The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.19900509AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MAY 9, 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. 132 W. Main - Minor Development and Landmark Designation-continued from April 25, 1990 V. NEW BUSINESS 6:00 A. Conceptual Development - Public Hearing 409 E. Hopkins - Alpine Bank Parcel 7:30 B. Pre-Application - 610 N. Third 7:45 VI. COMMUNICATIONS National Historic Preservation Week and Preservation Forum State Rehabilitation Tax Credit ABill- HB 1033 8:00 VII. ADJOURN MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Planner Re: Landmark Designation and Minor Development: 132 W. Main, Asia parcel (Tabled from April 11, 1990) Date: May 9, 1990 LOCATION: 132 W. Main, Lots K, L, M., N and the West half of Lot 0, Block 58, City and Townsite of Aspen APPLICANT: Steve and Lily Ko APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Landmark Designation for the entire parcel in order to take advantage of the incentives offered a designated landmark. The parcel consists of 132 W. Main (previously designated), 122 W. Main, which has now been moved forward on the lot and attached to 132 W. Main, and the vacant parcel to the east of the structure. The applicant is also requesting Minor Development approval for the alterations proposed to the historic structure: stair and entry addition to northeast corner of structure, handicapped ramp and dormer. A few windows are also proposed to be replaced. PREVIOUS HPC ACTION: This item was reviewed by the HPC for Landmark Designation on April 11, 1990, and tabled at the request of the applicant until this date. The applicant states they submitted an applicant for Minor Development which was to be reviewed by the HPC also on April 11, however, staff did not receive it for memo preparation purposes (which may have been the fault of the Planning office). The Minor Development application is being reviewed at this meeting. Last fall, the HPC granted Final Development approval for a two- story detached infill structure. PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW: Landmark designation is a three-step process, requiring recommendations from both HPC and P&Z (public hearing at P&Z level), then first and second reading (public hearing at Final reading) Of the designation ordinance by Council. Minor Development is a one-step process, requiring no public hearing. HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION STANDARDS: The Standards for Landmark Designation are found in Section 7-702(A) of the Land Use Code. Any structure or site that meets one (1) or' more of the standards may be designated as a Historic Landmark. A. Historic 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 of the cultural, social or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. Response: 132 W. Main, the c.1888 George Moser House, was designated in the 1970's. 122 W. Main, referred to as the c. 1888 Jason Freeman House, has not yet been designated. No information on the Freeman's or exist to meet the criteria in Standard #1. No information has been received on the vacant lot to substantiate Standard #1 criteria. B. Architectural Importance: The structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct or of traditional Aspen character. Response: While both cottages have been changed substantially over the years, particularly in the early 80's when they were joined, we find that they still represent the miner's cottage style architecture common in Aspen. The vacant lot does not meet this standard. C. Architectural Importance: The structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type or specimen. Response: The Planning Office finds this standard is not met. D. Architectural Importance: The structure is a significant work of an architect whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. Response: The Planning Office finds this standard is not met. E. Neighborhood Character: The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. Response: The Planning Office feels that the preservation of the two cottages is critical to the context of the Main Street Historic District. Previously, the HPC granted Final Development approval for a detached infill structure on the parcel. The applicant's need for office allocation is obvious, however, we feel that 2 designation of the parcel to bypass the GMQS competition is not the intent of the designation provisions of the code. Another argument can be made that the community is not getting a "preservation project" from this designation request. To staff's knowledge, no plans have been made to renovate and clean up the existing historic cottage " comp 1 ex " . 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: We find that the two cottages meet this standard, however the vacant parcel does not. ------ MINOR DEVELOPMENT: Staff finds that adding more to this already confusing complex of historic cottages and additions does not enhance the character of the structure. We do, however, understand the need for these changes in making the structure more functional for dwelling units. The only significant element we disagree with is the handicapped ramp off the sidewalk leading to the new east entry. The HPC has reviewed handicapped ramps in the past for historic structures along Main Street, and have stated that these are to access the structure from the rear (alley), and are not to appear from Main Street. The remaining elements are designed compatibly and are relatively small in scale. In general, however, we do not support the idea of more added to this complex, without a master plan for significant exterior changes. DESIGNATION DISCUSSION: It would appear from the last designation review (Lily Reid) that the HPC should revisit the intent of this standard, specifically the meaning of the word "site" when making this determination. The preservation of a vacant lot does not meet the intent of this standard, in our opinion. The Planning Office maintains that "site" is defined as the land immediately associated with the historic structure, visually and/or historically. The applicant discussed the historic development of these three 3 lots at the April 11 meeting, producing copies of historic assessor documents to support the case that there were three detached structure, one per lot, in c. 1890. To consider designation, the current integrity of the site is analvzed. If no historic resource remains, and the "site" is void of any significance as simply a "site", i.e. battlefield, etc., then landmark status cannot be granted based on what "used to be there". SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: In discussion with the HPC, the applicant's principal reasons to pursue landmark designation for the entire parcel are timing and exemption from Growth Management (allocation). The Planning Department feels that it is not appropriate to use the landmark designation mechanism in this way, believing that a negative precedent will be set. In other similar cases, we are recommending designation for a portion of the larger parcel immediately associated with the historic resource (i.e. 17 Queen Street, 801 E. Hyman). The Planning Office supports Landmark Designation for the remaining non-designated historic cottage (122 W. Main), however, NOT the vacant parcel. We find that the remainder of the parcel does not meet the criteria for Landmark Designation, as stated above. The incentives program has been specifically developed to aid in the preservation, rehabilitation and adaptive use of historic and significant structures that have received landmark designation in Aspen. The Planning Office feels that the entire parcel does not meet the standards to be eligible for designation. The Planning Office wiil work with the applicant should they wish to pursue sponsoring a code amendment to revise the office quota allocation. We are in support of the new office space/structure proposed. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office's recommendation for landmark designation remains the same as stated in the April 11 memo: The HPC recommend Landmark Designation for the remaining portion of the parcel containing a historic structure. We recommend that the applicant define the legal description of the lots associated with the historic cottage-complex and submit same to the Planning Office prior to scheduling this item for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. We further recommend approval for the minor development proposal, subject to the removal of the handicapped ramp off the front of the parcel, and redesigned to the rear. memo.pz.309eh 4 ATTACHMENT 3 1. The proposed development mainly involves renovations to the interior spaces of the building. The proposal, as shown on the attached plans, makes changes to the utilization of space, interior stairways, and flow of traffic. The only exterior changes are minor ones that will not, individually or considered as a whole, have a significant effect on the character of the existing building. The exterior will be repaired, refurbished, or repainted as necessary using materials consistent with the existing ones. There will be a new stairwayon the Northeast corner providing access to the employee units on the second floor. A handicapped access ramp will be added on the East side of the building leading to the ground floor. A dormer with windows will be added on the East side of the second story to provide 'light and ventilation to the employee units. 2. All building materials will either be the same (wherever possible) as the existing materials or materials closely compatible with them. 3. A scale drawing is provided. 4. The minor changes proposed should have no appreciable impact on the character of the building or of the neighborhood. The interior remodeling will maintain the present style. The exterior changes are all minor ones which do not materially increase the actual .or apparent mass of the structure. All of the changes are ' ' located on the East side of the building where they will be barely visible from viewers beyond the property itself, particularly from either Main or First Street. MEMORANDUM , , A ) TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Conceptual Development: 409 E. Hopkins, the Alpine Bank parcel, Public Hearing Date: May 9, 1990 --------- LOCATION: 409 E. Hopkins, Lots D, E, and F, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado APPLICANT: Alpine Bank, on behalf Of Laura Donnelley, represented by Bill Poss and Associates APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Conceptual Development approval for the construction of a new three-story mixed-use infill structure between the National Register Brand Building and the National Register Collins Block/addition. The structure is proposed for single use commercial on the main floor, free market and deed restricted affordable housing on the second floor, and free market on the third. An auto lift is proposed off the alley, accessing below grade parking for the free market units and commercial space. Six affordable studio units are proposed for the second floor, incorporating the previously approved Lane Parcel units. A 15' setback is proposed, creating 15% open space (10% is proposed to be mitigated with cash-in-lieu). Plaza landscaping similar to the Pitkin Center is proposed for this space. The applicant is further requesting the demolition of all improvements currently on the parcel, however, an application for demolition has not been submitted to the Planning Office. Conceptual Development approval is required prior to the submittal of a Growth Management Application to the Planning Office. ZONING: CC, "H" Historic Overlay District ~ SITE, hAREA AND BULK CHARACTERISTICS: Due to GMQS competition \forthcoming (application deadline is June 1), the applicant has not-/kuppl:Led the Planning Office with FAR f igures for HPC' s review. Therefore, the HPC is basically asked to give conceptual development approval on the facade and alley elevation. Please refer to staff's recommendation for an additional review of the parcel as a whole following complete GMQS application submission in June. EXISTING CONDITIONS: A number of uses currently exist on this parcel, which are all slated for removal: One story Alpine Bank building (non-historic) Sculpture Garden (waterfall and Meadow in the Sky sculpture) Garden seating area for the Smuggler Land Office restaurant Note: Staff suggests that the applicant sponsor a code amendment changing Section 7-602 D. of the Land Use Regulations, adding paragraph #6 to include an "Exemption" clause for non-historic, non-significant structures within a historic district for demolition or relocation. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: The applicable Guidelines are found in Section IV. Commercial Buildings - New Construction beginning on page 35. The Development review standards are found in Section 7-601 of the Land Use Code, and are reviewed below (staff's comments follow): 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... Response: The Guidelines state: " In all new commercial construction, compatibility to adjacent building types should be considered. Broad-scale characteristics such as the range of the building heights and their alignment at the sidewalk should be studied. At the same time, the designer should recognize fine-grained aspects such as facade composition and decoration." "The intent of the design guidelines for infill construction is to identify the elements most critical to the character of the historic commercial area and to insure that these elements are incorporated into new designs." Staff finds that these general characteristics have been considered by the applicant, however, the following issues must be considered when reviewing and analyzing the compatibility of this infill project: 1. Setback: The guidelines state "Plazas or courts that break the continuity of the facade alignment should be avoided. Maintain the general alignment of facades at the sidewalk edge. In some cases a courtyard may be considered if it has an active function or gives desired relief for the purpose of allowing a historic 2 landmark to stand out more prominently." The HPC should consider this 15' setback carefully, utilizing the model to test whether a straight streetedge alignment or varying depths of setback are appropriate. It appears at this conceptual stage that some depth of setback is appropriate for the purpose of allowing the two corner landmarks to stand out. The 1904 Sanborn Insurance Map section attached indicates this parcel was never fully built out to street edge, therefore, historic precedence has not been set.-1, 2. C Alignment and Rhythm of Facade Details: We find the 4<general patterns of the facades blend well, with the following exceptions: . ,% r K KI.LJ I / j_Lft,t ' a) Storefront bulkhead panel appears too narrow. b) Main floor flanking entrance doors appear too "residential"; these need to relate better to the commercial character of the facade and district. c) Second floor too narrow/thin; appears out of balance with the two adjacent structures. The banding between the 2nd and 3rd floors appears too heavy and out of scale. d) Second floor windows servicing the stair tower on each end are extremely narrow and appear incompatible. e) The parapet is much too heavily articulated. The center ridge of the pediment measures 421, exceeding maximum allowable. The roof edge is not subordinate to flanking landmarks, and appears too high and overwhelming in relation to the historic landmarks on the block. f) The proposed building and awning materials appear compatible (red brick, sandstone, wood trim and windows, acrylic/canvas awning. 3. Massing: Infill construction within the district is critical to review in respect the characteristics of neighboring historic structures. Two National Register structures flank the subject parcel proposed. The proposal appears to meet the massing criteria guidelines, however, staff and members of the Planning 3 Office feel further study is warranted to consider stepping back the third floor mass from both the street edge and the one-story Collins Block infill. Staff has yet to see this approach successfully designed in the core, however, we feel that this must be innovatively considered and demonstrated to the HPC. It would appear that the relief a third floor step back could create would be a positive design solution to both the street and the adjacent structures. Staff feels strongly that the HPC should carefully consider this stepback approach before further review of the facade. Other public comments staff has received on the proposal has focused on the structure being "too big", "too high" and "too massive three stories high with no break or stepback". The steep canyon created between the west elevation of the proposed structure and the adjacent building (Collins infill) is extreme. As the Collins Block parcel is nearly maximized in FAR, it is highly unlikely that an additional story will be constructed onto the infill building. Therefore, staff recommends that a softening of this canyon effect be considered in a massing step back. 4. Storefronts: The proposal appears to meet the storefront guidelines, however, we are recommending further study and the submittal of more detailed storefront plans to determine exact proportions and detailing. 5. Windows and Openings: Wood windows are proposed, which meet the guidelines. The spacing pattern of the opening presents a very symmetrical facade, however, the relation of the proposed second and third floor openings to the Brand and Collins Block appear slightly incompatible, and should be studied carefully. The windows appear squat in relation to their historic neighbors. The facade's second and third floor may benefit from slightly taller windows. The south elevation (alley) windows bear no relation to the facade. The first and second floor windows appear deeply recessed, and the third floor is primarily transparent (for views of the mountain). Staff feels the alley elevation should attempt to relate somewhat to the character Of the facade. This may be accomplished with a change in window style alone. 4 - 6. Materials: Brick, sandstone and wood are proposed, which meet the guidelines. Staff is supportive of this combination on this block, however, we recommend that the use of sandstone be very subordinate and less ornate than the existing structures on that block, including the new Collins infill building. Canvas/acrylic awnings are proposed, which are characteristic in the district. 7. Signage: This has not been discussed, and should be clarified at Final. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The applicant states that the Hotel Jerome viewplane is unaffected in this proposal due to the steep angle of the corridor. Staff's comments under Standard #1 also deal with Neighborhood Standard #2. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of designated historic structure located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: We find that there is argument as to the impact this size infill structure will have on the cultural value of the two adjacent National Register structures. In order to not detract from their value to the community, these must remain prominent and pure of integrity without an overshadowing building encroaching onto their visual and historic sense of place in the district. The development of a plaza/entry may add to the cultural value of the district. Landscaping and surface treatments should be carefully considered by both the applicant and the HPC. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: No designated structures exist on this parcel, therefore this standard does not apply. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider the following alternatives: 1. Approve the Conceptual Development as submitted 41 3. Approve the Conceptual Development with conditions, to be met at Final Development review, such as 4. Table action to a da '-3 specific, to allow the applicant further time to St :dy the proposal and revise the setback, massing, height, parapet and second floor fenestration. 5. Deny Conceptual Development approval finding that the application does not meet the development review standards. 1 / / /RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC ~ table conceptual development approval to a date certain, to allow the applicant further time to study the proposal and revise the C C 1.-C setback, massing, height, parapet and second floor fenestration, 4 4 and submit a completed application requesting demolition of the ~ C & existing improvements on the parcel. No conceptual approval may ~ i~ be granted for the redevelopment of the parcel without the HPC,1 s / treview and approval of a demolition or relocation application. C Â«/ d --433-7 -- Staff recommends that the applicant sponsor a code amendment changing Section 7-602 D. of the Land Use Regulations, adding paragraph #6 to include an "Exemption" clause for non-historic, non-significant structures within a historic district for demolition or relocation. The Planning Office further recommends that the HPC review the entire proposal once the GMQS application has been submitted in June. The preposal as submitted is vague regarding the Lane Parcel affordable dwelling units' incorporation into the Alpine Bank structure; the complete program/building must be reviewed by the HPC to determine complete compatibility within the district. memo.hpc.409eh.2 6 F e}.1 B Ek-2 *GO- r. 27Â· 841 ..17;,3837*ma.* If~t:Â£7~1:3~~- ~ 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO81611 TEL: (303) 925-4755 April 30, 1990 Roxanne Eflin Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 S Galena Aspen, CO 81611 APR 0 1990 Re: Alpine Bank Dear Roxanne: Please accept the revised HPC Submittal drawings for the above referenced project. We feel this design better addresses both the review standards and the HPC guidelines. Review Standards: A. The proposed bank is still set back approximately fifteen feet from the property line. We feel this location allows the designated structures on each side to remain prominent. A strong sense of compatibility is displayed by the essentially straight street facade. In addition, the strong horizontal lines created by details and awnings on the Brand Building and the Collins Block are carried through on the Alpine Bank. We have also included some vertical pilasters which are very prevalentonthe Brand Building. Finally, the materials to be used on the Alpine Bank are brick and stone with wood windows, doors and storefronts. These materials are identical in concept to those on the neighboring landmarks. Our intent is to use these materials in such a way that the new Alpine Bank will compliment rather than detract, or compete with its neighbors. Aais *4 >7)Bril Â¥41 : 'Â· Â·.0,: , m .: Â· Â· I k < ... + . 6 k p. 4.:wÂ· r 1- r F ...41% . : / f.-4 t. 1 f i f, A A - 44,1Â·44 1.1 - . I .E S / 41'.1 ' t'.4 k.Â· t $ L.I-.1;11:1~*Si* L.*L; t..11.z-Â£'42-*a=.i. B. With respect to neighborhood compatibility, the major issues are height and massing. With respect to height, the top of the parapet is 39'81' above existing grade. As you know, the height limit in the CC Zone is 40'0". A number of buildings directly across the alley from this project approach the limit. For that reason, we feel we are not only compatible, but it is essential that we achieve this height to look over neighboring buildings and have a view to the mountains. In addition, our proposed solution is only - approximately 4 feet above the Brand Building and 7 feet above the Collins Block. It is importantto note that the historic portions of the Collins Block are separated from the proposed bank by a one story structure which we feel acts as a buffer between the two buildings. With respect to massing, we have decided it is most appropriate to present a 3 story facade rather than to hold the third floor back from the front edge. If the third floor were to be held back, it would still be visible and have a 'wedding cake' appearance not in keeping with the HPC guidelines. C. The cultural value of the landmarks on the adjacent parcels derives itself from the use of the structures. In both cases, those uses are residential over commercial space. Since our uses are identical, there should be no detraction and quite possibly an enhancement to the cultural value of the immediate neighborhood. D. Review Standard D does not apply to this project. Roxanne, if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Finally, we will have a model for the meeting on the 9th of May; and a study model is now in our office if you want to review in preparation of your memo. Sincerely, -L-- Kim Weil Enclosure KSW:lah Joseph Wells Joseph Wells. AICP Land Planning and Design May 3, 1990 Ms. Roxanne Eflin Aspen Pitkin Planning Offjce 130 South Galena Aspen co 81611 Dear Roxanne: As we discussed last night, I raised the issue of programmatic information for the Alpine Bank at our meeting this morning. The problem we discussed was the fact that not only is our program not finalized, but also if we provide a detailed breakdown of square footages for public discussion, it puts our project at a disadvantage to any C-1 projects which may be planning to come in for a commercial allocation. As you know, such projects are not subject to public review prior to GMQS competition. Having said that, I can report that we are planning a project in the neighborhood of 18,000 to 20,000 square feet of FAR floor area which will include both commercial and residential square footage as well as affordable housing. We are taking into account the bui.ldout previously approved for not only the Lane Parcel but also for the Collins Block parcel to assure that we do not violate the floor area limitations for the various properties; in addition, we want to be sure that we maintain the prior commitments for affordable housing on the Lane Parcel. I hope this information will suffice for the HPC's conceptual review of the project. Sincerely, .//A , .~tuf~//0 /' .Joseph Wells, AICP JW/b 130 Midland Park Place, Number Fl Aspen. Colorado 8]611 Telephone (303 ) 925-8080 Facsimile (.303 ) 925-8235 - --9- 4 W...i~-- $.Ii I...1--- /1 4</ I. - -- 1 -4 -7 4-' -i Â¢Â·-P:Ek- I' 2- ,%.-2 E ,?-Ek ,946 - --1 1 E. El. I 5 4-/.- r 2.---- ,- 1 21-01 1 - ..1 P .1 7 - - - r - - -1- Â·----Â·I '-I---~i'- I---il-. Vil---1 LeD.L .*---1/- '' THIRD LEVEL PLA' O 1 -2 -21[407.. - 1 }Cl- 1 4 01 1 1 1Â§ 4 -_-32{~324 1 .- - te- 1 C.,4 12Â» ..1,2.4 0.-.41,1~==JJ < 1 1\ 4. 1 ' 1 E --4 -1 , 1--- A 2 + 1 0 .1 1 V - K -411 A t, C 1 . rd Â£ U r 11 - - 1. 1 ip< 4-- - 1 , 1. 1 1 / 1 \ I , u ID C, - al 1.- -----IN . 1 h ' T g ft A C r i :I- :jÂ·>i râ€¢- t 1 1 6 77 r : L 1.0 - 1 i. 1- lf.-Â¤~4---~-_kr---~ Â£ 01 - +7 "6 1 , 2 7:.12t=-3.--=12=At.-1 L L 1 Â»f -7 LE -- .-- lA . 1 11 -7- -tz.==:zz-2~12.- 91 1. -lilli 1 1 1 -Cif - / t- - ..1 /=R SUP+Ii=xynr~ L 1 - -- ... :l-411 . â€¢". 0 1 1 CEÂ« 93.;\-3Â¥39, 1 1 U~23=='2=,_.i 7--4-t ! 1 ----4 i ' *==t T=i r I \ Â¥--1552Â·- RE] 1 111 i I i-- f*/-7/' 1 lilli I 0 1 1 1 1 .1---I---- 1 1 ' 1 -LUrilÂ¥72 DOWeFÂ· Deve> "..2-7 - 1 -2. Di ?4 1T .% 1..OVVerL 1,6\45 l. 3*Yl' - i - TV Â£,I ':lir -- --- UP l-2 1,! -1 - Â·' 1 lilli: 1 1 1 14 I~2IECIZ 14 4 1 1 :1 /(; lilli 11 1 , Ilillilill] r . -111!ill!'111 1 11 11!1111 III Â» i 1 62 % 1 3.1 1 1 1 3. 11. ..1- , 11\.F 3. 1 EN\."-c>YSâ‚¬ Hoj:b~,e - 1 li N 4 1 11 , ii, 1 11 ' 1 ji l SECOND LEVEL PLAN F :>'4[>61DtÂ·46 - 13< C Et-3--7 7-EU-11 Â©_-p ----1-lf.--i.- I 74 .34 SPNOK -_-7 ---- ----t#* Ek3,465.R~ES --- -- - fir=Etr#*e==-==f t~:~1 -- Â»-- -- --2 -2= -4-= 1-u- -_ ~ ~ 0 1 Rchi E-2-_u 241 11-1~114 _tit_91 ~ L I . .3 b i Iii I 4 k. 21.-- -- -- , 1 1 f Il i IL;ifi~kiplu~: IIi-JE---7--- E----rf I==tid.#4*ov 4.A 1 L__f __-1 F i Â£ Vl/344.-v. iti' ..ca , I 1 4 '- 73*10*:'44 __21- _ a - -- 1-lit. " i. ---1.--_----_- 'ti-a*mi*Â«pti- U____ _-. 1 Ul 'U - -1-- 1, *==ip.--164â€ž-4&:044 'lt:i. A. ...t ~1?,Â·fa'L 3 Â¢19 12=~ 900*ad *12,4.-/ U 3 k**39 fl TZ-F- 11 233 11!~f Â· 11 i L-LY Â· L6TmC 1 iii r . fi I---t, ti,&.&1411 3.-__J #. ~, ..j , i-li~_ 2-Â£ 14Â»~ Ll - --1} 1 Medill . U ... 1- ..,4 8'Â°f#-di 'c N 1-ge.Â»2 , ylÂ·.m-,EMi, , F /EFA~ 1*9#7 t\Nlp. 'NP/6, -I . rL- LÂ¥ ..4.. t1372 ~ 1 ~ T'~ 2 i 141 1 ll.41 -- 1 111 i I I 32Â»=14 ===&W, Ill 11---E +2,2 I 1- i Id 1 p' 1 % -Iii 1 111 1 'FOOF.. 70 Al.trp 1 12[- t 1 ALLEY ELEVATION 2 -'Â»4#73Tot4% 00/9 . i , - 151:JÂ»- . 11 4 Â· . 'i - -- .1- 9 R FJ j_-_ i E 1 ' - . 1~ 1 1 -1 : -1 r Â£ 4 1 11 1 1 t- ====42 ..k-Â£2.-241 1Â·5:EmaE- ' 1 04 0 ~448 I i 1 9 F 11 I Â· ~ /Â© ./; 6.., 30. A. li i- 2246 ,Â·4%. g.*. k C~laÂ·~ - 29=72 -V - -1--2- L ., = --= 22 - , Â¥12, 1,4\/PY,1-7 1, e.-Irtak,-- ==46:b -3 -11 -2 1Jig-tt.t lit -E" . I .:4 Â© 7 P.FAIC<IC. . 1. 1 r===n ;;:z:n; r.Â·:< .d#0*JS-~4* ATI I .2Â£~P/3*315'Adfrivilk#:Z-1-671*327-*dT~~SED# Mfiâ€ž-*444*"7-I#~-4.gi i,Â·t=~~~I ~ Â·iii= . rk -,3*i-â€¢'-* tr-1? â€ž11 1 41Â·11.in.> l.'fi.,Ad#~. 604 '1 40~ 49~1- 4;'.6~ <4 -X> 1 il b 11 11 1, 1 i - Allt:TOI-rf#-11.1,6 -9 9 1 40* t< ctÂ·:b; .74. " . r H 4 -AÂ»~~~~-017 71rn i , Â·709.TA- --pdNÂ«1 4 -1 i;Z. 2,%1-> 411,4 2 ~ =21 4--a- 1 t .41.- r- i 0.71'. - 1 ; iyi -/f.71 i . ix 1 ---- 1 1 , 443-144! U *ILTURE ---- - 'r-___ It - .1. 7 1 r=* 4.41@Ve 1 . .erÂ¥ 1Â·20*#/=*â‚¬. 1 -~ ' I - -1- ' ...Lan Irl= ' 1 --- fo.-11 ,-' ' 4 t_- __-- #1 1 11 1 :4469}4322#.66-.41<i2,14....2.z:i -~;.iti:Â·:,~1.'r~,5 ~~ .~~ ~,11- .. 1-~1 ----,6- =B=-1 j 41Â· p , 1 7|16 - 14-,tÂ· 114* 4+ - 4 -liz-2 ....... 1.- 1 t, fit ' 1, ~~~.~ -/ 1 M 1 /1411 .44- 11 ill 11 it e .r--- ? 0 1 i Â· F. 111-r- a ' 4 1 1 'i, i 1 11 i 1; lk--__11 i lit 11., #-1. 'r-~ Ill d '. , 1 -. ... ....1 11 b 0#Far-q=i~Â·X~ .rcu .>j, ._ -v-:. Al;~ lk:rÂ·T 1[95=:-=4 1% 411, 4Â¥1--2-1...i~ i Il 5-- 0.6-7- ri AL P' 1 1 ] [f }1,Â»Â·ht 14- C ./DI I , 1 f.....~-r, .tz, ~ .-/ if .... . /frlt?\ (5)11 qi 11 1 /11 1 tritij ' ~~C-- 4\.5/ 1 V - # 1 11 .9.=-1 - 4 Â»12 \ b :'-fr~~-/J 4-/ 0 , V, 6-1 6/- t 11 k 1 *b fl i //4 \ 4 -</ 6 711 1771 " ~ w. 8 ~14 /04 0 1 86 wil 92---1~ -1 k> 2, ticrefR +Im.,44. ft, ,4.41\- 2.1 + / 1 i l' 4_11 rÂ·-1 / C>~ 0 D \/i/ 1/ 1Â£ -~0,>Â«~ 1/15% 41 .962 ... + .' "9,2:,in. [ 1/ 1 LI \ 1 1 A X 10 4 UX 4. 11 : mill % 4 1 12>ail i -1, 1 p 9~ 8 / \ IT-7. 0 r-'---71 0â€¢. ABLUE eLLÂ·/-; 102.:.-JÂ·'1 A'.L. M R. ~Â£Â£Â£_~J 2 \ Ak Â£59 71~ - 21 % 4 %1433'' .1 ..91.31 -'V..,r,,1-il. 4,1 )4 .1 9. y \ $ EE -1/ ;1 -- 6---1 4/ 77 , ] 1/ 0 7:m-a 3 1 /r-q 54*:% 4 8* a M N a - E 11 e 4 L '24.to'.11.0.2.. ..4.:GE@]2Â·or" 1 4 ZOÂ« 12.* 1 ,<1 - -- 4.11 3 - 1 4 / 11 PITHINCO.COURT HO. H IR TERM , Ir Hra: Ft FC ~1.H. ~100102 404 406 408 4/0 41% 4/4 4/6 4/8 412 422 424 428 42 430 432 434 Â£7// 11 300 &02 104 506 48 5/0 51% 5/4 5/6 5/8 52, (4ZW 0 1 E '1 40 w PIPE = â‚¬.M A=j = 0==; ====================== ==g 11 ret JI / 1 9 0 Of 3 c *60 f- ja Lo 0 9/. '48 -Off-4772 429 4:7/ 413 4/5 4Â£13/9 47) 42 4%5 427 423 43/433 435 h 50/ 50.3 905 507 509 51/ 5/3 5/5 3/7 5/9 531 V 2.J/-30 32. ir.- 0 2 00Â· O '(gt'It 'Â·I 7-794 4 '. Ati.' 25 * ,14 n E.bl. 11 E z-- .'79 4 ,<*bealy.oÂ·-6 4 0 r 2 01 o . 11 i 23 k .. . f . -9, r, , 2 -,ZN.36 Â·AS.RF FOLO/ *IX, 2 i * Co I]UZZ7*,mi gonjt-.L*ta 21 0 9 11 b 4 21,2/ Itc / i k 3 9/69 U * 4 4 ,-a. ~*CS D. E gEZÂ· F G. H. E--7\4 u,1 R. g. C 0. -01,3.1 2 1- 1.4 4-,---Bok Ful 177 ;,Â·L JJ 1 4 ;04243 ~.494 *1 Lic./1 -LU 1% ....1 1 1 1/* N ~ lilli 1% 111.0 - .8 - K 2 O ~7--IM 7 MA /XV [Ti~ IX 1 20. X < C 87 N 93 3 ,$44: ,Â« K. L. M. K L. M. V-021? / '\ /0 0 1 / X \*497' IiI il b \ 1 LL..1 Ll_LI 2,9 Vac. L CP-' _ 1 / , : 1~ 1JZZE~42 4/0 1 - 04 4 7-3 0. P 11 M &-d_ 1 + N. O. O 6. 2 4 R .lilli l I 2 3. â‚¬ d * J -(&49.....Â»211 IreÂ·,>.i k V 3 4 JÂ· .*MORY *4Â£Â·/â‚¬r,>., $ 02 .Aee,%737â‚¬0.,1.0 -4 7 77- 4 I k It 4 7-3 17 -71 h - rTmT- 4 I *+T - J 1 .Â·Ija Z ./470.7 - I / P 1 2Â· Â·Â· \.0 E . GLJ 1 20/ 11 P * 3 '' 3 tr . ~ 3~- .,. J 6~ 9 0â€ž. . Q - 49.7 'J j. - ' Lw -7:23 ~Â»i, 31'2 kl 191--2132&03 2= 07 23 0 1 - '2Â· , Â· I . \ 27 L/Â·3 1- ' lyx 0 1 N HO N - 2 47Â· i /* U.6.2 -:04.5... ' Cb'Â·- Â· i 1 || 400Â· 420 2 404 46' 448*6 4/2 474 9/6 4/8 420' â‚¬22 42,37 426 428 43(7 432 437 l Im 98 6,30 H.WEBBER 8'CH 1 61) U 1 ==== - ==5 = === E.HO P=K IN S â‚¬2Â¥ ~13 39% Pircd t 11 - 1 401 403 005 4(715 409 40 415 4/5 417 4/9 421 42= 07Â·4 427 4.39 431 433 435. 50/ 52 305 507 27)9 5// 5/3 5/5 5/7 5/9 52, 2 28. * u. /vo 1 -- -1U . ,/ 4 11 113.~ 0 -*ifl ..1 . k * 1 â‚¬ LF _11 27 Fr IC:bUL- 92'Q-/42'- 4 - 12 2 ..271 4 ,;i: W 1 u. .1 11 -' ' 044*Fl/:31Â·2'. r 7-- pr70 + I â€ž .. 4 / Mutr /2 1 - ., ~ 4.4 - - ILÂ·41 /0. 2 41 % 113 ~SeÂ· 3-,1 - f - - 0 - i' nm'r h I 11 E-71 c x :de.'C.Â¢4-11' ta N 4 11 V ; ' ' if 7% 4 3 30F 7 3 23 c 9 -c-1] O Cl toi O f 42 C , o. E, 4 i /jvac. ~ I r d - b h- &02 1 11 <4 *R/epÂ·f/Fy . ', P.4/ 4 ~3*~ ~Â© -: F,--P..7.ne.A"g'.r, F., 03 F - 4 9 4*4 - 4 *19 1 .oru.,O. I . ''. , 1 lt,66#e'.,t i & 11 g.nfiriÂ·'*0.-1â€žÂ·Â·-I-~ .1.*9n.'*'..1 0 . 8 G. H. 1. 88 3 Z. O 2 miA R. rEFrT-, m .,â€ž,4 t<4.17 --6 2 94 ~ , Fac ~7 *1 -1 3 L.-3 i. 1 9.444.3 *.'' Z 88,3 'dCOR.,A.c, 1 $ / 11 & 5000 6--J IL / 0 7* I Â· :' - A A ' i.1 2 - f 11 /y, 2 4.0 1 * 4 94Â£,i-Â·i: fe.,111' -~~ 1 ke 1 t k & 1 , n ..2. 4 3 ' 1 1 0.2 [bnâ€ž C:41'$,Mt. ,'' b 5 ki I i. ~ 731 4.i T-41.,f.7 LIP) 4 11 4 ,â€¢ Â· l~.0, & Ledjea 7444 '* '.7 11 4 16 X 2 13, 9 1.4 2 4 0-,44'k' ~ 0,: A 1 .1."j.6 .,r.4 ....,tr *' 4 - 42 3 3 -1 1 -40. 51 3 12. 149 0 au 45 6 . 4, Cks. 9./.449 1.6 10.3 75' "htÂ·j'X . ~ 1 : 12 4 224,010.0 z Za o 223.42*Â·ozze' o\<70, . o #w. zu~.024,0 2. 26' o z -261 ...o z.76'.-4 321 4 -J.7 ..Ab 1/>ro ? 'i A f ,~ / 2.34 D -400 402 404 406 408 410 M 414 4/6 418 420 42% i-4'31-DER= i.zi -4-33 2TSâ‚¬ 434 300 502 504.506*562 510 51% 5/4 26 5/8 860 lie OW. . , .CH, - 1%//O, Scale of Feet. (g) E.HYk.AN 50 0 50 190 150 . .:0 -9 20 1. - tky <#15- 1= = - - = =2 = = 1-7= - 077 5.'-2=.-0.=----li.-I-7 001 90/ 201 6. w. pipe 02 Zoo n nE X MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Planner Re: National Historic Preservation Week and Preservation Forum Date: May 9, 1990 Attached you will find the schedule of events for Preservation Week, May 13 - 19. Please note that your attendance on May 16, Preservation Forum, is required. The week is a very busy one, and I will no doubt be difficult to reach. Your participation in each of these special events is encouraged. The draft agenda for "Preservation Forum" is also included. I am seeking your feedback prior to setting all this on the Mac. Letters have gone out to ALL honor award winners requesting their attendance. Please note this is a cash bar. ---- ---- Volunteers needed: I need at least two volunteers at 6:30 that Wednesday night to help me take handouts and books (etc.) from City Hall to the Jerome. I also'need these people to assist with registration and Greetings at the door. I still need more slides of historic Aspen architecture and cultural environment. Please search a little more around your house or office and get them to me right away. Finally, I would like at least one HPC architect to attend and help present with me the "Community Preservation Workshop" in Redstone, Thursday (May 17) beginning at 6:30. I am seeking a variety of graphic and visual tools to help present this. This volunteer will need to meet with me for at least one hour prior to discuss the historic character of Redstone and current issues facing their HPC! Aspen and Pitkin County Celebrate NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION WEEK! May 13-19, 1990 National Theme: "Keeping America's Heritage Alive!" ***** Schedule of Events: May 14 Walking Tour sponsored by the Aspen Historical Society. Meet at 2:00 p.m. at the Wheeler-Stallard House, 620 W. Bleeker, Aspen. Free. 925-3727 for information. May 14 ' Proclamation announcing National Historic Preservation Week by the Aspen City Council, 5:00 p.m. May 15 Proclamation by the Pitkin County Board of Commissioners, with special focus given to the Pitkin County Courthouse's looth birthday! May 16 PRESERVATION FORUM and the 3rd Annual Preservation Honor Awards: 7:00 p.m., Hotel Jerome Ballroom, Aspen. Cash bar and refreshments, open to the public. Co- sponsored by the Aspen Historic Preservation Committee and the Aspen Historic Trust. Preservation Forum is an opportunity for members of the community to join in a lively sharing of ideas related to the protection and preservation of Aspen's historic and cultural resources. May 17 "Architreasures" Contest sponsored by the Aspen Times. Prizes awarded - winners announced in Times on May 31. May 17 Open House at the Wheeler-Stallard. Sponsored by the Aspen Historical Society, Noon-6:00, 620 W. Bleeker, Aspen. Refreshments. May 17 Community Preservation Workshop sponsored by the Redstone Historic Preservation Commission. Redstone. 6:30 p.m., Church of Redstone. Open to the public. May 19 Open House at the Holden-Marolt Heritage Site, sponsored by the Aspen Historical Society. 10:00 a.m., Marolt Barn (Castle Creek and Hwy. 82). Take a close look at Aspen's newest National Register site! May 19 Walking Tour sponsored by the Aspen Historical Society. Meet at 2:00 p.m. at the Wheeler-Stallard House, 620 W. Bleeker, Aspen. Free. 925-3727 for information. ### . 3rd Annual "PRESERVATION FORUM" Wednesday, May 16, 1990 7:00 p.m. Hotel Jerome Ballroom 320 E. Main, Aspen Sponsored by: The Aspen Historic Preservation Committee, the Aspen Historic Trust and the Hotel Jerome Agenda Greetings - Cash Bar - Refreshments Introduction of HPC and Trust members Presentation: "Keeping Our Heritage Alive" Roxanne Eflin, Aspen/Pitkin County Historic Preservation Planner Focus: Taking responsibility for the protection and preservation of our community's historic, cultural and natural heritage "We are the stewards of our community's heritage. From the smallest miner's cottage to the view of our mountain, the protection and preservation of our unique, traditional character is upon our shoulders. National Preservation Week is a call to action. It is an opportunity to celebrate our heritage, and that of our neighbor communities and countryside - to share that which is the essence of why we live where we do." -RE Preservation Honor Awards Presentation Hosted by Bill Poss, Chairman, Aspen HPC Eight awards will be presented this year, in the categories of: Residential and Commercial Renovation Residential and Commercial Infill (new construction) Cottage Infill * Public/Private Effort Craftswork * Business Revitalization Preservation Planning: What's Going on in the City? Main Street Historic District Study Cottage Infill Program Holden-Marolt Heritage Center West End Historic District Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway Plan: Its relationship to the preservation of village character. "Alternate modes afford the individual a greater opportunity to appreciate our small spaces and historic places." (Nore Winter, Consultant> ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION: Breakouts groups for the following topics: Architecture and Design Issues Landscaping and public spaces General Preservation process and education issues ### MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Planner Re: State Rehab Tax Credit Bill - HB 1033 Approved! Date: May 9, 1990 Attached is a copy of the final, signed bill enabling state income tax credits on rehabs of historic properties in Colorado. We are the 4th state in the country to have such an animal. I will explain the details of this bill to at this meeting, however, am requesting that you read through it prior to the meeting so that you will at least be familiar with the intent. Lane Ittelson will be coordinating a Rules and Regs Huddle Session with all the state CLG coordinators. Your input on this process will be extremely necessary and helpful. This bill WILL positively effect the preservation of Aspen's historic resources. You should become very familiar with it. memo.hpc.hb1033 - 1990 .-4 -4 FINAL COPY HOUSE BILL 90-1033. 8Y REPRESENTATIVES Grant, Chlouber, Foster, T. Hernandez, Johnson, Knox, Mares, Rupert. Shoemaker, Swenson, Tanner, Taylor-Little, Tilger, Webb, 0. Williams, and S. Williams; also SENATORS Rizzuto, Allison, DeNier. Fenlon, Gallagher, Hopper, Hume, Martinez, Mendez, Pascoe, Pastore, Peterson, Sandoval, Schaffer, Traylor, and L. Trujillo. CONCERNING THE CREATION OF AN INCOME TAX CREDIT FOR QUALIFIED COSTS INCURRED IN THE PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES, AND MAKING AN APPROPRIATION IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. E. 11 enacted k.x th-- General 8-kiekly 91- 1_he State EL Colorado: SECTION 1. Part 5 of article 22 of title 39, Colorado Revised Statutes, 1982 Repl. Vol., as amended, is amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION to read: 39-22-514. Tax credit for qualified costs incurred in preservation of historic properties. Cl) (a) Except ds otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection (1), for income tax years commencing on or after January 1, 1991, but prior to January 1. 1995, there shall be allowed a credit with respect to the income taxes imposed pursuant to the provisions of this article to each taxpayer: (I) Who is the owner or qualified tenant of qualified property and who incurs qualified costs in an amount equaling or exceeding five thousand dollarS in the qualified rehabilitation of such qualified property; or (II) Who is allowed a credit for costs incurred in the rehabilitatic., of property located in Colorado pursuant to the provisions cf section 38 of the internal revenue code. (b) Any taxpayer who is allowed a credit for qualified Capital letters indicate new material added to existing statutes; dashes through words indicate deletions ;rom existing statutes and ' such material not part of act. expenditures incurred in the rehabilitation of property pur<. .:.it to the provisions of section 39-30-105.6 shall not be d I lowed the credit provided in paragraph (a) of this subsection (1). (2) (a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection (2), the credit provided for in paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section shall not exceed dn aggregate of fifty thousand dollars per qualified property or an amount equal to twenty percent of the aggregate qualified costs incurred per qualified property, whichever is less; however, for any given taxable year, the maximum amount of said credit which may be claimed shall not exceed two thousand dollars plus an amount equal to fifty percent of the difference between the tax liability of the taxpayer and two thousand dollars. (b) If any taxpayer is allowed a Credit pursuant to the provisions of section 38 of the internal revenue code for the costs incurred in the rehabili'.ation of property located in Colorado. the credit provided for in paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section shall be determined pursuant to the provisions of section 39-22-507.5 (1) (b). (3) (a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection (3) and subsection (6) of this section, in order for any taxpayer to qualify for the credit provided for in paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section, the taxpayer shall: (I) Prior to the commencement of any restoration, rehabilitation, or preservation of any qualifit property, submit d fee of two hundred fifty dollars, the plans and specifications for such proposed restoration, rehdbilitation, or preservation, and a signed agreement, if any, specified in subsection (4) of this section to the appropriate reviewing entity and receive preliminary approval, in writing, from said reviewing entity stating that such proposed restoration, rehabilitation, Or preservation constitutes qualified rehabilitation. For the purposes of this subparagraph (I), any owners of qualified property and any qualified tenants leasing said qualified property who wish to qualify for the credit provided for in paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section for said qualified property may jointly submit the fee and the plans and specifications, or such owners may submit the fee, the plans and specifications, and a list of qualified tenants leasing said qualified propeâ‚¬ty. (II) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (5) of this section, complete the qualified rehabilitatior. of the qualified property within a period of twenty-four months from the date upon which preliminary approval was given pursuant to PAGE 2-HOUSE BILL 90-1033 the provisions of subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (a); (III) Obtain a form from the reviewing entity verifying compliance with the provisions of this subsection (3). If more than one of the taxpayers have complied with the provisions of this subsection (3) for the same qualified property, the reviewing entity shall issue such verification form to each such taxpayer, and such verification form shall specify the proportion of the amount of the tax credit allowed to such taxpayer as determined pursuant to the provisions of subsection (4) of this section. The reviewing entity shall issue said verification form only upon the submittal of an accounting of total qualified costs incurred in said qualified rehabilitation and the names of the owners and qualified tenants who incurred such qualified costs, the payment of a fee in an amount determined pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (a) of subsection (11) of this section, and the making of the determination that such completed qualified rehabilitation: (A) Conforms to the plans and specifications approved pursuant to subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (a); (8) Was completed within the appropriate period of time; and (C) Preserves and maintains those qualities of such qualified property which made it eligible for inclusion individually or as a contributing property in a district in the state register of historic places or for designation as a landmark or as a contributing property in a historic district by a certified local government. (IV) Submit the verification form obtained pursuant to the provisions of subparagraph (III) of this paragraph (a) with the income tax return being filed by the taxpayer for the income tax year in which such qualified rehabilitation is completed. (b) The provisions of paragraph (a) of this subsection (3) shall not apply to any taxpayer who is allowed a credit for costs incurred in the rehabilitation of property located in Colorado pursuant to the provisions of section 38 of the internal revenue code. (4) When more than one taxpayer qualify for the tax credit provided for ih paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section for the same qualified property, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the amount of the tax credit allowed pursuant to the provisions of this section shall be divided pro rata according to the number of such taxpayers. Such presumption shall be rebutted only upon the filing of a PAGE 3-HOUSE BILL 90-1033 binding agreement with the reviewing entity, as specified in subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of this section, which is signed by all of the taxpayers who qualify for said tax credit for the same qualified property and which specifies the manner in which the amount of the tax credit allowed is to be divided among such taxpayers. (5) The reviewing entity may grant, upon request, a one-time extension of the completion deadline specified in subparagraph (II) of paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of this section. Such extension shall be for a period not to exceed twenty-four months and shall be granted only upon a showing of good cause. (6) (a) (I) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection (6), any taxpayer who was given preliminary approval prior to January 1, 1995, pursuant to the provisions of subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of this section; whose completion deadline as set forth in subparagraph (II) of paragraph (a) of subsection (3) and in subsection (5) of this section is subsequent to December 31, 1994; and who has not completed the qualified rehabilitation prior to January 1, 1995, shall, in order to qualify for the credit provided for in paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section, obtain a form from the reviewing entity verifying compliance with the provisions of subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of this section and this subsection (6). If more than one of the taxpayers have complied with said provisions for the same qualified property, the reviewing entity shall issue such verification form to each such taxpayer, and such verification form shall specify the proportion of the amount of the tax credit allowed to such taxpayer as determined pursuant to subsection (4) of this section. (II) The reviewing entity shall issue said verification form only upon the submittal of an accounting of total qualified costs incurred in said qualified rehabilitation prior to January 1, 1995, and the names of the owners and qualified tenants who incurred such qualified costs, the payment of d fee in an amount determined pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (a) of subsection (11) of this section, and the making of the determination that the portion of such qualified rehabilitation which was completed as of January 1, 1995: (A) Conforms to the plans and specifications approved pursuant to subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of this section; and (B) Preserves and maintains those qualities of such 1 qualified property which made it eligible for inclusion PAGE 4-HOUSE BILL 90-1033 thousand three hundred seventy-five dollars ($3,375), or so much thereof as may be necessary, for the implementation of this act. SECTION 3. Safety clause. The general assembly hereby finds, determines, and declares that this act is.necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety. 2,14&91Â»- 4-4 Rrefix*- Carl B. Bledsoe Ted L. StricklarRI SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE PRESIDENT OF OF REPRESENTATIVES THE SENATE r--1 1.9, 2 gAL Q_ 5-71 264- L/~e C. Bahrych 69 Joan M. Albi CHIEF CLERK OF THE HOUSE SECRETARY OF OF REPRESENTATIVES THE SENATE APPROVED f**~;>0Â°* C.990 676- )42-ID /~*4- Rok' Pbmer G~NOR OF THE STATE Â·OF COLORADO PAGE 10-HOUSE BILL 90-1033 the interior as adopted by the state historic preservation officer and certified local governments pursuant to federal law; but shall not include any improvements undertaken due to normal wear and tear which occurred to a qualified property. As used in this paragraph (g), dexterior improvements" includes, but is not limited to, improvements made to the exterior of the qualified property and to the exterior of any historic outbuildings which are associated with the qualified property and which are fifty or more years old. "Exterior improvements" does not include enlargements, additions, landscaping, routine or periodic maintenance, paving, apd site work. (h) "Qualified tenant" means a taxpayer who holds a lease of five years or longer on qualified property or a portion of such qualified property. (i) "Reviewing ehtity" means: (I) A certified local government which has decided pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (d) of subsection (10) of this section to perform the duties specified in subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of this section; or (II) The state historic preservation officer when such qualified property either is not located within the jurisdiction of any certified local government or is located within the jurisdiction of any certified local government who has decided pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (a) of subsection (10) of this section not to perform the duties specified in subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of this section. (j) "State historic preservation officer" means the person designated and appointed pursuant to the provisions of 16 U.S.C. sec. 470a (b) (1) (A), as amended. (k) "Taxpayer" means: (I) A resident individual; or (II) A domestic or foreign corporation subject to the provisions of part 3 of-this article. SECTION 2. Appropriation. In addition to any other appropriation, there is hereby appropriated, out of any moneys in the state historic preservation fund created pursuant to section 39-22-514 (11) (b) (II), Colorado Revised Statutes, not otherwise appropriated, to the department of higher education for allocation to the state historical society, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1990, the sum of three PAGE 9-HOUSE BILL 90-1033 of a multi-unit building where such units are individually owned. (e) "Qualified costs" means costs associated with the qualified rehabilitation of a qualified property. "Qualified costs" includes, but is not limited to, costs associated with demolition, carpentry, sheetrock, plaster, painting, ceilings, fixtures, doors and windows, fire sprinkler systems, roofing and flashing, exterior repair, cleaning, tuckpointing, and cleanup. "Qualified costs" does not include costs, commonly referred to as soft costs, which include, but are not limited to, costs associated with appraisals; architectural, engineering, and interior design fees; legal, accounting, and realtor fees; loan fees; sales and marketing; closing; building permit, use, and inspection fees; bids; insurance; project signs and phones; temporary power; bid bonds; copying; and rent loss during construction. "Qualified costs" also does not include, but shall not .be limited to, .costs associated with acquisition; interior furnishings; new additions except as may be required to comply with building and safety codes; excavation; grading; paving; landscaping; routine or periodic maintenance; repairs to outbuildings which are associated with a qualified property and which are less than fifty years old; and repairs to additions made to a qualified property after such property Was included individually or as a contributing property in a district in the state register of historic places or was designated as a landmark or as a contributing property in a historic district by a certified local government. (f) "Qualified property" means property located in Colorado which is: (I) At least fifty years old; and (II) (A) Listed individually or as a contributing property in a district on the state register of historic properties pursuant to the provisions of article 80.1 of title 24, C.R.S.; (B) Designated as a landmark by a certified local government; or (C) Listed as a contributing property within a designated historic diltrict of a certified local government. (g) "Qualified 'rehabilitation" means any exterior improvements, structural improvements, mechanical improvements, plumbing improvements, or electrical improvements undertaken to restore, rehabilitate, or preserve the historic character of a qualified property which meets the - standards of rehabilitation of the United States secretary of PAGE 8-HOUSE BILL 90-1033 Amount of qualified Amount of costs incurred fee $5,000 up to and including $15,000 $ 250 Over $15,000 up to and including $50,000 $ 500 Over $50,000 up to and including $100,000 $ 750 Over $100,000 $1,000 (b) (I) Any certified local government which has decided to act as a reviewing entity for the purposes of subsections (3) and (6) of this section shall create a preservation fund. All fees collected pursuant to the provisions of subparagraphs (I) and (TII) of paragraph (a) of subsection (3) and subparagraph (II) of paragraph (a) of subsection (6) of this section by a certified local government shall be credited to the pretervation fund of such certified local government. The moneys in such fund shall be used for expenditures of such certified government incurred in the performance of its duties pursuant to the provisions of this section. (II) All fees collected pursuant to the provisions of subparagraphs (I) and (III) of paragraph (a) of subsection (3) and subparagraph (II) of paragraph (a) of subsection (6) of this section by the state historic preservation officer shall be transmitted to the state treasurer, who shall credit said fees to the state historic preservation fund, which fund is hereby created. The moneys in the state historic preservation fund shall be subject to annual appropriation by the general assembly to the state historical society for expenditures of the state historic preservation officer and the state historical society incurred in the performance of their duties pursuant to the provisions of this section and for expenditures incurred in the administration and general operations of the state historical society. (12) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires: (a) "Certified local government" means any local government certified by the state historic preservation officer pursuant to the provisions of 16 U.S.C. sec. 470d (c) (1), as amended. (b) "Contributing property" means property which by location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association adds to the sense of time, place, and historical development'of a historic district. (c) "Designated" means established by local preservation ordinance. (d) "Property" means a building or structure or a unit PAGE 7-HOUSE BILL 90-1033 (a) Within the first year, an amount equal to zero percent of the amount of the credit allowed; (b) Within the second year, an amount equal to twenty percent of the amount of the credit allowed; (c) Within the third year, an amount equal to forty percent of the amount of the credit allowed; (d) Within the fourth year, an amount equal to sixty percent of the amount of the credit allowed; (e) Within the fifth year, an amount equal to eighty percent of the amount of the credit allowed. (9) Within eight months after the effective date of this section, the state historical society shall create appropriate forms and shall establish and promulgate criteria and procedures by which the restoration, rehabilitation, and preservation of qualified properties shall be determined to be qualified rehabilitation for the purposes of the credit provided for in paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section. (10) (a) Prior to January 1, 1991, and annually thereafter, each certified local government shall adoot a resolution stating whether such certified local government will act as a reviewing entity for the purposes of subsections (3) and (6) of this section during the following twelve months. A copy of such resolution shall be sent to the state historic preservation officer prior to January 1 of each year. (b) Any certified local government which has decided to act as a reviewing entity for any given year for the purposes of subsections (3) and (6) of this section shall be required to perform all duties and responsibilities pursuant to said subsections (3) and (6) for all qualified rehabilitations which received preliminary approval from said reviewing entity during such year. (11) (a) The amount of the fee required to be paid pursuant to the provisions of subparagraph (III) of paragraph (a) of subsection (3) and subparagraph (II) of paragraph (a) of subsection (6) of this section shall be an amount equal to the appropriate amount- determined pursuant to the following schedule minus the two-hundred-fifty-dollar fee paid pursuant to subparagraph (I) of. paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of this section: PAGE 6-HOUSE BILL 90-1033 individually or as a contributing property in a district in the state register of historic places or for designation as a landmark or as a contributing property in a historic district by a certified local government. (III) The taxpayer shall submit the verification form obtained pursuant to this paragraph (a) with the income tax return being filed by the taxpayer for the income tax year commencing on or after January 1, 1994, but prior to January 1, 1995. (b) The provisions of paragraph (a) of this subsection (6) shall not apply to any taxpayer who is allowed a credit for costs incurred in the rehabilitation of property located in Colorado pursuant to the provisions of section 38 of the internal revenue code. (7) (a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection (7), if the amount of the credit allowed pursuant to the provisions of this section exceeds the amount of income taxes otherwise due on the income of the taxpayer in the income tax year for which the credit is being claimed, the amount of the credit not used as an offset against income taxes in said income tax year may be carried forward as a credit against subsequent years' income tax liability for a period not exceeding five years and shall be applied first to the earliest income tax years possible; however, for any given taxable year, the maximum amount of said credit which may be claimed shall not exceed two thousand dollars plus an amount equal to fifty percent of the difference between the tax liability of the taxpayer and two thousand do]lars. Any amount of the credit which is not used after said period shall not be refundable to the taxpayer. (b) Any taxpayer who has refunded an amount pursuant to the provisions of subsection (8) of this section shall no longer be eligible to carry forward any amount of the credit which had not been used as of the date such refund is made. (8) Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, if any taxpayer who is the owner of qualified property and who has claimed the credit pursuant to the provisions of this section sells such qualified property within five years of the completion of the qualified rehabilitation or if any taxpayer who is a qualified tenant leasing qualified property and who has claimed the credit pursuant to the provisions of this section terminates the' lease of such qualified property within five years of the completion of the qualified rehabilitation, the taxpayer shall refund the amount of the credit which has been used to offset income taxes which exceeds the following amounts: PAGE 5-HOUSE BILL 90-1033