The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.19890712AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE JULY 12, 1989 REGULAR MEETING * 3:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.m. FIRST FLOOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS City Hall 3:00 Meeting begins at 3:00 due to the length of the agenda, it is imperative that the meeting begin on time! 3:00 I. Roll call and approval of June 28, 1989 minutes. II. Committee Member & Staff Comments III. Public Comment 3:10 IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Minor Development (revised) - 309 & 315 E. Main Carl and Katy Bergman V. NEW BUSINESS A. Landmark Designation 309 & 315 E. Main St. 3:30 B. Minor Development: 514 N. 3rd. St. 3:50 C. Minor Development: 319 N. 4th St. 4:00 D. Conceptual Development - Public Hearing 211 W. Main 4:45 E. Conceptual Development - Public Hearing 135 W. Main 5:30 VI. COMMUNICATIONS Project Monitoring General Discussion STATEWIDE PRESERVATION WORKSHOP - FRIDAY, JULY 28 - GENERAL SESSIONS, CLG TRAINING DAY. YOUR ATTENDANCE IS REQUIRED. PLEASE COMPLETE THE REGISTRATION FORM AND RETURN TO STAFF. - AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE JULY 12, 1989 .RFGULAR MEETING * 3:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.m. FIRST FLOOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS City Hall 3:00 Meeting begins at 3:00 due to the length of the agenda, it is imperative that the meeting begin on time! 3:00 I. Roll call and approval of June 28, 1989 minutes. II. Committee Member & Staff Comments III. Public Comment 3:10 IV. OLD BUSINESS 224 4 /1 0 (.0 /0 Le<Lic-/4 boi # 64 Afs At /6 4 3 a., A) c. 8 joc_jc-, ec,Dic- Li) ALL_-~ ~q ~~c-lly) A. Minor Development (revised)-- 309 & 315 E. Main Carl and Katy Bergman,14 Â·' 05-56 V. NEW BUSINESS ' A. Landmark Designation 309 & 315 E. Main St. A? f /4 :4,<1 h 3:30 B. Minor Development: 514 N. 3rd. St.j,7 8 I j Â«et-IR go 3:50 C. Minor Development: 319 N. 4th St. A; 0:,yk,6 '6<0 (Lize. 4:00 D. Conceptual Development - Public Hearing % f 211 W. Main '-Je~-t,L< l~9- CL-.UILL .76--8L- 1LJ~y- - c/,2.2-2 v ~) 03- 1 (bâ‚¬ 4:45 E. Conceptual Development - Public Hearing [ J.3 1 4 r F-Â· 135 W. Main 5:30 VI. COMMUNICATIONS Project Monitoring 4 General Discussion STATEWIDE PRESERVATION WORKSHOP - FRIDAY, JULY 28 - GENERAL SESSIONS, CLG TR) INING DAY. YOUR ATTENDANCE IS REQUIRED. PLEASE COMPLETE THE REGISTRATION FORM AND RETURN TO STAFF. NEWSTiEOM,Dmil<S CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ; JUL 12 1107 LINCOLN AVENUE P.0 BOX 772559 STEAM8OAT SPRINGS, COLORADO Â· 80477 (303) 879-6229 19 Crystal Road Carbondale CO 81623 2000 WEST EIGHTH AVENUE DENVER, COLORADO Â· 80204 . (303) 623-3171 July 12, 1989 Pitkin County Planing Office 730 south Galina Street Aspen CO 81611 RE: Collins Block TO: Bob Gish Bob, We are writing this letter with regard to safety precautions that we and the Structural Engineer Tom Duesterberg feel need to be addressed immedia- tely. To be specific, the East wall of the Collins Block (old Aspen Hardare) has deteriorated over the years to the point of near collapse. To add to this condition we are constructing a full basement under this wa]1. In order to do this the wall needs to be shored and braced. It is our professional opinion and that of the Structural Engineer that the wall can not withstand this ordeal. If it did, and we take the remaining precautions of pointing and patching the mortar joints, the future of this wall will always be in question. Our recommendation is that it be dismantled saving the brick and be reconstructed on a new foundation. A close inspection indicates that the mortar in the existing wall is no longer acting as a catalyst. To under go the rigors of excavation beneath it while being temporarily braced is asking too much of materials that have deteriorated to the extent they have. Our problem' is that RoxAnne has taken issue with how the wall will be reconstructed. As a result of her stand she has refused to let us take down the wall. The issue of how the wall will be reconstructed is not what needs to be addressed now. At this point we are supporting the arches which brick and mortar are already falling out of. The wall has settled over the years yielding serious structural cracks making the existence of this wall a danger..to all of us working around it. Collins Block Newstrom Davis Construction Company page 2 of 2 Bob, this wall does not contain any engravings or historic emblems that could be destroyed if the wall was dismantled. The Colorado Historic Society located in Denver has said that there are no regulations that would mandate tnat the wall could not be dismantled and reconstructed. How this wall is re-constructed is an entirely different issue which can be decided with a review of the preliminary approvals and the final approvals yet to be decided. We have enclosed a letter from the Structural Engineer detailing his observations. We understand that RoxAnne has a job to do and we respect her position. But to ignore the structural integrity now and in the future of this building is a serious mistake and a weighty responsibility. By her demand the wall will not be removed. Thank You, ' /3 8 # / Rodney E. 4land Vice President NDCC REP/dp cc: RoxAnne :/ HPC Mark Fuller Harley Baldwin Carl I,. Schiesser 1306 Walz Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 ICDO Certification No. 13873 July 12, 1989 Mr. Robert Gish Chief Building Inspector City of Aspen Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Sir: I, Carl L. Schiesaer, am a certified special inspector for Structural Magonry, ICBO Certification No.13873. I have inspected the building known as the Collina Block (Old Aspen Hardware Store) now undergoing restoration and remodeling. It is my opinion that the interior east wall -from the street to the adjacent building should be removed and rebuilt of same or new material. This wall has deteriorated to a point beyond repair. Respectfully, &41Â£/CUÂ« Carl L. Schieaaer ICBO Certification No. 13873 MEMORANDUM TO : BOB GISH. CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR / /~ FROM : RICHARD ARNOLD DATE : 10 JULY 1989 RE : COLLINS BLOCK: EAST WALL REMOVAL A MEETING WAS HELD AT 11:00 AM, THIS DATE TO DISCUSS THE REMOVAL OF THE EAST WALL OF THE COLLINS BLOCK. PRESENT AT THE MEETING BOB GISH. BUILDING DEPARjnuwl TOM HAWKINSON, BUILDING DEPARTMENT ROXANNE EFLIN, PLANNING OFFICE HARLEY BALDWIN, OWNER WAYNE POULSEN, ARCHITECT RICHARD ARNOLD, PROJECT MANAGER ROD POLAND, GENERAL CONTRACTOR TOM DUESTEBERG, ENGINEER DON ERDMAN, HPC TWO ISSUES WERE DISCUSSED: REMOVAL OF THE EAST WALL THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AND THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR ARE INSISTING To THAT THE REMAINING EAST WALL BE REMOVED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE PROTECT THE WORKMEN ON THE JOB. AS YOU KNOW WE HAVE SHORED UP THE WALL BUT IT IS STILL A HAZARD. WE DO NOT FEEL THAT THE WALL CAN BE REPAIRED. PLEASE SEE THE UNCI Dewn Wn#LUU-U LETTER FROM TOM DUESTEBERG RECOMMENDING THE REMOVAL OF THE WALL. RE-CONSTRUCTION OF THE EAST WALL THE RE-CONSTRUCTION OF THE EAST WALL WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE PLANNING OFFICE PROCESS. WE CAN REBUILD THE WALL TO ANY SPECIFICATION. WE FEEL THAT THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE IS TO RECONSTRUCT THE WALL AND CREATE A SAFE WORKING ENVIRONMENT FOR THE Construction CREW AND THE FUTURE OCCUPANTS. 2 July 12,1989 1Â·lr Robert Gis,F~i Building Department Aspen Co. Dear Plr, 01 sh, As the Structural Engineer for renovation and reconstruction of the Collins Block, Building for Harley Baldwin, the owner, I have advised him of my concern foi- the integrity of the East walls that remain standing and strongly recommend these brick walls should be torn down under controlled conditions rother than allowing underpinning to be done. The South portion of the East wall is bearing on a shallow rock foundation which will require underpinning in short sections to prevent total collapse of the wall. Since the underpinning must be 13' 3" deep on the East and West sides of the wall, this excavation and vibrations could further deteriorate the already bad condition of the bricks and mortar. The wallis now shored on the East side, as it appeared to have leaned to the East since heavy equipment has been brought on site, so we thought it best to shore the wall as it is riot supported adequately at the second floor. This sharing will have to be rernoved as underpinning excavation is done, thus taking support from the wall when it is badly needed. The North portion of the East wall is bearing on a deep rock foundation because of the existing basement and a shallow foundation South of the basernent. The Northern 20' length is at the basement, and a shallow rock foundation for the 12' Southern length. These two depths require two different methods of underpinning. The Northern 20' must be held in place with a terripoi-ary steel lintel bolted ttirouah the brick wall. The mason has expressed concern about drilling holes in the old brick, and if the bricks will hold in place to provide the friction necessary to make the steel lintel and bi-0 work together The 12' Southern length will require deep pits or 1 L.) I.J Lit j i J.Â· -1 of the *311 down 13' 3- Again ti-ie heavy equipment and v i brations cari do darn age to these walls. W'tr at--: deallfig With nlarty Unkiltâ€¢WE-15, C bad britk, rotting n-luttar , instability, etc. ),by trying to keep these walls in place, whereas, if they could be removed and rebuilt with the old brick as the exterior facing and a new solid reinforced block wall placed as a core, the end result will be a structure free of the unknowns and safe f or future years. It was determined at the meeting to discuss these walls with the Historical Preservation Committee, Monday July 10,1989, that an Independent Engineer could make a decision if my concern for the instability of the walls and for the safety of the workers is correct. The inspecting Engineer niust be made aware of the poor conditions of the brick and mortar and the depth of excavation and underpinning required. As the Engineer for Mr. Baldwin, I recommend these walls be removed for Eafety reasons and a structurally sound wall rebuilt. Should the Independent Engineer not agree with my concern and states these walls should stand and underpinning proceed, then any failures, damage, or injury are the liability of that Independent Engineer-. Sincerely, Â»790~ /~ J.Qui,4 Thomas J. Duesterberq " (D *l 5737 k Â»Â»_.ezâ‚¬>~<9 'Â« dp-COLd?'- i V Â· A. MEMORANDUM @ilki. - .il To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee -* 1 7.10'11 ... rrom: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Planner Re: Minor Development: 309 and 315 E. Main St., Bergman Parcel, Improvements and Maintenance Information Date: July 12, 1989 SUMMARY: Attached is a revised application and general information from Carl and Katy Bergman addressing HPC's concerns for the two miner's cottages at 309 and 315 E. Main St., located in the Commercial Core Historic District. The Planning Office recommends that the HPC and applicant take this opportunity to discuss the challenges of preserving these two extremely important historic resources on Main St., and reach an agreement for a plan of action which addresses the preservation goals of the community. PREVIOUS HPC ACTION: At the last HPC meeting on June 28, an application for fencing and signage from tenant Don Westerlin for 315 E. Main was denied. The primary concerns voiced by members of the HPC at that meeting dealt with the overall parcel, which includes both structures, plans for general improvements and structural maintenance to prevent any further decay. STAFF COMMENTS: The property owners have reached an agreement with the tenants for tenant-paid improvements, which we find innovative under the circumstances. Staff's concern is simply that some preservation and improvement plan be accomplished immediately, not so much as to whom is going to pay for them! We are pleased to see some activity underway, and support the owner's interest in the renovation. The owner purchased these vacant structures less than two years ago, and is now able to lease them to tenants who have demonstrated an interest in improving them. (See letter attached.) The gravel walkway from the rear parking area to the sidewalk is being improved with the elimination of the gravel and installation Of brick pavers; the entire walkway is being narrowed as well. Wrought iron fencing will be installed in front of both structures, and signage will not be attached to the exterior clapboard. FRONT PORCH ON 309 E. MAIN: The most significant element indicating deferred maintenance is the badly sagging front porch. Staff is recommending the porch be restored within six (6) months of the final ordinance reading for Landmark Designation. This ' :,~1 may mean the er.tire disassembling of the porch (numbering each piece for exact replacement) or simply shoring up the roof. The F. , owner should familiarize himself with the newly adoption provisions of the Land Use Code, through Ordinance 7, Series of 1989, addressing Minimum Maintenance Requirements for historic structures. These provisions state that aeferred maintenance is not acceptable and that historic structures shall be maintained to prevent their complete or partial demolition. Staff has clarified the misperceptions the owners had with regard to "rating" vs. "historic designation", as well as "change Of use" (see letter attacied). Rating and location within any historic district is totally independent of Designation; Landmark Designation is underway for the entire parcel. A GMQS Exemption application for Planning Director sign-off (per Ordinance 16 and 27, Series of 1989) is required for the Change of Use. This cannot be accomplished until the Designation process is complete. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC approve the application as presented, and require the front porch at 309 E. Main to be restored within six (6) months from the date of the final ordinance reading for Landmark Designation. Further, the Planning Office recommends that the HPC offer any assistance to the owners and tenants to meet the historic preservation goals of the community. memo.hpc.309.315em.2 2 Carl R. & Catherine M. Bergman P. 0. Box 1365 Aspen, Co. 81612 July 3, 1989 Ms. Roxanne Eflin Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Co. 81611 Â» f Dear Roxanne: In response to your letter of June 22 and as a result of our conversation 0, Friday, we have attached a site olan for the nroperty at 309 and 315 E. Main Street showing the placement of the fence and the signing for both houses. We have also attached drawine from Don Westerlind for the house at 315 E. Main and a copy of the letter from Bob Oxenberg to us giving us an update on his plans and accomplishments to date. The Westerlinds have done a marvelous job on the interior as well and we would suggest that the members of the HPC take the time to visit both properties. In the material presented to us upon purchase of this property, we re- ceived copies indicating that these two houses had already been designated as "No.4" in historic classification. Consequently, we were surprised to hear that we were supposed to apply for this designation. We have enclosed conies for your information. 3ince these houses are also located in the Commercial Core, we believed we rented them to tenants with acceptable uses without having to receive permission. They were unoccupied when we pur- chased them so we were not changing any use. Since we were on vacation when Mr. Drueding notified the tenants they were in violation of zoning procedures, we instructed the manager of the Miners' Building to file the application on our behalf. It looks as.though we both have the desire tc save these structures and need to take a sensible approach to make this work. It has been brought to our attention that the HPC would like the walkway between the houses redesigned. We have indicated on the site plan that we would be willing to narrow the walkway to five feet and remove the gravel and brick this in with timbers on either side. We trust this information will be helpful before the meeting on July 12. Please let me know if you have further questions prior to the meeting. Sincerely, 7 C--0..-f U-<_.-AL.bvL-/L /)37 ~(21..,6,~-~1 Â·7'9-UL_ -,> Carl R. '& Catherine )M. Bergm an :- 1.4.1.U ,-130 1\2 1-22 1 T..C.%- cr33}Â·Ili GIl CD j tioft--,4 - )7 f\}id-V) 1.1 51 2 - -2.- U 3 10?~g-10 5-3-612- Eht-t\\V (30 Ete )12. rÂ·<-pu-wt (Â© _900 47% h . , -I--Ilid) Flt 3> R 01 , 6 -- - - j . --7~* -7, L,9 -7~-- b, $,6 -----7--Ii#-11 LIE -id.7,2-Jr 1 3 . 1 A ; P 1// 1 , 11 11 I x f 1 '\1 1 1 19 1 1 0 I .'01 h _21 |- -- -1 3Â¤ 123!1 1 - . 1 1 --1 % 71 4 -- 0 1 - 411 WlÂ» , / 21 //355/ /' 16 --7 - t ' 1 11 ... El - 1 m A 1 1 iii + \ Pl 3 \9 45 60 4 25%942-4 9 â‚¬. M\As(KI Elb-.11 ' L/ i' /1 : 0 , ;1(41 , 1 , 4 1/ S (4 27 Rll .J . ek-644 +~ 57 1230.it * 12 vcd49 berl * + l# 1 . f U- I }il a 8 1 '11 lit I 131 !:1 i N '>. i:j 49(* 03*11<5~1) caod (33.- k 44_Ls OfÂ«kE-0 ft) CE E . IAIE(\4 6-C 44*04 C.(3 Lyb %-Abo :,j*3(:E LU-to 0 T ' 1 A , .Â·1 4t' S~acia.~ 04 All, A / . a. V â‚¬J\Â» Ca_\5 . f 0/01- '5'3 " Â« /3-3/t-/ 6. 1 A 1/ 9 43 C-1 - _L -0- 1 1 A cfeara_Â«-2 -flul \" -~fo~~L~o.At 11. 1) 2~81\ 7~cls 62~- t A Co+.c.f @tre-- ... .... - r.,0~ CD r fret,+ au\# Ipr to~ f~ki< Aro -<, - - e # 4(_Pide Cout-04-60-064 Â¢1 -485 -4 cli-4 4-EkkE 5 \G L. t Arjl k i LT. f> t~Â·01 , COLD 2-AL>-D Tn +1 4 4 I 1 .j.;22 741Â·< C 1 5 02 0 U21 b 8g Bey râ€¢- r 1, 0 9 i : -1 g) 1 D fri 9 F 2 2 2 4 7 61 1 U B -0 W /1 - I #29 MD r mo 1 t 16.1 . 16, 1 \, 23 -tu -0 f Z 0 Fyi 4 1. . ry 1 0 . 7 01 - --' 1 1 01 ----- - 3 2 / 0 5 1 0 f <: AL.- C n 1 FT.1 2 2, . r Â· r- - 9 2: f a - 8 3 -- m (-: U rl 00 no Fal . 0 -4 1 P r .11 - 7 0 4 le I 1 1-3 5 1 <r--0 1 w 1 c , di 1 U , L / 11 Le ~ J .-I D 1 7 Â· 0 '9 ' - - - FI~* .*-- --;.- - I.-I- --. - - - i u f' 3/ r- In i k .11 > A. D . L :Â«91.--X ..... .1,Â«00,22Â»..I- -.... 0/, R 'LE] .*Il â€¢ w.-I-/.I-*+I.*--I. -r- â€¢-*..I-*- -/9/..... -. --I.Â· I -i- - i--Â· - â€¢ Â· Â·Â· , - , .2 0 43 Z n w X U ,-1 - 7 B (P 4 93-- r J P -I.. i 9%0 P 7 , / 3 Dge | -1 P z 1 1,0 /\ 8 Z 4 - F 10 11 - ILA m 13.K R. 31 I .C J 1 1 u; -11 & fri o ob -IC D I th 4 - 4 3 - 0. ic:, r- 1.2 ----11 tb f- /1 1 N , 1 B 6, k i 0 4 0 E 11 V P 1- 1 *4 r. 1 1 ri . .1 7 tri 1 . fit .* CO p 0 HRICK _,4 , ( i E ; 7 9 m M c 11 0 0 11 r r.8 +4 9 '8 0 E 0 r 11 tOP % O .0 FrA S) 3 * f Z < 11 01 0 1,11 - 9Â· 't , 9 2 - 9489 -12123 A' U el 'u 71 m " 4 P E A n -. c 4Â£1 6) m # g ~ ~ 61 J 2 i~ ; a 2 0 2 g (11 g 4 *090 A-6 A n 21 7 1 r O 8 0 11 D -1 0 ,0 U - Z Ill Â·.-. M -, D 7 -\ -' 0 -1- 4 0 A m 5 6 - 21 u' m b z L Z it z CPu- 0 )0- u m z m o A 30 fri 3 0 c 2 -__~______ - m~C - rif 2 M 1 0% - - 0 1 0 Z&@ < UM fAn M 1.71 ;A . m ic, iii Fr7 Hâ‚¬ MAIN STREET BLDG. '~ V ~ I I .~ 1 j A 441 ... & 144.. 1-1 ' 7ft rf , 1943 f F 4/61 (lf Â£ ~1-~~- *4200:-~~;~5414 912Â«~jz.Â· juou~ U- 3-84 RUE ; Lcyputt-~ 60.4 1 1 4. .,Bn j-u, ~-4-Â£4 tÂ·9 Â£-4-- 1 0Â«-a 1 6 Lk/n V r. A. ADA ' fii _Â£-CLES<Li ci i< 1 li-L Â¢14-,dqj-,4-f , JOit l~4-+1Le - ~44 - go tAÂ£ cot-4-4 LIN-5~ WKi, Uvuq, C.-~-~ Intl_ 2~J- LIL Lit --t--Â«-~221Â«*C c--3 itz f~_L h .1 1-31.--k 04Â» 2.u_-2 8,-1-- 3-0 - tr . )9 f 0Â«Fdfu' -,- Lida*o :. *t- ~ OUtÂ« 0 1%t...1-4 ~ 4Ld- 00Â¥Â«.1:(~. , -4 ~ + I - 4- 14 620*LO~/24 4 - - UL.U . Â«5-, %44- jt~*414.-04Â© 2~ 7.64 i.tÂ· ju - 611494-JÂ·~*x.2-6 i Â£1. v.i~hi 9--424~10 )~v+TLY-- f<- 2-I/Lao 3 62_12 -. 44212"i--4-f id,Lif 1-4.-A .---1-- /-4 462 41'Otâ‚¬-_ A-2- - i 0 Â·f>/ - th,11 56#AL J & 1%21 t,u.-4 --~-4Â·44. 3u jÂ«~r le- I Â£-1 .,1 . 1 FF - AL- --t\/11.- dU -<,1 u.e---~6-~34- LAg -0--- 1-~6-+La- . 9*Â· TÂ· r . - Â·1.Â·~.. ..Â£. 'I,.F~- ~f-f.- .2 2 8 j Airil:' :.06. & 0-Â»: --0 -* 44.~44 242 A. Â·r Â·a -1.-Â·n Â·Â·-.. 1 , 4% mi X 1 - + -I ~ I. A I , ' -1-.- - dE.4/1044.Uju ~41GUL/CE . A (tite__ ,ua_ V Â·~ 11 -1Â©-CALLET.4 5352+TY1-: tr:e ciIt' i- jitt t~-f -1-IÂ«& a--~ 3-9/ 90?Â»1-f 9 61/Ut 0 LA, 1-toÂ» Clotâ‚¬- .1 -c /t LO~Â·-Â£ 0 c'Un 66 114 ji uÂ«_ 016-06 4 1& 424 x I G F- 4,6 43-1-*144 U (4& g.d. .04Â£ i.de:6 /1/'. b Af- . R*%3431 - GI-y/pfurÂ¥ 0,Â»uÂ»-Â·c / IJ.3 t-VU U 9.0.- ov~hill Neus k.64.01 At 6622 10-A-r (3 'Â© 4 f 647 w ) i t-/9 *45).CE,3./.*13.fli- 1.t /303& ../.ELY<) 0~ Cit/2 44 g ji& coil-60 1 82 a<pf 4 06- Fl/- ' 2(&1/4 4 4.. . U,Ch.' 16.-Cok 9,1 I VÂ· A MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Landmark Designation: 309 and 315 East Main St. Date: July 12, 1989 11=E LOCATION: 309 and 315 East Main St., (one parcel) East 1/2 of Lot B, all of Lots C and D, Block 80, City and Townsite of Aspen APPLICANT: Carl Bergman APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Landmark Designation for both cottages: 309 E. Main - c. 1883-84, referred to historically as the Lena Kunz House 315 E. Main - c. 1885-86, referred to historically as the A. G. Shepard House HISTORIC EVALUATION RATING: Both are rated "4" ZONING: cc - Commercial Core SUMMARY: This property will become Aspen's lolst and 102nd designated historic landmark. Congratulations to the owners! PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW: Landmark designation is a three-step proce s, requiring r acommendations 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. The owner is required to comply with all public hearing notice requirements prior to the hearing with the P&Z; the City Clerk will notice the second and final Council reading of the ordinance. 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. Staff finds that the application meets both the criteria in Standard E. (Neighborhood Character) and Standard F. (Community Character). Standard 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. Eilill Response: The two cottages are among Aspen's most visible historic resources, located prominently on Main Street within the Commercial Core Historic District. The adjacent - Thomas Hynes House (303 E. Main) is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Together, all three make a '11'.1'511,1 very strong, consistent statement in this block, and are an ~:11 1 4. representative of Aspen's historic past. The two cottages are excellent examples illustrating the family/home environment and life styles of Aspen's mining era. Their 4 k preservation is a critical component to the character of the 111!lili district and Aspen as a whole. Of the entire 13.5 square block Commercial Core District, only 12 small scale historic structures remain. We feel these structures have been vastly under utilized (until just recently when they became occupied) and feel that the very activity of repair and renovation would speak loudly to the community and visitors alike that the preservation of Aspen's his.oric character is a top priority in this community. The Planning Office is pleased to see a cooperative effort between owner and occupant(s) in the maintenance, preservation and renovation of these extremely important historic cottages. Standard F. Community Character: The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance. Response: The Inventory file in the Planning Office states of both structures: "The historical significance Of this residential st.ucture is not of those who owned it or lived in it, nor of its architecture, although this structure is representative of Aspen's mining era..." 309 E. Main has a beautifully original, however significantly sagging, front porch, a situation which must be remedied this year. This architectural element is the primary focus of the structure, and speaks to the deferred maintenance the structure has received for years prior to the new owners purchasing the structure. The Planning Office recommends approval for landmark designation with the condition that the porch be preserved and restored within six (6) months following the adoption of the designation ordinance. This structure has a unique projecting front gable supported by an angular bay-like first floor. Its classic elements (i.e. narrow, horizontal clapboard, one over one narrow double-hung windows, brick chimney setbacks and lawn setting) define this is a vernacular cross-gabled 2 miner's cottage. 315 E. Main has a slightly altered front gable/porch roof, and contains a beautiful projecting Italianate bay. The classic cross-gable design has narrow, horizontal clapboard, a front gable face enhanced with cut shingles, and narrow double-hung windows. We feel that in the spirit of historic preservation, the exterior and interior preservation, restoration and rehabilitation of these two particular structures will clearly demonstrate to the community the commitment on the owner's part to help retain Aspen's historic, irreplaceable character. The Planning Office strongly recommends that all deferred maintenance on these two structures be arrested immediately, and that the owner develop a reasonable maintenance plan for the entire parcel, including all landscaping and exterior improvements. The Planning Office commends the owner for developing an innovative method to involve the renters in the renovation process. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC recommend Landmark Designation for the entire parcel containing both 309 and 315 E. Main St., with the following condition to be met within six (6) months following the adoption of the designation ordinance: The porch on 309 E. Main St. will be restored, using the exi-ting materials, substituting new materials only for those which have deteriorated past the point of preservation. The Planning Office shall review and approve an application for the restoration activity prior to the issuance of a building permit. memo.hpc.309.315EM.LD 3 20â‚¬Â·, - â€¢<, r >t Â·4~ -7Â©Â»" *5.,f, 41,&3Â·71 4Â·!..1 th=,Esg!:&i~/f/#4 VM#FA v *I+Â·VC~'â€¢'J~~~iC'N~*~~~'~~~1<~ - _AN,JÂ¢,79*81 k/Â¥4.4.- '1 .i =-3;411~=-3-7.- -112 i re Il !1 - IL_ *Jllis 'EAR,Eff .--1---*-i-*.- FU9 j.f~~~44/2/F/39 4 fih.=24 Pkagn=umm~*IN, r Jummi it#*---- i 1(EL-~ - . j.*<. fy&*M*/I.---Q - ./ '' .' .2.4&/.& :, 0,-4. 7- 20."e t- r r. i f *.s â‚¬Â«-1 4 r:F. f:42fl69441%~~-3-Â·~Â·Â· it T.,--~-~~.t ~ fl. . I 1 * I. ' - r 21.4 -- I. f'""&233-u'mu:."26Ln---.. 1 7*3#444.949 --- -ff lf- 4~54 /6//441*/UNF':19*launk. 1% & 6 -ik' le: 244 - - =71 - -- 4.- . ----I - -1 I fs,1/82 849.49,4 rE ~ - 71 "11 ,1--/ 91*. Â£ B i ew?Eti~ I 'be 4.- .. *' -. .- a - I * 22 2 =-==-===r- --32 0 433*ELET-1-_7~E r . B . J.. =L-LE-U *I -- .â€¢ 163Â·Â·41%/ 31 fl~ 4 03 14 Â·Â· Â¥ Â»f. 1. ... V . EX),- MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Minor Development: 514 N. 3rd St. Date: June 12, 1989 LOCATION: 514 N. 3rd St., (metes and bounds description), City and Townsite of Aspen APPLICANT: Donald and Karen Ringsby APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Minor Development approval for the installation of two principal facade dormers to add space in the Â· -* d attic for bedrooms, and other minor window alterations. . . ':1 ZONING: R-6, Landmark Designation is scheduled for final reading i :. before council on July 10. 1% RATING: " 4 It DESIGNATION NOTES: Landmark Designation is required due to the parking constraints for the two new attic bedroors created. Ordinance 16, Sec. 2, Paragraph 2, provides for the HPC to waive on-site parking requirements for landmarks if the parcel is unable to contain the number of spaces required. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicable Guidelines are found in Section VI. Residential Buildings - Renovation and Restoration, beginning on page 47. The Development Review Standards are found in Section 7-601 of the Land Use Code, and are reviewed below, with staff's comments following: 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: This miner's cottage has received a significant addition (south wing) since it was originally inventoried in 1980. The original porch has been enclosed and a duplicate "enclosed porch" added in the new addition. A significantly altered detached carriage house is located at the alley as well. The primary 3rd street (west) elevation is receiving the most significant changes, including two small gable roof dormers and a round window in the primary gable face. In \1 -- our review of other structures in the West End, we find the dormers are not inappropriate on this structure, and are necessary to provide light, ventilation, egress and headroom to the proposed attic bedrooms. (While similar dormers would be considered inappropriate on carriage houses, we find that the dormers proposed do not alter the overall character of the primary structure.) We are not as comfortable with the application of a round gable face window on this primary facade. The applicant has stated this window is necessary for light into the attic bedrooms; we recommend that the original gable shingles remain wholly in tact and that this gable end not receive a window. An ther window, oval in shape, is proposed in the north el vation gable end, an alternative shape for this west elevation window. The elaborate Smith-Elisha House, (Queen Anne) contains two large round gable end windows, which is an appropriate application on that facade. Round gable end LÂ· windows of this nature are generally not found in vernacular cottages. We do find, however, that the round window's size is scaled appropriately, should the HPC approve the alteration. The north, south and east elevations are the least visible, screened considerably by mature trees. The changes proposed on these elevations (deck railing, small gable peak oval window, tri-window with multi-panes and 3 flat roof skylights), are cosmetic in nature, and do not impact the historic character of the structure, in our opinion. The skylight application meets the criteria in the Guidelines. (Please refer to attached drawings.) 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: Staff finds the application meets this standard. Numerous structures in this immediately West End neighborhood have received alterations similar in nature. 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 the cultural value of this structure is in its small scale, which is not Leing altered with this proposal. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural inteirity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. 2 4 Response: Please refer to staff's comments to Standard #1 regarding the dormers. We find that the multi-pane wi:idows proposed for the dormers are small and scaled appropriately; the even placement of the dormers on either sjde of the front gable face does not diminish the structure's architectural integrity, in our opinion. We would like the applicant to consider the elimination of the round gable peak window on the primary west elevation gable peak, as we find the original architectural integrity of the Cut shingles to be appropriate and should be retained. The other elevation changes proposed are not easily visible, and do not diminish the architectural integrity of the structure, in our opinion. PARKING: Two new attic bedrooms are being created, requiring one on-site parking space each, provided space is available on site (please refer to site plan attached). Ordinance 16 provides the HPC the flexibility to waive this requirement on designated landmarks if adequate surface space is not available on the parcel, provided the applicant has made every effort to provide adequate parking on site. The applicant has met with the Zoning Officer to discuss the site constraints. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC grant Minor Development approval for the application for 514 N. 3rd St., waiving the parking requirements as allowed in Ordinance 16, Series of 1989. We further recommend that the applicant consider eliminating the proposed west elevation round gable peak window. memo.hpc.514n3md 3 JUN E \ 1 J Ci Attachment 2 Application from: Block 40, lots 1 and 2 Hallam Addition Donald and Karen Ringsby 514 N. 3rd. Aspen, Co. (920-1623) in Denver: 21 Cherrymoor Dr. Englewood, Co. 80110 (761-1180), Don's office-320-3960. In regard to an explanation of why the proposed development complies with the substantive development review standards relevant to the Development Application, is simply that our proposition is extremely modest with negliglible impact on the existing ambience of the neighborhood. In actuality, it will enhance the area. Our development is the renovation of our small attic into some livable space. Our Victorian home was originally a miner's cabin which has been added onto several times. We only have two bedrooms at the present and would like some additional space without adding on to the existing structure. The only exterior changes are as follows: two new dormer windows on the front of the house. These will provide 1-ight and space to the attic bedrooms as well as provide architectural Al Ki' 0 >BY 2 -2 detail to the exterior. The roof lines of the dormers will coincide with the current gable in the center, adding to the Victorian charm. They will have wooden framed windows roofed in the same shingles as the roof. In the center of the gable we are adding a beveled glass window (again to add light to the attic) which will be a companion piece of glass to the existing beveled glass as well as a new front door. To the rear of the house we will add three skylights which will open on the roof, but will only be visible to our neighbor on the east of us. Also to the roar will be a door in the center of the gable leading to a small deck. It will have balusters in a Victorian design, again looking as though it had always been there. On the south side of the house, visible only from our courtyard and our guest house, will be some additional windows in the gable. Again these will be' compatibly "Victorian" in design. On the north side of the house, where there is presently a vent, in the center of the gable, there will be a new round window to light the half-bath in the attic space. These will be in only exterior changes and additions, which we feel will enhance the Victorian charm as well as make the house more liveable and enjoyable. WicÂ»89 F.4 Attachment 3 9pecific Submission Contents: Minor Development in Historic Overlay District 1. The proposed development consists of turning unused attic space into some liveable space. This 1884 Victorian which has been added onto several times has only two bedrooms and we will have some additional sleeping area and a half-bath and deck. The only exterior changes will be the addition of two dormer windows to the front, skylights and a door and deck to the rear, and windows under the gables to the north and south. 2. Attached are samples of the materials to be used. The circular staircase will go in an existing ski closet. The dormers will have siding of the original house as well as the shingles. Enclosed are window samples. The new beveled glass window in the gable on the front will be compatible with the antique one currently front center. To try to keep a light airy feeling in the new attic space, the walls will be a light grey Aspen wood with pale grey carpeting. While the recessed lighting for sloped walls will not be "Victorian", we feel they are necessary to prevent one from hitting one's head on light fixtures in the limited head space. Bathroom fixtures will be Victorian in feel, with pale grev tile. There will be built-in cabinets with "antique" drawer 9- i2 119 6567 3Â· 0 pullS. 3. As to the effect of the proposed development on the original design of the historic structure, we feel it will definitely be enhanced and look as though it had always been there. The new skylights will not be visible from the front and sides. This enhancement with the addition of the dormers and beveled glass windows as well as the door to the new deck will not only enhance the house but the neighborhood as well. Attachment 4 Review Standards:Development in H, Historic Overlay Please refer to Page 3, a diagram of our immediate neighborhood for the character of the diverse area. While there is great disparity in the neighborhood, w are trying to preserve the Victorian ambience, not only of our home but of the West End in general. The very modest and minor changes which we are planning will not only enhance the Victorian charm but will make our home more liveable. We certainly have no desire to tear it down. The changes have been outlined in previous attachments as well as the architectural drawings. As to the architectural integrity of the structure, perhaps the additional dormer windows and beveled glass and small deck, make the house more "grand" than it was originally as a miner's cabin, I do not think it detracts from the house or the neighborhood, but enriches it, which is definitely what was done to the Victorian house directly across the street. It is expensive to continually renovate and repair these old homes, but we feel it is worth it and appreciate your concern for the preservation of the historic aspects of Aspen, both architecturally and culturally. â€¢ Custom-crafted of select mahogamÂ·. Standard-Z door mav be selecied for use with .---- 1 ' Ulass panels .,re fullv beveled with anv .short oval panel. piecise workmans}up. ' â€¢ Beveled glass is set in zinc or lead which is finished with a black patina. Etched glass panels are deep-carved in safety glass and laminated to meet 311 ,\ fuderal sumuards. ~ .< 4....4 E -r77 / Â· Â·Â·~ r LIU! STANDARD-Z Â©AAW M 147% AtÂ¥1 1 E - i.~Til 1 '42\1 m ~0 ~Elfll, ~ __ 14.41 1 !3fittl E 44 =2- t\-4 ' 1 -44 9 1 11 1 1( 11 0 -15(4 1 1 -1 fj 1 j I . --07> 121 1/141 . 1 i bful I IN 41': iN, 1 ,-127A ..17.- ~ / Al 10% 044:11 1 , </ 1 >044,0 1 1 4 Â«13 81 4)Â«1 I r <19 W# /4.-- Rt %*3,20 . 4% I .2/4. I m .9491 M 64, i :*t.'Â· h b'- i 9/*,4Â¥*1 Ii: 1 re. 3* 4~~. : *4Â· 1 F t mi&--)11.4/"I-- 7Â· ' Â· J 16 . '. . - - i-,- .- Z.3R Â©AAU' Z-4R Â©AAU' Z.5R Â©AAW ZÂ·6L Â©AAW Z-BL - Â©AAW Z-9L Â©AAU' Matching sidelites Matching sidelites Matching sidelites Matching sidelites 1 available. available. available. available. door A U , T\hu 09 - 00-0 1144 /6't 4 641 +-/ /-.~- lot 1 U ' 1-111't Â·iw' - - â€ž'.111 5 ...2 4.1 ,1.. 61 fillsi/'It I 9, 6-* 11 n ..69 1, 1. BAA| 12-* gam.4: 11/901 142'Br i I ~rle 0 I .:ilyÂ».Ill ' 2 9*-21 limt.im. =1 7%9=:j 4 '7* Â·Er.V, - ''/ lippa~,pi//2/1/1/0/li 3=21. __...~lyÂ·t <Ct.* /4//.3 4*02. 4.3- 32'.f/3 F. - '"'- UES=.Â·' iÂ¢:242Z~3.f Z.SB-3OL Â©AAW Z-SB-31L Â©AAW Z-SB-32L Â©AAW Z.SB.33L Â©AAW Nia,Â· be ordered alone MinÂ· he ordered al.ne or with Z-SB-33L for a or with Z-SB-32L t'ir a double entrY. dotible entr'. whâ€¢iâ€¢,-Pr 7 0 /01 A UnligUE SLAN I IN RELESbEL) LIGH 111\16 r-f/ \ 9 j / 4 1 C--2-pe},7 Li 43 ,1N _ 9 7% s 9 -27 h t. 51 ' SLOPED CEILING DOWN-LITES 1~ THE FIRST RECESSED DOWNLIGHT DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY-FOR SLOPED CEILINGS -Ill........~#.I-... - .i..-'.,:-.p.FiR:t~~Â·-44'91 .. 1 1 }1&.1.3,41~ ~ 931; U {-'!14%31 -067,4.&* ~1 .gh*.93;Â·f'Â·0* -4%49%44%.4,5-1 ., 74 Â· ~ Â· Â· ~t,Â·:Â·tÂ·. ts/Â¢,4 .9'U.- 1 1 -1.. rnÂ¢%.. Â· - ts-9".4.0 ,~r,I ' Â· Ner)' 'fli -'- 4,tÂ·'-~ 22;4-Wirmie~W//&./Mi'.1V- ~ 7 '1-i.,~'4.- ~H Â· :u 14 -4)'-*,4Â· AJâ‚¬t ' i th HI 1- . -,-I.../.-i -- -- C.6 + 215.V.-- TIX:,ili/0/9/Imitill 4 44 4,5 1: e.... I - 2 1. .0~'eall'IM 'got.â€¢ r Â»1 :164~24 Â·y" r~.m 4 -j,$2' 6 -#~.:*% - E.M 4 ~ 14. $'0*.'j .2 -4'Yil 11$0:.: 1:23 L,Â·'' Â· - --Imilit' -â€¢,4-4 2 0.1 '/W-+97 Â¥ e,ar - i. ., ./.- 5 bit 3 , -1.-- ., -p , .--~7'AL . F. :>,41, 1/ f 1 14,4 ..4 04*' 1 1 ..i -12.1 1 . . . 'le,39.-il-B 22,43. M. 316Â«Jft) 4 44 - 4 I C 1.'4*..4. .-7:' ~ 4 :If- r.. .. . .0 -,4.- . .;1.4 4 - 1 . 4-/.gg F * . ma ; 1.19(.*d-~.I:&#LPA'1*Â«.p.,va:42 'f'9'A 449331*11'*ae.â‚¬6 L-54, 40- '.i:Â· rÂ·..ti'Â· Ii;9 -- -Â· ..-''rÂ·52â€¢~4Â· -~,-0' I . r +,Air u , *- 4. 2- .2 v . A , .299..I=r 43 2Â«4 - 3 . #4 ' p cr 4-1& 4 â€¢ ". + 0 T- ~mi..,%2114-Ac1,Â£ r*+~ 92 ~70*-if-k 4671*f -~9Â·144.rfft; 42Â·4'4:' ': '' 049Â¥ a J , *it F Â· ' /':4) fleÂ¢rlgli.49./.''' I Q . : :f - 4 4 1:,4 ~] 1"tky? 31, t. 1443 73~* 2 : . 94. , ~ "ZE, , . - #* I I - ff:$... +i:...:fÂ« 0,4, ;49.i~t.4.91 1, 4,7'i,432422.S>.~ T}*6.5-KN- 41:tk/43933.3. * 2 -1 â‚¬ .1-ti# 344 '- ' ' *' :gÂ»lr, 1,6~-24 2*f? .44.-Â·d'*4*- ~ir#W:J. -;t~@S. yÂ¥,hÂ¥ I I V .. 4. . 1 41./ --14 13 ...94*~-f * J J..9-<4 . 7 -4 -,1 - I L 2 *.6 26... , . 9.. n 2 17,1 1.Â» ~e : . 4*2- -*19 p A#~div *~ 1, r,4, 1 2 72*24,4 4. 04 . A.:'5% 43, I 79.3 4.42-,i,4 Totitti.1 y 2* 1 . 3 , . "%99, 9Â»K - aGE -Â· 6...2 4 .* 4 . t rÂ« 5: 41, . 1:4 Â·a Â¢34 2 . , , eft, te #t 3%~ 42 - .i.,1.44&6,/8/91 - 4 - . 3 3?.63; -il#*#Hart, 1 .s ..a/,1 1 Act Â« V Y -* V. 31,1/:6""*1 ..4 < 4 4,2. 2 .-7 -â€¢. p * 0-*02~*~~'It<411 -e '44' .,4 0.2 , J i. r .4, 4. ' -,f + p i.. (244&:97? A rbi '. ' -Â»I. l' . . 1.iÂ·f,beiti +44.~' Â· .34- . , :4.*'*.16 m & t 20 I .. .. & , , ' .1 0/Â·.1 '7 ,. .1 94 7 * I 4 & Â·S tft, 44, Alt"-46.,--lf - .: ,...1, 1 , luJ.4....>t~L:, .. ';6 . 04 /.:.r.-Y*Â«i Â·93 'i~--FL , 0â€¢ 3 39-1.64243 , .9 '' 4,24 ..4-49!M - . % ~0-/44~L~,4 /1,~ j L ; .-Aill...i,Lal. 24* " " iIiÂ« 1 Iâ€¢' , I"a:*t: ,......2.~ f~.~~1~- 4- bl ?1*k ly r , I .-776-4,0.,. 14,1 4 1, 34,~. ,$0/ -.;.4 ~' i 4/ 4/37/ '1 , 7..2 .il... 4 46*41.- -- ....4/#Ii. I Gllirer A 1 ' , , -il'll-3 .. 1 .% . . .* 1. 1 -1.- 260 #Al '.1.Â·.Â·:Â·Â· 4-A+6~ 1,1, 1,9 0 . I: *.t ' 04$417:#AAÂ¢& 6927 543 . 6...: 24%/ 42#ktiÂ·+1:14*J)*I,illit#fi eâ€¢ tft#29 lic * U . 'Â· â€ž iwi-ii~,Â·1,+' i ...V . ~ L./ 4.4/66:Ze.i--- A â€ž 114 'll 0-In :Â·~62$48* ~. b ../ %isi~.r, Â· /Â· ~7. 9Â»42;'Â·'2 ' t. P--:4Â· 3. . *4*#3 ,,r.% r<21: i. 0 -9 4.i. 7 4.,Â»ftÂ£\., 1 . ' . L,2 ~UN ..1 ./ t b '41 Â°4* ~ 15(* 9 ~W. /7.4, ~~*6*. 993Â·' .* ti /* 6 4~,7 . 1. r.e~~ i Fil:./. t ' 7 1 ~i~* 2.1 1 *ARM, 2.21474 . 5 . '' I :. . a â€¢kerÂ·:4 >t< A -,1=1 _.ty 2~' Â·â€¢44~t /2 * 0 /< 3 . - -..- IMI- 4 /00, FLAGE>tow ti :>TEP t;loUES >.-~-- E X -7 E C 4 H I .. 1 ' . 5/ , /-T] C) 1 0-2. 1 1 16 , 0 . .. - Â»4%3 40 1 -F,-: 1 1 ?<I--.T, --~-_ -. 4. v. 51_'21-fit 1...1.--- L .,4 ~. ./ .1.'/ - -\~3 ./ 1 - I. ~ -611-003 FE-LE- tpA E.QuIPHE-krr ..:-HE,A-- ~~L---~'. ~.-'./< '. .'. .'' :// I. 1 - --1 -1- #i - \1 I Plant Li 9 C - K 05' LATTicE- 1-Â«luuc. --Â· - Play 1.Al D Ux Ic-k- <Â· 5 Â· i â‚¬t Â· ' 0 Ok hiJ [ -- 1 - :~Â· 011 - 5 Â· r..1 A FA-1-10 .. 79,7 FROUT YARD . , SYMBOL PATERIAL I -..'HA. SHRUBS: *6013 bEOL -Â· --- - 1 4 - .- - 6 Â· P rl U Â· C IS 015[ EJA Ext 'c.. G,Atk.- - t-j 1 -- 1.kb CR CLIMBING k 7-3 -'1 -8.M A MP MUGHO PINE O 3' LATTIC-2- 12*1 2 kb CM -' - - 1 -- ' - 6 1-rofi PEk0411ALS,10, 1 1 1 " Â· / /'41 'C-Ll>'~0~ls .''O;tÂ·>c~-1 ----- 1 . AF A NkilhALS Oo 4.Residence 1 -- 1 5 Â· M P. AST ASTER 0 0 1 . Cul CAHPAttULA M 1.DL---/ 4 Â°0.oct?Th_ Â·~qÂ·Â·Â·p ~ ~ rA-T\.1#- I T /,/ 1 7 Â·vc--- 4-\ 1 0,>8/ / C XX. 0 0 rirl /3/,/1 . 1 '.1 , CLB COLIMBINE - 969 9~-JY \ 10Â».'kI~Â£)~b":3 <" CP CREEPING PL DAY DAYLILLY 11 . ./ \.% 11 ./ - Dell DUiRF BLE[: urlt~15#A-vitrint,~7\1 1 % , o q. 11 c DEL DELPH]NIUi C I /0 - - 7 Â·M 12-- DIA DIN{Th.US i.1- f 2.C E-, - <40--1 - [71 ,0.Â· ith . 2 Â· OLD- 1 Â· C IS -- -- -. .-0 - COl DUARF COAL 1- \40.4'A .7 1. DC,1-1 -.. . 2- PS.p- -x b Â·CAM-- \, -\\ & 1- --i.i---.-- ; ,-I I DC,1-1--, :, 3.HA--1.... :! e Ir ... .,Cl ... -- ....7.-Â«2 - - - 1 -1/ IZ-- -1 V' \ DSD CUARF SWEI 0 F FLAX 'BLUE' \ AST- \1 3 - -- i. --- b D.Lkj ~ .r -r<<- --- ~- HI - hos HOSTA - 41 --- - . 1 ]RIS ExT 4. F ILKIC-2.--- - 4- '> Â· 3 Â·c.1./.1 ..rj.-- E--3--- 44>~ .~ -~ p Fi - IP ICELAND PO> // ix-1 Â·CLA ---3*AH) 1.-2(31 7 11 / - ' 42:i RD- .--- 14 --- 1- - ------- --- 1 Â· LA Vfl \ F r B . 1 ' liv -- - )VI 6-_|Â»' 3 Â·DIA ~ ~ , . /l /t Xy.13,4Â·3321.5-C-7-,----/1 --1- -----1 Â· c.p 1,1 ~ \'\ - og C~ I.w LmENDER Â·!11 .1- 63/.: / ./ . 3 ip_ 7- - ' -5. ,Â·fD'kr' LA tUudGK.,1 / f f.- 1.1.--r,. /1/:fl;A~r ,. 4 MR . NHENIA lie ExT 'c.. LI L.,AC.----~~ /7 - al . F tÂ·U MBNE,WORT 1 - D I A --' y 1 Â· A - . I 1 1.F -P. .. (r; MA PEQQ \ 1- .- 1 - CP- - E><T 'Ca.~C.. PAv E-- i. 1.DIA- . 1 .37;Â·- ~41JI- /,ch - U.\ 0 /1,40 - -%- . MB- TPANSPLANT: O 1 4 DIA --- . ' ./ 'BLUE SPROCE 41 0 Â· - . N. ----, 4-1 1- \ U BLUE SPRUCE 0 -Arc.- . ~ ilt ELL Ecal Er=- -/ ~)~Ilfh~ .. \. Ull,PORT Pl . 0, % /1 1 1 -1.0 ,-- 1-- 4 1 Â· P k'Â¥- -- / CL.Cl of - a -5 Â· D L 6. --17 1Â«/ 11-1-(7- 10 9 /9 24 -- 1 . c.p- - . U r 3 0 -3 K 4_11---1. C-12- 9 - lACITARD - 5 Â·DAX -*Ii ' ki DJ 1 0 3 - 5. DS D 44. -...-, Eishr#J'EK'-SA Â»4-- T /1 511150L hATEMAL TREES; %Szz-5-$d . / 19'.r - ./ .. 11.4 - % ,/ 1, 3 1 4, MaA hULTI-STEM -T!Â·-Â· 4. BEDS 1'8 1~ATIVE Blk' .U)103 - GÂ·I - 3-F - , / 1 1-0 125 - - , Â· 5Â· VY- -QK03 ShRUBS: 5 Â· DLL-'' bÂ· PLD- --5,Â£>0 - /Â·L , AL ALPINE CLA:.6 Cll Â£<LRF lIt.A PERÂ£htiIALS/6 CLU COLUiC:NE r U wl,OF I. rÂ· e - It C LIU . 1 1 /â‚¬\ 41.. I \ 4: \< Fiew 1 1/ \ Ate 91Â«6 I. I iff, ,/ 1 \ i f ./. 1- - --- 1 1 1 ".11'111:..;, 7 - , ~ 7 F 'i. INi -ip'Fl~ 111, , 11,1 1 >111 11 u -Â·'-:P.-- 42 1 1 --11.1 -1- 4 31!hunj!01-Lf E-j.:i,jii,~121-Â·- 1 9 t'' i. :/ \:--.----.... 1 ! 4 F i /1 1,1 t.11: N i: i 11 ~i; 1 j, . I 81 '. 5 Â£ .1 1 . 1 II 1 It - 1 '11 11, ! 1 1 11 1. . _Â· 0-1 ry/,71=1*â€¢Â£501.'U Un' -12Â·>Â·-60 Â£Ut.UL-=.:C/*.44 7,/*<.AS:140 CrelÂ¥ cii-ai*;CE-ttalme.'~7417!7.Pti';41%,ILTWX-YZSIL-&*Ilgil:*ret*ZI~7;TiC-'7710 1 /::1 , -r l- : 1 ji N ..4 i' 2- d 11 330 577 31 3451 6733 3-'--Â· 1'1 3,51ER] . C f .,1 0,115 R 1 L CEZZL/. AL ....._-t CIZ-4 .RED 71---- / T==f f-~1- r Ni /4i r-- 37, 1 1 N : 1/1 L_ 3 -- 1/ 4 --- - ~ 4-1 #-1 -1 -4 1 -7- .1- 7---*.".- liLi 11 3/ f. /,1 - I 3 7 / r. \ -- 1 I j *- - N 'id/ \ 22--. J ~25/ -- 1 -I 1 11 :lili, 2 1!:1 1 1 ] 11. 11 , ;1 0.2 ----3 1 - 1 1 111 {! 1-_.--__3 1 1 Iii] i 1 . 1 1 I 11, i ; L- 3 1 | ! r. 1 0 rt_~1 ~ ii F---- 7 ' -- ! . 09-2-1 ''i 11 r -+ Sot 131,Â· 49 <293Â«1194 /4.<-4-- 11 J)11 .-- J I 9. I 6/Mr 1, 1 1 )1 9 - j 4.'*%11 , 11 17-Jul, 1 - Â· .1 G =-2--i~ ...41. -- 1 21.: If/ T---1 / 1.\ 1 p evo I N ~-2. i ./ 4 ,:~i-~t- . \ 1 1 -4 _1LILl, - L.1.JLL_ , , ' 1 - Â«2 -7 - ,>.: /.' -2-3 I 2 ~Â·Â·i i f..6, -$ /. 9, I..: .- , 1- 1-~i.El -c:,1,ifISfirrl-Â·-r-fi~ , 1 Fl~1!1 111[flf:Til i-El,firly!:1.--1 1 ..47: k f 1 ' ' I, 1 1 E-=-1 :. 1, L. Â· H. i - 1 it gll:L,1 11,1 1 -1 . -, -- --- 11-- 11 il UU ...k--4. : (l I 7 & 1 l '' ' . lilli *, 1 !; 1 6-1 1-1 N 1 11 4 : i 1 1 1 Qi Â¢I' der . 1 I 1 1 1 , 1 /1 11 h ~-L Lili I ' ) 1, /1 ./* 'r --' 1 1 r -- b Pbo, . 1----4 1 ! Il in 1 4.9 7,04 r. I . 1, F, 4 -*-X* . .... i - 1 .- 7.- 3 5, 1 .4 , , 2,-UL-"4--ple-- - 61 kg . 1If 1 1 -4 >< 0 91-1 fiv#fl/->-7--4594 , L =Â·- 1-Â·- 4 2 n t: -: 3 i.:., JUN 1 (1 l /4>1 0-#\ //9, 9 1.64 \ . -1 -ne O fL_j l! 1 \\4\.\ 1 1 11 :I. l n I 'j .. . --4.... <11 " 4 j /6 '' I./. 9Flâ‚¬(A) Â¥ t-- --r 1 - 11 '1 ..... J. A ...il .'_1. 1 .iwillru- \,9 ./ , 1 0 1 0 ~ 11"~( 1,1,111 lilli $ 1 1 1 i~ -uj 1,-P 1 1. If ~Â· 1 i i ;1 1 1 1 11 ' Ii! i' M N '1 1 1 It: I Â· .1 , , 1 i 1 1 29 n.-F #=13~1 1 1 , 21 1 , f , 1 e y . 1 1 %-6- 1 . ----- %01-1 /7 1/. 11 -M! '. 11 . 1 L--. , & ''./f J f , Y, c , MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Minor Development: 319 N. 4th St. - Skylight Date: July 12, 1989 LOCATION: 319 N. 4th St., Lots F, G, H and I, Block 28, City and Townsite of Aspen APPLICANT: Robert Blaich APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Minor Development approval for installation of a flat roof skylight on the facade, to allow light into the kitchen ZONING: R-6, "H", Historic Landmark Designation PRIOR STAFF APPROVALS: On May 22, 1989, staff recommended Planning Director approval for a window and door remodel for the interior courtyard of this structure, finding the changes proposed were both not visible from any street location nor character damaging to the historic structure. We found the request for the skylight installation inionsistent with the Guidelines. Skylight applications require HPC approval , per im Section 7-601 of the Aspen Land Use Code. . 1 PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicable Guidelines are found in Section VI. Residential Buildings - Renovation and Restoration, beginning on page 51 under Rooflines. The Development Review Standards are .8% found in Section 7-601 of the Land Use Code, and are reviewed below, with staff's comments following: 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: Guideline VI(F)(1) states: "...Avoid adding inappropriate features such as new skylights unless their appearance is concealed from principal view. They should avoid being placed on any portion of the roof that faces the street. Skylights should be mounted flush with the roof to avoid altering the lines of the roof. Bubble-shaped skylights are not appropriate..." The Historic Landmark Development Guidelines do not prohibit skylights, however, staff finds the language of the guideline above appropriate for this house. We agree with the applicant that the historic chiracter of this (once) small cottage has been altered significantly, so that very little original integrity remains. As they state in the attached application (and staff agrees) "...this house is a hybrid of 10% original Victorian and 90% contemporary interpretations of the Victorian style..." Hr wei er, it appears that the location for the skylight is on that 10% of the original structure, facing the street (Francis) which we cannot support. Any further irradiation Of historic integrity is contrary to our preservation objectives. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: Almost all without e .ception of Aspen' s West End vernacular housing stock has been altered, some more than others. This structure, located on an unusually large parcel, has received a number of expansions and changes, all relatively in scale with the original cottage. While facade skylights may have been installed in prior years on nearby structures, we find them inappropriate in visible locations and recommend that the HPC remain consistent with the language in the Guidelines. 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 feel that the general cultural value of this structure is its interesting, eclectic "collage" of architectural "Victorian-era" elements, however, we feel that aading a principal facade skylight does nothing to enhance its cultural or historic value. 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: Please refer to Â«revious respons/. comments by staff, which address this stan ard. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC deny Minor Development approval for the skylight application for 319 N. 4th St., finding that it does not meet the Guidelines nor the Development Review Standards. memo.hpc.319n4 1 June 29, 1989 To the members oF the HPC: As the owners of a residence at 318 North Fourth Street, Robert and Janet Blaich (telephone 925-7545), we are seeking permission from the HPC to make a minor exterior alteration. This alteration, a flat surfaced skylight, is. for at least half of the year, mostly obscured from street view by Aspen trees. Tlie skylight complements the necessary renovation of an outdated kitchen, and is deemed essential to its function by allowing daylight to enter what is now a very dark space. You will note in the information attached that we purchased this home before the historic designations were made. It was our intention from the outset to make this change to the kitchen, but because we were not planning to live in the house as fulltime residents until 1990 or 1991, we were in no particular hurry to undertake the project. We purchased this home with the intention of living in it as fulltime residents at a later date; the condition of bringing natural daylight into the kitchen was crucial to our purchase decision. Now we find ourselves caught in a subsequent rulings situation. This minor alteration to a house that has been very substantially altered so as to almost completely negate its architectural authenticicty seems to us to be a reasonable request. We make this request with the complete conscience of our respective training and lifelong careers in architecture and design (Robert) and critical writing in, among other fields, design (Janet). Apparently former members of the HPC and/or the city planning office also agreed with the view that this house , in its renovated state, is not of significant historic interest, since when historic designations were assigned a fewÂ·years ago, the house was given the lowest rating. While these ratings are no longer applicable to rulings, they did at least signify the judgement of a group of people who made an earnest effort to classify the architectural significance of Aspen's structures. Our architect, William Lipsey, 210 S. Galena Street (telephone 925-3734) , has our authorization to represent us in the proceedings on July 12, 1989. and in any other communications regarding this request. Sincerely 01Â» Robert and Janet Blaich HPC Minor Development Submittal for HPC Meeting 7/12/89 Blaich Residence-319 4th Street, Aspen Attachment 3 Items: 1. The r oposed work is a m;nor development on an existing house located at 319 4th otreet in Aspen, Colorado. The work includes the addition of a skyiight overthe kitchen sink for additional light in a North facing room. 2. Building material info attached. 3. Scale drawing attached. 4. The house on which the proposed skylight is to be built consists of a small, original house dating before1900 that has been significantly added to in 1975, 1981 ind 1982. These additions constitute 75% of the present massing of the house. Modifications were made to the original structure itself including a reworking of both entrances, window bays and dormers on the roof. Non of thes additions could be called "authentic' in their design. Stylewise, this house is a hybrid of 10% original \Â·'ictorian and & 90% contemporary interpretations of the Victorian style. Contemporary elements include picture windows, easement windows, glass enclosed porches, mixture of metal and shingle roofing, solar collectors, and flat skylights. Tne street facades of this house reveal a h. brid collage of architectural elements accumulated over a period of time---the historical integrity of the origing' cabin has been lost in the process. The addition of a "flat" style skylight is con. stem with the existing collage of semi-contemporary architectural treatments forming ihe overall character of this house. 59#2 Â©EL@PEID @ELÂ£/ZONE @UÂ©CE[E [4] a 2 TABLE OF SIZES Scale 1/4" = 1' 0" (1:48) ~ 1' 91/2" (546) 2' 5 91" (749) 1 3' 014" (918)4 I 3' 11/4 - (946) 4 E- 3' 1074" 0 175)-4 1' 9" (533) 1 2' 5" (737)-1 I 2' 11 5/8" (905) F 3' 03/." (933) 3 Â» 3' 93/4" 0 162)-4 1816" (470) i261/2 " (673) i-_- 33" (838) _q ,_-34 1/, " (870) -4 2__. 431/4 " (1 099) _4 0. 5 11------1 18185L 2618SL 43185L --I RE * * * * U.) 12 R g LIE- 1826SL 2626SL 3326SL 34265L 4326SL 0- 50 r1 >23 0=2 -------------- 2633SL 4333SL IT RE --4Â«4 224 -0 6 111 ITT - * 22i e M 1 --- --------- - 1 1 ------------- 1843SL 2643SL 3343SL 4343SL * Unit can be ventilating or fixed. All other units are fixed only. - - Condensation gutter installed at sill of all units. 1872SL 2672SL 33725L 34725L k- 2692SL 3392SL 34925L ROLSCREEN COMPANY â€¢ PELLA, IOWA 1134" (2 432) 1 6' 31/i" (1 918) -4 " (946)4 k 3' (918)-3 2' 592" (749) 1' 992 " (5461 9 " C 419) i 6' 3" (1 905) - 1 721/2 " (1 842)- ~3~4" (22356) m -UÂ· 6.--, U -1 r-' U U LJ LAJ L) U L) U L_) UUU \Z,/ 10 SINGLE SKYLIGHT INSTALLATION DETAILS - WOOD SHINGLES Scale 3" = 1' 0" (1:4) ~00 7/A" (61 HEAD COUNTER FLASHING #47E8 ROUGH OPENING (includes water deflector) HEAD FLASHING #47F7 ////13 \/in /t\ 3-1.- BOTTOM FRAME , _Up V EXPANDER #47F6 72-th \ . -14 <---4122Â«23/62(263/ SIU. FlASHING #47E9 Vjl u jÂ» \ \\L ulN C l 2~2*Â·4FbOCr 4/ _2*S---75403Â·â‚¬252~ 9 \ 1 \ \\\ \ \ 3 1\ 1 :1 -~LI~----~ TOP \ l- NOTE: 1 HESE DETAILS ARE FOR TYPICAL SINGLE PUNCH OPENINGS. SEE PAGE 8 FOR MULTIPLE UNIT DETAIL CONSIDERATIONS. ~ ROUGH OPENING FRAME BOTTOM 1/4" (6) --a- c , SIDE COUNTER FLASHING #47FS . \< STEP FLASHING #45B3 d / / f_ / f \1k~~to )?2?Â¢?NA SUPPORT BRACKET #51(2 - .=====-_2-:*42=7Â¥6-' 1 b AT 24" ON CENTER , .'''LI'.'Â·i,, (MAX.) SECURE TO ..... h V. h "-=Zi - UNIT AND SHEATHING WITH #8 x 7/8" SCREWS i f \\1 \ SIDE 1 #1 A ROLSCREEN COMPANY â€¢ PELLA, IOWA 1--1 -62611-1-1,1.-4 flot,-1 E.Â· - 42 L / 2/ 1 1/ A r.- 110 11 *'t (LIAR- |r - L---- FellÂ·rk LAEÂ· 4 /' 0%.4 --11 ' coÂ«- . X\IfÂ»Â«- -I i .. 4 -1 . -- . - --------- - da_ 1 -------- 1! 1 -. r ! 1.-11 . rn,11.-1.j ---- 1 - l.01 1 - -- _- 2-f-1- --j~ 2~- -- : 1 ! r - 11--- Ir 11 - 1 . .x>f T H , râ€žâ€¢ n 1 i 4 --- --- 11 1 1 1 :1 1 1 1 11 644 1 . --- MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Conceptual Development: 211 W. Main St. Public Hearing Date: July 12, 1989 LOCATION: 211 W. Main St., Lot F and the West 15 feet of Lot G, Block 52, City and Townsite of Aspen ZONING: "0" - Office Zone, "H" - Designated Historic Landmark APPLICANT: Claire Newkam, represented by Ron Robertson, architect HPC MONITOR: not yet assigned APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Conceptual Development approval for the remodeling and slight enlargement of the main historic house, and approval for the second floor addition to the detached alley- oriented structure (non-contributing "carriage house'l) . Plans include the replacement Of all windows (of which none are original) with wood double-hung, new doors, reroofing with wood shingle and significant interior changes. Landscaping and fencing plans are also included in the application. Variations are requested for side and rear yard setbacks, to bring existing non-conformities into conformity. The plans have been designed to work within the applicant's- budget, yet improve the overall character of this Main Street Historic District home, one of the last remaining family dwelling units left in the District. SITE, AREA AND BULK CHARACTERISTICS: Lot Size: 4,500 Max. Allowable FAR 2,820 Existing FAR 2,416 Proposed Total FAR 2,725 .illi~- / Existing median height, principal structure 24' 6" Existing roof peak height, principal structure 29' 6" , 0- ExiÂ·:ting roof peak height, alley structure 14.0' Proposed roof peak height, alley structure 21.0' . OTHER COMMISSION/BOARD REVIEWS: The Zoning Officer has stated that this 4-plex must be reviewed and approved by the P&Z for conditional use, a Code requirement. The applicant will be meeting with Bill Drueding and a land use planner to clarify this use and make application. Also, the alley structure encroaches onto the city right-of-way, requiring the approval of an encroachment license through City Council. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: The Development Review Standards are located in Section 7- 601(D)(1) of the Land Use Code. Staff's comments follow. The review Guidelines may be found in Section VI. RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS - Renovation and Restoration, beginning on page 47. Standard 1. The proposed development is compatible in character with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels with then sub-,ect site is in an H, Historic Overlay district or is adjacent to a Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area, HPC shall find that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. Response: We find that the general application meets Standard 1. Please refer to the existing and proposed drawings for each elevation for comparison purposes. We will review alterations to the main structure first, then review the detached alley structure and site improvements. Main House - Facade Â· (North elevation) : This structure and carriage house appears on the 1893 Birds Eye View map of Aspen, and on the 1904 Sanborn Map. The asymmetrical facade appears original, a somewhat unique architectural treatment for a vernacular Queen Anne Of this type. No original photos of the structure have been found. The changes proposed are minimal, involving the three windows and main door. The proposed windows are double hung, 6-over-1, -~-e replacing the aluminum sash with wood. The upper facade paired window is being replaced with one, 1'44171114'I to match the two lower level windows. This "Queen Anne" multi-light approach, while not historically F ~ documented on this house, would be appropriate in this two-story structure, and helps break up the large expanse of glass in these windows. The new doorway contains a narrowed transom, which is also mole in keeping. All existing facade materials remain, and will be repainted. East elevation: Although this appears to be an addition, the 1904 map indicates both the side shed porch and the one story rear portion were elements of this house at that time. The proposed alterations include changing the existing one- over-one windows to 6-over-1 wood double-hung windows on the two-story portion, to match the facade. Windows and entry door on the one-story (rear) portion are changed from the existing horizontal and fixed panes to matching three-over- three "cottage-type" windows, which we find appropriate. Simple angular brackets are proposed for the side porch. The rear portion will be resided in horizontal clapboard to match the original portion of the house. South elevation: This elevation receives the bulk of the changes, and is the least visible of all sides of the house. Historic resources indicate the shed-roof rear addition is original, however, some alterations have taken place over the years, primarily the windows and openings. The primary purpose for the remodel is to allow the rear bedroom on the main floor to function better; it currently has very limited (low) headroom. The shed roof will be removed, allowing for a small second floor deck with railing and turned spindles, and higher main floor ceiling height. All of the rear elevation windows will be changed, again to match the already proposed multi-light windows. We find the changes on this elevation to be significant, however, in character and appropriate with the Guidelines. All historic materials will remain and be repainted. West elevation: The changes proposed to this elevation all relate to the rear andition roof and deck. We find that the proposed windows are different in character (one-over-one, casements and awnings) than the other three elevations, and recommend a restudv of the fenestration for consistency. These windows are hardly seen due to the close proximity to the adjacent structure (less than 10'). The other changes proposed are not out-of-character with the structure, in our opinion. This structure historically sat directly on the west property line, therefore, a variation is necessary from the HPC for this side yard setback. CARRIAGE HOUSE: We feel that this building is 3 more appropriately named an alley structure as its original integrity as an historic "carriage house" has been lost. The Sanborn Map indicates this has always been a one-story structure. It currently serves as a dwelling unit. The applicant wishes to expand the "loft" area into an actual bedroom. As the concept plans indicate, this is accomplished by a rooftop addition, located slightly off-center, replicating the existing roof lines. We find the fenestration on the north and west elevation compatible, however, we find that the east elevation windows require further study. NO openings are proposed for the alley elevation. A roof-ridge skylight appears, which the HPC should consider carefully. In general, we find that the rooftop addition to the alley structure is not in-keeping with the character of the one-story building, and recommend further study. The designer is challenged with a way to add livable space onto the structure in such a way as to not increase the non-conformity. Staff requests that the HPC conside recommending design alternatives based on past ex-eriences with alley structure renovations, to assist the applicant and maintain the overall character of - the parcel. The HPC may find the alley "eclectic" enough already to where the proposed addition does not significantly alter its character. LANDSCAPING/SITE IMPROVEMENTS: We find that the open picket-style fence generally meets the Guidelines. While its spacing is very narrow (1.5" approximately), it still allows some privacy from the bus stop and street, while be somewhat open in character. The HPC may consider recommending wider spacing between the pickets to prevent a "closed off" feeling of the front yard. The maximum height along the front is 42", with higher gates as the enclosed sketch indicates. A 6' privacy fence will separate the two alley parking areas with the rear yard. The Committee may wish to review a more detailed site study and north elevation illustration, indicating the fencing and other improvements in relation to the structure and sidewalk improvements. The proposed Main Street Historic District Study will dedicate an entire section to landscaping and site improvements, taking into consideration 4 noise, dust, auto and pedestrian traffic, etc. The HPC should take this into consideration when reviewing the proposed site improvements. PARKING: Section VI(E) - Alleys and Parking of the Guidelines discusses off-street parking, which "should be at the rear of the lot." Further, the Guidelines state "...there should not be parking off the street in front of the building." The existing parking situation is somewhat "historic", in that four spaces are needed for the four units. The site is compact, with only a 45' frontage, and two spaces have existed for years in the "front yard", accessed off Main Street. Two spaces are available in the rear accessed via the alley. While we feel the character of this historic structure would be greatly enhanced with the restoration of a front landscaped/lawn and the removal of the front parking spaces, we find that the on-site parking spaces are more critical for the owners at this time. We are pleased to see some landscaping improvements included in this , proposal, which should help the entire parcel. MATERIALS: We commend the applicant for retaining all original materials and repairina where . i necessary. We also find the replacement of the metal roof and aluminum windows with wood shingles and wood double-hung windows excellent and in- keeping with the historic character of this property and the Main Street Historic District. We recommend that the roof shingles be stained dark or neutral. Standard 2. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development Response: Generally, we find the character Of the neighborhood will not be impacted by the proposal, with the possible exception of the carriage house. The Planning Office commends the applicant for the proposed improvements to the property, which should add to the intrinsic historic character of the Main Street Historic District and improve the historic value of this structure. Standard 3. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: We find that the cultural integrity of this 5 structure is based upon its general support to the established pattern and verticality of the historic resources in the Main Street Historic District. We feel that relatively simple changes proposed for the most visible elevations (facace and east) will enhance this structure's historic character, adding to the District. We do feel that the character of the alley, which speaks to the district's cultural integrity, should be taken into consideration when approving alterations to the "carriage house". Standard 4. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: We find that the proposed improvements enhance the principal structure, however, we do not entirely support the addition proposed to the carriage house. The applicant is challenged with designing an appropriate, in-scale addition to this vernacular alley structure. Staff finds the proposed concept generally non-compatible (and somewhat awkward) when keeping historic one-story alley structure scale in mind. For HPC consideration: 1. The existing carriage house/alley structure has received a few changes over the years, however, has remained simple and subordinate to the principal house.Â· 2. The second floor addition appears out of scale and oddly placed on top of the roof. While the verticality appears basically compatible with the main house, we find that the overall design concept needs more work. 3. Staff recommends a re-study of the alley structure addition, and recommends that the HPC offer support and guidance to the applicant. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider the following alternatives: 1. Approve the proposal as submitted 2. Approve the proposal with the conditions as recommended 6 by staff and discussed in this meeting 3. Table action to a date certain (June 14 recommended) to allow the applicant further time to study the proposal, incorporating the comments and guidance from the HPC in a revised proposal. 4. Deny conceptual development approval finding that the application does not meet the development review standards. A denial would constitute public hearing re-noticing. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC approve Conceptual Development for the proposal at 211 W. Main St., subject to the conditions stated below to be met at Final Development review. We also recommend that the HPC grant a variation for side and rbar uyard setback. (Note: A complete application for Final DevelopmentÂ· Review must be submitted to the Planning Office for scheduling with the HPC.) 1. Restudy of the west elevation fenestration Of the principal structure for compatibility 2. Restudy of the carriage house/alley structure addition, fenestration and skylight, based upon the recommendations made by the HPC at this meeting 3. .An exact representation of building materials; wood roofing shingles to be stained dark or neutral 4. A more detailed site plan, indicating types of landscape materials to be used 5. North elevation illustrating fencing and landscaping in relation to the structure and sidewalk 6. Approval_ from City Council for'~ an encroachment license - for thi alley structure ,- ~ \ I memo.hpc.211wm 7 49*flj .0.4 I J Oi9*d 1 # f -09-OV?894 51 #011:yn-004 N' hIGM.1-9 02 Â·21 -974 .23-41-NOO, 9 2~14 . ON 005 hA~Â¥80Â©n~ 99 01 hiyedd,4 95809 NWN 94Â·\1- tiDS+103 111 AN 3#A RO,4141 317919*14 '1.4#190-4-#45 AA'5 3-Hl 89 NO UdÂ·903<-9 , 3-ttl. #11 M ' 1\ N 0 49'VW Ql N 0 0.4 d~dq 4-9015 0 NOO36 ' L O+11'DUU 4-113 ard-Â¥ SNIcltjobo N>Jl Mg N Â·9 '25AOH NLV'W 14 9094 NA?N '6 03-1.1 No + 147 MI S *94011-08 *3 A V 7 54067(1 kN*W aN.V S.NAGON\ 4 -Ft.4 731-13 91 'â‚¬ . W 6-4 Wati .t ae@-8 NA A ~svw'* MaN : 95Â·00Â·H Nt'rN Â·40 -aS.N-d go '66'9 9â‚¬+41 Ne CNW 0110939 ' D '1#*W 98440+84 â‚¬)NllWad44 9-dOW 4 108 25-UNA * 1-1<, Al 511.4 d â‚¬011-ey:?FÂ· NON -8O1-4311411 9*pwÂ·94 6,14 004 '\ ' : -â‚¬)ell'AÂ¢118Â·-941 94 crriNJ S+1918 -480 "00 710264 - 13 NIN'N '4 \1-0 19 1.GCU'V# 3 ~VV-AMON 3-91Â¥10' 9021 10-941+19-dy 34Â·11- Wy 1 1 1 - 1 N.3 M..3 AdÂ·* w -i<ac , , 1 1 14\4 00*801 00 Na 43 -9 102 9-WOD -48&093 . 3 at & '(3) 484*61-do'N 5~8Â·:94WVS 21-da o M NÂ·9113 kztyw ~ .' i, 6061 ; L 72*4 5969 ' 4.93Â· 4.01 , Â£3912 03 1 7170 1#27190 gul >103 0 1- 10311 Wo-39 - -- NO.5-1:239<70 0 Â·d r â€¢ . ' 1 f ir Aa q~ 94. . , 1 /- L --- 1 ; I I. 12 lor re -32% 0-- 6Huttebruck 2lili July 21,1989 Roxanne Eflin Planning Office, City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Aspen, Co 81611 Dear Ms Eflin; As a neighboring property owner who will be out of town for the public hearing on the Newkam Conceptual Development at 211W,Main I am herewith registering my strongest possiale objection to two facets of the plan. First, I do strongly oppose expansion to allow a second-floor bedroom addition,to the alley structure;and secondly I do object to the expansion labeled "New Storage" on the main strucure upper back. Both of these structures are non-conforming with zero setbacks and would normally require proof of hardship for a variance permitting such expansion. The mainstructure actually encroaches on my property within feet of the proposed addition and the "storage"would eliminate the remaining view from a room opposite it. I am confident that another option exists for storage that won't block my light. As just a passing suggestion how about the north Wil of the alley structure. Of even greater concern to me is the second floor proposal to the alley structure. This would cause substantial loss of view from several of my guest rooms. Please don't underestimatd the impact of this on us as having a "view of the mountains" is of great concern to many of our visitors and we must all become increasingly aware of erch.on of such special assets. Two other such recent projects and now this would combine to effectively eliminate views and wall us in. Loss of view of course is just tough luck except for the protection afforded by setbacks and variances. I imploreyou to not water down these important devices by approving this expansion on "Historical" grounds. As noted previously the alley structure is scarcely of hislbrical s klificance. Also of concern to me is the increased fire hazzard by expanding anencroaching wooden building so close to a high density lodge. I am asking you to explore other possible solutions to these items which will still satisfy Mrs. Newkams needs. Please note that other than the above concernsI like her proposal and would like to see it happen. Please convey this to the HPC and other involved parties. Thank you for your consideration . ~~7 cerely, - (303) 925-2980 233 West Main Street ' Aspen, Colorado 81611 ec - 6 ' ' 1 Fo 3 5 14 f c- JUN 1 9 R.C. Robertson ARCHITECT P.O. Box 1378 Carbondale, CO 81623 June 16, 1989 9 40 - 1 1 1/ 1 C 012 L To: Historic Preservation Committee From: R.C. Rokertson, Architect Re: Newkam Ren.odel Historic Development Application 2.5 ,2- The 4-plex at 011 W. Main Street was purchased by the Newkam family in 1969. A living room was added to Unit 3 in 1972. The proposed development hopes to bring all 4 units in harmony with the Historic Residential area and complies with the substantive development review standards revellent to the development application. Units 1 and 2 are a 2 story volume with Victorian detailing and double hung long vertical windows. In my judgement this volume and the alley unit are of Historical significance and the following changes will bring all 4 units more in character with themselves and their historic past. All existing window at units 1 and 2 will be replaced with the exact historic proportioned new insulated double hung windows. The metal roof will be replaced with cedar shingles. All units will have wood siding and trim to match units 1 and 2 with new paint in the Victorian tradition. (Subdued body color contrasted by accent color for trim.) The noise from cars and buses (bus stop in front of house) on Main Street is most annoying. Fencing with landscaping is intended to help this problem while respecting the Historic pattern. Street trees define the street edge and planting combined with a 4' high picket fence with 1 1/2" spacing between vertical painted wood will define property line. A 6' high privacy fence will provide privacy from the alley. The Newkams have rented to locals for years while raising and educating 3 sons and have seen Main Street grow to surround them with lodges and restaurants. As modest people with modest lifestyles, the Newkams now want to make modest improvements on their 4-plex. Regards, {2 - &Â«tu , R.C. Robetthon r, 1 /1 /_ ...... -/ WV. lvI At IN MOV J..60Â¢k q ry, Â· 0 235- 33 231-29 227-5 223-/ 2/.~/7 2/3-13 2~,p 207-~ /35-3 131-29 127-5 123-2/ 1/917 115-/3 m-9 lo.t 103- /07-05 0 % f 77 T-122; - --'i 7- -1 i -6-n ~ , 7--71-zzl -7- Etr.W C.0 1 -2 -2 _2)\ /1 [7-711 _1) L_i/ A 1 -1.-2 bil 15121 4 0 /I IX \ 4 F __[EN- 1 N -I--1 1_21 d 4 0 % Fl,BC DEF G H / 1 \ 13-1 0 8 C D E F G H ) 1 0 kely /1 /Xi X XM.\\ 3. /)(\ 1 11/ O 732~JE] 0 1 [7- '1%4,1 \ /\ [7-7 1/ 59 1< 0 t,1 //1 / *1 -t\_ - 1 XI I / x / 4 1, A /1 5/ x,1 /2 <1 1 -I LI 4 V Y [___I I' * '1 23 *, . M b N x921 ~ H L M N OP Q A S Â«K L M NO P 27Q /9 6 0 --1- _-[72 17 --4, 4 7 ->1 .El 71 d /4.te. 0 [7-0- Ck? Z' -7-7ill \ -- -01 -1/ 01 , k . ~| 7-4 ./,.' -7-- A r 6 , o 9 -52 I n AJ 06 , 4 -0 I.A â‚¬9 ' 111 z,- 1.--Â¥1 1 FD N r ZD x 3 2-7[-1 I.31-3 1 ---p , -17 X . 1 -21 -17 I' ,..27 U -EJ U~ 3 * 1.=In i ' B L' X, ' 115] /2 r~-t ' iF / x -ERR ~IEE 1-1Â£4-/ - 234-2 230-28 02-26-0 222-20 2/8-/6 2/4-/2 2/0-3 206-4 202- 200 D.NO/34-2 /30-28 126-0 !22- 20 /18-96 1/4-/2 //0.3 130 1 0 J 4.1- -81"lp L - 2. -- =-= --= = = 43 .Â©,11 W. HOPKINS AV. A Â©' 11 . . 235-3 231-29 227- 5 ?2349 219-17 235-/3 2/1-9 207-5 203-201 1353 81-29 127-5 123-1 /07-6 103 101 M X i-12 r 1-Vxlb 1117 % 99 r L. & flilÂ·>-5 7-123 7 -,47~-1' fl 10-4 0 --0 -1 ID 27 1 - 1/-1 41 1 4 . L. r--371 4 i /'1 4 11 4 A , 0 XI 1 \E \, X , 3\ -4 01.- r , -\D -I -73 9 4 --- 1, 01 1 1 ID/ Sol 50/ Lo/ 111 5// 5/1 611 6)1 102 202 902 60 WEIN30 S //0 82 1/0 I 'l A/lain â‚¬1~f_~72=,9Â» "LV Street -45.00' X. 9 /5.0 Vel t\1 07/57/7*/.-4 't ' <, PS' *479 j -a~ Scale:t=20 4 7 I. / 74 8.0 X 2-Story' / l *y Frame 41 / * CO.in 0- 40 + le F retÂ«) 1 ... /5// + -8/2 4 82 40 \ G ~ ((875 1 9 /7/1 7 /0 0 / -Story \ 0 Pra rn e .: / 2,4.2 6,4 *lw 1.L 04) 1 Â¢J , 1 l (1 2.5.7 e ~Fr<9Vel 1 f 9. / X /54/~ A 4 Â£)r/Ve ~k r 6 - 49: 40 . i & 4, 1.R Jujq i 1-Aol S 75009'//U e - \ 4//0 6 42400, I LEGEND @ Indicateg 22- Bar 4 Cap, Set L.6. 14Ill . t i Legal Description: Lot F and Westerly 1 of Lot G., Block 52, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. I hereby certify that on November 16, 1988 a survey was performed by me and under my direct supervision of the above described parcel of land. A two-story frame house was found to be on said parcel as shown on this plat. All easements, en- croachments and rights-of-way in evidence or known to me are shown. This survey is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Voy - f. By : ./*zil<.-_E f. ,- tyx >-d - , '. P e -- Sydney Linfi,borne P.L.S. 14111 *1111111 Mfu.,,. .#493.R Ef ,%9/. Im provement Survey ~ ,Â§>13.*~iNT il : f:31, â‚¬ N W. Mairt St \ 2 G..15 Â§2% 1411-1 -ii * Aspen, Cotorado ER... - BY: LINES IN SPACE ..02? **ze'fAL LA j, 11 +0 *//U 1Jil ~ ll\~6\\0 SYDNEY LINCICOME ( L.S. 14111) BOX 121 CARBONDALE, COLO. 303-963-3852 el Nov. 1988 SCALE:I"= 20' 5/4302997 1 1 1 N V 1 j G11S AA,--9 -Al 119 44'V 7 91 90 1 13?JJ Â¥19*0 0 NO~,kd9094 3/ZI 0- 1 % '.- + I. I 4 13 4 ' . I h ..1 00 ' 43 dâ‚¬t.CAR_tll-Yw 'Â£-111 , , Â·1- 1. J -1. 79OOwyi wv-,w e N 11132-'. ..1. ~ 1.JAVE)) rll: --- . 532)VAG 1-0 24 -12-- r-- â‚¬)~1 (14#qd 3 Lk-_, . . I - * -1.:--. lu.9.. 2Â¥_2.--7- . * ---C A Â· 1. 1 0. . . RON-)-1 11) 3>131 1<~swh.22* . 1*Weed L- 01 j./ 01 1 1 i &=f,~1 1 111 r7-111 . 4 1 1 . -43 3 0 0 0 04\ h 4 0. , ' - d 1 .1 . 0 1 .1 0. 6. 0 - . 1.. Â·a . .. D 101 - 0. i ' I '00 . 1 I (~-1. 1 N A 1 4 'f, i - .,30/16 0 % ilti I - 1 1\-1 1 ' I I i ve,6 Â£70â€¢Al â€¢14* ~ ~ 0 0. 0 el- 6 Ol O 0. le 1 . 1 t -' 1 7 6, I 4 Ill j.' 1 1 :.011-1 . ----L IM.t i 111 1 2 1 ,11 4 1 1 + + 19-3. 1, 1 . 1- 1 11 , 1 i - j ..(pki)3 1 No 1 j .. 1 1 -i.~i 1. 1! 1 1 ; ~ ' 1:1 '; , * 1 ./ 3 -17.'-I- -1. 1 111 1 1 - 11 -I .11 1 lili P .Ii 4 11,11 f :1,1 . - r 'irl Ill. . 1 1.,1 1 1*: i '11 Â· '1 'i'' . ~!i f-K-V Â¥-Â£Â«-. 2 -4, ['cticwdz t. \l . . 1 1 .1 k i 5 -LF , 1 1 I#i 62 J)# - tit!71 13 4 1 1 - . -1 1 Â¥ j1 A) . N03435 Cre)Ava) I e e~--4, ~~ 1 : 2>2-1%2#Li-* f 1 4,<icek.No / 1 I j 1 ! L, 7 711Â¥,A - N /*Â¥1 rj.3 hgN ' 1 A..... 1 I 7)ned .tted i i /Â¥1,1 ......L C T -) .. \524. - - , f, . ' ~:~7 ' ~ '~ ~ ~ .Â· .-~ Â· '11-7/A,904 .ba-19-4<.~*\ti < '1 I Z 'e AB 1 0/ 1,/ 7 t77 /ff , 1.27,3,Â» 1;.L~' i r / 9 1 ' i ' 1 1 ki /1 1 , il;! 11 4 ' 1 i, 71' i i 1 i i. r L l V iNG i t .47.- 1 - 4 0--Â» t 1 1 2 . 9 fu- . i 9 y -- '' F :1 : coÂ« poÂ· inj /1 - . li "2. 4! i .2 - ..â‚¬t EL* *Ivib)-~rril-C+kfq, ) 1 VY-*V ., icÂ· 7-/; 1 7 It It// 9 0' CLO* .*.,- f,Â«t#-1 ~ 1 / ; i ' \ irl-. i I I i / M 1 ,. Â¥ , .r U .r:' - ,â€¢ 11 - 42. I f- ' ir:ffIA-â‚¬049-4," U 11 1 -=/. i. Â· I i w 1 ..11 f N F--1 'J ELI-lij e-ti D. 41. .1 L---------4 3---3 4 1 â‚¬1 A â„¢.7 9 r ' 5-'4 Â¢ 3 1- -. IAÂ·/6**ty.72.0.24' :,'Â·9*-i**4,--ty>PZY*#&~6 9- 1 . 1 , hi Gvq 1<A A READOEL .l ~ C. ft~De E F-v-sav Â·Apot res:r 1 oF 16 Nâ‚¬\N F 1 8- 9 r FLOop U PIT [ i - 99.-tt.Of, ,.F:- I - ~13 2 -U.Â·ip.le,~ â‚¬3 & 02 0 /919 -4.1 CL --- - -r rNJZ - d - A--- -f - =4- 1Â£ P.U 1 ' T.--! 1 4-.6 1 - /1 ----. .* C:I - .-r / * ----1------I---i i r' 4. ~ A -<.l-_fi-~f--- 3 a - -1 it 9 k -- - - --- l ! .. , 1 OIl 1 4 8 012 - L o O1 q -4. 1 1 1 i if 1. ! 1 /-7\ 4 41 1 r . /1 \ \N 1 1. - Wil.*I~i- -il.~- \\ 111 --0 0 Â£'1 1 1 -~*A 7 ---4 -4 .-- -4-1 - 0 - 1/' /1 1 $1 1,<iaet -- 1 41 1! 1% .... DI AN 9 N - ~20<-21:94~ - * j***At*7eK r , E--77.--1 - 1 r -I Flf-it- - - 1 5 1 . -1+ 4 La=Ck.-23 3 1 F-*------7 1 1*. 1 1 1 il .1,9 A t 7 C 4 GÂ·lv \ _ -1 81 eq g & Im -& Fico 13OF+JIM? 80 001-] -- 9 -1-11 -1.-4- -52- STOT r11 ll, 0 J 1 /,j.....) 1 4- pr 1-,Ic - - I. 1 4.--- 1 1 - t~ A. \\ --- ii U , Ill).-' l f BATA la_._A- ' 0 ~ , 1 , .. \ j -, 1,-1 1 1'1 . 1 . UxurT li' -' - â€¢'.1./ fli~/*Abli----m 14- - lim' ify 1, , 1; 0 f- i - 1 Wl __ __ -- -- -- Et ib U' r---7 11 1 1 --- - - 1 -'--~- ; 3.J 1 k i * /1 k. 22819:â‚¬, '5 L/4 1 Ng 1 Â· -1 11 j 1 - 1 r,1 1 : 1 84 L.---- 3 l i ' a . 31 - r 11 1 . L j -1-\ Â» 6 -Z?--f__â‚¬-â‚¬ D. 1 3,121:/Fluts*killifiEL- - -_IRIL---1- ---4/ -- iL- 71 - ,- r-,1 LI j ':IIi !)1 i , lit ~ F ' 1 'tÂ· 1:. 1 ' I - c- -7 1 1: . i \ : 1 1 /t . 6 r i ;:i 1 i ' . ..1 . FL- 1 : -tÂ« 3 01 : ..0,-0; Â·f ' Pit : - 9 4 14:--L.*-i_: LÂ£9EZEZZ-------12 I - 1 -2-4- III 2- ~1---.--I ---- -- i - .---/2/f j - 1 1 # 15_- di i 1 1 1 . i 1 - M E- *1 F ! A 9 T PLODIL Up(T 8 - JjewHAM f'~6040001 p.,C k>MUT-10' Prp<'r *Â·Rer. 4 op le I 4 44â‚¬. - - I \ -7 - 12 /1-.U-~u . - 1 \L -Â· 1 + , :U' ~LK ~Â·LU'*t=:4 ,#--7... 7----- - -- 1 9- - I --- I 1 1 - Â·-1 1 L -1---4 - - 1 , 4 1 : 1 1 .1 , -- 1 L 1 11 ' '~ ~ ' ' ' -~ 1.- f-----4-4--ier-4 ji-L-:_-2- i 1 3,9 1 oP~ell. Ftdof.. 1 1 ~ 1 1 .-4 1 ' 1 --Ii--- G l 1 r----- - -il A .11 ,-p 11-1 --â€¢ - lk== 1,==r 1=1 11=$ G===T ", 1 1 4 - 1 -1 .-' 1 ,-71 , 1 1 ; 1 1 . 1. i 1-, 1 J Â¢ ..EL i AUIN flÂ»OF- 1 . - .... --, 1100(. 0/1 f Â· \1 1 -r f 'f' -9 2 _.) O jv iT ~ M GÂ¥/KA M P.OAODâ‚¬L 6- .0- l 63 1- G 24 0 [2-- H H â‚¬- ty- ~11 y. **i-K-372*,R-k, ce:). Â· Â·-- ~ I ' Â· I.--- .-t. uL.I.I...'-'"I-.Ill- Iâ‚¬IZ-__. . (-2 p- - C. PÂ©843#-T.504 Â· B#CrÂ¤â‚¬CT 5 OF 16 , A '- 11â‚¬Yl WOED 4411 Alll C YENT /2/42==0.91 4,' / 5vl- ''1 1 1# ,1 -4- 1,9 i x12+356 2 l-CUI_/ Â·' 1 L.A. L. t. , 3-5 4'u â‚¬w STâ‚¬ -- I \ : Ngri PAINT ./ / --U \ // / 7 Uuu / / 7 0 1-9 / / 2+JJJ _AJOJ c# 6Lcu.4-,LO.toli ~~~ 'f>r--:--L Â£ , 1 j Â»03 Ja - *I uLA_Viv_Â·t '*LA..4.-9, A / , l=Â»9 +3922- - u-/Uttk,LO-%-i LA.ALAAN /7 / zE=Inizzo_--2_10-4.-IC .-f-JI_-11)-EEEÂ£==FLRIEÂ»7&-112/-7-- <CA v li323Â«CI!*3Â« F--Inr6.3 F-M-* E-- 1 2-_7-72------~Ill IL_L_3~1-9 --- 11 , 11 P------1 , 1 7--------------2 r-Ltinqtt,~ InIZZIZZE= Ili 11 r.........1- -- - 11 1 - * 1 ) li li li li 1-----1 Ill '1 - - 12 i-<3- 4 0 11 UJUU'Jr 11 JU 1 f r 11 1 1---i---- i-----Ilill---I.--I' l ---- L---2.-1-- ---- -------- --------------- -TiiaÂ·-9"- A u?? â‚¬fk FUn(L ILIZIEZZIZIZE[ aul@Jgll,34- 7.-2-6-7--022-7.-----2-3--3 - 23 -i-2--41Â«221-2-123 I E|-i_ - U| |~_~ r-- - /4/0 lp-1M - NEW P#11)11 -- A--l\-/ 41\,100Â¢19 \B < &--1-------- En- F--) 6/519 *COD BONG 1 - \ 3-20--_02_222 i -- -1_ ~~ F-------4 01 81-5 OPNES- 1 1 A--4 rI E- 1 --- + -------- B A IN Fl-ODPÂ·Â· - -------- 1 006-2311- r-<'IQ772Â·-Flf+ Wr,y . #; ----Ik:ft:-f '.4-52*:t. *Nsnme-C:.tivsgrnqi- Itfi.Ar 0 N 17(03)50-YON 0 UNIT (D Â¢ @ bal,v Â©.MTHY 900* I - 510,â‚¬14 ST(3 Â· W/Git, 5 5 1#+VICM t,1 6 Nhi N O F- T H 9-Lâ‚¬v. N â‚¬vv KA a [46 /9\of)61 tÂ»" EFAi~Tf--73Â¢CM CIO It rn't F.Â·c 800 6-8-TSÂ© &:APEVITECT f.O 50 b ,%78 *P BoticAL< Co. 6 Â«- /6 49[49 E -3Ber,1, ME)F fi 1--1 L__- _ it !221_2_._ _-___222____71-LU_.12_22 ' EDI LT-OF -1---I~-il--.1--1- --X~-1Ii-i--IM~~--- ~/Â»f[ (3 P.hy EL F.Â©OF ---Â«--~-Â«Â«~9~jiÂ«~it L __ ' - - 1- 1-- 1 - -- 1 ' OP'PeP- FLOO A 'll . 1 - 1 1 0'Â· 90 U., --- 0Â«11-91 4 , -ill- ---- % 4 =2-4 M--11 4 - U -~ -2 ---~ E- F----~-~--1 1-fr======I~---~--- tiL--~~-4 Linflun-UJUT=--2-7--4 --------- -â„¢ 1 4 4 4-2 1 r[ En 1 1 --- - ...27-2-27 - -----4.. , 01-L=a==121 [-1 1-1-1 Ill --- - -- -I-W- WM~~--lij- 17 - 1 iÂ«noÂ«--00--- I [_di~_1 ~ I_IÂ» it 1 1 1 1 1- -- .- -L 4 _ f34 1/41 -f-imL 1 \1Â»4.5.- -. . U 11\/ 1 1-f . 1 _.. 4 ..4 6-Al STS 9- A ST EL 6 V. / 4 - \ t. // N 43.74 K-A--At /16/KOD@- ~Â¥1Tg~**iN rrFEN--, CO. -r C P C FOBGLTSON : APCH{ root- 'A -g-Ii-El;------4-1-----1-il#Li1-I--------1#-I-.i-li-------Ill+ 1-T--T--% -7--1 - --- T~T~ - - -- 1 -,New CC ENL 5-11<)Â«6 fapp . t T-7 9212-721--'-' 1 1 - -- | -1 -1.1 .11.11 1: ; 1 1. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 / Â¥ 11-r' rÂ· . 1 i .....r'-i' r--1 I i' 1---7-T-T-T-11 4-Li'.2.1 !1~ l'il' ' ' r r-T--rrem -----|r1AITX..110---C.2-2-22-_-6-2-212- - --------g--F-<19f- -- 041 yfG 4\ UT -\1? Â¥CÂ©V 1 r 11 11 9 . ===r ==+ 1------------- ---- -- ---------------9. Â¢ 11 1 ~-------- - L--2 111 ill 1. ./ 5 - ; , I - 9-- + - . , r G . ---.------------.-----.----------*.-.------------*.--------* -----*---------.*-----------*.--.*---*-----------.*--.---------------- . 1 1 ' | , I ---- -,1 r -- -- - - - - F . , 41 1 1 . 4 -4 !111 n~-==.=-irt 1 UFF@11 PLSOO- .- Ii----*--IV --Il-- . f 1101.9" i 1 7~_]Ll C.- /O-> ... 1 --fiff-Â» 13 1 . D . - : .0 Tr.'-/----i-2-22-*-----I-9--*-NE-321-U-F-B --/ --E--7-62263-EF--G=Â«=R===21#1 4r__ - L k-Â«_ -7-I-2-2----] M --9!( iv/1 -./Ift. FL-'ELL=-21-41~ 1202-0-Jifff{ It 7~~l~~ i p~Â«Â°---- 9 *11-214 La ' 11 / 3 11 UÂ»111 [20--141=40-21163 Il__u_=4 -n______ _ - _ -- __ ~ ---G,ist= _ rk===21 1 1 4 4 ---- 3 1 4 1.12 - -- --- ----- 1 L= r==1 -~---- -- --- ------- --- -- --- ~- - ---------- ---- ------ - -- -Â·--T }r --j'_MERN_.fl~CLF ---- - F ICE)I, O" ---11 1.--"7-77-7EINTIZ~r=---~~~~73 - t' :-29TfIÂ·~IT-lj,yÂ¥*PFJ-rl U g x tr--.-7-73Â°-~~'-----------7-7*9-L~--7-4-4-Fir '-* - - - -- -- 1ZI7-4<7-1~:,If-7-3737â‚¬Â¢57-- 1------41---6........,- -- _ULLT 5 Câ‚¬-,Â·IS-t'G :NE,30 9471 050510/tâ‚¬ 987/P)(31 liu\,1 _l; N 1 -r [_ 03 f (D f -El,U - to i\Atril 015; G. NOT â‚¬ f: N E-- W GAST 61 L 6 op le 1-till WINDOWS AM NOW N (2 WKA 'ix f.*ND(3(- NE~GUETRU - /499 9*20 F' O, 20601-4 7(ON: /Â¥ZOi f tâ‚¬0 F.O 130/ 13 72) CAP-Rot,~Al.f ro it ' \ \ - 904 STG Relâ‚¬ / . 02<N=:C> b/T-IN .-14---7- + I \\ \\ 24/9 -1 \ 3 1 .. - ------- --- 4 1 -1 4 1, 11 ' ! M i 1 1 - L L . 2 .. , I I - --- - ,-1 -1 5 0 Offâ‚¬R Plf& 0 1 -- -- ----0 - 13.1 . 1101.9. ' 6 -- 1 D-- >-i 4, r 1 , Billut. U:' -~ I I \\9,4, ,%98/401- ~~+ \\ /Â·097 Â· . 1 --7 -- 0 - 221 â€¢ 2. : 1,! :1 tiC/fld- - ~ ~ I - - - - * tori tk*6Â¢04 1 1 111.-14 11 F i , 1 2--#4 1 , % ~~ 1 :, 1 1.1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 4 1,Â· â€¢ 1 , 1 -----,11 :1, . 1 , , 1, Fl-F i I i 1 1 f,1 11 1 1 1% il ~ '1- ---- -.------9----- 1 ~~iln r.- 1:i ! . 1 *i> FU- 1 ' -5 1 -4- -- 1 100'Â·O' !ll . 1 â€ž--4......4.-'â€ž7.-â€ž...M... 1 1 % .... . .2 .1 ..54.Â¥,1 -:77:.29..42:1-,FEgErREETTEET/'TZ:jighT,13.-/..3.Z.- '-*: 5. IV/#.- 4 9- { 9 T 'G 3 0 u 7- M 6 6 6- 9 â‚¬ B "Â· AN N 57. A'7&: AOD '1 ALâ‚¬#KAM &991* e . c. Feeep.T 90,1 .M~Â·Ct\G 601 9 Op [6 9 11 NO 2 300(1 OUN/3 N,3 14 -5 D +140 3 9000 \4'/)1~91Â¥ M.ON 37 ~-0.t \ --- 'M 4190,4 @ 5.193(3 tiLLWW 01 -l;Â¥40*E) 0010 60,; '6 ' A -3 -1 --5 Al-nob 14.-3 N ' 03104 3 21NA N.8 N 51 WI-dl &8)NIOISO<DOM 114 5 Â©N Â»14 2400 Nltd 77 V 'I 1 NDÂ¥Â¢3693 QI- :S-310 N - C. , Â£ 0. ~~i~-~-Â£ i 'N, 1 1,01*1 99332Â·1 -J Â£ -- 11 41\\ 1-22_32 [-2 --22-2-21---1-_ 20---1 1-_ _33-2-1 1-7~- - ---- .00013 N Ph' 4 1 - 1 -LI P !1~11 11 \ 11 :--IN -51 - 111,1 1 1 5 11 i- ! -2 47- H--1142.-_..._! rÂ·---H U.-ir-r-0 2--Er--4 1 il Li 11 ---___~ .'U V Ii I 11 1 1,1 1 1 ~/=1 -i u I IÂ· 1 9 T- --------------4 1 ~ 1!1 Â£11, Â·LIER 11 :.- '1 ~. ~1[, b | 1------ A f'_- l._L- ill' rzz*ZE' 1.1 - lili 11 1 --=- Â· - Â£ 9-=*~l[- LL_-LL-11' 1 -221 - - . . . , 400,1 .. . ... e .... - --- El---9-3 zz-192 JILIENI I.4 ------ ------/7 -- I# 21 -1 - -FF-32-------7-5------1 A ___Et 'RLI l-trrj~f~i~-fE-7-1 E-19:r 9-9379--7,, -i .,Ti i- IT, %-- - ---- 0 ~80013 -zeddo 1.~ ;~ f H 11 El 11 Nk 4 g':~~ 17 4,8 -6-----2---~ 11 f lili!~i [ i [ Ailly; Â£'1 4 ----.---- 1 - i | ' , 'iÂ· ! 11 "Ii/4 I'' I.--- -- A /4 1, r 1-1 4 - A 4 -4 - 11 4 IiÂ·H Â·luut.2 Il - . i '-2 :1 1 -6 1- 1 ODOM eate~ 1 3- --_.2-; 1,1 i 4 -----. ---- ------------------ 1 1 -- --3 11 -r=Ji==4 11 422.=L=J L------ 1 ~ 5-13 ziv 4 11 L 11 !. 11.01 .i--- C~~Z~~~:Z~~2~~Z:~Zl 1 \ , T - .$-I ~ - I- . , 1 -<----4 [=FE=11 - -2 -- i--11Ekit-Â«ff' --,-4 - h 91 40 0\ 1 %7-6 --I"tt *)51,974Â· NCet-#,9 203 0 -4 '1 97 4254 1-5 'lsâ‚¬_Ivt!* 1 -- 1-300437 W Â¥>1 Nra N r. 1 1 i ! Â· v 11 : 1, 11 , !1 -: ' i dlli 2 --1 i i i 1 1 1 .-1 - - I . 1Â«4-- -i -- -- -- ~+I 1- 1 1 , :,11 , j :, 1. 1:1 , ~:4,71.~~m~,t..nuÂ»nou:u.vi~,zr~ pr-Â£~%,Â¢29Â·V>f:- -7,96~41%~7 U N 1 1-5 I,f 9) UN 1 -7.- :/ E A Z 6 -r G 74 41 9 -1- 9- L G-v r---I--##*-*Il-.-- --l--------- -- Nâ‚¬ WfAM._._FfeiG~~___ *11 - MAIN 5-r. Aspâ‚¬M CO. FÂ· C f43 ge p.-rEOP f AfCJ-1#169 11 0- 16 - nt '41'JL--fi--_-I_ - - C 17 -7-3 I Fl 11! .. 7 f 24 Ttr T , t T 21 - -~ Â· Â·- I~r~-I ~J v 1 1 1 J.,4.- 1 L_ -EJ- 1 - ---7 Alâ‚¬r; 0.-LAN /' 5/ U N Â» LE f J. r -- 1 4 + 1 111 0,11,1 1.I - -1- , 1 1 /39Â» 13339 -PG<Z - -- 1 5-1*32- 071'FieÂ·6~ 1 1 '9000 510/ING 7 ----------- -- fiR'.4 -10 *ATCH â‚¬Aisre. -------4-------i- 1 1 \Â·1 i I , -4 1 2--=11 F tel~=. 4 i 1 1 \ \1 1 , of>pâ‚¬g Plall #- 040- 8990,4 9 1 , 19 I ---2-z--4, ' . -1 ; mk , 1 14 z './ ; 1 --- -- 1 / li 1! 4 -- t 1 4 < - 11 2 -- --- 1 L--~ 1 i.-I -~--.. 1 1 - t- --, P .1 \ 1 , !1. \NX./ 4- ; 1 l. 1 3 - 1 : 1. i . 2, 44- ; 1 4 4.,r .5 2 -/ 'Â»1:(3 l -1 " N F:001 - . o.-7,: . -U r -4-/4%2/ f. M lot. :12... fi f. Â·Â· - - . AL U N z r--5 /11)-1 â‚¬ 70 4 c 01 yrs riooo 04 St G ~OC 0 9 10 I NG 0 N I T (.i) - 510//1 9- Â¥ TIMM 4 *F+IA .- TO Ak>T64 â‚¬,c\S-< G 14OTe : 14 6 W Y' r C , 1. ALL WINOONS Alkâ‚¬ fleÂ¥, O 3 1-- M 2\ - <9- op 16 NGWMAM' F.â‚¬/unpe'l 22\\ 1Â· tihi~R--*LASVEN Co. 9- C F-Ote PIT-TÂ» : bochtÂ·Â·rea 13.0 0,09 1-3 16 462-87, DALC,)60 , IL l { 1 q (DaÂ»/1 A A A ).1 /ff n - ---- IA -,1 - - i c - 6 n - ---' 4 4 6 A - Aha-7\-6 /\.717< A A A A-A/\-A-/\- - /\ Al/Â¢7%1 (3 - . /\ 'A /A /\ 1-----5_2_j f__ _ ------ -- - - - - - -I- - -li. - - - - - - -1 - - - - - - - - - Ill -- -1- - - - - - ----pl--- .. - - - - I .*- - -i~ - -- - - il - - - - - - -------- re' 1 -- 1-1 ---- - - - - - - - - - I - - -4/ . 1 t 1 01. Ou <.4'0' 1 1- f ?-- \ v /~ C- 7 F E- N Cf 1% OF=- ~ NeW KA-A/\ 2-EMOD al Efrv--*Al B S.T. AS p(:26 i Col 7-, c F-CE â‚¬ AT--9221 Â· Agâ‚¬+41'TEGI F. C & 0% 115 -ke> j (7Â¢-80'JOALâ‚¬, Co '81613 thefLF)4*I-,-Â·'e~,Â·~ ~4'cy;-: 64 #7Â».-aj .r-----+- r 1 A F'<38-0 M 0\ 4 - Â·1 .. *t K 411* 4----&.-1. * ,. 4 , 7@ ' '5 ..12: .Af c <X - i-ZI~LI 7 1 1 --- ' - -= - -' 1=- - L-11 1 'r Â·Â· -- ~ 44 2 ~ L___-. 6-- \ -r 14-1 r 1 1 , I F ' r Â· h.. ~ i- - r t - r , $ 47 - - N-:t ...../ , R :r - 1- J .L='V '/t 41. , 1 l 9- VU -1 h IT C H 9 24 ff; 4 ~,ir 5 k U UP , 1 K i J O 61- --00 4 - .... -- :. -r----4-- 1 IL- R-- 8 6--0 6-2--oj" R ' it '2.-- ill-------.--*$-i----*-W 1 T - --i' 1---- t 1 UCCE-- i i 814*'fâ‚¬1/1Â·'%0~4444,4 f.4$'4 5Â¥~ ; ~ -- L-=1 --- 1 1 - -/-- , | 1 *-T- m Ift 1__ __ 1 f , to; . r , r \ (5&11.16#T - i. A 804â‚¬ u C . . . i rv 9 BATH , r# 1 - -19- I '' ' a - 1 LI V / Al- G \-1 - - ---- / 1 1 1 '1 .4 1 1 1 . : -77 2, 2 1 4 1 __71-9 . t.__ / i 4 , - I . ' â€¢It , 1 - C. --- . - -1 . -1 f i ' . 1 f / 1 , 1 . I ' ' -I ' I - 1 M 8 - Â¥' f I F- 9 T FLOOF# ON IT Sâ‚¬COND FLOOR 14- 09 I 6 p GÂ¥; KA,M AG &10Det 11 I v MAIN 57-, *ASIEN Cb. tz- c F-o'MATION Â· Pa<-14<TUR - ht 90 1 4 , chit . 48 ht ll; 4 i, 4% .'i J /W \ N IE. 4 {~ - J 1 1. 31 1- ,-- 4 1\9 8Â» 4 1 1 N-,1 I 12 22< - It .- N..1 1 ZE i 41 1 21 , 6 4 n M i S tio 0 4 4 / 4% h Â· 1 46 C 6 1 . , - 11. 1 , . 19 ...1 , 1 0 1-ir 1- 1 1 :1 1 ~ --fi --- A 4 1 1 1 1 i. j H 1. i 1. 1 1,4, 1 ; " till 1 , 1. 1 1 , .,4, J-; jt:f ~ f & i J Â¢ ' .1 1, J . 1 1: A 'r , -0 1 .Lic 14 .1-1 1 -1 1 1. 1 1 1 1 I, 9/ M ,-1 i ' 2/4 1 - 7--I 0 : 1 1 1 1 11-1 P P. E 1 1 1 -A '1 1 - B' 11--.-] 1 li J 1 1 -4-ir I T :1-4 - j Ill? i.1 -, i 0 2 1 -14. f.-t [ 11'P ! 4 1 4 1- 6 - , './ - 1 0 ./. f . 47 %~ D 13 % 4 . m== -- IN 0-111 . 't ir U.> i lf,I i 4 t-11--1-1 1 Il -11- i-T-in- 1-- 1 19 3 0..... -Â·----11-7- :9 If 1 1 4 21111 11 4 // , ) U. f 9 3 0, - 97 i lit 1 I , 11: \ 4 / 4 14 1 â‚¬=:1\ I - i,Â£ 9 IFIES =37 f,1 1 c=A ,/|~_ ~ /7 / Mt 1 ~ 1 1 1 -~TTAWNYA< 1 1 t;; 1 f r NI Â· E !*s me 1 1 \ >\ \\1 IN' 1 49 E--9-1 11 1 It \\\ 4 4 1 --- \ 1 4 -1% 1 -- i -_b a ~ 1 1 1 f / 1/ t. . - 4 ej 9 --- - ~%73 / f W I 9 -11 N A 4---9 -1 SV 5 , j Q , 1 ---; 1 ph t,1/VA A tiff)/4/4/7 ' At/1 d 995 - *0 '1 -),~~1 49<'1 1 +181 41 - t. 11.1(45 'Wls tv?13 W 120|C Al â‚¬) 15'h'3 t' j, #\ u' 8 -9 1 -3 1 5 -9 4 A -3 N *6) 1 1 44 A-9 1 M 1 -1| O M AA -3 4 -3 4 -3 rÂ«f 11(0) .O..001 . * Â·me . 1-- 1 - /. . Â·. ....t,:. ' 1~~ . 1./.1...4/'...' ..2-.I' .- ..#- .lillie. . --. 1 1,013 N,VW 1 1-----I-*Il---$.-1---I~i.WI- , r--1---- ~19,1 1 1 1- 1 1 ---1 - L ..3 -7 74 4 '6) Lh'*3 HOW w E-- ----1 r r-------- lIli . !111- 1 --1111 . 11 F==1 . 04/4 + SN Kh s M J 4 - - 1 11 -1! 1-- '6019 1-rdoty 1.------- lili 1 --------- 111 111-[Er' G14 - 242 5>42"3 -, 1 -2- --- 111 f W i __ --___.-_~---_-_-..~__4 inl__...7-ZII 1 1----1'L=.=, 2 11. - 5-----id Qi==r==Il===1 - . 40 '301 -35013 93 J 30 r / -12-12: 1- - 19. / --4 1 :- -,2-Til--9---4- .-F 391â‚¬>NIHS 11 -- --- -- ~- - 1 1 1 1--- 144~- --=lum' 11 ------- .L_ 1 1 0 *WOW oaÂ¥ ------ - ---- 1 - -- - - - L] -- r --&1~ &-. /-- 1 IR--41 - - LS.,i:63 1 -1 -- 1 // 1.1 - =0==r--1-- l \ 41~ - 1 -i- I f--11 jun~ ----- --4 ---_LEJUIZZIZI-_.__1...._----4. : ---7 lib===1 &-7/ / M tn- ... _2~-Itill.-51+~~,---W-4 91 46 1--14 // ----l--UIIÂ«42Â»lin- Fbir - W N ,//0/ ; 1-111_1122 - -- -- I J 1. -â€ž-4 ..4.-- i '- F--'-fi22-22=222__=_===~u==~am==121=2~zzz--33(311- -,13 91 -49 91 X3311134Â¥ : Ft<J)5 14390-LI 271 011211.5*_LL_HEÂ¥.YE.r_U.2 1#00701' 0* /68 N MEMORANDUM 9 1 To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Conceptual Development: 135 W. Main St. Public Hearing Date: July 12, 1989 --- LOCATION: 135 W. Main St., Lots A and B, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen ZONING: "O" - Office Zone, "H" - Designated Historic Landmark APPLICANT: David Melton, represented by Architect Jake Vickery HPC MONITOR: not yet assigned APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Conceptual Development approval for a 1,948 sq. ft. residential addition, with 458 sq. fc. attached two-car garage, to the historic structure. The dwelling unit will be used as the primary residence for the applicant. SITE, AREA AND BULK CHARACTERISTICS: Please refer to application attached PROBLEM DISCUSSION: The Development Review -'tandards are located in Section 7- 601(D)(1) of the Land Use Code. Staff's comments follow. The review Guidelines may be found in Section VI. RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS - Renovation and Restoration, beginning on page 47. Standard 1. The proposed development is compatible in character with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels with then subject site is in an H, Historic Overlay district or is adjacent to a Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks were 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 S development in accord with dimensional requirements. p# RESPONSE: Staff 's research for historical documentation for 10 original footprints Of this structure and secondary structures turned up the following: This structure (along with one large carriage house and one small shed, now demolished) appears on the 1904 Sanborn Map (enclosed) in its present location. It is difficult to determine the precise outline of the structure on the 1893 Birds Eye View Map, and no original photos of the structure have been located as well. The HPC may wish to keep the carriage house footprint in mind when reviewing this application. General Comments: In reviewing this application for character compatibility, the HPC should consider whether the overall size: massing. height and scale. is appropriate for the landmark structure and the Main Street Historic District. The project comes extremely close to maximizing the 6,000 sq. ft. site in FAR. The maximum height of the new addition is 27', with a median height of 22'. The existing structure's maximum height is 24.5' with a 20' median height, however, the corner location, lawn setting and "open space" prevent the structure from appearing crowded on the parcel. Staff's concerns lie in the potential for diminished integrity of the historic resource with such a significant addition, over 100% enlargement when including the garage, 83% enlargement with the garage excluded. Code allows for a .75:1 build out, which we find is inappropriate when dealing with this kind of historic scale and integrity. We have seen examples of diminished historic integrity with large additions; staff wishes to prevent this from happening with this very visible and significant historic resource. The Planning Office is recommending that the HPC take scale and massing concerns into account when reviewing this application, and recommend a reduced addition. Height: While the new addition is 2' higher than the existing (at the median height), staff recommends that the new addition be at existing height or lower to prevent competition with the historic structure. However, as the addition is set back significantly from the street edge, the perception of the extra height vs. the original structure may not be a problem. West elevation: We find this elevation to be primary in reviewing the application, as the bulk T of the addition will be visible from the corner of 1st and Main. The proposal indicates a break or transition between the old and new, which we find appropriate. The new addition is proposed to be set at a slight angle to even more clearly define the new addition. The primary element requiring modification is the massive two-story "palladian style" window design, which we find does not meet the Guidelines (Page 69, E. 1 and 3). While attempting to replicate the basic style of the gable peak window in the facade of the original portion of the structure, we feel the proportion of solid to void is too low and needs further study. This element should be redesigned smaller, possibly with fewer rows of g'ass. The Guidelines state "...Contemporary interpretations may be considered if they are used in limited numbers as accents. Use ratios of windows to walls that are similar to historic structures." The HPC should consider whether the window above the door is appropriate in design, as well as the very narrow vertical window located directly to the north of the entry. East elevation: The grouping of three two-over- two cottage style (bedroom) windows on the lower elevations might appear more compatible if one window was eliminated, leaving two, and centering them in that portion of the addition. To break up the long, horizontal look of the garage wall, one or two windows may be appropriate here. Also, the application may wish to consider carrying down the vertical trim board from the middle of the upper floor. The upper floor arched window trio should be compatible with the other windows of this type, found mostly on the south elevation. South elevation: Consideration should be given to have the two upper floor arched windows match in size and style. Also, the HPC may wish to make recommendations to the applicant to provide some vertical breaks in the horizontal elements (garage door, deck). North elev tion: The new addition projects west approximateiy 8' from the western edge of the historic structure, and is visible from Main St. The detailing is extremely simple (one window is visible), however, it is from this elevation that the massing is very evident, and overpowering to 3 the historic structure, in our opir.Lon. The unbroken roof massing visible from Dehind the historic structure should be restudied and its impact lessened. BASEMENT: A full basement is planned, for which no habitable space is planned at this time. This is a very large space, with three rooms, and we strongly recommend that the HPC consider future impacts with regard to egress light wells should the basement be occupied. The Plannine Office feels that the massing, height and scalt of the above grade addition can be adequately lessened with the use of the basement for habitable space. LANDSCAPING/SITE IMPROVEMENTS: Landscaping plans have not been included in this application. The proposed Main Street Historic District Study will dedicate an entire section to landscaping and site improvements, taking into consideration noise, dust, auto and pedestrian traffic, etc. The HPC should take this into consideration when reviewing the proposed site improvements. MATERIALS: Horizontal wood lap siding is proposed. Other materials are not specified; staff recommends wood windows and wood roofing shingles, stained dark or neutral. Standard 2. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development Response: Please refer to staff's comments above with regard to massing, height and scale in comparison with neighborhood character. We feel that the materials proposed and the general location of the addition are consistent with the neighborhood character. Standard 3. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: We find that the cultural integrity of this structure is based upon its general support to the established pattern and verticality of the historic resources in the Main Street Historic District. We question whether the large addition will diminish the integrity of scale and therefore the cultural value to the community of the 4 historic resource. Standard 4. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: Please refer to staff's comments in response to Standard 1. We feel that the general massing and height Of the addition has the potential to negatively impact the architectural integrity of the landmark. We feel that the hyphen/transition between old and new is good architecturally, as perceived from the west elevation. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider the following alternatives: 1. Approve the proposal as submitted 2. Approve the proposal with conditions, such as: a. Restudy of the west elevation fenestration b. Height reduction C. Vertical breaks in the south and east elevation horizontal masses d. Clarification of basement use f. Variation for rear yard setback g. Landscaping/site improvements clarification 3. Table action to a date certain to allow the applicant further time to study the proposal, incorporating the comments and guidance from the HPC in a revised proposal. 4. Deny conceptual development approval finding that the application does not meet the development review standards. A denial would constitute public hearing re-noticing. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC table Conceptual Development to a date certain (August 9 may be a reasonable date) to allow the applicant time for restudy, taking into consideration the overall massing, height and scale of the addition as it relates to the historic resource. memo.hpc.135wm 5 ,f LTON CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT P.O. BOX 3347 92(303) 925-29799 ASPEN, CO 81612 FAX (303) 925-761 8 June 12, 1989 Roxanne Eflin Historic Preservation Commission Aspen, Colorado Dear Roxanne, Attached is our application for a residential addition to 135 W. Main Street. The addition will serve as permanent housing for my wife, daughter and I. We are now renters. In submitting this residential design we have tried to incorporate suggestions you made about earlier designs we had reviewed with you. These changes include the following: 1. We eliminated the windows we originally had planned for the upper basement walls. The basement is now entirely underground. 2. We have separated the mass of the existing building from the proposed addition by creating a "Hyphen" between the building forms, a recess in the wall plane, an angled wall transition element and a suppressed roof area. While doing this has reduced our usable interior living space we wanted to be sensitive about your concerns. 3. We have lowered the overall building height by making the first floor entry at ground level. 4 ,7'n / 4. We have reduced the square footage of the addition from PA , a FAR of .750 to a FAR of .718. , 699 ~3* 5. We have reduced the width of the west elevation main wall to further reduce the scale of the structure. 1//0 - We have changed the window shapes to get away from the "Industrial Look" (my term) and to a more traditional look. Iw'.T"*111: Page 2 Roxanne Eflin Historic Preservation Commission While not a technical issue I am hopeful that the Historic Preservation Commission will recognize that we are 14 year locals and a working class family. With the most recent round of housing inflation our chance to find permanent decent housing in Aspen has pretty much come down to this addition. Over the years I have tried to return something to the community by volunteering as a board member on the boards Of Ballet Aspen, Aspen Chamber of Commerce, The Wildwood School and as a member of the organizing committee for the Aspen Resort Association. My family and I look forward to remaining a part of Aspen and calling Aspen our home. We hope we can work together with the Historic Preservation Commission to reach our goal for permanent housing. Sincerely, David Melton 1 11 liU - U., %. i IAND USE APPLICATION P'CIM . 1) Proj ect Naze _ David Melton Residential Additinr 2) Project IDcation 135 W. Main St., Intc A & R Rlnrl, 59 Citv and Townsite of Agnen (indicate street address, lot & block ramber, legal rÂ»scripti an ~bere appropriate) 3) Present Zoning (0 ) Office 4) Iat Size 6000 Sq Ft. 5) Applicant' s Nam, Mir Ds & Phcne # David Melton, Box 3347, Aspen, CO 81612 (303) 925-2979 6) Representativer s Name, Address & Ihorie # Jake Vickerv Architect, P.O. Box 12360, Aspen, Colorado 81612 925-3308 7) Type of Application (please check all that apply) : COrditioral Use Concephlal SPA X Cor,ceptual Historic D.N. Special Review - Final SPA Final IUstoric Dev. 8040 Greenline Corx=entual POD - I<inor Historic Eev. Stream Darwin - Final POD Ilistoric D=Dlition Mintain View Plane Subdivisian Ifistoric Dasignation . condaminiumization - Taxti/Map .Azend=Erit (213S Allatmnt . Iat Split/Int Line X QUS ELEEption Adjustrent 8) Descriptian of Existing Uses (rimber and type of existing struchmes; approximate sq. ft.; nmber of bedroccs; ar~y previous apprcials granted to the property). Designated historical st,ructur=; rurrpnt I,Hco ic offirmÂ· pyictinn s.f. = 2.362 major architectural chanoes to secondary facade in ]974: cable end miners cottage/ carDenters aothic stvle (please see attachad narrative.) 9) Description of Develcgment Applicatian Residential addition to rear of eyifting qtnwturp 14948 sf + 458 sf aaraae; FAR w/addition = .718 2 story w/ full basement. 10) Have you attached the followirg? X Response to Attachment 2, Minimn St F. mi asian Contents X Response to Attachment 3, Specific Submission Contents Response to Attachment 4, Review Standards for Yan: Application RESPONSE TO ATTACHMENT 2 MINIMUM SUBMISSION CONTENTS Item 1. See attachment 1 for applicants and representatives information. Jake Vickery has the authority to act on my behalf. David Melton Item 2. See attachment 1 Item 3. See enclosed copy of warranty deed Item 4. See enclosed vicinity map Item 5. See attachment 3A ATTACHMENT 3A SPECIFIC SUBMISSION CONTENTS RE: Proposed Addition to historical structure at 135 West Main Street for David Melton. Please find enclosed conceptual sketches showing the following: 1. Existing conditions 2. Proposed Site Plan 3. Conceptual elevations of proposed addition The proposed structure is a two story residential addition to an existing wood frame house now used for offices. The existing building constructed around 1888, is currently a designated historical structure. Some remodeling was done in 1974 and an addition was added to the rear at that time. Also done was remodeling the interior and adding of several horizontal windows and skylights. Architecturally, the existing structure is a gable end miners cottage carpenter gothic. It sits on a double lot with 6,000 sf and provides very generous landscaped front and side yards. It is in the Main Street historical overlay zone. Design Strategy Of prime importance is that the existing house structure (now used as offices) be kept intact along with' its generous front and side yards. Consequently, the proposed construction is placed to the rear of the site and existing building. In order to do this we need relief on the following: 1. A rear yard setback variation for the building to 5 feet and slightly less for a small portion of the cantilevered deck. 2. While all required parking is provided, tandem parking for one car is utilized which may require a technical variance. The proposed residence wants to be separate and distinct from the existing office building with its own articulated entry. This is accomplished by creating a "hyphen" between the building forms: a recess in the wall plane, and angled wall transition element, suppressed roof area, and a new hedge. Materials are kept consistent with the existing: horizontal lap wood siding, corner boards. Details and trim are kept simple and minimal. The scale of the building volumes, the slopes of the roof, the proportions of the windows are kept consistent with the Page 2 Attachment 3A existing building. A window grid has been added to the new to differentiate the new from the old. The ridge height is kept within several feet of the height, blending in nicely. For emphasis, the existing front gable window, which is perhaps the most historically unique and valuable architectural element of the primary facade, was taken, enlarged and placed in the front facade of the new residence. This treatment was then modified in successive variations around the south and west sides. In this way the new fenestration is derivative and celebratory of the existing. Parking is kept to the rear of the site, broken up, hidden where possible, and maintains access off the existing alley. Two cars are parked in a garage. In conclusion the proposed residence takes the 1989 space requirements of the long time local resident owners and puts it into a structure that is respectful, supportive, and derivative of its historical 1890 parent. The new construction is of a scale and treatment which is subdued, secondary, and enhances the neighborhood fabric. Jake Vickery RCHITECT 6-13-89 MELTON RESIDENCE F.A.R. Calculation Basement (1,132 gsf) Exempt Lower floor 674 gsf + (458 garage) exempt Upper level 1,274 gsf + (156 deck) exempt Total Proposed 1,948 gsf Existing 2,362 gsf Total 4,310 gsf Site area 6,000 sf Project F.A.R. .718 Allowable .75 Page - 1 Melton Residence Preliminary Building Code Analysis Group R-3 Residential Type IV-N Construction Square Footage: unlimited Fire resistance walls: one hour less than 20 feet Opening protected less than 10 feet, not permitted less than three feet Occupancy separation R-3/b-2: one hour Notes: Firewall and door from garage: one hour Bedroom window egress Freeze protect pipes master bath Garage door clearance with openers Fireplace separation from glass Basement egress Page - 1 MELTON DD RESIDENCE ..RCHITECT J..2!W .F JAKE VICKERY 925-3308 ALLEY ///----N--\\ 0 - ./ 60' 5 / - . . 1% l 4 ifi // 1 1 1 10 0 f f 39 3 / \# 4 PROPOSED ADDITION r / /1 7 r----3 9 / f 0 1 0 b 0 EXISTING BUILDJNG ff>f - 1 1 60' -- -- 0 - | MELTON DD RESIDENCE MAIN STREET ~cHITECT SITE PLAN i-Lf-url VlCKERÂ¥ 5 7 ~JAKE 4.:..p'/1 133U1S 1Shll.3 -- C N 3 1 r .- C __-*-- MELTON i I RESIDENCE ! DD i MAIN STREET '~*~HITICÂ·r \Ezy ROOF PL.AN 0 2 5 ru--1 I e JAKE VICKE'Y $15-33/8 n 133819 1SUU EGRESS r UTILITIES E EC. HW 4 - -- -up 1 1 FOUNDATION 8 BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN MELTON RESIDENCE DD 1132 G.S.F 0-RCHITECT Â· E VICKERY 925-3306 'tr 1 11 liN i BEDROOM 1.1, 12'x 13' 1. 11 EXISTING.. ~ GARAGE BUILDING \ 18'-6"x 22'6" \ / Â» E 90 1 \ DATH = 2 -1 0-0 11 \ \ \\\ 1 1 1 1.\ 1. 1 ..1 T DN. FAMILY ROOM ~ 11'x 17' - A up c / / c r -// I f 11 1 0 MELTON DD RESIDENCE 025 .. RCHITECT r-1-1 1 LOWER FLOOR PLAN 674 G.S.E + 458 G.S.E GARAGE ~JAKE VICKERY 925-3306 ke ll 1 F.==1=== 4 3-0 Â« \\ 18' x 14' MASTER BEDROOM - 4 1 0 00 1- Uh ~\ ~ ~-~ LAUND. 0 2 L EXISTING \ ion , BUILDING \ 1 4 12'x 10' |YVALK-IN KITCHEN Â¢LOSET It 9 -0-2 1 1 JI ON. â€¢ DECK \1 1 GREAT ROOM z ~/ ~ ~ | 20'x 22' K====1 1 E â€ž===- 0 MELTON DD RESIDENCE 0 2 .RCHITECT r-7...1 P UPPER FLOOR PLAN â€¢ 1274 G.S.E + 156 GS.F DECK 4 WVJ AKE VICKERY 925-3308 ,Â· C. lf] 1 4- ---- -- f h 111111111111111!111 lilli lilli lilli Illili 111111111111 3 U 19=1 e. 6 e=1 -- -_f- -_ U -- MELTON RESIDENCE DD NORTH ELEVATION ARCHITECT 194 AKE VICKERY 925-3308 40 Itt /\ 73 0 m 1 //7---- -\ ~- -~-i-__i_~i {-f ~ -f---f - r- 2% . - _-_ 40Â»4- 3 - 1 - -Li - Oil 2 1 - 3-2- 1- 1 11 41 11 1 11 111 ILL-4H___.1-I MELTON RESIDENCE DD 025 1-n-1 1 SOUTH ELEVATION .RCHITECT ~J A K E VICKERY 925-3308 1% L \ 1 OIl - --4 ' 21 " 1 1 -- -27 r,--_z! 4 11 XI 4 Z ..zz j 4-31 -r- 0 2__LE-2-El j *rEZ , ?EX % 11 1 11 (84-2 /30-2â‚¬ 126 -0 ''T 1/6 114-12 1/0 -8 /00 /02 ~ D. **J.21 tn 1 - = = = - = /22 20 11 11 , ---- I *I-.- -i-i.i- I -.--*- Il - .....=- I--~ 0 /31,- P/ell , 4 V'â€¢' i LJ /ki 2 if T /01-05 203-201 /35-3 /3/-29'~27-5 /23-2/ //9-17 1/5-/3 ///-9 IOL 103- % 4 Â· 7-7Lzz,g 7--~tz=:* 0 1 3 -pY I rT-plt ~9 ~ f[-1-1 fLF k ff 1 CD -1-2* 4 \ 4 -1 / 1 4 2 _*3 -J 6 % B. 0 / h 1&214 0 fyi? R 8 COLF-GM/ / \ [77 3*><IE] 1 / 0 ,-DIrk-- 0 -%3.- I 1 59 / f 0 t' x -21 2 F * '1 n \7 / XI I ki K L /4 N 0 1-s~5_- 2 Â¥Q R - 6 4 2 -0 4 [74 -7-1 '. 1 / , 17-0- 4 7 71' - 7 ->F-- 1 ' 1 A r 7--61 / 1 ./ 1 2 -3 L .,.1 a.j~' , D' d -27 r u , i r \ - j\// L X J 1 /' 1 ., 4 .# 1 Gr %3 1.7-11 x 7-j~Lx 1 -1 , -17 .1 1 , 7 -7 7 IF 2 1 3 1 1 -2 /13 ' w I L, *1 -La}Â·3] /5 -Fj 5 / x Ul -ZE-~ L-\11)/ 202 200 D.H,/34-2 /30-28 /26-0 122-20 //8-/6 1/4-/2 //0-8 100 /02 4-2- = ==1 = =:= =- === === "=1 = = = = === == = = =- - = = == ==== = 2 ===1 == = -== = i 20' 4 208-201 135-3 131-29 127-5 123-1 119-17 ///5-13 ll/-9 /07.-5 /03 /01 Bro qj 7 71.'27 {JillI3 -7--32.-1 7 -,FT~L~ 1 /| 77 -4 m L JJVL I -27 E 3~| 4 E N . , 42 X r 2 8 4 X 0 -7 0 -77'r _113 ~ER _,4 w eL_ - _ - - A % tt I / 01 ABco FGHI 3% 1.73 8 ~ 3><El ~3>Â«5 'A W ' ' A Try] 1 1 1\0 LIu ly v x\1 1 [7 17PI 60 0 % 0 / 1/ 7 1/ x \ / 1 ' 7 ' 7 \7Â·4-Â· _x , 4 3 E -- Al COLD) * X G OYIN' 0 421 z NOT Q P Q 8 wr Â·Ja â€¢0 0 17= Rl K 3-.R! 3- J El A F 74 . f iT. Rt . U 1 C -p _f- ~ 01 P - 0 6 â‚¬, If 13 0 / 4 LEZO':3 ~ h , -70 * c-1 * LE_.2 -7-am ED m , N 237 tz A / 1 - -1.1.-f / * 1.2 1 1 0 ,A Z-1-EX 100. 227 ;34-2 i33 (.50 122-20 118-16 IICI-11 110-8 106-4 /62. /00 \-1 _.>.<1 /39-2- ,.ar.4 0/ 4 0/ _413/Y _ff 'PE 7 601 11 1 9// .9/1 611 6}/ 102 202 902 Log 602 1 2 Â£12 9/2 L 2 612 M 3 IN30 -S 2 2-/4 2/3 2/1 943 9-7 0 - Â« f Â°-Fy ti ~j_~ [I[lilli ///5Â«nÂ»\ 11 - 1 1--i 1 ~ LI-[-111 1-Kin~-' 11-1~Ull{jÂ« 9- c_Â»_ -- - 4= - - C=, = JLÂ·.--_t-=.,_2:g, Zt-~9411.._ ..=---. - - MELTON DD RESIDENCE 4,-RCLIITECT 02 5 1-1-2 WEST ELEVATION -J AKE VICKERY 925-3308 . ILL --7 1-9 1 111- Â« - (4 --- #--W----- Ilf --- 72Â«L=- -1-- - / 1 --- ~-En 'In-41 21 - - - -- --- . 1 Ct r:1 -- - A -1 :1 MELTON RESIDENCE DD 025 r-1_1 EAST ELEVATION ~RACI IITECT *~' JAKE VICKERY 925-3308 . reservation, atÂ·nome stvle 1 r' Bv Carl i.. Nelson The Preseration Week theme, took Rep. J.J. CJake") Vickie (I)-Tex.) is Honieward America," encouraged local known on Capitol Hill to be ali astute tribution historic preservation makes to groupsto call attention to the maior con- rui . 4 politician, and iii his yeaiÂ·s in the House the livability of America's cities, towns of Representatives has gained a well- , and rural areas-si,eciall>Â· on the home earned reputation for his huge store of front. The theme stimulated local preser- ~ '~~ ~ ~~ lore on Washington history. vation giÂ·mips to lead house and neighbor- So it was nosurprisethat he jumped at hood walking tours and spon:or furum: An- itak.> :.... : 14 the chance when the National Trul JEr Â£'. '-- 1-: >uggested he sponsor, and lead, ti,tirs at â€ž Americans [havel worked hard to cm community housing needs. gIX.f C . F ; 2 i I C K.,- 11 2 the highest pinnacle of government, the create and protect vibrant. livable town: 51 1 lilli k J knie of the V.S, Capitol, and Cities, where housing opportunities R The dome tour is a privilege usually exist for :11] citizens and where coin- ~ reserved for members of Cong-ress and a mtinities work together to grow and 2 2./9 0 ... Â· 45; 1 frwhonoredguests. But thinÂ·earit was '2~ 40 one of hundreds of events fiÂ·- coast to prosper.' Presicient George Bush wrote 2 coast marking the 17th annual observatice in a special message from the White An early cres,Â·section of U.S. Capitol. of National Historic PreserÂ·ation Week. CoutiumÂ·d M pum' 5 Preservation Week just to look homeward but to become In the Encanto neighborhood of home. "Banner Day for Birmingham" Phoenix, Ariz., preservation week ae- Conti?iztedfrom page 1 kicked offa week-long celebration May 16 tivities netted nearly $10,000 that will be when the Advent Day School fourth used to prepare a National Register nomi- House. "Historic preservation has played grade. costumed in cardboard as historic nation for the last remaining section of a strong role in this work." homes of all eras from three of the city's houses in the neighborhood not on the The look homeward took in some very historic districts, paraded through down- national list. The houses were built in small places. In the Pitkin County, Colo., town to city hall. 1939. and have just become eligible for villasre of Redstor,e (population 12.3), for "We placed 90 Preservation Week ban- listingonthe National Register, according example, the county's first National Re- ners on restored buildings downtown, to G.G. George,past president of the gister historic district was inaugurated plus a huge banner on City Hall," says Encanto Citizens Association. A portion with an "Evening Boulevard Stroll" on Marjorie White, chairman of the Birmin- of house tour profits are being donated to May 20 that attracted 50 attendees, some gham Historical Society. "The City Hall a local shelter for the homeless. from as far away as Denver. banner unveiled at the opening cere- "Our house tour attracted over 1,000 Pitkin's county seat of Aspen was the monies shows a map of all the historic people, George said. "And we also pub- May 17 of an architect's forum addres- districts and landmarks in Birmingham." lished a cookbook as part of the Preserva- the "real problem of affordable hous- National Register historic district certifi- tion Week celebration." ing" in this popular resort community, cates also were presented to representa- The 118-page $10 cookbook. E NConto according to Preservation Week coor- tives of five new historic areas. Cook-s. "is already in the black." George , dinator and county planner Roxanne The turnout of 2.000 for openintr eere- says. It opens with a recipe for "Sweet Eflin. Twelve local architects discussed monies was boosted by canny marketing. and Sour Birdie Wines- from Arizona ways of reintegrating resort employees eliorts. according to White. "First we Governor Rose Mofford. and contains back into residential areas biÂ· use of car- invited all the city ieaders and equnc.il classics like "Pomiy Seed Dressing 1Â·iage houses, caretaker units and other members to unfurl the new baimer. iiiÂ·izona. Coronado Road Chicken" and small-scale housing stock, as opposed t j White said. "Then because we nad 230 'Pic 1'.Ute Eat-Your-Heart-Out Salsa. -1 "faceless. featureless employee housing. kids coming. all of their parents ana Phoenix also hosted a preservation fair. , several architects noted at the forum. grandparents came too. Then because we sponsored bv the Arizona Historical Soci- "The designers' roundtable discussion had catered lunches and live music. all of et r. that displayed more than 100 restora- was a great success," Eflin says. -After the downtown office workers came out to tion products and services. .ind included all, Aspen has morearchitects per sauare enioy one oithe fiiÂ·st fine days of spring. demonstrations of preservation lind resto- block ti,an any othertown in America. one Afternoon activities included walking 1Â·ation techniques by 14 craft:inen. PN architect for every 400 people." tours of the cardboard "historic di:Piet. In Birmingham, Ala., the Preservation led by third graders from Mountain Brook Nfl.Non 69Â· mwinvolicatium< manafler m -inc ; Week theme proved an inspiration not elementary school. National Tnist's offier (d pubiic iriations. i