the alley should be compatible Nickfrom the start faeide. with the historic context. • A side yard fence is usually taller than its I 1 : front vard counterpart. It also is less 1- 4 transparent. A side yard fence mav reach 4.. 64 I 24·- A dg. heights taller than front yard fences (up to 1 six feet), butshould iricorporate tr,insp,irent elements to minimize the possible- visual impacts. L 1 • Consider staggering the fence boards on 00 0 eithersideof the fence rail. This will give the , .1, , 4>,2 appearanceofasolidplankfencewhenseen 4 46 + . -• w.f :t-·:Sk v . 1 -=3. 4 ..4 -5 g head on. . - • Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing.on theupperportions 1 ~ of the fe.nce. rg ,..,· 4 j,' ,,Ve, e€4':. Retaining Wans 1 - (41:1 1, 1 1 -1,4 -_ i 1.7 Preserve original retaining walls. 1 * Replace only those portions that are U £L- r.-7-4~ deteriorated bevond repair. Anv 1 replacement materials should match the original in color, texture, size and finish. 1 Rtplacement er ,;Im, fi -*:c:,i·,· ' c :..-:-. -n st, le ·.wrl:r.:y:, t,.,i ·:, <:heality • Painting a historic masonrv retaining wall, should De computible r.::h the L·.4.rfc ,-imlext. ,~~ e or coverin€ it with stucco or other cementitious coatings, is not allowed. 1 '.·:'•7, #01:.(c f':- Pr•·51.-·:tt:Onf'·'·•'·:•f Tifit::0!'32'9 . 1 Utilll 11*JU·' :f. I - . 'rel' 1.8 Maintain the historic height of a retaininiy -5.z.[.:·,>,pr-'-·=9i' .*3.;f-' ~.3.7igf~.:. ~~'» 0 ;vall. ;ic·~I:.-;~01-.9.~14#~ ·"7·:1· sllit~YA~. *Il ~ • Increasing the height of a wall to create a .(041-2.-i~,76'.1, %<t<1 4. 35;:1·•.1 44 privacy screen is inappropriate. If a fence is A. ...., Ine€xled forsecurity, con:Rider using wrotight ~~~9~ ~~i~ flif:j-~ iron. similar to those seen historically. that E~ I.1 1 11 .1.... 1 7...Kix: .% 4 -L Ej@R•:ltiLIL· ylimi'- is mounted on top of the retaining wall. 46.WpkNA£.EOU : GE:'.h - Walkwavs 4 - 4 4· 1.9 Maintain the established progression of 7 - - 4.3: =.4 public-to-private spaees when considering a =..*.£LY- - -&-21· arL_ -/ -1 r 143=U 2·2~ rehabilitation project. Pror.tic a icalk:rity r·uyint?'E:< perpeyulic:,lar fri2*n the street to the • This includes a sequence et experiences, Pont Emuy. beginning with the "public" sidewalk, p- 1 proceedingatong a semi-public"walkway, I to a 'semi-private' porch or entry feature I f 4-0 ¥~ [1\\ and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. 1 1 N \\ ». • Provide a walkway running perpendicular : Aj '221 1%1.41 h *,<~03 Prd€ 1 from thestreetto thefrontentry. Meandering 1 walkways are discouraged, except where it d/=-~>'llfW,<1&9¢ is needed to avoid a tree. • Use pavine materials that are similar to those used historically forthebuildingstvle. X .t \17 + 1 \ 1 / A, Concrete, wood or sandstone may be 1 - appropriate for certain building stYles. F I ,- 44%444 .. 5 ....... i *·4,1.:, f *, Private Yard V.V ~2 14/ :Semi-public 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to l ruplk provide an appropriate context for historic ~ structures. Utint;lin the estal.?11:64 progression €f p:,Wic-to-prinite spaces • The front vard should be maintained in a reff,m cons:diging a rehabilitation prulect. traclitional manner, with planting material '' and sod, and not covered with paving, for 1 16: .' 1* example. 1.11 Preserveandmaintainmaturelandscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. .=33,2 43,1/.ST.~evilms:.212/Jill/MI'll'lailifta • Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged or disensed trees must be L ap p roved by the Parks Department. • If a tree must be removed as part of the -YM additionoralteration, replace itwithspecies ....4 of a laree enough scale to have a visual .: 16 -5 2... impact in the early years of the proiect. i·fis:ti ; ~?:v .4,<2,·?itic,mt plunt.j:te Ji.-si.¢119, such ati Wang this .mry. Snatud, City of Asp*·it lit>t.,Fc 1'-i'4:r:·titit)•t D.:ti•:M GU:.it'!int'S ~-'%.. - ~ C- ' · Chapter I 1.12 Preserve and maintain historically 4 .-2·M - '·.-v.4:•ru~ significant planting designs. 1 . • Retaining historic planting beds, landscape teatures and walkways is encouraged. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. 4 • Select plant and tree material according to te • its mature size, to allow f:or the long-term ... .•/ I =i . U . impact ot mature griywth. tu __ ... ro. - ···~ a--=-~*:..-*:.....424 • Resenve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. • Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock Do m:t locate plants eT tries in areas that wilt cbsctire 0.:. lat or paving materials. archihirtti ral :Atatu~-15 or H«k ran:5 k; Rze Duaing. ~ 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere ;vith historic structures are ahidided A inappropriate. 0,6<..... 4*% 9, M . / • Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close lams'-3 i ....I Y . to a building. New trees should be no closer »'' Icw. shielded j 1,*4-- deck lampe t.haii the inature catiopy size. 1 . . 4% i low. Will:ke,Ve, 1 11 \2 0 1 r- a 3 . Do nottocateplantsor trees in locations that . 1 49 4 : / A ill obscuresigii i fiC.in t.7 1 chitectu-ra! features or block views to the building. ···»43>>el-·-3:4- 7 • It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. Use shidded ligins which direct l.,6: onto w.:IA·.,ig s:,©ices to minimize the visual impacts of site 14 ...... Site Lighting 1.13 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. • Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare untoatijacent properties. Focus lighting on walks anti entries, rather than lip into trees,ind onto fackle pl anes. City Of .k°•·" Ifi.t.,rri PA'v·fruti:/.1 Dr':47 C.,f •le'liM,14 S'r· ·:rear.' and Lot Features Streetscape , 1.16 Precervehistorically significantlandscape desions and features. 10-' · '%•~ p. 4, · * • -Thi.. includes the orr,jncy,r..lerit of tre „< .- O. I. - 6L. *L.~, f'*.:11.=L·k#EFIA €k shrubs, plant beds. irrigation ditches and *JilfI?eli!.I.:T¥:. 4 + sidewalks in the public right-of-wav. ¥4.*11611" PUK 1.17 Maintain historic irrigation ditches as an G*lilllill iciiiir integral component of the streetscape. -=#~r *~ -- • Ihe character ot an irrigation aitch should ~ 4 4 be maintain:ed. • It is inappropnate to use art irrigati:on ditch 1[IUFC .- 1. as a planting bed, or to fill it with another <tto fill?i! 1,!:44* 61 - 212-7:a. ilt 1!ft" . f .* ."£2£<4 - % ¥~10-'A-44*5 material. • Ditches cannot by culverted except where A „2 crossed bv a walkway or driveway, and a , % 11 - 4 = 4 *-/*- - Fit-=. 1 culvert must be approved bv the Parks d.3 1. p€ Department. Abintain mstoric trng(ition Ritehes us an integrul component of 6 4/ 01 / 1, I L .>Il Ft . n h Irrilatton , 1 21 - f f 1 11 j 12 7 4 b h rn r-1 M · L 1 r Al )< 1 5 ront fafr i 3 41<:w» Flant.no rtrie Prekier, .#St?rifUlly .Sit<N¢ii zj:t Aifids..:lpfr dc'91·,INS :ind th:turt:,s :uch as the arningement Of trees, st.r:,b.s, plant hlis, irrigation ditches :ind >idrawlks in th, imblic rit-ht-©,picav. Citw ef .bprit Historic Pre„-46»1 Drwri Gitil,!ine, ,<r J. 1,1,1,4 1 * .cs- -ti r o r·¥·-0-54:4> * * . ., 4 44>9' . €.kt>deli : Ck :.0 6 27 . 'Phy.4 ~ I .147#1 4 ..4,494 -:illi~* ...9 *3 - - . -:.1 :-41// 7 K .:<3~3,3.,11 2~.44 : /4, 1 .\ =41/"Ji + 744921. 1. 459=g . ./ 44/14,2 EN{i , 7 4 tated-- f .·'j~' 7.7.. ~U ' 4 / ·· .. .4. i . 4 , it'* . 221 .fr. 1 1 '11 LL[lill !.III.' *3 . . 45 .....1,1 4 ... . I .1 r'v :r i . "4: 1-* i.mee . 1 ~ 4* , 0. 4-9. . . Sk -t,- 4<64 r .: 4./- ·. -4 -3~·3* '.0.-/5// ~:/~.-4/ ..Ut. gy 17..y li k 1...1.t 5-4- . . ./ ' 't4«**f :. ¥ 2., 11 :Illtili'1111·· lilil I'll"iil,1 t' flillijj:i lill:fli-!11 ~':,f !! efl! i 1 ;1 1 -2·-~ 1,11,1 11:1, : :! , :l! lli!ll1ltt1'l1llllI ..1 I t ... r € 41.4 e,Ar-/*;/4%343 /-...7. .. r':S·+N,··~py..:.~ ·gv 4 0 S.14. ./ . .1 '. ..... 4 .7.4 -4.. C % €3»G .ki Pr,11 11- 1.. . . · · I.J.I.JU . 1.1.1.'.i. 7 1:. s U 14\ \11 + 4 Flowers Rudbeckia, Golsturm L~ - Scabiosa, Fama Blue - Veronica, Red Fox 4 , 1 4.r 9 11 Yarrow, Moonshine - 4 Arabis, Snowcap , . 42.-·C -0 -I·'X·•~72··14 744- 4 C...be 2 9 Campanula, Blue & White Snow and Summer Coreipsis-moon shine v 9 1,0, \\ - 4#0 1ce Plant-pink e Residence ® Delphinum 01 Dianthus, Sweet williams & Zing Rose 2*24 v Vvi (2532 e ractk-3 Echinacea, Purple cone flower Gaillardia, Goblin e Coral Bell, Red & Purple place Hot Tub Hosta, Pariot Green Garage Lamium / ciga MA\A\'N '~ e e 1/ \1/ 1/ 1 , Monarda 0 .4&0 lower bedsP ~ ~ Penstemon 2 Phlox, Anja purple ? 91 Columbine \ 1 Lupine \ r-- 1 24 1 - & Bushes 1,11/- C 4-47 € -1- 2 4= - . h / - Ea¢:¤5Ak , _ AndS;EN <'-1171 1,1-» Potentilla, Jackman . 14, i i %11 k %91*019#1- lim=a= ~==4/10/~i \ ~ DC\ < -•..2;6-p'.42*51,1>~fU'lad"51123/UPENE'a B.71'54EOLLEM-Y 0'/ 1/-BAT;Ullfir,1 .iWMAR-,iaS#.- Forsythia, Meadowlark IL 1 2 4«T\- 1- . .-1-i f ~ 1 ll- -,523 Existing Trees Juniper, Buffalo 6th Street Aspen Trees Privet goldstrum 1,-4't JUA, _©11 ~ Spiarea, Anthony Waters 11900&42>, 11) Colorado Spruce Trees 10' ~ Juniper, Blue Star ez ~ Red Twig Dogwood /Upright Junipers Bar Berry Bush /VATLE'/*#af&~MA Colordo Spruce Tree 5' Spears- 635 W. Bleeker Aspen, Co 81612 Landscape Plan/Remodel Date August 11,2003 Native Flower Inc, Bleeker Street MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Planning Director ~ FROM: Amy Guthrie. Historic Preservation Officer RE: 2 Williams Way- Major Development Review (Conceptual) and On-site Relocation- Public Hearing DATE: August 27,2003 SUMMARY: The subject property was listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures in 1999, and contains two miner's cottages linked together with new construction. The westernmost cottage (referred to at HB1 in the application) is original to the site and was built by John Warkentin, Jim Markalunas' grandfather. The eastern cottage (HB2) was moved to 2 William's Way in approximately the 1950's. Very late in the preparation of this memo. information was found that indicates the latter house was previously located in the 100's block of E. Main Street. 1 le The applicant proposes to li Nxi 1/11 1- 11 1 MI 7 - separate the historic buildings and Wtibil/"Vi ' F -t- 1 1 1 1 - - 1 2 11 1 restore them, based on the records ... 4 1. 1 , IA + 5 and physical information that are M.0 C 2.- :>5-*+ .111 L - planned for the north side of the ~1,0 16 4- -- Warkentin cottage. expansion is planned for the other i~' '~' ~~~:2;~;~~j~~ lw -' i i 1, H •1 4 p structure. The two buildings are .i,-----tf •00,1,g,;0~!!11' '#' 8 41-1 .LE~ i J j |~~|||~| IL.D 1.~:·-4 locations, and a new home built in 9,*-1 - the middle of the lot. No ~lit ~ 1, 43-1: j-~.-1~r 1*tt --t f:-4.1,9-~,(, i 1:,4-0,&~£~,,TQiEF - 1 ,~ -trk variances are needed for the 4:)4 : 1 4244/·. 1,4 ·. . 4 1 6 0- 1, - ~r- ' I '·t lili - ..2 project. t#*44 ' r- -' -, + '4#.4. 0 ... - I Staff is enthusiastic about the possibility of restoring these miner's cottages, but has concerns with some aspects of the new development, in particular the overall size and massing of the new house. and the site plan. The recommendation is that HPC review and comment on the project, then continue the case with direction to the applicant as to what must be revised in order to meet the review criteria. APPLICANT: Scott Hicks. The architect is Doug Rager. 1 PARCEL ID: 2737-074-31-001. ADDRESS: 2 William's Way, Smuggler Hunter Trust Lot #1. ZONING: RMF-A, Residential Multi-Family. CURRENT LAND USE: Duplex. The western unit is deed restricted to "R.O." (Resident occupied) and the eastern unit is Category 4 affordable housing. PROPOSED LAND USE: The applicant intends to take advantage of the multi-family zoning on this site. While multi-family is typically defined as 3 or more attached units, on historically designated properties, the dwellings may be separated. This option helps to further HPC's goals and is a benefit to the owner, who prefers to create some privacy between the homes. There is a Growth Management exemption available for landmarks which allows one new free market unit to be built on this site. Whether the Warkentin house or the new structure will be free market is a somewhat complicated matter that the owner will have to work out with the Housing Authority. It is not relevant to the HPC discussion. MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) The procedure for 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 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 tile 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, 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 to at least reference for this project (note that the questions do not serve as formal decision making criteria at this time): ' 2 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? th The property is important because it contains two 19 century miner' s cottages, one of which is original to the site. Key features of the property include the placement of the Warkentin house and the open space surrounding the building. Although it appears that the original house has been relocated, at least onto a new foundation the orientation of the building is believed to be unchanged. Architectural features have been altered on both cottages, however the basic simple plan and roof forms are essentially intact, as are some of the door and window openings. Below is the 1893 Bird's Eye View of Aspen indicating what staff believes is the Warkentin house. There are no Sanborne maps for this area, so information is somewhat limited, however in examining this map and a historic photo of town. we have some confidence. Two of the homes pictured in this drawing still exist on Walnut Street, but the remaining structures have all been demolished. As a result, the context lacks consistent character and is not particularly sensitive to new development. Staff has completed a very ge::IMEN';93~mi*e~'¤©:~~~ preliminary assessment of 1 - #21..R'.1-:174?A.€1:it?2.3965*9'*. -42:*2*.1-4%£* <2/ 9/:im, 2,/Fif-43/mir.,2*.-'.7;1:73 the integrity of these :L 6· site 1* buildings (attached). The 15 1¢ 4&"0 4/7*F)#gl"...11,38*Am/emi~/59457 property achieves the 244. 2.+9..v. . r;,1,1 ~700 -0, 140...A~ 1 h\'1.2 * minimum threshold score ~.~,~~,~-- 41, ~~.,*.~~*~~~i~;54Aw,~~7 6,3,~,.~~~~4,959.3. 4 for designation. Provided ,·.Ie:·.,..., ..:·, . . ·ia· t®,0-u'. JIGh; ~)' 2-Lnegge&&&,QUSE ~2;7,~ 0%:--·..L.irl, Mt : I -p /'F that restoration work is -- .Lt- 1,3.- · P 4,1 ...·,i,1-2~ Spruce St. ~. t·944IZ~74-«+2 fi~ t' *- based on facts to the 4--- ...0 ' greatest extent possible, ... ate£0-: ...~d*;~-4-2.. ---*7€:7.~.... ~·-,~t-f- ,~jft·.*~~(*~ their integrity will only be i- -2 .-19¢F ·' ~ Lk,~ Walnut St. ArD.*: <- --'2-<G~.-·31-.3*~~dmum, 4 lEi*39/jix:trigB '§*34%354£19/2,<r/;99~ strengthened. such, the maximum allowable floor area is 4.764 square feet. Multi-family housing is calculated on a different scale however. and in this case the allowable FAR takes a dramatic jump to 21.475 square feet. The proposal before HPC totals 5,800 square feet. therefore significant construction could theoretically still occur on the property. It is highly unlikely that anything approaching that number could ever be achieved, given the historic preservation concerns on this site, and if 3 designation weren't in place, a development of that size would have to compete for Growth Management allocations and include more affordable housing. Design Guideline review Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. A list of the design guidelines relevant to Conceptual Review is attached as "Exhibit B." Only those guidelines which staff finds the project does not meet, or where discussion is needed, are included in the memo. With regard to the treatment of the historic houses, the primary issues at this point are their relocation (discussed below) and the size and placement of the proposed addition to the Warkentin house (H131). More time needs to be invested in the details of the restoration plans, in part because it seems that we have been able to determine where HB2 came from afterall. Below is a map of a building on Main Street, which was moved when the original public library was built. Heritage Aspen has some photographs, that show this house with it's original bay window and porch. The house at 2 William's Way matches the dimensions of this building, except that the rear has been cut off, just past the cross gable, which seems evident at the site. Both historic buildings will be approximately 500 Possible ~~>«C~ footprint of square feet in size, once the existing link is demolished. The addition requested for HB1 is 11 HEQ, 1904 small (90 square feet), and placed along a wall that N Sanborne Map 9 154 P-7 4 48 must be reconstructed anyway, since the original 75 _L _11 ii¢11%/ materials were removed in the 1950's remodel. Staff / 955. '41 1/ 0 , 4 hi finds that the design guidelines related to height, / · -*1 1/'E scale, massing, and proportions are met. Issues 1 204 i »>,W related to the windows, doors, and dormers, should --2 2.-4 ·1) ~FIE , 1 be discussed at final review, or at least after the point L._A i ti in HPC' s discussion when the general idea of the 10 112 114 116 118 /20 122 i24 126 12. plan has been deemed acceptable. The proposed new house is approximately 4,800 square feet, obviously significantly larger than the historic buildings. In staff s opinion, the design is not achieving some of the goals for new buildings on landmarked properties, as stated in Chapter 11 of the guidelines. In particular, staff is concerned with: 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. o Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. 4 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. o The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. o The front should include a one-story element, such.as a porch. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. o They should not overwhelm the original in scale. Staff Response: Staff does not find that the new house has been broken down into distinct masses that could relate to the scale of the historic buildings. There are shifts in the wall plane, as well as dormers and other features, however these have the effect of complicating the form, which is also not characteristic of the adjacent buildings. While this design might be very successful on a non-designated property, staff does not find that it relates well to these historic resources. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. o Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. o Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. o On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. o Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames. Staff Response: The clipped gable roofs, while used sparingly, are not typical of the simple gable forms used on the miner's cottage. ON-SITE RELOCATION The intent of the Historic Preservation ordinance is to preserve designated historic buildings in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a building may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. 16.415.090.C Standards for the Relocation of Designated Properties Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; S!£ 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; or 5 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; RE 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionallv, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Response: The only review standard that this situation may meet is 4, which asks whether the relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object. The Warkentin house is proposed to be moved southwest of it's current position, and HB2 shifts to the northeast. Because of the limited information available about this property, staff cannot determine whether or not the current location of the Warkentin house is the same or similar to its original siting. It has been placed on a new foundation. We do believe that the orientation of the building is unchanged. The following guidelines have·been written with regard to relocation requests: 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. o In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. o It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative. o Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements. o A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details and materials. o Before a building is moved, a plan must be in place to secure the structure and provide a new foundation, utilities, and to restore the house. o The design of a new structure on the site should be in accordance with the guidelines for new construction. o In general, moving a building to an entirely different site or neighborhood is not approved. 9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HPC, a structure must remain within the boundaries of its historic parcel. o If a historic building straddles two lots, then it may be shifted to sit entirely on one of the lots. Both lots shall remain landmarked properties. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. 6 ¤ It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. o It may not, for example, be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. These two buildings did not sit together on the lot during the Warkentin house's period of significance (late 1800's), however they are obviously related in terms of architecture and scale. The owners have programmatic reasons why they wish to place the structures on the lot in the manner proposed, however, staff has concerns with isolating the two cottages from each other, and placing such a large new structure in their former location. It may be possible to make some interpretations about the placement of the original cottage, based on the size of the cottonwoods. which seem to be forming an arc across the middle of the site. Although the expertise of the Parks Department and the landscape architects on HPC is needed, staff suggests that these trees were planted to give shade and shelter to the house, which would have been located to the east of the plantings, roughly where it is now. The other aspect of relocating the buildings that will be important is ensuring that the houses are not significantly elevated from existing grade. The guidelines is: 9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic elevation above grade. o Raising the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable. However, lifting it substantially above the ground level is inappropriate. ¤ Changing the historic elevation is discouraged, unless it can be demonstrated that it enhances the resource. Staff Response: This guideline is met by the current proposal, and is merely being brought to the board's attention in case alterations to the site plan are discussed. DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: • approve the application, • approve the application with conditions, • disapprove the application, or • continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. 7 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the project be continued for restudy of the following issues: site plan, scale and massing of the proposed new residence, and additional research on the historic appearance of the two cottages. A. Staff memo dated August 27,2003 B. Relevant Design Guidelines C. Integrity Assessment form- preliminary D. Inventory forms E. Application 8 "Exhibit B: Relevant Design Guidelines for 2 William's Way, Conceptual Review" 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. o In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. o It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative. o Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements. o A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details and materials. o Before a building is moved, a plan must be in place to secure the structure and provide a new foundation, utilities, and to restore the house. o The design of a new structure on the site should be in accordance with the guidelines for new construction. o In general, moving a building to an entirely different site or neighborhood is not approved. 9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HI'C, a structure must remain within the boundaries of its historic parcel. o If a historic building straddles two lots, then it may be shifted to sit entirely on one of the lots. Both lots shall remain landmarked properties. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. o It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. o It may not, for example, be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. 9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic elevation above grade. o Raising the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable. However, lifting it substantially above the ground level is inappropriate. o Changing the historic elevation is discouraged, unless it can be demonstrated that it enhances the resource. 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. 9 o An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. 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, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street. o The building should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern of the site. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. o The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a means of access to the entry. o A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. o In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street; nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that orients to the street. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. o Subdivide larger masses into smaller ttmodules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. - o The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. o The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. o They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. o Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. o Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. o On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. o Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames. 10 INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- 19 TH CENTURY MINER'S COTTAGE Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. • LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. 9€\ 5. The structure is in its original location. / 4- The structure has been moved within the original site but still maintains 4< the original alignment and proximity to the street. *69 31 The structure has been moved to another site, still within the historic Aspen townsite. 0- The structure has been moved to a location which is dissimilar to the original site. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = ~/ • DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. BUILDING FORM 10- The original plan form, based on Sanborne maps or other authenticating documentation, is unaltered and there are no recent additions. 8- The structure has been expanded but the original plan form is intact and the addition(s) would meet the design guidelines. 6- The plan form has been more altered, but the addition would meet the design guidelines. 7 4 .4- The structure has been expanded in a less desirable manner, but if the Vy g,Fl.U't¢<@~'~~ addition were removed, at least 50% of the building's original walls would 2- The structure has been expanded and the addition overwhelms the original remain. structure , destroying more than 50% ofthe building's original walls. 0- Two historic structures have been linked together and the original character ofthe individual structures is significantly affected. ROOF FORM 10- The original roof form and the original porch roof, if one existed, are unaltered. /~ The original main roof is intact but the porch roof, if one existed, has been V altered. 6- Dormers have been added to the structure or additions have been made that alter the roof form, but the changes would meet the design guidelines. 1 2- Alterations to the roof have been made in a less sensitive manner, not in conformance with the design guidelines. 0- Less than 50% ofthe original roof form remains. SCALE 5- The original one story scale of the building, and its character as a small cottage is intact. 4- The building has been expanded, but the ability to perceive the original size of the 3 or 4 room home, is preserved. ~) The building has been expanded and the scale of the original portion is discernible. 0- The scale of the building has been negatively affected by a large addition, whose features do not reflect the scale or proportions of the historic structure. FRONT PORCH 10- The front porch is not enclosed and original decorative woodwork remains, or if there was no porch historically, none has been added. 8- The front porch is enclosed but maintains an open character and some original materials. 6- The front porch is not original, but has been built in an accurate manner, per the design guidelines. ~) The front porch is completely gone or replaced with a porch which would The front porch has been enclosed and most original materials are gone. not meet the design guidelines. DOORS AND WINDOWS 10- The typical door and window pattern on the original house is intact- two doors off the front porch, large double hung windows in gable ends, and tall, narrow double hung windows placed "sparsely" on building walls. 0=~ J 8- Less than 50% of the door and window openings on the original building 6/\ are new and the original door and window openings are intact. 12- More than 50% of the door and window openings on the original building are new and/or some of the original opening sizes have been altered. 0- Most or all of the original door and window openings have been altered. SIN[PLICITY OF DESIGN L) The overall sense of "modesty" in design and detailing on the original structure is intact. 0- New, non-historic trim and other decoration have been added to the building and have altered its character. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 50) = 23 ~ 0/ 2 • SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. PROXIMITY TO SIMILAR STRUCTURES 5- The structure is one of a set (at least three) of buildings from the ~ same period in the immediate area. 3- The building is part of a neighborhood that has numerous remaining n buildings from the same period. (gz.) The building is an isolated example from the period. HISTORIC LANDSCAPE FEATURES , 5- A number of elements of the original landscape are in place, including 3t historic fences, walkways, plant materials and trees, and ditches. 3- Few or no elements of the original landscape are present, but the current landscape supports the historic character ofthe home. 0- The current landscape significantly obscures views ofthe structure. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 10) = ~~ • MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. EXTERIOR WOODWORK 10- Most of the original woodwork, including clapboard siding, decorative shingles in gable ends, trim, fascia boards, etc. remain. 0-, Original siding has been replaced, but trim and other elements remain. ~'6) Original siding is intact but trim or other elements have been replaced. V- All exterior materials have been removed and replaced. DOORS AND WINDOWS 10- All or most ofthe original door and window units are intact. (~) Some window and door units have been replaced, but with generally _ accurate reconstructions of the originals. 6- Most of the original windows have been replaced, but with generally accurate reconstructions ofthe originals. 0- Windows and/or doors units have been replaced with inappropriate patterns or styles. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20) =L_~>/ 3 • WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. DETAILING AND ORNAMENTATION 5- The original detailing is intact. ~) Detailing is discernible such that it contributes to an understanding of its stylistic category. 0- New detailing has been added that confuses the character of the original structure. 0- The detailing is gone. FINISHES g) All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry unpainted. 4- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry is painted. 3- Wood surfaces are stained or modern in appearance but masonry is unpainted. 2- Wood surfaces are stained or modem in appearance and the masonry is painted. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 10) = ~6-~ /0. \ • ASSOCIATION Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. 5- The property would be generally recognizable to a person who lived in Aspen in the 19th century. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = O • BONUS POINTS UNIQUE EXAMPLE 5-The design of the building is unique or one of a small group among the miner's cottages. (i.e.It has Italianate or Second Empire detailing.) OUTBUILDINGS 5-There are outbuildings on the property that were built during the same period as the house. MASONRY 5-Original brick chimneys and/or a stone foundation remains. PATINA/CHARACTER 5-The materials have been allowed to acquire the character of age and are obviously weathered. 4 MAXIMUM NUMBER OF POINTS= 100 (and up to 20 bonus points) MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR DESIGNATION= 50 POINTS Note: Each area of the integrity analysis includes a description of the circumstances that might be found and a point assignment. However the reviewer may choose another number within the point range to more accurately reflect the specific property. 8S 5 . I . 0AHP1403 Official eligibility determination Rev. 9/98 . COAHP use only) Date Initials CbLOAADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Determined Eligible- N R Determined Not Eligible- NR Architectural Inventory Form Detemined Not Eligible- SR Determined Eligible- SR (page 1 of 4) Need Data Contributes to eligible NR District Noncontibuting to eligible NR Distict 1. IDENTIFICATION 1. Resource number: 5PT.952 2. Temporary resource number: 002.WW 3. County: Pitkin 4. City: Aspen 5. Historic building name: 6. Current building name: 7. Building address: 0002 Williams Wav Aspen, Colorado 81611 8. Owner name and address: Maureen Marv Kinnev 2 C.Lit . r I - 5 (A 5 013 = El cu 4 0.1~Li: PO Box 374 Aspen, CO 81612 11. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6 Township 10 South Range 84 West SE 41 of NW M of NW 44 of SE w of Section 7 10. UTM reference Zone 1 3 ; 3 4 3 5 9 5 mE 4 3398 4 5 mN 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 Block: Addition: Smuagler Hunter Trust Subdivision Year of Addition: 13. Boundary Description and Justification: Site is comorised of Lot 1: of the Smugaler Hunter Trust Subdivision of the Citv of Aspen. Assessors office Record Number: 2737-074-00-030 This descriotion was chosen as the most specific and customarv description of the site. 111. Architectural Description 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): Irregular 15. Dimensions in feet: Length x Width 16. Number of stories: One Story 17. Primary external wall material(s) (enter no more than two): Wood Horizontal Siding 18. Roof configuration: (enter no more than one): Gable Roof 19. Primary extemal roof material (enter no more than one): Asphalt Roof 20. Special features (enter all that apply): Rekource Number: 5PT.952 Temporary Resource Number: 002.WW ~ , Architectural Inventory Form (page 2 of 2) 21. General architectural description: This single storv wood frame minina era structure is made up of a number of independent parts that have been combined into one structure. The west part of the structure is a typical Miner's Cottaae, and was the oriainal structure on the site. It has trianaular windows in the aable ends facing east and a simple asvmmetrical facade facing west. The main front aable has a shed roof extension off the north side with a series of casement windows and an additional door. The structure sits up on a raised deck with lattice ir'dill below. The west volume is connected to an L-shaped miner's cottaae tvpe, by a verv low pitched shed roof volume which intersects the rear of the west structure and the side of the east one. The connector has a series of windows facina south. The deck level from the west side continues around to this side and serves as a base to the eastern structure as well. The eastern structure has a front cable facing south with french doors centered on the facade. 22. Architectural style/building type: Late Victorian 23. Landscaping or special setting features: The site is bounded bv roads on three sides, and has a grove of cottonwoods in a relatively natural setting. A stone wall runs into the site from the southeast creating a level area on an otherwise rollina site. 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: none (a barn and outhouse were once located on the site) IV. Architectural History 25. Date of Construction: Estimate 1880's (western Dart) Actual Source of information: 1896 Willit's Map 26. Architect: Unknown Source of information: 27. Builder/Contractor: John Warkentin (?) Source of information: Pioneers of the Roarinq Fork, bv Len Shoemaker, Jim Markalunas 28. Original owner: John Warkentin (?) Source of information: Pioneers of the Roarinq Fork, by Len Shoemaker, Jim Markalunas 29. Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): Eastern structure relocated onto the site from either East Durant or Main Street, see history below, date unknown. Alterations to both structures, windows, exterior materials. low connector, all dates unknown, Dre 1998. 30. Original location X Moved X Date of move(s): Date Unknown V. Historical Associations 31. Original use(s): Domestic 32. Intermediate use(s): 33. Current use(s): Domestic 34. Site type(s): Residential Neighborhood, Multi Family Rehource Number: ' 5PT.952 Temporary Resource Number: 002.WW Architectural Inventory Form (page 3 of 3) 35. Historical background: This structure is reoresentative of Asgen's minina era character. The buildina has the characteristics of typical mining era structures such as: size, simple DIan, and front clable / porch relationship. Jim Markalunas' mother and her siblinas were born in this house. Markalunas is a life lonq resident and current City Councilman. The relocated portion of the structure either belonged to Mabel Beckerman (Main Street) or Madge Soderstrum (East Durant). 36. Sources of information: Pitkin County Courthouse records: Sanborn and Sons Insurance Maos; 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 Mining Era 41. Level of significance: National State Local X 42. Statement of significance: This structure is significant for its Dosition in the context of Asnen's mining era. It describes the nature of the life of an averaae 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: Structures are sianificantly altered, Darticularlv the windows. However, the general form of the structures are recoanizable: the connection does not obscure the aable forms. or overwhelm their scale. 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: 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 Resodrce Number: / 5PT.952 Temporary Resource Number: 002.WW I 1 Architectural Inventory Form (page 4 of 4) Vill. Recording Information 47. Photograph numbers: R10: F22, 23 Negatives filed at: AsDen/Pitkin Communitv Develonment Dept. 48. Report title: City of Aspen Ubdate 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 E->chibit'le" HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING/STRUCTURE FORM State Site Number: Local Site Number: 0002.WW Photo Information: Township 10 South Range 84 West. Section 7 USGS Quad Name Aspen · Year . 1960 X 7.5t 15' Building or Structure Name: None Full Street Address: 0002 Willimmts Way Legal negrriptinn: SW 1/4 of Section 7. Township 10 R. Range 84 W of the ' At-h P.M. City Aspen County- - Pitkin Historic District/Neighborhood Name: None Owner: Private/State/Federal Private Owner 's Mailing Address: 2 Williamts Way ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Building Type: Residential Architectural Style: _ Miner's cottages (21;joined together Dimensions: L: X W: = Square Feet: 2017 (per 1 994 si]-rvey) Number of Stories: 1 Building Plan {Footprint, Shape): i rregular; east side is gahle with Side wing and west.~ side i.s side gahle; two separate house joined together in late 19508 or early 1960s Landscaping or Special Setting Features: atypical setting (off the* grid.. isolated from other historic houses) .several large pine t ·rees are on the property Associated Buildings, Features or Objects - Describe Material and Function (map number / name): no longer exist; barn and outhouse 1]spri ' to be present . For the following categories include materials, techniques and styles in the description as appropriate: Roof: wood Ah i ngl e ; verge board in gable end on east mi de of honme Walls: wood frame, clarboards Foundation / Basement: concrete Chimney(s): no chimnev visible : Windows: pl ai n, no embel l i ghment; set of rihhon windows. but probably nor historic; 1 window has d*corated verge board over window: windows on west sect.ion of house are no'n-traditional . triangular sh.ape Doors: glazed, simple easing in east Aide door and glass panel the length of the door: west side door gl azed with stained glass and panels in the bottom Porches: largA front porch; covers the extent of the front- of the house: porch ig covered over a small part of the wegt. side of the hbuse ' and i m supported by turned sri ndl es Page 2 of 3 State Site Number Local Site # 0002.WW General Architectural Description: West part of hoi isa was built i n 1880's by John Warkentin. This house shows up on the 1896 Willit's map and i A stil.1 in its original location. The east hoiise was moved to the Bite from town. either Madge Rode-rat-'rum's house from East Durant . Mabel Reckermants house from Main Street- or T,ney Ringquist''fq house (photo attached) . See Tan Shoemaker' s Pioneer' R of the Roari ng Fork. CPi m Mal-kalinaA' mother. alints and uncles ware horn in the house. The west. side of the house has more contemporary featwres t.han the east side of the house. FUNCTION ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY Current Use: Residential (diinl exl Architect- none Original Use: same Builder: nnknown Intermediate Use: Construction Date: 1880' s Actual X Estimate _Assessor Based On: style MODIFICATIONS AND/OR ADDITIONS Minor _1_ Moderate _*_ Major * Moved X Date * Describe. Modifications and Date: F,ast- mide of current house was moved to the site and integrmted wi.th exi Al-ing st.nic.1-11-re; signifirignt- exte-rior modifications inclnding triangular windows.. egfimated date of addition of house is late 19504 or early 1960s Additions and Date: Ree above NATIONAL/STATE REGISTER ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA Is listed on National Register; State Register is eligible for ___ National Register; ___ State Register - Meets National Register Criteria: A_ B C D__ E_ Map Key Local Rating and Laddmark Designation 1- 1 Significant: Listed on or is eligible for Nat ional Register 11 - Contributing: Resource has maintained historic or architectural integrity. o X Supporting: Original integrity lost due to alterations, however, is "retrievable" with substantial effort. Locally Designated Landmark Page 3 of 3 State Site Number Local Site Number * Justify Assessment: * Associated Contexts and Historical Information: * , Other Recording Information Specific References to the Structure/Building: Pirkin County Court- house Records ; Archaeological Potential: -_Y_ CY or N) Justify: ot.her st-nict-irreg on property have heen removed: sit--e was imed for some agri cultural lise (i. e. animals kept on site) Recorded By: Sarah nat-~em. Planning Technician Date: February 9. 1 999 Affiliation: Aspen Mist-o-ri c Preservation Commission - City of Aspen Project Manager: Amy Glithrie: Hi F:foric Preservation Officer./Planner Major Development/Conceptual Application Requirements 1&2 City ofAspen Community Development 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 To Whom It May Concern: The applicant is: Scott Hicks 2 Williams Way Aspen, Co 81611 970-925-1909 The property can be identified as: Street Address: 2 Williams Way Legal Description: Subdivision: Smuggler HunterTrust Lot #1 A parcel of land situated in the Southeast 1/4 of section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West ofthe 6'h. P.M. ofPitkin County, State ofColorado. Being more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point whence a 1954 Brass cap set for the center 1/4 comer of said section 7 bears N42°47'24"W 326.14 feet; Thence S01°02'42"E 195.56 feet; Thence N88°48'35"IE 32.93 feet; Thence NOO°37'58"E 53.24 feet; Thence N89°22'02"W 56.44 feet; Thence along a curve to the right whose radius is 181.70 feet, length is 48.48 feet and chord bearing is N81°43'24"W for 48.34 feet; Thence N00°30'00'13 195.57 feet; Thence along a curve to the right whose radius is 141.70 feet, length is 137.34 feet and chord bearing is N41°47'54"W for 132.03 feet; Thence S89°20'00"E 1.87 feet; Thence S01°02'42"W 1.63 feet; Thence S88°48'36'73 226 feet to the point of beginning. Pitkin County Tax records: Parcel #273707431001 Schedule#R017212 The above information is,to the best ofmy knowledge, accurate and correct. Respectfully submitted, Ill Smuggler Hunter Trust 2 Williams Way Aspen, CO 81611 Major Development/Conceptual Application Requirement #3 Consisting of: Commitment for Title Insurance Permanent Access & Utility Easement Park Easement Agreement Lot Line Adjustment = W Commitment for Title Insurance Rdelity National litle Insurance Company A Stock Company COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE FIDELITY NATIONALTITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and chargestherefore; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and 8 and to the Conditions and Stipu/ations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed /nsured and the amount of the po/icy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedu/e A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance andall liability and obligations hereunder sha// cease and terminate six (6) months after the effective date hereof or when the po/icy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment sha//not be valid orbindinguntil countersignedbyan authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Commitment tobesignedandsea/ed, tobecome va/id when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, a// in accordance with its By-Laws. This Commitment is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "Effective Date." # Fidelity NationaITitleinsuranceCompany : ..6 BY -02*23 c P¥,5,4 £ SEAL * 40\ Jb/ President ~X__~,0/*~ ATTEST 1 /8 5)'u , 9/ f Countersigned 0,~ ~ · Secretary Authorized Sianature, kj FORM 27-83-66 (9/94) Valid Only if Schedule A and B are Attached ALTA COMMITMENT - 1966 ....... . " ,[ ). Therefore, no policy(§) will be igued .. i the issuing agent. IkE FNT COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: 08/20/98 at 08:30 A.M. Case No. PCT13392 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a) ALTA Owner's Policy-Form 1992 Amount$ 865,000.00 Premium$ 1,037.00 Proposed Insured: Rate:RE-ISSUE RATE SCOTT A. HICKS (b) ALTA Loan Policy-Form 1992 Amount$ 300,000.00 Premium$ 70.00 Proposed Insured: Rate:COMPANION TO BE DETERMINED 3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested in: SMUGGLER HUNTER TRUST a. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO and is described as follows: See Attached Exhibit 11 All PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. Schedule A-PG.1 601 E. HOPKINS This Commitment is invalid ASPEN, CO. 81611 unless the Insuring 970-925-1766 Provisions and Schedules 970-925-6527 FAX A and B are attached. AUTHORIZED AGENT EXHIBIT A That portion of the following described property lying South of an East-West line delineating the Northerly portion thereof: A parcel of land situated in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado, being more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point whence a 1954 brass cap set for the Center 1/4 Corner of said Section 7 bears N 19°16'09" W 250.79 feet; thence S 88°48'36" E 139.00 feet; thence S 01°02'42" W 316.81 feet; thence N 88°48'36" W 135.99 feet; thence N 00°30'00" E 316.83 feet to the point of beginning. NOTE: UPON RECEIPT OF A REVISED SURVEY THE ABOVE LEGAL DESCRIPTION WILL BE AMENDED ACCORDINGLY. FNT SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: ITEM (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. ITEM (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record to-wit: j 1. Partial Release by the Public Trustee of the, Deed of Trust from : ELIZABETH ALEY to the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin 055:#PL for the use of : WEYERHAEUSER MORTGAGE COMPANY to secure : $135,000.00 dated : June 27, 1996 recorded : July 3, 1996 reception no. : 394385 Duly acknowledged Assignment of the Deed of Trust recorded February 10, 1997 as Reception No. 401653 assigning the Deed of Trust to BANK OF NEW YORK TRUSTEE. 2. Partial Release by the Public Trustee of the, Deed of Trust from : ELIZABETH ALEY AND MAXWELL ALEY to the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin for the use of : FIRST BANK OF SOUTH DAKOTA to secure : $25,000.00 dated : April 29, 1997 recorded : June 25, 1997 reception no. : 405722 3. Deed from : SMUGGLER HUNTER TRUST To : SCOTT A. HICKS 4. Deed of Trust from : SCOTT A. HICKS to the Public Trustee of the County of PITKIN for the use of : THE LENDER TO BE INSURED HEREUNDER to secure : $300,000.00 5. Certificate of nonforeign status executed by the transferor(s). (This instrument is not required to be recorded) 6. Completion of Form DR 1079 regarding the witholding of Colorado Tax on the sale by certain persons, corporations and firms selling Real Property in the State of Colorado. (This instrument is not required to be recorded) 7. Evidence satisfactory to the Company that the Declaration of Sale, Notice to County Assessor as required by H.B. 1288 has been complied with. (This instrument is not required to be recorded, but must be delivered to and retained by the Assessors Office in the County in which the property is situated) SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. yf'0'Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract or remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted as reserved in United States Patent t,1, recorded December 24, 1902 in Book 55 at Page 116. - I ~~f Terms, conditions, restrictions and obligations as contained in Agreement recorded May 26, 1971 in Book 255 at Page 540. w. Terms, conditions, obligations, restrictions and all matters as set forth in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrative Order on Consent (Docket No. CERCLA VIII-85-06) attached to Deed recorded March 16, 1988 in Book 559 at Page 19. 10~ Restrictions as set forth in Deed recorded March 16, 1988 in Book 559 at Page 19. 1£. Permanent Access & Utility Easement from Pitkin County to Pitkin County recorded February 14, 1992 in Book 669 at Page 420. 11. Restrictions regarding resale, ownership and resale and improvements and development of the subject property as set forth in Deed recorded November 15, 1993 in Book 731 at Page 210. 10< Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Occupancy Deed Restriction and Agreement for Employee Dwelling Unit recorded September 6, 1994 in Book 760 at Page 519. FNT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DISCLOSURES The Owner's Policy to be issued, if any shall contain the following items in addition to the ones set forth above: (1) The Deed of Trust, if any, required under Schedule B-Section 1. (2) Water rights, claims or title to water. (NOTE: THIS EXCEPTION WILL APPEAR ON THE OWNER'S AND MORTGAGE POLICY TO BE ISSUED HEREUNDER) Pursuant to Insurance Regulation 89-2; NOTE: Each title entity shall notify in writing every prospective insured in an owner's title insurance policy for a single family residence (including a condominim or townhouse unit) (i) of that title entity's general requirements for the deletion of an exception or exclusion to coverage relating to unfiled mechanics or materialmens liens, except when said coverage or insurance is extended to the insured under the terms of the policy. A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanics' and/or Materialmen's Liens executed by the persons indicated in the attached copy of said affidavit must be furnished to the Company. Upon receipt of these items and any others requirements to be specified by the Company upon request, Pre-printed Item Number 4 may be deleted from the Owner's policy when issued. Please contact the Company for further information. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained in this Paragraph shall be deemed to impose any requirement upon any title insurer to provide mechanics or materialmens lien coverage. NOTE: If the Company conducts the owners or loan closing under circumstances where it is responsible for the recording or filing of legal documents from said transaction, the Company will be deemed to have provided "Gap Coverage". Pursuant to Senate Bill 91-14 (CRS 10-11-122); (a) The Subject Real Property may be located in a Special Taxing District; (b) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction may be obtained form the County treasurer of the County Treasurer's Authorized Agent; (C) Information regarding Special Districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: A tax Certificate.will be ordered from the County Treasurer by the Company and the costs thereof charged to the proposed insured unless written instruction to the contrary are received by the company prior to the issuance of the Title Policy anticipated by this Commitment. This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B-Section 2 the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT13392 A and B are attached. · &,C, 49 5,W#KXKE<0 ..,ERE :2.4 £ 4.4 f 6..11 42.. , 0/4661, ·~ /09~45:· C .. le· 1 k,z>' 21 , r 4,...3 - #341654 02/14/92 15:23 Rec *.00 El< 669 PG 420 911·,la Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 PERNIANENT ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT FROM PITKIN COUNTY TO PITKIN COUNTY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS. that PITKIN COUNTY, a municipal corporation in tbe State of Colorado, hereinafter called "Grantor,-' for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars (S10.00) and other good and valuable consideration to it in hand paid by PITKIN COUNTY, hereinafter called the ",Grantee," receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, has given and granted and by these presena does hereby give and grant unto the grantee, its heirs, successors, or assigns orperpetual easement for purposes of access and utility service on, along, over and across the following described premises, situated, lying, and being in the City of Aspen, County of Pitkin and State of Colorado, to Wit: A perpetual access and utility easement as legally described in the attached Exhibit A and shown in the attached Exhibit B. The said easement shall be for the purpcses of providing pedestrian, vehicular and Utilizy service access to the real property presently owned b) the Grantee and known as the Williams Woods Affordable Housing Project which is generally to the north and west of the prescribed Easement. Grantor hereby acknowledges ihat the benefited property now owned by the Grantee may hereafter be subdivided and that the title to said benegned property or parts thereof may be held from time to time by various successors in interest or assigns of Grantee. Grantor hereby acknowledges that no such subdivision of the property, nor any increase in the burden upon the above described property (i) by reason of increased usage or increased frequency of usage of the above described property for access to the benefitted property or any part thereof, or (ii) for any other reason whatsoever shall operate to terminate, impair or otherwise adversely affect in any manner the easement created hereby or the rights and privileges of Grantee and its successors and assigns with respect thereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal this 1 Q day of-Ia:raaE, 1992. li: \Wu,6/Cj PITKIN COUNTY Idnes R. True /Chairman, Pitkin County Board of Commissioners Ir, ENTAM<Wite - #341654 02/t 4/92 15:23 Rec S. 00 9.. 669 PG 423 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doe *-00 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this L#ay of 1~64~ 1992, by James R. True. S - 4 - f S My commission expires: . 9.40 U j. Witness my hand and official seal: 6,e»au,t.~0~96'~.1 9 132%i »¥10.119 APPROVED AS TO FORM: D ,CL~__ 1 - -Ly-3 John Ely Assistant Pitkin dntyAttomey J •. 11341654 02/14/92 15:23 Rec e. 00 BK 669 PG 422 51 1 :,1 2. Davis. Pitt· in Crity C.'ier l: , Doc *. '-)'-, ) EXHIBIT "A" A forty foot (40') wide access and utility easement loca¥ed in the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Pitkin County. Colorado, being twenty feet (20') each side of the following described centerline: Beginning at a point on the west line of Spruce Street, a City of Aspen right-of-way, from whence a brass cap properly marked C 1/4, S7, 1954, 1958, S.P.M., in Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, bears N 31° 14' 00" W, 423.19 feet; THENCE N 89° 22' 02" W, 89.89 feet; THENCE 48.69 feet along the arc of a curve to the right having a radius of 161.'70 feet and being a point on the east line of Hunter Creek Commons property, said point beiuy the intersection of an access and utility easement granted to Pitkin County from Hunter Creek Comi .ons and recerdecl at Book d t.·f, Page · 'of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Said easement contains 5543.6 square feet, more o less. r./. _ 1 .. ,- 2 A .. 1 1 ur = U L El b ! Mt r 1 R 23 7 14, 1 /<7-4 1 V I.J .0.-1 b Ul LIZ 94 /9 ~- POINT OF EE,3!t,lt,lili(3 % 1 9 -1.43\ 1 - LA, M 6 Cd CD 47 W:DE ACCESS AND 1 N ..,29%/ . -/U \ 40 oo, 1 UTILITY EASEMENT FOR ;h 1 - G. S LE*>- 00 1 45¥ - AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUBDIVISION 4 THE WILLIAMS WOODS N /1 ~:6, 1 " sc, . ..-1 TIE TO S~ e 43~ il. .---1.'-1 - 1 80 7 c: 2 2 , P 4 - wn i ' -/ / Cy H n- LE! CO - - - ~20.00'20.00' ---- V 30 FEET A 3U F :L, 5 '0 Ld 1 10 - M) 10 - 1 Inch -30 1 r. ... :1 20 1 0 GRAPHIC SCALE ~ 1 - 54 > * lcD 107 -1 4 C 00 E LAtID OWNED BY 1775'05" .CO 161.70' co e n...9/,11 -A...17-" 1 Lvull 1 1 i = 24.33 r--1 6 2 AR 400 2 > 41 -1 n- 5 Li 0/ / N /00'30'00" E - Ila 01. HUNTER CREEK COMMONS 1 1 i---& 1 1 E V 0-1.511 , 1 BANNE F L /.\1 1 L I. .r -- 7* .N.]·49 t .ht'/ Cler 1 , Dul. i. f.,1-1 %44;, i EASEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made and entered into this day of March, 1999, between the City of Aspen, Colorado, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and Maureen Mary Kinney and Scott Andrew Hicks, 0002 Williams Way, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (hereinafter referred to as "Kinney-Hicks"). WHEREAS, Kinney-Hicks are the owners in fee simple title of the real property described as Lot 1 of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision, Pitkin County, Colorado, and WHEREAS, the City wishes to acquire an easement on Lot 1 of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision, Pitkin County, Colorado, for the purpose of creating and utilizing the same as part of a neighborhood park in connection with Lot 2 of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision, Pitkin County, Colorado, which is being simultaneously conveyed by Kinney to the City. NOW, TIIEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged by , Kinney-Hicks, Kinney-Hicks does hereby grant, bargain, sell, convey, and assign to the City a perpetual and exclusive easement in, to, upon and over Lot 1 of the Smuggler Hunter Tiust Subdivision, Pitkin County, Colorado, which is specifically described as follows: A parcel of land situated in the southeast 1/4 of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 601 p.M., Pitkin County, Colorado, being the southerly portion of Lot 1, Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book at Page of the real estate records of Pitkin County, Colorado, described as follows: Beginning at a point whence a 1954 brass cap set for the center W corner of said Section 7 (now marked "special purpose monument 1978") bears NOO°30'00" E 137.42 feet and N19°16'09" W 250.79 feet; Thence easterly along the southerly right ofway of Williams Way as follows: 48.48 feet along the arc of a curve to the left whose radius is 181.70 feet (chord bears S81°43'23" E. 48.34feet) S89°22'02" E 89.75 feet to the easterly line of Lot· 1 ofsaid Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision; Thence S01°02'42" W 53.34 feet to the southeast corner of said Lot l ; Thence N88°48'35" W 137.14 feet along the southerly line to the southwest comer of said Lot 1; Thence N00°30'00" E 58.43 feet along the westerly line of said Lot I to the Roint of beginning containing 7,338 square feet more or less. The basis of bearings for the description is as shown on the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision Plat. The easement is subject to that certain Permanent Access and ·Utility Easement from Pitkin County to Pitkin County recorded February 14, 1993, in Book 669 at Page 420. The easement is perpetually restricted to use as a neighborhood park. For a period of ten (10) years, the park is restricted as a passive park with emphasis on small child and family usage. During said period, the park shall be equipped only with picnic tables and playground equipment, without any provision made to create a volleyball, skateboard, or baseball facility. The City shall screen any toilet facility froni i the view of the Kinney-Hicks residence property on Lot 1. No motor vehicle parking shall be provided on the north side of the park property (abutting Williams Way), and landscape screening shall be installed and maintained by the City on the north side of the property, but the screening shall not exceed a height of ten (10) feet. The City covenants with Kinney-Hicks, thier successors, assigns, and legal representatives, that it shall bear full responsibility for the use and enjoyment of the easement granted herein and shall save and hold Kinney-Hicks, their successors, assigns, and legal representatives harmless from any claim of damages to person or premises- resulting from the use, occupancy, and possession of the same by the City. All covenants and conditions of this agreement shall be specifically enforceable, as - applicable, by any appropriate legal action, after thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. In the event that the parties resort to litigation or alternative dispute ' resolution, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover damages and costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees. No claim of waiver, consent, or acquiescence with respect to any provision of this agreement shall be valid against Kinney-Hicks, except on the basis of a written instrument, executed and accepted by Kinney-Hicks. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said easement unto City, its successors and assigns forever. The provisions and covenants hereof shall inure to and be binding upon the parties, their successors, assigns, heirs, and legal representatives. 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this instrument the day and the year first above written. MAUREEN MARY KINNEY CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO %1- 8-,_gr- 0002 Williams Way Jc#tn Bennett, Mayor Aspen<CO 81611 SCOTT ANDREW HICKS ATTEST: 0£40 ha_. 0002 Williams Way Kathryn Koc00 Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen City Clerk (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Aspen City Attorney STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS: - County of Pitkin ) The foregoing instrument is hereby acknowledged before me this day of March, 1999, by Maureen Mary Kinney, 0002 Williams Way, Aspen, CO 81611. Witness my hand and seal. My commission expires: (SEAL) Notary Public 3 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. Pitkin County ) The foregoing instrument is hereby acknowledged before me this )57~ay of March, 1999, by John Bennett, as Mayor, and Kathryn S. Koch, as City Clerk of the City of - Aspen. Witness my hand and seal. My Commission expires My commission expires: 12l2612000 (SEAL) 1«FA~ Ali Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) The foregoing instrument is hereby acknowledged before me this day of March, 1999, by Scott Andrew Hicks, 0002 Williams Way, Aspen, CO 81611. Witness my hand and seal. My commission expires: (SEAL) Notary Public 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director FROM: James Lindt, Plannerc~ RE: Hicks-Kinney/Hunter Creek Condominiums Lot Line Adjustment DATE: October 17,2002 SUMMARY: Scott Hicks and Maureen Kinney, represented by Alan Richman of Alan Richman Planning Services, have applied for a lot line adjustment to swap 5,603 square feet of land from Lot 1, of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision for 5,603 square feet of land belonging to the Hunter Creek Condominiums. A Subdivision Exemption for a Lot Line Adjustment may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Community Development Director pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.040(A), Lot Line Adjustment. Lot Line Adjustment: Staff feels that the proposed lot line adjustment to swap an equal amount of lot area between Lot 1, of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision and the parcel of land belonging to the Hunter Creek Condominiums meets all of the applicable review standards as set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.480.030(A)(1), Lot Line Adjustment. Staff believes that the proposal is an insubstantial boundary change. In addition, the applicant has consented to placing a plat note on the lot line adjustment plat to be recorded that states that no additional development rights, allowable density, or allowable floor area ratio (FAR) will be authorized on either of the properties by virtue of executing the proposed lot line adjustment. Z : Additionally, staff has proposed a condition of approval that de-lists from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures the land that is being transferred to the Hunter Creek Condominium parcel. Conversely, staff has further proposed a ° condition of approval that designates the land being incorporated into Lot 1, of the Smuggler Hunter Tnt st Subdivision to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. The historic resource located at 0002 Williams Way that is listed on Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures is located on the portion of Lot 1 that is not being transferred as part of the lot line adjustment. Therefore, because the property description of Lot 1, of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision is being altered through the lot line adjustment, the property being incorporated into Lot 1 should be included in the property's historic designation as is f proposed by staff in condition of approval No. 4. ------ uz Furthermore, the applicant has received a letter of consent to apply for the lot line adjustment from the Hunter Creek Condominium Association as is required by 1 1111ll lillillillil 111100~:~3 Review Standard "B". Moreover, the Hunter Creek Condominium Association will be required to sign the plat to be recorded prior to execution of the Lot Line Adjustment. Therefore, staff finds that the proposed lot line adjustment meets the applicable review standards and recommends that the Community Development Director approve the proposal with the following conditions: 1. The Applicant shall prepare and record a lot line adjustment plat that meets the City of Aspen's land use code plat requirements within 180 days of this approval. 2. The Applicant shall place a plat note on the lot line adjustment plat that states that the development rights, permitted density, and allowable FAR will not be affected on any of the parcels involved in the lot line adjustment. 3. The applicant shall install monuments at all of the new property corners of Lot 1, of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision and monument them on the lot line adjustment plat. 4. The 5,063 square feet of land located directly west of Lot 1, of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision that is being incorporated into Lot 1; is hereby designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures by virtue of Lot 1 being designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Moreover, the 5,063 square feet of land that is being transferred from Lot 1 to the Hunter Creek Condominium parcel is herby de-listed from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures because it is no longer incorporated in Lot 1, of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision. APPLICANT: Scott Hicks and Maureen Kinney LOCATION: Lot 1, of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision and the adjacent parcel owned by the Hunter Creek Condominiums. CURRENT ZONING: R/MFA Zone District REVIEW PROCEDURE: A lot line adjustment may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Community Development Director pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.040(A). 11 lilill---1111Ill 11111111--1 474336 Page: 2 of 6 11/04/2002 11:13A SLLF-A C..VIS FITKIN ECU„TY CO 9 31.00 D 0.00 2 STAFF COMMENTS: Review criteria and StaffFindings have been included as Exhibit "A". The application has been included as Exhibit "B". The draft Lot Line Adjustment Plat is included as Exhibit "C". RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Community Development Director approve this lot line adj ustment with the conditions as proposed below. APPROVAL: I hereby approve this insubstantial amendment to the Aspen Meadows SPA and lot line adjustment as proposed with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall prepare and record a lot line adjustment plat that meets the City of Aspen's land use code plat requirements within 180 days ofthis approval. 2. The applicant shall place a plat note on the lot line adjustment plat that states that the development rights, permitted density, and allowable FAR will not be affected on any of the parcels involved in the lot line adjustment. 3. The applicant shall install monuments at all of the new property corners of Lot 1, of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision and monument them on the lot line adjustment plat. 4. The 5,063 square feet of land located directly west of Lot 1, of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision that is being incorporated into Lot 1; is hereby designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures by virtue of Lot 1 being designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Moreover, the 5,063 square feet of land that is being transferred from Lot 1 to the Hunter Creek Condominium parcel is herby de-listed from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures because it is no longer incorporated in Lot 1, of the Smuggler Hunter Trust Subdivision. 4/> b. ~.LJJ-b dak 1 ,(ho /0.,- <.0 Ju~Ann Woods, Community Development Director 40641~f'' 2042 474336 1 11111111111lm lilli llil lilli 111111 111 @111 11/04/2002 11:13A Page: 3 of 6 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 31.00 0 0.00 3 ACCEPTANCE: I, as a person being or representing the applicant, do hereby agree to the conditions of this approval and certify the information provided in this application is correct to the best of my knowledge. Ad 4£ AMAUg2 date e | 4 ~ 01- Scott Hicks and Maureen Kinney, owners of Lot 1, of the Smuggleg.W,nte&Trust Subdivision. 13. /76,5<M/W<-< date ill 110-v Johg,B€00~06sident, H@*treeK Commons Corporation, Inc. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Application Exhibit C -- Draft Lot Line Adjustment Plat 474336 1 ill'111111111111111111111111111 lill'11 ~ lillillillili Page: 4 of 6 11/04/2002 11:13A SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 31.00 D 0.00 4 Exhibit A Review Criteria & Staff Findings Lot Line Adjustment. A Lot Line Adjustment may be authorized by the Community Development Director if the following review standards are met. 1. It is demonstrated that the request is to correct an engineering or surveying error in a recorded plat or is to permit an insubstantial boundary change between adjacent parcels; and Staff Finding: Staff believes that the proposed lot line adjustment is an insubstantial boundary change between adjacent parcels. The lot line adjustment will not affect the development rights of any of the parcels involved. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. All landowners whose lot lines are being adjusted shall provide written consent to the application; and Staff Finding: All of the landowners whose lots are being adjusted have consented to the application in 8 the form of letters of consent. Additionally, the owners whose lots are involved in the lot - to - line adjustment will have to sign the lot line adjustment plat prior to it being recorded at Q) ,: g Z the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. Staff finds this criterion to be met. CO~=® (9 -0 3. The corrected plat will meet the standards of this Chapter, and conform to the requirements of this Title, including the dimensional requirements of the zone district in e which the lots are located, except in cases of an existing nonconforming lot, in which the IDC adjustment shall not increase the nonconformity of the lot. The plat shall be submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Failure to record the ' plat within a period of one hundred eighty (180) days following approval shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the Community Development Director will L.---n be required before its acceptance and recording; and Staff Finding: -6 Staff believes that the proposed lot line adjustment is not in conflict with the dimensional requirements as set forth in the R/MFA zone districts in which both properties are located. Both of the lots subject to the proposal are conforming in regards ·to their - minimum lot size and neither lot is losing lot area through the lot line adjustment. Furthermore, the proposal will not create any non-conformities in regards to required setbacks. Therefore, staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. It is demonstrated that the lot line adjustment will not affect the development rights, including any increase in FAR, or permitted density of the a#ected lots by 03 Al.--1- I>I.LIr SIAUJ WIjlIS providing the opportunity to create a new lot for resale or development. A plat note will be added to the corrected plat indicating the purpose of the lot line adjustment and the recognition that no additional FAR will be allowed with the adjustment. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposed lot line adjustment will not affect the development rights, allowable FAR, or permitted density on any of the parcels involved. Staff is requiring that the applicant place a plat note on the lot line adjustment plat that states that there will be no change in the allowable floor area, permitted density, or development rights on any of the properties involved in the lot line adjustment as a result of said adjustment. Therefore, staff finds this criterion to be met. li l lil lili Ill lilli Ill 11/04/2002 11:13A 474336 Page: 6 of 6 SILF:A C..VIS FITKIN JC_NTY CO R 31.00 D 0.00 --- -- *'." L \ 4 ( C.ar€>-$114--.07 T 111% i,Faj .. Salvation\ .. #2 x -1-..~ 24" al'. / 'Cilfi 1 0 1 84,%11&?43:9· 4,6 .01 Nt> CQuil-,fF»// < 0 2 94-7' 101,0 . 3 y R 1 6/hwe l « a 1,4 N 0 Gillespie St Y Ave, /0 0, 1 Silver King I h I l'ea-11(, 1 1%1 113 2 Race St 9 -04 - f., _ 4 2/ // i 1 1. , * 1 1 Spring St '~14 m .-eglf' iff 'f,1, 5 A iax Ave v.\34{c, -\ -9 4 "Mlit % /, r<1'r e i 14-11 1 E 6 {).ik I.,1 b 45£ + -0 7 Maple 1.n t /4.41 C P --4 4 <'4.414 41~-.4 , R Mittland Park PI 0 -4. , , \.1 %... 4 3 :$3*9 0 9%19 9 MaAct,tte Li 7 / 4(*h li, h # 6 0 10 SmmUder (irove Ct 4 9/ Sa,~uiil!/ 0 € -:41-~-/-1 tho 11 Aidmore Ct Flills ** 7 4.-?bA 11\flank . 1 * 0 Riverside Ave (7 y 1-4 It I )ale Ave -1 1 -,31- i 4 - -,4 1 9.7 & If Nlaylloweic (21 1,1 Micll:Ind Ave I - u.s~ ~ Fit - 0 -- ·- ir -11._ ll)*I'lm » d '- 5 t/7 - 1 12% K. .9 4,1 4 -- 1-/ 54 - 4- -9 1 4 <*r-- NO ~ 1 1 :44;,1 7~61/1 fpr -3 4. N.f . Illbl C , i i KI . . i p.- tq~... .6 /14,4.11 \471, P--7 „ ~riX!4 9-'pt 1 04 ..9 '/ 7 )/ 3 muk! r. 1 2( : f , 9.9 Xb ' Y 4 1Uicts ~ fi / £(Frr,I, I k,~ 1._01 1 HIRED GUN Project 0207149 Comments SM UGGLER 1 -1 l. J N 1-1-14 1- R UST SUBDIVISIC) N SURVEYING Dote VICINITY 04/28/03 MAP P.O. BOX 9 Client HICKS SNOWMASS,CO.81615 970-923-2794 Smuggler Hunter Trust Major Development/Conceptual Requirement #4 Kinney/ Hicks Residence 2 Williams Way Aspen, CO 81611 Major Development/ Conceptual Application Requirement # 7 A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how the proposed development complies with the review criteria and The City of Aspen Historic Preservation Guidelines relevant to the development application. The existing development at 2 Williams Way consists of two historic structures now connected by a contemporary addition and serving as two residential units. The western portion of the house is the original structure on the property and shall be referred to as "Historic Building 1 (HB1)". The eastern portion of the home is also a historic structure that was relocated to the property from Main or Bleeker and shall be referred to as "Historic Building 2 (HB2)". The property is significant mainly for the "construction and design associated with distinctive characteristics of a building type, period or construction method". The two historic buildings are simple gable end and side gable residential structures. They are not significant for an "Association with events...", as "An example of an architect or master craftsman...", or for the "Integrity of location or setting...". The site has a number of mature cottonwood and spruce trees. The trees are a key original site feamre and a major element in the conceptual redevelopment scheme. It is planned that alllarge trees will be preserved but one. A work session with HPC and meetings with Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer resulted in the general agreement that a major goal of the conceptual plan is to separate the two conjoined historic structures into separate, stand alone, and restored buildings. The conceptual plan for both HB1 and HB2 is to repair deteriorated historic features, and replace only those elements that cannot be repaired. Both historic building locations and foundations are not original. The site gently slopes East to West. The Western ends of the new foundations proposed for both historic buildings and the new RO unit will all be exposed. Colorado red, "Peachblow" type veneer stone is proposed for all exposed foundation walls. Site massing of the three structures takes great advantage ofthe East to West slope across the length of Williams Way. Single story HB2 floor elevation is highest at the East. The new one and two story RO unit main floor elevation steps down and is central between the two historic structures. The low mass ofthe new RO Garage/Terrace again steps down its mass to the one story HB1 at the West. HB 1 will be moved further to the west and will maintain its current orientation to Williams Way and the site. A minor addition to the north side of the building and the integration of shed dormer windows in the roof plan is proposed. The southern wall and western walls are now the only original exterior walls. The southern wall will remain original as it now exists. The western wall will be restored to its original design. The door will remain, and the original window, as indicated by cuts in the existing siding, will be reinstated. The window in the gable portion of the wall will be finished with matching trim. The northern wall, which is now interior, will mirror the window placement, type, and trim detail of the southern wall on the westerly half of the structure. The easterly half ofthe northern wall will accommodate the addition. The eastern wall, also now interior and completely removed, will have two double hung windows that match the window scheme on the southern and northern walls. The design of the missing exterior walls, is based on the original historic design and window placement of the original South wall. The existing non-original high triangular windows in the gable end of the eastern wall will be replaced with an appropriate small window consistent with the window in the western wall and all applicable design guidelines. The plan envisions a small addition of approximately 90 sq. ft. to HB1. The addition is designed to minimize the impact on the original features of the building and which can be recognized as a product of its own time. The addition is placed to the rear of the building to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. The western wall of this addition will have outswinging barn doors. The northern and eastern walls will include windows that are different from but compatible with the historic structure. The addition and the proposed shed dormers will be sided with board and batten to differentiate new from the existing bevel lap siding of the original structure. The roofing material of the new low pitched roof will be metal standing seam to differentiate from the original 8/12 pitched restored cedar or composition shingle roof. The anticipated use of HB1 is as an art studio/dwelling unit and such use is compatible with the historic character ofthe building. Additional natural interior light is desired for the art studio use and the proposal includes the addition of three small shed dormers subordinate in scale to the primary roof. Based on recommendations from the HPC, these dormers have been set back from the roof edge and located below the ridge of the roof. The simple style of the proposed dormer design is in keeping with that o f the building. The southern roof will have two dormer windows and the northern roofwill have one matching dormer on its western portion. All of the proposed changes and additions are consistent with the HPC design guidelines. The historic integrity of the structure is maintained and the addition is minor in scale and influence. The dormer windows are consistent with the historic evolution of the building and respect the historic design character of the building. HB1 is a modest building and it is the simple original scale and detail that is its most stylistic feature and that which will shall be protected and maintained. HB2 is a currently and shall remain a category 4 affordable housing rental unit. HB2 will be moved to the northeastern corner of the property. Its orientation to the site will remain the same. However, the finish floor elevation will be raised to meet the grade of Spruce Street, and this street will define its primary street orientation. The historic integrity of this structure will remain intact. There is no additional floor area proposed added to this structure. The existing western wall is both exterior and interior. The proposal completes the western wall in the same design as the existing structure. The northern wall will remain the same. The eastern wall which will be facing Spruce Street will remain relatively the same. The main window will remain the same. In the porch fronted section of this wall, the door will be relocated to its original position, based on cuts in the siding. The current door will be replaced with a window that matches the existing window. The southern wall has French doors which are not historical. These doors will be replaced with a historically appropriate window. The adjustments to this structure meet all ofthe HPC design guidelines. The changes to this structure are to return the building to its historical condition. The restoration of this structure should be regarded as exemplary and should therefore qualify for the additional 500 sq. ft. project incentive bonus. Between the two historic structures, and located roughly on the existing combined structures footprint, a new primary Resident Occupied dwelling unit will be constructed. Wholly separate from both of the historic structures, this new structure is sensitive to the historical integrity of the two historic structures. The new structure is compatible in scale, site relationship and style. The new buildings alignment maintains a front yard transitional space between the public Williams Way and the private building entry. The primary entrance is clearly defined by using a front porch. The new porch is similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. The mass of the new RO unit is subdivided into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the two historic buildings on the site. Design of the front elevation is similar in scale to the historic structures with both one story front porch and living areas. Roof forms including spans and slopes and eave depths are similar to the simple gable forms of the historic structures. Roof materials proposed for the new RO unit are the same as those proposed for the two historic structures. Composition or cedar shingles on the approximately 8/12 sloped roofs and matte, non- reflective metal standing seam on the low sloped porch roofs. Siding proposed for the new RO unit is similar wood horizontal bevel lap similar to the historic structures. Building components including windows and doors will be similar and details shall be modest in character. The design of the new RO unit is not an imitation of a historic style. Smuggler Hunter Trust 2 Williams Way Aspen, CO 81611 Major Development/Conceptual Application Requirement #8 In an effort to restore the historic structures to their original state, we have begun researching the deed history ofthe homes, and we have contacted individuals who are in some way connected with the property. The goal is to determine the design and configuration of the original home, as well as discovering where exactly the rental unit was originally located in town. Unfortunately, to date, little progress has been made. John A. Williams bought a parcel of land in October 1902. The current Hunter Smuggler Trust Lot 1 parcel was part of this property. Trying to fill the history of the property between 1902 and 1971 has proven difficult. Researching the county records of deeds and titles has yielded little insight. It seems that Top of Aspen a subsidiary ofMcCulloch properties, who is responsible for the development ofthe Hunter Creek condominiums, purchased the property around 1971. An agreement between Top ofAspen and the Pitkin County Commissioners in May 1971 makes reference to options to buy five parcels adjoining the Top of Aspen's proposed development site. However it is not clear as to who owned the property at the time, nor is it clear how exactly the county came to own the property. It seems that the parcels that Top of Aspen purchased and the lot which was ultimately given to the county are not exactly the same parcel, but a subdivided portion of the Top of Aspen's property. The deed history gets murky, and we have been unable to trace the ownership ofthe property before Top ofAspen. Jim Markalunas has family who occupied the house at some point. We have contacted him, but he has been unable to provide any photos ofthe site. We will continue to communicate with him regarding any memories he may have ofthe design ofthe original structure. Jim and Mary Moran purchased the house next to the property in 1976. They only have memories ofthe house as it currently exists. They were unable to provide any insight into the design of the original house or the original location of the relocated portion ofthe house. Jim Moran did suggest a conversation with Jim Reiser who had a surveying business in the house. This lead will be pursued. The Architectural Inventory Form created by the City indicates that the eastern part of the structure was relocated from Main or Durant. Efforts to determine its original location have been unsuccessful. Bill Bailey who was responsible for moving many Aspen homes does not recall the property. However, he will be in Aspen in the middle ofJuly, and he will visit the site. Land Use Application THE Crrr OF ASPEN PROJECT: Name: 2 60 1LL /,4.5 60,9 Location: 2 LA \LU ANS .3 AN 5 nAC 6,Lte. HINT-ER- 7\El]ST L.01- -* C (Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description ofpropetty) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 213-1©71-13\©61 APPUCANT: Name: 50=T- 8\CKS Address: 0 LA , ULA NFS G Al Phone #: 910 -9,25 -l<~09 Fax#: 975 -95-7074 E-mail: 5McICS @ aer'cA.07 REPRESENTATIVE: Name: 45,4,~,- M 6%00 wE- Address: 'hone #: Fax#: E-mail: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): C] Historic Designation E Relocation (temporary, on or off-site) 1 Certificate ofNo Negative Effect ~ Demolition (total demolition) 1 Certificate ofAppropriateness C] Historic Landmark Lot Split -Minor Historic Development -Major Historic Development -Conceptual Historic Development -Final Historic Development -Substantial Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings. uses, previous approvals, etc.) fujo kly6rl6 944(:luvis gat~edld 47 C_.0~~JAA~'a-4 de|01 I#31. *Pufle-)0 wil·k ~6 9-0 unt- J e Re. ccrbgor.~ H o~$*0,46(/ ke #1*1~~~ re·v'*A.\ anl + PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings. uses. modifications, etc.) 14\510.1 4 *,ve*wes 4 9e-- ge~#CANd 2, Prte.-St'-A r,~ 94'velres a,w aro,AQI to Whtlitan,~ kutor\CA-1 rtleAJarce. Ne,n' stru eWvt te k. 64 +I FEES DUE: $ 2,0091 General Information ease check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This information will help us review yourplans and, ifnecessayy, coordinate with other agencies that may be involved. YES NO < 0 Does the work you are planning include exterior wod[; including additions, demolitions, new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration? 4 0 Does the work you are planning include interior work; including remodeling, rehabilitation, or restoration? 0 El' Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time? 0 4 In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative EfTect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interiork Standardcfor Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits? 0 If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential properties are not.) 0 0 If yes, are you seeldng the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Histoical Preservation? Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use: 0 Rehabilitation Loan Fund 0 Conservation Easement Program Q Dimensional Variances Acreased Density 0 Historic Landmark Lot Split 0 Waiver of Park Dedication Fees 0 Conditional Uses 3 Exemption from Growth Management Quota System 0 Tax Credits DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT FORM Major Development/Conceptual Application Requirement #10 Project: 2 Williams Way Applicant: Scott Hicks Location: 2 Williams Way, Aspen, CO 81611 Zone District: IUMFA Residential/Multi-Family Lot Size: 27,001 s.£ Lot Area: 21,457 s.£ (27,001 s.£ less 5,544 s.£ Williams Way easement) Commercial net leaseable: N/A Number ofResidential Units Existing: Two. Number ofResidential Units Proposed: Three Number of Bedrooms Existing: Three Number of Bedrooms Proposed: Six Proposed % of Demolition: 26% Dimensions: Floor Area: Existing: 593s.£ Cat 4 + 1360 Resident Occupied= 1953 s.f. Allowable: 7725 s.£ (Note 1 Proposed: approx. 5,800 s.f. Height: Principal Existing: approx. 19' max. Bldg.: Allowable: 25' Proposed: less than 25' Accessory Bldg.: Existing: N/A Allowable: N/A (Note 2 Proposed: N/A On-Site Parking Existing: 4 Required: 4 (Note 3 Proposed: 4 % Site Coverage: Existing: N/A (Note 4 Required: N/A Proposed: N/A % Open Space Existing: 86% Required: 35% Proposed: 68% (Note 5 Front Setback: Existing: 84' + (Note 6 Required: 10' Principal Bldg.. 15' Accessory Bldg. Proposed: 90' Principal Bldg.,15' Accessory Studio Bldg. Rear Setback: Existing: 12' Required: 10' Principal Bldg., 5' Accessory Bldg. Proposed: 10' Combined Front/Rear: Existing: N/A Required: N/A Proposed: N/A E. Side Setback: Existing: 16' Required: 5' min. Proposed: 5' W. Side Setback: Existing: 100' + Required: 15' Proposed: 15' Combined Sides: Existing: 116' Required: 20' minimum Proposed: 20' Existing non-conformities or encroachments: none Variations requested: none Notes: 1. Allowable floor area for multi-family =21,457 s.f. net lot area x .36 2. Accessory building max. height is not referenced in Aspen Municipal Code 26.710.100 Residential/Multi-Family. 3. Required parking from Aspen Municipal Code 26.510.030. Two spaces for four bedroom unit, one space each for the one bedroom unit and the studio unit. 4. % Site Coverage requirement is not referenced in Aspen Municipal Code 26.710.100 Residential/Multi-Family 5. % Open Space equals Total Open Space/ Total Lot, see attached . KIMMEWFUCKS RESIPEMCE OFEM SFACE WORKSHEET 1. Buildings ME\V EXISTIME a. HISTORIC KESIPEMCE 48b io. rIMM KESIPEriCE 3581 1953 c. HISTORIC CAT. 4 UMIT 579 Total: 4646 2. PKIVEWAYS 4 FAKKIMe a. MAIM PKIVE 1735 10. CAT 4 LIMIT 260 c. across Williams Watj O 500 Total: 1995 3. ARCHITECTURAL FROJEC TIOMS a. MAIM #55!PEMCE 67 100 Total: 67 Total Coveraae: 6708 2853 Open Space equal to Lot area: 21457 2/457 Minus coverage: 6708 2853 Total Open space: 14749 18604 Fercentace of open space equals Total Open space / Total Lot 14749 / 21457 68.74% 18604/2.1457 69.-7/X June 30,2003 Kinney/ Hicks Residence 2 Williams Way Aspen, CO 81611 Major Development/ Conceptual Application Requirement # 14 Verification that the proposal complies with Section 26.410 Residential Design Standards 26.410.030 A. Site Design 1. Building Orientation: Two front facades of the new RO unit and the Cat 4 HB2 historic unit are parallel to the straight section of primary Williams Way & perpendicular to secondary Spruce Street. The HB1 Studio historic dwelling unit is tangent to the curved section of Williams Way. 2. Build-to lines: Lot is greater than 15,000 s. f.. 3. Fences: No fences, hedgerows, or planter boxes are planned at this time. B. Building Form 1. Secondary Mass: The secondary mass in this project are the two historic structures which will meet the 10 % of total square footage above grade requirement. Their use as dwelling units is appropriate. C. Parking, Garages and Carports 1. Access: no alley or private road exists. 2. a.&b. Garage doors are not on the primary street facing fa~ade. c. Lot is greater than 15,000 s.f. & garage doors are perpendicular to the front faQade although they are not forward of the front f£wade. d. Garage floor elevation and finish grade elevation at the curb cut are the same. e. The vehicular entrance width of the Garage is less than 24'. f. The Garage doors are single stall doors. D. Building Elements: Street Facing architectural details. 1. Street oriented entrance and principal window. Note that the project has one new entrance and two historic entrances. The project is on a corner Lot and the new RO unit entrance faces Williams Way which has a greater block length. a. The new RO unit entry door faces the street and is no more than 10' back from the foremost wall of the building. The new entry door is not taller than 8'. The HB1 Studio historic building entrance is original and also faces Williams Way. The HB2 Cat 4 historic building entrance is proposed facing Spruce Street creating separated and more direct & private entrances for the units. b. The new RO unit entrance has a covered entry porch ofmore than 50 s.f. with a minimum depth of six feet, and is not more than one story in height. The two historic buildings do not now have original porches & it is unknown if they had covered entry porches. e. The new RO unit does have a significant group of street-facing principal windows. The HB1 Studio historic dwelling unit has an original pair and an original single double hung windows facing the street. The HB2 Cat 4 historic unit has a set of probably not original French doors facing Williams Way. The original principal window design at the French door location has not been determined, but Owner desires replacement of the doors with appropriate windows. The historic gable end decorative element will be retained & not modified. 2. One story element: The new RO unit has a one-story porch and living space comprising more than 20% of the building's width. The two historic structures are both one-story. 3. Windows: Street facing windows for all three units do not span through the area where a second floor would typically exist, which is between 9 and 12 feet above the finished first floor. There are no street facing areas with an exterior expression of plate height greater than 10'. 4. Lightwells. All areaways or lightwells shall be entirely recessed behind the frontmost wall of the building. E. Context 1. Materials: a. The two existing historic structures are clad with mostly original bevel lap siding, simple partially original wood trim, non-original roofing, and non-original foundations. Also note that significant sections of the exterior walls of both buildings have been removed or very modified when they became the interior wall of the existing structure. Proposed for the project is the restoration of the two historic structures with the use of appropriate materials. Siding, trim, and windows restored per guidelines from the Preservation Awareness Program Training Manual. All original roofs will be new cedar shingle. New low-pitch shed dormer roofs and Shop addition will be narrow pan metal standing seam. New RO unit siding and roofing to match the historic buildings. All three buildings will have new foundations. New exposed foundation walls for all three buildings proposed "Peachblow" like Colorado sandstone. 2. Inflection: Parcel is over 6,000s.f. a. A one story building does not exist directly adjacent to the subject site. f181 \10 0 1 14 'rh k -. 9 40 4 i 0 '1 I f 1. 4 '14 4 .44 . '. . f..7, 4 .*. ,0;1<,4 , ' '*"*** -4 ~ ,6'' 1 1 ... ' ' ..',7, .' 7 t-f · ~ L 2 1 2~· · lk - . 4 1 -1.3.1, , ..4 1 /re, ... 1 '02- , 1.1 4 ~ 4 ' ,~ ty :) PZ~. , r r 0. , . , r A h . 1 -434: . - - .Mm .r 1. 2 , -4./ 11.1,41 .-/ . 1 g . 0740 i i m.m.11! I L E. IllmillIF •,Al 7 fl :- 6 - 7 9 5=0!1 4- 1 1 plifilliliti.ilillilililliguili 111! 4 = f I - :'33 j ..: 4 /9,1/1 --4/' · I '% 7 4. -41 " s RE:j, 43 A. 4 ., I b 1 ·i.a A '. I' .. 'Ill . , - , ./.Al'. 7 .1.1 ' 4& ' I .' · ' j fl -':' 1 1' £ 1 1$*r . .' ~ ' * r~ .. .1 4 , ;.f 247'9 6. 1 f < - W ' ' P - i*Z · *-~· 2 3 * AN.:P . 7 " 11 lamed"ilit/45 1. I R ¥84':*~ 1 'tw; ·~·· \ JIIN~7/9/47 .Mi:201%1 I 4. 1.0. A• · - 42~ -JI 4.0. 1 14. .44 , I 1 1* I ' .14, i , , Aily 7 A '6?Nt 458Mbj): 1,f-, 1:- / 6. P.' i 129:t. I. I .. ib:ta,18*4~Tal C.,2-'-".Ty / 4 4 , - . 271 - · = . 1 --+ i . . . N J I - "44 I -• '3 11#14,44'*1.'.7...~ilt ~,·0-0 4. 1~414-/ ..al -- .1 7/15,1 dl &9 _ u .._ . '1" -. - il :..." 1....' '-." 33.f*. -- i ~ ,Wi.ilill~~ di.~ T.6*6£ ---- , ti ... - 1 *2,'5 4~,~'~- 14,/p-- --'~'04)VM"~~ y. ,.Ir..6 - 58", "FMI,f¥=311-litz-=1 ---'re 1 ".014:..4. . : 0 '-r, N., .9,~ f '.~ijki*:,~' - 1, p~~S, 4-~5;7,1 4 3~4;,4 4 J~ id&6 : ' '. 4 -7 4 4- - 1, Al '62. 1 .y . 4.S '~ ,'~,1, 1.4,1.r '.,•,·:F.'Kj'4,W/4.: 14 - I tim 7, I r f 6 ,41. 1,1,11*1' .t•*.4 I V• C'>BAK# 44444. 1/. #,1,1 . 4 927.1'.1 .- 1 . .1 - .......1.-'--.--...'.-'.*I'.-'11'..",1.1-"111-'1 .1.%10.-- 1, * 4 11.~ 0 -- 1 !,1 .. .2'ArkAWN, 1 ../ : ...·../. 4 7/ Ill- ...r'.a. 4,79 4 -9744*5 4. 9, 1= I I . 4 r. .2 ., . 1:1111,~ 10 h• ...... ./Mil". - -- = ·'4 '4 glm, N¢A[ .........m'p1 T~~11~I M Inll Iqm p'1'11.-,4 01 n, i 172#9 F . t ph' i y - . . .. .. 1 H..9 t ..l i M .11 1. .4 11 711 , I. .' . .. --r, r. ' ure /:2 '4 3 79 I.·94,: .· -:kir· -. A i,·fll ' "J · T - -1.~1 1~11=b,Fl--Ill-- --- . I ----- -0//'.ifi AM. fid>;4 .6 + - .44.24?1.0 ..6}.1,4 '' - - i .-Ey: , .1 %>.1,11, 4 M+1044 -./.:f 114 . L .6 42 01, . . Ir r.9~ ' 7 ./.*I V-I. 11 IJ| 411 L e - , /2 - 41.J '1 . A ill~ 1? . I i W.1 4 , 4 . :. 1. , , 8. = '1 711 ,- a , , 0 0. u ..L' 7.'B/' 1 'gl