The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.19921028 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE October 28, 1992 REGULAR MEETING SECOND FLOOR MEETING ROOM CITY HALL . 5:00 I. Roll call and approval October 14, 1992 and old minutes from June 27â€ž 1990. 'II. Combittee and Staff Comments 1. III. Public Comments Idis Centennial Celebration - Linda Romero IV. @LD BUSINESS A. None V. NEW BUSINESS 5:20 A. Landmark Designation, Conceptual Development, parking 4?46 variation and Inventory inclusion: 311 W. North Street'64,*ne 6:15 ; B. 520 E. Cooper - Minor Development - Storefront alteration 6:30 VI. COMMUNICATIONS A. Project Monitoring B. Sub-Committee reports 6:45 VII. Adjourn A -/A.AA PROPOSAL T OTC ID 10 THEATER 100TH YEAR CELEBRATION and the HPC WHAT : The Isis is 100 years old this year! We should celebrate! IDEA: Celebrate at the Isis some evening before Christmas. 1. Announce on radio, TV and papers (Maybe Denver Post too) 9. Mave pavere do & feature on the bulldthg 3. Celebrate one night at the Isis a. Proclaim proclaim Dominic and Kitty Linza Day. (a surprise) John Bennett b. Do a short announcement before the movie. c. After movie, have a cake, celebrate NEED HELP WITH: 1. Contact papers (Linda can write articles if necessary, ) 2. Contact TV 0 Contact Denver Post 4. INVITE PEOPLE 5. Need volunteers to do refreshments 6. Arrange for Mayor to be there BE AWARE: Dominic bates publicity and special recognition MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officerk Re: 311 W. North St.: Inventory inclusion, Landmark Designation, Conceptual Development review, and parking reduction Date: October 28, 1992 SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting inclusion on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, Landmark Designation, Conceptual Development approval and parking reduction approval for two spaces for the 1962 Bayer-Block House at 311 W. North St. APPLICANT: Beate and Martin Block, represented by James Weaver, assisted by Jake Vickery, Architect LOCATION: 311 W. North St., Lots 3 and 4 and the West one half of Lot 5, Block 40, Hallam's Addition, City of Aspen ADDITIONAL APPROVALS NEEDED: The P&Z must review the Landmark Designation application for recommendation to Council, and Council must grant historic designation in order for the HPC to grant a parking reduction. In addition, Conditional Use approval by the P&Z is required in order for this parcel to contain two single family dwelling units, due to the small size of the lot (7,500 sq. ft.), which also requires landmark designation from Council. INVENTORY INCLUSION: In order to be eligible for Landmark Designation, a resource must first be listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. The applicant is requesting HPC's approval for this, and has completed the Inventory form for your review and approval. LOCAL DESIGNATION STANDARDS: Section 7-702 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations define the six standards for local landmark designation, requiring that the resource under consideration meet at least one of the following standards: A. Historical importance: The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or an event of historical significance to the cultural, social or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. Response: We find that this parcel does not meet this standard, in that it is not "commonly" associated with a person or event of historical significance. The structure was built in 1962, and designed by Herbert Bayer, however, is relatively unknown by the community as being associated with Bayer. B. Architectural importance: The structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct or of traditional Aspen character. Response: Please refer to staff's comments under Standard C. C. Architectural importance: The structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type or specimen. Response: The structure is best described as "Bauhaus Vernacular". It is small scale, constructed of modest materials, and fits well within the eclectic West End context. The structure is relatively unchanged, with the exception of a kitchen and rear deck remodel. The HPC may find that this structure is perhaps unique due to its early 1960's style, with strong Bayer influence, which is a definite departure from the late 19th century Victorian era or 1940's and 50's Mountain Chalet styles. D. Architectural importance: The structure is a significant work of an architect whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. Response: We find that this parcel is eligible for landmark designation particularly with the application of this standard. Herbert Bayer was a significant architectural designer whose work greatly influenced the Aspen community from 1946-1965. The Institute structures, Music Tent, Trustee Townhomes, Sundeck restaurant and two residential structures (311 W. North and 240 Lake Ave.) are examples of his work, which created an eclectic and rich architectural foundation here. 240 Lake Ave. is identified on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. Paepcke Auditorium is eligible for listing on the National Register. Aspen's post-war cultural and modernist architectural history owes a great deal to Bayer. It is highly appropriate for the HPC for recommend designation based on this standard alone. (Please refer to the application for greater detail on Bayer.) E. Neighborhood character: The structure or site is a significant component Of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. Response: Although the structure is not from the Victorian era, its contribution to the West End's small scale character is significant. The HPC may find that the parcel meets this standard. F. Community character: The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance. Response: The contribution this small scale residential structure makes to the West End is considered to be a valuable asset. The community master plan and particularly the Character Committee support the retention of small scale structures in the community. Through Landmark Designation, the HPC will have the full review authority over the proposed addition, to insure architectural compatibility. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the HPC recommend landmark designation for the parcel at 311 W. North St., finding that Standards D and F have been met. CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT AND PARKING REDUCTION VARIANCE The Review Standards for Significant Development application are found in Section 7-601 (D). No approval for development involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the standards are met. 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 a H, Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to a historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard, and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area, 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 existing structure is a Bayer designed 1962 single family split level residence of 1,576 sq. ft.: 3 bedrooms, 2 baths and an attached carport. This structure remains virtually intact, with the exception of the SW corner behind the existing carport where the two units would join. Only minor demolition would occur. The proposal is for a 1 1/2 story addition of 1,884 sq. ft., three bedroom, 3 bath single family dwelling, which essentially creates a duplex on the parcel. Landmark designation is necessary in order for this single family unit to be approved. (It should be noted than an ADU could be built without landmark designation, requiring only Conditional Use approval by the P&Z.) The new addition is larger than the existing, however, as the application states, is no higher, and incorporates compatible materials in relation to the original structure. The application states: "The roof forms, general massing, modular layout and large glass areas are derived from and are similar to the existing resource, yet due to changes in code requirements and current building technology, the construction will be clearly distinguishable from the old." 2. STANDARD: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. RESPONSE: We find that the proposal meets this standard. The proposed development reflects the eclectic and small scale character of the West End. 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: The argument can be made that large additions to historic resources do not enhance their cultural value, however, the HPC may find in this case that the compatible addition design and minor connecting point to the existing resource do not detract from the cultural value. Staff finds that the existing resource will read through, and retains most of its original identity. 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: We find that due to the sensitive treatment of attaching the new addition to the existing resource, the structure's architectural integrity is not diminished. Staff encourages the HPC to carefully consider this standard in its application to this proposal. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC: 1) Approve parcel for inclusion on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. (Council will take final action on this issue at second reading of the designation ordinance.) 1) Recommend Landmark Designation for the parcel at 311 W. North St., finding that Standards D and F have been met. 2) Grant conceptual development approval for the addition, subject to specific conditions to be met at Final review. 3) Grant a parking reduction variation for two spaces, finding that the parcel is able to contain four spaces of legal size, which is ample for the needs of this parcel. (Note: the final action on the variation cannot occur until the designation process has been completed.) Additional comments: memo.hpc.311WN.LD.CD 311 W. North Street, Aspen, CO, 81611-1350 (303) 925-7743 August 19, 1992 Ms. Roxanne Elin Aspen Historic Preservation Officer - Aspen, CO, 81611 Dear Ms. Eflin: 6, The purpose of this letter is to request Historical Preservation status for our home at 311 W. North Street, Aspen, CO, 81611. This house, designed by Herbert Bayer and built in 1962 by George Vagneur, was purchased by us in the Spring of 1965. We are Beate and Martin Block, who are the first and only owners of our home. Martin Block is a Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, and has been professionally associated with the Aspen Center for Physics since its inception. He is responsible for the creation of the Aspen Winter Physics Conference Series, now a 3 week winter program, in its 9th year. Beam Block, who is fluent in 4 languages, was a professional language coach to some of the vocalists in the Aspen summer music program. She now volunteers as a interpreter for the World Cup, and is a volunteer in various community and music activities. In addition, she is active in the Sister Cities program. Initially, we spent summers and winter holidays skiing in Aspen. We now, as retirement approaches, are living in Aspen about 7 months of the year, being here winter and summer. We anticipate permanent residence here in the very near future. Our property consists of lots 3,4 and the western half of lot 5, Block 40, in the Hallam's addition adjacent to the city of Aspen. The address is 311 W. North St, Aspen, CO, 81611. The area of our lots is 7500 square feet, and there is an unpaved alley at the rear of our property. When we purchased our home, it was not in the City of Aspen, but rather, came under the jurisdiction of Pitkin County. Several years later, it was annexed into the City of Aspen. The lot was originally owned by Walter and Elizabeth Paepke. They sold it to George Vagneur for development, under the stipulation that Herbert Bayer, the famous Bauhaus architect, be the sole architect for the development of the property. The exterior of the house has remained the original Bayer design. In 1977, we engaged Ted Mularz as the architect to remodel the kitchen area. In 1989, we added some external storage under the car port, and a hot tub. Essentially, even now, the house remains the original Bayer design, and has been kept in mint condition by us. The house has its 3 bedrooms and 2 baths in a semi-basement, whose exterior walls are made of concrete brick. The second floor, the living and kitchen area, is wood frame, with cedar interior and exterior. The design is contemporary, and uniquely demonstrates the Bauhaus touches of its architect We need more space. We have two married children, with families. When the children and grandchildren come to visit us in Aspen (they love it here), the space problem becomes more urgent. Further, when we are gone, we would like to leave two houses for the two families. Hence, we are going to ask permission to build a duplex. This is the reason why we need historical designation. Our property is 7500 sq. feet According to the Aspen code, we would need 8000 sq. feet to be eligible to build a duplex. However, if the house is declared an historical landmark, we would be eligible to build a duplex (Land Use Regulations, Aspen Code Sec. 5-201, D. Dimensions required, 2, page 1609). This designation would obviate the necessity of our selling this property and having yet another tear-down, with a new monster house arising skyward in the West End. The justification for our requesting this historical designation is that Herbert Bayer, the internationally famous Bauhaus disciple, designed this contemporary home for an important period in Aspen's history, as a post-war resort area. Not ohly is Herbert Bayer famous internationally for his architecture and graphic arts, but, as is well known,. is famous throughout Colorado for his design of our state flag. The duplex will have as its architect James Weaver, who proposes to keep the original Bayer concept intact, and remain faithful to the integrity of the original house. He comes to this task uniquely equipped, having lived in our house for many years, while we were doing research in Europe. We sincerely hope that our request will be granted. It will aid immeasurably in preserving the character and integrity of Aspen's West End. Aspen is not only Victorian, but lives today. It's contemporary landmarks are as important to it as its Victorian roots. Sincerely, Â»-ecb-tÂ» 9-Â©ck_ C C 6**+<.x#L Beate and Martin Block 10 HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING/STRUCTURE FORM State Site Number: Local Site Number: * Photo Information: Township 10 South Range * West Section * p USGS Quad Name Aspen Year 1960 X 7.5' 15' Building or Structure Name: * 2,Loal< RES'DE.ULE Full Street Address: * 311 WEST WORTH WREET Legal Description: * LOTS 3, 4 AUD WEST HALF OP'5, Di-,224 40 HALLAAA'S ADDITDA) CIThj 6 7-DWOSITE OFAEFEC city Aspen dounty Pitkin Historic District/Neighborhood Name: * WEST Ekle owner: Private/State/Federal * MRS BEATE 56064 Owner's Mailing Address: 3\1 \01. KDRTH ST.; A:>PER, Co al&\\ ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Building Type: * 2661 PEUTIAL Architectural Style: * eAU HAL)5 //BAVER l':1&0'9 VER KJACULAA Dimensions: L: 6(.9 x W: 22' = Square Feet: l596 Number of Stories: * 1%1 Building Plan (Footprint, Shape): * RECTAkkE,ULAA Landscaping or Special Setting Features: * AUTOZE TREE 9 0 U WEST d EAST S1DES Associated Buildings, Features or Objects - Describe Material and Function (map number / name): * For the following categories include materials, techniques and styles in the description as appropriate: Roof: * oPPOSI A.J G. SHEOS, /0000 LAA i egAVEL , /Fz/~2 f *)2 1 1 Walls: * VERTICAL CEDAR 1 K* tgaVERSE ZAAIP â€¢~ 6ATI-Ed Foundation / Basement: * FACUTED QUPER FLOCK ,, //2 5ASEMEN.)7 Chimney(s): * SAA\E 'AS WALLS ; FA/kITED NETAL FLeE ABDVE A:coN Windows: * l.-ARGE PICTURE \Ajlk}OD\NS ABJD \6)001) CASEANEATS Doors: * WOOD FUJâ‚¬H 1 etÂ»lk]EP Porches: * C.Na:OP Dead \Al/\ETEBRAL SEACE :(JOCE 02\6\IAL>~ General Architectural Description: * rOUE STOKâ‚¬ IN/%25ASEV'~ek)T, c:DPFDS{ Ue, SHED Rd:ZOFS K/~2X FZSSEP (A)42:OD BEA AA'b , LARGE FC.PORE A LID LAk:t:~D CASEÂ»E UT \Al/k]DOWS . PEE.P OVERHAC)65 , EMP WALL pt k.15, \/EATICAL <ZPAR. Sle/k,16 'lk.)SUPE AAÂ·JD OD-r. Page 2 of 2 State Site Number Local Site Number * FUNCTION ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY Current Use: * RES. Architect: HERBERT- EAVER. Original Use: * gEE Builder: C:EapgaE VABUSL.>R. Intermediate Use: KELS. Construction Date: 1 962 >CActual 1 Estimate 3 Assessor Based On: * MODIFICATIONS AND/OR ADDITIONS Minor X Moderate * Major * Moved * Date * Describe Modifications and Date: * TrrC KER 8 DECK REVODIEL 'C~77 Additions and Date: * kIOUS NATIONAL/STATE REGISTER ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA Is listed on National Register; State Register Is eligible for National Register; State Register Meets National Register Criteria: A B C D E - Map KgM._ Local Rating and Landmark Designation Significant: Listed on or is eligible for National Register Contributing: Resource has maintained historic or - 21 - architectural integrity. 0 Supporting: Original integrity lost due to alterations, however, is "retrievable" with substantial effort. Locally Designated Landmark Justify Assessment: * Fg=o-NPa Associated Contexts and Historical Enformation: * TH E Slaul FiCAU<22 69 THIâ‚¬ KESIPEUTIAL 9722-rUEES. ts TRAI- IT le Ak) CORialkAL , UAl - DISTURIBEP E>01/APLE AF THE BACHAL}9 /VEgk}ACULAK AltH~ITECTURE rof HegraERT BAVE/K WHO HAP A MA.oR /k]FLUEUCM OU THE COLTURA L- M\STORW OF ASPEO Other Recording Information Specific References to the Structure/Building: Pitkin County Court- house Records; OWUEÂ©:5' gack,APS ., 6520<5 42 2177<12 <ZO, L.laRARV, Archaeological Potential: * CY orCED Justify: * Recorded By: * Date: * Affiliation: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee - City of Aspen Project Manager: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer/Planner APPLICATION FOR HISTORICAL DESIGNATION (CONT) BLOCK RESIDENCE OCTOBER 1, 1992 Herbert Bayer Summary * The Block Residence at 311 West North Street was designed by Herbert Bayer, teaching master of the Bauhaus and one of the Â·- few "total artists" of the twentieth century. Mr. Bayer was born is Haag, Austria, in 1900 and was accepted in 1921 as a student at the Bauhaus in Weimer. He immigrated to the United States in 1938. For over half a century he did pioneering work in all of the fine and applled arts. He was one of the major design and advertising consultants to American Industry. No other designer had as much influence on design for industry, nor did as much to improve visual communication in the world at large. Herbert Bayer designed the Colorado state flag. Bayer's work is the subject of several books. In 1945, Herbert Bayer met Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke who invited him to visit Aspen and give an opinion on its development. Several months later Bayer moved to Aspen and became a design consultant for the development of Aspen as a ski resort and ultimately as a cultural center. From 1946 to 1965 he designed the following Aspen structures: 1946 Sundeck restaurant; 1950 restoration of the Wheeler Opera House; 1953 Seminar Building for the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies; 1954 Meadows lodging development; 1958 Aspen Meadows restaurant; 1961 Walter Paepcke Memorial Building; 1964 Aspen Festival Music Tent and its related facilities; 1965 Eight Trustee townhomes at the Aspen Meadows; During this period he designed several private homes in Aspen, three of which we know of. The Block Residence is one which today remains virtually unchanged since it was constructed. His own studio, built on Aspen Mountain during this period, has been demolished. One other Bayer designed residence is close by on Lake Street. blochdjw.wps 4.2 APPLICATION FOR CONCEPTUAL REVIEW OF SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (CONT) BLOCK RESIDENCE OCTOBER 1, 1992 (attachment #, Item #) (2-1) see attached Owner's Authorization Letter (2-2) see attached Legal Description 6, (2-3) see attached Disclosure of Ownership (2-4) see attached Vicinity Map (2-5) Compliance with relevant Review Standards: This proposal would add a duplex unit to the rear of the site currently occupied by a Herbert Bayer designed residence. The new unit would be very similar in style, design, and treatment and would adapt a relatively small house to the current needs of the family that has occupied it since 1965. The existing structure would remain virtually in tact, except for the south west corner behind the existing carport where the two units would join. The new unit is to the side and rear of the existing historic resource. There would be only minor demolition of some overhangs and decks to make way for the new unit. 5A. The roof forms, general massing, modular layout, and large glass areas are derived from and similar to the historical resource but, due to changes in code requirements and current building technology, the construction will be clearly distinguishable from the old. It is compatible in character to the historic resource. The requested parking variation of 2 cars allows existing mature trees and vegetation to remain and keeps too many cars from obscuring the foreground of the historical resource. Four parking spaces are more than adequate for this location and the needs of these two units. APPLICATION FOR CONCEPTUAL REVIEW (CONT) BLOCK RESIDENCE OCTOBER 1, 1992 (con't) 5B. Although the neighborhood is mostly Victorian, there are a number of houses that are more contemporary or vernacular in character. The one and a half story heights of the existing structure and the addition maintain a low profile relative to its neighbors. The massing of the new square footage in a secondary structure is consistent with HPC directives and compatible with other multiple structures occupying many of the lots in this neighborhood. 5C. The proposed addition is to the rear and side of the existing structure. In addition, its placement preserves and utilizes the existing rear yard and rear yard vegetation. Preservation of the structure in tact is far preferable to adding on or corrupting the historical resource by adding an upper level or attaching a large, new addition to the old. In this manner, the cultural value is maintained. 5D. The architectural integrity of the existing structure is kept in tact with the second unit clearly separate and it's own architectural element. Only minor demolition is required of one eave and some non-historic deck structure. (3A-1) see attached survey and site plan (3A-2) Materials will match existing (3A-3) see statements above - paragraphs 5 A thru D (3A-4) This project falls into Category C: erection of a structure greater then 250 gsf. 4.1 SUPPLEMENT TO HiSTORIC PRESERVATION DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS IMPORTANT Three sets of clear. fully labeled drawings must be submitted in a format no larger than 11"xl 7-,-9_Ft one dozen_sets_of blueprints may be submitted in lieu of the 11 "xl 7" format. APPLICANT: MATE *00 vt*Â£110 66Â£)04 ADDRESS: 5/ 1 Â£)011TH ST. 3 Aip Pâ‚¬14.0 91(â€¢11 a ZONE DISTRICT: g.6 LOT SIZE (SQUARE FEET): 1500 59. FT. EXISTING FAR: IS 14 ge.FT, ALLOWABLE FAR: * 3450 sa. FE .. PROPOSED FAR: .1%08. 54: FT. EXISTING NET LEASABLE (commercial): 04 PROPOSED NET LEASABLE (commercial): Ji A EXISTING % OF SITE COVERAGE: HovizE: 0912.-mM:- ogz/45 4 0.1-1.0 !433 sq. FT. ( \9.14% PROPOSED % OF SITE COVERAGE: 250â‚¬ Se PC ~33.4 %3 EXISTING % OF OPEN SPACE (Commercial): h.44 PROPOSED % OF OPEN SPACE (Commer.): 4/A EXISTING MAXIMUM HEIGHT: Princical 81Â®,: C 6. o / Accessory Bldo: #. 1 ~â‚¬4*.9 PROPOSED MAXIMUM HEIGHT: Princioal Bldg.: C 0.0 cm/r) / Accessory BlÂ®: -â‚¬ .0' PROPOSED % OF DEMOLITION: 0 EXISTING NUMBER OF BEDROOMS: 3 PROPOSED NUMBER OF BEDROOMS: 6 EXISTING ON-SITE PARKING SPACES: *3 ON-SITE PARKING SPACES REQUIRED: 6 SETBACKS: EXISTING: , ALLOWABLE: PROPOSED: , Front: 20.O Front: 18.0 Front: 10.0 Rear: 4.8,0' Rear: \ O.01 Rear: 1 1 -O' Side: 15.6' Side: 12.5' Side: 22.5' Combined Front/Rear: 6A.O' Combined FrURr: 3aa, Combined Front/Rear: 31.O' EXISTING NONCONFORMITIES/ UOUE ENCROACHMENTS: VARIATIONS REQUESTED (elicible for Landmarks Onlv: character comoatibilitv findino must be made bY HPG: FAR: Minimum Distance Between Buildings: SETBACKS: Front: Parking Spaces: 2 Rear: Open Space (Commerdal): Side: Height (Cottage Infill Only): i Combined FrtiRr: Site Coverage (Cottage Infill Only): C 'V V ... 1 , 1 - 1 , l / i / 11 1 0 ~ N 0 fl 10 rl 0-1-, k C )(/ / \ 1 .1 11 1.: i Of; (75 C [-4 3 / Â·r. L \ , DC Â· Â· @ t- 0~ el 9, Cl- TONÂ¥001,2 1 : -'P 3 f Â· U.,FAF. W// 4 \ . ~ : FLE.LU: ~ 9 74-0 30'36"EL 7412-' ar.. Ft.UNC ..e ELL FyÂ«Fl CAP r C T . RECERIP:\ 4 75Â° cyr 11"8 -75. cry | ~ .- f > E C.*14 1.- ap' ', -3 l.....v .P 54 , \ d: 3*IJOJ :~ CZ& KI .*,1 1\ 1\ h ~ <l 1 1,1 r 1011- -6~ 4-1.\\\ 1 ~, A r ---7 :./5 - \ Â·a.Â·nr-*r-lr z '\ 1, \ \ \Â·22. M ~ /~ \~ \JF \ :1 \\1 \ 6 '1 #4 a~ 'L L 4713 [S \\ \ \ '\ 11 \\ \ \\\ U. , 7% r U rj . {4 0 4 0Â·(25' 0.4 \ \3.04 -,1 Â£ 49' ~ ~r J J j 11 -2 frok-1- >9 ~5>FL IT L~ VIE~ ~.~ -~ ~ 1 -- ,/4 Itux-< 4 WOOTF \ 4 --< FOWE + 0055 \ \ / U 1 3.19 1 -7.19 L: 1-- 2 11 0 4 1 3 0 i ' FIKE + r -4119-\lift>/-3--it<j, 7 I \ 0 0 I 3 0 - _.-4 # 1\ 11[ 1 lutb 7 " PINE. 2 n ' U \\ 44:\\ 0 9% f Â¢i U U -l[) Wcap CLE.cli -T 0 - 974 8 = [17 - 8 3 91 - 3-3. 1 - 1 \ 11 \ 6,4446- 4 i \\ \ 2 6 -- Z Z '4 Ok<LA< 1 M 6 8 - 1 f~ i P ul /3 If 1 b E al 1 F~ w I \9 \ 1 \& ff .,7 19 37 i IWVLP El 1 L LA f 4. \ +,7 3 0 Il -t LV' ERE VA.) LZE -- 1 3 I ' 6/' lm>.IE .- i c -c' 01 2,13: 14 75'09' 1 [n~ \A// K 75.aD ' \ 1 :bil 1/Al m \ \ 9., O REK,NE: VY'/ M < FIELD: H 75Â°021 44'11%/ 75.07' S ' I 4 1. i ) k- Foutlp : FAE-13Â»Fr- . F, L 6. 2672> lu L TELÂ· FED. 102 tco crs ELEC. VE [lati- A L LEt 22 L O C 11 <4 0 0 1 /0 .Il N " 2 100.4:7 , NY.1616 8-121 j =t AAâ€ž 607/02; 0*1 4 1 LIZksr) 11 UTO~ 1,1. -.. 2 - tool-O. -0 \ :91 . . 1 \\ // /1 -- .22 w15 1 -_ _ ,21.~ ASPHALT M-i tâ€¢ Â·" EOGE OF . lu'r"'i . 1 / f ' eXts/7/j'S SES' DeNCE F>eas>.â€¢0 Ma,crt-l ST: . (=11- M. 0. W. // l .Â·' .....2 UNIPAVED -- Ilip RELOEATIO I ./#.O.2/ , ALLaY â‚¬ / i --1 L rK,T Tu' 1 F>*wi U G I ,/ 1 C>L-Â£248â€¢ 40 1 . O .9 1 ..,1,/ '--- - -47 -I k VÂ·% ' 1 : 1 - 1 , , 4 N / \ I \\ 4 \\\4 .\ 'A.I. e 2- 1 -101' / 1 -- / 1 #2:g:* b- 3*<.-c--4 PK=yals ap ... . . \ \ --P...... : 1 3- \ 1 . W'.0 Ale..2. 1 G...ivat_ =8Â·.Ive .Â»v ~ | ' ' 1 4/4 \\ / L--1 1/-1.. 1 le- 0. 7 4 F,vi.a , C D 42 .1 k h \6 %! 1 1 ./1 .j ,- 104Â·' - /41 e / f or , 1001.-4.- - - --IT a Ff.. ._L.___ A ru e M O PO SE: 0 AESICEUCE APOI 7 10 41 t/t Alt 'a f I lu P=e A OA. ~ A\Ace. ,/V\ATI N-1 0 L G o 1<A. . 3 11 h.loAT rl ST. g ASPE:,0 1 09Â· - AL-leueT, <992 --- KEVISE 9 Zj â€¢52~7- A. 4.- P. 9/ , \ 11 L --C' 1 Â·Â·- r M - F 6 - i 13 1 n .wz 9 d /4 n C ; irl v 1- VI - f 111 0 - 2 1= r Ir 1 - -i -te l.ifirlif. L==- .. 3 1-20:!-411--11+194 2 : 2 E. A: .4-t... F 0 -u r-:3.-Difi 1!999 2 4 4-4/40=t=, Fj - 1--1 J o #4.41 M -t A -Z ~ ~ ~ 6, -i 'IÂ·,0: "6/1.,m.,. .1, r 3 =IL--f 3. A 1: 1 ,~ 1 1 \\ _ 1 | 710 r i '81 - 22.-2 i 111 >C 1 Z 11 1 Q z - ~' 11=1 i I 1 i p ,9 1 ' 5 11,1=u.:-' 1 ..1 1 I - U G 1 - D , 1 -71 1 1 . - 11 Â·Â· ' R 41, 4 1 10[F[ 1 1 /1 4 1 7 1011 21 ; 1 4 Â©731 0! 1 414 . 1 - 4. r -1 'P=== 1 mr I I i 711 m 4- t ~1~ 11 --Â· 3 5./1 1 M . EV-T-'---11--1 N lA E | .1 . 161, :1 6 'A ' B IL, 4 1 E Z t.. Â»11-111 9 -- co - It 1 \ 9-1 r-.1 .1 1, 1-Ill -1* 1 Â· 1 -* -1 1 Ai' - : t -Â·~ 4 -v--1 ! 1 R-- -* , ' 74 , 1 , ' ' - ' 'FL~ n I /-$ 1 1 .... 4 F.~: r:- ~ ' .. . . -- I , 9- , L_ IN. I J 1 1 10 h Â· 1 17 \ i C D Ill r &. 0 11 N:-9 6 * 18'4 310012 8. Gltâ€¢129- - - ry,20 â‚¬>rilig |*g -1 1 $ 11'r- 1-\1 -0 9 X Ill ' 9, 1\1 1, 1 1 11 11 11 1 4 J-K n 1 -. -/ 1 7' 74 1 0 - 3 &0 9 1%-1 : 1 c i 7 1 --1.---u.- --Ill - -- - --- -- --- - C C 11 71 r 1 -6611 9 1 581 i - , I 0 1 6-1~ - ------ - -- '/ 1 4 P 1 ..Ct---1-Â»Un. - p -- - 49 Â· T 1 .1 P 1.-- 1 00 . 1 f? L N a. .... -- > 1.-- C i - I /1 1 D r - - r 1 E Â£12 9 K AlÂ« T Â· -i I C ----- W 9 1 --1-7 3 -- FT i' 1 1. 1 1 4.- C O 7 - 0 ,- 1 i Ill < i 1 0 7 :OJ ~ 30 i '- L L ..:=saiiaÂ» =1 1 Â· 1 I i , 11 E 7- 1 Ili-2 r~'+1 -_p.*Â« i 4'1 i 0. 1 . C' -1 9 ,\! , i.i |Â· 1 i Â·3'-: _. _ i,1 2. lil Â·t-Til i '14. i,.vl .--0 _._'.-1 31 - -- r - gm 1 wo U {U #im Â£03 14 5 ,â€¢in r 28 14. R 1\U, 1 2-5 1 -9 4 11/ 1 -1 - 1, F .1 L .1 1 1. 0 : IOTIC-)1 --- 1 0110 1 1 I 'J 5-- f/&~7ijail,M- ~.- - 1 ...~11 1 U~ 6.1 9 ., , 1 M 1 ; 0. .... .1 . 1 . - 1 1 0 r 34 1 L 1 1 - - 8 1 1 73 8 I ----1 1 L r , 111 1 1 1 C . L 5 1 It : 1 4 n. 3,9 71 - m ja m .. - ---- vt I I . 1 1 A- 1 1 6 5 2 5'Â· 0' '1-9 \~ b C 5 4 ~ 74 7 , 11\L . 1 1 G % 0[? . c ~A' 1 N Â¢ -14 -Â· EL L. 3 . F'80Â«79 1/Ula ~, ~1 1 11 ~ ~ ~11 11 . 11 & v I hi , I I 2 123 , - --1 17 |3 2 '31-1 - 41 1 - 1 1 ..1- i I 0 1 QQ 1 2- t- - p- Ig 1 I P Il ~ 13 -~1; 1~0 - i 0 10 ' 0 - ~ | S 0 . ZL 0. --U - bi 7 P 4 z r-- P. - J\ F Â£ 171 -I i 'p T. ft & 91 1- , -1 \14. rf 1- n â€¢!Â· 2 3 4 e 01 7 1 11 OTI liN\ ) LA 07 4, 1 U & /01 J *4 .% ~A - -4 0 0 t Bl + 1. < 9-v!'' ~11\..27, l/@, -/ -Ilf - Â· Â· I .- - ~ {42Ul;.0te*:toug**Wilit#WIt*~Vi - Â· , 1122--194 *W 0 =6 M >Â« 42 \A â‚¬255 1 B /7 2 3 ~ - .- 8 ' 45 + c n 1 1 i A 1 Â¢ Or,1 m .A---1 1 1U k-la MN.40Â£ 1.24.1-64'""49'.%7 M.-Floqi.-.14.4-.- '0 4 ' ' 2 + r-3 - - 1 5 nit~ ~,h-c 1 2 h ..Â» 0 -1 1.6 I r W r al 11 j - Ft 1 1 0 ,4 i 5 r $ 9.-.-7 4- 1 m 2 1 7M Ln'J -ZI~ 1 1 1 4 1 - 0 1 - 5 n. P,-T-71]1 - C 1 - 71-71 {' 4 4.**Il 0 1-14( - t 0 - 1 1 $ *1 1 21 , n 12 - * C i : -1 1 M tul11114Â®1,#Nt#Mt#All,Billwkil,tÂ·IN+44â€¢',11!~~Illmil#Ilf,1111VIHIM]lumltlitAI11111j~ltÂ¥UlAMI,111)1~1}jIWIfE;, 11 1 41 f 111 11\ ' 2 5'Â· 0' m C A * UG R C 1 D. tn -11/ M r x 9 111.- 1 1 -0 dirt ,9 1 1 mED g=-ik * â‚¬ A :4 0\\ f.. ..1, i. Â· 0 e 1 1 133 M 4 1- A 3= + p' C- W 3 . 30 ar 1 2 mE-*9 :0- 3i i.N 383 Â· - 3 Ill CA' 1 X - 2\- 11 --iF 1 0 - 1 -= 1_.1: i = P . .1 < 11=111 1 . - 1- > L.-3 - -1 1( It] - 1 1-1 ; FJ / U -' - - 1 0 I 1 18.0 - .... - -- F Un~ gi m _ _ _ 1 0 -- 7 1 6 L - -- \F-Â«7-b 12 + I 2 1- 1~=E Ell. - 9 -- _ 4/Ell-~14.2 , 14 1.-' Â· r - - 0 - ' 1 -1 8 0 %-. 14r===â€¢CED - Ir 0 0 0 Ib 0-__ --7 5331 i IF ---- 7. -- --- J L 1 - --- -A A \3 - ID-Ift 5 -1~A /41 -: (~ 11] /'L./1_ 1 - -- 1 M n ,-1 9 1 21) U /4_.. acJÂ© '8 - -4~_ 1-Ip? 2 ru 13 J i 7 - ,*11#1- 0 4-*-: T ~ '-~ -- i J ,.C B' + 1 t-le-1 -- - , - 0 Â¥ 1 ==U \Ie/--, If L- -- U 0 _-1 3 4 I / 6Â· . - U 9 U _ 7 11 -4/1 il - 9 11/ 77 7 , L *27.3 1 Frd --1-3,/'.3'= '~'~ : - 0 0 -- - 2 7 f 1 11 o 1 , 04-2 4 - -- 2. -0 L 1, 0.0 - 4 - 153 1 1,1 :F ... 1 If 1 -im< ;53 k.- 3. dj ' ' - 1 , 1111 11 19 0 h L I - F r--- E If) I lA 0 M i L ~ - .-~ ~ dj D- 1 r.- .1 1 11. 1 , ! 01.1 ' ' 3 1.- 1, 4 , 1 4,1 1 1 1 1 I 4 2341/\21. â€¢02 I E-' E .061 f L.1.G W 1.YON lie Â¥91/ '99\V F 'Â«.2(53 1-LVAgnâ‚¬ MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer Aw Re: Minor Development: 520 E. Cooper, storefront alteration Date: October 28, 1992 APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Minor development approval for the alteration of a first floor storefront of the non-historic structure at 520 E. Cooper. LOCATION: 520 E. Cooper, legally described as Block 95, Aspenhoff Condominiums, Unit C-1, Township 10 S, Range 84 West, on the easterly 23.75 feet of Lot N, all of Lots 0 and P, and the westerly 28.35 feet of Lot Q, City and Townsite of Aspen. APPLICANT: Gerald Barnett, represented by Bill Poss and Associates ZONING: CC (Commercial Core Historic District). REVIEW PROCESS: The Development Review Standards are found in Section 7-601(D). 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 a Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area, 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 Planning Office finds that the proposal is compatible in character with the building, which is not historic. We find this storefront alteration to be an improvement over the existing design, bringing the entire first floor commercial space of this building into design compatibility. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: We find that this standard has been met. The proportions of this proposed storefront remodel more closely meet the current downtown core context, and the guidelines. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of a designated historic structure located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: This standard does not apply, as this building is not a historic landmark. 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: Staff finds that the proposal enhances the architectural integrity of the building. The use of stone, glass and stucco are proposed, which relate to the building more compatibility. The proportions are also correct to meet the guidelines, and in general, staff supports this storefront alteration, finding it to be an improvement over the existing design. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider the following alternatives: 1) Approve the Minor Development application as proposed, finding that the Standards have been met. 2) Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be approved by the Project Monitor and staff. 3) Table action, to allow the applicant to restudy specific issues of the proposal. 4) Deny Conceptual Development approval, finding that the Standards have not been met. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC approve the Minor Development application for 520 E. Cooper, finding that the Development Review Standards have been met. REVIEW COMMENTS: memo.hpc.520ec.md 2 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE 303/925-4755 FACSIMILE 303/920-2950 OCTOBER 23, 1992 MINOR HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT 520 EAST COOPER, UNIT C-1 Submission Contents (Attachment 2) 1. General Application Requirements a. Application form is attached as Exhibit "1." b. Applicants letter of consent is not attached. This item will be hand delivered as Exhibit "2" prior to October 28, 1992. c. The street address of the project is 520 East Cooper Street. The legal description is Block 95 Aspenhoff Condominiums, Unit C-1, Town 10 S, Range 84 West, on Easterly 23.75 ft. of Lot "N," all of "0" and "P" on Westerly 28.35 ft. of Lot Q. d. Disclosure of ownership is not attached. This item will be hand delivered as Exhibit "3" prior to October 28. e. The vicinity map is attached as Exhibit "4." f. Proposal Description; the applicant requests Minor Development approval by the Historic Preservation Committee to remodel the existing storefront at 520 East Cooper, Unit C-1, and divide the unit into two spaces. g. Review standards i. Compatibility The Project, though small in scope, attempts to improve upon the existing building's incompatible nature. The new storefront proposal uses elements and materials that help strengthen the ties to its historic neighbors. Sandstone, stucco and glass are employed to compliment existing materials, creating a more 4 520 EAST COOPER, UNIT C-1 Submission Contents (Attachment 2) Page 2 cohesive identifiable commercial block. The design is modern in I . its detail and appearance to maintain continuity with the rest of the existing building. Neighborhood Character The surrounding neighborhood is predominantly commercial retail with storefronts of various style in detail. The proposal would only strengthen its consistency in character within the existing framework of the downtown streetscape. The Project uses elements such as large storefront windows and horizontal lines to enhance the character of the existing street facade. iii. Cultural Value The proposed development enhances and improves upon the pedestrian streetscape that currently exists. This is accomplished by providing more interest in the design and detail of the new storefront where little or none existed before. New materials with compatible colors and texture add life and visual excitement to the streetscape. The massing and composition of the proposed design contribute to the horizontal alignment of the streetscape, preserving continuity. All the above mentioned design elements help and do not detract the cultural value of the surroundings of the proposed development. 9228subm.con -1-NE-AL FAIL 2-02 74, 32- - = M n I .* 3--- -- -721-9 'h r-1 I R tr --- 7% 14 ==El 0411 1 12= 11 - 1 ~1 ; ------7; 1 11 j jl h i i -11 Â· i 11 \\ i 1 . i 11 1 j 11 . f 11 1 / 11 IIi 11 It S 2 0-11. le 11 11 - 067< 4-615- 3 ,-2.W&, 2 3014, & 2- 4 -1 11 4 , 4 C LU 7 11 V -0 1 C 1 1 1 11 <11 lill 1330 1. 02713-11 Â«F i PAR_. cÂ»Â·.L-4-4-4 (6:2,2-['12- ~ A y-, ' 46 ..7 .' ..d,r. 1--:9764~,a 1 1 $ 142571-181*--3*12~*4 1- 5 WEW, 1,0=,C:, 0./.f. 4.U=Ir A /O Al HE=1>Â·t- 0..6.#-14+1-karr~2-6 14*W 0/Vu* 9/44-41-tr 1/' I - -01 12Â»U- 1-0 1 M.6rr-CH BÂ©Â«' & 1 -1=__Â·fit -r f _f-h T-ir_-_r ---4-ir--r' 1-9 V --- 1 111 - 1 19 1 1.-11Â·-le- oF: c:R WADZ >JHEJAHT- 016 2->â€¢.16-r'gr - 1.-4649 -E>Â»h,1 t=>eSP,4 E- CAt' g. 611:=>m+JAUC_ 1 -- &046-44- WAL_ 445420Â»41 L fmbFoeÂ®.2 t:kUAZOtzA! 1...... NA#*80*Pic=ims- 0 6229 E. 60=>Â·r=BÂ© Ah/EN LDE- 605 EAST MAIN STREET _._6.,purr-H a LeÂ·/*rlo A-1 ,15:t" , 10 4 H.2.6- SuartlTAL lo.2~1 2- ASPEN, COL.O/1.40081611 TEL {303) 925Â·4755 anissociate . HEAA ~.,GAH 0672Â»1 E- 426465 LTeâ‚¬-PdA#f er hrTWETId- 61--LICLC=' / rANS.Ut ~ C Fu.. +1 6 L.Z:;r ~ -ro MIKÂ»H bkier'dr nC A - /1 , 1. 42469â‚¬- 7-/ at-Â»6â€¢G L- f -1- - 1 9 -- - i 73 ., , ~ ,~-T.~I, Â· H . --,1 94-- j.vi . ' 1 31 j\ \-----4-Â»65 CE--6 - i--c~-L-2-e-J=, PA-4-EGL-6 641 '2-42 0.44 L L A 4 -SP'*62- a apT+TO 546 ~A ~ ~ ED Ndi\UhÂ«, Mi f{OnltiMS- - 6â‚¬0 E COKED rEA â‚¬-E 605 EAST AMI ASPEN. Col.OP ~Cti 124.-Â»/grIdÂ»4 y , 10.&2-'12- t 1 TEL; (303, landass