The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.19980708 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION July 8, 1998 REGULAR MEETING, 5:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:00 I. Roll call II. PUBLIC COMMENTS III. COMMISSIONER AND STAFF COMMENTS IV. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) V. BUSINESS A. 505 N. Eight Street--Minor review of covered porch and patio 0 ic 1(ey-7 _ 14#7 B. 203 S. Galena--Minor review of windows, doors, and signi~,47~ 4, u on L C. 920 W. Hallam--Public hearing Significant (conceptual) development, Historic landmark, Historic Lot split, partial demolition, on-site relocation, off-site relocation, variances, and Residential Design Standards variances. VI. INFORMATION A. VII. ADJOURN PROJECT MONITORING Roger Moyer 303 E. Main, Kuhn ~ , - ISIS, ~ : ... _ t 435 W. Main, L'Auberge 514 N. First . Susan Dodington 712 W. Francis 918 E. Cooper, Davis 132 W. Main, McCloskey Meadows Trustee and Tennis townhomes- 234 W. Francis Melanie Roschko 918 E. Cooper, Davis ISIS 107 S. Mill Elli's bldg. Zona storefront window Suzannah Reid 303 E. Main, Kuhn 702 W. Main, Pearson 218 N. Monarch, Zucker 414 N. First 1008 E. Hopkins, Bellis Mary Hirsch Meadows, Trustee and Tennis townhomes 420 W. Francis Street 435 W. Main, L'Auberge Gilbert Sanchez 1008 E. Hopkins, Bellis 414 N. First 303 E. Main Jeffrey Halferty 132 W. Main, McCloskey 234 W. Francis, Mullin 414 N. First 701 W. Main 101- 105 E. Hallam Heidi Friedland 420 W. Francis Street ~ 712 W. Francis Street 514 N. First CONCEPTUAL APPROVALS WHICH HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL: 834 W. Hallam (Poppie's), expires April 26,1999 123 W. Francis, Lot B (Vickery), expires May 24, 1998 514 N. Third Street (Ringsby), expires June 11, 1998 214 E. Bleeker Street (Greenwood), expires August 12, 1998 A. EXHIBIT [7] 17-#-9 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Director FROM: Julie Ann Woods, Deputy Planning Director M. [Acting Historic Preservation Officer] RE: 505 North Eighth St.--- Minor Review DATE: July 8, 1998 SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to construct a new porch roof over an existing rear deck. The roof will use three (3) columns for support, and detailing will match the existing columns of an existing covered porch. The deck surface will be converted to brick pavers, and some new planters will be added. APPLICANT: John and Marianne Schuwmacher, represented by Dave Johnston. LOCATION: 505 N. Eighth St. PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. The subject building is an historic landmark. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). Response: The proposed covered patio area is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with the adjacent parcels within the "H," Historic Overlay District. There are no variances being requested, and the setbacks will not extend beyond that allowed in the R-6 zone district. Please see attached plan and elevation, Sheet No. 3.1. 1 ' 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood ofthe parcel proposedfor development. Response: The proposed development will have little to no affect on the character of the neighborhood. There is an existing covered porch which opens out to a raised deck area. A new covered porch will extend from the rear of the existing covered porch approximately 14'. The covered porch area will be 20' wide. The roof structure will be supported with three columns which will match the column on the existing porch. A 1/4 fantail decorative trim will be added at the eaves of each column, similar to the detail of the existing porch. The wood detailing will be painted to match the existing. The new roof will match the existing roof material. The rear deck will be replaced with brick patio pavers which will extend to the north. New planters will be added within the extended patio area. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposedfor development or on adjacent parcels. Response: The proposed change would not detract from the historic significance of the designated historic structuresÂ· located on the parcel or from those located on adjacent parcels. The covered porch and simple detailing should not confuse old from new as covered patios ofthis scale were not typical ofthe Victorian era of architecture. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish front the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposed development will not diminish the architectural character or integrity of any historic structure. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe following alternatives: â€¢ Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. â€¢ Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. â€¢ Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) â€¢ Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC approve the proposed changes to 505 N. Eighth St., with the following conditions: 1. That the improvements will be substantially in conformance with the drawings submitted with the application, as shown in Sheet No. 3.1; 2. The roof material will match the existing roof, with a modified pitch as shown in the drawings. 3. Any additional significant changes from those proposed in this application shall be considered "significanf' and will require a conceptual and final review of the HPC before proceeding with construction; 4. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public hearings shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a decision-making body having the authority to do so. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the proposed changes to 505 N. Eighth St. with the conditions recommended in the staff memorandum dated July 8, 1998." EXHIBITS: Exhibit "A" - The submitted application, including Sheet No. 3.1. Exhibit "B" - Historic Architectural Building/Structure Form (Inventory) 3 05-KH t orr A 110% 418 E. Cooper Avenue r ,$,iwair Suite 206/b Aspen, Colorado 81611 970.925.3444 Vf 4% DAVIDJOHNSTONARCHITECIS PC JUL 0 1 1996 July 1, 1998 Community Development Department City of Aspen, Colorado re: Application for Minor Development Review Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Subject Property: The Schuhmacher Residence 505 North Eighth Street Lots Q, R, and S, Block 2 Aspen, Colorado Committee members, The enclosed information is an application for a Minor Development Review for the subject property in Aspen. The project involves constructing a new porch roof over an existing back deck. The deck surface will be converted to brick pavers. The roof structure will use (3) columns for support; the detailing will match the existing columns as shown in the drawings. The new roof material will match the existing. The new covered area will be 20'-0" x 14'-0", or 280 SF. Porches, as defined in the Aspen Land Use Code, do not count towards FAR. The new addition is located on the west side ofthe existing residence, on Smuggler Street, and completely screened from the road by evergreen trees. A planter structure, a fence, and extensive trees and bushes separate the new space from the adjacent neighbor to the west. Development Standards: 1. The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing, volume, scale, and planning with the existing structure. The existing residence contains a number of porches and one story structures. The roof is covering an existing patio; the function of the space will remain the same. 2. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the 9:33.t J??~11 neighborhood. Given the location of the proposed roof structure, any impact to the adjacent property to the west is minimal. In addition, the proposed modification is only visible slightly from the Smuggler Street side. The development is consistent with the existing structure, and consequently consistent with the neighborhood. 3./4. The proposed development does not detract from the architectural character and integrity of the historic structure. All details, materials, and colors will match the details of the existing porch(s). The essence of a "porch" is a consistent characteristic of this residence. Thank you for your attention to this application. Please feel free to contact my office for any clarifications to this application. Respectfully, ab-SU24 David Johnston David Johnston Architects, PC ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name Â«CLIUUMDCAAER &902,#Ce 2. Project location 9(le, U Â· Elcul# tnaZEr Apgw, Co 1.Cips CD. lEi .405, BU,<k Z. (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning tÂ· 6 4. Lot size 9000 ge' 5. Applicant's name, address and phone number louw 4 VU,2....W" Scuuâ€¢IM.Uleg . 005 U. 120%4(,1 â‚¬r. hleu 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number 9.b 105 -344+ hA#,O 36Wismu Aecwmia AT- 43 E (6912% 7206 -11, , Aspeu. 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA Conceptual HPC Special Review ~ Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD -~ Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD - Relocation HPC Subdivision Text/Map Amend. Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot SpliVLot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the property) 511.161 G,Miu.r %&56,IDI*Act 0 39890 Sr +41;Tâ€¢O gâ€¢KE CA) 91031,44 9. Description of development application thal' Foas Appmt,4 10, Have you completed and attached the following? 4 Attachment 1 - Land use application form V Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form v Response to Attachment 3 7 Response to Attachment 4 lllillll ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: 40'. 4 tvua,aw".0 Ge.,uw...c..~i Address: Ocyb U . ki 4.,Am snaasr , Ai,Pew Zone district: 26 Lot size: 90(0 9 Existing FAR: 5461.1 Â·w Allowable FAR: 9446 -,t: Proposed FAR: -6- Existing net leasable (commercial): Proposed net leasable (commercial): Existing % of site coverage: Proposed % of site coverage: Existing % of open space: Proposed % of open space: Existing maximum height Princioal bida: Accesorv blda: Proposed max. height Princioal bkla: Accessorv bida: Proposed % of demolition: Existing number of bedrooms: 4 Proposed number of bedrooms: Existing on-site parking spaces: On-site parking spaces required: Setbacks Existing: Minimum required: Proposed: LIb C.W.wed . Front: Front: to' Front: Rear: Rear: 10' Reac Combined Combined Combined Front/rear: Front/rear: 30Fr Frorlt/rear: Side: Side: 16' Side: Side: Side: tty Side: Combined Combined Combined Sides: Sides: td Sides: Existing nonconformities or encroachments: Variations requested: (HPC has the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.fl, site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts) It 9 0 0 0.7 1 L /4/ \' I /1 11,.: 1/1 - 49Â»Â« i: 16. 1,0,1,8 POMSH 1 8 1 K ., ..6 ' , 8 94.v ' _ \0\- h T . 1 , 4 011 0 1 *==i~ ; 1 A - <> r Pn 4 , j 4, 11 --=.1-r.r--53=2 11 - r 1- 7-11. Â¥ i ilit - J iii h 4 L iL 1 w 11 11 11 1 m or==- lif </ 1 4 -- -- -- - - .. 22= H -11 1 1 1,9 J \ A 1, 2 04, - 0 P i li :il 4 1 (,34-JU"WitÂ£ Â· M paaoi i ~ Oer .~UAAA i fil~ Cal - i 1 11 SIDE SETBACK i - 11 5 DAVIDJOHNSTONARCHITECIa $ PC B .- Al 31= 418 E COOPER ASPEN, CO 81*11 w (870Â»25.3444 1 - --- ~ - - 2 gwlÂ¥.19 >linle M) re. WAT= I . 1 4. 0 1 Â·Â§4.f 1 . -. 1 i a AL --,39/ 39> f '. .I .T--.---.- '. -f ' 41. 'A*1.-554.. '. t d 44,4 -ir; a.gu#=/.I<91 , 2 4 44241:Â§09>.*.f - ., av.., k + , 1 &.7/1/// 111/1 .Â¥* r A. . Efyi.' .. 4 2. 0. , 0 - -- - . '69... 0743% 0 4 -M . Â¥ 1â€¢ â€¢ r . 1.11 ./. IL , ' . il Midilill// I f : Cha i X. 4 I , . 4 4 *, + i.- i .2 ..49..:/4/P# N GAA *L . 2 -0, Â¥74' ;4 h, Â· ~ I... . 9 , . ''. - 0-~1.-aÂ¥ Â¥4. .0 - . " 4 145*Â· / -0 ~ , , $ I 4 *lt' - t: . . *44 - '25Â·$ / ,: Â· 8 .~ ...\/ . ' i - I. . -)t Â· 1 - 24=0 1294.-". . 94 132 4 ... - 'm>k - ..1 . '. . .4-/ . -- I- - , /yrirt . 0. I .. I , BAT* ..1, ''74'~ . .Â· â€¢4 - '.tur,. g.v 4 + 0 +Uâ‚¬.A, 4 â‚¬A 1 . t. ,~,1-6 3'LI~Â· ~ '- I.- 4464.1Â©04.'.': *~ 9~ 6 . I -1 . . I~ . - r . ... 6 -4-XeÂ»- Â¥ . 3[114%2*Â·7' "4~~ $- ir 7+9*AC-------- 1 01*Wact. . * $ #*#imff t . N.Â£9* 1,"1'.:'h; 4 ..Zl:*21.- .1 4 11â€¢ W.., 0 # u Wl--: - , . I - I#:... . I . , -,---E+.~.1. C , . 9 f.641:.. 3 ' 4 -Â¥ 44431, I . 4.. I --4 n .t 1 " - :'-36'%:Â·r.fi. 181.1,7,- 4, 1 - - . -44---Il---I----4.---*#; Â«11 1. , 1.14* i .1 2- , 1.- /Il '.4% ..2 ---I-- -#L-./. h -* 1 r. Al .j~11 '' I. 1 yi"'$< S. 4-- I 20.1 . . I '- :. I hal - - A 6 . - I , 4, all ...16,6.'llidullati . . 1 I ./. h I - A.4.- * . Â» .-. 1 K - .... B. W4 qM - 60 - 1 -, 0 44 - fl, , , 1. m- L ':]' . >.., 1. : 1.9* b;' "41,~ i 2 W- . N M- ~ , â€¢3'fi2M411 ;f: L'.,)1'l" . â€¢ -9,4 '2-4.C--.4%54: ...1 3,1 J ~ , ' ~ ff:1 6. '.1 1 lilli;111.. 1,4,1 't. 1 '~~1~1: il!~ â€¢r. . 9 , 1 .11.- 1 1 .If 4.4 - , .l' ~,4'it .., .I,"1 ..~ . 1, 9 .4-7,4 *#.2 4< e-,6 1 4 ' ..4 d 1 , 30... 2. 7 - 11. r.:1111. 4 Â·Â· Â·.. 14Â·' :,31 p./.% , I. 1-1, el â€¢ 2 j' f~ t'Â·tÂ· ~~,4 -~~~ ~~Â·' 'p ,&'114'i~~~44 "4 vi. " , ' 1 ' I 71/7. ;% ': 4*, r ~ d J , le I , Â¢ Â¢ 1., 4 , I Â· ii i ~1~4~ $ 1, ' ** 94.L I , 59. *4Â· ;~ -Â·..r :14: 1:SC: ....69-i DAL:Pill,117:~.1 .1 .2.-':;~'~~';; ~t ' ,~~f'~~~~~~~~,~~~~Lt;4t:J~:i~ ~~4~1]~, ;1 1 ;1.11 4 d :4IM,1 ,~~~ ;~~ ~:]:'Â· ,~:3,~:iotti.;Â·;:~i,~944'~~*)4;;Â· : <TI 3,~Â· ~ ~4~~ ~ 1 1,11~11* : ,;~; , ~11 '11 !â€¢1'111!~' ~ 1~N ~ ~ 11, '. iâ€¢ ~i ;- ~ â€¢ **#. ' + t . I r - .1 . 4. , â€¢i~ 4 J.1*~ 1~I ~' 4~1'1~11~ N : 1. " ~, r -1- . . . El, +1 ' , I 1 :2 1, .* 1 414 '1 11.-'1'UNE' 1, E , . . 4 . * 4 5 1 â€¢f 4+494 1 ' f â€¢ 24 . f - ..1 . 4 I . .. .1 L Al.~0 \ d--~'.. 7 i./th# r >4 .Ii. A 4 (t #2Â¢'.arke .:,1 leÂ» '.1~ 000*04 . - 1 /653 . %*19%29'4' .8 6/440&144: 4 :. p , '4 */196# ''. 5 ' , '. tkti,\ f. 0 I L . I 4' 4 00.-- ti,;; JA ' '1 . - A . ' â€¢*' 4 j f.* 1 694 ~ $1 . + I . 1. 4 ...1. ' 2 + ph.'iykf- 2JZ )44 *:' 0 . , 1 , Ju:,â€¢i,â€¢tlE,tÂ·~~~ $'*51 + -'#- Â·0iT~'-Il ~'...... - ...~- r 44 1 iÂ·iri *1-â€¢ ' ' 1'' iuy;.5@i~.. + - 41 -1 . ~ Pi?\,al N: ,- te $11 -19, 4 ve 701. 49. 1 4*.15 1. . , .* 1 'Cfr Â· ....% 2&4 4:54.thr'N. rÂ· ed f.. %2 4 34, 3,0.47 - 114, 1 + ~ a i ..4 . 7 .. r< I. '~ - tAle - .4 9. '<" ' P . . ~,4 4. '.* 4, * i . .4 - 6.16... .. '/u-M/'I/ I B.fl ./ ' t .2 7- 0% 4' fr l. I. I ./ I $ W i'â€¢g.Â¥ I ... , 1 . I . .. .' 94. r. ~ . )4 I . 4. . 1 .92 .. 24â€¢ 0 - +4 1 4 ' Fn#J 4 rn--- I ..4.r ' + . 24.42 . ..1 . .4 4 .. .2.* 1 4 I. 1.< 1. â€¢ , n. -- , 4 -29?f. 4 ..787/- .....Ill- ,. *".7-0 %5422<JUD**Â· ! v. * { 1/ 4 - *4% 1 1 4*4 @74 I.' . . *4 . . I 1 â€¢ . S..4 I -â€¢i *.-/ 4 h. I D. A.'. . 4 ... '1 42 2 1 /.//,filailil" .1/%*3// ' ,+09..C' 't, ..1 ./.ft 4, 4 "Am,:2 Al / .1Â¥. .. C *A 4 g ..LA.3 '3,4.*. , . . ... 2.4 &.3 ste- - --/41- . 1 -47, ..1 :.1&A . *i.11$4.- 0,Â¥ 427:- ... I . 4. â‚¬ . I. ' lf/r#*1 , ~ ~ $ ...j//4 ' '.'* ./ -1 h Pr=., -4//Ic"rt. F ; A.i.y ' 4Â· 39 'p 1 B. 4:.21,/ .--4- tlpf.,2 ./11":Ill' 1 .1 A : FL E CK, ..Â· ....,27/* I . *l 1 â€¢: le - 1 .. ,/:7...:4 :. Â¥*t .Â· r:, 4 f.â„¢Â£ 2, 4 -4 + 4<EW....1*. ; s, ..3 111* :J~#~/4: 'h let:W ....116*91~.f~~ 1,3:P. 49 2 1 Diti . 1- .... k.*01122%* - 6/LE.4. 4 .... 4 +.... .A..~el- *.. I . a., 6:14~1 ~%44: --, I. :.0 - 4- a.4.4 *k: Â·JÂ·n- .. . .4 ..1 . 9 1. ' 41 / , I.L.:il * ' i ~11 Ll 1 :, .6 -741 i t. ' ' .'- t-' bl, 41.. I . 0....0 r-- .:1 ''2044Â¥/ I. ./ A . -=m.---0.I--I / 1 .I.'- .4-Al...I \ i' - .-:71-5 t k i~ ,~1 6, ' , 1111* 4 r â€¢11Â· * 1--15 Â· t .1 11~9 +1 1 " 1.11 11. / . .1 41- 111 4 , ')1~J U/14., ... .,t .1 . . e . '4 E 4 r t ... . dz- . . 4. 0 L.-2 1 . I 2 ..J I - r * . I ro - + i . 1 .,0 16, N ti . - . .'11~ fk,j j :,6.1?4~4> 61Â£ 1.. . , 1 .21 I '4': 4 'L.,4 3. .1 , . I - */42* I - h tvÂ· ,â€¢ ip : , 1 0 .... ..r.j.al' i I Vil - , /4 -'4 + -/ - - A 1 1 - hiâ€¢ e ....- t- 4~~ -0.- 1. IJ .1 '< z' 74 *4 - ,1/44 r . k +V ..: ,~ Â· Â· .Â·R'Kfi ~~':Nt , ,{'4.. A R.6139 .,1, 1 '142 , i & .1 # .4 - d ~ I-fi.~--e,f'4-~.,14~2% Â¥.'r- Â·Â·-Â·1 jDZMWG,(5*V - ti"U-%*'1~ ~:trilÂ· 0 4.6 - .. .. 1. a 4,3. 4 , Â·CA. F -IMAN' 0_ y.-A.=1, -_< CÂ·d'f.1~;f*vifu,/4/1/4/,:. #gutfjfs/MA'IÂ·kliÂ»17\ Abl| 62 Â« <*L Â¢0 24 4 '349.~em-- -,%. 1 - . .. ~.m!~ e . 94.,4 '3Â·2.1471RMÂ»2(59*akâ‚¬I'U~adÂ»*n. -- -- .. ../ t 1 4 3< u Â«fr 29Â¥ 1 1, , Â· >:49. 3 "1449*:0.29.1 1 f oh'.t ka}4590 ., e r .4 id V. Â· - ' 11 . 1 2 7 'te: imit .4.67 2 1 6 47 4 ".11Â£146'-1#FK#4#)Ref*/LR,90 4,tij<'ELAAÂ¢k>Â¢ "'- - -LI~ 44 , T .4 I, -.41â€¢ Â·L . Â»â€¢'C~ . ..0 Â¢ 0 ./4 . . . I -d - X 4 i w f 1 44 , '1 1 ,1 + a . / Ale.:2 _-* Ir ' t,oti~1 2.42 ~ Â·Â»*- itÂ·;~~3.0 4.-93 313 :dp,lfr ,<T< 4:~ , .r * '-5942Â·kNI~ <-t:6 -~94Â· .-3,23 rff:i&*pur~ .I;'1#Jif#.tv 11 . I . ** 1 - 1- I I .1 #- =; I. 1.- *treÂ« .1117 .4: i.., ~1 0 ... <'..Itc.....,4 ..41.kilt , .4 - . 41. A 1. 1 ......7.1 'tr 0 , I /V I 9 . 4 :4 / Ar.' 3* rAI ; 749'*.- i~ , :.. 9: 4 h,yi,"'.I,--2 ) * Id - C - 7,0.- . -tiÂ» :45---/4 'r. I- , , 4 I -P 9 - 9, Â» r W le. .V '74 ... li 1 .- ... 4 â€ž11. A'. 1, r 41, pt Â· I- - -Id* ....E . 4 - .34Â®44Â£99"8/9 - 1 ' '~ \ - 3 I / .9---' 4 35,- I. '. i l. .EX/ST[*01 Â·elf,rts,tce 806 11. 2111 glWEIr D .4, ' u 4 ' .0 #:'' a ... .......... I.J Aspen '4 1 6 mi ,#*AÂ£ + 99 4 \31 ** tieek * j 24(- \94 a, Me - - = 05 1_9 v N To Abport 048/t N.â€¢Am,4..,6*mmor=meliâ€¢â€¢p 1 0 ,1 F m./d' imil:,5//ta,ix:<:26 r m. I -â€¢04*4 0,4 il /1,mam \.0 h j m -Â· Uke ' i / & 9:- P i -9 L.f 4"? 4014Â·*14Â·, Â· Â· .... r 4 4 0/P op Flcit .P i buy 10 V lai r i Vi Cr -0-1,4., . M/*La_-06 M./,00.1* --N , 8 tfuoon Uke Mmoon Ck Rk_.G-H.1.2 7 A i Mâ€¢se=LL.--IM -49 MIC.mor_ 1. 1 4 0.0, u M.*-â€¢Ri.-...P.G.3 . 1 Acomo. n 4/ akna $â‚¬2 1 4 Â£2=r==2N EEP#*EVE , 11 *-*45It O.xmhaSI......1........,.. -OÂ·H,4-3 MMOIPL.........â€ž......1&2 AN"RSâ€¢ ...'-.-i.---IA .--.-0.H.5 Gib=AL................ .0#66 N.le A....... A Al/A~PL- .â€ž.- .â€ž...â€žH+7 ---7 m*ad a=â‚¬9&. 4,Â· \ =IGKE*'*iLE- istz:#:.2 TZEU -,e Rizilde Dc... 1 -Â»...1.6-7 91*Bad, Dr......_......_.EÂ·12.2.3 -,4.JSL ................ .....-.--11.... R,~iR:Fuk EÂ»-+........1,7 ..........-114 C.111.*DI.................--.*3 - '~,1 PalkAâ€¢.Cit H.6 R.,0.-.-â€ž.9.-- .---â€ž..â€ž-06 501*h Aâ€¢.-__ 04 Â·Â·E-2 Ful m....,_.. %4 801* m.---L.-.....884 Split,8 . 44"â€¢6 S..aL-4..............+--..2 SP//SL-.-_,-_-_..06 6,AGZZLZE/0 #R~.-1..I ILIEW SdÂ¥01-0,_-_...........__E-2 Su=,110 u.. ZZ./.16~ 7--/8,1 4.m" 8,4-..................... .84444 ~~trrIZâ„¢ *f~;Ii.............__CH-7 =7. u *. 1. S- MHOCL--. .................GÂ·3 ... + ==W-- --92 11-2 Stld, U.--- -Â·....--.....N}.5 Storteâ€¢ ell m..4Â»2.1.-*.-.-I-84 46 . 46 ..... ....................Â·--+....H.0 .Wom m *---ir-2 1:#6,~w/r--==M EEE:/22*.$; ....I-..IN E&x= ---~4 MiL~=-::1~* ._-__-"+, =c- .t: ~ 24Â·dz;- O,1:1}lakeRL...-1.--1-7 DE+6 0**fa.._;:1 9.--1. 6. Winoâ€¢*b,W'g---BN-5 --31.6-7 Soilk-----..._12.0-3 WASheDâ€¢ ... ..06 . . S....0- -- -W . . a =41 : 49,1 ExÂ»,8,1- 6 HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING/STRUCTURE FORM ~ State Site Number: Local Site Number: 505.NE Photo Information: ASP-L-30 Township 10 South Range 85 West Section 12 USGS Quad Name Aspen Year 1960 X 7.5' 15' Building or Structure Name: None / Schumacher Residence Full Street Address: 505 North Eighth Legal Description: * East Asven Townsite City Aspen County Pitkin Historic District or Neighborhood Name: East End Owner: Private/State/Federal Owner's Mailing Address: ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Building Type: Residential Architectural Style: Victorian Miner's Cottage Dimensions: L: X W: = Square Feet: Number of Stories: 1-story Building Plan (Footprint, Shape) : Irregular "U" Landscaping or Special Setting Features: None ~ Associated Buildings, Features or Objects - Describe Material and Function (map number / name): Attached garaqe with single qable and simole detailing For the following categories include materials, techniques and styles in the description as appropriate: Roof: Complex cross-gabled with asphalt shingles Walls: 1st story clanboard; 2nd story decorative shingles Foundation / Basement: N/A Chimney(s): Red brick with corbeled top at east end of gable Windows: One-over-one double-hung with some fixed glass groupings; bav dormer to south Doors: Transom over 1/2 light over wood panel Porches: Open with shed roof. wraps southest corner. supported bv turned posts with snindle frieze. quarter-round brackets and decorative balustrade General Architectural Description: 1-story Victorian cottage with multiple additions. moved from its original site on Hunter and East Hookins in 1972. 0 Page 2 of 2 State Site Number 0 Local Site Number 505.NE FUNCTION ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY Current Use: Residential Architect: Unknown Original Use: Residential Builder: Unknown Intermediate Use: Residential Construction Date: circa 1886 Actual X Estimate _ Assessor Based On: MODIFICATIONS AND/OR ADDITIONS Minor Moderate Major X Moved X Date Describe Modifications and Date: Additions and Date: 2nd story unit (2 bedrooms and 1 bath) added on rear connects to 2-car garage: 1972. Detailing is sympathetic with main. but simpler. Building was moved from Hunter and East Hopkins to present site in 1972. NATIONAL/STATE REGISTER ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA Is listed on National Register; State Register Is eligible for National Register; State Register Meets National Register Criteria: A B C D E Map Kev Local Rating and Landmark Designation ~ I~I ~ Significant: Listed on or is eligible for National Register Contributing: Resource has maintained historic or - architectural integrity. o Supporting: Original integrity lost due to alterations, however, is "retrievable" with substantial effort. Locally Designated Landmark Justify Assessment: Associated Contexts and Historical Information: The historical significance of this structure has been diminished as a result of it being moved from its original location. This residence was moved from Hunter Street and East Hopkins Street to 8th and Smuggler in 1972. Reference Dermit #76-72. The structure was remodeled. adding two bedrooms and bath plus 2-car carport and remodeling. This structure is of historical imnortance bv illustrating various shapes and details of earlv Aspen homes. Other Recording Information Specific References to the Structure/Building: Pitkin Countv Court- house Records: Sanborn and Sons Insurance Maps Archaeological Potential: N (Y or N) Justify: ~ Recorded By: Date: Januarv 1991 Affiliation: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee - Citv of Aspen Project Manager: Roxanne Eflin. Historic Preservation Officer/Planner AT l F*; vp-YL i r 1 1/ 41661- END U 4 {- / 7,r~r- x 7883.9 Â· 7884.Ill x 7879.6 --~- - \ W j . / *\ 12 1, 4-1 47880.8 1 k <7 < - /4- 2 4 1 7 4 -- %3 j * 4 - 7890 4 - L 4 Scs N, -#14'*1.6 1 I 1 , I X7891.4 ------ 1/ / 1 1 /V 0 ' 0Â£22Â£1ED - ----7Â¤41~8 x C AA 1 1 9 n 1 r E- .. - 0 . 0 UM 411,14â‚¬,1 g 06% 2, LOT- RIS 00 5 \6[. SAUg 91Â« -fulÂ« .226\ Pek) CE- *Ike MoveÂ£> PgeM 44-U U-riSR. 9-k 4- E. 44086Â»6 40 â‚¬66 + 6\Au~9 fer io \ C~'7 2 - Ce-~grence_. FAM (T * -IG -1 L lize- 6-\-ruc-dfora WAâ‚¬, re mezzle.lecf , AD D, 69 4-vlb be-Deos>As AUD BAMER Â¥>LUe> 2- C.,c,2- (1Ae PoeT AL) O REMODELLL) 6 lA)'llaÂ¢21 OR_ OF- A/\048-Â© MeDLÂ»E . rÂ« ancÂ»: BAR.M.!~-r * 2 -12- 0 AJOR-\4 Dc>OE- 0<ic)i na.LQ~ 4 ARD!+D#Ac-DAD (COD+racÂ»m-Â© RiCAÂ¥Ag-t> M,Lwues-[-00 ,Â·prob/*b\H Ic) lq72-. ------ .-26296)22,6- I _f>rF-Kle_ _C=-~ BLDG. -IN-Spmc=>C - ;21Â»Gi,ARCJÂ¥6Â·A_:-_MEÂ£A___Gn_ERTRATIE~e-*a-, jul-N--ISo___ 4 --/ - + ciÂ·" 3 . i.'. 1 . 11 T /.9.-15: . . LA .. 1 . I - .--: ' 1.-i /'..:'.Il.-/. I 1 . . . . 7=.1 - ; . Ld..44X 1 Â¢ -1 8 .. . , 3././../7 .W 4 :M Â·# I. I I J : . I . 4 - .~ , ' Â· 2 - Â· . -Â· ' '"1 -- 9 1 4. 1-2 U 1114 2-- . 1 - I -:1 1/1 I-, . - VI .,2/- .. .r . illililiEilixt.. 7 I -,1.64.- 4,y ~ P V.,133. ... k A. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Director FROM: Julie Ann Woods, Deputy Planning Director 9.0-3 - [Acting Historic Preservation Officer] RE: 505 North Eighth St.--- Minor Review DATE: July 8,1998 SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to construct a new porch roof over an existing rear deck. The roof will use three (3) columns for support, and detailing will match the existing columns of an existing covered porch. The deck surface will be converted to brick pavers, and some new planters will be added. APPLICANT: John and Marianne Schuwmacher, represented by Dave Johnston. LOCATION: 505 N. Eighth St. PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. The subject building is an historic landmark. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). Response: The proposed covered patio area is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with the adjacent parcels within the "H," Historic Overlay District. There are no variances being requested, and the setbacks will not extend beyond that allowed in the R-6 zone district. Please see attached plan and elevation, Sheet No. 3.1. 1 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposedfor development. 0 Response: The proposed development will have little to no affect on the character of the neighborhood. There is an existing covered porch which opens out to a raised deck area. A new covered porch will extend from the rear of the existing covered porch approximately 14'. The covered porch area will be 20' wide. The roof structure will be supported with three columns which will match the column on the existing porch. A 1/4 fantail decorative trim will be added at the eaves of each column, similar to the detail of the existing porch. The wood detailing will be painted to match the existing. The new roof will match the existing roof material. The rear deck will be replaced with brick patio pavers which will extend to the north. New planters will be added within the extended patio area. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: The proposed change would not detract from the historic significance of the designated historic structures located on the parcel or from those located on adjacent parcels. The covered porch and simple detailing should not confuse old from new as covered patios of this scale were not typical of the Victorian era of architecture. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof Response: The proposed development will not diminish the architectural character or integrity of any historic structure. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe following alternatives: â€¢ Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. â€¢ Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. â€¢ Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) â€¢ Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC approve the proposed changes to 0 505 N. Eighth St., with the following conditions: 1. That the improvements will be substantially in conformance with the drawings submitted with the application, as shown in Sheet No. 3.1; 2. The roof material will Match the existing roof, with a modified pitch as shown in the drawings. 3. Any additional significant changes from those proposed in this application shall be considered "significanf' and will require a conceptual and final review of the HPC before proceeding with construction; - 4. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public hearings shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a decision-making body having the authority to do so. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the proposed changes to 505 N. Eighth St. with the conditions recommended in the staff memorandum dated July 8, 1998." EXHIBITS: Exhibit "A" - The submitted application, including Sheet No. 3.1. 0 Exhibit "B" - Historic Architectural Building/Structure Form (Inventory) 0 3 '5441 i 017- A 'ift'. 418 E. Cooper Avenue 24_ Suite 206/b Aspen, Colorado 81611 970.925.3444 Uf i DAVIDJOHNSTONARCHITECTS -STA,4 PC July 1,1998 Community Development Department - City of Aspen, Colorado re: Application for Minor Development Review Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Subject Property: The Schuhmacher Residence 505 North Eighth Street Lots Q, R, and S, Block 2 Aspen, Colorado Committee members, The enclosed information is an application for a Minor Development Review for the subject property in Aspen. The project involves constructing a new porch roof over an existing back deck. The deck surface will be converted to brick pavers. The roof structure will use (3) columns for support; the detailing will match the existing columns as shown in the drawings. The new roof material will match the existing. The new covered area will be 20'-0" x 14'-0", or 280 SF. Porches, as defined in the Aspen Land Use Code, do not count towards FAR. The new addition is located on the west side of the existing residence, on Smuggler Street, and completely screened from the road by evergreen trees. A planter structure, a fence, and extensive trees and bushes separate the new space from the adjacent neighbor to the west. Development Standards: 1. The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing, volume, scale, and planning with the existing structure. The existing residence contains a number of porches and one story structures. The roof is covering an existing patio; the function of the space will remain the same. 2. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the CÂ·: ~21 neighborhood. Given the location of the proposed roof structure, any impact to the adjacent property to the west is minimal. In addition, the proposed modification is only visible slightly from the Smuggler Street side. The development is consistent with the existing structure, and consequently consistent with the neighborhood. 3./4. The proposed development does not detract from the architectural character and integrity ofthe historic structure. All details, materials, and colors will match the details of the existing porch(s). The essence of a "porch" is a consistent characteristic of this residence. Thank you for your attention to this application. Please feel free to contact my office for any clarifications to this application. Respectfully, . ab--SU24 David Johnston David Johnston Architects, PC ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPUCATION FORM 1. Project name 6CUUM M DCHE Z ~15<m:MU<-9 2. Project location 9(75 61- tic,â€¢114 trraZEr '67661, Co 1.C>Teb (02 .E, .6.0 6, Fib<k 'L (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds descnption) 3. Present zoning 2.6 4. Lot size 9000 Sr 5. Applicanfs name, address and phone number . 101*w 4 M.bowgm Sewawâ€¢A.cueK . EXE, U. Es,In, ST, 81feu 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number 91 905 344+ Min 1*wsnu hawmarsit. 42, E C.afrA /206. A . Aspeu. 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD -~ Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD .-I--- Relocation HPC Subdivision Text/Map Amend. Historic Landmark 0 GMQS allotment GMQS exemption Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design ReviewÂ· Lot Split/Lot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft, number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the property) 151UGUE FAMU,i ~SWD-c.e. , 3928 sp VA,nia ip.~, 04) 859200.6 9. Description of development application tbia:u BAr Appmow 10, Have you completed and attached the following? V~ Attachment 1 - Land use application form V Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form ~ 7'- Response to Attachment 3 7 Response to Attachment 4 11111111 ATTACHMENT2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: 4044,4 4 1Â¥\4*au.O 60.40.,..00*314 Address: Obb U. k\GWTH Snaa:r , Al~pew Zone district: 26 Lot size: 90(:0 9 Existing FAR: 346 1.1 er Allowable FAR: 146,6 -5Â·F Proposed FAR: -6- Existing net leasable (commercial): Proposed net leasable (commercial): Existing % of site coverage: Proposed % of site coverage: Existing % of open space: Proposed % of open space: Existing maximum height Princioal bkla: Accesorv blda: Proposed max. height: Princioal bkla: Accessorv bida: Proposed % of demolition: Existing number of bedrooms: 4 Proposed number of bedrooms: - Existing on-site parking spaces: On-site parking spaces required: Setbacks Existing: Minimum required: Proposed: kle ow.â€¢Ge Â· Front: Front 10' Front: Rear: Rear: \0' Rear: Combined Combined Combined Front/rear: Fronurear: 301:r Front/rear: Side: Side: 16' Side: Side: Side: tty Side: Combined Combined Combined Sides: Sides: 119 Sides: Existing nor'~conformities or encroachments: Â·Â· Variations requested: (HPC has the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.fl, site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts) 1 1 {ttit M - - In LL* 3 i g 23>_/289Â»J i: M â„¢0\ 2- m . 111 N" 9 =tan,1..=01 i Ue -- - lia h.- 4 A r 4 -0. SIDE SerBACK % Â¥ i DAVIDJOHNSTONARCHITEGIB P $ pc 3- mi 9 -A 418 E COOPER SurTE 20,8 ASPEN. CO 81011 1 ."I.NO 0 0 0 . I;,â€¢ .~..~%.14117 ,â€ž24Â·6 -rzr.4,~~B p. A./' t '#/1, Â·Â· 2~4 : - 1..1,--9.04?4Â·il*4(fvt.f ' .144-444%7134i:Â· Â·.. .4: :...re 34:1,; 1 5 L I . .. Â· Ut:.1 â‚¬944*Â·Â·,43,4.%as.k. Â·4 . . L ./ I., -u.,Ji>.1 Jâ€¢,, .:4'C.f ,- . .C M. . , 4' S E "'i j i :- r' fe..06->,Â·'1.ItÂ·I':$ drlf*'.1,~I . I . . L. ...... ~ y...1~4 &2~/ 6# Q i T# il. <ty Lk...2. t,Â¥:'.f'. ' 49Â·Â¢141*~7.:2~.9,~r~Â·:~f?ifkdil~.0-3,Â·1'li, /-- â€¢V, ..t .11-r, h .h'eâ‚¬ , Al ....4,-Et.'....14:.39Â¢Â· I h. .4 - rew :' VVJ' ~&&.Â»i'V.'; 12''l~ '4~,1 -44 ..L'~ll.55Â£ 9. B r, . 3.,v.,+4>,Â·t:# f~ I. I: 11.-'/I â€ž '~~t','Jâ„¢i 4+33-f.Â¢91033-6.,-/~-/-1 ~52;Â· Â·Â·50-7 2%/* .2 1 ' ...1 ':t,&3*191Â£ 4 V?,2.-+1:,t~il.!krz, . tÂ®. ,. - -~..'~Â·~~ .Â·~,,... . - Â· 1 1 . ... Â·lid . 1 254 ...1 #4#2421r.lfAP>*Â·%5Â·64Â·ta, ' L . 1 . I N*42+3.i:,Ai~.7:~1Â·Â·Â·f~i-~~<j:4,4Â·Â·y.'. 41~ .A' tt.~32 /~'9.~NU..k.>99,14 /7.,ar-,"- -â€¢ ..,Â· *4~424.''Mi "' '6, 2 ,>V'11 1 ',1 1 V . -I- 4 47 A f lp.d 7 ' ..r.: :1..Â» - e.'. to . A, 1 I 1*UyiÂ· Â·' i . CH .Â· Â· f' ~~ â€¢f Mf~it* Â«.4. I 2523.:cl , ;4#4 M.1.U ..1Â£'. .; 4.11,1,0 + 2 "A 4*.~23*b:-; *AN: Â·45â€¢te,mi- Â· ,6 I % ... --Ed' 9 2 Â·*112- .~ +Â· lamik -Af.1.'.' :**Effrt~ tl' ' 2,411,1,4, , - ./ G .. I piGâ‚¬&411*2,11:~,~' 92:12'h?t?'trits>â‚¬.'tr.tr Â·19.:.*:q:. v- .'Â·'Â· ~ ,Luit.Â·p.~'." ' .Nl> *:4.6.9.Zii.:..t,t/8,~fÂ¢.3....tt. 9'4~,tfy'AyÂ·. ......'. -'Â· Â·Â·'~' . Â·a~ ; Â» >1*~fa 1 4 6 .-2 ......5 4..b'hA'' ,Â«il'~(0*344#fiÂ·9*24Â©FÂ·:31.?tritÂ·'-TiIA.4.if?3~49 4%i/'~Â·'-~ Â·*4~fi.432â‚¬Rfe . -1 .2 :. . ...Â£11.4. '~:Â·A : i ': -t Ve#' ' r, 1 *'S 94" fiIÂ«*'* .egm 1 aâ‚¬.16' _ ~ '' - -'' 0/ Ik;i'*2275Â£4;,~vt'Iaa.*tw# c. 4-[ff:;St.ir.~..Fic.DA:' U'- i*4 ~AL .= f., 7 L 1 , 1 tr, Â· 955.37 , *"4{. -,et),3.< 29;1*< ~ Â£ 41 6 -1 1 2 - 9-1:~Ipt'p~ L V 3 4 9f'/A',17 ~031,Vilf.&Â»4, _ 'fl , .:r r I On. 4%:; A:U#*S: 444%41*,-?ilietifikrj'fi~- \@*W,3,~ :Â·~ ~0 iÂ¥Â« 22 ' 31'for .,iÂ»WÂ·,feir *14)27 0,9:ye,4#â‚¬*rel*~*322*li>* Â£17., '1 , 84. ... Af P 76' 5%41Â©*:*0712'fyÂ»luf-yfe**at*%4-1 *. 4/ PR,3 -: *r y . 3<#*4,.8'1MÂ© Â·1:13'ti~%,~4~61 '1 ' ,'I -,4 #04 2 7331Jii'03Â¥37~*BartÂ«{443?- fi;243*i'lfl_ $ IA, .4, 91*1:. 4'~', ,-4~ k Â·41?42{. :44, 4/-, -Â· Ap-9 .i z h.; 4 ..,-1.4â€ž"IWIM ..#1.9 ,/ , 4*'j-=*' 4 J ,r..,-~~tA.4'*...3~~..6â€ž4*4..-2,528:Vt;404~Ajook>,i>Â·3*~*ttk:t~Â¥ 1,~ .'~4~~ -71-:1 344-1,)2f >1424.1,2&%222&12â‚¬.jk:944*245Â·i>fre>*-rf&,1*46-~ 7- 21 -,9' Â».Â¢ ' 7 01+~0,~.'t~:A,4~~Â£4<Ff tâ‚¬8* 3,- ''U "ct<~/.uc.~*At,8*~ : 1 %:.1, 13 -- p f.: '24~~g,Dil.i.-0-0., F 1.y&/16: i:: .Â·-,1.+S,â‚¬f~ ....4& CNT#<4-4- I . 4 ... ........ ./" ili 42.*. 0 '-1 &:-32/CA.42*7â€¢19>0... 6+2: ... Â°2 - --:4-1.:-:.,4,2Â»?i -effc,-,1 1.i-u,~Â·- -IÂ»-12 -91Â«29jAND:'732~09%9242-4 ~~*~ 91za<:-7Â»-~-r-~:INÂ«I,=34Â« 347~ .. , 'q*tÂ¢i-92 1~ X22~ 14~:3?~+I.Nftr~>*2>24. . /Â£ e' ./.* + N. 2--d ..â‚¬< 9 u/- 92.422-9.3 -' c.Â©Viejeb<92;94' 7 ~4Â£5...3.1jtf j~~;r . '*~ - 1 - I / . v r t.'14 9% !,1.1/Za....=e.-M -14< ; 3.9 00-F.1 .409*f*,9-i~4 ~1. ,-4~611~&~7----- . 12. *. : I. -ir.ZI)~Ff,/1: 1.-Â» Litr."464* .2,*Aer , ..0 ''â€ž, 4 , .~ .,fal,<.184.' . -*0,Â·Â·R '. 1 VER:time.ke ~'97~ Ar,~4 0-9 0.,--4. A.-6.1 0462{11~-<flif - .e :- 'kc*>1;>i u. iffi F I.i~, 64* d 4 -20. s â€¢ ... . I. r- 2 . /4 :, p ~64, 5 4=16 - 1 f . .... irt=,1-/#. . I._~* I . Â£ 1, 20 "A :$ 4 I ~Â«,7.i. /42.%5.~ c.~42*J-3-149147* 1 1218 1 Dy** .=L. # r ., -~ -- =N# . _11-,44-2<3-3.&41 - -4444 - ,-,1 .r Fit''lite.-1'6Â«limg~~-2- . - ' t: .'p7e -5,*m*/ ---I"I a. - 44' 's~'1 ~/' 'i0Â£'~~Z *,)*.*)C~I~~~0~ I L *43 I k. - 54.J =.4 . . N. 1 39 , I k,>fit '92-,Rkfipi~// dbz~ 4.+ , , 04 -â‚¬ 76' ip.=* ' . -aft'=f.e,i:*%./--I-)Ay- . - >,1, W **23;.-41~ ; 9 2%39 f>Â·'4 de. 4 >~ .-, N ./. - V.8,#r': I '-:, * Â·9. - 4'rÂ·+1715: 4' .1/h . p .le C e 01Â¢i -PAÂ»20+1: ~ ' , 4 1, .1 1 9 .F â‚¬ -4 k ..S,78,3.7 1,"J.el.#.?r,-.C.t"t~ %**iLL# . A 49~ 7 7 9 '. I 0. 1 , 4 t.: + . tc A : 2 1 8- 2 1 i , , 14 1:; i f 't !, ~ 1~ '12* Â·, ..,efÂ«, 2 0' ' 3'0:2*22~~.~.â€¢*7Â·jÂ¥,#x:4EL*ki~ 1Â· <,+ i. he---Cfyflib*&"4/4067>*482, , ~i25%24**,4,'..,f' 1':t ~.~I~f f,~il '16;62,tr L~.~ '**~93*3Ah,2,~~S;UNÂ·**04 -1/ ,eull,Y 9 4< ~7//.1"li/357 +A,~ ' *f . 3:7 ..lilliumgh. A- i ~tfUIingÂ»17Â«Â«iÂ·~ *~,~;~;,~ ~ r ' . ..rf. ~~~Ef~{~~~ ~:1.,~ti,\:,,4â‚¬461;.6 jfÂ¥qtjuff' - ':Liff,i,jÂ»*123 Â»124(*;f '*?fi:#mu, ~b, 946 P. 6.. 40, 4:'r~'..14:!gd,Â·;71.-b .4 45. *AL -4/3/ .'.:,7.214.#,1,2.4 64.%1),2 -'At, 2 -- -~4 .,r ?b.?%*BEW-/4 ' , 2 4 14 0 Ai:*22 -36 z, rÂ¥)8>*4'. iliâ‚¬"1, r,9, 34 4 I 1 INÂ£2%6 '7 :p bhj.94"i,4 4 58%12*f,#*9:'4,Â·.~ *.-dz-':z 7 4 6Â·44*ff2~40' 4 .teÂ¢ 81274 4'*i:'.44,45.31 -f.49: .f'*f:, tyi h -- I 0 6 1,~ 1. 8344',r 9 : ,-'9"l, 4 3:4 e -Â·Â·re.y5,- 9 4 . -,4"". ..1 - I :'>9.. - 06, ..2 1 21 - - - r 414 , ' ' f : I.r~ 6 Â·,2"'41 5% 4 /1 :a ., lA i , 1,0 4. . 1'' . D... Alf .W ... 1(5 ret J l :I g y ' ' s A â€¢ - a ..<67 62)4 -'- tiN.'54.3~1 ". ty 9 2 12%tic; A /' 5%,0,Â£92~â€¢C~#COgv#ACk#1*~*ObhBA)/id'k A-hife 'â„¢â€¢& '>. 3 4 UÂ· ', t,Wl r P-,te0* " "i' * Pi c y 7 ft ri @~24, 1.0&4':;1 â€¢1 7.. ... 4,'Abb: F-pÂ·t- ,:18 ttlk Â»Anct "rÂ» 1 7 1Â¢ilf' nE,0*FMiâ€¢*3 *'Â»si '~4~Â·,CO,I .3,:' ': 1%42~i ~'-1 7 ~'* 1Â· . 3 ~ â€¢ 4'Â· -- 3 ~cl , 31 , . ik 1, 8,1 ,~ 4 1 , I. '1 1 1 49 Â· Â· ly 4 I , 1 1 '41 1VT'r :P.'4 ,>41 1%.\Â£,1 r.,~ . % .9 , e : 9 j . k gre:U,iti t., ,ca.. . 1 . 1.27 .3 .'\.~ .' .Â«44**4. .. b tk * 47,3,5 4 &.*.M, go ..:,75: 4391 2 . ,<E .C ..Et 2:Â·t...5 .:61 ...:' .- . .,1 .4 ~ h '2' , ' bÂ»L-1 V e.,I l ' 211Â© . . I , ' 2 , 1 4 . r : 4 I ' AW, j 1Â·~ SI tÂ· . I b ./ ,4 Ir,Â·c f r r PL.. M . :el.WEEL. , ' 4 , R.-h 1 ; .,1 0 . 1: IX,4 .193 1 - I 4.0,= gly 0 f 1% f.=16 . - R , â‚¬ 6. A l# 7* -4 .f~ j, R , < 6 0 - 1.'ll .- , /4,1. L+6 P . 1 1, 4. . ..., 1 1 - : 451 7 ENillilli --. 1.'1 -3 & /16~12,//- .0 & r 4. . . . 4 . , 1 - lig I ed#., l 4 $ + .â‚¬AEt ~'' 1*id / '/>k>, 1... â‚¬4% - r. .#79 105# 08' 1*Fg~0~ 1 ft' b , 1 -- . 5. -46.,Â£4% ,; . 0~-*p~~gr#W **#****ff*#-I-+--,61~.&:1 ' .': I 1 1 -~ ~.}4,Â¥dl '4 : 1 :97,2 * 904/#lpalm*ke, 1* :* 7& 34*,Ar~~*UL4P +Lh '~59.*fref,C.316.i444*LffLAJ b : CANK' 1. . P I'(4 6 : 2.48 )4/ 14 '~1:'Pt;-Mt?56*Â·f *24)%72 r fir-FPVE' 4. . 0 air- 44.-le,NE 'L, ~1 -9 -,242: Â·., 44 I. (:3*0â€žFe#Ltit/0 f m) 4414'teswifk<j., 4 AMT.3 i~6410 -r ir/4 ..697::.P.22*:. ->=*>. 4Ma#,tr'F/<*~.al,5,/imek-'-Lati'I . L . I + 0 , ' â€¢ 1.1.4 **,+4 ' I )9. e { ./ :.JV 4, b 0:4 f < 1 'b AZ## _. ' ' 4%.. tr â€ž : rt- â€¢ ,i'. e./IlÂ¥'3 '14 , Â¥ ...3, ' I .9 + i h k 1 -' . ' , .,I. ./ A ' 0 . . A , A. 74 - I. . I hen n ..4 ,â‚¬..fE t . d '.4 't{ , ./4. #- C>Â· 11Â· , *, 2 ey,1.<,r :t ...F , 'D , , 1. 121 . ~ 5-f 4 ; 1 0 0 4, 1, . I 2 , ~ .1.< ;ff: .:. A* 7/ . V * 2/2. J \A. ./. . a $41 -- - t. :./ b 4,2 4 Â£ 1 ..Pe 7441, - , i ly ) WbA- 1, kl* < - /% I ' .. --. .14 '4'K -' Â·z , .... 1 -- , r., 0 V -/ 1. 4 A : . 1. Â·Â·... '.ph -fÂ·:* i aic . I . . U , f f /, 't' 1 -14 1 9 7 4 ..J I < 2.: I *' , /, 1-1. 25-4 . ~2; Fr<, - :- I .7 / , 7Â£ . r.. 4% 1 . ...V- V ..1 2% 1 1 lf, - 4- 4 5 : 1 52 :94, i J Ad''e -4 - 1., 4> ... 1-'9Â·47 4 9 42113~.; 1 1 ,~ 1 15,ilt -~6.Â·Â·t, m .: L , . 1 .. ,â€ž 1 Â·" 11 /1 f- .t<~1 .,c 4. M. Â·tÂ·, , AE. 21 . I V. .1 -5 '. :/2 / - , "4* 4-6 2 C - I 1 V . pÂ»-1. A:,d Â» ....7, r ' ' tÂ·tr'.1624Â»66.-Â·t ; 9 â‚¬ . L .2 1 1 4 , 1 - 2 ." ' I. . z ' +22.10 4- >.:p .94, - u.,1 '* 1 ':Â¥38, . 1. f<.. 41 . /. 1... . i,41 1,~, ,. 4 wg* ,9 4 4 ''Â· .T,Â¢' f (3 2Â© - Ad.- " f' ~:avGUTÂ· ~--,4~141'11,~>4 ;93%7~>~t'. ,<.1,4. 1,f.~/1\1h ,1 1 # 1 1. 1 Jk l, . - . I V. 7 ,/ eli - ; 7/31&=0*I#&: * A / -4* I . 4.Â· , .1*fr.:47.022.CktÂ· X â€ž. k. I. . v-,cmpikr#~49;(%14 ij\922 J ,0-4.72,7\Lf ; 74 11,2-Ab=744,2it~S.*==,A...r- . NÂ·'*'0.3,"/1 3,4, 1 ," 1,9 1.H k. ' k. :32,~7. Â¥Â«*'.71.4&AMN;;$24:44<11.~hv, i ,i C 't;Ii'lar '4. -a,Â¥3- th,thf~-44,t*f/24;-, ~ 1 { 7 I - / '411 '69 ~1 2 1 1 Q 'C..361.6*Allilillillilillilillillillill"lillil,B . .ON, I' , .4-Â·7&Â·22 /% .40. 12., .-â€¢ .4.--*41;4Â·64..32:,ka..; , . " SW'Â·44/iAÂ» e- - .Mit 14949 ..'*. Â£~10 Â£, r 2 t>rÂ»-j--T,:4:911>1-if:/4-9404 -14<fl-/24 , 1 ' & 1 .24 1 00 .-- - r I ,Â·5. -2.49 , . -. V '' 41 ' P I J , ,<1 , I V .,/1 . â‚¬ ..: . '... , 14 '; 1 1;, . *14%. 144140 1%*222Z,IMMA:ii:W#Adra %2*:*W 49 1 R I ' 1< 'i I ' , 44 r4 ' 10/ 4 0 -U I f I . .3.' 4. D ...5... , \ 4 WAI V.. 2 , ' t % h el â€¢ '6 -32% A I 2 -1. 206,4' . ... 2, 44, 44.,i: 1-Â»1'4321fht t- r ; . n. 22 :'13, M. 4 4 I ...'- 2 * . 4 4 Cl , 1,L -Â·-1.- 3-9<,2:16Â«=471-f~.44<42- 1.'t :A-Â«-,14' ffÂ«: j)Â«, U-- - . ./' 4 $ A. T' - . , , c ~'. rvhpl " V ./. I ' .A'. - -1- - adb.1 1#2.g~M7' I '. Â·: t ,< .- Mr J- 2- A: , 4 1 - 'c h 2* r *. B* ''4.1.'A,1 'p'b ' : 1~&. ~ 4/ArÂ¥ 114 ' L.'7 :/ 'I --/ . ..7 . a '~4,9*13 1 A ..,2 22' /4, ' + #. 44/ c,-*~JÂ·i - } 1,~46 \'4; .2 I . .b./.IN.."*- 4... .- - '. ~- ... 0, I Â» 2Â£- -'' Â¥ t --7 ............. Â¢k 74** : - I '/ ' D. /; >Â£ 1? 2 - I ''.# 4 '' *9. ~0% 11 - >r . 0 . ./4,1 $ .. e -Â¢ fÂ¢4,1., ,~ ) i>4 f . 1 - t##f~ f , I . 1 - I ' 25 5, 'Vir ' . ?C 1, : 1 , Â£92'd 4 .' I Â¥11/eÂ«P'.~@- -IP'/9& #A#ir - *r"7,6 aâ‚¬.al*-~i{6. , I.P. - .=~ % 1 g./4 4 92 1 1 -.11 4.3, 1. 1 '' 3% :*. i, %. F 4.1 t * 1 /19 1, y .. . C I *b' t , M .4, f 2 T Â© L. 4 1 N -6 ' . -6 >r., 4 ..30 4 1.1 "Â¥44 -- .41 4.0Â£ a ; f d<"Mfvme./- '-"M =â€¢f/2.9 /11 ' C 4% F 1 0 / 1 - 9 1,3 4 -4 1,9 41 , 4,1.0 -. 1 ' -4 9 '. 0 , ./SAFFS,iff'/.1,<91,**:* &047'11 *#,-1*2632*6~%Â£Â£-L~*~ {; 4, p,Li., u . I ' '.2,%44012'Fa, A 4 , I /1 - I .., .1. ..M- 2%, r .76 T 2 ...W*., I- /Pt#Ch - I. -:32~cft-Â·-i -- ,~ ..:,--W & ' - - - ) Ar =ft#21 Â·Â·Â·Â·Â· .- 1.'00.641&Â·124&*-3687#&1,9-:-. 99â‚¬7 13".6.,4,HZ=,21.-.. , - -- - * I. $ ...4 <At #1*'tâ€¢4*Â·r- , ~ 6%Met*yAÂ·~ioÂ¢*a f.,.'~*Â·:-p'#' ## * .,1 Ex.r[#1 p#G<D,Ace V, 4 - 606 14Â· 211( efiET , h~t \ 0 ., t j Aspen Â¢ . + f /4,)4.- a .0=2-4<1...U ...%. ilm. (4,3%.4 1:, 0 32.: \\ / \ 7<~* & r,1 4. Y 4... AA ' Nk- di. 144# 3 -.& I v-.21 (.R- F, fisC~~~~-~~~~~ 1 -t , 4 Di 6/ - Â¢ 91Â» - Seek 4 9 $ 4 TIA(,port 8â€¢gat . A ...444 4Â«) 91 Notd-*=46*-0.-di'-9 31 Iig:*=/ 2 7"4::Fik~'.4.'qk 12 (4* 1 9.31 45 1 ..- 1 0 ni.-.0,â€¢A 'lanam t 11 / /J k 73 /, 1 \; 0,0. U Uke ' 94 / ' r e / r/1- \ 3,4 741 Maroon cmelt Rd r--Â«~ ix'/ 46 1 L /9 h ~ /4, f 3 A 1 School P , 1 dr, "~; :. ; b **Â»' 4 4 0 7,) f.1 ~031~ ~ t v 47 &9Lt.- - : 9 \ Mi / 41&411 e M==La_.-H-7 / Â·Â· f ... ,gÂ»'tl i Mi::MI--*216 jifu. 114 4:gne:* t--22'- M:Skkimin: R,L..._IN.7 A~CitaÂ» _. 2.5 ..... Rd........p./.3 , ..161-1 McidaDL----0Â·114 < - ..#.11-44 FaiIilIiAL_......W 1 Â£16, * "Im-----.044; 04 k-2.ZILTEL"2"*7 --92//*.z:-A *=ti-#1 . 5-'O ..... 3,/ 9 - Alt*Vt-Ek.....--Â·_--M.3 Mal-let. D...--14.8 ' :=:215=I=ENCM Gh=AL .Â·....................6.465.6 Note Aâ€¢.-... irk Mtâ€¢Oâ€¢kâ€¢PL-..0.......H-2 Al'c.Al" PL...._.._ .... H.67 Githels.-I...........M.--H.5 Nkholls 14.... .(16Â·7 2100,=den--04[.5.6-"1~~~A lo ~' .PÂ·4 Rt/lor -... 2.3 L.; 11.6 .. B-=Be,INCLPI.Rd-...2-4.5 1//9/m EL........- â€ž.............0-M 0.1/ ft &*2-43# te" 91-1 M 01=k Bilch Dr + ....-_SP-2.3 1<2,8= 4.-. _._..., .....,O.H.2 04//5.-#V---..............#..HÂ·!4 R./&/F./D--/....1Â·7 ; 1 Ct-,9-S>.~ 4*. Xmfir-31-; s-~...2_.o~ 8 .}66 H E*la k... -.- .-Rph ZE!:----"--'---&~ - - --*......................&2 - ... 5..=* g N.' CR- Crtch 01_...........,Ja Ihil/C- RL ...........FF-6 Mam Me= De- -.............D.E.2 S- Mla CL_. .. ...-...â€ž-GS 4.6 *@GRI=I=gli / 53 3-- Â°E -#-- Â·Â·--Â·-Â·F-0,3 Â· 9 . Ckc=,A. 1.7 / 1.accle.11........ . ........1,1-6-7 Shon n Sit,u lumrn. Flw Â¥L._------ifil 4 .... *5M&=*Ei#~6 ..0./. ..6 f.'+ '47 L'*IE*-..................-W# Re,Me,~t~BRL....-.-D*34 ...1- r. .-74 1-A Ma.1000 IIi........................84 Rod'â€¢ RA.......................DE,46 S-k . Â· Ilâ€¢â€¢ WBI~,bbywn.-_.--B+,3 / i 'n,/1'Late. D- St. -H.6.7 ..41â€¢ . ...f.0-3 W*Rd 1.1 - .4 =:&. / _Ed -*~~~ _ -_Ra I / i' f 9 a ExÂ», ser 6 HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING/STRUCTURE FORM State Site Number: Local Site Number: 505.NE ~j/ Photo Information: ASP-L-30 Township 10 South Range 85 West Section 12 USGS Quad Name Aspen Year 1960 X 7.5' 15' Building or Structure Name: None / Schumacher Residence Full Street Address: 505 North Eighth Legal Description: * East Asven Townsite City Asven County Pitkin Historic District or Neighborhood Name: East End Owner: Private/State/Federal Owner's Mailing Address: ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Building Type: Residential Architectural Style: Victorian Miner's Cottage Dimensions: L: X W: = Square Feet: Number of Stories: 1-storv Building Plan (Footprint, Shape): Irregular "U" Landscaping or Special Setting Features: None Associated Buildings, Features or Obj ects - Describe Material and~ Function (map number / name): Attached garaqe with single gable and ~ simgle detailing For the following categories include materials, techniques and styles in the description as appropriate: Roof: Comolex cross-gabled with asphalt shingles Walls: 1st story clanboard; 2nd story decorative shingles Foundation / Basement: N/A Chimney(s): Red brick with corbeled ton at east end of gable Windows: One-over-one double-hung with some fixed glass grounings; bav dormer to south Doors: Transom over 1/2 light over wood panel Porches: Open with shed roof. wraps southest corner. sunnorted bv turned nosts with spindle frieze. quarter-round brackets and decorative balustrade General Architectural Description: 1-storv Victorian cottage with multiple additions. moved from its original site on Hunter and East Hookins in 1972. 0 Page 2 of 2 State Site Number Local Site Number 505.NE FUNCTION ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY Current Use: Residential Architect: Unknown Original Use: Residential Builder: Unknown Intermediate Use: Residential Construction Date: circa 1886 Actual X Estimate _ Assessor Based On: MODIFICATIONS AND/OR ADDITIONS Minor Moderate __ Major X Moved X Date Describe Modifications and Date: Additions and Date: 2nd story unit (2 bedrooms and 1 bath) added on rear connects to 2-car qarage: 1972. Detailing is sympathetic with main. but simpler. Building was moved from Hunter and East Hookins to present site in 1972. NATIONAL/STATE REGISTER ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA Is listed on National Register; State Register Is eligible for National Register; State Register Meets National Register Criteria: A B C D E Map Kev Local Rating and Landmark Designation Significant: Listed on or is eligible for National Register Contributing: Resource has maintained historic or Ll - architectural integrity. 0 Supporting: Original integrity lost due to alterations, however, is "retrievable" with substantial effort. Locally Designated Landmark Justify Assessment: Associated Contexts and Historical Information: The historical significance of this structure has been diminished as a result of it being moved from its original location. This residence was moved from Hunter Street and East Hopkins Street to 8th and Smuggler in 1972. Reference permit #76-72. The structure was remodeled. adding two bedrooms and bath plus 2-car carport and remodeling. This structure is of historical importance bv illustrating various shanes and details of earlv Aspen homes. Other Recording Information Specific References to the Structure/Building: Pitkin Countv Court- house Records; Sanborn and Sons Insurance Maps Archaeological Potential: N (Y or N) Justify: Recorded By: Date: Januarv 1991 Affiliation: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee - Citv of Aspen Project Manager: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer/Planner 1 1 C *Â¢06 x 7883.9 _/2)7884.1-~ ~~ ( i Lk ---**I -34-- ~ *7879.6 ~ 401 (07 21/ . ~- 2 i f i % 9- / 1 \ 41 \ la Â«J- 1 7880.8 \ f . tfo A i- - (1 ---0-1 t 7890 eÂ«= 1 0 , g.=S-~~--W. . 1 1 1 1 - -Â» \ 41 44--/ /â‚¬ x7891.4 4Â« 1 1 1/ 0 Â· 640*2Â£Â¥Aa x CAA,Irn, r- m I. . - 3% 2, LOT- R.~6 * 5 \A.. SAU34Â« - 314 ' 22 : 61 D eÂ© ca \,1 Ae, R o v e t> PR d *\ 4 4- U k ) - r E R. St- 4 - E. 40Â¥OPKIÂ»6 40 4*25 + 4*AUâ‚¬Â© f 52- i ko \ Ct'-7 2 - <4<enct- Â· 13*2,M t-r -+ -19 -1 L . - -PLE- Â·5+r--Ucdru re- W,ae,6 re.rncmle.ted , ADDIL-)9 4-900 be-Deos,As AL;t> 8#A-fu FLUe Z. C-Ag- 01*2 Poe-r *00 REMODEL-1 0 6 lk)72521 OR- OP A/Â»45.0 14â‚¬1Â»E . anc.e, : pieR-Ki--r * 8-3 -12.. 30â‚¬-\4 DDIDE- O.2-i 9(Aa-il~ 17 AReil-De:-Ac-0,-D (Ca)*racÂ»a-f) 4 'R,MEAg=> AA,LE;ue>--rzsCE) ;Frob,rb\H .le) Lqrlz.' - rh_ 1600226 1 - --Prna O - -C-Â£87 Mrl BLDG . -IN.specre 2.- . _21*,68+Rc-REAL__*eA__G_*-_ _ER#PATR-.ic-,C.~ 3(JL\[-~50 -Â· - -- - --1 - - . I- . 1 1 Â¥ Id... / Al 1 e ' Â· 753.1 r 7 ~-5 Â· ~ Â·:-Â·,4-Â·'Â· ,. -.~ . A A ..6 t. i 1 + ti; 4. , , -'........ -=1/.1 1 . . H. ./. ..Il. 1 .--CAÂ·-2Â«,2,Â·-,1"I-Vevi-=I-..-r -0 1 -- -002 1 1,-4 - -.I-- .. Â·~ Â·Â·Â· d . .. - i 1,16; 4.2-- ' 1 0 -11-- H ./ Â·41/ 1 -I- . i Â». - 1 "t~.=2.I. 9%1 3.-t6 i 1 i 1 . ' 4 - 1110101,~,1 -1->/ I - . -- . - 11 M. 1 1 . -7 " - - i '-. . . n .. . 2 lf Â·Â· 1:0 ' m .= 1 '111. 44 4 - - : '*4844,[6 k , Â»7440:44* 5/~-~-~~~/22.~.~:,44, %60%45% .. '04,Â¥'*- 26/460, 2. 0 4,$56+6 - - -- = . 'AA .*412~14~~ -- ;.- - :,F.; 44.2240 ~ , 240$ s,~ 9%Â»$%65*1* D**0; 4%424 4 2645%$ 61*~,~1*/64~/*0 9%92$%*4;S*-143%A <$%44-"0 0 .2 - Ir G 11-~~~7. 0-**242&41~6~/ 260,-,A =1.- J ERÂ»:-- . , - I. IC , .. r-=imi~fl It 1-gE_- 1 APPLICANT: John and Marianne Schuwmacher, represented by Dave Johnson illi--------.I LOCATION: 505 N. Eighth Street ACTION: Minor Review All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving a historic landmark must meet aUfour Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. Standard 1: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). Standard 2: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Standard 3: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Standard 4: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. PS. 1 9.2 7% EXHIBIT q- MEMORANDUM rE] TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Director FROM: Julie Ann Woods, Deputy Planning Director [Acting Historic Preservation Officer] 1 . RE: 203 S. Galena St.--- Minor Review DATE: July 8, 1998 SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to make modifications to two different storefronts: one faces S. Galena St. and the other is the entrance of the former Smuggler Bar on E. Hopkins St., across from the fire station. The S. Galena storefront is immediately south of the Luis Vuitton store. The applicant proposes to replace the existing door and frame and add a raised metal sign in the transom area above the doors. The E. Hopkins storefront is proposed to be similar in detailing as the S. Galena St. side, but would have a single door and a new display window. APPLICANT: Gucci America, Inc., represented by Bill Sofield, Gensler Architects. LOCATION: 203 S. Galena St. PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H, 55 Historic Overlay District, or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. The subject building is an historic landmark. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed jloor area by up tofive hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). Response: The proposed changes to the S. Galena St. storefront will match the existing storefronts along this street, and are compatible in general design, massing and 1 volume, scale and site plan with the adjacent parcels within the "H," Historic Overlay District. The existing painted wood and glass doors will be replaced with metal and glass with metal pulls. The doors are approximately eight (8) inches taller than the existing doors, and therefore a new, narrower transom will be installed above the doors. The Gucci sign will be affixed to the transom window, and a new downcast light will shine from the wood soffit above the entry. The storefront will be re-painted. The E. Hopkins storefront would have the existing door and windows replaced with a new painted wood and glass door, transom and window. the profile and detailing will match the existing S. Galena St. storefront. The same type of sign and recessed lighting would be concealed in the existing wood soffit. The application indicates that the existing door and storefront are not original to the building. Staff agrees that the door is not original, but is not convincedÂ·that the storefront is not original detailing. Though the proposed improvements would indeed provide more harmony between the building's facades, staff is hesitant to endorse approval to the E. Hopkins St. facade unless it can be conclusively determined that the facade is not original to the building. If it cannot be conclusively determined, then staff would recommend a re-study of the facade and door, using the existing windows and kickplate. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposedfor development. Response: The proposed facade improvements to the S. Galena St. elevation will have little to no affect on the character of the neighborhood. The building exists, and the improvements will be consistent with the other storefronts along that street. Although the proposed improvements to the E. Hopkins St. facade will have little or no affect on the character of the neighborhood, replacement of historic materials does diminish the character of a structure. Again, staff recommends that this elevation be re-studied. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: The proposed changes to the S. Galena St. elevation would not detract from the historic significance of the designated historic structures located on the parcel or from those located on adjacent parcels, as the improvements to this structure were previously approved by the HPC last year. However, the E. Hopkins elevation was not part of the improvements reviewed by the HPC at that time. Staff believes that the removal of historic detailing in this storefront could detract from the historic significance of the Brand Building. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. 2 Response: Please refer to item 3 above. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe following alternatives: â€¢ Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. â€¢ Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. â€¢ Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) â€¢ Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC approve the proposed changes to the S. Galena St. facade only, with the following conditions, 1. That the improvements will be substantially in conformance with the drawings submitted with the application, dated June 26, 1998; 2. Any additional significant changes from those proposed in this application shall be considered "significanf' and will require a conceptual and final review of the HPC before proceeding with construction; 3. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public hearings shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a decision-making body having the authority to do so. Staff further recommends that the applicant provide conclusive evidence that the existing E. Hopkins St. storefront is not original to the building. If it cannot be concluded that these are not original features, then staff recommends that the facade be restudied, addressing the continued use of the historic materials. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the proposed changes to the S. Galena St. facade of the Brand Building, 203 S. Galena St. only, with the conditions recommended in the staff memorandum dated July 8, 1998. I further move to direct the applicant to restudy the E. Hopkins St. facade unless it can be concluded that the existing materials are not original to the building.'; EXHIBITS: Exhibit "A" - The submitted application. Exhibit "B" - Historic Architectural Building/Structure Form (Inventory) 3 Â£(H ** rr Pl ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name Gucci 2. ProjeCt locatiOn 203 S. Galena Street. Aspen. CO 81611 Lot G, H &I: Block 88. City of Aspen (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning Commercial Core 4. Lot size 9,105 sa. ft. 5. Applicanfs name, address and phone number Gucci America, Inc. 685 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10022 (212)230-9326 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number Bill Sofield 380 Lafayette Street, PH#2 New York, NY 10003 (2121473-1300 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD x Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD Relocation HPC Subdivision TexUMap Amend. Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot Split/Lot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the property) Retail, storage & gallerv (basement) Retail. gallery ( firgt flnnr) Residence / condominiums ( second floor) 9. Description of development application See attached Memorandum 10. Have you completed and attached the following? x Attachment 1 - Land use application form x Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form x Response to Attachment 3 x Response to Attachment 4 11111111 ATTACHMENT2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: Gucci America, Inc. Address: 203 S. Galena Street, Aspen, CO 81611 Zone district: Commercial Core Lot size: 9.105 sq. ft. Existing FAR: N/A Allowable FAR: N/A Proposed FAR: N/A Existing net leasable (commercial): Unchanged Proposed net leasable (commercial): Existing % of site coverage: N/A Proposed % of site coverage: N/A Existing % of open space: N/A Proposed % of open space: N/A Existing maximum height: Principal blda: UnchangedAccesorv bldg: N/A Proposed max. height: Principal bldg: Accessory blda: Proposed % of demolition: Existing number of bedrooms: N/A Proposed number of bedrooms: N/A Existing on-site parking spaces: N/A On-site parking spaces required: N/A Setbacks Existing: Minimum required: Proposed: Front: Front: Front: Unchanged Rear: Rear: Rear Unchanged Combined Combined Combined Front/rear: FronUrear: Front/rear: Unchanged Side: Side: Side: Unchanged Side: Side: Side: Unchanged Combined Combined Combined Sides: Sides: Sides: Unchanged Existing nonconformities or encroachments: None Â·Â· Variations requested: None (HPC has the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.ft, site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts) MEMORANDUM Gensler Project Project Number Gucci Aspen 06.8042.001 Memo To Date Aspen Historic Preservation Commission June 25, 1998 Attention Telephone No. Julie Ann Woods Subject File Application for Minor Development Review Memorandum / Discussions / Observations Written Description of Proposal Note: All finishes indicated below are shown on the enclosed finish sample board, and are keyed to the elevations. A. The proposed alterations to the S. Galena St. storefront are outlined as follows: a) Replace existing painted wood and glass doors with new metal and glass doors (MT-4) with metal pulls (MI'-3). b) Align transom over entrance doors with the existing storefront window transoms. Finish of new transom to match new doors (MT-4); transom dimensions to match existing storefront transom dimensions. c) Repaint wood storefront (PT-3A). d) Install polished stainless steel Gucci sign (bIT-1), pin-mounted on transom above door and lit from above by lighting concealed in existing painted wood soffit above entry. The existing doors are approximately eight inches shorter thanthâ‚¬ door opening due to the previous removal of the entrance step to create an interior floor level with the sidewalk. The proposed new doors, which are Gucci's worldwide standard entrance door type, have bottom rail proportions similar to the existing doors. Since the doors are recessed from the sidewalk building line, are dark in color and are constructed from materials ofhigh quality, finish and durability we onsider that they in are keeping with the character and history of the neighborhood. The sign treatment and paint color are similarly appropriate - restrained in appearance and respectful ofthe building's character. B. The proposed alterations to the East Hopkins Ave. storefront are outlined as follows: a) Replace existing clear-finished and painted wood and glass door and large painted wood window with new painted wood and glass door, transom and window Profile and detailing of storefront to match the existing S. Galena St. storefronts. Paint to be PT-3A, pulls to be MT-3. b) Install polished stainless steel Gucci sign (MI'-l), pin-mounted on transom above door and lit from above by lighting concealed in existing painted wood soffit above entry. The existing door and storefront are not original to the building (see photo board ofpre-existing condition). We believe that the proposed facade treatment improves the overall harmony between the building's facades and that the scale of the proposed storefront window is more appropriate to a retail store.. In addition to the above proposed alterations, Gucci may wish to erect awnings on both storefronts in the future. These would be of similar type to and would align with the adjoining existing awnings on the Brand Building. Genster will rely on these notes as the approved record of matters discussed and condusions reached unless written notice to the contrary is received by Genster within seven calendar days of the issue of these notes. Distribution: Per attached transmittal Prepared by: Date Issued: Brian O'Tuama 6/25/98 s:\068042\current\memos\m062598.doc One Rockefeller Plaza Suite 500 Tel: 212.492.1400 New York New York 10020 Fax: 212.492.1472 *4:,1- S HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING/STRUCTURE FORM State Site Number: Local Site Number: 203.SG Photo Information: ASP-CC-1-6. 7&8 Township 10 South Range 84 West Section 7 USGS Quad Name Asgen Year 1960 X 7.5' 15' Building or Structure Name: Hvman Block / Brand Building Full Street Address: 203 South Galena Legal Description: Lots G. H. I. Block 88 Citv and Townsite of Asven City Asnen County Pitkin Historic District or Neighborhood Name: Commercial Core Owner: Private/State/Federal Owner's Mailing Address: ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Building Type: Commercial Architectural Style: Victorian with Romanescrue influences Dimensions: L: X W: = Square Feet: Number of Stories: 2 Building Plan (Footprint, Shape): Irregular square Landscaping or Special Setting Features: Corner building - storefronts on South Galena and East Hankins Associated Buildings, Features or Objects - Describe Material and Function (map number / name): None For the following categories include materials, techniques and styles in the description as appropriate: Roof: Flat Walls: Rough faced; coursed sandstone; A-A-B-C-C bav spacing on east facade; diagonal corner entrv; D-B-E-A-A bav spacing on north facade; bays are framed bv 2-storv stone Dilasters; on both east and north facades. paraget stens up 5 feet after A bavs; sandstone is corbelled to form dentils at garapet level Foundation / Basement: Sandstone Chimney(s): Unknown Windows: Windows on 1st floor east are fixed one over one wood storefront with each bav representing a different commercial estab- lishment; windows on 1st floor north facade are one over one double hung. typically all 2nd floor windows are one over one double hung Doors: Transom full light double wood entry at corner and tvoically for individual store entries Porches: N/A General Architectural Description: Use of sandstone as primarv material tvoifies commercial architecture demonstrating strength and stabilitv (original use as a bank). Dentil detailing out of sandstone at roofline allows for Dlav of light and shadows with change of natural and artifical light. The use of sandstone throughout is a definite statement of strenath but more imoortant is a feature Victorian architecture; use of different materials and textures for different affect. The roofline detailing. the sandstone dentils displaying varying light/shadow patterns. The color of the sandstone changes dramaticallv with varving intensitv of light. Page 2 of 2 State Site Number Local Site Number 203.SG FUNCTION ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY Current Use: Commercial Architect: Unknown Original Use: Commercial Builder: Unknown Intermediate Use: Construction Date: 1891 X Actual _ Estimate _ Assessor Based On: MODIFICATIONS AND/OR ADDITIONS Minor _X_ Moderate Major Moved Date Describe Modifications and Date: First floor alterations of facade. date unknown Additions and Date: NATIONAL/STATE REGISTER ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA Is listed on National Register; State Register Is eligible for National Register; State Register Meets National Register Criteria: A B C D E Map Kev Local Rating and Landmark Designation Signif icant: Listed on or is eligible for National Register Contributing: Resource has maintained historic or Ll - architectural integrity. 0 ___ Supporting: Original integrity lost due to alterations, however, is "retrievable" with substantial effort. Locally Designated Landmark Justify Assessment: Associated Contexts and Historical Information: Built for David H. Hvman. an early Dromoter of Aspen. this two-storv stone structure was completed in 1891. The First National Bank moved from the Aspen Block into the Hvman Block in 1891. The second floor consisted of a large hall which housed the Patriotic Order Sons of America (P.O.S.A.). a lodge dedicated to "society nurgoses and social gatherings." During the 1920's. M. H. Brand owned the building and operated a Conoco gas station on the corner. Today numerous shons occunv the space. Other Recording Information Specific References to the Structure/Building: Pitkin County Court- house Records; Sanborn and Sons Insurance Mans Archaeological Potential: * (Y or N) Justify: * Recorded By: Date: Januarv 1991 Affiliation: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee - Citv of Aspen Project Manager: Roxanne Eflin. Historic Preservation Officer/Planner I , . U h4 x7909.0 1 Â«0 / E. 14Â·OPKi ktÂ·6~ ,52,~ 6>ritaf \ --7 OOL-U ~351-07 1 L-- BL<%242 _A 6 ... 1 204 1 NYMAki r 4112\:7 41 Â¢ i11 It 1 1 3\0-\\ LoTe . -----1 1 i I Walki eeze, a,caL- i 66+31 4 1208 42' n . I A .--1.x-- : / On 7 0 .1 3 7913.Ox --- WHEaiyeg ~ 13 BLCE-K_ E 41 X .9 Of >ff X 1 #1#L *88 tilce t__ \ > 1 > i 424- 432 1 L 1 I. 0-__17 --- i j - i 2/' +kl_/42&-*J*- thi X 7912.9 ~/60462 9 NUN 4 1 ./1 11 Dif , 1 l./ \\ A 14_ ' /\low " ~0-02fA k Ytq 214 â€¢ 1 Ir.,Â·934Â¢%-1,511::f 1 . i 4 21/1 .4-':4%4%.1 0~./.'*... I ~~ 7 2..arm,=..I. ... -i-li, ...%,-'Â·Â·,Â·. .. . Â£ '11Â· a. .7/7â€¢,1: 1-:9' P : 3*P-:34: . 0 1 1 4 4*14-,45*62" 11 01 , AL,7 #. 4, , 1 6 & 4Â® ' 11Â£ 1.{r 'i M. 1 '1 , -1.-'-p 91 '.r,U - iltiE .% ' - , 1.1. .1.Q..1 - $ 64,11 0 r th h i drf#,4\ttl ,?\14511?14,+91 ' EF j..6.0 ft-Rk 4 1141 \<il,~(fl:~.*~ .Â·, ~ , TiA,i" 4 , iI r--ii Â¥ A f' 'Â·1 - Â· 16 I 414..i-: 1 70 r-711 Â¢ k itt ~2'Â·'.:i,-â€¢,Â·.*.'~'~,l,~1 'it t04.'. U .7 ./ Ir---1 I *444 1 AN , 4 ./ 12* 9 7.4, .57>3.-1. ;.4. W:)4 LL,Ul' ' 1~ rle - i tt. p Â¥. 1 -9 'U 6-1 '.. 1 1, 2011 - b 6 PeA '44 p /1 i4ilizil,1 .' ' 6: Â·m,r ""bit--'11 7Â·7, "Mr, 1 -4 744 & 1 1 Â¥ t . , ---7Ibl 12+ -U L '9Â·1994 ..Nal,9 .4,7,66*m:e- ;r' hil t. & . -â‚¬Â¥133 . 3~p; 2 _ I . . - 2~.-Eâ‚¬,1- -:1 =29%Â£ ==A-- ./.5- ----/F - V#-- Cr:ti . -L . 1 - 1 -Ii - 1- --c I .. 2 C:Ge' rat#&). -' 9. 4.. -i ~-9-AlÂ·tri: 2:,btla~22.6 . . 2 -f-*p Â· 1 Â·12 1.Â· Wi - 31*.Â·=19 . 2 , I .1. t N.. e HISTORICAL PHOTOGRAPH OF p - PRE-EXISTING FACADE 7- r--3 $ -.44 ' - -4 Â·2.-.Ilt & - ,//-'.I%'-t! 9 7 j .:>eM" - EXISTING E. HOPKINS AVE. FACADE 1.1. .47,4, - I : A ./ - 1 EXISTING S. GALENA ST. FACADE - GUCCI 203 1 GALENA ST. ASPEN,CO. Photographs JUNE 26,1998 Gens|ef Â· STUDIOS OFIELD 0 .998 ....1- Atl .... - 5SSUSERSSS 1,Â»44914Â·Â· 7,0,4Â¢p'lkedÂ·,d-4â€¢ '4Omr,#INNÂ·nehe:Â·d~- .7,tp i J.. : ~~u, 1 Il 2,94 A + . 4 -. I ./. ~i.#-..: I I -/~*. -.r-~ I-*<I-.+ -.*d~.*=--E:---- . I r-I :.~ r.- .., .~ r -* --r'-r.Â· -n tl> .i~ :-,â€¢. Â·Â· 4 '~ Â·I / Â·Â· -,iÂ·Â· . Â· - â€¢-'Â»--0-?'.Iâ€¢49/.iÂ¥*---Â¥14.4... ,~,. . *I Ilill al//6*,4#6,4.1~i# -I. 3 2.21Â®-4 Â©Â»Â»4*4, '11 A - 1~ a- % 0 I Â· â€¢ Â·117'~r Â·Â·~p--Â·w I EXISTING WOOD RECESSED , ~ r j/'2;Keg!1112=~#41*=rr CORNICE SIGN LIGHT PT-3A Â· .Â· Ir - 1 - '%?*Fâ‚¬iÂ©3 EXISTING STONE 59*2*21, M?'1922122 - 1-7 -4-- -e , --/Â«Â» 1 .. - 1-:12%9 - Ait>*2:3*sY.21;01.-5*322< 57 82;&51-Ir~,134=vwj, EXISTING LIGHTS r .\>\ -et. J ....7 Ok-. CLEAR GLASS (TYP) i 3-,Un.811,113115* L :Â·U. -34.403/ 11*3//8 \\ GL-1 O U_ CC' .. jifÂ·Â·(*~19Â° SIGN \R SIGN dpl%*m'*Py- 1 4 1 0/ MT-1 ,/- MT-1 5.* 3%40[~1:4 Â·3 -r~l;i'@~,Â»*.!Ny- DOORS AND FRAME 3 7.*W .*.':~:/'. MT-4 46,7" .4. T.rp,1.k,4Â®111*t- . 45&1*B**: -- DOOR PULLS Mitet)%.9.Â·~ MT-3 A A'trÂ·,143,90412&611 i.1*2&*21,20*r EXISTING WOOD STOREFRONT atilimm*muniwmtiummi~ 1//5*2249/i*.3 ....4~ 0 .. ~ ~ DISPLAY MNDOW INSIDE 2% *l SHEER AND MOHAIR DRAPERIES INSIDE 2. S. GALENA STREET ELEVATION 1. SECTION THROUGH ENTRY R 1' 11. 1 1 4.4 -7 jÂ«'1 ~- 1 .*4 - 44 3. PLAN DETAIL mra GUCCI o HE ' -23 0 0 4 203&GALENAST. 4 ASPEN, CO. 43% JUNE 26,1998 Gensim Â· STUDIOS OFIELD e '998 6-1- ., , 121.4.--d SSSUSERSSS 1~ 14*9*;â‚¬ , gi". I .fop ' 0,Â·'9-D Â·Â·JÂ·*99~,4 44 -7Â·, s, 4: wÂ·Â·Â·9~ip..,. 42.. if o, Â¥ 4 i J * _ I.&-.gÂ·leÂ«n.-4- --, . --- < . 3- . *g /=0 -,1,6 -- L.Cl.-*.1.2.... g W. i & W - .*- - I~- I--. - . t- I -k.):-V+ ./-#..~ .== - SIGN i MT-1 1 4/ Â· - 4 *, r . 1.@+ -9 - .1-4.y~â€¢' - * . *.,4 :'t- ..1- 2 , .. EXIST STONE EXIST WOOD UNTEL PT-3A 4-1/ -I - L - -â‚¬. V . li - 7 44. F WOOD BEAD BOARD 4â‚¬ -11.. . 7,Â¢9-,Fe: PT-JA . 1 1 oucclt . CLEAR GLASS ~ GL-1 . 9,-y ,Â· ;.<r 7 3,5 1 Â· 1 - '92Â· I / 1 -- CLEAR GLASS GL-1 DISPLAY , 1 WINDOW p . 1 -- - WOOD DOOR AND FRAME PT-3A tv - ~' - EXIST. STREET I 1 I 1 UGHT EXTURE 1 DOOR PULL MT-3 WOOD STOREFRONT---J TO MATCH EXIST 1. PT-JA 1. SECTION THROUGH STOREFRONT 5. LOWER STOREFRONT DETAIL 1 3. DETAIL OF NEW STOREFRONT - E. HOPKINS AVE ELEVATION # 1 1 1 1 EXISWNG UPPER 1 ' 1 0 i TO REMAIN ~ i ~ 1 1 : 1 1 SHEER DRAPERIES ~ IN UPPER WINDOWS . >1 11 11 11 (OFFICES) It 11,0 1 Â· 3 MOHAIR DRAPERIES 1 BEHIND OUCCI DISPLAY WINDOW ' GL-1 TYP 4. PLAN DETAIL j 2. E. HOPKINS AVE ELEVATION 203&GALENAST. ASPEN,CO. JUNE 26, 1998 Gens|er Â· STUDIO s OFIELD 0 19/ 6-- Att R,9,- 2...r.- 5SSUSERSSS a ./ 00 1':6-4-:Â·-> ?:r; il 32, Â·K . ./'. I' ~i'''i'.'i~:.#~t:Â©~'~ Â¢ ' Â·} I Â·. .. : 4'.1 .0 4114-E..1142/I Â£16646&~,Wi/LiakiN/#8#ja~Bi,I >-.1. S 1., 57:....:8~. b-&~i:.{-flt:-.82.7.:-:Â¢Â· 0 ~Â·..=fit- ;234241--{1 Â·3-;i ;,ic. Â·:~-iÂ·:...r.Â«~-:~.... f-:Â·~47-:5 re~ .......2....,. 7 ./ 02 .r -, - ......i. . .......I 4 -f :.Â·1.. 9-Â· -: A..:'- ' 4.2. I : -4 ?Â·~ rÂ·<~'.3.KI' Â·C,Â· ..':,6-' 3 1 MT-1 MT-4 1 3Â·...1..%40.Â·Â·:Â·roc tf. 3 ,109.7, Apt- . i I STOREFRONT FINISHES 1 GL-1 GLASS. CLEAR, INSULATED, BURGLAR RESISTANT i ~~i~ff--ft?(1-7:~Il f.rf<-1-LIV ~-~ ~. I~Â·-}-Â·4~Â·f>~.2,#f~-Â·~~:Â·f .6-.:-1~Â· f:Â·::1Â·- 6Â·; M T-1 STAINLESS STEEL WITH POLISHED FINISH MT-3 NICKEL PLATED BRASS, BLACK/BROWN ipifaffi:'Â·Gift'ft--Iffii-<ft-- Â·.'5~344.,4 , t.6-2--.> 9 p,Â·.f,~--f--i.4Â·,t..634.Â·.iRN..4.Â·-;..~. t&~-i{);44-~131 . ..... . COLOR, SATIN FINISH lfÂ·titi?Y.ft-â‚¬44Â·859.? fiP-; -<L.-triti - (j Â·~~~~~1~~.i A Â·fÂ·tÂ·-. 4Â·-j..Â·lifiREÂ©â‚¬*4<:.~ Ati ' MT-4 NICKEL PLATED BRASS, BLACK/BROWN -:ce:*.4 33-Â·.i&.%73454~Â».-3.JokÂ· t-Â·:...Â·:..f Â·*fi- r-*9- 17.4.1..'f. f iÂ©N.J--4 - ~- COLOR, POLISHED FINISH PT-3A PAINT. PRATT & LAMBERT #2293 "WENDIGO" GL-1 SEMI-GLOSS ENAMEL FINISH PT-3A GUCCI 203& GALENAST. ASPEN,CO. Storefront Finishes JUNE 26,1998 Gen~er Â· STUDIOS OFIELD 0 1// 6-6- â€¢. .... R-1-- SESUSERSSE APPLICANT: Gucci America, Inc. represented by Bill Sofield, Gensler Archit~~~ c - ~ ~ LOCATION: 203 S. Galena ACTION: Minor Review All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving a historic landmark must meet allfour Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. Standard 1: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.09003)(2). Standard 2: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Standard 3: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Standard 4: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereoÂ£ r /1 MEMORANDUM 1220 TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Director Julie Ann Woods, Interim Historic Preservation Officer A~11/', FROM: Mitch Haas, Planner 1 BC RE: 920 West Hallam Street: Historic Landmark Lot Split, Partial Demolition, On-Site Relocation, Off-Site Relocation, Significant Development (Conceptual) including variances, and Residential Design Standards variance. --- Public Hearing. Parcel I.D. No. 2735-123-03-003. DATE: July 8, 1998 SUMMARY: The site in question currently contains three (3) separate structures. The principal structure is a two-bedroom single-family house containing approximately 990 square feet of floor area; it was built in 1888 and is a one-story, cross-gabled structure with a prominent bay window and decorative ornamentation on the front facade and porch. Next, the structure that is currently used as a garage was originally used as a "section house" for housing workers of the Colorado Midland Railroad and was moved to this site in the early 1940's; it contains approximately 454 square feet of floor area. Lastly, the property contains a 231 square foot shed that was once used as a concession stand at the base of Aspen Mountain and was moved to this site in the late 1940's. In total, the applicant is attempting to split an existing 11,048 square foot lot into one parcel of 3,432 square feet (Lot A) and another of 7,616 square feet (Lot B) by having the property designated as an Historic Landmark and then completing an Historic Landmark Lot Split. The single-family home that would be built on Lot A would be allowed by right, as a permitted use in the zone district. Lot B would contain the existing historic house as well as a new house. In terms of the HPC's review, the applicant is requesting approval of a proposed Partial Demolition to remove the lean-to structure attached to the garage. Approval of an On-Site Relocation is requested to move the existing, historic house approximately five (5) feet to the east, eleven (11) feet to the south/forward, and eighteen (18) inches up in elevation, in order to excavate a basement beneath the house, center it between the two newly proposed houses, and create enough space to move the existing.garage behind the house (the garage would also be rotated 180 degrees so that it can be entered into from the alley). Off-Site Relocation approval is requested to move the small shed structure to another, yet to be identified, site in town. Historic Landmark Lot Split approval is requested to create a new, separate lot on the west side of the property for the development of a new house while the easterly lot would contain the existing historic house and another new house. Significant Development (Conceptual) review, including variances, is requested for the two new houses and the minor changes to be made to the historic house. 1 f [f any of the requested approvals are to be granted by the HPC, said approvals would need to be contingent upon City Council approval of the proposed Landmark Designation and Lot Split. The applicant's submitted application is attached as Exhibit "A" and referral comments are included as Exhibit "B." APPLICANT: Aspen Historic Cottages, LLC, represented by Ron Robertson and Glenn Rappaport. LOCATION: 920 West Hallam Street; legally described as the east 1/2 of Lot M, all of Lots N, O and P, and a portion of Lot Q, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen. The property is on the north side of West Hallam Street, between the Castle Creek Bridge (to the west) and 8th Street (to the east). ZONING: Medium-Density Residential, (R-6). CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residential. LOT SIZE: The lot in question contains a total area of 11,048 square feet (.25 acres). As proposed, the Historic Landmark Lot Split subdivision exemption would result in a 3,432 square foot parcel (Lot A), and a 7,616 square foot parcel (Lot B). ALLOWABLE FAR: The existing lot of 11,048 square feet in the R-6 zone district would have an allowable duplex FAR of 4,202 square feet, exclusive of reductions or bonuses (such as the 500 square foot FAR bonus applied for though the Historic Preservation Commission). Given the Historic Landmark Lot Split provisions, the maximum amount of FAR floor area that can constructed on the whole site cannot exceed the allowable FAR for a duplex on the fathering 11,048 square foot parcel. Thus, the FAR that could, by right, be built in a single structure would, if the proposal is approved, be split up between three (3) separate structures. The FAR of the proposed home on Lot A is 1,850 square feet, while Lot B would contain the existing 1,000 square foot historic house and a new 1,850 square foot residence. In total, the proposal does not provide the applicant with any additional FAR (other than the potential for a 500 square foot FAR bonus from the HPC) than what is allowed by right under the zoning. PROPOSED LAND USE: Three (3) detached single-family residences with attached garages. Detached residential dwellings are permitted as conditional uses on landmarked lots of 6,000 square feet or greater in the R-6 zone. REVIEW PROCEDURE: Conditional use approvals by the Planning and Zoning Commission require a public hearing. It is a one-step review that requires notification to be published, posted and mailed in accordance with Section 26.52.060(ID. The following sections of the code are applicable to the conditional use review: Section 26.28.040, Medium-Density Residential (R-6); and, Section 26.60.040, Standards Applicable to All Conditional Uses. The Planning and Zoning Commission is reviewing the conditional use application on July 7,1998. 2 The application to the Historic Preservation Commission requires a public hearing for the Historic Landmark Lot Split, Significant Development (Conceptual), and variances to the side yard setbacks, combined side yard setbacks, site coverage, and residential design standards. Included in this hearing will be the requests for Partial Demolition, On-Site Relocation, and Off-Site Relocation. The On-Site Relocation is reviewed according to Section 27.72.020(D)(2), (3) and (4); the Off-Site Relocation request is reviewed according to Section 26.72.020(D); the Partial Demolition is reviewed according to Section 26.72.020(C); the Historic Landmark Lot Split is reviewed according to Sections 26.88.030(A)(2) and (5); the Significant Development (Conceptual) and dimensional requirement variances are reviewed according to Section 26.72.010(D)(1); and, the Residential Design Standards variance is reviewed according to Section 26.22.010. The HPC serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council with regard to Historic Landmark Lot Splits (i.e., makes a recommendation only, and Council makes the final decision). All of the other requests are under the purview of the HPC, and FAR Bonuses are not approved until final review of the Significant Development application. The application will then go before the City Council for final decisions regarding the Landmark Designation and Landmark Lot Split requests (first reading on July 13th, and second reading on July 27th). The HPC unanimously recommended approval of the Landmark Designation at a public hearing on November 12, 1997, and the Planning and Zoning Commission did the same on December 2, 1997. After City Council's review is completed, provided approvals are granted, the applicant would have to return to the HPC for Final approval of the Significant Development request, including the requested 500 square foot FAR bonus. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Referral comments from the Sanitation District, and the City Engineering, Housing, and Zoning Departments are included as Exhibit B. STAFF COMMENTS: Section 26.28.040. Medium-Density Residential fit-6) Two (2) detached residential dwellings on landmarked lots are permitted as conditional uses on lots of 6,000 square feet or greater in the R-6 zone district. The lot (Lot B) would have an area of 7,616 square feet. The minimum lot area per dwelling unit for historic landmark lots is 3,000 square feet per unit, and the proposal exceeds this requirement. The minimum lot width for lots created via the Historic Landmark Lot Split process is thirty (30) feet, and Lot B's width would be approximately seventy-six (76) feet. The required side yard setbacks call for a minimum of five (5) feet, but both sides combined must total at least 23 feet. The minimum front and rear yard setbacks are ten (10) feet each, but must combine for a total of at least thirty (30) feet. The site coverage is not allowed to exceed thirty-five (35) percent (2,666 square feet), and the maximum roof height cannot exceed twenty-five (25) feet, as measured to a variety of points depending on the particular roof slope. There must be a total of four (4) off-street parking spaces provided (two (2) for each dwelling unit). The proposed plans indicate that the development would meet all of the dimensional requirements of the 3 zone district, with the exception of the side yard setbacks (each side and combined), and the maximum site coverage; the applicant is seeking variances from these dimensional requirements from the HPC as part oftheir Significant Development Review (below). Section 26.72.020(C). Standards for Review of Partial Demolition Partial Demolition approval is requested to remove the lean-to structure attached to the garage. Section 26.72.020(C) states that "no approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met:" (Standards are provided in indented italics with staff responses immediately following). 1. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure. Staff Response: The partial demolition is requested to remove a lean-to structure that is not original to the garage. Furthermore, the garage itself is not original to the site, but was moved to its current location in the 1940s. The applicant indicates that the lean-to cannot be accommodated in the proposed site plan due to its size and the FAR limitations associated with the whole development. The applicant proposes to accomplish the rehabilitation and restoration of the structure by renovating it in a manner that would make it useful as a garage. To truly restore it to its original condition, the 1940s lean-to addition needs to be removed. In this sense, the partial demolition is necessary for the renovation, restoration and rehabilitation of the structure. 2. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: a. Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions. Staff Response: As explained above, the proposed partial demolition would remove only non-original elements of the structure and, therefore, limits the impacts on the historic significance ofthe building. b. Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions so that they are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. Staff Response: No new additions would be made to the structure in place of the removed lean-to; however, a new corrugated metal breezeway (roof structure) would be connected to the garage structure just below the eave line of its gable end. This breezeway would connect the garage structure with the rear side of the historic house. This breezeway would not, in staff s estimation, compromise the architectural character or integrity of the structures located on the parcel as it would be subordinate in mass and scale to the historic structures and located in such a way as to leave the primary facades unaltered. Section 26.72.020(EL Standards for Review of On-Site Relocation 4 Approval of an On-Site Relocation is requested to move the existing, historic house approximately five (5) feet to the east, eleven (11) feet to the south/forward, and eighteen (18) inches up in elevation, in order to excavate a basement beneath the house, center it between the two newly proposed houses, and create enough space to move the existing garage behind the house (the garage would also be rotated 180 degrees so that it can be entered into from the alley). Thus, on-site relocation is requested for both the existing house and garage structures. Section 26.72.020(E) states that "No approvaljbr on-site relocation shall be granted unless the HPC Jinds that the standards of Section 26.72.020(D)(2), (3), and 649 have been met." These standards and staff responses are as follows: 2. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be the best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure, and the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures will not be diminished due to the relocation; and Staff Response: Moving the house would allow the applicant to accomplish the proposed development which, in turn, allows for the preservation of the historic house without any significant additions or modifications. As a result, the house would retain its scale, size, form and general appearance. Specifically, moving the historic house allows for the placement of the new houses in a manner which would create the rhythm and spacing between structures that was typical of historic Aspen (i.e., houses of small-to-moderate scale placed on lots of approximately 3,000 square feet each). Moving the house forward would allow the structure to retain its prominence on the site. [f the garage structure were to remain on the easterly corner of the lot, it would lose its association with the historic house and be left behind a new structure of a greater size, mass and scale; thus, making the historically significant structure subordinate to a new building. Moving the garage to the rear of the historic house and rotating it to face the alley would allow the structure to continue to be utilized while maintaining its association with the historic house. Staff does not believe the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures would be at all diminished by the relocation ofthe house or garage. 3. The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation; and Staff Response: The information required by this standard will be submitted by the applicant either prior to final review or with building permit applications. 4. A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security with the engineering department, as approved by the HPC, to insure the safe relocation, preservation and repair (grequired) ofthe structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation; and Staff Response: The applicant will submit the relocation plan and financial security with their building permit application. 5 .. 0 Section 26.72.020(D). Standards for Review of Off-Site Relocation Off-Site Relocation approval is requested to move the small shed structure to another, yet to be identified, site in town. Currently, the shed resides within the alley right-of-way. No approval for off-site relocation requests shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met: 1. The structure cannot be rehabilitated or reused on its original site to provide for any reasonable beneficial use of the property; and Staff Response: The applicant explains that many options to try to reuse the shed on site have been explored, but none have proven workable. The shed is too small to be used as a garage stall, but too large to be accommodated on the site solely for storage purposes. Consideration has' also been given to leaving the shed at the end of the alley as a sort of neighborhood gardening/storage shed; however, maneuvering of vehicles and City snow plowing equipment in the area would be problematic under such a scenario. Consequently, the applicant has determined, and staff concurs, that the best preservation method for the shed is to relocate it to another site in town. The shed is not original to the subject property as it was once located at the base of the ski mountain where it served as a 0 concession stand. The applicant proposes to locate an appropriate site for relocating the shed, such as the new ski museum, one of the City parks, or a location associated with the Ski Company. 2. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be the best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure, and the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures will not be diminished due to the relocation; and Staff Response: As mentioned in response to the standard immediately above, the applicant has determined, and staff concurs, that the best preservation method for the shed is to relocate it to another site in town. The applicant is committed to finding a use for the building, as opposed to demolishing it. The shed is not original to the site or to the neighborhood, and the two significant structures on the site would be preserved as freestanding buildings with minor modifications, thereby strongly aiding the efforts to preserve the historic character of the property and its neighborhood. 3. The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation; and 0 Staff Response: The information required by this standard will be submitted by the applicant either prior to final review or with building permit applications. 6 0 4. A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security with the engineering department, as approved by the HPC, to insure the safe relocation, preservation and repair (ifrequired) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation; and Staff Response: The applicant will submit the relocation plan and financial security with their building permit application. The receiving site shall be required to be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. 5. The receiving site is compatible in nature to the structure or structures proposed to be moved, the character of the neighborhood is consistent with the architectural integrity of the structure, and the relocation of the historic structure would not diminish the integrity or character of the neighborhood of the receiving site. An acceptable letter from the property owner of the receiving site shall be submitted. Staff Response: As mentioned above, the applicant intends to find a site which is relevant to the building's history (i.e., ski related). If this is not possible, the applicant would like to find a site where the general public can view and enjoy the building. However, as a specific site has not yet been found, staff does not feel that this criterion can satisfactorily be addressed or its compliance ensured. Therefore, staff must recommend that the off-site relocation application be continued indefinitely, until such time as the applicant can return with a specific proposal (receiving site). 0 Section 26.88.030(A)(5). Historic Landmark Lot Split Historic Landmark Lot Splits must meet the requirements of Sections 26.88.030(A)(2), 26.88.030(A)(5), 26.100.050(A)(2)(e), and 26.72.010(G) ofthe Aspen Municipal Code. â€¢ Section 26.88.030(A)(21 Subdivision Exemptions, Lot Split The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one additional detached single-family dwelling on a lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14, 1977, is exempt from full subdivision review provided 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; and Staff Response: The property is not located within a previously approved subdivision, and the lot predates the city's adoption of subdivision regulations. 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 0 26.100.04001)(1)(c) [this citation is incorrect and should actually refer to Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c)]. 7 Staff Response: The proposal calls for splitting one lot into two. The two resulting lots would conform with the dimensional requirements of the underlying R-6 zone district. Pursuant to Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c), the newly created lot will have to mitigate for affordable housing by providing either an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU), paying an affordable housing impact fee, or placing a resident occupancy deed restriction on the home. The applicant proposes to pay the applicable affordable housing impact fee. 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)(1)(a) [this citation is incorrect and should actually refer to Section 26.100.050(C)(3)(a)]; and Staff Response: The property in question has not been the subject of any prior subdivision exemption application or approval. i A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the requirements ofthis title, is submitted and recorded in the o#ice ofthe 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 Response: As a recommended condition of approval, a subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed by the Planning and Engineering Departments for approval and recordation within 180 days of final land use approval. The plat and the agreement shall include a prohibition against further subdivision and a requirement that additional development comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code. Failure to record the plat and agreement within 180 days shall nullify the approval. 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 required for a showing of good cause. Staff Response: The language of this criterion is included as a recommended condition of the subdivision exemption approval. Also, see response to the previous criterion (d). 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 Response: No dwelling units will be demolished. 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. 8 Staff Response: The applicant proposes a total of three (3) units. Two detached homes would be built on Lot B (easterly lot) and would be in condominium ownership. A third unit would be located on the westerly parcel, which would be a fee simple lot. The Community Development Director has made a formal code interpretation finding that the word "may," as used in this standard, is permissive and means the same thing as "can" or "might." Thus, the proposed development complies with the technical requirements of this standard. Furthermore, the three detached units would combine for an FAR equal to the allowable FAR of a duplex on the fathering parcel, which is an arguably better scenario than placing all of the allowable FAR that is not currently utilized in the historic structures into one large duplex. Staff finds that the proposal complies with this standard. â€¢ Section 26.88.030(A)(5), Historic Landmark Lot Split The split of a lot that is a designated historic landmark for the development of one new single-family dwelling shall comply with the following standards: a. The original parcel shall be a minimum of 9,000 square feet in size and be located in the R-6 zone district or a minimum of 13,000 square feet and be located in the R-1 5A zone district. Staff Response: The parcel is 11,048 square feet (larger than 9,000 square feet) and is located in the R-6 zone district. b. The total FAR for both residences shall not exceed the floor area allowed for a duplex on the original parcel. The total FAR for each lot shelli be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat. Staff Response: The proposal involves dividing the 11,048 square foot property into two parcels, the westerly (Lot A) of which would contain 3,432 square feet and the easterly parcel (Lot B) would contain 3,432 square feet. The development on both parcels shall be restricted to the floor area that would be allowed for a duplex on the fathering 11,048 square foot parcel. The allowable FAR for a duplex on the fathering parcel is 4,209 square feet plus the potential for an FAR. bonus of up to 500 square feet, if granted by the HPC. The applicant requests the 500 square foot bonus, but these bonuses cannot be granted until Final approval of the Significant Development application. The easterly parcel (Lot A) will be assigned an allowable FAR of 1,854 square feet. The westerly parcel (Lot B) will be assigned an allowable FAR of 2,354 square feet (plus the potential for an HPC granted FAR bonus of up to 500 square feet). The information contained in the two previous sentences will need to be included on the plat, as a plat note. The applicant intends to allot 1,000 square feet of Lot B's FAR to the existing house, with the remaining FAR to be utilized in the new house. c. The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district. HPC variances and bonuses are only permitted on the parcel that contains a historic structure. 9 Staff Response: The proposed development of Lot A (the westerly lot) would conform to all the dimensional requirements of the R-6 zone district. The proposed development of Lot B (the easterly lot) would conform to all the dimensional requirements of the R-6 zone district, with the exception of the individual side yard setbacks, the combined side yard setbacks, and the maximum site coverage, but the lot itself would meet all applicable dimensional requirements. Consequently, the applicant is requesting the following: â€¢ a variance from the minimum side yard setbacks of five (5) feet to allow for two (2) foot side yard setbacks on both sides of Lot B for the lightwells (the walls of the structures would meet the five foot setback requirement); â€¢ a variance from the combined side yard setback requirement of twenty-three (23) feet to allow for a combined side yard setback of seven (7) feet on Lot B; and, â€¢ a variance from the maximum site coverage requirement of thirty-five (35) percent (2,666 square feet) to allow for a site coverage ofthirty-seven (37) percent. The variance requests and the applicant's justification for them, are discussed at length in the Significant Development Review section of this memo, below. â€¢ , Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(e), GMQS Exemption by the Community Development Director, Historic Landmark Lot Split The construction of a new single-family dwelling on a lot created through a Historic Landmark Lot Split pursuant to Section 26.88.030(A)(5) shall be exempted from residential Growth Management allocations and shall not be deducted from the pool of annual development allotments or from the metro area development ceilings. Staff Response: An exemption by the Community Development Director will be processed following approval ofthis application, if approval is granted. â€¢ Section 26.72.010(G), Historic Landmark Lot Split The development of all lots created pursuant to section 26.88.030(A)(5) shall be reviewed by HPC at a public hearing. Staff Response: This meeting is a noticed public hearing before the HPC. The HPC shall forward their recommendation to the City Council, who will also review the application at a public hearing. Section 26.72.010(D). Significant Development Review Standards The applicant is requesting Conceptual Significant Development approval for the proposed development of an historic landmark lot, including the variances discussed above. No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving Historic Landmarks shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met. Before HPC approval of a significant development involving an Historic Landmark may be 10 granted, a conceptual development plan and a final development plan shall be reviewed by the HPC pursuant to the procedures established in Common Procedures, Chapter 26.52, and the following review criteria: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(13)(2). Staff Response: The proposed development is compatible in general design and site planning (layout and orientation) with the designated historic structure and the neighborhood. The historic development pattern of Aspen placed small-to-moderate size homes on 3,000 square foot lots. The proposed development would include two homes of 1,850 square feet (bigger than historic houses, but smaller than the vast majority of residences built in Aspen within the last twenty or so years) and another of approximately 1,000 square feet, all fairly evenly spaced on 11,048 square feet of land. The three structures would share a common built-to line (front setback), be oriented to the public street, and have their garages and parking in the rear, along the alley. The general design, massing and volume, and scale of the proposed development, however, warrants further discussion. Staff supports most ofthe proposed changes to the design of the existing historic house as the house would be one of the only miner's cottages in Aspen to be left almost completely in tact. That is, the applicant is proposing only minor changes to the historic house, including a new door and window on the rear of the building (in a portion that was added to the original house in the 1960s), an addition of a roof/breezeway over the area between the house and the relocated garage, and the required lightwells on the east, west, and north sides to serve the new bedrooms in the basement. Staff finds that the proposed changes to the historic house are appropriate and compatible with the historic resource in terms of mass, scale and general design, with the exception of the proposed windows on the rear/north elevation. These proposed windows are, in staff' s estimation, out of scale (approximately 48 square feet of glazing) and incompatible with the miner's cottage. While staff appreciates the attempt to make the new easily differentiated from the old, the size, scale and design of the proposed windows are too far of a departure to maintain compatibility. Thus, staff recommends restudy of this proposed fenestration. With regard to the proposed design of the easternmost structure, staff believes it to be generally compatible in massing, volume, scale, and site planning with the historic structure and surrounding neighborhood. Staff does, however, feel that a good deal of the proposed fenestration on this house needs to be restudied and scaled back, especially on the south and 11 west elevations. For instance, the frontmost wall of the street-facing facade (south elevation) includes approximately sixty-four (64) square feet of contemporary-style glazing, which equates to approximately thirty (30) percent of this facade's area. While these windows are vertically oriented, as is appropriate, they are simply too grand and out of proportion, resulting in undue prominence that may detract from the historic structure. The same is true, but to a lesser degree, of the proposed windows set farther back but still on the front/south elevation. The proposed glazing on the east elevation is similar to that of the other elevations, but is less significant since it would be obscured by its proximity to the Sagewood Condominiums and, thus, would not detract from the historic resource. Staff finds the proposed glazing on the west elevation (adjacent to and facing the historic house) to be inappropriate, out of scale, and generally incompatible with the adjacent historic resource. The proposed design includes over 100 contiguous square feet of glazing for an internal stairway. Staff finds this grouping of windows to be not only unnecessary (views from a staircase), but also incompatible with the historic resource in terms of general design, massing, volume and scale, and recommends restudy. Staff finds the north elevation to be acceptable as proposed. With regard to the proposed design of the westernmost structure, staff is of the opinion that the massing needs to be restudied. In particular, the height of both gable ends on the south, street-facing elevation should be brought down to a level that would be more compatible with the scale of the historic structure. The south elevation does not match with the east and west elevations with regard to the point at which the higher of the two street-facing gable ends intersects with its cross gable, but staff feels that the design shown in the east and west elevations is more appropriate since the crossing of the gables occurs at different ridge heights. Regardless, staff thinks these ridge heights should be lowered. The staff comments with regard to the proposed windows on the front elevation of the easternmost structure hold true with regard to this, westernmost structure as well. In addition, staff feels that the square-shaped window on the front elevation of the westernmost structure should be given a vertical orientation to reflect the influence of the historic house. The fenestration proposed on the east elevation is acceptable to staff, and should serve as an example for the east elevation of the easternmost structure. The west elevation would be very visible to traffic (pedestrian and vehicular) coming into town. As such, it should provide an appropriate statement for its almost "gateway" status. Like the westernmost structure, this elevation includes an inappropriate and unnecessary amount of glazing (10' x 4') that would serve an internal stairway. The glazing in the stairway gives the appearance of windows that span through an area where another floor would typically exist. Staff feels that the glazing, in general, on the proposed west elevation should be restudied to achieve greater compatibility and functionality. The north elevation is acceptable to staff as proposed. As mentioned earlier in this memorandum, the applicant is requesting the following: â€¢ a variance from the minimum side yard setbacks of five (5) feet to allow for two (2) foot side yard setbacks on both sides of Lot B for the lightwells (the walls of the structures would meet the five foot setback requirement); 12 â€¢ a variance from the combined side yard setback requirement of twenty-three (23) feet to allow for a combined side yard setback of seven (7) feet on Lot B; â€¢ a variance from the maximum site coverage requirement of thirty-five (35) percent (2,666 square feet) to allow for a site coverage of thirty-seven (37) percent; and, â€¢ a five hundred (500) square foot FAR bonus for Lot B. According to this review criterion, the HPC can grant these variances and this bonus after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with the dimensional requirements. The City Zoning Officer has reviewed the proposal and found that these variances would indeed be required; however, the individual side yard setback variances may not be necessary if they are to accommodate nothing other than the minimum size lightwells required for compliance with the Uniform Building Code's provisions for egress. Nonetheless, it is the Zoning Officer's recommendation that the applicant seek this variance anyway, and it is the Community Development Department recommendation that the requested side yard setback variances be granted. Staff also finds that compliance with the minimum combined side yard setback provision would be less compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would development with this variance. The combined side yard setback standard results in non-uniform spacing between structures and tends to distort or breakdown the rhythm of structure-to-open area-to-structure that is typical of historic neighborhoods. For similar reasons, staff also supports the requested variance of 2% from the maximum allowable site coverage. Staff supports the request for a 500 square foot FAR. bonus (which will be considered at Final review) since the extra square footage makes the preservation of the historic structure viable. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposedfor development. Staff Response: The property is located in a neighborhood which is composed primarily of multi-family structures, with single-family and duplex homes to the north. Staff finds that the proposed development is consistent with the established character of the surrounding neighborhood. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Staff Response: Staff is of the opinion that the proposed development would enhance the character of the surrounding neighborhood, especially with respect to the adjacent structures and the relationship between these properties. With regard to the relationship between the proposed new structures and the historic house, please refer to the staff response to criterion "a." above. d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Staff Response: Please refer to the staff response to criterion "a. " above. 13 Section 26.58.040. Residential Design Standards Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with the "Residential Design Standards." In staff s review, it was determined that the proposed designs for the two new houses contain violations of the "Volume" standard on every side, except the north elevations. The "volume" standard reads as follows: For the purpose of calculating floor area ratio and allowable floor area for a building or portion thereof whose principal use is residential, a determination shall be made as to its interior plate heights. All areas with an exterior expression of a plate height of greater than ten (10) feet, shall be counted as two (2) squarefeet for each one (1) square foot offloor area. Exterior expression shall be defined as facade penetrations between nine (9) and twelve (12) feet above the level of the finished floor, and circular, semi- circular or non-orthogonal fenestration between nine (9) and fifteen (15) feet above the level of the finished floor. Simply put, this standard requires that there be no windows (facade penetrations/ fenestration) in any areas that lie between nine (9) and twelve (12) feet above the height of the first or second story floors (plate height). Given the lack of compliance with the "volume" standard, the applicant is left with the choice of pursuing one of the following three (3) options. First, the applicant could accept the two-to-one (2:1) floor area penalty for each violating window while ensuring that the entire building, including FAR. penalties, would fall within set FAR. limitations. Second, they could redesign the proposed structure such that the new form would comply with the "volume" standard, as well as the rest of the residential design standards. Lastly, the applicant could appeal staff' s findings to the Design Review Appeal Board, or in this case, the HPC. Rather than accept the floor area penalties or redesign the proposed residence, the applicant has chosen to seek a variance from the "volume" standard. Consequently, if variances are not granted, the applicant would have to create new designs that would comply with the volume standard. Pursuant to Section 26.22.010 of the code, an appeal for exemption from the Residential Design Standards may be granted if the exception would: (1) yield greater compliance with the Aspen Area Community Plan; (2) more effectively address the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to; or, (3) be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. According to the pending revisions to the Residential Design Standards, the purpose/intent of the 'Nolumâ‚¬' standard "is to ensure that each residential building has street-facing architectural details and elements which provide human scale to the facade, enhance the walking experience, and reinforce local building traditions." Although pending code amendments do not hold any force in the review of current applications, staff felt this information might be helpful in understanding the issues/concerns that the volume standard attempts to address. Since the proposed design does not yield greater compliance with the Aspen Area Community Plan, if the requested variance is to be justified, it would need to be on the grounds that either the proposed design is necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints, or the proposed design more effectively provides street-facing architectural details and elements which provide human scale to the facade, enhance the 14 walking experience, and reinforce local building traditions than would a design that meets the exact letter of the "Volume" standard. Given the staff comments and recommendations with regard to standard "a." of the Significant Development Review (pages 11-12 of this memo --- staff finds the most of the proposed fenestration to be inappropriate), staff recommends that the review of the requested "volume" variances be continued. In the Significant Development Review, staff recommends that all the proposed fenestration be restudied, and if the HPC decides to support the staff recommendation, then granting variances to allow the currently proposed fenestration would be premature. Staff suggests waiting until the new designs are submitted and reviewed before deciding on the variance request. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any of the following alternatives: â€¢ Approve the Development application as submitted. â€¢ Approve the Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit and/or Certificate of Occupancy. â€¢ Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered). â€¢ Deny all or part of the Development application finding that any one or more of the Development Review Standards are not being met. RECOMMENDATIONS: Community Development Department staff recommends the following: 1. Approval ofthe partial demolition as proposed. 2. Approval of the on-site relocations with the following conditions: A. Either prior to Final review or with building permit application, the applicant shall demonstrate that the structures to be moved are capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation; and, B. Either prior to Final review or with building permit application, a relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security with the engineering department, as approved by the HPC, to insure the safe relocation, preservation and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. 3. Indefinite continuance of the Off-Site Relocation, pending determination of a suitable receiving site. 4. That the HPC recommend that City Council approve the Historic Landmark Lot Split with the following conditions: 15 A. The approvals contained herein shall of no force unless and until the proposed Historic Landmark Designation is granted final approval by the adoption of an ordinance to that affect by City Council. B. A subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development and Engineering Departments and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of final approval by City Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision exemption agreement within the specified time limit shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. As a minimum, the subdivision plat shall: (1) Meet the requirements of Section 26.88.040(D)(2)(a) of the Aspen Municipal Code; (2) Contain a plat note stating that development of new residences shall be required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c) ofthe Municipal Code; (3) Contain a plat note stating that the lots contained therein shall be prohibited from applying for further subdivision and any development of the lots will comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at the time of application. (4) The easterly parcel (Lot A) will be assigned an allowable FAR of 1,854 square feet. The westerly parcel (Lot B) will be assigned an allowable FAR of 2,354 square feet (plus the potential for an HPC granted FAR bonus of up to 500 square feet). The information contained in the two previous sentences will need to be included on the plat, as a plat note. C. As a minimum, the subdivision exemption agreement shall include the elements outlined in Section 26.88.050 of the Aspen Municipal Code, and shall meet the recording and timing requirements described in Section 26.88.030(A)(2)(e). D. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy on either lot, the applicant shall sign a sidewalk, curb and gutter construction agreement and pay the applicable recording fees. E. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public hearings with the Historic Preservation Commission and/or City Council shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a Board/Commission having authority to do so. 5. Continuance of the Conceptual Significant Development application to a date certain for: 16 A. Restudy of the proposed windows on the North elevation of the historic house to achieve greater compatibility, B. Restudy of the proposed windows on the South and West elevations of the easternmost structure to achieve a better relationship with the historic house in terms of scale, volume, and general compatibility; and, C. Restudy of the mass and scale of the proposed westernmost structure, including the gable/roof forms (ridge heights) and the glazing on the South and West elevations to achieve a better relationship with the historic house in terms of scale, volume, and general compatibility. 6. Approval of the following variances (part ofthe Conceptual Significant Development): A. A variance from the minimum side yard setbacks of five (5) feet to allow for two (2) foot side yard setbacks on both sides of Lot B for the lightwells (the walls of the structures would meet the five foot setback requirement); B. A variance from the combined side yard setback requirement of twenty-three (23) feet to allow for a combined side yard setback of seven CD feet on Lot B; C. A variance from the maximum site coverage requirement ofthirty-five (35) percent (2,666 square feet) to allow for a site coverage ofthirty-seven (37) percent; and, 7. Continuance of the requested variance from the "Volume" provision of the Residential Design Standards to the same date certain as the Conceptual Review. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the staff recommendations contained in this staff memorandum, dated July 8,1998." EXHIBITS: "A" - Application package 17 EY'118 IT W 0 920 w. hallam June 4,1998 City of Aspen - Mitch Haas, Planner 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 920 W. Hallam Street Land Use Application Dear Mitch; Herewith please find our application for Partial Demolition, On-site Relocation, Off- site Relocation, Historic Landmark Lot Split, Significant Development (Conceptual), 0 including variances, and a variance from one element of the Residential Design Standards. The application includes the following: 1. Land use application form. 2. Dimensional requirements form. 3. Names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the representatives authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 4. Response to review standards for Partial Demolition. 5. Response to review standards for On-site Relocation. 6. Response to review standards for Off-site Relocation. 7 Response to review standards for Historic Landmark Lot Split. 8. Response to review standards for Significant Development. 9. Response to review standards for Residential Design Standards. 10. Legal description of the parcel and a disclosure of ownership of the parcel. 11. A general vicinity map. 12. Demolition/Relocation Plan 13. Neighborhood block plan at 1"=50' 14. Bird's eye view ofproperty in 1893. 15. Sanborne map ofproperty in 1904. 16. A site improvement survey. 17. Graphics representing the proposed development (Site Plan, Building Elevations 0 and Floor Plans, As-Builts of Existing Buildings) 18. Photographs ofthe property and surrounding properties (to be provided at the meeting.) 19. Model (to be provided for the meeting) Sincerely, Aspen Historic Cottages, LLC 601 E. Hyman Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name: 920 W. Hallam Street 2. Project location: 920 W. Hallam Street, the east 1/2 of Lot M, all of Lots N, O, and P, and the west 7.16 feet of Lot Q, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen. 3. Present zoning: R-6, Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures 4. Lot size: 11,048 square feet 5. Applicant's name, address and phone number: Aspen Hiâ€¢toric Cottages, LLC, 601 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number: Ron Robertson, - 417 Main Street, Carbondale, CO 81623. Glenn Rappaport, 229 Midland Avenue, Basalt, CO 81621. 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA ;>< Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD ~<Relocation HPC Subdivision Text/Map Amend Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption b< Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization b<Design Review :;kLot Split/Lot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 0 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the property): Two bedroom single family house- approximately 980 square feet, Garage- approximately 453 square feet, Shed- approximately 231 square feet. No previous approvals have been granted. 9. Description of development application: The development proposal is as follows. HPC approval is requested for Partial Demolition to remove the lean-to on the garage. On-site Relocation approval is requested to move the historic house approximately 5 feet eastward and 11 feet forward of its present location and to excavate a basement under the house, and to move the existing garage behind the historic house and rotate it 180 degrees so that it can be entered from the alley. Off-site relocation approval is requested to move the existing shed to another site in town where it can enjoyed as a piece of ski history. Historic Landmark Lot Split approval is requested to create a new lot on the west side of the property, allowing one new house on that lot The remaining east lot will contain the historic house and one new house. Significant development review, including valiances, and "Residential Design Standards" approval are requested for the two new houses and for the very minor changes to be made to the historic house. 0 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: Aspen Historic Cottages, LLC Address: 920 W. Hallam Street Zone district: It-6 Lot size: 11,048 square foot fathering parcel. New Lot A: 3,432 sq. ftâ€ž New Lot B: 7,616 sq. ft. Existing FAR: 1,289 square feet Allowable FAR: 4,202 square feet, plus potential FAR bonus Proposed FAR: 4,702, including 500 square foot FAR bonus Existing net leasable (commercial): NA Proposed net leasable (commercial): NA - Existing % of site coverage: 13% Allowed % of site coverage: Lot A: no limitation, Lot B: 35% Proposed % of site coverage: Lot A: no limitation, Lot B: 37% Existing % of open space: NA Proposed % of open space: NA Existing maximum height: Principal bldg: 12 ft. Accessory bldg: 11 ft, 6 inches Proposed max. height: Principal bldg: 13 ft 6 inches historic house 23 ft new houses Accessory bldg: 11 ft., 6 inches Proposed % of demolition: 6% (100 sq. ft garage lean-to) Existing number of bedrooms: 2 Proposed number of bedrooms: Lot A: 3 bedrooms,Lot B: 6 (3 per house) Existing on-site parking spaces: 2 On-site parking spaces required: Lot A: 2 spaces, Lot B: 4 spaces (2 per house) Setbacks: Existing (house): Minimum required: Proposed Front: 31' Front: Lots A & B:10' Front: 20' Rear: 31' Rear: Lots A & B: 10' Rear: 10' Front/rear Front/rear Front/rear Combined: 62' Combined: Lots A & B: 30' Combined: 30' East side: 47' East side: Lots A & B: 5' East side:Lot A: 5',Lot B: 2' West side: 34' West side: Lots A & B: 5' West side:Lot A: 54Lot B: 2' Combined Combined Combined Sides: 81' Sides: A: 10', B: 23' Sides: Lot A: 10', Lot B: 7' Existing nonconformities or encroachments: Garage and shed encroach into alley. Variations requested: Lot B: 500 square foot FAR bonus, sideyard setback variances of 3 feet on the east and west sideyards for lightwells, combined sideyard setback variance of 16 feet, site coverage variance of 2%. 920 w. hallam June 4, 1998 City of Aspen Mitch Haas, Planner 130 S. Galena Street - Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 920 W. Hallam Street Land Use Application Dear Mitch; This letter serves as our authorization for Ron Robertson, 417 Main Street, Carbondale, CO, 81623 and Glenn Rappaport, 229 Midland Avenue, Basalt, CO, 81621 to act as our representatives in this application. Sincerely, A Aspen Historic Cottages, LLC 601 E. Hyman Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 RESPONSE TO STANDARDS FOR PARTIAL DEMOLTITON No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the HPC finds all of the following standards are met: 1. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel. Response: The partial demolition request is to remove the lean-to addition on the garage. The building is not original to the site, but was apparently used as a section house on the Colorado Midland Railroad in the late 1800's and moved to this site in the 1940's. The lean-to cannot be accommodated into the site plan or FAR limitations. 2. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: a. Impacts on the historic significance ofthe structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions. Response: The historic significance of the building will not be compromised by the removal of the lean-to. b. Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions so that they are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. Response: No additions will be made to the building in place of what is being removed. RESPONSE TO STANDARDS FOR ON-SrrE RELOCATION No approval for on-site relocation shall be granted unless the HPC finds that the standards of Section 26.72.020 0*2),(3), and (4) have been met The required standards are as follows: 1. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be the best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure, and the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures will not be diminished due to the relocation. Response: The existing house is to be moved 5 feet eastward and 11 feet forward of its existing location. This is necessary to allow the placement of the new houses in a manner which creates the rhythm and spacing between buildings which was typical of historic Aspen (Le. houses placed on lots of approximately 3,000 square feet), and to protect as much of the existing vegetation as possible. Also, the house is moved forward to maintain its prominence on the site. The garage is to be moved behind the historic house and its entrance rotated towards the alley so that it may continue to be used and will maintain its association with the historic house. 2. The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness ofthe structure proposed for relocation. Response: The applicant will submit the report prior to application for building permit. 3. A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security with the engineering department, as approved by the HPC, to insure the safe relocation, preservation, and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation, and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. Response: The applicant will submit the relocation plan and financial security prior to application for a building permit. RESPONSE TO STANDARDS FOR OFF-SrrE RELOCATION No approval for on-site relocation shall be granted unless the HPC finds that the standards of Section 26.72.020 (D) have been met. The required standards are as follows: 1. The structure cannot be rehabilitated or reused on its original site to provide for any reasonable beneficial use of the property. Response: The applicant has explored many options to try to reuse the shed on the site, however none have proved workable. The shed is too small to be used as a garage stall, and is too large to be accommodated on the site solely for storage space. Discussion has also been given to leaving the shed at the end of the alley, however maneuvering cars and City snow plow equipment in the area will become problematic with the shed as an obstacle. The applicant has therefore determined that the best preservation method for the building is to relocate it to another site in town. The shed is not original to this property, but was once located at the base of the ski mountain as a concession stand. On one wall of the shed, one can still clearly see the menu board. The applicant proposes to locate an appropriate home for the building, possibly the new ski museum or a location associated with the Ski Company. Other possibilities are one of the City Parks, for instance the new park proposed at the Snyder property. 2. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be the best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure, and the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures will not be diminished due to the relocation. Response: The applicant is committed to finding a use for the building rather than seeing it demolished. It is not original to this site or neighborhood. The other two historic structures on the property are being preserved as freestanding buildings with very minor modifications, and will therefore go far towards preserving the historic character of this property and the neighborhood. 3. The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation. Response: The applicant will submit the report prior to application for building permit 4. A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security with the engineering department, as approved by the HPC, to insure the safe relocation, preservation, and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation, and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. Response: The relocation plan will be submitted prior to application for building permit. 5. The receiving site is compatible in nature to the structure or structures proposed to be moved, the character of the neighborhood is consistent with the architectural integrity of the structure, and the relocation of the historic structure would not diminish the integrity or character of the neighborhood of the receiving site. An acceptance letter from the property owner ofthe receiving site shall be submitted. Response: As stated, the applicant is interested in locating a site which is relevant to the building's ski history. If that is not possible, a site where the general public can enjoy the building is preferred. An acceptance letter from the property owner will be provided when a site is located. RESPONSE TO STANDARDS FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT REVIEW STANDARDS: The Historic Landmark Lot Split shall meet the requirements of Section 26.88.030(A)(2) and (5), Section 26.100.050(A)(2*e), and Section 26.72.010(G). Section 26.88.030(A)(21 Subdivision Exemptions. I~t 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; and Response: The lot has not been subdivided previously. 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). Response: Two lots are created, both of which conform to the requirements of the R-6 zone district. Mitigation is required for the two new houses only and will be provided. 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(CX1 *a); and Response: No previous subdivision or lot split exemption was granted. 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. Response: The plat will be submitted and recorded following the approval. 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 required for a showing of good cause. Response: The subdivision exemption agreement and plat will be filed following the 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. Response: No dwelling units will be demolished. 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. Response: The applicant proposes a total of three units. Two freestanding homes will be built on the west parcel and will be in condominium ownership. A third unit will be located on the east parcel, which will be a fee simple lot. Section 26.88.030(A*5). Historic Landmark Lot Split. The following standards must be met: a. The original parcel shall be a minimum of 9,000 square feet in size and be located in the R-6 zone district or a minimum of 13,000 square feet and be located in the R-15A zone district. Response: The parcel is 11,048 square feet and is located in the R-6 zone district b. The total FAR for both residences shall not exceed the floor area allowed for a duplex on the original parcel. The total FAR for each lot shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat. Response: The property is proposed to be divided into one parcel of 3,432 square feet on the west and one parcel of 7,616 square feet on the east. The development on both panels will be restricted to the floor area which would have been allowed for a duplex on the original property, in this case 4,209 square feet plus a 500 square foot FAR bonus which the applicant requests from HPC The west parcel will be assigned an FAR of 1,854 square feet. The east parcel will be assigned 2,854 square feet, 1,000 square feet of which will be allotted for the existing house and 1,854 square feet which will be allocated to the new house. c. The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district. HPC variances and bonuses are only permitted on the parcel that contains a historic structure. Response: Variances, which are reviewed by HPC, are only requested for the eastern parcel, which contains the historic resources. Development on the western lot will meet all dimensional requirements. Section 26.100.050(A*2*4 GMQS Exemption by the Community Development Director, Historic Landmark Lot Split. The construction of a new single-family dwelling on a lot created through a Historic Landmark Lot Split pursuant to section 26.88.030(A)(5) shall be exempted from residential Growth Management allocations and shall not be deducted from the pool of annual development allotments or from the metro area development ceilings. Response: An exemption by the Community Development Director will be processed following approval of this application. Section 26.72.01(KG), Historic Landmark Int Split. The development of all lots created pursuant to section 26.88.030(A)(5) shall be reviewed by HPC at a public hearing. 0 Response: The HPC will hold a public hearing and forward their recommendation to City Council, who will also review the request at a public hearing. 0 RESPONSE TO SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STANDARDS No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met: 1. The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale, and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "11" Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to a Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to 500 sq.ft. or the allowed site coverage by up to 5%, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). Response: The property has been in the Skiff family since 193i The house was built in 1888; two other buildings exist on the site, which are used as a garage and a shed. The garage building was moved to the site in the late 1940's and at one time served as a section house for workers on the Colorado Midland Railroad. The shed was a concession stand at the base of Aspen Mountain and was moved to this property in the early 1940's. 920 W. Hallam Street is listed on the City of Aspen "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures," and is in the landmark review process. The HPC has seen this project in worksession format, as required when an FAR bonus is requested, and has visited the site. This application takes the historic landmark lot split program, which has been very successful, one step further. The property is to be divided into an western lot of 3,432 square feet, and a eastern lot of 7,616 square feet. Because the proposed eastern lot will be larger than 6,000 square feet, a duplex or two detached units may be built on it as a conditional use, to be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commision. The total square footage for the three houses that will be created will be limited to the maximum allowed floor area for a duplex on the fathering property. No additional FAR is gained through the creation of a third home. In fact, the result will be three small homes, which are similar in size and scale to Aspen's historic homes and particularly to the existing historic resource on the property. HPC has indicated agreement that the idea brought forward in this application is exemplary. The two new houses will each be 1,850 square feet, and the historic house will maintain its existing size, just under 1,000 square feet The new houses are completely sympathetic to the scale of the historic house, and by avoiding any addition to the historic house, it will be left as what may be the only miner's cottage preserved completely intact in Aspen. As discussed in the on-site relocation review section, the existing house will be relocated slightly, and the existing garage will be moved behind it. As part of its move on the site, the house will be raised 18" in height A key part of the plan is to open the historic platted alley across the back of the site. At one time this appeared to be an issue of some small amount of controversy, however, since that time, a neighbor to the north received approval from the Board of Adjustment to build a garage off of the alley, with the support of the neighbors, and will undertake that project in the near future. In terms of the architecture on the site, only minor changes are to be made to the historic house. A new door will be added at the back of the building, in an area constructed in the 1960'Kanew window will be added on the back, a roof will cover the area between the house and garage, and required lightwells will be added on the east, west, and north, to serve the bedrooms in the basement. The two new houses take their design cues from the characteristics of the historic house, but are clearly new. The massing of these houses is mostly one story and they have porches detailing and materials which tie them in with the old house. 2. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The property is located in a neighborhood which is primarily multi- family, with single family and duplex homes to the north. The important concept in this project is that the applicants' recognize the difficult challenge presented in trying to add onto Aspen's historic miner's cottages in a sympathetic and sensitive manner, and the importance of being successful in this challenge in such a prominent location as the gateway into Aspen. Rather than make a significant addition to the existing house and build a new house of a larger size next to it, the applicants' have developed an idea which seems to serve all of HPC's goals. No additions will be made to the historic resources, and the new buildings will have characteristics of buildings which might have been built on this property in the 1800's, had this neighborhood been fully developed at that time. The applicants' feel that this makes the project very compatible and beneficial to the neighborhood and the community. 3. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: The proposal does not detract from the historic significance of these structures. 4. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: As stated, there are no additions to the historic resources and the very few changes to the historic house are made at the rear, in a 1960's addition. The new structures support and enhance the architectural character of the historic resources. RESPONSE TO RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS The applicant finds that all but one of the "Residential Design Standards" are met by this application; that standard being the "volume" standard. On all sides of the new houses, there are windows which violate the "no window zone." In this case, the windows are not overscaled and are used to distinguish new from old construction. A variance is requested to allow these windows. QUIT-CLAIMI)EED Katie T. Skiff, a/Ida Katie Skiff for TEN DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, in hand paid, hereby sells and quit claims to Aspen Historical Cottages, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company whose address is 601 East Hyman Avenue, #102, Aspen, 7- Colorado 81611, the following real property in the County ofPitkin, State ofColorado; to wit: .t\. 1-0 7. The East 1/2 of Lot M, all of Lots N, O, and P, and that parcel mzrl described as commencing at the SW corner ofLot Q, thence South 75Â° 09'11" East 7.16 feet; thence Northerly to a point on the =8&4 Northerly line of said Lot Q which lies South 75Â° 09'11" East 5.95 - feet from the NW comer ofsaid Lot Q; thence North 75Â° 09'11" West at -1- 5.95 feet to the NW corner of said Lot Q; thence South 14Â° 50'49" 0 & Iri~k East 100 feet to the point of beginning; all in Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen, O Nk with all its appurtenances. SIGNED this 13th day ofApril, 1998. 1 Ark- r 14-1 E Katie T. Skiff, a/Wa Katie' Skiff o A ~ <SfATE OF COLORADO ) N k %0 ) SS M Z M.â‚¬COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) ~ ~92 The foregoing Quit Claim Deed was acknowledged before me this 13th day of April, 1998 by Katie T. Skiff, a/Wa Katie Slaff WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: ..4- / 27/.. 65* I /4 //'briÂ·, .// fb>,0,4. f r. LNotary h~id . 91 1 9, 7 i '. Â£ UB L\6 ie 111111111111111111 lim 11111111111111111111111 lili lili 416455 05/04/1998 12:14P QCD DAVIS SILVI 1 of 1 R 6.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO SPF U HI C ..Chrr RED MORMAN ASPEN, COLOR %--- ----------- 40, ..4 POINTs OF -11 .. .-~ 4 . . WAY 1 =Fle... . fil .. 4 1 42 0 - 2% . ~6 a ........= 9 ... =trmâ€¢r 42 * --U % .UNG $ RED -TE - i HOMESTâ€žrE -"MIRT 361 % . 31 0 et - (14 . k $ . -e 4 4. A .. -12u- -. -22 8 - \ . - I i - 9, S 44 5 , â€ž.â€ž 4. ...R ./-- I F. s .r . . - S . 0/ 0 d - - 82 ... -/ A px HS W a , 0 - - :t..1&5Â·* id A n / 0 3?. - r- ~h t .-. 0.- 1 i m J t i -4/1 .. - '1 1 1 ile 1 // A P 1 .% ---- -Â« t it 11'/1/l# r-- , . t 1, I . 1 I It 1 W FRANCIS ST L- 4 , 1 , 1:4 \ , tt 1 1 1 1 1 '1 1\ 1 1 1 l i 11 .1 7 - -1 . <wit<f- - . 1 1 , I r 1 ~ .~ ~_~~_.:L,. PARKING ARE~ 'It ),- ~ F------------9 @17 1 11 1 . 1 ill/ ,1 , , / 1 1 , 1 i t J .- E,3- A . ! 111 1 .1. 1 1 / L.....7211\ 1 1 /ii I /11-1 _11-1-J 11 1/ 1 Â·ir ' 1/ 3 1 i LL_ _--41.ill /1-- -/ i ; 4-J. Sl HWY 2 h I"= CO' CK- ' - . 2 i --/ -9 0/444(=--7-=e ------------, r------7.-------1 ' 11 I . , f i 191 le \ _Ell#1 X NEW , f~\jlt-%11\419 69 < 2 1 1 //r .0% . 4. ... 4 .4 .,1 7 LQ/~.Elyâ€¢ 2- Â·~' . . I . .. .. . I .Â·,4 . - Â· ' 62,0 1 .lybr .6 Â®, /1.- - .â€¢ 4/Ly ...z *,286=U,--..*,s#*ta . .. 14 Nie,0, -Al.5Â¥1, *-9r '45.. - //1/<1~ , â€¢ 2 31 '0.1.- ..19 - .J Â¥-- 2 ...4 e... --- e. . . f.* Wbu"/Dic.,163"IL .. -41 = 1. . ST':.4-AL*WI,R.'uthlbf//gies:,Ir*I- . '--- ../==Il - L...hiliâ„¢.W reD##Fi \ ./.u--m, .......WI . 11 0 ....... 9. / . 4. 1... B - 7 .... A.. Â¥ 1.- . e.t , 1 1 .1 . 1 1 1 . .. ... 4 , , 1 /, 1 . 4 r 1 1'. I /.5.KiNgral,~r/"/3...Tit&/ Â· --- I.=.Ii-/ 1 â€¢-427 kre ay.Ey A.i.1 .. 1 1 1 -r. -- IMIE&A~liz#~SMAIWI'l~~M9JQ~~Il,7IIIA-1.~XVI'will'#~'f h 4-w,~kir:jAWNCI'F)#~HOllir.Al 4 I//5/111â€¢r:Â·-Â·IT:/,~~~_-71:2 //7 4 4/46&44*(11'7%-65- ~1 1 Â·,IGE",/2.- .6 7 1*036*b r *:ke,_ 7~1*53'Eii;448 -1 4,- -r.2/27 A.V..-1,143*U#*Cy bl44.~- .4 ..... tâ€¢. t <7.H , ./,Fa'.1.~ ..st.*:146%4%510,~:Wm"mill' - .....r., ...r . . r .... Â«52Â« f tÂ« r "' 4-41' It si"'*f~ ~- U~ - 1 1 - 1 1 i L, j *6$ --4:7-: :,7----'-~~ 1"-= t. -7 - r ---Â· i P k ..1/)'Ob#"//&7"Spin'll.j 9.-1 InLL/.alittl.~ . ... .....A . 42 . , +A...HM...p A.,7.Ow.1/'de Â¥ 19-97'ER, 1,//'66~#42)'41,;.;~ 1~t , M< .. e. A/4 t . 1 ,"20Â£ff.~Â·f* /*2Â· .,rul 6 ~* * . 14 ... ' r-ljl- 'IL /Â· -6-~4?Â«kN -8. :-1,-bd -4 -9 triafwi*i-LiMMIAN&4- Ft<..f tÂ·' 4. - 43. /- - -- 19 - -r .e. - <.. 11:'"'.."'*Aâ€¢ 0. ._=2!Zili . I ,â‚¬/*-414 f.*.. ~ DÂ« 4 ti. .... . ..4.hut 4 R ed. =/AR-,in A . ..=tu- .467.1..=.4.~ 'Ct... ..2.Fiffp: .3~SM . Â· . 442/.Y:yikr<&1: -I'. r..-- ' *~gr . 9 - - - < ~tu -9.-*....4 <.6.~40 rt~.-d~gtw~..~.i~4.AJ 231~Z.i* 11}>1:-~Â·-0#0~1'.~~.~=~ Â· Â«e.Â·195:.:gy~ .6,4.1,~2: .,. Â·.,i~,3 26~~~~%4/~/~~~I .~ *v~- , T . -*. ~t~~-frtÂ·*17*Mff*lehYA#: 74,:,~ 7,~ 1 Wip Lâ€¢.2 -4.. .1- 4,4~,40,44.4.- t. ......~- Il L. 457 '-'.-1 326:ft*hY. *251~t.IZriMM,Wh' Liwili.iwilll:I 6.A I. ; 7-, -r--KE=r-r-7-74, -~Il 1. Court House. 10. Chris. Sanders' Brewery. 19. St. John's Eviscopal Church. 24. Aspen Minâ‚¬â€¢Trn, 2. Washington School. 11. First Presbyterian Church. 20Â·. Cilizen's Hospital 2.4 Arimnlum-Junia 3. Lincoln School. 12. Christian Church. 21. M,Â·lk, r }lr<,s. FoundrY. :;11. Durant Tunnel. 4. Garfield School. 18. Methodist Episcor,al Church. 22. K. Sel,len Foundry. :11. Asprn Ikip Min 5. Hotel Jerome. 14. Christ Church (El,im,val). 23. Midlitiâ€ž! R. R. Diâ€¢pot. :12. Enterpriae Mint 6. Roaring Fork Electric Light Co. 15. Seandin,ivilin Luther-nn Church, 24. D. & R. G. 1:. R. Depot. 1.3. Aspen Mining & 7. Holden Lixiviation Works 16. Baptist Church. 2.1. Aspen 14,1,lic Tramwity. 84. Eversrreen Ceme 8. Hardinge Smelter. 17. Roman Catholic School. 26. Clarendon HolelÂ· 9. Smuggler Coneentrator. 18. Roman Catholic Church. 27. Dur:trit Minnur Co.'14 Tramway & Or,Â· House. 36. Tiv,iIi Thenter. ;#5. AH!,en Grove Câ‚¬Â·1 /813 P -IN It- . \ . A ~ 37 1 75 91 40 t.1 i. E. c 6. H. 1Â· \8 . C. D. 4. 1,4 4 4 106. 1 /X\ n i .. k 1.1 \ , 4 - N 1/ 2,1 P , =1 EL 8. UI.77<7 0 IT7~ lul Ob/*. \ 5 M. N. 0. .. L 13.-4- - 56 \ 0% 17 rÂ¥51 j -rI- . / It . ..50 0 3/6 . ~ 56 / C. 40\74- r riM 0 \F \\A .- \55 / LEGAL DESCRIPTION CERTIFICATION / 5% - -In . - I. 11 =el 1 - . - --- '..... lilli....................... Â¢67,Â¥J*ad#Art 4-1 -w .....D- C.,1. n............... - 1 i' 4 - /2-,- 01~,59~.%54/4&-W --=-.- - .----- 1 1 1 1 ..2 E .'.................. /. m 244 ... 1â€¢â€¢aM - I =i~L_ ,... / / tz-- .. 1, ......,11 SCALE 1 i ~â€¢ ...... L~2:â‚¬9'~ * i32<2Â· ... 1 1 1 0 - I -* 1/34*0\ \41 )(/ I 1 loT I ALLEY BLOCK 4 1 4 1 il MWIN #st 41 . 11 1 1. 2 1 It .- t 1 40 0.. 061 1 2 = 11%10.1 1 -- 1 1 1 +ed 4kvoc.*Ov., 40 \02/ . I is i , *31 = vatu\-Â£1 off 1 .1 Ii I ' LEGEND AND 11 . .1 i 1 1 Cor O 11,â€¢61Â¥â€¢ ./ - -I..-- 1 lilerfi: :/I : i 1 1.4 11 .5 1 --- 9- : ED 4 'l lili 1 LOT R . -4 1 1111 1 . I'll- .-'.- 1 iii 1 Ill I 1 . .. 11 1 i i i -~ I ll 1 #702Â£04'DO A - / ji , -15 NO. 82 iF / 40 i NEST i 1 U*+ HALLAM STREET -lu'u-, IMPROVEMENT SURVEY 79=211 #,7Ur_, ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS + INC . - IHO I 3 EXHIBIT*-. APPLICANT: Aspen Historic Cottages, LLC \ 7- 9- F [7] LOCATION: 920 West Hallam ACTION: Significant Development (Conceptual), including variances, Historic Landmark Lot Split, Partial Demolition, On-Site Relocation, Off-Site Relocation, and Residential Design Standards variance. SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) - Significant development in an "H," Historic Overlay District must meet allfour of the development review standards in order for HPC to grant approval: Standard 1: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site coverage by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in Â· accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). Standard 2: the proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Standard 3: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Standard 4: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. PARTIAL DEMOLITION Standards of review for partial demolition. No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met: (Note: "Partial demolition" shall mean the razing of a portion of any structure on an inventoried parcel or the total razing of any structure on an inventoried parcel which does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel). Standard 1: The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration, or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribuie to the historic significance of the parcel. Standard 2: The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: A. Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions. B. Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions so that they are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. , ON-SITE RELOCATION Standards for review of on-site relocation: No approval for an on-site relocation shall be granted unless the HPC finds that the following standards have been met: The relocation activity is demonstrated to be the best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure, and the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures will not be diminished due to the relocation, and The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structurai report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation, and A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting of a bond or other financial security with the engineering department, as approved by the HPC, to insure the safe relocation, preservation and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. OFF-SITE RELOCATION Off-site relocation shall not be granted unless all of the following standards have been met: The structure cannot be rehabilitated or reuked on its original site to provide for any reasonable use of the property, and The relocation activity is demonstrated to be the best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure, and the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures will not be diminis4ed due to the relocation, and The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation, and A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security with the engineering department, as approved by the HPC, to insure the safe relocation, preservation, and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation, and The receiving site is compatible in nature to the structure or structures proposed to be moved, the character of the neighborhood is consistent with the architectural integrity of the structure, and the relocation of the historic structure would not diminish the integrity or the character of the neighborhood of the receiving site. An acceptable letter from the property owner of the receiving site shall be submitted. Historic Landmark Lot Split Section 26.88.030(A)(2), Sttbdivision Exemptions, Lot Split 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, and 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. . 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, and 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. 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 days following approval by the city council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the city council will be required for a showing of good cause. 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. Maximum potential buildout for the two parcels created by a lot split shall not exceed three units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single- family home. Historic Landmark Lot Split The original parcel shall be a minimum of 9000 square feet in size and be located in the R-6 zone district or a minimum of 13,000 square feet and be located in the R-15A zone district. The total FAR for both residences shall not exceed the floor area allowed for a duplex on the original parcel. The total FAR for each lot shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat. The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district. HPC variances and bonuses are only permitted on the parcel that contains a historic stucture. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS For the purpose of calculating floor area ratio and allowable floor area For a building or portion thereof whose principal use is residential, a deternÂ®ation shall be made as to its interior plate heights. All areas with an exterior expression of a plate height of greater than ten feet shall be counted as *o square feet for each one square foot of floor area. Exterior expression khall be defined as facade penetrations between 9 and 12 feet above the level of the finished floor, and circular, semi-circular or non-orthogonal fenestration between 9 and 15 feet above the level of the finished floor. NL- /fl Â»1 1 ILL Il_ _._~J ~ tril' 41 /41.W U i 2 flif 14 2-661#5h),S A 6 1- ec-â€¢TE> AKI 9 f,Al% EDI 8 6 houTH ELEVATION 1/6 ". li /., 920 w. 144 LL AM 4 L J _ 9 iddo P|Ew 60*Co*. Kt. C..w,cr'.61 . 0 2.0.P .-23 . --1 ---4 Ei -24 -====1â‚¬2 11 lillill il.il,1.1421~.:f----~. 1 1, L 1 dilltil!11 . 3 1 1 I . / 1 0.,133 . R- 1 Â· :k=Â· 1 -111 - -2- > 1 D :litiliiltli . H . t . 16 i t K *jifly#Wee . 4,(ociÂ·râ€¢ 0 g x,4Â·rÂ» 64 Fisif)15 Ac-E WÂ·GLoc-Area AAID IZA,5,0 18" - . WE'PT El-EVATIoN )*1611*ott irworoSEP. 03 898 Afk' 9 0/ 1Â»L 7/ 05 \NX ,/3.1/- Berc 1- 61 -1 \C.%0%/00. r >2* . 1 &044. .-..9 --_...- 1 i 0 MI -*.*.--9..WL....=.,$ - . 0 1 6 1 1 --,- 1 1 N o 12 TH ELEVATIo N 1/B" = 1 'O" fROPOSEP / , 111, ..0 5 *98 ' 1 , 'li Il -- I I 4/ 'r-=v=44 1 - 1 ailililill.7-- - 9. 1 1 1 1. -- 1 Â¥ IiI 1 1 lili 1. 2.- .-1 I 1 ~ - . il u li - ------*-1-=-UE ~ *89' 6=pA 7-4 -1 litillil/fl .. 11 1 :1 <23&2UBE .. *451 m L a.-3Â¢4-1 1 0 U 1/*140.: -f*9Â¥erof -1 - 1 --- Cl ~4Â§:~ . w - WAMBGTI AS 1:h:f Â· / 1 1 WOFTH ELEVA TIOA Pe..110.4 13597 'ELEVAT I oN F'120Foom> ENUGe Ft2bF,5-50 6*tzAGE - Â»03%Â« 41- , 14 ila/*il:li /0/,/ iÂ©J-- 5 4 4 -1 -11 I ii--1 L_-1 if 1 _90 UTK ELE.VATION V.. 1'. o" WEST ELEV ATte N r F O SEP UARAGE t'ForoSED aA;2Age EN+Kn- - 2 r -- -n ....IOO O 0 0 7493 - KI.R:WERI- Â·W\-1.X.0~ 00 61 F- -- - - 649462. - 1111;111 11 . .-. ------- f p w - 1 1 , Ii:ir 1~ _ I / '60,-71,8.19111- - 1 -- - , 1 - ~16 W C.avEÂ¢.6 O MNING 74 - efi-*,4Â·e 2.00, C.M.twrION) Â· 9-- l.'VINA V - 841 Ed MAIN F 500 R , 96'. 110" rfo Po SEP 920 w.1-1 ALLAM --; ~ 1/-17# lf 0 19& ..... L UGHT WELL.-4 --- v - (06 2.6151 --=- Â· I * -\ 1 1 4: 4 1 L -.--4-- . ' MUGH TVÂ· IKM Â· 8,12#4 - 1 1 1 -~-it- --=9 20 2*JU'Ybi= - 1 1 #111 -" itti HALL TV. El 11~ , 11 0 M.UgH M.B.RM. D.RM 1. Â¥ 18 -4 CD - 4 UGHT WELL,TYP. . - PASEMENT r LOOR 1/k'. t'- 0" PROPOSED . 9 20 w. 1-1 A L LAM 11 1. 9 1998 'DR: 9 /*3X \.Â»L 3\ - \4\ . L._.,.2352, '* , 1 No F TH B L E.VATIoN Ve" 5 150" EXÂ»TIN 6 : f APR 0 1 .. .. C 0 f 1 ri . - nf - 1- 1 -- t. t idi 1 ,.... Â¥-6 6 T BLEVATION )/&'6 It-011 *<terthhe . 03 898 L . . Â¢beTR--1- F F V 1*-r- I o â€¢1 .. Fe.-lLc:"t P,667 ELEVATION ~ ge Â·Â· = flo Â·i , -AXIâ‚¬'DNe AAF,688 SM'GTIA,0 0*WAaE . /9%46 . 1 1 1 , . ..1. !1 1 1 1 1 - 1 --- 1 ' - - 63 -- 7 1 Ill _- 1 101)=-- --E.UN,klle.IL.. ... . . }6?â€¢tioâ€¢ WEST ELEVAT; a N 1/6.4 1 1 0,1 .. 14'r I NG #AMAGE. MA 16-rl Ajg GARAGE . .- \4, 0' , :1 - I I \ / ./ .1 t . ./ t -- Al.024TGOÂ· 1I .4 /thit : 1 -- - - 0 2 TAANg#GE,%46% 9 71.-4--1 , 1 , â€¢ 1 /2640=460 . \f *. Â·It ' .- '4'04â‚¬ rEQUMAL 424:,C+7 E O - JUA/lpEA. FT . . ' -~~ - Â»â€¢08044A/A/ 1 1 4 1 ./ 1 A r . Â·~ M chrlâ‚¬ 41&+C 9 1, 44/11+ . Y 70-2 . . -6-- 1 4 1 : 11 5%0947,1~ f J; *; ~0' 3 1 1-1.0 .. 1 , A L / '04,18"% , 11 - - . 7898 .1 '1 :062 '1â€¢Â· r:,-7.- 2-1 '' 61 -4:,--Â·. - .~:Ar.. J.et#zia-:Â« i 1 .- . 1 4 Â·'.:Â·C: 7<ztt.bliswic: ; 1. t--/Â·-Â·Â· --.X~2.~Â·.3.:14Â·7-93./ti r -f. V.* I - . , - 43* CO'MONWO,OD 1 4 -i ,* - /-Â· Â· 4 1 ./fy J7O,04(,b : / -- h/' '461 10 *'"40 - ~,A li... . , fri -30'422'r/74<$4%4 4 4 k.1 EllÂ·.4 ---2215, 2 - 1 1.Â· SBEQGA,40) 1.l.3.27. .au Â· i rjÂ«Â¢8 7.AGMAW Â·1 A 9 ..2' ~-7 .. 4'. . \ i . -Ill.â€ž 1 i - 1 1. t . Â· 4 I \.4....6 1 = 'b 1 Â· 1 1 -Yoe 1, 1 6 1 1 . 1 il. 1 - 9, 1 5, 4 ~-1 ,90 -.- .T, --- ~-L717 1-362 f -7 72, 44,1,4 7 - 1 7~ LOT 1) 11 11 i A 5662 5,2.FTâ€¢~ '. 7 ' i j 1 70> \Â·6 89. 01.. 11 tu . - ENS'* 61-Ki Ah-OLGED . 3 10 Â£6#BAY It .... 1.~ 4 ' . f 1 Â» --" - 7 ' r,#I;,E~ ALNck 3 1 - 4 1 - 1 - " 1.- I .4, - 1.- 1 0 - C .r~ I. 4-1 --i-- 7504 7 - Elqls J.'.CE WA:â‚¬- - // //, --- - h L.--4 , 9 6Â© M 20,44 cH; fli 23' 2;9 2 2, 3 2 10 W ZÂ» m .4.-7~~ Ar t PUBLIC NOTICE 4 % It 9- 29 29 County of Pitkin } &~ AFFIDAVIT OFNOTICE PURSUANT 0 } SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATION State of Colorado } SECTION 26.32.060 (E) L ~-<3044 v ue , being or representing an Applicant to the City of 4(spen. personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursâ€žAnt to/Section 26.52.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations in the following manner: 1. By mailing of notice. a copy of which is attached hereto. by first-class. postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners of property with three hundred (300) feet of the subject propeny, as indicated on the artached list, on th4224~y of~D'4~- 1992(which is.(93 days prior to the public hearing date of -7/Â§% 1. 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and thatthe said sign was posted and visible continuously from the-z:>cv day d~~~ MO, 199~ (Must be posted foratleast ten (10) full days before the hearing date). A photograoh of-the posted,sign is attached hereto. Sign7 (Attach photograph here) Signed/6efore me this 7 day 9Â«. , 19â‚¬6y WrrNESS MY HAN]~m-OFFK@at SEAL My commission expiA:/4.. 1Â¥9% ... 44 '11 1-6- 4 602) ny./ 44. M 0 Notary Public Notary Public's Signature AC*uii42 SHARP DESIGNS INCORPORATED - - LOUD H MONTGOMERY & PAULA CRYSTAL PALACE CORPORATION A COLORADO CORPORATION PO BOX 11660 PO BOX 32 PO BOX 8630 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 GREGORY KIRK - STUART DONA ALDERFER JOHNNIE MAE GREGORY PETRA PO BOX 11733 BOX 10880 PO BOX 10055 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 MAINTENANCE SHOP COORDES HEINZ E-~-- CITY OF ASPEN COORDES KAREN V CITY OF ASPEN 130 S GALENA ST 530 E MAIN ST 233 W MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 RUNNING BEAR LLC -- - - TALENFELD ELIZABETH G SKIFF KATIE C/O BENTON SMITH-ADV PROPERTY 915 W FRANCIS ST 920 W HALLAM ST SERVICES ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 315 E HYMAN AVE STE 211 ASPEN, CO 81611 ZUCKERMAN NORBgR'CXIBFJSL- BERGMAN CARL R & CAIHERINE M JONES EARL ZUCKERMAN=HEEEN;*ijANGMF81*M~*73% 70'B 280 DAINES.S~~ 834 W HALLAM ST ---"-Â· ---- I._. _ i._-r-- ASPEN, CO 81611 BIRMINGHAM, MI-48669 ' - - -- - MURRY PAUL J - -- -= --2---- Â«p-- OW PAM LARNER JACQUELINE L MURRY BONITA J 3._...W 61ST CIR 376 DAHLIA 814 W BLEEKER ST 05 BOCA RATON, FL DENVER, CO 80220 ASPEN, CO 81611 D'ALESSIO ROBERT J COHEN RICHARD A FATAHI AMENEH D'ALESSIO JEAN M COHEN ELIZABETH A PO BOX 8080 814 W BLEEKER Cut PO BOX 1806 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 SCHAFFER WILLIAM H MORRIS CHARLES R JR TRAN HONG HUONG SCHAFFER KAREN W ASPEN VILLAS MGMT 814 W BLEEKER UNIT Cl 127 BRIXWORTH LN APT 7 814 W BLEEKER ASPEN, CO 81611 NASHVILLE, TN ASPEN, CO 81611 LUU TONG KHON TOPELSON ALEJANDRO UHLER FRANCES M TRAN TUYET LE TOPELSON REBECA 814 W BLEEKER PO BOX 2785 5300 DTC PKWY #400 ASPEN, CO ASPEN, CO 81612 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80111 HEISLEY MICHAEL E LI 'WALTER GARY R GELLER SCOTT LW GIES - HEICO INC C/O 35 BOLT RD 29 BARKLEY CIR . 2075 FOXFIELD RD STE 102 JOLIET, IL FORT MYERS, FL ST CHARLES, IL 60174 KURTZ KENNETH T & KAREN - - GLATMAN THEMIS ZAMBRZYCKI BRAKUR CUSTOM CABINETRY INC GLATMAN BRUCE ROY HINRICHS NANCY R Clo 100 N 8TH ST #2 18"6 S RT 59 ASPEN, CO 81611 20034 CALVERT ST :WOOD, IL 60435 WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91367 FERRARA VINCENT J DI BARTOLOMEO BETTY M KOPF CAROL ANN & DONALD W PO BOX 956 FERRARA ANNA M - JT TENANTS VILLAS OF ASPEN #C-11 ASPEN, CO 81612 100 N 8TH ST #16 100 N 8TH ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 EIDSON JOY REVOCABLE TRUST-1/2 DOYLE R&G 10% SEARIGHT P 30% EIDSON ARVIN WAYNE REVOCABLE DOYLE R T III 30% GRIST F 30% REED BRENT H & GEORGE L II TRUST-1/2 3711 EASTLEDGE DR 100 N 8TH ST #6 PO BOX 271 AUSTIN, TX 78731 ASPEN, CO SULPHUR, OK 73086 SAMUELS LAURA R ASPEN SQUARE CONDOMINIUM PITKIN EXCHANGE HOLDINGS OF ASSOC ASPEN LLC PO BOX 4934 ASPEN, CO 81612 617 E COOPER AVE 601 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 HADDON HAROLD A LEPPLA JOHNL ANZALONE GRACE E HADDON BEVERLY J LEPPLA JOEN F 40*21STz5'* .#d.r*F :-.Z. A- . PO BOX 3808 ASPEN, CO 81612 4040 DAHL RD DENVER, CO 80205 MOUND, MN 55364 Tr JAMES W JR LANDIS JAMES H RICCIARDI RIK 10v i. 8TH ST #5 100 N 8TH ST #14 C/O MICHELLE BRIGHT ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 530 RIVERSIDE DR BASALT, CO 81621 SIEGEL ELIZABETH N & NEIL B WARD PATRICIA ANN PATERSON CARRIE E 4706 WARREN ST NW 429 E COOPER AVE PO BOX 11675 WASHINGTON, DC 20016 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 BEHRENDT H MICHAEL BLANZ JAMES M BEHRENDT H MICHAEL 334 W HYMAN AVE 2555 NE 11TH ST 334 W HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304 ASPEN, CO 81611 TOTH MICHAEL & ANNE G FAGAN PAUL L CHISHOLM MARGO J 910 W HALLAM ST #3 PO BOX 244 PO BOX 4870 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 S Z ANDY L & MICHELLE M SHOAF JEFFREY S BEHRENDT HERMAN MICHAEL PO BuX 1801 ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 3123 334 W HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 , BEN HAMOOSHLOMO& PATRICE PETROCCO J ANTHONY KEILIN KIM MILLER CONYERS 910 W HALLAM #11 PO BOX 10064 PO BOX 2902 ASPEN, CO ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 iv.ADSEN GEORGE W JR MAROLT RANCH OPEN SPACE FOREST SERVICE ASPEN MADSEN CORNELIA G CITY OF ASPEN HEADQUARTERS 931 W FRANCIS ST 130 S GALENA ST UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 920 W. HALLAM STREET PARTIAL DEMOLITION, ON-SITE RELOCATION, OFF-SITE RELOCATION, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT, CONCEPTUAL REVIEW (SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT), AND VARIANCES TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACKS, SITE COVERAGE REQUIREMENT, AND "VOLUME" PROVISION OF THE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, July 8, 1998 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Aspen Historic Cottages, LLC, requesting Partial Demolition, On-Site Relocation, Off-Site Relocation, Historic Landmark Lot Split, Conceptual Review (Significant Development), and Variances to the side yard setbacks, Site Coverage Requirement, And "Volume" Provision Of The Residential Design Standards. . The property is located at 920 W. Hallam Street, which is described as the East 1/2 of Lot M, all of Lots N, O, and P, and a portion of Lot Q, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact Mitch Haas at the Aspen/Pitkin Community , Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5095. s/Sara Garton. Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on June 20, 1998 City ofAspen Account g:\planning\aspen\notices\920whal.doc t . 1 4 0 . , . . _ -_..__*- -*- + . --G ~' 1 - Â·a . ~ 1 4 P . .. / 0 -*v i Â»\ 1 ,1 H }A L-~06 11:; 1~4 '4 f 274.0- !2#Y I i Na '10.1 *-t--1. i-~fHF - t=-79*kax - .1 1 41 41 . 1: 1 #. 1 1 |f .1 . 1 1-220/ 44412!"i*ie.~4 .4 1 - A .Ekillf<tw9- - ..r 1 - ARAA 11 4 2 . - , h . 2 -h, B Â· i 4 ,4 â‚¬ -. - - ./m//m---'ll. 1 ; &4/2-**2.-77.2 '#.--* ; L --6 TZ.= m Il 8,Â£â€¢Det Â£ i --. . T il ial. fai~I~m-J-Flit- .... f * 1: -!L.+4... 1////21 -l. !.al*-1-M ill 1 11.1- - illÂ· -- --~si.**iim*...~ _ -9 i W|l/.6 Â¥936&2--- Rl rtONC .COT-r,GeÂ· --Aint=AYL_-_-rÂ·- _.. - rÂ·~~r 1_ $ 0 9 T B G/L- 6/7 A T Â£ ON - vt ew pp-42* w. #4*0-AM - 9'2-0 W, #*LLA'A. <$/tw R. C. ROBERTSON â€¢ ARCHITECTS - 0 (P 9417 MAIN STREET, STUDIO 'A' .. CARBONDALE. CO. 81823 .oÂ· 903 -0587 4- 1970 2963 Â· 8138 FAX m AU JUN- 5 898 I. 0 4 /41/., - A t.. .Â·463.... : 122*4. 3.U.Zb:$-Â·.1 ,. â€¢ . . . 5 198% C 0% - --1 - ...-t: i . 1 (34, 'Vil . 414 5 #enâ‚¬, r \ ,3Â¤-a, 1 ~ rl~fi~~~*~ 01 tl r~~7*3-1 2 J ~~~41 11 4 -k N. 0, Â£14-4- -*=d /1. lu// -9 r.- 1 9 1 . â€ž .001 f Ll DReFfj//1/5) 1 . i A / C CARÂ¥ a 1 1 )94 F>41 1 \ rr #e~ Â·"--- li . M=rr 4-1- 1 15& 4 13 T \ .5 - 11 1 1 m =1-1 4 Ill 1 0 t 00 61rdr94 . 14=1~~ i P 1 ~-1-.4 g 1 -64- . 1 / . \ 4;,I -t i li k I , 1/42 .9 ip, ,4 1 #i M--7 n 1/ 1 1 1 i Â·ni u 17 - 1.. S ; gle#. I 1 1 1 Iii -- m 1 4: 1 2 0 L_ Â£--1-1Â·'p . 1 11; , , ~vir- 1,1 . 1 -<PAM t Li L/v,ke 1 !: 111! E !1. ) 1 illil Iii i n a - N. a. i tr Ep /V\. 6 N 75 G-ACDOM O PLOOA- O P + 7 A- I KLE - C. ROBERTSON â€¢ARCHITECTS 1- O to 0 " 7 MAIN STREET, STUDIO 'A' CARBONDALE, CO. 81823 Â»v /9Â»re~ O. 207- 25' _990 â€¢Â·MA LA-AAA â€¢ A.U - 970Â·983Â·0567 /849 9 MAP- < /8SJâ€¢ 1% Arp â‚¬ B (79. 6.5- 8 970 Â· 963 Â· 8938 FAX A LLC)*96 0. / 1 7 1--9 1 JUN " 0 - Â¥ 1 r 0 -/*. -I O 4*A~~--6- O- . H 1 1 'P'.1 1:.111.'i --2 ,,5.. te., ,. . ,t ;1 ,%~~ hEEE#' -- 7...11 1* i , ' 1 1 10:4 1 ' t~ /11 I 'Â·P:it*' I M-~ , 9 ,#Z===X 11 i i,#-4-==:I.-1-9*2*Vi.. 1 11 1 4 14 11->- 1 1 #-1 -0 n -- 6 - i 2- â€¢ trri.-7==-u.,rEEE . . e 1.~ b ...4 -L- ILI-IL- 4--.. 4 1,2.-1----5 -- 1 J .'i/.-I-JO . - I <Plot -, f- - 1 1 1 - r=1*.,1 11 - 1 1" ! r -+ 1 1 i Ill I 1 -1------ 4 Â¥J o u T B.- A- S - T. + 10 Â¢ 'fr / --Id 4 . 920 8Â£004Â£4 AM New Meurâ‚¬ ON LOT- 8 A Sl> Gp, CO -76,5, 98 9 OP 6 .. . 51#gb 0% 0 1 . / 1 7Fw=~i I r . 1 11 . . D . 117 r, t !,It "-1-3-1 1 1:, ;1 . , 1 E=- F . - :1'/ '# i 1 V I . O --tfF~==t 1 : 11 - 1 t . 1 i ~.... limil . li ' ' i~i ~ . . *r UL - -rl 1 11 i l. /'' I 'j 1. 3 1- . 40-4-4Hn----/.awg~J- & f- 4 U 101/ 1 n.ulrof . .1 E. am â‚¬ Ii'~ Me, '.-1 f . 2%2>00Â¢*<Sk, -I ... Ilit - p al.] I i t 1.1_LH 1-L , - * ' 1,1.Al jil Â»Â¢94 1 LLd.11<irH,21-~-e.'022~/41-1, -fFFTe,Trf-F#Bgrl- j .. . 15 E~=I : i,~p E 1 :Â·, VI . s i ......rv ... ..... J. |4-41 1.1 1. 1,~t~L-il 4.1 1,1.- 1 1 1 1 1 N Cb 14 1- 14- W â‚¬Â©T 0 10 R. C. ROBERTSON Â· ARCHITECTS - , 417 MAIN STREET,4 STUDIO 'A' New MOvre 0, tor g CARBONDALE, CO. 81623 923 *trA-2 L *4-*1 970 Â· 983 Â· 0567 970 - 983 - 9938 FAX -~ CO E 5 Â·98 . .AMIA / . t3=* 6 ~ .1 -- I i I . ,..... . . 5 139% . e. 0/7 3- .,.' i f /- \ /1. / 4. Z/6,477,0,Â£ \ 3 1 4 -- < --- j - - . T 1 Enr-' I -â€ž= 1 ' 1 . 79Â£A,64/ 3 41Â£28Â· 1 1 ~[t-- 1 -74 .I ! 413 0 = .-I 1.'. -#>i 1 , * D. / 11_1-84 #Â£$3&14'N 0 o: * . - i ud., 5 .1-1 1 i fl B. 1 i i,; 1 S k 8â‚¬Â£>/462Wt Or OE t.'i_ 1 1. f , #2 14 1 . .. pi I - 1, 1,1,1 1 - - 11&41 - 1140 / 1 I 2 - tp t i/ t !1'Ii!' 1-1 1- 0 1 1-110 ,#41 . h 'ThÂ«9 t 14â‚¬97 Z. 4-7. IIi! 649" --2 I i -1 ly. 1 3 i' .-' Fl-9191 1 414*l~_-el ; ]L, ,: (*H l . 1. 1 L.) I i iI ill, 1 I- 1 11% 1 ~4 1 1 4 U /3 i 4 z./ 0//2. ~1 Â· 11 /1 Z 1. \ i - l -, '1, ' I - 1 ! i b it, 1 c T Innyrr-TTTITI~FrTHI Nfi il , 1 \ i. 11 .. 11, 11.1 \ l N. 8/4 te /14 6-H I G P-<DoN ID Fk..90 P.._ .dh U PJ\TA- IPLOP O 10 R. C. ROBERTSON Â·ARCHITECTS - New Hoom cÂ» LC)7 A 417 MAIN STREET. STUDIO 'A' CARBONDALE, CO. 81623 .-' 920 bv.HA-L LA /11 970Â·963Â·0567 6.5.98 1668 * PAR. < 1893* PAR A r p GA ~ C_D 970 Â·183 Â· 8936 FAX a A.I.A. . ALLâ‚¬]M/42 i Â¢ cr 6 -1 l 10% 589% - NG# Moore op toT A 992 4-641- LA A M- r P 9- Ca . 6.9Â·98 VV 1 + V 0 --- 0 .. /*i*Plk Aft 1 0, _ 02 i i bli~ 1 1 -a /12* 113% 1 /7 1 73 - ti' '/A#.MER#t - -1-,1- = . -, NA I --1 I , \ .1,3 1.1,1 111 11 11 ts 1 , . . 1-1~ .1 \ .. . I . 1.-1. 0 .- ~ .. b .. . .. 6 fkd. t=Zi mivi i - '* ' 1 ./ i ~ 11 f i. Â·i- i'.1.,ir :.1. 1 1 .t \i ~ 41=- 1 ; 2 ., rlr1---1.-11 1. -: 1... C~ = - - 1 V _14.-t===R~ I / . 1 ''- - .---11~ ., 04 i RAN/...i-1 :El 4 1~==124/,1 - i- 1 -*....C-L----I-Ilin<--,- - 0 :IMIT,= . . 73 ~ 4~4/1 & . v~Imirk=~-,Ff-ft, _ -1 A . 01 -,- 1 : 1 4 4. 4 1 11 + a ..4â€¢ . .cj-4 i r , -., - i: 11.1 *,--4U - - 1 ' i 9 -- 1 1 1'.1 ...lfÂ£ 1 1 i . -â€ž.+ .. ... 4.-."- - -14 - 141*, . 4- ,- ===tÂ· 1 1211 ......:- i _ -4-NWAVA~JJ"2'1~(Lb=j#*46*4+ dwmad#BX'AL-- 1 ! 1 1. 1 I .. 1 . 1 1 . 1 .. R. C. ROBERTSON â€¢ *RCHITECTS - 4 r .-Ill.. -Il- I--I .Ill.- 417 MAIN" STREET, STUDIO 'A' CARBONOALE. .CO. 81823 .JO UTA . â‚¬1 A r T â€¢ 970 983Â· 0567 / 970 983 Â· 8906 FAX NAAA. o to , 1-5.P 23 4 JUN 51998 - f V. Y' j V. .A :04. n 41 1 1. r-, , $ 4/igh - - 1- ill .1. - 1 / 1 41 1 - .11 / 1 1 -. - f 1 1 - +1 - /: . . Li ~ iyesa , 1 , 1 11 f i. i 11 11 4 16 U- u ..16 4._i -1- -- t--. 1 - -- f. *$5..r ! __~1 1....4 , - 10Â«-21.- i. , *.~;,V. ~ 2- 1 '.. -lir f ... .-2 ~-flÂ® .. . - 1 *111~ *Ul~-= -1-Mag"Edia#*"-i#- :1 i had 4', 1, ill .l 1 1 j - 0 '#,1 1 f NeST NOATA C. ROBERTS@N â€¢ ARCHITROTS - o to 7 MAIN STREET, STUDIO 'A' RBONDALE, 90. 81623 )Â·083Â·0607 A rps=k f ce 6.9.9/ New HOW Se .ON. LOT- *N 1.00:808.1404 12 . ~ LA/,1 m A.1.Ar . . rg-Â«1