HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20050503ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
MAY 3, 2005
NOON
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
130 S. GALENA
ASPEN, COLORADO
SITE VISIT:
I. Roll call
II. Approval of minutes
Ill. Public Comments
IV. Commissioner member comments
V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent)
VI. Project Monitoring
VII. Staff comments: Certificate of No Negative Effect issued
(Next resolution will be
VIII.OLD BUSINESS
A. NONE
IX. NEW BUSINESS
A. 426 E. Main. Street- Major Development (Conceptual)
Public Heamng~/) c~/~
X. WORKSESSION
XI. ADJOURN
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
~M
Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Planning Director
THRU:
FROM:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE:
426 E. Main Street, Galena and Main project- Major Development (Conceptual),
Public Hearing
DATE:
May 3,2005
SUMMARY: The subject property is located on the comer of Galena and Main Streets, adjacent
to the Pitkin County Courthouse. The site is partly occupied by a non-historic building, and
partly vacant.
The proposal is to remodel and expand the structure as a mixed use development. The building
was previously anticipated to be a new Aspen Visitor's Center, including offices for ACRA, a
commercial/retail space, and apartments. The Visitor's Center use has been eliminated.
'''c,
HPC conducted a work session in 2003, and Derek Skalko participated in the development of the
project as HPC's representative on a COWOP committee. In 2004, the board granted Conceptual
Major Development approval, which expired. HPC granted Conceptual approval again on March
23,2005, however questions regarding the adequacy of the public notice has resulted in a request
to re-hear the application. There have been no changes to the design.
Staff finds that the project meets the applicable review criteria and recommends
Conceptual approval as proposed.
APPLICANT: Millenium Plaza LLC, represented by Poss Architecture and Planning.
PARCEL ID: 2737-073-22-015.
ADDRESS: 426 E. Main Street, Unit I-A of the Galena Plaza Condominiwns as described in
book 49, page 82 at the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office 426 E. Main Street, Unit I-A
of the Galena Plaza Condominiums, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado.
ZONING: CC, Commercial Core.
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL)
\,..,
The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, is as follows. Staff
reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance
with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is
transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a
recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons
for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the
evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of
Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve
with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to
make a decision to approve or deny.
Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual
Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual
Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the
envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application
including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of
the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan
unless agreed to by the applicant.
Staff Response: Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a
proposal. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit A."
The property is located at the edge of the Commercial Core Historic District, on a block that has
no historic resources. The Courthouse is the only landmark structure that will be in any way
impacted. The site is currently developed with a one story office building.
Staff finds that the architects have done an excellent job of meeting the design guidelines. The
structure has all ofthe important qualities that we have indicated are desired in a downtown infill
structure, and manages to be very respectful of typical characteristics of the 19th century
architecture in town, but also new and innovative. The height, scale, massing, and proportions of
the building are appropriate and staff does not find that there will be any diminishment of the
visibility or character of the Courthouse. The applicant has provided a thorough explanation of
how they have met the guidelines within their application and staff does not disagree with their
assessment. Staffrecommends Conceptual approval be granted to the project as proposed.
The Planning and Zoning Commission previously granted approval to waive some of the parking
required by this project in exchange for a cash-in-lieu payment. P&Z also exempted the project
from the "Residential Design Standards," which are not relevant for upper floor residential units.
These decisions will be reviewed again at a public hearing scheduled for May 5th as a result of
the public notice issue. Statf does not anticipate a different outcome.
A number of questions have been raised by the public with regard to height, view planes, and
other aspects of this project. A letter from an adjacent property owner is attached as "Exhibit S."
For HPC's information, the staff analysis is as follows:
Historic significance of the existing open space: Although this corner has been vacant for some
time, that circumstance has not been found to have any historic significance in terms of
.. relationship to the following designation criteria:
2
a. An event, pattern or trend that has made a significant contribution to local, state,
regional or national history,
b. People whose specific contribution to local, state, regional or national history is
deemed important and be identified and documented, or
c. A physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or
method of construction, or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized
designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important.
The 1904 Sanborne Fire Insurance Map, attached as "Exhibit C," indicates that a Victorian era
house occupied most of what is currently open space at the corner of Main and Galena. The
house has since been demolished. The Parks Department has estimated that the existing trees are
approximately 30 years old.
Accessibility. The sidewalk north of Main Street, adjacent to the subject property, is developed
with ramps. These ramps permit the use of an accessible parking space. Police cars do
occasionally overhang the sidewalk adjacent to the Galena Lofts building north of the subject
site. Staff has asked the City Engineer to examine this situation. The Police Chief and the
Sheriff may need to instruct their personnel to park short of the curb. Curb stops could be
installed if necessary.
The City has no current intention to modify the head-in parking to parallel parking on North
Galena Street. The Ruhnau letter, attached as "Exhibit B," correctly states that this has been
wrongly diagrammed in the application. Staff does not consider this representation to be
purposely misleading, as is suggested in the letter. The site plan submitted for final review
should accurately reflect the on-street parking configuration.
The proposed building was reviewed by the Building Department for ADA compliance issues
and found to be compliant, subject to a more thorough analysis at the time of building permit
reVlew.
Public Notice. The project has been re-noticed.
Height. A neighbor contends that the proposed building is over the height limit due to the
courtyard. The City measures building height at the exterior of the building to the lower of
existing or finished grade along vertical planes at each point surrounding the building. Along the
north of the building, a sunken courtyard exists and height must be measured vertically from the
courtyard level to the portions of the building along the courtyard. On the South side of the
building, the vertical plane intersects the grade of the existing sidewalk. Therefore, height along
the south side of the building is measured from the sidewalk level.
3
The City's Zoning Officer, Sarah Oates, has reviewed the proposed building and has found the
proposal in compliance with the height limitations of the Commercial Core Zone District and the
manner in which the City measures height. See "Exhibit D."
Administrative Process. It has been suggested that the application cannot be reviewed due to the
public vote on the Visitor Center. The vote denied the rezoning of the property with a Plarmed
Unit Development Overlay. This application does not request a PUD Overlay and is therefore
not bound by this resubmission limitation. The limitation does not appear to extend to similar
projects on the same site, as is implied in the Ruhnau letter. In any event, the resubmission stay
will have expired by the time this item is reviewed by City Council.
Mountain View Plane. The Courthouse view plane, or any other city-regulated view plane, does
not affect this property. See "Exhibit E."
Storage Area. The project includes a storage area on the lowest level. This storage is accessory
to the residential units and is not independently capable of commercial, residential, or lodging
use. This is consistent with the City's regulations for storage areas. There is also a mechanical
area proposed on this lowest level and it has been accurately identified in the plans. There are
windows and doors planned for this level. This fenestration is not prohibited.
DECISION MAKING OPTIONS:
The HPC may:
. approve the application,
. approve the application with conditions,
. disapprove the application, or
. continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the project be granted Conceptual approval with no
conditions other than the standard timeframe required to submit for final review.
I. An application for Final review shall be submitted for review and approval by the HPC
within one year of May 3, 2005 or the conceptual approval shall be considered null and void
per Section 26.415.070.D.3.c.3 of the Municipal Code.
2. An elevation representing the carport is required to be submitted as part of Final review.
3. The site plan submitted for final review should accurately reflect the on-street parking
contiguration.
4
Exhibits:
A. Relevant Design Guidelines
B. Letters from adjacent property owners, Sharon Engel Ruhnau and David Ruhnau, dated April
7'h, 20th and 27'\ 2005
C. 1904 Sanborne Map
D. Memo from Sarah Oates, City Zoning Officer, dated April 8, 2005
E. Map of Courthouse View Plane
f. Application
5
"Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines for 426 E. Main, Conceptual Review"
Relationship to the Town Grid
13.1 Respect the established town grid in all projects.
D Maintain the alignment of streets and alleys whenever feasible.
13.2 Orient a new building parallel to its lot lines, similar to that of traditional building
orientations.
D The front of a primary structure shall be oriented to the street.
13.3 Orient a primary entrance toward the street.
D Buildings should have a clearly defined primary entrance. for most commercial
buildings, this should be a recessed entry way.
D Do not orient a primary entrance to an interior court.
D Providing second'lry public entrances to commercial spaces is also encouraged on larger
buildings.
Alleys
13.4 Develop alley facades to create visual interest.
D Use varied building setbacks and changes in materials to create interest and reduce
perceived scale.
D Balconies, court yards and decks are also encouraged.
D Providing secondary public entrances is strongly encouraged along alleys. These should be
covered or protected and clearly intended for public use, but subordinate in detail to the
primary street -side entrance.
Building Setbacks
13.8 Maintain the alignment offacades at the sidewalk's edge.
D Place as much of the facade of the building at the property line as possible.
D Locating an entire building front behind the established storefront line is inappropriate.
D Where a portion of a building must be set back from the sidewalk, use landscape elements
to define the sidewalk edge.
Mass and Scale
13.9 Maintain the average perceived scale of two-story buildings at the sidewalk.
D The design of a 3-story building should in some way acknowledge the 2-story character of
the downtown.
D Floor-to-tloor heights should appear to be similar to those seen historically. In particular,
the windows in new construction should appear similar in height to those seen
traditionally.
13.10 True three-story buildings will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
D In general, a proposed three-story building must demonstrate that it has no negative impact
on smaller, historic structures nearby.
D The height and proportions of all facade components must appear to be in scale with nearby
historic buildings.
13.11 Consider dividing larger buildings into "modules" that are similar in width to
buildings seen historically.
D Where buildings are planned to exceed one lot width, use a change in design features to
suggest the traditional building widths. Changes in facade material, window design,
facade height or decorative details are examples of techniques that may be considered.
6
These variations should be expressed throughout the depth of the structure such that the
composition appears to be a collection of smaller buildings.
Building Form
13.12 Rectangular forms should be dominant on Commercial Core facades.
D Rectangular forms should be vertically oriented.
D The facade should appear as predominantly flat, with any decorative elements and
projecting or setback "articulations" appearing to be subordinate to the dominant form.
13.13 Use flat roofIines as the dominant roof form.
D A flat roof, or one that gently slopes to the rear of a site, should be the dominant roof form.
D Parapets on side facades should step down towards the rear of the building.
D False fronts and parapets with horizontal emphasis also may be considered.
13.14 Along a rear facade, using building forms that step down in scale toward the alley is
encouraged.
D Consider using additive forms, such as sheds, stairs and decks to reduce the perceived
scale. These forms should however, remain subordinate to the primary structure.
D Use projecting roofs at the ground floor over entrances, decks and for separate utility
structures in order to establish a hwnan scale that invites pedestrian activity.
Storefront Character
13.15 Contemporary interpretations of traditional building styles are encouraged.
D A contemporary design that draws upon the fundamental similarities among historic
buildings without copying them is preferred. This will allow them to be seen as products
of their own time and yet be compatible with their historic neighbors.
D The literal imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
D In essence, infill should be a balance of new and old in design.
13.16 Develop the ground floor level of all projects to encourage pedestrian activity.
D Consider using storefronts to provide pedestrian interest along the street. Storefronts should
maintain the historic scale and key elements such as large display windows and transoms.
D Large storefront display windows, located at the street level, where goods or services are
visible from the street, are particularly encouraged.
D The primary building entrance should be at street level. "Garden level" entrances are
inappropriate.
13.17 Maintain the distinction between the street level and the upper floor.
D The first tloor of the primary facade should be predominantly transparent glass.
D Upper floors should be perceived as being more opaque than the street level. Upper story
windows should have a vertical emphasis.
D Highly reflective or darkly tinted glass is inappropriate.
D Express the traditional distinction in floor heights between street levels and upper levels
through detailing, materials and fenestration. The presence of a belt course is an
important feature in this relationship.
Repetition of Facade Elements
13.18 Maintain the repetition of similar shapes and details along the block.
D Upper story windows should have a vertical emphasis. In general, they should be twice as
tall as they are wide.
D Headers and sills of windows on new buildings should maintain the traditional placement
relati ve to cornices and belt courses.
7
13.19 Maintain the pattern created by recessed entry ways that are repeated along a
block.
D Set the door back from the front facade approximately 4 feet. This is an adequate amount to
establish a distinct threshold for pedestrians.
D Where entries are recessed, the building line at the sidewalk edge should be maintained by
the upper floor(s).
D Use transoms over doorways to maintain the full vertical height of the storefront.
Detail Alignment
13.20 The general alignment of horizontal features on building fronts should be
maintained.
D Typical elements that align include window moldings, tops of display windows, cornices,
copings and parapets at the tops of buildings.
D When large buildings are designed to appear as several buildings, there should be some
slight variation in alignments between the facade elements.
13.21 Special features that highlight buildings on corner lots may be considered.
D Develop both street elevations to provide visual interest to pedestrians.
D Corner entrances, bay windows and towers are examples of elements that may be
considered to emphasize corner locations.
D Storefront windows, display cases and other elements that provide visual interest to facades
along side streets are also appropriate.
8
...../08/2005 08:40 FAX 780 8318184
....
. .
.'. .
. .
. . II
. .
. . .
. .
RRC CARLS8AO
~001/004
~\lo~~ ts
David F. and Sharon Engel Ruhnau
Post Office Box 7209
Rancho Santa Fe California
92067
Phone 858.759.7826
horseatty@sbcglobal.net
April 7, 2005
Via Facsimile 970.920.5439 & Reaular Mail
John Worcester
City of Aspen, City Attorney
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Proposed Development at Galena and Main
Dear Mr. Worcester,
"".,.,
We have recently become aware of the development
proposed at the corner of Main and Galena Streets, have reviewed
the proposed plans, history, spoken with individuals at the Planning
Department and attended a meeting of the Aspen Historic
Preservation Commission. We have also written letters to the
Planning and Zoning department and City Commissioners,
addressing our concems and procedural irregularities. We have
received no responses to our letters; we have been given
misinformation from the Planning Department and were dealt with
summarily by the Historic Preservation Committee.
:; We are now writing to advise you that not only have there
been procedural irregularities; there have also been legal violations,
municipal, state and federal, with regard to the proposed
development. Should these matters fail to be addressed we will
seek recourse through all means available including legal action.
-
1, Violations of ADA
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires public
sidewalks to be readily accessible and usable by persons with
disabilities. On Galena Street, North of Main, disabled parking is
designated, however there are no handicapped curb cuts nor is the
space the required width or depth for handicapped parking.
I ----,
04/08/2005 08:40 FAX 780 8318184
RRC CARLS8AO
~ 002/004
City Attorney
John Worcester
April 7, 2005
Page two
Law Enforcement Vehicles have designated parking perpendicular to
Galena Street, North of Main_ When parked, the vehicles overhang
the sidewalk, narrowing passage to less than 24 inches. It is difficult
for an able bodied person to use the sidewalk, for a disabled person
it would be impossible. This obstruction also violates Aspen
Municipal Code regarding clearing of sidewalks and liability.
'"
In all submitted plans, all parking is shown as parallel to the
curb. These plans, as submitted are false and misleading. Historical
records indicate that City Council, recognizing the parking problem,
proposed relocating law enforcement parking when the initial project
was submitted in 2003. Apparently, when the initial project was
rejected, the City, planners etc. neglected to address these issues
on resubmission. Further, when we raised this issue at the Aspen
Historic Preservation Commission Meeting of March 23, 2005, one of
the Commission members told us that our concerns were irrelevant
because he parked in the parking garage and walked up Galena
Street everyday and he always walked on the Police Station side of
the street.
2. Leaallv Insufficient Public Notice
Aspen Municipal Code section 26.304.060(E) requires that
every public notice:
.'
J shall include the name and address of the
applicant, the type of development application
sought, date, time and place of the hearing,
the address and legal description of the subject
property if applicable, a summary of the
development application under consideration,
and identification of the decision-making body
conducting the hearing". .
A Public Notice advising of a City Council Meeting scheduled for
April 11, 2005 was posted on the subject property. However, the
Notice was legally insufficient: it did not include the address of the.
applicant, the type of development application sought, the address
and legal description of the property, a surnmary of the
development application under consideration... Furthermore, such
04/08/2005 09:40 FAX 780 8318184
RRC CARLS BAD
City Attorney
John Worcester
April 7, 2005
Page three
notice must be posted at least 15 days prior to the public hearing.
Therefore the imorooerlv noticed Dublic hearina must be oostooned
until proper notice has been posted for at least 15 davs.
3. Violation of Buildina Code
The project violates the building code. We have questioned
the mass of the proposed project, particularly with reference to
height. The Aspen Historic Preservation Committee advised that
that it was approving the project because it was the same as the
project that had been submitted in 2003 and approved at that time.
However, in 2003, the project exceeded zoning standards regarding
density. When questioned, the Commission refused to address the
issue. The Commission would only repeat that the project was within
the 40 foot height limit. This, however, is incorrect.
,.",.,
Aspen Municipal Code Title 26, Chapter 26.104 General
Provisions Section 26.104.100 Definitions, defines "[t]he height of a
building shall be the maximum distance possible measured vertically
... from natural or finished grade (whichever is lower) at any point
around the perimeter of the building to the highest point of the
building... within a vertical plane. The lowest point of natural or
finished grade on the proposed project is not street level but the
courtyard level which is 12' 3-1/2" lower than street level. As
indicated on the plans, but ignored by the City, planners, Historic
Preservation Committee.... the buildina exceeds the 40" heiaht limit.
In fact the proposed plan for the existing boilding on Main Street,
when measured from the lowest point of natural or finished grade, as
required by Code, is 49' 9-112". This exceeds the height allowance
by 9' 9112".
.,,'"
Not only does the proposed project violate the letter of the
law, it also violates the spirit of the law. While the commercial core
of the City is characterized as two story, three-story buildings are
considered on a case by-case basis. However, the proposed
building is not a three story building, even if it conformed with the 40'
height limit, which it exceeds, it should be considered a 4 story
building, a building story being approximately 10 to 12 feet. A 40
~ 003/004
04/08/2005 08:40 FAX 780 8318184
RRC CARLS8AD
~ 004/004
City Attorney
John Worcester
April 7, 2005
Page four
foot high building in the Commercial Core Historic District in no "way
acknowledges the 2-story character of the downtown. . 1
4. Violation of Administrative Procedures
The original project was denied approval by the citizens of
Aspen via Referendum 2A which repealed an ordinance amending .
zoning which imposed a Planned Unit Development overlay on the
subject property.2 Any ordinance repealed by the electorate may
not be reenacted for a period of six months after the date of the
election at which it was repealed. (Article V. Initiative and
Referendum, Section 5.4). It is mandated that the Ordinance
seekina to imoose the Planned Unit Develooment overlay could not
be reenacted orior to Mav 2. 2005. It appears equally correct to
require a commercial project, not enhancing or contributing to the
betterment of the public and voted down by the electorate, to
similarly wait prior to resubmission.
We expect the hearing scheduled for April 11, 2005 to be
postponed until properly noticed and that you will address the
matters raised herein.
"
"
~..t~' ~/.
I Resolution of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission (rIPC) Recommending Major Development
(Conceptual) Approval for the Property Locate<! al 426 E. Main Street, Unil I-A of the Galena Plaza
Condominiums. Cily and Townsite of Aspen. Colorado, Jan. 14,2004
2 Novemlx:r 2. 2004
. ....
..
..~ SHARON ENGEL
... .
:-...
..:-
FAX NO. : 858 759-7824
Apr. 202005 03:12PM Pi
David F. and ShamJI I:ngel Rulli au
Post Office tl(, ( 7209
Rancho Simta FE! Californi~
92037'
Gx~"b(r IS t
10' ,one 858.759.7826
hor~ e ltty@sbcglobal.net
,t'priI20, 2005
Via Facsimile 970.920.5439 & Reoular Mail
John Worcester
City of Aspen, City Attorney
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: proposed Development at Galena and Main
Dear Mr. Worcester,
--^,,'--.-.
You have not responded to our correspordence of April 7,
2005; however we were informed that the City Council meeting
addressing the above-referenced project was pOlitponed from April
11, 2005. In addition we have been given notice of a publiC hearing
before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commis~;ion scheduled for
May 3,2005 and a MayS, 2005 scheduled hearillg before the Aspen
Planning and Zoning Commission. Both of these notices do not
indicate that the proposed development has been changed other
than it is now describedasa "four-level building' and proposes a
"baSement" for "accessory storage". The propo~ied development
continues to violate the law.
.....-..
1. Violation of Buildino Code
Whatever the sub-grade area is called ar,d to whatever
purpose it is used has absolutely no effect on bringing the proposed
development within the height restrictions of the Building Code.
, whether a sUb-grade area is to be excluded from floor area may be
relevant in calculating floor area ratio but it cannl)t be excluded when
calculating a building's height: there are noexc:e :>lions.
Whereas in the past this project was referred to as a three-
story building it is now, more realistically, acknowledged as four-
stories. The commercial core of the City is charilcterized as two-
'story; three-story buildings are considered on a (;ase-by-case basis:
FROM SHARON ENGEL
FAX NO. 858 759-7824
Apr. 20 2005 03:13PM P2
City Attorney
John Worcester
, April 20, 2005
Page two
, , '
, there is no provision for four-story buildings. Fou '-story buildings
aren't provided for because they would be compliltely out of place in
Aspen: they violate the height restrictions.
I repeat, Aspen Municipal Code. Title 26. Chapter 26.104
defines the height of a building as the maximum llistance possible
measured vertically from natural or finished grad,'! (whichever is
lower) to,tJ1e highest point ofa building within a "'~ltical plane. The
"basement level of the propose<! projectis 12' 3..'/," lower than street
level, therefore the propose<! building, when mealsured according to '
the Building Code, is 49" 9-%" which exceeds tilt! maximum
allowable height.
The proposedbuildingmust be redesiglll'd and, in all
likelihood, a story eliminated, to bring the buildinuwithin the height
limitations. '
"".".~
"",
3.
Violation of Protected Mountain View PIS\pe
In my continuing research, I note that the Aspen Courthouse
has a protected vi,ew plane and that U1e proposed building would
infringe upon it. SpecifiCally, Section 26.435.050 of the Municipal
Code provides that the Court House Vlew Plane has two protected
motintain,viewplanes and that no land use or bl.lilding may project
uponjhem. ,The proposed building wouldprojecl into the protected
, Court HouseViewPlane.
2. Prooosed StoraQe Area
, The new notices propose a basement f,:>! accessory storage.
We have not seen the plans forthe storage are.. but note that it
must not be independently capable of residential, commercial or
lodging use. Nor shall it contain plumbing fixtures or mechanical
'equipment that support the principal residential, ,;ominercial or
, lodging use of the property. The original plans indicated a virtual
_ ',_wall of glass windows and doors on the sub-graCle wall. We assume
',,:O"1ttat as a designated storage area, the glass windows and doors
would be eliminate<!.
FROM SHARON ENGEL
FAX NO. 858 759-7824
Apr. 202005 03:13PM P3
-"-
'"
, City Attorney
John Worcester
, April 20, 2005
Page three
Finally, you have not addressed the cOllcinuing violations of
the ADA or the violations of administrative proD;!dures as set forth in
my prior correspondence. If we do not hear from you in the
immediate future we .are prepared to begin lega I action.
~~~~
'~","^
Cc: Jeffrey Hafferty
Chair, Aspen Historic Preservation Commissior:
with enclosure
.~.,
Jasmirie Tygre
Chair, Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
with enclosure
"
.,
. .
....-M SHARON ENGEL
. . .
. .
.....
. . .
. .
FAX NO.
858 759-7824
Apr. 27 2005 09:22PM Pi
David F. and Sharon Engel Ruf;fJW
Post O!,'ice '3:1:' i209
Rancho Santa [:8, Ca[iforni,
'320(;7
P':)Ile 858.759.7826
hors;~i ttY@o:bcglobal.net
A;)nl 27: 2005
, Via Facsimile 970,920.5119 & Reaular Mail
John Worcester
City of Aspen, City Attorney
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611 '
Re: Proposed Development at Galena and Main'
Dear Mr, Worcester,
Thank you for your acknowledgement of our cone;,p<)ndence of April 20,
2005 alid April 7, 2005, We intend to attend tile public heal'lngs scheduled for May
, 3, 2005, Aspen Historic Preservation Committee, and May t, 2005, Aspen Planning
and Zoning Commission, and hopefully all issues regarding the proposed project
will be addressed at thai ~me. However, several issues do '10't appea~ to fall within
, the purview of either Commission, rather they appear to be egal issues.
, '
" We are not confident that legai matters will be adquately addressed
within the format of a public hearing. In fact when a'legal i~;ue was raised ata
, , prior public hearing before the Aspen Historic Preservation .;ommission, the
Commissioners stated that they did not see how the proPQ!;ed prcject would have
been before them if it violated any code sections and pro,~;,~ed to approve the
project. At the very least, the vole should have been defen~ until the Commission .
conferred with Legal Counsel and/or verified tllat any leg<11 i~;ue had been
resolved. ' '
Are, we to understand from your letler that during j:.ublic hearing the
Commissions will address violations of the Americans wil h Oisabilities Act. legal
insufficiency of public notice; violations of administrative pr,:;celjures, as well as
, violations of.code sections? If, a pUblic hearing is not the ()frect forum and/or
these are not the Correct bodies to address and resoive th"se matters, then your
response appears to do rio more than delay addressing pre perly raised legal
issues.. We will continue to pursue these matters.
Sincerely, __~'
----=. -::-V'.. ,::,,;;:-..., r, "^' "
~""'?rV t." ~
l ...,./ '
.....-------
"/... '
, SI\:;,ron Engel RI. hn3u '
David Ruhnau
~
,
"
F\ :~
..... ~I
,," I"
'" ~~:~_?~,
.~ '
:t 'S
~ SUI3~'"
....it O~SIJ'H;l
tlA~lo\~
o
v
~
b'
'-&- "-~
" ".,"...,.'.
f!Ji --'-
/
Cl:
<:S
'"
;.
Z/I all
"-.,
- - V'N3iV9"~
tl/ ~I E'II III
~ :. )( .
.* R
~ OJ -.:. '-
~<1
, ~
G
-
-
--
@
;,
l(
..;
I::j b]J
. 'l>
,\.j
V
~
~ t J~'~
;.DJ,....'....~.~.~ ",.
[Jsfr
. -, :.~?;i~;~-
..j
'-
...-
-
--
.......
/JjO"~
\....c
'h"';bit -=D
MEMORANDUM'
TO:
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
, ..$
Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer C;>
.'''. "
':k ,,:
"",.C,' ..,..,.'<.
.L ,,','..~
FROM:
RE:'
Proposed GalenalMain Building
ASPEN / PITKIN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPM!.!NT DEPARTMENT
DATE:
April 8, 2005
I've reviewed the pending architectural plans for the GalenalMain Building regarding the
42-foot height limit of the Commercial Core zone district and the City's methodology for
meas,uring height.
The site is developed With a courtyard. Portions of the building adjacent to the Courtyard
are required to be measured from the lower level and have been appropriately designed
considering this requirement. Portions of the building along Main Street and Galena
Street are measured from the existing grade (the sidewalks) and have been appropriately
measured by the architect.
The proposed building complies with the City's requirements for this zone district. In
fact, substantial portions of the building are well below the height limit. Compliance will .
need to be verified during building permit review.
130 SOUTH GALENA STREET . ASPEN, COLORADO 81611-1975 . PHONE 970.920.5090 . FAX 970.920.5439
Printed on Re<:ycledPaper
~--
02/25/05 11: 07 '6'310 576 2440 GARY FREEDMAN
.' c FH: 25.2005 8:43AM ~1Ll ru~~ M~U~l~1 D
I'V, ,JU7
,
Februuy 25, 200S
Historic: Presetntion Commission
CitY Hall- 3;d Floor
130 S. Galana Street
Aspen, CoIarado 81611
:Re: Concepmal HPC Submisiion - The Main atld Galena Building
To Whom It May Concern,
~ 0021002
,. ,
Foss ArchirectUre . PI~.".,,;,,1l' is authoriJed to act as the repr~.~ lor won: to be complered at the
subject property. IJsred ~ are the applic:ation requl:emenlS ~ numbets 1 and 2.
Applicanr:
, Mlllennium Pb2a, llC.
c/o Lowen Meyer
P.O. Box: 1247
Aspen, Cob:ado 81612
(970) 920-2377 PI-e
~.
Alirhoti=d Rc.l'.csuCllti:wl
Poss An:hI=e + PT''''''';,.,g
605 East MMn SMCt '
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 92547SS Phc1lC
(970) 920-2950 Fa
Conea= Kim Wei!
Stephen Holley
SubjeCt PropertY
S_Adchess- 426 East Main Streer
Aspen, Co\ondo
Lepl Oesaipdon- Unir I-A; (ftl~na PWa Ccmdominiums; Book 49 ar Page 82
273 707322015
~
Land Use Application
'''",
~
THE CITY OF ASPEN
PROJECT:
Name: The Main and Galena Buildina
Location: 426 East Main Street. Aspen. Colorado
Unit 1-A' Galena Plaza Condominiums' Book 49 at Pane 82
(Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds descriotion of orooertv)
APPLICANT:
Name: Millennium Plaza L.L.C. c/o Lowell Mever
Address: P.O. Box 1247 Asoen Colorado 81612
Phone #: /970\ 920-2377 Fax#:
E-mail:
, REPRESENTATIVE:
Name: Poss Architecture + Plannin
Address: 605 East Main Street As en Colorado 81611
Phone #: 970 925-4755 Fax#: 970 920-2950
'......"
E-mail: sholle
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply):
D Historic Designation
D Certificate of No Negative Effect
D Certificate of Appropriateness
D -Minor Historic Development
[KJ -Major Historic Development
00 -Conceptual Historic Development
[KJ -Final Historic Development
D -Substantial Amendment
D Relocation (temporary, on or off-site)
D Demolition (total demolition)
D Historic Landmark Lot Split
One two level commercial buildin~. The structure appears as a sinde stOry from Main Street. However. a ~arden
level opens out onto a sunken courtyard not visible from the street.
One two level commercial building. The structure appears as a single story from Main Street. However, a garden
level opens out onto a sunken courtyard not visible from the street.
FEES DUE: $ 2,620.00
/--
"->-
General Information
Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This information will
YES NO
~
I I
LJ
~
u
u
~
u
~
uu
uu
help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that may be involved.
Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions, new
construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration?
Does the work you are planning include interior work; including remodeling, rehabilitation, or
restoration?
Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time?
In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative Effect
and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places property in order to qualify
for state or federal tax credits?
If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in conjunction with this
project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are eligible. Owner-
occupied residential properties are not.)
If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Historical Preservation?
Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use:
nRehabilitation Loan Fund n Conservation Easement Program nDimensional Variances iIncreased
Density iHistoric Landmark Lot Split DWaiver of Park Dedication Fees DConditional Uses
o Exemption from Growth Management Quota System DTax Credits
"
/-
Proj ect:
Applicant:
Proj ect
Location:
Zone
District:
Lot Size:
Lot Area:
'-
Dimensional Requirement Form
(Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.)
The Main and Galena Buildina
Millennium Plaza. L.L.C.. c/o Lowell Mever
426 East Main Street. Aspen. Colorado
CC
100.00' x 90.02'
5.002 s.f.
(For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas
within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the
definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.)
Existing: 2,604
Existing: 0
Existing: 0
Proposed: 1.997
Proposed: 4
Proposed: 8
Commercial net leasable:
Number of residential units:
Number of bedrooms:
Proposed % of demolition: 0% (Structure of Existing Building to Remain, Brick to Be
Salvaged)
DIMENSIONS: (write nla where no requirement exists in the zone district)
Floor Area: Existing: 1.976 s.f Allowable: 15,017 s.f Proposed: 8.235 s.f.
Height
.... Principal Bldg.: Existing: 24'-6" Allowable: 42'/46' Proposed: 41'-71/2"
",..
Accessory Bldg.: Existing: n/a Allowable: nJa Proposed: n/a
On-Site parking: Existing: 2 Required: 9 Proposed: 2
% Site coverage: Existing: 29.66% Required: 0% Proposed: 63.4%
% Open Space: Existing: 53.5% Required: 0% Proposed: 24.5%
Front Setback: Existing: 0' Required: 0' Proposed: 0'
Rear Setback: Existing: 0' Required: 0' Proposed: 0'
Combined
FrontlRear: Existing: 0' Required: 0' Proposed: 0'
Indicate N. S. E. W
Side Setback: (east) Existing: 0' Required: O' Proposed: 0'
Side Setback: (west) Existing: 0' Required: 0' Proposed: 0'
Combined Sides: Existing: 0' Required: 0' Proposed: 0'
Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued:
Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): ;>6 410 040 Residential Design Standards -
,~ ,ecttions BCD E
po SS ARCH ITECTURE + PLANNING
>,,"'-
'"
605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORAOO 81611
(t) 970/925-4755 (f) 970/920-2950
VICINITY MAP
Application Key 4
426 East Main Street
Aspen, Colorado
'~
'''''''..."
pOSS ARCHITECTURE+PlANNiNG
./J"
605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORAOO 81611
III 970/925-4755 If) 970/920-2950
HISTORIC PRESERVATION DESIGN GUIDELINE REVIEW
Application Key 7
'k,
Project Overview
Existing:
The existing development on the property consists of a two level commercial building. The structure
appears as a single story from Main Street. However, a garden level opens out onto a sunken courtyard not
visible from the street. The total building size is approximately 3,000 gross square feet. All of the exterior
walls are faced with brick. The building has a flat roof and is connected to the adjacent US Bank building
by a bridge. The eastern third of the property is undeveloped and contains a lawn area of approximately
1,200 square feet.
Proposed:
The proposed development is shown on the enclosed conceptual plans. The structure of the existing
building will be retained with two additional stories constructed above. The development proposes to
utilize the remaining undeveloped portion of the site to reallocate the existing commercial space from the
garden level to the Main Street level. The existing office space on this level will be modified to include
more windows facing Main Street. Above the street level will be two levels of residential space. The second
level contains three affordable housing units, 2 two bedrooms and 1 studio. The third level contains 1 free
market three bedroom unit. The garden level of the project will include dedicated storage space for all of
the residential units plus additional storage for the commercial spaces. All levels of the building are
accessible via an elevator.
,,",
The principal building materials include a palette of brick, native stone, weathered metal panels, and
contemporary iron detailing. The massing has been designed to compliment without detracting from the
Pitkin County courthouse, the neighborhood's significant historic resource. When viewing the project
from Main Street, the western section of the project has a strong two level base to carry the line of the
existing US Bank building. The third level will be constructed of iron and glass and appear much lighter.
The massing at the corner of Main and Galena is given its own identity and contains a roof shape thar not
only acts as a marker but also directs the viewer's attention to the much taller courthouse. The two
sections of the building are separated by a lower hyphen element giving each a separate identity.
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines
Per the chart of page iv of the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" this project is
subject to the guidelines contained in the introduction as well as chapters 11, 13, and 14. This section will
address this proposed project with respect to each of these standards.
Chapter 11: New Buildings on Landmark Properties/Historic Landmark Lot Splits
Policy: In some cases a new primary structure may be constructed on a parcel that includes a landmark structure. In
such cases, it is important that the new building be compatible with the historic structure such that its integrity
is maintained.
"
This chapter deals with new construction on historic properties. However, since the proposed Main and
Galena project is not located on a landmark lot and does not involve a historic lot split, the standards
contained in this ch~pter do not apply.
pOSS ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING
""
HISTORIC PRESERVATION DESIGN GUIDELINE REVIEW
Application Key 7
Chapter 13: Design in the Commercial Core Historic District
Policy: ImprO<iements in the Coml1\eTcial Core Historic District shoukl maintain the integrity of historic resources in
the area. At the same time, compatible and creative design solutioru should be encouraged.
13.1 Respect the established town grid in all projects. The Main and Galena project respects the alignment of and
is parallel to both Main and Galena Streets.
13.2 Orient a new buikling paraUel to its lot lines, similar to thot of traditional buikling orientations. The front of the
proposed project is oriented towards Main Street. All of the building lines are parallel with the lot lines.
13.3 Orient a primary entrance toward the s!:reet. The primary entrance for the commercial space to the west will
face Main Street. The eastern commercial space and the residential spaces will have secondary entrances
along the sides. The main entrance to the commercial addition is recessed back from the building line.
The remodeled commercial space entry will not be recessed since the foundation walls are already in
place. The ability to recess this entry, waterproof the lower level, and maintain an accessible entry at
grade is almost impossible because of the existing foundation walls.
.,,,,.,
13.4 Develop alley facades to create visual interest, The subject propetry has very little alley frontage. The
principal construction activity does not impact the alley. However, a one-story open carport is proposed
for the small section of the property that does front the alley. This carport is proposed to be
approximately 18' wide and 24' feet deep. In order to accommodate windows and vents from the existing
apartment building, the sttucture will consist of simple columns and a flat roof.
13.5 Retain the character of the alleys as part of the original town grid. As mentioned above, this property has very
little alley frontage and will not alter the character of the existing alley. The only change proposed related
to the alley would be the carport described above which would be located over the existing two parking
spaces.
13.6 Reserved
13.7 Reserved
13.8 Maintain the alignment of the facades at the sidewalk edge. The existing building is located at the sidewalk
edge. The proposed Main and Galena project keeps this alignment in place. In addition, the addition
containing the visitors' center also aligns with the sidewalk edge.
13.9 Maintain the average perceived scale of two-story buikling> at the sidewalk. Though the proposed building is
three stories high above main street, the lower two levels provide a strong base that relates to the US
Bank building to the west. The corner element is taller and relates to the much taller courthouse
" building to the east. It should be noted that the height limit in this zone district is forty-two feet. Weare
not requesting any variances and in fact are under the height limit for the entire project.
poss
CII!TECTURE + PLANNiNG
."'..........
...~ HISTORIC PRESERVATION DESIGN GUIDELINE REVIEW
Application Key 7
13.10 True three-story buildings witt be considered on a case-by-case basis. Since this project is located in a transitional
location between the two-story US Bank Building and the much taller Pitkin County Courthouse. We
request consideration under this standard. As mentioned above, we are under the allowed height limit.
In addition, the architecture has been designed with a strong two-story base so as to relate to the two-story
US Bank Building to the west. The third level appears much lighter with its iron and glass detailing. The
lightness allows the third level to appear secondary to the two-story base.
13.11 Consider dividing larger buildings into "rrwdules" that are similar in width to buildings seen histOTicaUy. The project
has been designed so that when viewed from Main Street there is a "hyphen" between the existing
building and the proposed visitors' center.
13.12 Rectangular forms shauld be Mminant on commercial COTe faaules. The western portion of this building has
been designed with this standard in mind. The south east portion of the structure is designed to take
advantage of its corner location and create a transitional element between the US Bank Building and the
courthouse.
13.13 Use flat roof tines as the Mminant roof fcmn. While this standard is appropriate for the vast majority of the
__ Commercial Core Historic District, this property lies on the extreme northern edge of the district and
...., neighbors such as the courthouse, Catholic Church rectory, and the recently remodeled apartment just to
the north do not adhere to this standard. The Main and Galena project is proposing a series of varied
roof shapes designed minimize the bulk of anyone element and create interest. When viewed from Main
Street, however, the building will appear to have a flat roof.
13.14 Along the rear fa,ade, using building forms that step down towards the aUey is encouraged. As mentioned earlier,
no portion of the principal structure will front the alley. Only a small, one-story, carport is proposed.
13.15 Contemporary interpretations of traditional building styles are encouraged. The architecture of the Main and
Galena project will in no way imitate traditional architecture. The materials take their cue from the
traditional palette, but their use, massing, and detailing should be considered contemporary.
13.16 Develop ground floor levet of an projects to encourage pede5ttian activity. The existing building will be
remodeled to include storefronts at the lower level. Presently, there are only a few windows in a mostly
brick wall. This remodel should allow this space to be more attractive to a variety of commetcial uses.
The additional development to the east is designed for commercial tetail on the Main Street level. The
primary entrances to both spaces are at the Main Street Level.
13 .17 Maintain the distinction between the street level and the upper fIoOT. The Main and Galena project has been
designed with storefront windows facing all streets. The existing commercial space will be remodeled to
include storefront glass. The windows on the second level draw their vertical proportions and spacing
from traditional architecture. Banding and belt course details will be used to express the traditional
distinctions in floor heights. No highly reflective or darkly tinted glass will be used in the project.
'",
13,18 Maintain the repetition of similar shapes and details along the block. Both the US Bank Building and the
Pitkin County Courthouse contain vertically proportioned windows on the second levels. The proposed
pOSS ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING
~-
HISTORIC PRESERVATION DESIGN GUIDELINE REVIEW
Applica tion Key 7
Main and Galena project will utilize similarly proportioned windows on the second level. Contemporary
interpretations of headers, sills, and cornice details are also proposed.
13.19 Maintain the pattern of recessed entryways that are repeated along the block. As stated previously, the main
entry to the visitors' center is recessed from the building edge and the majotity of the building including
the second level is at the sidewalk edge.
13.20 The genera! alignment of horizontal features on building fronts should be maintained. The horizontal features of
the Main and Galena building will be in alignment. These features include the storefronts, window
headers and sills, belt coursings, and cornices.
13.21 Special features that highlight buildings on corner lots may be considered. Since this property is a comer lot we
are proposing a corner element that relates to both Main Street and Galena Street. This corner element
also acts as an anchor and a draw to an extremely prominent corner within the town grid. To set this
element apart from the remainder of the building, there is hyphen visible from Main Street. In addition,
the material and detailing of the corner element becomes more contemporary on the upper levels.
Chapter 14: General Guidelines
,.."
~...
Policy: This chapter discusses design toPics that may be associated with many types of projects, including those
affecting in~entoried properties as well as work in the historic districts
14.1 These standards should not prevent or inhibit compliance with accessibility laws. The owners of the Main and
Galena building intend to conform to all codes and regulations.
14.2 Generally, a solution that is independent from the historic building and does not alter its historic character is
encouraged. AB there is no existing historic resource on site, the conformance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act regulations will not involve a historic building.
14.3 Keep color schemes simple. Our color scheme will be simple. Natural masonry with a mixture of similar
metals will call atrention to the massing and details in a quiet and subtle way.
14.4 Coordinating the entire bu.ilding in one color scheme is usuaUy more successfu[ than working in a variety of palettes.
The Main and Galena project will use a single coordinated color scheme. Color will not be used to create
interest among the different building elements. Rather, massing is used to create interest.
14.5 De~elop a color scheme for the entire building front that coordinates al1 the fa<;ade elements. The color scheme for
this project has been developed as a coordinated scheme. No highlighting of fayade elements through
the use of an uncoordinated color is planned.
14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditional1y. Exterior
light fixtures will be contemporary in nature and compliment the exterior architecture. They will all
have shielded light sources. The level of light will be the minimum allowed by the building code.
"C"
14.7
Minimize the ~isuat impacts of the site and architectural lighting. All site and exterior lighting will conform to
the city's lighting guidelines. All light sources will be shielded. Light sources will be located just above
poss
iTECTURE
#-,
"'-
HISTORIC PRESERVATION DESIGN GUIDELINE REVIEW
Application Key 7
the first level to minimize excessive off site light spill.
light.
We are not proposing to wash the fa~ade with
14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spit! from a building. All exterior lighting will have shielded sources and be
located and directed to not shine off the property or onto public right-of-ways.
14.9 Use the gentlest means possible to clean the surface of materials and features. This project does not involve the
cleaning any existing materials or features.
14.10 Repair deteriorating primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the
material This project does not involve the repair of any deteriorating building materials.
14.11 Plan repainting carefuUy. This project does not involve repainting.
14.12 Provide weather.protective finish to wood surfaces. All wood surfaces will have a weather-protective finish
applied as parr of the construction process.
14.13 Leave natural masonry colors unpainted where feasible. We are not proposing to paint any masonry on the
.- Main and Galena Building.
.....~
14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street. The Main and Galena Building will have
no service areas visible from the street. Trash is currently off the alley and will remain unchanged.
14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equiPment as seen from the public way. Given the small size of this
structure, there will not be a great deal of roof top equipment. Any roof top equipment that is required
will be screened from street view by parapet walls. No thru wall equipment is proposed.
14.16 Locate standpipes, meters, and other service equipment such that they wiH not damage historic fa,ade materials.
There are no existing historic facade materials in the project. The standpipes will be located in
coordination with the fire marshal. All other service equipment will be located on the north elevation.
Where allowed, remote reads will be utilized if they will minimize the visual impact of the service
equipment.
14.17 Design a new driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. This project does not involve a driveway.
14.18 Garages should daminate the street. This project does not involve a garage. However, there is proposed, a
small carport that is accessed from the alley and is not visible from either Main Street or Galena Street.
14.19 Use a paving material thot wiH distinguish the driveway from the street. This project does not involve a
driveway.
14.20 Offstreet driveways should be removed, if feasible. There is no driveway currently on the property.
';'."
pOSS ARCHITECTU
PLANNING
~~
HISTORIC PRESERVATION DESIGN GUIDELINE REVIEW
Application Key 7
14.21 F",. existing driveways that cannot be removed, provide tracks to a parking area rather than paving an entire
driveway. There is no driveway currently on the property.
14.22 Driveways leading to parking areas should be located to the side ",. rear of a priTJUlty structure. The only parking
area is the existing two-space lot off the alley. No change is proposed to this arrangement.
14.23 Parking areas should not be visunlly obtrusive. The only existing parking area, the two spots off the alley
cannot be seen from the street. No new parking areas are planed.
14.24 Large parking areas, especially those f",. large commercial and multifamily uses, should not be visunlly obtrusive. The
only existing parking area, the two spots off the alley cannot be seen from the street. No new parking
areas are planed.
14.25 Locate signs to be subordinate to the building design. The commercial tenants will have signage visible from
Main Street. All signs will be atrached directly to the building. All signs will conform to the city's signage
code.
14.26 Sign TJUlterials should be similar to those used historically. The materials used for the signage will compliment
the materials used on the building. Principal materials will be metal brackets and metalletrers. While
\... highlighted for visibility, the color of all signage will compliment the building.
14.27 Use signs to relate to other buildings on the street and to emphasize architectural features. A sUIVey of the
immediate neighborhood shows that all but one business utilizes signage affixed directly to the building
or graphics on an awning. It is anticipated that the Main and Galena Building will follow this lead.
14.28 Pictographic symbols are encouraged on signs. The design of the sign content will be up to the individual
tenants. The building covenants will dictate the location size, style and general color of all signage.
14.29 Wuminate a sign such that it compliments the overaLl composition of the site. All signage on the project will be
illuminated in such way so that the light source is shielded. In addition, any illumination of the signage
will be designed to illuminate only the signage.
poss ARCHITECTURE + PU1,NNING
'"-
605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORAOO 8]611
(t) 970/915-4755 (f) 970/910-1950
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS REVIEW
Application Key 14
Aspen Municipal Code
26.410.40 Residential Design Standards
A SITE DESIGN. The intent of these design standards is to encourage residential buildings that address the street in a manner
which creates a consistent "fCl{-ade line" and defines the public and semi-public realms. In addition, where fences or dense
landscaping exist, or are proposed, it is intended that they be used to define the boundaries of private property without eliminating
the .~ibait:Y of the howe and front yard from the styeet.
1. Building orientation The front [-acades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On comer lots, both street facing
facades must be parallel to the intersecting streets. On curvilinear streets, the front facade of all structures shall be parallel to the
tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street.
One element, such as a bay window or dormer, placed at a front comer of the building may be on a diagonal from the street if
desired.
The proposed structure is on a comer lot with both front and side facades parallel to the streets
-'
2. Build.to lines. On parce~ 01' lots of less than 15,000 square feet, ar least 60% of the front fW;ade shall be within 5 feet of the
minimum front yard setback line. On comer sites, at least 60% of both street facades of the building shall be within 5 feet of the
minimum setback lines. Porches may be used meet the 60% standard.
'",,-,
100 % of both street facades are within 5' of the minimum setback lines.
3. Fences. Fences, hedgerows, and planter boxes shall not be more than forty-two inches (4 2~) high, measured from natural grade, in
all areas forward of the front facade of the howe. Man-made berms are prohibited in the front yard set back.
No fences or berms are proposed.
B. BU1LDlNG FORM. The intent of the following building farm standards ~ to respect the scale of Aspen', h~torica[ homes by
creating new homes, which are more similar in their massing, by promoting the development of accessory units off of the city alleys,
and by preseT\ling solar access.
1. Secondary Mass. All new structures shall locate at least ten (10) percent of their total square footage above grade in a mass
which is completely detached from the principal building, Of linked to it by a subordinate connecting element. Accessory buildings
such as garages, sheds, and accessory dwelling units are examples of appropriate uses for the secondary mass.
A subordinate linking element for the purposes of secondary mass shall be defined as an element not less than six (6) feet in width
and ten (10) feet in length with a plat< height of not more than nine (9) feet.
As this structure is not a residential home the specifics of this section should not apply, however, the intent
of the section, to be respectful of Aspen's historical character may be addressed. The proposed structure is
respectful of Aspen's historical building form for commercial or public architecture. The proposed
structure is complimentary to the massing of the historical commercial core.
,....,
"'.....'
pOSS ARCHITECTURE +PLANN!NG
"-..0'
605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORAOO 81611
(t) 970/925-4755 (f) 970/920-2950
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS REVIEW
Application Key 14
C. PARKING. GARAGES AND CARPORTS. The intent of the following parking, garages, and carport standards is to
minimize the potential for conflicts between pedestrian and automobile traffic by placing parking, garages, and carports on alleys, or
to minimize the presence of garages and carports as a lifeless part of the streetscape where alleys do not exist.
/. For all residential that have access from an alley or private road, the following standards shall apply:
a. Parking, garages, and carports shall be accessed
from an alley or private mad.
b. If the garage doors are visible from a public street or alley, then they shall be ingle.stall dorm, or double-stall dorm designed
to appear Like single-stall doors.
c. If the garage doors are not t'isible from a public street or alley, the garage
doors may be either single stall or normal double stall garage doem.
2. For all residential uses that have access only from a public street, the following standards shall be met:
a.
b.
c.
","w d.
e.
f
On the street facing facade(s), the width of the living area on the first [/.oor shall be at least five (5) feet greater than the
width of the garage or carport.
The front facade of the garage or the frontmost supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least ten (10) feet
further from the street than the frontmost wall of the house.
On lots of at least fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet in size, the garage or carport maybe forward of the front facade
of the house only if the garage doors or carport entry are perpendicular to the street (side-loaded).
W'hen the floor of a garage or carport is abooe or below the street leve~ the driveway cut within the front yard setback sharl
not exceed two (2) feet in depth, measured from natural grade.
The vehicular entrance width of a garage or carport shall not be greater than twenty-four (24)feet.
The garage doors shall be single-stall doors, unless the garage doors are not visible from any public street or alley, in which
case the garage doors may be either single-stall doors or normal double stall doors.
As this structure is not a residential home the specifiCS of this section should not apply, however, the intent
of the section, to minimize the potential for conflicts between pedestrian and automobile traffic by placing
parking, garages, and carports on alleys may be addressed. Two parking spaces are proposed off of the rear
alley.
D. BUILDING ELEMENTS. The intent of the following building elements standards is to ensure that each residential building
has street-facing architectural details and elements which protlide human scale to the facade, enhance the walking experience, and
reinforce local building traditions.
As this structure is not a residential home the speCifics of this section should not apply, however, the intent
of the section, to ensure that the building has street-facing architectural details and elements which provide
human scale to the facade, enhance the walking experience, and reinforce local building traditions may be
addressed.
1. Street oriented entrance and principal window. All singk-family homes, town, houses, and duplexes shall have a street-oriented
entrance and a street facing principal window. In the case of townhouses and accessory units facing courtyards or gardens, entries
and principal windows should face those features.
P'""
"
pOSS ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING
605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
(t) 970/925-4755 (f) 970/920-2950
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS REVIEW
Application Key 14
On corner lots, entries and principal windOU's should face whiche'Ver street has a greater block length. Multiple unit residential
buildings shall have at least one street oriented entrance far every four (4) units, and front units must haue a street-facing principal
window. This standard shall be satisfied if all of the following conditions are met:
a. The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten feet (10'0") back from the frontmost wall of the building.
Entry doors shall not be taller than eight feet.
b. A covered entry porch of fifry (50) or more square feet, with a minimum depth of six feet (6'), shall be part of the front
facade. Entry porches and canoPies shall not be more than one story in height.
c. A street-fadng principal window requires that a significant window or group of windows face street.
The primary windows and commercial entries face the greater block length of Main Street. The secondary
or residential entry is along Galena Street.
2. First story element. An residential buildings shall have a first-story street-facing element the width of which comprues at least
twenty (20) percent of the building' overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first,story element
is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior litling space, the height of the first story element shall not
exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first-story element may be a porch or litling space. Accessible space (whetha
it is a deck, porch, or enclosed area) shall not be allowed O1.!er the first story element, however, accessible space ooer the remaining
first story elements on the front fcu;ade shall not be precluded.
-
-
The design of the first or ground level fa<;ade incorporates features which bring a human scale to the
building along the pedestrian walkways.
3. Windows,
a. Street facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor level would tyPically exist, which is between
nine (9) and tweltle feet (12) abooe the finished first floor. For interior staircases, this measure ment will be made from the
first land ing if one exists. A transom window abooe the main entry is exempt from this standard.
All street facing areas with an exterior expression of plate height greater than ten (10) feet shall be counted as two (2)
square feet for each one (1) square foot of floor area. Exterior expression shall be defined as facade penetrations between
nine (9) and twelve (12) feet above the level of finished floor,
b. No more than one non-orthogonal window shall be allowed on each facade of the building. A single non-orthogonal
window in a gable end may be divided with mullions and still be considered one non-orrhogonal window.
The windows have been designed to define individual floor levels and not to portray an excessive interior
height, which does not exist.
4. Lightwells. All areaways, Hghtwells and/or stairwells on the street facing facade(s) of a building shall be entirely recessed behind
the frontmost wall of the building.
Not Applicable.
E. CONTEXT. The intent of the following standards is to reinforce the unique character of Aspen and the region by dmwing upon
Aspen's vernacular architecture and neighborhood characteristics in designing new structures.
,
1. Materials. The farrowing standards must be met:
/'-
pOSS ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING
'-~
605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORAOO 81611
(t) 970/915-4755 (f) 970/910-2950
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS REVIEW
Application Key 14
a. The quality of the exterior materials and details and their application shall be consistent on all sides of the building.
b, Materials shall be used in ways that are true to theiT chamcteristics. Far instance stucco, which is a light ar non-bearing
materi a~ shall not be used below a heavy materia~ such as stone.
c. Highly reflective surfaces shall not be used as exterior materials.
The quality of materials used is consistent on all sides of the building. The materials are used in ways that
are true to their characteristics, stone is used a base across the street elevations. Masonry siding rises from
the base stone and finally steel accents work from the masonry on up to the roof all providing a hierarchy
of materials in keeping with the Aspen vernacular. There are no highly reflective materials used on the
exterior.
2. Inflection. The following standard must be met far paTcels which are 6,000 square feet ar over:
-
'-..
a. If a one (1) story building exists directly adjacent to the subject site, then the new construction must step down to one story
in height along their common lot line. If there are one story buildings on both sides of the subject site, the applicant may
choose the side towards which to inflect.
A one story building shall be defined as follows: A one story building shall mean a srructuTe, or portion of a structure,
where there is only one fioor of fully usable living space, at least 12 feet wide across the street frontage. This standard shall
be met by providing a one story element which is also at least twelve (12) feet wide across the street frontage and one story
tall as far back along the common lot hne as the adjacent building is one story.
Not Applicable
~.,