HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20050622ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
June 22, 2005
5:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
130 S. GALENA
ASPEN, COLORADO
SITE VISIT: NONE
~IV.
V.
VVI'
II.
Roll call
Approval of minutes- April 13, 2005
Public Comments
Commissioner member comments
Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent)
Project Monitoring
Staff comments: Certificate of No Negative Effect issued
(Next resolution will be #21)
VIII. OLD BUSINESS ' /,,.,. ,
A. NONE
IX. NEW BUSINESS ~x~
~,' A. 710 S. Aspen St. - Request for Extension of Conceph~lX,,x
approval (5 min.) ~'~
, B. 314 E. Hyman Ave.- Major Development (Final) and
.......... ~ ......... -C~Design Review, Public Hearing (25 m~n.f'' ~ )
C. 604 W. Main St. Historic Landmark Lot Split and
' ""- .... Ii ' '
,,,__ V~riances, P~b ~e~nng (25 min.)
~ ~). 920and 930 Matchleg~D~:Maji~r~Develapment
X~ i (Conceptual) and Variances, Public Hearing (~min.)
~ ..... i E. 629 W. Smuggler St. - Major Development (Final) and
Variances, Public Hearing (25 min.)
X. WORKSESSIONA. NONE '7 ~ / '-
XI. ADJOURN 7 pm
_1X cA.;
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
THRU:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Plmming Director ..JAA
FROM:
Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Intern
RE:
710 S. Aspen Street- Extension of Major Development (Conceptual)
approval
DATE:
June 22, 2005
--------------
"'.;.-
SUMMARY: 710 S. Aspen Street received Conceptual development approval on July
28, 2004. Section 26.415.070(D)(3)(c)(3) of the Land Use Code provides that an
application for Final development review shall be filed within one year of the date of
approval of a Conceptual development plan. Unless HPC grants an extension, failure to
file the Final development application shall make the approval null and void. The
Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown,
grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan
approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no
less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date.
APPLICANT: 710 S. Aspen LLC, Greg Hills Managing Partner, represented by Haas
Land Planning and Oz Architecture
PARCELID: 2735-131-21-001
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC grant the 6 month extension.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to grant a one-time, 6 month extension of the
Major Development approval (Conceptual) granted to 710 S. Aspen Street through
Resolution #_, Series of2005."
"'--
11 J3)
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
THRU:
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
FROM:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE:
314 E. Hyman Avenue- Major Development Review (Final) and Commercial
Design Review- Public Hearing
DATE:
June 22, 2005
SUMMARY: The subject property, built before 1886, is listed on the Aspen Inventory of
Historic Landmark Sites and Structures and located in the Commercial Core Historic District. It
has been the home of The Motherlode restaurant since 1959, and before that the building was
occupied by a saloon and a grocery store.
The applicant requests HPC Final approval to rehab the historically significant portion of this
structure, to demolish additions which are considered non-contributing, and to construct a three
story addition. HPC is also asked to consider the project according to the City's new
"Conunercial Design Review" criteria, which are required for any commercial expansions.
Staff recommends HPC grant Final approval and Commercial Design Review approval with
conditions.
APPLICANT: Regent Properties, with authorization to apply from the current property owners.
The applicant is represented by Poss Architecture and Plarming.
PARCEL ID: 2737-073-38-007.
ADDRESS: 314 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots Nand 0, Block 81, City and Townsite of Aspen.
ZONING: CC, Commercial Core.
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL)
,.".,-"
The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Final level, is asfollows. 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
A~pen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve
1
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) amI/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: Recently, the HPC has been contemplating new tools to analyze the
appropriateness of proposals to alter historic structures. The following questions are likely to be
the center of future discussions, and may be helpful for HPC to at least reference for this project
(note that the questions do not serve as formal decision making criteria at this time):
1. Why is the property significant?
2. What are the key features of the property?
3. What is the character of the context? How sensitive is the context to changes?
4. How would the proposed work affect the property's integrity assessment score?
5. What is the potential for cumulative alterations that may affect the integrity of the
property?
The property is significant as one of a handful of remaining structures that were built between
1879 and 1885, immediately following Aspen's incorporation. Along with the other oldest
examples, which are 302 E. Hopkins (the white Carpenter Gothic house that has the earliest
docunlented construction date; 1883),316 E. Hopkins (Genre Bistro), 303 E. Main Street (home
of Matsuhisa), 309 E. Main (Alderfer's), 413 E. Hyman, and 101 S. Mill (the Elli's building),
The Motherlode indicates the earliest character of town. The Motherlode is a false front building
which, although strongly associated with the 19th century development of the West, is a rarity
now since most were either destroyed by fire or' replaced with masonry buildings as towns
prospered. The building is relatively unaltered except for minor modifications to the storefront,
and replacement of some materials.
Key features of the property include the alignment of the fa<;:ade with the sidewalk edge, it's flat
fa<;:ade, and one story height. The context is sensitive to change in that the site is located in a
historic district, where there is a desire to maintain important patterns. Except for the open space
on this lot and next to the Wheeler, the block has a stronger sense of buildings being aligned with
the sidewalk edge than some other downtown areas. The block is clearly physically dominated
by the Wheeler Opera house.
HPC has developed a system for assigning a score to determine the integrity that a designated
building possesses, by analyzing it in tenns of factors such as whether it is in its original location,
and whether or not it retains original features and materials. While some points are deducted for
additions which are of a dramatically different scale, this has relatively little weight compared to
the degree of authenticity that the historic building itself has. Staffs attached integrity scoring
form for this building as it exists today awards it a perfect score of 100 points. In staff s opinion
2
oJ
""""
...,.1
the proposed project will not eliminate enough points to jeopardize the designation of the
building, but is arguably damaging to it through the finding that building form, scale and
association would all be reduced in value.
'",.~~. 4
There will be no remaining potential for future additions to the property if this project is built,
because it represents a build out to the maximum allowed. The applicant plans to take advantage
of a GMQS exemption that permits one free market unit to be added to a landmark property
without growth management implications, and one to be built with mitigation.
Dcsil!n Guideline review
Final review deals with details such as the landscape plan, lighting, fenestration, and selection
of new materials. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit A." Only those
which staff finds warrant discussion are included in the memo.
There is no landscape plan to discuss for this project. No specific light fixtures have been
indicated, which can be handled through staff and monitor. The board has had a worksession
since Conceptual review to go over fenestration and new materials. There were no objections
made.
Staff s only concern relates to the entry for the new residential unit. There is an error on the site
plan, which does not indicate that the one story addition does have a parapet wall extending
across the full width of the area that is currently open space. The doors to the residential unit are
significantly set back from the street and the entry corridor is open to air on the east side. Staff
recommends that at the least, a decorative gateway, ifnot doors, be placed on the Hyman Avenue
fa<;:ade according to the following design guidelines:
13.15 Contemporary interpretations oftraditional building styles are encouraged.
o 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.
o The literal imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
o 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.
o 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.
o Large storefront display windows, located at the street level, where goods or services are
visible from the street, are particularly encouraged.
o The primary building entrance should be at street level. "Garden level" entrances are
inappropriate.
While the applicant's interest in having this corridor open is understandable, it is very out of
chamcter with downtown structures and should be discussed.
The application does not comment in any detail on work that will affect the historic portion of
the building, however, staff assumes that repairs and restoration work will be undertaken to the
,
.J
extent needed. Further information as to what restoration techniques will be needed must be
reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. No materials have been approved for removal and
it appears that little about the fa<;:ade has been changed based on the historic photograph below.
There is some sort of a decorative hood over one of the entry doors that should be restored if
possible, in lieu of the existing awning.
~
"-..,,.,,'
~
-..J
COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW
An application for Commercial Design Review may be approved, approved with conditions, or
denied based on conformance with the following criteria:
1. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial
Design Standards or any deviation from the Standards provides a more-appealing pattern of
development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose
of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the Standards.
Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested Design Elements, is not reqnired but may be
used to justify a deviation from the Standards.
2. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed
development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial Design Standards,
to the greatest extent practical. Amendments to the fa<;:ade of the building may be required to
comply with this section.
3. For properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or located within a
Historic District, the proposed development has received Conceptual Development Plan
approval from the Historic Preservation Commission, pursuant to Chapter 26.415. This
criterion shall not apply if the development activity does not require review by the Historic
Preservation Commission.
""""
Staff Response: The design standards are attached to this memo as "Exhibit B." They are in
many ways similar to the HPC's own guidelines. The only area where staff questions the
4
.."",J
project's compliance is with regard to C3, which requires entries to be "well defined and
apparent." As discussed above, staff recommends some modification to the way the residential
entry is treated at the street-front. With this resolved, criteria 1, above, is met.
The applicant asks that HPC waive the requirement for on-site open space, which is witllin the
board's abilities. In the past, a property owner could be exempted from having to provide on-site
open space, but would still have to make a cash-in-lieu payment. This is the situation that was
approved for the Motherlode at the time that P&Z reviewed the project some months ago. Since
then, the City has adopted the Commercial Design Review process that HPC is discussing and
has created an opportunity for waiver of the cash-in-lieu payment as well. The new language is
as follows:
Reduction of Requirement. The Plmming and Zoning Commission, or Historic Preservation
Commission as' applicable, pursuant to the procedures and criteria of Section 26.412 -
Commercial Design Review - may reduce the pedestrian amenity requirement by any amount,
such that no more than half the requirement is waived, as an incentive for well-designed projects
having a positive contribution to the pedestrian environment. The resulting requirement may not
be less thml 10%.
The Historic Preservation Commission may reduce by any amount the requirements of this
section for Historic Landmark properties upon one of the following circumstances:
1. When the Historic Preservation Commission approves the on-site relocation of a
Historic Landmmk such that the amount of on-site pedestrian space is reduced below that
required by this Chapter.
2. When the manner in which a Historic Landmark building was originally
developed reduces the amount of on-site pedestrian amenity required by this Chapter.
3. When the redevelopment or expansion of a Historic Landmark constitutes an
exemplary preservation effort deserving of an incentive or reward.
Staff is not in support of waiving the entire cash-in-lieu payment, as requested by the applicant.
The cash payment is used for important pedestrian improvements downtown and would be a loss
to the City. In addition, tile project does not qualify as an exemplary preservation effort in our
opinion because there is little restoration work necessary and the landmark building is heavily
impacted by the construction proposed behind it. It is true that HPC required the applicant to
amend their proposal to provide open space on-site, therefore staff recommends a waiver of 10%
of the cash-in-lieu fee.
Criteria 2 is not applicable. Criteria 3 is met because the project does have HPC Conceptual
approval. Staff recommends approval for Commercial Design Review.
DECISION MAKING OPTIONS:
.......-
The HPC may:
. approve the application,
......
5
. approve the application with conditions, .-.
. disapprove the application, or
. continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to ,make a decision to approve or deny.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC grant Major Development Review
(Final) and Commercial Design Review with the following conditions:
1. The applicant must submit a preservation plan with the building permit indicating what
original materials appear to still exist on the structure, and what treatments will be used to
retain them.
2. HPC staff and monitor must approve any changes with regard to the type and location of
exterior lighting fixtures by reviewing a plan prior to wiring, purchasing, or installing the
fixtures.
3. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved
drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the
information is available.
4. Staff recommends that at the least, a decorative gateway, if not doors, be placed on the
Hyman Avenue fa<;:ade of tile new addition.
5. HPC should evaluate the appropriateness of having tile entry corridor to the new
residence open to air on the east elevation.
6. The applicant shall restore the decorative hood over the central entry doors on the
Motherlode if possible based on the historic photograph. The awning should be removed.
7. The open space cash-in-lieu fee is hereby reduced by 10%.
8. Submit a demolition plan, as part of the building pennit plan set, indicating'exactly what
areas of the existing house are to be removed as part of the renovation.
9. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being
reviewed aJld approved by HPC staff and monitor, or the full board.
10. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the
building permit plan set aJld all other prints made for the purpose of construction.
II. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC
resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to
HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of
approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer
prior to applying for the building permit.
12. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty
license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit.
Exhibits:
A. Relevant HPC Design Guidelines
B. Commercial Design Review Guidelines
C. Integrity Assessment
D. Application
6
""'
....."
-...
d'
-.,..",,,./
Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines for 314 E. Hyman, Final Review
1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting.
o Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on
walks and entries, rather t1lan up into trees and onto facade planes.
2.1 Preserve original building materials.
o Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that Call be repaired in place.
o Only remove siding which is deteriorated and must be replaced.
o Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cormces,
pediments, steps alld foundations, should be preserved.
o A void rebuilding a major portion of all exterior wall that could be repaired. Reconstruction
may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity.
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
o Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions,
sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows.
o Repair fralnes and sashes rather than replacing them, whenever conditions permit.
o Preserve the original glass, when feasible.
3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building
wall.
o Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate, as
is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where
the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining feature.
o Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls.
o Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it
to receive a larger window on primary facades.
3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade.
o Significantly increasing the anlount of glass on a character-defining facade will negatively
affect the integrity of a structure.
3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
o Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive
a larger window is inappropriate.
o Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered.
4.1 Preserve historically significant doors.
o Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the
door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing,
trallS0mS alld flanking sidelights.
o Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances.
o If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so
that the door Call be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep tile door in place, in its
historic position.
o If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original entrance on the primary facade must
remain operable.
4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening.
o Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height.
6.1 Preserve significant architectural fcatures.
o Repair only those features that are deteriorated.
o Patch, piece-in, splice, consolidate or otherwise upgrade the existing material, usmg
recognized preservation methods whenever possible.
7
o Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins
may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also may be
used.
o Removing a damaged feature when it can be repaired is inappropriate.
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the
primary building is maintained.
o A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the
primary building is inappropriate.
o An addition that seeks to imply all earlier period than that of the primary building also is
inappropriate.
o An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic
style should be avoided.
o An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate.
10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
o An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also
remaining visually compatible with these earlier features.
o A Challge in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material
or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may
be considered to help define a change from old to new construction.
10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic
materials of the primary building.
o The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials.
13.4 Develop alley facades to create visual interest.
o Use varied building setbacks and changes in materials to create interest and reduce
perceived scale.
o Balconies, court yards and decks are also encouraged.
o 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.
13.15 Contemporary interpretations of traditional building styles are encouraged.
o 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 coinpatible with their historic neighbors.
o The literal imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
o 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.
o Consider using storefronts to provide pedestrian interest along the street. Storefronts should
maintain the historic scale alld key elements such as large display windows and transoms.
o Large storefront display windows, located at the street level, where goods or services me
visible from the street, are particulal'ly encouraged.
o 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.
o The first floor of the primary facade should be predominantly transparent glass.
o Upper floors should be perceived as being more opaque than the street level. Upper story
windows should have a vertical emphasis.
o Highly reflective or dmkly tinted glass is inappropriate.
8
-,
,-+''''
"'.
'-...-........'
-
~
o 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.
13.18 Maintain the rcpetition of similar shapes and details along the block.
o Upper story windows should have a vertical emphasis. In general, they should be twice as
tall as they are wide.
o Headers and sills of windows on new buildings should maintain the traditional placement
relative to cornices alld belt courses.
13.19 Maintain the pattern crcated by recessed entry ways that are repeated along a
block.
o Set the door back from the front facade approximately 4 feet. This is an adequate alnount to
establish a distinct threshold for pedestrians.
o Where entries are recessed, the building line at the sidewalk edge should be maintained by
the upper floor(s).
o Use trallS0mS over doorways to maintain the full vertical height of the storefront.
13.20 Thc general alignment of horizontal fcatures on building fronts should be
maintained.
o Typical elements that align include window moldings, tops of display windows, cornices,
copings and parapets at the tops of buildings.
o When Imge buildings are designed to appear as several buildings, there should be some
slight variation in alignments between the facade elements.
14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that
used traditionally.
o The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be
approved by the HPC.
o All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence.
14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting.
o Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be
permitted.
o Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures.
o Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent mmecessary sources of light by
controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night.
o Do not wash aJ1 entire building facade in light.
o A void placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls
of buildings.
o A void duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area.
14.8 Minimize thc visual impact of light spill from a building.
o Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that
direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within
the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged.
o Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off
the property or into public rights-of-way.
14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of scrvice areas as seen from the street.
o When it is feasible. screen service meas from view, especially those associated with
commercial and multifamily developments.
o This includes locations for trash containers and loading docks.
o Service areas should be accessed off of tile alley, if one exists.
9
14.15
Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public
-..,
way. .~
o Mechallical equipment may only be installed on all alley facade, and only if it does not
create a negative visual impact.
o Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof must be grouped together to minimize their visual
impact. Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials t1lat are
compatible with those of the building itself.
o Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges.
o A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does
not create a negative visual impact.
o Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the street or
alley. Also minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Use
smaller satellite dishes and mount them low to the ground and away from front yards,
significant building facades or highly visible roof planes.
o Paint tele.communications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize
their appearance by blending with t1leir backgrounds.
14.16 Locate standpipes, meters and other service equipment such that they will
not damage historic facade materials.
o Cutting charmels into historic facade materials damages the historic building fabric and is
inappropriate. Do not locate equipment on the front facade.
o If a charmel must be cut, either locate it on a secondary facade, or place it Iowan the wall.
_.
......
10
Exhibit C: Commercial Design Standards.
~.""..
..;,"~.,;
The following design stalldards shall apply to commercial, lodging, and mixed-use development:
A. Building Relationship to Primary Street.
A street wall is comprised of buildings facing principal streets and public pedestrian spaces.
Consistent street walls provide a sense of a coherent district and frame an outdoor room.
Interruptions in this enclosure Call lessen the quality of a commercial street. Corner buildings are
especially important, in that they are more visible alld their scale and proportion affects the street
walls of two streets. Well-designed and located pedestrian open spaces Call positively affect the
quality of the district, while remnallt or leftover spaces Call detract from the downtown. A
building's relationship to the street is entirely important to the quality of the downtown
pedestrian environment. Split-level retail and large vertical separations from the sidewalk can
disrupt the coherence of a retail district. The following standards shall apply: .
I. Building facades shall be parallel to the adjoining primary streets. Minor elements of the
building fa<;:ade may be developed at irregular angles.
2. Building facades along primary streets shall be setback no more than the average setback
of the adjoining buildings and no less than the minimum requirement of the particular
zone district. Exempt from this provision are building setbacks accommodating On-Site
Pedestrian Amenity, purSUallt to Section 26.575.030.
3. Building facades along primary streets shall maintain a consistent setback on the first and
second story.
4. Commercial buildings shall be developed with the first floor at, or within two (2) feet
above, the level of the adjoining sidewalk, or right-of-way if no sidewalk exists. "Split-
level" retail frontage is prohibited.
5. Commercial buildings incorporating a setback from a primary street shall not incorporate
a substalltial grade change between the building fa<;:ade and the public right-of-way.
"Moats" surrounding buildings are prohibited.
B. Pedestrian Amenity Space.
Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting, and vital
downtown retail distJict and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere.
Pedestrian amenity can take the fonn of physical or operational improvements to public rights-
of-way or private property within commercial areas.
On parcels required to provide pedestriall amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030 - Pedestrian
Amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the
method or combination of methods of providing the Pedestrian Amenity shall be at the option of
the Plalming and Zoning Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission as applicable,
according to the procedures herein and according to the following standmds:
I. The dimensions of any proposed on-site pedestrian amenity sufficiently allow for a
variety of uses alld activities to occur considering any expected tenant and future potential
tenallts and uses.
'<;,..,.,,.,,
II
2. The pedestrian amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this
characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade
trees, solar access, view orientation, and simple at-grade relationships with adjacent
rights-of-way are encouraged.
3. The pedestrian amenity, alld the design alld operating chmacteristics of adjacent
structures, rights-of-way, and uses, contributes to an inviting pedestrian environment.
4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls,
sidewalks, or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian
environment.
-
"".'
5. Any variation to the Design and Operational Standards for Pedestrian Amenity, Section
26.575.030(F) promote the purpose of the pedestrian amenity requirements.
6. The Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, as
applicable, may reduce the pedestrian aJ11enity requirement by any amount, such that no
more than half the requirement is waived, as an incentive for well-designed projects
having a positive contribution to the pedestrian enviromnent. The resulting requirement
may not be less t1lan 10%. On-site provision shall not be required for a reduction in the
requirement. A mix of uses within the proposed building that enliven the surrounding
pedestrian environment may be considered.
C. Street-Level Building Elements.
The "storefront," or street-level portion of a commercial building is perhaps tile single most
important element of a commercial district building. Effective storefront design can make an ~
entire district inviting and pedestrian friendly. Unappealing storefront design can become a
detriment to the vitality of a commercial district. In order to be an effective facility for the sale
of goods and services, the storefront has traditionally been used as a tool to present those goods
alld services to the passing pedestrian (potential customer). Because of this function, the
storefront has traditionally been as trallSpal'ent as possible to allow maximum visibility to the
interior. The following standards shall apply:
I. UnarticuJated, blank walls are prohibited. Fenestration, or an alternate means of fayade
articulation, is required on all exterior walls.
2. Retail buildings shall incorporate, at a minimum, a 60% fenestration ratio on exterior
street-level walls facing primary streets. (For eXalnple: each street-level wall of a retail
building that faces a primary street must be comprised of at least 60% fenestration
penetrations and no more thall 40% solid materials.) This provision may be reduced or
waived for lodging properties with no, or limited, street-level retail, office buildings with
no retail component, and forService/CommerciallIndustrial buildings.
3. Building entrances shall be well-defined and apparent.
4. Building entrances shall be designed to accommodate an internal airlock such that
temporary seasonal airlocks on the exterior of the building are unnecessary.
5. Non-traditional storefronts, such as along an alleyway, are encouraged.<
-
12
D. Parking.
-- Pal"king is a necessmy component of a successful commercial district. The manner in which
_ parking is physically accommodated has a larger impact upon the quality of the district that the
alnount of parking. Surface parking sepmating storefronts from the street creates a cluttered,
inhospitable pedestrian environment. A downtown retail district shaped by buildings, well-
designed storefronts, alld a continuous street wall is highly preferred over a district shaped by
parking lots. Well-placed and well-designed access points to parking garages can allow
convenient parking without disrupting the retail district. The following standards shall apply:
I. Parking shall only be accessed from alleyways, unless such access is unavailable or an
unreasonable design solution in which case access from a primary street shall be designed
in a manner that minimizes disruption of the pedestriall environment.
2. Surface parking shall not be located between the Street right-of-way and the building
fa<;:ade.
3. Above grade parking garages in commercial districts shall incorporate ground-floor
commercial uses alld be designed in a maimer compatible with surrounding buildings and
uses.
",,-
,.,,-
-
4. Above grade parking garages shall not reveal internal ramping on the exterior fa<;:ade of
the building.
E. Utility, Delivery, and Trash Service Provision.
When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building
Call better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one building can
detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are
important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply:
1. A utility, trash, and recycle service area shall be accommodated along the alley meeting
the minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060 Utility/Trash/Recycle Service
Areas, unless otherwise established according to said section.
2. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private propeliy and along the alley.
Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall
be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site
conditions, such as a historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments
shall be properly licensed.
3. Delivery service areas shall be incorporated along the alley. Any truck loading facility
shall be an integral component of the building. Shmed facilities are highly encouraged.
4. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the
roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the Street as practical.
S. Mechanical ventilation equipment alld ducting shall be accommodated internally within
the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed
behind a pal'apet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a
public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for
future ventilation and ducting needs.
13
Suggested Design Elements. The following guidelines are building practices suggested by the .-.
City, but are not mandatory. In many circumstances, compliance Witll these practices may not
produce the most-desired development alld project designers should use their best judgment.
A. Sifmaze:
Signage should be integrated with the building to the extent possible. Integrated signage
areas already meeting the City's requirements for size, etc. may minimize new tenallt
signage compliance issues. Common tenant listing areas also serves a public wayfinding
function, especially for office uses. Signs should not block design details ofthe building
on which they are placed. Compliance with the City's sign code is mandatory.
B. Disvlav windows:
Display windows provide pedestriall interest and can contribute to the success of the retail
space. Providing windows that reveal inside activity of the store can provide this pedestrian
interest.
C. Lif!:htinz:
Well-lit (meaning quality, not quantity) display windows along the first floor create
pedestrian interest after business hours. Dynamic lighting methods designed to catch
attention can cheapen the quality of the downtown retail environment. Illuminating certain
important building elements can provide an interesting effect. Significant light trespass
should be avoided. Illuminating the entire building should be avoided. Compliance with the
City's Outdoor Lighting code, Section 26.575.050, is mandatory. ,-,
D. Orizinal Townsite Articulation:
Buildings sparming more than one Original Townsite Lot should incorporate fa<;:ade
expressions coincidental with these original parcel boundaries to reinforce historic scale.
This may be inappropriate in some circumstances, such as on large corner lots.
E. Architectural Features:
Parapet walls should be used to shield mechanical equipment from pedestrian views. Aligning
cornices and other al'chitectural features with adjacent buildings can relate new buildings to
their historical surroundings. Awnings and canopies can be used to provide architectural
interest and shield windows alld entryways from the elements.
-
14
""'.'0"",
Exhibit C- INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT-19TH CENTURY COMMERCIAL
Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance.
.
LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place
where the historic event occun'ed.
10- The structure is in its original location.
8- The structure has been moved within the original site but still maintains the
original alignment alld proximity to the street.
5- The structure has been moved to another site, still within the historic Aspen
townsite.
0- The structure has been moved to a location which is dissimilar to the original site.
POINTS: 10
TOTAL POINTS (MAXIMUM OF 10) = 10
. DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, ~pace, structure,
and style of a property.
BUILDING FORM
10- The original plan form, based on Sanborne maps or other authenticating
documentation, is unaltered and there are no recent additions. .
8- The structure has been expanded but the original plan form is intact and the
addition(s) would meet the design guidelines.
6- The structure has been expanded in a less desirable maimer, but the character of
the form of the building from the streetview has been preserved.
0- The structure has been expanded to the detriment of the streetscape elevation.
POINTS: 8
ROOF FORM/CORNICE LINE
10- The original roof form and decorative cornice are unaltered. There is no rooftop
addition.
8- The roof form has been altered by a rooftop addition, but the addition would meet
the design guidelines.
1- The rooftop addition conflicts with the characteristic roof form of the building.
POINTS: 10
SCALE
5- The original scale alld proportions of the building are intact.
3- The building has been expallded, but the ability to perceive the original size of the
structure is preserved.
0- The scale ofthe building has been negatively affected by a large addition,
whose features do not reflect the scale or propOliions of the historic structure.
15
POINTS: 5
STOREFRONT
10- The original storefront and associated features (recessed entry, kickplates, transom
windows, etc.) remains.
5- The storefront has been altered, but some original materials remain.
5- The storefront has been accurately reconstructed.
0- The original storefront is completely gone or an inappropriate new storefront has
been installed.
.......
.",,,",,,,,"
POINTS: 10
DOORS AND WINDOWS
I 0- The original door and window pattern is intact.
8- Less than 50% of the doors and windows me new and the original openings are
intact.
4- More thall 50% of the doors or windows have been added and/or some of the
original opening sizes have been altered.
0- Most or all of the original door and window openings have been altered.
POINTS: 10
TOTAL POINTS (MAXIMUM OF 45)= 43
. SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property.
.......
#
PROXIMITY TO SIMILAR STRUCTURES
5 - The structure is one of a set (at least three) of buildings from the same period in
the immediate area.
3- The building is part of a neighborhood that has numerous remaining buildings
from the same period.
0- The building is an isolated example from the period.
POINTS: 5
PATTERNS AMONG SURROUNDING BUILDINGS
5- The building helps to create a continuous pattern of elements with adjacent
buildings by aligning or repeating window patterns, cornice lines, etc.
POINTS: 5
TOTAL POINTS (MAXIMUM OF 10) = 10
,..."
16
"'"".J'
. MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a
pmticular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic
property.
EXTERIOR SURFACES
10- The original primary wall materials remain.
5- The original primary wall materials, if the building is masonry, have been
sandblasted.
0- Less thall 50% of the original primary wall materials remain.
POINTS: 10. The building has always been entirely wood construction, which is
still thc case.
EXTERIOR WOODWORK
5- Most of the original woodwork, including siding, trim, fascia boards, etc. remain.
4- Original siding has been replaced, but trim and other elements remain.
3 - Original siding is intact but trim or other elements have been replaced.
0- All exterior woodwork has been removed and replaced.
POINTS: 3. Some of the original siding and trim have been replaced.
-
DOORS AND WINDOWS
5- All or most ofthe original door alld window units are intact.
4- Some window and door units have been replaced but with generally accurate
reconstructions of the originals.
3- Most of the original windows have been replaced and/or new windows have been
added.
0- Windows alld!or doors units have been replaced with inappropriate
patterns or styles.
POINTS: 4
TOTAL POINTS (MAXIMUM OF 20) = 17
. WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular
culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.
DETAILING AND ORNAMENTATION
5- Original detailing is intact.
3- Detailing is discernable such that it contributes to the understallding of its stylistic
category.
0- New detailing has been added that confuse the character of the original building.
0- The detailing is gone.
,
""".......
POINTS= 5
17
FINISHES
5- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry unpainted.
4- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry is painted.
3- Wood surfaces are stained or modern in appearance but masonry is
unpainted.
3- Masonry is painted.
......,
POINTS= 5
TOTAL POINTS (MAXIMUM OF 10) = 10
. ASSOCIATION Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person
alld a historic property.
5- The property would be generally recognizable to a person who lived in Aspen in the
19th century.
POINTS: 5
TOTAL POINTS (MAXIMUM OF 5) = 5
....
. BONUS POINTS
UNIQUE EXAMPLE
5- The design of the building is unique or one of a small group among the 19th
century commercial buildings (i.e.It is false front or has Italianate or Second
Empire detailing.)
PATINA/CHARACTER
5- The materials have been allowed to acquire the character of age and me obviously
weathered.
POINTS= 5
MAXIMUM NUMBER OF POINTS= 100 (and up to 10 bonus points)
MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR DESIGNATION= 50 POINTS
(Note: Each area of the integrity analysis includes a description of the circumstances that might
be found and a point assignment. However the reviewer may choose another number witllin the
point range to more accurately reflect the specific property.)
STAFF ASSESSMENT OF 314 E. HYMAN A VENUE= 100 POINTS
-,
j
18
LKG)
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
THRU:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Community Development Director
FROM:
Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Intern
RE:
604 West Main Street- Historic Landmark Lot Split and Variances- Public
Hearing
DATE:
June 22, 2005
-
SUMMARY: The subject property is located within the Main Street Historic District and
contains five structures: a late 19th century (circa 1890) Victorian miner's cottage that currently
functions as an office; a 19th century garage; a 19th century dilapidated shed; a cabin circa 1950;
and a newer shed circa 1950. The Victorian style building, 19th century garage, and 19th century
shed exist on the 1904 Sanborn Fire Insurance map, and appear to be in their original locations.
The late Victorian miner's cottage has undergone significant alterations over the years including
the removal of the original front porch and the removal and infilling of many original windows.
The 19th century shed is listed as being in poor condition and straddles the property line between
this lot and 612 West Main Street. The 19th century garage, which has also undergone
alterations, encroaches between 0.6 to 0.4 feet into the alley. The applicant proposes to retain the
location of the 19th century buildings and will propose the construction of a small home on the
newly created lot at some time in the future.
Staff recommends that the Historic Landmark Lot Split be supported with conditions. The
review criteria are met and the Lot Split will restore Lot Q to the historic 30 feet by 100 feet
lot size that is indicative of Aspen in the 1880s. A variance is recommended for the 1950s
office building that will be in violation of a 5 foot setback from the new lot line as well as
setback variances to legalize the existing locations of the Victorian Buildings. The ownership
and state of the 19th century shed that straddles two property lines needs to be resolved.
APPLICANT: 604 West LLC, represented by Alan Richman Planning Services.
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-44-008
ADDRESS: 604 West Main Street, Lots Q, R, and S, Block 24, City and Townsite of Aspen,
Colorado.
-...-
ZONING: MU, Mixed Use.
'-"-
HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT
"""
In order to complete a Historic Landmark Lot Split, the applicant shall meet the following
requirements of Aspen Land Use Code: Section 26.480.030(A)(2) and (4), Section
26.470.070(C), and Section 26.415.010(D.)
,-;d'"
26.480.030(A)(2), SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS, LOT SPLIT
The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single-family dwelling on a
lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14, 1977, where all of the following
conditions are met:
a) The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board
of County Commissioners or the City Council, or tlle land is described as a metes
and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision
regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24, 1969. This restriction shall not
apply to properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and
Structures; and
Staff Finding:
The property is part of the original Aspen townsite, is not located in a subdivision approved by
the City or the County, and has not been previously subdivided. Most of the Historic Landmark
Lot Splits that HPC reviews occur in neighborhoods where residential development is the only
option. Although this property is in the Mixed Use district, a condition of approval will be
required to make it clear that the development occurring on Lot Q must be a single family
residence, unless a future code amendment lifts this restriction.
1
".-.'
b) No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to the
requirements of the underlying zone district.
proposed will mitigate for affordable
26. 100. 040(A)(l)(c).
Any lot jor which development is
housing pursuant to Section
Staff Finding:
The applicant proposes to create two lots with this lot split. Both lots conform to the
requirements of lot size and lot area per dwelling unit for Mixed Use Zone and Historic
Landmark Properties. This proposal will create one 3,000 square foot lot and one 6,000 square
foot lot. These lot sizes comply with the 3,000 square foot minimum size requirement for a
Historic Landmark Lot Split.
With regard to the requirements for affordable housing mitigation, Council has adopted benefits
for historic properties, pursuant to Section 26.420.020 (B)(6)(e) of the Land Use Code. The new
lot in a historic landmark lot split is exempt from the requirement to comply with any of these
housing options. Staff recommends that HPC b'fant GMQS exemption for the Historic Landmark
Lot Split.
c)
The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a
subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or a "lot split"
exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.040(C)(1)(a); and
2
-...
.,I
Staff Finding:
""~ The land has not received a subdivision exemption or lot split exemption.
d) A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the
requirements of this title, is submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin
County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no further subdivision
may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built witllOut receipt of
applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth management allocation
pursuant to Chapter 26.470.
Staff Finding:
The subdivision plat shall be a condition of approval. It must be reviewed by the Community
Development Department for approval and recordation within 180 days of final land use action.
e) Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in
the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder. Failure on the part of the
applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following
approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of
the plat by the City Council will be requiredfor a showing of good cause.
Staff Finding:
The subdivision exemption agreement shall be a condition of approval.
~
f)
In the case where an existing single-family dwelling occupies a site which is
eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to application for a
lot split.
Staff Finding:
As per the application, the existing three 19th century structures will not be demolished as part of
this lot split. The ownership and future of the 19th century shed that straddles two lots lines will
have to be resolved.
g) Maximum potential buildoutfor the two (2) parcels created by a lot split shall not
exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single-famiIy
home.
Staff Finding:
The proposal will add one new dwelling unit on Lot 2 (Q). Lot 1 will remain as a
commercial/office property. The three Victorian era structures will remain and the applicant
anticipates restoration of these buildings in the future.
26.480.030(A)(4), SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT
The split of a lot that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures
for the development of one new single-family dwelling may receive a subdivision exemption if it
meets the following standards:
-
o
~
a. The original parcel shall be a minimum of six thousand (6,000) square
feet in size and be located in the R-6, R-15, R-15A, RMF, or 0 zone district.
-,
Staff Finding:
The subject parcel is 9,000 square feet of land and is located in the Mixed Use (formerly 0) Zone
District.
b. The total FAR for both residences shall be established by the size of
the parcel and the zone district where the property is located. The total FAR for each lot
shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat.
In the Office zone district, the following shall apply to the calculation of maximum floor
area for lots created through the historic landmark lot split. Note that the total FAR shall
not be stated on the Subdivision Exemption Plat because the floor area will be affected by
the use established on the property:
If all buildings on what was the fathering parcel remain wholly residential in use, the
maximum floor area will be as stated in the R-6 zone district.
If any portion of a building on a lot created by the historic landmark lot split is in
commercial/office use, then the allowed floor area for that lot shall be the floor area
allowed for all uses other than residential in the zone district. If the adjacent parcel
created by the lot split remains wholly in residential use, then the floor area on that parcel
shall be limited to the maximum allowed on a lot of its size for residential use according to """"
the R-6 standards.."';
If there is commercia II office use on both newly created lots, the maximum floor area for all
uses other than residential in the zone district will be applied.
Staff Finding:
Because the maximum cumulative floor area for properties along Main Street in the Mixed Use
Zone District is 1: 1, a total of 6,000 square feet of floor area is permitted to be built on Lot I.
Maximum floor areas for residential development in the Mixed Use zone district are the same as
allowed in R-6, except that a 20% reduction was adopted as a disincentive to future single family
home development in this neighborhood. Development on Lot 2 will allow a maximum floor
area of 1,920 square feet.
c. The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements of the
underlying zone district. The variances provided in Section 26.415.120(B)(1)(a),(b), and (c)
are only permitted on the parcels that will contain a historic structure. The FAR bonus
will be added to the maximum FAR allowed on the original parcel.
Staff Finding: The applicant does not propose development at this time. No floor area bonus is
being requested at this time. Staff finds that the only new non-conformity created by the
proposed lot split is a 3 foot side yard between the office on Lot 2 and the new lot line, where a
-
.J
4
-
5' separation is required. The criteria for granting setback variances, per Section 26.415.110.C
of the Municipal Code are as follows:
';.,......~
HPC must make a finding that the setback variance:
a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district;
and/or
b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural
character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic
district.
Staff recommends that a 2' west yard setback variance be granted on the new Lot 2, so that the
existing buildings can be left in their CUlTent locations, and the new lot line follows the historic
30' x 100' configuration. HPC is also asked to award setback variances because cUlTently, the
outbuildings on this property sit in the setbacks and create some encroachments onto abutting
property. The applicant requests variances to legalize these historic conditions. Specifically, the
eastern-most shed has a 0' setback on the east sideyard and a 0' setback on the rear yard instead
of the required 5', the center-most outbuilding has a 0' setback on the rear yard instead of the
required 5', and tile western-most outbuilding has a 3'6" rear yard setback instead of the required
5'. There is an outbuilding that straddles the western property line and has a 0' rear yard setback
instead of the required 5' and a 0' setback on the east sideyard instead of the required 5'. The
eastern-most and center-most buildings do not meet minimum separation requirements as they
are approximately 3' apart rather than the required 10'. Staff recommends all variances be
approved to legalize the buildings.
.....~....
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:
1. Staff recommends that HPC grant 0' setback conditions on the east, west and rear lot
lines, and a waiver of the minimum distance required between structures to legalize all
four outbuildings on this site.
2. Staff recommends that HPC and Council require that the applicant is responsible for the
maintenance and restoration of the 19th century shed that straddles the property line, and
submits a plan and timeline for it's stabilization as well as posts a bond to insure it's safety
during restoration; all of which must receive HPC approval.
._ 3. Staff recommends that HPC grant GMQS exemption for the Historic Landmark Lot Split.
5
4. Staff recommends that the applicant pursue an encroachment license from the
Engineering Department for the 19th century garage that sits in the alley.
5. A subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and approved
by the Community Development Department and recorded in the office of the Pitkin
County Clerk and Recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of final approval by
City Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision exemption agreement within the
specified time limit shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by City
Council will be required for a showing of good cause. As a minimum, the subdivision
plat shall:
a. Meet the requirements of Section 26.480 of the Aspen Municipal Code;
b. Contain a plat note stating that no further subdivision may be granted for these
lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals
pursuant to the provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at the time of
application;
c. Contain a plat note stating that all new development on the lots will conform to
the dimensional requirements of the Mixed Use zone district, except the variances
approved by the HPC; and
d. Be labeled to indicate that this proposal will create Lot 1 of 6,000 square feet in
size with 6,000 square feet of floor area, and a Lot 2 of 3,000 square feet in size
with 1,920 square feet of floor area.
6. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development
plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development
order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this
approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise
exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be
recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development
order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the
development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits).
Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in
the creation of a vested property right.
No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary
to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be
published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the
City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific
development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice
shall be substantially in the following form:
Notice is hereby given to tile general public of the approval of a site specific development
plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years,
pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado
Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 604 West Main Street
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews
and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or
the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this
approval.
6
-
""
.-
.-.
,/
,,.-
......,
,,~
""'-"
-
........
The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial
review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin
to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required
under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the
Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter.
Exhibits:
Resolution #_, Series of2005
A. Application
7
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A HISTORIC
LANDMARK LOT SPLIT, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION AND
GMQS EXEMPTION, AND GRANTING APPROVAL FOR SETBACK
VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 604 W. MAIN STREET,
LOTS Q, R, AND S, BLOCK 24, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
COLORADO
-..,
RESOLUTION NO. _SERIES OF 2005
Parcel ID #:2735-124-44-008
WHEREAS, the applicants, 604 West LLC, owner, represented by Alan Richman
Planning Services, have requested a Historic Landmark Lot Split and Variances for the
property located at 604 West Main Street, Lots Q, R, and S, Block 24, City and Townsite
of Aspen, Colorado.
WHEREAS, in order to complete a Historic Landmark Lot Split, the applicant shall meet
the following requirements of Aspen Municipal Code: Section 26.480.030(A)(2) and (4),
Section 26.470.070(C), and Section 26.4l5.010(D.), which are as follows:
26.480.030(A)(2), Subdivision Exemptions, Lot Split
The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single-family
dwelling on a lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14, 1977, where
all of the following conditions are met:
-....
.,.......'
a) The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin
County Board of County Commissioners or the City Council, or the land
is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided
after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on
March 24, 1969; and
b) No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to
the requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which
development is proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to
Section 26.100.040(A)(1)(c).
c) The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the
subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or
a "lot split" exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.040(C)(1)(a); and
d) A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to
the requirements of this title, is submitted and recorded in the office of
the Pitkin County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no
further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units
be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter
and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.100.
--.
7X
D
MEMORANDUM
,;",_.
-
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE:
920 and 930 Matchless Drive- Major Development Review (Conceptual), On-site
Relocation, Demolition and Variances- Public Hearing
DATE:
June 22, 2005
SUMMARY: The project before HPC involves a large lot that contains two miner's cottages.
The cottages were moved to Matchless Drive along with two other Victorians (one of which has
been since been demolished) in about the 1960's.
The applicant plans to pursue a lot split through the Planning and Zoning Commission and City
Council to divide the site approximately in half. 930 Matchless will contain one free market unit
in the Victorian house, and a new free market unit over a garage at the back of the lot. The
miner's cottage at 920 Matchless will be converted into a voluntary ADD, with a new free
market unit built behind it.
-
This neighborhood, which is zoned R-6, like the West End, was down-zoned when annexed into
the city some years ago. No single dwelling unit in this subdivision can be larger than 2,486
square feet. The application misinterpreted this situation to mean that each lot is limited to that
FAR. At this time they do not wish to change the plans before HPC and may choose to sell some
of their rights as TDR's. The bonus request remains on the table although it might be used to
create more TDR's.
The miner's cottages have been modified fairly significantly in terms of materials, but still retain
a small scale. HPC is asked to grant Major Development (Conceptual) approval for
rehabilitation of the cottages and construction of new additions, as well as approval for the
construction of one new detached home at the rear of the property. (The new unit proposed to
the rear of920 Matchless Drive will be brought forward for review at some time in the future.)
930 Matchless Drive is to be temporarily lifted in order to dig a basement. The applicant
requests setback variances, a parking variance and a 500 square feet FAR bonus.
The application lacks some necessary information. Staff has concerns with regard to the
design of the addition to 930 Matchless. Continuation is recommended.
APPLICANT: Peter and Chris Dodaro, represented by Kim Raymond Architects.
. "'''',
PARCEL ID: 2737-074-22-001.
--..
ADDRESS: 920/930 Matchless Drive, Lot 5, Alpine Acres Subdivision, City and Townsite of
Aspen, Colorado.
-
ZONING: R-6 PUD.
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: Recently, the HPC has been contemplating new tools to analyze the
appropriateness of proposals to alter historic structures. The following questions are likely to be
the center of future discussions, and may be helpful for HPC to at least reference for this project
(note that the questions do not serve as formal decision making criteria at this time):
1. Why is the property significant?
2. What are the key features of the property?
3. What is the character of the context? How sensitive is the context to changes?
4. How would the proposed work affect the property's integrity assessment score?
5. What is the potential for cumulative alterations that may affect the integrity of the
property?
The properties are significant as part of a relatively small group of remaining miner's cottages in
Aspen that have not been significantly expanded. They have been moved to an area that contains
few Victorian buildings. These three cabins have had a number of alterations that may be
reversed. As discussed above, the project as currently proposed does not represent full build-out.
Design Guideline review
Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. A list ~""
of the design guidelines relevant to Conceptual Review is attached as "Exhibit A."
2
The application suggests a plan to demolish additions on 920 Matchless Drive and replace them
- with a small room. Elevations have not been provided, therefore feedback cannot be given at tllis
_. time. Plans for a new home at the back of the lot will be developed in the future.
An addition that appears to be non-historic is proposed to be removed from the back of 930
Matchless. The applicant has provided floor plans and elevations along with drawings of the
new unit proposed to be built behind it.
Staff has concerns that the proposed addition on 930 Matchless conflicts with a number of
guidelines. In particular, there is not a distinct COlmector piece between the new and old
construction. A successful connector is usually at least 10 feet in length and inset more from the
corners of tile historic building, allowing its modest size to be clearly understood. While it may
be acceptable for the new addition to be taller that the historic house, a more sympathetic
transition is needed as well as a restudy of the long sloping roof line. The encroachment of the
second floor deck onto the back of tile cottage creates a jarring relationship and disrupts the
historic roofline and eave. Guidelines that concern staff in particular are:
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the
primary building is maintained.
D A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary
building is inappropriate.
D An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is
inappropriate.
,-, D An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style
should be avoided.
D An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate.
lOA Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
D An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining
visually compatible with these em'lier features.
D A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a
differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be
considered to help define a chmlge from old to new construction.
10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building.
D An addition that is lower than or similar to tile height of the primary building is preferred.
10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back
substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building.
D A I-story connector is preferred.
D The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary
building.
D The connector also should be propOliional to the primary building.
10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building.
D Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate.
D Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential strnctures with sloped roofs.
-,--
...........
3
10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or
obscure historically important architectural features.
D For exmllple, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should
be avoided.
10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the
historic building.
D If the roof of the historic building is symmetrically proportioned, the roof of the
addition should be similar.
D Eave lines on the addition should be similar to those of the historic building or
structure.
We have few concerns with the design for the detached new house at 930 Matchless.
separated from tile miner's cottages mld does not have a strong relationship to a street.
FAR BONUS
The applicant is requesting a 500 square foot floor area bonus. The following standards apply to
an FAR bonus, per Section26.415.110.E:
~"'"
It is
1. In selected circumstances the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square
feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be
considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that:
a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; and
b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the "'"
addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic ...J
building and/or
c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; and/or
d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic
building's form, materials or openings; and/or
e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or
f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; and/or
g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or
h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained.
2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent
upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the
proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices.
Projects that demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood
of being awarded additional floor area.
3. The decision to grant a Floor Area Bonns for Major Development projects will occur as
part of the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan, pnrsuant to Section 26AI5.070(D).
No development application that includes a request for a Floor Area Bonus may be
submitted until after the applicant has met with the HPC in a work session to discuss how
thc proposal might meet the bonus considerations.
Staff Response: The applicant is proposing to remove non-historic additions from the two
cottages and to make relatively small new additions, which is commendable. No information is
4
-.,
-
given about restoration work that will take place, although some of the specifics would likely
need to be delayed until a "demolition and discovery" provided more information about the
original location of window openings, etc. There is not enough information available at this time
to make a finding on the FAR bonus. It is not needed in order to construct the project. The
applicilllt may choose to request it, apply it to the site, and free up additional "allowable floor
mea" for sale as TDR's. As has been the case with other HPC projects, granting of the bonus has
been held to a high standard involving exemplary design and restoration efforts.
"'-'
ON-SITE RELOCATION
The intent of the Historic Preservation ordinance is to preserve designated historic buildings in
their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical
relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to
particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a building may be
appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on
the attributes that make it significilllt.
26AI5.090.C Standards for the Relocation of Designated Properties
Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it
meets anyone of the following standards:
1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation
will not affect the character of the historic district; Q!:
2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on
which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic
district or property; Q!:
3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; or
4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method
givcn the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move
will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was
originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of
adjacent designated properties; and
Additionallv. for approval to relocate all of the followinl! criteria must be met:
1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of
withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and
2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and
3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair
and prcscrvation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the
necessary financial security.
Staff Responsc: The applicant proposes to lift 930 Matchless to construct a basement and then
to put it back in the same place. Staff finds the review standards are met. A restudy of the
placement of a lightwell directly adjacent to the historic front porch may be needed.
..~.......
""">I.~'
5
DEMOLITION
-
The applicant proposes to remove non-historic additions from the miner's cottages as part of
their Conceptual Development. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the
application meets anyone of the following criteria:
a. The property has been determined by the city to be an imminent hazmd to public
safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner,
b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to
properly maintain the structure,
c. The structure Cillmot practically be moved to another appropriate location in
Aspen, or
d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic,
ill'chitectural, ill'chaeological, engineering or cultural significance, and
Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met:
a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic
district in which it is located, and
b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the
integrity of tile historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent
designated properties and
c. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs
of the area. "'"
,.,#
Staff Response: It is unclear where these buildings were moved from, therefore we cannot use
Silllborn maps to determine their exact original size. From a site visit, it appears that the areas
proposed to be removed are non-historic. Some limited removal of siding or interior finishes
might be appropriate to confirm those assumptions.
ON-SITE PARKING
The development that the applicant proposes (2 free market units on 930 Matchless, I free
market unit on 920 Matchless, and one ADU on 920 Matchless) generates the need for 7 parking
spaces. A three car garage is proposed at 930 Matchless, and the intention is to provide 2 spaces
at 920 Matchless. HPC will be asked to waive 2 on-site parking spaces.
In order to grant a parking waiver, HPC must find that the review standards of Section
26.415.110.C of the Municipal Code are met. They require that:
1. The parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may bc approved upon a
finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic
significance or architectural character of a designated historic propcrty, an adjoining
designatcd propcrty or a historic district.
Staff Response: The lot width at 930 Matchless does not appear to allow for ah additional
parking space to be accommodated without the granting of setback variances to push the new
unit closer to a side lot line. HPC has not been provided with a design for the new structure at
6
~....
Matchless Drive and is therefore not in a position to determine whether or not four spaces
,.... can be accommodated. A finding on this variance must be delayed until more information is
"- provided.
SETBACK VARIANCES
The application includes the following variance requests: a 4' front yard setback variance
because of the existing location of the front porches, and a west sideyard setback variance of up
to 5' to accommodate the proximity of lightwell on the west side of 930 Matchless Drive to the
proposed new lot line.
HPC must make a finding that the setback variance:
a. Is similar to the pattern, features and charactcr of the historic property or district;
and/or
b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural
character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic
district.
Staff Response: The front setback variance simply allows an existing condition to remain. The
sideyard variance is intemal to the propeliy and only permits a lightwell. Staff supports the
Vill'lances.
'-
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: The application lacks information about 920 Matchless Drive. Staff
has concerns with regard to the design of the addition to 930 Matchless. Continuation is
recommended.
Exhibits:
.~
A. Relevilllt Design Guidelines
B. Application
'"-
7
Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines Conceptual Review
9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
D In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in
a historic district.
o It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative.
D Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements.
D A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details
and materials.
D Before a building is moved, a plilll must be in place to secure the structure and provide a
new foundation, utilities, ill1d to restore the house.
D The design of a new structure on the site should be in accordance with the guidelines for
new construction.
D In general, moving a building to an entirely different site or neighborhood is not approved.
10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right.
D Such illl addition is usually similar in character to the original building in terms of
materials, finishes illld design.
10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed.
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the
primary building is maintained.
D A new addition tllat creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the
primary building is inappropriate.
D An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is
inappropriate.
D An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic
style should be avoided.
D An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate.
1004 Design a new addition to be recognized as a prodnct of its own time.
D An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also
remaining visually compatible with these earlier features.
D A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material
or a differentiation between historic, illld more current styles are all teclmiques that may
be considered to help define a change from old to new construction.
10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with thc main building.
D An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is prefelTed.
0.7 If it is necessary to dcsign an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back
substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic
building.
D A I-story connector is preferred.
D The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary
building.
D The connector also should be proportional to the primary building.
10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the
visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character
to remain prominent.
D Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate.
D Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not
alter the exterior mass of a building.
.........
"""'\
-
8
-
"-
,-
.~
,.-.
o Set back an addition from primill'y facades in order to allow the original proportions and
, character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is
~ recommended.
Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic bnilding.
D Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate.
D Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped
roofs.
10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure
historically important architectural features.
D For example, loss or alteration of ill'chitectural details, cornices and eavelines should be
avoided.
10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic
building.
D If the roof of the historic building is symmetrically proportioned, the roof of the addition
should be similar.
D Eave lines on the addition should be similar to those of the historic building or structure.
11.1 Oricnt the primary entrance of a new building to the street.
D The building should be arrilllged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid
pattern of the site.
11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by
using a front porch.
D The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a means of access to the entry.
D A new porch should be similill' in size and shape to those seen traditionally.
D In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street;
nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that
orients to the street.
11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the
parcel.
D Subdivide lill'ger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic
buildings on the original site.
1104 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building.
D The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure.
D The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch.
11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property.
D They should not overwhelm the original in scale.
11.6 Use roofforms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block.
D Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms.
D Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context.
D On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the
context.
D Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street
are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frmnes.
11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
D This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings.
D Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history
are especially discouraged on historic sites.
9
"~"",,,
~
...."'"
-"'"
OCE)
MEMORANDUM
-
-
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
THRU:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
FROM:
Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Intern
RE:
629 West Smuggler Street- Major Development Review (Final) and Variances
(Public Hearing)
DATE:
June 22, 2005
SUMMARY: The subject propeliy is a 4,500 square foot lot that is listed on the Aspen
Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. The property contains three buildings; a
Victorian era house and shed, and a non-historic detached garage.
The applicant requests HPC Final approval to lift the house to construct a basement, demolish
and replace a non-historic addition, demolish and replace a non-historic garage, and adaptive re-
use of a 19th century outbuilding. The project has been granted setback variances, ill1 FAR bonus,
illld a Vill'iilllCe from the "Residential Design Standill'ds." Additional setback variances and a
pill'king waiver were omitted at Conceptual Review and are now requested.
Staff finds that the project meets the relevant design guidelines and recommends HPC grant
Final approval with conditions.
APPLICANT:
Collaborative.
Robert and India Wardrop, owners, represented by 1 Friday Design
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-09-00 I.
ADDRESS: 629 W. Smuggler, Lot A illld the west \12 of Lot B, Block 21, City and Townsite of
Aspen.
ZONING: R-6, Medium Density Residential.
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL)
-
The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Final 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
I
~
Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. TIle 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: Recently, the HPC has been contemplating new tools to analyze the
appropriateness of proposals to alter historic structures. The following questions are likely to be
the center of future discussions, and may be helpful for HPC to at least reference for this project
(note that the questions do not serve as formal decision making criteria at this time):
1. Why is the property significant?
2. What are the key features of the property?
3. What is the character of the context? How sensitive is the context to changes?
4. How would the proposed work affect the property's integrity assessment score?
5. What is the potential for cumulative alterations that may affect the integrity of the
property? -,
4'Y'
The property is listed on tile Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. The
Late Victorian structure is significant for its position in the context of Aspen's mining era during
the late 1800s. It represents a common middle class residence during that period, as well as
construction techniques, materials available, and the fashion of the time. The building is also
indicative of the evolution of the mining cmnp into a broader based community. The house is
relatively unaltered. There are few other Victorians in the immediate vicinity, and the integrity
of the historic house will be improved through restoration work. This project represents a full
buildout.
Design Guideline review
Final review deals with details such as the landscape plan, lighting, fenestration, and selection
of new materials. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit A" Only those
which staff finds warrant discussion are included in the memo.
Landscape Plan:
The architect plans to work with a lillldscape architect to develop a plan for the site which will be
a condition of approval. In order to receive HPC approval, the landscape plan must be in
compliance with the design guidelines, for exmnpJe, there must be a sidewalk from Smuggler
Street to the front door as per Section 1.9 of the design guidelines:
---
2
--
1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering
a rehabilitation project.
o This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk,
proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature
and ending in the "private" spaces beyond.
o Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the sh'eet to the front entry.
Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree.
o Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style.
Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles
--
Lighting:
Light fixtures have been indicated for the new addition but not for the historic Victorian House
or the historic shed. When available, a review of these fixtures can be handled through staff and
monitor. HPC approval must be achieved prior to purchase and installation.
Fenestration:
At the applicant's request, the board commented on a proposed skylight for the east side of the
Victorian during conceptual review. As per section 7.3 of the design guidelines, the skylight was
deemed inappropriate and is not included in the final proposal. Staff commends the applicant for
this revision.
With regard to the historic house, the application mentions possible replacement of existing
windows. No original windows may be replaced until a site visit by staff and monitor determines
whether this is appropriate.
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
o Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash,
muntinsjmullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows.
o Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them, whenever conditions permit.
o Preserve the original glass. when feasible.
The east side of the historic house features a large window that is very unlikely to be original.
The applicant plill1s to retain it, and requests approval to replace a small window that probably is
from the Victorian Era. Staff recommends against replacement of the small window unless it is
demonstrated to be recent construction, and receives approval by HPC monitor or Staff.
,'.--
3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building
wall.
o Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate,
as is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades
where the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining feature.
o Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls.
o Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or
increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades.
,,--
3
Staff is concerned with the addition of one window to both the north and west elevations of the
historic shed. Staff finds that the new windows would disrupt the reading of the historic shed
therefore compromising the integrity of the structure. It also requires the removal of historic
material. This proposal is does not comply with section 3.3 of the design guidelines:
3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade.
----- 0 Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character-defining facade will
negatively affect tl1e integrity of a sh'ucture.
However, if this window is permitted by HPC, a wood window must be used. There are 2
original window openings on the south elevation that have previously been closed. If windows
are needed in the shed, Staff recommends that the 2 original windows are reopened and wood
windows are installed.
Most of the fenestration on the new addition has similar proportions to the historic windows,
however the placement is quite different. Staff has some reservations about windows that meet
the corners of the walls, creating a foreign relationship between the historic house and addition.
This project is particularly sensitive because the addition is completely exposed to view on Sixth
Street.
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the
primary building is maintained.
o A new addition tllat creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the
primary building is inappropriate.
o An addition tl1at seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is
inappropriate.
o An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic
style should be avoided.
o An addition tl1at covers historically significant features is inappropriate.
10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
o An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also
remaining visually compatible witl1 these earlier features.
o A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in
material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques
that may be considered to help define a change from old to new consh'uction.
The project is really excellent from a massing perspective, and the material palette creates a
compatible but distinct statement as to when each section of the house was built. Staff
recommends there be a discussion of the corner windows on the east and west elevations, and the
skylight that pops up on the COllilector. The Board may see the light monitor on the addition as a
play on a chimney form.
4
-.
~
-....',....#'
~...
.-,.,
7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices.
o Flat skylights that are flush with the roof plane may be considered only in an obscure
location on a historic structure. Locating a skylight or a solar panel on a front roof plane is
not allowed.
o A skylight or solar panel should not interrupt the plane of a historic roof. It should be
positioned below theridgeline.
"'-
Materials:
The applicant discusses replacement of the aluminum siding on the old house with wood
clapboill'd with an 8" exposure. It must first be determined whether the original siding is present
beneath the aluminum, in which case it probably should be restored. If not, the Board should
determine an appropriate exposure for the new siding, probably in the range of 4" - 6", not the 8"
as shown on the plans.
2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing
materials on primary surfaces.
o If the original material is wood clapboard, for example, then the replacement material
must be wood as well. It should match !he original in size, !he amount of exposed lap and
finish.
o Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only
those should be replaced, not !he entire wall.
~",,# 2.8 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for primary building materials.
o In some instances, substitute materials may be used for replacing architectural details, but
doing so is not encouraged. If it is necessary to use a new material, such as a fiberglass
column, the style and detail should precisely match !hat of the historic model.
o Primary building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced Witll
synthetic materials.
o Syntlletic materials include: aluminum, vinyl siding and panelized brick.
DElFS (syntlletic stucco) is not an appropriate replacement for real stucco.
At conceptual review, a commissioner mentioned the need to keep the historic shed as close to
grade as possible. Staff recommends a restudy of the foundation height as per the design
guidelines:
9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic
elevation above grade.
D Raising the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable. However, lifting it
substantially above the ground level is inappropriate.
o Changing the historic elevation is discouraged, unless it can be demonstrated tllat it
enhances the resource.
~
5
DECISION MAKING OPTIONS:
The HPC may:
. approve the application,
. approve the application with conditions,
. disapprove the application, or
. continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC grant Major Development Review
(Final) with the following conditions:
I. The applicant must submit a detailed landscape for approval by staff and monitor which
must include a walkway from Smuggler Street to the entranceway of the historic house.
2. HPC staff and monitor must approve any changes with regard to the type and location of
exterior lighting fixtures by reviewing a plan prior to wiring, purchasing, or installing the
fixtures.
3. Approval must be granted by HPC monitor or Staff before any original windows are
replaced.
4. The small window located on the east side of the Victorian House will be retained, unless
deemed non-historic by HPC monitor or Staff.
5. The applicant is not permitted to alter the historic shed by adding new windows openings,
but is permitted to reopen the 2 original windows located on the south elevation.
6. The fenestration placement on the new addition will be restudied and submitted for
approval by HPC monitor or Staff.
7. The applicilllt must submit a detailed restoration plan for historic material with the
building permit indicating what original materials appear to still exist on the structure,
what treatments will be used to retain them, and which materials need to be replaced.
8. If no historic material exists beneath the aluminum siding on the historic house, then the
exposure of the new wood clapboard must receive approval by HPC monitor or Staff.
9. A restudy of the foundation height of the historic shed must be submitted for approval by
HPC monitor or Staff.
10. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved
drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the
information is available.
II. Submit a demolition plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating exactly what
areas of the existing house ill'e to be removed as part of the renovation.
12. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations or materials as approved without
first being reviewed illld approved by HPC staff and monitor, or the full board.
13. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the
building permit plan set illld all other prints made for the purpose of construction.
14. The applicilllt shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC
resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to
HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of
6
-
-
-
approval are known and understood illld must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer
prior to applying for the building penllit.
15. The General Contractor illld/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty
license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit.
16. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan
vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order.
However, illlY failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this
approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise
exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be
recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development
order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the
development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits).
Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in
the creation of a vested property right.
No later tllan fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary
to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be
published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the
City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific
development plilll and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice
shall be substantially in the following form:
,."-
Notice is hereby given to tile general public of the approval of a site specific development
plan, illld the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years,
pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen illld Title 24, Article 68, Colorado
Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 629 West Smuggler Street
-
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews
and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or
the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals ill'e not inconsistent with this
approval.
The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial
review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin
to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required
under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the
Coloradp Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter.
Exhibits:
Resolution # _, Series of 2005
A. Relevant HPC Design Guidelines
B. Application
-
-
7
Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines for 629 West Smuggler Street, Final Review
1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a
rehabilitation project.
o This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with Ihe "public" sidewalk, proceeding
along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or enh-y feature and ending in the
"private" spaces beyond.
o Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering
walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree.
o Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style.
Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles.
1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic
structures.
o The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, wiIh planting material and
sod, and not covered with paving, for example.
1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and
shrubs.
o Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of
damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Deparhnent.
o If a h'ee must be removed as part of the addition or alteration, replace it with species of a
large enough scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project.
1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs.
o Retaining historic planting beds, landscape features and walkways is encouraged.
1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context
of the site.
o Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact
of mature growth.
o Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent.
o Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials.
1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are
inappropriate.
o Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer
than the mature canopy size.
o Do not locate plants or h'ees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features
or block views to the building.
o It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard.
1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting.
o Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on
walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes.
2.1 Preserve original building materials.
o Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place.
o Only remove siding which is deteriorated and must be replaced.
o Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices,
pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved.
o Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired. Reconstruction
may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity.
2.5 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating
or otherwise reinforcing the material.
o Avoid the removal of damaged materials that can be repaired.
8
~
-
-
--
-
,"".....
,
o Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins
may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also may be
used.
2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials
on primary surfaces.
o If the original material is wood clapboard, for example, then the replacement material must
be wood as well. It should match the original in size, the amount of exposed lap and finish.
o Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are dmnaged beyond repair, then only
those should be replaced, not the entire wall.
2.8 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for primary building materials.
o In some instances, substitute materials may be used for replacing architectural details, but
doing so is not encouraged. If it is necessary to use a new material, such as a fiberglass
column, the style and detail should precisely match tllat of the historic model.
o Primary building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with
synthetic materials.
o Syntl1etic materials include: aluminum, vinyl siding and panelized brick.
DElFS (syntl1etic stucco) is not an appropriate replacement for real stucco.
2.10 Consider removing later covering materials that have not achieved historic
significance.
o Once the non-historic siding is removed, repair tl1e original, underlying material.
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
o Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntinsj mullions,
sills, heads. jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows.
o Repair frames and sashes ratl1er than replacing them, whenever conditions permit.
o Preserve the original glass, when feasible.
3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall.
o Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defirring facade is inappropriate, as
is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where
the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining feature.
o Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls.
o Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it
to receive a larger window on primary facades.
3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade.
o Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character-defining facade will negatively
affect the integrity of a sh'ucture.
3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design.
o If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double-hung.
or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of
glass panes. .
o Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades.
3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original.
o Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character-defining
facades. However. a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window
components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish.
3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
o Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive
a larger window is inappropriate.
o Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered.
9
3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the
original window.
o A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's casing, the sash steps
back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which
individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They
distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall.
4.1 Preserve historically significant doors.
o Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the
door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing,
h'ansoms and flanking sidelights.
o Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrallces.
o If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so
that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its
historic position.
o If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original enh'ance on the primary facade must
remain operable.
5.1 Preserve an original porch.
o Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions and
spacing of balusters when replacing missing ones.
o Unless used historically on the property, wrought iron, especially the "licorice stick" style
that emerged in tl1e 1950s and 1960s, is inappropriate.
o Expanding the size of a historic porch is inappropriate.
6.1 Preserve significant architectural features.
o Repair only those features that are deteriorated.
o Patch, piece-in, splice, consolidate or otherwise upgrade the existing material, using
recognized preservation metl10ds whenever possible.
o Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins
may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components als0 may be
used.
o Removing a damaged feature when it can be repaired is inappropriate.
7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices.
o Flat skylights that are flush with the roof plane may be considered only in an obscure
location on a historic structure. Locating a skylight or a solar panel on a front roof plane is
not allowed.
o A skylight or solar panel should not interrupt the plane of a historic roof. It should be
positioned below tl1e ridgeline.
7.7 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character.
o A new dormer should fit within the existing wall plane. It should be lower than the
ridgeline and set in from the eave. It should also be in proportion with the building.
o The mass and scale of a dormer addition must be subordinate to the scale of the historic
building.
7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to
those used traditionally.
o Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled
buildings.
o If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone
and have a matte, non-reflective finish.
o Flashing should be in scale with the roof material.
10
-
"'"
"", ._~('
-
~,.."
".,~,
-
,~,.,,,
_.,..;'
o If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non-reflective
finish.
9.7 A lightwell may be used to permit light into below-grade living space.
o In general, a lightwell is prohibited on a wall that faces a street (per the Residential Design
Standards).
o The size of a lightwell should be minimized.
o A Iightwell fuat is used as a walkout space may be used only in limited situations al"ld will
be considered on a case-by-case basis. If a walkout space is feasible, it should be surrounded
by a simple fence or rail.
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the
primary building is maintained.
o A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with tile historic character of fue
primary building is inappropriate.
o An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period fuan that of fue primary building also is
inappropriate.
o An addition tllat seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic
style should be avoided.
o An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate.
10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
o An addition should be made distinguishable from fue historic building, while also
remaining visually compatible with fuese earlier features.
o A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle chal"lge in material
or a differentiation between historic, and more current slyles are all techniques that may be
considered to help define a change from old to new construction.
10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building.
o Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate.
o Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped
roofs.
10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic
materials of the primary building.
o The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials.
14.3 Keep color schemes simple.
DUsing one base color for the building is preferred.
o Using only one or two accent colors is also encouraged, except where precedent exists for
using more than two colors with some architectural slyles.
14.4 Coordinating the entire building in one color scheme is usually more successful than
working with a variely of palettes.
o Using the color scheme to establish a sense of overall composition for the building is
sh'ongly encouraged.
14.5 Develop a color scheme for the entire building front that coordinates all the facade
elements.
o Choose a base color that will link the entire building face together. For a commercial
building, it can tie signs, ornamentation, awnings and entrances together. On residences, it
can function similarly. It can also help your building relate better to others in the dish'ict.
o The complexity of the accent colors should be appropriate to the architectural slyle of the
building.
o Doors may be painted a bright accent color, or they may be left a natural wood finish.
Historically, many of the doors would have simply had a stain applied.
o Window sashes are also an excellent opportunily for accent color.
II
o Brilliant luminescent or "day-glo" colors are not appropriate.
14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that
used traditionally.
o The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be
approved by the HPC.
o All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence.
14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting.
o Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be
permitted.
o Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures.
o Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by
controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night.
o Do not wash an entire building facade in light.
o A void placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls
of buildings.
o Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area.
14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building.
o Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that
direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the
shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged.
o Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off
the property or into public rights-of-way.
14.12 Provide a weather-protective finish to wood surfaces.
o The rustic bare-wood look is not a part of the heritage of the historic districts or individual
landmark properties.
o Painted surfaces are most appropriate. Stains may be accepted in combination with
materials that give a well-finished appearance. Use water seal to preserve the porch deck.
o Rustic finishes will not be approved.
14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street.
o When it is feasible, screen service areas from view, especially those associated with
conunercial and multifamily developments.
o This includes locations for h'ash containers and loading docks.
o Service areas should be accessed off of the alley, if one exists.
14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way.
o Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not
create a negative visual impact.
o Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof must be grouped together to minimize their visual
impact. Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials that are
compatible with those of the building itself.
o Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges.
o A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does
not create a negative visual impact.
o Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the street or
alley. Also minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Use smaller
satellite dishes and mount them low to the ground and away from front yards. significant
building facades or highly visible roof planes.
o Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize
their appearance by blending with their backgrounds.
12
-
,'"'
--
rP'''''
'-.~
',--
."-
-
14.17 Design a new driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact.
o Plan parking areas and driveways in a manner that utilizes existing curb cuts. New curb
cuts are not permitted.
o If an alley exists, a new driveway must be located off of it.
13
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) AND
VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 629 WEST SMUGGLER STREET,
LOT A AND THE WEST Y, OF LOT B, BLOCK 21, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
-
RESOLUTION NO. _' SERIES OF 2005
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-09-001
WHEREAS, the applicill1ts, Robert and India Wardrop, represented by I Friday Design
Collaborative have requested Major Development Review (Final) and Variances (Public Review)
for the property located at 629 W. Smuggler, Lot A and the west Y, of Lot B, Block 21, City and
Townsite of Aspen; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure
shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a
designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted
to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures
established for their review;" and
WHEREAS, for Final Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff
analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance
with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.DJ.b.2 r"",
illld 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve,
disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information
necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and
WHEREAS, for approval of setback variances, the HPC must review the application, a staff
analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.415.110.C of
the Municipal Code, that the setback variance:
a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or
b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural
character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic
district; and
WHEREAS, for approval of parking reductions, HPC must review the application, a staff
ill1alysis repOli illld the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.415.110.C of
the Municipal Code, that:
I. The parking reduction ill1d waiver of payment- in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by
the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significilllce or
ill-chitectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a
historic district; and
-
,..-
'-'
".-
"-
.--
\".,..-
~ ;J; ~v -
,_., ~
~ tn ~I .- .. .
~0 f/
Response to HPC concern of the 8" Proposed
Traditional Lapped Wood Siding:
No original siding exists beneath the current non-
historic aluminum siding, so unfortunately, we
truly don't know what the exact dimension of
the siding historically is_ We are happy to switch
the proposed siding to a width of6" if the board
is comfortable with this. We feel from looking
around town, 6" for a building of this scale and
period would be best served by this dimension.
Response to HPC concern of the east window
proposed for removal/replacement:
(3.2 - Preserve the position and arrangement of
historic windows in a building wall)
Although we do not believe the east window in
question is historic, we are willing to work with
the HPC during the construction process to deem
the authenticity of the window. We ask the HPC
if - should the window be deemed a non-histori-
cal entity during construction, staff and monitor
grant the approval of a window similar in pro-
portion to the other existing vertically oriented
historic windows_ We believe the window was
placed in the victorian at the same time the non-
historic addition was erected due to a kitchen
being relocated to this area_ The only other win-
dow similar to this proportion is found on the
non-historic addition of the house. Construction
of the windows appears to be of same time pe-
riod. We would also like you to consider under
Guideline 3.2 - "greater flexibility in installing
new windows may be considered on rear walls".
This being the rear viewing wall for the resi-
dence.
c
".-
',--
/""
"""""
Response to HPC concern of the east and west
comer window propposals:
For clarification, the east window is in a loca-
tion of moderate visibility from the interior lots
of the alley only. The major driving factor for
using the comer window on the west elevation
was actually a direct response to the mass and
scale of the project in helping the piece to "read"
less vertically. After lengthy effort working with
the massing and elevational proportions, we con-
tinually came back to the rationalle the horizon-
tal nature of the comer window helped to create
a clear distinction between the two architectures
and theirtime periods (we feel this actually gives
support to guideline 10.3), gave less emphasis
to the vertical aspect of the addition, and was
being more respective to the historic Victorian
by becoming more interperative and less imita-
tive in proportional relation (10.4 - An addition
should be made distinguishable from the historic
building, while remaining visually compatible /
differation between historic, and more current
styles are acceptable techniques ): we believe this
comer window is accomplishing this.
We would also like to point out the comer win-
dow idea (some much more radical in protru-
sion, geometries, and materials - we are propos-
ing a rectangular, wood entity), have been used
very successfully in previously approved HPC
projects, two of them being recognized by the
HPC for outstanding design! preservation efforts.
c
N 75.09'"",,, 45.00' Alley
EY BLOCK 21
A - Proposed Sauna Area of Shed
B - Proposed Changing Area
C - Proposed Location ofWmdows
D - Historic Door Openings on Shed
Response to HPC concern with the addition of two new windows to the historic shed:
Alley Elevation / Current Existing Condition - Historic Shed:
629 West Smuggler
When we began this project with the clients, we took the approach that the shed was not a hindrance to the success of
the project, but an opportunity to turn an unusable shed ( the roof doesn't even stop water) and incorporate this into an
integral part of the design proposal. The shed has been completely negleted for the past half century (and perhaps
,..Jonger). Also, the currently approved HPC project includes a plan that proposes no formal improvements to the
0ndition of the shed. We feel this is a tremendous opportunity to give a "second life" to this shed, and for the HPC to
show how builings of this peculiarity can (If granted some degree of tolerance in the interpretations of our guidelines)
be adaptively re-used in a positive fashion. The very essence of preservation is to keep alive over the course of a
changing time, and we believe this is an outstanding example of just how to do that.
I understand it may immmediately seem most logical to reopen the doors on the alley fiu:ade: We have three concerns
that discourage us from agreeing with staff's suggested direction when looking atthe totality of why we are proposing
the changes in the first place:
I) In the diagrams, we are attempting to indicate how the planning of the interior spaces for the facility could be used.
We anticipate no windows in the actual sauna area of the shed, and thereforethe locations curently make it adaptively
problematic from a location and sizing perspective. We are considering windows only into a small changing area in the
shed. We also beleive that the alley facade (due to its level of visibility) should remain the most unaltered in appear-
ance, therefore leaving the historic doors as currently existing. We would also note the construction of the doors (D)
appears to be of similar construction to the rest of the shed. It may actually be more historically inaccurate to remove
the doors and replace them with windows on the most visible facade of the structure.
2) Privacy - The current location (directly on the alley facade) and height and size (3' from the interior floor height of
the shed) does not make for a viable option from the functional standpoint of privacy. I would please urge you to
consider this when making your decision.
o Security - Although welive inAspen , the reality is the shed still sits directly on the alley and the client desires some
Sense of security from the direct access of the alley. By allowing the proposed windows (both smaller than the door
openings and higher), we will be able to address the issues of function, privacy, and security, while turning and unused
element into a vibrant piece of the property.
c
Response to HPC concern of proposed raising
of shed foundation height:
To clarifY the issue, we do not plan any changes
in the current existing elevation of the shed. The
foundation will be incorporated into the com-
plete new addition so slight variations may be
necessary to the project internally, but the exte-
rior relationships will not be impacted.
',,-
- ),;.
-,
Foundation as currently existing - 629 West Smuggler
Response to HPC concern of Historic Victorian Wmdows Replacement:
We are happy to comply with the desires of the HPC wherever possible. During the construction phase, a
complete evaluation of what can be done to appropriately preserve each specific window will be done with the
inclusion of a project monitor if desired. Wmdows may have to be temporarily removed an re-insta1led after
.,-. being repaired off site.
"-
"""
'-
Response to HPC concern of establishing a pathway from public to private spaces. Guideline 1.9:
We are happy to work with a landscape architectural firm (to be determined) and the HPC on this topic as we
develop the landscape plan further. We would like to point out no path historically exists from West Smuggler
to the main house, and we would be concerned about what implications installing a pathway at this location
would do to the very large blue spruce occupying the comer of the lot currently. The main path of the house has
been from the side street (Sixth Street) entry. We would ask the board allow us to further study what is best for
all conditions of the site before making a final determination of exactly where and where not the path should
happen.