The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.199310134 2 1 i AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE OCTOBER 13, 1993 REGULAR MEETING SECOND FLOOR MEETING ROOM CITY HALL 5:00 I. Roll call and approval of July 14, 1993 minutes, August 11, 1993 and August 25, 1993 minutes II. Committee and Staff Comments III. Public Comments IV. OLD BUSINESS 5:15 A. City Hall Roof materials --01/3Â£0.- 5:35 B. Planet Hollywood - awnings-9 B A-,4-2.2 6/2 5- 69./7/*Un-. jL_J? 5:55 C. 232 E. Ha J lam Amendment to Final Significant Development Approva 1 -- 1-3-POK- A P p 1 , i e._4Â·.b n 40 1 -f-A 0 i q 44.7 V. NEW BUSINESS 6:15 A. 205 S. Mill St. Chanin's Restaurant - Minor Awning 4,%,--cu 613 .9 Lutr:,- 3(-cr.1" 6:35 B. Neighborhood Guidelines PLEASE BRING YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER GUIDELINES A. Project Monitoring a) Add conceptual date B. Sub-Committee Reports C. Neighborhood Character Guidelines E. Red )Brick update ongoing E, Ck,4.< 2-t 60--n : tit4jk--ztx~~ 9- CÂ·~,6 14 1~ Pyl409"0'' 7 12-<_f ci.,~ 7:00 VII. ADJOURN I eÂ»-p-.31Con,i 1 Â£u-J/- 34 fh,i=urto,/ 44 /711-4'uof-1-k- /b fl wt 9 , g-Â·64.~.,R.rf- t,u-JX 1Â¢)7,0-cÂ·n;,a,4, _ 0 144 - f/1 - I . 1 HPC PROJECT MONITORING HPC Member Name Prolect/Committee Add Conceptual date to all projects when approved Bill Poss CCLC & PPRG 413 E. Hyman County Courthouse Highway Entrance Design Committee Character Committee-AACP 601 W. Hallam (app. liaison) HP Element-Community Plan Aspen Historic Trust-Board Member 214 W. Bleeker St. Mary's Church 533 E. Main Donnelley Erdman The Meadows (Chair-Sub Comm) 442 W. Bleeker (Pioneer Park) Collins Block/Alley Wheeler-Stallard House 624 E. Hopkins 304 E. Hopkins 234 W. Francis ueslie Holst Holden/Marolt Museum (alt.) In-Town School Sites Committee Aspen Historic Trust-Chairman 824 E. Cooper 210 S. Mill 303 E. .Main Alt 312 S. Galena - MD (Planet Hollywood) Joe Krabacher 801 E. Hyman AHS Ski Museum Aspen Historic Trust-Vice Chairman 612 W. Main 309 E. Hopkins (Lily Reid) 617 W. Main 312 S. Galena - MD (Planet Hollywood) Jake Vickery The Meadows (alternate) In-Town School Sites Committee LR>14 5 *A *CC 233 t/1/kni Â»1 5 205 S. Mill Larry Yaw CA bor\. Y.#~ .- 716 W. Francis 442 W. Bleeker (Pioneer-alt.) 204 S. Galena (Sportstalker) City Hall 627 W. Main (residential-Jim Kempner) 232 E. Hallam Al f L -- p,t 2, IjtA r- Loger Moyer CCLC Liaison 334 W. Hallam , Aspen Historical Society 409 E. Hopkins 303 E. Main 311 W. North Farfalla lights outside 210 Lake Avenue (alternate) Karen Day Rubey Transit Center 334 W. Hallam (alternate) Cottage Infill Program 134 E. Bleeker 435 W. Main Swiss Chalet 311 W. North 304 E. Hopkins 121 S. Galena Martha Madsen 620 W. Hallam (alternate) 100 Park Ave. (alternate) 214 W. Bleeker (alternate) 132 W. Main Linda Smisek 134 E. Bleeker 210 Lake Avenue 305 Mill St. 702 W. Main - Stape - Conceptual Development approved Sept 8, 1993 E MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 232 E. Hallam Street, Amendment to Final Significant Development Approval DATE: October 13, 1993 SUMMARY: The applicant requests HPC approve an amendment to their Final Significant Development Application (approved on April 14, 1993). The development approval was for construction of a 496 sq. ft. addition to rear of this Aspen Landmark. Attached are the previously approved design, new drawings and minutes from the HPC meeting of April 14. The proposed changes do not affect the dimensions of the addition, but affect windows and doors. APPLICANT: Dick and Linda Roberts, represented by Stryker/Brown Architects. LOCATION: 232 E. Hallam Street, Lots M and N, Block 71, Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or involving an Aspen Historic Landmark 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. NOTE: The applicant did not provide an east elevation and must do so at the review. The letter submitted to HPC indicates that the only change to that facade is the deletion of the dormer window. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in character with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcles when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark... Response: Proposed changes involve a reduction in the amount of glass, which was of concern to HPC during previous reviews. As a result, the new design appears to be somewhat more sympathetic to the historic structure. Any ornamentation on the dormers, brackets or other features should be minimized and should not mimic the original house. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The addition will not be easily visible from the street, and is compatible in scale and design with the surrounding historic structures. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: This structure has had several modern additions which are not in character with the historic resource. The studio will provide a terminus for the long axis which has been created by the flat roofed additions and will reflect attention back to the form of the historic building. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The addition does not directly affect original building materials. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any Of the following alternatives: 1) Approve the amendment to the Final Significant Development Approval as submitted. 2) Approve the amendment to the Final Significant Development Approval with conditions. 3) Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (specific recommendations should be offered) 4) Deny the amendment to the Final Significant Development Approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC approve the amendment to Final Signficant Development approval for 232 E. Hallam Street. Additional Comments: 4 Â£ Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of April 14, 1993 Doug: The client requested that we not do the windows up above in the gable and wanted something in a pattern. Jake: The original house is simple and there is a lot of complexity in the addition. Is it appropriate to take that intricate shingle work and detailing it in the addition. There is no real shingle work on the house. The idea is that the addition not be competitive with the original house. Doug: To me it was a change from the original miners cottage which is very simple and this will separate the addition from the original. The complexity is the tower element in the back. It is a progression and I felt if we kept it too simple it would blend in too much. We have the subtle size of material that is changing in each addition. Jake: What is your thinking of the horizontal windows with a grid? Doug: There is a stairway behind both of them and it was the intent to make them like a jewel with beveled glass to let light into the stair well. It is not meant for a view windows. Just to break it up. 1 Jake: I think the siding concept is great and I like the idea of simplification. I realize what you are trying to do but they are eyeball elements in the composition. They are the only two horizontal windows with grids. Bill: Do you feel smaller more square cottage type windows would be more appropriate? MOTION: Bill entertained the motion granting final approval based on the information provided in the Staff memo dated April 14, 1993 and that the materials have been submitted at this meeting and that the conditions of conceptual and final have been met for 210 Lake Avenue. Martha: I so move; second by Linda. Question was called by the Chairman; Carried 3-2. In favor: Bill, Martha and Linda. Opposed Jake and Roger. 232 E. HALLAM - FINAL DEVELOPMENT Wayne Stryker, architect: We originally thought of this as a contemporary thing and make it contemporary but through the meetings we decided to integrate historical parts of the house and contemporary. We decided to take the massing and simplify the detailing. I feel the design has improved. Some people are very hot or cold about this house as it has the 70 style addition. The 6 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of April 14, 1993 detailing of the addition is simplified. We did an analysis of the second empire style of the old house and developed those into the appearance of what we are proposing. The addition would have the same siding but the roofing material would be different. Bill: Wayne is asking the Board to approve the revisions to his conceptual design and also asking for final approval which means submitting details on how he is going to build this building and samples of building materials. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Jake: The letter is one of the best letters ever written to this Board. The research, thinking and philosophy, approach and strategy is very consistent and appropriate to what this Board supports. I feel the design is extremely compatible and does exactly what it should do. The changes are excellent. Roger: I concur with the letter and the mass and scale work with our standards. The fenestration on the north side is non-competing with the original and the other addition. The fenestration on the west side is compatible. The south elevation (street view) is competing with the original building. Wayne: The south fenestration came about as the owners wanted light. Roger: The shape and size of the fenestration and the width of the trim surrounding it is quite large. It stands out. Linda: The south elevation is a little competing with the shape of the windows and doesn't' flow. The windows could be shaped a little different. Martha: This project is difficult because it is as though we are going to loose another old building due to the additions. Bill: I feel this is a compatible additional and the style works well with the new and old. Since it is a one bedroom studio I can see the architectural intent of having the north and south windows be complementary and the east and west windows be complementary. When you read the south elevation and the designer or architect tries to represent what is going on in the back they tend to read and have a lot more impact to the south elevation. I do not feel the window will ever be perceived from the street. If you look for it you would see it. The consensus of the Board is giving approval to the conceptual revisions. We would have to go through materials and details if Final is to be given. 7 6 t Historic Preservation Committee 1 Minutes of April 14, 1993 Bill: Sometimes a study model is necessary but I realize this addition is small. Wayne: This is on a cad system and I can show exactly how that would appear from the street. Roger: My other question is the trim width and is it exactly depicted? Wayne: The reason that line is so heavy is that a roof exists and we were keeping the insulation of R-30 through that dormer. Roger: I am dealing with the standards as to whether it detracts or adds to the original structure and the new addition. I feel the window fenestration on the south side should be the same on the west side. I feel that would be a simple statement. Linda: I also feel the windows should be in keeping with the main structure. Martha: I do not feel strongly either way. Wayne: I will study that issue. Jake: I understand what you are doing taking the old and new and mixing it together and a restudy is appropriate. MOTION: Roger made the motion that HPC deny final approval and that one condition of conceptual has been met and upon receipt of proper drawings designating exact scale of trim and materials final could be granted; second by Martha. DISCUSSION Jake: I feel the applicant should receive final approval and pass this onto a monitor. I will volunteer to be that monitor if the board deems so. Regarding final the applicant has talked about the roofing material and he has said that the materials in general are the same as the old house and that the detailing is similar to the detailing on the old addition and. he has given the simplified cornice going around the perimeter of the roof. The only detailing in question is the trim and window treatment on the north and south. The drawings represent the roofing and siding. Bill: You could table it and revert it to the sub-committee. Roger: I didn't want to deny it, tabling would be appropriate. AMENDED MOTION: Roger made the motion to grant final approval with 8 . Historic Preservation Committee ~ Minutes of April 14, 1993 the condition that the architect submit drawings to the monitor and restudy the fenestration on the south elevation; second by Martha. All in favor of motion and amended motion, motion carries. DISCUSSION Bill: For clarification Jake is concerned about the thickness of the detailing on the north and south elevation. 234 W. FRANCIS - CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT Kim: The principle residence is going to be remodeled inside and the majority of work will be focused on the carriage house and the addition to make a bathroom and legal living quarters. Staff agrees with the request for a setback variance. John Schenck, Project Manager for Cunniffe & Associates: This house is at 234 W. Francis and is the Davis-Waite house and built 1896 by Governor Waite and he was the only populist governor. We want to keep the historic style of the house. On the main house the structural engineer stated that the house needs under pined. The interior remodel requires the roof to be restructured. The client also has requested an additional window on the north side of the structure. On the carriage house we want to make this deed restricted dwelling unit and that requires a bathroom and in doing so we will add a 9x9 ft. bathroom. We have it located on the eastern edge of the building on the north side trying to hide it from street view and keep the context of a small building. The cottage needs raised to make head room for a nice accessory dwelling unit and loft space that the client has requested. We propose to do that by putting in a stone base or water table under the existing structure and also building a new foundation. Since we are building a new foundation we are going to use storage in the basement. We also have a window at the western elevation of the carriage house. We will try to match the details and proportions of the existing building. A door has also been proposed to enter into the back yard. We will add a parking space even though it is not required. The total of the ADU would be 694 Sq. Ft. CLARIFICATIONS: Roger: You said you had roof modifications, will the roof be opened up or what? John Schenck: I am not exactly sure but if it does get opened up it would be replaced as is. Roger: The carriage house does not have a foundation presently. Does the existing house have a foundation? 9 STRYKER/ BROWN ARCHITECTS,PC September 7, 1993 Amy Amidon Historical Preservation Committee Aspen/Pitkin Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Historical Preservation Committee: The Owners of 232 East Hallam, Dick and Linda Roberts, would like to modify their H.P.C. approval. Drawing numbers 1,2,3 and 4 show the approved design. Drawings 5 and 6 show the modifications desired. The project has been reduced to an artist's studio only. The large rounded dormers facing north and south have been deleted. The two smaller dormers facing east and west have been deleted also. The large glass area on the north (post office view) elevation has been redesigned to a 3 panel sliding glass with a transom above. The south dormer has been designed at the same height as the roof to allow sunlight into the studio. The mansard roof material will be asphalt shingles similar to the existing home in lien of the standing seam metal roof. We feel that this modification to the approved design has all the scale and materials to be a very pleasing addition to the residence. Sincerely, -1 48 / A %9 V George Kelley Architect (representing Wayne Stryker, AIA.) 3 () 0 5 SPRING 4 T R F F T St; 1 1 1 300 A<PEN (2 <) 1 0 1<A i) () *161 1 303 92:Â·22'4 9 2 i ?25 X (FAX k .. ~711.1111. 1,1,1.1,1.0,1, If 1,11 ..1,1,114~ E-7 61. r.eâ€¢ r ;IM~'NIENE~EIE L E--9 1 1 up-lummumul--79 1 1 - - If i J 4. - NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0" ROBERTS ADDITION 232 EAST HALLAM STREET ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS, P.C. 300 S. SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 (303) 925.2254 '11,1411 1 .. I + -. 7 lili B 1 1 - - - 8 - 1 ------ --i#-1.-il--Il-I - --6~-i-.~I---.~ ------ - -- --- 00 -- - 4=(~8 tl mting rf WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0" ROBERTS ADDITION 232 EAST HALLAM STREET ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 300 S. SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS, P.C. ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 (303) 925.2254 1 - :11 Â£ 1 1-3 \I -3~ 1 1 =- 111 91 1 Â·' 1 . T 1 l: %121 fill tri L 1 . SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0" ROBERTS ADDITION 232 EAST HALLAM STREET ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS, P.C. 300 S. SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 (3032 925.2254 (F) te 1 1, !, .1'lili 1 : 1. !11/1,1.lili 11, 4 - -I LrÂ·*-~~ 44 \-r E i. d====. , -~1~ t lili ===1 * i 1. - 41 1 11 1' 7 11~ 1 1 1 ~ 1 1 -il K -M . i-' Â£ ilf - O 01 U 11 1 == .1 1 1 EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0" ROBERTS ADDITION 232 EAST HALLAM STREET ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 300 S. SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS, P.C ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 (303) 925.2254 .. -1 3. i & 4 t- 7,-4-4 -- -' 5 -,1--4% 1 < -FF 11 i flill 1* Â· 1 3; 11 1 D i , I #: Â« te -4 i b , - 0-Ofu T.9:! Â· 41? S . 77:06:1 *?Ft:, et 0 1 , A.*t'JU -Â·~4~@~ 1 Irr i li 71,1 2 , .11 -I. 1 3 114 2 EL * 1 1 ' l a fk 4- P h M I 1- I}. 2 1 -0 1 fy. - . 1 -ell Er . f -1 : lili ti 1.13:142,1 -- ill 1 ''21 4 1 1 i i '12'1 ", Â· 90 '45 4 1 \ t. r 1 '61 2 4% i ':2. , I ' ' '. 4- - ' 4- . iâ‚¬ 1.P 34 -4, - . ' e N 1 1. 1 S Â· i.~ 4 4-?.-t~-Â·.,:Â·f Â¢ 427 9 . 1 ...6,6 L..1~- 41'g 11 7 - . j ' 1 r I ' i*. e I 'S 9 or . I ./ 4 1 _ â€ž\ 2 j '0 - - , 4 -/1 4-1 1,1.11 2 1111141Â©. . Â»Pr - A~ iff it.41*1 1 =3 ' 2 , - 44411.*trita. 1.4. . Â£ 1.1 - 1144-4-tÂ·.-2 - _1 -19 117., . -1 1 - , .... , r.--- =:k-i i-i = LE 22 1 C . N 1 }1==gil - 04+ 1 . A ' . 14 Â£ -r .~:~ ,4G .-4 1 Â· 1 r. 1 - --. =25 "- AM: .=ra I 1-t- 4.41 -,4-1-- R 1 .,i* H+141* 7--r L i .LI 14Â·-612~TIW - ' 1.-u 1.b~.ILDtri.t - .1 1 /J.ter=I . - /1 -- A 1 , - .-..1.... . ' . . ...-----1:*= - ly V <f Â· ' 4 riT . W... â„¢ rb ;t 1 't t.1 ~.: ,:0 :-f :1,. D ? i f>, --0 3 47Â·'4 Â· - A , ita :flt, A.al, 41'.2~ .~ fe** ,ild 6:'* 11'3: 14 .1. -4 - 9 e. . 1 4 4 i 441 4 . IrÂ· i 1-1. ( -1-2. ., 1 9% RE r p. bil - I.: 1 Ar i - 4-1_ ~ :I ..? 4 - 4 0, r Â· 4,4-4 , .. 4~ I . . - Â· ,-;. z -r..L. t -r 3.F- ...,iÂ·*44.- :i.-2-Â¥g,4%1}3Â¥i- 1>f-, 2*C&-. < 1 * 1 .. 146# - % '24'50 Â· . --7 1- 35-1 . . I .. ' - *-12-77' el 411 9672-1. 1/ i 4*6 4440,15. . t. Te*Nt,â€¢p/A '-Â· 190 0 1. . L I,,0~ -,up rT MEA-Tma- ll - 92 ,. i: Â£121- - 4,) w/*,1-1 0 * 077 60 f : ~f~f> 968,111 INa CÂ» TR~6*6)-t'ON It,U' 1 i . 0 AP 4 ,â‚¬14;le -r--- 76 (p} 44120.-I-jI.4-\- .flh f 9â„¢No - .â€¢t It i , :70<(:1,9 l> J -i f 'f Ful.0 omt; - - 1. -rl I , f < .' 0 ... . g- 1. 1 -2. - 1 / (Me) &47' 1 - 1 11),- - '00.--w (9 44 6,9- , 13'FFEr-- CIA#isÂ¢42 . -3- -6.--9%3 Â£. . ...* .~ . _. -7~-/Â·.Â·3-'Â·. 'Â·Â· -9ftil/4 - 1,0,19 4 ~ ~It' . . n .2 . 941.- 4.-' I . e .fl \.tÂ·. ~fâ€¢~,trb J 9 kifÂ·rA:394332 9 - .Rt. -4)#f2 1 .... A. ; b .7-Mâ€¢rz~tÂ» #'t-.t:jÂ·rti<DIJ? Â·:Â·Â·Â· - -S 1 .. ..... C 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 205 S. Mill Street, Chanin's Restaurant, Minor Development DATE: October 13, 1993 SUMMARY: The applicant requests mindr development approval to install a canvas awning over the restaurant entrance. The awning is to be the same color, but not the same form as those on the rest of the building. APPLICANT: Aspen Restaurant Association L.P., represented by Gibson and Reno Architects, 925-5968. LOCATION: 205 S. Mill Street (Mill Street Plaza), Lots D-I, Block 81, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING DEPARTMENT ISSUES: In order to meet the open space requirements for this parcel, the awning must be retractable. 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 character with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H, " Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark... Response: The structure is adjacent to several landmarks and is located within the Commercial Core Historic District. Several awnings already exist on Mill Street Plaza and on neighboring historic buildings and new buildings. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: Awnings are consistent with the character of the Commercial Core. The proposed awning is not a "traditional" form, but reflects the shape of the roof and will provide the needed shelter for the entrance and L stair landing. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: The proposed awning will be visible from a public way, but will have only a minimal impact on the appearance of the Mill Street Plaza and will not detract from neighboring historic resources. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: No historic structure is directly impacted by this proposal. 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 HPC approve the Minor Development application as submitted. Additional Comments: ATTACHMENT 1 1 r- r ... IAND USE- APPII[CATICN FCERM '. , 0 'ti 7 1 11 1) Project Nana Â»NAN/RE . KEST-74 URANT- ~ 1 ill OCT - 6 1993 i ill- Project Incation 2 05 5. M/Le. 57-~ Lty[-6 D ' E , FL 6 + t.-1. I 86Â©0 lc_- 8 l \ Undicate street address, iat & block rlmber, legal desck#zien-2=e_..____ -3 appropriate) 3) Present Zoning OCIL 4) Iat Size 18,008 -5. F. 5) Applicant's Wane, MaressÂ·,& Minie i Alsfâ‚¬kl RES-1-AugANT A 6500. L.F . ip.O.&O% 84>10 ALFâ‚¬N. 60 816/4- 920Â·2858 Gh FegmemeÂ£&21*es *me-, AN#$22& & B~e # 61 8606.1 4 gENÂ© ABLf//72115 : 4[8 a. cooee p. kspEN , go 816/1 925 5748 7) Uypd of Application (please check all that qpply): Â· 4 Conditional Use _ Conceptinl SPA Concep~al Historic Dev. Special Iariew Final SEA Final Historic Dev. 8040 Greenline Conceptual POD ~ Mi~or Historic Dev. 1 Stream Margin Â·- Final ED Himforic Dmnl iti ne Mountain 'View Plane ___ Subdivision - Historic Desigration CIâ€¢hniniumi zation- _ Teody14Â® Amendment . --- (2*~hS Mlhent Iat Split/Int Line ___ 99S EEption Adjustment 8) Description of Existing Uses Â· (limber ani.Â· tape of ecisting structures; a~mcimate sq. ft.; amber of bedmans; any previous approvals granted to the property): EX[Â«Ilde U Â·5â‚¬ GNÂ·stâ‚¬-Es OF- AN AFffox/HATâ‚¬ 6310 Â«F. 12-6 61--Autzwr /EAR- LMATED & -lik MILL- STREET- PLAU . bLt ILD/Kle . 9) Description of DevelqÂ»ent Applicaticn De\JEC-optleul- APPLICATIONI CoNs!57-6 OF- A CANVAS AWN/,46 86/NG ADDEÂ© OVen -ME 6*15[-I-NG ENTER. 3-#6 AWN/Ne 9601_0 ExTEND A HAM/Mut-1 3.' 0" Fg-opt E)(/67/06 Bul,17/Ne ARD 91 6 004-0 A- Woo LD HAIL?1 771*f DF -ING- 6Â¥15{Â»le AWNING.-THR-006(4007- -THE- -0) Have yal attadied the frillowirâ‚¬? N/L-L- Â«2-ter pu-LA ge/Le/Ne. fe 5 Response to Attachment 2, Mininml Sulmission Ocntents YE 5 Response to Att2~ment 3, Specific Suhnission Contents *5 Respanse to Attachment 4, Review Standards far Your Application 1 1 ' lilli. SUPPLEMENT TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS IMPORTANT Three sets of clear. fully labeled drawings must be submitted in.a format no larger than 11"xl 7", OR one dozen sets of blueprints may be submitted in lieu of' the 11 x17 format. APPLICANT: AoFEN REST-Ad RAN-7- As500. L.R _ ADDRESS: Rae>ox 8(240 Age#, CO Elâ‚¬le_ ZONE DISTRICT: 0011 tteRL / AG 630@â‚¬ (921 LOT SIZE (SQUARE FEET): 18.000 6.p. EXISTING FAR: 9 6,7/5. .2- 5. F, ALLOWABLE FAR: PROPOSED FAR: 146 Apprr/ACAL FAÂ·.2- . Appap EXISTING NET LEASABLE (commercial): 1.31 934. 25-~ 5.,9 PROPOSED NET LEASABLE (commercial): No Aporne>NAc LEAâ‚¬ABLE ADDED EXISTING % OF SITE COVERAGE: 14/A PROPOSED % OF SITE COVERAGE: Ai/~ EXISTING % OFOPEN SPACE (Commercial): 6-2 70.5- 5. F . PROPOSED % OF OPEN SPACE (Commer.): /90 E:;4*IGE 73 ofEW 6/94â‚¬60 EXISTING MAXIMUM HEIGHT: PrinciDal 131Â®.: / Accessory Bldg: PROPOSED MAXIMUM HEIGHT: PrinciDal BlÂ®,: /96 C/*61/GE / Accessory Bldg: PROPOSED % OF DEMOLITION: O EXISTING NUMBER OF BEDROOMS: 0 PROPOSED NUMBER OF BEDROOMS: O EXISTING ON-SITE PARKING SPACES: O ON-SITE PARKING SPACES REQUIRED: / SETBACKS: EXISTING: ALLOWABLE: PROPOSED: Front: Front: Front: Rear: Rear: Rear: Side: Side: Side: Combined Front/Rear: Combined FrVRr: Combined Front/Rear: EXISTING NONCONFORMITIES/ ENCROACHMENTS: VARIATIONS REQUESTED (eliaible for Landmarks Onlv: character compatibility findina must be made by HPC): FAR: Minimum Distance Between Buildings: SETBACKS: Front: Parking Spaces: Rear: Open Space (Commerdal): Side: Height (Cottage Infill Only): Combined Frt./Rr: Site Coverage (Cottage Infill Only): 4 Park â‚¬4 7 \\ 1 4 , N )1 17Â»Â» --0 -Ck â„¢. Or 1 -~4 4 44 Ad .4,9~K ,<-uj,~--- / Cleck / 22 C,7 To Basall SÂ»,11 1 9 Aspen 11 4% Irwleue 1 f Â« 44 ~ 1- Music , . Teri 1. / Golf Course i k ,/ =-9.1. , 65 1 G ~ Waroor, Creek /1 1 m . Smug- Wh Rd Aspen 5 &/ Â» p,t 742 Â¢ 1 -0 . \ 60_f f. Pk f 1 . 4 4, (,44 '~~ SITE ' Maroon Lake ~tv 1 29' lili Xt. I Al 3-In~ d F r 9 91 41- 4 BLA To T,An Lakes,~/ Independence' Pass VICINITY MAP L 6. GIBSON S RENO Â· ARCHITECTS DAVID F GIBSON. AIA AUGUST G RENO, AIA October 6, 1993 SCOTT C SMITH. Ala Historic Preservation Commission 130 S. Gelena St. Aspen, CO 81611 Attn: Amy Amidon Re: Project description for Minor Historic Development to the existing restaurant at 205 S. Mill St. in the Mill St. Plaza Building. Dear Amy, Enclosed is an application for a Minor Historic Development for the existing restaurant at 205 S. Mill St. in the Mill St. Plaza Building. The proposal consists of the addition of a canvas awning over the existing entry to the restaurant. Currently within the Mill St. Plaza there exists numerous canvas awnings throughout the exterior corridors. It is intended for the proposed awning to extend no more than a maximum 3'-0" from the existing building as to not increase the floor area ratio that already exists. The proposed awning is to be of the same color of the awnings that already exist within the Mill St. Plaza Building. The proposed awning reflects and is consistent with the character of the existing Mill St. Plaza Building adding to the present awnings that exist throughout the existing development. The proposed awnin,g will enhance the existing development while not distracting from the cultural value of the historic structure or the architectural integrity of the Mill St. Plaza Building and specifically the restaurant located on the upper level of the Mill St. Plaza Building it is to be added to by replicating the curve linear roof shape that exists on the restaurant. Thank you for your consideration of this application and should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please feel free to call. Sincerely, James Terry C 418 E COOPER AVENUE â€¢ ASPEN, COLOAA[30 81611 Â· 303/925Â·5968 â€¢ FAX 303/925-5993 L 6- GIBSON & RENO Â· AFICHITECTS DAVID F GIBSON, AIA AUGUST S RENO. AIA SCOTT C SMITH, Altl August 24, 1993 Re: Letter of Authorization Gibson & Reno Architects, 418 E. Cooper Ave., Aspen, CO 81611, telephone number (303)925-5968, are hereby authorized to act on behalf of the applicant, Aspen Restaurant Associates,L.P., operating under the name of Chanin's Restaurant, P.O. Box 8610, Aspen, CO 81612, telephone number (303)920-2853, on the proposed covering leading to the existing restaurant located in the Mill Street Plaza Building at 205 S. Mill Street in Aspen, Colorado. tal<31 4~Hi Paul R. Chanin, President Date 418 E COOPER AVENUE â€¢ ASPEN, COLOAADO 81 611 â€¢ 303/925-5968 â€¢ FAX 303/925-5993 ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE MANGO'S, INC., a Delaware corporation authorized to do business in the State of Colorado ("Mango's"), hereby assigns all of its right, title and interest in and to the below described lease to Aspen Restaurant Associates L.P., a Colorado limited partnership ("ARA"). ARA, by its acceptance of the within assignment and execution of this Agreement., agrees to assume, on the Effective Date (defined below), all of the terms, conditions and covenants contained in the Lease except as samd may be modified herein. REFERENCE IS MADE to that certain lease ("Lease") dated July 24, 1992 between Mill Street Plaza Associates, a Colorado partnership as "Landlord" and Mango's, Inc., a Delaware corporation, as "Tenant" which Lease involves the premises located at 205 S. Mill Street, being Space No. 306, containing approximately 4,000 square feet and a walk-in downstairs refrigerator ("Premises") . The Lease is amended to add a provision requiring the posting of a Twenty-Four Thousand and No/100 Dollar ($24,000.00) security deposit by ARA to the Landlord, which sum shall be held to insure ARA's faithful performance of its obligations under the Lease. The security deposit shall be held by the Landlord in an unsegregated account and Landlord shall not be obligated to account for any interest earned thereon to ARA. The security deposit shall be returned to ARA (so long as it has not been used by the Landlord to cure any of ARA's defaults under the Lease) on September 15, 1995. The return of the security deposit shall be conditioned upon there being no uncured default under the Lease existing on September 15, 1995 and, further, upon ARA's not having had during the two-year period commencing on September 15, 1993 and terminating on September 15, 1995, a habit of being habitually late with each month's rent. For purposes of this provision, habitually shall mean more than twice in any calendar year. If such defaults have existed, the security deposit shall be returned at the termination of the Lease. Mango's and its individual guarantors are hereby released from all obligations under the Lease. The Effective Date of the within Assignment of Lease is September 15, 1993. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Assignment of Lease. MANGO'S, INC. Robert BIanchard, President , ASPEN RESTAURANT ASSOCIATES L.P., a Colorado limited partnership by Aspen Restaurant Corporation, Inc., its general partner By~lU~~~~ Paul R. Chanin;'President The undersigned, being a principal of Aspen Restaurant Corporation, Inc. , the general partner of ARA, hereby personally guarantees to Landlord that ARA shall faithfully pay all sales and withholding taxes attributable to the business being operated by ARA in the premises. 942(La Paul R. Chanin The undersigned, being the Landlord pursuant to the Lease, hereby consents to the within assignment and the amendment to the Lease herein contained and certifies: (1) the Lease is current and in good standing, (2) there exists no Lease default on behalf of the Tenant, (3) rent and all other charges are current to September 15, 1993, (4) % rent is not due for the Lease year ending August 1, 1993 and (5) % rent figures for the period commencing August 1, 1993 and ending September 15, 1993 can be based upon Mango's sales tax returns. M~LL STREE< PLAZA ASSOCIATES Tony Mazza, Partner MIH\AOT\Mill.ARA 1{,Â·rer,imi N, i.. Â· ~ ' . h.0,~'. Clerk and Ilecorder 002//11-1 .. DEED OF TRUST 31)UK QJO Mui 720 (Commercial & Multi-Family) (Financing Statement; Assignment Of Rents) Â·-Fl)01Â·1-Ilt!St i~mitte thic .7th. , 'lay (}f. . January . 19.83 , among the:Grintor, MiLL SPREFf. PLMA .MS(?VIATES,. .0. Colorado .Fenerel ,99<tr?ersl?ip.,,..,,,.,,,., , (herein -Borrower")* whose address is. clo .Anthony. Maz.za, 434 East Cooper, Street,,Aspen,.Colorado. .81611. tlic Put)tic TrusH . Â· Pitkin. . Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· Â· County, Colorado (herein "Trustee"); and thc Beneficiary. The Empire Savings. Building and I.nan Association. a Colorado corporition, (herein "Lender"), whose address is 1634 California Street, Denver, Colorado 80202. Wlll!(1Â·.AS. 11'irri,wer :Mil. . FPANK. J. PDODS, .III.AND, ANEHONY.J....MAZ.ZA. has/have executed a Promissory Note dated. . January. 7, 19:'83. , payable to the order of che Lender, iii the principal suni i,f. . FOUR. MILLION. AND NO/10.0 ................_â€ž....~.......,,..,.,...,.............,. Dollars, v a.. 4,.000'.000...00. ) with inrercu thereon. providing for installmcnt, of interest ind/or principat, with the balance of the indebtedness, if litil "'virr i,iâ€¢I. ilii,Â· ni,il :,i,:ilile iii, . Fet,rt,La ry. 1 ,10 .88. ,..,.(herein Â·Â·N"te"). NOW. TIIEREFORE, in consideration of ilie indebtedness liercin recited and (Ite trust herein created, Borniwer, for the purpose of securing r.payment of the indebled ness evidenced by the Notc: the payment of all other sums, with interest thereon, advanced in iccordance with this Deed of Trust to protect the security of thit Deed â€žC 1 ruil: dic performance id rlic rilver.tri, iml agrce,nent, of Barrower coni:ined in thiâ€¢ Qced,of Trust: and the repayment of iny future advances, with int crcu there,in. made o Borrower hy 1.enticr p u r,un 1 0 1 he terms f illis t) rÂ·,1 af Trust, irr rvaribly gralit, ami conveys tri Trustee, In trust, with power ofille, the Pitkin fâ€žIt,â€¢wing â€¢Irâ€¢rrilicil prinprity Iâ€žrair,1 iii dir Crnmly â€žf .......... ... .. ,...... .,State of Colorado: 7. 1- re 1.0 Lots D, E, F, G, 11, I, Block 81, ,.3 - 71 -:./ City and Townsite of Aspen; c, !. i J CLD ..1 Â· 1â€¢1 Â·' :2:p -0 0 : 31 37 7J f '1 r.1 = CJ! r , 1,1 W 2-J which has the street address of. . 211 So..Mill Street. .(street) Aspen .(city)'. Colorado. .81611. (state and zip code); with ill build'ingi, iri,provcmenti, fixi,i,a or appuric,iâ€¢,irri, now nr I,creafter crecied thereon, including, but not limited to, a|| appiratu:, equipmm, an v.Â·!:cÂ·lier ir. s:ng!: urit.s ,Â·r crn!,illy c,mtÂ·,ilic,! 1,Â·Â·eâ€¢i,ply 1,Â·:t. g/. steini, air cundilitinin9, Â·Â·iater. light, /,iwer, refrig:râ€¢ti,in, ventilation. cooking, pit,mb- ing, and power systems, mchines, appliances, nd any other thing now or hereafter zituated therein or thereon which are now or may hereafter pertain fo or be usci with or in said premises even though they be denched or detachable,also all buildings, improvements or construction material, supplies ind equipment now or 1,crearter delivered m u i J preinkes and inicniled m be iii cori,i,rated ind initall cd ibm in or used in construction thereon, 1 1,0 111 building permits, con,trucdon conÂ· tracts, daims aild warrantic, under construction wi,tracts, tap fees, architecturd plans ind ipecific,tions relating to canstruction of improvemenu on said lind and trademarks ind logos related to marketing the property; together with any and ill rents (subject to the rights ind authorities given herein to Lender to rollect and ap p|y 5uch rents). profiti. royakies. mineral, geothermal resources, oil ind gal rights and profits, water, water rights, ind water stock, ditch rights, easem nt: and acces rights, now owned w hereafter acquired by Borrower, used, belonging to, or in any way connected with the real property, allof which :re declared to b:â€¢ part of said roll propcny. whether phy,ically attached th./0 or not; ind all of the foicgning. together with wid property (or the leaschold estate if this Deed of Trust is on a leâ€žchold) ire herein referred W u the Â·Â·1'raperty": To have and to hold the Property together with iny and allof the rights, privilegcs, hercditaments and appurtenance:in any way appertaining and belonging there- to. That in the ever[ of any breach or default by Borrower, or hil succe,5ors in interest, under the terms of the No,e or thil Deed of Truit, the Lender may file written notice wi,1, the lÂ·rus[re ,|CCIA,ing such ilchul, in,1 irs election ind demand chit such Property be advertised for site and sold in mccordinfe with the statutes of the .â‚¬11 r â€žC {:..1,ir,JA. 1 h mip,in, dir Â·1 i ii,i rr ilillt irll .,1.1 ili,pa v id i lir I'r pernÂ· ili,1 * 1 (,C t he fight, tit le ind interrit nf the norm wer, 11: heirs, Rucces,ori, Ind al.,igns, / p ublic a uct ion m t he big lieu b id der t u r ras 1, a, dic t ime i nt 1 plactÂ· m J umler the crms d csigilâ€¢ ird in t he mitire of tale, a fter public nut ice of t ile â€ž le havin g p reÂ· vioudy been given by advertising, weekly, for four consecutive weeks, in a ncw,paper of general circulation in the County where the Property is located and after copies of the notice of sale have been mailed in accordance with the statutes of the State of Colorado, The Trustee may postpone sale of â€¢11 or any parcel of the Pro- perty by public announcement H the time and place of any prrviously Echeduled 51!e, Lender, or Lender'; designee, may purchm the Property at iny .le The parties further covenint ind agree :s follows: Security Interest - Fixtures. Certain goods ar: or will beco,ne fixtures attached to the Property. tt is intended th.t the filing of this Deed of Trust will make this Deed of Trust effective u a financing statement filed asa fixture filing within the meaning of the Uniform Commercial Code. The goods covered hereunder *re more par,icul:rly described herein. Construction Mortgage. 't hii [)Ced nf 1 rust constitâ€žte, a construction mortgage under the Uniform C.ontmercial Code, giverno :ecure an obligation incurred for the cons,ruction of an improvement on rhe lard described above (including theacquhition com of the land). chivctiâ€ž/ 4 of l ille. 11â€¢,iri.wrr ,Â·i,viÂ·,i.1 â€ž9 ;lint 1~,irrower k lawfullv tri,ed i,f Ilie rum lirreliv r,invryril and lus the right to grant and convey the Property, that the Pr' perty ' unencumliered ind thi Iturri,wer will warrint an,1 defend generally dic title 0 the Pri,perty agâ€¢inst al! ct,ims ind der,lands, subject to iny clccl:lridens, eucmenti m restriccions, which are of public rec'ird a,id lisied in a schedule of exceprians in cover,ge in i title injurance policy insuring Lender'sinteres[ in the ProÂ· rely. Waiver o f Excli,pti,ili, B,irrower waives .1/ right nt liti,ilestead excinpliuâ€ž ill Ilic Properly and all either excniptions now vÂ¢ited or hereafter acquired. Câ€žvenants or Borrower. B,irrower covenants and igrees to promptly pay Lender :11 principal ind interest ind all other sums of money payable by virtue of the Nole and this Dced of Trust ind to perform each and every covenant and agreement in the Note, this Deed of Trust, any Cons[ruction loan Agreement with Lender, or an,Â· ather il,4-unientircluing k, th' 1,â€ž,1 "presenic,1 hy Ilic N,ire, including, lit,1 mit limitcd to, die (:ammitment Letter to Borrower, dired .February. 19, . 1982 amended March 12, 198~ (i,~reili ''(:,i:,i~iit,i,crli I,c,icr"),Ii,1.1,~Â· Assigi,ii,clit i,f I.ca<ciand Renis. l EL-114 .29-82) PROPOSED CANVAS 4//-\1 AWNING 4 \ .- 1.52Uvt r \ 1-f . v-\ 1-Â·r \9\ 61\14\ 2 V / 7 1- th - , i " ' 9. '\ 1.r A A W - -- - Â»X .--- -----= g =SL/- . 1 /L----y---3 -32 ' .U Â£\ . 1 _ _C -- - -1 -- --- -- ~,~, ~ . - - ' ~ Â»,c - I Z V.~.rÂ· - - -2 Â· .-"< fl: - Â»044 -2=0444* pÂ« Â«1--z IJ.....\ - 191'* 143**B-~a-- 44\ Ujues=4 *1*Â»==-7 Â»44 15..3-/..-.-..) \ \': 2 6 3~f~\ .1-62 rf ---2-133 , . .. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Neighborhood Character Guidelines DATE: October 13, 1993 I have prepared a map of the exact boundaries of each neighborhood we are including in the guidelines. I would like the committee to review the map (at the meeting) and we can discuss any changes or any "subareas" which you think should be defined. We need to be sure that each area can be justified as an individual neighborhood which shares some particular characteristics and features. In addition, I'd like to continue the discussion we had in August, and try to answer some of the questions which came up at that meeting. Some of the points we might want to discuss are: How will the Guidelines be used? How specific or general. should they be? How could we give them strength? (i.e. give some sort of a bonus for projects which comply to them) It seems appropriate to reduce allowable FAR and give some back as a bonus for complying Include a Maintenance section in the booklet Replace a lot of the text with visuals Should we include all the neighborhoods in one book instead of separate pamphlets? How can we make the Guidelines more exciting/interesting/useful? Should we attach zoning maps or state the existing zoning in each neighborhood? What is the direction we want to go? What are we trying to encourage/discourage? . MEMORANDUM FYI I attended the National Trust for Historic Preservation conference in St. Louis last week, and heard a presentation on a nationwide survey of 1,863 Preservation Commissions. Each commission was asked what their top concerns are, and here are the results (in order of importance): 1. Screen service and utility uses 2. Blend signage with the building 3. Protect established vegetation 4. Decrease the variety of signs 5. Preserve environmentally sensitive areas 6. Respect neighborhood context 7. Consider the existing topography 8. Decrease the visibility of parking 9. Discourage "boxy" structures 10. Offset portions of the facade to break up the building mass