Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.hpc.19980909
AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION September 9, 1998 REGULAR MEETING, 5:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:00 I. Roll call and approval of August 12, 1998 minutes II. PUBLIC COMMENTS III. COMMISSIONER AND STAFF COMMENTS IV. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) V. BUSINESS 0 5:10 4,A~~Assign monitors for 920 W. Hallam and 516 E. Durant 5:15 ~ B. 510 E. Hyman, Elks Plaza - Landscape Plan 716 4 ot Jop-/01 3 5:30 ~ C. 920 W. Hallam St. - FAR bonus - Public Hearing 5:45 D. 520 E. Hyman - Minor Development Whiv, 4"2 6:15 ~ E. 520 E. Cooper Ave. Hunter/Jumpers - Minor Development f»€-1 « *-al ALL-i,«_-7 6:25 ~ F. Discussion - code amendment 6:40 ~ G. Discussion - Annual Awards 6:55 ~I. Discussion - HPC project survey t -2 -5 S ; lip ~ 604-6-- 0,80·1«-£'~ELUL'00~- ~~ 7:10 VI. ADJOURN 5£-k 0-3 ) )£:icli¢ NOTE: There will not be memos for items A, C, or F. PROJECT MONITORING loger Moyer 303 E. Main, Kuhn ISIS 514 N. First Susan Dodington 712 W. Francis 918 E. Cooper, Davis Meadows Trustee and Tennis townhomes 234 W. Francis 203 S. Galena, Gucci Melanie Roschko 9-1-RE. Cooper, Da¥i® ISIS - +fll-S. Mill Elli's bldg:*ona..ste:efcontwiAdew 706 W. Main 35 1 6, 7, 13 u €=t 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 203 S. Galerla, Qucci 4 610 bu . ilcutte- Gilbert Sanchez 1008 E. Hopkins, Bellis 414 N. First 303 E. Main Jeffrey Halferty 234 W. Francis, Mullin 414 N. First 701 W. Main 101- 105 E. Hallam / 9 3-0 - W . U 4 t K-% 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 (Vickey), expires May 13,1999 214 E. Bleeker Street (Greenwood), expires August 12, 1999 920 W. Hallam Street, expires August 12, 1999 AUG 19 '98 03:25PM CHARLES CUNNIFFE P.2 ' 73 343 C . AFFIDAVIT OF NOMCE PORSUANT . C.9 at'Han 1 11 2-99£-- | TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATION State of Colorado } ~~ ----- J SECTION 26 51060 (E) 4 7/44 22-EX , hing or mgreseming an Applicant to dte Ciry oY Aspen. persoully certify thar I have compiied with tim public noria requii,mgor: puall»rtr to Sec:ion 2631060 (E) of the Aspen Und Use Reinianons in 42 following nam=r: t. By mailing of notice. 1 copy of which is amched hiram. by fim-class. postage prepaid u.q.- 9.iI to oil owners of proverry via three hundred ( 300) fes: of tle subject prove'cy. as indicamd on [he =ached lisc on the 26 day of Al .,ST, :992#(which is -5 days pnor to the yublic hearing dom of f· 1 · 184. 1 By cosrmg a sign in a conspicuous place on che subjec. properry (as ir could be seen 0 from che nearest public way) and thar the said sign vas posted and visible continuousiv from the -~/*;~ _day of .Au4u*T- _ 1991% (Musr be posred forozleast ren (10) 8111 days before che hearing datej. A photograph of:he posted sign & al:ached hereto. / 914 74._ - . Signatcre Signed before ate Ihis_ 6 lidlvcek ~ NOTICE 1 1 TIME___* ~~INESS D,fY HAND AND ( My commission expims:- 6 X/~5~bt~~lIAL 3«Up fO 14 . J, I - 4 4..Ja N -1 Ngdkablid ~/~~<Lijti#45 Uu / Q 7.£,--*< Notary Public' s Signamm 1 1 EXHIBIT 1. 9,?,9 y MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Director & Julie Ann Woods, Deputy Planning Directoi .. FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer ~ RE: 510 Hyman Avenue, Elks Park- discussion of change to approved development DATE: September 9,1998 SUMMARY: In 1997, HPC granted approval for a redesigned pocket park outside the entrance to the Elk's Club. The site plan which was presented to HPC is attached, along with minutes. The site plan and the applicant's representations to the HPC showed that the main plane was to have three canopy trees planted in it. Instead, a single spruce tree has been installed. Staff followed up with the applicant, who will be present at the meeting. Once construction commenced, there was apparently a discussion between the applicant and the City Engineer's office. City Engineering directed the applicant that roof drainage issues needed to be addressed on the site and recommended installation of a new drain in some location, preferably where the parking is. The applicant chose to install the drain in the planter, which has impacts on the depth of tree roots which can be accommodated. The spruce tree is expected to survive in the space and appears to be very healthy. Stephen Ellsperman, City Forester, is going to visit the site and provide comments for the meeting as to whether the type of canopy trees approved for the planter could be used, along with any other recommendations. In addition, HPC should discuss the fact that the applicant represented the flower pots would be intalled by drilling through the mortar joint. Instead the bolts were placed directly into the brick which can be detrimental to the masonry wall. illmlligibill EXHIBIT 1 1-1 0 lillillilzzlies.*30349#~/94£*.,1,r .'' ~1 4:'I:*I - :11.1, ~- 44*f + -1 ' 1 9, . e · -/, .C'·f '* *1, '. ...21'.3 + i '' - 14 1 3#,2 - ' 1, ~ , . i: .au ~ 2- 0 ·re/RE. .k .... - 1. -- 6 4 3 9.7443.1 31 - *'' 1 - '. 3( Id!:-» . i 47·1 fo.74 .27, I . 96# i>03- dre' «:* 7 - °·94,-:-,1, Af..%, swle-- I ME V U. , ·. ..9-··-, v.*117*bMF.: .6..., :' 1 £ 7 ' e ,··Ste . · ··P. 4, , - r . - 1 024% . I . · r, i.'....4 - Wlif» 4. .4 .[110"AX., 0 - . 111 ,•Ill --_ 71~11 '-1.L'l -72 :9•55- - L~- - ... . 4 %« 4 % 944 . - 1./ 3 TAT 4 ': " 1 . . 1 t. .1 · .r - ./.fdz .1 ' Ii' ':t: . 4 ...I ' 72*1>4. 1.1 6604 - :lift:. 6 2 0. *. 6042.99:.9,2-2 7 ' '099-. K /.0 *41:" :Nes.. >AR . i <i:/Gia/WA//RI'll'llilill.......I- 32!~ v~"·i~~.........~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 44 k.· · f· i - ..' L 1~14. da -m·. . 9. - 4/.1 1 '44;*jv .0 *vitkf¢,02 4*C_ ~db .:*1 ¥22*®fe*'b -2. · ·A>*tri~ I $6*F C.-4 . 44,4,<614<6 j.j&* jilr." , 44+22 , 4 ¥1Aws,nflafifi r~,~•~I,·:P -e:y 19, f. 4 . 1 €% f / 1 41 I--I , -4, . .Ts/im.. 1. 4 - 1- / . k. 1 440%.1,~ r-tu P ...3.262 2.42,.*1*1': ..1 .P .4 1 t. ..... .. -her. '*I - . - - .!.. . .. ¥* I v +F 114 11 fr 94 U, -4- t.*«. 1 4 t. -I * . '2:f.,M··-riA..i.-* «22·;··*i}.We.rldiA:.-1..-~.··.:.4 **1~*44:~4*r :~~44<~~~&.9.lkAS2 ~rb.~Ruiek#.7---' - -12 IT ' 4/ .-I .2 I 9-'~J~<94-2 .32'1 ke'·, , ·1' 4·<4. .t 4·. . .'63¥ · 7•N'k % 5.Fuff..P:. : .tr €' ...·LF--'·-2 S~ f.~·'C~'.4'474.'t~-N:,RD,7--~04.7;1-F-: 421.:}.7,4.'.2.,G ..:.4..1 371.4 .t j. ·Fi.**=·:itr.3. .vor 4.*11+:.2.tff:* f- 7* r,V.*::~.. : : 7,5r.·- ---1-7 .-24 = T .4 -*..2-ANg'...> i..1 ·F- ·· ~¥ fa?¥Mird w + 4.. 0 I .: ...k. f -4,4 ..7 ':f + ·· ' -r .' 1 . 3nN3AV .. 1 . I ... . .1, 1·" 0 //- +. 1.-9 1 1-aSNEW/4 · I Z .,I, 1 4 r \. 17...f 4 T .C..- -, r v l ·- ·>11¥macle , .* , ytvmacts .-· »'-1,-*-- 4. Bi3hiONO:3 3.LEBONOO ; i·~ Wt-ri-t-t-1, 1 111 1 - .~.-~ IF 1 1 !1 ... -b,4621¥.0. - . 1 .1 I 1 gatamet 20 18*g i Dabi'91%17 · i C»" GIS 39(M E ShIONS; 4 i r--, - ,' D 2-1.-t» . 042 - EA,09,7 N. 1%:1 -ue-7%/ 1 '6295'>7 1- ~*1 919 39 1 i ' I ..It 1 . 4. 1 , 1.11 1 JG[2 39OM 3811:1 f + ie 2:7 Sh'EIA'/ct >01¥9 0, . f \1 h131)¥ 14 3 -- ~ 119WP'GMS 1- /, 3.-Ivmaaig L - 343"200 i [-- 4- f & 4 ' •4=,NaG P~ 2-1 -~- · h · ..off · % , r .... :% 4 r + ..... I. I. I.'I.: - ' '... I * I ' 1+.... , .... 1.44 . € i 1. ' , "..... I , I ./ . I . . A - i k J 82 . ./ -'' . «114«90»0-2 «f-:#4.R:Li.2-,~ru..-- il#.279 -2 -- -·+ I.I.:1'.0 1-/ '' '.... .... '' A.. ... ....+9......... . 1. ... .1 C.!47 v. .. 11 I 9 ./ ..... 4 /1 4.... 4 . 9.r j.}j{~..5~~x.,-.~2'.I.~1~2~,~~.~~~~~~4#~~~5t- -44*y-j-b-41-'- 4»·...· 4--i,·{i~jji·i-~·ir- i -~-~-·~:~ ~~-i~:._<· 4 I . I ' 1 ,.. 4 - 9 I toi,:.·:.ft· i.*' ~'t'· Ift~3€17 4'u·,»- •r -3 . 6·.€Thn*Witcltah- 9 L *Jj~41/r'. /,/.. .../.2 5,;,tfty;~/ ~ . . +4 -,4.- .ht, IN 1 .4 • ' . .... ' )4· 7-Y&*; 'b ¢ *: .·.'-·l,lf..... I.r.:.*.· £ i~ il. *, ~* ~~24·*6*2064· €0·~ ci~~ 4. 4 0 2 4- . N--02~ 2* 0 v.*141)Nr- . t I ~1*1 C ...., ... , ..... -, I., . . .4. $ ... + . 1 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMM[SSION MINUTES OF AUG. 13. 1997 Chair-person Suzannah Reid called the meeting to order with Mary Hirsch, Melanie Roschko, Jeffrey Halferty, Roger Moyer and Susan Dodington present. The Commission welcomed new member Heidi Friedland. Excused were Gilbert Sanchez and Mark Onorofski. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Mary Hirsch relayed to the Commission that two more trees have been lost at 303 E. Main and it is an unfortunate situation. Those trees needed more fertilizer and more water and a concerted effort should have been made to retain those trees. The house has had extraordinary changes. Amy Amidon, Planner stated that an agreement was signed between the owner and the city regarding the trees on the city right-of-way and their replacement. Melanie stated that it would be very difficult to get a large root ball into the site ofthe dying trees due to the constraints. Jeffrey stated at the Paepcke house a year before the excavation a slip/form plyboard was placed into the ground so the roots would move and grow to the side. This process prevents roots from being severed during excavation. That process takes 1 1/2 years. MOTION: Roger moved to add 132 W. Main and 411 E. Hopkins to the agenda; second by Susan. All in favor, motion carried. 210 S. GALENA 510 E. HYMAN - ELK'S BUILDING - MINOR Amy Amidon, planner stated that the presentation is for the development of the Elk's third lot which is basically the alley/trash/parking area. They propose to do a park in the vicinity of the elevator and some off street parking and to move the compactor. Bike racks would be added and they are proposing to do some improvements to the sidewalk. Staff is recommending delaying the sidewalk as the DEPP Committee is doing a study as to whether sidewalks should be wider in the core. Staff 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUG. 13, 1997 recommended approval with one condition; more information about the flower pots that are to be extended from the historic Elk's building. Larry Yaw, architect presented. The proposal is to re-create and enhance the entry and in general present a better face to the streetscape. Snow melting the sidewalk area is in the plan. They would like to create seating within the Elk's property, wall offthe alley and place a detached bike rack for ten bikes off the west wall of the Mason Morse Bldg. A nine foot wall would be proposed between the two buildings running east and west separating the parking/trash area. A free standing planter would be proposed and not attached to the east wall. The trees proposed would be high canopy trees to provide shade to those sitting on the benches. Three down lights/planters are proposed for the historic east wall of the Elks bldg. They would be attached through the mortar. Mike Haman, trustee stated that the nine foot wall as indicated on the plans was to separate the seating area like a room and it would cover the top of city hall and you would only see Red Mountain. Some trustees liked the five foot wall as it keeps the area open to the back of the building and is more pedestrian friendly and you would see the dormers and roof of City Hall plus Red Mountain. Commissioners discussed the proposed brick pattern and sandstone. They also had concern about the planter's closeness to the historic east wall. There was concern about moisture and if a water proof membrane would be used on the interior of the plane and the appearance of the plane against the historic wall. Other concerns were the wiring ofthe lights/planters into the historic wall. All the commissioners felt the proposed development would improve the site. Larry Yaw responded that the wiring would be coming through from the inside of the building out to the existing conduit. The existing conduit would be replaced and painted out. Susan stated that she had concerns about bolts being placed into the historic wall. People should see the wall as old and possibly crumbling as they are 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUG. 13. 1997 historic walls. She also felt the lower wall was more pedestrian friendly as opposed to views being blocked off. Heidi had concerns about the planter obscuring the historic wall. She also stated that the cityscape is important and she is in favor of the lower walI. Melanie had concerns about the planter and its closeness to the historic wall during harsh weather. She also indicated that the lower wall would be more pedestrian friendly and in scale with the entire project. Jeffrey indicated that the lower wall would be safer in the evenings but either wall would be acceptable. He felt design specifications should be provided on the proposed light/planter. Mary had no problem with the free standing planter but is opposed to the planter/light attaching to the historic building. Roger likes the "room effecf' of the design with the proposed nine foot wall. The lights on the east wall will improve the area. The planter with something in front of it creates an inner play of texture, color and feeling. Suzannah indicated that the detail ofthe lights/planters should be provided. She also had concern about the planter against the historic wall. She has mixed feelings about the height of the wall. MOTION: Rogermoved toapprovethesiteplanchanges at 210 S. Galena - 510 E. Hyman Ave. Improvements in the City right-of-way must be delayed until final comments are received from the DEPP committee and a sample provided to Staff and monitor with the following conditions: 1) The designfor the planter and how itjits on the east facing wall be submitted to Stall' and Monitor for final approval. A revised drawing as presented tonight be submitted to staff and entered as exhibit VI to the records. 2) The design of the light/planter be submitted to staff and monitor for final approval. Motion was second by Melanie. Motion carried 4-3. Yes vote: Heidi, Jeff, Suzannah, Roger. No vote: Mary, Susan, Melanie. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUG. 13. 1997 Roger stated that he did not address the idea put forth of a five foot wall. The wall presented is nine feet. Mary informed the applicant that he should make a decision with the trustees and come back to the board and present the changes at the next regular meeting. Heidi thought the proposal to have openings in the upper portion of the wall was a desired element. Melanie will be the monitor for the Elk's Building. 130 S. GALENA - CITY HALL - MINOR DEVELOPMENT Amy Amidon, planner: The proposal is for two skylights on the north elevation to provide better light and ventilation to the offices on the third floor of city hall. The skylights would be flat against the roof. All mechanical equipment should be painted out. Stan Clauson, Community Development Director indicated that the windows proposed would be velux windows that are hinged at the top. A mechanical ventilation system is being proposed for city hall but would not take place for another two years. Amy added that interior remodeling is also being done and the skylights might have to shift slightly toward Galena Street depending on where the separation walls are placed. A monitor should be assigned to the project. MOTION: Mary moved that HPC approve the minor development proposal for 130 S. Galenafor the two skylights as submitted with the condition that the mechanical equipment on the roof be painted in a dark color that compliments the historic building; second by Roger. All in favor, motion carried. Heidi is the monitor for City Hall. 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Directorg,>0 FROM: Mitch Haas, Planner,[~.~~ RE: 920 West Hallam Street: 500 Square Foot FAR Bonus Request. Parcel I.D. No. 2735-123-03-003. DATE: September 9,1998 SUMMARY: On August 26, 1998 the applicant received Final HPC approval (by a vote of 7-0) for their proposed Significant Development of the historic structure on Lot B, 920 West Hallam Street. Conceptual approval was granted on August 12, 1998, by a vote of 4-0, with the decision regarding whether to grant the requested 500 square foot FAR bonus deferred until Final review. Final review does not require a public hearing, but granting of an FAR bonus does; thus, the language of the adopted motion granting Final approval included the following: "A 500 square foot FAR. bonus applicable to Lot B. This bonus shall be subject to approval at a legally noticed public hearing on September 9, 1998." Therefore, the purpose of this hearing to carry out due process requirements in the granting of a 500 square foot FAR bonus by doing so at a legally noticed public hearing. APPLICANT: Aspen Historic Cottages, LLC, represented by Glenn Rappaport. LOCATION: The easterly 7,616 square feet (Lot B) of 920 West Hallam Street; 920 W. Hallam Street is 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 fathering parcel contains a total area of 11,048 square feet (.25 acres). As a result of the Historic Landmark Lot Split subdivision exemption, Lot A contains 3,432 square feet, and Lot B contains 7,616 square feet. Lot B is the subject ofthis FAR. Bonus request. ALLOWABLE FAR: The allowable FAR on Lot B of the 920 West Hallam Street Historic Landmark Lot Split is 2,352 (plus the potential for a 500 square foot FAR bonus). This leaves an allowable FAR of 1,850 square feet on Lot A. REVIEW PROCEDURE: This Final application to the Historic Preservation Commission does not require a public hearing, but consideration of the 500 square foot FAR. bonus does. That is, final reviews are not public hearings and as such, do not require advertised, posted, 1 or mailed notification, while FAR bonuses constitute variances from the dimensional requirements of the zone district and can only be granted at public hearings. The other two houses that were approved as part of the Conceptual application will come before the HPC as a/two separate Final Significant Development application(s). As the applicants are proceeding independently of one another, the effects of such an incremental approach (deferral of the FAR bonus to Final review, especially when there could be three (3) separate final reviews) has the potential to create some rather serious, practical problems for the applicants. Consequently, staff recommends that the HPC vote to approve the requested FAR bonus. More discussion of this issue is included with the staff response to criterion "a." of Section 26.72.010(D), below. STAFF COMMENTS: Section 26.72.010(D). Significant Development Review Standards Final approval has been granted and only the requested FAR. bonus remains outstanding. As such, the staff comments section of this memo focuses only on criterion "a." of Section 26.72.010(D) --- the only applicable standard. 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 jive 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 vcniations 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). Staff Response: At the Final review of August 26, 1998, the HPC voted 7-0 to support granting of the requested bonus but agreed that it would be subj ect to approval at a legally noticed public hearing. As mentioned earlier in the "Procedure" section of this memo, staff recommends that the HPC vote to approve the requested 500 square foot FAR bonus. The FAR bonus is an historic preservation incentive reserved for "outstanding" or "exemplary" projects. Staff believes this proposal represents just such a project, but the HPC decided at Conceptual Review to defer the bonus request until Final review because some members were not completely satisfied with the proposed height of the westernmost structure. Under the applicant's proposal, the historic resources are being preserved almost completely in tact and with no significant additions while the remainder of the site is to be used in a fair, sympathetic, and compatible manner. Consequently, staff finds the proposal to be an "outstanding" and "exemplary" historic preservation project. 2 .. In staffs opinion, the height ofthe westernmost structure is unrelated to the floor area bonus request. For instance, the westernmost structure is on Lot A, to which the bonus (if granted) would not apply. Also, reducing the height of the westernmost structure would have no affect whatsoever on the amount of proposed floor area. Furthermore, the architect of the proposed structure on Lot A was given clear direction as to the concerns of the HPC at Conceptual review, and when a Final review is scheduled for that structure, the HPC will be under no obligation whatsoever to approve the design. That is, granting the FAR bonus would not in any way reduce the HPC's leverage in ensuring the development of a compatible and appropriately scaled structure on Lot A. These points are further compounded by the practical and procedural problems created by holding off on deciding whether to grant the requested bonus. For example, Final review does not require a public hearing, but granting of an FAR bonus does, and this leads to some timing related issues that could have the potential of putting an end to what staff feels is an outstanding project deserving of an FAR bonus. It has also been staff and the HPC's goal to avoid incremental decision making, and the other two houses that were approved as part of the Conceptual application will come before the HPC as a/two separate Final Significant Development application(s). As the applicants are proceeding independently of one another, the effects of such an incremental approach (deferral of the FAR bonus to Final review, especially when there could be three (3) separate final reviews) has the potential to create some rather serious, practical problems for staff and, more so, for the applicants. It would be unfair to make the applicants wait until the last Final review associated with the property before deciding whether or not to grant the requested FAR bonus, especially given the substantial amount of capital already invested in the project and its design. The project was 1 I. seen as a whole for the last time at the Conceptual review level, and staff believed and Still maintains that the project is deserving of the bonus. RECOMMENDATION: Community Development Department staff recommends approval of a 500 square foot FAR bonus applicable to Lot B of the 920 West Hallam Street Historic Landmark Lot Split. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to grant a 500 square foot FAR bonus to Lot B of the 920 West Hallam Street Historic Landmark Lot Split." . 3 2120 U, 64 (at/ta County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT..=4 } SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIOP~- EXHIBIT State of Colorado } SECTION 2632.060 (E) li~J I, ,,»4«·-q C _»61 0, l-a , being or represemmg-an Applicant to the City of Asppn. personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to S~tion 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 within three hundred (300) feet 44 20-„ 4 21 of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the day of ~© 4 , 199~(which is (CD'tilvs prior to the public hearing date of ~et\73. 61 . liA,9/ tpulpted>/, f 21 f ZE> 2,57> Yvt,$53&~SLA.6,09- €*« . 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place dn the subject property.ths it could be -2-6 1 seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible -7 +-Ni11 continuously from the \134-7 day of ,,~\~ , 1995 (Must be posted for at least ten (10) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto. - (Attach photograph here) Signature ~ Signed befdre me this day 1- , 199fby +A Y 6 Ur-1-4 /CLE i 1 1 wn'NESS MY HAND AND OFTICIAL SEAL r M My commission expires: A: Iltal,~ PUNF• -' r Notary Public J¥ ef) 1 UFC+0 00'.1. SI)5144 FAR 40-5. S.4 21 - MPO 4• -»b~ (-7.lialsiFEZM#tr~alifi /0.-Uu off-,1 -10,4- 4..sk,.,,1 *dry Public's Signadl?~2~40~#~~OV . r 1 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 920 W. HALLAM STREET FAR VARIANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, September 9, 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. The owner requests a 500 square foot floor area bonus. 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/Suzannah Reid. Chair Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on August 22, 1998 City of Aspen Account PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 920 W. HALLAM STREET OFF-SITE RELOCATION REQUEST NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, September 23, 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. The owner requests approval for the off-site relocation of a shed structure (believed to have once been used as a concession stand at the base of the Aspen Mountain ski area) that is currently sited partially in the alley right-of-way and partially on the rear portion ofthe property. The property is located at 920 W. Hallam Street, which is described as the East 1/2 of Lot M, all of Lots N, 0, 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/Suzannah Reid. Chair Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on September 5,1998 City of Aspen Account 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 CITY OF ASPEN COORDES KAREN V 130 S GALENA ST 233 W MAIN ST 530 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 RUNNING BEAR LLC TALENFELD ELIZABETH G SKIFF KANE C/O BENTON SMITH-ADV PROPERTY SERVICES 915 W FRANCIS ST 920 W HALLAM ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 315 E HYMAN AVE STE 211 ASPEN, CO 81611 ZUCKERMAN NORBERTXTRUST_ BERGMAN CARLA & CATHERINE M JONES EARL ZUCKERMAN HELENZINVIN F BO.*NU;35£= 834 W HALLAM ST 280 DAINES STE42%=2*363 --r: .9. ASPEN, CO 81611 - + 2 ' »- - -" BIRMINGHAM ,MI48009 -- -=--*~ MURRY PAULJ-<"--r- f ..5-=- .OW PAM LARNER JACQUELINE L MURRY BONITA J 3520 NW 61ST CIR 376 DAHLIA 814 W BLEEKER ST C-5 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 C-4 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 WBLEEKERUNITCI 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 L- 4WALTER GARY R GELLER SCOTT LW GIES - HEICO INC C/O 3 ,BOLT RD 29 BARKLEY CIR 2075 FOXFIELD RD STE 102 JOLIET, IL FORT MYERS, FL ST CHARLES, IL 60174 KURTZ KENNETH T & KAREN BRAKUR CUSTOM CABINETRY INC GLATMAN BRUCE ROY HINRICHS NANCY R GLATMANTHEMIS-ZAMBRZYCKI C/O 100 N 8TH ST #2 18656 S RT 59 ASPEN, CO 31611 20034 CALVERT ST EWOOD, 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 In 30% GRIST F 30% REED BRENT H & GEORGE L n TRUST-1/2 3711 EASTLEDGE DR 100 N 8TH ST #6 ASPEN, CO PO BOX 271 AUSTIN, TX 78731 SULPHUR, OK 73086 SAMUELS LAURA R ASPEN SQUARE CONDOMINIUM PITKIN EXCHANGE HOLDINGS OF ASSOC ASPEN LLC PO BOX 4934 617 E COOPER AVE 601 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 HADDON HAROLD A LEPPLA JOHN L HA]pDON BEVERLY J. - .· . _ _ LEPPLA JOENE -=--i.r=x -m-r«·=- ANZALONE GRACE E PO BOX 3808 4040 DAHL RD ..a-i*li€22*01=-.1.-•Er. ASPEN, CO 81612 DENVER, CO 80205 MOUND; MN 5536*=-- 1- LANDIS JAMES H B S'IT JAMES W JR - RICCIARDI RIK C/O MICHELLE BRIGHT 100 N 8TH ST #5 100 N 8TH ST #14 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 - -2 ANDY L & MICHELLE SHOAF JEFFREY S BEHRENDT HERMAN MICHAEL PO BOX 1801 PO BOX 3123 334 W HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 V 1 '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 MADSEN 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 - EXHIBIT 1 7-9 9 7 MEMORANDUM E-1 TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Directof 9 Julie Ann Woods, Deputy Planning Director CIA, 1 ~ YOAC, FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer ~ - RE: 520 E. Hyman- minor review DATE: September 9, 1998 SUMMARY: The applicant is remodeling the condominium unit on the third floor of the building where Syzygy is located. Some exterior modifications are proposed, particularly window replacements, rooftop deck and hot tub additions, and modifications to existing railings. The subject building is not historic but is located within the Commercial Core Historic District. APPLICANT: John Elmore, represented by Bill Poss and Associates. LOCATION: 520 E. Hyman Avenue, third floor. 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. 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(13)(2). Response: The applicant requests HPC approval to replace the existing clad windows on the south and east sides of the building. The new windows will be similar in character to the existing ones, although just slightly higher. They do not encroach into the Ordinance #30 "no window zone." Existing lintels and brick detailing will be modified slightly to allow the increased height. On the north side of the building, a window is to be replaced with french doors to allow access to the roof. A staircase will also be added. On the rooftop, a new deck, hot tub, and skylights are proposed. These elements will likely be completely hidden by the parapet wall, although the applicant should provide confirmation of that with a section indicating their heights. Finally, the applicant will install additional balusters in the existing metal railings on the building, to meet Building Code requirements which have increased since the project was built. Staffhas no concerns with the proposal and recommends approval as proposed. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood ofthe parcel proposed for development. Response: The use of the space is not changing. Residential units are encouraged to be located on upper floors of commercial buildings to add life to the downtown. 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 proposal will not affect the historic significance of any 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. Response: The proposed development does not affect the architectural character or integrity of any historic structure. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe following alternatives: • Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. • Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. • Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) • Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION AND RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the proposal for 520 E. Hyman Avenue as proposed, with the condition that that the applicant provide information for staff and monitor review confirming that the rooftop elements are below the parapet wall." APPLICANT: John Elmore (represented by Bill Poss and Associates) LOCATION: 520 E. Hyman 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 Landmark& 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(13)(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. ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPUCATION FORM 1. Project name Elmore Penthouse 2. ProjeCt |OCatiOn. 520 E. Hyman AVAnlle. Aspen. Colorado.. Block 94. Lots 2 and 3. Pitkin Center Subdivision (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning CC 4. Lot size 6,020 s.f. 5. Applicanfs name, address and phone number John Elmore Box 381, Wrightsville Beach, NC 28480 (910) 256-9940 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number Les Rosenstein Bill Poss and Associates, 605 E. Main St., Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-4755 7. Type of application (check ali that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD X Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PU D Relocation HPC Subdivision Text/Map 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) Group M (Mercantile), U (Private Garage), B (Restaurant), R-3 (Dwelling Unit), Penthouse 3,069 s.f., incl. 3 bedrooms, existing decks 206 s.f., new decks 1,078 s.f., total decks lr784 s.f. (1,360 s.f. allowed based upon lot size), past HPC building approval. 9. Description of development application Expansion o f existing f ree market residential unit located in Unit 3B into adjacent Unit 3A. Work inrludes an additional north deck. stair and rooftoo tub deck. 10. Have you completed and attached the following? x Attachment 1 - Land use application form Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form x Response to Attachment 3 X Response to Attachment 4 11111111 ~ and associates 605 EAST MAIN STREET ATTACHMENT 4 (item #4) ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE 970/925-4755 FACSIMILE 970/920-2950 This work consists of the following items: 1. Interior remodel of the interior third floor penthouse condominiums 3A and 3B, into one single living unit. 2. Addition of north deck, stair and rooftop tub deck. 3. The replacement of all penthouse floor windows and doors, with same manufacturer's clad Pella products; color to match existing window frames. a. South elevation: • Replace existing 8'-0" high sliding glass door (K) with new 8'-10" high sliding door unit. • Replace existing 5'-4" high easement window (L) with new 6'-6" high easement window. • Replace existing 5'-4" high double hung windows (M) and (N) with 6'-6" high easement unit (M). b. East elevation: • Replace existing fixed 5'-10" high window unit with unit of the same configuration, 6'-6" high. • Relocated Unit (X). c. North elevation: • Replace existing easement (II) with (103-A) French swing door onto north deck. 4. The matching replacement windows and doors of a taller proportion maintain compatibility with existing architecture. The use of matching sandstone color and finish above windows (L) and (M) compliment the existing architecture while providing variety. . . . .. . . ~1 1 30[3 , . f. -1 - f. WERE)$4 ./ 4 6 - . 4 ,~ - 1 - . - 4 -- ..I - 0 213=6<~2 -2*~~g~14~ . -3 Ila . F ..0 -- ...1 -- 44 44--,1- »4 ---·=ve-•a-=~KE,a~,*e£2=-2=0- 'r - -; _* / - 4. - ...I 4-1~, 4- 0 I ,. . & .·:A·*'=19 4. ..... 1 ».i 4 -1- IC- -4- --22- 2 -4 4%,4 im 47332---- ---4-,W --. ig , A Emabak 444: . 11-** 71 -10* v. faler?*22.-L- -91-==.0%3 1.86=*=.. , : 5 -211 T L,Jill ~A .,1 -- 42 '~ ' ~9;,J~ --ya prize*. •r#W;g»*2251~ : 34:.' ~ -2-1 - -- 4. 4 - - » ¥ 4 -IM/&,Ar :IA* **2 -' I .r A-'*5/424 ap*~-6'>* %445-2.,=:1 -' 7.-9, ~» -i·44Ah»*- c • ./ I. . .'A .-I · _ .•Amed · ~ . ..I I ;92.4984--r___ -Ii -_- '· ' ----- ---1-~4~1 · -~ ~ I - 2,2 -.4- . 4.iN I 14. I. :4.*1 1.92 : I * .le. h a'.- 2·4 ---'. .e ,- ./ 1.9™... 9 g :; ~A =F L# ......., - r:·.3 Acen:~t.u fA?,4-,~-4.92*9191#3 :/M q*33-349EA#*4-4.- . . 1.-44.. 4 214. I. . g.r t £*22.- . 9-,49# ... 43--=4"///limmr#BL , I t»,7 - -f•.'24:t.*r=---===,=:~eigra·&2,mr.Fi 35 €• -- ' - al ...4.,.1-Z:,Adwgit e.... --1....9 ..1 · ...6- 01,- :i-:j~.2- -*52-4 -4.·i 4343:i@ p<4 )9*3-1238.5--NifE;ikj 't·*26,35,:7 -49*,*u.™=%1--fia·; f 3*fA 9-· 11-»· -r · -4.-7 :t -%. . - - , 0 . 4 . ~.7- .~~T -· ·M - .... . Tr - .&' &./. -- '...h:4+4 1 # .... -. -- 2* .. r. - ..: , 4-:.-1 -· -13 3 '34 >,-* tri'~¢'»·kc . - li 4 - - */3,+ ' I.- I. .. 3. - I . #.'--:£:e·.,c;U*.1.-- •'W*:6 .. -t - I.. de,r · ... ... ..** I I. . .,- .. . ·•-- . '-, . .1 1. '.. 1. .t?'3?/r-fiff~~2£*14¢-45*116924*- ..~ €1.·.A.,6 ·,92~ 2 -... . . .....*Il.-0 W. I . 1 11*4 Pi#UN- cmir,Em: 1 a --2-.PR*9.140%1pmit - . I . ... -..:*Exuarnidrpiece*ki#br --2--- . I -4 . * ~:r,=r- .. I ..t. -... -A- . 4.~1~y .. ... . . 1 - . I : ' ..14 .t " ./t * 1 .. . :. 0 I.*I'l. .3»-- .. p~...4'5. * *4, bprrevzp- >t -65: FLA-,6*-pins#,=4 Pt -THE (Trct - 0 b#*-71-4-m•r , Ser b*+ mGN= . 04"' Pi - 4. i.,.442.„uir -. e.'~ ' -' ' ~~~ 4 4.,-- ~..~,X. r--"....e., -4t -. I . 1 - .... . - · - - ta . • . e '-. :- 1- JAA.9 Liv.ele/1,8/"4*/44&1"*imullb)-V, - .LMmal t.£2 . i. -1-6 -4.7-0941 ,-3. T.- - - - t,1 ' .*9**' ' .-'. uf- -6 -* E*t' .-+ i:' 5· -> *40:18' .4 /2 ~ -· e'CATE 0-21=-22- . ~/3 0 -7 . 1. - £-2.CK,4,/Cr¥ . C=&44 br pm•,al-7.- , . I. .$·TMS ~,~ c~ WA , r / le-•E*19*0~ f . p. U. 714,5 C..#iriwitt•*<141 ,&.gr Gr '9714"**4&*'41*3&·cs,c=.~9<al.w, . , .P 2 ..- C .. .9.0,=1" -mi~ CazPA&,34~LUL ap 1%01~t Ct 4 . i: Ji . - / . Mr . Cr- i-+ . ..L 1 9 * . . . - - -4:/ , . 1 /47 - . 41 - · . · ./ .. A./.I".--Il- . 1 . - - i lit #t# I:' -*.-) . Ct.KA 44 =Calm.40 =1#01"PrtzA- 09"#4*EMOI"*- .... 7 ... I - S.-% 344 02<Xe,ANfOM FL,:r Cf Pm~ CENTEK Come©-4,UD* . I , --1 . N - 10*2'4*. -6 , CLE,<A 4* ME=431,7,% OF PrileM cOtNT•t- tifJ;-4 - 4,11. : - ./.24··....£>' ·l 1 Ar:N~-C-Mt .2-5<t ./.- --t~16~¢Q3134*16, AH) 19 82.....OZEMEr' p,4 ~ _. --3--,•-M-HTFI.,5.~um- ...5.r'.- r. --- 7=1- - .0 * .----*-%--& I + -... ~ · ,•6 REcepric» P I Y .... -VIJ,f. :. 4 01*4'65*'*t#02&4105- * upff- -£- 4 =44-Im. -M-M.*IM--%--:1- U - u}4-4 144 . 4./ :.- 2 -I - ... ...F ....·--- CLIZEK 4 412£0•52/< A~*"L ..-, 1.¥ ;. . ' ' - AIMU*but- - .... 0 . . P4" I . = . I - I. I -- . I Nall.1 ·r -rut FEac*;4 W . .. I ,-Art·AJ..MT. ..4.*1· 7% 4. .4 *=-=..2._'·9 , ..7:.-4 - r -» 3 - -64+.. • 8.1- Z•#**Mere st *1©WN C?4 1.TKiN COUNFT -Ttlle, 162:.. . Ah T rrt..2. FOL I CY, CAeg NO G*15. 6~84 -4.0% 96:&.I;.fh'Plu/*I.%:97. A.LI-c: s- .. . B.. ; , rf•Z»:ra•H Ualla 4 -64 - ~ '* ~~~ :' :2:· 114-6 9-*=Irk* . I~'6910,0,13, Se»111,1,"x21*Covt wr al) 35, Ftwrbme celm-1Fof *rMAT TH,9 -2' CON!,4,45 AU. Cr I , crrY- stom-CM. · THE NeCEM,1-foN *GLHTZED M C.A.9. 88-59.5 - 909. -U.. • .. 4 BLE COP 1 ./• .....- 4 -C, 'lili . ·:.4,4..- 4 /dibY.·.3, ~.;ze " ~- --' p o /-/.4 --0 2-..- ·:A ./ ..„ .· f .~ . ", 0 - *.. . a>: 4 , -- .9. e . .... .--Ill .til - - - 4» ./ I 1' '4- . , 2,%4.3,1 - .· ·. - 0. 2:&26· - · · e - ~-' --%•~»·- ..~-~p.;40~5A „imB.r p. :IR:, . f - I - =a:=a.De - .lam= . : - -4*& 14*1444 1 2*2*i 24*PAW~~Wgil. 14544,%-IM: lt~' D ' 4,:e#A« 1 * he k - - '440* = 5-* ' f -- -*4* . 4,21*34 .. ..... - 9-'-,1.-2-,,-e'.A#*c-Uk'«~P' . . i - : - - 1 ,=PCS:€*43 I + .10~ 'In.'.I, . i.w .p*rt* 7:'ttl. 32*/A#VS#/05<RE<... '7.0- ," 69*le©·r..1/,X-41- -17~£ ..4--- .9, I 43.k - - .t. . 1 4¥, - -·· · .,'e-.·-·10<92 .e,0.244-AM#·*65#**#*%,p3¥6' . ' - - - 2-4. 4.4*#PA#%9'. . -~ · ~33*'*'4 '4.-r Z . ¢ . .1. . .5€.r ·41 -·*.5•w r..4,~rr - p .R.A":- . ·~.-fo, .. i·· 2 -/ . u ·· · · .. /1 -. - - I : 9: ; . A•. I --1*-- . . ..· ,.: ·u::2'--<:y:3:.F"t.·,4~*d2f~ES'.9%¥~ - ~ ~ - ..~..~.--=-~.~.-~-94.2.~-**:%~4.---- -~:1--~iff**4Gue:k--472;5339%'4**%54*01*2-fi~*-2.' -·-. :,L, -- - 4. 2- **=-· .~'..0:: 6-:f:L*..-~.45*ir-*-~-i-.~:uri .f.:.14.-·.4: 3.:=~~:'--_.f ..t-i~...<22~0'.~: .:~ft.'4{~~tl_~ ~ v ·.. 7 , I. · €30.~ 424.51**p·~*··0. 96,2 :*·- . Ur '. .. .. Nlly)-S~ 3~.1,146-9 1-:-3~~--I»=;:€ &--' 49.6.-~-£--~-4.1.,'it.·644~ - .Xi -'-3- I + j•62"ii,filbdititib:9 - 0.' i. 2 ..517·241. ..fc€....:.:. .40%«'.-*644. .42 ..1-·-,·3.14 -0..:0.~5,5-· ·. ,-t..·pu --7-f:t,:,i::Ex€£%.4 - <-**r:*1UN0R~-6-r - . . .- . „:111.. -4& . . . I -- I . p 2 I 4 . 6 *421WY * I y 92.0~1 12?40'i~-I'~-:~0..2: r-:.I- .--· .. f . .- · ··.f ..1~~<**=3 :910,-tr.,a..r:.~ - -_~ . -. ., S . 0 - I - t ./ 1 - .. 35' . I d.- - ./ I *.. - . 4 C... -ig ....ut.- i ... . ~20 r * . . '0. . ~In'z-.11.--.9."/6~. · 2 - . b - . I . I. I . . 2- . . " . . e. . , .4. ..... 1-I.* 6 ... .el ..4 '' - . .. . 40 & -9W ,%.- 1- . .. * ~ ~~~~ : - , - - f. . ... * -- ° · ... ......1 :: I . I 0.4.*-31-*ba-m.-·,=pa 4 ' ~ r'ly# ,,i ~" ' :%. 2*4»,OF?L'_ *f 4 ...4. , " ~4" ~.- '- 41 ..27% . r • 64•·*· ..A :4~- 4...1 ,: •'4 4/ ' ' , ·my,a.r- C;bvt..,4 .1 .--, ...C + 21•1' r· m E-JEli].. ... 39: _~tfff , 4 . 410 .. . I -61 -7.. -, . , I I.*: '-I.,0.. T -2.1Tr*.city~ts..4"..::*32-~-*.2-". , ~..· 0.0.r~V·V: - .....,f 4.92 rcm:,·.vz·; - - /41 '•-Ii- € .. 1 _ - .....4 IN . · · ir . I . ..'. . ~ · I. Fle<.1#/8*01"ju'JIZI .... · - lailk*- " • .· . 4 •.• €7. • 9.-~ .... ..... 9 -:.. 1 :12 13 ? t,IN. J - 2 UNrr_ .25<.. . p - I. · - 2 1 :21 -- 1 UNit-344:1 3-: MNe * 8 ·- 7 - - - : . 6*4$#3 k.:44 ..4 1 . r - ' . -- . - - ... · I - 6.- .. 24122 0 li ' 9. , . ts.T... 1/415 - .. I. ./ I , At - I ,/.... I."I//I. "I; 0 .ilimr'.ljim ....- .- - 4'4 i · · 1 0 . . . I I I - · Z ¢ I. t.. 4 - I . . I ' I .. - 8*'/a"'/Ri/0.= Ro...rfie m•ir, Me,6 2 . 1 . . 1 9. 3 31-· --1* -: : . · ..4 t.4 . - b '14# · .--- ...2 ..4. -A I .. . . d .4 . 4 4. · '' ' -6.4.=/21/W, ,, · ··z L,v · .... . 1'15 ..... myin.LV *t .. ... . - ./F#I--<----Il-- . •9 -7 .. •• ... C#•H:•F , Bt , -,Imeak t ... -•-£LKA · 1 - - ~ p •y- r~Il_EIZ~ FI-- - . . 41 -** C. - I *·- · ' 4- . -L { , :.44%...L .. A .. ....... r . -. UNIT 2* f u f . : C-46 -4153 . . 0445**Ir.$42~321: - fa-3:Le»1--5 ..elvt • - ' ·ir 5 . , 4. - 7 9,1, . . $ . 1-' ../ · *.9.,4 - r. ;4* -r'Z· 3.- 91. · .12 .... 4 -,59:/t·14 -- - . 7 -'·7,27%4*:- ./ ~FLOOR THI» Fl©*- - 7 £. I....525,1/%*0 . -.. f - 9 .45402.::253 .. 1 -. f · . I * / 4-5/:. 147. /4.*- 4% . . - 1 _4 -,4- -e.. 14.5 · 4111 - · -* 4 1 . - - - r.'·'·4Ade.f<:i# ·:'fS i. - 1 - L.1.- . 2.3.3..1.r».Ir<579/M%/91 . · -I=.- .:=wr»··,v A ; A..:&* , . I. .- ...;-I--. '- I ./I...' ./*I. , ... - . . ---1- ...1... 3. . -S. 1, 3-3.74.2 9*Sittte:3%*t . ,- •6" 0 1441 C 6 ..Pt . . - . -- , 2 - a , ·· 0· ' :ft't-4.4,»te,le50*34 ·· 133'r I. I I-. . · *t· f: 1 16'p:»·"P~.B·'·•7 . :.4 J f~Z 7~ . I . ... I 'I - .4/.1 1.. h EXHIBIT MEMORANDUM L 1 19.-3-1 TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Dirc Julie Ann Woods, Deputy Planning Director (*PO FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 520 E. Cooper- minor review DATE: September 9,1998 SUMMARY: The applicant, Hunters/Jumpers Restaurant, is taking over the space formerly occupied by Eastern Winds. In addition to an interior remodel, they wish to modify the entry doors and windows, light fixtures and signage. The subject building is not historic but is located within the Commercial Core Historic District. APPLICANT: Hunters/Jumpers, represented by Bill Poss and Associates. LOCATION: 520 E. Cooper Avenue, basement level. 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. 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 applicant requests HPC approval to alter the existing restaurant "storefront." A new entry door, along with bifold doors, which can be opened to the outside courtyard, will be installed and an existing plane will be converted into a fountain. Gas light fixtures will be placed at the entry and the restaurant name will be placed on the building wall using cut out letters. The restaurant space is below the streetlevel and there are no historic buildings on this side of the block. The proposed doors, while not typical of the traditional commercial storefront are an improvement over the existing greenhouse window and their operability will enhance the character of the space. The gas light fixtures are not typical of the historic district and do not have historical precedent in Aspen. Staff recommends that a more traditional light fixture be selected. The proposed cut-out letters for the restaurant sign also might be reconsidered and at least be given a matte finish to be more in keeping with signage in the area. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The use of the space is not changing and the bifold windows will improve the space's contribution to the character of the neighborhood. Items not consistent with the area have been discussed above. 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 proposal will not affect the historic significance of any 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. Response: The proposed development does not affect the architectural character or integrity of any historic structure. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe following alternatives: • Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. • Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. • Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) • Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION AND RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the proposal for 520 E. Cooper Avenue with the conditions that a more appropriate electric light fixture be presented for review by staff and monitor and that the cut out letters be given a matte, rather than a shiny finish." 119-9-97 1 APPLICANT: Hunters/Jumpers (represented by Bill Poss and Associates) 1 LOCATION: 520 E. Cooper 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 26.40.090(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. EXIST. GAS TORCHIERS TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED EXISTING BRICK PARAPET WALL 041/ NER ELECTRIC FIXTURES METAL CUT-OUT LETTERS, P41/EXIST. LIGHTS 4 CONDUIT REMOVED TO BE DETERMINED IN MATTE FINISH a" HleH, 8'-0" LONG, IN COPPER LINED FOUNTAIN FONT TO BE DETERMINED EXIST. 6UARDRAIL IN PREVIOUS PLANTER RECESSED DOWNLIeHTING IN SOFFIT POSSIBLY BAGKLIeHTED ~ CREATED BY MOVINe DOOR VALL FROM ~-- EXISTING BRICK MALL ABOUT e" BEHIND PARAPET MALL TO NEN SANDSTONE CAP ON ABOUT 3'-O" BEHIND FOR RECESSED LOOK ic AND HANDRAIL TO REMAIN TOP OF EXIST. BRICK LEDGE 1 i Ilillillill Illillill Il 1111 Ilillil Ill lilli 1/I Ill lili Ill Ill Ilillillill Il Ill Illilltlt I Illl#l j $ j . ~ ~ 1 EXIST. SLOPING RAMP 1 · TO STORES ABOVE 111 1 '6* *t' 414[Pely®~ '~'~ ~ i ' 1 1 1 1 1/ 1 1 1 L 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 ' 1 '6/' 11 0 - PAINTED WOOD TRIM 1 lilli l Alll | | | | | AROUND DOORS (TYP.) I'll'lll 1111 11'111 lilli l 1 1 1 1 1 lilli 1 1 lilil 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I i 1/111 VI I )11 11 lilli lilli 1 t:7 1111111111111 1 1 9? 1 1 lili 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ill 11 1 1 1\1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 Ill 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 lull 1 1 1 Ill lili-1 1\11111 + 1 1 jr 1 / , , , , 1 1 1 1 1 4' I ' 9 9 9 9 1 1 7% 1 1 0 > St ¢ 0 0 0 0 0 4, 0 a 1 1 1 LL , It , 1 l- PR. 3'-0"x ®'-10" - PAINTED YNOOD TRIM - SLID[Ne POOR SYSTEM: WOOP GLAP REVISED 4 PANELS 4'-0" x 6'-10" NOM. ALUM. CLAD MOOD DOORS ENTRY DOORS /"~h FRONT ELEVATION CENTER PANELS OPEN ~. SCALE: 1/211=11-01' ff TO BUILDINe 00 C 0 4 DUTCH DOOR ELEVATOR C O LOBBY H/0 ACCESS 00 FOR COAT CHECK - - COAT r\1~/-1 ~ MAT INSERT STORAGE _~~ 1 / COAT ~1 1/ ART OR CHECK i 0 I THEME 1 PASS- 114 i NICHE ~ THRU A- 1 1 41111 111 EXIST. STAIRS TO REMAIN . ---O UP , j~ ENTR*41] 1 \ I.L C ]1 - ~ - PREVIOUS ENTRY I ~ DOORS (REMOVED) NER FOUNTAIN IN L_l PLANTER AREA 1 - 4=17-- lut=7- 1 ---- IHOSTESS lEd -[O - PIGK-UP 4 BTATION SERVER - - PREVIOUS sTOR. 11 1 1 6 6 114 lily / TAKE OUT-g:2 ·0 GREENHOUSE '1 1 - 1 WINDOW / /-/\ 1 \: (REMOVED) 11 r / 9 051 1 SYSTEM- COURT YARD || ~~| 1-1 n SLIDINe / 1 11 / GLASS ~ F 11 A 1 1 1/ DOOR | SYSTEM | | RETROR. | |,1 1 1 - 114 V I Ul<ERY 1 11.11 1 13 / -3 bISPLA¥ | DSL. SFYING 1 | 11 1||<= 1 SVC.SATE 1 - 11 1 1 11 11 1 \ 1 Il J i LJ I 2-- /"/ : L- 14 ~~VIDEN / r- ROTIS.~ J R%UNDER r- TO BE REMOVEIA~ - 1 ~ OVENIC - BAKERY 0 / MARNI INe A~n DR»ERS I BELOW ~ MIXER 1 1 OVEN/ ----1 [;o~*-1 f / E-1 ~ r~ 11 Q ~ PROOFER PRpiR PREP 1 -~LA'KN L 3- 3t ~~ \ MALL-MOUNTED | HAND SINK LOINER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 0/ A2.1 SCALE: 1/4"= I'-O" (EXCERPT) 9 COOPE~T. SIDERALK ABOVE ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name MUNTS« JUMpeRS 2. Project location ·520 e#*T coorGERL . Aer,MJ,40 616.1 1 RM Btf ekl *l OF OON Po M INI 1 Dll , A (indicate street address, lot and block Mumber or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning 60)"Me86,1 01% 4. Lot size 5. Applicanfs name, address and phone number ov p,AL@Kle BONPel<. 20* A , P'*Petd ,OC>~Al><DO 6,611 410-9'10 -#2.27 399.4 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number MI 10+4 eue p,Al r#A ucc 1 90 -1 91-MGG CT , P¢67,62*-1 rc,Ovof»000 0161\ 970-920-1929 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 PU D Relocation HPC Subdivision Text/Map Amend. HistoMc 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) Wrl rle!€CIP+ fe€,TAulg:/*Ur 9. Description of development application Orp P€ e 6,01~eNT f AC#<PG- Palt> irl FgDVE ©0516*1. IM INe CN-ric,kIC€ TO COPE- - 10. Have you completed and attached the following? Attachment 1 - Land use application form Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form Response to Attachment 3 Response to Attachment 4 11111111 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Application Package Contents Following is an application for minor development review at HPC. Included in this package are: 1. Attachment 1- Application form 2. Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form 3. Attachment 3- Description of general requirements for a complete development application 4. Attachment 4- Description of specific requirements for a complete development application to HPC 5. Attachment 5- Applicable review standards on which HPC will base its decision 6. Attachment 6- General summary of the HPC review process 7. Attachment 7- Definition of minor development To submit a complete application, fill out Attachments 1 and 2, include all items listed on Attachments 3 and 4, and provide any other information necessary to clarify the project. A pre-application conference is strongly recommended so that the appropriate review process and submission requirements can be discussed. In addition, other reviews, such as those before the Planning and Zoning Commission, which may be required by the Aspen Municipal Code can be identified at this time. A consultation with the Zoning Officer and Building Department is also recommended early in the application process. TWO COPIES OF ALL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS IN A FORMAT NO LARGER ™AN 11"X17" ARE REQUIRED. FOR GRAPHICS WHICH ARE LARGER THAN 11"X17," SUBMIT TWELVE SETS OF PRINTS. 7 *7' Vt 4 9 - Ir 1 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE 970/925-4755 FACSIMILE 970/920-2950 Members of the Board of the Historic Preservation Committee Aspen City Hall August 25, 1998 Re: Revised Front Entry for Hunters/Jumpers Restaurant Members of the Board: I am writing this at the request of Charlene Gondek, owner and developer for the Hunters/Jumpers Restaurant that is going where Eastern Winds used to be. Originally, the front entry to the restaurant was intended to be basically the same as what was there, with just some fixing up and refinishing. However, the existing "greenhouse window" had to be removed to get the required grease trap into the restaurant space and was not in good shape in the first place. Rather than replace what was there, which was not particularly attractive, the owner is proposing to upgrade the entry as outlined below. We hope you will approve the enclosed front entry design. The single entry door will be replaced with double doors with glass in the upper portion. The doors will be stained wood. The portion of the front wall where the "greenhouse window" used to be will be replaced with a folding glass door system, that can be fully opened in good weather, allowing the lower level patio to be open to the inside. The patio could be used as kind of a "coffee terrace" or an informal eating area. The doors will all fold to the side underneath the sloping ramp to the stores above. The plane of this new wall, mostly consisting of the entry doors and the folding doors, will be set back about 2-1/2 feet from the existing location, or about 3' back from the brick parapet wall above. This serves several aesthetic and practical considerations. It makes the patio a little more generous; it breaks up the plane of the brick wall above; it provides a little bit of shelter as you enter the restaurant; it provides a recess for the folding doors to stack under so they look "tucked in" rather than "sticking out"; and it enables lighting to be completely indirect, recessed in the soffit thus created, rather than having fixtures mounted on the wall. The existing light fixtures and exposed conduit on the wall will be removed. There was formerly a planter at the base of the patio stairs, to the left of the doorway. We gather this never functioned very well, and it has since been I and associate, covered with sheet metal. The owner is proposing a small fountain in that area, which will not only help to mask street noise, but be a visual public amenity. • There were four gas torchieres associated with the previous restaurant, 2 on the brick parapet wall above the door, one at the stair landing, and one at the top of the stairs. The owner is proposing replacing these with gas lanterns, with the gas flame within a glass enclosure, which would be both safer and more attractive. · Cut-out brass letters, 8" high and approximately 8' long, would be used. In all respects, this is less than what is permitted by the City sign code. We will be applying for a sign permit separately. In all respects, we feel that the proposed revisions to the entry represent a significant improvement over what was existing. We are concurrently asking the Aspenhof Condominium Association for their approval as well. Thank you for reviewing this, and we hope that you find it acceptable. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ~-) *a _LI-3 41 Richard L. de Campo, AIA, P.E. Project Architect CC: Charlene Gondek, Owner/Developer Michelle Morris, General Contractor Hal Dishler, Kaufman & Peterson, P.C. Les Rosenstein, Bill Poss & Associates encl: Proposed Front Elevation (1/2" scale) Proposed Floor Plan excerpt at Entry and Patio (1/4" scale) BUILDINS - TO 00 /4 c o ELEVATOR ~ ~ LOBBY H/6 ACCESS 00 4 DUTCH DOOR FOR COAT CHECK -- -- COAT r\'1~/-1 ~--MAT INSERT STORAGE 11 - 80*r 3-3/ ART OR CHECK· ~ 1 1,r 1 THEME .PASS- 114~ / ~ NICHE . THRU 7 /1111 1 1 4 5 EXIST. STAIRS ~ TO REMAIN O UP 1\~ ENTRS+U I 'cp--/11 - 1 -PREVIOUS ENTRY ' C F -4 - -*ty--- il ·9\ DOORS(REMOVED) / 1 NER FOUNTAIN IN PLANTER AREA 9» <#TqjFkILILICILLL /t\ - 11-d I r==2% f 1 HOSTESS STATION I Ill 11- PREVIOUS | | SERVER PICK-UP 4 STOR, 1 I TAKE OUT----4~--- | 0 GREENHOUSE || 1 | .1 1 ENDOW -/ //\ ,\- 1 11014 - 1 1 (REMOVED) - ,- -- I r p.o.s. 1 , 1 SYSTEM-' COURT YARD 11 41 ~ ~ ~r-- FOLDING ~ 1 11 / GLASS F / DOOR 1 1 11 n I 11, RETROR. | ~6<~ lili 8 1 1 SYSTEM | 1 1 1 - | | || ~AKERY bISPLAY ~ F BL 911146 1 ~ 11 2/0.' BATE 1 1 - \\ 1 1 1 1 11 1 al /1 --- i 1 1 LI I i --- 1 I::+444:JiKzrrijillillillilillililillillillillillillillikillili L_.1 ~ ®-011 AL--- fgpiAD */ALLS I r ROTI S.~-~~~ R~UNDER F TO BE REMOVEO~ - Ae.E. NE¥& I ~/ 1 OVEN 0 00 "21 - BAKERY MARMIN¢5 /An BELOW MIXE OVEN/ f~DRAINERES PROOFER PRF'R ~ ~~ PREP ~ ~ ~ 1 MALL-MOUNTED | HAND SINK 03 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/4"=1'-O" (EXCERPT) COOPE~~T. SIDERALK ABOVE TRO EXIST. eAS TOROHIERS EXISTINS BRICK PARAPET MALL EXIST. 6UARDRAIL TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED FN/EXIST. LIGHTS 4 CONDUIT REMOVED AND HANDRAIL TO REMAIN KTMO NEW SAS LANTERNS COPPER LINEP FOUNTAIN IN PREVIOUS PLANTER BRASS CUT-OUT LETTERS, RECESSED DO»ILIGHTING IN SOFFIT 8" HISH, 8'-0" LONG, IN CREATED B¥ MOVINe DOOR MALL FROM - EXISTING BRICK MALL FONT TO BE DETERMINED l ABOUT B" BEHIND PARAPET INALL TO f NEK SANDSTONE GAP ON ABOUT 3'-O" BEHIND FOR RECESSED LOOK TOP OF EXIST. BRICK LEDGE / 1111111111111 111111 1111111111 lilli lili 11/11111~ 11111 Ill 11111111111 111 lilli 1 1 lilit 111 111111¢l 1 - EXIST. SLOPING RAMP ~ TO STORES ABOVE 1/1 1 lili I i i i i~ X®[f]~11(04[ER¢0(2§~'~ i i i i i i i i i i i i iu-i I L 0 - PAINTED WOOD TRIM 1 1 1 A 1 1 11 1 1 I I I 24 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 11 ~® ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ ~ lilli'11111 ~111111 11 AT EDGES (TYP.) 1 1 1- V 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - I 1 lilli / 1 1 1 111 - Illllltllllll 000 E El El 1 1 lit] Ift ~ ~1~ 9 9 - 9 9 9 9 9 1\1 4 -601 1 1 1\1 O " 0 1' 1 a - Ill ill 1 4 11,1 f 11+0 1 1 111 ki4..i 1 1 1 - - PR. 3'-O"x 6'-8" -PAINTED WOOD - FOLDINS DOOR SYSTEM: STAINED WOOD PANELS 4 TRIM 5 PANELS 3'-O" x 6'-8" NOM. ENTRY DOORS ~~ FRONT ELEVATION PATIO TO eE COMPLETELY OPEN ALL FOLD TO RISHT SIDE FOR TO INSIDE FEATHER PERMITTINS MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Directof 66,0/ Julie Ann Woods, Deputy Planning Director \~*F: 11 . FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer V RE: HPC Annual Awards DATE: September 9, 1998 The HPC Awards for 1998 were postponed due to my leave of absence and are proposed to be rescheduled for October or November. Following are a list of large projects which were completed since the last event in May 1997. Some may not be considered appropriate recipients of awards, but are listed for your information and consideration. The projects selected may be a restoration, renovation, adaptive re-use, contribution to a historic district, etc. 210 S. Galena, Elk's building pocket park- contribution to the historic district 303 E. Main, Kuhn- renovation of landmark structure 918 E. Cooper Avenue, Davis- 2 detached units on one lot, renovation of a historic house 935 E. Hyman Avenue, Kent- the historic rock, creative solution to preservation issue 426 E. Hyman Avenue, Curious George- remodel, contribution to a historic district 123 W. Francis, Vickery/Erdman- landmark lot split, renovation of a historic house 514 E. Hyman, Mason and Morse- renovation of a building within a historic district 132 W. Main, McCloskey- renovation of a historic building, improvement of building condition. Trustee Townhomes, Aspen Meadows- Addition of two units new units within a historic context MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission (% A THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Dire*Q{ Julie Ann Woods, Deputy Planning Director C fl/- FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Survey ofHPC projects DATE: September 9, 1998 As part ofthe City's effort to improve effectiveness of staff and services, the City began a program two years ago which established certain ways to measure our performance. Each year HPC must select two significant projects they have reviewed and survey the surrounding property owners as to whether the HPC decision resulted in a project which is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The goal is to have 60% of the respondants agree that the project is compatible. The same list provided for the awards discussion indicates those projects which have been completed recently and are candidates for the survey. (Last December we surveyed for Curious George and 123 W. Francis. Staffwill report on those results.) 210 S. Galena, Elk's building pocket park 303 E. Main, Kuhn 918 E. Cooper Avenue, Davis 935 E. Hyman Avenue, Kent 514 E. Hyman, Mason and Morse 132 W. Main, McCloskey Trustee Townhomes, Aspen Meadows 4 -1%& Hfo# 94