The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.19981028AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 28, 1998 REGULAR MEETING, 5:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOON Site Visits - (meet at the first site) 330 Lake Avenue 421 W. Hallam St. 5:00 I. Roll call and approval of Sept. 23, 1998 minutes II. PUBLIC COMMENTS III. COMMISSIONER AND STAFF COMMENTS IV. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) V. BUSINESS 5:10 A. 520 E. Durant, D&E Snowboards-7-0 - 2/4 5:15 B. 514 N. Third St. - Ringsby - Public Hearing tabled from Oct. 14th 1-0 0 IC 5:25 C. 421 W. Hallam St. - Minor Development 6:05 D. 117 N. 6th St. - worksession 6:35 E. <*7=NEEIN~A~. - woglia@&*ion 7:05 F. 330 Lake Ave. - worksession 7:35 ADJOURN Fiw'Wimugn PROJECT MONITORING loger Moyer 303 E. Main, Kuhn ISIS 514 N. First 112 S. Mill St. Susan Dodington 712 W. Francis 918 E. Cooper, Davis Meadows Trustee and Tennis townhomes 234 W. Francis 203 S. Galena, Gupei 3 i G E. ft~bAN 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 town-homes 420 W. Francis Street 203 S. Galena, Gucci 920 W. Hallam Gilbert Sanchez 1008 E. Hopkins, Bellis 414 N. First 303 E. Main 520 E. Hyman 112 S. Mill St. Jeffrey Halferty 234 W. Francis, Mullin 414 N. First 701 W. Main 101- 105 E. Hallam 920 W. Hallam 240 Lake Ave. Heidi Friedland 420 W. Francis Street 712 W. Francis Street 514 N. First Lisa Markalunas 520 Walnut Street Christie Kienast 520 Walnut Street 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 13,1999 214 E. Bleeker Street (Greenwood), expires August 12, 1999 920 W. Hallam Street, expires August 12, 1999 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Interim Community Development Director~~ FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer r RE: 520 E. Durant Street- minor review DATE: October 28, 1998 SUMMARY: The applicant, D&E Snowboards, is taking over the spaces formerly occupied by Gcranium' s and Sunshine and Rex and Doris and proposes minor alterations to the exterior of the storefronts. The subject building is not historic but is located within the Commercial Core Historic District. APPLICANT: D&E Snowboards, represented by Aspen Design Works. LOCATION: 520 E. Durant Avenue, Ajax Mountain Building, lower courtyard 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 make exterior changes to the existing storefronts. These proposed changes are: replacing wood doors with fiG , 6 (#A metal doors on Cafe Ink and the former Rex and Doris space, removing the wooden door on the former Geranium's and Sunshine space and replacing it with two metal doors with a sidelight, and enlarging windows on the former Geranium's and Sunshine space. Staff has no concerns with the proposal. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The changes proposed will have no impact on the neighborhood, because there are no historic resources in this immediate vicinity and the shop does not have a very direct relationship to the street. 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: 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 AND RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the new entry doors and window changes for 520 E. Durant Street, D&E Snowboards shop, as proposed." Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated October 14, 1998 B. Application r-zimmE-1 11/*,99 4 1 APPLICANT: D&E Snowboards, represented by Aspen Design Works L--.-/ LOCATION: 520 E. Durant ACTION: Minor Review All 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 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. ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name Dt m c.,0,60.4 9k9 r 2. Project location .41Â£7 f l)#Od (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning 4. Lot size 5.Applicant's name address and phone number LVVES*,Ba,"19/ illp 510 E Ov,-t 0.,I;. 92#-25395 6~~~esentative's name, address, and phone number 04& i '0 1791 Aspot :80 16-66 . 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 SpliULot 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 properbA #6&2 / *ofes. 9. Description of development application 82â€¢W.0/8630-Â»,*;6# - N.W Wwlâ€¢,15 * A.8 P* 90*0441 4#A,Nait 10. Have you completed and attached the following? )~ Attachment 1- Land use application form X_ Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form X Response to Attachment 3 Response to Attachment 4 64(L L \C- ED 11111111 li' BIE__58/ NQ r - f ---4 No#6 4 Nell Blaj. l --1 - E. DU MArr ST (01Â¥64' lÂ®~61 / MY*(A A- 1 - 1 Â· " , D+15 ' 4525Oa / 530 2 Per*d- **%932 \ Alâ€¢% Mt.. 01*t i . 1, I , V X./V AJVY X#40 AU.er /0 - 1 - 69 1 f.. 000 Fne- AVE --1 - - J 113 V NinÂ¥& *S TO: Historical Preservation Commission 14 October 1998 FROM: D&E Snowboard Shop Aja Mtn. Bldg. 520 E Durant St #107,8,9,10 Aspen, Co 81611 970-920-2337 Representative: ADW Inc. PO Box 3757 Aspen, CO 81612 970-963-8160 970-963-6145 fk. WRITTEN DESCRIPTION: The following changes are proposed for the D&E Snowboard Shop storefront elevation located at the address listed above: 1) Removal of existing wood-frame doors to be replaced with equivalent in metal- frame on units 107 and 109. 2) Removal of existing wood-framed door on unit 108 to be replaced with two, ( 3'00" X 6'08" ) metal-frame, full glass doors, with 16" full-height side-light. 3) Enlarging of existing windows on unit 108 from 4'6" to 6'0" height. STEPHEN J. MARCUS RO. Box 1709 ASPEN, COLORADO 81612 (970) 925-7615 (970) 920-3693 FAx October 13, 1998 To The City Of Aspen To The Historical Preservation Society RE: Spaces # 107/109/109, Ajax Mountain Building, 520 East Durant Street, Aspen, Colorado. To Whom It May Concern: The Ajax Mountain Associates, Ltd., (Landlord) gives consent to D&E Snowboards (Tenant) to remodel the above numbered spaces in the Ajax Mountain Building, as per attached sketch. Very truly yours, -1)Ax MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATES, LTD., 9 1/96& Paula Brodrm Property Manager Enc. 9 z 00 8= - 11 1 P z 0 32 M ke -- -IC Z N 9-*62 trt* , *121 -9 . 3 13* 1 80 0 1 - --==4 aspen design works D&E Snowboard Shop - Â£5â‚¬Rpr /117 520 E Durant St. # 109,110,111 #;X N11N6T CONDIT-101+5 Po box 3757 aspen, co 81612 Aspen, Co 81611 telephone 970 963 8160 facsimile 970 963 6145 970-920-2337 74'= V 04 11491 :#M 01 0 Id-VA-319 61424 f X321 aed rl//71 - . - 4 o Ed 1. 1 - 92)12 3 ; imi: - tri] 1 1-a~ Ntt 1 / 3%5 i I 'd 0 O 1/11, A *iÂ¥ Ex tri &2 2: c 1 /'h L ,,R kit ~ 04 .4 0 $ I- 9 -2, r 7-5 aspen design works DkE Snowboard Shop ..: I ~ 4 r 520 E Durant St. # 109,110,111 ??oP*UD qwePRONT- Po box 3757 asp.en, co 81612 Aspen, Co 81611 telephone 970 963 8160 facsimile 970 963 6145 970-920-2337 101-4 -160# _1-N O-3=:1~ ~~A~~~I~M~~A '0 B .b,\/ .Â¥1 00,9 04,1 ff tl 4,i LOWBe To 19,]Â·E - ('dlq ~~UN~ -agMA Â®1911 -Â®15 go'M,91 - 40 6' f' D ODA Vt 21 APPLICANT: Don and Karen Ringsby, represented by Gray Ringsb~ 3-0-2{10 or ' LOCATION: 514 N. 3rd Street -I........I ACTION: Variance All 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 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. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Interim Community Development Director ~,~2- FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer r - RE: 514 N. 3rd Street- variance, Public Hearing (tabled from Oct. 14) DATE: October 28, 1998 SUMMARY: At the October 14th meeting, the HPC reviewed the attached packet and memo with regard to a shed addition built illegally at 514 N. Third Street. The applicant has requested setback variances to legalize the structure. The neighbors to the east attended and indicated their concerns with the way the shed directs snow onto their property. HPC advised the applicant to prepare drawings for a Â·new roof design that would protect the neighbor's property from snow shedding and to work with the neighbor in the design of the solution. The new proposal is attached. Staff was not able to confirm that this interaction with the neighbors took place by the memo deadline. The Engineering Department has been contacted and will not have a concern with the additional snow shedding into the alley. Staff finds the revised design acceptable and recommends HPC approval. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the HPC grant a 10 foot rear yard setback variance, a 21 foot 6 inch combined front and rear yard setback variance, and an east sideyard setback variance of 5 feet for a storage shed, finding that the variance allows the development to be more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements as described in the staffmemo to HPC dated October 14,1998. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Interim Community Development Dire FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer V RE: 514 N. 3rd Street- variance, Public Hearing DATE: October 14, 1998 SUMMARY: This property is a designated historic landmark with a Victorian home and carriage house on site. Each building is a dwelling unit. The applicant has received HPC approval for an addition, to be placed between the old house and carriage house, and is under construction. A complaint was made in regard to a shed structure on the property which was built some time ago without permits. The shed violates setback requirements, so the owner has the option of either eliminating it or requesting a setback variance, which is the direction that has been chosen. A 10 foot rear yard setback variance, a 21 foot 6 inch combined front and rear yard setback variance, and an east sideyard setback variance of 5 feet are needed. APPLICANT: Don and Karen Ringsby, owners, represented by Gray Ringsby. LOCATION: 514 N. 3rd Street, Lots 1 and 2, Block 40 of the unrecorded Hallam's Addition to the City of Aspen. SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks, 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 coverage by up to five (5) percent, HPC 1 644-clo \ tr A 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 shed area in question was added to the east side of the historic carriage house several years ago. It sits directly on the east and rear property lines. The roof of the shed slopes towards the adjoining property. A letter has been provided by the applicant explaining how the shed came to be built and their need for the storage space. They point out that the shed was built in character with the historic resources in terms ofmaterials. The historic house and carriage house were originally built far to the east side of the property. The location of the new addition reviewed by HPC last winter was fairly restricted because HPC did not want the addition or any other new construction to project more towards North Third Street than the existing buildings, or to encroach onto those buildings or be taller than them. The addition that was approved is relatively modest in size. There are no basements and there is no garage for the site. The site offers limited possibilities for storage. That said, the location which was selected for the storage shed is the solution which is most compatible with the historic landmark. It can be accessed from the alley, is not visible from the street, and therefore does not affect the public facades of the historic resource. No other location on the property, including along North Third Street and North Street would be likely to be approved because it would place a storage building in the foreground of the historic structures. In terms of neighborhood compatibility, the neighbor has a very valid concern that the shed dumps snow right onto their property and the plants along their fence. The applicant's proposal to install a snow fence and gutter along the eave ofthe shed may help the situation, but may not completely alleviate the problem. Staff recommends an alternative, which is to change the roof shape so that it is either a gable, or a shed roof which slopes northward into the yard at 514 N. Third Street. If a gable is selected, snow must also be prevented from shedding into the alley, which is a public right-of-way. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character ofthe neighborhood ofthe parcel proposed for development. Response: There are many historic structures in the neighborhood, most of which have some sort of non-conformities due to the structures having been built before zoning regulations and more recent efforts to accommodate historic preservation. The adjacent structure which is affected by this application is also a landmark; a 1962 Herbert Bayer house. 2 As discussed above, the neighbor is currently being affected by this particular setback encroachment. A solution has been proposed to eliminate the impact caused to them. 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 does not affect the historic significance of the property. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereoÂ£ Response: The shed addition was made on the east side of a historic building, however it was done with compatible materials and is not visible from the street. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe 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. â€¢ Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered). â€¢ Deny Development approval finding that the application does not medt the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION AND RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move that HPC grant a 10 foot rear yard setback variance, a 21 foot 6 inch combined front and rear yard setback variance, and an east sideyard setback variance of 5 feet for a storage shed, finding that the variance allows the development to be more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements, with the condition that the applicant change the roof form so that snow does not shed towards the neighboring property, 311 North Street, and also is prevented from shedding directly onto the alley." Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated October 14, 1998. B. Application. C. Photos of current condition. 3 Oct. 2, 1998 To: The Historic Preservation Committee Attn: Amy Guthrie From: Don & Karen Ringsby of 514 North Third Street, Aspen. Submitted by: Gray Ringsby for the owners This letter is in regards to the issue ofthe existing storage shed that is attached to the backsideofthe carriage house. We would like to request a setback variance for this shed. The shed was built about ten years ago by a carpenter that rented the carriage house from us. He built the shed in exchange for letting him keep his tools there over the winter. It appears that there was no building permit when it was built. Our intent is to now make this a legal part of the dwelling. The shed was very well built and blends in perfectly with the existing house. It has identical siding, shingles, and trim. In fact the roof slope looks the same as that ofthe rear part of the main house. Aesthetics aside, the only people that are affected by the shed are our neighbors, the Blocks. Their concern is that snow falls from the shed roof over the fence and onto their bushes. We would like to offer a solution to that problem. A simple but sturdy metal snow fence and rain gutter would keep all snow and water from their property. This we would agree to install immediately. This unobtrusive shed is very necessary for our property. There is no garage and no other place to store all the outdoor things that one accumulates and uses. Gardening equipment, lawn mowers, snowblowers, bikes, and tools are some ofthe items stored. The shed is a much more attractive alternative than a pile of stuff sitting there with a tarI) over it. This shed was built on in such a way as to be historically correct. All the other numerous additions to this property over the years were done with shed roo f style attachments, just as this shed was done. Please allow this unobtrusive shed to remain as it is but with the new snow fence and gutter. Sincerely, RECEIVED Don & Karen Ringsby OCT 0 5 1998 ASPEN, rt I KIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ifil/1/6(4-JEED - %4 , 4. r L . Â»i LE b -- . 24 4.I~!k Â· . . 0 ' <*. I. I -' 'I '.''' b b.)6': . ..0. . .- I V Â· 4 121 1 4 .'. . 4. Â¢ .. . . A.,~rl . ' 04.-' : " 11 1, , n. 1 ' 1 . 1 lim//*, G ' 1.1 0 W .. *49*3**1:91 . -2 't .4,<2?bR*Ii':.0,6,1 't,r:. 4,3Â·644Â·.iâ€¢,5.)2'201â€¢ , Â· ,. 2 ' .4 h....Â«r 4vÂ·,Â·42Â¢%*45:Â·4â‚¬4:1 Â· w "1~: ;'9Â· ~: Â·t'.Â·0;.1%&:06, 0 : . ..2; 4--. ./ E ' I. 1 ff.' 'Ilifbyliff.fL .. :. 4 R : ' 11 4,tâ‚¬331tkp.,j :p.:~ . :,i:.3,f,1'I:Â· 0. 4â‚¬..~ ~~~~~ ~~ ,r ~ , ,~ L~. ~3 ~.~ .~'*14,i't; jq~28,11.iÂ·tit.>.-i41~~5~ii* ,~~' Â· .ti. E, .-;Â· ~ i '1 '3-t ' >1 ; . f ''i .... X'. .i.*,4 li b ' 6 ..' t#*r Â·f : r~'~ Â·*.'. F.Â·.ZW HAA. U I . â€¢ E '19 '' " 4'1 Irdu 1'1 2/rÂ»02'Â·"4 ,,1. MWTHmFs :erÂ·-,Â·fteÂ·Â·Bevt'~7'- . 16*'N.9-Â· 517 : , 5-77993Â»"-- . L I I i.,5.7..:i'P.h:Â·tu , ...: '' . .' ' I I '. 1 ,/ V. . ' ..4 ' ' __ -,d AJ YÂ·k Â·U= ; T. 77 k. ., .ty =Zi:&45-'#A'*'/* Â·.Â· : M)*14â€¢-.JÂ·, 4 Â·- 9: 8 2 2/!%#*4:24.4 --~- 1/1 i bl 1 11 1111 Wf . TOP of PROPOSEP NEW ROOF - ~ ----0---.-- 143 2,5 2 - u. Tof of ROOF 2 L -MI-.-- ---tz - - @ EAVE APOVE POOR TOP OF E)051-0 FENCE - ~ --- . i Z /735 Z - i fOPOF EXISE FENCE - - =100 O - -, A .3 - - EXIST, CRAPE _ 4, 13'-2" 4 / A / 'Pen'\ 0 / VAf 0% FROPOE NEW ROOF FOR EXISr, 5HE F 5CALE 1/4"*1' -0" \\\ \\\:t:\ k:kkk~:t 4514 KOOF PÂ® PNY PM* Off\05 9(ED E____1_1 TO DE SET BACK I '-O" MINIMUM -7' ~_| t -Oil FROM THE FENCE ~Â· TOP OF PROP(75EP NEW ROOF lid - A - -TOP OF EXIST. FENCE \0 \ .- EX'5Â£ 61?APE L EXIST, FENCE 0 0 4'-8" I . / 4/-) 1,/ / 5VATOC PROPOVEP NEW ROOF FOR EXIVE 51189 5CALE I/4" I '-0" 1 TOP OF PROPO*P NEW ROOF .. fOP OF EXIST, FENCE - - - E 52 0 EXIVT, GRAVE _ 4 , EXIX. 3'0"X 6'8" POOR- / 1 nor- 5 / --- VAFOC PROPOEP NEW ROOF FOR EXISr, SHEP 5CALE 1/4"-I' -0" 6 f -Oil 3' -2" --7~ -0--9-9-1 1 Bgrjkb%J-r =14X Elli 11 ,1 '1.1 - TOP OF PROPO5EP NEW ROOF - ~ -1~2.9 t TOP OF ROOF @ EAVE APOVE POOR TOP OF E)051-0 FENCE - ~ --- --_ ,;;4~(- - ~ fop OF EXISE FENCE -3100 9 9 - .. 5091'. til~PE _ a, - ~ . 4 Ij'-2' I 0 54</ / / ./.0 VAf 0\ PROPOEED NEW ROOP FOR.EXIST, 92%9~~,tevo-\LJ 5(ALEI/4"*1'-nll le f 3 h Â© . k 3 5 k :b k ~2*1 Roof PED ANY PARf ount '9Â£0 4 +1 1 -01' FROM THE FENCE TO PE 5E1' PACK I '-Ott MINIMUM --------- - '~ TOP OF PROPO*P NEW ROOF I . - - TOP OF EXIST. FENCE 21 - ~2 \ . EXIM. G'*E -EXIST, FENCE . I 4'-8" .. / . VATOC PROPO5EP NEW ROOF FOR EXIGf, 51189 5CALE 1/4"-1' -0" c TOP OF PROPOSP NEW ROOF - ~ 1. TOP OF EXIVT, FENCE - - - = 9 - 40 ZE EXIVT, GRAVE _ 4 , EXIST. 3'0"X 6'8" 00012 ~ 4 <791'. 5 ' / VATOC PROPOSEP INEW ROOF FOR EX15Â£ 5HE P SCALE 1/4"*1' -0" I 214.7,~. . I . I . - ..3 - , FAR, fABLE Lor 518- 6,163 5P. . EXIerING FAR.- 2,239 5.F. M.LOWPOLE FAR- 3,2615F, PROFCMED FAR.- 2,819 5F. KEWAPPITION- 578 5/. HIRKE 30 HA5 KEN WAIVEP UY HP.C. I <Ing % 2 Z -TS,N; arpoolt,Â·1*PUCE rog.- <fU N 140EG.50'49'E - , _-2.-Â¤2.-.%Â£.2.-Â© TIEm li.k-+9>ZI 8 1 - ~.L=[2 4---L LifitilloIlimE,/Li-- rae 1;ZE rODE *ENTI c:05/15 w= oca ' , Fum 1,85 fooe I, Lr- - Ld + p.91; *-+----------- JAE6 m FIi b -j L.-1 V- LA,NI ~ Mh &FAA 9 -4,1 U ........................ Iv I v 44Â·~ + *00 . 111 illi ./ . LJ USLCb 1 - 1,/ , 3> EX:51â€¢,GILOGRM.m(*50Â¥*aSON,2) z z &-- - - td- -- ex-,-tr-AL-~--Â·UmK-727-91 , 0 j d ><Raw-14921 M : 6 UJU) < 1 41 ...2....0-2 W *11. -71+- )) V 319 1 cm 22 - 6 Â· ~/-~~br--0 MEA,mommumefOMIEAe/20-n\ az \- ~h.Â·e---'*Esti -la ~GSING fla5 rO KEWW- --~~~----CePEL P,â€¢0<.E; U.N I. TO 'AV*1 >I a \-- z -)(Erceâ€¢-7 j.liE.G.u>- U lt, zzvi LIMN . Â¤ 1- < 0-- % NORTH THIRD STREET 1.- t- 5178/ LANNAPING PLANI 5CALE 1/16"-1'-011 Ii:-. 6/ 0/98 RECEIVED JUN 2 6 1998 51â‚¬Ef NO. Â»V . A.I ASPEN/ PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - 1 OF 6 7.-- - NORTH STREET N 75DEG.09'11'W d 30103 -T~#'4.- 13~, 2 IT. t. .. Â¥r; - .--1.17.Z-. 4 . 00*165 fE TED ( NEÂ£100 - .// 1% . - I...-Li 0 0 I @. A Â»e=512=8 0 ~ 0 Z nk4 r= 0.11 04 FÂ·? 46 : Nâ‚¬200 A- \ 1 1 1 -4 ,----1 0 - FORMER & GABLE PLANI 5CALE 1/4"-1'-0" 9.- 11' C' - 11 Uaz O " Â·~ 3,5 2' c V, r J . . Z le- ~ 20 1 Ylp. 21 Wh < 0 fj ZZ 1 - 1 / A 532 O 8159* a,fooot rept.c - -1 f, Â®Â®uÂ® - ..9 alio 1+ i} 22 L w#6 , Fi /4 / /1/99 / Fift/%6< i "1.lOOL com: ru CU)5Er t / ~ PAnÂ«00&4 Â© ROOM > 12 9 1 1 C.m E |1-4 â€¢ 7 8 4-- 2 ./ f POM -3 + r~- 7 eNCCELED IM}tN .tur o ir 43 0 2- ' ##6152 *5Â£00M 055*COM , ome,A h - ///IN-ljj /I1/ II *FECOM --1 1 1-r-1- I- 1i /L I /1 / 1// / / ZZM : 8105fNOWALTOMIAÂ©V#9-l , ..,9092'0 * thevES,?OW,LL FUEP N a 1- < . : -19-Y- 1Â©ju>~4, \Â£\ 4*(10% 1 * ROOM LANWAL .OCCIt ~Laroo:rooa~ i r---" Od fk@jzM<=5 F PAT)Â«00*L_ 1 ; â€¢ h d< 10 ! = 3%15!M Â· u u P"15 004450* â‚¬W -61* 08:70014 =VE@ 0 05 0 i =T (rooarwvâ€¢&210,Â£ Rewrom,1 6 FWOOCNWOEURNECOâ‚¬ VO 6/ 0/98 1 - - 1- . m i - 51, 200 1161. J 3' 4. ./ 7Â·4.-1 00 RECEIVED 5â‚¬Efc. i Â· 1 1 _ 4 * 1 . 1 , 1 - I ........ FLOORÂ·PLAN JUN 2 6 1998 n - / - â€¢.013 Al. 0*41510 M vie$ 59 N FE-0 SCALE 1/1"-1'-O" / \ Z- ASPEN/ PITKIN COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENI-2 OF 6 #"17" .-- ."-a .x,45.,0. - ..41;.'. r 1. --Â·G . - I -32*/3, :3/. 'I . -fl ./I, 12Â£1119*brÂ· . . 44 e>Ka LINE OF 8)4511NG ROOF TO % EXTENDED-1 ."illi_ 1 / i '59 ir l. .Ji . 1 0499â‚¬919*L----j& ~- 44*44443 0 m 11 & Ill///// L h -* ifi 4:l i EFOE \\ 11.NNkl IN 1 / 21 21 UZZO VALLEY V - A' 0 12102 111 V~ < VALLEY v h 1 4+ 1 KCHEP AREA REFREEN15 NEW ROOF 0,\- Z 230 r- U > 9 ii --A 1 1 1 \ 1 0 8- Z 2 v7 -LINE OF W,ALL DELOW ~ - IROOF PLAN SCALE 1/4"-1'-0" 6/16/ 98 RECEIVED JUN 2 6 1998 ASPEN i 1-9 1 Aint COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SHEET NO. A -17 30?6 Â»..+A2%.:,r.-,râ€¢- - VALLEY VALLEY 00Â¥30103'NildÂ¢V R 133316Â· d3IHJ. +1130 N 41 6 \ 2 \ 6 \0 33N 3d IG 33 A G591\113 2 0 2 LU e 2 .0 ER u.1 cu b O,1 LU 3 2 90. DZ 11- . -T[---~T :26 - 0 1-v- c VEÂ· VE r=. C 3> <C 1.-KT ..6% !!22_ e Jk.1 e) al v~Â· F le m Ul F 14: 21 6 - r A "f' f *1 -chb .G@ 2 i I 'titirift//J ill 44 4888881 1 f --%1 N 1 + *01 1 ' 'V' 1 91171 â‚¬ /8 i f# 1 \/IL 14' 1 54<0 1 -U< 01113 FFEFFI "i 8 - 1 Â©e I -...... 9 liuuu.UL 11 11Â«11Â®0 1 IlurTrrmmmrr-1- 12Â· -i- 2 -1~3 - 4Â» E Prii 1 - Â» Ill 1 . - 2 =60* 1 4 9Allam 144= A - B-- r. Tlmmmnmmn.. ./98881 19~ _I- 1 1 111:1 1 (081 1.El 1 1:111 1 IJ ~]E] Fi,IM.i:,0â€¢i;,ilm'T':- XII 0 =E f# C f Â»1 /,1 ~% â€¢UL EE:9 <â€¢W - 4 149 e I. ~* 4 1/\ 1 k . '2 Â·'?00 4meÂ·r.4 4 1.NBV'Ic~73 ALINOININOO 1 /=Â»1 lie' / A IN1,41\'IN N '3121 k N hlf:l N DI K 3, \=tÂ»-1 Irl#MÂ®Â©elml 1-==M--,~ -0,21Mi**1~1~ F~1~11 Â¢ oR A#%111 *1Â¤ I*111 ul Il~ / 1 ' 11=111 37 50UTH ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATIONI - EZO MALEI/4"-1'-0" 501-81/4"-Â·It-oIl Z\-n 21 cm < Un 22 11-1 I 22 \- >I - S\-Z WINPOW EGEPLLE ~ POOR SCHEPILE Un a.z 21 -EM__L_EL_L Â¢0010Â¢NNG AUNY Cmt.06 N.WEE/11#0:9 1 MAftili | HARDWj'RE 1*Wa C:5 0 ZL f,VE R . ---------r-------- WX I A 2'Â·9 1/4â€¢' X D'-0 1/4 Pate HZ ~ PELLA 24202CUM L...!L_ 1 ,Â·.0,%8'e,x,Â·,/4'- 1 WOWZIEveli:ir--1----amor- 0 . Â·It/2" kg Â·0 1/ 2' , 14 CU5rOMJ FELLA . I 102~.. _- ~ 4'411/41' %8:Â·0"1(13/4" I WOGV/0..65 [ ENTIRY PELLAFIENCH JA IMP.M 8 . 1 - C ill/2"%0'-81/7 FOEX ELSOM) PELLA 1 10,. I 2â€¢4Â·'*6'y'.FiÂ»74'" 1 ",MIRMAIHEPRLE*aNU-1. 0 6' 2" %6'Â·01/4" PaLL 3 FUE; MLLA 5254,10.2 1 104 - 1 2.-0,981Â·231' *1524': 1 -VUEUKE*&*LBZ-EE0M4:P*ii 37- â‚¬ T < 8 86â€¢0 *t,H y /004 AD-2 liz ELG- F 2 +91/â€¢"14'Â·71/4Â·1 COAE PUL PELLA 282424041 \f\ 6 8' 57/2'Xy-75/8" FSÂ¢Pel,IMOM) PELLA 184<4842/15.75 3.Gre _, 9~ H 4' 9,/2"%2'Â·09/8" 'DEP PELLA 1818CM Â·< 1 -761/7 1(60Â·29/8" r\*0 PELLA 4068CM 3 4 Â·9+/711Â·09/8' PELLA 080/ - ?gur K 4 9:/296.-29/80 fneD ELLA 4865CM - L ,+It 9/8'Â· * 2'-Ill/4" FDEEP PELLA 152OCM W/ AUNIN 0425 4'C M 1 -11 9/ 20 X 7 Â·11 1/ 4" FWI PEUA 152001 W/ MNrN UM?5 92* N 1419/8'Â·1(20411/4" '120 PELLA 192OCM W/ AININ 0,25 1Â« 0 ..119/8*2'Â·111/ f FDE[7 MUA 192OCM W/ AÂ«NrN 0,â€¢29 Â·4. p ,-*4"1(7411/4" FOER (115T0M) "FELLA 120*19%- LEFf :CE VER!. - 0 5'Â·!1 t/f' * 7 411/4' FIED< abrOM) mt.A ra#ige - 20Â¢ 508 vu?r W 5.-111/411*7411/4" FrEG< 01*OM) _61Â·LA 11&4â‚¬U- ek}Â·r SUE VÂ¢Rf 5' -11 7 4" X 7Â·11 1/4â€¢ FIEK ClbfOM) FEI.LA 11?1,'AW- LE,f (CE VERT. t. 71.4 1% ri/16798 RECEIVED . JUN 2 6 1998 9- . Aerciv i r'I rKIN [-NEETAr-1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT A-91 1 501:6 13 30103 0 .19,<444,3,11Â§... . J .t APPLICANT: Jennine Hough and Joe Myers, represented by Sven Alstrom 1~ 1 1.1 b -9 y LOCATION: 421 W. Hallam L-===1/ ACTION: Minor Review and Partial Demolition Minor Review All 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 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. Standards for Partial Demolition: Pursuant to Section 26.72.020(C)), no approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the HPC finds all ofthefollowing standards are met: Standard 1: The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration, or rehabilitation of the structure. 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. .S MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Interim Community Development Director OBLN r . FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer ' RE: 421 W. Hallam Street- minor review and partial demolition DATE: October 28, 1998 SUMMARY: The property is listed on the 'Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures." As a result of the new code amendment, minor development review standards, in addition to the partial demolition standards are applicable. The site contains a duplex; one half of which is historic and one half newer construction. The application affects the non-historic unit. The proposal is to change the roof pitch and roof material on the non-historic unit and change detailing on the front facade. Staff recommends approval of the roof changes, but modification of the proposed new detailing. APPLICANT: Jennine Hough and Joe Myers, represented by Sven Alstrom. LOCATION: 421 W. Hallam Street, Lots D and E, and the east 39 inches of Lot C, Block 36, City and Townsite of Aspen. PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: SECTION 26.72.010.D. REVIEW STANDARDS FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT IN THE "H." HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT. AND ALL DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING PROPERTIES LISTED ON THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures 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 1 Ezin \Ull- 6 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: From the attached 1904 Sanborne map, the general form of the historic house located on Lot E appears to be intact except for a modification at the back. The historic front porch and front door have however been removed, dramatically changing the appearance of the building and almost eliminating its identity as a historic home. The new unit which was added to the historic house is fairly quiet and reasonably scaled, however, it has a front porch and front door and therefore already has some more prominence than the historic house. Also the two units are connected and begin to blend into each other. The applicant requests HPC approval to make exterior changes to the non-historic half of the duplex. Staff inquired whether there was an opportunity in this remodel to physically detach the two units but the applicant feels that would be too far beyond the proposed scope of work. (This would require landmark designation and conditional use approval for two detached units on a 6,000 square foot landmark lot.) The proposal is to change the roof pitch of the non-historic unit and change detailing on the front of the house. The new roof is to be a more steeply pitched and more historically proportioned gable roof, with cedar shingles. Staff does not have a concern with this in that it would not be desirable to copy the hipped roof of the historic house and further confuse that relationship. The existing house has a metal roof, so the different materials will help to create some more distinction between the two units. Staff has significant concerns with the proposed new detailing for the non-historic unit, which includes decorative shingles in the new gable end, a Victorian bay window, and sunburst detail in the porch roof, all of which create a false appearance that the new unit is a historic structure and further diminish the prominence of the true historic resource. Staff recommends that all three of these detailing elements be revised to be very simple and not strongly Victorian. Staff further recommends to the applicant, who has first right of refusal on the historic house, that at such time as they may come to own that house, serious consideration be given to detaching the structures, reconstructing the missing 2 front porch and entry door and restoring that building to its earlier appearance. There are numerous local and state programs which provide incentives to undertake this work. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The applicant's proposed changes are clearly meant to make the addition more similar to Victorian architecture in the neighborhood, however HPC has a strongly held policy to not allow new buildings to replicate historic structures. Compatibility is desired, but creating a confusion between which buildings are from the Victorian period and which are new is not desired. 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 the historic structure on the property provided that the detailing discussed above is revised appropriately. 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 affect the architectural character or integrity of the historic structure on the property if amended as described above. SECTION 26.72.020(a. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW OF PARTIAL DEMOLITION: No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the HPC finds all of the following standards are met. 1. Standard: The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation Of the structure. Response: The applicant requests HPC approval to remove and reframe the roof over part of the unit. The work does not impact historic materials and is acceptable as a renovation of existing construction. 2. Standard: 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. 3 Response: This addition is not considered historically significant and no historic materials on the original house will be affected. 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: Compatibility issues are addressed under the development review standards listed 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 AND RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the roof changes to 421 W. Hallam Street, as presented on October 28, 1998. All other detailing changes (fishscale shingles, sunburst design and new window) on the north elevation are to be revised to be very simple and not strongly Victorian in character, to be approved by the HPC." Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated October 28, 1998 B. Application 4 W'%â€¢J~ 8 rep ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM M /NOF:L 1. Project name ft)001-\/ mfel:2511*SUDGN(6 Â·122/nottll k\0 2., Project location 42/ W, /*47.6,471/1 UNI T A OF: *10Â¢t-LAN\ 5712Â£27- C#Alth A.LN/ U/n 9 (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds descMption) 3. Present zoning Â·72 (P 4. Ldt size 9&4% '*, PT JENNU44. 5. Applicant's name, address and phone number 46)6 /67*R S 245 CRBI-Â¥7814 Â¥:*13 NE, 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number - Â· .mE\(,17-VE*1 925-/We ALSTROM GR(11IP P C ' ARCHITECTURE AND INTERIOR DESIGN 7. Type of application (check ail that apply): 121 SOUTH GALENA / SUITE B ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 970 9251745 / 970-9254576 FAX 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 /O&1- View Plane . Condominiumization Design Review /$$57&'Â¥O 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. propeg) UN IT 6 = 1, 4-70 234,FT- (Â·0)<ls'17/~ FiAFâ‚¬3 RES /001/77*L 5 825*200#M S 9. Description of Aevelapment application m/NOR APC, r 12 111) MIDÂ©(A) *22, PLACO,kDAIT /NTRB/094 f as/Ylpttalk}(:3' . 9 10. Have you completed and attached the following? 4 Attachment 1- Land use application form 1/" Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form V' Response to Attachment 3 LÂ·Â·'0' Response to Attachments 4 and 5 llllllll 15 90 i 70 . 6 ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: Uâ‚¬AINLN-â‚¬0 +10296,1+ dmid Vet nvre:~- 1 Address: 42.) 111, A*Â£,6/Â¢rY\ Zone district: 741 (P Lot size: (27,82Â·;5 7=73 Existing FAR: 1/ANT A = /470 ap UNIT 13 - 986 MAR Allowable FAR: 3240 + 91 = 3755 1 Proposed FAR: ON M:A Â» utigr- 89= NO C,PIANed, E)qg-/4 0 Existing net leasable (commercial): AO/~041~71/ABProposed net leasable (commerciap: N A - P. 546Â» Existing Â°/0 of site coverage:000+6*-= 43,49% "106~6*1Bcâ‚¬, = r?4& 74-= 4054 62)1,â‚¬Râ€¢'E,6 , Proposed % of site coverage: : AlÂ£2.--Â¢2~ _ - 3- _ Existing % of open space: Proposed-% of open space: : NA : p*,j,* Existing maximum height: Principal bldg: /2- 2/ Accesory bldg: A//'<EL 1~62/3) Proposed max. height Principal bldg: /O Accessorv bida: /V,0/6, Proposed % of demolition: 90Â©F *7~2.7/Al- OF -UN* A Existing nwmber of bedrooms: ONE A = Â· Proposed number of bedrooms: &*77-4 = 5 Existing on-site barking spaces: 5 On-site parking spaces required: 3 .. . Setbacks NO - v /tchs Existing: Minimum required: Proposed- Front: /0.2-9 Front: /O Front: k.29 Al/6 444 Rear: /9,0' Rean 10 Rear: )5 14) 6 tiÂ¥.IST/Ae Combined Combined . Combined NON- . .M Front/rear:25, 2.7 Front/rear:30 Front/rear: 25Â· 29 0//<1 :,w/DER)/77-" Side: 5 u/657- Side: 6 Side: 5 60&57- /V/t Side: 73 Stâ‚¬r Side: O Side: N â‚¬AST /V/c- Afcombined Combined - Combined 611 6 Sides: /5 Sides: IE:> Sides: /5 : Com W Alâ‚¬D Existin noncooformities or encroachments * REzzrÂ¢RLAÂ«E) S,10â‚¬~ 45.49% E*/s:1-, S/77, 6Â£)U e,iV,56 - Variations requested:_1_,, .._ - _ . . t. -, L - -*NE>a - Ant> ITIoN,Â« L (.HPC has the ability to vary the following requirements: satbacks. distance between buildirts, FAR bonus of up to 500 sql site coverage variance up to 5%, height variation-s under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts) . 1 '0 . 31 8 14 ek 1,1-, ri' Fril- - -rir- .1 .1 'r i 'V i,bilivi ..' .A, 6- _Lr-, e 98 1. 3 /1 ,, 21 i /1 *H '9 3 * 3 *0 *1 9 W- 1 R , rM~-11 \-71 ;.El !1 ~1 l: INJ -i--7 \ Fl A 0 1 1*1~ ~ :s c, a i~ CF' m diLLI 20 1 17% y 10# toD UD 600 6017 5/15 91Â·9 6/D 6/4 /WÂ· 20 930 67,0 61# ED teD 2Â£b m.9 209 - {Â£09 99, (No) . id.4/36, ,@ 812 f =439.l37_ @ -================ 11 (9DW (02#, HU 00#20#90' 00# 80# 0/D Z/DD/* 9/b 8/t; 02# 33# 12# 905 82.* 11913 295 1195 1 009~205 1 1,71 11 k / Ix /1 771 1-ZJ ~ e if e - rf A FT p.1 1 1 -1 C 4-TL 4 it -- /1 1 1.Â£ 4 1 L b / 1% 4 * 11 0 1 .11 ~57 27 C/Ke\ / N *VA ' 7 H g.3 Y *-7/ w lA\ /907 \ & 1*1 0 . E k 4 0 I r v r,ix .IK /1 * # -11 1* * u- 7 1 77 17 0 .3 4 1 9~7 n- 71 & 11 4 - 8 1%-7- Â£-I - 71 Â· 1 2 vi--L * 11 52 1 1 0 /1 4 c,* LKIL-tw 7, rÂ¢-9- 21 , a71 k / 1, QI:71--8 i IF- a . 0 0 4 En- 96 g..41 Q ,-PZ #00 ED# SDD 60# 60# /10 510 91b LIb 6;b 12# 9# 528 421, 62# lit 11 20 522 ~= =1 - ( bl32=SH=)== - (9Â£0 550) li /- , 0100 ~\ ====n= = I A 1910 . 11 '19 GR Â£-â€¢ 912 WE liE 602 Zoe 502 609 /09 . I 602 602 902 %1% %14 2,/6 7,/2 ST. 103 205 %07 %09 0// 2/3 2/3- 2/7 2/9 30/ 303 305 307 309 . ALSTROMGROUP P.C. ARCHITECTURE and INTERIOR DESIGN 121 SOUTH GALENA, SUITE B ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 970 925 1745 / 970 925 4576 fax 1 2 OCTOBER 1998 Amy Guthrie 920 5096 private ' CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 920 5090 dept. CITY HALL 130 S. Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 .. RESPONSE TO ATTACHMENTS 4+5 ROOF REPLACEMENT FOR NON-HISTORIC DUPLEX HPC MINOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 421 WEST HALLAM RESPONSE TO ATTACHMENT 4 ITEM 1: This project is before HPC primarily as a roof replacement project of a portion of the roof of a non-Historic duplex. We wish to overframe the existing roof of the western portion of the duplex above the living room porticin of the plan. We ate terminating this overframing at the location of a truss which exists. The other purpose of this new roof is to repair the skylights and to remount them on the new steeper roof to avoid the current leakage problems. ITEM 2: . The existing vaulted living room of UNIT A was a circa 1981 improve- ment which we are using as part of our new construction. Our r structural engineer Steve Peightal of SKPEIGHTAL ENGINEERS has inspected the building as well as myself - we both find it capable of adapting to the proposed improvements. ITEM 4: The existing non-historic building is not a great contribution to either the neighborhood or the adjacent Historic building. This OWNER primarily wishes to improve existing roof conditions and in the process slightly upgrade the appearance of the building. We believe that the new roof which will be in fire-retardant cedar shingles will be both a technical and aesthetic improvement. HPC MINOR DEVELOPMENT AND PARTIAL DEMOLITION OF NON - HISTORIC DUPLEX 12 OCT 98 P2 RESPONSE TO ATTACHMENT 5 PARTIAL DEMOUTION * The project has a low impact on the neighborhood since there is no significant change to this duplex in terms of ownership. use. or types of materials used on each portion of the existing duplex. We believe that the cedar shingles are a significant improvement over the existing asphait shingles. . . Sincerely, . Sven Erik Alstrom AIA .. 4 1 ... V.: a " . w t . + .. .,ILI,~; ..4 * 4.4 . \,44 . 1 414'* 0, 7, 1 7 6 ,~...WI: 4.: , r , f ~ ,~, ' 49%4 . 1.. 1, 81 . U L~~~ .1 1 1; % rÂ·Â·Â· 2-4 .<41.. .1.1.S~ 8 ...0.kilt#'1531: *,f .~ .. . 19.- 4 0#' <31 4 ~ 4, ..1. .. 0 +U* 1~,4* r,*c, ,. ~ *, 0*,6 , u# ij#9.'y:fa.~'~8 1 ....1, : â‚¬FE:?El...2 . : .,r , T. â€¢W*.1 fe~ .2 w . I ..flgtv,11*6 .. ., 6 '1': 1 V<74 Ne"/p.'/--&/' 11, -1 >14 Me'Â¢11 AL#*GE)<"1 ! *: Â·Â· -4,1 +364/24*17 rÂ· ~ \14 ',Â· 2' 2~ . .1 411 "lili,f 1 11 1 1'14'1 b '. .* ,; :;421:(631.,1//7. . 1923.44 .4 - , 1 ' ig..7 Y# ,1,62 >4,1 ..1 .OA ..r: ".3 " 'ti': I. 224 4.16 4- 7 4 'L,..t '01 , , 16"11.114 ;Cl~: 1 414 . i I 161':. J..~ I;|L M' ~~'| ~~ 1 !, L,1144.41:~] 4' 10 -~ '.1. A ) , i *'44 1 4Â·'1% ; â€ž t... 6 . I 4- 4 9 i :' Â·: '*4,<TÂ¢ 2, 4, 1 1. lilli 1 M 1 1 1 Mi, ,!f '.1~'r:4:4 4 +. . ..='74 *'' i.LB~ -*LU -' --r.+war:. *Ari' i . ~. - .'-. - 4 / =' '6.41/â€¢ 7 ' ,,1 -J@ 4Â¥48 -I.M.47 11 11 : 1.1 Ill L.4 r 9 1 11 . .t _ 1 11 1 'rl;j 66~41 &%%41 41~ 1, 11 , /1 Â· 4 4, 4.. 44 * U 71 ~1811(Nt&1 * Ba A It Â·Â· , MAft,#fret' t.7,4,I' .,1 - p'At'21, 1 , v . /*Â·'Â·Â·'~'b Â·Â·Â·. ' I 11../. 1,1 Â·Â·-, 8 '~ - Â·'. 41Â· i 4f4 i'F?fi'j; lk.Jâ€ž~~Y'jj;k ~vn Â¢*1%~:yi**tk~~ .14 lit '4Â»00, 4.1 - 1 146 I /.Ar~**Â¥2 -~r..X t:~1/Quip/,hAMEM/:lit# 4*/*W- . i.*.Â¢,lift#,Trikwkt'A. -c'.0*64 44Â· A, 6/*Â¢1'L *t.Vt**k .~,4. '1. 111,1 41 . . 11.,1, 61.1 .11. 1, , L,/ . 1. . I. .1 . ... .1 .. - i ..4 "il ., 9'1 ' i,., i.3~11~1411,1#:t ~. .0 $ v . 9.11 I . , 141,3 .., . 0 ~,M '- '- 4 .... + 411111 . 1 111--1 ..,/.mIL 2 14]11Â¢911.1111111111111~ ,-Cl 6 .11441 --r-11 -- 'Illill.lillil#... a. -' 4Â®<4/ .. L.,9"'.--*--Ill B *1---*Il-. F 4 4-1 , I. D ./ 1 ---I' d' : Ij 1,0 ,' , Y~ 1 11"ll!~ 1.,l.1 1! 6 P 1â€¢~9714 1 /1 U <, b.' : 7 *M 4 u .1./-:4 .. . . '2 +L ~ 1 td k. .., , 8. . 0 i ./ . b #1*MI " -- ril 11 4 0 l '11 L 1Â« .1,~. 1 , 11 1 2. + Â· 111 r" 1 4 -7.,â‚¬. fill . 1 Â¢:F"/1/1/ . i .~~Li<* 3 1 1'.4 1 1 44 rIF I I. I I i, d ' 17 I. . *N. . .4.0 -1 .-,-1.-,4.: -9-a---vil .11" 1~14, . .. .. . 1.1'r ar . . ......4- 1 4. .1 . 41 ./ 44./. . ...A- 1. P r # . & 67. 53 11 , .9 1=-r...im 9 4. .....~. U.., & a"*'I.-'1.<-I- 2. I . 9, r I,r; Â· -1 ':Re h : .ftâ‚¬ 1 1, 0 Â» ~ ... . r j Â¥ 4 144022- :4 . :349 12 3/1. 'f 9*6 , .: '.0 % . I. ..4/.44=Ta e.. '1=1 ...f lf, , *. . r .... + . . "tit - 1 .. . - -%..1. r . S ' ./. Â·4,/4/.5 ,L'r=â€¢t , 4, . . I. -I . . - . .... 1.. .. ./ .. .r . I . I...tr2 -Gâ€¢. --, I I. fl , 4/ , .. - . ./ .... I . .. - .. ..,1, Â· dIES+MIK . U .. . 4 .A . 4 2- â€ž- p Â¥ 4- 2 .. . - 1 4'' 1. .1, - â€¢ ./ I .t . , ...r. Al V v.>,~. z: Â·44 11 1- 0.4 - 0./, , : . ,.. - .th....1. : f 2 .4 1 - ' . 4-' .. i'Â«i. . .-4 4 1'. *4 , 71 7- '14 -*b . * liâ€¢* 4+4* ,â€¢ 09&4~ j ?*,*: / . i=.,4 1 1 4.~ .. + ' 1 2 + 2. . I ...U, 641 M t/L lik .1 Â¥ r 44 "f *: 4, ' ~ . K. '. 1 11 : 6, V Â· â€¢ir ~*, ,~ ~ ~~ IL' Ii'!1114.thÂ·14 I , 4 1.:I~ '~'~," 11. IL!,11.U ..1 . I 4:.I /* | ~ ~ ~|4 1 f 11,1 :.1 1:612,1 4 1~4 1 1, i . *f.k ir:2Ff'/~RE~.bl~*Irt y . e ..4 , .. 42'tr':4 , . I , ..11 ..1 ... 4;..1 1 - *44.1 6 :.J *dill X..7. 4- I /161 t % .111, : 5 7 j I 4/. .. I , . I gill. I. 1 4 . 9/p 2 -, ~ C 2,-I 12 - I I . 4, t.1.1,1, .h- 44*1Â£8**ACT#"'AFLT.â€ž41-*29/Zi'. ~~ -- 42 :...U .. 1 Jit...2. , U.; '. . I Â· = S.,*122-: ~4,â‚¬*-49*13 #11't~â€ž4*Â¢. 44.L/ I I . . 4 . 1- - â€¢ ' 1â€¢ 4~'*t . l:. r 4..4 I~t ,-?f:Â·Â·fÂ·I:ri=39vt/LÂ· .4 2 . 1 1 , blâ€ž,t. .4. 5 4' :M,411,11,5Â®fte. MI It 111!.Â»101.'IN'111~1;., , d.. '1 4 f p. :~ir - .1. ' "~'0~'l"fl ..4. 16,111Â·' . . I,/ 1 ..O-#. 44 1 ' L. I. ....-1.â€žMI, 'Mt' /1...... iN I.R 4 . ......Ab.:--Ild. - kNI - . .41'11!111,111,111/1 . Â» A , 4 . .V - ' - "]"t.'1~1'11'11%%!mllm,2%40'.2 4*14,4"84 f ..1 ..0,41 rd.. . .. - 4 4. 6 4 - . *I./........../..............1//Il1l/*Il- r ' I -~1.4 t.7.. i ZAST,t:12. + 1*4 0 J *~,4.t. p, :4 tÂ¥ .w . '. Zq#J I * - 4.+ A a . . l . / I +Il'Â· '3~* .G & 1 9 . 14: Â·,4 Â·95./ I J ., 1.V '.4 . t..LIFIE#ir :9.- i.* Â· t~~' ~Â£1; #4 14 Â¢litâ€ž 4.. 11'la. 4:5 l â€ž 0 , 1%:m~,9 * '111 Uld' m]1~ ... 11: . 7//lip - I.' 4 . 1 J: , . ....3. ' A I.%,/ 11 11 0 . . I'ld'~ '91% . : Â«W,1.,10 r. .4 .. 4/A . -7.4 5. .. ... - I' ;d-,9449'. 49..9 17 9, '4 7, ' . 2- r 941,220,:.- 1-I ' . 2.....SAK. . / . k I 2>22?P :Z. , ... ifier:. API , , ht . I . * 1 4Â· - ,r 34Â»jit a I . 1 4 i . ~ 7,09' ' Ailt;2 1.&910â‚¬...,9â‚¬: 4 . 1 A . W . . FriA-. 4Â»U.... 11:61:7:LitÂ»11<13%942*1, i{<Jitik";2~'p %- ' - f 2 -44 *ift-lt #Â¢61:*luri .,tj -/ 9 ..r. 45 040,5.14/7,0.fi:trj?~*yer.:1.0.24~ -;-li93'-. . apt 81.29 **274â„¢ . ' 4 Â· 7, 0 T", 4 Â· -p: - 49- I . 1 -. 1 1. ... . I. 45... r r 13.~1'$. 17 1.104 41. f,y't~1 -r 'RS I I #.... . F. '74:2- A . U. e . ,-*TLk&,t:t --12- fi, i.~.1~1..:Apm-,.Â» . ... .1,2 f-14114~5'.79/ 2 *C--J~~7 ~- Fidd.. , 42,9Â· N, -5 I . AAX - - Â£ 4 h 44Â· ~ik/1->5-:. '-: ~fÂ·'9Â·Â· 1 1- 44 ./ I. 3. %*,9 & 29;21. '4 1 r.Â·< 4-t-*93.0/, ./ UJ#Â« tr, ~:91 4 'L I 4 9 , 40r. r- -- -1- 4=441-- 1+I Â£ .4 ,F.~ 1.11 't I *20 1-1 1% : '<&Â·' Â· >Â·, A i L .. h 4&."12 -<6 7 - . -1.AJ' . 1 *--. '-**/4.. d ._ - .. *:5~70-4.-; . 2 SEMEMIER 1998 HOUGH / MYERS NOTES GENERAL NOTES 1 ... . 1. A '- I ''' I -a-- -4 â€¢04 10Â©ail- prior 10 -* 2. Alâ€¢,cAshi.arb,-4,f~bl.local.*17.-1.0-1004. * 3. iVEWWYTHOWNaWHICHFEESHAVEBEENmPAD. ~ ALSTROMGROUP NIC Q, h-*.4., b, 16.0......60 n.1,6 Sch-1â€¢ ARCHITECTURE & =*Nomb ili,/liatioadO,-rs,10/lid Ii-# INTERIOR DESIGN t. Al * ides of 1. c..it d...., v....1 CaAIN- 01,6 ,- Â»DJACENT- UNIT C.*.1 6.,Com"/*I.%A D.....,101 (1907/4.04 1 tc. _"No NORI< Trrls Â»,REAn 121 SOUTH GALENA S.Rb..14*..cze*.adoc./.5-=/.11./-~- g. , SUrrE B 'ADJACEN-T UNIT s. ~ -NO *oRK -tÂ·~!S AR,4 ASPEN, COLORADO B1611 1 - - 1 l -- \\\9 1 - - 0..It."fl.r,YA. - 4 970/ 925 1745 TEL 6. . 970/ 925 4576 FX - - ' 7. "/4./.&/0./.7./.1/4<ibÂ· prâ€¢i"I C-=Ii/-~hic.6.1.-:10...n,4 60.,6 HOUGH / MYERS RESIDENCE / 41.Ukr %221 1 1 9. For-0,--â€¢â€¢â€¢--iâ€¢â€¢ofp,=a.â€¢,-., ~ ~-~ MINOR REMODELING 5earION 44&1 421 WEST HALLAM ASPEN, COLORADO * DEDROOMÂ®12- 1 10 /*bmi,Ile...1.011.a,; 0..6*-,0.-4 _- -=P~M * L 1, 11. 8,-1/-//h,2/6â€¢16'44/11/46~/IN/0 0 - 12. Pli.42/wal,Â»6.2=6/16â€¢04.-1-~i,i.-4 d.*. r.6'.S.-0'h.51.!0,0.-4,- 0 -4 /~ RDee of NON ~ 13. - 41< 94:T. 0211.,INe ~ 2 SEPT 98 VAUL-720 66Â·01' 11 106. 12'ullace- */ca//1- 0 w-Iate/4* - O+15 BOOMI rf y# 04 ' ][~_BTRUCTU-1-Â· INSPedT; - i ' R~IOi.PUÂ©Ne COASI-Â· drawing na 16. /,9.1/2--169*wid-/di'=0-4â€¢1â€¢106 p.**lorC--,Wo.d,holloed,-Fo-- i Al 3 2&;si) C? un z - - DUMOLATION 19-AN AiA DOCUAENTA 205 Geâ€¢EIAL CONÂ©mONS OF THE GONâ„¢ACT . ul'.111 FOR CONSâ„¢,cnCN of A S.Au .Q'ECT (19,3 8.~*4 ad .Ply ---- tl-,0//-. 5Â»0-1-E U. 1 4222 _NeW Revfoc,EL- 19.AN ADGACeNT DuruD<. UNIT -gj~ 1-/01" MIN60* No FNORK A - 4 Â» PIREC,rEP DY U B 3 ~'~ENTISS , 7-- ~- AVN 1 - - Â· KITCHEN U FreMOVS *NFEÂ· -__-THIS Aae,4 F PÂ¥- KFUNT OUNY rmeNCM IZE , - n tHSTORIC UN liT \ .-T. 1 --55* MI NISI4 SGE-eDUL-E E-- 7-~1-=.c~0 i 8124*N ANC) NO-reS NR IPRâ„¢RIOR. ' cm"Tal.61Ne Or taN=al UNS- hoRK 7>HS-7'4254 -. 2181Â·SHES V , . OR, AT 4.r>Hs VALIL 194mTI0N~ . Â· *,2JILT Call,INe -ThMS ! :555 CUOR- ASNO _LN[NDS,4 42.0-'Goi~WrLz/ _21141Ne FOOM. _1 -O*61â€¢egs BOCM/577411-B INSPES 01 I . 5CHEDUUS MOR SIZES OF FIEN/fÂ©Det ANC> MeleÂ»-1- :s= . _ REPLACE Nihrr..l.iNJ-T-3, =P,WM *-1 ReÂ© D ===r-1- i REAK 30- OVNNER. Â¥L#Nue ,6 - _Bely<OWE. RE+O v*Rl,Y~ ALL Pswâ€¢eep ) 1,1Vi Ne 8.COM J CPOOK - ~ _2:2~ET UV[Ne- 1*â€¢N,1 ~ DthR24.SIONS PRIOR TO_ Â»08 or NMA./ 1 4 -821-srÂ·Rucrumâ€¢â€¢we-6,PI~. CONS,UCTION VA! 6780 C>Le, , 5177-10*+T MOF*k (05 SRUCTIJAN.) ---' GO-OROIN,â€¢:1-8 Â»&1131, EN'/1 - ROOF. p.10"K \ Naw NINDON - 71/L=lr i_ 5UBMrnreD MORL HÂ·Pd \ 3*Y r,W~#**&*me E--c i il L Trâ‚¬Sa DRAA; NeS 09>d- - Â· - ~-2 11 7Ill X1~~--1;WRIAS (6450T- JUrINCMâ€¢. DeVS-OFâ€¢Mle,â€¢rT 1 . NÂ»*at --1 11 \ _It-/ \. fi/A --_. ..asvi=IN -ih . 843-1 h i '' 2 -- .4 .1-- 3--17- - --3.Â».+-f..422- NOT FOR CONST-PLK;71(X ./ -1 ' Ul 4 8 =ASi , 'L._.fA~,vE eqso 4 'pomcH < DUPLÂ·â€¢eÂ·>C ' Â»Â¥ WINew c.er / 0 * 1 ' 1.4 1 e NO P.10- 011\Lpal=- -5><16'nNe WARDROBE Â¤ 0 m b MRT I f 2SaD,*40 N,-14'19 1 *, 11. ton Glot ., --PLAN --1 7,40%-744 -imECE-_:ROM DAN/6f,GE 7%\sl- 1146 - GROUNP LE.VE b PLAIA . N.44.. P#Â©SMS / REMODUL, ..F.ek.A.Al 37@h,WL]-1-10 N FLAN -*41 4.9-M--T.-: - --.--. -. 043-z.â€¢ ...1'.rail. '' Ze!~ak~ EXISTIN10 BOOMS 1'5122 OVe,MHAN/11 Ne SWEE DUMOUTION ff**N AND NOTeS ~B- Bo<*TriLy/~ \\ AL \â„¢At- 4 . 1 -+v- -.0- 17/ AL511Â¤10Â¤RCRP 11 --4.- ARCHITECTURE & â€ž =rE f--17== 1. zz=--:Revove *INTERIOR DESIGN =R=Ue E-7- 11 ZTE] - -- m<~fâ‚¬â€¢er 121 SOUTH GALENA ~ SUITE B rlIN 0210 :22 -imnnrlil JE tmt=m*rE ~ = : ASPEN, COLORADO 2 111111UL-111 JE- 1111111!1111-- - 81611 ~1 -104-HISTOSIO EXISTING i I iÂ·__d I Â· 970/ 925.1745 TEL 970/ 925 4576 FX Â» 511*-deNT .,rmâ‚¬HED--0-) . 141Â¥1.Ne--UNIT-- 4 pro/oc, 0*. R 36 me ,8,99 559-5780_.19Â·.RON, NORT'>4Â· 51....EVE<rION HOUGH / MYERS RESIDENCE .INON-8570816 HAI--1,AN/r BACADEE . MINOR REMODELING 421 WEST HALLAM ASPEN, COLORADO .- FeN OVERFEAveD /1 -ator=_Â·- , -12<18=16) ---1** date 2 SEPT 98 /Â» râ€¢\9*SN-6 - - /,41;!IM"*AiL -71* ' 'FANGÂ«CUG 1 11'OUNogil;# ~ - ; AU--*flltn.. - .RED CD,Â·B. Al --m><151-: eâ€¢â€¢848 \ A /.,441.1,1,13.AM4444WÂ·rhl:A<7%& -15+1181-US 7Â°m- , - -END OF PaÂ»CaNN /91%\ 'â€ž.11==,irr- .*L /OVEF- DUPLEX / /' .-~Â»AN0 ROOP ~ Miglumiuz- ?uultullu--. 11 - NEMN NINDOW 649 / - 0+IP) - &=41 6-4.-74/ MARVIN (6040 _ p--- - htÂ©OID Vâ€¢IINDONS 7 ocr 96 . --NaN NOOD I - . En . rs'DINe . -2 air le, - 4=fls-T'OBI a>Â¢1'82108. # 1 1. -*11*0N-m- _0*[!FlÂ»FÂ© 1 UUMS#:-UNET MI.INCES ~ 12;11- . -2*18-riNe_...meâ‚¬}+ - -mES 04â€¢m., - - NOBTI+ ELEVATION - INEhl IND~ r .+ / V4'i= 11-011 2 2-3 h#ST- fzb,4-1= Or DUF'LE>< NEW 1~U ED F:ER 1--+FO 124 10. OVEFF:9Â«MED mUsl~N,0 ROOF= - .Nb-i- FROR COASTRUCTION 12; 1% (SEN-29414 N'9.m \ 14 \ 1 - 1 V 1 Uoo / Fifee- 542.:A%<IMA#.7- / - Â»les.TERN EED CEDMA S-*INeLES (TYPICALA / CMEN--Â»Nal.84 70 R NEN FRCCF= 74.rsM, 1 -,N S.emeRS OVPM N ' Bin.rjVME Mah/!FRE 12:12. \ ~ 12! i'20 mtij -_-31 LNG <~*fr; Mlt-â€¢ FOOM ININD*4 , Nal,4 PORN'158â€¢ CP. -77*STINÂ® POROFF ROOM Boor PI,+N - â€ž.- O 1/41 . 11.0 11 C*+ WEST HAL LAM STREE7 R.O.W. 74.38' 1-30.67 ; al-/0 80098, 40049> l l CURB / L' 375*09011-E 183.25* (187.23' 14EAU 14 - - BASIS OF BEAR INGS-- - - -/ I- S 75009'It'E 63.25' go\8 0 0 go\8 < 34.31 > < 28.94* > gok. - - 0, N E 0 PORCH v - m v -f-0.0/50 0 0 29.2' 0 14 0~'] ifii,/,Ate. 1,044 3. ~i'...A:; f.'. .42\. Â·91 0 Â·1? 4:-Â·a. D Â· -4 f 9 9*Â·4* *.0 ;1 11. +13 0.; .1 f.. e;'-U'c -1 4.*e Â·.Â·p 0:- ~:>id; 1 4 4-f '~'Â·.7''T~jG ~Q..1, , UNIT A , ~ 36.1 *0*6Â¢*mt, ;v~~I:~. 2 . DECK O ONE STORY irÂ·1Â· i Â·Â·~~~~fiffit :T, 1342::2..$~fe , 1 .1, 0, 0 + 8 0.6. -09 *-0 f.:f).'.tt~f*i-ty#i f 'it44.2Â·24 3.*Ni -1(3 1.6# 'I: -f?:.:rf;*:, 6 1.0 0 091 ~ i.- fÂ· 8.Â·.#,0.;i>%*200Â·. 3 844<0~ 6 ..:4Â·41 Â·: 92:4 , 4 4Â· 7Â· Â·51Â·4, O 4 1 6.1, 1.f<'.1;trly'Ii,-,:1Â· i.#Â· 4-2~ 41,3 , Â® / 9 2.-~ f .i. m,;If'my:< r ~fi-:Â·i?Nif %51 1 4* f B N.4,0 Â· ' 2,Â·lk'iÂ·~14..1}~t., ..... 1 .4, ;Â®f t. 61*.~3 .Â·~L Â·Â· 14Â· A,1<4Â·:.tÂ·00Â·:5 v., 41Â·.,i r,Â·11&9,.I.9 1 Â· f 1 9, ;~f~"pil'L ;~1~fo 1 4 Â· P. ~ Ic'-1- f 0.-!Ji:f.,?Eff'.Â·i ~*-)~'R~:~-AÂ·-;,2.-,. ...~:~ ~,. 0, I N ': IÂ·Â·Â·7'.?STA~::~ '.4 J.'3 ..~5: ~ f ~ Â·9 . O 4 - I,~ft :'.ZiÂ·~fAtfi.23.Â¢-4 11 .1.-:&1~.,4,.2.'.1,8~4,Â·; I~~I â€¢AÂ·.5, 4,,fe kdÂ·#51.4.~ LOT C 6 4.1.itt 111%~ M ",4 ~if ~. 14 r I ' 4 1.- 4Â· 'M.. i . 0- .4/"%211-043#*4~ A: 4/b-Â·i}Â·sP~:Â· >Â·M ' Z ~ &414':'Irm-0,4401 0 1Â· e, Â· 4, 41 A~ .., P LOT F /*0/939 're.-*~,/ 6.,- i '-Â·.Â·1 Â·' 2 5 'B. 5.0. bc' . '0~ Di, r. 49.4 <4 ...1 Â¢ A/3.'-D>:+714 2. 5'.6,;1~'hik O 4 djÂ· 'JO#M~4&65,A'*Al lak.Â·t.. 4 1 0 5 9 0 ~ L.C.E. Â·42\ 8 01 0 0 17.3. . ~ U 5 0 0 1 m -7 ,44. 11.4*â‚¬61 1 2.d STORY , il,1. r.r: 0 3.0* WOOD,DECK . r'U ~~, -4 1, 4 'Â· &44& 2,Â·1. eyÂ»06 AV'Ntâ€¢/ r*Al. 'V k i 14--?if.: SkihtÂ·; --1 hÂ· 2.-f lt- g .t ;. '1 t#M{: 3,9 $ 9 2Â·. 3 .:: PARKING , /4/363,4.1.4,1 r .'Â·4 11, ...7 i.ti Â· i Â£"g# :*Â·: 0 0 i,491.1.,A (30.82') 4 32.43 t.1 - *i c ". sel 15947 J ~~ 63.25' N 75'09*11'Vt b---0 U '10. S 1. e 05-BAR Â®ALLEY BLOCK 36 8.64.&"â€¢1 S .99-001 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Interim Community Development Director ~ FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 117 N. 6th Street- worksession DATE: October 28, 1998 SUMMARY: HPC reviewed a partial demolition for this project in September and had several objections to the design, leading the commission to initiate landmark proceedings without the owner's consent. The owner subsequently withdrew her application and has hired a new architect. A different proposal is being submitted as a two step significant development application, probably including landmark designation, and will be reviewed in November. At this time a worksession on the new proposal is requested. The Sanborne map of the property in 1904 is attached for your reference. 74 .. tal J I. 1 216/ %73% - / *~ 1// Coal. /1 U 0 . W -- 1 5)* D T71-1 % 1 _JEJ 16 2 Q. R. v. l'e K. L. M. N. 0. R Q. R. S. 7-11 CO / X 1/ 01 4 kr -\A -7F D I; D * Dx -- r-' ' 11 .1 1 FT-7 1 UZE \ tabiA, L~Or - 11 l IlaJ - -.-I- 11 812 810 304 734 726 . 712 700 11 . 1 W. BLEEKER FU ~*pee Illit-Â®,1 - - - --tro H -. .. 80 721 713 11 715 lEE] 1 - * 1- 1/1 rri~__ a_,4 k bc: t.- 31 7-5 Â® 1 ID 1 D Dll 1 9 1 1-71 I 4 â€¢4 11 1 . 11 6.' 11. L 4. ,3\1 0 C. D. E. F. 6. 'H. 8. E 1 ill 9~i vi g 11 18 4 0 11 m / Shed. x/ o -Ly_il *i 24 1><E 3?< MI 11 K Q. R. S. K. L. M. N. 0. R Q. R. S. 11 114 1 :Al 11 1 Y n 1 1 1 X -- 0 , 17 -19 Â·-|| 12 *\ D D,Dz,DX lif , xij / w 1/ 1 - _-Al L.-L--*1 'IEX -1- - - 2 1 < St, .34. 1.4 Â·0<Â· i t. 1 (c \9 ! i. I C, 1 I L 4 1 6 5 1Â· '- &10 2* 720 7/# 72 29 210 -- 1 *h) 1 . (700) t 1 L--- ty ,. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Interim Community Development Director ~ ' FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 330 Lake- worksession DATE: October 28, 1998 SU1MMARY: HPC will hold a site visit at this property on October 28th. The property has been previously subdivided into two parcels; the southernmost which contains the historic house and barn, and the northernmost which is vacant except for a corral area. Both parcels are included on the historic inventory. The property owner is looking for guidance as to what changes might be acceptable to the historic buildings and what area is the most appropriate for the future construction of a new house. HPC may want to consider the historically open setting of the property and will also want to avoid development impacts to Hallam Lake.