The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.19901128L- 1 /' A -et* 1 AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 28, 1990 REGULAR MEETING SECOND FLOOR MEETING ROOM City Hall 5:00 I. Roll call II. Committee Member & Staff Comments III. Public Comment IV. OLD BUSINESS 5:10 A. Final Development and Vested Rights (Public Hearing): The Sportstalker- 204 S. Galena-ANEw, I l.' C O '94! Â« â€¢. h i .i. - 11- u.-iÂ·Â·L--Cl V. NEW BUSINESS 6:00 A. Conceptual Development: Holden-Marolt Ranching and Mining Museum - Public Hearing - P.'j-4 3 .,. Lâ‚¬ 5 7:00 B. Minor Development: 517 E. Hyman, Little Annie's : 0 e Â¢L,0~A.Gai VI. COMMUNICATIONS 7:15 Brief Presentation: Ken Johnston, Harding Glass Cottage Infill Ordinance County Courthouse wheelchair ramp Project Monitoring reports 601 W. Hallam (staff) 8:00 ADJOURN PLEASE REMEMBER! HPC sponsored Christmas Party Thursday, December 13, 5:30-7:30, Caribou Club! The following board members are being invited as your guests: Aspen Historic Trust, Aspen Historical Society, Redstone Historic Preservation Commission, City Council, Board of County Commissioners, Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission, Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission. 7-5 3-1-- 04 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer Re: Final Development: 204 S. Galena, The Sportstalker Vested Rights approval (Public Hearing) Date: September 12, 1990 APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Final Development and Vested Rights approval for a two story addition to the Sportstalker building at 204 S. Galena. PREVIOUS HPC ACTION: The HPC has reviewed many designs and ; revisions at numerous public hearings. Please refer to the memo of August 22, 1990 for a further summary of those previous meetings. The primary issue brought forward at all of these has been the proposed massing and detail design within the context of the three-story massing scheme. Conceptual Development approval was granted with conditions on September 12, 1990. A sub-committee was appointed to meet with the applicant and address the conditions of restudy as required, and identify further requirements (if necessary) for Final review. The conditions required of the sub-committee were as follows: 1) Restudy the details of the 2nd and 3rd floor, in particular the center portion of the west elevation 2) Restudy cornice 3) Restudy awnings for window specificity STAFF'S RESPONSE: The applicant has presented two options for both the upper floor treatment and the awnings. Staff finds that the window specific awnings meet the Guidelines and are generally compatible with the structure and the district; the continuous canopy creates too substantial a horizontal element on this building. Staff is still not in favor of the second and third floor treatments, and is recommending Final be tabled until the sub-committee has had an opportunity to meet with the applicant and finalize these details. We find, once again, that the elevations are difficult to discern the level of detail required in a Final Development review, and are recommending fully detailed, scaled drawings with all details called out. We also feel the model and renderings are critical to examine prior to Final Development approval being granted. ALTERNATIVES: Approval as proposed of both Final Development and Vested Rights, approval with conditions to be reviewed and approved by the sub-committee and staff prior to the issuance of a building permit, tabling of both requests to allow additional time for re-study, or denial of the proposal, finding the Development Review Standards have not been met. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC table action to allow the applicant and the sub-committee an opportunity to again review the conditions as agreed to in Conceptual Development approval, to determine whether these conditions have been met. The sub-committee findings shall be incorporated within a revised Final Development application. We further recommend tabling Vested Rights approval until such time Final Development approval has been granted. HPC COMMENTS: memo.hpc.204sg.fd 2 C Welton Anderson & Associates Architects October 19, 1990 Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservationist ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 S. Galena Aspen, Colorado RE: HPC FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN for Sportstalker Building 204 S. Galena . Dear Roxanne, Attached as part of our final development application are written responses to Attachment 3b of the Final Development Plan application. Sincer C. Welton Anderson, Architect Planning / Architecture / Interior Design Box 9946 / Aspen,Colorado 81612/(303) 925-4576 FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Sportstalker Building 204 S. Galena Aspen, Colorado October 19, 1990 Response to Attachment 3b, part 3, In recognition of the Historic District Guidelines this project has a commercial character streetscape defined by the storefront, corner entrance, and awnings. The building's zero setback forms an edge along the sidewalk consistant with other commercial structures in the neighborhood. The building's overall massing is essentially rectangular but differentiated from its.landmark neighbors by mid-block and corner set- backs that break the upper portion of the building into smaller vertical elements. Response to Attachment 3b, part 4, The following items specifically respond to Conceptual approval conditions remaining and include drawings related to each item. a). WINDOWS: Second and third floor windows are more similar in size and detail so as not to place undo importance to the third floor windows. Ground floor storefront windows have solid transom panels added above them to visually raise their head height and to reinforce the detail in the upper story windows. A wide horizontal band above the storefront windows also visually separates the retail street level from the residential level above. This band will be largely obscured by awnings or canopies, (whether "opening specific" It '1 or continuous). FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN October 19, 1990 page 2 b). AWNINGS: Two versions are presented to the committee for review. "Opening specific" - These awnings are shorter and they narrow to the width of the store windows below. They strike me as being dinky and too varied in size (width), and some- what scattered about the facade. The vertical areas between windows becomes much more important, only moderated by the horizontal trim and bands on the surface. As mentioned several times during our meetings, awnings go define the window.openings below them, more so on masonry buildings because they fit between the masonry piers that form the structure that separates the windows. On a flatter wood building, awnings can define the windows they are over or they can define the whole pedestrian street level by pro- viding a full canopy. In Aspen as well as other western towns, wood buildings (both old and new) often had a "continuous" canopy over the sidewalk to protect pedes- trians from rain or snow. These are (were) generally wooden porch roofs supported by columns at the sidewalk edge and covered with shingles or metal roofing (or flat as in some of the "modern" covered sidewalks in Aspen). The second elevation labeled "Continuous Street Level Canopy", in addition to simply covering window openings, protects pedestrians and clearly defines, differentiates, and separates the street level retail from the residential use above. The existing canopies are not awnings and should not be replaced by awnings. They serve a different purpose (pedestrian protection) and are as appropriate on this wood building as they are on the Mesa Store. Final Development Plan October 19, 1990 page 3. c). GLAZING: Restudy of the glazing details on the west mid-block setback. Overlay drawings show different treatments and mullion patterns for this part of the west elevation. I prefer the overlay labeled 'C' because it is the most consitent with the glazing patterns established elsewhere. These comments conclude the issues raised by the appointed subcommittee review and.items remaining from the last meeting. C Welton Anderson & Associates ~ ~ Architects /1 0 October 26, 1990 Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservationist ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 S. Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: SPORTSTALKER BUILDING, 204 S. Galena, Lots A,B,C,Block 94 Aspen Dear Roxanne, This letter is a formal request for Final Development approval to include a resolution by HPC vesting the approval of this development for a three year period. Sincerely, 94 )11 r- C. Welton Anderson Planning / Architecture / Interior Design Box 9946 / Aspen, Colorado 81612/(303) 925- 4576 A 9 11 ) ! C 5 - 4 (/0 4 3 râ‚¬Â·r =On= 1 T . -06 - re vcÂ· CD 4 1 6, . V ' -1- - - - 11 j f 1 1 ... ..Li . : _- --7,3--.-r= =--=- EF 71 : +133 1 1 9 Lk# 1 1 & 1 1 - 1 ,-1-1 1 1 El F!3 ~ .-T- 1 1 1 1 Al=.5:4 2 1 -)-- 1 ----- 1 ~ 1.--4 - f tllnt__02_ ---u_-- -i_ Fliff -1431 *v.-i E-1-- 1 i-- - i 11 4-1 CE i - - . L 1 1 4 IL 1 ' 1 1 - "<093 l /1'1 ~~~.Â»k - 29{ 21-EE. - - 01/ 1 - -. 1Ii~i= 712-I-In - 1 --_LECU_1~jurITIE:~ 212 4 1.11 -Ir r FE-JEUE_ilfrrET1~ | 3[33-I ? i - i #[ 111:11 - - C 1 : - 1 a. 1 } i l-- - ]!--11- t.1 1 - -- 1 11 1 1 2 i Â·- 1 - 1 1 1 ~ - 3 661,/,7-. DS ' NEOT ELEÂ»TÂ·loNi W.1,00 f \ 0\10 304 0920 told, A to M i) 4 g 2-t D 3 ' SaPPos* 19 uos*xv 1 - E i i :Ii.zr--rmi i 5...i , K? 1 42 65 1 1 1 r - -=L-d==--c-..1;1 -- --7~ =1 U 9 1 1 4,11 1 o I , . n LIa J ' L. 4 -Ir<-_A, 1 _LL 1 ; 141 + - .2-4 1 3 7/ 1 1 on r,4 - Ok. 17 h ! 1 -- - 1- 47. 41 ~ :-41 ~ 3 2~*9 I' - --F .-11 1 - ' -JIL P 1 2-1-~f~ i - 1\1 -I 92 1 1 ? . : 11 1 2 01 7-T=Jill I ir--' [9 ~ 1 -2- - -7.7-- , 1 ----142 1 1-1 1. 1 ..lat, 5 1 -4 14 AS - ik /3 1 -/ 7 a .:9 i *9 3 , 0 /9 1,> 39 2 *U U fcOT- 8-Â« * dcle 1 06- -0 ~ C 14,ttton *clerson & Assock,0, PC ~ 1 r,r-1 tv 40'1Â«Â«213 --ID >.t-t d} (3 ly 5 11 1 . 1 1 Â°5Â·7.-~ as~ .1 1 5.3-[1.3 =EVT-060-2 0 33 0.0 1 0 //-946 , 1.1 r: 1 7-1 r. - k. F. 1 ~IN - E-t- r -7 1 U mmit"- Pr i v fl 1 i 0 I 1 11 H .. t | F 1!11111 i rE c TEl Ul[Â£ i / 1 1 PKI - - 5/20/.3 - -7 41 11 24jk:*ILI- in- ..1.+1 -- ' ; 01- -' i F'L L ZE_ZIL ~ ZI_ 3333 I i i 264 -43 ~ 1% ~ - $0//O I ':004 -1 _- 1 - 2= L L -- 6 - ..pJ ex.:,r,e , reÂ·113.1 7262>1 5'413Â·T .5 51.5...< WORTH ELEVAT-!ON 1/1 0 ' 11- 0, < Oak)7100006 OAA)39.< 1 -- ~ ..J?.82,4 . ~ 1Â·Tr71---*-~'~'~1~'~ ' ~ I 03 's*POSSY 1 UOSJaplÂ¥ UO#*p' 0 1 0. _ort 09 A it (9) , 1 Ir 1 1 1 *5Â»Z~ ' V 1 Al 5:'i,5 -~*~ 1 1111,~,INNLL.te'l ' 7 lilli =iÂ·~ 71' ,#-1 '77 , i . C le-- 1 ~F--3 --11 1 . -1 -1.-11 In-_/ â€ž___- '' 01 11 12 It El 1 1 - -- 1__ 1 1 : - ff 1- 1-Jt,)I;~ -;--- -- -- ~' ~ , 1 0,1 , 2-ffil O 1 - --" 11111111,0/4> 73-R '-311.11. 1 .1 NE . T. 12 -- 1,93{I~ 3-11- 331 311 1 lilli ir. /.- I - f , ' -T fj-2 -- i .......I ./j'.1 1 . 677117%2-- -L_ "L-1 ,._--7 - 1 --/ / 6 t Lingilk " . .. - I - li â‚¬ 1.2-5. 1 1 - i 2.30*1,\ 9 1 232â‚¬--_~~._-41 Â»301 1 Kill L ' 1 M)<1Â·LT),e d~4/'O~ CAST El C\/NTI ON i , C '.... 49 Wil'-0. 1 1 1t St-K Â· - a + I O.Â·7-0,15 5:2Â«OND .leÂ·.1 I U , . 11 1.- .- a u _ - Â·-- - ft 7 ,- FAFFL- Ii-di T-] i i -Â· Li- CID . 1.1 1 11 11 11 1 . i .1 J' 1 71 .0 ___ i -2 -- .. . 013 7 7- - 71 31 1 2.4 711 Â· &L . I 11 , 6 . L Â»L"2 1 --- ''ll 1-- . 2 --2,0 - > 5FCONO 14-3- 1 . 1 - - ---- .1-4.-1.- ~- - T r 7 7-7 - j - ' : InT.-zcz - ~ JU-- I-JE 0 i . 1 1 ' --3 i --- - , , /1 1 : -4 -4 [-2-l - L JI. 2- ' i ' ' _ __. , _- . ij) RN?,Â·e - .2 31 0..3/ h.5 Tâ€¢,6 5 De,Â·Â·Â«r. NORTH ELEVATION 1/11.11-0, copFOU k)(j â‚¬)Ped'~Ff L-< c 1 /1 60/U / 04 9 -129Â· ' Â·Â· i {7 h V . (Â£ 1 45 3, â‚¬ 1 1 .i 1 Â·Â· v 1 1 U i 0 1 :-- 1 . 4/1 Q . , I - f 7 .1, 1- 1 ' 1-1- r'-J 1 1 1 I 71. 11.1 :111'',11.Â·111 - ! . !8 ,Â·4 . I. ' ' &4. 31.' . 33 Cul i- 1 513- '-3 j--1 [f- *t-i n -7 + 4111-Â·- - 71-~T -- 1% -11 1 Fi S , 541.11 f 1% E....1 9 1..: 1 ..)i..1.+...2.p '.i i .)41.:pro 0. 1 1 i ilimill:!ID El, t . _.0. - - 4 / 11':22 ' I a Iii[AB - <--r -- ~ ALF:tfo,â‚¬1~,2'::~41-; ,cr, ; L- 1- Â· LL-il L___ - - Â©313 n-Y AL--- h - - .-- ~.1 7 2. . 11 41 I 1, - . 'llÂ· ./.1 ' t-- L[-- -il,i.Ikr:i,li,i,1 iflit dll iw = ii .2 1 - 4 .fcs< 1 -21341] - -4- 4 4 -- - 29 1 1 1- A - II } 1-~ - 311 1{ ; f - 1 1 1 - - 1. Â«1 4 1 ~ j I r=: L.L~1_-_1- 1 EE._1._ 0 1 ,11 -- 1 1 f 11 7 1 - 1 "evil -----9 L L_.21[122 -EL-i~i -~=-~ -- 1 1 -- 1, r '- C *,ST â€¢46 9,qÂ» De , C S,Di,4/+O< KIEST ELEVATION 11 COUTI 0000% O/kooff t . 1,1: 1 F / / , __214Â»Â»Â«Â« 1 !1 11 .1 - 11 ..1 - -, 1; T-- I 111 , -~ 4 1 1 7 4 -- -- 1.. V====- +i . ---r11 it ~---ita ]7~~ #17~- 7 l.--- --1.-- --3-6 A }t , 1 .1 , 1 .- 2 1.9--3 j-1-7.FilÂ» 1 -1 =Cdt 1 L_L_1 ' i i iii 1. - - 1 ' [223-2221 Il-_--11_-1~- I 1 1 .1 , Ili 2 .. 1. - Â· 4 - 1 .- -r"- 73-4050 61Â·~11>11-.1 -- ' - I- ++ --T-tr- ---7.T.7-3-Ir----7,- -fr--7-1 if. ,... -4 - , - 1 1! lili 11, Â·-. Â· - I, /-7-1 rut 1 1 0 1 - 11 1 1 J. - -1 1 1 - & ----- 1 1 1 1 , - I 1111111-- U --- ---- - r / - ..=.I--i--I.-~1.-1- *. I - 11 .** 12-1 Biu . -tÂ· I FÂ¢ T .. I. - k Â·: 9 ,Â·Â· )~ - 1 -L. 1.. . --Stik: 11:lii,{Â·tt. -~-" , 1Â© 7 | . I , F.-L 1Â¥,>ef - - i '4 'U. 1.. Â·- Â· -' t' - -"~",~ f-t,' '1'4 -'I' '4-*"a"-FCA f.'-ti~ 4 .â€¢ 'I' â€¢2â€¢'D'-:t er . I-..*- .-lilli! '. '5' I . , F 1.1 V 1 , 1 . 231.14 N'* r ty - - ~' ~. 2 1\11 - - --i-- - 1 .......1 .. 0 --i--1 . . h t=.1 Ie'*gr,14 - .14 14 - . ~ 1, I --:. 0- - 61'.6. 7 .74'.,1 A r , \ DI 11 f A r I i Ill 1111 1 ~ 11,11 13%'- Â»19 Vtk.24566411 t'~11 -1--1 11Â»21-- . '1111 1 1 - ' - --1- i 111; 1 , al; 3 ,11 : 1 1 1 - 1 i 1 5 1, 1 1 1 11 i i i ltÂ· -t -- - '' 111.111 ./ 1 )11 1 . 1112 1#===41===::RL Illl Ill - 1 -1 ILT: It- 1 1 1 I l l 1 I t 11 Ill_11 iil i It .-pi r.-: 1IFEEEVEEEqY i Ill t : .1 1 I -i=01 1 pte==:1 " ~ - . Fy *.~~r.-111~4~:~1,~ 1 + - 1- ---- - 1 If==ir=11 =f Â· 11LIL_1 1 ' 0 / 1 .1 11 7 1 ' 4221[2 Â· 11-__Il vIL-.LIL.u ' 1 MI r-T--1 F----71 -Â·4 . 1 1 - 1 'Â· I 1 - 1- r- . i T-/. 1 t ~~1--2 1 '1 .,1. ; ' -I 111 . ..11! .1 1 1 11 . 1 11 HI '1 . 1 - -111- -- 1 -, 1, 1, 1.1 1, 41 2 - .2 1 f 11 '1- 1 1 I.-----Il. ---- ---- 1-- *---- - - - - --1- - 1. 11 '' Il 11 1 1 --4-- --1 1 Â£ 1 f Al . '' Pl - 1 r--3 1 IL-_ - 1 ' L L .1.11 T 1 1 ----- AU- 33- ! i - -, 1 L-*- j -1--~-7 L 4 -' 1 , - 9 1,1 Â· . Il 1211_L IL:LJL<Ziplll.AL<k - Â· i , 1 I #C . I< '-t 1 ,11 0 1 - . 1 r , 1 2 -4.1 [t 7 . i , .' . 1 U:4 - . , ' ' 1 - -3 f ~ ~ . 2 - / CG Â· 2 I .2Â£-11+ ~ ...:.. iâ€ž 11 --I Â·irÂ· Â·" 11Â·,0 1: .t %1 1 1 . . P . 41Â· ..... I -:.: //*.B *.-.<I .-I /.-./tft .': 9.7-5 'ft -Â· , , ~8-4-4, 1- P'-' 2.0.11 , /E 1 3'.. Â· . 11 -p, 1 1 1 :2 \1 - 1 , 11 ' 3-6 76.:' - 4 I j .-i , wiliffÂ¥23*,21451- #Rifici. ~~:-2.-1 292119 h :0.-3.*-itkmf# * 39'.; C -:-1 ..3~'2â‚¬~'.73 it-&42'*.716#*Â·+7.-I Â·- -9. rl =r -' 1' 1~ Â·'.3Z,73'f4;W 'FiÂ·s##Aif437/72- --- 1 . 1../ ' i.-1 1 2-1 -It i 1 1-1 -1-1 -1 11 ' . ~ 111 f..116-04 rl - 1 , ./ . - 1 I Â· -----9 - th .Â·,Â· â€ž r<It f i 1114 21&7 i ti . Â· .,4. 1*i 4 ' '~ ~' 4 1- 24 :-434~~ , 4 -i. 14 12* 9 -l_---1 - 1 ==1...v . . ta I .. I ':/1.~ji: ==4=z=z-/ . .1 .1% %46 ' 1 . 14 1 1 2 . 1 f..44 1 1 j , . L .f .NK.; , . i. 1 ?fi 3 4,1.1. 4 4 . . 1 1 1' 4.4 1 1. 4 '1 1 1 / ~~ ~.~ f- 1 , 1 1 1 /1 . 1,4 6 i / .1 .--- . p.Â·,11.1:. i ~1 , \ - i -1 --1-'. - 1 4 i .. .4. . , - 1/ -Â» 77 3 3 -7 -1 - t.. 1-7 I . I. : I 1:. 7 // : ~ ~ ' . ir:. -J - ~ -t- . J \ 9 -------- 7 1 - . .4 -1 - r . 1 i h / i . 1 4 --= 1 â€¢ *' . f r 1 \ , .-- 1,': t.l ..7 lkâ€¢ .4 4 01 12.0 lip. f. /1.1 L . ~ 1' , \& 12'74.3, '.6 /4:.' Ir..'" '. - . 4 114 4 11// 1 ---* ill : ff 1 r ' C b'..... $"--~4.-1, A- '4.1,-Liatt., -â€ž.,Â« .i,Â·Â·Â·,B.1.-i . 1....Le;..., 17' 1.. L h ... i ..1,\ . t ' ! 1 9 2412 493Geri, C.,1 112=21,2 1'*1Â£Rit 1 . 1. 0 1 .. S 1.1. 47 . \1 ' I W., I 0 4 -71*91"MeÂ¥772,5 + ,* /'pl/3.-"'dil/* M~4'"/4=/' r:'f -'1/4#7'"0"'=Ip* 1 - 1 1 - f .1 - *1 r ~'-77~~-rr!,rt,-- , ./.9,6.-T i 1 r 4 7. 41'F '.r. -6 ... 44: .Â¢ . - I I . - k. 1. . 2.Â·.4.. ' . 1 1'r i T. . __ i ,#*.#R ., f P , 1 . .1 * T -- I , - ./ I '.a ... . , . .:1 .31'ha i W : D.Ill,2/235.Qk.'2 +A, 54 i .Â· , . ~ d..r.,69*- - '.' t '21 :i ; 3:/.11 7- ; :-7 Â· a. 1% ' - 4 -*1-:_ r.gÂ·~48.,2~:P- '.r,j?:Â· :' ; 115 .6*.-m 4 ,*.fÂ·. r Â·,- ' P 91 ti,2-3 -' . w- 1 .4, ' >,61'' 316,2.Â£7: 1. ..:/ , , ?F77 ... 5,4 I - -- - I. Â· 11 ..2 i . 1 . i .' L .C 1 1 3 1 1 : 4 p ... , d .-,- ---1---- --- -- - 4 ' r b j l 1 I -64 , :.1 UN 1 .1 301211 1.1 1 Â·. i.l-1 liti,{iii ! 1 1 11 4. ' i * i r Â£ |:'i'.E!-,1 I: 4~Â·,i..,Â·LÂ·4 -1~. L /kl.}L:f.l i.1,~r:,1.;f.~i,4Â»~ . 6 4..13 .Lit*%4.Wit/1,~t#Â·f' Fâ‚¬â€¢~04& 11 1 1 ... -1. ...: . 11..â‚¬f. ., . : 6 0,ALK".â€¢ ' '182.;i 1 . ' 2 'w : 3 4.4-4 .4.4,-4,â€¢â€¢ Â·Â· ,-=:'1:Â·01.*604.44*1114â€¢414**agot*leAVY#j#dsÂ¢*Mitw.e.~~,~,p~.45 :, Â· 2 -' 1''Agidk&Â£4 2~'~~~~~~f?~p>943%~t,*~~t~~ F *RA- --:m~;42Â·-1â€¢3~'pÂ·=r'.1 j .1 Â·r . lit '-it.. 1 - =,i.7 I . - Â·*fl' 1 , . i '' - 1,Â·' e . .4 I. === - h . . , .3 -Â·'--'' 4 4 '. - I 11& Â· - 1 - f. .'11 1 RUIL- ' 712 9 , 1 1 - .3 !1 1 1 . - 1 t t 'li - il ---4 - f E 4 4. ' 14 f , . 1 . , 4,-1 r I , .99 Â· 41. . AM 4 - * Â· --t / . ,, 6 4 r i... '.. ' 4.: 4?: I 4 4 lf~ ' 'e' , 1/ i '' --2, r , . . 4 L - - ,~ i Â© , , I .1 p , . . . U 41 . - 4.Ktk..'f \\ 4 . 4..,1.. 1 23 1 ' ' . Â·:IdNE; 1 f . 1 ..4. Ui Â£ I I . I. , . .2.1, ' 1 . C '1#frj ,#1 34 ..#.1 A \1 ' 1 , \.9..3 1.7 p -..4, 1 -''hÂ· ~ 4,Â«1) 11 6 , 6, 4 f . 1. 1 b<Ji-ibb I I - 79'04.4;4-4.,Ft'., I*,.7. u - '.. 1 - ...IF-,36" ?: f - I / 2,9/'t 4 3 , .... 1 I, -I -1 1-2 4 1 11 . 1 -=K 6. , 1 . r . 0.2 ':ir .. . -D..e...,-I --,0/.i .. m.-â€ž , , , 1 17~ . $4-- - - -*...0'yo.-- 1 / I ' 1 1 (ah ) 12/ 1 f i 1 1 1 171.11.. -- 4% j it J &:It, I ....... 1 B ..1.1 7 1.-r.[(.....7 3 , . - . I. I -1.--el. . .,.2 . ~ â‚¬ i 2 ia- I .2 - I U ' 52:-I : ' . *' ~ I# -' ; 31: 4 : i' .1.1.1 3 1 '~ 4 3 3 5? w...f',.. . ; Â· i â€¢ i -". + -.* .3 - c . . 1.'" 7-.7 .-p, 2 'F.**' 'i:J : '91}i, /1 -L _011 ' .5 L '2. ! 1 . 11 -,4~ Â·;:'.. ~ .1.Â¢Â·Â·. L ..'2-l , . 1 : I , . 1 31,1 t .Â¥, , 11.1, Â·Â· -:Â· Â· 9.<, p.1 , 1 'Ch . ..el I L- 1.4. 1 ./- --- I.--*-T' 104 .-2Â·2 7.'411 41''Di,; 1 i .I .; p -~ii''I' Mi ll -11- 1 :1 1 --4. , 1 1 1 1 11 Â¢ r 1 . 1 1 1 1 3 - .. - Nr---4j MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer Re: Conceptual Development (Public Hearing): Holden-Marolt Ranching and Mining Museum Date: November 28, 1990 YOUR INDIVIDUAL ON-SITE REVIEW OF THE MUSEUM SITE IS NECESSARY PRIOR TO THIS MEETING. SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting HPC's Conceptual Development approval for the master plan of the 2-acre Holden- Marolt Ranching and Mining Museum. Development includes the restoration of the two "barn" structures, the reconstruction of the roof ridge cupola (main structure), display areas, and deck/landscaping treatments. APPLICANT: The Aspen Historical Society, represented by Graeme Means and Heidi Hoffman, architects ZONING: Currently, the parcel is zoned R-15 PUD/SPA, with an Â¥!Hil Historic Overlay, however, an application for the re-zoning to Public (PUB) is currently underway by the applicant: The larger parcel, including the Opal Marolt House and mill ruins, is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. This museum parcel is somewhat of a island within the National Register site. - PROJECT MONITORS: Charles Cunniffe and Roger Moyer, alternate DISCUSSION: The Development Review Standards are found in Section 7-601(D) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in character with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an H, Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. , Response: , The Planning Office finds that the applicant's proposal is well thought out, and generally sensitive to the historic resources and their relationship to the land. Our concerns focus on the following issues: 1. Building preservation and restoration (required to meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards - see attached) 2. Loading dock preservation (same comment as above) 3. Cupola reconstruction (must be based on accurate dimensions garnered from historic photos; staff is recommending a restudy of the cupola windows) 4. Display design, spacing and relationship to the structures (must be sensitive to the land and provide carefully considered visitor flow and access) 5. Newly proposed east stair to main structure (appears necessary for building code; must be carefully designed) 6. Deck area off loading dock (has potential to significantly impact facade of Sampling Works building, and how "meadow" area is used. 7. Landscaping, fences, signage, lighting, etc. (critical to overall interpretation of site) Staff will be discussing these issues in depth at the meeting. Please refer to the application narrative for historic and preservation details. The Preservation Master Plan for this site, prepared by staff last summer, shall be utilized in the development of the Final Development application. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The Planning Office has supported the use of this parcel for a sensitively designed and managed ranching and mining museum site. We feel that with careful HPC review, a sensitive design approach by the applicant, and a general clear understanding of the nature of this site, this standard will be met. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of the designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: Clearly, we find that the proposal meets this standard. We are enthusiastic in our desire to work closely with the Historical Society in this comprehensive, cultural effort. 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: Our architectural concerns have been primarily 2 outlined under staff's response to Standard #1. The HPC should carefully outline ALTERNATIVES: Approval as proposed, approval with conditions, table action or denial, finding that the Standards for Development Review have not been met.' RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends HPC grant Conceptual Development approval for the Holden-Marolt Museum Site subject to the conditions as follows: 1. Preservation activities shall adhere to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. 2. The sub-committee, consisting of the two project monitors and staff, shall meet on-site with the applicant to review all details of preservation, restoration and reconstruction prior to the submission of a Final Development plan. The sub-committee's findings shall be incorporated within the Final Development application for full HPC review. 3. The cupola shall be designed as a reconstruction, based upon accurate historic research. A restudy of the cupola windows is recommended. 4/'Â·,4 -za.,0-,+04-0 4. All landscape, deck, ditch, fence, etc. details shall be submitted in the Final Development application. 5. Exact major building materials (roof, windows, railings, etc.) shall be submitted as required in the Final Development application. memo.hpc.marolt 3 The Secretary of the Interior is responsible for 4. Most properties change over time; those changes establishing standards for all national preservation that have acquired historic significance in their own programs under Departmental authority ond for right shall be retained and preserved. advising Federal agencies on the preservation of historic properties listed or eligible for listing in 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction the National Register of Historic Places. techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be presenÂ·ed. The Standards for Rehabilitation, a section of the Secretary's Standards for Historic Preservation ' 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired Projects, address the most prevalent prese;vation rather than replaced. Where the severity of deteri- treatment today: rehabilitation- Rehabilitation is oration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, defined as the process of returning a properk to O the new feature shall match the old in design, color. state of utility, through repair or alteration, whic}i texture, and other visual qualities and. where possible. makes possible an efficient contemporary use while materials. Replacement of missing features shall be preserving those portions and features of the pro- substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial perty which are significant to its historic, archi- evidence. tectural, and cultural values. - Â·- 7. Chemical or phvsical treatments, such as sand- =â‚¬, I blasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall The Secretary of the Interior's x. not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if Standards for Rehabilitation appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 1 8. Significant archcological resources affected by a The Standards that follow were originally published in project shall be protected and presened. If such 1977 and revised in 1990 as part of Department of the Interior regulations (36 CFR Part 67, Historic resources must be disturbed. mitigation measures shall be undertaken. Preservation Certifications). They pertain to historic buildings of all materials, construction types, sizes, and occupancy and encompass the exterior and the interior , - 9. New additions, exterior alterations. or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that of historic buildings. The Standards also encompass characterize the property, The new uork shall be related landscape features and the building's site and i differentiated from the old and shall be compatible environment as well as attached, adjacent or related with the messing, size, scale. and architectural features new construction. to protect the historic integrity of the property and its The Standards are to be applied to specific rehabil- k environment. tation projects in a reasonable manner, taking into 10. New additions and adjacent or related new consideration economic and technical feasibility. construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future. the essential form and 1. A property~ shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change integrity Of the historic property and its environment to the defining characteristics of the building and its would be unimpaired. site and environment. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place. and use. Changes that create a faise sense of historical development. such as adding conjectural features or architectural clements from other buildings. shall not be undertaken. HOLDEN-MAROLT RANCHING AND MINING MUSEUM CONCEPTUAL HPC SUBMISSION Submitted By: The Aspen Historical Society 620 W. Bleeker St. Aspen, CO 81611 925-3721 Prepared By: October, 1990 Graeme Means Heidi Hoffmann P.O. Box 4956 925-2867 Aspen, CO 81612 925-9150 , F. 2 + ATIYGIM -NI: 1 IAND USE APPI_J CATION FERN ) Proj eat Name Holden/Marolt Museum ) Project Location Marolt Open Space See Attachment G (ind.icate Street address, lot & block rinter, legal descrip'licil wherÂ·e aa>ropriate) ) Present Zcning R-15A PUD SPA 4) Lot Size 1.9 Acres ) Applicant's Name, Address & Phone # Aspen Historical Society 620 W. -Bleeker St., Aspen 925-3721 Representative' s Name, Address & Phone # G ra eme Means P.O. Box 4956, Aspen 925-9150 ) Type of Application (please check all that apply): Conditional Use Comeptaial SPA X conceptual Historic Dev. Special Review Final SPA Final Historic Dev. 8040 Green-line Conceptual FUD Minar Historic Dev. Stream Margin Final POD Historic Demolitian Mountain View Plane Subdivis ian Historic Designaticn C~xicininiumization - 'rext/Map Amendmerrt CMOS Allotment Int Split,/I.ot I=ine - (2439 E>omption Adj ustinent Descriptian of Exi_sting Uses (rxmber and type of existiry stnrhIres; approximate sq. ft. ; flimber of bedroans; arry previous apprevals granted to the property). 0 Open space, trails, existing 1920 ft.' building, existing 400 ft2 building, both used as storage Description of Development Application Restoration and renovation of two existing historical buildings for use as a ranching/mining museum. ) Have yoU attacinl the folla.ing? x ksponse to Attadlment 2, Minimum Suhnissicn Ccrrtents X Response to Attachment 3, Specific Suhnission Ccrients x Response to Attachment 4, Review Standards for Your Application MINIMUM SUBMISSION CONTENTS 1. See Attachment A 2. See Attachment G , 3. See Attachment B 4. See Attachment C 5. Written Description Of Proposal Building Description The Holden-Marolt Building was built in 1891 as an ore processing facility for the Holden lixiviation works. Closed in 1893, most of the lixiviation plant has been dismantled or destroyed over the years. Only the Holden-Marolt barn remains. The barn began a new life in the 1930's as part of the Marolt Ranch. Only minor modifications were made to the building at this time and that situation continues today. Also existing in good condition is the salt shed which measures approximately 32 feet x 25 feet. Thus, we have a building which remains very much intact from a historical and structural standpoint, and also represents the two primary economic activities of early Aspen. This wood frame structure is of post and beam construction utilizing heavy spruce and iron rod trusses for roof support. It measures approximately 60 feet x 32 feet and is approximately 30 feet to the - peak. Fortunately, the building was very well built initially (due to its original use) and remains in excellent structural condition today. Some areas do need to be addressed however. See the structural report (Attachment D) for further details. Museum Description Proposed use of the Holden-Marolt Barn, salt shed and surrounding 1.9 acre property is as a museum interpreting the mining and ranching heritage of the Roaring Fork Valley. The barn building will contain display areas, meeting and demonstration space, visitor reception area, toilet facilities, and storage. The loading dock area will serve as entry to the museum building, informal gathering area, and focus area for larger gatherings and special events. The salt shed will contain a work shop area where exhibit material will be repaired and maintained. The lean to shed off of the barn will be used for display of historic exhibits. The remaining 1.9 acre area will be used for exhibit display stations, pedestrian and bike trails, and demonstrations of agricultural and irrigation techniques. There will be no vehicles allowed on the property except emergency and service vehicles. For a further description of the concept, see Attachment E. Review Standards A. The proposed development is compatible in character with designated historic structures located on the parcel in that a major element of the proposal is to restore the shell of the building as historically and as accurately as possible. Please see discussion of proposed exterior treatments in specific submission contents. B. The intention of the City of Aspen in purchasing the Marolt parcel is to create an open space amenity with park like aspects (such as this museum). This will hopefully ensure that the areas surrounding the museum site will retain an open and agricultural feeling. Thus, a barn type structure is compatible with this environment. C. The very essence of this project is to enhance the cultural value of these designated historic structures. D. This proposal is designed to enhance and preserve for the future the architectural integrity of this structure. SPECIFIC SUBMISSION CONTENTS 1. See Attachment F 2. A concept which is fundamental to this entire proposal is that the two structures be restored as accurately as possible while also considering their new use and modern standards of safety. Final decisions will require further investigation, but a discussion of options follows. SidinR The existing siding consists of a double layer of lx8 wogd planks vertically attached directly to the timber framing system. One hundred years of exposure has resulted in wonderful textures and colors. We feel that preserving this patina is an important part of a restoration effort. Our hope is that in areas where the building shell needs to be made more weather tight, this can be accomplished by an interior wall treatment. We hope to limit siding repair to renailing loose boards and patching with old boards as required. Windows The existing six over six wood windows are deteriorated to such a degree that we propose installing new wood frame, single pane windows fabricated using the existing windows as a pattern. Wood frame, single pane storm windows could be fitted over these for winter. Doors The loading doors on the west side of the building (main entry) are in - good condition and would need only minor repair to be serviceable. Others to be rebuilt as needed. Roof The existing asphalt shingles are badly in need of being replaced. They have been laid directly on the 1 by 6 roof sheathing. We propose to add rigid foam insulation on top of the 1 by 6 sheathing. It has been determined that the original roof was wood shingle, and we intend to reroof with wood shingles. West Overhang The west roof overhangs the loading dock and projects approximately 8 feet from the building wall. This has been identified as a structural problem and is in need of repair and reinforcement. We see two potential soultions to this problem. The first is to cut two fee off of the overhang thus Ieducing it to approximately 6 feet and thus reducing the loading on this portion of the roof. This solution would allow the existing supporting trusses to remain as is. There is historical precedent for this solution in that I believe that at some time two feet was added to the original roof. The second solution would be to reinforce the existing trusses and possibly the joist system in order to carry the roof loads. This solution would change the appearance of the wood trusses which are a very prominent feature of the loading dock area. Lean To Shed The lean to shed on the south facade is not original, possibly being added by the Marolts. This has been identified as being in need of structural reinforcement (see Attachment D). This will be done with new columns and beams of rough sawn timber as per existing. Loading Dock The existing loading dock runs the full 60 feet length of the building and is approximately 5'-6" wide. It is constructed of timber posts, 2 x 10 rough sawn joists and two layers of 2" wood docking. It is approximately 4'-6" above grade. As identified in the structural report, it has deteriorated significantly. We propose to make only minor repairs to this platform and to utilize it to display exhibits of mining and ranching. This solution would not require guardrails or extensive redecking. Thus, a larebe part of the rich texture of the old wood would be retained. A new entry deck would be built using materials compatible with the original. This deck would be lower than the existing platform and secure both as entry to the museum and as a gathering place at the entrace. Configuration of this deck would be determined after trail layout and handicap access to the museum have been resolved. East Stair We propose to add a wooden -stairway to the existing door on the east side of the building. This stair would be built of wood members compatible with mining era construction methods and materials. Final design of this stair will be determined after building code standards, handicap access and fire code standards have been determined. Cupola Historical photographs indicate a "cupola" of approximately 14' x 14' atop the barn structure. Our intention is to rebuild this structure using materials and designs similar to the original. It is known that this cupola was removed by the Marolts. Investigation of the existing structure should give adequate clues to its original size and design. Reasons for wanting to rebuild this structure include historical restoration; a desire to get light and ventilation for the museum; and providing a lookout where visitors can view the surrounding area and inspect the timber trusswork supporting the roof. The cupola, as shown in historical photos, has no significant openings for light or air as is consistent with its original use as a hoist for ore. Its proposed new use would necessitate a significant amount of fenestration which would be a departure from the original design. (See (= Attachment H) Site Plan (See Attachment I) A conceptual idea of the main elements of the site plan follows. Many details depend on final determination of access issues, trails, fire considerations, etc. which will be worked out at the Planning and Zoning Review. The barn itself will contain mining and ranching exhibits and will require a modest entrance fee. The salt shed will be used as a working shop where exhibit material will be restored. The 1.9 acres surrounding the buildings will be treated as an historical park designed to attract the casual visitor seeking a pleasant environment, as well as those museum visitors intent on viewing exhibits. Outdoor ranching apd mining exhibits will be arranged in "pods". Each pod will contain exhibits of related equipment pertaining to either ranching or mining. There will be a clear distinction between ranching pods and mining pods. Mining exhibits will be displayed on low podiums constructed of heavy wood timbers. Ranching exhibits will be displayed on low bases of red sandstone similar to that which forms the foundation for the barn. Paths leading to these pods will be treated differently to enhance this distinction. A pond which presently exists will remain as shown. Irrigation ditches are also proposed as shown on the plan. The precise configuration of these water features would be subject to change throughout the life of the project. Fences were a very important part of the ranching scene and we propose to utilize them for both utilitarian and aesthetic reasons. Various fences of different vintages exist on site and we would retain them where possible or carefully move and restore them where they interfere with the proposed circulation. Vegetation would consist primarily of those species which were commonly found on ranches. Open areas between pods would be largely composed of nature grains and grasses with small pockets of nature wildflowers. Berry bushes would line certain fences and fill edges of the property. The southeast corner of the property might contain a potatoe patch and possibly a vegetable garden with pea fence or apple trees. 3. The proposed design is extremely compatible with the historical nature of the building. Significant effort will go towards preserving the physical building. Just as important, the building will find a new use which will turn it into a treasured community resource and thus ensure that it will be preserved into the future. 4. The proposed development falls under Category B. "Erection Or Remodeling Of Combinations Of Or Multiples Of Any Single Feature Of A Structure Which Has Not Been Determined To Be Minor." D PATTILLO ASSOCIATES STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS March 23, 1989 Aspen Historical Society c/o Graeme Means P.O. Box 4956 Aspen, Colorado 81612 RE: HOLDEN/MAROLT BARN Analysis of Existing Structure Project #89006 SCOPE This report is the result of a structural analysis of the existing "barn" structure on the Holden/Marolt property in Aspen, Colorado. We understand that this information will be used in consideration of converting the building to a public museum. The analysis includes checking the adequacy Of the gravity support systems using modern design loads and material properties. Also checked was the lateral stability (wind resistance) of the building. TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION The structure is of "post and beam" construction using rectangular heavy native timber members and is approximately 100 years old. The building is rectangular in shaper approximately 32 feet by 60 feet with a 6 foot loading dock along the west of the building. The loading dock is covered by a cantilevered roof eave. The main roof clear spans the 32 foot width with seven heavy timber and steel rod trusses spaced at 10 feet on center. The roof is composed of 2x8 rafters spanning across 8x8 timber purlins which span be tween each truss. The roofing material is corrigated metal over lx6 planking. The wall construction comprises two overlapping layers of lx6 lumber sheathing. This wall sheathing is attached directly to the heavy timber posts, beams, and diagonal sway braces. Each short face of the building has three 3 foot wide by 6 foot windows. Each long face has three 3 foot wide by 6 foot windows and three 4 foot wide by 7 foot door openings. The floor surface is 2 inch planking supported by 2x12 joists. The floor joists bear onto four rows of timber beams and posts in a 3 to 4 foot tall crawl space. Each bearing row rests on grouted stone masonry strip footings which extend into the soil to an unknown depth. Small square holes (approximately 3 feet by 3 feet) penetrate the floor structure over three 5 foot by 6 foot by 5 foot deep pits. The walls of the pits are partially lined with stone masonry which are incorporated with the strip footing foundations. PO. BOX 751 0 GLENVVOOD SPRINIGS, COLORADO 81602 0 [303] 945-9695 Holden/Marolt Barn March 23, 1989 Page two ANALYSIS OF STRUCTURE Personnel from Pattillo Associates have made two site visits to inspect the Holden/Marolt barn to measure material sizes, check the quality of lumber, review connection details, and to check for any signs of building instability. In general, the structure is in good condition. Most joists, beams and posts are free of decay or other signs Of deterioration. Calculations also show that most of these structural elements meet present building code requirements. Overall, there appears to be no instability of the structure; the walls and floor are approximately level and plumb, and little or no cracking was observed in the foundation. Following is a summary of five general areas of the structure and an outline of specific areas that need attention. In addition to these areas, there may need to be minor repairs throughout the structure, such as an occasional cracked or decayed joist that needs replacement. Roof At their present span and spacing, the roof joists meet local building code load and deflection requirements, although the 8x8 purlins which transfer load from the joists to the trusses have inadequate shear capacity. A single 2x8 needs to be added alongside the 8x8 purlin and together they need a steel hanger to support them at the truss bearing points. The heavy timber trusses are in remarkably good shape for their age. The design leads us to believe that it was probably originally engineered. The only portion of the truss which does not appear to meet present code requirements is the connection between the sloping top cord and the horizontal bottom cord. This connection may be remedied by through-bolting a steel plate to each side of each connection. Floor The floor appears to have been designed for heavy equipment and machinery; as a result, the floor framing presently meets, and in most cases exceeds, building code live load requirements for the museum type loadincs proposed (100 PSF for assembly areas, per UBC 1988). However, some repairs will be needed because of the holes in the floor framing above the pits in the crawlspace. New joists and floor decking will need to be added at these areas. Holden/Marolt Barn March 23, 1989 Page three Foundation No foundation problems were observed. The timbers used for the beams and posts in the crawlspace are of adequate size to transfer gravity loads to the masonry foundation. While the exact construction and bearing depth of the masonry strip footings are unknown, there are very few signs of any distress (i.e., cracking) to the foundation or in the superstructure. We can safely assume that if the foundation is in this condition after 100 years, it will be suitable for the building's new intended use. As a precautionary measure, we suggest that the types of materials used in the restoration be compatible with the rustic character of the building. Sheetrock or plaster materials, for example, tend to exhibit more signs of structural movements. While little distress can be found in the superstructure, it is all of wood construction, which is very forgiving of foundation or framing movement; therefore, signs of potential distress problems with more rigid materials cannot be readily recognized. Exterior Loading Dock and Roof ; The loading dock is the poorest part of the structure. Much of the joists and beams show evidence of decay and general deterioration and there are portions that have collapsed. We suggest that the entire loading dock be removed and rebuilt. The cantilevered roof over the loading dock is well below the requirements of the building code. The 6x6 members which pick up the roof support columns are greatly overstressed at their present soan. We suggest cutting back the entire roof structure approximately two feet. Alternately, the eave structure may be rebuilt using larger cantilever members, although this option would probably entail greater expense. Side Shed Structure The shed on the south side of the barn appears to have been added after the original construction and as with the main structure, is generally in good condition. The only portion of the shed that needs attention is the roof. The roof joists span too great a distance to meet current snow load requirements.Â· A new beam supporting these joists at midspan should be added, along with new column(s) and associated footing(s) for support. SUMMARY Even considering the corrections outlined above, the main barn structure is in remarkably good condition for a building built in the late 1800's. The floor structure is strong and well founded, Holden/Marolt Barn March 23, 1989 Page four and the roof structure only needs minor additions to meet present codes. The most restoration work is needed at the exterior loading dock and side shed roof. Overall, the building is structurally sound, and after the outlined repairs, should provide many additional years of useful service. Please be aware that our investigation has necessarily been limited to those conditions which are readily observable in the building. Other conditions may exist which warrant structural repair. Periodic observations of the repairs and renovation by a qualified Engineer are recommended. Specific repair plans should be prepared by a Professional Engineer prior to commencing any work. This completes our report. Please contact me should you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, ~~~~~A A /19 i ) 6 /1,1,- "jut*UllitfUU/,49 Robert M. Pattillo, P.E. -9~ pA KTH E le p %>, 92:Fl:ST Eli~ 7 .4/<,/ RMP/kmk e Qt: 6 0.1- . 2 .b itk 16794 HÂ·* wpfile:HOLDEN 3 A..4 .tr.:00:4 Â»3%39*. \MUUMON , h HOLDEN-MAROLT RANCHING AND MINING MUSEUM INFORMATION SHEET The Aspen Historical Society is dedicated to preserving, protecting, and promoting the histÂ·lry of Aspen and the Roaring Fork Valley for the benefit c: present End firture generations. THE PROPERTY: The site and associated structures are the last remaining in Aspen and Pitkin County representing the silver mining and ore reduction process and represent state and nationa! historic significance. Equally important is the site's "second history" representing ranching, the major economic force in the Roaring Fork Valley for niany of the quiet years. Built in 1891 by Ebon Holden, the Holden Smelting and Milling Complex was a smelting company for Aspen's silver industry. The lixivation works was an early day ore separation process, utilizing leaching to concentrate silver ore for shipment on the Colorado Midland Railroad. At one time the largest of its kind in the world, the plant was five stories high and had the tallest smokestake in Colorado when it was built. The sampling works building and salt shed still stand. A spur of the railroad was constructed to reach the special loading dock on the side of the sampling works. Sometimes known as the "grainery", it was used as a barn by the Marolt family in the twentieth century. TH E P LAN: Located between Castle Creek Road, Colo Highway 82, and Castle Creek the property is o'v-:ned by the citizens of the City of Aspen. The Society seeks a long- term lease for 1.9 acres of the property including the structures known as the "Marolt Barn" and shed. A long-term lease is essential before the fund-raising for the project can be done. A three-phase plan for the on-site preservation of the structure and the property has been developed. Phase I is the restoration of the shell and provides the structural repairs, stabilization, and new roof required for a hundred year old building. Phase Il is for the museum amenities including heating, restrooms, and interior finishing. Phase 111 is museum exhibits. A total cost estimate for the first two phases is $186,000, including labor. Labor costs could be significantly reduced with volunteers. The museum concept will include educational and interpretive presentations. It will be a hands-on historical resource complete with demonstrations of old equipment, historic displays and talks about the history of the area. The Society's goal is to have a living museum where the visitors can find a vantage point to look back on the valley's history. OUR SUPPORT: The Aspen Historic Preservation Committee has endorsed our efforts to restore the Marolt barn for a ranching museum. (June 16, 1988 memo) "The (City of Aspen) Council endorses the concept of an Historic Ranching Exhibit on the Marolt Property as an amendment to the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan ...'1 (Resolution No, 20, Series 1988; July 25,1988) The City of Aspen has designated the site a historic landmark pursuant to Section 7-703 of the Land Use Code. (Ordinance No. 45, Series 1988; December 12, 1988) "The Community will benefit from having the historical society care for the historic site and buildings." (Editorial, Aspen Times, March 16, 1989) "Given the proximity of the site to downtown...a wonderful opportunity exists for interpreting the mining and ranching history of the Complex for the citizens, as well as visitors." (Colorado Historical Society, Cnristine Pfal Preservation Planner) THE COMMITTEE: Mark Howard, Project Chairman 925-4399(v.,), 963-3897(h) Carl Bergman, Aspen Historica! Society, President 925-5550(v,1 925Â·7199(h) Rick Newton, Aspen Historical Society, 925-7973(wh 923-4939(h) Graerne Means, 925-9150(w) Mark Fowler, 925-123004 John Moore, 925-9416(hi) Christie Kienest, 925-8921(h) Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Pianner-CRy of Aspen liaison, 920-5090 S 71â€¢ 20Â·,- 1 1 , 1 .1. 222 2,~5.5. I \ 2 - - 1 2 G <' A VEL ROAD 4 2 1-Â·32.WAY 82 AREA 1 90 ACRES +/7~Â·i f. -%/-6 3- 93--__3 42 ---*. --n- / / -\43 7 â‚¬ i 2 j 1 10 ' GRAVEL Ch G f TRAIL Â£ 1 \\ ,\ j t \ Â¥ + 1 --.'. 98\ A,SO,LE.00 S ,21'lif LEGAL DESOR I P J- CON A TRACT OF' LANI) BEING A 1 9 ACRE MORE ON LESS PORTION OF THE MARALT RANCH AS PLATTED I N PLAT ]90(.)1< 1 2 AT PAGE 1 OF THE PITKiN ./. COUN-I 'f RECORDS S] CUATED IN SECTIoN 12 10WNSHIP 10 SIc,UTH, RANCE 8 5 WES.r OF .]HE Gth PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, CIVY OF ASPEN P 1-1'KIN COUNTY . COLORADO DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BE(JINNING AT.Till: NORTHEAST (L(.-)[?t~' lEn C A NUMBER 5 REBAR WI'I H CAP 1 61 29) WHENCE THE WEST 1/4 CORNER OF G ECTION 1 2 13FARS N 60 -10' 08" W 1 939 5,3 FEET AND THE BLM MONUMENI -ALIMUTH'' BEAkS N (77 38'5(J''W HIENCE 5 un 47'05"W 337.72 1-I 2, A NUM!1}-'R 9 ki-:HAR Wl !]1 ('Ain 16! 2 4 FHENCE 5 78 41'46 "W 162.68 EN' 1'0 A NUMBER 5 REBAR WITH CAP 1 4 1 1,9 CHENCE N ]5 21'05 -W 168 19 FT 'I U A NUMBER 5 REBAR WI'l'H CAP 'L n THENCE N 11 45'31-W 185.20 E-r 70 A NUMBER 5 REBAk WITH CAP .h 16129 h b rn THENCE N 20 00'E 1 03 52 Mr 1 () A NUMBER 5 REHAR W[TH CAP 16 129: 17 1 11 73 I 1 70 11]E POINT (31Â· UDS I NN I NG I HENCE 5 71 20'25 5 c.'()N-IAI WING 1 90 ACRES MORE ON LENS r--T f i~----r--~ 6 --f - 0 1-j 11- Â·- U _.1 L l = -1 L - J . 811 lEft_Trrof L. Li IL_-1-_1 12_L_-t ~ 11 lili !1 1 11 1111.- 1111111 11 , 111 111 ,Ill: i, il ! ~ Hill i:' 1 11]. : 1 .1 1 Â· a, ! i 1. 11 L,lili'S:1 ilil .1: d 'ili ; 1/ 11 1' 1 11; 19:.AIL!.1;,~ : 11. 2 1 ; 4 1 ! |' |' 1' " '1 1' 11 li 11 !~ i, i, 4 11 1: 11 H A ;I :1 1i 1! 1i 11 11 11 1, Â·i l: li ll i Z ': 11 1 ! , t , 72 67- 2-1--Ev/Â«7- 1 OF\.1- 1/4-,1 = 11 I - 11 <X = 1,1 1 hi Â»-0-11 1 1 .11 !~i h<X -977 51 1 ; 730\ \\\ ....94 -526' 1, 1/ t. \20\ . I \\ 1. 1 1 1 . 1 , 1 -4 - 1 - Ir..1 ~:1 Ir ~1.4 .11 ;j'!:i ' 1 L 1 - N o Fer-3-LE ELEb/>VT- 1-0 N 11 1 1/6 - I 1_ r--1 1.-b. MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer Re: Minor Development: Little Annie's, 517 E. Hyman Ave. Date: November 28, 1990 SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting HPC's approval for the relocation of the entry door., to increase the width of the entrance way to allow for better egress. An encroachment license was granted by Council approximately eight years, to allow the owner to enclosed the "front porch". It should be noted that staff is still researching any conditions that might have been placed on that encroachment license through the City Clerk's office. APPLICANT: John Hamwi, represented by Stan Mathis, architect ADDRESS: 517 E. Hyman Ave. ZONING: CC, Commercial Core Historic District (Structure is not historic) 4 DISCUSSION: The Development Review Standards are found in Section 7-601(D) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in character with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an H, Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. Response: We find that this standard has been met. The modification is slight and we find it to be an improvement to the facade of this structure. 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. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of the designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: We find that this standard has been met. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. 1 Response: We find that this standard has been met. ALTERNATIVES: Approval as proposed, approval with conditions, table action or denial, finding that the Standards for Development Review have not been met. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends HPC grant Minor Development approval for the proposal at 517 E. Hyman Ave. memo.hpc.517eh 2 ATrACâ„¢ENT 1 IAND USE APPLICATION POIM 1) Project Name Little Annies Eating House 2) Project Location 517 E. Hyman Ave, Aspen (indicate street address, lot & block nUInber, legal description where appropriate) 3) Present Zoning 4) Int S ize John Hamwi 920-1490 5) Applicant ' s Name, Address & Ihone # Stan Mathis Arhcitectture & Planning 6) Representative' s Name, Address & Ihone # 105 S. Fifth St., Aspen 920-1434 7) Type of Application (pleake check all that apply) : Conditional LIse - Conceptual SPA Conceptual Historic Dev. Special Review Firal SPA Firal Historic Dev. V 8040 Greenline - Conceptual PUD , Minor Ilistoric Dev. Stream Margin Final IUD IListoric Demolition Mountain View Plane Subdivision Historic Designation Condaniniumization TextÂ»lap Amerximent - CNES Allotment Lot Split/Lot Line - (NQS Exepticn Adjustment 8) Description of Existing Uses (râ€¢mfer and type of existing structures; approximate sq. ft. ; Ilmber of bedroans; any previous approals granted to the property). Restaurant 9) Description of Devele,nent Application Relocate entry door - move it approxl' 6" to the west, and increase the width of the entrance way 10) Have you attached the following? Response to Attachment 2, Minimum Submission Contents Respanse to Attathment 3, Specific Sulnission Contents Response to Attachment 4, Review Standards for Your Application November 20, 1990 Roxanne Eflin City of Aspen Aspen, CO 81611 130 S. Golena St. RE: Little Annies Eating House - Reniodel 517 E.Humon Ave Aspen, CO LÂ·' CÂ·Ul 1-,1-1.Â·NUI IC, Wit-efererice to the 8uu,:Â·e picipe. i '.iN, 1,Â·,~Ii<Cii 15 IULÂ·U,-EG hi oii Mich.i-i i i.: 1-1 7 01 , 1.J 14 u j c. u , 6 1., Â·AÂ·' e 81-6 1-e q U C Â·_, 1. - ing opproval for the rel o co i. ing o f the e rit. 24 1814 door We would like to move the entry door oppro .imotely 2' 6" to the .-, A n'004 aiiu increose Y,Â·'ldth of the -4.- U , i 1.1 0 1~ CE! 9/iD' ' Enclosed 4 0 u wil l f ind (9) copi es o f the proposed f Rio r ci 1 8 t-i , 8 j m i. 1-i e existing f toor plon :.uemolit.ion pion). Ula 1 <Gthis STAN MAnus ARCHITECTERE iND PLAWNG Post Office Box 1984 Aspen Colorado 81612 303/920-1434 W 60 02 d - GU-r 1-1022. 512.API 1 4 4 4 - Euttwaruâ‚¬141- -- - 6,2.1 M -- - Le:* a mÂ· -~4-~ \F/ / puyÂ»1Â¥-(El WALL -1 -11111 1 4,1,1 -11 1-T r- A*F{ZiÂ»10744414#C[A LL 11 -----tr 1 11 i WEI,*-02*m*2WlbIDOW# TOCM*Tharâ‚¬**9*dit , --TI [1Â·1 1 A 11 1 ~4 -----l - -= -f----~ - i I=*-| ' '111,1 1:1 :,1.1 - 1 ebl ITRIA QUE22*Ekl --- y" WALL A 2EA-TO NATEU (* NORTH ELEV. -7174 f =- i top - - 0% 1 4.- . 4 E h k MAN CH I N 6 %1 M I N 11 \ 16 ] \ AUSC O M +6Pe KI H IEil-OACAL SOCJ all A961\ 1, CD EX 63-6, Vgeâ‚¬TA-1-ION 9 Â£-ANDPÂ«*vts > 4~ 0 0 C 4914. 1 8 0 8 0. \ \ \\ \J\\ \ 4 - -0349~<6 4 . e I N F 0-1--0,46 ~ g.krt/154-r- 4.1 . i , i 1 C, . 9 - 4\ \> 1 11 . 4-\--ff 4 4%1 1 V. FOTOrce _ $ #0.--2>99344~~1 \ 1 . - - I - > \ 1 F/ 22<707*. PZPAD -- 0 > 4 trY \ 11 ~ 1 Z t. 0 0 / . Â·r+ . , 7-M/6 729/950 Ch C 1 -t 4-3 .1 - 29<me/7- ,Â«als -= . 2 .- \\\E kA VEL\ 4 % Â¥ 1 - lifil 065 . 4 4dl ' i . ' ' N , . . LANDS<-Ae/614 - 0\ 6% 2 %\1 + \ I, -- j , 1 \ b . , ----- 1- j-- . / 1 1 . . - /V \ \\ .LI '* 1/ , 1\\~ \, -- IffieATION PITCH \ 1 1 -\ f 1 i c,- .ti i 1 14 0? 16- ---Â·Â·--r \\ .,lf j /: I I " 1 k . ENT-/Â«11260<. . 1 . N Decl</ C>UT- --- . 1 /; Ilr -1 l i ' . /% 1% - 0,~1 1 - / 1 t V f j t exft' 18>IT AMENS - 7: 1, 2 -' --I- I I *PnORIAL F>\CJ\)142) \41 -I \ l.ti '' \ lili,~tle . ,-I , ! .'i l . 4 i 4 * 11' ' . excre, ve,ger: 9 ~ \\ -- t exti/45/T/ 4/ 1 =- / e,A<De N d-,AA/O/~290*e \, - -% 1/< 0-)t' 1 / - / V - EtÂ©LIBBED Â»A/61*/U6 9 /MIA//A/6 Â»ak-9\ A 1% , 4 ~ il ~ 1-1 1 , 0 OUI-DootÂ« UttlerY 4 MUSEUM 4 . . . - . ./1 9 . t... 1 /1 - - , , -. I %47 - 0 r .- , \ 4 . t Â· o ex/diT AFEAt> Ul .0 / 1 <-4 XI 1 , 1. 1 /<' 1 , ., I. . 4 . . 4 r \ 0 2 U.M. ,=-EX. -- 1 --\ \ , <,'E) . ,-)/--.I--I-I--5 .1 . 04/5 78. Fifk/Ca p / YV< *. IN#. f. 4;-K/271Â« 1 aggv/ <26 1 I 4 - 9 57Â©64 66 >,4/925) 68/1*ca 5960 ' I i k 1 11- 2 4 1 ti/2\ r.1.. - ji r b/1 11 Â· 1 1 â€¢1 â€¢11 r 11~ 8 77â‚¬4/6 71 AW-0 '9 13 \\,\P ~ ~ 7 gn. Ill . Â¥-\009.46 .1 1 . It-- 1 ~Â»07 779.4 /LTD - PED. Â©ttl De,E, . --9....'.* . Il , .. 11 , . 11 mi .. -- 1/ 4 1 C U h 1 -\7 S 78Â° 41 46"W 162.68 - -- CONCBPTUAL tiPC SOBM/â‚¬SION NOV 2, /990 el -re FLAN A 1 06 \0 04 b %. 70 -,â€¢e: 7%?26 f, I. 61 891 - 4 /83 SUÂ· 0' 71 00 .1- J 1 1 1 1 1 01 1 1 11 - ' FLe re 1 1 , OF ED,Mt 11 1- 7 -1 1 ' Id ~9214 1 11 6 4 1 - 1 1 - If 1- 1 1 _- 4 122.bcATE 1â„¢- 1 1 1- - _-1 ul 11 A----P 1 1 1-1 4) 1 1 1 1 . 1 EXIal-.It-FR. OOL Url\- 1, ' REMODED I 1 11- 9 - 1 ! 2 22 0-00 , i A - 1 - - -1 r . 1 . 1 _ W _ 9 ~-- 21 .9 1- N 1 ' 6 1 *t Â· | , 4, -6 1 22... 1 1 6,1 I E---1 <0 / PRO Vi dE TE,1 9. SUPPoe- 1 Fog (E) Rzoof 4 2â‚¬MOVE *AMI - 1 T- 4 WALL . BELOWi -- - 4 6) & 1 1 9 - - ~1 B E MOVE (Â© E>CG LI] 0 2-\ WALL *DWOWN 0- 001â‚¬.O ./.,0 FRE~Nic of DUILSNA 2 k Z j 12.10. (20 Eld.Te>f Â¢ 12<Ga,*#62=4 - f- \ 0 - i e. e ~ . 1 Y C * ~ 1 i--1 . -220= 61 1 1 11 7 11 11-- -- -1 1 1 - 11Â£ 11 -1 3 i 1 1, f 2 12] f Llt tz 5hÂ· . , (1 JI Â¢ DEMOLITION - FLOOR PLAN VA" s 1 50 -- ~f" 47% 2- e..Â·NIB"' , *-ice )5=fc\1 ~ T.:- CD EELOL-A-r 12 (E) ELECT 122' x 24' FT-* te"OP AAâ€¢bEBOAWO UIâ‚¬A;i-Ege I.....1 -== 0 00 14/ 5 - 4.5 RE@Ae EU 1-0 EX-r. WALL 100 . 6(a) Prl,1132191-4 - ~ (14 m or- i I i i 7 4 â€ž r-Lf-8 1 1 1 1 1 1 lilli 1 - CON.5-1-202.-r htâ‚¬14 FleAM E P.LOO 2 -EN{14 L -1 03 1- --- r -1 1 FL 002 A-r OINIA'61 Al Re A UP 1-0 viAÂ»4 - _ - 41 - - - - .Ihit-TALL 110 4 PUPLE,x , j 'I. . - F-Loof2 ELEVATION 1*11 200< i 13 / /=Ii-:Id 4/0/4 CD I -**I--) - CE Al-r#IN C,LE.tâ‚¬E4TORÂ¥ 1 ' h -41 -00-Aqxo + FOC Cd-U21Â£ FAI,1- 11 1 -OV- 111 Or- 4 ==O J 1 1 - FIEAM E. eocÂ¥ oVER VI 9 11-11 . J V LUO -4- 22' o P NEW IOPERIN|46 f *r -1- -- ---- - -6 69416(Trp) .v- 4 cu) O c.~ IN â€¢0-r4 L L GLEIVE#-reer â€ž | '24 *>24 r+2. 1,2'trp A' WINoque pae 4 1 *4/ 4-â€¢e 21-BArt E.14. M | ~ - 4Â·. o ' 4 2662,11ON A , <3,4-r Al- ' G (E.bl FT# De-rA -* 0~- NEâ‚¬)7- Or 44'e poiNT -~ --LL Z | r *A ~ ~1-- F-- -- - --! (ED W,NOOkle -rD 3" 1,0, PIP'EGOL \ th 12Â£MAIN i r,-, -# EOLLI t ON (E,3 GON& Fru -- 1 11..,r 1 \ 11-_0' Lfiewâ‚¬ _ 1 ' 1 -iLL tty f 7"--f"' *C 36 co 2-*Uta - --- --4 9 LEI -- - A 1.12, 1 1 1 el . 1 1 l Â®* . 8 16= 4 +42/ 61 7 ; Â«//1=lv-(4112 -,4- 1 1 7-- 3 - S ' 6'Â·0_' 5'40 1 %46\ + I i 9 + 311 1 1 2 1 '92 -4 1 f LA - 13- C Na-rail- AJEEDY, Project Architect 1 WA'Â·ri N A- . 7 2 (4\ HEA-r 11*-r IN NEW , on/0 0 DONG, EATRY doLAIb ELNE#< PELTO | ia'd F~|XED 8A1:.TOP Â·4'74?"-ry< 1 00 9 Print Record 1 , BLOR F'Ge,1 1-r It/6/, e 4 too 3064--09* 000 8 -) 4 \3 -2,~ ~ FIXED '4ndP 60-TOOL- Al Revisions 12EOUILD EX-r. WALL -TO MIA-TCH EXI OT. W LAINDOWA 4 Ual N 6, /2. >t G 61- U De 8 \(0" 06, p < REMODELED - FLOOR PLAN Al 1 1 l/d "= I'-0' > ~ v r clu MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer Re: Cottage Infill Program: Copy of adopted Ordinance attached Date: November 28, 1990 Please review the attached copy of Ordinance 60, Series of 1990, adopting the regulations that create the new Cottage Infill Program. Jot down your questions or comments for discussion at this meeting. Glenn Rappaport is the Cottage Infill liaison to the HPC. ORDINANCE NO. 60 (Series of 1990) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE ASPEN LAND USE REGU1 ATIONS, CHAPTER 24 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, BY ADDING OR AMENDING DEFINITIONS AND BY AMENDING ARTICLES 5, 7, AND 8 OF CHAPTER 24 SO AS TO PROVIDE AND/OR CLARIFY REFERENCES TO ACCESSORY DWE:LLING UNITS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen wishes to encourage and provide for incentives for the development of affordable housing for residents of the City and has previously adopted legislation that promotes the development of accessory dwellings within single-family homes and duplex dwelling units; and WHEREAS, accessory dwelling units provide a mechanism to revitalize neighborhoods that have become idle due to the predominance of vacation and/or second homes; and WHEREAS, the City through the Aspen Historic Preservation Committee has been promoting and wishes to continue to promote the renovation and conversion of existing carriage houses and outbuildings as affordable habitable spaces and dwelling units; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to adopt a Cottage Infill Program to encourage and facilitate the renovation and conversion of carriage houses and outbuildings to affordable dwelling units for local residents; and WHEREAS, the construction of new detached accessory dwelling units and the renovation of existing detached secondary structures on parcels occupied by a primary residence will 1 facilitate an increase in the availability of affordable dwelling units. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN: Section 1 That Article 3, Sec. 3-101, of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, "Definitions as used in this Chapter", is hereby amended by adding a new definition "Accessory Dwelling Unit", and amending subsection "G" to the definition of "Floor Area", which shall read as follows: ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT means a separate dwelling unit that is located within or attached to a principal residence, having a entrance separate from the primary residence, or that is detached from a principal residence situated on the same parcel, containing not less than 300 nor more than 700 square feet of allowable floor area. An accessory dwelling unit shall be deed restricted to Resident Occupancy and shall not be a separate unit for density or sale purposes. FLOOR AREA, the definition of Floor Area, subsection G, shall be amended to read as follows: G. Accessorv Dwelling Unit. For the purposes of calculating floor area ratio and allowable floor area for a lot whose principal use is residential, the following shall apply: the allowable floor area of an attached accessory Â·dwelling unit shall be excluded up to a maximum of 250 2 square feet of allowable floor area or 50% of the size of the accessory dwelling unit, whichever is less; a detached accessory dwelling unit shall be excluded up to a maximum of 350 square feet of allowable floor area. This floor area exclusion provision only applies to accessory dwelling units which are 100% above natural grade and are subject to review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to Conditional Use review and approval, Section 7-304 of Chapter 24 of this Code. Section 2 That Article 5, Sec. 5-508 of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, "Accessory Dwelling Units", is hereby amended and it's subsections renumbered to read as follows: A. General Provisions: 1) Accessory Dwelling Units shall contain not less than 300 square feet of allowable floor area and not more than 700 square feet of allowable floor area. The unit shall be deed restricted, meeting the Housing Authority's guidelines for Resident Occupied Units and shall be limited to rental periods of not less than six months in duration. Owners of the principal residence shall have the right to place a qualified employee or employees of his or her choosing in the Accessory Dwelling Unit. Parking shall not be required 3 if the unit is a studio or one-bedroom unit, but one (1) parking space shall be provided on-site if the unit contains two (2) bedrooms and one (1) additional space shall be required for each additional two (2) bedrooms in the unit. 2) An attached accessory dwelling unit shall be subject to all other dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district. 3) A detached accessory dwelling unit shall only be permitted on parcels that have secondary and or alley access, excepting parcels with existing structures to be converted to detached accessory dwelling units, detached garages or carports where an accessory dwelling unit is proposed above, attached to, or contained within such detached garage or carport. Detached accessory dwelling units are prohibited within the R-15B zone district. B. Development Review Standards: The review standards for a detached accessory dwelling unit are as follows: 1. The proposed development is compatible and subordinate in character with the primary residence located on the parcel and with development located within the neighborhood; 2. Where the proposed development varies from the 4 dimensional requirements of the underlying Zone District, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall find that such variation is more compatible in character with the primary residence than the development in accord with dimensional requirements. The .following dimensional requirements may be varied: a) minimum front and rear yard setbacks; b) minimum distance between buildings on the lot; c) maximum allowed floor area may be exceeded up to the bonus allowed for accessory dwelling units; d) the side yard setback shall be a minimum of three (3) feet; e) the maximum height limits for detached accessory dwelling units in the R-6 zone district may be varied on the rear 1/3 of the parcel, however, the maximum height of the structure shall not exceed 16 feet. On Landmark Designated parcels and within an Historic Overlay District the HPC shall have the ability to make such height variations; f) maximum allowable site coverage may be varied UP to maximum of five (5) percent, on Landmark Designated parcels and within an Historic Overlay District the HPC shall have the ability to make such site coverage variations; g) in the case where the proposed detached 5 accessory dwelling unit is located on a Landmark designated parcel or within an Historic Overlay District only HPC may make dimensional variations pursuant to the standards of Section 5-508 B. 3. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Historic Preservation Committee may exempt existing non- conforming structures, being converted to a detached accessory dwelling unit, from Section 5-508 B.2.(a-g) provided that the non-conformity is not increased. 4. Conditional use review shall be granted pursuant to Section 7-304 Standards applicable to all conditional uses. C. Bandit Units: Any bandit dwelling unit which can be demonstrated to have been in existence on or prior to November 1, 1988, and which complies with the requirements of this section may be legalized as an Accessory Dwelling Unit, if it shall meet the health and safety requirements of the Uniform Building Code, as determined by the Chief Building Official. D. GMOS/Replacement Housing Credits. Accessory Dwelling Units shall not be used to obtain points in the affordable housing category of the Growth Management Quota System (GMQS). Only those units meeting the housing size, type, income and occupancy 6 guidelines or approval of the housing designee and the standards of Sec. 8-109 may be used to obtain points in the affordable housing category. Accessory dwelling units also may not be used to meet the requirements of Chapter 18 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, "Resident Multi-Family Housing Replacement Program." Section 3 That Article 7, Section 7-601, of Chapter 24 Of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, "General applicability and requirements", is hereby amended at subsection D(1)(a),"Review Standards for all Development in H, Historic Overlay District and all Development Involving Historic Landmarks" to read as follows: a. 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 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. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached 7 accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 5-508 (A). Section 4 That Article 8, Section 8-104 of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, "Exemptions", is hereby amended at subsection B. (1)(d), "Exemption by Commission", to read as follows: d. Accessory Dwelling Units. The development of no more than one Accessory Dwelling Unit on a parcel containing an existing detached residential unit or a duplex, and the development of accessory dwelling units in a newly constructed multi-family development which are not required to meet the Standards of Article 8. Section 5 In association with the compulsory review of Ordinance 1 (Series of 1990), this ordinance shall be evaluated as to its effectiveness on or prior to April 15, 1992. Section 6 This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. 8 Section 7 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed s separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 8 A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the day of , 1990 at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 1990. William L. Stirling, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 1990. William L. Stirling, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 9 HPC PROJECT MONITORING Update: November, 1990 HPC Member Name Proiect Address Status Bill Poss 413 E. Hyman Approved (Reide's City Bakery) 200 E. Main Completed 430 W. Main U/C Highway Entrance Design Committee Charles Cunniffe Guido's U/C Holden-Marolt In Process Don Erdman 501 E. Cooper (Independence) U/C 210 S. Galena (Elks) U/C The Meadows In Process Glenn Rappaport Paepcke Park Gazebo Approved 17 Queen St. Approved Cottage Infill Program In Process Leslie Holst 215 W. Hallam U/C 221 E. Main - Explore U/C 212 Lake Ave. Approved 210 Lake Ave. Approved Joe Krabacher 801 E. Hyman In process Jake Vickery The Meadows (alternate) In process Roger Moyer Holden-Marolt (alternate) In process 1004 E. Durant U/C Georgeann Waggaman Wheeler-Stallard House Approved hpc.monitoring