The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.19930414AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE April 14, 1993 REGULAR MEETING SECOND FLOOR MEETING ROOM CITY HALL 5:00 I. Roll call and approval of March 10, March 24, 1993 minutes. II. Committee and Staff Comments III. Public Comments Transportation Plan - Diane Moore IV. OLD BUSINESS 5:30 A. Vicenzi Balcony ; 1_1-1.__ /At-6 ) <c Ft,- i )14*4tio. 5:35 B. 120 W. Francis .:,6.Z< 7 :122/'4\ 1/ C'.C <~% 5:40 C. Final Development - 210 Lake Ave. , 10 1(.<4-hz, - 4 I /& 1V 0 /C 6:00 D. 232 E. Hallam - Final Development 'ju-*n X /< j V. NEW BUSINESS 6:30 A. Conceptual Development PH - 234 W. Francis (Vidor) VI. COMMUNICATIONS A. Project Monitoring B. Sub-Committee Reports C. Neighborhood Character Guidelines D. Ordinance on Pioneer Park Lot 1&2 E. Red Brick update ongoing e o j n .v, r-4 .GUL NW. 418 4 \ c L, , r~ n 1 C',pl~-5 7:00 VII. ADJOURN HPC PROJECT MONITORING HPC Member Name Prolect/Committee Bill Poss 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 534 E. Hyman (P.C. Bank) CCLC Liaison 214 W. Bleeker St. Mary's Church 533 E. Main PPRG 715 W. Smuggler Ann Miller 700 W. Francis Donnelley Erdman The Meadows (Chair-Sub Comm) 442 W. Bleeker (Pioneer Park) Collins Block/Alley Wheeler-Stallard House 700 W. Francis 624 E. Hopkins Leslie Holst Holden/Marolt Museum (alt.) In-Town School Sites Committee Aspen Historic Trust-Chairman 824 E. Cooper 210 S. Mill 303 E. .Main Alt Joe Krabacher 801 E. Hyman AHS Ski Museum Aspen Historic Trust-Vice Chairman 612 W. Main 309 E. Hopkins (Lily Reid) Jake Vickery The Meadows (alternate) In-Town School Sites Committee 205 S. Mill Larry Yaw 716 W. Francis 442 W. Bleeker (Pioneer-alt.) 204 S. Galena (Sportstalker) City Hall 627 W. Main (residential-Jim Kempner) ~~2*~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~_~rE=~ ---~Â© OR ~- /i ~ 0 cy=42 2-3/V<1 C ll/- Roger Moyer Holden-Marolt (alternate) CCLC Liaison 214 W. Bleeker 215 W. Hallam 334 W. Hallam Aspen Historical Society 302 E. Hopkins - Beaumont House 409 E. Hopkins 520 E. Cooper (storefront remodel 303 E. Main 311 W. North Farfalla lights outside Karen Day 716 W. Francis (alternate) Rubey Transit Center 334 W. Hallam (alternate) Cottage Infill Program - 134 E. Bleeker 435 W. Main Swiss Chalet 311 W. North Martha Madsen 620 W. Hallam (alternate) 100 Park Ave. (alternate) 214 W. Bleeker (alternate) Linda Smisek 134 E. Bleeker f, 4 j b 4 - 6.4 4 - 2 1 /)6 -I MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Kim Johnson, Planner Re: 232 E. Hallam: Final Development for rear addition (duplex unit) Date: April 14, 1993 SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting Final Development approval for a rear addition to the "Vigoda" addition at 232 E. Hallam. The proposed addition, a free-market duplex unit, does not interface with the historic resource. No variations are being requested. The drawings in your packet have been revised since this item was continued from March 24, 1993. APPLICANT: Dick and Linda Roberts, represented by Stryker/Brown Architects LOCATION: 232 E. Hallam, Lots M and N, Block 71, Townsite of Aspen, Colorado SITE, AREA AND BULK INFORMATION: Please refer to the attachment from the applicant. The applicant must verify the new FAR figure for the Zoning plan check with the building permit application. PREVIOUS HPC ACTION: The HPC granted Conceptual Development approval to the 232 E. Hallam project, with conditions, on February 10, 1993. Attached are the minutes of that meeting. The HPC seemed to not object to the proposed general location of addition. ADDITIONAL COMMISSION REVIEWS: None are necessary, as the lot meets the minimum size requirements for a duplex unit. Ordinance #1 affordable housing mitigation applies, and the applicant must pay the cash-in-lieu amount in effect at the time prior to issuance of any building permits. Payment is based on the square footage of the new construction. PROJECT SUMMARY and REVIEW PROCESS: All four Development Review Standards are required to be met in order for the HPC to grant approval. Please refer to the applicant's letter and set of drawings (most recently submitted on April 9) as a summary of the revisions. Development Review Standards REVIEW STANDARDS: Section 7-601 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations 1 defines the four standards for Development Review. All four of these standards must be met in order for the HPC to grant approval for the proposal. The applicable Guidelines are found in Section VI, beginning on page 47 of the Historic District and Historic Landmark Development Guidelines. 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. 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 of exceed the allowed floor areas, HPC shall find that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. Response: The proposed duplex addition is being added to the "Vigoda" addition, which was a mid-1980's expansion to the landmark. The proposed addition is not readily viewed from the street edge or facade, however, is primarily viewed from the post office and ACES parcels to the north. Our primary concern and responsibility is in either the contribution or deprivation the development impact has to the landmark, neighborhood and community, within the context of historic preservation. For the past 5-6 years, since the Vigoda addition was completed, the HPC, National Park Service, Colorado Historical Society and visiting preservationists have viewed the design approach of this addition to a Second Empire-style structure as being a radical departure from the idea of "new yet compatible". The distinction between old and new was made in such a way as to detract from the architectural integrity of the historic resource. The HPC has found this addition's positive contribution to be in the use Of compatible materials, quiet roof form and small, articulated scale. The addition is small (under 500 sq. ft.), is tucked into a rear notch of the addition, and does not significantly impact the facade. The architect has changed the design to reflect the Second Empire style of the original structure. Four small and two large dormer windows have been added into the roof to allow light to penetrate the space. The new roof projects above the modern addition, and is perceived from the street edge. However, it is well back from the front property line. No variations are being requested. A basement has been added to the proposal since Conceptual review. All required parking is being handled on the site. It appears to staff that the proposed materials meet the Guidelines and are compatible with 2 the historic resource. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The "Community Church" neighborhood of the West End contains the greatest concentration of small historic resources. We find that the addition's small size and placement on the site is not inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood, which contains a variety of architectural styles as infill. 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 adjacent parcels. Response: We find that any detraction in cultural value to this parcel occurred at the time of the Vigoda expansion, and that this addition is relatively neutral regarding this standard. 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: In staff's response to Standard #1 above, we ask the HPC to carefully consider these architectural integrity points: a) By continuing to expand the addition to the structure, which ends up at maximum allowable FAR (4,670 sq. ft. FAR (+/-), does the historic architectural integrity of the Second Empire diminish? b) If the addition is not perceived to increase the incompatible design approach, does the proposal then meet this standard? ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any Of the following 3 . alternatives: 1) Final approval as proposed, finding the Development Review standards have been met. 2) Final approval with conditions. 3) Table action to allow the applicant time to revise the proposal in order to meet the Development Review standards. 4) Deny Final Development approval, finding that the Development Review Standards have not been met. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC approve the Final Development Plan. Additional comments: hp.232eh.3 4 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of February 10, 1993 ~ Bill: That helps us understand why you took that approach. Jake: If we find that the mansard roof is a better plan we can give a FAR variation to accommodate that calculation. Straw Poll on proposed roof shape and height as presented; five members in favor. Two opposed. Wayne: Some glazing is important. MOTION: Joe made the motion to grant conceptual approval for 132_ E. Hallam and that the applicant be directed to restudy the windows and possibly look at the height of the addition; second by Roger. Les: A revision would be the only way I would vote for this. To me this addition is not soft and needs more work. It is too abrupt and too much visually. Joe: There is one group that likes it to relate to the old and one group that likes simplicity and to have it relate to the new and this is something in between that doesn't seem to fit. You need to sell this to us. Motion withdrawn. Jake: The job is to relate to the historical resource not relate to the old addition. I am clear on that. Pull out details on the historical structure that you like and simplify and bring them into the new addition that you are doing. MOTION: Roger made the motion that HPC grant conceptual development approval for 496 sq. feet to the Vigoda addition of 232 E. Hallam with the condition that the applicant restudy the fenestration (windows) on the north elevation; second by Jake. Jake: I would like to add restudy of the roof form (mansard roof). Roger: I feel that is included in the motion. Chairman Bill Poss called the question: Carried 5 to 2 - Opposed were Les and Don. Linda didn't vote. Wayne: I may do a model of just the addition for the next meeting. 205 S. MILL - MILL ST. PLAZA - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING Roxanne: The applicant is requesting an addition of around 875 sq. feet. A facade addition to the Mill St. plaza. This parcel is not , designated but is located within the Commercial Core Historic 5 4 STRYKER / BROWN ARCHITECTS,PC April 7, 1993 Ms. Kim Johnson Historic Preservation Planner Aspen /Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 re: Roberts Residence Addition, 232 East Hallam, a.ka. "The Glidden House." Dear Ms. Johnson: Enclosed are our revised plans for the Roberts Residence Addition which incorporates the design changes suggested by the members of the Historic Preservation Committee. The following is an analysis of the original home, an example of the French Second Empire style, an analysis of the first addition, and a description of the challenges and goals of attempting to create an appropriate design for the proposed addition. The Original French Second Empire Home An excellent example of the French Second Empire Home, the Glidden House has many of the distinguishing elements of the period as well as an eclectic mix of elements from the Italianate and other Victorian periods. The house is designed with dominate horizontal elements in the traditional tripartite (base, middle, crown) elevation composition. The floors are separated by a bracketed cornice which acts as an entablature, the bracket patterns suggesting the classical triglyph and metope. Each elevation is modulated with the bay windows characteristic of the period: bay windows project from beyond the roof line and surrounded with molding. Each window and door has an arched " eyebrow" head which softens each opening and relates to the more decorative arches on the dormers above. The bays are set on a paneled base. The Mansard roof is set on a bracketed and molded cantilevered cornice. The Mansard is modulated by decorative dormers each of which have an exuberant "false front" with molding and a single star. As below, the windows heads have arched framing. Lacy metalwork sits on a molding which delicately decorates the top of the Mansard creating a "Widows Walk" and crowns the roof. The front elevation of the residence is squarely proportioned framed panel below the cornice with centered bay window and dormer above. The dormer sits above the bay window creating a centered "tall glass window" element. The front is further framed by two tall trees. As the facade steps back, a delicately framed porch with paired columns (a detail characteristic of the period) fills the transition. The entry door has a transom window with an arched top similar to the other windows. The base of the composition is a simple plastered plinth in strong contrast to the exuberantly detailed and textured elements above. All other elevations repeat these elements in a horizontal echo of the front facade: simple base, framed panel mid-section of beveled siding and bay windows, bracketed cornice, dormered mansard with lace metal crown. 300 S SPRING STREET SC[TE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 303Â·925 2254 925Â·2258 (F AX) Roberts Residence Addition, 232 East Hallam, a.k.a. "The Glidden House." Historic Preservation Submission, April 7, 1993 page 2 Goals of the proposed Addition To complement and be compatible with the original historic structure. To be appropriate in the context of the neighborhood. To enhance the cultural value and architectural integrity of the historic structure. To relate to both existing portions and bring them both together. To acknowledge that this is of today, not the 1890's. To reinterpret the Second Empire themes, designs, and details. The Proposed Addition To complement the original and existing structures, we propose to recall the massing of the historic original, while using the simple and restrained detailing of the 70's addition. By echoing and paying homage to the original mansard, tripartite facades, and massing the proposed addition will complement and not compete with the original. By invoking the simple detailing of the 70's addition, a bridge is brought between the disparate designs. The mansard is recreated of black standing seam metal. This will complement and not copy the original. The metal lacework is of period and not repeated. Rather than many small decorative dormers, the proposed addition shall have large light welcoming dormers on the north and south facades, and smaller, understated dormers on the east and west facades. The semi-arched tops recall and reinterpret the subordinate arch in the window details of the original. The semi-arch becomes a dominate flavor in the new composition. The north window wall is centered on that facade echoing the tall glass window elements of the original south facade. The "bracketed cornice" is reinterpreted in the addition at different scale, proportion and material from the original. The location compliments the "cornice" of the 70's addition by continuing the horizontal lines created above the garage door and the strip of siding above the north elevation's horizontal band of windows. The brackets and all details of the cornice are simple, in keeping with the Ms-Style addition. In a new twist the "entablature" continues across the northern window wall/ dormer as a band of windows. The main middle panel is of beveled painted siding as are both the existing structures, but it is framed (as in the original) simply (as in the 70's addition). All trim on the new is similar to the simple trim of the 70's addition. The above efforts, designs and details achieve the stated goats and the mission of preserving the historic character of the original home while reinterpreting it in a vocabulary of "post-modern" materials and methods. We thank you for your comments and ideas in helping to make this a better and more appropriate project in Aspen's historical context. l,/ O Sss-ued,~/ f /,/) tl / / C.)bu.___ Wayne Stryker, AIA David R Brown, AIA 1 1/ j 1 lit / lit 1 11 --- - d,T/+IDLD' 0 +MAA Afl~ Finr - 67*7101Â¢\ / i /'' 1 Â«Â©N>Â»e Â«U hor- 1 1 I 1 074TM" d * u L 1-4 & & 1 06,1 L.ta**120 X / i / 05' / f 0 -r 14 -1/4\\ f )(\ /7 - 44 9/ 6 / - - .49</5*74>2-2-- 27 / b \\6/1 / // _*34: \/ if 1 Ly-4 1 --. --*.4. - , /e.-/-/9-~ 124. \ \ 1 \ 1 I \0441 1 11 \ i Ut*N FAN[212 i fÂ¥-eroÂ¥*-r ---1% 19 ; 42 vykx . b t I \ X! \1 1 --I .ki it I \ 1 7 1 440 0 / / 'i i -uff-4 wap- T)24'A /7,~ 27~N'*- Â·WlÂ»Â»71 7371~ (3 227Â»T! 62(-1 Ph Â»aeÂ»- Pry<:44 *Â»1\-0.- MEMORANDUM To: Historic Preservation Committee From: Kim Johnson, Planning Date: April 14, 1993 RE: 210 Lake Avenue - Final Review Summary: This item received Conceptual approval on March 10, 1993. The project received a 3' variance to the 19' side yard setback along the eastern property line to allow for a stairwell. The HPC asked that the Final plan show a roof overhang above the stairwell to shed snow/rain away from the stairs and to provide relief from the expanse of that elevation. Although the application states that a FAR variation is needed for this roof element, the architect has indicated that additional FAR is not required after all. Please refer to the application letter from Doug Graybeal which describes the responses to Conceptual review concerns. Staff believes that the Final plan successfully meets the Final plan criteria and Conceptual critique. AC 1433 . L- ITTLE I 3 3 3 , l. 4 kl- 014Â« GRAYBEAL March 19, 1993 YAW ARCHITECTS LTD City of Aspen Planning Office Aspen Historic Preservation Committee Aspen City Hall 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Planning Officials, and Committee Members: On behalf of the Schermer's, I Mummit this application for Final Development Plan Approval. Attached are the required documents. Please contact me with any questions. I will be providing siding and trim samples for your review during my presentation. . i In accordance with the requirements for final Â· development plan we submit the following information: 1) General application information required in Section 6-202. Please see the information submitted with the conceptual development package. The project is located at 210 Lake Avenue. 2) Reserved. 3) An accurate representation of all building materials, such as samples and photographs, to be used for the proposed development. We will be providing materials samples for your review during our presentation to you. Materials to be used are noted on the enclosed elevations. 4) Scale drawings of the proposed development in relation to an existing structure. See the enclosed elevations. 5) A statement of the effect of the details of the proposed development on the original design of the historic structure and character of the neighborhood. The detailing of the addition to this historic JOHN COTTLE. AlA structure are designed to compliment the historic UG GRAYBEAL. AlA structure and separate the addition from the original RRY YAW ALA structure. The materials used on the original house ARK HENTHORN, AIA were those available'at the time of it construction. The wood siding and trim were small by today's 510 EAST 11â„¢AN. SUITE 21 ASPE\. (01.ORADO 81611 PHONE 303,925-2807 IAN 303 025-3736 '1111111']11!Ilk. standards. The addition will be sided with the larger sized siding and trim available today to separate the old for the new. What better way to separate old from new then a historic material separation. The addition will be further separated into two masses by two differ size siding and by the spacing of siding. As noted on the attached elevations the siding size and spacing will progress from the existing structure at the front of the property through the addition at the rear of the property. This progression separates the building into three separate components. The window and siding trim also changes size from 3 1/4" on the existing structure to 4 1/4" on the rear addition. This difference adds an additional separate of the old from the new without having the new trim overpower the appearance of the addition as happens in some track houses. The window patterns will vary from the existing structure to the new addition. The existing structure will be fitted with double hung windows to match the original windows. The addition will use a variety of double hung windows and easement windows in patterns to breakdown the mass of the addition. This addition to a historic structure fits into the character of the neighborhood as discussed during conceptual approval. 6) A statement of how the final development plan conforms to the representations made during the conceptual review and responds to any conditions placed thereon. The proposed addition conforms to the representations made during the conceptual review. The proposed addition conforms to the conditions placed thereon during the conceptual review. A conditions of the approval was that we study the fenestration of the addition on both the west and the east side to breakdown the surfaces. We have added detail to the enclosed elevations to show the shingles in the high gable ends on both sides, plus we have added some variety to the windows by varying the window patterns, size and types. We have also added a horizonal trim board to separate the upper level fenestration from the lower level. During our conceptual approval you recommended we study adding a porch roof element over the exterior stairs. We have studied this option with our clients and have included it in our design. You indicated you would be willing to grant a variance for this addition. We request you grant an FAR (floor area ratio) variance of approximately 75 square feet for this porch roof and grant a setback variance for this 00.. - . . encroachment into the required setback. You have already granted a setback variance for the below grade stairs this roof would cover. We wish to be sure the variance covers the roof over the stairs. We appreciate your time in reviewing this application. We will give you a presentation of our materials at the scheduled meeting. Sincerely, 4 11.4 I V .- -021 'u..9 k-P A , 1 9(3 n y . < / g UL.v(K.L. L.,L-0, Doug Gkaybeal LAIA Principal Enclosed A Message From The Aspen City Council To: City of Aspen Residents, Businesses, Employees and Visitors About The Draft Transportation Plan The Aspen City Council wholeheartedly supports and endorses the ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN which incorporates the work of over 400 citizens in a broad community vision for transportation in our valley. This plan recognizes that increased traffic (partially caused by lack of affordable housing in Aspen)has degraded the quality of life for both residents and visitors. We believe that competition for fewer parking spaces, traffic congestion, unsafe roads and poor air quality are the very things we sought to escape in coming here. The "status quo" is no longer acceptable...we must act now to preserve our future! "Cities and towns that have not taken positive action to plan for these effects have suffered enormous environmental and social costs. Aspen cannot build its way out of traffic problems anymore than Los Angeles was able to solve its problems with ever larger and wider freeways." (Aspen Area Community Plan, 1993) We are committed to a Transportation/Parking strategy which: * results in a reduction in parking and traffic congestion; * causes a realistic reduction in cars; * burdens and benefits are equitably distributed amongst all people; * helps to meet air quality standards; * fulfills the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan. We welcome your suggestions and input on the Draft Transportation Plan or any other plan which meets the above goals. -March, 1993- ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN TRANSPORTATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN SUMMARY DRAFT MARCH 12, 1993 After approximately two years of planning through the Aspen Area Community Plan, the broad- based citizen planning groups have developed a draft Transportation Implementation Plan. The goal has been to move from an auto-dominated transportation system to a balanced system which limits auto use while increasing mobility via transit, carI)ooling, pedestrian and bicycle modes. ISSUES: Traffic and Parking Congestion Quality of Life Air Quality Degradation GOALS: Develop a comprehensive and convenient transportation system. Create a less congested downtown core. Provide alternative solutions that offer a balanced program of incentives and disincentives to reduce the use of single-occupant automobiles. Put transportation alternatives in place prior to the establishment of the parking management system. FEATURES AND BENEFITS OF PLAN: * Achieves both transportation and environmental goals. Improves parking availability for shoppers and visitors. Reduces parking impacts in residential neighborhoods. Enhances pedestrian friendliness within the community. Maintains economic vitality and personal mobility within area. Designed to be equitable--All elements of the community (residents, commuters, visitors, merchants, and employees) share both the burden and the benefits. Provides a proactive package of both incentives and disincentives. Dedicates plan revenues to transportation plan costs. Based on user fee principles--Direct link between value given and value received. Designed to be flexible and responsive to community needs. STRATEGIES: RECOMMENDATIONS OUTLINED IN THE DRAFT PLAN Timely reductions in traffic congestion and PM-10 levels will occur through substantial expansion of transit service and other transportation alternatives in conjunction with implementation of a customized parking management system. It is universally recognized that mass transit and HOV alternatives must be in place before the parking elements are implemented so as to achieve the highest possible success in reducing automobile use. The proposal outlined below describes the components of this two-pronged strategic approach. 1 *** I. Transit Service and Transportation Alternatives: 1. Develop park-and-ride lots at Brush Creek Road/State Highway 82, Buttermilk, and/or other appropriate locations, which would be free to the users of the lot and secured. Provide frequent, effective and free transit service between the lot(s) and the City of Aspen. 2. Expand the Roaring Fork Transit Agency bus fleet by eight additional buses to improve Downvalley service and to provide frequent service from the Upvalley park-and-ride lots. 3. Improve the frequent, free cross-town shuttle service utilizing the Galena Street Corridor with termination points at the Post Office and the base of Aspen Mountain. Evaluate implementation of an east-west shuttle system serving Main Street and the lodges located on the west end of Main Street and along Durant Avenue. 4. Return to full year-round city transit service. 5. Work with CDOT and the Snowmass to Aspen Transportation Plan elected officials to expedite the state/federal funding and construction of Highway 82 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes between the Castle Creek Bridge and Shale Bluffs. 6. Fully explore and implement Cab Coupon/Dial-A-Ride/"Colectivo" programs to fully meet local residents' alternative transportation needs that are not able to be met by mass transit. 7. Establish several drive-up parking information centers to distribute transportation/parking information, provide HOV parking permits, and offer directions and information about the community. 8. Implement the recommendations in the Pedestrian and Bikeway Systems Plan in a phased capital improvement program. II. Parking Elements: 1. Implement a "pay for parking" system within the commercial core of Aspen (bounded by Main, Monarch, Durant, and Spring). The "pay for parking" areas should be enforced during the peak congestiori periods of 7 am to 6 pm, six or seven days per week. â€¢ The pay for parking spaces should be limited to two (2) hours or less, and the parking fee should initially be at least one (1) dollar per hour. â€¢ Current parking control planning is being based on cardboard cards that can be purchased at various shops and other retail outlets throughout town. The driver must indicate (by punching or scratching Â·the appropriate marks) the date and time of arrival at the parking place within the controlled parking area. The top of the card is then folded over the top of the curb- side window, which is then rolled up to trap the card on the inside of the window.' 2 2. Establish a resident parking system which restricts most parking in the residential neighborhoods adjacent to. the commercial core to residents through a signage and permit system. This shall be established simultaneously with the "pay for parking" system in the commercial core. â€¢ A six block walking distance from the commercial core should be utilized initially to delineate the boundaries of the program. The boundaries should be expanded as needed. â€¢ Fees for the residential permits will be set to cover the administrative costs of the program. 3. Provide a limited number of all day parking passes valid in specified spaces within the Residential Parking Control Areas for those who choose not to utilize transportation alternatives and who want to park for more than the time limit in the commercial core. â€¢ The fee for the day pass should be higher than the daily rate for parking in the Rio Grande Parking Plaza. 4. Provide incentives for carpooling, including rideshare matching and convenient, free parking for vehicles with three or more occupants. â€¢ Designate free HOV spaces along the periphery of the commercial core, in the municipal parking facility, and in spaces specified for day pass use in residential parking control areas. 5. Accommodate the legitimate parking needs of the many lodging properties located in the residential parking control area. 6. Avoid placing an onerous burden upon businesses that require a vehicle for deliveries by making an annual business parking permit available at a reduced fee to allow business delivery vehicles to park in designated spaces in residential areas and in the municipal parking facility. 7. Evaluate and increase the number of short-term loading/unloading aftd service vehicle spaces in the Commercial Core. . 8. Address the legitimate parking needs of non-residential land uses in the residential parking control areas (such as churches, schools, and restaurants) on a case by case basis. 9. Construct an East-End parking facility to address remaining long-term parking demand. Rather than "attracting" additional auto trips into the core, these spaces should be managed to replace residential-area onstreet spaces used in the Day Parking Pass program. This facility would also serve as a summer intercept lot for traffic entering the City from Independence Pass. 3 10. Evaluate and modify the fee structure in the Rio Grande Parking Plaza to make it the primary mid-and long-term parking facility within the City for those who choose to drive and need to park for longer than the time allowed in the commercial core paid parking area. â€¢ Either daily or monthly fee structures would be more appropriate than the current predominantly hourly fee structure. 11. Monitor, evaluate and report effectiveness of parking programs. Revise programs as indicated to maximize effectiveness. ' The advantages of this system over the more typical "hardware" approaches are as follows: Does not require major (up to $500,000) capital expenditures for parking control equipment. Does not require striping nor the subsequent loss of about 175 onstreet spaces. No visual impact: Retains the historic and aesthetic character of city streetscapes. Expedites implementation. Provides financial incentive for merchants willing to serve as parking card retailers. Increases potential customer base for merchants. Low maintenance, low vandalism, low administrative and revenue-control costs. No loss of revenue due to equipment malfunctions. Customer convenience in ease of prepayment for multiple parking cards; no need to bring quarters. 4 ..... 1 ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN Draft Transportation Implementation Plan February 24, 1993 Prepared by the AACP Transportation Implementation Committee Molly Campbell, Chairperson Bob Daniel Pat Fallin Brent Gardner-Smith Shellie Harper George Hart Roger Hunt Bill Lipsey Howie Mallory George Newman Mary Ryerson Chuck Torinus Bob Wade John Walla With Staff Assistance by Diane Moore, City Planning Director Randy Ready, Parking/Transportation Director Dan Blankenship, RPTA Director Bud Eylar, County Engineer Lee Cassin, Environmental Health Officer Jack Reid, Streets Director With Technical Assistance by Leigh, Scott & Cleary, Inc. ASPEN AREA COM]V[UNITY PLAN Draft Transportation Implementation Plan Through the Aspen Area Community Plan process, a broad spectrum of the Aspen community has voiced a consensus that the City's transportation system is increasinglyat odds with their vision of the area. Again and again, the goal has been cited of moving from an auto-dominated transportation system to a balanced system limiting auto use while increasing mobility via transit, carpooling, pedestrian, and bicycle modes. The steps presented below are designed to attain both transportation and environmental goals, while maintaining the economic vitality and personal mobility that allows the community to function. In addition, the design of our transportation system should be attractive and appropriately sophisticated. If our system sets the standard for all its visual aspects such as signage, graphics, lighting, structures, logos, then it will become a source of pride to the valley and attract more users. To accomplish this, guidelines need to be developed which enhance the visual character. This Plan also incorporates some of the comments suggested by the public at the November, 1992 Transportation Forum. After presentation of individual parking, transit, and pedestrian/bicycle elements, a summary of plan impacts is presented. Estimates of the revenues and costs of this Plan along with an implementation schedule have been attached. A number of key findings drove the development of this Plan. First of all, the Plan is designed to be equitable: all elements of the community (residents and commuters, visitors and employees) are required under this Plan to make accommodations and changes in mobility patterns enabling the area as a whole to limit personal automobile use. Secondly, this Plan is based upon the conclusion that proactive steps are needed to reduce the attractiveness of the personal automobile: "carrot" approaches such as improved transit service will not by themselves induce the substantial reductions in traffic and congestion that is the goal of the Community Plan. In addition, the Plan is designed to be implementable, as revenues generated by the Plan will cover a substantial portion of the Plan operating costs. Implementing the elements of this Plan will require the City to utilize a number of funding sources beyond the City of Aspen. The Plan is also designed to be flexible; adjustments can be made to the Plan if specific issues are identified (after Plan implementation) and need to be corrected. To successfully implement this plan, it will be critical that the alternatives be put into place before the auto restriction elements (such as paid parking) are implemented. This Plan is based upon a long history of transportation analyses conducted for Aspen and the Roaring Fork Valley, including the Aspen Transit/Transportation Development Program (1986), Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Element (1987), the Highway 82 Busway Plan (1988), the Roar- ing Fork Railroad Plan 0991), the Draft State Highway 82 East of Basalt to Aspen Environmental Im- pact Statement 0989), the Aspen Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan 09913, and the Snowmass to Aspen 7>ansportation Study (1992). In addition, a number of data collection efforts were conducted in the fall of 1992 to obtain necessary up-to-date information, including an inventory of onstreet parking, off- street parking, and parking use in neighborhoods adjacent to the commercial core. PARKING ELEMENTS Existing parking supply in the commercial core is presented as part of Table A, attached. The area surveyed is bounded by Main (inclusive), Monarch (inclusive), Durant (inclusive), and Spring (exclusive). A total of 872 public parking spaces are avilable in the current unstriped configuration (including six handicapped spaces) within this area. During the winter peak period (early afternoon), approximately 95 percent of these spaces are occupied. In addition, there are 340 spaces in the Rio Grande Parking Facility, and 350 private spates, for a total of 1,515 parking spaces in the commercial core as a whole. Drivers destined for the core area also park in onstreet spaces in the fringe commercial area (150 vehicles),tprivate spaces in the fringe area (260 spaces), and onstreet in nearby residential areas (700 vehicles). 1) Parkint Card Program The typical "hardware" approach to parking control of onstreet spaces (such as parking meters) has a number of significant disadvantages. Even with the most advanced equipment, more than 60 parking permit machines would be required throughout the commercial core, which would have a substantial visual impact and cost over $500,000 simply to install. A preferred control strategy was discovered in Bath and Chichester, England, which have both instituted parking control schemes for their commercial core areas. These plans are based upon a cardboard card, on which the driver must indicate (by punching the appropriate holes) the date and time of arrival at the parking place within the controlled parking area. The top of the card is then folded over the top of the curb-side window, which is then rolled up to trap the card on the inside of the window. The cards can be purchased at shops or garages. A deal is displayed in the window of establishments indicating points of sale. They are most commonly sold in books of ten, but are also available individually. Incentive for outlets to offer the parking cards is provided by offering a discounted purchase price from the City. The blocks on which the cards are required must be signed, effectively replacing the existing parking limit signs. Rigorous enforcement of the parking card scheme is recommended using parking control officers, who walk along the curb checking for missing, expired or unpunched cards. Experience in English resort communities indicates this scheme has been very effective in reducing parking problems very similar to Aspen's. The time spent searching for an available space in Bath was cut almost in half. Average space turnover in two-hour parking zones was increased by 63 percent. Application of this program to Aspen should have the following characteristics: â€¢ Parking cards should be sold at shops, lodging facilities, the Rio Grande Parking Facility, City Hall, the County Courthouse, and condominium offices. In addition, they should be available at the Parking Kiosks, discussed below. â€¢ The most straightforward design is to replicate existing onstreet parking controls by making each card valid for 90 minutes. A minimum parking fee of $1.00 per hour ($1.50 per ninety minutes) is recommended. Cards should be made available both singly and in books of 10. â€¢ To provide for parking duration between 90 minutes and three hours, drivers should be allowed to hang up to two cards at one time, punching the time of arrival on both. As a goal for parking in the commercial core is to encourage turnover, using more than two cards or simply replacing the cards near their time of expiration should be prohibited. If this is found to be a problem, license plate and parking card serial numbers could be recorded to identify lawbreakers. â€¢ Vehicles with valid handicapped plates should be exempt. Since the parking cards cannot be displayed on a motorcycle in a way that precludes theft, motorcycle parking should be subject to some type of enforcement, determined by the Parking Department. t rhese figures are based upon an extensive survey of parking accumulation and turnover conducted in 1986, on- and off-street parking supply counts conducted in 1992, parking accumulation surveys conducted in residential neighborhoods in 1992, an analysis of parking needs based upon commercial core land uses, and City of Aspen records of parking activity in the Rio Grande Parking Facility. Page 2 DRAFT â€¢ The potential for counterfeiting of the parking cards can be minimized through the use of a special card stock with the Aspen city seal, through the use of "invisible ink" visible only using a hand- held ultraviolet light, or through serial numbering of the cards. â€¢ The Parking Department should investigate the use of short term parking zones (15 minute zones) within the commercial core. â€¢ The hours of enforcement are from 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM. An additional advantage of this method is the avoidance of onstreet striping. Onstreet unstriped spaces require less space per vehicle than striped spaces. A block-by-block analysis of available curb space', indicates that striping would result in the loss of roughly 175 spaces. Issues regarding the visual impact of extensive striping throughout the commercial core are also averted. The Parking Department should investigate the development of a parking card/coupon system that is interchangeable with other parking and transit facility use. 2) Residential Parking Permit Program If the disincentive of the paid parking program is to be achieved, and if the attractiveness of Aspen's residential areas near the commercial core is to be maintained, it is crucial that a parking control program be instituted in residential neighborhoods. Surveys indicate that up to 700 vehicles are already parked in residential areas by drivers destined for the commercial core. If commuters and visitors can continue to drive alone into Aspen and simply park a block or two farther from their destination, this spillover problem would multiply, and the desired traffic reductions will not materialize. A goal of this transportation plan, moreover, is to effect reductions in residential parking impacts. A permit-based parking control system is therefore recommended for the residential/lodging areas surrounding thecommercial core withportions ofthe street reserved foronlyresidential on-street parking. In light of driver's willingness to park in residential areas and wall[ to the commercial core,3 all residential areas south of the Roaring Fork River within a six-block walking distance of the commercial core should be included initially in the parldng control program. The boundaries should be expanded as needed. Three residential districts should be established -- West, South and East -- with distinct residential permits for each. By prohibiting residential permits for onedistrict to be used in another, residential permit-holders will be discouraged from driving between residential districts. The districts should be comprised of the following areas: â€¢ West District - Area bounded by Monarch between Hallam and Durant (exclusive), Durant (inclusive), Aspen Mountain, Fourth Street, Hallam Street, Second Street, Francis Street, the bluff south of the Post Office, and Monarch between Bleeker and Hallam. â€¢ South District - Area bounded by Durant between Aspen Mountain and Dean Street (exclusive), Dean Street Onclusive) and Aspen Mountain. â€¢ East District - Area bounded by Spring Street (exclusive), the Roaring Fork River, Aspen Mountain, and Durant between the ski base area and Spring Street (exclusive). . 2 Based upon a recently-conducted survey of existing curb usage throughout the commemial core. ' As evidenced by the effects generated by the imposition of pay parking in other communities. Page 3 DRAFT Each district should identify a representative to work with the Parking Department during the establishment and implementation of the residential parking control program. Residential permits should be distributed by the City Transportation/Parking Department to current residents providing proof (voter registration, property tax bill, lease, etcetera) of residency within the specific district. A nominal fee should be required to cover the administrative costs of the program. Residents' visitors staying over 90 minutes can purchase a Day Parking Pass (discussedÂ·below), or park off-street. In addition, it is recommended that the residential parking program hours of enforcement coincide with the commercial core parking control program (7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M.). Evening visitors to the residential areas are therefore not subject to the parking control program. 3) All-DaÂ¥ Parkine Pass in Suecific Spaces Within the Residential Parkine Control Areas Inevitably, some drivers will want to park for more than the 90 minute time period allowed in the commercial core parking zone (without having the three vehicle occupants necessary for a HOV parking permit). For the overall parking plan to be successful, it is necessary to provide these persons with an opportunity to park, but at a relatively high cost. An all day parking pass valid in the Residential Parking Control Areas should be made available for any driver willing to pay a fee of approximately $6.00 per day. These passes should be displayed through the windshield, and should be color-coded for easy enforcement. This strategy is included in the Transportation Plan as an interim measure until additional off-street public parking (e. g. underground parking structure) can be developed in the commercial core and other transportation alternatives are implemented. 4) Preferential High Occul,ancÂ¥ Vehicle On-Street Parking Providing incentives for carpooling is an important element in reducing auto travel. Given the parking controls recommended, the provision of convenient, free parking for vehicles with three or more occupants would be a very strong incentive. In light of existing vehicle occupancy figures* and commuting patterns, 250 HOV spaces should be provided. HOV free parking should be designated along the following streets or in spaces designated for day pass use in residential parking control areas: â€¢ Monarch Street between Bleeker Street and Durant Avenue; â€¢ Spring Street between Durant Avenue and Main Street; â€¢ Rio Grande Place between Mill Street and Main Street; and â€¢ Bleeker Street between Monarch Street and Mill Street. Some spaces along these streets should also be available for residential parking permits and lodging parking permits. Daily, free HOV parking permits should be made available at the parking kiosks at the Park-and-ride lots (discussed below), the Rio Grande Parking Facility, and other identified locations. 5) Onstreet Lodge Parkint It is necessary to accommodate the legitimate parking needs of the many lodging properties located in the residential parking control area. An appropriate number of parking permits should be provided to lodging properties at a minimal cost. Lodging properties desiring onstreet parking permits for their guests should be required to submit a simple application detailing their need for parking and the availability of offstreet parking, paying a nominal fee for each annual permit. Only parking permits adequate to meet each property's onstreet parking needs should be provided. Parking permits should be part of a flexible *Forinstance, a surveyofvehicleoccupancyconductedduringthe 1991-92ski season i ndicated that approxi mately 175 p rivate vehicles with threc or more occupants were entering Aspen on the Castle Creek Bridge during the AM commute period. Page 4 DRAFT andÂ· enforceable system that meets the needs of both the Parking Department and the lodging properties. 6) Annual Business Vehicle Parkine Stickers For some of the business establishments in the commercial core, the easy accessibility of a vehicle is necessary to their operations. To avoid placing an onerous burden upon businesses that require a vehicle for deliveries, an annual business parking sticker should be made available at a reduced fee to allow business delivery vehicles to park in residential areas and in the municipal parking garages. Businesses would be required to justify a sticker for business delivery use (other than simply commuting) and adhere to strict qualifications. Businesses would also be required to use the designated loading zones in the commercial core for deliveries. In order to meet the goals of the parking plan, a fee shall be established that discourages frivolous use of the business sticker. 7) Increase in Loading and Service Vehicle Spaces The lack of adequate loading/unloading and service vehicle spaces in specific areas of the commercial core creates an operational problem for business, as well as creating congestion caused by double- parking. Additional loading and service vehicle spaces are currently being evaluated by the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission, in conjunction with the Aspen Police Department and Parking Department; their recommendations will be added to this report. 8) Other Non-residential Uses in the Residential Parking Control Area It is recognized that there are a number of non-residential land uses in the residential parking control areas, such as churches, schools, and restaurants. The legitimate parking needs of these land uses need to be addressed on a case-by-case basis. 9) East End Parking Facilitv Though this plan will substantially reduce parking demand in the commercial core, the provision of additional offstreet parking in the area is needed to address remaining long-term parking demand. The city block bounded by Cooper, Spring, Hyman and Original (Kraut/Bell Mountain Lodge) is the most appropriate location for additional public'offstreet parking, as it is convenient to many employment sites as well as the ski base area. There also is interest in development of a joint facility that will serve City Market and the redevelopment of the block. Themunicipal portion of the proposed underground parking facility should provide a moderate amcunt of public spaces. Rather than "attracting" additional auto trips into the core, these spaces should be managed to replace residential-area onstreet spaces used in the Day Parking Pass program. This facility would also serve as a summer intercept lot for traffic entering the city from Independence Pass. MARKETING AND PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR THE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM A key element in instituting a successful transportation control program will be to conduct an aggres- sive marketing program. Marketing efforts should include cable TV spots, development of a press kit, and the development and distribution of brochures customized for the following groups: â€¢ Residents of the Residential Parking Control area; â€¢ All other residents and property owners in Aspen; , Visitors (distributed through lodging properties and the Resort Association); â€¢ Downvalley commuters; and â€¢ Commercial Core business owners/employers. Page 5 DRAFT These marketing materials should clearly lay out why the program is being implemented, what the parking fees are to be used for (such as increased transit), the use of the parking cards, and should particularly stress the alternatives available to travellers (such as carpooling and transit service). PARKING INFORMATION CENTERS Several drive-up parking kiosks should be established to distribute information regarding the parking program, transit services, carpooling and other alternative transportation modes. Flexible kiosk locations should be established in areas associated with the Park-and-Ride facilities and/or other vehicle intensive areas. Additionally, information regarding the transportation program should be made available at other auto intensive locations (e. g. car washes, gas stations, inspection stations). These kiosks should be staffed daily for at least 12 hours during peak seasons, and as needed in the off-seasons, and should serve the following functions: â€¢ Distribute information regarding the parking program, transit services, carpooling, and other alternate transportation modes; â€¢ Distribute daily parking permits for HOV vehicles; â€¢ Sell daily commercial core parking permits; â€¢ Sell daily parking passes; â€¢ Provide directions and information about Aspen. These services should also be made available on a walk-up basis at the Rio Grande Parking Facility and at future parking facilities. TRANSIT SERVICE RECOMMENDATIONS 1) Exvansion in Downvalle,/Snowmass Service A key element in reducing auto use is the provision of convenient and cost-competitive public transit service. Both residents and visitors to the Roaring Fork Valley have proven to be eager to use transit; indeed, ridership is often limited only by }he availability of vehicles. Analysis of existing ridership and potential demand indicates that substantial increases in service to Snowmass and Downvalley communities - are a cost-effective means of achieving Community Plan goals while benefiting transportation conditions valley-wide. Up to three additional buses should be operated year-round between Aspen and El Jebel/Carbondale, and up to two additional buses between Aspen and Snowmass. During peak periods, service would be provided approximately every 12 minutes on average to the Downvalley areas, and every 15 minutes to Showmass Village (see Table B and C). 2) Park-and-Ride Facilities A key element in the transportation plan is the expansion of free, park-and-ride facilities downvalley of Aspen. Over the last few years, RFTA has been developing a series of park-and-ride facilities that have proven very effective in generating increased transit ridership while reducing Highway 82 traffic levels. An expansion program for these downvalley facilities should be vigorously pursued. In addition, new facilities should be developed to serve mid-valley residents bound for Aspen, and to serve residents of the Maroon Creek/Castle Creek areas. Pitkin County and CDOT should be participants in the location and funding of the park-and-ride facilities. Preliminary evaluation indicates that the most appropriate location for a new mid-valley facility along Highway 82 is the vicinity of the Brush Creek Road intersection. This location would allow the facilit to also serve as a lot for Snowmass Village, and to serve as a convenient parking point for carpool Page 6 DRAFT arriving from downvalley with occupants destined for both Snowmass and Aspen. A parking information center provided as part of this facility could also serve both Snowmass and Aspen. This location is just outside of the Aspen air quality non-attainment area, which has its downvalley boundary near the northwest end of the airport runway. The Buttermilk area, and the Maroon/Castle Creek and the Marolt area remain reasonable alternate/additional candidate sites, depending upon land costs and availability, and the final results of the Aspen to Snowmass transportation planning process. Evaluation of existing travel patterns, the forecast response to pay parking implementation, and park- and-ride activity in similar areas indicates that a lot with approximately 200 to 250 spaces should be provided. A parcel of 2.5 to 3.0 acres will be required, depending upon the configuration of the parcel, and this would include a transit loading area. In addition, a smaller facility should be constructed in the vicinity of Maroon Creek Road and Highway 82. This lot would serve as a park-and-ride facility for the many residents of the Maroon Creek/Castle Creek/Cemetery Lane area. It should be located within convenient walking distance to Highway 82 and provided with signalized access to the highway. In light of travel patterns in the area, a lot of 100 to 150 spaces (roughly 1.2 to 1.5 acres) would be required. If overcrowding by drivers coming from other areas develops, a permit system limiting use to nearby residents should be considered. It is important to consider these parking facilities and the transit shuttle service that serves them as only part of a comprehensive transportation plan. These lots serve as the last opportunity for drivers destined to Aspen's commercial core to find free parking. They also serve as portions of a system of park-and-ride lots throughout the Roaring Fork Valley, serving the mid-valley area between Aspen and Lazy Glen. It is recommended that the City solicit financial support from CDOT in expediting the phasing of the park-and-ride facilities, incorporating multimodal design concepts for the intersections with Highway 82. In regard to the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Highway 82, the concept of a grade- separated interchange is encouraged, but the proposed interchange system design that depicts a " modified trumpet" interchange is unacceptable. Intersections should be designed as multipurpose, multifunctional transportation facilities. The interchange design should also minimize visual impacts. The City should prioritize the development of for the park-and-ride facilities as the park-and-ride lots are a key component of the Transportation Plan. 3) The UpvalleÂ¥ Transit Corridor: High-FrequencÂ¥ Free Transit Service on HighwaÂ¥ 82 between Asven and Brush Creek Road Additional transit improvements should be implemented for the relatively congested and developed corridor between Aspen, the Airport Business Center, and the free, Park-and-Ride lots. Up to three additional vehicles should be put into operation, initially providing free transit service every 10 minutes throughout the corridor during peak periods and at most every half hour during non-peak periods. In light of expected passenger loads, shuttle vehicles of moderate capacity should be operated. Considering the Downvalley and Snowmass buses serving this corridor, peak-period service will be provided roughly every five minutes in each direction. In addition, all fares should be eliminated for service within this corridor. The elimination of fares substantially increases the convenience and "user-friendliness" of transit service. This step would essentially expand the existing free-fare area from its current terminus at Maroon Creek Road downvalley to Brush Creek Road. Page 7 DRAFT 4) Return to and Expansion of Full Year-Round Citv Transit Service As a cost-savings measure, service hours and days have been reduced on RFTA's four City Routes in the spring and fall, resulting in a reduction in service quality. The spring and fall service reductions should be eliminated and full operation (free of charge) returned year-round through additional subsidy funding. Additionally, the city transit service should be expanded to include additional areas not currently served by transit. Ridership levels on routes should be monitored frequently to identify if smaller vehicles can be effectively operated. 5) Cross-Town Shuttle RFI'A has recently been experimenting with a cross-town shuttle service between the commercial core and the post office area using vans. This service should be made permanent, and vehicles specifically designed for such service (and of a size in keeping with the character of the area) should be purchased. In addition to reducing short auto trips in the commercial core, this service promotes transit usage into and out of the area by allowing passengers to run errands in town without their car. Based upon the success of this shuttle to generate passenger-trips, an east-west shuttle system serving Main Street and the lodges located on the west end of Main Street and along Durant Avenue should also be considered. Within the next several weeks, the Committee will review and discuss information regarding the trolley concept and foward their recommendation to Council. 6) Cab Coupon Program The Committee has not fully investigated several transit service alternatives such as the dial-a-ride concept, collectivo's, or the cab coupon program. These transit alternatives will be discussed further by the Committee in the near future. The Committee has conceptually discussed the cab coupon program and offers the following information: Even with the provision of a quality, free City transit system, there remains a potential transit "market segment" that the existing fixed-route service is not reaching. Considering all of the potential options, a cab coupon (or "user-side subsidy") program could be developed on a trial basis for a portion of the community to assess the concept's effectiveness. For certain potential transit markets with a low density of demand, a cab coupon can provide more transportation at a lower cost per passenger-trip than the subsidy required to operate fixed-route service. An initial candidate program would be the Mountain Valley area on the east end of town. This trial program should operate as follows: â€¢ Based upon the experience of other communities, a general public subsidy rate of 50 percent would be appropriate. A ticket-book approach is recommended, in which passengers can purchase taxi coupons for a specified fee. Initial outlets could consist of City Hall, the Rio Grande Parking Facility, and Rubey Park. Additional potential locations would include any banks or stores willing to participate. â€¢ Residents of Aspen would be allowed to use these coupons to pay taxi fares for any taxi trip between the Mountain Valley area and any destination within Aspen's city limits. For services outside the city, passengers would either have to pay full fare, or would transfer to an RFTA bus. â€¢ Over time, a pattern of regular cab coupon passengers will develop. The cab operator would be encouraged to group these trips into a shared ride arrangement, providing a further discount to passengers willing to share a ride. In this way, total vehicle-miles of travel (and therefore PM1 emissions) can be reduced by this program. Page 8 DRAFT The primary advantage provided by a user-side subsidy program is its attractiveness to a transit "market segment" not currently using the fixed-route service, including persons of higher income than the typical existing transit rider, and persons making occasional trips. In addition, parking needs in the commercial core would be reduced. By developing shared rides, total pollution emissions can also be reduced. Based upon the results of the pilot Mountain Valley program, the user-side subsidy program could easily be expanded to cover other sections of the city. HIGHWAY 82 EASTBOUND/WESTBOUND HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANES Even considering the traffic reductions that will result from implementation of this plan, episodic traffic congestion at the entrance to Aspen will continue to occur during both winter and summer. The proposed High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes along eastbound and westbound Highway 82 between the Castle Creek Bridge and Shale Bluffs should be constructed, as it is a cost-effective means of promoting both transit ridership and carpooling. A signalized pre-emption system to allow transit priority at bridges, with the longer term goal of constructing bridges with HOV lanes, should be considered. It is acknowledged that the HOV lane construction will need to be phased due to funding constraints. The City should continue its involvement with the Snowmass to Aspen Transportation Plan and all three jurisdictions should aggressively seek all available funding from CDOT to expedite the construction of the HOV lanes. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILMIES Improved Galena Pedestrian Corridor Substantial improvements to the pedestrian facilities along Galena Street should be made between Main Street and Cooper Street. Through the conversion of angled parking spaces to parallel spaces and the construction of pedestrian improvements at the intersections, this important connection between the Mall and the Rio Grande area can change from an "auto-dominated" to a "pedestrian-dominated" environ- nnent. Improved Bicycle Connections Over much of the year, bicycling is an attractive travel alternative, particularly for Aspen residents. Bicycle facility improvements should be constructed along Highway 82 and other arterials, as well as within the offstreet trails system. Bicycle storage racks should also be made available throughout the commercial core. Improved Sidewalks Between Commercial Core and Residential Areas Finally, there is a strong need for improved pedestrian connections between the commercial core and the residential portions of Aspen. It is unrealistic to expect Aspen residents (as well as some lodging guests) to walk to the commercial core if they are forced to walk in the road. The unattractiveness of pedestrian travel is only made worse by snow on the road, which often requires walking in the travel lane. The recent recommendations of the Neighborhood Advisory Committee regarding the implementation of the Aspen Pedestrian and Bikeway System Plan are endorsed. Specifically, the following improvements should be pursued: * Construction of the north/south routes (sidewalks and trails) and this includes Smuggler sidewalk, Neal ~Street sidewalk, Lone Pine sidewalk, and Lone Pine/Art Museum trail; Page 9 DRAFT * The river trail system (easement acquisition, design and construction); and * Completion of the Main Street sidewalks. SUMMARY: FUTURE TRANSPORTATION CONDIT[ONS WrTH IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PLAN As a whole, the Transportation Element developed through the Community Plan process will significantly improve the liveability of Aspen and the Roaring Fork Valley. Key findings of the implementation analyses indicate the following: â€¢ Overall demand for parking spaces generated by the Commercial Core are projected to drop by 800 vehicles during peak periods, which is equal to 30 percent of existing demand. Most importantly, almost all of this drop in demand (750 vehicles) will be hi long-term parking such as employees; short-term parking demand will drop by only 50 vehicles. â€¢ Parking availability will be increased dramatically. While onstreet parking in the commercial core is currently 95 percent full during peak periods, future peak onstreet parking utilization under the Parking Card Program will be 70 percent. At this overall level, onstreet spaces should be available - on even the most popular block. As a result, the unnecessary traffic congestion and driver frustration caused by the search for available parking will be eliminated. â€¢ With reduced pressure for general public parking spaces, existing spaces can be used for increased handicapped spaces, additional truck loading spaces, and conversion to pedestrian improvements. â€¢ A key benefit of this plan is the dramatically improved availability of parking for visitors an shoppers. This plan will not reduce the attractiveness of Aspen for shoppers. Experience in simila resort communities indicates the attractiveness of more convenient parking resulting from this plan will more than offset any disincentive of pay parking. â€¢ Another important benefit will be the reduction of parking impacts on the residential areas near the commercial core. Commercial-core parkers in the nearby residential areas are expected to roughly total 200, a reduction of 500 vehicles (or 71 percent) from current peak winter levels. â€¢ Overall auto use in the Commercial Core area will drop by approximately 20 percent, yielding dramatic improvements in traffic conditions. Traffic reductions in outlying areas, such as residential areas and the entrance to Aspen, will be on the order of 15 percent. To successfully implement this plan, it will be critical that the alternatives be put into place before the auto restriction elements (such as paid parking) are implemented. This will allow auto users the time needed to make the adjustments in work, childcare and shopping schedules necessary to accommodate the loss of the instant mobility the private car provides. In addition, the participation and effectiveness of the Plan needs to be continually monitored and evaluated so that adjustments can be made to the Plan. The benefits of this Transportation Plan will extend far beyond the City limits. The reduction of traffic along Highway 82 will substantially improve the quality of life in Basalt, El Jebel, Carbondale and throughout the highway corridor by improving air quality and reducing congestion. Rather than simply an Aspen plan, therefore, this Transportation Element is a key part in an integrated solution to transportation problems valley-wide. Unlike other plans currently under discussion, this proposal promises to benefit all segments of the visitor and residential population. The transit service improvements will be provided to year-roun Page 10 DRAFT residents, both in Aspen and the Downvalley communities, as well as for visitors. While funds are slowly being diverted from the Highway 82 expansion project, and proposals for the Downvalley com- muter train and the Aspen - Snowmass tam have to date foundered upon their very high capital requirements, the Community Plan transportation elements yield a timely and achievable means of realizing the community's transportation goals. Finally, a benefit of this plan is that it will not preclude additional future transportation improvements. As paid parking programs remain the single most effective generator of transit ridership, moreover, the institution of this plan would be a very strong spur for the development of future alternative transit capital improvements. dmhacp.leigh . I Page 11 DRAFT ASPEN'S DRAFT TRANSPORTATION PLAN: HOW WILL IT IMPACT ME? Some Automobile Expense Factors to Remember: * Owning and operating a $10,000 car cost a consumer $20,000 over a period of five years - Institute of Certified Financial Planners. * The average American spends one out of every five dollars on auto-related expenses and puts in the equivalent of ten 40-hour weeks behind the wheel each year - Surface Transportation Policy Bulletin. * The average cost per mile to operate a six cylinder vehicle is approximately 39 cents - American Automobile Association. I am a Downvalley Resident Commuting to the Commercial Core and Lodging Areas for my employment. I typically drive straight to work and currently park for free in either the residential areas or in the commercial core. If I paak in the commercial core area, which is posted with 90 parking limitation, I either move my car every 90 minutes or spin the chalk off my tires to avoid a parking ticket. Ocasionally, I do some errands after work or during my lunch hour. I am concerned about the impacts of the Plan and wonder what my options are if paid parking is implemented in the commercial core. The Plan provides a variety of options: * Carpool with 3 or more passengers, pick up a free HOV parking permit, and park for free in HOV spaces within the City or the municipal parking garage. Existing ride-share program is available through RFI'A. * Ride the expanded Downvalley RFI'A service. * Drive to Park-and-Ride lot, park for free, and take the free shuttle into Aspen. * Park in a private off-street space Of provided for employees). * Park in the municipal parking garage (daily or monthly rates available); ride the cross-town shuttle which has the Post Office and the Gondola area as destination points. The shuttle could bÂ© used during your lunch hour when you are running your errands. 1 * Purchase a Day Parking Pass and park in designated spaces on the residential streets. * If you drive your car into town, you can run short errands by parking in the short term loading zones, which will be designated within the commercial core. * Ride a employer provided van into Aspen, if available. I am an Aspen Resident and commute into the Commercial Core and Lodging Areas for my employment. My commuting distance is not far, but I like the convenience of having my car nearby. In that .private, off-street parking spaces are limited, I usually park for free in the residential areas or in the commercial core. If I park in the commercial core, I face the task of moving my car every 90 minutes, or I spin my tires to remove the chalk marks to avoid a parking ticket. What are my choices? * Can)001 with 3 or more passengers, pick up a free HOV parking permit, and park for free in HOV spaces within the City or municipal parking garage. * Ride expanded RFTA City service. * Use the Cab Coupon program, if available in the area. * Park in the municipal parking garage (daily or monthly rates available); ride the cross-town shuttle which has the Post Office and the Gondola area as destination points. * Park in private off-street space (if provided for employees). * Walk or rjde a bicycle. Pedestrian and bikeway improvements are included as an integral part of the transportation plan. * Purchase a Day Parking Pass and park in designated spaces on the residential streets. * Ride an employer provided van, if available. * Drive to Park-and-Ride lot, park for free and take the free shuttle into Aspen. I am a Short-term Shopper or Visitor to the Commercial Core. I was wondering how the proposed transportation plan would impact me. My reasons Â· 2 for coming into the commercial core are to drop off certain items, or to buy a present for a friend, or to have lunch. Typically, I will only be in town for about an hour or two. What do I do when the transportation plan is implemented? * Park in commercial core and use parking cards (2 hour maximum limit - approximately $1/hour). * Use lodge van service, if available. Some of the local lodges and hotels have van service for their guests and drop their guests off in the commercial core. * If you drive your car into town, you can run short errands by parking in the short term loading zones, which will be designated within the commercial core. * Park in municipal parking facility; ride the cross-town shuttle which has the Post Office and the Gondola as destination points. * Ride the expanded RFI'A city or downvalley service. * Carpool with 3 or more occupants and park for free in HOV spaces within City or municipal parking garage. * Park in private off-street space. * Park in nearby residential areas (90 minute maximum). * Drive to Park-and-Ride lot and take free shuttle. * From Aspen origins, use the Cab Coupon program, if available in your area. * Walk or ride a bicycle. Pedestrian and bikeway improvements are included as an integral part of the transportation plan. * If you are a visitor, take a cab into the commercial core. I am a Long-Term Shopper or Visitor, or Day Skier to the Commercial Core. I usually spend about 6 hours in town and like to have lunch in town. My reasons for coming into town are to shop, to walk around town and have iunch, or to ski on Aspen Mountain. Occasionally, I like to stay in town and have dinner at my favorite restaurant. Once the transportation plan is implemented, whal are my choices? 3 * Ride expanded RFTA city or downvalley service into town. * Park in the municipal parking facility; ride the cross-town shuttle which has the Post Office and the Gondola area as destination points. * Drive to Park-and-Ride lot and take free shuttle into Aspen. * Purchase a Day Parking Pass and park in designated spaces on residential streets. * Ride the free skier shuttle service between Aspen and Snowmass Village. * Use lodge van service, if available. Some of the local lodges and hotels have van service for their guests and drop their guests off in the commercial core. * From Aspen origins, use the Cab Coupon program * Park in private off-street space. * Carpool with three or more occupants, pick up free HOV parking permit, and Â· park for free in HOV spaces within the City or municipal parking garage. * Walk or bicycle, if you live close to town. * If you are a visitor, take a cab into the commercial core. I am a Resident of the Neighborhood Parking Control Area. I have been frustrated in the past as I sometimes cannot find a parking space on my block for myself or visiting friends. It appears that alot of c0mmuters are occupying these spaces. I am relieved to hear that the City will be requiring parking permits for my neighborhood but I was wondering how this new program would impact me. What are my options? * Park in off-street space (i.e. driveway). * Use minimal cost Annual Residential Parking Permit for on-street parking spaces. This permit is only for your particular residential district and three permit districts are propo>ed. * Between 4:30 PM and 8:30 AM, anyone can park on-street for free. 4 * Visitors to the residential parking control areas can park for free on-street * for a maximum of 90 minutes (between 7 AM to 6 PM). * There will be designated areas along the street where purchasers of the Day Parking Passes will park. I am a Visitor to a Residential Parking Control Area. Occasionally, I cannot find a place to park when I am visiting my friends; the worst time is during the peak season. I also understand that 3 residential parking control districts are proposed for the City. If the residential parking control permit program is implemented, how will this impact me when I visit my friends? * Park in off-street space (i.e. driveway). * Visitors to the residential parking control areas can park for free on-street for a maximum of 90 minutes (between 7 AM to 6 PM). * Between 4:30 PM and 8:30 AM, anyone can park on-street for free. * Purchase a Day Parking Pass and park in designated spaces on residential streets if staying longer than 90 minutes. * Walk or ride a bicycle. * Ride expanded City RFTA service. I am the Guest of a Lodge and it is located in one of the Residential Parking Control Area. I have rented a car or have driven to Aspen and was wondering where I could park my car. What options do I have? * Park in off-street space at the lodge. * Use a lou -cost Parking Permit provided by lodging property for on-street parking spaces. * Between 6 PM and 7 AM, park on-street for free. * Purchase a Day Parking Pass and park in designated spaces on residential streets. I am the Guest of a Lodge and it is located in the Commercial Core. I realize that the existing spaces in the commercial core are limited to 90 minutes of free parking so if I rent a car, or drive my own car into Aspen, what are my choices for parking nny car? 5 * Park in off-street space at the lodge. * Park in the municipal parking garage; ride the cross-town shuttle which has the Post O ffice and the Gondola as destination points. * Purchase a Day Parking Pass and park in designated spaces on residential streets that are located within a Residential Parking Control Area. * Consider not renting a car and use the lodge van service (if available), taxi/limo service, or mass transit. We are Parents that commute from Downvalley into the Commercial Core and Lodging Areas for our employment. We have 2 children that attend the Aspen Elementary Schools at the Maroon Creek campus. We either drive our children to school or drop them at the school bus at Aspen Village. We feel that our children are not old enough to ride the RETA bus alone to Aspen Village, where the school bus picks up the children. After work, we pick up our children at the elementary school extended day program before 5:30 pm. We would prefer to take the RFTA bus to work and home but in order to pick our children up at the elementary school, we would have to take the bus to the school, get our children and wait for the next bus into town, then get the RFTA bus downvalley. How will this issue be addressed with the proposed transportation plan? What alternatives will be available for us? * Carpool with 3 or more passengers (children are considered passengers), pick up free HOV parking permit at parking info center (park-and-ride lot), drop children off at Maroon Creek campus, and park for free in HOV spaces within the City of Aspen or municipal parking garage. * RETA Downvalley and City transit service will be increased if the transportation plan is implemented. Parents could ride the bus with their child to Rubey Park and transfer their children to the Highlands bus, which drops the children off at the Maroon Creek campus. At the end of the day, supervisors at the extended day program can put children on the Highlands bus and parents can pick up children at Rubey Park and ride the Downvalley bus together. * Parents and children could drive to park-and-ride lot, park for free and take the free shuttle into town. Parents could then transfer childen at Rubey Park to the Highlands bus, which drops the children off at the Maroon Creek campus. At the end of the day, supervisors at the extended day program can put children on the Highlands bus and parents can pick up children at Rubey Park and ride the Downvalley bus together. 6 * Parents and children could drive to park-and-ride lot and park for free. The School District and City should work together to provide a shuttle for the children (at peak times) from the park-and-ride lot to the Maroon Creek campus. Once their children are on the shuttle bound for the school campus, the parents could then take the free shuttle into Aspen. At the end of the day, the parents would take the free shuttle out to the park-and-ride lot and wait for their children to arrive on the shuttle from the school campus. * Parents could drive their children to the Maroon Creek campus, drop off their children, drive into town and park in the municipal parking garage. 7 . ........... 4 COTTLE GRAYBEAL YAW ARCHITECTS LTD 510 EAST HYMAN, SUm 21 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 PHONE 303/925-2867 FAX 303/925-3736 111 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 r----- 1 -1 -1 SCHERMER 1 11 r-1 1 11 1 L _ ____ -1 1 -1 LF 1 1 RESIDENCE 1 1 11 11 6-\/ 0 1 3- 1 1 1 1 CPU L - SOUTH ELEVATION (2- - SCALES b/4411-0, ASPEN COLORADO ELEV-A41.VwF ISSUE: 3/29/93 DESIGN DEVELOPMEr 000 00 E 0 0 REVI~p#L..4 0 1 11 1 1 1 1 11 Ill 1 1 1 11 Ill 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 1 4 1 1 lilli 1 1 " 1 11 1 1 1 1- 1 1 11 1 11 7 1 â‚¬ r-----1 ''-7 1 - 1 1.---____--1 L----- -11 -a i SOUTH & EAS ELEVATIONS 11 1 11 i ' 1 ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' I -----7--- 7-----------r-------------------r--- SCALE: 1/4" 1'-0 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 lili 1 1 1 1 1 L 1 L--------------------------J---------*-/ 79 .4 Â·4> EAST ELEVATION ||Al.1|| ' (1 -- ' SCALE: 74'-11-01 -*4,2.-lk-42._C~t.-t~~4,3*~. 614.-5.1.jku... .- .......... ITECTS r -1- ---- rn_____ /7----f~ZIEZE ........... r 'COTTLE 1 1 I GRAYBEAL I 1 YAW ARCHITECTS ~ ,'~ LTD 1 510 EAM MA SUm 21 ~ j ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 1 1 PHONE 303/925-2867 00 FAX 303/925-3736 Un ELE j 1 o Uuu 1 1 1 1 1 lilli It 1 11 1 11 1 1 11 11 1 1 1 11 1 ~ 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 11 11 1 1 1 11 1 SCHERMER r-I i i r-1 r -1 r -1 r -1 1 L_ L-1 L -1 L -1 L -1 1 RESIDENCE 1 1 11 1 1 11 1 1 i I It ________ __________ _- _1_ ___-__-_L______________________Jr- 17 - NORTH ELEVATION 1 (2- - SCALE: 7441~ 1 ASPEN j COLORADO ~ ELEV - 441. VWF: .~ ISSUE : 3/24/93 ~1 E Un 00 Luum El El REVISIONS: DESIGM DEVELOPMENT 0 011021 0000 00 1 lilli 1 1 1 1 11 1 11 1 lili 1 11 11 1 lili 11 Ill lili 1 1 1 1 1 1 lili 11 1 1 1 11 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 1 1 11 m 1 1 1 1 1 r 7 r i i r - - - 'i r-% 1 1-1 r -1 NORTH & WEST L-1 ,~ LJ LITJ I L---J L -r- F 1 1 - 1 L- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I i ELEVATIONS lili 1 1 It 1 1 1 Ill 1 1 1 1 1 1 'Ill SCALE: 1/411.11-0m L - - - ------1____-- -1 ---____-__ _1 - _ - _ _ _-______ -1 --_ - _ _ _ -__ -1 __ __ -- -- ----- ----------- -1 - J ------------- - ----------------------- - - -1 - WEST ELEVATION 41_1 1/ SCALE: V461'-01 . e . . . . . . . . 01-~ 4 By-/ST7 14 Â·27 ADot-rloN CLT AU CTE-4 fUL_ gAD PA/VE wAY 1 1 / 1 i \ ---1 1 1 1 1 1 /1 \ , i 1 I . i \ \ 01 \ it 11 lili 11-- \ i / 14 - 11'Ir,fÂ« , 24-,1 1,111 1.1 \ \\ 9--1 - 1 1 -\ ill \\ \ --- 1 fter ----1 1 0 FF ULL 46,0 0 . , I. , / M - - / I \\ 1 1 1 / 1 ' 1 ' ' . \ AN \4/ 3 9 / . 4 I , \ 1 / 7 \\\ 1 // , / , , . \ f. . / / / i / , -A ////1 / f 1 \ / '1 ./fe V rbl'' , / ./ r. \ . a .0- , 1 / \ 9 \ '/ 1 1 , ' / i / ' / t . \ \ \ / ./ 1 / 11// 7 1, 1 / I / / / 1 \ \ 1 / i / / / / / / 1 :a,/<6 1 1 \ 1 1 I / 7// , f // 'Fi / j / 1 / *...I-1 \ % 1 11 / 1 . 1 1 / / . 0 1 j / / i 1 -%-%-%--- -\ 1 ij 1 \ \ I 1 777 SITE PLAN SCALE: 2' c BO' APR - 9 r993 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 0 0 CA I =Â®2=22 i / 2 < -- 0 X 45 7779(37 9 677*674/AS ' 1 1 ~1 _1 l -1 1 L .l 1 -1 LI _l 1111[ 1 FLLI 1 _11 1 Ill_11_111111 Lil _l ld~ Up 0 I T 'liTI. I . 1. -- -- - - --- -- - -- -- 1 0 1 Â«7-272- 45-92 - , CD:Â·42>2-AARTEÂ»-7- UT/L/TY - 6 /ty /<4 Of L ~ ---------- 0 8#11111111,]t I .111, --- -- - -- - ~ /F 1 4C 53 k///UDO W 1 ~~ MLALL- L 4 ~4 1L--I1 1 11-~--r~~ 1 If 9% 4 Le# 2 1 1 Full-it-d ft. 4<---~mÂ¥/ST/19(9 ST"/ CTâ‚¬-/Ft- BASEMENT PLAN SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0" ROBERTS ADDITION 232 EAST HALLAM STREET ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 I STRYKER/BROWNARCHITECTS, P.C. 8- 300 S. SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 (303) 925.2254 \Â»Â»Â»20006/ ~020*NEÂ«~--- : ,lili lilli 11.11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 1 1 1 1 1 1,1 1 :111 1 1 1~1 ...~ 9 0 0 1 1 --1 1 4 1 z J= - --6 -â€ž M(,88MM(d08MM0MEMballbbbMEbM0M0bbb88888(100825;i - - --- - - - -- --- -- - - ~-~ CX * % 1 1 1 L / V//7 3% f< /6 . 1 /64:770 291 1 1 .' ->/.56-1-1-f~ \ _6/ 7-0/f tz./4. J 1 - 1/Y _---__---_--_ db@666~36&0Â£Â£h~~4040M*Â£&&&0~*~8Â®imm.1 6_--- ~- n ~-- - --- --41 1 C j 0/=Â£06 h 1 1 i , Nk - 9.-- fet- PST/Nâ‚¬> FLOOR PLAN m 6779/67*922 SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0" ROBERTS ADDITION 4 232 EAST HALLAM STREET , ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS, P.C. 1 1 300 S. SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 (303) 925.2254 I . . e (3 0 1 1 1 1 J I L- -- -- -- 1- L-_ ----O 1 1 .. 26/67 6: I . N 1 1 * 1 1 - 1 . Ifc- ./4 -1~ 1 V 1.- .aa j 1.--0. 3-99 j * 1, 1 - F_I / . t. ... " \ t t:-1 yy,aM ./ I &* 1 y1~ r . 40/../12/95 1 . 1 - . . 1 1 . 1 .. . . 1 1 - I 1 , ! 1 1 11 7 -_ / 1 - .1 , 11 1 1 --1 -- ---- 1 - I. . 1 .- I. I 1 . I , t . , 1 1- - - -~ - -jay/457-5 1/,1,. . / AOOF- -1 V. 1 \ ROOF PLAN SCALE: 1/4"= 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 /1-/,3 ~,~,~9.Qj /~ 1 d C CÂ«7/Â« - 4 8 ' 1, EL- Cr .....1 11 1 1 4 60 01 L- C 9 ~~EEE+ 9 '1 93 L'tan-----~ .1, =,7 &j-2. 4. - -- 1 i ==== 1 I R Al. 21 L 1 SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0" ROBERTS ADDITION 232 EAST HALLAM STREET ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS, 300 S. SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 (303) 925.2254 l 1 '17-~'121 AhJ IME-; ~- WÂ«0: 11754f-Plw 11 811 f I 111:lu *AL Â· -- i. r .Illl. h 'f .1 m===1 1 ELLÂ«Illi3Â·--[4 - NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0" ROBERTS ADDITION 232 EAST HALLAM STREET ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS, P. , I 300 S. SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 (303) 925.2254 . - 9 111----4 !~ i , 11 . 1Â¢Â£11- 22'-1- L-lt E - Ill I .L_. 1 4 ll hm- E 1 1 i 4 1[ 19 3' 8* ~,/ rim --- - 1 18//4 / 1 1 1 -Al lip 1 1 1 -1 - --7-111Ir---1 --- li I Int Ill tEl iI 1 J - -' 1 1 1 EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0" ROBERTS ADDITION 232 EAST HALLAM STREET ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS, P 300 S. SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 (303) 925.2254 1/1,1.1.1.81 l . + - 4 .1 4 . 1â€žiu 1,1 '' -_ ~_-= __ _ i ; 111 - '*--nÂ·2rly--Um-I'll:I-'"----*.~- - - 4..'L~LL) ///Lizafrir./ . - - i - + -M~ 7.---- â€¢Â·Â·r - - .1 11'i -- . - 1 44 ~~ ----------2-- - 1921 124IU - - M ---- WEST_EL EVA=TION SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0" ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 | 232 EAST HALLAM STREET i | STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS, 1 300 S. SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 | ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 ' ... -k:DEL p*. 0 = 1 .1 . E-/1 L fr~Â« 1.1 /9,1- 1~-4 Ouummuum 1 .r. A =21 4"0/ twdgiriallifillill- - 1-2==I=ftb~*~ \ 11 \ 2Â¢t - 1 . 1 i 1 1 1 6 IT Â£-1 BUILDING SECTION SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0" ROBERTS ADDITION 232 EAST HALLAM STREET ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS, ..C. 300 S. SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO, 81611 (303) 925.2254 -- - e ..91. - ' .-0. r. g ~I '- : . ' d ,... ' i .. MEMORANDUM To: Historic Preservation Committee From: Kim Johnson, Planner Re: Vidor Conceptual Development Plan (234 W. Francis) Public Hearing Date: April 14, 1993 SUMMARY: Staff recommends approval of the renovation and addition to the carriage house (including 8' side setback variation) and the interior changes to the main structure (a duplex). The carriage house is proposed to be an accessory dwelling unit, with one parking space to be provided. Please refer to the application packet for a complete description of the structural changes. APPLICANT: Quentin Vidor, represented by John Schenck LOCATION: 234 W. Francis (Lots K-M, Block 44) SITE, AREA AND BULK INFORMATION: The 9,000 s.f. site is zoned R- 6, Medium Density Residential. Maximum allowable FAR for a duplex is 4,080 s.f. with maximum site coverage of 30%. Minimum side yard setbacks are 10 feet. The existing structures on the site do not meet the required side or rear setbacks. ADDITIONAL COMMISSION REVIEWS: The Planning and Zoning Commission must grant Conditional Use approval for the carriage house dwelling unit. Final HPC review is also necessary. Development Review Standards 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. 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 areas, HPC shall find that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. Response: The 8' side setback variance is warranted because of the interior functional requirements of the carriage house remodel and conversion to a bonafide living quarters. If the 10' 1 side setback were maintained with the addition, the bathroom would be centered along the north elevation of the building, limiting options for access front that side of the building. The carriage * house is being raised 1.5' and a stone base is proposed. Staff questions the inclusion of a basement under the carriage house especially since no access from the main level is indicated, nor is any use indicated. The structure will be moved horizontally into the yard while the new foundation is being laid. Staff recommends that at Final review, the 5 review standards for relocation are addressed. Specifically, the applicant must provide documentation from a licensed engineer that the structure can withstand the relocation, and that a financial guarantee is provided to "insure the safe relocation, preservation and repair (if required) Of the structure, site preparation, and infrastructure connections." Only one window is being added to the main building. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: Very little impact will result because of the limited exterior work being proposed. 2 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not distract from the cultural value of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. 4 Response: Updating both structures will help maintain the lives of the structures which is also a benefit for the community. 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 exterior additions are very limited and are in character with the existing structures. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any of the following alternatives: 1) Approve the development proposal as submitted. 2) Approve the development with conditions to be satisfied for Final HPC consideration. 3) Table the Conceptual Review with conditions. 4) Deny the Conceptual Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposal (including the 8' side setback variance for the carriage house addition) with the condition that the relocation review criteria (Section 7-602.D.1-5) are met at Final Review. Additional comments: hp.vidor 3 Lem March 4, 1993 ARCHITECTURE Ms. Kim Johnson PLANNING Planning Office INTERIORS City of Aspen 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Vidor Residence 234 West Francis Dear Kim, Please find enclosed an application for conceptual review of significant development for the Vidor Residence also known as the Davis-Waite house. If you have any questions, please contact us. S ip~PeÂ·1~7, , 1 ienck Manager CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS Â· 520 EAST HYMAN AVENUE Â· ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Â· 303/925-5590 FAX 925-5076 . ATmCHMENT 1 IAND USE APPIICAECN FEERM t) Proj ect MalIa Vidor Residence -) Project location 234 West Francis, Block 44, Lots K, L, M Aspen, Colorado . (indicate street address; lot & block number,.legal 8#9=ciption whe~re appropriate) R-6 4) Iot Size 9,000 sq.ft. 3) Present Zoning 5) Applicant's Name, Address & Fhone # Quentin Vidor 925 Gibson Ave., Aspen, Colorado 81611 - 920-7768 6) Represertative's Name, Mdress & Bxne # John Schenc k-925-5590 Charles Cunniffe Architects, 520 E. Hyman. ST. 301. Aspen, CO, 81611 7) Type of Application (please check all that apply): Corditional Use Conoeptual. SPA X corâ€¢Â·,Â·:tilal Histocic Dev. Special Review Final SPA Final Historic Dev. 8040 Greenline Concestual FUD Minor Historic Dev. . Steam Margin Final FOD - Historic Demolition Mamtain yiew Plane - Subdivision Historic Designation - . OorÂ«Ininiumization Uhxt/Map Amer*berit QCS Allotment Iat Split/Iot line GEOS Exemption Â· AdjUStivent 8) Description of Existing Uses (number and type of existing- structures; approximate sq. ft.; number of bedrooms; any previous approvals grarrted tb the pmperty). The property consists of a main house with an att,cher' frpp markpt unit .. of approximately 2523 sq.ft. with a total of six bedroomq. No on-site parking. 9) Description of Development Application Structural enhancements to roof & foundation of main hnitqp. Remodel of main house upper level & attic. Structural enhancements of outbuilding Remodel & addition to outbuilding, creating a deed restricted ADU . Addition of 1 parking space. (Not required) 10) Have you attached the following? Response to Attachmerrt 2, Minimum Submission Oorrtents Response to Attachrrent 3, Specific Sihni qsion Ocrrtents Response to Attachment 4, Review Standards for Ya.Ir Application lilli 1 1 Ill 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: Quentin Vidor 925 Gibson Ave., Aspen ADDRESS: ZONE DISTRICT: R-6 LOT SIZE (SQUARE FEET): 9000 sq.ft. EXISTING FAR: 3114.5 sq.ft. ALLOWABLE FAR: 3660.0 sq.ft. PROPOSED FAR: 3239.7 sq.ft. EXISTING NET LEASABLE (commercial): PROPOSED NET LEASABLE (commercial): EXISTING % OF SITE COVERAGE: 20% PROPOSED % OF SITE COVERAGE: 21% EXISTING % OFOPEN SPACE (Commercial): PROPOSED % OF OPEN SPACE (Commer.): EXISTING MAXIMUM HEIGHT: Princi[)al BlÂ®.: / Accessory Bldo: 12 ' -9" PROPOSED MAXIMUM HEIGHT: PrinciDal Bldo.: / Accessory Bldg: 14 ' -3" PROPOSED % OF DEMOL[TION: 2% - Entry trellis EXISTING NUMBER OF BEDROOMS: 6 PROPOSED NUMBER OF BEDROOMS: 3 EXISTING ON-SITE PARKING SPACES: 0 ON-SITE PARKING SPACES REQUIRED: SETBACKS: EXISTING: ALLOWABLE: PROPOSED: ADU Bath Addition Front: 16' Front: 10 Front: Rear: O ' Rear: 10 Rear: Side: 0'/1' Side: 10 Side: 2 ' Combined Front/Rear: 16' Combined Fri/Rr: 30 Combined FronURear: EXISTING NONCONFORMITIES/ Side setbacks, rear setbacks, combined ENCROACHMENTS: front/rear setback VARIATIONS REQUESTED (elioible for Landmarks Onlv: character comoatibility findina must be made by HPC): FAR: Minimum Distance Between Buildings: SETBACKS: Front: Parking Spaces: Rear: Open Space (Commercial): Side: 2 ' Height (Cottage Infill Only): Combined Frt./Rr: Site Coverage (Cottage Infill Only): I. GENERAL APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS A. A letter of consent to representation is attached as Exhibit 'A'. B. The street address and legal description of the proposed project is: 234 W Francis Lots K,L,M, Block 48 Aspen, Co 81611 C. Disclosure of ownership is attached as Exhibit 'B'. D. A vicinity map locating the subject parcel is attached as Exhibit 'C'. E. Description of Proposal 1. Main house a. Reinforcement of foundation by means of underpinning. b. Reinforcement of roof structure along with some modifications to ceilings. c. Reinforcement of floor and wall structure as necessary. d. Remodel of interior spaces on upper level and attic. e. Addition of one window on the North side of house. 2. Outbuilding a. Conversion of outbuilding to a deed restricted Accessory Dwelling Unit. b. The building will be raised 1'-6" and a new foundation poured (basement). The increase in height is necessary to accommodate a new loft space. The exposed foundation will be covered with a stone veneer. C. The existing canopy or trellis will be removed and a new canopy will be built at the entry. d. A new door and window will be added to the North side of the building. e. A new bath approximately 9' x 9' will be added on the North side. In keeping with the design intent and the character of the site, this addition is located within the side setback and will require a variance by the HPC. f. The interior remodelling Of the outbuilding will include the addition of a kitchen and a loft. F. Compliance with relevant review standards 1. Design compatibility with existing structure. The main house will not change in appearance since the work is limited to the interior with the exception of one window which will be similar to existing windows. The outbuilding will increase in height (1'- 6" ) and gain a stone base which is not uncharacteristic of Victorian design. The loft space which dictates the height increase, creates desired space without a large addition to the original form. The bath addition utilizes a shed roof which works with the existing gable without detracting from it. 2. Consistency with neighborhood character. The visible additions and changes to the Davis-Waite house have been kept to a minimum to reduce the impact on the neighborhood. 3. Enhancement of the cultural value of the structure The proposed work to the Davis-Waite house Will increase the cultural value of the property in that the structural modifications will extend the life of the house. Turning a relatively unused outbuilding to an Accessory Dwelling Unit provides much needed living space which will not be neglected. 4. Enhancement of the architectural integrity of the structure The architectural integrity and Victorian character of the historical structure remains intact as the proposed additions are limited and unobtrusive. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS A survey prepared by Alpine Surveys, Inc. along with floor plans and elevations drawn from field measurements showing existing conditions is attached as exhibit 'D'. III. EFFECT OF PROPOSED DESIGN ON HISTORICAL STRUCTURE AND NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER The proposed addition and remodel of the Davis-Waite house is planned to remedy structural problems incurred over the years and to create more usable space for the owner and tenants. The main house remains relatively unchanged on the exterior. Modifications to the outbuilding occur out of sight from the street. The addition of one on-site parking space is planned to accommodate the ADU although this is not required. It is the intent of the applicant to maintain the historic character of the building and to restore it to ensure its continuing presence in the Historic district of Aspen. The proposed development is illustrated as Exhibit 'E'. IV. APPLICATION FOR PARTIAL DEMOLITION The applicant is requesting approval of the demolition of a trellis at the entry to the outbuilding to be replaced by an entry feature more in character with the building. V. APPLICATION FOR SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE The applicant is requesting a variance for the East side yard setback. Presently the property is nonconforming on rear, combined front and rear, and both side setbacks. We have proposed an addition to the outbuilding which will occur 2'-0" from the East property line. The outbuilding is situated 1' -0" from this same property line. The proposed location preserves the character of the structure and is in keeping with the layout of the entire property. EXHIBIT A *43 February 17, 1993 ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS To Whom It May Concern, As Owner of Lots K.L,M, Block 48, Aspen Township, also known as the Davis Waite house located at 234 West Francis Street, Aspen, Colorado, we authorize Charles Cunniffe Architects, 520 E. Hyman, Suite 301, Aspen, Colorado, 81611, (303) 925-5590, to represent our interests in the minor historic development of the aforementioned property. S incere*1 844-91 Mr. Quentin Vidor 925 Gibson Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 920-7768 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS Â· 520 EAST HYMAN AVENUE Â· ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Â· 303/925-5590 FAX 925-5076 P.2/8 MAR 01 '93 13:18 WHEELER SQ LAW APEEN EXHIBIT B k , ISSUED BY ~ Commonwealth; POLICY NUMBER Land Title Insurance Company 128-053556 OWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE SUBJECT 'CO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE THE EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE CONTAINED IN SCHEDULE B AND THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS, COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Pennsylvania corporation, herein called thÂ¢ Company. insures, as of Date of Policy sliown in Schedule A, against loss or damage, not exceeding thc Amount of Insurance stared in Schedule A, sustained or incurred by Ihc msured by reason of: 1. Title to thÂ© estate or interest described in Schedule A being vested orher than as stated therein; 2. Any detect in or lien or encwnbrance on the title. 3. Unmarketability of the title; 4- Lack of a right of uuiss to and from the land. The Company will also pay the costs. attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in defense of the title, as insured, but only to [he extent provided in the Conditions und Slipulations. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, COMMONWEALTH LAND 1~ITLE INSURANCE COMPANY has caused its corporate name and Kal to be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers, the Policy to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company. COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Atten: By: 1 8. 82 +1 91 94, 9 AL U Suretary Prendcat I . EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The fullowins malters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and tile Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fcca or expenses which arisc by reason of: 1. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (induding but not limited to building und zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (0 the occupancy, use, or cnjoyment of Ihe land; (ii) the charbictor, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter ereclcd on thÂ¢ land; (iii) a separation m ownership or a change in the dirnensions or area of thc land or I any parcel of which the land ts or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or tile effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the enent thal a nouce of the enforcement thereof or u notice ot a defect, 11Â¢Ii Or encumbrance rÂ¢sulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting thÂ¢ land has been recorded in Thc public records al Dutc of Policy, (b) Any governmental poliuc power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance reaulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the i.ind ha. boon re,ordcd in th: public ICCUTUS .11 baw of Policy. ~ 2. Rights of Â©mincnz domain unless notix of the exercise thereof has bccn recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any laking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of u purchaser for value without knowledge. 3. Defects, lions, encumbrances, adverse ClaimM or other matzers: (a) created. suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company, not recorded in the public record5 at D,lte of Policy, but known to the insurod claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by thc insured claimant prior to Thc date the insured claimant became an imured under thii policy; (c) resulting in no luÂ» or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent ta Date of Policy; or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have bccn sustained if the in*ured claimant had paid value for the estate or interest insured by this policy. n -- American Land Title Association Owner's Policy C 10-21-Sh Face Page Valid Only If Schedule A, B and Cover Arc Attached Form 1141-2 ORIGINAL MAR 01 '93 13:19 WHEELER SQ LAW APEEN# P.3/8 Luivl.4 Z Rul'J AND STIPULATIONS (c) Whenever the Company shall have brought an action or inierposccla c 1. DEFINITION OF TERMS. defense as required or permitted by the provisions of this policy, che Company may pursue any litigation to final <letermination by it courl of The following tenns when usÂ¢d in this policy mcan: competent jurisdiction and expressly reserves the right, in its sole discretion, (a) "insured": the insured named in Schedule A, and. subject to any to appeal from any adverse judgmenE or order. rights or defcnaci tho Company would have had against ihe named monfed, thase who succeed to the interest of the named insured by operation of law (d) In all cascs whcre this policy permits or requires the Compittly to distinguished from purchase including, but not limited zo, hoirs, prosecute or provide for thÂ¢ d:fcn:e of any action or proce.ting. the butccs, devisccs, survivors, personal reprecntativcs, nat of kin, or insured shall secure to lita Company the right to so prosecute or provide oratc or fiduciary successon defense m the action or proceadmg, and all appeals therein. and permit the Company to use, at its option, the name of the insurd for this purpose. h) "Insured claimant": an insured claiming lost or damage. Whenever requested by the Conipany, ihc insured. al thÂ© Cumpany'i (c) -knowledge" or "known": actual knowledge, no[ constructive expense, shall give the Company all reasonable aid (i) in uny action or knowledge or notice which may be impured zo an insured by reason of the proc=ling, securing evidence, obtaining witnessÂ¢*, prosecuting or public records as defined in Ihis policy or any other records which impart defending the action or proceeding, or cffecling settlement. and (10 m any constructive notice of matters affecting tho land. other lawful act which in thc opinion of the Company may be necessary of (d) "land": the land described or referred to in Schedule A, and desirable zo establish the title to the estate or interest as insured. 11 the improvements affixed thereto which by law constitute rcal property. Thc Company is prejudked by the failure: of the insured to furnish thÂ¢ required terin "land" docs not include any propÂ¢rty beyond the lines of the area cooperation, the Company's obligations to the itisurtul under Lhe pohey dacribed or referred to in Schedule A, nor any right , title, inIcrest, ejuite shall terminate, including, any liability or obligation Lo del'end, prosecute, or or easement in abutling Strects, road:. avenues, alleys, lanes, ways or continue any lingation, wilh regard to the matter or InatterS requiring Such waterways, but nothing herein shall modify or limit the extent to which a cooperation, right of a=ss to and trom Thc land ]5 insurcd by this policy. 5. PROOF OF LOSS OR DAMAGE. M "mortgagc": mortgage. dÂ¢cd of trust trust dced, or other security In addition to und ufter the notices required under Section 3 of these i 05 t rum,nt. Conditions and Stipulations hiwe been provided the Company, a proof of loss or damage signed and sworn to by the insured claimant shitti he (f) "eublic records'% records established undcr @tatc statutes aL Datd of Policy lor the purpose of imparting constructive notice of mattery relating furnished to the Company within 90 days after the insured Â©!aimant shall to real properly to purchasers for value and without knowledge. With axcrtain ihc lUcia giving rik to the loss Or damage, 1 hc proof Of lobs or respect to Section 1 (a) (iv) of the Exclusions From Cover*e, "public damage shall describe the defect in. or lien or encumbrance on the ti[le, or other matter insured against by rhis policy which con,1!tutes the bubiS Of records" shall also include environmental protection liens tilcd in thc loss or damag: and shall statc, to the extent possible, the basis of records of the clerk of the United States district Court for the district in calculating the amount of the loss or damage. 1 f the Company is prejudiced which Ihe land is located. by the failure of the insured claimant to provide the required proof of loss (D "unmarkctability of the title": an alleged or apparent matter affecting or damage, the Company's obligations to Lhe insured under [he poljcy shall the title zo tha land, not excluded or excepted from coverage, which would terminate, including any liabilfty or obligation to delend, pfosecute, or entitte a purchaser of the estate or interest described in Schedule A to be continue any litigation, with regard to the matier or Inalters requiring such released from the obligation to purchase by Virme of a contractual proof of loss or damage. condition requiring the delivery of marketable titlc. In addition, the insured claimant may reasonably bc requircd lo submit 2. CONTINUATION OF INSURANCE AFTER CONVEYANCE to examination under oath by any authonind represt'nlative of the Company and shull produce for examination. insp:ction and 0pying, sit OF TITLE. such reasonable times und places as may be designated by any authorized ThÂ¢ coveragc of this policy shall 4.ontinue in force as of Date of Policy in roprcscntativÂ¢ of the Company, 311 records. books, led*:rs. checks, favor ot' an inburod only *0 lon& 41* Lhc insured retains an estate Or interest corrcspondcncc and momorunda, whether bearing a date batorc or after in the land, or holds un indebtedness secured by a purchase trioney Datc of Policy, which reasonably pertain to the low ot daningc. Further, if rtgage given by u purchaser from che insured. Of only so long as the requested by any authoriked representative of tlic Company , the insured red shall have liability by reason of covenants of warranty made by the claimant shall grant its permission, in writing, for any authorized red in any transfer or convcyance of the estate or interest. This policy reprCSÂ¢ntativc of the Company to examine , inspect lind copy all recoids, 11 not continue in force in fuvor of any purchaser from the insured of books, ledgers, checks, correspondence and memoranda in the custody or either m an estate of interest in the land. or (ii) an indcbtedncss secured by control of a third party, which reasonably pertain to the Ing or damage. a purchase money mortgage given to the insured. All information dÂ¢signated as confidential by the insured claimant provided to the Company pursuant to this Section shill not be disclosed to others 3. NOTICE OF CLAIM TO BE GIVEN BV INSURED CLAIMANT. unless, in the reasonable judgcment of the Company. it is necessary in the administration ot' the claim. Failure of the insured claimant to subinit Ibr The insured shall notify the Company prompily in writing (i) in case of examination under oath, produce orher reasonably requested information any litigation as set forth in Section 4(a) below. Cii) in case knowledge shall come to an insured hereunder of any claim of title or interest which is or grant permislion to GÂ¢cure reasonably necessary inforniation from third advÂ¢[sc to tho title to thc estate or interest. as insured, and which might parties as required in this paragraph shall lermin.Ile any liability of the cllusc loss or damage for which thÂ© Company may be tiabiÂ¢ by virtue of Company under this policy as to tha[ claim. this policy, or (iii) if litic to the estak or interest, as insured, is rejected as 6. OPTIONS TO PAY OR OTHERWISE SETTLE CLAIMS; unmarketable, If prompt notice Sliall not be given to the Company, then as TERMINATION OF LIABILITY. to thÂ© injurcd all liability 4 thÂ© Company qhall torminatÂ© with rÂ©gard to In case of a claim under this policy, the Company shall have the the matter or matters fur which prompt notice is required; provided, however, that failure to notify the Company shall in no casc prejudice thC following options: righti of any insured under this policy unless the Company shall be (a)To Pay or Tender Payment of the Amount of Insurunct:. prejudiced by the failure and then only to the extent of tho prejudice. To pay or tender payment of thc amount of insurance uncle:r this policy together with any costs, attorneys' fees and expense* incurrcd by 4. DEFENSE AND PROSECUTION OP ACTIONS; DUTY OF the insu,ed claimant, wht,h were authorized by the Company. up to the INSURED CLAIMANT TO COOPERATE. time of payment or tender of payment and which the Company is obligated to pay. (a) Upon written request by the insured und subject to the options Upon the exercise by the Company of this option. all liability und contained in Section 6 of these Conditions und Stipulations. tho Company, obligalions to The insured under this policy, other than to niakc the at ju own cost and without unreasonable delay. Shall providc for the payment required, shall terminate, including any liability or ohligution to defenâ€¢C of an insured in litigation in which any third party asserts a claim defend. prosetute, or conlinue any litigation, and the policy Shall be adverse to tha title or interest as insured, but only as to those stated causes surrendered to the Company for cancellation. of acrion alleging a defect, lien or encumbrance or other mat[er insured (b) To Pay or OthÂ¢rwise SelllÂ¢ With Parties Olhar than thÂ© hisured or apinst by this policy. The Company shall have the right to select counsel With the Insured Claimant. 01 its choice (subject to the right of the insured to object for reasonable (i) to pay.or otlicrwiw *cttlc with other parties for or iii the n,une cause) to represent the insured aS !O those stated causes of action and shall of an insured claim.int any claim insured against undÂ¢r this policy, logÂ¢ther not be liable for and will not pay the fccs of any other counsel. The wilh any costs. attorneys' fees and expenwes incurred by the insured Company will not pay any fee;, coÂ£,6 aT exeenses incurred by the insured claimant which were authorized by the Company up to lime of puyinent in the defense of those causes of action which allege matters not insured and which the Company is obligated to pay; of against by this policy. (ii) to pay or otherwise scttle wi[h the insured claimant the loss or damage providÂ©d for und,r this policy, together with any costs, attornÂ¢ys' (b) The Company shall have the right, at its own cost, to institute and fucs and expenses incurred by the insured claimant which were authorized secute any action or proceeding or to do any other act which in its by the Company up to the tim: of payment and which the Company is ion niay be necessary or desirable 0 Â¢5tablish the tizle IO the estate or obligaled to pay. rest, as insured, or to prevent or reduce loss or damage to the in5urcd. Upon the exercise by the Company of either of Lhe oplions provided 1-or 2 Company may take any appropriate action under the terms of this in paragraphs (b)(i) or 00, thÂ© Company's obligations to the insuNd undur pollcy, whether or not 11 shall bc liable hereunder, and shall not thereby this policy for thc claimed iosi or damage, other than ihc payments concede liability or waive any provision of this policy. [f the Company required to be inade, shall terminate, including uny liability or obligation lo shall excroise its rights under this paragraph, it shall do go diligently. detend. prosecuic or continue uny litigation. Cooditions and Sfipulwtions Continued inside Cover Â¥ 8-ll41-2 . MAR 01 '93 13:20 WHEELER bu LHW Hrt-cri r. 4, o I )-7.50 #349697 10/15/92 12:50 Rec $10.00 BK 691 PG 525 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $117.50 0 71 WARRANTY DEED Ad 71 - O 6-7 A THIS DEED, made this ll- day of , 1992 m 84 DJ _, between John Hall, whose address is 1 0 gri, 107 Â«er,. 11Â» EgATH 20 , O 4 P< (IA d . 4.. D<150 1 . ("Grantor" ), and Quentin 8 5 --AVidor, whose address is 2 Upper Hook Road, Rhinebeck, New York, w Â¢4 91 12572 C "Grantee"): 9 U WITNESSETH, That the Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars and other good and valuable consideration r- to the Grantors in hand paid by the Grantee, the receipt and L sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted, * bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, :Â§ bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the Grantee, his 6 -- successors and assigns forever, all the real property, together z with improvements, if any, situate, lying and being in Pitkin 0 1\-2 County, Colorado, described as follows: 'R f . L LU LOTS K, L, AND M, BLOCK 48, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and Â£ r "' 6 appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and 5-qI the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, 0--g issues and profits thereof; and all the estate, right, title, - interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the Grantor, either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises above bargained and described with the appurtenances unto the Grantee, his successors and assigns forever. And the Grantor, for himself, his heirs, executors, and administrators, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the Grantee, his successors and assigns that, at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents, he 24 is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, U c~ in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful -0 authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from 1 all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or l nature so ever, EXCEPT: ~bl., 1. 343,% 14*%/ /44** 94144%41/*A /*t*# t#*N,/ /4*09*41/ M#40#MI***Nollill g.**/419 / 1*/ Al-1*Y /**Â©Al#**l %4*/1,1&%**/ An /00144* / AM#41#M l.*/ Mic#Â¥ 1 wcfy //li 9*lam ;*9)*7*4/ /4***Â¥9/*AMUÂ¥ 10*/4 /j/ 1992 Taxes due and payable in 1993. 2. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deeds from the City of Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Page 85 and Book 59 at Page 122 providing as follows: "That no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws." 3. Encroachments as shown on Survey from Alpine Surveys, Inc. dated September 24, 1992 as Job No. 91-65. The Grantor -shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the aboverbargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the Grantee, his successors and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural , the plural the singular, and the use of any gender shall be applicable to all gender. Signed and delivered this L 1 day of 1992. john Her\\ - - -- 11 12.36182: Transfer Declaration Received R# 349697 MAR 01 '93 13:21 WHEELER SQ LAW APEEN il. 3/ 6 4- *349697 10/15/92 12:50 Rec $10.00 BK 691 PG 526 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $117.50 STATE OF Ca li (or olq ) )SS. COUNTY OF foÂ·s /6,4 jqeld) 301 The foregoing Warranty Deed was acknowledged before me this P day of 00+01Â£<- , 1992, by John Hall. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires : QI,36 1<73 /47/0,//9, - Notari Pb/lit l 9 < j OFFICIAL SEAL ~k CHRISTY LGOWDY K 0.1 Neâ€¢:r, p.â€¢homalomia I~ 9 08 A}406628 GOUNr, 8 r 1 . 1 i I 4 -- 3'i' 1 ------ i- i , --1 :11 1 di 17-1-1 -1-1144- 0 \ t. E ,1 , 1-il - - ... - 1 Ini- il- 1 ' -i_ _:1 1.5:'~ - 2.n:!Floor - 11 1 1 31- lili --- L 11 -1 1 - 0 6 -- ------ - 1 KIU - - - Â»2:FE Al-AW lori 1\11 - 1,- oIl H 1 \1 n 11 - 2 1 -_ 1 1 1 -Â« .- 11 \0 d 11 -- - - - 7~4---111- 2-2-779 1 4 -LI/>1 -1 1 1 1 ---1 16144 1-- 1- 1 *i-fg<_1_11_01 2 111 - 2 _ 1 7-: -27- 1 ' ip 1 1 --1 ----11 1 1 . 1 41 --------- =3 /' -I--1 ! -- 1.1 - -- - -- - -Lutu---- - - ---1 1-- -4 61(JEST C0TTA611 e - ..... -- - - 2 -- i /) g 1-- 4 1 N 3 1-- 2 -1 11 1 -1--1 ! . 1 2 2 1 11 1 1 1 11 11 --1 1 ---- i j ------ -~- -1 11 -f 1 Lf IiI --- - - ~ri~ 11 4 ' - ___~ _- - - ------- - Â· ,n o J 1 - .- --- .-- --1 - - ---- 1 - 1 -1 I 1,-1 156[1 ELEN//KT I 01-4 1 -I-I--j-F, 1 1 -1 -- -1-11 1 1 1 1 , 1. -1 1 1 ------ 1 -- - 2-l 1 1 1 29--1 -1 -------------- ---- ----------- - ----- - - 11 1. 1 1 3 -- . -1--------- 1 1 1 1 1 1 47 0 -il 1 3 - -- - -- 11 1 1% 1 -- - - 0 0 1 - ---- - 1 ZI= --1 --------5- - .Ill 1 4 â€¢l - --1 - 1 1 1 -F 1 1 7 . --- PE19--1 fitev5â‚¬rlo N----22Â¢992:P-*46== 11 Ill 1 1 1-- 1 . 1 1 1 L 1 - - - - 90{frlf BL-*\hÂ«FION ._ .-- . _-.... 11 1 , 1 1 11':.1 1 1 1 1 1;1 1 1 11 1 /ill' 11!1 illill 1/1 - 1 1 Li I i . // / 1 j. .4 - 4 j \.1 i .1/0< 1 1 ill -- 1 1 1 , 7 $ 1 1 1 \1 i NOIL.kv/Â«14 MAR 01 '93 13:22 WHEELER SO LAN APEEN ~ CommonwealthÂ® Land Title Insurance Company SCHEDULE A-OWNER'S POLICY SE NUMBER DATE OF POLICY AMOUNT OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER CT-6929C2 10/15/92 @ 12:50 P.M. $ 1,175,000.00 128-053556 1. NAME OF INSURED: QUENTIN VIDOR 2. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LAND HEREIN AND WHICH IS COVERED BY THIS POLICY Is: IN FEE SIMPLE 3- THE ESTATE OR INTEREST REFERRED TO HEREIN IS AT DATE OF POLICY VESTED IN: QUENTIN VIDOR 4. THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS POLICY IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: LOTS K, L, AND M, BLOCK 48, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. D-l Al_>:U 1. *L no 601 E. HOPKINS AVE. PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. Countersigned Authorizeâ‚¬jAgent ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (303) 925-1766 THE POLICY NUMBER SHOWN ON THIS SCHEDULE MUST AGREE WITH THE PREPRINTED NUMBER ON THE COVER SHEET. Form 4100 - MAR 01 '93 13:22 WHEELER SQ LAW APEEIN r 7 . r-, r.1,0 ~ CommonwealthÂ® Land Title Insurance Company SCHEDULE B-OWNERS ASE NUMBER DATE OF POLICY POLICY NUMBER PCT-6929C2 10/15/92 @ 12:50 P.M. 128-053556 THIS POLICY DOES NOT INSURE AGAINST LOSS OR DAMAGE BY REASON OF THE FOLLOWING: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, enchroachments, any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof, water rights, claims or title to water. 6. Taxes for the year 1992 not yet due or payable. 7. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deeds from the City of Aspen recorded in Book 23 at Page 240, Book 59 at Page 85 and Book 59 at Page 122 providing as follows: "That no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws". EXCEPTIONS NUMBERED 1, 2, 3&4 ARE HEREBY OMITTED. Form 4100 MAR 01 '93 13:22 WHEELER SQ LAW APEEMONS AND STIPULALIONS P.8/8 (Continued) 7. DETERMINATION, EXTENT OF LIABILITY AND COINSURANCE. (b) When liability and the exion[ d loss or darnage has heen definilely This policy is a contract of indemnity against actual monetary 1055 or fixed in accordance with thesc Conditions and Stipulations, the loss or damase sustained or incurred by the insured claimant #ho has suffered los <lamage shall be payable within 30 days th:reafter. or damage by reason of matters insured against by this policy and only to 13. SUBROGATION UPON PAYMENT OR SETTLEMENT. tent herein described. (a) Thc Company's Right of Subrogation. he liability of the Company under this policy shuil not exceed the Whenever the Company shall have settled and paid a claim linder this f policy, att right of subrosi,lion shall ve* in the Company unaffected by (i) Â¢hc Arnount of Insurance stated in Schedule A; or, any act of [he insured clainiant. (ii) the difference between thc value of the insured estate or interest as The Company shall be subrogaidd to und be entitled zo all rights and insured and th, valuc of the insured estate or interest subject 10 Ihe defect, reinedics which the insured claintanT would have had aguinst any person or lien or encumbrance insured against by this policy. property in respect to the claim had this policy not bion ISSUCd. 11 (b) In thÂ¢ event the Amount of Insurance stated in Schedule A at Lhe fequcsted by the Company, the Insured claimant #1011 tranbfur lu ihe Date of Policy is less than 80 purcent of the value of the insured estate or Company all rights und remedies against any per-son or property nceesS,Wy intorat of the fun consideration paid for the land, whichever N less, or if in order to perfect this right of subrogation. The insured clailliant shall subsequent to the Date of Policy an improvement ili crected on the land peiÂ·mit the Company to sue, compromise or settle in the name of the which inercascs thÂ¢ value of the insured estate or interest by at least 20 insured claimant and to 411Â¢ the flame of the insured claimant in any percent ovor thc: Amount Of Insurance stated m Schedule A. then thisi trimsaction or litigation involving these rights or retnedigs. Policy is subject to the following If a payment on account of a claim daes not fully cover ilie loss of Lhe (ij where no subscquant improvement hus been made, as to any parhal insurÂ¢d claimant, th: Company shall he Qubrogated to these rights and loss, thc Company shall only pay the loss pro rata in the proportion thar remedics in the proportion which the Company's p:ty,nent bears to thu Ihc amounl 01 insurance at Dutc of Policy bcars to the total value ot- the whole amount of the loss. insured cstatc or interest al Date of Policy: or If loss should result from any act of the insured claimant, as sitted (ii) wherc a subtequerit improvement has been made, as to any partiat above, that act shall not void this policy, but the Company, in Lhat event, loss, tho Company shall only pay the loss pro rata in the propoftion thut shall bc required to pay only ihut part of any losses in.ured .tgainst by ihis 120 percent ot the Amount of Insurance stated in Schedule A bcars to the policy which shall exceed the amount, if any, 1041 to the C,impany by num of the Amount of fnsurance stated in Schedule A and the arnount reason of the impairment by Ihc insured claimant 01' [lie Compuny's right expended for the improvement. of subrogation. The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to costs, attorneys' fees (b) The Company's Rights Against Non-insured Obligers. and expenses for which the Company is liabh: under this policy, and shall The C:ompuny's right of subrogation again#t non-iiiwured obligors *hal! only apply to that portion of any loss which exceeds, in the aggregate; !0 exist and shall include, without limitalion. the right.~ of the msillÂ·ea ti, percent 01 the Amount of Insurance stated in Schedulc A. of ' or hotids. Indemnities. guaranties, ollier polic,c, Inourance (c) 'the Compatty will pay only those costs, attorneys' 1-des and expenses ni)twithstunding any lerms or con<titions contained in Illose iii,Â·lruilicilts incurred in accordancÂ© with SccUm 4 of thÂ©se Conditions and Stipulations. which provide for subrogation rights by reason of this policy, 8. APPORTIONMENT, 14. ARSITRATION If the land d(Wribcd in Schedule .4 consists of two or more parÂ©cls Unless prohibited by applicable law, cither tlic Comp:Iny or Ihe insured which are not used us a single sire, and a loss is established affectin; one or may demand arbitration pursuant to tho Title Insurance Arbitration Rules more of the purcels but not all. the la,s shall be computed and settled on u of the American Arbitration Absodiation. Arbitrable matters nay include, pro rata bas,y us if the amount of inturance under thi, policy was divided hut are not limited to, any controversy or claim between the Company und r*la as lo the valuc on Date of Policy of each separate parcel to the the insured urising Out 01 or rclatifig to this policy, iltly jervice of the Â·, exclusive of any improvements made subsequent to Date of Policy. Coinpany in qunnection with ils issuancÂ¢ or the breach of u policy u liability or value has otherwise been agreed upon as to cuch parcel provision or other obligarion. All urbitrable mitters when the Amount of Â¢ Company and the insured at the time of the issuaticÂ¢ of this Policy Insurance is S 1,000,000 or Icss shall be arbitrated al tile option Of either the and shown by an express stalentent or by an cndorsemenE aUaGhcd to this Company or the insured. At! arbitrable rn:~tter, when thÂ¢ Amount of policy. Insurance is in excess of SI,000,000 shall be arbitrated only when agreed to 9. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. by both thÂ© Company and the insund, Arbitration pursuant ta thi: paticy and under the Rules in cl'feet on rhe date the demand for arbitration i~ (a) li thÂ¢ Company establishes the title, or removes the alleged delket, made or, at the option of the insured, the Rula in effect lit Date of Policy lien or encumbrance, or cures {hc lack of a right of =49 lo or from thÂ¢ shall be biriding upon the partieS, 1-11Â¢ award mity include 21!tormeys' ic:b land, or cures Ihe claim of unmarketability of title, ull as insured, in a only if the law# 01 the state in which the land is localed permit 2 court to reasonably diligent manner by any method. including litigation lind the award attorneys' tees to a prevailing. party. Judgment upon the award compktion of any appeals therefrom, it shall have fully performed its rendered by the Arbitratorls) inay bc entered in uny cona having obligationk with respect to that matter and shall not be liable for any loss or damugc causcd thereby, jurisdiction Ihercof, Thc law of the situs of the land shall apply to an arbitration under Ihc (b) rn the event of any litigation, including litigation by the Company T-it lÂ¢ Insurance Arbitration Rules, or with the Company's consent, the Company shall have no hability for loss or damai;e until there has been J final deternunalion by * court of A copy of the Rules may be obtained from thÂ¢ Compatly Upl'fi 1'441,1#1. competont jurisdiction. and disposition o< all appeals therefrom, adverse zo 15. LIABILITY LIMITED TO THIS POLICY: POLICY ENTIRE the tirl, a, insured. CONTRACT. (c) Thc Company shall not be liuble for loss or damage lo any insured fur liability volunwrily aawned by tho insured in settling any Gluint or suit (4 This policy together with al! cndorsements, if any, attached hÂ¢rti) without thÂ¢ prior wrillen consent of thÂ© Company, hy the Company is the enlife policy and comract bctwcen the insured aud the Company. In interpreting any provision of- this Policy, this policy shall 10. REDUCTION OF INSURANCE; REDUCTION OR TERMINATION be construcd as a whole. OF LIABILITY. Ab) Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, All payments under this policy, except payments made for costs, und which artics out of tho Ntalus of Ow title to the estate ar wteres! attorneys' fecs and expenses, shall red,lic the amount of the insurance pro covered hereby or by any aclion asserting such claitn. shall be restricted to ihis policy. tdntO. (c) No arnendmeni of or endorsement 10 IMS policy 98 & m.,du 11. LIABILITY NONCUMULATIVE. except by a writing endorsud hcrcon of ultaÂ¢hcd herclo sigited by ciliter the n (he insured acquireb fille [0 th, Â¢wtale or intefc:$[ in quistaction 01 thC President, u Vice President, the Secret,try, an Aihist,int SÂ¢*Rtury. or indebledness sccured by tlle insured mortgage.or any part thcreof, ilis express- validating officer or authorized signatory ot the Company, ly' understood that the amount of nburance under ihig policy shall he reduced by any amount f he Company may pay under any policy inhuring a mortgage [o 16. SEVERABILITY. which exceplion is taken in Schedule B Or to which [he insured has agreed. anuincd, of taken subject, or which is hereuiter executed by an inAured and In the event any provision of the policy is held invalid or unenfurceable which is a charge or lien on the estate or interest described or referred to in under applicable law, the policy shall be deeml:d not to include th,1 provi- ' - cdule A, and thC amount so paid shall be deemed a payment under this hion and at! other provisions shall remain in full force und effect, 17. NOTICES, WHERE SENT. PAYMENT OF LOSS. All notices required to be given the Compuny und any statement in, (2) No payment shall be,nade without producing this policy for endorsement writing required co be furnished the Company shall include the liumber 01 of the payment unte5s the policy has beetilos[ or destroyed, in which cate proof this policy and shall be addressed to Commonwealth Land Title Insurance of lobs or destru,tion shall bc furnished [0 che sansfac[Ion of the Company. Company, Eight Penn Cciater, Philadelphia, Penn:iylvania 19103-2198. MM 1 American Land Titlu Association Owner's Policy (10-21Â·87) Cover Page Valid Onlv If Pace Page. Schedules A and B Are Attached EXHIBIT C 51. ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS u park 7 5 1 40 442 \â‚¬.4 2 %%it. + i /0,0 % 9 In V~w Dr E. ~ Creek ,Ad -59 0 8-4 9 064 4* Snow unny Ct .C S'Irre *%44 90 4 4 2 1 Institute 1 N j , Hunt. 4/ For, Md Music 0 - Â· OJ CT LOCATION ~ * Tent Halam 4 Not every street or road is LaU * W ANC S named on maps or listed in street guides. Construcbon of imp streets and roads may be in .i"%&*Re/~A - #4 0% E I U r VIIâ€¢ S' G progress in certain areas. Don AWK di ~-~~ 2 e $ f i i RIc, St Smuggler Mtn Rd Aspen 0 1 ex al St 5 P : 2, A Pit S *4 Mosenal %16 # 2 + 4 . P.th a . 4 9 n' Se 1 e - 44. Mall Lar,//4 H J44 . 444 4 P > 1 1 /-Al u summn 92'k * blf' F + ' 0{ VICINITY MAP : 4 44/ - Cry:tal L.h' Ad r .. ...... CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS Â· 520 EAST HYMAN AVENUE Â· ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Â· 303/925-5590 FAX 925-5076 Creek f lu cf*f ALLEY BLOCK 48 }<xm i[)Â· 678 Fl BAR 4 CAP *--i. . r ' N LS 9018 3 S * 5 75'61 ' il" E 900 ''17//fool 1//Uff .0 I I LCTEIC. 11[ ill' / .0 1:11, !f ./'i/'fll''i '10-7 14 FLOOR DECK / 2 to 11111,11 -1 LOT M ///4 .'>Â»/4 O 4*3532~1//25532 Alr. 1.Â·to. - -1 BA515 OF 6EARIMG - FOUND MorIUMENTS A.5 51-IOWN 19 0 </ 6 LOT L 2 0 , SURVEYOR S CERTIFICATE: 2/25>~ 11 6 ' MADE UNDER MY SUPERVI51011 ON 5EF[EMBEK 18,1991, 1 : I HEREN CERTIFY THAr THIS MAP ACCURNELY DEPICI-5 A SURVEY 1 OF LOT K, L,M BLOOK 48, CITY OF ePEN, COLOR;00. THE TWO 5TORY FRAME HOU3Â£ WAS FOUMP TO BE 11 liu LOCATED ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BOUNDARÂ¥ LINES OF THE ABOVE DE 5CRIBED PROPERTY. THE LOCATION AND v- --3 I ,> f# 1111'11' ./ DI PlrlicIONS Or ALL BUILDINGS IMPROVEMT50 , ' VUEMEN-Tb, RIGHT-OFÂ·WAY IN'EVIDENCE OR KNOWN 12 0 COVERED COrIe i ' D ME, AND ENCROACHMENT.5 BY OR OM THE THE5E . CRAAL SPACE Ull R r 5-loop PREMIJES /\RE ACCURATELY 51-10 Wri ah! . :9%~:::Vis.:.'.. ~.... ~ 3. 1 1 ' / i W F /O. H. 10/ // , ' /~04'1,1 51012.T FRAAES.f r P///"5'/4/34<4~, : b),, ., ,. ,~5667~(4~~OA16~/781// ' APINE SURVEYS. INC. BY. , 1 ~ 4,1~7. - \\1 tfffoff/f fÂ«ffÂ·:JÂ¢ - 5[FTEMBER 18, 1991 L 5, 2 / / /POUNÂ« i // ir/044 ~ r 116 10'I i 1 4# Del'"//tr r-.Â·/, 1 I NOTE: PITKIM COUNTY POLICY * FCT-5781 WAS USED PREPARING LOT 1< , T HIS SURVEY. N.,â€¢ M , , r , . FOUND M 75' 09' 11"W 90.0 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAr A VISUAL IM5 PECTION WAS PERFORMED CITY MONUMENT oriDER rlÂ¥ SUFFAVISION O. SEPrEMBER 21 ,/991 OF TEIE ABOVE DE5C-Rte ED PU)PERT-Â·r. NO CHArÂ·16Â£5 24-RE FOunD EVOEPT- AS 5,16 t., 1 1 ALPINE SURVEYS Inc BYâ€¢ CE '-:5(lf FRANCIS STREET tt PIE hle,ER 29 . $991 MOTE: PIT-KIM COUNTY POLICY 110 POT--6919(2 EO IN PREPARite l'HIS jUR.VEÂ¥. MI I 4-' 50' 49" E I EXHIBIT E EXISTING CONDITIONS 1 1 Â»2 1* - U-r 3 =t 14 ft -ti- -*3 -I h Â» 1 e X N t aoL SA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Itt- 9 . hÂ»-41 ~6 OLTT BUIL-PINq MI, rv<. M.â‚¬ 014 â‚¬ 9:5" lilill J -- 15412 BaPPLOM + 2 F4501*rr f i O (4 1 1 p -- ,7/C-Â»er- \ r. --*#PI~rt * 3 1 1- . 1 1 4 | - t.*4,:a. mectacz:rf 1 1 3*R t-- --1 /\ f 1 AM tâ‚¬f RED'2*1 \13 5 1 8 f M -4 f (PFrIA*M~*m. 11 -- 0 D 0 1 0- I i 19 > 41 00 1 I \ - 1 1 - 1 --11 1167 A Forl 4 1- i - 1 . 1 F.rÂ©*1 - MATE+L 1 1-1146 A , Erer Mon)44 91179EiT- 100 -- h/\A ion - f LI HE A / el-r!Â©r FS'l'W- A---ft ,*S' 91-er- U F 04 **0 I 1 9 <--% r i -4 t- U 4 1 [1 1 1 P MirÂ·4 3 ~ 7' erer up -1- v I 1 5 - 1I\ 11-F (Ap >i j W â‚¬7" 1 1 'f 71- 7" Sme UP , -1- r - - Alv IMA Vivr< 1- - il-- -I "7Â»K i FIA. PRAD# - 1 1 f=120 MT- #Mr,tr 4-- -- --1 1-1Â»114 p Loo R p lÂ»+1' 89-CO-H- -- 7 1Â»121---ZE-luv-1.~--947'-t4 drj-Z; . -11. -1 W=emaqI gls'â€¢W r . -1 1 ,4 T â‚¬* Waoid#4- i 1 \ -~'21.1.1>/ 41- 4 Jr , / 1-1-LI',- 101 1 / 1 Ck L - - 14 1.laNdgd 1~ ~ 1 4% .KIAk:*il 4th,4 14 lili - I 1 9 0 - =@$*=O-9.13 - 1- --- - --- 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1/ 1. . - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i .*~0--- 944 1Â« MIA [tf.*AS-g- ~ A-LIt'-01. /4.**Ir --- - f -2*5rMÂ·-71&mae:M -f f 40%.1 i 0 2 40 F- Lcz:PFL Fl,Â»1 - (31 JEST DoÂ»<:36 '411 = Ila 1/ 1 11 1 ;1 '1 'i'24-1 11 1 1 111 1: : !1 --1 0 1 1111 1 i 11 1 13 0 1 1 1 i 1 11 1 111! 111 t, '41Â·1: 4 li 1 1 1 :1.1/ 1 It ../ i - 1, 1 , . /\\ 11 i - 1 - 0 1 E d II 11 1.-j 71 - 71 '1 ~t Il ; 1 , 1 11 1 11 1 ! , - r- 1 .1: 11 ' 1 111 k, - 1 1 1 7- 1 111 r -- 1 1 1 1 \\3 0 -17Â»7 -~ ~ 1 1 i t C L 1 \ 11 1 1 1, , 1 -1 \ 1 11 2 1 11 1 /'--- \1 '' .-. 1 f L 1 \P - 1 1 t' lili 1 11: 1 f 1 1 11 / F 1 1 11 : 1 . 1 1 11 1 1'' 11 1 217 1 1 1 1 . 111 1 4 - : 1 1,1 1 , ING ILv/\Fa12 H.Lzle H - CARRIAGE HOUSE ADDITIC)NS At-1-1EY W M W 1 11, $ r ----r 1 -I . I <%-1 1 4/ 1 4 j a r mt-11 4 24--21 0â€ž ii "1 11'UE'll L 9- 1 -4 1 :=91 + - -,- 1 lillill - 1 1 --...=1 i-,__1~ 1 /,1/ %Â¢ 1 01- 14 bor 11 - -. 1-~ M 2- 1 . ;'|14 :f &Â·/'$ y.. FÂ»lei 9 %9#T 71 051:k 1935 j 32>23& CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS A.St WL 'P'â€¢1~64 6 520 E. HYMAN Â· SUITE 301 ASPEN, CO 81611 Â· TELE: 303/925-5590 FAX: 303/925-5076 300 W. COLORADOAM Â· BO(2863 Â· TEUURIDE, CO8143512Â£ 303/728-3738Â·FAX: 303/728-6722 26, rt, 440"bo Â©COPYWRITE 1992. CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 427 4 F 4 2- 1 1 90 1 9,4 *4* 41 - i - 1,6 "97:30,7.-7*...4'Mt/fee*57//#24&/~ ' <IrÂ¥#CH.V '4*.24Ui&-.*... - i .r ./ Â· , *4,/7 '*,2. .94*10*94084.1/ i # : JV i ic- -- 3 V Y 44 1 -1-1 9-5 I VIPOK SC~12=146* CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS /1. 520 E. HYMAN Â· SUITE 301 Â· ASPEN, CO 81611 Â· TELE: 303/925.5590 FAX 303/925-5076 1,+ 14. pxrdle 300 W. COLORADOAVE Â· 80(2863 , TELLURIDE. CO81435Â·TEUE303/728-3738Â·FAX 303/728-6m /8 Â© COP-RITE 1992. CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCH[TECTS __ 0**, COU)~44Â©0 3 2 - ------* --4 mi . 1 ,f 1 1 $-+ 1 -1 Alm Â·- . 1 1 1 1 . 1 - '-3 7 - *4 *Flort A-A 4 1 ! =Ir. C 7 1 -t - J <<f I %.il- 1 1 r \ , iJ f W 1 - 1 11 1 ofl i 1 1 1 E- 1 Uv 1 4- i 53 5 1 e------- -1 4 C-1 VICÂ¥212- 12#61 =PACE- ~CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS I. 520 E. HYMAN Â·SUITE 301 Â· ASPEN, CO 81611 Â· TELE, 303/925-5590 Â· FAX: 303/925-5076 2 94 1.4.- PM'diC;19:2 300 W COLORADOAL , 80(2863 Â· TELLURIDE, (081435 TELE. 303/728-3738Â·FAX 303/728-6722 ija Mipath ) CoW,3,â‚¬k) Â©COPAMME 1 992 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS /.1 1 1 1 :iii U 1 1 )141Â· ---1~ -- - 9 1 0 ~< SACTnof A-A *IN = 0 = VIDOM- Â«GIPS'Â©13 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS il. 520 E. HYMAN Â· SUITE 301 - ASPEN, CO 81611 TELE: 303/925-5590 , FAX: 303/925-5076 2,4 IN, F*.ttls 300 W. COLORADOAVE , Â¤2863 Â· TELLUBDE, CO81435Â·mt,Â£303/728-3738 FAX:303/728-6722 /8 Ae#14 , DAâ‚¬$12â€¢00 O COPYWRITE 1992 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS Â«U Eliel 'llu=4 R ~* Chnn 11 ; 111 1 '111'.1 El 1 \ \ 4-t ~31 k i i\\ i 11 0-1- i 1 1 -9-4 1 , 1 ' 9.t . 4-0 L ,Z m In 7t- elli /$ 2 j 1 ......= 9 == i 8-'C)" ., 1% ~ 7'L & p 4 NIS. \ cf-..r- 1 1 Fi 0 tEl-1=PLU '0 1 20 1 1i - fl 0.0 L EXIST/464 810133<241 % 2 v' 206 )#6 1 .aplds# CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS /4. 520 E. HYMAN Â· SUITE 301 - ASPEN. CO 8161 1 TELE: 303/925-5590 - FAX 303/925-5076 2bt 14. P~Pe- 1 S 300 W. COLORADO AVE Â· BOX 2863 - TELLURIDE, CO 81435 TEE 303/728-3738 FAX: 303/728-6722 *43 AGrBM, 4,8-ele.,po Â© COPYWRITE ]992. CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS J.193 arva Ret OVE Ed><1 T. OlÂ»1, 4 -- P \A 11% - \\4 70-7 4 . .\ li . ~ h ..lu 4-4 ----- f1 1 U - 1 lit %\\ 1 .' - J.4-=J I 1 1 I 4 /,f i m I 1 r f W 294 1 t 1/1 11 j 'j 4 meu . E><IST' kler 31)1|,PlhÂ·161 , ADDU ' \/ 1 D O S * 61 D ef c / * CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 520 E. HYMAN Â· SUITE 301 , ASPEN, CO 81611 TELE. 303/925-5590 FAX 303/925-5076 1 M Ul. P"*440 5 300 W. COLORADOAVE. Â· Â¤2863 Â· TELLURIDE. CO81435Â·TELE 303/728-3738Â·FAX 303/728-6722 -M&44$0 Â©COPYWRITE 1992. CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 4 096:4191 +LatM *igatle/\ al-1019 rlgl-1 ~-If --2-It:TtÂ·H h.-461.4 6812>NK. 9-Â·11 hICSILES . - E>* 1 STI G| 61 Fbut UP I '-4 01 NEU 20<1 aTi 423 IDI) 1 LD 1 44<:3~ ADDi T i 06.1 f r--14. % 1 3 0.-* : il -7-, 1 It A 1 \\ 0 2 1 T1 1/ 4 l unt . -Jin C 1 4<~ J VIPO~ 195:ip Â»C'B CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 520 E. HYMAN - SUITE 301 Â· ASPEN, CO 81611 Â· TELE 303/925-5590 FAXÂ· 303/925-5076 *D+ U. Er,a:,1 5 300 W. COLORADOAVE , 80(2863 , TELLURIDE, (081435Â·TELE. 303/728-3738Â·FAXÂ·303/728-6722 AMS,1/rt. CO,&â‚¬21~Po Â©COPYWRITE 1992. C}W?LES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS U:321 r.49Â» 91-1019 Plat-4 ple W ADP' 1-1 31 1 , --7'7 '1 fl f 41 111 f 1 - ..111 \- 1 111 1 Â· 1 + /L i Oil 1. 1 i; i i -- /& I I . - .1 1 1 ' 41- i i R 11 l i 1 -1 4/IP/Trze,2.-Me@PRES#..16% CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 05. 520 E. HYMAN , SUITE 301 Â·ASPEN. CO 8161 1 TELE. 303/925-5590 FAX 303/925-5076 1*+ U. Fr,4461S 300 W. COLORADOAVE Â· 80(2863 Â· TEU-URIDE CO81435Â·TELE. 303/728-3738,FAX: 303/728-6722 Wa feete COWÂ»pOO Â©COPYWRITE 1 992. CHARLES CUNNIFFEARCHITECTS tim-w +t>p; H 401 1/41 4 16:iÂ«i 40-4- MAIN HOUSE ADDITIONS .Er 1 - fÂ«f j - 1911471' - w O Â«Fa--- o f =i<__ * 0 Â©eatcer'AL.- 1 1. 1 ~ 1- ~ - 12~ATIeR*22 l1 '1.011 ./. fl 11 1 1 ,4 117 1 1 11 1.1.. 11 11 11 11 - 11 1 | 1 L-- -+ 4--4----------+ -t -I- ----- 1 11 El --- --- - - -1 1\ / It 0/4 11 11 EM~I~4,6--2- il #9300*-2 . I 11 . If } . Il 61.0Â» -1 1 1 UPPER LEVEL PLAN i.. 1/4~=1'-O" .t-F-. ' \\ -- 42----1 11 11 1.1 - 11 . 4 11 ./1 .1 11 - 11 i ' 11 I I ..prj 1 1 1 11 1 1 11 rI 11 11 1 1 1-1 4 11 I .UZ Z== :41 4tz:A ll 11 11 11 11 11 11 - | 11 **50+Al 11 11 11 11 11 11 -- 11 11 11 It 11 11 11 , 11 11 1~ Z Z Z Z Z Z * re.rleve= w A-1-5 ~ 6Xl6TI>'re ..4 Al--l--0 \11 . 11 11 11 11 1 1 =--'2 3.Â· bul 24Â».1-25 , i .1 _Â«Er 1 6 9-Â»7 24,2= 11-0,1 f -12#EI= 4 It I .! - Â»AD-P=*- 7/23*r-- ID?stird/Ar- -- . /21 //4 al] 1 10 1 74 00=3F4 411 1-0 11 .. Existing Floor Area Ground Floor 1316.6 sq.ft. Second Level 946.0 sq.ft. Attic 260.0 sq.ft. 2522.6 sq.ft. Outbuilding 485.4 sq.ft. Overhangs (3.0" +) 106.5 sq.ft. Total Existing Floor Area 3114.5 sq.ft. Accessory Dwelling Unit Floor Area Existing Outbuilding 485.4 sq.ft. New Loft & Stair 113.8 sq.ft. New Bath 81.0 New Volume 14.4 sq.ft. Total ADU 694.6 sq.ft. Proposed Floor Area Main House (Existing) 2522.6 sq.ft. ADU (Existing & New) 694.6 sq.ft. Overhangs (Existing) 106.5 sq.ft. Overhangs Removed - 84.0 sa.ft. Total F.A.R. 3239.7 sq.ft. Total Proposed F.A.R. 3239.7 sq.ft. Allowable F.A.R. 3660.0 sq.ft. Site coverage Site Coverage Existing 1802 sq.ft. Site Coverage Proposed 1883 sq.ft. Allowable Site Coverage (R-6) 30% of 9000 sq.ft. 2700 sq.ft. Yard Requirements Minimum Side Yard 10 ft. Total of Both Side Yards 30 ft. Front & Rear Yards 10 ft. Total Front & Rear Yards 30 ft.