The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.19950524AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION May 24, 1995 REGULAR MEETING SISTER CITIES ROOM - SECOND FLOOR CITY HALL 5:00 I. Roll Call and approval of April 12, 1995 minutes and May 10, 1995 minutes. II. Commission & Staff Comments III. Public Comments i IV.* NEW BUSINESS 1) 3 3, 441' P 82Â«. 1% li,<14-f 9/9/1 04 6'41 5:15 A. 123 W. Francis- Landmark, Conceptual, On-site relocation, partial demolition, special review to exceed 85% of the allowed F.A.R.- PUBLIC HEARING - 6:15 B. 130 S. Galena, City Hall- Minor 1 1 6:45 C. 434 E. Cooper, Kemo Sabe- Minor 7:00 VI. ADJOURN HPC PROJECT MONITORING HPC Member Name Proiect Donnelley Erdman The Meadows Collins Block/Alley 624 E. Hopkins (CD:3-8-95) 220 W. Main- European Flower 930 King Street- Cunningham 330 Gillespie Jake Vickery The Meadows 130 S. Galena- City Hall 520 Walnut- Greenwood 205 W. Main- Chisolm 610 W. Hallam- Iglehart Leslie Holst Holden/Marolt Aspen Historic Trust 303 E. Main- Kuhn 930 King- Cunningham 939 E. Cooper- Langley Entrance to Aspen Roger Moyer 409 E. Hopkins Holden/Marolt 303 E. Main- Kuhn 420 E. Main 107 Juan Martha Madsen 132 W. Main- Asia 435 W. Main-L'Auberge 706 W. Main (CD:4-27-94) 702 W. Main- Stapleton Linda Smisek 229 W. Hallam- Pinnington 316 E. Hopkins- Howling Wolf 939 E. Cooper- Langley 801 E. Hyman- Elmore Sven Alstrom 624 E. Hopkins 4-12-95 Barn and historic house approved final Susan Doddington Melanie Roshko Jeff MeMenimen 91Â«j MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 123 W. Francis Street, Landmark designation, Conceptual Review, Relocation and Partial Demolition, and Special Review to exceed 85% of the allowable F.A.R. DATE: May 24, 1995 SUMMARY: The applicant requests landmark designation, conceptual review, relocation and partial demolition of existing structures and special review under ordinance #35 for the property at 123 W. Francis Street. The house, the Mathews House, was built in 1888. Three outbuildings are found on the property. The project will also require review for two accessory dwelling units and a gmqs exemption. This will occur at Planning and Zoning Commission. APPLICANT: Jake Vickery. LOCATION: 123 W. Francis Street, Lots C,D, and E, and the East 1/2 of Lot B, Block 56, City and Townsite of Aspen. LANDMARK DESIGNATION PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW: Landmark Designation is a three-step process, requiring recommendations from both HPC and P&Z (public hearing), and first and second reading of a Landmark Designation Ordinance by City Council. City Council holds a public hearing at second reading. LOCAL DESIGNATION STANDARDS: Section 24-7-702 of the Aspen Land Use Code defines the six standards for local Landmark Designation, requiring that the resource under consideration meet at least one of the following standards: A. Historical Importance: The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or an event of historical significance to the cultural, social or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado of the United States. Response: This standard is not met. 1 B. Architectural Importance: The structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct l or of traditional Aspen character. Response: The Mathews house is a simple Victorian miner's cottage with some alterations. An addition has been made at the rear of the structure and there has been some alteration of the northwest corner of the house. Lt essentially retains the original footprint and a number of original features including windows and decorative doors. From historic maps, the house appears to have some features, such as two front porches and entries, which are not common to other local historic resources. C. Architectural Importance: The structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type or specimen. Response: This standard is not met. D. Architectural Importance: The structure is a significant work of an architect whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. Response: The architect or builder is unknown. E. Neighborhood Character: The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. Response: The surrounding neighborhood contains a number of significant historic structures, Aspen Landmarks, and National Register of Historic Places properties. This house has had deferred maintenance, but can be rehabilitated to further contribute to the character of this block. F. Community Character: The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance. Response: This site is representative of the modest scale, style and character of homes constructed during the mining era, the community's primary period of 2 historic significance. Conceptual Development PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 7-601 of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H, " Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to 5%, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to section 5-510(B)(2). Response: This historic house has suffered long-term deferred maintenance and some incompatible changes in materials. Beneath these changes the original house is almost completely intact, inside and out. The applicant has the opportunity to discover the original character of the structure and restore it. The property is 10,500 sq. ft. Currently, the code allows two dwelling units to be constructed on a property of \ this size. The units would have to be owned by one \ person or could be condominiumized. The applicant is pursuing a code amendment at P&Z and City Council to allow a lot split in such a case for historic landmark properties. The lot split will allow a more appropriate distribution of the allowed F.A.R. for the site, resulting,in a smaller addition to the historic resource. The applicant must have HPC approval to relocate the historic house in order to make the project work, but this action will not result in any greater development rights than are currently allowed. The proposed code 3 amendment specifies that in these cases, the maximum allowable F.A.R. for the parcel will be the duplex F.A.R. (4,170 sq.ft.) Usually F.A.R. would be calculated for each individual lot that is created (here a 4,500 sq.ft. lot and a 6,000 sq.ft. lot) instead of looking at the parcel as a whole. This would result in a net F.A.R. of 6,060 sq.ft. as opposed to the duplex F.A.R. of 4,170 sq.ft. used in this project. Staff has no concerns with the compatibility of the addition to the historic structure or with the new structure. From examinations of historic maps and site visits, it appears that a significant alteration has been made to the northwest corner of the house. Originally there was a second front porch here. The back wall of the porch appears to still be in place, along with the original front door. Changes have been made in the roofline and j the porch has been enclosed. Staff feels strongly that the applicant should determine the original configuration of this area and restore it. The house appears to be a somewhat unusual design, no other examples of which exist in Aspen. The applicant does show a lightwell in this location and reconstruction of the porch may cause some problems with the basement floor plan. An early addition exists at the rear of the building and a rear porch has been removed. The applicant means to restore the porch, but will demolish at least the roof of the rear addition in order to add a second story. Staff can support the addition of new space in this location, but recommends that the applicant allow the original one story form to continue to read. This is accomplished to some extent in the proposed design. In terms of the restoration of original materials, the applicant proposes to side the structure with clapboards. It is unclear at this time if the original clapboards still exist under the asphalt siding and what condition they may be in. Original windows should be restored where possible and the original front doors and porch details should be retained. The existing house has a fairly large footprint. With the addition of new living space and a garage, the applicant requires a 5% site coverage variance. This is available as a landmark preservation incentive. The applicant proposes to retain the historic barn, but will demolish or give away the garage that sits at the front of the site. The historic barn will be converted into one bay of a two car garage. The outbuilding will still 4 read as a separate form as there are breaks between it and the rest of the building. The applicant also requests a side yard setback variance of 2.5' on the interior lot line. This is necessary due to the width of the existing house. The overall parking requirement for the site is 9 spaces. The applicant requests a waiver of 5 spaces. Since the application was submitted, the code has been changed to require only 2 spaces per unit, therefore the waive would be in line with new regulations. A 500 sq.ft. F.A.R. bonus is requested in order to make the historic structure a more livable unit. The original house is 1,363 sq. ft., and the total addition would be 587 sq.ft. The existing structure is not easily viewable from the street due to large trees on the property. It will be more visible after its relocation. The applicant also proposes to relocate the smallest of the front three trees to allow the new structure to be viewed from the street as well. Alternative floor plans for Lot B (the new unit) have been provided by the applicant, showing an octagonal element at the front of the structure. This is intended to offer a connection between the building and the street. Elevations will be provided at the meeting. The applicant requests a 5% site coverage variance for this structure as part of the Cottage Infill Program. This program encourages "over the garage" A.D.U.'s. Without this variance, the applicant intends to place the A.D.U. below grade. If it is possible to relocate the westernmost tree, the new house will be moved forward slightly to align with the neighboring structures. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The parcel is surrounded by inventoried properties, historic landmarks and National Register structures. The applicant has made a very strong effort to respect existing development by stepping the new house away from the adjacent historic landmark. This project will contribute to the historic character of this area. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. 5 Response: The structure should be considered very significant as an example of a fairly unaltered historic resource and of unusual details and form. The proposal should protect these characteristics and improve the physical condition of the structure. The existing outbuildings at the rear of the property appear to be original, but have new board and batten siding. They are both to be retained but relocated. The garage at the front of the site is not original to the property. The applicant proposes to demolish it. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: Minimal demolition is proposed and the project will involve significant restoration effort. ON-SITE RELOCATION 1. Standard: The relocation activity is demonstrated to be the best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure, and the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures will not be diminished due to the relocation. Response: The relocation and resulting development is preferable to adding approximately four time the existing square footage onto the historic house. 2. Standard: The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation. Response: The applicant must submit a structural report for Final review, or prior to applying for a building permit. 3. Standard: A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security with the engineering department, as approved by the HPC, to insure the safe relocation, preservation and repair (if required) of. the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. Response: The applicant must submit a relocation plan 6 and bond prior to Final review or prior to applying for a building permit. PARTIAL DEMOLITION 1. Standard: The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure. Response: Minimal demolition is proposed. As discussed above, the rear addition to the historic structure should be preserved in form as much as possible. The existing garage should be salvaged in whatever way possible for use on another site. 2. Standard: The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: A. Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions. Response: Only a limited amount of demolition will occur, at the rear of the structure. B. Impacts on the architectural character of integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions so that they are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. Response: The architectural character and integrity of the historic resource will be preserved through the new development, which is of a similar mass and scale and which is placed to the rear of the structure. SPECIAL REVIEW TO EXCEED 85% OF THE ALLOWED F.A.R. This project is located in the West End, therefore both the General Guidelines (Chapter 1) and the specific guidelines for the West End apply. Staff finds that the proposed project is in compliance with the Neighborhood Character Guidelines. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any of the following alternatives: 7 1) Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. 2) Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (specific recommendations should be offered) 4) Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. Recommendation: Staff recommends HPC approve Landmark Designation of Lot G, Block 19, City and Townsite of Aspen, finding that standards B, E and F are met. Staff recommends that HPC table conceptual review with the request that the applicant provide new elevations for the structure on Lot B and that the applicant document the previous appearance of the northwest corner of the historic structure and provide for its restoration. Staff further recommends that HPC subsequently find that the project meets all applicable standards and requests for variances should be granted. 8 123 WEST FRANCIS JAKE VICKERY 100 SOUTH SPRING ST. #3 POST OFFICE BOX 12360 JAKE ASPEN, COLORADO 81612 VICKERY TELEPHONE / FACSIMILE (303) 925-3660 j 4 K-C-H-!ILE-I May 8, 1995. Amy Amidon Aspen Historic Preservation Commission 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 123 WEST FRANCIS Dear Amy, Please find attached our combined Land Use Application for HPC Landmark Designation, HPC Conceptual Review including relocation and partial demolition of existing structures, Special Review for Ordinance #35, GMQS Exemption for additional free market unit, and Conditional Use Review for 2 Accessory Dwelling Units for proposed development at 123 West Francis. Information provided for Review: 1. Application Summary 2. Combined Land Use Application Form 3. Compliance with Review Standards for Landmark Designation 4. Supplement to Historic Preservation Development Application Form 5. Compliance with Review Standards for HPC Conceptual Review of Significant Development including on site relocation and partial demolition of existing structures. 6. Special Review Compliance with Ordinance 35 7. Compliance for Conditional Use for 2 Accessory Dwelling Units 8. Specific Submittal for GMQS Exemption by Director for a new free market unit 9. 50 scale Adjacency Map and Neighborhood Photos 10. Vicinity Map 11. Survey 12. Disclosure of Ownership 13. Owner's Authorization to Represent 14. Applicant's letter requesting designation grant and waiving of park dedication fees 15. 1 set of 1 1"x17" reduced (1/8" scale)copies of all drawings including existing and proposed site plans, floor plans, and elevations. 16. Check for Review fee. Sincerely, <IMIN . Jake Vickery, Architect I ID 0, PROPOSED LANDMARKING & 2 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES 123 WEST FRANCIS APPLICATION SUMMARY May 8,1995 1. The applicant would like to create two single family cottages and two accessory dwelling units, one voluntary and one required. 2. The applicant is proposing to Landmark the property and conform to preservation guidelines to achieve this goal in the most compatible way. 3. This is consistent with the R-6 Zone and the AACP. It supports the ideas of smaller scale houses and historical preservation. 4. The existing cottage has changed little over the last 40 years with the exception of a incompatible addition to the rear. Existing outbuildings are non-conforming and this situation would be improved by this application. 5. Using the R-6 Zone requirements for Duplex, 4,170 FARsf are available. This FAR has been apportioned to the two building sites identified on the plans as "Lot A" and "Lot B". "Lot A" is apportioned 1450 FARsf, "Lot B" is apportioned 2,720 FARsf. 6. The land area of the site has been apportioned as follows: Lot A is 4,500 sf, Lot B is 6,000 sf. Development on these Lots has been designed to conform to underlying zoning as if they were lots of record as much as possible considering the adjustments necessitated by preservation of the historical structures. 7. The two dwellings units have been separated to maintain the historical integrity of the existing historical structures. This is preferable to adjoining new square footage to the small scale massing of the historical cottage. The proposed plan is to create separate, independent and compatible structures off mixed scale and architectural interest. This protects the integrity of the historical resource and adds a variety and interest to the neighborhood. 8. This fragmentation strategy would require a 500 FAR bonus from HPC available to Landmarks and a finding of "more compatibility." A 500 sf bonus is being requested for the historical cottage. Currently it is 1,680 sf. Removal of the incompatible addition reduces the square footage to 1,363 sf exclusive of garages and sheds. 9. Two ADU are applied for. One is for the Historical House and is voluntary., The second is for the new single family unit and is required, These units are proposed subgrade because of the limitations on FAR and coverage. lj 10. Have you attached the following? YES Response to Attachment 2, Minimum Submission Contents YES Response to Attachment 3, Specific Submission Contents YES Response to Attachment 4, Review Standards for Your Application j It LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1 Project Name: 123 WEST FRANCIS 2. Project Location: 123 WEST FRANCIS (Indicate street address, lot and block number, legal description where appropriate.) 3. Present Zoning R6 4. Lot Size 10.500 SF 5. Applicant's Name, Address & Phone # JAKE VICKERY. 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET #3. ASPEN. COLORADO 81611. 970 925 3660 6. Representative's Name, Address & Phone # SAME AS #5 7. Type of Application (Please check all that apply): X Conditional Use Conceptual SPA X Conceptual Historical Dev. X Special Review Final SPA Final Historic Dev. 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD Minor Historic Dev. Stream Margin Final PUD X Historic Demolition Mountain View Plane Subdivision X Historic Designation X Condominiumization Text/Map Amendment GMQS Allotment Lot SpliULot Line Adjustment X GMQS Exemption 8. Description of Existing Uses (number and type of existing structures; approximate sq. ft.; number of bedrooms; any previous approvals granted to the property). SITE IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH HISTORICAL MINER'S COTTAGE OF 10*O APPROXIMATELY:- â€ž >SF. WITH SEVERAL ADDITIONS AND MUCH DEFERRED MAINTENANCE 9. Description of Development Application TO DEMOLISH A PORTION OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURES. PRESERVE REMAINING STRUCTURES. RELOCATE EXISTING COTTAGE TO ONE SIDE OF SITE AND CONSTRUCT A SECOND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. \3 APPLICATION FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION - ATTACHMENTS 123 WEST FRANCIS May 8,1995 (attachment #, Item it) (2-2) Street Address 123 West Francis Aspen, Colorado 81611 (2-3) Legal Description Lots C,D,E, and East 1/2 of B, Block 56 City and Township of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado (2-4) See attached Vicinity Map (2-5) Compliance with Review Standards This property meets review standards B, C, E and F and qualifies to be a local designated landmark. It was built in 1888 and much of the original materials are intact. Vernacular in nature, it suffers from several incompatible non-historic additions and deferred maintenance, and is representative of Aspen's Victorian past. (3-1) See attached Boundary Survey (3-2A) Jake Vickery is acting own his own behalf. See attached contract to purchase authorizing Jake Vickery to act as Owner's Representative. (3-2B) See attached letter requesting designation grant, and waiver of Application and Park Dedication Fees. 13 SUPPLEMENT TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS IMPORTANT Three sets of clear. fully labeled drawings must be submitted in a format no larger than 11"X17", OR one dozen sets of blueprints may be submitted in lieu of the 11"X17" format. APPLICANT: JAKE VICKERY ADDRESS: 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET # 3. ASPEN. CO ZONE DISTRICT: R6 LOT SIZE (SQUARE FEET) 10.500 SF EXISTING FAR: 1.680 SF HOUSE + 364 SF SHEDS + 228 SFGARAGE ALLOWABLE FAR: 4.170 SF PROPOSED FAR: 4.670 SF EXISTING NET LEASABLE (Commercial): N/A PROPOSED NET LEASABLE (Commercial): N/A EXISTING % OF SITE COVERAGE: 21.6% (2.272 SF) PROPOSED % OF SITE COVERAGE: 37.5% (3.937.5) EXISTING % OF OPEN SPACE: 78.4% PROPOSED % OF OPEN SPACE: 62.5% EXISTING MAXIMUM HEIGHT: 25 FEET MIDPOINT PROPOSED MAXIMUM HEIGHT: 25 FEET MIDPOINT PROPOSED % OF DEMOLITION: 36% (877.5 SF) EXISTING NUMBER OF BEDROOMS: 3 PROPOSED NUMBER OF BEDROOMS: 9 EXISTING ON-SITE PARKING SPACES: 1 ON-SITE PARKING SPACES REQUIRED: 9 SETBACKS: EXISTING: ALLOWABLE: PROPOSED: Front: 20.3 ' Front: 10' Front: 15' Rear: 27' Rear: 10' Rean 15' Side: 31'/ 65' Side: 15'/ 36' Side: 5' 1 1 Â·5' Combined Frt/Rr: 47.3' Combined Frt/Rr: 30' Combined Frt/Rr: 30' EXISTING NONCONFORMITIES/ GARAGE IN FRONT AND SIDE SETBACKS. SHEDS IN REAR ENCROACHMENTS: SETBACKS VARIATIONS REQUESTED (eligible for Landmarks only: character compatibilitv finding must be made by Beck FAR: 500 SF INCREASE Minimum Distance Between Buildings: SETBACKS: Front: Farking Spaces: 5 Rear: TO 5' Open Space (Commercial): NLA Side: TO 2.6' Height (Cottage Infill Only): N/A Combined Frt/Rr: TO 10' Site Coverage (Cottage Infill Only): 10% fo Sheetl 123 WEST FRANCIS 123DATA3.XLS SITE WORKSHEET 5/6/95 LOT'A' LOT'B' EXISITNG SITE AREA 4,500 6,000 4500+6000 10,500 FAR Underlying Allowable 2,820 3,240 6,060 4,170 Assigned/Aportioned 1,450 2,720 4,170 HPC Bonus 500 0 500 500 . ADU Bonus (P&Z) 350 350 350. Total 1,950 3,070 6,910 5,020 COVERAGE Underlying allowable 2,250 2,400 4,650 2,887.5 Assigned/Aportioned 1,450 1437.5 2,887.5 HPC Bonus 525 1,050 525 ADU Bonus 525 525 Total I 1,975 1962.5 5,700 3,937.5 Page 1 - - -1Â£1 w o \.6 4'W.Pine 1"Al'/IyClll'=ZIII*IISI"IIIIIA =4=--4 L-- W:HAirL-AM=- i I i, /00 It 6 124 134 4 15' 04 1 1 IT- -.3 0 -I----- ;-4 + w w ji-% Â» J;-gli . Â·,1.0 L *11 1 jEL) ~ I; -A-]C- - - Ill.- 7-, 113 . n LIE 4 4 i 4 4 b 0 0~ 4 2 1- 9 -- 11. CD><4 rs-:9 ... * Prf -2. - 0 Cl f! â‚¬3 --,4, 41 u 41 E-21 L.211213 1/ 1 1 9 b 4 01 4-1 0 * -1 - li . 11 i 11 4 . 1 ---1 9 Z j ' . -ize.. 1 1 . 12 - Â£ 2-5,112 r.L 1-1 9.9 6 22. r %1 .1:~01 1 .0 1 1 1**1 45*q N n..07# . 1--- 10 1 .1 f - 123 129 I35 mi CP W. FRANCES i Â·r W. Pipe = == =..=====./ - .k 282 Ilo McG 134 - 1 I E m - *tflu 2 1 /-11:Â£..2 ~L-* B U 44 CD ' + 11% 1 - - r-| - 02\\ m ==1 4 4 4 A 3 0 7 k 1[3-21 El] [Z-=1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i- 1>12101'14 75' ~[33- - - V.=-I- <29 ========== =====Al=Â¥=-- =29===t= == = == 41' i W. pipe 402 4/2 420 43.4 -4 ~ 75' - 4 0 g a 1 1 1 1 1 0 U g W ~ 11 ~ ht ki . N> i .=1 -=-- 1 L .,1 7 -' 402 1 . 1 1 .- 1/Ap,4.V* - -99 54 1\ 1 1. 4 0 4 1 10 - 0l f % 0 r \ L_.r N I 1 tb 4 ip , D St L ria J - . . .i-- . f At::1 8.~ll__ _JET #9 4-p 114 ... - -- 0 r./ 1 1 1. 8 1 12 3 129 135 W. FRANCES 4-' W. Pige-- -- 120 11 C 134 .k - -1-- --'-4 .... -- 1---1 'C'... N A /J -. A te tro 05-3 3-1 11\\ CD . CliY- -1 00 - . - tÂ© - /4 - 96 N. 157 400 APPLICATION FOR CONCEPTUAL REVIEW OF SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT - SUPPLEMENT 123 WEST FRANCIS (attachment #, Item #) (2-1) see attached Owner's Authorization Letter (2-2) see attached Legal Description (2-3) see attached Disclosure of Ownership (2-4) see attached Vicinity Map (2-5) Compliance with relevant Review Standards: Please see Application Summary for additional information. Phase 1 of this proposal relocates the existing house and back shed on site. It removes incompatible additions, particularly on the south east corner and places the historical structure on a competent foundation (basement). It cleans up areas of the structure that are deteriorated and restores important elements of the house to improve its integrity and contribution to the streetscape. It preserves existing trees as much as possible. The front garage would be demolished because it is structurally unsound. The small shed would be preserved as a play house/gardeners shed. The existing large shed would be relocated and used as a one car garage. The presence of the sheds and alley elements of this proposal as well as the desire to use the yard area for people instead of cars requires the requested reduction in required parking spaces. Phase 2 of this proposal adds a compatible second detached single family residence to the property. Because it is separated, the placement of the additional square footage on site impacts the historical structure the least and affords more flexibility for the design of the new structure. Phase 3 of this proposal demolishes the rear portion of the historic structure to add a secondary tallish element with additional space needed to bring the historical cottage up to current livability standards. The new addition would be of current technology but derivative and subordinate in style, design, and treatment. The tallish element preserves useable open space valid addition giving the cottage current relevance. The proposed ADU's would add on-site housing for two to four local residents. Specific Replies: (4A) The roof forms and general massing are similar to the historical resource in shape and proportion but smaller in scale. Detailing will be related but thinner and lighter and will be clearly distinguishable from the old. It is compatible in character to the historic resource. (4B) The neighborhood is predominantly renovated Victorians and a few Neo-Victorians,. There is a non-historic two story chalet style structure directly to the East. The proposed development is extremely compatible and sensitive to the neighborhood. The placement of the new Phase 2 square footage in a separate structure and the new Phase 3 square footage in a hyphenated a "secondary" massing is consistent with HPC directives. It achieves a high level of compatibility with multiple structures occupying other similar historical parcels. (4C) The proposed additions are to the rear and side of the existing resource. In addition, its placement preserves and utilizes the existing front yard alignment created by house on the West and preserves side yard and side yard trees. Preservation of the structure intact is far preferable to adding on or corrupting the historical resource by adding to and adding a massive upper level. In this manner, the cultural value is maintained. (4D) The architectural integrity of the existing structure is kept intact with the additions clearly separated and their own architectural elements. The Phase 3 demolition is interior to the property and has minimal effect on the alleyscale or streetscape. It is the least impactive demolition alternative and maintains in tact the primary facade. (3A-1) see attached survey and site plan (3A-2) Materials will be similar to existing but lighter and smaller proportion. (3A-3) see statements above - paragraphs 5 A through D (3A-4) This project falls into Category C: erection of a structure greater then 250 gsf. j kt 123 WEST FRANCIS 5-8-95 EXTERIOR MATERIALS SPECIFICATION Existing New Exposed Foundation concrete stone veneer Sill Skin existing (1 x10) 1 x 10 cedar Watertable existing (2x3) 1-1/2" x 2-1/2" beveled Typical Horizontal siding existing cedar ahvg (1/2"x 5-1/2" 1/2"x7-1/2" 4" exposure) 6" exposure Typical Vertical Siding n/a cedar ahvg lx6 T&G Vertical Wainscoting n/a 2-1/4" cedar beadboard Typical corner trim existing (1"x4") lx4 Typical window and door trim existing (1"x4") standard brickmold Rake Board existing (1"x 10") lx6 Typical Fascia lx6 lx5 Secondary Fascia n/a 1 x3 flat Soffit 1 x 3/8" ply - cedar beadboard Exterior doors existing Pella Wood - full light Typical Roofing asphalt shingles cedar shingles Secondary roofing n/a metal standing seam - 12" Window - single existing wood Pella Wood Architect Series , j Windows - Array n/a Pella Wood Architect Series 3\ COMPLIANCE WITH NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER GUIDELINES 123 WEST FRANCIS May 8, 1995 Information submitted elsewhere in this application is integral with this application, particularly the section on HPC Conceptual Review. Please refer to those sections for additional information. Below please find supplemental specific replies to items enumerated on the application. 5. Applicant's Description: The neighborhood is mostly upscaled (literally!) renovated Victorians and a few Neo-Victorians. The structure directly East is a 2 story triangular chalet style structure probably of 50's vintage. It is a classic West Wend Neighborhood and is located on the pedestrian route to the Music Tent. The facade line is approximately 15 feet back on the side of the street this development is located. There is a mixture of scale in the neighborhood. 6. Compliance: The proposed development meets all of the goals (A through D) of the Neighborhood Character Guidelines. Because of its high level of compliance with the neighborhood character guidelines, this development warrants approval at maximum FARsf. Please refer to attached checklist. Guidelines are complied with unless otherwise noted. 7. Please see attached drawings and photographs ..11 GUIDELINES CHECKLIST General Guidelines for all core neighborhood Mass and scale 1. Human scale 2. Similar scale as neighborhood a. setback large masses b. divide into modules, use hyphens or connectors if necessary c. step down in height and scale towards smaller adjacent structures d. locate floor area in secondary structures e. human scale windows and doors 3. Street elevation scale as traditional 4. Entries scaled as traditional, no grand entries Building Form 5. Roof form visual continuity a. compound and varied rectangular forms b. gable roofs, overhangs c. simple character with appurtenances, dormers, bays, wings, recesses (d) no large or long uninterrupted wall surfaces (f) solid to void ratio as traditional Site Design 6. Entry oriented toward street a. primary facade pedestrian scale and visual interest b. respect setback and alignment patterns d. yards and entries at street level e. reflect grid if applicable (f) semi-transparent fences, low walls, walks, hedges, screening/buffer (g) front yard as neighborhood - 7. a. Entry at Traditional level b. avoid sunken terraces 8. Maintain solar access Building Materials 9. a. human scale materials b. native materials c. durable materials d. variety in trim, native preferred e. shingles and standing seam metai roof Architectural Features 10. Pedestrian friendly Features a. window and doors and details inviting b. creativity and personal c. distinguish old and new if appropriate d. trim as traditional scale e. primary entrance clearly defined. (f) variety and playful appurtenances (g) porches (h) variety of window and door designs 11. Minimize solar collectors and skylights b. away from street c. flush with roof Garages 12. minimize impact of garage a. detached preferred b. locate to rear first or side second avoid front c. small size door, blind doors d. garage facing front<50%. single preferred e. slope driveway towards garage (no) f. minimize wall area used for garage doors Driveways 13 minimize visual impact a. rear or side, no front circular drives b. no pull in front setback parking c. minimize hard surfaces d. porous, decorative drive materials different from street Service areas 14. a. locate service areas to rear b. screen with fences or planting Impact on Historical 15. preserve a. minimize impacts b. see historic guidelines, contemporary interpretations j 16. minimize impact on adjacent historical structures a. designated properties b. step new larger buildings c. edges of historical areas 7d APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE - 2 ADU's 123 WEST FRANCIS May 8, 1995 (Attachment #, Item #) (2-1) see attached Ownefs Authorization Letter (2-2) see attached Legal Description (2-3) see attached Disclosure of Ownership (2-4) see attached Vicinity Map (2-5) Compliance with relevant Review Standards: This proposal is to add 2 ADUs: one bedroom required unit in the new single family cottage (B) and one voluntary two bedroom unit in the Existing Cottage. The existing cottage structure is an historical resource. The proposed addition will accommodate 2 employees or an employee family. The new addition is placed above and to the rear of the existing non-historic addition to minimize impact on the historical resource and the site. Please refer to other sections of this application for more detail regarding the proposed development. is Please see Items 4A through 4F below for a more detailed explanation of conformance to specific standards. The proposed work is under review by the Historical Preservation Commission and additional information is available in the related Combined HPC Landmark Designation and Conceptual Review Application. (4-A) The Aspen Land use code permits a duplex or 2 single family houses on Lots of 6,000 square feet if the property is a Designated Historical Landmark. This property is 10,500 sf and can accommodate the proposed development without significant impact to neighbors. It provides smaller scale structures in units of ownership more accessible to local resident families. 94 (4-B) The ADU's provide an accessory residential use in the R6 Zone and mix in a variety of housing types in the neighborhood. They are compatible with other residential uses in immediate vicinity. The massing of the addition units into separate and distinct forms located on to the rear and side of the property is similar to the multiple structures occupying some of the near-by properties. (4-C) The proposed location below grade maintains open space and minimizes the mass above grade. Light and air are provides by generous light wells. (4-D) Services will be an extension of the services already in place and are adequate. (4-E) This proposal will not generate any new employees and provides on-site housing for two to four resident employees. (4-F) This proposal conforms to the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and other requirements of the Code. 14 APPLICATION FOR GMQS EXEMPTION SPECIFIC SUBMITTAL 123 WEST FRANCIS May 8, 1995 GMQS EXEMPTION Request is hereby made for a GMQS Exemption by Director pursuant to Section 8-104-A-1-b-3 of the Code. The proposed development complies with this standard in providing only one new unit of density on an historically landmarked property. (6-1) Description This request for exemption would allow the existing historical residence to remain in its current location on the site, with its primary street facades unaltered. This proposal does relocate an out building to a different location on the property allowing it to also be preserved in tact. New floor area has been added to the interior of the property in such a way as to minimize impacts on the integrity of the historical structures. New square footage has been placed subgrade to minimize any impact on the historical structures. The resultant configuration allows for only 4 additional parking spaces on site without detracting from the historical resource. Please refer to other sections of this application for additional detail on the proposed development. (6-2) Complete set of architectural preliminary drawings are attached. (6-3) Contained herein are applications for Landmark Designation and HPC Conceptual Review. (6-4) Copies of recorded documents which affects development: None. ---- 0 . -- -- - 1 111 1 1 i ---- ---- Il-- , LU i : 0 2 0- ~ 9 . 0 Z . ~ in h \ 5 <C ------------- '0 6 J il ) C ,.{ 4* . ..C tâ€¢. - 0 P 1 4 :, 00 I CO i 7' 2 witÂ·at *jkan.WiltuÂ·Â»4 -11 1-1 1 . ~--II'' .U,49' OF J iqg ' 1 L- I 1 1/41 c.6 1 1 . 1 -- -1.---- ----t 4 i . O 4 JO JO . 0 4-,1 i i 0 \4 3 11/ . C j < 1/ 1 1 1 1 1 . l] 1 , _ CLIA_-21-197 - 1 4 , 1 1 . lS lS 1 N . 0 ' - 1 11 9 L , PG~ ' 'c i il I 1 1 It, 11 4 U / 4-' 099 4.:-0,4 /...' 141 I ASPEN tyrt 0 INSTIIUTE u, % I 2/ \\ /Ag M'&* ./ A C HALLAM LAKE '* 9 TE"W, ~-â‚¬fdliÂ©14 0â‚¬\ LONEK-fir L \ -9 t\% .. _ c-n r-\ftiiAN NonTII 1 E -7 EU] Crl<442022-x k N (A\ Â»...1.- 4, U~Ei> 3.2.1 C.-3 0.- 3 E-3 0 Cb:-EZE] C=:2 - - 4 - - 1 4 34 SMUGGLE -, 9\ ~| If -2- imE . LE. WI....3 CE] Crl O E 22Â«j / 1;11 - .]EL.- _ ]E[.>'1~f#*-] [EZZ' CZE] = [-3 1 E-' 1 [2.3 CIZI ET] ( -- ~V 4 i; LKilt,3.,* Fi~!242,(ki n RE 1.-=ELERC._21 L..3 [223 CE] CEL] r-j.,f w i i \ J PARKING / ~ NL hi., ................ 1 IAL LAM -6- 81*231* 62-1 IE *}*REF:likvÂ¥21% Elii{2232] 1-jjpfuTÂ¢j /41~47 E--1.1 ~2.I~~ ' Cl.3 1=3 [3 -3 C.U.JEE=] L -1*L--1~Z]8 L--1'L_1#6 1 / /42.-~ 3 i LZ]i IL El CLE] f-FTÂ·4 CU 1-537-1 [EI]El rTIV [Tnll Cii[3 1 67] =lin I[Il GTA.1 ~-h~...fl==6 .11 1- MAIN ...=lim-7 L-IE] i.rk L--i cryj r--zj c_ Â· _ En 03 [-1 03 -3 [=ZI [ZIZI [Ezi CL ,=:Â»=====~Â¤~D I \0\ tj i [2.-LI [ 23 [ZI~] ELI] 0 0 Efl LLI [ZE] CLE] EZZI EE] Crl [223 l._.......- - ,.v . ~â€¢-"0 -01 11OPKINS E-7 [73 [I]'~ l__ITE_.J [73gCZE]o[JI]xEJECLCOJE]or---1 I f-- Fl--7 81-1 r--1: riTTial[23 r-Tin#r---IA[in--1% E-IlrT-lir-1&[--I~::- --1 j ~ HYMA I g g 1.4 g Z F--3 i [T7~11-Twl [-;il--11 The IWT-1: 13*;11 f-lwl ~ [QUI III1 [-lal i[IRIB Faill.~J:(.3~~2~~611,16 Â·, i. coop-A Aspen : r-1 Gr-1 " 'uNFV-RRE-6[3 [_.112-~il_L. CIT] EL_ lic 1.=1 ~ Appraisal Group, Ltd. a~EED=131[=]61 4.6231.l-*IEL....1" F--11[ZIL ELI]!Gril -MET'[~-- CI.-1 [BEW~ ~ ll!11 L_1[@i' ' 2 1 2:25- 1 L WA1 ERS 1 Lly -1Â® 1 1 r-IFE 1/4 MILE FÂ© 19 6 waer ptz,A/6,42 /A Ig - 1% 1 1-4 1 1,0Â¢44'116~ 9 10 N 1714 VWAft - American Land Title Auociation Commitment - Modified 3t78 41 - 0 ~-11 vil COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY 1 STEWARTTITLE GUARANTYCOMPANY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, A Texas Corporation, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in I Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by lhe Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the ] failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. Signed under seal for the Company, but this Commitment shall not be valid or binding until it bears an authorized Countersignature. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A. STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY M/4/63:' Chairman of the Boarn ' President l., 15:40 -*- 93*1 FL ~SE 1308 /S; Countersigned \428/ 5 4-3 Â«Â»- . , STEWART TrrLE OF ASPEN, INC. Agent ID #06011A 9 Order No. 00021768.32 ~ r --7)0 6,- d ' 011 A.Wil diaf ;Â·-IMY+ 1.-999 Mt- *|* . + " -11,=*..r~ 00021768-(2 - te: April .20, 1995 at 8:00 A' ~ Policies to be issued: r Amount of Insur C *. *lilli~TA. Owner's (Standard) $ 940,000:00- . b f.. Â· 4, ~72~ Insured: 4.44..SEK H. VICKERY I I :40 -Â· '4 IN k<:-1 1(6) A.L.LA. Mortgagee's (Standard) 9$ ~ - , proposed Insured: . 'fp.4 ~/~il~~19~-4 . 9 1 . 19. 5.132?i**A*GW-* 44% . 3.-Â· -Â·U *, ' (c) Leasehold ...$ Proposed Insured: 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is fee simple 4. Title to the fee estate or interest in said land.is at the e#ective date hereof vested in: HAROLD QUAM AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 1/2 INTEREST, VERONICA M. MARTIN AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 1/6TH INTEREST, CARROLL QUAM AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 1/6TH INTEREST AND LORRIE CRUMLEY AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 1/6TH INTEREST 5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: The East one-half of Lot B, and all of Lots C, D, and E, Block 56, City and Townsite of Aspen County of Pitkin, State of Colorado . Â·, STATEMENT OF CHARGES These charges are due andpayable btforâ‚¬ a Policy can be issued. Owners Premium $ 2,207.00 Tax Certificate $ 10.00 3WART TITI~OF ASPEN, INC. Authorized Countersignature C1~ l UPDATED: 04/13/95 10:20 AM C.\WINWORD\CONTRACnVICKERY.DOC t THIS ADDENDUM HAS NEI'I'HER BEEN PREPARED NOR APPROVED BY THE COLORADO REAL ,~ ESTATE COMMISSION. rr MUST BE REVIEWED BY LEGAL COUNSEL OF YOUR CHOICE. l calendar days from the date this instrument becomes at contract or the date specified herein, the seller may, at seller's option, declare this contract null and void. 10. ENTIRE AGREEMENT - Buyer hereby agrees by way of Buyer's signature hereunder that Buyer is relying solely and exclusively on the statements, conditions and warranties set fonh in the Contract and this Addendum. Buyer hereby agrees that Buyer is not relying on any oral agreement or written representation not contained in the Contract or this Addendum, including, but not limited to, statements or representations made by agents, advertisements or brochures. . 11. FUNDS AT CLOSING - On the Closing Date, the cash to close and any other funds required shall be delivered by the Buyer either in cash or an electronic transfer funds and no other form of delivery of such monies shall be acceptable unless they represent immediately available funds. FURTHER ASSURANCES - Each of the parties agree to execute, acknowledge, deliver, file and record, or cause to be executed, acknowledged, delivered, filed and recorded, such further instruments and documents, and such certificates, and to do all things and acts as the other party may reasonably require in order to carry out the intentions of this Contract and the transaction contemplated hereby. 12. INSPECTION - Seller has negotiated and contracted to sell the subject property in its present condition. Buyer acknowledges that Seller is conveying all improvements on the property in their current condition 'as-is" without warranty either express or implied. It is incumbent upon Buyer to inspect all aspects and intended uses of the subject property, including but not limited to HPC Designation, to Buyer's satisfaction during the inspection period. Buyer may inspect all aspects of the subject property pursuant to the terms and remedies of the Inspection Paragraph. 13. INTERPRETATIONS - No provision of this Contract shall be construed against or interpreted to the disadvantage of any party by reason of such party having or being deemed to have requested, drafted, required, or structured such provision. 14. LAND DEVELOPMENT FEES - Pursuant to the inspection paragraph, it shall be incumbent upon Buyer to investigate any and all fees related to the development of the subject property. 15. LAND USE APPLICATIONS - Seller hereby permits and authorizes Buyer to submit during the Inspection and Closing period any and all land use applications for proposed development of the property so long as such applications and approvals are contingent upon Buyer or his assigns closing on the property. Costs related to such applications shall be the sole responsibility of the Buyer. Seller makes no representations or warranties as to land use or development potential of the property and this contract is specifically not contingent upon approval of any of such applications. In the event that Buyer receives any such land use approvals, zoning changes or the like and does not close this contract pursuant to its terms, Buyer agrees that all such approvals shall be the property of Seller, including but not limited to any renderings, conceptual drawings, designs and architectural proprietary work product used or filed in any approvals or pending land use applications with the City of Aspen. 16. LEGAL COUNSEL - This is a legal instrument and joshua & Co. of Aspen, Inc. recommends that you seek legal, tax and individual counsel before signing this agreement. 17. LICENSED AGENT - Buyer states that jack H. Vickery is a licensed Real Estate Broker in the State of Colorado acting on his own behal f and shall receive a credit towards the sales price equal to a co-op fee of 2.5% of the Purchase Price. 18. NATURALLY OCCURRING ELEMENTS - Radon has been known to exist within the State of Colorado and Aspen. Buyer may investigate such pursuant to the inspection Paragraph. 19. PURCHASE PRICE ADESTMENT -The purchase price sha!1 be reduced by $4800 per month for a closing that occurs earlier than the closing date indicated herein, but at no time shall the purchase price amount be less than $915,000. 20. RENTAL RATES & INCOME - The Buyer represents that Buyer is not relying on Seller's or Seller's agent's representations of past, present or future rental income in Buyer's decision to purchase the subject property. l.4-LV.6 page 2 9 '1/ -2> 4-/ 0,Â£=tf) . May 8, 1995 City Council City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, CO 81611 GRANT AND PARK DEDICATION FEE REQUEST Dear Sirs: We hereby request award of the $ 2,000 grant for having the property at 123 West Francis, Aspen, designated as an Historical Landmark. We further request that any Park Dedication fees be waived. Sincerely, CÂ«Jlotat/' - Jake Vickery, Applicant I 100 South Spring Street #3 Aspen, Colorado 81611 23 A 1.-10 4, 0 10 20 8. . LEGEND AND NOTES IEAailUl OASID - /000 CITY -Ullm M lem m 11'00'IPÂ¥ 41 ~ O /011. el-EY .01.-" A, 0,1.1,1. 1 - 2 A ,~VEY Co.TROL IFEST FRANCIS STREET guir==.r. 74.72' R.O.V ell O UTILITY ICK . TI,U Iâ€¢,O-â€¢To. M.,Ile .I -t STED..T TITLE 0. Al/81, ,IC. 0."#~0'"002~;1#,â€ž 11-1 ENCRWÂ£11 INTO ALLEY -06.-1 hilmt -I-- f 'Â°7 r r L 4 e, l/ 1 '2 .1 / \ 411\70 47. 0 - /-1 .7.. 1 ' 1 1 - If il i 0 1 C 7., 3 k 1 1 1 ... 1 cky 1 l 97.1 9..0 1 1 1 - ' GARAGE -- 1 1 -- 11 41 - A Ill Mt - - 15 '7.. 1 1 Â· f ' 8 2 1 1 I -1 1 -'u- HOUSE i. Al,ell 1 1 1 g:4.-c~*ji 4 0 / 1,1 1 CERTIFICATION J,knf~Â°o:~ n'um,eng 09:4-*"WI:LZ:ri E 11 IN If IA:*0 0,1 nâ‚¬ FIELD EÂ¥10â‚¬*CE Al *10- NO T Tle, ARE 110 DI.C.EPANCIEs oF RECORD ,OC/,OIIÂ¥ LIAE CO-LICTI A- . .3 04 - mairt WAL= tdil= MIMM.91%0= I.0=â€¢â€ž4 Al/Em L -1 + 1 Â¥ VI â„¢ TH -AL OR THE IURVEYOR IELOW. 1 9..2 DATED:AL~kIR - . 97+ /k/*. He,ORTH P.Ll. 2S*â€¢7 1 - I i I 97.1, U 1 ...t 1 #IS. . it 11â‚¬0 ...1 / 1 4 M.- Fâ‚¬EWESm:'29#,31Mtjlf.3%4& 1 - . ". r. 94. ' . SleD 1 1 --1 1 ............ SECTION ll. To,WHIP lo Iouâ„¢, RNÂ«Â£ 05 *11 - 1< 1,6 P.M. .N COUNTY CURK All RECORDER l â€¢â€¢17 2â€¢.7 ...7 / I kt-Pro7- -:ti / ALLEY BLON 0;-7-Â«gil ** 9 se 09 r- ---- W.y -- IMPROVEMENT SURVEY \ OF Dâ‚¬ EAST ONEâ€¢IULF OF LOT 1, NO ALL OF LOTS C D NE) 1. ILOCK M. CITY AMO TOWNS ITE oF ASPEN, FITKIN Cot,ITY Colotâ€¢,O. CONTAINING IO.SOO 00. FT. â€¢/- ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC. 11% $=-*. Al.,1. C.-Aâ€ž lilli 2:0 -râ„¢ --m= - :/TE a. 4/- â€ž1. 1,6. 4..7..L-=ly-0 1 i~$â€¢-r~ Â· 4:/. 'Â·rty 1 1 - A I kMEIS>\ rax 1 0 ,1 11 111. 1 1 ///f~~ 1 .AILP.11 1 1 1 1 Na 1 1 1 1 | R '111 4--------------r 11 ' 1 12 b. F *:1 ' :. 4 1 i i il li ~ - 1 M~dif iljl-11_l-tr~ ~[ -~ IiÂ·-, 1-il-1~11-1 Ii.uÂ«Mc U,121! 1'1: 1 9 '119]1 :!:ililliliii,;ir_u=============p---4 4All')!.11 1111;1 11~&4 :,1 1111,~ I i I i ; I |1.31 1 1 ~ 1 4 , 1 Â·Â· i ; ... 1 ./ ' ."/ 1 ~ i 1;!i Â·' ' 1 f.15 '/ ' 11 '1 1 111~11mll-* IINT[~3]ml I! IEE, [111 1 4 1.11 1 11'Fl 2 i i::, e 11 i 11 . 11.53 1!11: !31,1 !1111. 111.lili I .. I' ~!Â· ~'| It !:;' H .1 i~ il i I Ji '1 1!;;1~'Rtiti,5?fi'l~lir!!All:iill--4 il =Â·WEd'28:111; 1.11 11311 i u== 11 En' 1[10 1. - H A :~ 1, '~i'4:, i h /!l : ;il 7;Ill:JUR,7954 2:11!9%#TbAU'Ir!!tz=# 11 I i ' ; I 1, â€¢râ€¢ - â€¢ ' , 1 :, i.-1 , 'i Ii;|:I w' y nwfl 1.0.; 11 I r,u I,i .IZ:~ r- 1 1 11 Weel- 61Â»Wea--1 4 =1-1-1-H ~Â«Â«F 1 014 , ==================.......'I"il.'ll===:I~'I==I=~ 1--7/0/~~ 'le<-\ i/k Â· -Â·-JIÂ©Ii-[1 Â®mlll]1]r I I it I_-1 -111#~ r ..2311;~~ i?33Â·11 * ahiN=L= _ " 2- Â·1 . 5 .01 i=~%&&#A.~ 1.Lf.2114'll!!Iii 111*2-â€ž.__--=2~~:~~~=Lun~~JiI, tw-==r=---m-~,1.-...~ 11;N**11 1-6=UrNÂ·144!i 111 '64 1.111Â¥Â¥41111!19111Mdf~ - ; 111Illillillil Il ,-1/.1./ ~LL-1-1.-1-1.11 -11_Â£11-1~1111Â£1-1-JI 1 2-1-1 /0 , .. . _ --- 1 EA,6,1- *>bev,derIG+-1 b|Â¢'Prk' 846\*MohI 1568.VAÂ«14914 pÂ»8485> 6417*2> V - 113 WEST FRANCIS 4 JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECTS 6 MAY 8,1995 FRV F?* MAL,1 1--/974 j , ALLEr 1 1 1 1 . -- - 1 ; 1 1 4 --31 -3,ME*-" 1 2 - 11 1-3- 1 1 \\%' -22Â£EkLE- 1 1 - 22==Â£=1=7==-- 1 4 1 6.1 1 k 1 Iii ---- 1 ,__- 13199 1 \1 1 1 -1 1 1 - ABL y 4!6 i .mEL U / 1 1 Ax .2329&-ali_ ' Â· L , I . 1 0.35- e-42 I 4 31 - 1 -- _&58Â£ - -- -hEE=L- -1 1 4% 1 1 1 *+00*Â· 1 -r-, 1 i ! UPAÂ£ FU:02 MAN . ~4*OUNCP *6Â¢522/2. Fee#Â·.1 8 0 Â¥,2*NO4 *, Â·Fâ‚¬*1Jc4 IlaPI:19*D PeEU IM INAQV *10#Â£ 9144 "01- 3" ~iz#~ 123 WESr FRANCIS JAKE VICKERY ARCH]TECTS E; MAY 8,1995 HU~ 4 1 i. 1 1 1 ! 1 - 1 li E-- 1 1 1 1 1 :1 -1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 I! ..1 #--L 8*004.49 9 1 1 #---11 #pr. Pou 1 1 . ue i - 1 5 . , 4 311 l 42 ~ f 1 -- eeciâ€¢,14 - 110~ I i 1 1 ; i 7 4 i -It 46_ .. c,*uNce? 2*f i 3 : w ,# â€ž 1 I i. i 4 FÂ»MIL>r /Met:* - 1- --1. ; --/ 11 / . : 1 4 i 0,0,0-1 " 4 I 0NL- ~z56~ ~ ~ -- 1 1 80Â»141- ~ 11 1 1 1, , 1 . 1 -f - Â¢3*40'y' eNT Istd'B TZAN. W.. ft#Ncis Fle B 'PLAN6 - " Lor 13,4 ~ FI2,FeED FIABLI FHINP*,1 . Â·E 123 WEI FRANCIS JAKE VICKERY ARCHrrECTS â‚¬ 5 MAY 8,1995 4 I 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 111 - 1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 1 1 1 1 1. 1 1 -Li 1 r F -- *---11 -1 .TI Â· Nr' is' ' '.1 I. 1 1 ' 11_ 1 21 1 1 1 1 1 1 A ! 1. 1 1/1 11 1 I ./.Ill 1 1 / 1/ IL - 1 1 1 1 f.n: 1 1- \ 1/ 1 1 \ I -- 1 --------4 11 -1 ~, i // 1 lei , 1 1 : 1 .11 111 1 1 \ 1 L --1-7 || 6 1 1 1 \ 1/ 11 1/1 h , , . i 11 \ le- __-4 i ki/-2-17- " ~ hfl-L--11 1 1 i , 2-2 -111 //1 \. 1// 11. Il // i .91\ /1\ \1 \\1 \\ Ill 1 1 -1 Ililli , 1 . 11 1 1 1 1 li /1 Â· 1 15 1 7 11 1 1-1 - r 1 1 1 1 - -- ..I -*I 4 1 1 - ->k- - - --1 i'll /\I 1 1 / 1 - - - _-- k = -.-3. 6,61=+ -- 1 \ 1\ -7 j 1 \\ / /~ 1// i / / .. - 1 - 1 / : : l lit 1 111 126 1 1 14 , 11 , 24 : \ /\ 1 1\1 <1/ -L - ' 4 rl* 8,â€¢Al / ~ # 123 WEST FRANCIS f / JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECTS 1 / 1 / MAY 8, 1995 / , . -1. ri-g n.2 1 3. - A- 1. . 1 . -2 1 -- 1 2-1 -=L I , n, p f 1. . 1 i , 1, 1 . . , MA452ECEVA-FIERI - - ----- 1----_i~JIM _ECE~AT-125 Ar / 1 i ... i 9.-P- *. I ./ A 7-014 Â· 1 1 01--22102 it . I WI- 1 . 1 t-1[-11 . 1117 ... 1 12 - . 4 Â· .__ I - LEA,< dee-V~fl.-24----- --1- I.---- - - 4 . 142*nt EllE - VATIÂ£561- ~ - . gl-, , 1 . 1Â»* ' U 1,4,114 6$,1'11.â€¢t, 0 '2 61.-1.67' u~~ 14 1 4%4 *toÂ¥33- -~ Pw Wd - - 2. 1 -: i , 1 6 - .. 1*. 6 - *pl NliÂ·49 ~ errn%\4 / r-- - -' t. - ;i- - Fx ml N 4 6.0130ka i ; 1 1-- 123 WEST FRANCIS i- JAKE VICKERPARCHITECTS 2- MAY 0, 1992 MfÂ».1 , ./ â€¢.7.i #â‚¬7- wi . 11.4 I h.,I i 1 40/=Iru-*----l 1 - ; ......7//1....2/ , n it-1_11; - .i...1 1Â· 11UILE 1 -, 18=M - . 7--3 â‚¬L_Ff! 7~222~ ell--1 1 1 1:, Â· - - __ I 1 t. r. , , 1 1 :1 e ~ .''ti : :ill ': S .1 1, ;, 1.- 1. ..::.,1, I [---77, 1 Â· 1.XE-- 4 : 5---rl 1 . 4 1 Â¢ Â· Â·?i ' ' ; .Il. W-I .-=. i 1--1 ~ + ':- P !! 1 h at 1 !:11,!:'11:!::Â· 71 . ; 1, . : ,â€¢ - . 2 tvo eÂ»13 gi#v,00,162 667140 6. 123 WEST FRANCIS JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECIS MAY 8,1995 0 4- n - : I. 1 -2 9 m'I ' -j - Aix) LIVIOG ' 1 m +MAAE ! - 8(DO. 1420.4 , 1 r-- 1 r-- 1 i; - 2 --- 1 1 a./H I ~ auc,g | 1 a.0 1 ig -- \ 4%~- 1 1914 ectREEL ' -f - = 11 0 - 1 ADHe:J RANB 10. f 11â‚¬Tlt Â£*14 (2641 1 CR~N . 1 ENTâ‚¬Af jOE ' i U t, 1 - 1 - li- 1 1 â‚¬Â·Ra*5agr it 0.-+4 FE)242+4 ' ~ e,Al, - .-7 1 C JPl->ER- FLCUK- . 64 120 upj p FLODA- 1 - 1 L_a- e 123 WEST FRANCIS JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECIS ~ MAY 8,1995 1 72 L UL -7 1 .. .1- i I BA 1 - : ial l - 1 1 41.8 :445, 1 , r..... -==4 == 1 . 11 - 1 171 1 14 41- - 1 1 1 . 1. 1- H - - -# r" * AP.U. . I 11- - i . 1 -7 WEU, - - / 11 1 ,' . Livitiâ‚¬ _ --z_ 4[1 1 1 11 1 t. _.--- Â·brâ€¢4 .1 0 : , , 4 1, 1 1- %.11 li : i eli-- - , 1:!; 1 1 1 'TE t---71 I 1 1 3962 1 A 111 -3[. 1 i 1. t 1 1 1 n 1 . 1 1 4 Huk ~1 pk.v b 1 W--f --i.~ % 1 ' DIHIN,4 1 1 1 12Ei_ 1 : i i : 86 :1 1 1 1 r 1 ~te 1 - 4---1 1 24 Filer 4 : i r 1 i t94@W'FL- il .44 1 11 i . th . 84< - I 2 / ~~ *f~1NA ~ ~~ .- -4 -* . 1 1.1: /1 ... + 2 1 1 Â·FÂ»:14 12 61.- 1 *44 73/ .1 1 11 - 0- illu i ll i t 1 r C \ ' I h . 11 -- 8346*~ *41- Fl+ FA.4644 IMFÂ¥06 rDA FlÂ»+4 1 4aout-10 FLF- : FLAI 1 + 1 +1 \ 1 I ! C / \ / 1 / ' tPOPOSED aftl*:18 A 123, \,veST' ME>AHZ>16 0,68 20'1>46 rp~~8992Â·p JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECIS 6 123 WEST FRANCIS 4,1 =11-2 NÂ¢,erN\ MAY 8,1995 -Ng vICKÂ¢ Pr - 05*44'4.. ty .h . Ad,4. -- -- -- 1 . . . . 11. i I I ' 1 1 1 ,1 1 ..1 1! ; Â·11. 11 - 0 - i lilli 1 1 ill I - E ! -, 1 E .f . 1 1 1 6*M* 5*92\ 11624 11 1 i '11:11 - - 1 ill 'Iii , 1 . 1 lip| ~ U_ Â·- -1 1 It 1:1 lit 1 1 1 . 1 11 1 '. 0 . 11 Iii' 1 li 1 i 1 j . lili j f 1 1 5 i. ' 111 ~: 11 111 1 113 1 . . Iii 1 -1 -123- 1 - 1!1 If 1 , - Â®11 011 . I . lili , (mlo 0---' 1111 1 i 1 1 1 j - 4 V ,"U . A ~1i~~i:i~ 4 Â·2 1~111111111 1- - 3 - li -Â·Â· -- '- : ~ 11 WHilitlll 1 1 2 \ rj- 1 fl dll/f~ /4 i = I -Â· -*1 1'26 w. FDANCi ; Al iyte si '= 3 - \ I i ll // --VII Â· ~ / 1 I \ 1 1 It . 1 W~/414/CLillibirl'kililezzlilll . r 4 I *t'LI. . 3 1 - 1 11. f / 4.1 - 1 Lof- 23 Â»Utle . '41 lAi A 1,4A~1 Â» 1 - li . Â« 11 Eilfilli ii,11HNIWIililhldil,iÂ·,1,1Â®liM,11 -EH ~ 1 1 ~Ul.....EÂ·,--rT[~mnmmimnimiiwlâ€¢==; . 11.11 1 EL - --- A m I *0747/0 MR 01*Ng mumidli 1111 ~''ili'~illilililillii! 4Et E 1- WE,6-E RievA~94 -__2 6 Gr413+ 8>1*>MA1-167+1 W-. - 4 hA A '7â‚¬4#*tx Hl - ~ A~~~1 ~11 *'1 hAh ' 11. 1.=27 F.At.MI 1 32i0&Egut~_--_~=:=~~i-; ~- i ji~1~~~MW AH ---. - - W,VT#Rer/*Ads/,rEE--- 41 E 1 iMMNA 5,1 -11 0412- 2 Â£ im~~ i~! 1.M#MHWFW) m m -Fl' 11 1 ,Â·1 1 #Aer *te Vwrle,14 94 mrM' 9464*1-1~7~90 *ew*r! 114 ' ppe48 p enpe 3 1. 9 - 19, auu,BPX"k"jo -- <.I- JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECS MAY 8, 1995 6 , tâ€¢ ' - p , t ' . 1 A LUR 4 I 1. - - r 4 1-43 r 11 1 1 1 11 '11 1. 1 - tz- =_ -z. - 1 -- - .--A -1.-----7--,tr ..4.- -- \ 0,4, pou 460 * efu p, 0 --- 1 --r - !11 ' Uf' 6 1--- - -6 1 Q * -R~ =C ~, f '**LÂ·'61 16 .. . 1 \ t. 1 1 1 J.... 1 f - .2*fit - . 1 1 / \ 11 w 1 1 1 - 4 1 1:, -LA-LINFer 1 -1 11 i 4 2 K , FÂ»Â·111->r /1Â«letpt,6, 1 /- - -Itz#; i / / A J , V 19 14 , 1 $ 1 i / J tr- -- 99*1- -- - dup ; -87Â»12.191 *04- 7-Il Tr / 1 -I - . . ** eNT FlÂ« 7%41. V /6.IN /2 n, - 6.109 .irl Â·t-> A -- 1, + f I I .Ir ' 1 5 ...* .V A LE--8-61 ' qp 5 - e - / . A .. .r - 9 -214*TEE.E_.f-L diMz.0%14 -2.- 2 -AMZA*,12.1 .- 1/ --- i 1 --Nup-==,C 1 .N - M , f*Fghl. 2 ACE 6 \ 1 1 / ~. //// 2 1 11 f k * C>-â‚¬2.-_ , 1 11. i 1 +Vt 1425# i bf, 13Â».--3 0~ *--- eemc~-----~~i 6- ; . 1/06 . .14\ 1 1 /1 14 /1 3 1 , O/ / / 1 1 ...11 dkfi 1 1. 4/. 6 11..10, 1 -gi--- -- fli- 841 001 4% . 41 - F+114 :i 417. - // if 44 1 i 1 . - Atzou N O F l.62:PtzÂ· FZ.*14 4 1 <.1 VJ , PGANC.0(4 . , , ALLEY , 1 _Idvi#/14 - -- * 2 1 - A Intl - l \ 695'* I 11--- 1 - 1 1 , 16 . 1 1 t t f il, - 1 , 1 1 1' Â· 1 1 . I. /*t . 1 j > <~ 0 .-4 .. 1 1 1 fl ,- . 1. 11 1 , rr 1 \ ; 1 1. , ! 1/ 1 4 - 1 1 -- 1 1 â€¢ I i 1 1 1- , FA*~112-Â©Â« 1 . 1 \ LIPFU, FLZXPe 8*0 . W ~ 82*140(&7 I . JES MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission From: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer Re: 130 S. Galena, City Hall- Minor Date: May 24, 1995 SUMMARY: The applicant requests HPC approval for construction of additional windows on the south side of the building in order to bring light into below grade meeting spaces. City Hall is an Aspen Landmark and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. It is located within the Commercial Core Historic District. APPLICANT: The City of Aspen, represented by Cris Caruso. LOCATION: 130 S. Galena Street, Lots K,L, and M, Block 93, City and Townsite of Aspen. PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 7-601 of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H, " Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark... Response: In March of 1994, HPC approved the construction of a new entry at the rear of City Hall, as part of plans to construct a basement. City Hall is exceeding its capacity to house the number of employees and meeting spaces which are necessary. The decision was made to place meeting areas in the basement and offices above grade, since most meetings take place at night and are brief, while employees must work in their spaces all day and ought to have access to natural light. The new wall which will be exposed at the rear of City Hall will have sevejral windows which will light the new City Council chambers. The new Sister Cities meeting room will be located in the southwest corner of the basement and will receive a limited spillover of natural light from Council Chambers. For this reason, the City has submitted an application to HPC to construct two new windows on the south side of City Hall. The floor area behind these windows would be cut away so that light would reach the meeting room. Traditionally, light is brought into below grade spaces by lightwells. A lightwell has been ruled out by the ' applicant, because it would affect the public walkway along Hopkins Avenue. Staff finds that the proposed alternative, new windows at the "foot level" is incompatible with the historic structure and does not comply with several of the design guidelines. The guidelines state that "the pattern created by existing window openings should be preserved." The proposal does involve replacing an existing door in this area with double hung windows, which is a very positive move. However, the new windows ground level windows do not relate to the original window pattern and are used in an awkward manner. Staff recommends that the applicant continue to study other options, for instance the use of glass block as a covering for a lightwell or other interior solutions. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The proposed windows will be very visible to the public and are not consistent with the character of the neighborhood. This is the only city block in Aspen which contains only 19th century structures and it should be considered extremely significant. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: The City has recently adopted the "Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation" as mandatory for all structures listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Staff finds that the proposed development will detract from the historic significance of this structure by altering the established pattern of windows along a primary facade. 4. Standard: The proposed deve,lopment enhances or does not diminish from the architjactural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposal does diminish the structure's architectural character and integrity. The new windows have no relation to the fenestration patterns on the building and do not contribute to the preservation of the structure's architectural style. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any of the following alternatives: 1) Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. 2) Approve the Minor Development application with conditinns to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (specific recommendations should be offered) 4) Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC table the application for Minor development, finding that, as proposed, it does not meet the Development Review Standards. Staff further recommends that HPC work with the applicant to determine whether another solution may be found which eliminates the impacts stated above. 1 2 1-4 9 2 . 1 'I ' ' W.1 ,<, rr- . U) U I . t g + 3 , tÂ·fiC Â· =1 4 0 jf' p 1 :' <11 0 lili E ., .0 1 'bill!@ . +0 . 111111111111111.:F~.11 ~~ .1 . III 11 .2 0 ..___-_uu:u,u.i/- -i r,~~ . ' ' t -Â·' -- ~ 2%~m ~ I.. f 2 -r 0 lt,tnm#Â£ Â· Â·'- ... Â·. . o, ,, >4., 1 2 1=4 . ~ ~ 1Â¥11 Z ..' 1. - ..L - e 11. '/~1/ 11 + N , 16')'r.lilli.lili .'111.1 9,- - 1 8 -4 ; 9. I . 1 1 /i 1 - .. . 41 --2-1 1 '' 2 , Â· ; 11,1!Ellill limillitul.. 11 3> - / i232-4 7 7">11 1 . 1 1, , 1 1 , 9 i ' 9 -1 91 -3 1 , 021-4-21= 1 4 4 k*N2111.: ' . -/ 1 1 / 51----a--1 =tÂ· . . , I . /7 9 . . : Â· ,11 ' 9/.4 . . 1Â·/ 1,eemÂ£=,~=AU:Â¢==.d . 1 - . 41*.. Â· f,Â·Â·Â·Â· 1 Â· A . -r W. ..1. -4, . n . , , 1 '" .Â·- -. T.irrmmroilimtÂ·Â· Â· . , . l - 1--- .1 11 1 ii 1-millii'lilit - - 1, .-- - 2.4 , 31 -â€¢r " 1 lit - , 1 - LD..A 111 . . Ilb , ' 1 '1'Hg 71 1 1 ' - j 5,9.i Â· - I - . . 1.11. . 6 + 42111 '. . . 11 . ~Â· Â· '' 42 - 0!,1 76 ,~ ) - , 1% U U ... b 0, a W I I 4- R . 9 m 4, 1 ... I ' ' : '. i / '' 4. -' r. ~ 4~ +'/ I I :6 '..... I , 1 4 1 -4 . 1 .. . I. I , - M J . 1 , IÂ· IN Â°11[El- 0 7. I H===Ir - - Â· 11Â¤11=11 ~ ' 1641 ~ 1% Ink :11 , --- I.*Re H-00* 6 L. 1==ttlt==t 1 4 1-Eal.': /iti '.'.1/ Ir- - . _~ ~ ./ * + 4 - I - :. 4 ' - 1 -2,4/(1, /4,2,OK. 1-7 .1 - 0- liECE:-22/aaw-:- I 711, Â¢ . x I f ... :.-., 1 107'- 15 EA.,r Â£140 2 . / ..1894 53.*leSr EN(7 4 , J.W.1 - I ...1. 1- 1 1 - L._.1 -litsr ,:zag- - . _ - C==1 -6 --$*...-Il --.I. =-0 .--0--. My "Cri ' '12 %4.'-,44 .. -' - I. ..4- . *CPO.- U. P - I - . .. 3 T 916 81 4 4 4 - ,-Â£11*i= .ibÂ· --Â·,2---e- -â€¢,--Â·Â·Â·.'-'ly daeâ€ž,9-1 1 â€žLEVA,ION - --'. .1. I - .... 6. 1 . 2 + L , + -I . . . k. f.. - ...1 - ... ti.Ma\ alx_14Mk~ ~~~~ :rk .. .Â·Â· -1*foeec?_/8.4/MiA -~ - . ' . I ' - . 'Cl Â· -. ..Â·~ ~~ -9.f/:--3-j-..3 .Â·Â·fÂ·Â»:-~F-int/2424.;2-.... 0Â·52 -29-Â·%Â·tfÂ·tiÂ·-d:A- s-7:y?iÂ«.iâ‚¬64-2s-,-4-7%3;4~: - 1 - '.t....),1114 i./1- _1_Y_ CL-2 MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission From: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer Re: 434 E. Cooper Avenue- Minor Date: May 24, 1995 SUMMARY: The applicant requests HPC approval to install an evaporative cooler at the rear of the structure. This structure is not historic, but is located within the Commercial Core Historic District. APPLICANT: Tom Yoder of KemoSabe. LOCATION: 434 E. Cooper Avenue. PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H, " Historic Overlay District must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 7-601 of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. Section 7-601 has recently been amended through Planning and Zoning Commission, Resolution 6, Series of 1995. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale, and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H, " Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark... Response: The proposed cooler will be located on the rear of the building, at the loading dock. The unit is 34"x36")(34." It must be painted to match the building. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The dock area, and therefore the cooler , are not visible from the street. The cooler will have little impact on the alleyscape. l 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: The proposal has no impact on the historic significance of any historic structure. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposal has no impact on the architectural character or integrity of any historic structure. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any of the following alternatives: 1) Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. 2) Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (specific recommendations should be offered) 4) Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC approve the Minor Development application with the condition that the unit be painted to match the building. Additional Comments: j mTACIeN-r 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FEe,i 1) project Na[me ~28_gium (-04,Â«- 40|e f 1 2) Project Location 1,1 il,\ L LOO Pe t - b 4.4- U rqof Â¢ Ilâ‚¬&1 (indicate street address, lot & block Inmaier, legal descripticn where apprcpriate) 3) Present Zcning Â«4_--, 4) Iot Size 5) Appli.cant' s Name, Mdress & :0xxie # r...FJIA 4 4 2 4 terM SaL Â· 43\1 E (goget +PA %1611 924 -7<37% 6) ReitieseIT#~ve's Nane, AddIEss & ax:In # <-4 M ~ha I I Man , (cj Alcu 4 .4 Piceli_ SReit- Men-1 q zg- 2 LISM Typd of Awlicaticn (please check all that awly): . . 4 Ocnliticnal Use _ - Conceptual SPA ccoceptalal Historic Dev. Special Beview Â· Final SEA Final Histcric Dev. 8040 Greenline Ocnceptial HUD ~<~ Mi ncyr Hist-nric Dev. -1 Stream Margin Â· Â·- Final POD Historic Demolifirn Mountain,kiew Plane Subdivision - Historic Desigration Conrhninitnni zatirn - 9Â»Yt,/Map Amendment GEDS Allotmpot Iat Â®lit/Iat line Â· (24& â„¢emption Adjustment 8) Description of Existing Uses Â· (Ilmber and f type of existing structlres; amrrocimate sq. ft.; Ilmber of bedmans; any previous approvals granted to the pL-operty)'. 9) Descrintion of Develqpent Application 4443Ckl LISGO c.Â·lipn ewo*oroz--tue Â¢-do IQ' 40 0-&< 0-~ iu,/dtn] ' 407â‚¬_ AeÂ£-4 24 011&1 \ d:# 6-a LAR 6-tree,K 10) Have ycu attached the following? Respcnse to Attachment 2, Mininum Sulmission Ccntents Response to AttachnErt 3, Specific Suhnission Occitents Ihespense to Attadmerrt 4, Review Standards far Your Application lillia OecD REMOMBE MA~ i &31 1 9 9 g 3 0,0~ (Mer , culnd- (kÂ®110% 14 %'FC} \fae "jO [A-Gtl C AK 1-Â«tord]14Â« e.66104 CA 14- Af Â¢# 1-6- 6,1Jai~ Icatd ot 11 1 4 E- 6op e / c *vi 46- 064ae-41 a.nal )464-/Mr A 3Â» Agli'*1n kert- SRee-1- Ng-k-Â¢ < 4-4944+ kUS? Ak-% (ejoic Aspon l... 4614.i. Â·Â·p ".C,;46--rn Â·:Â¢gs.t- 494**pi d*&,,.~ ~: ..{ .-.1.35...:Uff YÂ¢Â·f~j~,-*;itÂ·Â¢28%'1~.kbyâ‚¬ Â·0Â·'IiÂ·: f .Â».. 1 -Â«,2 E 3 4,2 ~L Oujner--~joi~<,t~ 94>If.%644/4 -2% teâ‚¬1-0.-:Â·Grage- 1 (( < , ... Â·i-.Â·Â·.-//Â·41%2Â·.4:.'I.*274 '.P'.Â·i~i~iti.... Â·J - ~ f&-- gi.iÂ·~. :.~t'>~ikiÂ·:~40Â· 2-4;6~5Â·Â·:11.4.1--Â·~v*~.-22?>~i f r.:--1.>.ii~:.ictf?Â·.-.1?fitzÂ¢~?f;-*; ~ 4ii YA PC '4+ C 616 i Qi . .4-,, 2:F,Â·~ .Â·~%312. 04Â·,i fit....gu Â«..le-:. 4 #.. 14 v , , <,r:~tÂ·y~'..4 4032121:faq.., Â· Â· 2.0:9?3iâ‚¬XtfUERit ~/49.~~~,y . 0/ 4..7 5 , 1-- I ip. C hIt 1 7 4 4 f 4 0/ 4 - 434 EAST COOPER â€¢ ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 â€¢ (303) 925-7878 P 4Â¢- MO Â»-0% U- -Li * Li E (9-8 0 4 4 f 1, . (6614 4 1 6 f.&4 d 113 c 476 'Of rb 39 lo F L~X~ 3 4 + kl 'tf 39" dcup l C 6-6 & Â« Cm n n 6 + 41, 1 l Lic- 1 ,\ Â·adle tÂ¢ Lin C~ e i 62 L e kn HI--05 ,- Ste e C %41 r w e J- i (Lf- 74 ed 64 dot-4 6-&,Lena 91-(Te 4 ir.Nquidt 1 0 c_lc ~ re LK i b 0 (k-06 g,o-c~ cora tr vr- j Â¢A L~\ cl, 4 74* L~Qtitt uer 5>9-k *4//#//1//~'.>;:it:Â»0797/NO I -- "*,#iq . v#*i. :1~'Iâ‚¬011Â·:., ' -3-,2. Â£1â‚¬24 :IAE t. 2Â·121':i~773- 431.:-T ;Ii"/Ailt# 3.2 ' - riWNÂ· =L-W!.- .. 1.?41 .%Â«4'4+ - /""""/~/M/ER.J.~9.>A â€¢,0Â£446 f li"/gui//"""I// illillilillillillililill ..:IZA-ew t#sililillillillillillillill r r . - * -/ ... .....I-. - Â·- .'-Â· .Â¥'Â· - 7 . . 1 ~ 6 c le_ at f U< 44) 4 14 -mj-I~ E (0-0%Â« . 4-a<@na <-,Â·irn-+ 4/17 1 8 13 1 (11,3 4 41% 1- 98 6-N 6-1 14 r.* 14 + of- 1- cl e A,kfdj 4