The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.apz.20010605ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE 59 2001 4:15 PM PUBLIC DISCUSSION WITH STAFF 4:30 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS I. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Public II. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST III. MINUTES A IV. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 413 W. HOPKINS DRAC VARIANCES, Fred Jarman B. 515 GILLESPIE HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION, (cont'd from 5/1), Fred Jarman C. 640 N. THIRD STREET LANDMARK DESIGNATION, (cont'd from 5/1), Amy Guthrie. D. 419 E. HYMAN LANDMARK DESIGNATION, (cont'd from 5/1), Amy Guthrie E. 629 W. SMUGGLER LANDMARK DESIGNATION, (cont'd from 4/17), Amy Guthrie, CONTINUE TO 7/10 F. HISTORIC LOT SPLIT CODE AMENDMENT, Amy Guthrie V. ADJOURN RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISISON APPROVING VARIANCES OF THE NON -ORTHOGONAL WINDOW AND SECONDARY MASS RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE YOUNG RESIDENCE, 413 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE, LOTS E, F, WEST1/2 OF G, BLOCK 39,CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO. Parcel ID # 2735-124-65-002 Resolution #01- J' WHEREAS the applicant, Paul Young, represented by August Reno, AIA, has requested a variance of "Residential Design Standard" 26.410.040(D)(3)(b), non -orthogonal windows, and 26.410.040(B)(1), secondary mass, for a proposed single-family residence to be located at 413 West Hopkins Avenue, City of Aspen; and, WHEREAS pursuant to Section 26.212, the Planning and Zoning Commission may review and approve variances from the Residential Design Standards; and, WHEREAS all applications for variance from the Residential Design Standards must meet one of the following criteria in order for the variance to be granted, namely the proposal must: a) yield greater compliance with the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan; b) more effectively address the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to; or c) be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints; and, WHEREAS the Planning Staff in a report dated June 5, 2001, recommended the Planning and Zoning Commission deny the variance requests; and, WHEREAS during a public hearing, which was legally noticed, was held at a regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission on June 5, 2001, the Committee approved, by a to (_-� vote, the requested variances, subject to conditions listed herein, finding criteria B met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission: That the variance of Residential Design Standards 26.410.040(D)(3)(b), non -orthogonal windows, and 26.410.040(B)(1), secondary mass, for a proposed single-family residence to be located at 413 West Hopkins Avenue, City of Aspen, is hereby granted, subject to the following conditions: LOCATION: 413 West Hopkins. ZONING: R-15 . Moderate Density Residential. NON -ORTHOGONAL WINDOWS The applicant's proposed development is not in compliance with the following Residential Design Standard: 26 410.040(D) —Building Elements. 3. b. No more than one non -orthogonal window shall be allowed on each facade of the building. A single non -orthogonal window in a gable end may be divided with mullions and still be considered one non - orthogonal window. Orthogonal E3 �4on-Orthogonal CIS) 0 There are two non -orthogonal windows on the east, north, and south facades. There does not appear to be any unique site constraint requiring such windows. The standard was written to minimize the aesthetic effect of these non-traditional windows and staff does not believe the particular windows provide a more effective manner to address this issue. The windows do not yield a higher compliance with the AACP than orthogonal windows. SECONDARY MASS: The applicant's proposed development is not in compliance with the following Residential Design Standard: 26 410.040(B) —Building Form. 1. Secondary Mass. All new structures shall locate at least 10% of their total square footage above grade in a mass which is completely detached from the principal building, or linked to it by a subordinate connecting element. Accessory buildings such as garages, sheds, and Accessory Dwelling Units are examples of appropriate uses for the secondary mass. 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director FROM: Chris Bendon, Senior Planner RE: Young Residence, 413 West Hopkins -- Public Hearing Non -Orthogonal Windows Secondary Mass DATE: June 5, 2001 SUMMARY: The applicant, Paul Young, owner, is requesting a waiver of two Residential Design Standards for a new house to be constructed at 413 West Hopkins. The property is currently developed with a house to be demolished. The site has no topographical constraints or other characteristics hindering development. Relief from the Residential Design Standards may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission during a public hearing for one of the following three reasons: 1) The property possesses an irregularity in which a waiver is clearly necessary for reasons of fairness; 2) The proposed design represents a more effective manner to address the particular issue in which the standard is intended; or, 3) The proposed design yields greater compliance with the Aspen Area Community Plan than would result with application of the particular standard. -� Staff does not find the variance criteria to be met for the requested variances and is recommending denial. The property is not unique in any manner and staff believes the standards can be met on this property, the proposed design does not address the particular aesthetic issues in a manner more effective than the standards, and the proposed design does not yield greater compliance with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff recommends the requests for variances to the Residential Design Standards not be granted. APPLICANT: Paul Young. Represented by Augie Reno, AIA. 11 This standard uses the term "subordinate connecting element" in combination with the graphic to express its meaning. The Planning Director has interpreted and applied this standard to allow only a one-story element as the connection between the primary and secondary building elements. The applicant contends this standard has been inappropriately interpreted by the Planning Director. An appeal of the Director's interpretation has not be submitted and this hearing is not a determination of correctness of the Planning Director's Interpretation. The property is flat, buildable, and does not appear to have any characteristic preventing this standard from being met. The particular design does provide some articulation in the massing to indicate primary and' secondary forms. This articulation is less than required by the standard and staff does not believe it represents a more effective way to address the issue of massing. Staff does not believe the proposal yields greater compliance with the AACP. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Planning and Zoning Commission deny the variances for "non - orthogonal windows" and "secondary mass" for the Young residence, 413 West Hopkins Avenue. The recommended motion has been worded to grant the variances to ensure clarity of a failed motion. If the motion passes, the variances will be granted. If the motion does not pass, the variances will not be granted. The motion can be divided to consider each variance request. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the requested variances of the Residential Design Standard for non -orthogonal windows and secondary mass for the Young Residence, 413 West Hopkins Avenue, subject to the conditions listed in P&Z Resolution 01-10 _LaL, finding the proposed design represents a more effective manner to address the �. particular design issues in which the standards were intended." ATTACHMENTS: ]Exhibit A - Application k] 1. The "non -orthogonal window" and "secondary mass" variances are granted for the specific proposal presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission on June 5, 2001. All other aspects of the "Residential Design Standards" shall apply. Any substantial change to the proposed residence which necessitates an additional or different variance from the design standards shall require review and approval. This approval shall not represent approval for any other required land use action. 2. Before issuance of a building permit, -the applicant shall record this Resolution with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder located in the Courthouse Plaza, Building. There is a per page recordation fee. In the alternative, the applicant may pay this fee to the City Clerk who will record the resolution. 3. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPROVED BY THE Planning and Zoning Commission at its regular meeting on the 5th day of June, 2001. APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney — ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk PLANNING AND ZONING COAMISSION: Robert Blaich, Chair April 13, 2001 Mr. James Lindt, City of Aspen Zoning Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Young Residence 413 West Hopkins Aspen, Colorado 81611 Design Review Appeal Dear James: Thank you for meeting with me yesterday to pre-app the project. I have attached the following information related to this application: l . Land Use Application 2. Agreement for Payment Application 3. Applicant and Letter of Authorization 4. Street address and Legal Description 5. Disclosure of Ownership 6. Vicinity Map 7. Site Improvement Survey 8. Site Development Plan 9. Project Description 10. Dimensional Requirements Form 11. Neighborhood Block Plan 12. Site Development Plan 13. Building Elevations 14. Floor Plans, Roof Plan 15. Photographic Panorama / Photographs 16. Variance Request 17. List of Landowners within 300 feet of 413 West Hopkins, Aspen, Colorado, Lots E, F, West 'Y2 of G, Block 39, Aspen, Colorado. 18. Check for $500.00 Please let me kiiow if there is any additional information you need. Also, please let me know when we will be� scheduled for the review meeting and when and what we will need to notice. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Res ectfully y urs, w� Augt st . Ren , A. CC: P. oung AUGUST RENO AIA SCOTT SMITH AIA RENO - SMITH ARCII1'ra,CTS, L.L.C. III 210 E. HYMAN N° 202 ASPEN COLORADO 81611 970.925.5968 FACSIMILE 970.925,5993 E-MAI L office@renosmith.com 0371 SOUTHSIDE DRIVE BASALT COLORADO 81621 970.927.6834 FACSIMILE 970.927.6840 LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: Name: YnllnQ RPM i dpnrP Location: 413 West Hopkins, Aspen, CO, Lots E,F,West 1/2 G, Block 39 (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) APPLICANT: Name: Paul Young Address: 13355 Noel Road, L.B. 28, Dallas, Texas 75240 Phone #: (972) 85*1 -7862 REPRESENTATIVE: Name: RPnn Smith ArrhitPrtc I I r. Address: Phone #: 210 East Hyman Avenue, #202, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 925-5968 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Conditional Use Special Review Design Review Appeal GMQS Allotment GMQS Exemption ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, Mountain View Plane Lot Split Lot Line Adjustment F_� Conceptual PUD Conceptual Historic Devt. Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ❑ Final Historic Development Conceptual SPA Minor Historic Devt. Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) Historic Demolition Subdivision Historic Designation Subdivision Exemption (includes Small Lodge Conversion/ condominiumization) Expansion Temporary Use Other: Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Single Family Residence with Garage Have you attached the following? FEEs DUE: S 5 0 0 .0 0 F—] Pre -Application Conference Summary Attachment #I, Signed Fee Agreement Response to Attachment 42, Dimensional Requirements Fomi U Response to Attachment #3, I\/Iinimum Submission Contents Response to Attachment #4, Specific Submission Contents Response to Attachment 95, Review Standards for Your Application ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and Paul You n (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for Design Review Appeal (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ 5 0 0 . 0 0 which is for hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $205.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN Al By Julie Ann Woods Community Development Director Da Mailing Address: 210 East Hyman Avenue #202 Aspen, CO 81611 g:\support\forms\agrpayas.doe 1/10/01 ng APPLICANT LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION Paul Young 13355 Noel Road Lock Box 28 Dallas, TX 75240 (972) 851-7862 ARCHITECT: Reno Smith Architects 210 East Hyman Avenue #202 Aspen, Colorado 81611 August Reno (970) 925-5968 1 1 3/ 2001 10: 47 9728517847 PAGE 01 r� April 12, 2001 � � T Mr. James Lindt Aspen Pitkin County Community Development. Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 1 VIA: Hand Delivery Re: 413 West Hopkins Aspen, Colorado Dear Mr. Lindt: Please accept this letter as authorization for the firm of Reno -Smith Architects, L.L.C., located at 210 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen, Colorado 81611, (970) 925-5968, to submit and process the application on my behalf for: 1. Building Permit 2. Design Review Appeal Reno -Smith Architects, L.L.C. may represent my interest at any related meetings, hearings or presentations. Sincerely, Paul Young (972) 458-7618 (972) 851-7862 Telefax 13355 Noel Rd. L.B. 28 • Dallas, Texas 75240 eiephone STREET ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION 413 West Hopkins Aspen, Colorado Lots E, F, West 1/2 G, Block 39 City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT } SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS State of Colorado } SECTION 26.304.060(E) I , being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code in the following manner: it to all owners of property the attached li =OZO)feet =the firs e prepaid U.S. ect property, as indicated day of , 200 (which is the public 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from and that the said si n was posted and visible continuously from the�� day the nearest public way) g of , 200 j , to the day of M 200� . (Must be posted for at least to ) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto. Z Y 0- 0 cn w O H w a O a z w U Q O Q j� V z ui a U) W z 0 uj d W W 0 F- F�- cc W CL O cc CL Z W t3 d n d W U Z W 0 W cc 0 Z 0 ap 4 1 W .i _1 H cn 14 W W 0 F- F-- uj a 0 a H z W W u Z W 0 05 W Z m 0 W 0 OC w z oc 0 CU H w �0 00 z0 � J Q (� �z F— Q CC W 0.2 W 00 cc0 o- co w v z w 0 W C� z n d cn Z a O F, Z Q w :W cc H ;cc M LL O cc W Z cic U F- (1) LV W CC SF- �U OC � O� ZF- U) a� J 0. I— Q � LL O~ 0. 2 W U Z LEI 0 — U5 W cc 0 Z M z 0. O mr z Q w 1 cnt / R% Q M LL O cc w z cc O U ♦F- W V+ W = =U CC O�- z (/) Q� _J LQL W i G. H O= a w U z W 0 w cc 0 z 0 W W I— (n 0- cc M U w CC 1� �LL L F— W U Z W 0 Vn W C� Z O ^`IN v / z CL O x 0 z H w w oc F- 0 M LL O M w z x O t� H a Lu F- IX O z x Lu v z W 0 Fn W z M 0 Z Q. O Z Q F- w w cc F- 0 Cl) W O cC w Z cc O V F- Q w H O U) Q oc Ill CL 1 W J J Q .� LL W 1 y Ii 1 W tr�l. V 9 F- CC W a. O A W CU Z W _0 Cn W cc CD Z m 0 Q LLI u z LLI a rn LLI cc 0 z M 0 dl VARIANCE REQUEST SECONDARY MASS First, in our opinion the proposed design meets the secondary mass requirement. However, the interpretation of the secondary mass by the planning office has indicated this must be a 1-story element. The written guidelines states that at least 10% of the total square footage above grade, which in our case is 366 square feet. The proposed design meets this requirement. We have 825 square feet. The guidelines go on to say that the secondary mass either has to be detached from the principal building or linked to it by a subordinate connecting element. The proposed design links a primary mass, which is a 2-story structure to a secondary mass, which is also a 2-story structure with a subordinate connection. The link is 8 feet wide recessed back from the primary mass by 2 feet and 2 %2 feet back from the secondary mass. The height of the connecting link roof is 3 feet lower than the primary roof at the center of the roof and 7 feet lower than the primary roof at each end of the link. The connection link has a totally different roof form than the primary and secondary masses. The secondary mass is a 2-story structure with the garage on the lower level and a bedroom/balcony terrace on the second level. The secondary mass is 20% smaller than the primary mass and is clearly linked by a subordinate connecting element. The roof form is clearly different than both the primary and secondary mass roof forms. It should also be noted that the secondary mass roof form is lower than the primary mass roof. The main reason for the 2-story secondary mass is to retain as much yard space as possible and not to fill the entire building envelope with structure. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Community Development Deputy Director FROM: Fred Jarman, Planner r_rt- RE: 515 W. Gillespie St. Historic Landmark Designation DATE: June 5th, 2001 View showing the North and West fagades of the house. SUMMARY OF REQUEST Pamela and Neil Beck (the Applicant), represented by Randall Bone, is requesting approval for a Historic Landmark Designation for a property and residence located at 515 West Gillespie Avenue, City and Townsite of Aspen. Therefore, the Applicant requests the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval to the City Council for the Historic Landmark Designation. PROCESS The Land Use Code specifies the correct process related to this application. The matrix below outlines this process and decision -making responsibilities according to the appropriate City authorities. In addition, this requested land use approval for the historic landmark designation is evaluated against specific review criteria that are included as Exhibits in the rear portion of this memorandum. Planning & Zoning Commission 1 6/5/01 BACKGROUND The subject property currently contains a two-story residence (pictured on the front cover of this Staff Report) is situated on a 9,210 square foot lot currently maintained on Aspen's Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. The house was built in approximately 1887 and was originally located at 100 West Hopkins Avenue. It is approximately 1,681 square feet in size and is used as a single-family dwelling located in the R-6 Zone District. HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION Staff finds this structure meets three of the five standards used to review structures in the City of Aspen to be considered a historic landmark designation including 1) Architectural Importance, 2) Neighborhood Importance, and 3) Community Importance. Historic resources are finite and cannot be replaced, making them precious commodities and defining elements of a town's evolution. Historic resources are, in fact, slices of time, preserved to be appreciated and to help a community understand its past. This house is a strong example of how a valuable resource can be maintained and preserved with the evolution of a community. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval to City Council for historic landmark designation for a property located at 515 West Gillespie Avenue, with the following conditions: 1. That the Community Development Department shall adjust Aspen's Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures to include the subject property at 515 West Gillespie Avenue, Lots 4, 5, and 6 of the Hallam Addition to be designated as historic landmarks; 2. That Lots 4,5, and 6 are designated historic landmarks and must receive HPC approval for all development in accordance with Section 26.415 of the Municipal Code, as well at Section 26.410, the "Residential Design Standards;" RECOMMENDED MOTION ri "I move to approve Resolution No, , Series 2001, recommending approval to City Council for a historic landmark designation for a property located at 515 West Gillespie Avenue, with the conditions stated herein." EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT A - HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION FINDINGS EXHIBIT B - RESOLUTION No. 2, SERIES OF 2001 EXHIBIT C - ARCHITECTURAL INVENTORY FORM Planning & Zoning Commission 2 6/5/01 EXHIBIT A HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION STANDARDS Any structure or site that meets two (2) or more of the following standards may be designated as an historic landmark. A. Historical importance. The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or an event of historical significance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. Staff Finding In general, this structure is indicative of an upper middle class lifestyle during the last 1800's silver mining era. It is expressive of the materials, methods, and style of the period. Specifically, neither Staff nor the Applicant has any knowledge of any specific significant historical events or persons associated with this structure. In any event, it should not be dismissed that the Beck Family, who are the current owners, are also the same family that originally built the structure in 1887 (by Neil Beck's grandfather) and the family has continuously resided in the house until this time. While the Beck Family may not be considered as "significant persons" in the context of the City of Aspen and would not qualify as meeting this standard, Staff is aware that there are not too many unique situations such as this in Aspen. Staff finds this standard is not met. B. Architectural importance. Based on the building form, use, or specimen, the structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct, or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type. Staff Finding Staff finds that the 515 Gillespie structure, built in approximately 1887, originally located at 100 West Hopkins and subsequently moved in 1971 to its current location, is an excellent 114 year old example of Aspen's traditional Victorian Era architecture from before the turn of the century. Even though the house has been relocated, it has maintained its original form with the exception of a very minor single story shed detail on the rear of the house not seen from the street. A specific defining element of this architecture style includes a distinct roof form called the gable -end. This house style typically has a rectangular "T" shape plan with a gable roof with the ridge running perpendicular to the street as well as a cross gable form running parallel to the street. Most houses of this architectural type, as this house does, have a porch on the gabled end and a smaller roof is attached to the shelter porch. Planning & Zoning Commission 3 6/5/01 In Aspen, many of these porches have been closed in and incorporated the space in the interior of the house that compromises the architectural integrity and the original form. This house has not enclosed the porch element that continues to be one of its defining features along with classic turned posts. (Please refer to the photo to the right). Most houses of this era specific to Aspen also tend to be wood sided and are 1 to 1 1/2 stories; however this is an example of one which has 2 stories which is uncommon. Another interesting feature includes a small "hip" or "clipped gable" element on the gable roof ends as shown in the photo below. After examining other houses in the neighborhood and throughout the west end, there were virtually no other examples of this interesting architectural treatment. It is because of all the aforementioned reasons and defining architectural elements, that this structure, which is indicative of an upper middle class lifestyle during the last 1800's silver mining era and is expressive of the materials, methods, and style of the period, that Staff finds this criterion to be met. Photo showing "clipped gable" roof forms as well as bay window details C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. Staff Finding Neither Staff nor the Applicant has any information regarding the architect who designed this home; therefore, Staff finds that this criterion is not met. D. Neighborhood character. The structure or site is a significant component of a historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. Planning & Zoning Commission 4 6/5/01 Staff Finding The structure is located in and is considered a very important historic element of the historic West End of Aspen that gains its character from the prominence of historic homes such as the subject home at 515 Gillespie Avenue. It is immediately located among other houses on the same half block fronting Gillespie Avenue that are more contemporary in nature that make this structure even more prominent as an important and historically distinct neighborhood structure. (See photos below) Residence to the east. Residence to the west. In the blocks that surround 515 Gillespie, one finds a wide variety of house styles, ages, sizes, and so on. The preservation effort sought by the Applicant through this application will continue to allow this structure to add considerable value not only to the specific block but also to the traditional west end neighborhood. When viewed in context of the surrounding blocks, there are ten houses currently listed on Aspen's Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures; three of those structures maintain landmark status. This structure at 515 Gillespie Ave. is clearly a neighborhood -defining element that is complementary of the other three landmarked houses. Moreover, it is one of the better examples of Aspen's historic past due to its uncompromised form and detailing which is an asset to Aspen's historic West End. Staff finds this criterion to be met. E. Community character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location, and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance. Staff Finding: In a similar perspective of neighborhood character, Staff finds that the 515 Gillespie single-family home is a critical site for preservation as it is already established as a home on the inventory and is an important and defining historical element in Aspen's Historic west end neighborhood as it relates to and adds to community character. The City of Aspen takes great pride in the fact that it has been able to preserve a great deal of its past so that future generations will be able to actually see the evolution of this small mountain town into what it is today. This structure is an important and original slice of time Planning & Zoning Commission 5 6/5/01 showcasing an example of an upper middle class lifestyle during the last 1800's silver mining era and is expressive of the materials, methods, and style of the period. This structure and site is important because of its relationship to the existing neighborhood and other similar homes in terms of size, location, and architecture. Given that this unique two-story Victorian Era gable -end home is in excellent condition and remains as an excellent example of Aspen's 19r11 century Late Victorian Age homes, it is a "city wide" resource that should not be lost to demolition but rather preserved as a historic structure. Essentially, there are a few homes in Aspen that have remained fairly true to original form with little modification to them. This house is one of the few that has maintained a true original form and design in its architectural elements defining its period of origination. So this house can be considered among the handful of very strong examples of Aspen's historic past. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 1VoR Sr Geographic Information System coverage showing the subject lot outlined in a heavy black outline. Planning & Zoning Commission 6 6/5/01 7PM;SUNRISE COLONY ASPEN ;9709204433 # 1/ 1 Cougt"r 03"Dwt1da AFFI DAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT TO ASPEIN LAND USE REGUTO'ITOLA State of lorado } SECTIONSECTION26.304.060(E)NS I being or representing an APPlicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify thatI have complied with the public notice P tie requiremei its pursuant to Section 26.304,060(E) of the Aspen Munici al Code in the o P following manner. 1 ByrV ailing o f notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, b first -clan - U.S, s postage prepaid C, Mail to allriers of property 'within three hundred ' 00 ( ) feet of the subject property, as indicated on the att ed list, on e � day of �) , 200� (which is days prior to the public hearing dat of � .Zd P ?. By osting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property as it could PY i be seen from the nearest ublic way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuousl o y from the � day of _f--, 2004, to the t• day of 200 1. (Must be posted for at least ten (I 0) ful days before the hearing date), A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto, ;Attach Signature ere) Signed before me thi51 day of WITNESS MY 14AND AVD OFFICIAL SEAL .MY COt1'N" ISSIOn moires My Commission. expires; August 28, 2C)oI Notary Publi .,� VO Not ry Rae a 31ofie of Cokoodo PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 515 W. GILLESPIE LANDMARK DESIGNATION / CONDITIONAL USE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 1 ", 2001, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm, before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Council. Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., City of Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Neil and Pamela Beck requesting approval for a Landmark Designation and a Conditional Use approval for the ability to place two single-family dwellings or a duplex on a 6,000 square foot lot. The property is located at 515 W. Gillespie and is described as Lots 4-6, Block 99, Hallam Addition, of the City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact Fred Jarman at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5102, fredj@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Robert Blake, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission oe Published in the Aspen Times on April L01h, 2001 City of Aspen Account FRAZER WILLIAM R & JANE Z KAUS PETERSON JAMES D 8401 °iAMILY TRUST PETER & EVA PETERSON HENSLEY R 433 W GILLESPIE 401 VISTA LN PO BOX 1714 ASPEN CO 81611 PRESCOTT AZ 86301 ASPEN CO 81612 _,A AND LOYAL III DR & BERNICE BLACK 4314 FAWN CT RT 1 CROSS PLAINS WI 53528 U.BLFELDER NAOMI PO BOX 1165 ASPEN CO 81612 SALTER JAMES P O BOX 765 BRIDGEHAMPTON NY 11932 KNURR GOLDIE P & WERNER 603 W GILLESPIE ST ASPEN CO 81611-1242 GOLDSMITH ANDREW LUBIN 1/3 N DOHENY DR ANGELES CA 90000 ELLIOTT ELYSE A 610 NORTH ST ASPEN CO 81611 MCCARTY DANIEL L PO BOX 4051 ASPEN CO 81612 STUNDA STEVEN R 515 5TH ST ANNAPOLIS MD 21403 NORTH FOURTH STREET ASSOCIATES C/O MIKE CONVISOR PO BOX I I ASPEN, CO 81612 COLLINS CHARLES & JANICE S PO BOX HH ASPEN CO 81612 BECK NEIL H & PAMELA 515 W GILLESPIE ST ASPEN CO 81611 HODGES ELAINE C 2020 S MONROE # 118 DENVER CO 80210 GOLDSMITH JOHN JOSEPH 1/3 7313 25TH ST SANTA MONICA CA 90400 LUETKEMEYER JOHN A JR & ODOM JOHN A JR ODOM LORRIE FURMAN 11490 W 38TH AVE WHEATRIDGE CO 80033 AARONSON JEFFREY C P O BOX 10131 ASPEN CO 81612 CHRIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH 536 NORTH ST ASPEN CO 81611 O'SHANA CATHY 108 ROBBINS ST OSTERVILLE MA 02655 ELGART ALICE CLARE GOLDSMITH 1/3 - ' 27 E 62ND ST 6TH FL NEW YORK NY 10001 SUZANNE F MCCARTY DANIEL L SCHREIBER EUGENE H & STANFORD PO BOX 4051 17 W PENNSYLVANIA AVE ASPEN CO 81612 TOWSON MD 21204 MUSIC ASSOCIATES OF ASPEN INC ASPEN INSTITUTE INC 2 MUSIC SCHOOL RD 1000 N 3RD ST ASPEN CO 81611-8500 ASPEN CO 81611 NITZE WILLIAM A 1537 28TH ST NW WASHINGTON DC 20007 RICHARDS ANN K 1537 28TH ST NW WASHINGTON DC 20007 LEWIS ADAM HELZBERG SHIRLEY BUSH TRUSTEE SMALL ALBERT H & SHIRLEY S C/O KATHLEEN HONOHAN QUALIFIED PERSONAL RESIDENCE GLENBROOK RD @NATIONAL CITY BANK TRUST ESDA MD 20814 1900 E 9TH ST LOC 2030 5805 MISSION DR CLEVELAND OH 44114 SHAWNEE MISSION KS 66208 FOX SAM lY tJSGRAVE MARJORY M 629 W NORTH ST 'ASPEN CO 81611 ENWOOD JIM �V35 W 57TH ST KANSAS CITY MO 64113 FOX MARILYN HOFFMAN JOHN L 7701 FORSYTH BLVD STE 600 1035 W 57TH ST CLAYTON MO 63105 KANSAS CITY MO 64113 COHEN ROGER L 1035 W 57TH ST KANSAS CITY MO 64113 .- 1 } MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 640 N. Third Street- Historic Landmark Designation - Public Hearing DATE: June 5, 2001 SUMMARY: The subject site contains a 19t' century residence and is currently listed on the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures." The owners are in the review process to remove and replace some inappropriate additions and alterations that have been made to the house over the last several decades. Staff and HPC recommend landmark designation for the property. APPLICANT: Jim and Gae Daggs, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects. PARCEL ID: 273 5-121-08-002 ADDRESS: 640 N. Third Street, Lots 4, 5, and 6 (less the southerly 3.2 feet of Lot 6), Block 1021, Hallam's Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential) CURRENT LAND USE: 11,707 sq. ft. lot containing a single -story residence, garage, and caretaker apartment. �. LANDMARK DESIGNATION Any structure or site that meets two (2) or more of the following standards may be designated as "H," Historic Overlay District, and/or historic landmark. It is not the intention of the Historic Preservation Commission to landmark insignificant structures or sites. HPC will focus on those structures which are unique or have some special value to the community, as put forth in the standards. A. Historical importance. The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or an event of historical significance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. Staff Finding: Staff and the applicant are unaware of any historical significance in connection with this site with respect to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. Staff finds this standard is not met. B. Architectural importance. Based on the building form, use, or specimen, the structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct, or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type. Staff Finding: The original house has numerous features that are typical of 19th century residences in Aspen, such as a decorative front porch, front gable/ porch relationship, and simple plan. The form of this building is somewhat unique in that the front gable is 1 1/2 stories and the cross gable is 2 stories tall. Staff finds this standard is met. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. Staff Finding: The original designer is unknown, therefore this standard is not met. D. Neighborhood character. The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant ,neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. Staff Finding: The property is located in Aspen's historic West End neighborhood, along Lake Avenue. There are numerous 19th century homes in the immediately surrounding area and this building is one of four in a row. Staff finds this standard is met. E. Community character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location, and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance. Staff Finding: The house is representative of the modest scale, style, and character of homes constructed in the late 1800's, which is Aspen's primary period of historic significance. Staff finds this standard is met. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and HPC recommend that P&Z recommend Council approval of Historic Landmark Designation for 640 N. Third Street finding that review standards B, D and E are met. RECOMMENDED MOTION "I move to approve Resolution #, Series of 2001." Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated June 5, 2001 B. As -built drawings of house RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 640 NORTH THIRD STREET, LOTS 49 59 AND 6 (LESS THE SOUTHERLY 3.2 FEET OF LOT 6), BLOCK 102, HALLAW S ADDITION TOT E CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID #2735-121-08-002 RESOLUTION NO.M, SERIES OF 2001 WHEREAS, the applicants, Jim and Gae Daggs, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, have requested Historic Landmark Designation for the property located at 640 N. Third Street, Lots 4, 5, and 6 (less the southerly 3.2 feet of Lot 6), Block 102, Hallam's Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. The property is listed on the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.420.020, requests for landmark designation shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval by the Community Development Director, by the HPC, and by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved at a public hearing by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found favorably for the application, and recommended approval of landmark designation; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission reviewed and recommended approval of landmark designation by a vote of 4-2 on May 23, 2001; and WHEREAS, all applications for Historic Landmark Designation shall meet two or more of the following Standardse for Designation of Section 26.420.010 in order for P&Z to grant approval, namely: A. Historical Importance: The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or event of historical significance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. B. Architectural Importance. The structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type (based on building form or use), or specimen. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. D. Neighborhood Character. The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. E. Community Character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 5, 2001, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission considered the recommendation made by the Community Development Director and HPC, took and considered public testimony and recommended, by a vote of _ to _, that City Council approve landmark designation finding that standards B, D, and E are met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends Council approve landmark designation for 640 N. Third Street, Lots 4, 5, and 6 (less the southerly 3.2 feet of Lot 6), Block 102, Hallam's Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on June 5, 2001. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COAMISSION: City Attorney Robert Blaich, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk ELEVATIONNORTH B got SOUTH 'ELEVATION III = 101 County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT } SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS State of Colorado } SECTION 26.304.060(E) I j-8VJVdAr Y1 , being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally ertify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code in the following manner: 1. By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first-class postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the day of i , 200 t (which isle days prior to the public hearing date ofMa4gq 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the day of '� , 200L, to the I - day of , 200 (Must be posted for at least ten (10) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto. Signature 5t Signed before me this day of 200L. by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFS SEAL My Commission expires: Notary Public r I1% �.s OKZ� PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 640 N. THIRD STREET — LANDMARK DESIGNATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 1 2001 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Jim Daggs requesting approval for landmark designation. The property is located at 640 N. Third Street and is legally described as Lots 4-6, Block 102, of the Hallam Addition of the City and Townsite of Aspen' For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the Aspen/Pifldn Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St.-, Aspen, CO (970) 920-5096, amyg@ci.a.spen.co.us. s/Bob Blaich, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on April 14, 2001 City of Aspen Account ALTEMUS E A PARTNERSHIP LLL P ASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL V, BART'MORRIS lil & CATHY KANTER 620 N 3RD ST ASPEN, CO 81611 STUDIES- 100 PUPPY SMITH ST 1711 PALMER AVE: NEW-ORLEANS, LA, 701:18-6116- ASPEN, CO 81611 BELL 26 LLC ,f J BERGER BRUCE / BLOCK'FAMILY TRUST'44.5%. (-NT °r C/O BROOKE A 960 CHEROKEE BLOCK QUALFD= PERSONEL RES TRST PETERSON/KAUFMAN&PETERSON DENVER; CO 80204 55.5% INT 315 E HYMAN AVE STE 305. 311 W NORTH ST ASPEN; CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CRAIG CAROL G CURTIS DAMES L D W RINGSBY ENTERPRISES PO BOX 18 300 E HYMAN AVE A PARTNERSHIP . G WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 ASPEN, CO 81611 1123 AURARIA PKWY. #200 DENVER, CO 80204 DAGGS JAMES K & GAY DEE INVESTMENTS LTD PARTNERSHIP DURAND LOYAL III DR & BERNICE BLACK 640 N 3RD ST 211 ROYAL PONCEANA WY ASPEN, CO 81611 PALM BEACH, FL 33480 4314 FAWN CT RT 1 CROSS PLAINS, WI 53528 EFH HOLDINGS LP I FINKELSTEIN RICHARD & CARIA /FRAZER WILLIAM R & JANE Z FAMILY CAROLE C 50% TRUST P 0 BOX 8770 ASPEN, CO 81612 9034 BURROUGHS- RD FRAZER WILLIAM R & JANE Z LOS ANGELES, CA 90046-1405 TRUSTEES 433 W GILLESPIE - ASPEN, CO 81611 4REENWAY NANCY R TRUST F/B/O /HOOK BRADLEY K & PAMELA D 0 MEADERS DUCKWORTH & MOORE HERNANDEZ CECIL M & NOELLE C 782C N KALAHEO I FIFTH AVE PO BOX 1045 ASPEN, CO 81612 300 CRESCENT COURT-STE 1000 NEW YORK, NY 10176 KAILUA, HI 96734 LUBAR SHELDON 8, J KAUS PETER & EVA Ar,5 LEWIS MEMRIE M ,� LUBAR MARIANNE S 8401 VISTA LN PECKSLAND RD 700 N WATER ST - STE 1200 PRESCOTT, AZ 86301 - o GREENWICH, CT 06831 MILWAUKEE, WI 53202-4206 LUNDGREN DONNA MARSHALL RONNIE MIDDLETON RANDALL TRUST PO BOX 6700 320 LAKE AVE 600 JEFFERSON STE #350 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 8161'5 ASPEN, CO 81611 HOUSTON, TX .77002 J MUSIC ASSOCIATES OF ASPEN INC MUSTANG HOLDINGS LLC �% NITZE WILLIAM A 2 MUSIC SCHOOL RD C/O BROOKE PETERSON ESQUIRE 1537 28TH ST NW ASPEN, CO 81611-8500 315 E HYMAN AVE WASHINGTON, DC 20007 ASPEN, CO 81611 RTH FOURTH STREET ASSOCIATES J. OAK LODGE LLC f DIMITRI & DIANE J MIKE CONVISOR C/O WILLIAM 0 HUNT PERROS 79 LOCUST RD BOX] I PO BOX 7951 WINNETKA, 1L 60093 .ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 PETERSON JAMES D PHELPS' MASON PINES DAVID- & ARONELLE S' PETERSON_ HENSLEY R 201 S LAKE AVE* STE 408.: REVOCABLE TRUST � PO: BOX 1714 - PASADENA, CA 9.110.1 403 W*N11CHlGAN I OPEN,, CO 81612 1. . URBANA,.1L 61801 STARODOJ ROBERT F 50% INT �STUNDA S.TEVEN R. WEIL JONAS PO BOX 1121 515 5TH ST PO. BOX 7963 ASPEN, CO 81612 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21403 ASPEN " CO 81612 ,f WOOD DUCK REALTY CORP C/O DWORMAN DARRYL _ j 65 W 55TH ST STE 4A NEW.YORK, NY 1001:9 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Directors FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 419 E. Hyman Avenue- Historic Landmark Designation - Public Hearing DATE: June 5, 2001 SUMMARY: The subject building, commonly referred to as the Paragon Building, is one of Aspen's finest examples of a 19th century commercial structure. It is currently listed on the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures." Staff and HPC recommend landmark designation for the property. APPLICANT: 419 E. Hyman LLC, represented by Fenton Construction and John Kelly. PARCEL ID: 273 7-182-160-3 0 ADDRESS: 419 E. Hyman Avenue, The Roaring Fork Arms Condominiums, City and Townsite of Aspen. LANDMARK DESIGNATION Any structure or site that meets two (2) or more of the following standards may be designated as "H," Historic Overlay District, and/or historic landmark. It is not the intention of the Historic Preservation Commission to landmark insignificant structures or sites. HPC will focus on those structures which are unique or have some special value to �. the community, as put forth in the standards. A. Historical importance. The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or an event of historical significance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. Staff Finding: This building, historically known as the Cowenhoven and Brown Block, was built by two businessmen prominent in Aspen's silver mining industry, Henry P. Cowenhoven and D.R.C. Bown. Staff finds that this standard is met. B. Architectural importance. Based on the building form, use, or specimen, the structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct, or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type. Staff Finding: This is one of the most architecturally significant structures in downtown Aspen. It is a three story masonry building, constructed in 1889, and has cast iron storefronts on the ground floor and arch topped windows on the upper levels. The storefront includes stained glass transom windows, and there is decorative brickwork on the upper walls and cornice line. Staff finds that this standard is met. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. Staff Finding: The original designer is unknown, therefore this standard is not met. D. Neighborhood character. The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. Staff Finding: The building is located in the downtown historic district, which is composed primarily of 19t' century structures. It is one of the larger commercial buildings in Aspen and is key to the character of the Hyman Avenue mall. Staff finds this standard is met. E. Community character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location, and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance. Staff Finding: -. The building was built during Aspen's silver mining era and represents the prosperity of that period. e RECOMMENDATION: Staff and HPC recommend that P&Z recommend Council approval of Historic Landmark Designation for 419 E. Hyman Avenue finding that review standards A, B, D and E are met. RECOMMENDED MOTION "I move to approve Resolution #-QW, Series of 2001." Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated June 5, 2001 B. Digital photo of 419 E. Hyman Avenue RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 419 E. HYMAN AVENUE, THE ROARING FORK ARMS CONDOMINIUMS, BLOCK 899 CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO Parcel ID #2737-182-160-30 RESOLUTION NOvq, SERIES OF 2001 WHEREAS, the applicant, 419 E. Hyman LLC, represented by Fenton Construction and John Kelly, has requested landmark designation for 419 E. Hyman Avenue, The Roaring Fork Arms Condominiums, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen. The property is listed on the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures" and is located in the Commercial Core Historic District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.420.020, requests for landmark designation shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval by the Community Development Director, by the HPC, and by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved at a public hearing by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Community. Development Director performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found favorably for the application, and recommended approval of landmark designation; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission reviewed and recommended approval of landmark designation by a vote of 6-0 on April 11, 2001; and WHEREAS, all applications for Historic Landmark Designation shall meet two or more of the following Standards for Designation of Section 26.420.010 in order for P&Z to grant approval, namely: A. Historical Importance: The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or event of historical significance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. B. Architectural Importance. The structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type (based on building form or use), or specimen. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. D. Neighborhood Character. The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. E. Community Character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 5, 2001, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission considered the recommendation made by the Community Development Director and HPC, took and considered public testimony and recommended, by a vote of _ to _, that City Council approve landmark designation finding that standards A, B, D, and E are met. That the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends Council approve landmark designation for 419 E. Hyman Avenue, The Roaring Fork Arms Condominiums, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on June 5, 2001. City Attorney ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk PLANNING AND ZONING COMIVIISSION: Robert Blaich, Chair MEMORANDUM. TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Code Amendment to Section 26.480.030, Subdivision Exemptions, and Section 26.710.180, Office Zone District- PUPLICIRE G DATE: June 5, 2001 SUMMARY:. The Community Development Department has received an application requesting a code amendment to extend the Historic Landmark Lot Split program, currently only available in two residential zone districts (R-6 and R-15A) to the Office Zone District. There are several new issues raised in attempting to transfer this program into a district which has office/commercial zoning. Staff requests .input from the Planning and Zoning Commission. r APPLICANT: Scott and Caroline MacDonald, represented by Bob Stardoj. LAND USE CODE AMENDMENT PROCEDURE: Pursuant to Section 26.310.020, Procedure for Amendment, a development application for an amendment to the text of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended- for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval- by- the Planning Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the City Council at a public hearing. PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The application is to amend Section 26.480.030 and Section 26.710.180 to read as. follows, with text to be eliminated stricken and text to be added underlined: Section 26.480.030.A.4 addresses the types of development eligible for subdivision exemptions. Please note that staff has included corrections to citations in this passage that were not fixed during the most recent update of the- Land Use Code. Section 26.480.030.A.4, Subdivision Exemptions 4. Historic Landmark Lot Split. The split of a lot that is a designated historic landmark for the development of one new single-family dwelling. The Historic Landmark I Lot Split shall meet the requirements of section 26 88. 03064 (2) 26.480. 030.A.2 and 4, section 26 4 00. n snie t (2) 26. 470. 070. C, and section 26 72. 01 26. 415. 010. D of this Code, and the following standards: a. The original parcel shall be a minimum of nine thousand (9, 000) square feet in size and be located in the R-6 zone district or O, Off ce Zone district, or a minimum of thirteen thousand (13, 000) square feet and be located in the R-15A zone district. b. The total FAR for both residences shall not exceed the floor area allowed for a duplex on the original parcel. The total FAR for each lot shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat. C. The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district.. HPC variances and bonuses are only permitted on the parcel that contains a historic structure. Note that the above section states that the purpose of the lot split exemption is to allow for the development of one additional single family residence (as opposed to allowing new commercial space.) The proposed amendment to section 26.710.180 is as follows: 26.710.180 Office (0).. A. Purpose. The purpose of the Office (0) zone district is to provide for the establishment of offices and associated commercial uses in such a way as to preserve the visual scale and character of former residential areas that now are. adjacent to commercial and business areas, and commercial uses along Main Street and other high volume thoroughfares. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Office (0) zone district: E 1. Detached residential dwellings, multi family dwellings; 2. Professional business offices; 3. Accessory residential dwellings restricted to affordable housing guidelines; 4. Home occupations; 5. Group homes; 6. Accessory buildings and uses; 7. Dormitory; and 8. A mixed -use buildings) comprised of a residential dwelling unit and permitted and conditional uses in the Office (0) zone district so long as such conditional use has been approved subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425; and 9.. Accessory dwelling units meeting the provisions of Section 26.520.040. 10. Two detached residential dwellings on a 9, 000 square foot lot containing a historic landmark. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as in the Office (0) zone district,. subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: 1. Only for those structures that have .received historic landmark designation: antique store, art studio, bakery, bed and breakfast, boarding house, bookstore, broadcasting station, church, dance studio, florist, fraternal lodge, furniture store, mortuary, music store (for the sale of musical instruments), music studio, restaurant, shop craft industry, visual arts gallery; provided, however, that (a) no more than two (2) such conditional uses shall be allowed in each structure, and (b) off-street parking is provided, with alley access for those conditional uses along Main Street; 2. Duplex residential dwelling, of which one unit shall be restricted as affordable housing to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines. The affordable housing unit shall comprise a minimum of one-third (113) of the total floor area of the duplex. In the alternative, both may be free market units if an accessory dwelling unit . shall be provided for each unit; 3. Two (2) detached residential dwellings or a duplex on a lot containing a historic landmark with a minimum area of 6, 000 square feet, of which one unit shall be restricted as affordable housing to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines. The affordable housing unit shall comprise a minimum of one-third (113) of the total floor area of the two dwellings. In the alternative, both may be free market units fan accessory dwelling unit shall be provided for each unit; 4. Child care center; 5. Commercial parking lot or parking structure that is independent of required off-street parking, provided that it is not located abutting Main Street; 6. Health and fitness facility; and 7. Lodge units and lodge units with kitchens. 3 D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Office (0) zone district: 1. Minimum lot size (square feet): 6, 000. For lots created by Section 26.480.030, Historic Landmark Lot Split: 3, 000. 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (square feet): a. * Detached residential dwelling: 6, 000. b. Duplex: 3, 000 per unit. x c.. Multi family dwellings on lot between 6, 000 and 9, 000 square feet: Studio: 1, 000. I bedroom; 1,200. 2 bedroom: 2, 000. 3 bedroom: 3, 000. 3+ bedrooms: One (1) bedroom per 1, 000 square feet of lot area. d. Multi family dwellings on lot of more than 9, 000 square feet: Studio: 1, 000. I bedroom; 1,250. 2 bedroom: 2,100. 3 bedroom: 3,630. 3+ bedrooms. One (1) bedroom per 1, 000 square feet of lot area. e. Multi family dwellings on a lot of 27, 000 square feet or less, when at least fifty percent (50%) of the units built on -site are restricted as affordable housing: Studio: 500. 1 bedroom: 600. 2 bedroom: 1, 000. 3 bedroom: 1,500. 3+ bedrooms: One (1) bedroom per 500 square feet of lot area. f. Multi family dwellings on a lot of 27, 000 square feet or less, when one hundred percent (100%) of the units built on -site are restricted as affordable housing: Studio: 300. I bedroom: 400. 2 bedroom: 800. 3 bedroom: 1,200. 3+ bedrooms: One (1) bedroom per 400 square feet of lot area. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): 60. For lots created by Section 26.480.030, Historic Landmark Lot Split: 30. 4 The amendments to this section include allowing two detached homes on a 9,000 square foot lot as a permitted use. Currently, two detached houses are allowed as a conditional use for landmark lots as small as 6,000 square feet. The new permitted use is an incentive for historic preservation and is consistent with what is allowed in the neighboring R-6 zone district. This section is also amended to allow lots created by the landmark lot split program to be as small as 3,000 square feet, also consistent with the way lot splits are addressed in the residential zone districts. REVIEW STANDARDS: Chapter 26.310, Amendments To The Land Use Code And Official Zone District Map, at Section 26.314.040 provides nine (A -I) standards for. City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission's review of proposed amendments to the text of the Land Use Code. These standards, and staff s evaluation of the amendment relative to them, are provided below. A. Whether the proposed amendment is. in. conflict with any applicable portions of this title. RESPONSE: Historic Landmark Lot Splits are currently allowed in two residential zone districts; R-6 and R-15A. The goal of the lot split is to divide the mass that could be added onto a historic building into two or more structures. The office zone district, the subject of this code amendment, is primarily located along Main Street, as are the four or five parcels that would be affected by the application. While the goal of dividing up the allowed floor area is as beneficial in this neighborhood as it is in the West End for instance, there is language in the subdivision exemption and growth management exemption standards that states that the lot split is granted for the purpose of creating one additional single family dwelling. Since the goal of the office zone district is to provide space for office and commercial uses, locking a property into a residential use in this neighborhood could be considered in conflict with the land use code. Allowing for the possibility of a "change in use" of the newly.created structure to commercial space in the future could be considered circumventing the intent of the subdivision and growth management exemptions. The first area where staff requests the input of the Planning and Zoning Commission is this point. Should the newly created lot be restricted to residential use or should it be allowed to go through a change in use process in the future? Or, should the subdivision exemption and growth management exemption standards be amended to allow for splitting off a lot for the purpose of creating new commercial space in the office zone district? A further complication to this issue is the fact that the office zone district has a lower floor area scale for residential use than for commercial. The floor area allowed for a historic landmark lot split is currently based on what would be permitted for a duplex on the original parcel. The applicant has the ability to divide that square footage as desired between the two lots, as long as neither parcel is given more floor area than zoning would typically allow for a site of its size. Staff s question to the Commission is, how will the maximum floor area be determined for lot splits in the office zone district? If all of the 5 development is residential, than the duplex floor area is appropriate. If one or both of the lots wish to undertake a change in use process in the future, the development would be considered "mixed use" and a higher floor area would apply. A plat amendment would be required for any increase beyond what was envisioned in the original project. Staff requests direction from the Planning and Zoning Commission. The intent of the landmark lot split was not to allow the splitting off of small lots (3,000 square feet) for commercial development purposes. Although there may be no negative effect (essentially it is creating no change to development rights, only an option for fee simple ownership rather than condominiumization), staff feels additional discussion is needed. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. RESPONSE: The Aspen Area Community Plan encourages infill development within the historic townsite. It also encourages efforts to maintain an active, mixed use character along Main Street and calls for the extension of the historic landmark lot split program to additional zone districts. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics. RESPONSE: The proposed amendment does not create new land uses, and does not specifically increase density since a duplex or two detached houses are already allowed on a 6,000 square foot lot in the office zone district as a conditional use. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have any effect on traffic generation or road safety because, as stated above, the density is already envisioned in the zone district regulations. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parrs, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have any additional effect on infrastructure or infrastructure capacities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have a negative effect on the natural environment. m G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with .the community character in the City of Aspen. RESPONSE: Main Street was historically a residential area. Today, only the western portion of the street (from 7' to 2" Street) retains that character, becoming more commercial and lodge oriented as one travels east. The historic preservation design guidelines in regard to Main Street discuss the concept of preserving some of the patterns and characteristics of a residential area, while allowing for a mix of uses. The code amendment would support that goal by providing an incentive to break new construction down into structures that reflect a variety of building sizes. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. RESPONSE: Main Street has been negatively affected by traffic congestion. Any efforts to- preserve a small scale, pedestrian orientation to the area would be beneficial to the neighborhood. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. RESPONSE: The proposed amendment is in harmony with the public interest by providing an incentive for the ''successful preservation of historic buildings. There has been significant community input of late calling for more assistance and options for owners of designated properties. RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests input from Planning and Zoning Conunission in regard to points raised above, or other aspects of the amendment that are of concern to the board.. The public hearing is to be continued to June 19''. Staff will prepare a resolution for the follow up meeting, incorporating the recommendations of the P&Z. pip L- R4!; 0 C1—aA h County of Pitkin State of Colorado AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS SECTION 26.304.060(E) I. John T. Kelly, being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code in the following manner: 1. By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first-class postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the 20t" day of April, 2001 (which is +10 days prior to the public hearing date of May 1, 2001). 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the 20' day of April, 2001, (Must be posted for a least the (10) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto. Signature 1 Signed before me this day of ! - l 2001, by / WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFI My Commission expires: Notary Publivq42:7r PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 419 E. HYM[AN AVENUE- LANDMARK DESIGNATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 1, 2001 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by 419 E. Hyman LLC, requesting Historic Landmark Designation. The property is located at 419 E. Hyman, and is described as Lots A through F, Block 89, Roaring Fork Arms Condominiums, City and Townsite of Aspen City of Aspen. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-50963 amyg@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Bob Blaich, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on April 14, 2001 City of Aspen Account PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 419 E. HYMAN AVENUE- LANDMARK DESIGNATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, May 28th, 2001 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by 419 E. Hyman LLC, requesting Historic Landmark Designation. The property is located at 419 E. Hyman, and is described as the Roaring Fork Arms Condominiums, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5096, amyg@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Rachel E. Richards, Mayor Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on May 12, 2001 City of Aspen Account 4 SKIERS LP 1108 NORFLEET DR NASHVILLE, TN 37220 419 EAST HYMAN LLC C/O TED C SKOKOS 425 W CAPITAL AVE STE 3200 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 ALLEN ROBERTAc 601 E HOPKINS AVE STE 103 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN DOWNTOWN LLC J C/O BROOKE A PETERSON/KAUFMAN&PETERSON 315 E HYMAN AVE STE 305 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN OFFICE SUITES LLC'e 520 E COOPER AVE #230 ASPEN, CO 81611 r� 401 COOPER PARTNERS FLEISHER COMPANY C/O 200 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 • a% j.. 407 EAST HYMAN PROPERTY LTD 34425 HWY 82 ASPEN, CO 81611 517 E HYMAN LTD ✓ A COLORADO LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 517 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ARCADES ASSOCIATES LTD RJS—RS INC C/O 304 S GALENA STE A ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN DRUG INC PO BOX 11468 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN SPORTS INC j C/O BECKER BUSINESS SERVICES 630 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 B SSOCIATESV BALDWIN HARLEY'f A ,RADO GENERAL PARTNERSHIP 205 S GALENA ST 308 o MILL ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 BENTLEYS AT THE WHEELE} PO BOX 10370 ASPEN, CO 81612 r BLACK HAWK ASPEN LLC ROECLIFFE COTTAGE JOE MOORES LANE WOODHOUSE EAVES LEICESTERSHIRE LE12 8TF ENGLAND, CARLSON BRUCE E PO BOX 3587 ASPEN, CO 81612 BIDWELL BERT INVESTMENT CORPORATION PO BOX 567 ASPEN, CO 81612 BLESD LLC C/O SIMON DEVELOPMENT GROUP 370 LEXINGTON AVE #607 NEW YORK, NY 10017 CHARLIES COW COMPANY LLC 315 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 r 517 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE LLCM 201 S 7TH ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN ART INVESTMENTS LTD 1450 SIERRA VISTA DR #B ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN GROVE ASSOCIATES LLP PO BOX 3421 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPENQUEST LLC #{ 11248 JOHN GALT BLVD OMAHA, NE 68137 BALDWIN HARLEY All v 205 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 BIRKWOOD ASSOCIATES A COLORADO PARTNERSHIP P 0 BOX 3421 ASPEN, CO 81612 BULLOCK G E GRANDCHILDREN PTNRSHIP 1/6 C/O SUZETTE GOODMA 500 E MARKHAM STE 305 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 r CHEEK JOHN H JR PO BOX 564 ASPEN, CO 81612 C LM REVOCABLE TRUST CITY OF ASPEN COMCOWICH WILLIAM L TRUSTEE OF ROBERT BARNARD TRUST 18� 'BEAVER ST 130 S GALENA ST 420 W MAIN ST FLAGSTAFF, AZ 86001 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO ST CONTINENTAL DIVIDE COS A COLORADO CORP 230 S MILL ST !" , CO 81611 DENSON DAVID & KATHLEEN 170 E GORE CRK VAIL, CO 81657 DUVIKE INC PO BOX 2238 ASPEN, CO 81612 f(/1 C FLEISHER DONALD J;' - 200 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 GOLDEN HORN BUILDING LTD A COLORADO LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 11678 E BERRY DR ENGLEWOOD, CO 80111-4146 EK CHARLENE AN // 5ku CAST COOPER AVE 230-6 ASPEN, CO 81611-1861 GRIFFITH ANGELINE 530 WALNUT ST ASPEN, CO 81611 HARTMAN HARRIET TRUST 600 STREAMSIDE LN BOULDER, CO 80302-5968 HOPPES DIANA 5400 VERNON AVE #106 EDNA, MN 55436 COTTONWOOD VENTURES I LLC 419 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 DOLE MARGARET M C/O FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CEDARIDGE PO BOX 8455 ASPEN, CO 81612 ELKS LODGE 224 210 S GALENA ST STE 21 ASPEN, CO 81611 FOOTLOOSE MOCCASIN MAKERS INC 240 S MILL ST STE 201 ASPEN, CO 81611 GOLDSTEIN ALAN J.,` GOLDSTEIN MANAGEMENT C/O 150 METTRO PARK #2 ROCHESTER, NY 14623 GREENWAY COMPANY IN� QUINN HAROLD J JR 666 TRAVIS ST STE 100 SHREVEPORT, LA 71101 i HABATAT GALLERIES A&P,�N INC HAGOPIAN SANDY C/O 213SMILL ST ASPEN, CO 81611 HILLIS OF SNOWMASS INC 170 E GORE CRK VAIL, CO 81657 HOPPES DIANA 5400 VERNON AVE #106 EDINA, MN 55436 0 Z' COX JAMES E & NANCY C/O ROB SNYDER 304 S GALENA STE A ASPEN, CO 81611 DRUKER HENRY L 9 W 57TH ST STE 3420 NEW YORK, NY 10019-2701 FITZGERALD FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LTD C/O FLEISHER AND CO 200 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 FRANCIS JOHN D 525 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 r` GOLDSTEIN PETER & ALAN 150 METRO PK #2 ROCHESTER, NY 14623 GREENWOOD KAREN DAY & ST /RLING- JAMES 409 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 HAMPEL WALTER F JR 290 HEATHER LN ASPEN, CO 81611 HINDERSTEIN FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST P 0 BOX 1576 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 zl_� IMMOBILIEN LLC C/O NATIONAL TAX SEARCH LLC PO BOX 81290 CHICAGO, IL 60681-0290 =NDENCE LODGE UNIT 209 LLC INDEPENDENCE LODGE UNIT 210 LLC INDEPENDENCE PARTNERS C -cRALD LUSS C/O GERALD LUSS C/O M & W PROPERTIES 100 TRUESDALE DR 100 TRUESDALE DR 205 S MILL ST #301A CROTON ON HUDSON, NY 10520 CROTON-ON-HUDSON, NY 10520 ASPEN, CO 81611 JENNE MARY C / 1768 YANCEY CIR S COLLIERVILLE, TN 38017 KAUFMAN GIDEON 1 315 E HYMAN AVE STE 305 ASPEN, CO 81611 LEFFERS JEFFREY J TRUSTE , GERARDOT J REVOCABLE TRUST 5526 HOPKINTON DR FORT WAYNE, IN 46804 MARTINEZ JOSEPH 205 S GALENA #15 ASPEN, CO 81611 I t MCPHETRES RICHARD M 7 YOUNG ST BARTON ACT 2600 AUSTRALIA, 21S ROBERT P HOPKINS AVE STE 304 ASPEN, CO 81611 MTN RESORT TRU C/O FISHER D PO BOX 4273 ASPEN, CO 81612 ORTNER AVA K 29435 BRIARBANK'CT SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 PITKIN COUNTY BANK 80% ;,=f 534 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 �s. RTS EILEEN ,'ORK ST YORK VILLAGE, ME 03909 0 . 0 KANDYCOM INC KANTZER TAYLOR MICHAEL FAMILY 766 SINGING WOOD DR TRUST #1 ARCADIA, CA 91006 6501 VISTA DEL MAR PLAYA DEL REY, CA 90293 KNIGHT CHARLES T & ANNE G LCT LP 433 E COOPER TENNESSEE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 101444 NASHVILLE, TN 37224-1444 f LINDNER FRITZ & ERIK LOMA ALTA CORPORATION/ 66966 TEN PEAKS CT 6210 N CENTRAL EXPWY BEND, OR 97701-9277 DALLAS, TX 75206 MCDONALDS CORPORATION 6 MASON & MORSE IN /152 514 E HYMAN AVE REAL ESTATE TAX SECTION ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 66207 CHICAGO, IL 60666 MILL STREET PLAZA ASSOCIA4ESLLC MEYER GUIDO PAU 23655 TWO RIVERS RD C/O M & W PROPERTIES BASALT, CO 81621 205 S MILL ST STE 301A ASPEN, CO 81611 � x ' 1 MOUNTAIN RESORT TRU T MTN ENTERPRISES 80B C/O FISHER D C/O HILLIS OF SNOWMASS PO BOX 4273 170 GARS CRK DR ASPEN, CO 81612 VAIL, CO 81657 NORDAN JOSI OLIVER JAMES S & LOUISE 110 WEST CST STE 1901 1020 15TH ST #39E SAN DIEGO, CA 92101 DENVER, CO 80202 r PETERSON BROOKE Aj PEYTON MA C/O KAUFMAN & PETERSON 409 E COOPER #4 STE 1 315 E HYMAN ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 RAY W T JRL/ RED ONIONINVESTORS LLt SPEED J B C/O RED ONION MGT CO 50 SCOTT AVE J 418 E COOPER #205 ATTN: CHARLES B COOKEVILLE, TN 38501 f`` ISRAEL ASPEN, CO 81611 RODGERS PORTER R JR fi ROSS BARBARA RODGERS CAROL L REVOCABLE TR 1300 S MAIN ST PO BOX 594 SEARCY, AR 72143 HANALEi, HI 96714 RYANCO PARTNERS LTD XX� C/O SMITH PAT 415 E HYMAN AVE STE 105 A-zDEN, CO 81611-1945 SCHMIDT RALPH N 536 N 7TH ST GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 r STEPHENSON JOANI PO BOX 1301 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 SWENERG JAMES & SANDR L 2660 ROCK REST RD PITTSBORO, NC 27312 TENNESSEE THREE RENTAL" C/O MRS A E MILLER 126 PAUL SMITH LANE ROAN MOUNTAIN, TN 37687 PLAZA LL _EISHER COMPY 2L- c MAIN ASPEN, CO 81611 l WENDELIN ASSOC A NEW YORK GENERAL PARTNERSHIP 150 METRO PARK ROCHESTER, NY 14623 WILLIAMS DEXTER M 5 /o 230 S MILL ST ASPEN, CO 81611 SAWOOD SALES CORPORATIO 501 S BEVERLY DR 3RD FL BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 SJA ASSOCIATES LTD J30% PO BOX 1709 ASPEN, CO 81612 STERLING TRUST COMPANY TRUS EE PO BOX 1491 HANALEI, HI 96714 TAKADA MINOA/ 2 17 10 B ISHIKAWA CHO OTA KU, TOKYO, JAPAN 145-0061, TOMKINS DOUGLAS C 0 ASPEN ART SUPPLY 520 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 WALL RICHAR 7538 CAMINIT AVOLA LA JOLLA, CA 92037 WHEELER BLOCK BUILDING TKG MANAGEMENT INC C/O 1001 CHERRY ST STE 308 COLUMBIA, MO 65201 s WOLF FAMILY TRUST,' 1221 MYRTLE AVE SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 SCHAEFER WIDO 341 SURFVIEW DR PACIFIC PALISADES, CA 90272-2915 rP STEARN LEATHEM 37 FERRY LN E WESTPORT, CT 06880 SWEARINGEN WILLI/M F 3611 EAGLEROCK DR DORAVILLE, GA 30340-4105 TENNESSEE THRW/ A TENNESSEE PARTNERSHIP 101 BROADWAY NASHVILLE, TN 37201 TOMKINS KERN AND COMPA ZY KERN ELIZABETH C/O 3131 LAKESIDE WAY GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81506 WAVO PROPERTIES LP 443 SW SIXTH ST DES MOINES, IA 50309 1 f r C WHEELER SQUARE - CASP /FAMILY LLC 315 E HYMAN ASPEN, CO 81611 WOLF LAWRENCE G TRUS E 22750 WOODWARD AVE #204 FERNDALE, MI 48220