HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20041208ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
December 8, 2004
5:00 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
130 S. GALENA
ASPEN, COLORADO
SITE VISIT: NONE-
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
Roll call
Approval of minutes - Oct. 27, 2004
Public Comments
Commissioner member comments
Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent)
Project Monitoring
Staff comments: Certificate of No Negative Effect issued
(Next resolution will be #33)
OLD BUSINESS ~'~ ~j~ ~¢_~ ~/
A. 110 E. Bleeker Street - Amentiment to Final Major
Development - (Continued public hearing) 20 min?/~-
B. 701 W. Main Street, Historic Landmark Lot Split, GMQS
Exemption, Demolition, Relocation anti Variances,
(Continueti public hearing) 30 min.~ 2 ~/
NEW BUSINESS
A. 631 W. Bleeker Street, Major Development (Conceptual,
public hearing) 20 min. ~ ~
B. Adoption of Amended "City of Aspen Historic Preservation
Policies, Criteria, and Design Guidelines(20 min.)
WORKSESSION
XI. ADJOURN 6:30
~-~---".-._"~'
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
THRU:
Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Community Development Director
FROM:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE:
110 E. Bleeker Street- Substantial Amendment to Major Development
approval
DATE:
December 8, 2004 (Continued from October 13,2004)
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 owners 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 October 13'\ continuing it both times for re-
study of the materials and detailing of the addition. Minutes of August 25th are attached,
while October 13'h,S are not available yet. Staffs summary of the concerns at the last
meeting were a request for restudy of the window scale and design on the north and south
elevations of the addition; reconsideration of the use of stone, or its application on the
second floor of the addition; and restudy of the roof forms over the new bay window and
doors on the north side of the historic house. In addition, a west elevation of the historic
house was requested.
The architect has submitted a letter and revised plans which appear to address the issues
that the majority of the HPC members have cited. 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 ID: 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 2001 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 fayade 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.
/"""'llo~
~..._.._--~-~-~~.~~----...........-..
.,/
At the August 25'h 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:
3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
D Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to
receive a larger window is inappropriate.
D Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered.
To address a concern brought up on August 25th, the architect has revisedthe 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 meetings. The exterior material for the addition is now wood, as was
approved in the previous plan for this site. This helps the project to meet Guidelines 10.3
and 10.4, below.
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character
of the primary building is maintained.
D A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of
the primary building is inappropriate.
D An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also
is inappropriate.
D An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's
historic style should be avoided.
D 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.
D An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also
remaining visually compatible with these earlier features.
D 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.
IO.II On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the
historic materials of the primary building.
D 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. Staff finds that the amended plan retains 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:
1. 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, the applicant shall
contact staff for an inspection to determine whether there were any original
window openings on the east fayade 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, to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor.
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. Any changes to the landscape plan must be reviewed and approved by HPC
staff and monitor.
7. 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.
8. A picket fence as represented in the plans may be constructed along the
property lines.
9. 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
'""
.~,,,#
-
4
fixtures must comply with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design
Guidelines" and the "City Lighting Code."
10. 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.
II. 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.
12. 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.
13. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without
first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor.
14. 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.
15. 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.
16. 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 #_' Series of2004."
Exhibits:
A. Staff memo dated December 8, 2004
B. Application
5
"Exhibit B, Relevant Design Guidelines for an amendment to Major Development"
~
1.2 A new replacement fence should use materials that appear similar to that of
the original.
D Any fence which is visible from a public right-of-way must be built of wood or
wrought iron. Wire fences also may be considered.
D A wood picket fence is an appropriate replacement in most locations. A simple wire
or metal fence, similar to traditional "wrought iron," also may be considered.
D Chain link is prohibited and solid "stockade" fences are only allowed in side ,md rear
yards.
1.3 A new replacement fence should have a "transparent" quality allowing views
into the yard from the street.
D A fence that defines a front yard is usually low to the ground and "transparent" in
nature.
D On residential properties, a fence which is located forward of the front building
facade may not be taller than 42" from natural grade. (For additional information, see
the City of Aspen's "Residential Design Standards".)
D A privacy fence may be used in back yards and along alleys, but not forward of the
front facade of a building.
D Note that using no fencing at all is often the best approach.
D Contemporary interpretations of traditional fences should be compatible with the
historic context.
1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally.
D Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment.
1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when
considering a rehabilitation project.
D This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk,
proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature
and ending in the "private" spaces beyond.
D Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry.
Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree.
D Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style.
Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles.
1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for
historic structures.
D The fi"ont yard should be maintained in a traditional marmer, with planting material
and sod, and not covered with paving, for example.
I.I3 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic
context of the site.
D Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term
impact of mature growth.
D Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent.
D Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials.
-
--,
6
._~"~_._,u_~, ~.".~n_'_'_..'___'~''''C''__
I.I4 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are
inappropriate.
D Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no
closer than the mature canopy size.
D Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure signilicant architectural
features or block views to the building.
D It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard.
I.IS Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting.
D Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting
on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes.
2.1 Preserve original building materials.
D Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place.
D Only remove siding which is deteriorated and must be replaced.
D Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices,
pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved.
D Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired.
Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity.
2.2 Protect wood features from deterioration.
D Provide proper drainage and ventilation to minimize rot.
D Maintain protective coatings to retard drying and ultraviolet damage.
2.3 Plan repainting carefully.
D Always prepare a good substrate. Prior to painting, remove damaged or deteriorated
paint only to the next intact layer, using the gentlest means possible.
D Use compatible paints. Some latex paints will not bond well to earlier oil-based paints
without a primer coat.
2.4 Brick or stone that was not painted historically should not be painted.
D Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer, or patina, to protect it from the
elements.
2.5 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in,
consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material.
D Avoid the removal of damaged materials that can be repaired.
D Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and
resins may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also
may be used.
2.6 Maintain masonry walls in good condition.
D Original mortar that is in good condition should be preserved in place.
D Repoint only those mortar joints where there is evidence of a moisture problem or
when mortar is missing.
D Duplicate the original mortar in strength, composition, color, texture, joint width and
protile.
D Mortar joints should be cleared with hand tools. Using electric saws and hammers to
remove mortar can seriously damage the adjacent brick.
D Do not use mortar with a high portland cement content, which will be substantially
harder than the brick and does not allow for expansion and contraction. The result is
deterioration of the brick itself.
7
2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing
materials on primary surfaces.
o If the original material is wood clapboard, for example~ then the replacement material
must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, the amount of exposed lap
and finish.
o Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then
only those should be replaced; not the entire wall.
2.8 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for primary building materials.
o In some instances, substitute materials may be used for replacing architectural details,
but doing so is not encouraged. If it is necessary to use a new material, such as a
fiberglass column, the style and detail should precisely match that of the historic
model.
o Primary building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with
synthetic materials.
o Synthetic materials include: aluminum, vinyl siding and panelized brick.
DElFS (synthetic stucco) is not an appropriate replacement for real stucco.
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
o Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash,
muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows.
o Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them, whenever conditions permit.
o Preserve the original glass, when feasible.
3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a
building wall.
o Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is
inappropriate, as is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on
primary facades where the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining
feature.
o Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls.
o Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or
increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades.
3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade.
o Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character-defining facade will
negatively affect the integrity of a structure.
3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design.
o If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double-
hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number
and position of glass panes.
o Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining
facades.
3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original.
o Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character-defining
facades. However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the
window components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish.
8
,.,..,.....-..",,""'-,,-......-
-
~
,.....-
~~
3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
o Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to
receive a larger window is inappropriate.
o Considerreopening and restoring an original window opening where altered.
3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that
of the original window.
o A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's casing, the sash
steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments,
which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important
details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall.
3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than to replace a
historic window.
o Install a storm window on the interior, when feasible. This will allow the character of
the original window to be seen from the public way.
o If a storm window is to be installed on the exterior, match the sash design and
material of the original window. It should fit tightly within the window opening
without the need for sub-frames or panning around the perimeter.
4.1 Preserve historically significant doors.
o Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include
the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware,
detailing, transoms and f1anking sidelights.
o Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances.
o If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible
so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place,
in its historic position.
o If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original entrance on the primary facade
must remain operable.
4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening.
o Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in
height.
4.4 If a new screen door is used, it should be in character with the primary door.
o Match the frame design and color ofthe primary door.
o If the entrance door is constructed of wood, the frame of the screen door should also
be wood.
4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the
original door or a door associated with the style of the house.
o A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement.
o A historic door from a similar building also may be considered.
o Simple paneled doors were typical.
oVery ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless
photographic evidence can support their use.
4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, consider using a storm door
instead of replacing a historic entry door.
o Generally, wood storm doors are most appropriate when the original door is wood.
9
o If a storm door is to be installed, match the frame design, character and color of the
original door.
5.3 Avoid enclosing a historic front porch.
o Keeping an open porch is preferred.
o Enclosing a porch with opaque materials that destroy the openness and transparency
of the porch is not acceptable.
o Enclosing porches with large areas of glass, thereby preserving the openness of the
porch, may be considered in special circumstances. When this is done, the glass
should be placed behind posts, balusters, and balustrade, so the original character of
the porch may still be interpreted.
o The use of plastic curtains as air-locks on porches is discouraged.
o Reopening an enclosed porch is appropriate.
5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form
and detail.
o Use materials that appear similar to the original.
o While matching original materials is preferred, when detailed correctly and painted
appropriately, alternative materials may be considered.
o Where no evidence of the appearance of the historic porch exists, a new porch may be
considered that is similar in character to those found on comparable buildings. Keep
the style and form simple. Also, avoid applying decorative elements that are not
known to have bee!, used on the house or others like it.
o When constructing a new porch, its depth should be in scale with the building.
o The scale of porch columns also should be similar to that of the trimwork.
o The height of tile railing and the spacing of balusters should appear similar to those
used historically as well.
6.1 Preserve significant architectural features.
o Repair only those features that are deteriorated.
o Patch, piece-in, splice, consolidate or otherwise upgrade the existing material, using
recognized preservation methods whenever possible.
o Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and
resins may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also
may be used.
o Removing a damaged feature when it can be repaired is inappropriate.
6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use
methods that minimize damage to the original material.
o Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of
replacing the disassembled material in its original configuration.
6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be
replaced.
o Match the original in composition, scale, and finish' when replacing materials or
features.
o If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material
should be wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish, which
traditionally was a smooth painted finish.
,..........,
-..
~.",...",
10
6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features should be based on
original designs.
o The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating
a misrepresentation of the building's heritage.
o When reconstnlction of an element is impossible because there is no historical
evidence, develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the
original, and maintains similar scale, proportion and material.
6.5 Do not guess at "historic" designs for replacement parts.
o Where "scars" on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is
no other physical or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that
are similar in character to related buildings.
o Using overly ornate materials on a building for which there is no documentation is
inappropriate.
o It is acceptable to use salvaged materials from other buildings only if they are similar
in style and detailing to other features on the building where they are to be installed.
6.6 Replacement of missing elements may be included in repair activities.
o Replace only those portions that are beyond repair.
o Replacement elements should be based on documented evidence.
o Use the same kind of material as the original when feasible.
o A substitute material may be acceptable if the form and design of the substitute itself
conveys the visual appearance of the original material. For example, a fiberglass
cornice may be considered at the top of a building.
7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional.
7.8 Preserve original roof materials.
o Avoid removing historic roofing material that is in good condition. When replacement
is necessary, use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as
physical qualities and use a color that is similar to that seen historically.
o Specialty materials such as tile, slate or concrete should be replaced with a matching
material.
7.9 New or replacement-roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture
similar to those used traditionally.
o Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably
styled buildings.
o If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth
tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish.
o Flashing should be in scale with the roof material.
o If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non-reflective
finish.
7.10 If it is to be used, a metal roof should be applied and detailed in a manner that
is compatible and does not detract from the historic appearance of the building.
o A metal roof material should have an earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective
finish.
o A metal roof with a lead-like patina also is an acceptable alternative.
11
o Seams should be of a low profile.
o A roof assembly with a high profile seam or thick edge is inappropriate.
10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed.
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character
of the primary building is maintained.
o A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of
the primary building is inappropriate.
o An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also
is inappropriate.
o An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's
historic style should be avoided.
o An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate.
10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
o An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also
remaining visually compatible with these earlier features.
o A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in
material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all
techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new
construction.
o Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will
not alter the exterior mass of a building.
10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building.
o Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate.
o Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with
sloped roofs.
10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or
obscure historically important architectural features.
o For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should
be avoided.
IO.II On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the
historic materials of the primary building.
o The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials.
10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the
historic building.
o If the roof of the historic building is symmetrically proportioned, the roof of the
addition should be similar.
o Eave lines on the addition should be similar to those of the historic building or
structure.
14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity
to that used traditionally.
o The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be
approved by the HPC.
o All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence.
........
~
-~""'.,
11
14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting.
o Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not
be permitted.
o Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures.
o Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by
controlling the length .of time that exterior lights are in use late at night.
o Do not wash an entire building facade in light.
o Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper
walls of buildings.
o Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light tile same
area.
14.13 Leave natural masonry colors unpainted where feasible.
o Where the natural colors of building materials exist, such as with stone or brick, they
should be left unpainted.
o For other parts of the building that require painting, select colors that will
complement those of the natural materials.
o If an existing building is already painted, consider applying new colors that simulate
the original brick color.
o It is also appropriate to strip the paint from a masonry building to expose the natural
color of the stone or brick.
14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public
way.
o Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does
not create a negative visual impact.
o Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof must be grouped together to minimize their
visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials that
are compatible with those of the building itself.
o Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges.
o A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it
does not create a negative visual impact.
o Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the
street or alley. Also minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service
boxes. Use smaller satellite dishes and mount them low to the ground and away from
front yards, significant building facades or highly visible roof planes.
o Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will
minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds.
14.16 Locate standpipes, meters and other service equipment such that they will
not damage historic facade materials.
o Cutting channels into historic facade materials damages the historic building fabric
and is inappropriate. Do not locate equipment on the front facade.
o If a channel must be cut, either locate it on a secondary facade, or place it low on the
wall.
13
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
...JAA
Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Community Development Director
THRU:
FROM:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE:
701 W. Main Street- Historic Landmark Lot Split, GMQS Exemption,
Demolition, On-Site Relocation and Variances- Public Hearing
DATE:
December 8, 2004
SUMMARY: The subject property is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites
and Structures and contains two structures, a cabin and an outbuilding. Neither building exists
on the 1904 Sanborne map. The year of construction on record with the Assessor's office is
1935.
'"'-'--"
HPC has discussed this project over the course of several meetings. The applicant wishes to
receive approval to relocate the house on the site, and to complete a Historic Landmark Lot Split.
Either this owner, or a future owner, will restore the cabin to the extent possible, and develop the
two halves of the lot as residential or mixed use. In order to pursue this redevelopment, a
variance from the minimum lot size for a Historic Landmark Lot Split is needed, because 701 W.
Main Street is a non-conforming parcel.
TIle attached application presents a few possible configurations for the lot split, as well as
alternate locations for the cabin. Setback variances are indicated for the cabin, but carmot be
approved because they were not included in the public notice. In addition, no information about
the future redevelopment of these parcels is provided to justifY the need for setback variances.
An FAR bonus is not requested at this time.
Based on the previous board discussions, Staff recommends that a Historic Landmark Lot
Split be supported, including the variances to the minimum lot size required for this
subdivision. The review criteria are met and the Lot Split is a good tool for removing
development pressure from a small building. Staff recommends that the cabin be placed on
the eastern lot to maintain it's corner exposure, and supports On-Site Relocation with
conditions. Demolition of the outbuilding is acceptable, but removing a portion of the
existing cabin is not recommended at this time because there is no redevelopment plan
prepared that explains the justification.
APPLICANT: Wes and Susan Bailey Anson, owners, represented by Jake Vickery, architect.
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-46-004.
1
ADDRESS: 701 W. Main Street, Lots H and I, less the west 2.35 feet of Lot H, Block 19, City
and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ""'"
ZONING: 0, Office.
HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT
In order to complete a Historic Landmark Lot Split, the applicant shall meet the following
requirements of Aspen Land Use Code: Section 26.480.030(A)(2) and (4), Section
26.470.070(C), and Section 26.415.01O(D.)
26.480.030(A)(2), SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS, LOT SPLIT
The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single-family dwelling on a
lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14, 1977, where all of the following
conditions are met:
a) The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board
of County Commissioners or the City Council, or the land is described as a metes
and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision
regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24, 1969. This restriction shall not
apply to properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and
Structures; and
Staff Finding:
The property is part of the original townsite and has not been previously subdivided. Most of the
Historic Landmark Lot Splits that HPC reviews occur in neighborhoods where residential
development is the only option. Although this property is in the Office Zone district, a condition
of approval will be required to make it clear that the development occurring on the vacant parcel
at 701 W. Main Street must be a single family residence, unless a future code amendment lifts
this restriction. The lot that contains the cabin can be developed as either residential or mixed-
use.
"".
b) No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to the
requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which development is
proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section
26.100.040(A)(1)(c).
Staff Finding:
The property is a non-conforming 5,765 square foot lot as a result of an adverse possession by
the adjacent neighbor. This proposal will create one 3,000 square foot lot (which is the minimum
size required for a Historic Landmark Lot Split), and one 2,765 square foot lot, which requires a
variance that will be discussed below.
Council has recently adopted new benefits for historic properties, pursuant to Section 26.420 of
the Municipal Code, which states that affordable housing mitigation will not be required for
properties created through a historic landmark lot split.
'......
~
c)
The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a
subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or a "lot split"
exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.040(C)(I)(a); and
"........
Staff Finding:
The land has not received a subdivision exemption or lot split exemption.
d) A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the
requirements of this title, is submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin
County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no further subdivision
may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of
applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth management allocation
pursuant to Chapter 26.100.
Staff Finding:
The subdivision plat shall be a condition of approval. It must be reviewed by the Community
Development Department for approval and recordation within ISO days of final land use action.
e) Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in
the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder. Failure on the part of the
applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following
approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of
the plat by the City Council will be requiredfor a showing of good cause.
Staff Finding:
The subdivision exemption agreement shall be a condition of approval.
f) In the case where an existing single-:family dwelling occupies a site which is
eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to application for a
lot split.
Staff Finding:
No dwelling will be demolished as part of this lot split. The outbuilding along the alley is
proposed to be demolished. It is currently being occupied as a residence illegally, which must be
corrected.
g) Maximum potential buildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split shall not
exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single-:family
home.
Staff Finding:
The parcel currently contains a single family home. The proposal will add one new homesite. No
more than two units in total can be created as part of this redevelopment based on the size of the
lots.
3
26.480.030( A)( 4), SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT
The split of a lot that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures """"
for the development of one new single-family dwelling may receive a subdivision exemption if it
meets the following standards:
a. The original parcel shall be a minimum of six thousand (6,000) square
feet in size and be located in the R-6, R-I5, R-I5A, RMF, or 0 zone district.
Staff Finding:
The subject parcel is 5,765 square feet and is located in the Office Zone District. A variance is
being requested in order to meet the minimum lot size stated above.
b. The total FAR for both residences shall be established by the size of
the parcel and the zone district where the property is located. The total FAR for each lot
shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat.
In the Office zone district, the following shall apply to the calculation of maximum floor
area for lots created through the historic landmark lot split. Note that the total FAR shall
not be stated on the Subdivision Exemption Plat because the floor area will be affected by
the use established on the property:
If all buildings on what was the fathering parcel remain wholly residential in use, the
maximum floor area will be as stated in the R-6 zone district.
If any portion of a building on a lot created by the historic landmark lot split is in
commercial/office use, then the allowed floor arca for that lot shall be the floor area
allowed for all uses other than residential in the zone district. If the lldjacent parcel
created by the lot split remains wholly in residential use, then the floor area on that parcel
shall be limited to the maximum allowed on a lot of its size for residential use according to
the R-6 standards.
~
If there is commercial/officc use on both newly created lots, the maximum floor area for all
uses other than residential in the zone district will be applied.
Staff Finding:
The maximum floor area for the original parcel, containing a historical landmark in the Office
zone, is 3,142 square feet. The applicant intends to develop the lot which contains the cabin as
mixed use, therefore the FAR is indicated on the site plan as .75:1. This note should actually be
removed, in case a future owner decides to develop the cabin as a residence, which would have a
different allowable floor area. As stated above, the new lot must be developed as a residence,
however no specific FAR should be indicated in case City codes are amended in the future.
c. The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements of the
underlying zone district. The variances provided in Section 26.4I5.I20(B)(I)(a),(b), and (c)
are only permitted on the parcels that will contain a historic structure. The FAR bonus -....
will be added to the maximum FAR allowed on the original parcel.
4
Staff Finding: No variances can be granted for the vacant new lot under the HPC review
criteria.
VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REOUlREMENTS FOR A HISTORIC
LANDMARK LOT SPLIT
The applicant will need two variances related to lot size. The first is a variance from the
minimum required size for the fathering parcel, which is 6,000 square feet. Due to the adverse
possession, the lot is 5,765 square feet. The second variance is for the size of the newly created
lots, which are meant to be at least 3,000 square feet each. One of the new lots will conform to
the requirement, but the other will be 2,765 square feet.
In order to authorize a variance from the dimensional requirements of Title 26, the HPC must
make a finding that the following three (3) circumstances exist:
1. Tlte grant of variance will be generally consistent witlt tlte purposes, goals, objectives, and
policies of tlte Aspen Area Community Plan and tltis Title;
Staff Finding: The AACP does support of the concept of more dense development and infill,
and preservation of a variety of historic resources.
2. Tlte grant of variance is tlte minimum variance tltat will make possible tlte reasonable use
of tlte parcel, building or structure; and
Staff Finding: Without the lot split, the "use by right" development options for the site are a
single family house, which would entail an addition of approximately 2,400 square feet to the
675 square foot original cabin, or an office/mixed use development that would add some 3,700
square feet. HPC has found in the past the Historic Lot Split has worked well to satisfY their
goals and the property owner's, and it takes away the pressure to create out of scale additions on
designated buildings. Because of this, staff finds that a variance will allow for the most
reasonable and appropriate development scenario in light of the City's Historic Preservation
standards.
3. Literal interpretation and enforcement of tlte terms and provisions of tltis Title would
deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by otlter parcels in tlte same zone district,
and would cause the applicant unnecessary Itardsltip or practical difficulty. In determining
whether an applicant's rigltts would be lleprived, tlte board sltall consider whether either of
the following conditions apply:
a. There are special conditions and circumstances which are unique to the parcel,
building or structure, whiclt are not applicable to other parcels, structures or buildings
in the same zone district and which do not result from the actions of the applicant; or
'-
Staff Finding: As stated above, the property does have an unusual circumstance in that it
became non-conforming through a property line dispute. The applicant is working with an
existing building, which cannot be modified in any significant way. Staff finds that this standard
is met.
5
b. Granting tlte variance will not confer upon tlte applicant any special privilege """"
denied by the Aspen Area Community Plan and the terms of tltis Title to other
parcels, buildings, or structures, in tlte same zone district; and
Staff Finding: No additional FAR is accrued through the variance, only the right to divide it
into two residences. This is a use that is generally allowed for historic properties in the zone
district. Staff finds that this review standard is met.
DEMOLITION
The applicant proposes to demolish the outbuilding that exists on the property, as well as the rear
portion of the existing cabin.
In order to approve any demolition, the HPC shall review the application, the staff report and
hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general
public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be
approved ifit is demonstrated that the application meets anyone of the following criteria:
a. The property has been determined by the city to be an imminent hazard to public
safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner,
b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to
properly maintain the structure,
"""
c.
Aspen, or
The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location In
d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic,
architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance, and
Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met:
a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic
district in which it is located, and
b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not
adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or its historic,
architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and
'flJ/
c. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the
historic preservation needs of the area.
,
'1
1
11
,I
JI
I
I
I ec:'~ - .1,
I I'
~- -~
~:? ! S"><-::j ;;
[7"'L
fI":j
rl "~"
I~'~
Staff Response: No information is available about the age of the
outbuilding, other than that it was constructed after the 1904 Sanborne Map.
A portion of it can be seen in a 1969 aerial view of the property. It appears to
have been constructed in at least two phases. This is a large structure that
6
/.
/1904 Map
I
I
......
extends almost the full width of the property along the alley. At this time, staff does not have
information that would support a position that it is historically significant building. It does
contribute to the alleyscape in that it is a typical one story utilitarian structure set right on the rear
property line, an important development pattern in Aspen. Staff believes that without a more
definitive position on the age and importance of the building, it will be burdensome to require the
applicant to retain this shed.
The guidelines state:
8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved.
o When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. Thesc
include its primary and roof materials, roof form, windows, doors and architectural
details.
o If a secondary structure is not historically significant, then its preservation is optional.
8.2 If an existing secondary structure is beyond repair, then replacing it is encouraged.
o An exact reconstruction of the secondary structure may not be necessary in these cases.
o The replacement should be compatible with the overall character of the historic primary
structure, while accommodating new uses.
With regard to the historic cabin, there is very limited information that has become available
about its history, however staff has located a floor plan drawn for the assessor's office in
approximately 1957 (below.) The addition which is proposed to be demolished appears on this
plan. At this time staff does not find that enough information has been
presented to justifY its demolition, or to explain why that is necessary since the
redevelopment of the lot is not designed yet.
(;.'
Some important information that this drawing from the Assessor's office does
provide is evidence that the building used to have a front porch. This is
4' supported by the historical narrative provided by a previous owner. It is clear
on the site that this section of the house has a different foundation, and on the
I inside of the building there is a door opening and a window opening on what
was likely the original front of the house. Staff recommends that the applicant
.. oon'"'"' '" pn"", nilicr wnre" '" nltim"dy ",ido ,", re!illbi""'in" nf >hi,
cabin, including older assessor records that may be available at the Aspen
Historical Society, photographs of Main Street at the Historical Society, and
any photographs that neighbors or other Aspen residents may have. It is very
important to locate more facts about the building in order to go forward with
this project as a good preservation effort.
1957 Floor
plan
ON-SITE RELOCATION
The intent of the Historic Preservation ordinance is to preserve designated historic buildings in
their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical
relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to
7
particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a building may be
appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on
the attributes that make it significant.
-""I",
26.415.090.C Standards for tlte Relocation of Designated Properties
Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it
meets anyone of the following standards:
I. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation
will not affect the character of the historic district; Q!
2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on
which it is locatcd and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic
district or property; Q!
3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; Q!
4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method
given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move
will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was
originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of
adjacent designated properties; and
Additionallv, for approval to relocate all of the followine criteria must be met:
I. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of
withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and
2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and
3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, rcpair
and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the
neccssary financial sccurity.
-
Staff Response: At the previous meetings there has been debate about how the lot should be
split and where the cabin should be placed. Site plan alternatives are attached that divide the
property parallel to, and perpendicular to, the orientation of the historic lot lines. HPC has
previously rejected the horizontal lot split, which staff agrees is inappropriate in terms of the
historic development pattern of town, and the problems it creates for vehicular access and the
need for new curb cuts, not to mention the impacts of potentially placing the cabin along the
alley. The two approvable plans, "Plan A," and "Plan B," move the cabin to the side and forward
of its current location. "Plan A" puts the building on the corner of 6'h and Main; "Plan B" puts it
on the interior lot. Staff recommends that HPC support "Plan A," finding that it is the best
preservation alternative for this building. It has historically been exposed to view on two sides.
If placed on the interior lot, this character is diminished, and the building is impacted by a large
spruce tree. In addition, staff believes that mixed-use development is the best alternative for this
building because it is possible that it could remain a free-standing office or commercial use,
which will not be the outcome of redevelopment for use as a single family residence. An office
or business would likely have more viability on the corner than on the interior lot.
The following guideline will be in question:
~"''''
9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
8
o In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in
a historic district.
o It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative.
o Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements.
o A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details
and materials.
o Before a building is moved, a plan must be in place to secure the structure and provide a
new foundation, utilities, and to restore the house.
o The design of a new structure on the site should be in accordance with the guidelines for
new construction.
o In general, moving a building to an entirely different site or neighborhood is not approved.
The Municipal Code will permit the cabin to continue to sit in its current location for the time
being, in spite of the fact that a new property line will run through it. Staff recommends that the
first action that is taken to redevelop this property shall be the permanent relocation and
rehabilitation of the historic structure. It will not be acceptable to move the building and
"mothball" it, in favor of undertaking construction on the vacant parcel.
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 recommend Council approve "Plan A" lor
this site with conditions as stated in the attached resolution.
Exhibits:
A. Staff memo dated December 8, 2004
B. Relevant Design Guidelines
9
"Exhibit B: Relevant Design Guidelines for 701 W. Main Street Historic Landmark Lot
Split, Demolition, Relocation and Variances"
",<~..
1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and
shrubs.
o Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of
damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department.
o If a tree must be removed as part of the addition or alteration, replace it with species of a'
large enough scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project.
8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved.
o When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. These
include its primary and roof materials, roof form, windows, doors and architectural
details.
o If a secondary structure is not historically significant, then its preservation is optional.
8.2 If an existing secondary structure is beyond repair, then replacing it is encouraged.
o An exact reconstruction of the secondary structure may not be necessary in these cases.
o The replacement should be compatible with the overall character of the historic primary
structure, while accommodating new uses.
9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
o In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in
a historic district.
o It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative.
o Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements.
o A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details
and materials.
o Before a building is moved, a plan must be in place to secure the structure and provide a
new foundation, utilities, and to restore the house.
o The design of a new structure on the site should be in accordance with the guidelines for
new construction.
o In general, moving a building to an entirely different site or neighborhood is not approved.
.......
9.2 Moving an existing building that contributes to the character of a historic district
should be avoided.
o The significance of a building and the character of its setting will be considered.
o In general, relocating a contributing building in a district requires greater sensitivity than
moving an individually-listed structure because the relative positioning of it reflects
patterns of development, including spacing of side yards and front setbacks, that relate to
other historic structures in the area.
9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HPC, a structure must remain within the
boundaries of its historic parcel.
o If a historic building straddles two lots, then it may be shifted to sit entirely on one of the
lots. Both lots shall remain landmarked properties.
10
9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation.
o It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback.
o It may not, for example, be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building
~~~cl~ .
10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right.
o Such an addition is usually similar in character to the original building in terms of
materials, finishes and design.
10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed.
ILl Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street. (New buildings on
Landmark Lot Splits)
o The building should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid
pattern of the site.
12.1 Respect historic settlement patterns. (Main Street Historic District)
o Site a new building in a way similar to historic buildings in the area. This includes
consideration of building setbacks, entry orientation and open space.
12.6 Minimize the use of curb cuts along the street. (MSHD)
o Provide auto access along an alley when feasible.
o New curb cuts are not permitted.
o Whenever possible, remove an existing curb cut.
12.8 Provide a front yard that is similar in depth to its neighbors. (MSHD
See the guidelines chapter: Lot and Streetscape Features.
12.9 Orient a new building in a manner that is similar to the orientation of buildings
during the mining era, with the primary entrance facing the street. (MSHD)
o The building should be oriented parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid
pattern of the block.
o A structure should appear to have one primary entrance that faces the street. The entrance to
the structure should be at an appropriate residential scale and visible from the street.
12.10
12.10 When constructing a new building, locate it to fit within the range of yard dimensions
seen in the block. (MSHD)
o These include front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks.
o In some areas, setbacks vary, but generally fall within an established range. A greater
variety in setbacks is inappropriate in this context.
o Consider locating within the average range of setbacks along the block.
12.lI Keep the front setback of a new structure in line with the range of sctbacks on thc
block seen historically during the mining era. (MSHD)
II
I2.I2Maintain similar side yard setbacks of a new structure or an addition to those seen
traditionally in the block during the mining era.
-'lIo,
14.17 Design a new driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact.
o Plan parking areas and driveways in a manner that utilizes existing curb cuts. New curb
cuts are not permitted.
o If an alley exists, a new driveway must be located off of it.
14.18 Garages should not dominate the street scene.
See Chapter 8: Secondary Structures.
.,",
~~',>.,
12
w
A BRIEF HISTORY OF 701 W. MAIN STREET
ASPEN,COLORADO
The corner of 6th and Main has been here to witness several points in Aspen history.
The house al 701 has at various times been a home for several farmers and herders
,
a small rooming house, and for nearly two decades the home to the Sheriff of Pitkin
County. We believe that the house was moved there sometime during the Depression
from another location outside of town. We believe the family moved into town as a
result of the economic depression in the area. The house according to oral history was
used as a rooming house by several people prior to World War n.
..
After the war the family that bought the house WClS tile family of the then-Sheriff of r'itkin
County. He served for many years into the 1960's. His widow then lived in the house
along with his daughter. The daughter's two sons, (grandchildren of the Sheriff) lived
there until the late 1980's when the current owners bought the property.
When the property was originally built it consisted of a simple four square house
measuring roughly 20 x 30 feet, with a screen porch added later facing Main Street.
Subsequently, during its rooming house period the front porch WClS em;losed and now
serves as a unheated bedroom holding two bunk beds. At the back of the house a
leanlo structure was added in the 1960's, we believe, to contain :3 new bathroom and an
additional bedroom. Inside the house, the original kitchen really consisted of nothing
more than a hand pump and an opp.n water drain to the surrounding irriQation ditch.
Unfortunately because of the multiple owners the house has over time deteriorated.
However, it is our belief that it represents a time and penod in Aspen history lhat is
rarely represented on the Inventory of historical structures - a home that while not
being from the Grand Age of Victorianism found most often in Aspen, nevertheless,
represents a vernacular style of PrairielCountry architecture that rose up in America
after Worlu War I.
Finally the back structure served as a tool-shedftractor-shed and measured
approximately 7 feet x 12 feet when the current owners acquired the property. . They
subsequently added two additional temporary structures for storage of personal items.
The back structure has never had a foundation and simply has a dirt floor with a single
wall construction and no internal structure. It never would have nor can it currently
withstand either Improvement or movement --- particularly since the original structure is
less than 100 feet square and was intended and used for as a tool-shedftractor-shed.
'"
C;\DOClJments and Settings\aobrienlLocal Settmgs\Temporary Internet Files\OLK6\A BRIEF HISTORY OF 701 W
Main.doc
MEMORANDUM
c
THRU:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
Joyce Allgaier, Deputy commu~ievelopment Director
TO:
FROM:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE:
631 W. Bleeker Street, Major Development Review (Conceptual) and Variance-
Public Hearing
DATE:
December 8, 2004
SUMMARY: The subject property is a 4,500 square foot lot that was created as a result of a
Historic Landmark Lot Split. The site is vacant except for a non-historic outbuilding that has
HPC approval for demolition. The applicant proposed to construct a new single family house,
which is limited to 2,400 square feet in size.
,....
....
Staff recommended that the public notice for this project include a request for a variance from
the "Secondary Mass" requirement within the "Residential Design Standards." This variance
was noticed in case HPC feels that the proposed new house needs to move back on the site, to
align more with the front of the historic house. Such a move would make it difficult for this
design to meet "Secondary Mass" as it is defined in our regulations.
Staff finds that the proposed new house is an excellent response to the design guidelines and is
sympathetic in height, scale, massing and proportions to the adjacent Victorian. Conceptual
approval as is recommended, with a condition that the front porch be restudied.
APPLICANT: Kevin Patrick, represented by Lipkin Warner Design and Planning, LLC.
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-01-302.
ADDRESS: 631 W. Bleeker Street, Lot B, Nevitt Historic Lot Split, City and Townsite of
Aspen, also known as the east \I, of Lot B and all of Lot C, Block 24, City and Townsite of
Aspen.
ZONING: R-6. Medium Density Residential.
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
. approve the application with conditions, "'"
. disapprove the application, or "J
. continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny.
RECOMMENDATION: StafIrecol11111ends HPC grant Conceptual approval for the project with
conditions outlined in tlle attached resolution.
A. Staff memo dated December 8, 2004
B. Relevant Design Guidelines
C. Application
~
\
4
"Exhibit B: Relevant Design Guidelines for 631 W. Bleeker, Conceptual Review"
11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street.
D The building should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid
pattern of the site.
11.2 In a rcsidential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by
using a front porch.
D The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a l11eans of access to the entry.
D A new porch should be si111ilar in size and shape to those seen traditionally.
D In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street;
nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that
orients to the street.
11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the
parcel.
D Subdivide larger 111asses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic
buildings on the original site.
11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building.
D The pri111ary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure.
D The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch.
11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property.
D They should not overwhelm the original in scale.
11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block.
D Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms.
D Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context.
D On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the
context.
D Exotic building and roof for111s that would detract from the visual continuity of the street
are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames.
5
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL)
FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 631 WEST BLEEKER STREET, LOT B,
NEVITT HISTORIC LOT SPLIT, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, ALSO KNOWN
AS THE EAST Yz OF LOT B AND ALL OF LOT C, BLOCK 24, CITY AND TOWNSITE
OF ASPEN, COLORADO
-
RESOLUTION NO. _, SERIES OF 2004
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-01-302
WHEREAS, tlle applicant, Kevin Patrick, represented by Lipkin Warner Design and Planning,
LLC, has requested Major Development Review (Conceptual) for the property located at 631 W.
Bleeker Street, Lot B, Nevitt Historic Lot Split, City and Townsite of Aspen, also known as the
east 'l2 of Lot B and all of Lot C, Block 24, City and Townsite of Aspen. The property is listed
on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures;" and
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure
shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a
designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been subl11itted
to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures
established for their review;" and
WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application,
a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's
conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section
26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC
may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain
additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and
......,
WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated December 8, 2004, performed an analysis of
the application based on the standards, found that the review standards and the "City of Aspen
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" have been met, and recol11mended approval with
conditions; and
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on December 8, 2004, the Historic Preservation
Commission considered the application, found the application was consistent with the review
standards and "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and approved the
application with conditions by a vote of _ to _'
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC hereby grants Conceptual approval for 631 W. Bleeker Street, Lot B, Nevitt Historic
Lot Split, City and Townsite of Aspen, also known as the east 'l2 of Lot B and all of Lot C, Block
. 24, City and Townsite of Aspen, as represented on Dece111ber 8, 2004, with the following
conditions:
I. Restudy the front porch to be more in scale and character with the front fayade of the
adjacent historic house.
2. An application for final review shall be submitted for review and approval by the HPC
within one year of December 8, 2004 or the conceptual approval shall be considered null
and void per Section 26.415.070.D.3.c.3 of the Municipal Code.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 8th day of Decembcr,
2004.
Approved as to Form:
David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney
Approved as to content:
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Jeffrey Halferty, Chair
ATTEST:
Kathy Strickland, ChieCDeputy Clerk
,.....,
-
..
..
LIPKIN WARNER DESIGN & PLANNING
23400 Two Rivers Rd, #44, PO Box 2239
Basalt, Colorado 81621
I T 9709278473
I F 970 921 8487
23.November.2004
Ms. Amy Guthrie
Aspen Historical Preservation Committee
130 South Galena
Aspen Colorado 81611
Re: Patrick Residence Major HPC Development Application (Conceptual)
For Property at 631 W. Bleeker, Aspen CO
Parcell.D. #2735.124.01.302
Legal: Lot #631 , Nevitt Historic Lot 5plit Subdivision
Dear Ms. Guthrie,
We are pleased to submit this application for Conceptual HPC Major Development approval.
We understand our public hearing date is December 8, 2004, and we are submitting our
application and completing our public notice today.
Attached here please find all of the Application submittal requirements, including Ownership
Disclosure and required Fees, and all required descriptive documents to communicate the
nature of our proposed development, as listed in the HPC Application Package.
This development proposal is for a single family home with a full basement and an attached
garage. We have designed this building in strict accordance with the required guidelines for
Height, Massing, Setbacks, Floor Area, and the proper relationship to the adjacent home to
the west, at 635 W. Bleeker.
The front face of our building aligns with the front face of the 635 W. Bleeker house, though
our front porch extends closer to the street; this porch is still more than the 10-foot
required front setback distance.
We have related the height of our proposed building to the 24' height of the house at 635
W. Bleeker in the front, and carried our roof line up to the allowed 28' height for this zone
district, only at the rear. We have connected our garage with a "Linked Pavilion", of heated
indoor space, as allowed and encouraged by the F.A.R. regulations. We are not requesting
any variances from the Residential Design Standards, unless the HPC requests dimensional
adjustments that may affect the required size of the "Linked Pavilion".
We intend to demonstrate the materials for the exterior finish of the house at our final
stage, as requested. Thank you for your consideration of our Conceptual Application, and
we look forward to meeting with the HPC on December 8, 2004.
:;;:~2J22
Michael Thompson ~
_ Project Architect
Patrick.HPC.conceptuaI.2004-11.23.DOC
Land Use Application
l!tJ
'-
THE ([TY OF ASPEN
PROJECT:
Name: jC..EV / A.j L-. ?Aitz,IG IC-
Location: C&>?/ W. ~U3~Ic:..Er<-... 'ST.
A5pe~, L- OL-C> rzA 170
(Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property)
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 2-7'7;,$' /2.</. 0/' 302.
APPLICANT:
Name: J:;::::.euu.,j t.... --pATfGICK-
Address: l'?o 6. -Pu(2.A/>..JT 'ST. 5<.I1.62CO . A~=::-.. CO S/&;JI
Phone #: '770' '720' /026 Fax#: 970' '12S' u,8c.J7 E-mail: -pat:l-,c.k@wat:erlsuJ. c.all'l
REPRESENTATIVE:
Name: fltC.HAEL- --rFIc-u. cA./ L./ I~"../ t..vArzIJEI<.. ~{C's7JJ "PLAAJ.AlJ u...c...
Address: Z3'-1oo TuX> fGwE-t25 f!.oAo4F<..N . "BAsAc.:r 00 StwZI- zz ~9
.~none#: 970 '97..7'6'-1.7 Fax#: 70''7Z7'B'i~7 E-maii:l~-t~a""
TYPE OF APPLICATION: lease check all that a Iy:
o
o
o
o
1r
o
o
Historic Designation
Certificate of No Negative Effect
Certificate of Appropriateness
-Minor Historic Development
-Major Historic Development
-Conceptual Historic Development
-Final Historic Development
-Substantial Amendment
o Relocation (temporary, on or off-site)
o Demolition (total demolition)
o Historic Landmark Lot Split
EXISTING CONDITIONS: (descri tion of existin
G.kf rY {...o-r E",c.f: r po!2. e'1f./STIIJ
rovals, etc.)
scc Slj!l.llCiY
c:::.oNST(U/Gj/CA./ OF NE<-V ";;>JJJEjL.E pA...ul(..'l
..--
.-
.~'.-'--~"
-
FEESDuE: $ 2, &2-0.
00
General Information
Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This information will
help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that may be involved.
YES NO
){
o
o
~
o
)(
o
Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions, new
construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration?
Does the work you are planning include interior work; including remodeling, rehabilitation, or
restoration? (N~ =NSTtzUC.T'oA.! oAlC{)
Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time?
J&'
In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative Effect
and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places property in order to qualify
for state or federal tax credits?
o
o
If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in conjunction with
this project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are
eligible. Owner-occupied residential properties are not.)
o
o
If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Historical Preservation?
Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use:
o Rehabilitation Loan Fund 0 Conservation Easement Program 0 Dimensional Variances 0 Increased
Density 0 Historic Landmark Lot Split 0 Waiver of Park Dedication Fees 0 Conditional Uses
o Exemption from Growth Management Quota System 0 Tax Credits
~/<'"
""'-"
~,-
_oject:
Applicant:
Project
Location:
Zone
District:
Lot Size:
Lot Area:
Dimensional Reqnirements Form
(Item #10 on the snbmittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.)
"PATlZ.tGIC- ~ES I oE?Jo.J.C€
;:::"ElJI'" c.... -pATR-tGIC-
Co~1
U)."'BLEC'tc-.E'R-
/Z.w
(9. If Ac.rzE
<-I, e:c= SF
(For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within
the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot
Area in the Municipal Code.)
Existing:
Existing:
Existing:
Proposed:
Proposed:
- Proposed:
-
Commercial net leasable:
Number of residential units:
Number of bedrooms:
t
3
Proposed % of demolition:
t-I/A
,
DIMENSIONS: (write n/a where no requirement exists in the zone district)
Floor Area: Existing: - Allowable: 2, i{co. Proposed: 2,4=.
Height
lIrincipal Bldg.: Existing: Allowable: 'Z.~' Proposed: Z8'
'"1\ccessory Bldg.: Existing: - Allowable: Proposed: /7!..CfJII
On-Site parking: Existing: - Required: ~ Proposed: Z.
% Site coverage: Existing: - Required: 5::> '70 Proposed: 43'70
% Open Space: Existing: - Required: 507c Proposed: 57 '7D
Front Setback: Existing: - Required: /0' Proposed: 10'-2'%)"
Rear Setback: Existing: - Required: 5' Proposed: 5'-t.{Yz'
Combined Front/Rear:
Indicate N. S. E. W @ Existing: Required: /0' Proposed: (O'-Z 3/.!\.
Side Setback: @) Existing: Required: 5' Proposed: 5'-2:,"
Side Setback: @ S' S' II
Existing: Required: Proposed: -0
Combined Sides: Existing: Required: to' Proposed: {o'-8"
Distance between Existing: Required: 10' Proposed: f/!../l%,"
buildings:
Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued:
.yariations requested (identify the exact variances needed):
'~, ..
-'-",
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQillRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
......
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
w. "BU:cE~
8, . \:;:>E<:.EM"F.:>E1<-
, Aspen, CO
,200!d
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: G:> '?I
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
County of Pitkin )
I, d c-ti A Ec- -Y--ffc>.A.-/. P ~oAj (name, please print)
being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have
complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the
following marU1er:
_ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
~. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the
Community Development Department, which was made of suitable,
waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide
and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed ofJetters not
less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted in a conspicuous place on
the subject property at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was
continuously visible from the _ day of ' 200_, to and
including the date and time ofthe public hearing. A photograph of the posted
notice (sign) is attached hereto.
.?>,. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) ofthe Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class, postage
prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within tlrree hundred (300) feet of the
property subject to the development application, and, at least fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class
postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal
government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental
agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject
to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners
shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no
more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the
owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
---
-
Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in
any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision
of this Title, or whenever the text ofthis Title is to be amended, whether such
revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use
regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other
sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and
addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall
be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public
inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days
prio,"'th'p,,"li, 1=i"g~ "OC~~ .
Signature
The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this _ day
of ,200_, by
-
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My commission expires:
Notary Public
ATTACHMENTS:
COpy OF THE PUBLICATION
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
BY MAIL
"',
.---.----
~
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: 631 WEST BLEEKER STREET- MAJOR HPC DEVELOMENT (CONCEPTUAL)
AND V ARlANCE
-
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, December 8,
2004 at a meeting to begin at 5 :00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, City
Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to. consider an application for Major
Development (Conceptual) submitted by Kevin Patrick, represented by Lipkin Warner Design and
Planning. The project affects the property located at 631 W. Bleeker Street, which is described as
Lot B, Nevitt Historic Lot ,Split, City and Townsite of Aspen, also known as the east 'l2 of Lot B
and all of Lot C, Block 24, City and Townsite of Aspen. The application includes a request for a
variance from the Secondary Mass requirement within the "Residential Design Standards." For
further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development
Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 920-5096, amyg@ci.aspen.co.us.
s/Jeffrev Halfertv
Chair, Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on November 20, 2004
City of Aspen Account
--
~.-..
'-
I
I I
631 West Bleeker Street
I I
0 ~.L
.~
-fRV1-4G.re RD I
" :S-It). ""'
- '<1>_
I ~J u,
r. ....'1'(82
I -....
I
I Legend
I # Mapt Roads
I ,tV Roads
I ,-_I Subdivisions
f/ Rive., and Streams
. lakes and Ponds
o Lots and BkJcks
o Parcels
. Strudures
.-_. Urban Gro\\1.h Boundary
o Cities
Federal lands I
I - I lUt
-
I usrs r
, 0
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,0
I
I
I
I
c
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
.
. . ,
.
\. ,
I
I
o
~
Cl) '-
l:l...11
o ll)
!.... ~
I.\... [Q
~ :s:
~ ~
'r: t<)
~ \&)
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o
I
o
I
I
I
o
I
I
I
I
I
o
o
o
.
C)
.
I
I
I
o
o
u
~
\,'
> 1O_
~MH
""cop-.
~ 'lJ
L
E-<
~OE-<
>~O
~ H
n
L
z
o
.......
'lJ
.......
>-
.......
q
c::i
;=J
[fl
o
~
~
D
,
U
U
e
~
o
u
~
!j
~
~
E-<
~
~
U
L
~
Q
"
"
t;
~
~
~
u Q
.......
0:: e-
Or:;
~
E-<
[fl
.......
::r::
E-<
E-<
.......
>-
eLl
Z
~ ~
-
!;;
~
~
,
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
+I!
>;
~
I
I
\
\
\
,
>'L
~: g
-.---.-
-'---
-'-'-
-'-'-
---
---
,
C
I;
1
1
f'
I;
F
I
I
,I /
,/ ;
'A Ii:;
li~ f t"
,
{
f,{
f?
i"
. .-~,..:
-. :-'-'...:
'::;
; i~
/
/
/
/
/
I
\
\
\
~ ",
'c,
\
\
\
co,
?
~ $/in,) ~a ~J~8\
,z,y,yij,zs
!/,zJ'/s
-c:::::]z
00"01
,.,'
.
Cl
I
I
\
\
\
\
\
-.\
OJ \
'" \
\
F-. \
-'~-r-'-,-,_~_
)
/
.
/
/
/
'"
"
co'
!-~~
Co
I:)
rll C)
U
~
'"
!/,zijON
,
,,'
_J
~
U
""
"
'"3
u
u
/
/
/
/
'u
I
I
"-
.'1
,
I
I'
o .
~ '-0 ,n
C : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
;!I;Hqn
~ ~ I - 3 0 ~ ~ 0
: wmWL
<l " CL ~ ,~; ~,'
(, .:, ~;,;; ~ ~ ; - ~ a
'" GO ~. 1 0' w ::; ~
; Wll1iW!:
,:; '"
"
'"0"1
.1ili
~'is
(EJ,
.
. ' J: .'. ~.
/; -J L : c
" ';)
I n 7.~.
.. 1'1'
I ./','
i l"
i f.
i " "l.,
I I.
i i"
-'-.-.-{' /"
, i,~_
:....\'....:.-.. '
.
-.-.....;;:.-
-----.-
,.,
';..
~~
!l
'Jo
cy
<e.,.
If
\
I
1
I
iJ
<:::>
~
,.
----- W
-------- --__J
1).)----___
;. /!5j ,-
'WI CO :' '.g
I ..
" I
~
'"
~
,-- /
/y
/
I
I
".'1
f'....
o
~
f,~
!
,
"
1<"
~:;,
\
\
\
\
~
i>;
B,"
,1.-,'
co,
~~~
;;;~~
C.z6
~,~
~~
,
,
~~
"
.~
"
~~,
~IDI!l
o.
~,~
_l.:
,,~
"-'
Co
~~
e-L' ~2
:~,'
~" ~~
~: ~o
;i! ~i
~~~ 00
~~; ~~
::;Z~ n,.,
!Ii ::
77 D,.,
;~ !j~ 0'
,. '" "',; ~~ I
;, ~.'~
r", ';,0_ .
W
/
~
''1
'"
~
<
~"
\..) .'
~ ~
[q
~ ~
.co
VJ
::;:-
'0
0. ,.,~'
>:
~
l/J
"
~ ~"
',:,:;
'" ~ ;
. ~ ~ :\
~ ~;
':<,
"
-0
~ ~'
,"\
~ ~ ~
~:; D 0
"i1..
""""",,"M_: rz.;tSOO'.LiVSV1I
LilWLItl0L6 : 6rnXOIn]d
H'1i"LU'0L6 I'W"m1Sl1Hhll10M.L00Ia
9N1N~tI'N9lSl1(] lIXNYVMNDWI'l
__il.
d a
.. 'I
H9-rg OJ I N3dS\f
133M1S M3~331g IS3M tE9
3)N3aIS3~ ~)I~lVd
i
,
I
I
t---
I
!
f-
W
W
a::
f-
rJJ
I
f-
X
Cij
I
~
o
z
w
'"
6 ~
~ ~
o '"
o N
;:
. - ---l
I
II
11
D~[]D
133<11S <13>13318 lS3M
T-,
I I
I '
--------------.--. ._---._---"-------~.. .----- .. .-----"...----------.---
(1;' .-:;;,,~.~'..:___.""
l
n
~
ri
....-ITc~-c===c'''c~~===~~F.c==~-- .
!' II I
11\ " I I
' " '
, 1
I 1 I
"1 '
" ,
II I
~,
T-c===-ll=:.~
11 ,.._.
, I
--.]
I ,I r
I 'I 1
'L.,.. .. .. --- -.-I'.r.-, --t.
'------tIT-
I l~ J c._..____.__.r-.-,.--i
, 11--- ,
i!
Ii
II
II
"
II
'I
II
,l~.-
ill
'II
"
i!
1
--;il
r=
I
,
,
,
,
I
,
,
,
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
[I
! :
"i
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
I
,
J
-==b.=
ill
~
Z I
::15>';
0.-":
" .
wO?~
1--
1ii
w
;;!
u
'"
-....-,
I
-'
LiWLZ6"0l6 .
.'~'mi'0l6
lt9ts OY~'lVSY1I
6Q:'!:XOO'O<l
l'n<nlSlmMllO!ll.lOOl'a
mmocnd '" N!)JS:!I(( 1IBNl[VM.NDidn
. a
.. 'I
H9t8 0) . N3dSV
133~S ~3~331B 1S3M tE9
3)N3aIS3~ ~)I~lVd
D!
~
o
"
O~
,
0-
.'
L~
~.
D~[]D
~
~
~~
Oc
lfl'"
z
:5
a.
....J 'j
W'1 .
>....p
UJII~
....J. .
c::;'!;~
W
~ ..
O~
....J1\
00
~c
0,
o.
:I:'
r
~~
~..
.1
.
"
~
.
~:I ~
. ~ ,
x ~ ~
,
o
10
:1
I
x
g)-~
It;!:';
q
o
d
~, lt9180C\'.nV!1Vl!
LlIWLt60i.6: 6E'z:tx.oa'O'd
W>ll"!U'OL6' m-<1lI~OAUOOIoEZ
H9TR 0) 'N3dSV
i33HiS H3~331R iS3M TE9
DNINNYld'li' N"DIS:ro lmNllYMIoIDLIrI
d Q
II 'I
3)N3aIS3~ ~)I~lVd
D~[]D
'" >C' ...jl..",.-cp
J\\J' V,I' ,~J"
c",:,1} 1 !jvl't.,
o :)~\." ( j::-:J{ .
"", ,~-~,-~s\A.. E " .6.
<'"~ >j--r-'-, ~~~~
8=_-_ .u. =.~ ~.= .u. ~.=.8 =_= .-. =_= .-_ =.~:a: =_~ __. = ___ ~ 'j ~\\)~~'
:<'~ I ~ ~\':7-\7:'
,/ r' J.;l,.f~-r....'"
\ \ ~ > 'U"'"~ I
\. \ '7 ! //
/\\\\ ,Ii
/ '\ '. \ /'
1/
V
,
.
"
z
.
co
.
~
.
.
~~ ~
.
z
d:m
II II
.
,
COo
W liz
~,
. > ~l
0 8
Q 8
~ .
x ~
. z
. %
< i\
c:J
. ,
! ~
< ,
. ,
\J ,'\
-------.:.~"'>.
'\
/--:...=-
/ ----
</~-"r-"00'7 !
~"\ [~ /
, \. ,\ ! '
" \ "
\ ""
\, , \
\:". \
"
'\
\
/
"
c.
" .-.......
I -
I /--7
~ /..-
\--'/1..//
/ /
,~/
j
/j
!
I'
I
,-?
/j
',' ;"
'/
!
.
;
/ /-/
. r
II.""
--"'-"-'~
-./
//']/'"
(/ V'
( ..
V
-c:::-"- _,
(
\,,-
'. "
"'\ '\
\ \
\ \
~ \,
II' \; /
/
--
- ---\
~"'::>1
!
~i
~
!
I
'-l
/: -I
I
!
~
,
I
/
,\j
~
~
a..
....Jb.
UJ .' '"
>:t:
UJ. .
-'~;Z
Z
<( u
::q
u
U)
...._'A lr<lUIOO'HVSV
L8WLU'!lI..6. 6rn:XOl'ro-<f
W'lrL~6'O"6 tvl"m1Sl1RhJllOAI.1~
~NINNY'ld.N91S'lJIIUNlfYA\.NIXdrI
1:1:9,8 0) 'N3dSV
133M1S M3~331B 1S3M ,.9
D~[]D
. a
II ~
3)N3aIS3~ ~)I~lVd
"
,\-""',<H<'>vr
i)_ 'JO \~' \h ,'.,~ \ c,
.";,"~~:J 'I' /1Y')' It>c
~"" "\" v:.fi!
"~--~- ""~'" \ -~:. -<" ^
/",--~:\\.!<_/ ",L::"
;'7(C".,,9F"^
/\\,,"""'--,\ '",---''''
~'\'\::";~:]
, '''] / \ r~~ ': .,. '"
__--t'-' ,\'. ,-..,e..
~_/....,~' Vv ..lY'I.:::,\.'V'".
h. '\- J,o_;" ~ ~f;' '> l ?
\'\ "0 ,/ /,/ l/
\ \ "j /' F j/
\ '
~
000
. .
<
.
o
o
(
"
~
u
.
o
d
",
\J \
\,
Ii
)1
z
:5
a.
.....I. .
UJ5'",
> ~ .
UJrr~
.....I. .
'!'"
0:: ~ <.
UJ
a. ..
a.~
::J('j
UJ
>
t ~~
Rl 0;.-
~ m-
//>----
1/
/.,
.
~.
.~;
~m;!
~
u
.
o
d ~
. "
~ ~
. "
<
>
-""'-=:::=::.:::--,
D
o 0
;>
-~
/"--\
-":/1
i
I
~
/
t
ImI
,
~
~' TIdI
. "EfB
--tI . .... .
IT""-
"i ).1.:
I -..-.-
~~' rm
II~D
I
j... -- 1--
, ,.
I,
j
1m.
g
MJf~~I~/i1
. ~~.d[25\I[~~"'" '" .
U..i'
1",,1 il
I, '
I II
ii'
I I
,,~..
~. ::::t=J
,ibl
rg]
rt!J
I: ;
l@
"
""
IZ91g opnoloJ 'J
t+ :n!ns p-eoreSTij 6fu XO'i! '0 'd
1I s;J;"I^!'CI OM.l ootb:
p;
R ~
. ~ ,;"
1i
~ '
~ :!
~, ;:
~'~ ;..
"'"
I..... ':1
~ it,
\,J,I;I.
~ e,'
t ~
I
!
, '
" '
~:
~:' i,
t.; 'j
\Ie \,
;;, .,
~;;-
"I'"
\.\' ~
"'" .',
..
Ir=t=1r
~~..."C
wff~'.
~...ii '
... I .
'"j '~
I
1
i
-
I
10
\
l'~~ .._"~~
i i
,
I
--j-
r!
~
U .. .(
Il__~____---1
r~
i.
itll
"
'I , ..
Ii '
ii, ;
11lC1
II"
I I
QI
II~JlTT ..
I,." +,""',"
'i !I i,---J::
I II II
F,I!C~~,..J,,,..I
:~ I: ;,' 4r=l-
, " !. I'
'1......."",.'..",.,.11,1 i'.,
' ~1 -~'11-"- '
, jlR i '
.-- ....--.. ]
i
(i ,-,~
Ii ..
=
JQ
~D' ~
~~
~\l ~
~
\)
.
~~
)
Iji-:
, "
~' "
~ ,VI
~~
~I
~
~
ll\
''?
~. ~
-.........,...i
'-
i:' ,\
, '
~ ~
\J "-
\J ~.
~ \0
~ '-
f\:,~
,
, I
.
~
~
"
}
~!
~j,
~N
1>".
~-t\'
~n
~
~
~\J
"-
"-...
,