Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.hpc.19961023
AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 23, 1996 REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:00 I. Roll Call. II. Commissioner and Staff Comments II. Public Comments III. NEW BUSINESS A. NONE Q IV. OLD BUSINESS .11 A. 214 E. Bleeker - Conceptual (table to Dec. 11, 1996) 5:05 B. Entrance to Aspen 6:05 C. 624 E. Hopkins (amendment) 6 ki ~35 -/ L/li-7 6 <:vp$9--~ 6:35 D. Aspen Meadows trustee town homes - Conceptual (continued from Aug. 28th) 7:20 V. ADJOURN 1 £ OJECT MONITORING Donnelley Erdman Meadows 624 E. Hopkins 220 W. Main - European flower 420 E. Main Galena Plaza Jake Vickery Meadows 520 Walnut Street - Greenwood 435 W. Main - L'Auberge Roger Moyer 303 E. Main 420 E. Main ISIS 939 E. Cooper Lindeau 426 E. Hyman (Curious George) Sven Alstrom 624 E. Hopkins 712 W. Francis - Orbe residence 918 E. Cooper 820 E. Cooper 939 E. Cooper Lindeau Susan Dodington 616 W. Main 316 E. Hopkins - Howling Wolf 525 W. Hallam Wyckoff Melanie Roschko 918 E. Cooper ISIS 123 W. Francis 706 W. Main Suzannah Reid 320 Lake Ave. 303 E. Main 702 W. Main 315 E. Hyman Benjamin's Mark Onorofski 426 E. Hyman 123 W. Francis 517 E. Hopkins , NCEPTUAL APPROVALS WHICH HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL: 406 W. Hopkins (Isis), expires August 23, 1996 820 E. Cooper (Anson), expires September 27, 1996 939 E. Cooper (Langley), expires November 9, 1996 520 Walnut (Greenwood), expires March 22,1997 834 W. Hallam (Poppie' s), expires April 26,1997 123 W. Francis (Vickery), expires May 24, 1997 . j 400 West Main Street, Suite Ioo T 970920 II42 LIPKIN WARNER DESIGN PARTNERSHIP Aspen, Colorado 8I6II F 970 920 38I6 Transmittal /6*Th <1 Date: 10/4/96 < OCT 15 1996 To: Amy Amadon U'.--„- t:19.19-:3*p,t·rT City Of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee 9441;/Il- -a&fitijilsix,4 From: Martin Mata Re: Rothblum Residence, 624 East Hopkins Amy, As we have discussed, we are asking the HPC to permit the deletion of an overhang over the large window on the street facade. This project has had several revisions. Attached are drawings that show the evolution of the street elevation. We would like the board to recognize that all of the changes made have been to simplify and strengthen the building's street facade. The latest modification is intended to delete an element that has no functional value and is unnecessary aesthetically. We hope that the individual members of the board find the time to visit the site before the next meeting. If anyone has any questions I am available at any time. Thanks, j ' .. 4. h 9. . -4,· 'r '+A 00 4 , I Ir L 4 1 4, 4 Val" VIL . 1// 44 >t ' 1,4 R 1 17' a ./L /1 - l€ 9. 4,1 . ·J .. . .6 .11 k 1 , F. 7 1 2/ i ../ . I +-8 * 4E 1=~.2 =F 1 lA -B' \17 - . e. .9 ill"/Ir-i- I.. 1.5. . d,16 ~ .. 'r.1 .6 ' -'11 0 % 1,t i ./.;.11 1/pi. Art, i>*2$2;~|* /1.1 13 7*~ 1F,4/W~6114.. i . 1 :./ 1.* t'.'f- 9 r 2 '11 1 ; 1, 3.66 7 : ' - -:102 I. f 'C - 4 1 € e ....4 2%6'U__,*,4,*I IL ~= --t 1 I . 1. 21£ . . 2.412 .- h. - - ' N.:99 '64- -3$-* . W 1- ·3;1.' + T 1 . 7, e . 7 W t. -4 1 - I 9 2 4*.- ~. - 46, . 7- 242* i Ic, 9 4- * TX . ... -. 4= . I.= ill W: 1/1 PU//1 1 iii ,, nu a ni ,»94«55«/-961 1 1 1 1 Vs// lit,e. lual G.17(91- 11 0? Ill 1- -te ~~ 4-'3 19<4-.4 i 1 Eh // //7 1 i. E lili w / li; 42 1 1 1 11 1 // U--==2=2 2.y--~ \Pt J l-(= - 84370 46, 3X 1- 0 ACK C :-04 .. -4.-9 S. 4. we I i--I - r I ~-, A ,MI·% 1/ ..1...11 Pt. r ~ .-". 0,&94*L :_·r r 4 1, , /1 1, i 1(26-23 ~= ' ,- , i {---I \[\ J Li-J-f *ts====89=ES=- - /077=-7711.k==»--------_-r CLIZE7~ als .D • ... . 1 1 - -<rf VT. . 1 !'1 ' . 1 liz. #42..h -· 14 , , 1 c i . l , I i lilli .., ..... - iku---1 I . 2,1 ... .... . I . I . ..... I . ............ .. . .....ill . .Ir I ~-4 J. 2- .............................................. ............................................. t . . .............. ...... . ...... . ............lilli 1 ~1-'''p''," IH~1/1.1 ... 1* C . 1... . .. . I . I .... Il . .. ... . . ..... 0 ..mm~~. ··.... 1 . .............."2Uwan"Bil...... 11 1-z:•:i -F ..., 24 0 . 11 ' '..... .... 0 . . ..........................0 : 4.: 0. ....................... .•IMC- 1 f ... . . I &4~:til I ../'ll'.0...../.ilililix'..li .... .. 0. .. ...... .•••,••"01;9~11#11,• ,• ,-- 1-'a- I . .. 0 4 .0 - -..... ,,....,~I77AE,/gj'n . ' • r ·· . ........ 1 0 0 ' . 0 -IM<44*se,M,0 1 . ...."......... ....... ........ ............ I - .. I. ......... I 1 „in' . 0 470 ¥20 it, 1 141 , 42+ I ' ... .. .... .0 .... I I ... .... . 8 -/ . 1==1==a--1 1 %' ... . 4. ... I . RS ••,4 .•• 1, i.,1.11,11'~~ FT? · . 0 011.Im} 0. 0 . . . I U#L'44*:A 47, f .liilld". 0 lill- 1 0 1 .... .. .. I 1 1 . 4 %:' 34. 44 f , /,14, 1~,44 - Rothblum Residence Street Elevation Lipkin Warner Design 4 00 W. Main St. #100 , 624 E. Hopkins St. 1/8"=1' -,1 Aspen olorado 111'C Work -'ession - Aspen, Colorado -1611 I - 81611 February 1995 92 0.11422 9 20.. -fax 1 €40 - +LE: - 1---0-- -I. -- --'/0- -- ----- ------- 1 --11'' I .. . 4 1 - .- ..1~, 6 *1 no -7.- 1-2 - - --=1 I 1 I=-1 ' - - 1 L LI' 0 . - LA= 3-114-- Uctga 1 1 ---I- L-J , Il',1 1 2 --- -- 1 lk-- - -i -- r--JIant =Ir -lk-1 - - - -7(/mtbri/J+ 9-* trpliihi - 1=22 - %-2 bal:>.·&! i }>> f#i#=9 - 1 2tt3~F~ECE Ellili 1.- Il J -. A640 #60 6*. FMDS.p bull,PIK'*- 14.MAL *al-At. 1 grZ A g South Elevation March K 1995 HPC Conceptual Review Rothblum Residence 624 East Hopkins Aspen, Colorado 3...le; Lipkin Warner Design Partnership .-- . l . -- 1 1 1 1 /11 11 1 11 1 1 , 1 1---- ...... -------I-- - .- - -- - .......- -4.-,- - I... - -,- - I - 1 ' 1 - 11 .. 030 / i ------------------- -;*---T----- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~- \ r -1 -r -1 - 6.29.95 ~00* D illoN'4. 0 SE Qry< 4 FOTEELU,i 16PSioet.14 6- ~ LIPKIN WARNER DESIGN PARTNERSHIP 400 West Main Street, Suite Ioo Aspen, Colorado 8I6II 4 24 5 - 0#Ffle S 3 2 11 0,11 ALUMINUM F#Ama 3 & li hil I SKY,~*Ar 10.- 0 1 u, r-vA 44. FIN •54 1.3 E 3, lil i t.pep- Cop.„6 + 1:, Ort-R C.OmmoN 842,6*- 1. ROOP LEVEL t - r 03/1 ."04-AL AN'...4 00 61-kta. /,/5/LATE,) 60 GorPR=,1 49.,6-4. A 6,/. S O LU O - O6AV,, 4 Ned#Ast•) D Z 00 Unguum 000 416416,421. 1=92*,ne. J Ill Id NAnt#i Fir,11•5*t to,Pe-~ 00 0 1- O k - r--Ir-r-ar-i I - 0 ------- 1 MSTR. BORM. LEVEL 1 O% 0& i 0 . EL][JUE][L] 080 F 010 ix - 24 L EU][El k '2 -- 1 5.1.5 -C MNAL REVIEW EXEM-EMEL.___* 1 4040,2.60 d•,NG,267-2 ~ 1' hb 56/,Jp,•tf £42£.z,maty 8 :... --:~ joiiurl \ 6,-A55 m NA,4*ew .... f: S/OHT•.INE& p,IR•:e TR-ANS¢.de.16-NT t·4tuLATIN I . 1 : * "'r ·/ /,· FT733?Ir-77-1 sy.,24 p.'186,6.5 4 5¥. . I. I. .. r .11 RECYCLED AED•voOD PANELS ¥ ocap. .. 1. ,~ '' ENTRY LEVeL * ~ 1/4 '•1'-0'~ 80&,Ck- poR.C. El[Il L_exteISr-na-ele ~ hI -7 1 ~~6 - IJ AL. R.el lew S ·51 ·962 1 LIPKIN WARNER DESIGN PARTNERSHIP 400 West Mai i*21 %O-04 BL... YAFS, Det.rce B 2- ) # *vf K , NS ----] SNI>Id /2/ VA.4..e.,44.:92. f-·64.-G; ·-I'~~'.f '.--44... .. ·: -- - 063%9£4-41.12... 34465. 2..i 2- ...,- -·· . .- . rb. I'- -I . -la«.*4334%44--·- ···· - ~-- METAL TRELLIS . %.0912 * I. 1 COPPER • COPING - - - '--~*Efaa--merf%-..2--.---~ -..-E~ ==%'gg„.*jE*._- *·.1·.':294641 ---- - 9-----==52[--8PEN Ifll OPEN h=£=-c:SE=-=EalE=:NUE . ROO= LEVEL 6 + ' . t l< J ,3,#2 ' i' - - -'mik'e-~-~.-=----- m=-2---fi£%2- 1- --2 3£E- R=-1-fg/gk~~EL-EE=zE==I<E 32Ea'.3 J~~~~- 24.126 -T i .e.,1 ..9 Mt.>' 995 - -- . + I . 1 -7-= m ==== . COPPER . Te..·*iNE. Fl[-1[--1:22 . ~ COPING N * 77,4 15.4¢.:, - ......... -- ------- 1 -t - ...... =· -= -=.·2221~ -- 1 *LK· € .ti-2.-·':4 444:9991...+' _ ---- - - ----- ' 1 4:·*45#34 - FEEE%#EE2 b=~ I==i LEU -2 109402%211@S :a.*511*dist ·:>.·:i+. EVEJ][--1[----]rl ------------------- uU -ts=.... inell SS -_ unL i. -- - ..26 :1 t. n I - CaPPER SHEA™ING .. . 1- + 11 1 .TEIEE 1 :EEEL .-_ MSTR. BORM LEVEL el• 116'-8 3.:int»,9>¥ - -- - - 'liffty*P.:19 f* _ <-1finnmn 1*16, 000 -**3 492 -1.: L_-J - =.2-:----Illt ' --- - - BRICK 23*9 ,,ik - -- ·i.: 1->< Igifi nJ *,# 000 -«:~. 1-EE--------2 I : 2.,I.9. 4·:<1:4: €46& ammiat- ~ - -1---///ft---. .///1/U==-/#-/7-/----*27/ COPPER SHEATHING .:i«*.1.S?:43. ~=-IEET----%#Lfi--5#Ef~Ei---- -26 2 - .-771.-21==. 7 :L, '.,CZE.6.£·t.4 - ·· -'' -1 3 ~·· 3'··ht'Adr 4. - .- .--.------------~.2.€-IrEEEa=E.7-3329~ E: EE€-5JPE--3-~ . EL• 107-6' ... 1 C=Z=]C~oc~=]C==cz200 :I ..4,. ...,.te€'... it, 4 4 Ir==711 -E - 9EDWOOD PANELS A E--flr]Ill 1 2 4 REDWOOD GRID ~ ?* Itt. 4, 4.../VeRL r---1 - MER'NALK-hEZE--4 1 EL• 100'-C' .. t. .· • - 6-% 1- 41~/9 ----b-~-- EEL 11 ' 1 g.e=*Siot. 7 - -:Lit~~"dEFAae -2------~ '1 11 + ENTNY-LEVEL -3 : 07+4Aa.·h EL• 2810• - 3046 lhELEEL-_1113 t, Suite IOO - ~LIPKINWARNERDES1GNPARTNERSHIP400Westl i Aspen, Col 9-r#+~L. F-Esl PEHCE 60'24 6 . *PALAS IL-.------------- 1- 8 1 TRELL 19 1- 11: U. I METAL COPING -- - TTE----~----~Fl -- 9- STEEL /00 -- -- ----121-2Lne.AUL_./2 -----•~-~U-•Cuum---cur J~._..__~-~ 9.2/6 TUBE >13 ~ ' --IIi4---- -Ii-I- - P, - Il--------i-=Z-./.r=.I-i Rec• Top I To pt. rwo Dec< 127·8 . t„SULA-20 GLAS, -- IN ker... PRA.e ----- :mi Z N ... b 26*26, It, 1,=r . . - ~----2=Al#I#-2-2 13_43 - ----i-- E--LR--/2/6/.-tz'.18--29- . MSTR SORM LEVEL -- TO PIN PLOOR 1,8.-8- £ 42 9 .RtcK b I - - I 1 i.: l . / 1 i \ \1/ 11 ---=-----=f=--22£*P/LE . - ... . . .. ..-.. LIVING LEveL --·1=='2-*====4~EEEE- 9-3-4222~16 = To PIN PLOOR 100'·6- CURVED OVERHANG TO 11 11 11 . 82 1/4* STEEL PLA-e i -- -7:Zn-_-1-_r.L - .,.. ''L - --"-4-=lull--- Gl- 4 = -1 - + - , b. 1--1 1 4-4 . 1 -11 li=Zy , I * t b . IFEE ;' kt' fit- R-·1_r--~%---:: 6 2 9102¥VALK LEVEL £ 4 / L_i-+_ ' / -t_ £-1 i -1_....1.. .u_.2. 102 -O- f eNTRY Level ' -* -*#<*--- -=- ro MIN PLOOR 100··o e \ 4 /11 / 0 4, ' 20'295'Net.6 2, / EGIB / g 1... 1 1 66·AACT F C>*re• 110.10.9€ , Suite I00 ~ LIPKIN WARNER DESIGN PARTNERSHIP ~ 400West I ~ Aspen, Colo 21 '8>7+43Lu.-, (2·Gsl DENC€ 621 6. WoefiNS - - t«. L.I- 2,7 2.4 437/E· I · 2 4 - 1, 4 1 , t. 11 tsr- 1 I ROOP TOP r TO. PLYWD DECK 07-8~ WD,14. BORM LEVEL. T.O. MIL PLOOR 11*€ 6 ; LIVING t.evmt. TO. PIN. PLOOR KWAY -ruiar- , / 1-yul :f 4 $ F'N $ t 1 ENTRY LEVEL T.O. rt!* PLOOR 100-0- b eARDEN LEVEL T 5)86 le A ,0.1 5.140 ~ LIPKIN WARNER DESIGN PARTNERSHIP 1 400West Ma' Sux)(/00 FL-nfacup· R.G-Scoe- ACCE- 8 24 6 · *6'ew-, es. , C n i Ir 1.1 1-': \\ 4 \\ LY=- D) MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Director v FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Trustee Townhouses- Conceptual Development (Public Hearing continued from August 28 and September 25) DATE: October 23, 1996 SUMMARY: In 1991, HPC granted approval for expansion of the existing Trustee Townhomes, and for the addition of three new units of a very similar character. Subsequently, the property owner decided not to expand the existing units, but to undertake minor variations to them (recently reviewed by HPC), and to scale back the plans for the new units as well. Development plans have been revised again, and the applicant now wishes to build the three new units to the size approved in 1991. As a result, the new units are larger than the existing and no longer as similar in overall design. HPC reviewed the new proposal on August 28th (minutes attached) and tabled the application with the following comments: 1) Reduction or elimination of the hipped roofs. 2) Reduction of the pitch of the main roofs. 3) Restudy of fenestration to be more consistent with the prevailing aesthetics. 4) Investigation of possible further separation of the proposed new work from the existing townhomes. 5) Restudy of massing in general to reflect a better articulation of heights as expressed in the existing townhouses. APPLICANT: The Aspen Institute and Doug MacPherson, represented by Gretchen Greenwood. 4 LOCATION: Aspen Meadows, Lot 5, 1101-1211 Meadows Trustee Townhouses 1 ZONING: RMF Conceptual Development PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. Response: The applicant has revised the proposed new structures in several ways since the last review. Unit 1, which is the new unit to be built on the south end of the existing townhomes, is separated from the existing buildings by approximately 10 feet. Units 10 and 11, on the north end of the existing units, are connected together as a duplex, separated from the existing buildings by over 30 feet. This change has been proposed as a way to avoid having the new units overwhelm the townhomes, and to minimize impacts to views from the original units, however the relocation results in the removal of an area of trees and also a setback violation which must be addressed by the Board of Adjustment. The applicant has also made numerous design changes which respond to the concerns raised in the conceptual approval, namely, a redesign of the roof form, wider roof overhangs and larger porch and deck elements, and fenestration which is more similar to the existing structures. Staff supports the proposed changes and the physical separation of the new and old buildings. HPC must determine whether they wish to support the location of units 10 and 11 in an area where a group of trees must be removed and a setback variance is needed. There has been considerable concern from the adjacent townhouse owners, who were not able to secure building plans and a site plan from the applicant in advance of this meeting. Their input is needed and therefore stalf recommends tabling the application so that their comments may be i sought. 2 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the 0 character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: This remodel creates a more clear distinction between the historic resource and new construction, benefiting the historic character of the campus in general. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: The proposal does not involve any additional demolition or other changes which would detract from the historic significance of the original buildings. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not dimiriish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposed development enhances understanding of the original character of the Townhomes. 0 ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any of the following alternatives: 1) Approve the Development application as submitted. 2) Approve the Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (specific recommendations should be offered) 4) Deny Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. j 0 3 Recommendation: Staff recommends HPC table the application, to allow adjacent property owners an opportunity to comment. 0 Recommended motion: "1 move to table the Conceptual development review of the Trustee Townhouses to November 13,1996." 0 j 4. 0 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28. 1996 ASPEN MEADOWS TRUSTEE TOWN HOMES - CD - PH 1 ENTRANCE TO ASPEN 7 710 N. 3RD - MINOR DEVELOPMENT ,9 935 E. HYMAN - CD & FD - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING 9 214 E. BLEEKER - CD- PH- LOT SPLIT 11 706 W. MAIN - FINAL DEVELOPMENT 14 j 18 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28. 1996 Meeting was called to order by 1 st Vice-chairman Roger Moyer with Susan Dodington, Suzannah Reid, Mark Onorofski and Donnelley Erdman present. Jake Vickery was seated at 5:10 p.m. Melanie Roschko and Sven Alstrom were excused. MOTION: Susan moved to approve the minutes ofJuly 10th as amended and the minutes of July 24th; second by Suzannah. All infavor, motion carried. STAFF COMMENTS Amy stated that 820 E. Cooper was red tagged. Amy also stated that the Hotel Jerome is requesting air conditions for a few days in their rooms to accommodate a group of clients requests. Roger stated that Aspen is an tourist town and possibly health issues are a concern. He also stated that it could be an air exchange system and more research needs done. Amy stated unless there is some justification she recommends against air conditioners and the use of fans would be more appropriate. ASPEN MEADOWS TRUSTEE TOWN HOMES - CD - PH Gretchen Greenwood, architect presented the affidavit o f posting to Assistant Attorney David Hoefer. David Hoe fer stated that the affidavit o f notice meets the requirements o f the City of Aspen and the HPC has jurisdiction to proceed. Amy stated that an approval was given in 1991 to modify the units and add three new units. At that time all the units were going to be brought to 2500 sq. ft. Sinde that time the plan has changed and the existing units are going to be itiodified as is without much additional square footage. The new units were expected to be built basically to match. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28. 1996 She also stated that the applicant would like to now change the new units. They are proposing the same square footage but the building has a different character. Originally there were to be detached car ports and the three new units have garages which is very different. There is not the solid and void character in the new units. There ought to be some type of one story element on the street facade. The HPC also needs landscape information. Staff recommends tabling. Gretchen Greenwood is the architect and Doug MacPherson is the developer. There is one site at the south and two sites at the north end of the existing town homes. The Aspen Meadows restaurant is at the South end. In 1991 the units were designed for 2700 sqft. including a ten foot addition on the back and a below grade space. The car port was to be eliminated and garages were approved to be built. Although garages do not exist they have to ability to build them at anytime because they are approved plans. She stated that the proposed plans for units 1, 10, & 11 are similar in size in terms of FAR, they are 2700 sqft. but closer to 3400 sqft. in terms of what is below grade in terms of mechanical laundry room which are below grade quite extensively. The intent was to not replicate the designs of the existing units. There is a one story element at the street which is a garage and the door recesses back six feet with wing walls on either side and cut outs to de- emphasize the garage and pick up other elements of different units. The existing Bayer units are 1 1/2 story down a steep site. The intent is to re- create that with the two story element 30 feet back from the face of the building. The height ofthe existing building is 21 feet above the existing grade at the street and the proposed buildings. are 26 feet. The buildings sit in the approved foot print of 1991. The buildings are separated from the existing town homes about five feet. There will be shingles and clad windows on the building. Suzannah asked about the FAR and does it reduce the availability of square footage for the other units. 1 Doug MacPhersAn stated that the Institute owns two other units and David McLaughlin owns one and he has assigned that square footage to these three units. None o f the other home owners would loose square footage. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28. 1996 Amy stated that they were approved for all the units to have the same square footage. Gretchen stated that the SPA amendment allowed the units to vary in the FAR due to the way each unit sits with the grade. Our attempt is to create a different development because there are so many Bayer houses and they stand on their own. Chairman Jake Vickery opened the public hearing. Bob Maynard resides in unit #2 owned by the Aspen Skiing Co. which was involved with the redo o f the Aspen Meadows from the beginning. He stated that the square footage is larger than the existing units and in the existing units not one person has tried to do the expansion that was approved in 1991. You can't do it economically. He stated for the last thing to do in the institute is to bring in a foreign design different than what was there before. Harris Sherman stated that he owns unit 91 and he walked the area. As a general matter he agrees with Bob about the character of the Meadows. The existing eight units are low density and they all step down from the south to the north end. There is a feeling of openness that goes with the units. He stated that the car ports create space between the units and for those units that have windows on the north side you can see Castle Creek and the hillside coming down. Herbert Bayer made an impressive design. He stated now on the north side there will be a two story wall beside his unit and he is greatly effected by it literally being five or ten feet from his house. He stated that he is looking into a wall o f the new unit and detracts from his unit and the overall ambiance o f the Meadows. It is partly a problem of size and how the units are located. There is adjacent land that the institute owns and the units could be moved 40 feet to the north and vegetation planted. He stated that he did not know what could be done with the south side of the project. He stated that these are serious design issues and impacts. The Aspen Institute owns the land and is selling it to Mr. MacPherson and Mr. j Sherman does not want to complicate the plans of the institute. They have the right to sell the land and get as much money as they can within the context of what is being preserved. All of the existing eight units are co ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28. 1996 between 1600 and 1700 square feet. On the west side there is permission to add space under the first floor living room and technically you could not do unless you excavated underground in order to create a basement area. No one at present intends to do that. The proposed units start at 2700 sq. ft. up to 3200 sq. ft. which is almost a doubling ofthe square footage. That will change the character as it is twice the size. If the units could be separated visually from the other units this maybe acceptable. Moving it 40 feet may not be acceptable depending on how the buildings are positioned. Bob Maynard stated that there is a waiting list for the existing units and to say that larger units are needed to meet the market demand is inappropriate. Doug MacPherson stated that there maybe some demand for the existing units but we are taking at a lower price given the price that he is going to pay the institute for the vacant sites. Financially a bigger unit is needed given the di fficulty o f the site and because of the price the institute wants for the land. The prices for the existing units is $500,000. The biggest unit is 3600 sqft. with some of it below grade. The institute had expressed interest in having this kind of unit. David McLaughlin gave us the transfer of square footage to this unit because the institute felt the need for larger units. Gideon Kaufman, attorney for the Institute stated that they support the proposed projects. He spoke on behal f of five of the eleven units. In 1991 when HPC had the debate whether the units should mirror the existing there was a split on the HPC at that time. He presented a letter from the institute in support of the project. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Donnelley stated that he is the monitor and acted on the project in 1991. HPC' s responsibility then and now is to the existing styling o f the architecture created by Herbert Bayer and Fritz Benedict. He st{~ted HPC cannot comment on the FAR bepa'use the applicant does have,the right to ~ build to what they are allowed. They are also building wit;hin the foot print that was approved in 1991. He stated that there are three major problems: 1) Hipped roofs are explicitly anathetical to that design. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28. 1996 2) The roof pitch is too steep. What was approved in 1991 the S. elevation acknowledge the very shallow pitch of the other units and that is consistent with the Bauhaus aesthetics, no hipped roofs appeared in this design. 3) The vertical fenestration or bands of fenestration always emphasized horizontality. Susan stated that the HPC needs to stay with the Herbert Bayer plan. She also stated her concern is that on the north there is one house and the south has two which looks awkward. It is unbalanced and she also indicated that the new houses should be spaced appropriately, i.e. 40 feet separation on the south. Mark stated that his concern is the proximity o f the two units to the existing units. He also stated that roo f pitches need addressed and he agrees with Donnelley. Suzannah agreed with Donnelley also. A cue should be taken from the older buildings in the way the massing was done and the way they split from side to side with the sloped roof and flat roof. That is important to the rhythm of the project. They do not respect one another the way the original design does as the eaves drop down. #10 should be sifted to the outside and well as #11. The new buildings need to be significantly separated and the amount should be determined. Roger stated that he was here in 1991 and concurs with Donnelley. He also agrees with the separation of units at both ends. Gretchen stated that they want the units divorced from the original units and it would be better project if they could be stepped down. Right now we are allowed a five foot setback and they are 21 feet from the side so there is room to move. 40 feet might put them over the property line on the road. Doug MacPherson stated that he met with Sherman and his concern was sieparation and he would move them as far to the north as possibly. He · stated that he-could get some separation on Bob Maynard's unit on the south but the restaurant is close and it is a steep site. He will get a topo done this week. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28.1996 Roger asked about the garages. Doug stated that the present homeowners did not want to peruse it. Gretchen stated that if you site visited the area the turning radius would be very difficult to do. Bob Maynard stated that the units are large but that is his personal concern. It is deviation from what is there historically that concerns him. MOTION: Donnelley movedthattheapplicationforunits 1, 10 & 11 ofthe Aspen Meadows town homes be tabled suggesting restudy of specific areas: 1) Reduction or elimination of hipped roofs. 2) Reduction of the pitch of the main roofs. 3) Restudy offenestration to be more consistent with the prevailing aesthetics. 4) Investigation ofpossible further separation of the proposed new work from the existing town homes; second by Roger. DISCUSSION Suzannah stated that she would like massing included in the motion. She stated that you have a tall volume and a longer low volume going along and in the proposed elevations there is one single large volume and the hipped roof doesn't effect that. Amended motion: 5) Restudy of massing in general to reflect a better articulation of heights as expressed in the existing town houses. second by Roger. All in favor of motion and amended motion. Suzannah also stated that she has concerns with the garages. Roger stated that he does not find the garages objectionable and they differentiate between Bayer and new. He also likes the idea ofthe winged walls and redessed doors. In this particular case it is not on the street. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28. 1996 Donnelley stated that there is a precedence as the entrance to the units is on the side where you park your car. Gretchen stated that the entry is 26 feet back from the face o f the garage. They tried to get a relationship between the depth of the entry without cars similar to the existing town homes. Donnelley stated that the 1991 approvals did not approve garages within the units. He also stated that he would rather see car ports than garages. He would rather see a more appropriate reflection of the shallow pitched roo fs. Jake stated that the issue of the car port should be considered with the general issue of massing. MOTION: Suzannah moved to table the application until Sept. 25, 1996, second by Roger. All infavor, motion carried. ENTRANCE TO ASPEN Stan Clauson, Community Development Director presented the EIS in its most recent form. The impact statement was handed out to the Board. Stan also presented a draft resolution to the Board on part of the Elected Officials that would be a unified response. The response accepts the modified direct alignment which goes through the Marolt Open Space. In CDOT's suggestion of the supplementary draft a highway would be constructed as the first phase which would contain two general traffic lanes and two dedicated bus lanes. This draft is asking CDOT for two lanes of highway and a transit envelope. The concern of a four lane has impacts on Marolt Open space which is too great. The proposed cut and cover of 400 feet would mitigate for the open space of the new road. There would be a continuous flow of open space from upper Marolt Thomas to the golf course. Cemetery lane would be brought in on the Castle Creek Bridge and intersect with Main Street. , Amy stated that at the last meeting HPC did not support the cut and cover and she supplied comments to council. Numerous issues need to be taken into account. 7 Conceptual Development of a Historic Resource Application for the Aspen Meadows Trustee Townhouses Unit 1, 10 and 11 1101-1211 off of Meadows Road Gretchen Greenwood and Associates, Inc. 520 Walnut Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 970-925-4502 0 - j 4 ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM ~ 1. Project name Au,¥/7 Alladou,3 /,ubt«. 73wn house 2. Project location lipen .,UM/OWJ 6,7 6 ! !01- 1411 Al,arlouw -riu,lt€- of+of M uttlou» Be.d (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning AMF 4. Lot size 3.2 61£76 5. Applicant's name, address and phone number Douq ./1/Ic Ph vion 514 E HrimaA Av. A¥€n: CO. 8/01 9»· 7000 6. Representative's name, address; and phone number ~27~'~7 *euwood 52.0 Watnu;t 4. Ayul, eD. 8/QU 923· 490; 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA J/~ Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD Relocation HPC Subdivision TexUMap Amend. Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption Demo/Partial Demo 0 View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot SpliVLot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. DescMption of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number otbgdrooms, any previous approvals granted to the propedy) 6 EXISnNG /Rusfte.-76umhouses w/ 3 Bed,ooms SPA Devdop,n~f PlaA 9. Description of development application Deve/»94£7' of.3 /706' -1-k uste. 76Wnholuo . U.Art l. ZO f U- wl -#lnt butroc/.1 ot ef,so b(s~f~~ t~~~t#:b ) 10. Have you completed and attached the following? 10'~ Attachment 1 - Land use application form 4 Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form 1 Response to Attachment 3 / Response to Attachments 4 and 5 11111111 . ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: Doua 1At Phus. 1 Asput Al€«douu 7iurl,<13•Ahoust 4 Address: 514 8. Alt!'- t A¥*14 00. 8/(W Zone district: RAP Lot size: 3. 2 aCNJ Existing FAR - /5,7(.3 49· #* I A\\owat\e PAR. 2.7, 700 39. A. / 2.,500 21.4 #L<L :Inewibwnhe-4 Proposed FAR: ' 1,500 '44.ft Cnew * wnhollial 0111- il 10 ft') Existing net leasable (commercial): ' *)49 Proposed net leasable (commercial): NlA Existing % of site coverage: -05* Proposed % of site coverage: **44 Existing % of open space: 05 N• pu 4 PA Proposed % of open space: 45 0/* pu •SPA Existing maximum height: Principal blda: 25 - 83 Accesorv blda: Proposed max. height: Principal bida: 25 - 85 Accessorv blda: Proposed % of demolition: O Existing number of bedrooms: 2> ar -Tru42£76wnhe tuu Proposed number of bedrooms: 3 po' Uad- .~ 10 ¥ Il Existing on-site parking spaces: 8 -/8 BULX/.s,/W, 77~,06 -remnhouse On-site parking spaces required: / Pwr Bednem Setbacks Existing: Minimum required: Proposed* Front: 30 Front /0 9¥: Front: 60 8- Rear: 50 - /00 Rear- 5 /0 *. Rear. 50 - /00 ~ Combined Combined Combined Front/rear: Fronurear: Front/rear: Side: 40~7 Side: 5 Side: 02/ Side: 40#· Side: 5 Side: 2/ Combined Combined Combined Sides: Sides: Sides: Existing nonconformities or encroachments: /1/9 Variations requested: N/A (HPC has the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.ft, site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts) J 1% , 4 4 . 0, 1144 ..4 „ V.4, , . 24\;594...6,%:r , 0> i:#,. #44.4.1.}wt.-.- ·,~,4 ,.49.4*:4:90,~:·· 1134€~'77*2 01/24/92 16: 1 1 ID,•c $400. ·)0 81 667 1.11 756 Silvia Davi ·.0 , Fj il.j r, Cl,1.9 01 r,r 4 . Doc i. GO requirements for form and content above set forth. Any such substitution shall be subject to the prior approval of the City Attorney in his determination. 3. Imili The Final Plat depicts a trail easement across the Physics Property from Gillespie Street to the race track trail on Lot I. Physics and the City agree that this ttail easement is not to be paved. Physics is granting this easement but has no financial obligation of any kind for the trail or any related work. D. LOT 4 - CONSERVATION LAND: Lot 4 is to be sold by Savanah to the City of Aspen for the purpose of open space. Lot 4 shall be zoned Wildlife Preservation (WP). It is the intention of this zone district that this Property remain open with a trail system and appropriate bridge connectiont to the Rio Grande Trail. Neither the Consortium nor any of its individual members thereof shall have any responsibility whatsoever for the construction, installation or maintenance of any trail or other recreational facilities to be incorporated into Lot 4. Exact trail 0 locations must be approved by the Planning Director giving priority to those alignments which minimize damage or disruption to existing vegetation and landscape and which subordinate.grade considerations and, thus, minimize switchbacks, to preservation of I existing topography. 1. Skclm=ventents (a) Utilities. The Final Plat shows utility line easements as exisling and proposed for electrical, gas, storm and sanitary sewcr, and water. E. I.OT 5 - THE TRUSTEE HOUSES AT THE ASPEN MEADOWS: 1 Lot 5 is Savanah's Property and is zoned RMF according to and as shown on the Plat. Existing development on Lot 5 consists of the eight trustee houses, each of approximately 1,750 square feet, consisting of three bedrooms and two baths. Development has bccn 1 approved for an expansion and renovation of the existing trustee houses to create eight i three-bedroom units of 2,500 square feet of FAR each. In addition three new trustee houses shall be developed on Lot 5, one on the South end of the existing units and two on thc North end of the existing units. Each new unit will be 2,500 square fcct of FAR with three bedrooms. Total build-out on Lot 5 shall consist of eleven units with thirty- thrcc bcdrooms and 27.500 square feet of FAR, excluding carports Cup to 500 square feet per dwelling unit). FARs and the definitions thereof for the existing and new trustee houses shall remain as set forth and defined in tile Aspen Land Use Regulations in effect as of June 10, 1991, notwillistanding and shall survive for not less than the three year • 22 "~67 ,~'a»df;BWWkinl£* ,1 er w.,41 ·,t 91, 'W'2·?P'. IM·: 0 ' •:er tat-:•• .....1 . 9340937 01/24/72 16: J 3 Rec $400.00 BK 667 PG 757 Silvia Davis. Pillin Crit.Y Clerk. Doc 1.DO period next succeed,14: june 10, :991, any subsequently adopted reduction in or change to the definition or calculation of FARs. The three new residences have received an allotment under the GMQS and have received variations for setbacks, height and open space, as noted on the Plat and as described below. 1. Dimensional Requirements and Variations Therefrom The following dimensional requirements are for the RMF Zone District; .. variations in these requirements that have been granted for the development activity contemplated for Lot 5 are noted: a) Minimum lot size (sq. ft.): 6,000 0 b) Minimum lot area per dwelling unit: e I. 1 i) 3 bedroom unit: 3,630 sq. ft. c) Minimum lot width: 60 feet 40 d) Minimum front yard: i) Principal building: 10 feet r iD Accessory building: 15 feet ;11 (Note. A variation from minimum RMF Zone District front yard setbacks for accessory buildings has been granted by the City to .~ zero feet for lot 5.) s..1 e) Minimum side yard: 5 feet f) Minimum rear yard: D Principal building: : 10 feet ii) Accessory building: 15 feet g) Maximum height 25 feet Mole. A dimensional height variation for the two northernmost trustee '' 1 houses has been granted by the City for up to eight feet.) h) Percent of open space required for building site: 35% 23 -L ,1 1-i-- 1 i ·*,11:4141110., 11,·, #349937 01/24/92 16: 13 2,·,c 1,400. 00 131: 667 PC; 758 Silvia Do.vit. Pit.1.ir, Cnly C jeri:. Doc $.00 (Note. Minimum RMF Zone District open space requirements have been waived by the City for Lot 5 in consideration of the open space otherwise provided in the SPA development plan.) i) External FAR (maximum): 1: 1 D Internal FAR: no requirement 10 Off-street parking requirement: 1 space per bedroom 2. Condominiumization and Six Month Minimum Lease Requirement Pursuant to findings made during the approval process and in accordance with Section 24-7-1007 of the Municipal Codc, the City has granted and awarded condominiumization approval for all eleven units contemplated for Lot 5. I Condominiumization of the eight existing units is subject to payment of an ~ affordable housing impact fee according to Section 24-7-1007A(1)(c). Tile fee totals $64,240 and shall be paid at time of recordation of the condominium plat and declaration for the units on Lot 5. The six month minimum lease requirement for condominium units as contained at Section 24-7-1007 (A)(1)(b)(1) of the Municipal Code has been and hereby is waived as to all the condominium units on Lot 5 as approved by this SPA plan. 3. Si# Imorovements (a) Utilities. At! telephone, electric and cable lines on the Property servicing ~ the improvements shall be undergrounded. All water and sanitary sewer lines shall be designed and constructed inaccor¢lance with standards of the City and of the ACSD and written easements will be provided if and as required confirming the as-built location of each easement. (b) LAndscape Improvements. Savanah shall abide by and substantially conform to the tree removal and landscape plans recorded as part of the Plat in Book 319 at Page 5, e, seq. of the Records. The landscape plans depict and describe the nature, extent and location of all plant materials in appropriate relation to scale, species and sizc of existing plant material, flower and shrub bed definition, a plant material schedule with common and botanical names, sizes and quantities, proposed treatment of all ground surfaces (e. g., paving, turf, gravel, terracing, etc.), decorative water features, retaining walls, fencing, benches, and all other agreed- upon landscape features. Such landscaping shall be completed ina logical , sequence commensurate with the staging of improvements as contemplated , in the Lot 5 Construction Schedule, but in no event latcr than one year 24 Attachment 3 1. Attached please find a letter authorizing Gretchen Greenwood to act on behalf of the owner's for the attached submission. 2. Aspen Meadows Trustee Townhouses Lot 5 1101-1211 Meadows Trustee off Meadows Road, Aspen, Colorado 81611 3. The disclosure of Ownership of Lots 1,10 and 11 by the Aspen Institute is on file with the City of Aspen. 4. Attached please find the Vicinity Map locating the subject parcel. +CNAK)465 113? HCCLA,Al RED W- % 1,Act R 404*V~*1% I , 4 AL - i Alortt#11 C 'ele-Z:*6 tu 19 AN,4 £ 47 U 4 4 6 dr- -4 4 , UL ' f 'Mal J 4. 4 1 /4 - 0/11* 2,29*Gatj~¤ Obotcl r-, grla lgA.1 ,15•}US 6. "*41,-823=nj" , r-1 All L U ' 0 WA f 1 %1 -4 0 8 0 4 * iWOT DRAD.rO SCALE llA 0 ASPEN %%2> j I 0 , 0. . Attachment 4 Specific Submission Requirements: Conceptual Review 1. Attached is a Site Plan showing the property boundaries ofLot 5, the eight existing Trustee townhouses, and the three proposed Trustee townhouses. 2. The Major building materials that will be used on the 3 proposed townhouses are as follows: Siding: Wood Shingles Siding at Garage Door and Stair tower: lx4 Vertical T&G Square Edge Wood Siding RoofMaterials: Wood Shingles Railings: Metal ( The design will be presented at Final Review) Entry Courtyard Exterior Flooring: Colorado BuffFlagstone and Exposed Aggregate Decking: 2x6 Cedar Windows: Clad 3. Attached is a written description describing the proposal and a description of how the proposed development complies with the development review standards. 4. Attached for review are the following drawings: Unit 1 and Existing Unit 2 Lower Level Floor Plans Main Level Floor Plans Upper Level Floor Plans Roof Plans South Elevation ofProposed Unit 1 East Elevations West Elevations 4 I page 2 (con't) Existing Unit 9, Proposed Unit 10 and Unit 11 Lower Level Floor Plans Main Level Floor Plans Upper Level Floor Plans Roof Plans East Elevations North Elevation of Proposed Unit 11 West Elevations 5. An architectural model ofthe eight existing and three proposed Trustee Townhouses will be presented to the HPC. In addition, photographs ofthe existing townhouses will be presented at the meeting. 3. Written Description of the Proposed Development The original eight Trustee townhouses were designed by Herbert Bayer in 1965. These Bayer townhouses have been approved through a SPA for a redevelopment and redesign, that includes living space, one bedroom, bath, mechanical room, detached garage and exterior decks. These additions to the buildings are at the lower and upper floors that add a total floor area of 2,800 Sq.ft.. To date, the expansion and redevelopment plans for the Bayer townhouses, Units 2 through 9 have not been completed. The approved SPA also allows for the construction ofthree new townhouses, Units 1, 10 and 11. Unit 1 is located to the south end of the existing townhouses and Units 10 and 11 are located to the north end of the development. It was approved through the SPA agreement that the construction of these three new townhouses was to match the redesigned Bayer townhouses. The end result of the redevelopment would have created 11 new townhouses that were consistent in design, size, and materials. Under this plan, there would have been no recognizable difference between the new townhouse and the old Bayer townhouses. This application proposes to develop the three new townhouses, Unit 1, 10 and 11, with a compatible, yet different floor plans and elevations. The townhouses are approximately 3,500 Sq.ft. of living area with a two car garage. Thefinal FAR for Unit 1 is 2,711 Sq.ft., for Unit 10, the FAR is 2,748 Sq.ft. and the FAR for Unit 11 is 3,209 Sq.ft. The architecture of the new townhouses departs from the redesigned townhouses (Units 2-9) in order to preserve the integrity of the existing architecture of the Herbert Bayer townhouses. The new buildings have been designed to have a simple appearance, combining details, proportions and materials similar to the Bayer townhouses. The new townhouses are larger in size that the existing units. This is due to the programmatic needs of the developer and the Institute to have an inventory of more spacious accommodations for their rental use for the dignitaries who visit the Aspen Institute. - j . i 0 Attachment 6 Development Review Standards 1. The proposed development of the townhouse units 1,10 and 11 are compatible in general design and proportion with the Herbert Bayer townhouses. The townhouses are a simple design, utilizing contemporary architectural forms and massing for the building and roof planes, that fit with the architecture ofthe Bayer townhouses. The selections of similar ideas including building materials and exterior architectural details further complement the old townhouses and eliminate any competition between the old and the new. 2. The contemporary architectural form ofthe proposed townhouses is consistent with the modern architecture ofthe Aspen Institute's inventory ofbuildings. The proposed buildings have been designed to fit into the family of Institute buildings, yet finished in natural materials that relate to the mountain environment. 3. The proposed buildings do not detract from the historical significance ofthe Bayer townhouses. The buildings have been designed to be a separate architectural design, that does not mimic the Bayer townhouses or detract from their importance. There will only 0 be three new townhouses, while there will be eight remaining Bayer townhouses. So the majority of the townhouses on the property are historic. 4. The proposed development does not detract from the architecture and integrity of the Bayer townhouse. The architecture of the new buildings has been designed to be simple in form and mass, in order to be a thoughtful neighbor to the adjacent townhouses. 0 0 .- -T 41 fEEZE__UNLI-12--0*Ittle-UNLT-Z -Eh«ri»leE66€El 0* - 1 .10 Le, 1 j 0 TV O ¥v .- 1 1~ 1 1~' '0'll 0 -1, I r 3 -m!,2 i Vi' ill'J.Tre'll'll"I'l. 1 .1 . E 1,/./. --t 1 Wl I: 1.11 lt#- f~Fl-ItiT 11 1 1 :1111 111 It 1'.1.-bl' 1,1 ~1111111~11.11111,11. 1: 1. 1 11 . 1 /li /1 1 11& 1 . ' 1 Ll 1 L* 1 2 ; 1 tt 1,1 6 1 111'ti .1 1, iii ' 11 1 1] F j.:, Ot ¢,~\ ,: Tlif li lilli .11 . - --% 'dll Al |,1 1 i 1/11 - 1 11:1.11-1 ~ It 11 11 1.1 0---1 11 l il l i 1 '1 --r411 1 F 1·t UN rr I · ..7 0,4 !11 / / &47'-T[o f.1 - j 0 t 1~~4*»~1*y IF«Il; i~ ~1-r~~ r 1-2-ly L -1: h=E52 f- ~1==E=il:T-;379'i.F=39 - Lunt/hah/76*~ 1 -327 ill W - ' ID a. 9..· ,·b:'.i :%- 1 . :rf-«FF.~E".1-9--1 1. * I f A. \Al - , ,rmt [7~311 + «.-3,74 ':11.-10 . lili I · +.•Ill-lull /1 pral E 4 3 305 i -3 1-ilillililimimin~ ;. ··' 1| 1! '1 · · ·..Il'' ' ni:.*- fir!:Ul . L ./ Ill....1. 1.- .J . :11.-1 + . tfuL/,11'.01 / f r / 1%74 Illill"Il~IlllIll"ill EEIFil,Tali~~EEEHUEall .~-,.64. 1 4 0131» 'E<-93.2!*lit,VES----:E hld-..:IL·.1;-1 .6 -- =====I=--i=--=I= .~I,q.-I~--==I=I:-..-,.~M,-1-.i::; :m:mIE[£#11:Gwm=; 6..:,55*M~.I:I-Jiu-..I„%~.18~:El~ 41....... .1 + 1251....72'W m~FLW,~.=:#=I,jud„Ai,----.u ~1 ~337:1~ * -6 1-161 111, &~ RM:=:Ef..JEAk-6.EMEE :m-#eX-::AMO,m///2:1Ff.gbr=7,-*9~7~3 <0-61 5##U, 4 2 409*u u- :2#01Ii li~:' =rvt~~ [4-Ull,•r-IUIA•,-All~~ ¥4. 4. 1 -4 4//Itn/ 1MH/7/l)HUI M ·It ./1-1~1 ~ leaz~liME~ 11 /716 :u~: ©11 -u,·,·, :i:","w'#j--M"'° *Il' ~ 1~ 9 7 r >/1 :======~ n + dr 89£7*fl,j~43~ ~ay/WTE >111:3!Niff 0% -ME.... I fll;:11:69 -9-Hug'=1' '11. 2'•r- & F . / // 1/ .1i Fl JIP.. 9 1,-/4: 411,2.f*- // ZI, ""=...1-1.-=„.-1.1-1.. I..En.*&............eUU:'U-.Wd 1.1.1.' '%6<1-LHEEEF.ZEMBEHIEREE ium-Mmn-Ill-man--Ii,mmal .1.1.1....1.11.1.,11.-ullmilumn -0.--1-1-I--, ---li....1.lum."92"im ' Uk - 4 ' 411111111111 0 1 1 M *ctr-H ket. P.F».M 1*9¥0'M ip 1- 0O 1 wwelt ; 04 774% i PBON-M 1 0 - +L 0 7 i r 1 lu !6- . c LPLINFIC¥ M wcHAH [c,E i j FBOF#6 0'P UNIT I · 00<1*T ING UNIT'2 <-1£ L.eW.BIL Leve,1, FL-,oB FL/+1 - 1 1/' 10 1-,1 9 ~ . e - 0 - ---72--~7-:1--cui- - li~-e~ILL'=L..,.~I itfAEqi(ii~ '~EU:~1 1 -£31-i,,#E-- amffl 0-~'=1 --< ./....1- 1 ...UU."L -r I.I.-I--Ill-ill=i= "n[ 0.1 '.11, , ., m, / 10.KIP ..Al . '::==1, U..6 11 L.C..Fa . 1-1 9.........l.1...1, -- .. T~ign Ek=--_=; 225215!! t.u. .. 1. 7-,r ..... ....1 1 6 1.-r-.1.1.-0..1„n......M-Ur. ... 1/... 2 9 .................. :=62[, '".""-' 1 mi=:11 -~SE--li~--,~~Ir~ P'll/9-- .'· . .......1 1 .......... --- Rr-->3)~@37-42-:M 5 *. 2;57. ..1---W 4 -1.a,- ........ .-,1 1 - //. . r. 'IE.-".-..-* -..-..~.........-.u.2-"-'-1-"---1 :-:-:e-a- !:=-- .Ey-7-CFTiiar-'lip-TiTNT.'-"-"--ET-,- =---- - · .1... Ir-„tru I 1 11 -4 4 11$% Reae~12% ~eam,11111' = .... I.I:.- _ 1 1.-£-1.'_-a. i~ --- ·- 41 , 1...1.1. .....I.... . - .t:. -- .-- - - .' 1// 1 I - 7+ 1--1040{lt . - 11.t . 1.A ... ~ ~ ires,Ell'.1 1 11' . m:b n :i¥Eff.,91 3,h-- - .. 1- 1.m... 1 111=11, . 4 f A- l@ r l, , - . w . I . 1. 1 11 1 -•In/H/'/Il,1//Il~-2·-1-1&;Dor-/0-• •L~l ilialn laU] I.VI-l UNUMI IN Ily '111 .111. 1 0 n .. . 1 1 1 NA~ 73/TE./."" 1~ E:4#AF 11~211 11:0 -E, ~931.11 : :9 1 i,/. 1 ~ 1* k 1|: ~ ; d#-1. ~ -iI '3 ~„ .-: l Z 112 . 1 1,11 f a- r~n- •Il- f LM 1 - :l iklli Mlill#l = - 1 7 , I.•le·/ 4 - I J.., 4 ?z i f -- fl--- 1 .115 - 1 -11 Il.../..=.W/1.....1/i"........1,-1 -£---I=.....U-lul-1-1.-Il- ./ . ..... V . ~ 7779-7 ...41.. JA-*::.I :7 - ' 1 f ]IL-ff-.:EFF-7<19#5*. i:. ~"~·23 iII U:WL ·/2. :M ..1 u , . - / 11 -----------------------------...................---------------- -----------------li-------------------- ------ 1 . 1/1.-1, '¥ - ' 111 -i,IL__1 --- " ../,2-....ir - ./. 1,1'.1 .. 7 . 2.- 1111/- ..112 1 IF.., 1 -45--EMI-'-Mi-/Imi U~ milili,illili& 1**10 1% 1 <.1 . S i 111; 11'' Fill'¥ #I ~mmm C J -=L --T -Gur - J. M.- -B ,/1 'Al -- - 1[ « 7017 4- Phi - w - -1- ~LIVIN12 Fl HI HC> - 10$1- 4.-P" pit-1 l Hap I &, 1- I T A 21-- 14-7-1 , I L T -.- UF l/IN 117-9 PH 1 --6- - - --I- 0.-I'.*.- 1 pw Pri F==.~Z 18_ - LIF' Ptl UF-* 1 - PH L Ivltit> TN 01 ... i cx<1 .=-r 1WTKY 4- 4,--- 1 V 1/ ~ - E- 7,1 e P==t- 1-7 PN 77608 1 04 0 / ©CONG Varl T 7021 lip Phi 1714 7 7*Ze ,.~ -F· 60146 PH 9,1 -- ..1 r -- VEE_ <4 07<1 «Fl N 6> U H [T 1 - F»F¢79 0 P U M IT 10 4 11 O k// Ylt !14 / WH+TRY 1, Fvfl, Fboof FLr H 1 1 111~ 10[0, t - il - - ~ 4 .I. I-- 94010 -rn 4. b.6.0 - -Ill - UnAL op.n -1. WI•,1 - - .-I 214 PH M/01*12 O 00*F#M Mpe™ Ft E .11+ 9 'Fwn -le »W 0 - 0•pre• M LI '.. 90«- -- C¥014 - - 'll..- I. Flt«[Flt- rEPIrgeN j . 0% lerr! He Url 1-Fl ' FF»09901.[7 UNt-00 ill- - u rre,tz t~X*LEk-€2-EL.rhA i \3~ \Ofo# - 11 4% M I t 1-- € f I -Ill- - --- /1. . 5 - .al M., te> - L- - , . 1. .- 1 - . . . 4 %41.1-1 Ha; UNIT cl- F'Propoee,P UALT !0 4 4 Poe F FLe· H 111= 1 -0, 13 . I . . 1 1 I 1 - 71. 1»Fr-M J - r 0'»FF-M .... 5 Plf'PIWM R < o li#w•* 7 7.07 W K LIF Ple¢:It~.flic/»G *Le 4, 11 t' Lh) Mralt'·14 Ic,1- 1.,8-UNPIty lul 2 9%990 M 1 4110 L, UNfl¥ M *c·HE H ice k Irl P 0 06 0 ...... - $><I«Fl He UH[T 1 · r,=,proe *p Url IT 167 4 LI 6 0 INFK 1. Fv & 1, F1,0of FL/6- H f. loLO, 19 - x v -. p .. -'* . -.z . v-. v.. v..4 . 4 1 -45,1,1 , I |, | 'ifirt#*A- '3,514 41.1 lili 1 1 11 /4•11 1... 1 Xe..L - , 1 1 · Z 1 1 , 41. F'< "- J|I' ' i.' 1'1 Pul 14 1 | '~4 09'011 ' lilli ' lilli 1 3 11 1 ./ It 1 4'lili ~~ ?',ti ~1~ 1,1 1 f 6 1 11 ~f2 1~k ~~~1 ,i' 1; 11 ljlk'11101.11 'f ~01,il, - :11111 11 1 1 111 12 11 1 1 11 +Il 41 L 11 1 1 111 11 1,1111 11 'IL Id lillI ~ 11~ 1111,1~ lili 1 'f A Ill ~,111,---ve- Ill lilli 11 - 4 li 111 ' 4 1 It' 111 11 1 JI (11 It 1,1 Ill 1 1 ~ 111 61 '111 11 1 ~ 7. 2 -U<1 1~ lili 1 i 111 ~ li lli 1111.'l~L~ ~~,~ ~:~~;L~~~;~~~~ *Eft>-9- - ./ 1.1 1 1 0 . "l 11 1 i ,i ,;11 ¢,1"lli' "0'111 2,1 '1~ 1~,1'f ,'i<,l I ''.I~ i,~~1~1111.1//1 t L , i , ~ r~„, 'i' 3 '; 'i'1'1~i ~,'i'1~ ~*" ii" ' "' it 1111,1.111 I 11 ll, Il 1,'1 1 11,I| |I b| ,· 111, , - ' 1 j N o F-TH @,1. ev/-7 100 Ill , 1 0 1=10-0 Flzo res@ D UN!-r 11 I5 £• 4.C.. t •rt .. 1 L 117 * ./I'll"'ll'll,lill'llilli LIVING 1~*=r- € 0' PIN ING =4 -0 f. + 4- UF PH Uf 01 _ O PH E-1 10 - . 10·NW 1 1 1>4 T7~.6 ke#w, 7 7 of 5 T Arr. ce- L Al - 14_ 4; 01 - 1 FForeee,9 UHrr 1 - Exlertri O UN IT 02 Clk FH-rtgy · M,1 H L..EX/5 1,0 FLoof rl» H 10 , 10 Lon 1 1 .. 0 E - 4, 4. Wom Ii- - - 944 1 1-11 f PR - i Mt«B F O ge,plubM et-1110 :=01 k . t F\/li 1-1 LJ - I - 7%0100 FF UNTE I · f><letHB UNIT€ UFFPM LE'vlM, Fl,401< Fl.t- 14 f. 'Ld,j 1 9 . e9 1- '.I . , - ---4 j 950 70099 UNrr I · Pyle-T~INB UNIT'2. F-OOF 71,» H 14 1,2 49 1 /y E:/A ~ 1 '.,4 .. . 4 t a , j - - - - - - 1 21 L_ f 121 b. - 6 4 1 j 9%~I NG UN FF ut· rtervag,p UN IT !0 f_!1 th*E_.22£gzate-ki 1 14 1 07267 0 01 + 1 -1-1 t-4 M 979 4:2 0 3714 Alh/1 0 J..21 - 443.-23*-r-14 +6 - H-€8 z:514:,· 4 - 11 0101 = 0/ . , 0 0 -130>99\ 9 1 4 - H -4 -0 0 45:- 1 · -r:'-4* -t * r--1 1 ~ -71L ~~W~t , ' 0 ·,4.tpreg~·~'.1 4 - -8 .. 2 7 1 11 :I 22¥9> ./ 'tySG r o.:' /:9 2 V. , I i .05 f 4 *4 I ...I- 2 -- ' .--1 --. 1 : lilli . O 1~ --.4. 1..L 1 ~ 11 ill 11,11 1 1 1 : 61 +Ultil 111 11 , 0 1 . d -r - - - &%mil - ......11 i-- F- 11 I . 11 . I 4 1 4.... U : A¢ 11 m . 0 "m I - I -- » ,·* I 1 43 & V614 $644644*411 44 r . M 1#11#4 H O 12-r H *-1,> Pt-v»-r I o rd : B 111=10 L C'. 11 -1 I '1 ilripil, /4-,6.-11'_ 9. t-1 lf"l BO€2_2.k*_-~3©__U€77.E€.B' -Fo IN H 14 0[-140,6 44/,/ U N 1-r I 4 -1/__ - - 0 lilli 11- i ... . I .LI H B 8 01 -1-·VA.-3/1 /3 .1, 94 5 ~-f*-y~ A 1-1+ r«,+1, f -7/0 1 + /77 1 1 4 V N J¥ + eal I j fj[INGEi©IFI~~ 1 1· 1 • 11 3. 4 i N, 11,r 11 , ~1 2.11 1 ~ bar-' lr- I 11 - - . ' ---111 4. 1 : - -/--- ~'~ .. =:WAI~-Ju.Ir..11.. ". . ·-.._aL.,1[.LA/1 6. li)·.·-IZE:1:-r.-72,-73----C.T.L--7,!~~2-- . . ..~ . L. I -- - , ; i q., M i -~- - *.:1 -lili t~- h -* ...... ....rz~itilililillillilillillill'llimil"':Il il 5 4 ./' 4 r 99.. - lili 1 . I - : i ,=:h -I./../.1.-I.....Il.-I..=- ... ./- --'~~EGGW~ =1.11.11.11.1= h ..h: r . TR«%4 1 : i; C. fil i'·.9.- 4%2 Af - I'llill//1,"Ill'll'll'll'll'llill'll'll//1/'ll.......ill.../...ili./dil/lill..~Will.'I~./.C/BE.turrillt.;1:::::::::::::::::::::::::~ill = 1:.al.il'll.til. *11 . 1 9 2. , L 4. 41·14,1.1. k . ---- Ig- - - Ii- --- - /:... -* /42'V'Bi~~--'-'I-Il-::-'ill'::- I ----f: · Cli¢/1 -/r .....'./4,4 .10-0~.#*4./......./~li"--/.................."-- ..--'---:------'-I-'I P ... . 1/ 4 r~4994 - 22-E r.'' ..40~71., y.. 994€,11.. ~:. ..P T: - 4------------ 1 , 1 1·1'1 ;'#i·fili,H·.4 ...1. t.0.~ n-- ¥ t. -r b . . . · 7,7.=.I|---12¤2937E*4~231?fEE-'~~-.2%' ...~277'7397i= 4'4, l :.N.£, 7·Dit·.,fil<:~1 i;NI-d'W VIJ!:. 7 ~ 52*2**447%~mdimmm~mmul11111 t . P.:4....~'. 1- , .hty 31?5222 ~lflfrou=lul¢11111'Imillillillillill@. 1201. 2···: =/ ) .12-11 •M'&/'**W-'/li./.::./.al£- 2 )·~:i€" ~7.»9 f .·13'~ Yen,- i .1 9 4 @PR.1 (Q,<.4: *4 ,£15#1211<Il-2 11 mill!!11 . 1·' ---==HZ--f 12 i Illinli;mlilliwinlilim.,ti ~ 1--~.t'*-1.f- - I UN·5111§-= ; illi!~.Ii-/4/:ag/~ur r. .-t lit:11!AU..01 44.. =i-'aa-:24--6:6*1* 5 -~ 16···7: 4.1,141~147+#1«y/;-*4%;-52-152*7 Immilillillillillillllillillill"""lillill'.Ill'.9/'ll///Ilill'll'llill"IN W*Nifr/NNE=,OK::"....5 ---gia.2426 :i:,Wi:,Wi:im:::::i/litilililillililillilililil/vi/al/////1 ~1.,1 1 - 4:1 --44.--i-Ve' a .--- ~.~15*9~~ -.- . . "f ' 4 *$..... . I.il -v.. ·--# ' . --'.·«·*. 1/ «t·« ' ··3: I 16'i??w-:;#'th...f.~ .1. :.,?..r#©li~945.*4 -- ~~-*tr~~ 11- Ve:Aa. I tmet :..1-~1.atif,224*ff«414% *gfl 11?hul'. L,0, .8/'ll .......ME]hu?41?**i#40//m~ \,=A=X.&,Fir#D~:--6 -1.U,i-1~1 ./. m 1 E///PZ~. i-----1: -A 0,7!~777·T"7.90/77 -'~r '1Z"., lr...,~rt™.¥4 4 .. ;,i;+22/L&,lk Laik-¢'1·:44 &,Tilik *Ai# I~2\ =m~ Libidul# 4 .2,) N 'I ..7.4>Tfi:«=>02....4.wa~~_--066/, i~~3.'.. ~ -dii,1.11.1,~*-*-----.~ il*ar---- 11:UK :696*6£40/1/22/t.liti/-2.,Wi,t--21 - - 40»,424'--' - 29 ffj .t j f. 1% 1 ifitdtic' ..:ii !«44*kt#*34-;· ~»; 0.1,»#*,.·Ct.:·f)11-·11-•~_6&+913.91*77~~-1,~1-*24air*bJALY*9*3;Z,:d ABEA:~ ¢187£34, waft· "1 #'+i k -ss..:i. Ii=emert·• FC;2*EE::EY;Ei:;E~ElEil**23~1 1. 7 .91·,1 ,-'/.J«-.4/ 2.4 III. . p .a,kfid...,M#,1 i=====™. -1-]-.--*-'.1.-".-,3-0 092'114.-P. ---P : Wei., H , ~~t~-n~'-•-•--,~:mi~ 1;3297-4., ~..~ L J 1~*4*k i . q I'll/'Bill'll -/·6- i 511*3: u ,"1/5,1*: . 74*9"'Aga/Na/li ---:240«N --1 31/1/elf-' 2 '. 1.- 6,5 4 1 Ft!£.&*f=v£*£K*&£l:£j=*p#f~.B,rime %1 --59.* ··+2!~•~'--i --Mic f.--.-b.--I It=- *1192:41 --Ii#71=Wii--ai~46 --1 1 ~i.,Ina 063. , 4 - ....i=:@AG :6 --22:~ :2...i#.-.+-I-I - 1 2 1 1.tu@t 41 2 1111.1 i Ni,21. 15 I r·,Pir.•~ ==frit-2---- 1- - |1411 5 .el,1~ -=I .......£/,/1,/2/E/,F„EF/E/9/1//EX................... ,-1.-19= - -Illilli~iltlilimipa 91 - FZ9FET1 : 1 IE*~ P'. - L 41 , 1 ! 0 . U. . . .1 U . : :9 10' ..: 0. . 103 \ I . I -- 14 - 6 ... U . ..1 -- . a Ce ---7---4*-Clai!*)8%,HA\41}1\.Mili -- M.~ 91 0221\Clt i .1 - /h EAST ELEVATION NO CHANGE THIS PERMIT- APPUCATION Z u 3 012 4 Cl-UL-9 C. . 41 0 6-24 - -4 U <40 C 1 1: Z U Z U fc i Z ~«7 ~ 2%~ > LU 9. .-i -1 , - 1 1 1 -1 -5--x ~ < --1 - 1 --13«beqk / 0 -4.1111 -11.-1 9 m m . C) 2 Cl 0 1 LL / REMOVE EXISTING , . WINDON. PATCH AND -51 Lu REPAIR PLASTER AS REQUIRED U '11 -· : - -' :-Tmerf.41 01<r - ····O% m LL 0 70 * I lt--'c?41 - J :1,0 :g¥,3.: - ,---,&.0-2·.4·:?W>A. 1 DRAWING . a 0 - NORTH ELEVATION U A JOB NO. 9645 DATE 10-0-96 012 4 t 888 88®88 9409-5260£6 :Xy:I . 0655-526026 8131 . 11918 00 'NldSY 06 13018] 9 H' d'El 5101 £9561£00£6 :%¥3 . DUE-9240£6 4111 i 51'Lt 03'3(~I~~1~£~'34~,Vimgist'(:2' 00VQ!0100 3dSV O 0 · 88 El 8 8 61 El El e 0.- -1. m Li -0 00 m fl}ble@~96*,9-·+~ ~ · - r . 1,·: 411 ...71111 16.4111 . -1 .+ 27.- 4.1 i Z ..= S=====.- ..,6 .: t..:... ?:. 1 6 . 1... · · ' 92'10 ·A':509434 '1 1, 1 ...: 10 ..... :.. 9, 4... '11 1 © 1 . 1'.6 J..:6?F£69: 47.t:32 Y{·.6::jr :::#"I'/..:CO:.·W . 4.'4·.*:.2.:9#NE 'J 1,1.'.. A --· V. \ 1. 61 - € -1 111- ..1. I ... ~C -2 I ·-·' t. 'Nt:R.id ' , 2 -1--1 - l 17 1.93 0 6» 711:; ul? -11 1 .-. > 1 11 - 2 1 <> 4-i.K- ~i f.1 e. :-0 .. 1.11- t ~ 1...:r.% . 1.j \.it Pl 0 1 ji 13 /12 ffi \ \\ .-0 1 1-- \ \\ .......'......'. LILI- 1 UNE gN F,4#.1 ~ : 114 arn[4]880 ..l:.t.. I it:): 5'S r . F..............= il·4.14:i ' 6 J tufF€44 Xrk©67%.1, f ti ------1 /3 8 4%2 i AN or 49 1% 11 ~ OFFICES FOR RIVER VALLEY RANCH CHARLES CUNN/FFE ARCH/TECTS ~ 6 R .-· 0 0,1. 1.OTS E,F,G,H & I BLOCK 90 ~ ~AST }147•11>1 AVE.' StATE lot · ASPEN. CO 81611 • TFIE: 970925-5590 ' FAX: 97092$-3076 ASPEN, COI ORADO 1~. COIDRADO AVE. ' TE, 1 WHID!, CO 11415 • Tft[: 974728-3718 • FAK: 97(W,8.9567 NO!1VA313 HlbION ~51 61 61 61 61 01--t . ·t· -~ ~ E+~'~I-'-.h:!tnr_tatum fl#t-L 0 0 8®8 ®Egm[PE] : el e \1 ==- ---il--A I m £6 -3 > --a 1 3 7. 1 m ------7 ----- - - -/~ - . 11 r :g.&?:4·2:i'<:E)2:X·?· " .11 . .1.9 . ,: || r~'t 1 1 ' %•/ i•,1 ./ C.:IIi ' ~· , ... Z ; 1 h.- . % 17*% 11 !.. 11~ 111 ---1 .1 . ./:2 .*... . r ' ****(.6-3% 2 <> i .1 .. 9%••.,.1*4.4• t. .1 4.11'* · ., .: ' I. ...' .' ..1. 12*29:202 : ..:: ' 0 : r. 1 lili 7 . : 1'..1 1 29..UE<%/i*ilff€f 77171..1. : . 1/1.1 60\4 1 € ...'/~~:L.'/58.&.~~ .:~-~:.*iM:~.i: HO 15 2226*6.....2 &2·Wby·4;·: ;9:3*«fER 4 . - -Lit**3433% Ler .ell--17~I~ T ' 2 . 1 . / '0' ' TI' 'it..1 ?\1.~11,4 :'tj.1 6: \\ \ c~ © :?~T.'. 4 ,· i·'.1 ffi 4 \\ ··443¢Xf.%.fitff..' f:3?A 003 - , 1 .:tb·.:a· 26. 0-:..1.· i .-:tr.NO·ivy AM.4 , 1 - . tb...:'.i Ji?.1.3. 1 I *9....1.9 iII:Ir..4 : .:7747:!,Irt: 88888® 1 to I 1- 923. . . C=== / 1 4 \/ I k.ff.: /,f -1. . Ih f:.%·fEN?4~62<'f '' --0--- 1¤ 8. B OFFICES FOR RIVER VALLEY RANCH CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS ~ i LOTS E,F,G,H & 1 BLOCK 90 ~ ~AST HYMAN AVE.• SULTE }of ' ASPEN, CO 81611 • TE!£: 970925-3590 ' FAX: 970923-3076 ASPEN, COLORADO ~E. COiORADO AVE,' TE,WRIDE, CO 81415 ' Tilt: 976728-3718 0 FAX: 9702&·9567 NO!1VA313 Hll=ION :> t..t::1....4 LiziN tn r-tri /1 1 n rj I M e LIE) 0 -i 11- . ED . : . :z.:.:'* 0.- 1 r ·0 1. -3,11 1 ZI 1; 9 - 1-- - . 111 - © -- 1 -'-1 1 w . © G ' 1./ . 6 .; 1. ) 1 110 \ / 1.1 .© 1 © 1 10 © IIi -~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ - - =Z=== 733 '....k '-I/*4 -AT KWNE*&4*i··: ~~ 7 . TO 1-1. ·t:i·:ty-p:x~t·:trb·*, 2132· -41*3944..: I 9/1 . I- . ------ L=18088 61 . . 88 8® 0 1 1 ~ OFFICES FOR RIVER VALLEY RANCH CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS i 1 9 kl ..'ll LOTS E,F,G,H & I BLOCK 90 520 EAST }nMAN AVE• SUITE ]01• ASPEN, CO 81611 ' TOE: 970925-5390 • FAX: 970975 5076 r--IF•IImR;F ASPEN, COLORADO 220 L COLORADO AVE. • Tillt;RIOr, CO 8143$ • TELE: 975778-3738 • FAX: 971)72R 9167 ---- 1 .......... . .•'-Il ./T 1 H..fil lf-I H N0I1VA313 HlbION pv f if 111 i ~///#/ /1 j 0 /1:1 40 fil i i 26295 lili l ~ 7 2 91 ~ itil, :Ii li, cy --. *-. / 1 , ..1 11,1.11 E OURS \El) /ff A ,€ 1- 1 ' 1 ' 1 11:3! Ill ; 3 /1 al \1 1 ,1 ' ' ' 1'11't' 1 , f.. 4 0 F.1 Li / -91-N/.- / :!lij , ' it. i 2 .1 ; 1/ N -liDici \ 0 h : ' 1.lit:: , w, 1 f 0-0.2. f f f~-1,/ , \ .Nit;1' ! 1 -1 , i le 85 1 y icil \91.0 \\\1 '5'a j 0 / 1 1# Off/fff } · · ,+I li - -/- 2, 111 fl -\ i t t t. I :11· ' '.. i' t. '.i ? /1 4 1 0504 5 72 f)~* ~ ~ 03 4~ lit l .4, .i:th'; ' i; ; 1 , 1 ? f , i: ': 1 7 «, 7 7820 ~ /4 1 2/9 9 - f. h . BUILDING 1- L 9 - - 2---14/9 -711 7 - v /-11/ 4- ~ & 1 1 '' - 1 /1 r.\ 1- 7 1 I f i Z 26295 /< if /< i i r --14 11- f ''/' N ....- © 9.I .,1 T AN~ -- (0 ~~~~ 7% f- -1 * 7 259 47 4 / - 2/7/; h k 1 - M -43 . -4 , 1» i /,0 ---LI-- ~--t) lil - »0 484 4 ' (fc -«ac '012 B . 1-- r · -- i ./ tvo f' :/ t *... 1 f f .71 ,- //im&21 / I ~ i , ¢7 \/t U) I \// ,«46 ; \ 1 \ \\ i j '/9 , 1 4 - /41 0.0.- f- i 4\7 U / .1- <ff r ' 14 \ 1 k- ' Z ~/ s /6-9~* ~~// TREESf I , -1' 1 0\ 22 \ 0 h 0 1 4 fr \ 83. 1 4 - 111, \ C Lic .4 \\3 \ 06\1 9 u-1 0-) / ~ 1/f ~t GE ~ 1~ \ ~ 2 1 CO 4 , 4 V 0 1 ApEM Ti 0 V /*~ ' ~ A C-°>£~ - 101 9 1 %\ - G.C.E. 1 =10 - V : CO ov --1 / \01\ 1 # 2 Vi.»-10-___2 J 7 -1/¥' -7-r ·-.· f - ~-:07 k FFWA. -A 'h ' 1 ....5 - + ,-1'97 . ./ I 6. ray r 1;'. ?1 4% . K P \\ 7 / :4 1 4, r 14 e 4 7 UNIT 3 G.C.E. 1 9. \\ 1/ 1 1 1 91\11 P..0 1 1 ;Wi¢ 1 1 e. \ 4 1 4-1 \11 ¢ 1 1 hi l 1 - \\ 1 14 1 1 \1 1 1 P 1 4 VENT - 1« 1 1 +91 1 i ELECTRIC EASEMENT I IN \\ \\ 11\, .li \ i 7 1 16 01\41 1 1 in\> 1 0« i I . i.- - r 1 1 1.1 1\10 1 ·41 k .11- 3.- i i f:a %2 404 21 f*' ff 1 1 1 1 1 r /1 41 1 11\ 0 1 1 i \ \\ 1 1 1 WAS PREPARED FROM ~ ~ ~ ERVISION DUR-[NG NLESS WET STAMPED. G.C.E. \ i 1 1 / 44 i \ 1 \ i ".U i ? N -1 1 1 I 1 26295 .- 9 + #. , t r 7 J , 9*T 'r N- 19 J 1 .. .. .... 0 .. .. 0 -/4- '4 10•~,01 ~ i~' 0~~ . . e 'AL V 0 , . 0 ----- 4 ' ..: . .. .-:~ " a- ni' -:-*imilill//0/:Imilit- 2-0 .. '11.. 9... , . ...0 .A. . r * 0.1 0 . 0 . 1. 4,0 4 0,0 .. . 0 0 ...D ... .... : D ..... D : .... .... 91:, A . . 0 0 A A . . . ..AD. ; 0 . 0 A 0. ,A 0 0.