HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20041013ASPEN HISTORIC P~RESERVATION COMMISSION.
REGULAR MEETING
October 13, 2004 5:00 P.M.
.CITY COUNCII~ CHAMBERS
130 S. GALENA
ASPEN, COLORADO
SITE VISIT: No. on - Please visit 314 E, Hyman and 530-534 E.
Hopkins on your own.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
Roll call
Approval of minutes - September 22, 2004
Public Comments
Commissioner member comments
Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent)
Project Monitoring
VII. Staff comments: Certificate of No Negative Effect issued
(Next resolution will be #30)
IX.
Xe
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
A. 701 W. Main St. - Historic Landmark Lot Split, GMQS
Exemption, Demolition, Relocation and Variances, -
Continue Public Hearing to Oct. 27th.
B. 114 Neale Ave. - Conceptual, Continue the public hearing
to Oct. 27th
C. 110 E. Bleeker Street - Amendment. to final, continued
from Aug. 25th (ten minutes)
D. Aspen Meadows C~ onference and Meeting Hall - Referral
(40 minutes) [AJ'L~
NEW BUSINESS
A. 314 E. Hyman Ave. - The Motherlode - Major
Developmen~ (Conceptual) and Parking Waiver (45
WORKSESSION
A. 530 - 534 E. Hopkins (30 minutes)
xI. ADJOURN- 7:15
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
THRU:
Joyce Allgaier, Interim Community Development Director
FROM:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE:
110 E. Bleeker Street- Substantial Amendment to Major Development
approval
DATE:
October 13,2004 (Continued from August 25th)
SUMMARY: In 2002, HPC approved Major Development for 110 E. Bleeker. The
project involved a significant restoration of the Victorian house on the site, and a new
addition. At this time the owner's would like to amend their plans, mostly in regard to
the design of the new construction. This is being brought forward as a substantial
amendment.
HPC reviewed this case on August 25th and continued it for re-study of the materials and
detailing of the addition, which was thought to be too Victorian in nature.
Based on the plans submitted for this meeting, staff recommends approval of the
project with conditions.
APPLICANT: Robert and Lexie Potamkin, owners, represented by Rally Dupps,
Consortium Architects, and Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning.
PARCEL In: 2735-124-37-006.
ADDRESS: 110 E. Bleeker Street, Lot L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen,
Colorado.
ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential).
SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT
Per the Municipal Code, all changes to approved plans that materially modify the
location, size, shape, materials, design, detailing or appearance of the building elements
as originally depicted must be approved by the HPC as a substantial amendment.
Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the extent of
the changes relative to the approved plans and how the proposed revisions affect the
project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable land use codes.
This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed
revisions and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with
conditions and the reasons for the recommendation.
The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented
at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with
conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make
a decision to approve or deny.
Staff Response: The proposal is to make an addition on the west side of the existing
house. Restoration work on the historic building will take place, in part as an
enhancement offered to justify the FAR bonus which was awarded.
HPC discussed this project several times in 200 I and 2002 during the Major
Development review. Primary concerns were the height and placement of the connector
between the new and old construction, and the proximity of the front fas;ade of the
addition to the front of the Victorian house. The landscape plan was also a topic of
debate at Final review. The project was ultimately approved in July 2002, with
conditions.
The amended plans that have been submitted for HPC review are, for the most part,
consistent with the approved set with regard to the historic house. Postive changes
brought forward by this amendment are that the architect is representing the restoration of
the street facing front door, which appears to have been an omission on the earlier plans,
and a non-historic addition is being removed at the back of the house. The architect has
corrected some errors in the way that the roof condition at the front of the house was
represented in the approved project. In addition, the plans have been cleaned up to show
that wood shingles will be used on all areas of the historic house's roof. It is clear in the
historic photograph that the roof was wood shingle.
At the August 25th meeting, the
applicant committed to continuing
research on appropriate windows
for the east elevation of the
historic house, under the gable
end. Currently there are no
windows here, but if evidence is
discovered during construction to
indicate the location of any
original windows, they should be
restored. The guidelines state:
2
3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
[J Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to
receive a larger window is inappropriate.
[J Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered.
To address a concern brought up on August 25th, the architect has revised the design for a
new bay window on the back of the historic house so that it does not appear to be part of
the original Victorian design. This is a strong philosophy of the Aspen HPC to not allow
the addition of confusing, psuedo historic elements on designated buildings.
The new addition to this house has been changed so that the connector is one story in
height and the addition is extended further towards the rear of the site. Staff finds that the
change to this link is very positive, and it removes a significant concern from the
approved project. Extending the length of the addition has no effect from the public view
and does not require any variances, therefore this is supported as well.
All of the ornate detailing has been removed from the addition per the direction of the
board at the last meeting. Staffs only remaining concern with the new construction is the
selection and application of the stone. Staff would prefer the addition to be wood, to
offset it from the historic building, but if the HPC finds stone acceptable, the choice of
stone to be used, and how it is laid is very important. The architect has proposed rubble
in a field of mortar. Staff is concerned that may be inconsistent with the scale and
uniform coursing of the brick on the old house and may call too much attention to the
addition. Resolution of this issue can be handled as a condition of approval that requires
samples, mock-ups, or photographs to be submitted to either staff and monitor, or the full
board for approval. Guidelines 10.3, 10.4, and 10.11 go to this issue:
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character
of the primary building is maintained.
[J A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of
the primary building is inappropriate.
[J An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also
is inappropriate.
[J An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's
historic style should be avoided.
[J 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.
[J An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also
remaining visually compatible with these earlier features.
[J 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
3
-----,_.._,-~"----~,~.._~-
techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new
construction.
10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the
historic materials of the primary building.
[J The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials.
The FAR bonus granted for this project was for a proposal that represented an
outstanding restoration of a historic building, and an addition that had very simple,
cleanly detailed materials. The amended plan should retain that same character.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends HPC grant approval for an amendment to the Major Development
approval at 110 E. Bleeker Street with the following conditions:
I. HPC has granted a 325 square foot FAR bonus and a 5% site coverage
variance for the project. In order for this project to qualify for the FAR bonus,
the porch, front window, and both front doors are to be restored to their
original condition and the paint must be removed from the masonry.
2. The method for removing the paint from the masonry must be approved by
HPC staff and monitor. Test patches will be reviewed by staff and monitor.
3. After the paint has been removed from the historic house, contact staff for an
inspection to determine whether there were any original window openings on
the east fas;ade of the house, under the gable end. If so, the window( s) should
be restored based on a plan approved by staff and monitor.
4. A cut sheet must be provided for any new windows to be installed in the
historic building.
5. Detail drawings showing the reconstruction of the porch and bay window to.
match the photographs must be submitted for review and approval by staff and
monitor.
6. Provide material samples, mock-ups, or photographs of the proposed masoury
for review and approval by staff and monitor (or HPC) to ensure compatibility
with the historic resource according to design guidelines 10.3, 10.4, and 10.11.
7. Any changes to the landscape plan must be reviewed and approved by HPC
staff and monitor.
8. As part of an overall restoration of the historic character of the property, staff
recommends the owner work with the City Parks Department to remove and
replace the existing trees on the City right of way with more appropriate trees.
The current trees disrupt the relationship between the front of the house and
the street. If the owner is in agreement, this will be done at the City's
expense.
4
9. A picket fence as represented in the plans may be constructed along the
property lines.
10. HPC staff and monitor must approve a plan for the type and location of all
exterior lighting fixtures prior to wiring, installation or purchase. The light
fixtures must comply with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design
Guidelines" and the "City Lighting Code."
II. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the
approved drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and
monitor when the information is available, before their installation.
12. Submit a demolition plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating
exactly what areas of the existing house are to be removed as part of the
renovation.
13. No elements are to be added to the historic house that did not previously exist,
other than what is approved by HPC. No existing exterior materials other than
what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the
approval of staff and monitor.
14. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without
first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor.
IS. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of
the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of
construction.
16. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the
HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter
addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating
that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with
the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit.
17. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a
specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit.
RECOMMENDED MOTION
"I move to approve Resolution #.:tlSeries of 2004."
Exhibits:
A. Staff memo dated October 13,2004
B. Application
5
consort
u m
pcb 786
Basa~. CO 81621
fax: 970-927-2286
phone: 970 927 2299
architects
TRANSMITTAL
FROM:
6.r:n.y..G.lJ.mr.i.EJ.........................................................................................................................................................................
13:9.1.IX..~.lJ.p.P.~.!..~I.I.\.............................................................................................................................................................
~.?Z.:.1.?Q.1..................................................................................................................................................................................
TO:
FAX #
PAGES:
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................
DATE:
?EJ.P~EJ.'!.I~.~.U.~!...?.QQ.4....................................................................................................................................................
RE:
110 E. Bleeker HPC final revisions.
Changes:
1. removed ornamental fans at porch columns
2. The ornamental balusters have been removed. Simple rectangular balusters are
now being proposed
3. replaced turned porch columns with rectangular ones
4. all roofing on the historic house is cut cedar shakes
5. fencing drawings will be detailed
6. windows in the east gable end will return if we find there is evidence they existed
during construction.
7. the north elevation kitchen bay window has been redesigned to appear as though
it was an addition later, not original. All of the wood detailing has been simplified.
8. the oval window at the stair north elevation has been removed and replaced with
an orthogonal one
9. wood trim detailing in the gable ends of the new house have been removed
10. the roof eave returns in the gable ends of the new house have been removed
11. board and batten has been moved from the stair element to the lower 2nd storey
massing.
12. vertical wood siding has been moved to the stair element
Enclosed are 10 copies for HPC next Wednesday.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
THRU:
Joyce Allgaier, Interim Community Development Director
FROM:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE:
845 Meadows Road, Aspen Meadows Conference and Meeting Hall- Specially
Planned Area (SPA) Amendment, Referral Comment
DATE:
October 13, 2004
SUMMARY: The Aspen Institute, Music Associates, and Aspen Center for Physics received
approval in 1991 to make certain improvements to the Meadows Campus through its designation
as a Specially Planned Area. The Aspen Institute acted on some of its development rights, but
did not construct the last of the series of lodge buildings that had been planned. This building
was to be located between the structure known as the Wexner Building and the Health Club. The
Institute has recently determined that they need better conference facilities in order to improve
overall occupancy of their existing lodge units and amenities, and therefore has applied for an
SPA Amendment to convert the un-built lodge approval into a Conference and Meeting Hall.
The Historic Preservation Commission participated in the review of the original SPA, and in
1995 certain parts of the campus were designated historic. These include the Trustee
Townhomes, Meadows Restaurant, Health Club, and Bayer gardens. Only these immediate areas
were designated, and not the entire campus. As part of the requested SPA amendment, HPC is
being asked to evaluate the proposal based on our guidelines in order to make a recommendation
to P&Z and Council.
Although this is not officially a Major Development application, staff proposes that the HPC
review this important project in two steps, similar to a Conceptual and Final hearing. Timing is
very important to the applicant, who hopes to break ground in the early spring, therefore staff has
allocated time on upcoming agendas to complete this review.
HPC and the applicant had an excellent dialogue at the September 22"d meeting. The architects
have responded with a significant revisit of the site plan in order to protect views of the Health
Club and to preserve the open grass area around the existing pond. Staff recommends that the
HPC accept the project at the Conceptual level with conditions, and invite the applicants to
return for Final review on October 27th
APPLICANT: The Aspen Institute, represented by Jeffrey Berkus Architects and Jim Curtis.
PARCEL In: 2735-121-29-008.
ADDRESS: 845 Meadows Road, the Aspen Meadows SPA, City and Townsite of Aspen.
ZONING: SPA.
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 the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of
Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve
with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to
make a decision to approve or deny.
Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual
Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual
Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the
envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application
including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of
the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan
unless agreed to by the applicant.
Staff Response: The Aspen Institute for Humanistic was created in 1947 by Walter Paepcke and
formed the foundation for the Aspen Renaissance period after World War II. The Meadows
campus is very significant as the center of activities related to Paepcke's "Aspen Idea." Paepcke
brought Herbert Bayer to Aspen in 1946 to serve as the design consultant for the Institute, a role
in which he served until 1976. Bayer, with assistance from Fritz Benedict, was offered the
chance to design a planned environment, where the goal was total visual integration.
The key features of the property are the campus plan and the relationship between the
architecture and landscape. A number of original Bayer buildings remain, and new structures,
such as the Physics Building, the Music Tent, and Harris Hall, have been designed in a manner
that is sympathetic to the Bauhaus aesthetic. It is very important that this careful stewardship of
the property be maintained. Staff has provided a number of historic photographs at the end of the
memo to give the HPC a sense of the campus from its beginnings.
This application proposes a new structure that will be central to the Institute. The Conference
and Meeting Hall is proposed to be 11,917 square feet above grade, primarily one story in height.
Desien Guideline review
Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. A list
of the relevant design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit B."
Staff admires the amount of analysis that the applicant has given to the history of the Meadows
and Bayer's work. This was conveyed to HPC at the September 22nd meeting through the
application materials, site visit, and presentation.
2
At the September 22nd meeting, there was a very productive discussion about the character of the
Meadows, and the Institute's goals for their new project. The applicant has given thoughtful
consideration to the concerns expressed by staff and the board, and has responded to a suggestion
that the building plan be "flipped" so that the end with a slightly more compact footprint is closer
to the Health Club. In addition, the building has moved towards Wexner and as far back to the
top of slope as possible. The approach to the building more closely reflects the placement of the
existing pathway through the pond area, and leaves the grass meadow undisturbed.
A line on the site plan, taken off the corner of the "HC mural" shows that the view towards the
Health Club is less obstructed than in the previous plan, which is beneficial. If there is any
additional potential to relocate some of the space in the first floor lounge that flanks the entry
more towards the north, staff believes this would go even further to protect the Health Club and
create a connection between the buildings when people gather on the entry terrace. It would also
make the project even more consistent with the placement of the lodge building that was
approved in the 1991 SPA.
There is one other minor issue on the revised plan that staff would like HPC to address, which is
the sloping roof over a staircase on the north end of the building. This portion of the building
will likely have limited visibility, however in elevation the shed roof form is somewhat
inconsistent with the character of the adjacent structure. This might be resolved if there is any
revision to the lounge as discussed above, but otherwise, while staff appreciates what is probably
an effort to step down height towards the Health Club, a flat roof in this area may be more
appropriate.
The building displaces a portion of pond that mayor may not have been part of the Bayer design.
This particular pond is more naturalistic than the landscape features Bayer is known to have
created and its elimination is unavoidable if the meeting hall is to be sited as planned. At the
September 22nd meeting, all appeared to be in agreement that the proposed location for the new
project is sensible because it completes an established pattern of buildings that line the edge of
this bluff. The new building does incorporate water as a primary element of the entry, now in
the form of a reflecting pool, which will be a thin layer of water over rock. The applicant still
has every intention of installing a piece by famed environmental artist Andy Goldsworthy,
however the design will likely be revisited given the site plan changes that have developed. Staff
finds that a Goldsworthy design will be an exciting addition to the campus given that Herbert
Bayer's "Grass Mound" pre-dated the "earthwork" movement in landscape design by 10 years
and was one of the first environmental sculptures in the country. The applicant is also interested
in pursuing the idea of removing the large cottonwood trees that have sprung up in the pond and
block the Health Club in a way that was not originally intended. With HPC's endorsement, they
would like to meet with the Parks Department to discuss restoring this aspect of the site.
In terms of the architecture of the new building, staff discussed the form at some length with the
applicant and raised a concern that it is somewhat complex compared to the immediately
adjacent, rather boxy, flat roofed buildings. Considering the guidelines though, staff does not
find that the composition, massing, or roof are out of character with the campus, because it has
many strong relationships to some of the seminar buildings east of this location.
., ,_.,,~_.~__,...~~,~~<~..~..,__,~__~___~._r'.""._'__ ~.~,.,~,.,"...~-.
Staff recommends that HPC approve this application on a Conceptual level, with conditions for
restudy, and that the applicant return for Final review on October 27th. Final review will address
the landscape plan in greater detail, lighting, fenestration, and selection of materials.
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.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC support this project conceptually with
the following conditions.
1. For final review, study the potential to move some of the first floor lounge area to the
north in order to open views towards the Health Club even more effectively.
2. For final review, study the shed roof on the north side of the building and consider a flat
roof instead.
3. That the concept of removing the cottonwood trees in the pond for the purpose of
restoring Bayer's original concept for the Health Club is acceptable.
Exhibits:
A. Staff memo dated October 13,2004
B. Relevant Design Guidelines
C. Application
4
HISTORIC PHOTOS OF THE MEADOWS
6
The tent, Seminar
building, and Race
Track
The Health Club
and Pond
7
Grass mound, looking
from the location of the
new Wexner building that
replaced this lodge.
.
Sculpture garden,
looking from the
location of the new
Wexner building that
replaced this lodge.
8
Seminar building
Outdoor conference
gathering
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
THRU:
Joyce Allgaier, Interim Community Development Director
FROM:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE:
314 E. Hyman Avenue- Major Development Review (Conceptual) and Parking
Waiver- Public Hearing
DATE:
October 13, 2004
SUMMARY: The subject property, built before 1886, is listed on the Aspen Inventory of
Historic Landmark Sites and Structures and located in the Commercial Core Historic District. It
has been the home of The Motherlode restaurant since 1959, and before that the building was
occupied by a saloon and a grocery store.
The applicant requests HPC Conceptual approval to rehab the historically significant portion of
this structure, demolish additions which would be considered non-contributing, and to construct
a three story addition. The board is askdd,to waive all of the required parking beyond the spaces
that can be reasonably accommodated on the site. This project requires further review by the
Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council related to Growth Management Exemptions.
As stated in previous meetings with the applicant, and during the HPC worksession, Staff has
concerns that the project approach, which is to relate the new construction to the broad
characteristics of the district to a much greater degree than to the Motherlode itself, is
debatable in terms of meeting the HPC guidelines. Staff recommends that there be additional
discussion of alternatives which better preserve the architectural character of The Motherlode.
APPLICANT: Regent Properties, with authorization to apply from the current property owners.
The applicant is represented by Poss Architecture and Planning.
PARCEL In: 2737-073-38-007
ADDRESS: 314 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots Nand 0, Block 81, City and Townsite of Aspen.
ZONING: CC, Commercial Core.
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
I
recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons
for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the
evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of
Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve
with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to
make a decision to approve or deny.
Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual
Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual
Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the
envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application
including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of
the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan
unless agreed to by the applicant.
Staff Response: Recently, the HPC has been contemplating new tools to analyze the
appropriateness of proposals to alter historic structures. The following questions are likely to be
the center of future discussions, and may be helpful for HPC to at least reference for this project
(note that the questions do not serve as formal decision making criteria at this time):
1. Why is the property significant?
2. What are the key features ofthe property?
3. What is the character of the context? How sensitive is the context to changes?
4. How would the proposed work affect the property's integrity assessment score?
5. What is the potential for cumulative alterations that may affect the integrity of the
property?
The property is significant as one of a handful of remaining structures that were built between
1879 and 1885, immediately following Aspen's incorporation. Along with the other oldest
examples, which are 302 E. Hopkins (the white Carpenter Gothic house that has the earliest
documented construction date; 1883),316 E. Hopkins (Geure Bistro), 303 E. Main Street (home
of Matsuhisa), 309 E. Main (Alderfer's), 413 E. Hyman (another false front building), and 101 S.
Mill (the Elli' s building), The Motherlode indicates the earliest character of town. The
Motherlode is a false front building which, although strongly associated with the 19th century
development of the West, is a rarity now since most were either destroyed by fire or replaced
with masonry buildings as towns prospered. The building is relatively unaltered except for minor
modifications to the storefront, and replacement of some materials.
Key features of the property include the alignment of the fas;ade with the sidewalk edge, it's flat
fas;ade, and one story height. The context is sensitive to change in that the site is located in a
historic district, where there is a desire to maintain important patterns. Except for the open space
on this lot and next to the Wheeler, the block has a stronger sense of buildings being aligned with
the sidewalk edge than some other downtown areas. The block is clearly physically dominated
by thc Wheeler Opera house.
HPC has developed a system for assigning a score to determine the integrity that a designated
building possesses, by analyzing it in terms of factors such as whether it is in its original location,
2
and whether or not it retains original features and materials. While some points are deducted for
additions which are of a dramatically different scale, this has relatively little weight compared to
the degree of authenticity that the historic building itself has. Staffs attached integrity scoring
form for this building as it exists today awards it a perfect score of 100 points. In staffs opinion
the proposed project will not eliminate enough points to jeopardize the designation of the
building, but is arguably damaging to it through the finding that building form, scale and
association would all be reduced in value.
There will be no remaining potential for future additions to the property if this project is built,
because it represents a build out to the maximum allowed. The applicant plans to take advantage
of a GMQS exemption that permits one free market unit to be added to a landmark property
without growth management implications, and one to be built with mitigation.
Desien 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 warrant discussion are included in the memo. Please note that staff
is addressing fewer guidelines than were included in the applicant's letter because some of those
guidelines relate to topics which are reserved for final review, and because staff does not find
that Chapter II, "New Buildings on Landmark Lots," is pertinent.
The application does not comment in any detail on work that will affect the historic portion of
the building, however, staff assumes that repairs and restoration work will be undertaken to the
extent needed. Nothing has been proposed to alter the front 30 feet of the existing structure that
is clearly on the 1904 Sanborne maps. The series of additions to the back do not appear to have
any historic merit, or value from the street view. Staff supports the request to demolish these
pieces. The Motherlode will not have a basement excavated below it. The new construction will
be kept entirely on the north side of the building.
As noted above, The Motherlode is the oldest building on this block, and one of the oldest
buildings in town. As evidenced by the historic photograph in the application, this was once a
street lined with one and two story commercial buildings, greatly overshadowed by the 1889
Opera House. Although the discussions with the applicant about their intention to reflect the
character of the larger masonry buildings in the Commercial Core have been very challenging
and interesting, and staff fully respects the design experience and ideas of the architectural team,
we feel that the current proposal is not paying enough attention to the structure that it needs to
relate to most directly. The design guidelines which are most troubling to us in this regard are
guidelines 10.3 and 10.6, below.
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the
primary building is maintained.
[J A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the
primary building is inappropriate.
[J An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is
inappropriate.
[J An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style
should be avoided.
[J An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate.
10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building.
[J An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred.
Staff finds the proposal lacks a sensitive transition between the two building phases and does not
acknowledge the value of the fact that The Motherlode is completely different than the adjacent
masonry commercial buildings since it was built before the mining economy really began to
prosper. There is a very striking difference in height and materials when the addition meets The
Motherlode, and one element of the addition even projects out over the roof of the building.
While every case that HPC reviews has its own unique challenges, staff believes that the board
has been insistent in the past several years that an addition to a one story building do everything
possible to push the tallest area of construction to the back of the lot, taking advantage of
perspective to decrease any perception of imposing itself on the landmark. In staff s opinion the
board's commitment has increased the success and reputation of the program. This policy has
been applied to all residential development, and although the project at 303 E. Main Street,
where Matsuhisa is located, has a number of issues in its execution, the general concept of
distancing the new construction from the old worked there as well. The same was required of
another recent commercial application, the as yet un-built development approved for the white
house at 302 E. Hopkins.
Staff has promoted, and still supports the idea of allowing a taller building or addition to be built
next to The Motherlode, consistent with the historic downtown pattern. Staff is disturbed
however by the proposal to load up significant bulk and mass right behind the historic building.
The relevant guidelines are:
10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back
substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic
building.
[J A I-story connector is preferred.
[J The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary
building.
[J The connector also should be proportional to the primary building.
13.10 True three-story buildings will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
[J In general, a proposed three-story building must demonstrate that it has no negative impact
on smaller, historic structures nearby.
[J The height and proportions of all facade components must appear to be in scale with nearby
historic buildings.
We suggest that the applicant continue to look at options which redistribute the desired square
footage either next to The Motherlode, or more towards the alley. We have mentioned the
possibility of mitigating the affordable housing units off-site.
Staff has concerns with material palette, which might or might not be alleviated by are-design,
however this topic is reserved for Final review in any regard.
4
ON-SITE PARKING
The project will generate a requirement for approximately II parking spaces. The number
cannot be firmly stated at this time because the Planning and Zoning Commission will establish
what is required for the affordable housing units during their review. The applicant has included
a letter explaining why it is not possible to provide any more than 4 spaces that meet the City's
requirements for on-site parking. They are asking that HPC waive everything above that amount.
In order to grant a parking waiver, HPC must find that the review standards of Section
26.4IS.IIO.C of the Municipal Code are met. They require that:
1. The parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-Iieu fees may be approved upon a
finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic
significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining
designated property or a historic district.
Staff Response: The property cannot physically accommodate any more legal parking off of the
alley. Staff supports HPC granting the parking waiver, as well as waiver of the cash-in-lieu
payment, which will generate a cost savings of approximately $100,000 for the developer.
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.
RECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommends that HPC continue the application for restudy of a
better transition between the new and old construction.
Exhibits:
A. Staff memo dated October 13, 2004
B. Relevant Design Guidelines
C. Integrity Assessment
D. Application
S
pOSS ARCHITECTURE + PLP,NNiNG
September 15, 2004
Amy Guthrie
City Historic Preservation Officer
City of Aspen
130 South Aspen
Aspen, CO, 81611
Re: Conceptual HPC Application: Mother Lode Development
Dear Amy,
This letter is a formal request to the Historic Preservation Committee to consider our
application for a conceptual review of the above referenced project.
Project Location:
The project is located at 314 East Hyman Avenue in Aspen. The legal description of the
property is Lots Nand 0; Block 81; Townsite of Aspen.
"'%
Existing Conditions:
The existing development on the property consists of a single level commercial building.
The total existing building size is approximately 4609 square feet. All of the exterior
walls are faced with wood siding. The existing building fronts Hyman Avenue and has a
western storefront with flat parapet and a pitched roof behind.
Proposed Development:
Program:
The proposed development is shown on the enclosed conceptual plans. The existing
western storefront along with the southernmost thirty feet of the existing building will be
rehabilitated. A new three story building is proposed for the rear of the property
accommodating retail/commercial space on the first level, a one bedroom free market
residential unit and two affordable housing units on the second level and a three
bedroom free market residential unit on the third level. A roof deck will be developed
on top of the building.
Mass, Scale and Form:
The scale, rhythm and mass of the new addition to the rear of the property compliment
the scale, rhythm and mass of the adjacent historic Wheeler Opera House and Crystal
Palace. Both of these buildings have strong vertical and horizontal delineations that are
also present in this new building. The proposed new building will be three stories in
605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 It) 970/925-4755 If) 970/920-2950 WWW.BILLPOSS.COM
pOSS ARCHITECTURE + PLA.NNING
,
height with a flat parapet roofline. The existing gable roofline behind the westem
storefront wall will remain.
A repetition of building rhythm is created through the vertical stone massing and glazed
infill, derivative of the adjacent buildings. The parapet line is broken to provide a scale
and rhythm in keeping with other historic buildings in the commercial core. The entry
canopy and balconies above provide strong horizontal elements that relate to the
horizontal elements that exist at each floor level of many of the historic buildings in the
district. This rhythm of stone protrusions, recessed glazing and overlaid steel detailing
has substantial depth casting shadow lines and adding a three-dimensional feel to the
new fa<;ade. Although contemporary in nature, it is reminiscent and respectful of the
design of many of the historic buildings in the district whilst providing a creative and
innovative design solution.
Materials:
The principal building materials include a palette of native stone, brick and
contemporary iron detailing, also complimenting the existing adjacent buildings.
~
Street-front character:
The existing building fronting Hyman St will remain and a small adjacent open space
will be incorporated responding to the adjacent Wheeler Park open space that will most
likely remain as open space in the near future. This open space area will provide a
pedestrian friendly environment with seating elements, planting and paved areas.
,
Conformance with Review Criteria and Guidelines:
According to the chart of page iv of the "City of Aspen Preservation Design Guidelines"
this project is subject to the guidelines contained in the introduction as well as chapters
10, 11, 13 and 14. This section will address this proposed project with respect to each of
these standards.
Chapter 10 - Building Additions
New Addition
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of
the primary building is maintained.
In this instance the existing historic building on the property is clearly separated from
the new building maintaining its identity and significance. The adjacent Wheeler Opera
House is also a consideration in this instance. By setting the new building back, we
believe that the majesty and significance of this historic landmark building is also
preserved.
".
pOSS ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING
'>","
10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time
The design of the new building to the rear is clearly a product of its own time with
contemporary interpretations of scale, mass and rhythm to the fa<;ade and distinctly
contemporary detailing where appropriate. Whilst strongly reflecting the palette of
materials in the historic commercial core district, materials will be incorporated with a
contemporary interpretation.
10.5 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic
alignments that may exist on the street.
Historically the open space parcel (Wheeler Park) adjacent to the Wheeler Opera House
has existed since at least the 1950s. The street elevation between Mill St and Aspen St
consists of two very tall corner buildings with much shorter infill single storey elements
in between. The addition of this three storey building in between provides a transition in
scale between the two storey Crysl<il Palace building and the four storey Wheeler Opera
House.
10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building.
In this instance, we believe that due to the nature of the adjacent buildings, it is of more
importance to be compatible in size and scale with these adjacent corner element
buildings providing a continuity of scale along this city block.
The scale of the first floor glazing of this new building relates to the scale of the existing
storefront.
10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it
back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the
historic building.
The new taller building is set back from the existing single storey building and is clearly
delineated through the use of different materials.
1 O. 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.
By setting the new taller building back the original proportions and character of the
retail buildings that exist between the Wheeler Opera House and the Crystal Palace
remain prominent.
10.9 Roofforms should be similar to those of the historic building
Roof forms of the new building are similar to those of the historic adjacent buildings
(the Wheeler Opera House and the Crystal Palace). Both these buildings appear to have
flat roofs. The Wheeler has a low-pitched roof that is not very visible from the street.
pOSS ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING
_.
"'..
10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure
historically important architectural features.
No historically important architectural features exist to the rear of the existing
commercial building where the new building connects. Therefore, no historically
important architectural features to this building are destroyed or obscured.
10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic
materials of the primary building.
In this instance, we believe that it is more important to use exterior materials that are
compatible with the historic materials of the adjacent historic buildings. However, steel
elements will be used in several architectural details on the new building to provide a
level of compatibility with the existing wood building on the property. The steel
elements will have a paint scheme designed to compliment the historic structure. The
corbelled brick fa<;ade with its horizontal emphasis and shadow lines abstractly
compliments the lapped wood siding of the historic structure.
Rooftop additions
(not applicable)
,;",'
Chapter 11 - New Buildings on Landmark Lots / Historic Lot Splits
""-.
We believe that this building, although it is technically an addition to an existing
structure, also qualifies to be reviewed as a new building as a consequence of it's scale
and mass and relationship to nearby Wheeler Opera House and Crystal Theater building.
Therefore the following guidelines are also adhered to:
Building Orientation:
11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street.
The primary entrance of the new building, although setback from the street, is oriented
to the street.
11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by
using a front porch
Not applicable
Mass and Scale:
11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on
the parcel.
The proposed building is similar in scale to the adjacent Wheeler Opera House and
Crystal Palace. In addition, is likely that the Wheeler Opera house addition will also
appear similar in scale.
poss ARCHITECTURE+PLANNING
..........
11.4 Design afront elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building.
The front elevation is set back from the street enabling it to be of a scale in keeping with
the adjacent historic buildings, as opposed to in a scale similar to the historic building on
the parcel. We believe that the scale of the overall city block as perceived holistically is
more important in this instance.
Building and Roofforms:
11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property.
Building forms are reminiscent of the adjacent historic properties and provide a unity to
the entire city block.
11.6 Use roofforms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block.
The flat parapet rooflines are similar to those present on the Wheeler Opera House and
Crystal Palace building. The parapet line is broken to reflect the scale and verticality of
the traditional city block.
"
11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used
traditionally.
In this instance it is proposed to incorporate a roof garden and deck on the flat roof area
of the new building.
Materials
11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale.
Building material will predominantly consist of masonry (stone and brick) that
contributes to a sense of human scale through its small-scale modular nature. Detailing
utilizing steel elements, will also contribute to a level of intricacy that relates to a
traditional sense of human scale.
Architectural Details
11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic
property.
Building components are arranged to reflect the size and shape of the adjacent historic
properties. Window proportions and solid elements (stone + masonry) are reflective of
the proportions utilized in the adjacent historic buildings.
11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
The new proposed building does not imitate or copy any older historic styles, but
through a sensitive use of materials, composition of solids and voids and complimentary
use of scale and massing it provides a contemporary and innovative design solution
unifying the entire city block in this historically significant part of town.
poss ARCHITECTURE+PLANNir~G
-~
.~.-
Chapter 13 - Design in the Commercial Core Historic District
Relationship to the Town Grid
13.1 Respect the established town grid in all projects.
The orientation of the new building respects the existing town grid pattern through its
orthogonal and blocky nature.
13.2 Orient a new building parallel to its lot lines, similar to that of traditional building
orientations
The new building is oriented parallel to its lot lines.
13.3 Orient a primary entrance toward the street.
The primary entrance is oriented toward Hyman Street.
Alleys
13.4 Develop alley facades to create visual interest.
The alley fal(aue creates visual interest through the introduction of windows, doors,
balconies and fa<;ade detailing (see drawings).
.'.,
13.5 Retain the character of the alley as pa/1 of the orig inal town grid.
The character of the alley as part of the original town grid is maintained through the
introduction of balconies providing interest and through providing residential access
from this alley.
Building Setbacks
13.8 Maintain the alignment offacades at the sidewalk's edge.
The existing alignment of facades at the sidewalk's edge is maintained in this instance.
A short setback occurs in alignment with the adjacent Wheeler Park open space. In
order to align with the sidewalk edge, a trellis is proposed to extend from the new
addition to the sidewalk. The area under this trellis can be used for outdoor seating or a
small art park.
Mass and Scale
13.9 Maintain the average perceived scale of two-story buildings at the sidewalk.
As the new building is set back from the street front, the average perceived scale from
the sidewalk is of a two-storey building.
13.10 True three-story buildings will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
-
po SS ARC H ITECTU R E + PLlH~!\ i II G
-...
."",~.....
The proposed new building is a three-story building. However, due to the setback, the
perception of scale from the sidewalk is that of a two-storey building. The adjacent
Wheeler Opera House is a four-story building.
13.11 Consider dividing larger buildings into "modules" that are similar in width to
buildings seen historically
The fa<;ade of the new larger scale building is broken down through a rhythm of mass
and void that is similar to the rhythm of facades seen historically in the historic central
core district. The vertical elements along with the break in the parapet line helps to
create this sense of modulation.
Building Form
13.12 Rectangular forms should be dominant on Commercial Core facades
Rectangular forms are dominant on the fa<;ade of the proposed new building.
13.13 Use flat roof lines as the dominant roofform
Flat rooflines are the dominant roof form on the proposed new building.
'..;,
13.14 Along a rear fal;;ade, using building forms that step down in scale toward the
alley is encouraged.
The central portion of the rear fa<;ade of the proposed new building is setback
sufficiently to create a long balcony that effectively breaks down the scale of the
building fa<;ade to the alley.
Storefront Character
13.15 Contemporary interpretations of traditional building styles are encouraged.
The proposed new building uses contemporary interpretations of traditional building
styles to create an innovative and creative design solution.
13.16 Develop the f{roundfloor level of all projects to encourage pedestrian activity
Pedestrian activity is encouraged through the introduction of a paved pedestrian zone
adjacent to the Wheeler park open space. Paving and landscape elements such as seating
and a possible art park will provide a pedestrian friendly environment.
13.17 Maintain the distinction between the street level and upper floor.
The street level and upper floor levels are distinguished through the use of a strong band
of rough-hewn stone at the street level, in contrast with predominantly brick and smooth
stone used above.
Repetition ofF a9ade Elements
13.18 Maintain the repetition of similar shapes and details along the block.
poss ARCHITECTURE+PLANNING
-
....
Similar scale and rhythm of windows and vertical and horizontal bands are repeated in
this new building providing continuity along the block. Window proportions and solid
brick elements are reminiscent of the scale and rhythm of adjacent buildings.
13.19 Maintain the pattern created by recessed entry ways that are repeated along a
block
The adjacent single storey retail building to the west has a recessed entry. The open
space to the east provides an opportunity to set back the entry to this new portion of
building on the property.
Detail Alignment
13.20 The general alignment of horizontal features on building fronts should be
maintained.
Horizontal features to the proposed new building align with the proposed floor levels
(12' -6 to the first level, 11' -6" to the second level and 16' -0" to the highest third level
parapet). The first floor glazing aligns with the existing building on the property (The
Mother Lode).
13.21 Special features that highlight buildings on corner lots may be considered
Not applicable
Chapter 14 - General Guidelines
14.1 These standarsd should not prevent or inhibit compliance with accessibility laws.
All accessibility laws are complied with.
14.2 Generally a solution that is independent from the historic building and does not
alter its historic characteristics is encouraged.
The new building is clearly independent from the historic building on the property and
does not alter its historic characteristics.
14.3 Keep color schemes simple.
A simple palette of masonry and glass with a minor amount of steel is proposed.
14.4 Coordinating the entire building in one color scheme is usually more successful
than working with variety of palettes.
Any painted materials will compliment the existing painted wood building on the
property providing one comprehensive color scheme to the property. Natural building
materials (stone and brick) will compliment the adjacent buildings.
14.5 Develop a color scheme for the entire building front that coordinates all of the
fat;ade elements
pOSS ARCHiTECTURE + PLf1,Nr~rNG
..."
,,,.:....
The proposed color scheme will coordinate with all of the fa<;ade elements within the
streetscape of the block.
14.6 Exterior lights should he simple in character and similar in color and intensity to
that used traditionally.
Exterior lights will be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used
traditionally and will provide a level of light providing the minimum allowed by the
building code. Exterior lights will however be contemporary in nature to compliment
the exterior architecture.
14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting.
All site and exterior lighting will conform to the city's lighting guidelines. All light
sources will be shielded. Light sources will be located just above the first level to
minimize excessive off site light spill.
14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building
All exterior lighting will have shielded sources and be located and directed so as to not
shine off the property or onto public right-of-ways.
14.9 Use the gentlest means possible to clean the suiface of material and features.
The fa<;ade of the existing historic structure on the property will be cleaned using the
gcntlcst mcthods as proposed in the historic preservation design guiJdines. Any
woodwork that needs to be cleaned prior to repainting will be undertaken using
approved technical procedures for cleaning refinishing and repairing historic structures.
14.10 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in,
consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material.
The existing wood building will be repaired where required to restore it as reasonably
close as possible to original condition.
14.11 Plan repainting carefully
The existing color scheme to the existing historic building will be retained.
14.12 Provide a weather-protective finish to wood suifaces.
A weather-protective finish will be applied to all wood surfaces.
14.13 Leave natural masonry r:nlors unpainted where feasible.
All masonry and stone used on the proposed new building will bc left unpainted.
14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street.
Services will be shielded from the street. Any roof top elements will be hidden behind
the roof parapet at the alley side of the building. A service area will be incorporated on
the alley to minimize any impact to the street.
pOSS ARCHITECTURE + PLANNII~G
-~~".
.......-'
14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public
way
Any mechanical equipment will be concealed behind the north parapet.
14.16 Locate standpipes, meters and other sen,ice equipment such that they will not
damage historic fa~ade materials.
Standpipes meters and other service equipment will not be incorporated on the fa<;ades
of the existing historic building.
14.17 Design a new driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact
Not applicable.
14.18 Garages should not dominate the street scene.
The residential parking garage will be accessed from the alley and therefore will not
dominate the street scene.
<,,,"
14.19 Use a paving material that will distinguish the driveway from the street.
Not applicable.
"",..
14.20 Off-street driveways should be removed, if feasible
Not applicable.
14.21 For existing driveways that cannot be removed, provide tracks to a parking area
rather than paving an entire driveway.
Not applicable.
14.22 Driveways leading to parking areas should be located to the side or rear of a
pI imwy slmciure.
Not applicable.
14.23 Parking areas should not be visually obtrusive.
The parking area accessed via the rear alley is incorporated within the fa<;ade of the main
building and therefore will not be visually obtrusive.
14.24 Large parking areas, especially those for commercial and multifamily uses,
should not be visually obtrusive
The parking area accessed via the rear alley is incorporated within the fa<;ade of the main
building and therefore will not be visually obtrusive.
14.25 Locate signs to be subordinate to the building design.
"'.
pOSS ARCHITECTURE + PLANNiNG
/...'"...
~jO'
This building requires little signage and therefore will be subordinate to the building
design.
14.26 Sign materials should be similar to those used historically.
Any signage that is incorporated as part of the new building will compliment the
existing signage to the existing historic building.
14.27 Use signs to relate to other buildings on the street and to emphasize architectural
features.
Signage will be incorporated in a manner that relates to the entry canopy design while
also relating the existing signage on the Mother Lode building in some format. Signage
will most likely be the name and number of the building only.
14.28 Pictographic symbols are encouraged on signs.
Pictographic symbols will most likely not be relevant in this instance.
14.29 llluminate a sign such that it complements the overall composition of the site.
Illumination of any signage will be minimal in this instance and any light source will be
shielded from the street and adjacent properties.
~,...
Neighborhood Guidelines
We are requesting that the Historic Preservation Committee grant this project a variance
from the neighborhood guidelines. The guidelines are geared to projects located within
residential neighborhoods. In addition, the neighborhood guidelines do not address
mixed use projects. The HPC guidelines for development within the commercial core
historic district are much more relevant to this property.
If you have any questions about the information contained within this letter, please do
not hesitate to call. We look forward to discussing this project with you and the Historic
Preservation Committee on October 13.
Sinc ely,
Bill P sS,and Associates Architecture and Planning, P.C
~
~
REGENT PROPERTIES
DOUGLAS S. BROWN
September 17, 2004
AMY GUTHRIE
CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
CITY OF ASPEN
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Conceptual HPC Submission; Mother Lode Redevelopment
Dear Amy,
.......
The above referenced project is proposed to be located on the property as described below:
Legal Address: Lots Nand 0; Block 81: Townsite of Aspeu
Street Address: 314 East Hyman Avenue
Parcel ill No.: 2737073 38 007
".."",
The applicant for the project is Regent Properties whose contact information is as follows:
Douglas S. Brown
Regent Propelties
450 N. Roxbury Dr. # 600
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
310.888.0163
The following firm is authorized to act of behalf of the applicant with respect to this
application:
Poss Are-hitec-ture+ Planning
605 East Main Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
970.925.4755
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
\;,."
450 North ROl(b~r.r Drive: ,Suit~ 600 ' Beverl,Y Hills CA 90210 " 310.88~.Ot6~ . Fin ~1.0.,276:7339 . DO,u~B.rown@regenlpropertles.com
AssrDA T A\iV1Nhcr L()Jc'{ orrcspond..;>nc~"~:\mvCut!1n('.h PCSUi~]Til)S]()n, q, i:> ,1}4.(kc