The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.20001108ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION November 8, 2000 REGULAR MEETING, 5:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS SITE VISITS - NOON - Meet at the first site. 333 W. Main 203 S. Galena 5:00 I. Roll call II. Public Comments III. Commission member comments and project monitoring IV. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) V. OLD BUSINESS 5:05 A. 515 Gillespie - Variance Request for 500 square foot bonus, Lot Split (cont' d from 10/11/2000)& Worksession - 14 t' 23 Â£~-t /01 11> R:50 B. 303 S. Cleveland - Request to be removed from Inventory (cont'd from 10/11/2000) ~no. memo) 50 - CF?Â·13 3 % . 4 9.L P nÂ«_ - 8 rc~-i_ /9-Â£4_r ALÂ«.6 70 f - 0-0-vt,'t ~- 1 2// i PA# VI. NEW BUSINESS 4*) 5119-541 vrd#u- ho ,04.- Â©Â¢A. du- 41- 6:10 5 A. 447 E. Cooper - Minor Development 2/-20 6:30 + WB. 501 W. Main (Christiania) - PA4@eLManie~p*19#Â»rt VII. WORKSESSIONS 6:50 A. 333 W. Main - Window Addition 7:10 11%&%:KA,tNewEJ1*Cli,G~%*i*,Mij B I y- 4 / ~kip~ Â© u' 3 7:30 ADJOURN NOTE: Lunch meeting on Historic Inventory on Nov. 8th - NOON - 1PM Location - City Council Chambers LOJECT MONITORING Susan Dodington 240 Lake Avenue- Greenberg 930 King - No Problem Joe's 121 5th & North - Ernie Frywald 330 Gillespie Ave. 232 E. Hallam St. 74 & Main Street 213 W. Bleeker Suzannah Reid 414 N. First- POLE 240 Lake Ave. 312 S. Galena 7m and Main 330 Lake Avenue 620 W. Bleeker Historical Society Jeffrey Halferty 414 N. First- POLE 920 W. Hallam- Guthrie 212 W. Hopkins Ave. 312 S. Galena 620 W. Bleeker - Historical Society 213 W. Bleeker 200 E. Bleeker Lisa Markalunas 939 E. Cooper- Langley (work stopped) 240 Lake Avenue- Greenberg 214 E. Bleeker- Brumder 330 Gillespie Ave. 520 E. Hyman Ave. 200 E. Bleeker 419 E. Hyman - Paragon Gilbert Sanchez 312 S. Galena 333 W. Bleeker Street 501 W. Main Christiania Lodge 330 Lake Ave. 121 5th & North - Ernie Frywald 200 E. Bleeker -Rally Dupps 419 E. Hyman - Paragon 501 W. Main Street - Christiania Lodge 129* Francis 435 W. Main 930 King Street Melanie Roschko 232 W. Hallam 520 E. Hyman 213 W. Bleeker 0 0 CONCEPTUAL APPROVALS WHICH HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL: ,~4 W. Hallam (Poppie's), expires April 26, 2001 5 W. Bleeker old house expires Oct. 14,2000 302 E. Hopkins- September 22,2001 HPC Legal Procedures (Submit affidavit of notice for PH - conceptual) Swear In Staff presentation Applicant presentation Board Questions and Clarifications PH opened and closed Board Comments Applicant Comments Motion 0 0 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS 0 37.232 E. Hallam Street - Variances PH July 26,2000 38. 129 W. Francis Street - Final July 26,2000 39.435 W. Main L'Auberge - August 9,2000 40.200 E. Bleeker Street, Aspen Community Church - August 23,2000 41. 104 S. Galena St. St. Mary's Church - August 23,2000 42. Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures - September 11- rescinded 43. Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures - September 13 - rescinded 44.123 E. Hallam - September 13,2000 45.302 E. Hopkins -Extension of conceptual - September 13,2000 46.232 E. Hallam-Landscape Plan - August 23,2000 47.735 W. Bleeker Street Extension of conceptual approval Sept. 27,2000 48.200 E. Bleeker Street - Aspen Community Church Final Sept. 27,2000 49. 616 W. Main Street - Minor October 11,2000 -00:ati:Gillespie=-VarianceRSÂ®es --32EUL!*130epep=Minor-Iky_*Pment Noven~e:*2000 -0.4*1*-0' 56 , Obj' 5 GAL~ 45'ca 8-04,1 0 5/1 9 0/7 5. Gue-- -AAzv 4 1*vw 0 5 * 8 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Joyce 0hlson, Community Development Deputy DirectordAD FROM: Fred Jarman, Planner /.e. rp RE: 515 West Gillespie Street - Historic Landmark Designation, Historic Landmark Lot Split, CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING 515 West Gillespie Street - 500 sq. ft. bonus request, FAR Allocation and variances PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 8,2000 SUMMARY OFREQUEST The applicant, Pamela and Neil Beck, represented by Randall Bone, is requesting a 1) Historic Landmark Designation and 2) Historic Landmark Lot Split, 3) 500 sq. ft. bonus, 4) allocation of FAR to each new lot, and a 5) 3' side yard and 3' rear yard variance for a 0 property located at 515 West Gillespie Avenue, Lots 4,5, and 6, Block 99, Hallam Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen. BACKGROUND The subject property contains a two story residence currently listed on the City's Inventory of Historical Sites and Structures and is situated on a 9,540 square foot lot. The house was built in approximately 1887 and was originally located at 100 West Hopkins Avenue. It is two stories and is approximately 1,681 square feet in size and is used as a single family dwelling located in the R-6 Zone District. The lot also contains a non- contributing garage that is not listed on the inventory. The lot split will result in two lots; Lot "A" having 3,540 square feet and Lot "B" having 6,000 square feet. Further, pursuant to Section 26.480.030(A)(4) Subdivision Exemptions fbr a Historic Landmark Lot *lit, the applicant is required to allocate appropriate FAR for each newly created lot. The duplex FAR allowed for the fathering parcel is 4,112 square feet which is subsequently split between the two newly created lots. The applicant is aware of a potential additional 500 square feet FAR bonus which is awarded by the HPC if a project is considered having significant merit. The applicant is formally requesting this 500 sq. ft. bonus from the HPC as a result ofthe project as having significant merit. 0 The applicant is presenting plans to the HPC in a worksession to discuss proposed development to 1) move the historic structure onto the smaller 3,540 sq. ft. lot (Lot "A'D 1 k and construct an addition on the rear of the house and 2) propose a development plan for Lot "B" which will contain two single-family dwellings which requires conditional use approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission. These requests, which would allow the applicant to meet their intent of developing these two lots in this manner, require additional applications and public hearings in the future before the HPC. It should be noted that HPC conducted a site visit to the property and reviewed the application on September 2* in a worksession to discuss the general concept for the lot split, the floor area bonus request, and trees on the site. Additionally, this is a continued public hearing for the Commission to consider the Historic Landmark Designation and a Historic Landmark Lot Split. The applicant renoticed to include the request for the 500 square feet, variances, and FAR allocation to each newly created lot. Staff and the majority ofthe HPC are in favor ofthe project as it has been presented to date. PROCESS The following standards from the Land Use Code shall apply to and are to be utilized in the review and evaluation of a Historic Landmark Designation and a Historic Landmark Lot Split. (See Exhibit A and B) 26.420.020 PROCEDURE FOR DESIGNATION A development application for a proposed designation for an historic landmark shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval by the Community Development Director, by the Historic Preservation Commission, and by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing, and then shall be approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved at a public hearing by the City Council in accordance with the procedures established in Common Development Review Procedures set forth at Chapter 26.304. 26.415.010(D) HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT. The development of all lots created pursuant to Section 26.480.030(A)(5) shall be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission and the City Council. An historic landmark lot split requires a two step review including 1) a public hearing before HPC and 2) a public hearing before City Council. Action taken by HPC includes a resolution approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving historic landmark lot split. Subsequent action taken by City Council includes an ordinance approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving historic landmark lot split. RECOMMENDED MOTION "I move to recommend City Council approve the Historic Landmark Designation, Historic Landmark Lot Split, variances for side and rear yard setbacks, 500 square foot FAR bonus, and allocation of FAR to the newly created lots for 515 West Gillespie Avenue, with the following conditions:" 1. A subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development and Engineering Departments 2 and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of final approval by City Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision exemption agreement within the specified time limit shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. As a minimum, the subdivision plat shall: a. Meet the requirements of Section 26.88.040(D)(2)(a) of the Aspen Municipal Code; b. Contain a plat note stating that development of Lot "B" shall be required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c) of the Municipal Code; c. Contain a plat note stating that the lots contained therein shall be prohibited from applying for further subdivision and any development of the lots will comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at the time of application; d. Contain a plat note stating that all new development on the lots will conform to the dimensional requirements of the R-6 zone district, except for variances approved by the HPC; e. That Lots "A" and "B" are designated historic landmarks and must receive HPC approval for all development in accordance with Section 26.415 of the Municipal Code, as well at Section 26.410, the "Residential Design Standards;" 2. Further, the applicant shall verify with the City Zoning Officer the total allowable FAR on each lot, taking into account any and all applicable lot area reductions. The property shall be subdivided into two parcels, Lot "A" receiving 3,540 square feet and Lot "B" receiving 6,000 square feet in size. Provided it is found by the Zoning Officer that no lot area reductions are required, the maximum allowable FAR on Lot "A" will be 2,072 s.Â£ (including a 500 square foot floor area bonus) and 2,540 square feet of floor area on Lot "B." The information specific to exact allocated FAR as indicated above for both lots as verified by the City Zoning Officer, shall be included on the plat, as a plat note; 3. As a minimum, the subdivision exemption agreement shall include the elements outlined in Section 26.480.030(A)(2) of the Aspen Municipal Code, and shall meet the recording and timing requirements described in Section 26.480.070(IE); 3 4. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy on either lot, the applicant shall sign a sidewalk, curb and gutter construction agreement (if applicable) and pay the applicable recording fees; 5. That the construction of the two new single-family dwellings on Lot "B" created through this Historic Landmark Lot Split pursuant to section 26.88.030(A)(5) shall be exempted by the Community Development Director from residential Growth Management allocations and shall not be deducted from the pool of annual development allotments or from the metro area development ceilings, in accordance with Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(e); 6. The schematic design shown on the site plan presented to HPC is in no way approved or endorsed by the HPC. Any further development for the historic structure or on the lots created by this lot split shall be subject to further review as required by Section 26.415 ofthe Aspen Land Use Code; 7. That the HPC herein and pursuant to this Resolution, grants the applicant approval to allocate the FAR to be split between the two newly created lots (including the 500 sq. ft. bonus) to be 4,612 sq. ft. in total. The applicant shall appropriate this FAR in the following manner: Lot "A" as having 2,072 sq. ft. and Lot "B" as having 2,540 sq. ft. prior to consideration of potentially applicable lot area reductions (i.e., slopes, access easements, etc.). Further, these lot sizes and floor areas shall be indicated on the the final plat that is recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and recorder's Office; 8. That the HPC herein and pursuant to this Resolution, grants the applicant approval for a three (3) foot side yard variance and a three (3) foot rear yard variance to be allocated to Lot "A" containing the historical structure; and 9. All information in regard to possible future development on the parcel shall be removed from the site plan prior to review of the historic lot split by City Council. Only the existing structures, proposed lot lines, and existing vegetation shall be represented. REVIEW CRITERIA AND STAFF FINDINGS EXHIBIT A = HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION EXHIBIT B - HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT EXHIBIT C - PARCEL LOCATION ExHIBIT D - APPLICATION EXHIBIT E - RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2000 4 EXHIBIT A 26.420.010 HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION STANDARDS Any structure or site that meets two (2) or more of the following standards (Section 26.420.010) may be designated as "H," Historic Overlay District, and/or historic landmark. It is not the intention of the Historic Preservation Commission to landmark insignificant structures or sites. HPC will focus on those, which are unique or have some special value to the community. A. Historical importance. The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or an event of historical signijicance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. Staff Finding: Staff does not have any knowledge of any significant historical events or persons associated with this structure. The structure was built by the Beck family and has been continuously resided in by their family since its original construction in 1887. B. Architectural importance. Based on the building form, use, or specimen, the structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct, or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the 515 Gillespie structure, which was originally located at 100 West Hopkins and subsequently moved in 1971 to its current location, is an excellent example of Aspen's traditional Victorian Era architecture from before the turn of the century. This house is estimated to have been built in 1887 by Neil Beck's grandfather. A specific defining element of this architecture style includes the gable-end. This house style typically has a rectangular shape with a gable roof with the ridge running perpendicular to the street. Most, as this house does, have a porch on the gabled end and a smaller roof is attached to the shelter porch. Most tend to be wood sided and are 1 to 1 M stories; however this is an example of one which has 2 stories which is uncommon. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. Staff Finding: Staff does not have any information regarding the architect who designed this home. D. Neighborhood character. The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is importantfor the maintenance of that neighborhood character. 5 Staff Finding: The structure is part ofthe historic West End of Aspen which gains its character from the prominence of historic homes such as the subject home at 515 Gillespie Avenue. E. 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. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the 515 Gillespie single-family home is a critical site for preservation as it is already established as a home on the inventory and is an important and defining historical element in Aspen's Historic West End neighborhood. This structure and site because of its relationship to the existing neighborhood and other similar homes in terms of size, location, and architecture. Given that this unique two-story Victorian Era gable- end home is in excellent condition and remains as an excellent example of Aspen's 19th century Victorian homes, it is a resource which should not be lost to demolition but rather preserved as a historic structure. 6 EXHIBIT B HISTORICAL LANDMARK LOT SPLIT In order to conduct an Historic Landmark Lot Split, the applicant shall meet the following requirements of Aspen Land Use Code: Section 26.480.030(A)(2) and (4), Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(e), and Section 26.72.010(G). 26.480.030(A)(2) SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS, LOT SPLIT The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single-family dwelling on a lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14, 1977, where all of the following conditions are met: a) The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners or the City Council, or the land is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24, 1969; and Staff Finding: The lot (encompassing lots 4,5, and 6) has not been previously subdivided since March 24, 1969. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b) No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which development is proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.100.040(A)(1*c). Staff Finding: Two lots are created as a result of the lot split - Lots A and B; both of which conform to the minimum lot size requirements of the R-6 zone district. An Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU), cash-in-lieu payment, or deed restriction on any new residence will be required for a proposed house on Lot B. An ADU or cash-in-lieu payment will be required on Lot A if more than 50% of the existing single family house is demolished. The applicant may also choose to voluntarily provide an ADU on Lot A. Staff finds this criterion to be met. c) The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or a "lot split" exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.040(C)(1*a); and Staff Finding: Staff finds that the lot in question was not the subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or "lot split" exemption. Staff finds this criterion to be met. d) A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this title, is submitted and recorded in the ojfice of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no further 7 subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.100. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the applicant agrees that the filing of the subdivision plat, that meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this title, shall be submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth management allocation. This shall be a condition of this approval. Staff finds this criterion to be met. e) Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in the olfice of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the applicant agrees that the plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall meet the timing requirements for recordation. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days, following approval by the City Council, shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D In the case where an existing single-family dwelling occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to application for a lot split. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the existing dwelling will not be demolished; rather, the applicant intends to move the historic single-family structure from Lot "B" onto Lot "A" subject to the proper application process and review by the Historic Preservation Commission pursuant to Section 26.415. g) Maximum potential buildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single-family home. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the applicant intends to move the historic single-family structure from Lot "B" onto Lot "A" and construct two single-family dwellings on Lot "B." The applicant is aware that proposing to construct two single-family dwellings on a 6,000 square foot lot 8 requires an application for conditional use to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The total buildout shall not exceed three units. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 26.480.030(A)(4) SuItDIVISION EXEMPTIONS, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT The split of a lot that is a designated historic landmark for the development of one new single-family dwelling. The Historic Landmark Lot Split shall meet the requirements of section 26.88.030(A)(2), section 26.100.050(A)(2)(e), section 26.72.010(G) of this Code, and the following standards: a) The original parcel shall be a minimum of 9,000 square feet in size and be located in the R-6 zone district or a minimum of 13,000 square feet and be located in the R-15A zone district. Staff Finding: The subject parcel to be split encompasses 9,540 square feet and is located in the R.-6 zone district. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b) The total FAR for both residences shall not exceed the floor area allowed for a duplex on the original parcel The total FAR for each lot shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat. Staff Finding: The duplex FAR. which would have been allowed for the fathering parcel is 4,112 square feet (not including the 500 square feet FAR bonus.) The applicant has formally requested the FAR bonus award from the Historic Preservation Commission to allocate appropriate FAR to each newly created lot. The FAR to be split between the two newly created lots (including the 500 sq. ft. bonus) is 4,612 sq. ft. in total. The applicant wishes to appropriate this FAR in the following manner: Lot "A" as having 2,072 sq. ft. and Lot "B" as having 2,540 sq. ft. Further, these lot sizes and floor areas shall be indicated on the plat as a condition of approval once requested. c) The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district HPC variances and bonuses are only permitted on the parcel that contains a historic structure. Staff Finding: The applicant is requesting a historic landmark designation and a historic landmark lot split. As part of this request, the applicant is also requesting two variances to be applied to the historic lot. These variances include a 3 foot side yard variance and a 3 foot rear yaerd variance. Any future development shall meet all dimensional requirements of the underlying R-6 zone district. Additionally, the applicant understands that HPC variances and bonuses are only permitted on the parcel that contains a historic structure. The applicant intends to return to the HPC upon submitting a application for any further development on the newly created lots. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 9 0 26.470.070(C) GMQS EXEMPTION, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT The construction of each new single-family dwelling on a lot created through a Historic Landmark Lot Split pursuant to Section 26.480.030(IE). This exemption shall not be deducted from the respective annual development allotments established pursuant to Section 26.470.050 or from the Aspen Metro Area development ceilings established pursuant to Section 26.470.030. Exemption review is by the Community Development Director. This exemption shall only apply if the standards of Section 26.470.070(B)(1) or (2), as applicable, are met. Staff Finding: Staff finds that this exemption for the construction of each new single-family dwelling on a lot created through a Historic Landmark Lot Split shall not be deducted from the respective annual development allotments established pursuant to Section 26.470.050 or from the Aspen Metro Area development ceilings. Any development of Lot "B" (specifically the two proposed single-family dwellings) shall be required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.470.060(13)(1) of the Municipal Code and shall be reflected in a plat note; 0 0 10 EXHIBIT C PARCEL LOCATION GILLESPEAVE S :4r I r-z PEARL CT LE 0 li )4779 ST -* z .. f rÂ»rm sr r-% -* ./\ r 11 EXHIBIT E RESOLUTION NO. 50, SERIES OF 2000 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN APPLICATION FOR A HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT, VARIANCES FOR SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS, 500 SQUARE FOOT BONUS, AND ALLOCATION OF FAR TO THE NEWLY CREATED LOTS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 515 WEST GILLESPIE AVENUE, LOTS 4, 5, AND 6, BLOCK 99, HALLAM ADDITION, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, ASPEN, COLORADO Parcel ID: 2735-121-11-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, Pamela and Neil Beck, represented by Randall Bone, has requested a Historic Landmark Designation, Historic Landmark Lot Split, variances for side and rear yard setbacks, allocation of 500 square foot bonus, and FAR allocation to newly created lots for the property located at 515 West Gillespie Avenue, Lots 4,5, and 6, Block 99, Hallam Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen. The property is currently listed in the City of Aspen's Inventory of Historical Sites and Structures; and WHEREAS, all applications for a Historic Landmark Designation, Historic Landmark Lot Split, variances for side and rear yard setbacks, allocation of 500 square foot bonus, and FAR allocation to newly created lots shall meet all of the following Development Review Standards of Section 26.420.010, Section 26.480.030(A)(2), and Section 26.480.030(A)(4) in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 26.420.010 Historic Landmark Designation Standards Any structure or site that meets two (2) or more of the following standards (Section 26.420.010) may be designated as "H," Historic Overlay District, and/or historic landmark. It is not the intention of the Historic Preservation Commission to landmark insignificant structures or sites. HPC will focus on those, which are unique or have some special value to the community. b) Historical importance. The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or an event of historical significance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. c) Architectural importance. Based on the building form, use, or specimen, the structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct, or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type. 12 d) Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. 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 ofthat neighborhood character. 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. Section 26.480.030(A)(2), Subdivision Exemptions, Lot Split. The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single-family dwelling on a lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14, 1977, where all of the following conditions are met: b) The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners or the city council, or the land is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24, 1969; and c) No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which development is proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.100.040(A)(1)(c). d) The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or a "lot split" exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.040(C)(1)(a); and e) A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this title, is submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.100. f) Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. 13 g) In the case where an existing single-family dwelling occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to application for a lot split. h) Maximum potential buildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single-family home; and Section 26.480.030(A)(4) Historic Landmark Lot Split. The following standards must be met: a) The original parcel shall be a minimum of 9,000 square feet in size and be located in the R-6 zone district or a minimum of 13,000 square feet and be located in the R-15A zone district. b) The total FAR for both residences shall not exceed the floor area allowed for a duplex on the original parcel. The total FAR for each lot shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat. c) The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district. HPC variances and bonuses are only permitted on the parcel that contains a historic structure; and Section 26470.070(C) GMQS Exemption by the Community Development Director, Historic Landmark Lot Split. The construction of a new single-family dwelling on a lot created through a Historic Landmark Lot Split pursuant to section 26.88.030(A)(5) shall be exempted from residential Growth Management allocations and shall not be deducted from the pool of annual development allotments or from the metro area development ceilings; and Section 26.72.010(G), Historic Landmark Lot Split. The development of all lots created pursuant to section 26.88.030(A)(5) shall be reviewed by HPC at a public hearing; and WHEREAS, in a staff report dated November 8th, 2000, the Community Development Department determined the application for a historic landmark designation and historic landmark lot split met the applicable review standards indicated above, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission continued the public hearing, which was legally noticed and held at a regular meeting October 11, 2000, at which time the HPC considered and required the applicant to address certain conditions prior to returning to the HPC; and 14 WHEREAS, at a public hearing, which was legally noticed and held at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission on November 8th , 2000, at which time the HPC considered and found the application to meet the review standards, and recommended approval to the City Council for the historic landmark designation, historic landmark lot split, variances, allocation of 500 square foot bonus, and FAR allocation to newly created lots with conditions by a vote of to L to _). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC recommends the City Council approve the Historic Landmark Designation, Historic Landmark Lot Split, variances for side and rear yard setbacks, allocation of 500 square foot bonus, and FAR allocation to newly created lots for 515 West Gillespie Avenue with the following conditions: 1. A subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development and Engineering Departments and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days offinal approval by City Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision exemption agreement within the specified time limit shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. As a minimum, the subdivision plat shall: i. Meet the requirements of Section 26.88.040(D)(2)(a) of the Aspen Municipal Code; ii. Contain a plat note stating that development of Lot "B" shall be required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c) of the Municipal Code; iii. Contain a plat note stating that the lots contained therein shall be prohibited from applying for further subdivision and any development of the lots will comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at the time of application; iv. Contain a plat note stating that all new development on the lots will conform to the dimensional requirements of the R.-6 zone district, except for variances approved by the HPC; v. That Lots "A" and "B" are designated historic landmarks and must receive HPC approval for all development in accordance with Section 26.415 of the Municipal Code, as well at Section 26.410, the "Residential Design Standards;" 2. Further, the applicant shall verify with the City Zoning Officer the total allowable FAR on each lot, taking into account any and all applicable lot area 15 reductions. The property shall be subdivided into two parcels, Lot "A" receiving 3,540 square feet and Lot "B" receiving 6,000 square feet in size. Provided it is found by the Zoning Officer that no lot area reductions are required, the maximum allowable FAR on Lot "A" will be 2,072 s.Â£ (including a 500 square foot floor area bonus) and 2,540 square feet of floor area on Lot "B." The information specific to exact allocated FAR as indicated above for both lots as verified by the City Zoning Officer, shall be included on the plat, as a plat note; 3. As a minimum, the subdivision exemption agreement shall include the elements outlined in Section 26.480.030(A)(2) of the Aspen Municipal Code, and shall meet the recording and timing requirements described in Section 26.480.070(IE); 4. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy on either lot, the applicant shall sign a sidewalk, curb and gutter construction agreement (if applicable) and pay the applicable recording fees; 5. That the construction of the two new single-family dwellings on Lot "B" created through this Historic Landmark Lot Split pursuant to section 26.88.030(A)(5) shall be exempted by the Community Development Director from residential Growth Management allocations and shall not be deducted from the pool of annual development allotments or from the metro area development ceilings, in accordance with Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(e); 6. The schematic design shown on the site plan presented to HPC is in no way approved or endorsed by the HPC. Any further development for the historic structure or on the lots created by this lot split shall be subject to further review as required by Section 26.415 ofthe Aspen Land Use Code; 7. That the HPC herein and pursuant to this Resolution, grants the applicant approval to allocate the FAR to be split between the two newly created lots (including the 500 sq. ft. bonus) to be 4,612 sq. ft. in total. The applicant shall appropriate this FAR in the following manner: Lot "A" as having 2,072 sq. ft. and Lot "B" as having 2,540 sq. ft. prior to consideration of potentially applicable lot area reductions (i.e., slopes, access easements, etc.). Further, these lot sizes and floor areas shall be indicated on the the final plat that is recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and recorder's Office; 8. That the HPC herein and pursuant to this Resolution, grants the applicant approval for a three (3) foot side yard variance and a three (3) foot rear yard variance to be allocated to Lot "A" containing the historical structure; and 9. All information in regard to possible future development on the parcel shall be removed from the site plan prior to review of the historic lot split by City 16 Council. Only the existing structures, proposed lot lines, and existing vegetation shall be represented. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 8th day of November, 2000. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Deputy City Clerk C:\My Documents\Current Cases\HPC\515 W Gillespie\515WGillespieMemoII.doc 0 17 . /15 West Gillespie -Historic Project Proposal TO: The City Of Aspen ec: Pamela and Neil Beck Date: August 28,2000 Subject: Review Criteria From: Randall Bone 515 Gillespie, Historic Lot Split Proposal (Representative) A Brief History of the Historic Home at 515 West Gillespie The historic home at 515 West Gillespie was originally built by Neil Beck's grandfather around 1887. The home was originally located at 100 West Hopkins. Neil' s Beck's grandfather raised Alta and Henry Beck (Neil's father) in the home. Neil and Pamela Beck rised their four children in the home as well. In 1971, in response to the construction of "motels" near their home and hippies in the park, the Beck's decided to move their home to its current location at 515 West Gillespie. When the home was moved to Gillespie, there were no trees on the property. They have since planted every tree that exists today on the property. One of many great anecdotes about the home that was told to me by Neil and Pamela: When - the home was moved from 100 West Hopkins the porch was clear. When it arrived later that day at 515 West Gillespie, however, their milk delivery from Simpson's Dairy was sitting on the porch. When the milk man had arrived at their empty lot on 100 Hopkins, he tracked down the home and made the delivery, en route. Project Description: Historic Lot Split of property consisting of Lots 4,5 and 6 of Hallam's addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, also know as 515 Gillespie, pursuant to Land Use Code Sections: 26.480.030(A)(4) Exemptions for Historic Landmark Lot Split 26.480.030(A)(2) Exemptions for Lot Split The property will be designated an historic landmark. Property to be split into two lots per attached plan. One lot of 3,540 square feet to contain the historic home and one lot of 6,000 square feet to contain a duplex. The 4,612 available FAR Oncluding the Historic Lot Split Bonus) is to be divided between the properties as follows: 2,072 square feet to the historic lot and 2,540 square feet to the duplex lot. ~ Subsequent to the lot split and duplex conditional use approval, the historic home now located on the property will be move west onto the newly formed lot and will be restored with some addition to the home in the rear, pending approval by the Historic Preservation Commission. 0 4 The project meets the criteria for the historic lot split and duplex conditional use as follows: 26.480.030(A)(4) Exemptions for Historic Landmark Lot Split a. The original parcel is an minimum of 9,000 square feet and located in the R-6 zone district b. The total FAR for both residences (4,112 not including 500 square feet for historic lot split) does not exceed the floor area allowed for a duplex on the original parcel (4,112 SF based on lot size of 9,539.55 square feet). c. The proposal meets all the dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district 26.480.030(A)(2) Exemptions for Lot Split a. The property has not been subdivided since March 24, 1969 b. No more than 2 lots will be created by the lot split c. The lot was not previously subject of a subdivision exemption d. No additional subdivision will be undertaken on the property. Units in addition to the duplex units will be subject to growth management allocation. e. Subdivision and exemption agreement will be recorded within 180 days following approval by the City Council. f. The dwelling will not be demolished but rather will be moved on site subject to the approval of the Historic Preservation Commission. g. Proposed project includes no more than 3 units, consisting of a duplex and a single family home. Review Criteria in the "H" Historic Overlay District: 1. The proposed development provides for two lots that are approximately 40 feet wide at the street which is in excess ofthe historic 25 to 30 foot lot widths originally created in the area. The additional 10 feet beyond the 30 foot lot widths common in historic lot split projects will enhance the architectural character and integrity of the historic structure. 2. The addition to the historic structure is planned to be relatively small in comparison to the existing historic structure, will be less than the existing height and width of the structure and will be added to the rear of the structure minimizing any visual impact on the appearance of the historic from Gillespie street 3. By splitting the lot and maintaining the historic structure with minimal addition and concentrating the new development on the adjacent duplex lot, the impact on the historic structure will be minimized, preserving its character and integrity. Prior Resolutions: ~ No deed restrictions are recorded with the County Clerk's Office and a complete search by the Clerk's Office ofthe City ofAspen found no record of any priorresolutions or agreements pertaining to the property. ~- ''t:Iik -;;F- ;.I' Ic(~I~Â·1 --I~~ 11.1 =:1=-11~-'â‚¬3= r ' 1.1Â·'.1'91E~* ll--c=~::,11!11Rz;1~ ~~ ' 7-_!Il'Itdrt-1.1 11;111!=i _.b-_, I_â€ž ,4 - Ir-i'ri"LJ -â‚¬z'l 466Â¢41.- -U.,1 :-tri=l~~~tÂ¥- ,-1.-711-2-- 11-- 9-LE Vir'--Ii E-* ~1= I i*i7it'i--izaÂ·L-- ='7=~7&~ ,I,-F'- +,-+---I#-I;91~.4,-il- i, A-T -,i~ Ig' -ip -,Pliwl, t 2.12-1. . [Ee-54~1,~= 4-_:4.-fA'Ak .f,ii:11 ::- :i."jif ir '*LPI.<*~i~~/~~4-hrfi~4.4'1.32'4~~1 321'-' -*+EMI- t=Et-r:+ 4. '1 1 1 - -- -1. 01'=r ,=- '-1. IT-LÂ·1 =!!gr_,1 + .- Â· r- 1 -w-Ir.i--, 4-~ ,__~.- -~~Â·ti:, ~-, :'~ -,~ THE CrrY OF ASPEN 10209 -- "4[1' 1,4=479.,1 1;31 07%111-~-1475 7--4 4 â€ž_' 24Â·- 2 me.p ,-Â·Â£-fi~'44' ,!, 4 Ll 1 -J *4+4119-1 --t--?'41-2:35',7-1--~ili- 3Â»m#5*0621f*-fi' ~r. 47"P Â£ Â·.-t 4Â· - 1,* -1 - 4Â·' I 'l 0 . l af M- Jtef,-Ti~,72=1~1 -1--1--I.I~'-~,4~140Lt~-1 -13:"I.:I -Iiiiit~l,~F- %'Lp&,~C 7:I~,~I~K,# 9 2-1 1 9- 1 -:rk râ‚¬t..,--2,41--- 11-1 2.-1-41-5 f 4,- il 11~*T~-#Ed#~4 MA_ 2' i '- t 4264--f#, i Eiti6FTE'*fd - -1 - * Tz ,-'~-,tu=-1- ..1.1-7 4 .=!~- -, r Parks Office I Â·*,' 9 a' .6 5 ll_ h .1 7-,422'111 .1 81 , i It if " pr , 4 e J '<rt'I-Fl =' 1111-tiÂ·,t---=-ftÂ·-_-, /I 1,1-. 1611.'2Â£;#_ /4-.11Â£hJ Jj'1.-~t~r'' 920-5120 _ TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPLICATION The following is all outline to assist in the preparation of a tree removal permit. 1) Outline/Sketch/Drawing ofproperty to include: (please attach 2 copies) a) Property address. b) Property boundaries. c) Locations ofbuildings on the property. d) Location, diameter, and species oftrees on property and designate with arrows or circles which trees are to be removed. 2) Site address_ 515 Gillcopte-------------------------------------- 3) List trees to be removed, species and diameter at 4.5' above grade. * 8" Willow tohbe removed * 14" Willow to be moved on site (see attached plan) * 14" Spruce to be moved off site to Gerald Hines' house 0 4) Reason for Removal To accommodate relocation and preservation of historic house at 515 Gillespie 5) Mitigation Plan (relocation oftrees or replacement of comparable worth trees as. referenced in Aspen Municipal Code Sec. 13-76, (e)). Add to Property Drawing. a) Location ofreplacement/relocation trees. b) Size and species of trees to be replaced. * 8" Willow removed to be mitigated by (at the direction of the Parks Dept.) adding additional Aspens to the site, addition of trees and shrubs to the right of way across Gillespie (next to patki:*gulot) 0 Dayment of fees.. 6) Completion Date oi Froject 12/01 7) Person responsible for project (applicant): Neil and Pamela Beck Libby Thurman v #4 11*Mt/\Aj Property Owner Â· Name of Architect or Construction Representative 515 West Gillespie Avenue Wind River Tree 963-0744 , Address & Phone Number Company name Phone Number Signature Date 8/25/no Â·inettzz., ~du-,6 8/25/00 Signature MUST BE POSTED ON PROPERTY ~ rft' Ik-t' 41 1 . . 0 0 4 0 7 , O ~, 5,6 T RE 86 f. 4 04â‚¬ L 5 104 0181) CO '' ,- 4.1 le \ , Â·Â· 6 r -> EA.E?T 77 83 \ '1. .\ . -A I ./ '' 'JE 1 0 CA I /1 . k.1/ .\ 0 V. 1 / T 1 4 P 00 ,c -~'. fl ~', ~ ~ L Af~ A 0 -'. / t . r 1 1 jj 4, 1 / 1 1 ' u - , , 1. r A- 2 'Et â‚¬ji- _ / - .i--I ---- - WOOD OECK 41//////\ m.3 ----1-9-9-ij .- -7 //000//1 1 1 / 1 // ~/2/2/22 \ lilli c /u 0 \P 1 i ~~Cs, iiÂ· ~<-Â·61 1 Â·Â·:i f,3.Â· f. fic:.~f 6: li.t l' r- Â¢ 1 ''/////2/, Al k ..111 , f~ /I//.~.,//'.'/i.~.ijft ~2OArt~f fl~~~fl'/6 1 4.1 $ 4/1 \ , N , P \ ..4 A 7 5 ' 1 // / / / / i ./.// // / 7--22 4 1 '' tx? 1 / // l D .-r---- { 1 t/// UO' L_._ ____ 1/1/////\ 1 , 08(H 1 41 1 I 0 09990///1 O.7 - 01 9// // 8 01 / /-/1/.,t/,/1, 1 1 i;% 9Â· ~,4 ' Ll-- -. - _--- - - _ 1-12. 22 1 * . l , f 0.8 0 H -f ! , f AREA ' 1,531.5550. FT.t 1 - f - . 0 9 1 n 1 1 0, .9 ' 4 1 . O 3, e + i 0 .1 1 U. O 0.11 j 1 O 4-3 \ 1 look/2 1 \\ i OU f . 1 , 1 00< 0 \ k 9 0 01 A~~/*~KAG~ M 13 ~ 1 //\ 1 '40 01 1 /9(/1,1//0 1 MOS 00 EOGE CF FAVEr'IENT / 1 /9 .4. 1 01 Â· ...' 1-' . \ ,// /\4.4 f ,/~\ 00 0 002 7 -- 03/ ~ f 7 5 i 2,301Â· 1 1 ~Â« i' 547.--~ 32 '/00' * - e ICE)l-NI ALLEY 515 Gillespie : Existing Conditions 0 30 0 WORTH Zzl H.LAOS' 9) . (/0 0 0 'to 5 4 3.3 1 EAST' 4 39-83' K â€¢C W 0- r 0 0 Ii> 0 i 41' 64 AN - - 21# 4 20 014 i- r 00 C 2 Â¢ r 0 \< 3 -- -I - _ r 2 (7.0 -91'hÂ·~~~~ \\:ii. lill/ij Ir kÂ«7 Ill 1 , 1 05/9/Â»414 fj41 4Â¢ 4% i:>r 6- \ 1/74J i/ , Ad/96Â« I.--52 - 211, #*,f , 4 '11 terÂ«t,/ \; / , t H 4 4 'll/ & 5,Y i lill rk'll- 004 64/ 4.4-0151 6%? .6> rd ~\\\\~ 44Â·1410 .1 /fit T 12 prap*~,*0-*I /to " dolitiA\,\4.r Â¢ i 1 1=244 1 1- 06 N 69 61 0 C) C) s f " -0 I C> 7() S F f e . . 0 , P to Â¥ A 14' /1 12 02 6'/ T# Â© t? p O \1 42 A 19*4 Al 1\ 3 \0\ r#46Â«7 1 - t Â· ilkÂ«-il Vari q.ct 5:44 74 . I I 1 Â»Â· 7' $46.t s.fl < r, I k \1.44 14 14 WIES-T-- 7636-, Al-Lr 515 Gillespie : Proposed Historic Prolect EXHIBIT 1 C h F--1Â»d 0 f-T] MEMORANDUM TO: Michael Hoffman FROM: John D. Feinberg DATE: November 7,2000 RE: Tower Property - 383 3.C- ~02% ~0,~_~ Introduction The process of placing a property on the national, the state, or a local register is subject to a protocol based on many interconnected linked decisions. Characteristically if any link in the chain is weak or faulty, the chain breaks. This protocol, established by long years of practice, is contained in numerous documents published by the National Park Service and supplemented by local states in which the property is located. The protocol is based on informed judgements with a basis of scholarly research, archival research. and close inspections of the physical resource. The links in the protocol chain, to which the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission 0 needs to pay particular attention are where you are in less charted waters and/or are away from the standard protocol. When you are away from the norm, your justifications must be well researched, your research must stand-up to scrutiny, your reasoning must be obvious, and your process must be clearly set out for all to see and understand. In other words, if you replace a link in the protocol chain, it had better be strong for it will be tested. A typical protocol is presented as a process flow diagram on the attached sheet. It is a macro-scale assessment. There are many mini-chains within each individual item. This memo addresses just a few ofthe weak links in the Aspen protocol evidenced by treatment of Mr. Tower's property during the last eight plus years. These are: 1, The development ofyour local historic context 2. Connecting this context to building uses 3. Connecting local history to architectural style 4. Understanding architectural style defined for the nation and the state 5. The rationale basis o f definition of your style 6. Assessment of defining characteristics of Rustic and Mr. Tower's buildings 7. Integrity 0 Historic Context In the Aspen architectural context, the historic basis for the "Rustic" style is the development of Aspen as a ski resort community. The foundation of significance is assessed as being due to the selection of this rustic style to house summer vacationers and ski area employees specifically: "These structures were used as simple vacation homes and inexpensive housing for early ski workers." Source: Aspen's Architectural Context: Post World War II This use basis requires research to determine that this was both the purpose for which these buildings were constructed and how they were used. No such proof has been provided. Further, there is no link established between ski area development and the use of the "Rustic" style, other than serendipity. While the rustic style could be said to be influenced by Swiss Architecture (specifically, the Adirondack style), no reference has beeh found by us in current literature of the influence of Tyrolean architecture, per se, as set forth in the historic basis for the architectural styles of Aspen. The units in which ski area workers resided were not designed to be part of a ski area Tyrolean architectural style. There is no connection or link established between the development of Aspen as a ski resort and a pervasive "Rustic" style. Process A key question is whether Mr. Tower's mock log buildings are of sufficient status to be considered "significant", that is, "All those resources which are considered exceptional, excellent, or those resources individually eligible for listing on the National Register" (memorandum from Amy Guthrie to Aspen HPC dated October 11, 2000, p. 2, Review Standards). Ms Guthrie, however, further states that "the category [e.g., "significant"I has no effect on the review process. It is merely a method to understand the overall quality or level of alterations made to properties on the inventory". This statement would seem to say that the overall quality or level of alterations made to properties has no effect on the decision to place a building on the inventory. In other words, Aspen has inventoried everything regardless of quality or level of alterations (integrity?). The inherent assumption, given nomination procedures and protocol, is that the evaluation of quality and integrity comes between initial inventory and nomination. Further, this assumes that some buildings will be judged to possess too little quality and/or integrity for further consideration and will be rejected. This review process is established to allow judgement and demand further research between inventory and nomination. Just because a building is old and has been inventoried, doesn't mean it is exceptional, 2 . 0 excellent, outstanding, unique, or rare, and therefore significant: nor does it possess sufficient integrity for further consideration. On page two of the same memorandum, Ms Guthrie says "The property was evaluated as viewed from the public right-of-way, and entered onto the form created by the Colorado Historical Society". This form is assumed to be the form attached to the memo, titled "Architectural Inventory Form". To date, we have not seen any Nomination Form. We have also not seen any revised inventory form reflective of other than a windshield survey or walkabout survey. If you can't see it fully, you can not evaluate it fully. Accepted protocol requires more complete evaluation and research. Rustic Style: Defining Characteristics, Basis, Ability to Judge This building does not meet the characteristics of"Rustic" style expressed in the Architectural Context previously referenced. The characteristics of style must be clearly and fairly unequivocally articulated so that a surveyor can make a clear determination as a result of fieldwork and research. As such, a description which is overly broad is without usability. This is particularly true for the "Rustic" style. Here is why. The National Register defines a very large number of styles. "Rustic" is not one of them. A building which meets one of the classic styles is assumed to be architecturally significant, subject to integrity and historic significance issues. A surveyor can choose the "Other" 0 category but then must face the need to define the style and its defining characteristics fully, and to tie it to an historic context. In essence, "Other" does not mean etcetera. The State of Colorado does believe that a "Rustic" style exists for the state. Sarah Pearce, in A Guide to Colorado Architecture" published by the Colorado Historical Society, provides multiple characteristics through descriptive text and photographs. These are: Defining Characteristics Tower's Bldgs 1. Natural setting x 2. Use of log and stone x 3. Designed to blend in with the environment x 4. Used as vacation homes, hunting lodges, dude ranches or 4 tourist facilities 5. More refined than Pioneer log structures x 6. Traditional building techniques 7. Handcraftmanship emphasized 8. Majority built after 1905 0 9. Battered walls 3 10. Overhanging roofs x 11. Small paned windows x 12. Stone chimney x In a review of 25 state approved register nominations with the "Rustic" style categorization, Judith Broeker, historian, distilled the most mentioned defining characteristics as follows: Defining Characteristics Tower's Bldgs 1. Stone foundation 2. Stone chimney/fireplace 3. Gabled Roof 4. Blend with natural surroundings 5. Uncoursed, rough cut stone x 6. Overhung rafters, open eaves, overhanging roof x 7. Wood shake/Engle roof x 8. Small paned windows X 9. Casement windows x 10. Peeled log posts x 11. One story 4 12. Walls notched logs, peeled logs x 13. Concrete walls covered with stone veneer x 14. Wood framed windows 15. Wood frame structure 16. Rectangular (smaller structures) 17. Concrete mortar 18. Siding/clapboard on upper walls and gable ends 1/2 In Aspen's definition of"Rustic" style, there are a great number of equivocating terms used: "not always", "may", "otherwise", and "usually". In addition, the description references two fairly well documented styles-Adirondack and National Parks-and sets forth some of their defining characteristics but seems to back away from these defining characteristics by allowing alternative expressions or essentially watered down versions as well as the real thing. For example, instead of real logs, simulated logs; instead of traditional log details, referred details: instead of true log construction, none; and so forth. Even more equivocal are the following two contradictory statements: 4 M>Â¢Â»W >eXAX 1 True log construction with overlapping ends, coped, and stacked. 2 Materials in later buildings are used to simulate log construction. Equivocation can not help. In development of defining characteristics, there is no ability to be flexible. Practicality and fairness demand specificity. Even with this lack of specificity, one can examine the "Rustic" style definition in the Aspen Architectural Context manual and provide a list of characteristics that are unequivocal. We have provided this list which is followed by those characteristics that are equivocal. The list begins with the characteristics described for the Adirondack style and the National Parks architectural style as set forth in the same Aspen Architectural Context. Adirondack and National Parks architectural style (conceived by Aspen Architectural Context as progenitors of a local style) specific defining characteristics are: Defining Characteristics Tower's Bldgs 1. Simple rectilinear structures to elaborate 1/2 2. Log and stone X 3. Varied roof forms x 4. Dormers x 5. Expressed architectural details x 6. Indigenous materials x 7. Blending into the landscape, and x 8. Expressive of that landscape x "Forty's and fifty's modest local structures" specific (unequivocal) characteristics are: 1. Locally available materials 2. True log construction with overlapping log ends, coped, and stacked. 3. Chinking 4. Window openings are spare 5. Wood trim is used to finish out the window openings 6. Building plans are simple rectangular forms, with smaller additive elements 7. Roof springs from the log wall, and gable ends are infilled with standard framing 8. The emphasis is on handmade materials and the details come out of the use of the materials, otherwise the detail and decoration is minimal. 5 Equivocating characteristics and alternatives include: 1. Stone may be incorporated at the base, or in the form of a fireplace and chimney 2. Buildings are usually single story, with a low pitched gable roof 3. Logs may be dressed and flattened for stacking or may be in rough form 4. Windows are usually horizontally proportioned 5. This [?] may be a small triangle or a second level of living space 6. Materials in later buildings are used to simulate log construction and refer to the particular visual details of the original log structures. Specific details of traditional log buildings, and construction techniques are not always carried forward into the newer structures. A quick comparison review ofthe State's various defining characteristics for "Rustic" style and those of Aspen indicates the Aspen manual has major differences and a lack of definitiveness and specificity. Still, how do Mr. Tower's buildings fit the Aspen manual's characteristics for "Rustic". ASPEN'S SPECIFIC CHARACTERISTICS TOWER'S CABINS . 1 Imported to Aspen, Source 1 "Locally available materials" unknown "True log construction with overlapping log ends, Not logs, machined lumber, no 2 coped, and stacked" coping, 1/2 overlapped 3 "Chinking" No chinking 4 "Window openings are spare" Multiple windows, not spare 5 "Wood trim is used to finish out the window None openings" 6 "Building plans are simple rectangular forms, with True smaller additive elements" 7 "Roof springs from the log wall, and gable ends True are infilled with standard framing" 8 "The emphasis is on handmade materials and the Milled materials, no log details details come out of the use of the materials, No handmade materials otherwise the detail and decoration is minimal" 6 Conclusion: Five out of eight required items are not present for Mr. Tower's buildings. For the equivocal items, Mr. Tower's buildings compare as follows: No stone foundation No stone chimney No dressed logs No rough form logs No stacked logs Mixture of window types Yes, single story, with smaller additive elements No reference to visual details of original log structures Yes, simulated logs Six no's, two yes's, one maybe. Our conclusion: Mr. Tower's buildings do not meet the vast majority of characteristics presented in the Aspen Architectural Context manual for "Rustic" style. His buildings are not "Rustic" style. Integrity 1. The majority ofwindows have been changed; this alone would cause the delisting of an already listed structure. 2. His buildings have modern doors. 3. One building has a major addition of a shed roof solar-gain dormer. 4. His buildings have plastic skylights. 5. His buildings do not blend in with a natural environment, they are on urban lots, always have been. Even if his buildings were considered "Rustic", it is our considered opinion that they lack sufficient integrity for listing. 7 --1 116.11 " //- 2 -140 1 1 - stryker briwn , 119 S. SPRING ST. ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2100 FAX: 925.2258 strykerbrown.com .EXISTING PARAPET WALL Â©G 0 9 0 /9- 9 1 1 1 1~ FLOWER BOXES ' ' 1 / ' i MOUNTED ON RAIL i 1 1 11 ' ' 1 1 ,. ~ NEW 36" GUARD RAIL 1 1 ' ~ 4/ ,/' ~ SEE OPEN RAIL DETAIL | 1 / 1 0---- i / 1 - 1 /. b . NEW 36" ~ - 1 - - - 1 1 SOLID RAIL ' i 9'-0" 3' PAINT TO MATCH STONE al 1 1 ............-â€ž ....-----t.â€ž-.-â€ž....f 1 . ' GRILL 1 1 SUNEET i 1 1 1 - '-- _Ii-- ~-L~-~1-1"11 _ 1[Li--~-~/Jx-- . r 7___0 v. PLAiNT El ' 1 .. EXISTING i I Existik'& STAI~ - 1 ~ ..--- ~ STAIR TOWER I SITTING i J I I'Â« I 1~ Tp'ROOF 1, 1 AREA- 1 f /il 111 1 WOOD -1 _ ___ 2 2-4*<-1-64664 4- ~3i- --- -- - -O Richard Wall 1 1 -r. FPNoibs--O-1--1 .: 5 * 70 4.*VANSION 5( 1.... -Â·- STAIR TOWER L --Â· NEW Roof Deck f I HOT 1 1 ~lor==31AYI...93 1 5 ' TUB Â®-- - - I - - - ---- -STE# - -----_-_-_-1-_-_._._.___ ._ _._._ .I_ 0 ---- -1-----0 in the DOWN ~~ 5 1 1 1 \ 1 Brand Building - 0- 1--3 - .+Â» -- ... - .. .... - ---- -- .-- .. .-- . - - --I -- I-... 0 1 ~ 0 OPEN WOOD DECK , 1 EXPAND EXISTING ~ | PLANTER Â· i ENTERTAINMENT i STRUCTURE FOR BENCH LARGER STAIR Unit 13, . * AREA 1 i DIAMETER Lots G,H & 1, Block 88 Townsite of Aspen I dIN ~ | - Pitkin County, Colo. *â€žati pNEW 24" SOLID RAIL 1 + 7371 - /1 --1- 205 S. Galena Street L. , 1 Aspen, CO T , -=~~ ~ PLANTER ~~ 1 i NEW 42" SOLID RAIE. / 9 11 col 1 1 1 1 : ~ EXISTING SKYLIGHIL I 1 1 TO HALLWAY BELOW i DATE: fSSUE: 1 1 1 AUGUST 23 2000 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 1 ~ EXISTING ROOF ' NOV. 8, 2000 HPC REVISIONS /Ir..1 'SLOPE . 1 4.-1- 1 1 A I 'l A A : 'A . n i i i ---i EXISTING PRIVATE i i i SKYLIGHT- TYPICAL 66 6 6 6 6 6 Roof Deck Plan PLANS 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE A 2.1 \Â«\ ' 119 S. SPRING ST. ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2100 FAX: 925.2258 T. RIDGE strykerbrown.com 111'-9 / EXISTING STAIR BUILDING MAXIMUM HEIGHT T. BRG. T. PROPOSED STAIR ROOF= 108'-8 ---rn- 4-- - - - 108'-1" ~---- -- ~----- -- Â·' L_-3 U --- -\--~_ -d--0 T- EXISTING STAIR ROOF= 108'-1 NEW HOTTUB G IN RAISED WOODEN . 42>0 WATER PROOF CONTAINER .- i T. EXISTING ROOF L 2],- VARIES- SEE SPOT ELEVATIONS NEN'36' â‚¬Â£. l., O - h Ir--11 1-~ P i ME-nâ€ž i. ..13 T, LOWER 40,60 CAp_,__ 1. // 1 T. UPP RPLATFORM 100Â·-7 PLATFORM 100-0" LS -1 2 -- NEW PLANTER BOX - ---+-i $-liW Â£il.W T. EXISTING ROOF VARIES- SEE SPOT ELEVATIONS Richard Wall Roof Deck < NEW ~ EXISHNG ~ in the e Brand Building - Unit 13, Lots G,H & 1, Block 88 Townsite of Aspen Pitkin County, Colo. South Elevation 205 S. Gatena Street Aspen, CO . NEW ROOF ---_*_-------~ WOOD SHINGLE AOOFING WATER PROOFING --- 5/8" PLYWOOD 2 X 6'S @ 16" OC BUILDING MAX HEIGHT EXPOSED JOIST T. ROOF MAX HEIGHT 1 l. T. ROOF BEARING 7 1 T. ROOF BEARING= 7-9 1/2Â· DATE: ISSUE: .-: - 2 1 --- 1-1 -- ----- --- ___--.._-Â·- NEW STAIR TOWER 107'-9 1/2" - ~ - 0-'~~~ -'m ' AUGUST 23 2000 SCHEMATIC DESIGN NEW GRILL .....-- ~ - EXTENSION- 2*6 WOOD Nov. 2, 2000 HPC REVISIONS STUD WALLS WITH CLAD WINDOWS AND SHINGLE ROOF . N NEW 36" OPEN RAILÂ·x -....- E ' 1-- 11 EXISTING BUILDING 1 ROOF- ELEV VARIES T. UPPER PLATFORM= 100'-r ~ T. UPPER PLATFORM= 1007' _ T. LOWER PLATFORM= 100'-0" 4 ~ --- / 4 T. LOWER PLATFORM= 100'-0 0 1 b I --, NEW 7" DEEP FLOOR: T. EXISTING ROOF= VARIES 2 X 6 REDWOOD DECKING SEE SPOT El-EVATIONS OVER 2X6 REDWOOD JOIST- - PLACE OVER EXISTING ROOF RUBBER MEMBRANE WATERPROOFING- EXISTING ROOF ELEVATION VARIES ELEVATIONS- 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE West Elevation A 3.1 8-1 1414 7212. NEW METAL ROOF - stryker brown ~ WATER PROOFING 5/8" PLYWOOD 2 X 6'S @ 16" OC \.... EXPOSED JOIST 119 S. SPRING ST. HEIGHT ~ ASPEN. CO 81611 970.925.2100 FAX: 925.2258 strykerbrown.com 1-F- - 7 '-1 " If) Â·rm REMODELED ---7- - STAIR TOWER = r Â·r- [Â·447 -irt-- --- --=-11 _ _ __L- _ _-----.-- ;!111 Uill,fI_lllll'llilll,111111;1, '1;1111Illillil.l Ililll 11111!11111111111511111111111.1111111'ilillill!1111;111111111111, Richard Wall Roof Deck North Elevation West Elevation in the e Brand Building ~ Unit 13, Lots G,H & 1, Block 88 Townsile of Aspen Pitkin County, Colo. 205 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO E 3 LILI 1-1----4\\-- _ DATE: ISSUE. 1 - AUGUST 23 2000 SCHEMATIC DESIGN Nov. 7, 2000 HPC REVISIONS III-- 111* 11 (li _l i _ 1_1 J l ifilil .l j i ll .l 11 l U l ill _l [ 1 ua 22..541-j~TR- W.--'--'-.m-'- - ~ ~ ELEVATIONS- East Elevation 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE South Elevation A 3.2 .. < RF-1 ~ . 1. .-........-1.......--1 -'.. 0 nr Ik -- - 2 x 6 WOOD CAP JO><4 1 2x4 STUDS TOP & BOTTOM ~.- 1 - 8" x 8" REMOVEABLE PLANTER BOX i F ATTACH TO WOOD STUDS I 9 4" X 4" WELDED WIRE FABRIC CO 2 4 1 9207< 2x4 REDWOOD STUDS - E SEE ROOF CONNECTION DETAILS /~~\ TYPICAL 36" OPEN GUARD RAIL @ NORTH <Wl p <fAF- l .. 6 0 6 ~ g#WBal< 4Uffllht kâ‚¬ 4Â»9*N<9*?%44%9 7 ~ r Â¢-**Ple 1,10% 1>f Â¢ ME,lpr 19*5,\; ~ / /*11/ 4- Oc&* Vb 4.4 l< - fMFIA) 8,42 ' 1 1 ~ ~4 NI,tr - FAN-TEO amz-1\\ \,~~~ 1 11\ lit tz r I - -.4 'Wif -9--1 1 lill Li ill.4 -- .ti / 1 4 - 14Â· d i ill d ki - 1 - 1. 1 le -1 J I $ . .r- . -- /2 'fl.*- ......k 1- - -- -. .... - . . 4 1 61 L -- ' 1.i 4<944) th\ / 9Â«93 .60 W - */4 "0 1' 40 V Â· et//f'/8, .. 2 x 10 WOOD CAP - PAINT DARK BROWN 1027143 <r 2x6 STUDS @ 16" O.C. STAINED 3/4" EXTERIOR GRADE L\ PLYWD. (R.S. CEDAR VENEER) 0 CO N" EXTERIOR GRADE PLYWD. - - PAINT TO MATCH BUILDING STONE 1 ... 2x6 REDWOOD STUDS - 3 -/// -I-----* 1 SEE ROOF CONNECTION DETAILS /'~~\ TYPICAL 36" SOLID GUARD RAIL @ WEST <W2 p .. W. . 1* 0 4 1: 44 14 2 ROOF PLAN d" m 5' i +5 7949 8 PARAPET ' - 4- -7 - -..----1 1 79-34.A FLOOR + 173 -0 \ -Ni z.& - ' FLOOR. 9 0 1 -- M .... I SCA 1 1 .. 7901 6 Aspen 211 P. ( AS Â· NORTH ELEVATION 1- 4, Id-'Â·~tai#SG* 1-,â€¢1Â£,Â· ...+.... 2 17/ 6 4 - 3 F 4-4-2- . I . 203 5 .1 0/ .. .. RESOLUTION NO. J~ (SERIES OF 2000) RESOLUTION OF THE, ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT TO EXPAND AN EXISTING ROOF DECK FOR THE BRAND BUILDING LOCATED AT 203 SOUTH GALENA STREET, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID# 2737-073-46-011 WHEREAS, the applicant, Richard Wall, represented by Stryker / Brown Architects requests minor HPC approval for exterior expansion of the roof deck of the Brand Building Condominiums, Block 88, located at 203 South Galena Street, City and Townsite of Aspen. The property is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, is a local landmark, and is within the Commercial Core Historic District; and WHEREAS, all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a property listed on the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures" must meet all four Development Review Standards of Section 26.415.010.B.4 of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 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. 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 by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site coverage by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units pursuant to Section 26.40.09003)(2). 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 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. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof; and 0 WHEREAS, Staff initially performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended to continue the application from its original public hearing date of October 11, 2000 until November 801, 2000 in order to request the applicant to create "mock-ups" of the proposed development to be reviewed by the HPC during a site visit; WHEREAS, Staff performed a second analysis of the application subsequent to the site visit to review the mock-ups of the proposed roof top deck development and found favorably for the application, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on November 8, 2000, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards, and approved the application with conditions by a vote of to NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Minor Development for the expansion of the existing roof deck of the Brand Building located 203 South Galena Street, City and Townsite of Aspen, as presented at the November 8,2000 meeting, be approved with the following conditions: lf.blnlat the applicant agree that all improvements will be held back a full three feet from the north building wall; 0 ~* That if the applicant wishes to expand the staircase enclosure, the applicant shall provide the HPC monitor with final drawings for review as to its relationship to the historic structure, prior to the application of a building permit; ~ (~ That *e appl icant agree to construct the railing along the north wall to be open so that ~- snow is not trapped against the parapet; 3 Â® That the applicant agrees to plant nothing but flowers and low shrubs in box planters. J Trees shall not be permitted; (/(5~ That the applicant agree that no furnishings on the roof shall be taller than six feet in / - height from the roof surface; -5- ~That the applicant agrees that no roofing shall be constructed over any part of the decking on the roof; ~ ~ That the HPC Staff and monitor will need to approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures; and ~ (8~ That all representations made by the applicant in the application and during public 04 uk â‚¬91-3-3*-j Fl-Â£ 1.uu,u~j n a 4 j meetings with the Historic Presergtion commission shall be adhereÂ¢ to and /htuL,UL- h. 4-d fl_&Â£4- 81 0.3 Â«9--3) 40 .4/6- ap,ung Â» t-6 4--~ 420 ~,~1 0â€ž~/ 60 011 at- considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions; and APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 8th day of November, 2000. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to Content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Recommended Motion: "I move to adopt Resolution # , Series of 2000, approving a Minor Development for an exterior expansion ofthe roof deck ofthe Brand Building Condominiums, Block 88, located at 203 South Galena Street, City and Townsite of Aspen with the conditions set forth and stated herein." ~ brown - ARCHITECTS Memo: TO: Mr. Nick Lelack, City Historical Preservation Officer FROM: Steven Buettow DATE: October 26,2000 50,0 / k./ 1 MA 1 U-4, Rre: Summary of Changes proposed to previous HPC approval of a Minor Development Review of Christiana Duplex and 4 plex. Dear Nick, On February 9,2000, the HPC approved a Minor Development Review Application for the existing duplex and 4 plex buildings of the Christiana. Since then these buildings have progressed through the Construction Documents phase and there developed some changes. Conversations with Amy Guthrie and Suzannah Reid confirmed that these changes would be observed by the HPC monitors at the time when a building permit application was made. This permit application was put off as the other buildings were developed. However, now, the Christiana owner is scheduling construction and wants to expedite these two buildings. Listed on the following page are the proposed changes which are consistent with the previous HPC approval. Attached are reduced drawings showing the approved plans and our CD's. We would like staff, the planning director or Hpc monitors to make a determination that: 1. the changes listed are insubstantial 2. the changes are consistent with the Minor Development approval - 3. that we may proceed with construction on the basis of -our Minor Development approval Please call me with any questions, Thank you & A StAA Bkttow " Aichitaci--9 119 SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 970.925.2100 925.2258 (FAX) steve @ strykerbrown.com E- mail . Minor Modifications to Christiana, Duplex & 4 plex during Construction Drawing preparation Duplex building 1. On the South elevation, lower level farthest to the left the existing window changed to a door . A field visit pointed out that the exisitng building drawings that we started with were inaccurate on the Southeast comer of the building. At some time in the past this corner was enclosed. This corrected wall is shown with 2 new windows in it to add light to the existing room. A door is eliminated. A new stair and guard rail are added. 2. On the West elevation, in the middle section two windows were slightly enlarged to provide egress, moving right the window combination farthest over was changed to a double door and window combination. On the upper level, farthest left a door was changed to a 2' x 2' window, on the gable end a fixed window was changed to 2 double hung windows the same size and farthest to the right the single door double window combination was changed to a double door and single window combination. 3. On the North elevation, lower level farthest left a single window was changed into a double , a 2' x 2' window was changed into 2 double hung windows, and farthest to the right a single window was changed into a double window. A new window well was added. for light and ventilation. On the upper level farthest left a double window was changed into a double door, farther right a 2' x 2' window was enlarged to 2'-6" x 3' and a single fixed window was changed to 2 double hung windows the same size and farthest to the right the double window was changed to a double door. 4. On the East elevation farthest to the left on the corrected wall is a new three window combination, farther right the window seat is eliminated and the door and windows stay the same. At the upper level, a window is added farthest to the left. 4 plex building 1. On the North elevation farthest to the left of the lower level is an added door and window combination, farther to the right two triple windows are added and farthest to the right a 2' x 2' window is changed to a single door. On the upper level farthest to the left the covered porch gable is eliminated, a matching double hung window is added, on the gable end 2- 2' x 2' windows are eliminated, a single window is added and a single window is changed to a 3 window combination and farthest to the right 2- double hung windows are added. The stairway is eliminated. 2. On the East elevation lower level, fallhest left a door and window combination is changed to a single window, the central door and window combination is eliminated and a stairway is added. Farthest to the right the door is changed to a window. On the upper level the door and window combination is changed to a separated door and window, farther to the right a door and window combination is changed to a window. The gable roof to the right is changed to a shed roof on the left. 3. On the South elevation an existing stair is shown and the two windows to the right are reduced in size. On the upper level, the deck on the left is covered and the two windows in the middle are changed to a three window combination. The window to the right is reduced in size. The gable porch covering is eliminated. 4. On the West elevation, lower level left, the door is changed to a small window, the stair changes direction and the window is moved. The existing window well is shown. The double window to the right is reduced in size. On the upper level, the gable dormer is changed from the left to the right and the door and window arrangements are changed. On both buildings 1. The buildings will be raised up l' on the main level and l' on the upper level to allow 9' clear ceilings. 2. Due to construction problems caused by the existing panabode walls, we are proposing to rebuild these walls with typical 2x6 wood stud walls on the existing foundations. Stryker Brown Architects 119 SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 970.925.2100 925.2258 (FAX) *'466* 94- 71 1111#42%11 i. 2+12Utl 11*53?N159-Fi'IR#Nwaii~Fao-7%7Â©Wal I *ip I~o I~IL_i~._â€žj..u.uT,, Ill Ill rn_ltrn-1 n l,-11 I ni ll i ll 1.11 I 'rhy 1 $ p IJF in Ir~I~n*91:[42;41!ifi~:ili~Pil,litutlitMIHI l~Il 'llili"1111'1111~ttidO'Y5451 ' 1 111 ---u~rrr-/Tr-Tri"rl --=tem=EN ' i - - 4 1 1 11! - . 1-TJ -=1*1 [Illy? If ! 11 U d !,i 1 d 1111 lf!11 -EEEB-lilli// 1 lilli 11 - - lirmil ' 1t1 1'2?~r*97@111rill I iii]]] E-/ W-ill# ./ i -i 1[]IMffi[ ]MN17]1 f . 12211922Â£,NIZZLI.ILIZE)ZEr-2~1.In .HI -- :11 C~, 1 lit 0 f [117Â«x--- Wgi ~ ------Er=-i-- - O-MI]juri Â»/Ely 171@KI T AM EN , -2-3 1 /2711 -1. 1 1 r- 0 -1]FlyÂ· 047'12 9-1110 . 11 1 1I1@pr n ~1 â€ž ~11 1 7 4~1| I I 1 " 1 1 -ld 11 1 4011 Ll 1 1 .1-1 I 1 3% 1 ,$424,;46 I'lll'll'll IT 4449 1 Il I il 11 )1II)11< I 1 =1[13 7 11 1.11 I U --i- 1 -711 ~Il~ ~I I 1/iHiÂ·mWM*IWIU 8~~~KU~*21- Ill 01 r-- 11 .= El 1 1 J[tii_-imi-i--ill-4Â« unon_ f ~ [IJ ......._. ._- 12211[4111=I- - 4 2.=..LL.In I #teâ„¢ I -4 - 1 1__l Â«-_Â»--- 11 1 03-ClfÂ«t~-_HAPFR__ - It" s 11,011 - . 1 211]d 1 1 ~ I il I, UET[Ill J 1 1 -3971-1*IrÂ»-7- - j -2191]-te, 1*510 FfIEN T fewl AN 1 -_%2,_Â« 9 1,1 le - e 1 12 It El 140 -alt[J 144 0*1 114314121~9/43 *_ildp -i- ........ 194 - /-4/391 . , 1 / 1-,1- --1_-./: 8 % E [[1 1. I 1-1/0 -2163- Off 1201[Ul[Lit lili U ;-4 ----J - U 1/ - t.14 0% 47Â»14-- - ! L . - 1 71 ..1 L 1971...... '. ~i*j j~ ~ Rfit -~~ ~ - 1 Â«1 - f 7 1 V .:,:-:i .... 1 11 +041 1 1 [ Irili~9 -'~~(~Jji~iJJij' '?jim' F247*44,-I,PuioÂ¢44~;~~TI 11 Kit 11[1Â©4.l:I ill ~[WT~.II_ 1.~roly---- Et] 1 8 44~UITT--in--i-Tr /Â»1â€žel -*SSi 417 -'466Ei~ _.__ri;rnrIEftt6911;*t lili '44~ EL/1/77~Ap/'99-re-n--_ MLYâ€žU 1 1 1 1 11-111 1 11 11111'IL?11 1 111 Ul#1 Ill 1 - f/ 1 b Vt ~ PUÂ¥ -21Â¢ t*%31 1Hdk]49*' 924-1[43 -9- 1%/f LD-f*1~~~- 1 1 1-MI liu] IiI - , . . 1011 41 0%JE-tri- I EE 1 1~1 / 11 --47 / lili- 2 Al-F:, 4 CE] ' Tikig-Â·=Â· 'llp III- 11 0 1111 1-1 1 Ill 1l - ===,====~.~-6.-g*-M-u/439~3Â«F~ lk-1-1--- EE --221_*22- IF-----j-- ~ .. 1 1,--f.- -*. i 1 111 f ]- l i lf Md- - ,- 1 Li 4 - 1 _-Â·twi:li~~~f~f~f~35]%(jt~fifiÂ¢jDu~w~~iri>~ =,4P40%[1*%NeÂ©+U*pu~4-111:11~-~rl ill 1 ~(1111/ 1121111 1, 5 , / ' 41 1 5- 1 . . i ~ [)01{MI It HIL)('.1 - 614'Â·':L.;'J... 128'11Â·HEV Â·Â· .. DoltMEH RIDGE~ .1 -J''i:1 :~!{ :Â·'' :1 ' i. ' 0 Â·':'iii ..,i:.~ :*:. - % -,<S< ie~gâ‚¬ 4~ 4 4<< ,1.4%& , <~t':tli ~ d '' t,V , ~ryker brown l er-7 9 ELEV ' Â·Â·Â·Â·,~,vhf,i~i;i 3:116]illit!:i,hh,i:.;i,indili.:,i: .I.Â·;:Â·,Tbi ,ijb:'1.:...ii:I,!Ii{Ii; i.2>:. . - 'l 'i 1 . 1...:'11..,1 1 1 CEDAR SHINGLES -- - -- - --> i '' ii:,i:Â·.i : I:,lil'Â·,1/,I- Â·,i.â€¢' ,~:i'll Al--Â· ~- Â· Â· 1! =:. .. .i:!.1,4i...:... !!.ili . . r.. ARCHITECTS 1 . 4. iN: : t. 1 x.1,1.,1.11:â€¢:11-1:,Illill.pilt: '!I. . ,:iÂ·:~Â·7!11:i,;-Â·,!., :.:Â·1&'.!,Â·t,. :,:.le L.I. i . ,// 1 , 11 Â· ''t:c'.i:Â· ,- : Â·,-â€¢itifill''Itâ€¢,/'a't, ,: . i, i.Ii, .~:;:, , ti 'ifiti i ., :t .;. i,Â£:;.Ll.------*Â£111111:Â·Â· . ~ .i: I ~!!~ :. .4 1 ; 3 .E,E-t-â€ž~-~, ~ I N i '#rii , i , i 5 1 _~ i '{.lill; 't'. i .i..~ .:Â·,~;2;'''iÂ·' 1 Jil&21.-LL *- -- ..1-uk..U , i , r !!1,1! i l! 111 11* 4 ': ' ~ CEDAR SHINGLES 2 1,9 SCUTH SPRING STREET 11.1.2-)- ' .it.:Â· Â·i.fl!!Ii:! .1 O: ASPEN.COLORADO 81611 1 - ~JIL,i:li :,f:L - 4 .7 111 (Ph1970/923-2106 (fax)9:%'925 2258 ' ' ; iii'w...~_. __ -- - ---Al.Â·Clu' 2. 2..G '+2.0.-1â€ž2â€žZI t r-? {eÂ·maW//*sop:tJ, ner Â·.hÂ·rÂ·, r -2-23,~ 7,~ Y " - -*.lit ..311 4flh,L-1-i.-11Â»M- I 2*12 WOODFASCIA _---1*4- i . s''TT--'-- 1 -V--4- ' Â· '*Il' , . -1 . BEARING PLATE,~ f <. BEARING PLATE =-E,/~14 /1. 119'-9'ELEV. :.11:-IS: /1 ' I lilli.. 119'-6Â· ELEV Â·- i Â·Â· 12" VERTICAL WOOD SIDING "-- Â· ~ Z.-5-2-â€ž- =t~ ..it --r--1 r-Jul--- -- 6Â·HORIZONTALWOODSIDING ! 1-4 f .. . ,Â·92, -1 â€¢ 00% 1 1/2tj, 1 ! ' i it", ---1 r----f * 80 HANDAAIL DESIGN - .11 .â€ž.......-. V..Â¥ V. ~1%. i . 1 -- 1==-=1 1 O , 20 t . 1 1:tfu=:A ------ r - - -. Er i li]Effpr 8 X8 WOOD END POSTS -1Â· 11+1111 ~! I I .m-: 2 X 6 HORZ TOP & BOTTOM RAN S --- - Â· Â· L== ! 4X4 WWF WELDED To i Xi l:H ANG{.ES 4 -- 44 1+Hi BOt-TED TOTHERAILSANDENDPOSTS $*VOW 2 1 - ~ Â· - 1----F 64 qPPER FLOOR < , ~ UPPER FLOQR -â€ž4 ..- "Â·'vvwr'me< ~..... ~-Â·~7~Â·nÂ· .~Â·{ ' L ,~-25: :ti, tililiZ~-Zi.-.~â€ž-â€ž ... <- Â·--Â·--- 2 X 12 WOOD FASCIA 111'-94(EV I 111'-9Â· ELEV - ~itat- Ir=U-- i T 12" VERTICAL WOOD SIDING 4 STONE VENEER â€ž ---.-.-.- -,43 CA) 4 1.26 1.:Â·~==-1 : -- - - E--1 i ~ 1 Â·Â· 112 b 0 1 1 / 4 1 L El f : --- =1 1 - -: CHRISTIANIA 501 WeA Main Str:vt r.--1//Li L Â£ 11 -=1 . ,_ _ Aspen, Color,td,;61611 fo-fult - -Ii -- - - - ~ ,-L MAIN FLOOR _ _ _ ~- MAIN FLOOR _ 4 101'Â·9'ELEV 101'-9' El.EV. L- --- - 1 : | EXISTING GF1ADE F <- -- | ---Â·-- EXISTING BASEMENT | ' UNDER 1/2 OF BUILDING 0 NEW STAIR -------------- ~ > E-- - 11 h b 4 'P 1 IL =iii 1 . ..9 r. EXISTING BASEMBT ELEVATION . LOWER FLOOR i L_ -_ -- i Li-_1 -------------------2 ./ L - 3, N 91'-9- ELEV DA'/1 DUPLEX SOUTH ELEVATION .kl (kt:.b,;r 2080 I I ISSUE: (F) (E) (A, EllÂ·(_' Minor lieveli,pnuÂ·ni. 12Â£,ue.v Applicaff 4 DORMER RIDGE \ /' 4.--/ â€ž< Â· -Â·Â· RIDGE VENT TYP. - ~. 128'-11Â·ELEV . 4 DORMER AIDGE, le. 1 L 127'-7 'P~ - '1 lt#:1,19 n-fl CP ED ~13.LIF,flir.,~ZiliECZEFE-'-1-441>'.:' ' CPT =-3 3ZiN i .7!16..46 3 Â·. r.-1 1 ''' CEDAR SHNGLES A-- - -----m.&&- \9 . i' f - 11 jiltilt.Ili! ~' 11 -iÂ·.it/1Â·1111$1Â·.4 CEDAR SHINGLES 1 1/ 4 11*i,cliviments h.,Â·Â·be- i prep.,iÂ·ed % ~ '-H '*,4. 4.irt. â€ž.* â€ž ... ,â€ž, #....- 4,-* ' v-/ A . 4 'l- _-0_ BOARjNG PLATE 2 X 12 WOOD FASCIA ' -....1-..1--... 02,1-tiEil-EfR}finlÂ·tait+ttn}bid#,-zi --- ---- a6----- I ht #Â· cre not >uit= r' i 'll' l'r -11 Fry;Â·Wmyâ‚¬PTFUÂ¥1 -ap . " â€¢ __â€ž BEA.~ING PLAI<_ .pÂ·:'!, ailv tortfu :.a I'rilit, 1 119'-9' ELEV 119 -9' ELEV pm+ 1 1 : ar in {,lher 1, .11!-11 tl. ,41 1 â€¢val and pd. 1 ,i.,trna , f ilir CEDARSHINGL-ES ]2--i ~- id i: 1:! i.Â·I . . ., ~.,iÂ·lillâ€¢ it ReproductiK]11 prohibited A. 24.41) .,I â€ž Ler/br:,wn Archile. i. _.. ,-F 1 11'i...4..!621 23.---1 4- 0 .ifirti../'i't' - t. -I _-RE Â®irittifii'I +1 Â· A ! HANDRAIL DESIGN Zo B X8 WOOD END POSTS : 2 X 61-10112.102 & 8OHOM AAILS 4 X4 WWF WEI DED TO 1 X1 1/8Â· ANGLES BOLTED TO liE RAILS AND ENDPOSTS _ ...~_ UPPER FLOOR , ~â€ž=rÂ·=,er#~&./---Im. <. UPPERFLOOR 1 ------------------ -- - 1- 11-111'-AECEV 2 X 12 WOOD FASCIA -----Â·Â·Â·Â·--Â·Â·Â·-- ~ 111Â·-9' EL[EV pr.,14Â·" Â·fl'-- E r j.kilÂ·*60.*RUM,411*tiLNIL i:*Will"it 1 1-B I --i. --1-Lit =_Â« . i. ;1 1. N' ;1~ tilt215.!11 -+ h'- , rAM?NImmACE,4 --,M 4â€¢. STONE VENEER - - --Â·Â· -Â· Â·- Â·Â·Â·Â·-Â·-Â· u - 1 1 1 11 12" VERTICAL WOOD SIDING - 9 KEY PLAN INTERIOR STAIR DESIGN Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·-Â·Â·Â·Â·Â· : 1 .1 I , 11. 11 11 ./ E O 4 X 12 WOOD TREADS ~. - 4 X 12 WOOD STRINGERS ~.~iÂ£:CL_~~ |' *' ~i,~Likb--, 4 4' 1 ANAINZNy SEE 1 1*ift-t-1 , 0 11; .1.4'I q'.-Uâ€ž.- 1'.i' r-1.4.: 3 i ====== . 6" HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING Â· Â·Â·Â·---- - ,7 fliÂ· i : 11 1 1. 1-21 :,1 t,]/,1~417 71 h . ........ ; i ... .. __ 1 Â· Duplex 1-- 4"STONE2 VENEER , 0 MAIN FLOOR :.1...1.fi,$$ Â·~ r '-Â·, ,241 2â€¢ '<1-44'rt'i.42#Ki Â·Â· : .~. _ ~, MAIN FLOOR , 14'-HM>. '4).iÂ·Â·L'~l,i~ -1! ~â€¢, wk'# 'H 101'-9' ELEV 101'-9' ELEV. , 1 .1 ----- 3121'.j':...|i'?'.~,i-Â·:i;lt:!:.M'â€¢'Â·i!;i AiÂ·,1Â·1,4,!-:iÂ· I . ....~ ~i,:.r: South Elevation EXISTING GRADE West Elevation 1 EXISTING FOUNDAnON & FOOTINGÂ·Â·Â·Â· Â·Â· Â·- Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·-Â·Â·-Â·Â·Â·-'t Â·Â· > b UNDER PORnON OF BUILDING <.. ~ ~ ~ . EXISTiNG BASEMENT 0 UNDER 1/2 OF BUILDING - WITHOUT A BASEMENT 1 1 DUPLEX WEST ELEVATION EXISTING BASEMENT ELEVATION AA 3.1 4 0 LOWEil FLOOR ..._ ~..... -------------- -------J - - - .1, LOWEAILOOR 91'-9 ELEV. i ' 91Â·-9- ELEV 2/ L ok-,Z 10'-0" 10'-0" ~ 1)011MER All.}{11-~ 71':t=t> :11:~<Jt Sittor:11' 111~~2 '-I:- E~Ii, 128'-tl' El.EV 64 001'MI 11 I Â®GF ...:f '14 1 ,1" !1111:1-Iii i!!1 i i ;t:J' 127 71/2Â£ ELEV ,Â· 111' :t:/lilli Â·t./'llit ':! 61' -' ' 'itil lit' 1:ilit , Â·: CEDAR SHAKE SHINGLES Â·.. i i.i Ii: :;Â©- ..:.. *~i::, . 1,:6~:-:iÂ·i; i.i iNA:i:{ i, iii nitt t.i r : 1.:hF h k!.0,Â·IÂ·.9 .,.:111Â·!LOilÂ·41!111.' ,1:;i!1;, Â·:ilii NEON:i.ij 1Â·!,Â· !,,I!!u CEDAR SHAKE SIÂ·!INGL ES 4-Ati':till-{-3-114 i. ifb:-:- :Â·E.;:'13.' 1. in_i:U-n--c_-,LLE it; in:!:fl litil!91-1 11;:,3 i.11414 1~~~trid: 9 ARCHITECTS ----- I liI SOUTH SPRING STREET 11*!i:914!1(~-Illifilill.ilifibi-jiLl-I---A-- ---+Lktillil.11-~:r!11 4,a!;'.-i,li, F,i: ..:'ti ' Aâ€¢PEN,COLORADOS,61! 0 # 7 'liN.:-;iliify .il Li-Ji.1-1,-s~_. ---1.- ilill-141.i.Li :f;Ii:;ti'*{i! ~ <- --Â·' i (e mail) .bal'.19. nal (Ph: 97~232100 {Fait)97a'9:S-2268 *":~ :~':;ial 141-*--=-_- -1.,1'-'llial.11{11': i 2 X 12 WOOD FASCIA 1 --LUL Â£11 BEARING PLATE ~, BE.ARINg PL.~TE \ 119Â·-9' ELEV. Â· .111'f..1.1.:/10,#,11 119'-9' Et FV 6' HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING <1~-= t.: CUEEEÂ·'a~' 1-4 ..'i 411 Firl ----In 1 1%. : , 12" VEATICALWOODSIDING ~ [-f L>~_~__~ ~ -t Â¢-1; ff .[)3-CE: - CEDAR SHAKE SHINGL.ES 0 6 1 - -: i i -~ -- 6 11 I ~ i- 1; ~ Â°~-4 -- r-~-~, CÂ·~ licâ€ž~ 8 Xe WOODEND POSTS i 4 1 1 -11<ic: JU HANDRAIL DESIGN 11 r= 1/ 1 1 1 / - -9- 4 X4 WWF WELDED TO 1 Xt 1/8' ANGLES 2 X r HORZ. TOP & BOTTOM RAILS ' BOLTED IOTHE RAILS AND ENDPOSTS /i. UPPER FLOOR c UPPEA FLOOR 1 T . . - -, 5,1.- ..1 ... Â·Â· .ut:.E,e,Mae~ .,e~~~.~~ M.*-:._ . _ .. - - - -- - - - - - - __ _ _ .~ __ 111Â·Â·9' ELEV - u <-- -- 2 X 12 WOOD FASCIA 111Â·-9' El EV I L . 6 I . D 1 1- E 46... t. 1 1 5 I . i 4 k I I 1.21 1. & 1 6'HORIZONTALWOODSIDING ---- 1 .1 -- 27 E- . i.1]32 , . 0 *fl ./ 4" STONE VENEER 12- 1. k u .1. 9 <43 (33 ..11 t 2 Ell'[- . -\ .-7: 11*T- i ... ' b 3% 4. -- 1 1 \.3. 1 0, 14 ' :q Â¢91 3 24 . 221*N= 1 1 CHRISTIAN IA O 1 EXTERIOR STAIR DESIGN Â· 1 - L r . ' 501 West M.,in Str.Â·[Â·1 -r-1 Â·trl , rk --. \ ..Sil-NI. i L. 1â€¢ e. i -1- .a . 4-1 : 4 X 12 WOOD TREADS + !. ... Â·- 7 -- - 4 X 12 WOOD Sâ„¢INGERS 1 A.fien, Colur.)41,1 8161 1 .: 6 â€ž 1 1 - r-1 - 'VI &8XB ENDPOSTS - SEE : R # L._1 /.1... ~ * t f 6, MAIN FLOOR - ~ ~ J ib: 0.1,1,1 . {:3#21Â£? - - ~ k E Â¥ 101'-9Â·ELEV 1 - Lid:&/F_>*4323*Ki.~ ~~til:Â·*, ' , 11*JMAL DESIGN &* MAIN FLOOR 101Â·9' ELEV. ---ty- --------- --3/24=nÂ· titt~444~ ,~~ - ~~~~~ . 11/ -1 .11131,81*0 -31111 -tÂ»LiÂ· | EXISTING GRADE ~P',1 1--- t-.afe i.51)'Â· 1 (51) i .12. r 1 0 6 NEW WINDOW WELL - -- ---- .~~ ~ ~ 1 h ' k 1 -11 1 <1 EXISTING BASEMENT i E - - UNDER 1/2 OF BUILDING 1 . EXISTING BASEMENT ELEVATION . LOWEft F L.O<)14 . 6, LeWEB ELOQR -- --------------------- - ---- 91'-9Â· ELEV ' 91Â·9 EL.[V 11Â·\'I I DUPLEX NORTH ELEVATION 30(Â®tÂ·Urll.,1:0 ISS[;E: CAb (El (F" __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _,;~ DORMER AIRG~ - HPC Alin,ir Devek,pilieril ttevitÂ·w Applicati RIDGE VENT TYP. 128'-11"ELEV. % B _DRRME]l HipGE _ _ _ _ . _ 127'-71/2'ELEV, /4*~**R#i inqu/Zift:J<L~Lifix 9 -.2* /4 11 1-j!~il"\31Â·141: . Â·k:2 4.liti!1 721. 14 1 1 1 9--7 - m k --n - 4 4 1 -t, Â·14 CEDAR SHNGLES 2-7. U,Â·,Ill 1.11- .W.LrI"2 72-1 it'7Â·ir a CEDAR SHINGLES 11'ZIL>2".1.... 1 .t.:1 2-4,11.!1 1-Z-.4--t':'1.11:f-:Â· L.~.i.~ 2~I..t--4.:rÂ·mÂ·,1 3 .3., : 4 1. 1,1 1 1 : :1 1-- 0-- W. : .!it'] --YÂ·-,Â·-Â·Â« -/ 13 -,--0. 1 1 4 4,~,~.Â¥,V,-'.9,,40 'A~,~+ ~..j 11.Â·wÂ· documâ€¢ 1~l. 11.â€¢ve been prepared ~964+19>~"1 1.203341.iilifizER--*, , ||. -W r' -VM, #& - L /; - I, 41 ' 64 LtiÂ·Â»iâ€ž*-Â·~' , , 41 t 4 ,4 BEARING PLATE 2 X 12 WOOD FASCIA _ â€ž BEARING PLAI E,~ >p,Â·,ill, 111 , 10,rthe Chri>ti.inia Trole: t L...L 119'-9' ELEV I h' Â·t BilÂ· T:, 1~ Â·Â·iii l,ible fer u:Le 1 n til er 1191-9. ELEV . _[... 1. 2.7.-,3-- 1 -1 1 _ _ 1-._.- p@62,66.6 ' L -1 1. 4.... t .. . . .. pi.9, 1/ pr m 'ther I,lation> without 12 VERTICAL WOOD SIDING Â· th'. .MÂ·reval and portâ€žipation of tile : r:,1.'er.' r'i,10(luction prohibited Fr Kir E -: {'25; 'i-- ' Hc: - Pri.fs:r 9! CEDAASHNGLES __ - HANDRAILDESIGN ! 4,20)0 :.ti, Lâ€ž.brown Archite: ts 201 .r---- - . 1 1 - - 7 4 [E. 1 39 7 8 X8 WOOD END POSTS W 2XBHORZ TOP & BOTTOM RAILS Ec> 4X4 WWF WELDED 101 X11/3' ANGLES 80[-TED TO 1113 R.Alt-S ANDENDPOSTS -1 - 1/ : 4-__1~jjtltift}Eltialii- U . UPPER FLOOR Â· ..RJ*1.~~ I----EJ--+â€¢~5'-- 4 ,4 UPPER FLOOR - tri'-9'ELEV < 2*12 WOOD FASCIA 111'-9'ELEV C . / . Fl- .-. - - - - 1 F e-- I 8/_ 13- 11- 9 - - -- Â·Â·-Â·Â·Â·Â·----Â·- 6" HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING 12 VERTICAL WOOD SIDING f 111 19=.=. 1 M b KEY PL.AN 1 -9-rrlf. -- /1 : -' 111 11 Â·I151 H n=====9 - 11.- L. 1 o rl-1 1\ lij . Â·Â· b F Â« l\\ TH : ~11/2 i... -If - : : . U f 9.- u :g=; -= - - RAfflf -lt**0ai44**iti#Â·- 1 1 L-- .... ......- r HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING '1Â» r a ' /431 113 31Â·* 31**818Â£33-4Â£30Â·*3#4*.4.2 ./ - 101'.9' ELEV 4" STONE VENEER ( -1 emiN/lgoa ___--------------4- ---- -- ---- 1'' 31 11"Filj:*,31Â£211 111,31MÂ£$%24W-**31.:pi 3 22.-2- - -2-==- 1 MAIN Ft OOR i 101'-9' 21 EV. Duplex North Elevation | EX15nNG GFV~[)E East Elevation < EXISTING BASEMENT ~ 1 11 tJNDER 1/2 OF BUILDING bi &(Al.1 1/11- = 1'-UÂ· a 1 1 1 p DUPLEX EAST ELEVATION 1 1 EXISTING BASEMENT ELEVATION AA 3.2 4 ~, LOWER FLOOR . Lâ‚¬)WEB F[.O(,ft L 91Â·9'FLIV ---- - --- - - - - -~ -~ 91'-9' ELEV 1Q':Q' ....,L'r..1-9.4-1.22|1-â€ž /1 1 8- < â€ž OOP.MER All)GL 128~-1 1Â· f ~Lv CO d .61 N CEI)AR SHINGLES - ,14 DORMH{ AIDG< 1241-51/2Â· ELEV. ARCHITECTS > 2 i 12 11'; SOUTH SPRING STREET 11 + A S P EN, COLORADO 8 1 6 1 1 I. BEARING PLATE I (PI~~ 97~923 2100 (FaK)97U'925 2258 t 13 1---1/--- - 121'-9 1/4' ELEV 2 X 12 WOOD % ---- ---Â· - - CEDAR SHINGLES {e in~il) r./.so.... FASCIA ~ -----~ - ~ ~~--2 Q < -iÂ· t==21 - 6--7-- 1 , 4 BEARING PLATE ~-**g '--' f=I=. -Â·=====r==t- Â·- -= - _.~:~j_~~ Â· - -- Â· 1 ,i / - / i Â· 111-1-1 ' i ~' 119 9Â· ELEV. :1 -1-1 ! r. < CED SHINGLES -13 - i-1111 1 6' HORIZONTAL > ~ '' - TYPICAL WINDOW UNITS M WOOD SIDING DOUBLE 11!JNG WINDOWS WITII DOUBLE THERMAL GLAZING Q O - AND 1 X4 WOOD TRIM 4 HANDRAIL DESIGN --_.-__ ' 1 C.-1 - -Ii ---- --1 i 8 XBWOODEND POSTS -- __ _/. < HANDRAII. DESIGN 9-1 . 2 X 6 HORZ. TOP & BOTTOM BAILS .4+1+H+++ 8 X8 WOOD END POSTS 4 X 4 WWF WELDED TO 1 X1 1/8' ANGL ES Pittlittlt 2 X 6 HOHZ TOP & BOTTOF,1 RAIL S 801 -1 ED TOTHE RAILSAND ENDPOSTS. ~~~~'~I~I~ . , â€ž ' 11. 4 , H I 1 . 4X.1 WWF WELDIED T01 X1 1/8' ANGLE S 4 ,4 UPPER FLOOR .---.-U-11.--- '2~1Â£~2 - _1 --- /"_'-_f_: I .. _ Â·Â·Â·-i.. _ _ _. _.. ,_ - -= ._ -_ _ _ .IBOLIED TO [tiE RAIL-SANDEN[)POSTS.-, - .QA Ut'PE_111 LOOR i ' 111'-9 ELEV . 111'-9Â·'ELEV. i .' ----â€ž- ---- Â·Â·Â·----Â·- ---- -Â· -Â· Â·-Â·--- 2*12 WOOD FASCIA i ~Emill EXTERIOR STAIR CONSTRUCTION O - - ' : 1-, 1: 1. 4%12 WOOD TREADS dEEI . -- Â· 6 91 4 X 12 WOOD STRINGERS ,-- - - -- . 6 1 . ,... m &8 X 8 ENDPOSTS. SEE HANDRAIL DESIGN , 7 I B X 8' TYP. WOOD COLUMNS - : 173* I CHRIST]ANIA , -- -- -'' ~ -Â·Â· Â· Â· 0 ' : CEDAR SHINGLES 6:' HORIZONTAL - 1; - 11 -: .... ....... - t.... I , LE < 5(}l Wit Al.lin Stre . Â· /1 4 e MAIN FLOOR WOOD SIDING ? Â· , ,.i I h,Â· - Â·----7 7 --- --t Â·----Â· ~~-Â»-" --~--- -- -----" EXISTIING GUARDRAIL I.-4. i. 1 - MAIN FLOOR i Aspen, Cuir,1,1061,â€¢1 1 101'-9'ELEV , It Â· . /'' 1 i .1 101Â·-9' ELEV. il--:iÂ·: . 1 1 EXISTING GRADE 1 1 '' 1 1 11 O [1' UM 21 It - / )m 1 / 1 -- 1 EXISTING BASEMENT 0 1 , < UNDER 1/2 OFF BUILDING EXISTING STAIR 1/ 1 l ul , râ„¢ , - LOWE ft FLOOA . LOWERF-LOOR . _ __ / 91'-9 ELF_V / ,~6, EXISTING BASEMENT ELEVATION 91'-9- 8 EV i r \ l 3) 4 PLEX SOUTH ELEVATION V ' MA'l ti *Octubir.'1)80 15% lÂ·E: 1 11'C Alin,}rike, pnwÂ· 1.: 144â€¢view Appli.ali . LJORMER RIDGE ----- =- - -= - - =- - RIDGE VENT TYP ~~ DORMER Fll C ~- Di elt, r V - 128-11 ELEV. 128Â·-11Â·ELEV. I 1 1 */21 9, 1 124 121// 12 - -N 1 - ED! EXISTING ROOF ~ -7-> CEDAR SHINGLES . n A A A A n A , / !11+14.13 1 -~-=\ 1 SNOW MELT AND SNOW GUARDS I T hese.1,]cument~ h,lve been prepar.Â·d Â·. BEARING PLATEâ€ž| >pecifi.,11]V fur thi Chri>liani.â€¢Pr,iwit '5 BEARING FLATE,4 1-hey arp not :sult,itile for useâ€žnother 7 ~-~ 1;~'-8Â·E~_EV---~f~V 32-Lff' ,Â·1 k V 12_ 17 2_--_1__ _ . . . -Â·Â· GUTTER , O-3 6" HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING theappreval and pailitipation,19 ihe Â· ' ~ 119'Â·9' ELEV 1 . ... ' prijtrts or in ntlier lintions wÂ·ithout 12' VERTICAL WOOD SIDING .311 +11 ~-i . + 1 DaJBLE HUNG WINDOWS 2 2000 strfler/brown Archie: t. TYPICAI WINDOW UNITS Architect. Reprodi,cti,in pruhihiled 6 - IT~ - WITH DOUBLE THERMAL GLAZING . ~ 11' - b , Â· ! AND 1X4 WOOD TRIM 6 HANDRAIL DESIGN : 1 el. 1 26 8 X8 WOOD END POSTS Â·Â· - 2 X 6 HORZ. TOP & BOTTOM RAILS O ; ..i ,Â·tÂ·1 z . - 1 -! 1 1 - ' < - Â·Â·Â·--= -- -- -- Â·--Â·. HANDRAIL DESIGN 4 X 4 WWF WELDED TO 1 X1 1/8' ANGLES .i.*;i.;Â· ,&:t;~i!.2 ,~,,og-Â«~- - 1 - ! - gj 2XS FIORZ. TOP & BOTTOM RAILS ==9 rze=-=- , 8XS WOOD END POSTS BOLTED TO THE RAILS AND ENDPOSTS. : 4 X4 WWF WELDED 10 1 X1118Â· ANGLES < ~~ UPPER FLOOR I ..... .. , . M .... 1 .BOLTED TO IHE.RAILS AND ENDPOSTS. ~ , UPPER FLOOR 4 111Â·-9'ELEV. 111'-9' El EV. | 443* =j~ C Â·Â·--Â·-â€ž Â· Â· -Â·Â· 2 X 12 WOOD FASCIA ' - Mti:ic.~ 12 VERTICAL WOOD SIDING EXTERIOR STAIR CONSTRUCTION R.---Â·"---Â·-Â·Â· ~~ . ~ Â· - -+11 P,ZI #il 1- 4 X 12 WOOD TREADS .- I.' 1 .ve. e . 1 ..., ~a - 1-11[-T--1 1 KEY PLAN 1 2/ 0. --- 4 X 12 WOOD STAINGERS --I._1_Ill- E i r-- 0 &8 X 8 ENDPOSIS.- SEE HANDRAIL DESIGN - -- -- - ----- - - NEW STAIR fP i CEDAR SHINGLES -- -: > 173477':it.....:t Â· itmit -flflf~ifÂ«%4~~ 77-- 1 I. MAIN Fl.OOR ' ' '' -0-MANN Fl.OOR 1 101Â·4rELEV i T -" - 166Â· oÂ· FLEV : . lK.T .. - - --; p*ii *Nit It==- ..... - 4 plex i==i, ~ 4 1 3 1 It EXISTING GRADE South Elevation It ; 1 11 1 1 _.-_.._-- EXISTING WINDOWWELL - West Elevation 1 . it . f Â·~ 11 41- - -=- 3-L b . 1 :i .1 ~ 1 1 1 EXISTING BASEMENT b: 9 ALL: 1 /8" = 1'-tr UNDER 1/2 OF BUILDING i i < ~1 LOWER F Le>011 1 â€¢ LOWER FLOOft 1 .,-u - - 91'-9' ELEV (E) (D) 4 PLEX WEST ELEVATION < -A ~ EXISTING BASEMENT ELEVATION 91'-9' ELEV AB 3.1 1.Q'-.Q". j ~ DOERME Ft RIDGE i _ _ _ . 0~_pgrttliti-1 IRIDGEk 128Â·Â·11 LIEV 128'-11Â·Et[V 1=ker browl' il i | 12 ru < (JE{JAH SHINGLES _' : ARCHITECTS 18 SOUTH S'HING STREET 11 - ___- 12 ASPEN,COLORAE)08:61, (Ph;97-23Â·2 leo (Fax) 97/92622 2258 , ~4 BEARINQ PLATE _ L-6----ir-----v- Â·Â·-1.-- ., .. i - 121Â·-9 1/4' EL.EV , 2 X 12%00[}FASCIA _ ._-- _- , - 1 ] 1 ~ 1 0 BEAR!,GPLArtl 4.4-1 -- ..-I---. : 1-I~ 1 19'Â·9â€¢ ELEV 1 ' I 1 rl:.: -. -13 1 -T- - CEDAR SHINGLES i>: 1--1-~~- ~ i ===4 -. <'"-t. ' - TYPICAL WINDOW UNITS ; 1 %1. 1-1-- itt 1 1 1 1 1 1 DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS : It -11 1 WI 1 H DC)U R L .E THERMAI GIâ€žAZING : O 11 ! r-r== Â· j 1 P===2 2 1 1 i -- 1 j. . 4 HANDRAIL DESIGN . . . AND 1X4 WOOD TRIM / a \ urrurrr 11 ' ' 1 - 1 -1 11-KITD 11 HANDRAIL. DESIGN 8 x8 WOOD END POSTS :1 - . :1 - V ... â€ž , ~ ~ - E E. : 5% 1 2 X 6 HORZ TOP & BOTTOM RAIL S , 1 . ............. . 1 t % ......1- i 1 : 8 X8 WOOD END POSTS 4 X 4 WWF WELDED TO 1 X1 1 /8' ANGLES -1-f- : 1 i . El- 1 -- 4 4 1 1 1 , 1 1. Bol TED TO THE RAILS AND ENDPOSTS. : 1 4 4 ' 1 : 1 1 1 1 n -i UImI:, 2 X 6 HORZ TOP & BOTTOM RAILS L _~4 UPPER FLOOR -----: E M 9 4 Â· 4XIWWF WEI.[)ED TO 1 X1 1/8' ANG[.ES 1,1 :-9 ELEV r ' Â·- -- BOLTIEDTOTHIJAAILSANDENDPOSIS. -- - * UPPER. FLOOR 4 - -- 2 X 12 WOOD FASCIA 111'-9Â· ELEV. N h = 44 1 . 1 1 1 ~ I 5--ff[ iRRE 1" VERTICAL WOOD SIDING 2 , EXTERIOH STAIR CONSTRUCTION : ~ i ''El =-- 031 I - -7- ,,.#.< 4 1 11 4 X 12 WOOD I READS -=- - CEDAR SHINGLES 9 4 X 12 WOOD STRINGERS 10 i 1 Â· Â· tÂ·' I 11FT-[ : 11.1 1 23: 9 &8XBENDPOSTS.-SEE _ , I it 1 ,1.1,01 D EEB | * #vÂ·I. ~~Â¤ Tu I iIL-~t~#jilgj!Â·Nt#*4 - HANDRAIL DESIGN d 1 I ''' 11 fâ€¢ 17...... : : 2 5 x 31 1Li it:MIEF~FF]*tri'-11 . L ; 41.-3 y A r U.EELL .... 1 ..r InllitÂ·It' #*12,1;:Ii- 11:'' 1' ~: 1*0* . ' / 1 :i.Flitst f .;tÂ·fl~)1~,it, 1 ~ < Â·- 8'XEr' TYP. WOOD COLUMNS -HRISTIANIA ..1 4'STONE VENEER ~ ~. MAIN FLOOR _ __ . Elit:* 4 - 1 501 W,!btll'lait~ fitrerl ' 101'-9' ELEV. ' 101'-9'EL[V : 0, MAIN FLOOR ~ A.pt n. C.k:.in b D 'll *1. 11 I 'Â·F J#. $ Â¤14*1;2'Â·Â»Â·93**3**3Â£11*r k Â·wAiS&4*60.~~ARANÂ·MA ird?FLÂ·; 11 1 EXISTING GRADE 1, 1, râ‚¬.hâ‚¬4~ ' 5-3~Â«~5-3-Â©-11 ~ i i i 1 1 1 1 111 3 1 1 1 1 - L ri.- f 111 11 -1 1'4" 111 , .1 1 1 16 + mill 'll 1 1'|.'.7-7,1 11 11 1 1 : 11 i 1 41 1 111 *,: L <]'1;'2.-1 iii 1 < . 1 i.. EXISTING BASEMENT .. UNDER 1/2 OF BUILDING i 1 1. 43. 4 2 1 Â»99]!AÂ»j <.-1--'.4.-..- -'- -- '--- EXISTING WINDOW WELL 0 LOWER FLOOR 91'-9' ELEV EXISTING BASEMENT ELEVATION 91-9Â· ELEV :1, 4 PLEX NORTH ELEVATION = ])Aiii: .U: Ck teher 21*10 1SS[JIL r- DOHMEF RIDGE RIDGE VENT TYP - * DORMER RIDGQ 111'C Min . Dev ' 1,11:Â·M Review Appli: ati W e I t ----- ----- -- -- -- - 128-11Â·ELEV Â· i 128-11' ELEV CEDAR SHINGLES , Lâ€ž 1 2 1 1 N 4 7 , 1 , , ul ~ N.m k~ 1 w BUILT-UP ROOF : > r qâ‚¬ 13 11 1% i 11 31 11 1~ s lili %% l~ Ilti EXISTING ROOF L-- 0 BEARING PLATE~ 2 X 12 WOOD FASCIA ' , 120'-6 1 '4' ELEV 1 bebe thitumeÂ·nts |VIVL been prepared >p':r i fialll, fur the CluÂ·i.ti.ini,i I'r,ilett r ~, BEARING PLATE Â· " Â· 0 BEARING PLATE[ ' 1 1 Â· - - - Â·-- + They /re nut >uilable tor use in other 1-1> - ? Eli] 4 . if- t 119'-9 El EV 6Â·' HORIZONTAL Â·-" Â·Â· Â·-Â·Â·Â·Â·-Â·-Â·-Â·Â·Â·Â· -Â·Â· Â· --+ -...... ..4_4 1 / 119' -9. ELEV. _1 3 Â· ph*Â·cts ~rirmierl.,catii~n. withi,ut - Â·Â·WOODSIDING _ --. -. TYPICALWINDOW UNITS : Archited. Reproduction prohibited 1 1 : j.1 :,1 1 : '32009:.trvker/brown AriÂ·hitectÂ·. DOCIBLE HlJNG WINDOWS WITIi DOUBLE THERMAL GLAZING b / t' 61 HANDRAIL DESIGN - .. ..-.-- .. * . --- - ~_ _..LUE.-9-_Â£ FR --i.... ~â€ž-i~--- 0 0~~ ' AN[)1 XIWOODTRIM | ,Â· ===21=-1 - ~= 14- 4 -8 XB WOOD END 'POSTS~ - 1 1 . 1 -: r , I ...._HANDRAIL DESIGN 2 X 6 HORZ TOP & BOTTOM RAILS ; 4 X 4 WWF WELDED TO 1 X1 1/8 ANGLES .: I 8 X8 WOOD END POSTS BOLTED TO THE AAILS AND ENDPOSTS . % ' * Â· i. ;..2 Â· 1 2 X6 Hole TOP & BOTTOM RAILS 4 X 4 WWF WELDED TO 1 X1 1 /8Â£ ANGLES . 40: ,. ( r. UPPER FLOOR - _ i Â·9Â· - - - - -- -- - - -- - ---- Â·BOLTED TO THE RAILS AND ENDPOSTS ...0 LPPER FLOOR < 24Â¥3 - CNI11[~--ta. 111Â·-9'ELEV. CEDAR SHINGLES - \.- U--4. â‚¬ Â·Â· -Â·Â·Â·- Â·-Â·--Â·Â·Â· 2 X 12 WOOD FASCIA 111'-9Â·ELEV 1 q.. D 11 l. k.kn;:*~1 -eL-JUE ! , , i 1.=-1 '.?:~?'' \~ Â·Vt ii 11.1 . i /Lrult..n-=1211 8,~7 -I- 1 - Ir f & Iii .- -Â·-Â·Â·--Â· Â·--Â· -_. CEDAR SHINGLES 1 01 . TYPICAL WINDOW UNITS -.'- '-- III 9: DOUBLEHUNGWINDOWS .;'%Â· 2 ' KEY PLAN 61 WITH DOUBLE THERMAL. GLAZING ,'1434;Â·' Â· Â· -12iye'l !1 i... 1. -- ' ' : __----Â·--Â·-- NEW EXT. STAIR CONSTRUCTION Â· 4 : AND 1 X4 WOOD TRIM . . . . $ b -22 --zin : : 3~.ni;-0 -ii.21, -9.Z,67Mi .r.:.2.4..,~ : 1--. .. 4 X 12 WOOD FREADS ' -: I . ' ' I .' 1--- - 4 X 12 WOOD STRINGERS 1. &8 XB ENDPOSTS.-SEE I I. . :Il .:' - -4-- 11,_4814.FLQC)8 ------------------------- - - -- -~-- -- -~ -=~~~<~~ IMNDRAIL. DESIGN . ___________ 101Â·-9Â· ELEV :<1 f 101Â·-9' ELEV. Â·iÂ·. #,0 Jill 11 1 4 plex 1 It i i EXISTING GRADE | North Elevation East Elevation 6 1 -1 li 1 1 1 2. I i ....1.... 1 | L _~ ' 9.Al .F 1/8Â· = 1-{r 11 b . 1 1 1 0 LOWLIi Fl-004 1 OWER FLOOR . _ L i f 91'-9Â· ELIFV (~ 4 PLE EAST ELEVATION EXISTING BASEMENT ELEVATION AB 3.2 -1 m. 10'-0" 1 1 2=~Â»T. 1 - Â¢-F' -- - .2141,9. : INA- . I - .' <7.6.,1 . - ':%7.6 Nb. 94 - - :4Â£ - 443. I 342*? 1 9 9 i fafilillillillullillillillill 's i - ill 40 ..: Du lex - south facade (alle ) Duplex - west facade (facing 5th Street) 1% . -r ' 1 I , 1 + 1, , 1. .11 ..1 1 1 k. 4,2 , *FA'Ft*:* . 42. ,. 11 . 4 + 1 0.3. 1 - 11.,1 4,4.141 4 1,411 1 1 411 e. . 39 . . % 1 ilap . 14 414 v -' ~AU54729*'. i 1 0.2. 4<*1~.':. - 0 %4 Duplex - north facade(facing Main St.) Duplex - east facade (facing 4-plex) ... . r ./ 2 + 4 1.~&.j..' I le .. 4 & - - -4.r ,- 1 -. m *, I. Â·-/9-"AIFT/"I-= . - /1 1 /61 i~/P...1.1 . k * r 2*,116:...11. . ./5 e 4-Plex - north facade (facing Main St) 4-Plex - east facade (facing panabode) IP I.0 0 ' 110 /1 1 t 'G , h. tte..1:fm. 4 2 444 '*r Uff â€¢t. -: . -Â·Â·- . . /".IN/*Um t/& r J. 04. li i 2 - - . - . 4 I . :, f '1 , 11 *, 'i . f. - Â»*64 * ' , .1 Â· t... 7 & = ..4 71 9.1 I I - *J , '- *8* : e + '4< â€¢â€¢~ . 4 - .. .... .. 4-Plex - south facade (facing alley) 4-Plex - west facade (facing duplex) ... f' 1 Staff recommendations: 1. Duplex - West Facade (facing 5th Street): The west facade no longer contains a ground level door. Staff is concerned about the losing the pedestrian connection with the street-facing facade on the ground level. In addition, the second story door is about half the size of the previously approved door, further reducing the building's pedestrian connection. Staff strongly recommends the original design be retained or another design increasing the pedestrian connection with this building. 2. 4-Plex - North Facade (facing Main St.): The design is a dramatic departure from the design HPC previously approved. Although this building is situated at the back of the lot and not very visible from Main Street, it will still be seen from Main Street, and therefore an important facade. Instead of the 2 ground level doors on this facade - creating an interaction with Main Street - with windows, etc. Staff far prefers the design originally approved by HPC. 3. 4-Plex - South Facade (facing alley): The new design is a significant change from the design HPC approved. The approved design has more character than this proposal. Staff prefers the approved design over the proposed revised design. 4. 4-Plex - West Facade (facing panabode): Similar comments to No. 3 above. Staff recommends that approved design be implemented. ... County of Pitkin } ~ _di>939 ~ AFFIDAvrr OF NOnCE PURSUANT } ss. [_-~ TO ASPEN LAND USE. REGULATION = State of Colondo } 9=------ SECTION 26304.060 CE) I, \ : Mn f' b 6960 f)*0 , being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations in the following manner: 1. By mailing of notice, a copy o f which is attached hereto, by first-class, postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners of property with three hundred (300) feet of the subject 1 property, as indicated on the attached list, oil thec)Â£7 day of (12-j . , 146_ (which is _ 2.000 days prior to the public hearing date of / 4 1. 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as ir could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously 7 000 from the ,24 day of 0 c .<, , 199-- (Must be posted for at lean ten (10) full. days before the hearing date). A photograph of che posted sign is attached hereto. 0 -04>20 kigna~ j. Â·- Â·46.':f**j)63Â·.9.f' -~.:t .6.4 .... - k.1/J PUBLIC NOTICE 4 Sig]~0 before me this E day f# o Jâ‚¬ rn 1-1/ -1 ,-1-99_by 4 5254#DATEd/Â»t~ g__.â‚¬ ) C ) t ' *i;571**4: RodpeE 4 0 (& me 5 Co lon,6, j .0**22&=U WITNESS MY HAND AND 9FFICIAL SEAL UPURPOSEE ; E~~mmission expires: *10 /20-1 1.erÂ¥Â·' - 1.3 4 6-Â· 1,/ 1 er-7-/1 1Ift R~?4ikw Â® 1.-;giÂ·l,A::- f Â·'. Â· ;. ' . ft i a (4 G. n no n _ 2-*11 6-,<611/ 14â‚¬Dob**Antl 6.9--L- ~ 1 1 Nt*Publip) Ff (-7-3 MA H . 4-44Â«4*1 +2- ..VI:*Mulam . Evit.121Â£46 3.5- 4.5. -;t L :1 ~ Notary Public's Signature Page 1 of 1 PUBLIC NOTICE DATE_103/00 TIME DOOPH. *. 1 30 r. 4/W :4 IA- PLACE Cow4,t 6 .O#Atifir' - fal 294* . l'grimp'.I~ PURPOSE --r 11'. HFC REVIEW 13 1&31-th, r EX1911: !5 f )06Â£ AMI, , WINrov.' IN Obtvo'C, IFvii Pir,14. e - + A ': r â€¢ tile://C:\WINDOWS\'1 EMP\hpcphoto.JPU 11/8/00 V! A MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission f //d-J#- 1 THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Directord*D FROM: Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer â‚¬bb RE: 447 E. Cooper Avenue (Guido's) DATE: November 8,2000 SUMMARY: The Manrico's Cashmere is taking over the space formerly occupied by Stefan Kaelin at 447 E. Cooper Avenue and proposes minor alterations to the exterior of the store. The applicant is proposing replacing a glass door and window on the east elevation with a large window to match the others on that elevation, replacing an off- center ddor with a large window with a center door with windows on each side on the north elevation, and adding several small windows to match existing windows on the south ele*ation. The subject building is not historic but is located within the Commercial Core Historic District. APPLICANT: Guido Meyer, represented by James P. Colombo. LOCATION: 447 E. Cooper Avenue. PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.415.01003) 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 patcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard anÂ¢ rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(2), for detached accessory dwelling units. Response: The applicant requests HPC approval to make an exterior change to the storefront. The proposal is to make changes to the windows and doors on the south, east and north elevations. Staff has no issue with the changes proposed. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The change proposed is consistent with the character of the neighborhood. 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 will not affect the historic significance of any building. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposed development does not affect the architectural character or integrity of any historic structure. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe following alternatives: â€¢ Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. â€¢ Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. â€¢ Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) â€¢ Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION AND RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve replacing a glass door and window on the east elevation with a large window to match the others on that elevation, replacing an off-center door with a large window with a center door with windows on each side on the north elevation, and adding several small windows to match existing windows on the south elevation at 447 E. Cooper Avenue." Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated November 8,2000 B. Application j:\planning\qpen\hpc\cases\minor\guidos.doc RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT AT 447 EAST COOPER AVENUE, ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO.c~ /, SERIES OF 2000 WHEREAS, the applicant, Guide Meyer, represented by James P. Colombo, has requested minor development approval for replacing a glass door and window on the east elevation with a large window to match the others on that elevation, replacing an off- center door with a large window with a center door with windows on each side on the north elevation, and adding several small windows to match existing windows on the south elevation for the property located at 30**2*Mil Mfeet. The property is a historic landmark and located within the Main Street Historic District; and WHEREAS, all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards of Section 26.415.010(B) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 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. 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 by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(2), for detached accessory dwelling units. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 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. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof; and ,â€¢11,5.1. WHEREAS, Sarah Oates, in her staffreport dated November 8,2000, recommended approval without conditions, and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission on November 8,2000, the Commission considered and approved the application without conditions by a vote of to . -- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That minor development approval for 447 E. Cooper Avenue, Aspen, Colorado, be approved as 51'Gen November 8,2000, without conditions Section 1 t ?flitttiOMP't A) Â£60...9 -6 14,43/ 44 All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Historic Preservation Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 2 This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or 0 amended ~ as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion ofthis Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity ofthe remaining portions thereoÂ£ 4 - - rv*=1 411 -fl k- Ukj 6 7 7<*#7 J *ljo-t APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 8th day of Noveniber, 2000. Approved as to Form: City Attorney 0 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Chairman ATTEST: Chief Deputy Clerk . . 0 ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM A 1. Project name "'/ /'40 21 CO S C>?9./.v} EEG 2. Project location 44-1 2 - C.Ct:,PEâ‚¬ Ree.J LAE n/7.Â·:,c-i-_ AgeD Ap-r 1-1 9 zE , it~cc< 90 ' (indicate street ad~ress, lot and block nufnberor metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning CC 4. Lot size - 5. Applicant's name, address and phone number Grul CO h'~2-94 4(yb E . CooPEE Aomeue. ; Aspglo ," R.,coe - Â£=no-CU-lÂ·-vio 3 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number diES P Cc=:/1/780 Cpo G . Coc,oge , 952â‚¬-,O . /2â‚¬â€¢vE - 9'JUS --7KO G 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA Conceptual HPC *pecial Review * , F,inal SPA ~ Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD *>< Minor HPC 0 - Stream Margin Final PUD Relocation HPC Â¢ubdivision Text/Map Amend. Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot SpliVLot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approxiÂ¢iate ~g. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the propeftit /=5 1-19=71 43 (4 2-G--729, L SPACG- . 9. Description of development application /01002 2 Â¥ 725-2,02 I 102 00 Doot 10 8*19~)Cy DCOE LORY 8 6.040[Â»0 9-6 te PuaLE E *1%:1~For,- DOGÂ£ ~ 10. Have you completed and attached the following? 0 J Attachment 1 - Land use application form -5c- Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form M Response to Attachment 3 4 Response to Attachment 4 11111111 . 0 ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: Address: Zone district: Lot size: Existingl FAR: AllowÂ®le FAR: Propos~d FAR: - Existing net leasable (commercial): Proposed net leasable (commercial): Existing % of site coverage: Proposed % of site coverage: Existing % of open space: Proposed % of open space: Existing maximum height: Principal bldg: Accesory bldg: Proposdd max. height: Principal bldg Accessory bldg: Proposed % of demolition: .. Existing number of bedrooms: , . Proposed number of bedrooms: 0 Existing on-site parking spaces: On-site parking spaces require . Setbacks Existing:~ Minimum required: Proposed: Front: Front: Front: Rear: Rear: Reac Combined Combined Combined Front/rear: Front/rear: Front/rear: Side: Side: Side: Side: Side: Side: Combined Combined Combined Sides: Sides: Sides: Existin onconformities or encroachments: V ations requested: 0 (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 variatiorts under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts) i -Â£- PACKARCJ T Tn li 1 Tr T 0 September 28, 2000 Historic Preservation Commission City of Aspen 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Guido Builidng minor exterior alterations Dear Staff and Commissioners, I authorize Colombo International, Inc. to represent me in all matters relating to the minor exterior alterations proposed for the Guido's Building located at 403 E. Cooper Ave. in Aspen, Colorado. 0 ti /4 - (36ido Meyers- Guido Swiss inA 0 ! SEP.29.2000 11:09AM STEWART TITLE ASPEN i NO. 406 P.2 STEWART TITLE OF ASPEN INC. OWNERS]UP AND ENCT-~BRANdE REPORT *4 Order No.: 00027539 -~ PREPARED FOR: 0006348 1 STEWAEr TrrLE OF ASPEN. INC. HEREBY CER11FIES from a search of the books in this OAce thatti:le to: See Ateached Legal Description 1 1 ' situated in the Count, of Pilidn, State of Colorado, qppear~ to be vested in :he mme of: GUIDO PAOL MEYER am to Pareel A. and GU:fDO'Et SWISS INN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP u to Parcel B 1 and that theabove described propere oppears to be subje,~to the following tiens: 1. A Dead of TzÂ·ust dated May 19, 1993 executed by Guido Paul Moyar and Guide's Swiss Inn Limited Partnership, to the P:*lic Truatee of Pitkin County, to secure an indebtedness of $1,350,000.00,~ in favor of The Bank of Aspen, recorded July 7, 1994 in Book 754 at pa~ 884 as Reception No. 371851. NOTE: Aasignmant of Rents recorded Culp 7, 1994 in Book 754 at Page 885 aa Reception No. 371852, given in conneatio~ with the above Dead of 2Â¥ust. 0 1 1 \ EXCEPT a,Ey and all taxes and assessments. i EXCEPT alleasements. rigl# of we, restrictions and res~vationa of record. 1 â„¢srepon does not rdectany of the following n=en: \ (1) Bankruptcles which, from date of adljudlcation of the ~st recent banknwtcies, antedate the report by more than fourteen (14) years. 0) Suits and judgments which, from date of entry, =tte#ate the repon by more than seven m years or until the goven,ing statue qf#mitations has evired, whickeper fs the longer period. (3) Unpaid taic liens whi*jtom date ofpayment. antedÂ«r~thereport by morethansevenyears. ~. Althoughwebelieve thefacts stated are true, Ihis letter is + to beconstrued as an abstract of title, nor an opinion of title. nor a guarane of title. and it is understood and 4*reed that Stewan Title of Aspen, Inc., neither asmones, nor will be charged with ally jinancia! obligation or liabim) whatever on any statement contained herein. Dated.- Auguat. 16, 2000 at 7,30 A.M. , at,t,pen, Colorado ~*Imc. k1 5 SEP.29.2000 11:09AM STEWART TITLE ASPEN NO.406 P.3 SCHEDULE A Order Number: 00027539 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A: Lots E, P and G, Block 90, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN PARCEL B: Lots H and I, Block 90, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN COUNTÂ¥ OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. SEP.29.2000 11:09AM STEWART TITLE ASPEN NO.406 P.4 ... INVOICE STEWART TITLE OF ASPEN, INC. 1 620 E. HOPKINS ASPEN CO 81611 (970) 925-3577 1 0006348 PITKIN COUNTY DPT PUBLIC WORKS 76 SERVICE CENTER ROAD ASPEN, CO 81611 Buyer ; Seller: MEYER, GUIDO I Property address: Subdivision: CITY & TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Section: Block: 90 Lot: E,F,G,H, I Sales Amount: $ 0.00 Loan Amount : $ 0.00 09/29/2000 File Number: 00027539 Invoice #: 37855 Income Code Description Amount Ownership and Encumbrance Report 125.00 Invoice Total $ 125.00 STEWART TITLE OF ASPEN, INC. 0 PROPOSAL FOR MINOR ALTERATION The Guido's Building is located at 413 E. Cooper Ave. at the corner of Galena St.. on the Cooper Ave. Mall. The building was built in 1954 and remodeled in 1990. It is a non-historic structure and has a non-confomring architectural theme with any of the surrounding historic buildings. The building has a Swiss/Bavarian architectural theme which is not consistent with the Victorian influence of the surrounding area. The proposal does not call for any architectural change to the existing theme. The applicant request the replacement of the existing main level entrance with a new wood framed glass door and sidelights along the Cooper Ave. Mall frontage. The exi$ting glass door at the Galena St. frontage would be replaced with a new wood framed window to match the-existing windows. Two new wood framed windows would added to the southern elevation . These 0 windows Would also match the existing windows in style and size. Given the non-historic, non conforming architecture of this building, the applicant feels that these changes do no detrimentally effect the Historic Overlay District and are consistent with the general architecture of the existing building. 0 0 0 0 111) ill g PAEPOLE DARK 1 . *hrt U.14*rrFAL 11 1 Irptd A '-~ rN E HO4~ 5 .1 , r -15/EZE-- C. -A-1 r 1 Mra - M F 0 Â£ Mâ„¢AN AVE. I \\ 1 1 1,4-1.1-1 W H 4 ~ . I . ! I. 1. 1 *Ac:~ 10Â·Â·7[ I I 2 - 1 1--Ept,-1 1 - ;2.1Â® --1 f ~7:'FR:Ll[LE li r .,11 g P t,=ic- E.~ 161Â£A Â£-1 i i i i i i ~ i ~ rum-r *i ~': --~- '~ ~/~ E ~EN 1 AVE 1 1-4 '~jit - :_origIC ~li[ili~] 1~ 1 1 6 : -871}7.1 77-'r\ Â·11 'I il IN#| JI 1 10 4 --B . I b|f |11~' IT m~FÂ»92,/ FAM c &11- 31Ui 41' 09 1-lÂ·I 4 1-/UU IIIT -1-- 'IrM':11'M" 11/17-IT , r---â€¢:~lf'11 ' 1 -T-- R-1~Â· L+Hi 7 -6---4 3-*.../-1 1 f 'A rl Lt-1 (Pl,0, ~ 1 _ 4 1 L.1.. 795f,1 - i N.!i 11 4L1_111 ~ -~l \Â«W.1- 1- ---- -'Zzl'*iF 2 W-r . , . , k #.. r..0- 2t 1.- 74+ ~. 142 'Â©g 1.NLit- -- 0.- i ' i ' i 4 P YNitr =/./.,~k . -3 ,#r ---1 3\7Â¢517\, .FR/733 Â·V . V / a ~4~ #-- Ii,f *v 4..7. B-M< r:~1: ;2 1 811// 14 ---.lk ~ .6*,-*s . 4. .... - 1! ASPEN VICINITY MAP ~ -lit-44-Fill-1-14-- pâ€¢EP C.<E 1 79- 71 T 'Ar :-lrip , - T-7 - ...r ' 1.- 1 1 i q _11.1.64 1:Lig--------.1 1 1 J' 11[ .1- : p 14'E 1 1 1 * 4 1 ' I kâ€žIlt_Lkit_-,= 1 : 1 1 1 Ill 11 1 1 i.lip ~ |- J ~~ E HOPEâ€¢N.5 - 1 - 1 - AP * 9Ii>.\ 4 " 71 - f-Ferfl-0 1.T -O-TrE 1 I I IAR I 34 1 1 1, 1 -- LU ; ...1 11111-121jl: 19 : I(*~ i-~ 1 1(211 i =-1-*L-1 414 - [[L 11.- - frrllpT-trA:I - ~ 11- 3 - i Â·' tr- _ - I Ir-ri j 0,2 r n i f-Ti I 11_'f. 11 g # Lii, i I i Ilit . A - 1 t ' - i_.1 -- Â· 01 1 - LER R-MF .--ip- ------4 J#V V PO/ 7 E. WYMAN AVE lili 11 1 '%. 1 1 EMANRICO'S L ..., ' 1 ' rig-T 1 : 11 - 2 ---- -, 9 ~ 415 111_J 167 - 1 . Z Voill! --- CASI,MERE I , 1 Vil _r i .6 91, ER , Oil Ni 1 Z L.U.t m -#Rfl~ 1 ,~~r,~ E 'd,FR Alt !--------1---i ---- W 11 11>LI -I 3-Â»14_ifEI- i i ~~ Fitj~ : P".~K iii[4 - 1 11 1 ! '|2*r_*4_' P~PRO~t~L-fl F[Il[; PI I CU N U 931 r 1! - -1 f) 11 1 1 [-7 1 N 7-1 rT 11 r TÂ»=ZEI ' L 2 L--08-57. 3 1 _ _ 1â€ž--L_k~ 1 @1 1 J 1 ~ I le i J El . , ri 1,1.31418 s '16 91'Un 11-1 3 8]1 11 L Ll 3 L -1-14,4 11 1 421 % ;t 31 2+Phi Â®I 2 11 1 >1 <i I ~1 -1,7-1 .ikiÂ« e.1- :1~ 11 | 14 - LA/N TT ' ,~~ ' lili_l 1 1 ..43 1 ~ 1 213~. 4 6,8 0 442~ .H434Â¢* I I I 1 Li] - 2 \ i %64 . 1 [Tr u P U D) IB .JIJAM 3- ~ 1 - f 1 1 1 - *St<=+5 7- - -- Ig 12 1 -*-*-. -L! 2- 111?12-1 - C 1 - -1 3,1 11 3 , I 1--4. \. J' "3 reÂ·~----~~C~ -1L Ll-_L_ i | 4 ' 01! MF 7- 0-. --2__.. $ f..0, -- r-1--1/ak7-7=-U JJ.Ll-â€¢1 9-r, ~___- L- Ir*.Ni : , 1 ,~ n f--1 4 f -15 1 5 1 , 0 11 i#i , .Zza - 9 --1- 1 7-- 17 1-. . i..; . 1 L Ja ; 1 !=J , ... 130 1, - '0 t. 1 1 1 1 4 46 <il /i R f I . /.bl S 'i -Â· _.145, 1 11 4 ' 1 \ 4.4- 1 F \ /, fF Via) \</ / 14 / 4.1 -1 / af\ - -- -1 XÂ«74. /101 , . t.Â«/ t h U &62 Â£111- 1 1/ S F -=tÂ»- - L 1 Â»- 46 '471 9. M 1311/ 4 4419\1 7 4, 1 14 4 71 126 -471-7 -- \4/4, - - 1! 1--- .. ASPEN-VIC[NITY MAR - N WEH I ---- '16 --DA,lad PLANTERS .. PAnO ON SOUTH Sa EETT IT biO ..rÂ·NEW WINDOWS TO MATCH EASTI~ ~~_~ | - E k- mul'll. A.CÂ»-1 , RAMP DOWN 7-4 1/20 - ..1 C71 DUMB ..L=: I /111 YVAITER. -I---iiii iiii ii 11 mTING ~ ROOM - Be,CH $-322 11 ../-4/13\r- 0 4 - . ROOM IgCH.,NCAL.gIASE / 0 5 ~.MU /\ 1 1 TO - 1 i =- a 9 41 ON X | ON \ EMERGENCY EXIT 9 N BJTRY TO <,*-_~ ~ 9-â‚¬ET mt_E 1 ~ -i * PADPOSED MAN FLOOR ..Ca 'U'BER 0010-2000( DATE 6 09/ovoo 0Â«A-,1 BY PE)/aaN REXID 04*06 DATE BY \4 /2 L i ELEVATOR t~EW '41hDOW TO /1 ~ 24ATCH ED(tST1NG DCMMENTS ---Le ~ H.4 < ke-1 n //3 - :4*4.....5:...- 2-; NEW ENTRY DOOR & L__3 Â·Â·Â·Â· WINDOWS PROPOSED FLOORPLAN SCALE:1/4" 110. E[UHF\[HSVE) S,02)1HNV]A[ c oavkloloo 'N3dSV -Â»Â»*>.C~uuw 11 1/2" TI -TM SET I f f \\\ 110 4 11 14 Iii fff 13.-3 Ell ------------------05871NAQRC0N'r~ WOOD SIDING Ill~ilillilli I- ./ %*ING Iltl Il' Il' 1 1 Â·Â·Â·r *a "Well/"li 1~JE DATE TO 1 1/2. L Â»4Â· - 4'-or L 7-611 1 r DRYSTACK SANDSTONE PLANTERS 15'-2â€¢ 12'-8Â· 15'-2* 43'-0Â· DEE' TITLE DOSTING NORTH ELEVATION JCBMIBER 0010-200X DATE 09 '06/00 DRAWN BY FEMSCN FED(]FI EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION NO 04AN<* DATE BY SCALE: 1/4" 1'0" CC-ENTS AÂ¤ ..... --- ITTYPE 97 W f /f~ -- . =EW- - , Ill / / I . ff f f f f iff// 1 4 1[-7-1 IM--f./Ill 2, -; ~ 1,EL~~~~~siNG STUCCO WALLS 1$*~ 1_ lcd 1 to 1 : 1 STUCCO HEADERS 2'-3â€¢1 3'47' 1 3'-0" 1'-4' ./ 1 1 10'-10 19'-9 3'-0â€¢ 19'-9 ISEUE DATEE TO 42'-6- EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION SHEET mLE EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" 1 '0" JCe huta ER 0010-2000C DATE 09/06/00 DRAWN BÂ¥ REMICNRECCRD NO CHANIGE DATE BY OCMMENTS : 94Â¢4:::...::::::: A.7 ES ~l:ii; IT BOS -ING SHEEB ETAL ROOFNG 1 1 - - 111 111 111 111 111 Il' l" IIiI 111 111 ORIZONTAL WOOD St[)ING BOSTING STUCCO WALLS ' - hil'11,11'1111,1111,1 111'11: . - . 1 r- 'SaE DATE TO DOSTING STUCCO SILLS NEW WINDOWTO MATCH EXISTING S'-0" 3'-0' 547 3'-0- 8,-0- 3'-0" 4,-2. \ 8'-2- 1 r.9 3'-3" -DRYSTACK SANDSTONE PLANTERS 17Â·-7 1/2â€¢ 14'-0Â· 24'-8â€¢ , \*NTRY TO GUIDOS RESTAURANT PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4Â· 1'0' SHEET TITLE PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION JCB NLMIER 001 0200OC DATE 09/06/00 DRAM BY REGASICN REDOFa CHANGE DATE BÂ¥ WIMENTE m.1Â·iÂ·.Ut 1),I E~ .. IÂ·r T YPE ITNO :u/>R *fw: 04 - Iiii lli Iiii Ill 'll 1 Ilil #1 . Be~ - --- --------------------------------EXISTIN*,UQBIZONIAL.,WOOD SIDING C 'v, 3 V- -\ D<ING 1*~Â·ii iii:*: a 111 111 5*CO / *'41.s, ~ - */7/7 5 MMI#.:iM 611 1 lili , ... Malf#EfiESE,IEEigifiEfi#E#EFEEEk ' lilli 111.31'1~ *45 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 ISSE DATE 11 .1.1 - 1,9.1,1,1 ki) To L 8-1 1/2. 2'-5" 6'47 1 .1 20-5â€¢ ~ , 7-6â€¢ i DRYSTACK SANDSTONE PLANTERS -1 '1 15'-2. 12'-8' ~ 15'-2" 43'-0â€¢ NEW ENTRY TO MATCH EXISTING 9Â·EET 71TLE PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION JCBMJIBER 0010-2000C . DATE 09 06/Co DRAWN BÂ¥ PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION F vISCN FECCFÂ© CHANQE DATE BÂ¥ SCALE: 1/4" 1'0" Colk.EN.TE . I . . li. I . . E[-HITINHSVI)-RODINNVIN Oavkloloo 'N3dSV /054. U 12\\ SET T, PE 3<3~ 16 SET NO 1Â«A M 4< f -734\\ /7111 4 t! - int 2-11/ f f NEW WINDOW TO MATCH EXISTING 68=*mmmm- E,n,favaL.,... Luy L__ _ p [ L...4--11 ./. 6 STUCCO HEADERS ~EW WINE)OV S TO MATCH EXISTING 0" 1'-4' 3Â·-0" 1Â·-4Â· /F'M// N 1 '. ' 10'-10' 19'-9" 3'-7 19'-9' 1~EE DATE -0 42'-6' PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION .. S+EET TITLE PROPOSE D SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" 1'0" Jae IMBER 0010-2000C C}ATEE 09 06/00 []RAIN BY FEVIBCN RE XRD 04/K* DATE BY CCIM ENTS Al. r ... ZiMEIP\[HSV3 S,031>INVIA[ 00Â¥30103 'N3dSV IM:Wm =*iMM: 118$2:i:1: : ilitiuilium 61 ::il: E...~E:Efi J .. SJ- TYPE I :4 : 43 f .144 EDOSTING S-EETÂ»ETAL ROOFING : *EE- 1.~i*E *: /0 -5 1 ---- f~LEE I=E=EEE=EEEZEEEEBEEEEâ‚¬ 111 IiiI & Iiai Iil 111 111 10 'il 14 ________--Â·--HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING : ~:i:i:i:i:~:?:i:i:.: r iti:Â· U-::1 i-l ff /(/71 40 DOSTING STUCCO WALLS â€¢ , 6 mii *Mit E ** 3 1 :f::::::::1: 1 1 - 1--7-1- 1-1-r-r-1-1--r-, i , i, i -7 '-- ---- r) s 5 'tr-E 1,11'111,1, 1 / // I 159.E DATE 1 7'Ex,y 1 K EXISTING STUCCO SILLS 3'-0- 4' 5'-0Â· 3,47' 5'-0" 3'-0Â· 8'-0- sÂ·-0" 4'-2' ~ 8'-2" 7'-9. L 3-3 ~-ORYSTACK SANDSTOME PLANTERS '1 t 7'-7 1/2â€¢ 14'-0. , 24Â·.8. ENTRY TO GLEDO S RESTAURANT EXISTING EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1 /4Â·' - 1'0 SHEET n-LE DOSTING EAST ELEVATION JOB h UMBER 0010-2000C DATE 09/06/00 DEAWN EY PEVS EN FE CORD ND Â·CHANGE DATE Bb /1\ E CCNMENTE :92Â¢:9::'..::::..:: ... .. E[HE[WHERVD-S DDIN_N-VIN ~:R <Lift#%9Â¢I 00V210100'N3dSV 3'-6" 5'-0" 12'-1 5,8" 42:*, Ji Â·: U N 1 nv L I lim /1 ' 1 Ilt 1-~1\[LL'41-- H 14&LqI Ri d 1>41 Ilf i ~$25Â©k~AL- & .C'\ I t-IliÂ®~-c_L.Â¢S-1.. -2 1 Mump i - Â· 1-CE t f. I U.. - - i "- ~ lit n 1 4-- -r -- lil ::11 i : _ 1 Â·tkiJ LAI :114,[' m 1 -- 3 + ---------------/ / 1 E 4 - 62*..1 1-J HOPK' 5 ! 0491 | | A-i I ~ ~ I I ~ LLÂ· .nLi ~ ' 1 1 [1-TJ r .1 4 1.,1 111 M- /ir 1 -9.1 fia I vl- 6--..-.--I... g t. 1 LL.1- 49 00 , 1 ..'h M: l i ' , It I. 1 *191 1 1 .1 . 1 11 1 ' 1 - 1.1 4 1 U 1 -- 1' â€¢ 1 m r~~ 9,:r, râ€¢ F 1:1 1 111 1~~1 ;- f [ffi- I 11 liE 1 r,-1 4.W - 1 - J . 4 .1/1 . 1 Jil F.0" 11 1 1 1 4,--7 R- M F p~.Hi-1 |i |41 1 1 |~p 1, 1 1 , 4 .0. V FC.'.1.04 Ill \\ ------ . F WYMAN ] AVE 1 j ! ......... ---1 -21%4Â·JITTTFT-] it-Ill.l [f-60[KIL; lif--rtial#11Â¢~ wifi it 141-[-Il ~ Ii- 1 1 1 -- \1 2 121.11 2 944 JM~ i r:H IIÂ®i .. : A. :t@ Â·'':~'~| tal : 6 111â‚¬J l" .. . Z , A ------, I . 1/' , 4,0 -- - 1 1 GN [1 1 ~ ..7 =! 1 1 13 -1 1 1 <wk~ Itt *,I; I.''t' 1 1 i= I,Ii ' ]MANRICO'S :lili) 1 ;I i I I'l-~ 1 1 1 1 k 1 111 [ N : . L ./1 1 1 ; 1 Iii 1 1!\ - Â· 1 CASHUERE! il '.- 1 J 4â€¢A '31, ER ~46 < ' -- 1 IA E '.E Li: 91 1 1 E I- 47 1 t P me,4 r-rr- I ... -4 T. 1 !11: t. 11, 1: Ifill i 5 1 4 1 , a I ' I- TI I 100 Ill[ZÂ·I H il 1 - . VA i- i.. I ell i l.11# " iIi 1 : R . 7- 1 1 44 7 ET- I'.0-di..-----ig- ---Irw-1 - ! e 1 7 Â·i) L , ril - i j f . ,1 .906, ..: : 11. .1 4 . OU 1!i:1 1 ~44< 0 2 0 2 - 4 -----=ifii . li>~I ' : ~_lifill-l 1 - \ 1 ~ -7- -r J 1 -l 2 , - ,n --- I . - 11 ,1 11 , ,. 1, 1 11 L ./. 0 #< h.- 6--a-----0---HIN7-14 9% - ' li 1, .lili fl, 1 1:I :1 f '1.1, 1-1 IT +4F-+J i 1 1 1 7 31' 1 1 1 4 ill 1 C L 4 : I j L i.11 J le ~ ..1.j 4 t t j 11 -- ' 1 1 1 '1 Ir 1 13 i lific~ i i i i i i 112 3 4 81 9 11. L I ! 1 (77,1 | | 1 ,Â· ' ' ' 2 i I Al 1 lili ! -1 >--- . 1 1/ ~ h ~ L U ....X,lf, - 7 ,........ 1. . ------Â¥.I-- - 1 /1 - 1 1 3 1~ Lilk 7 jl*'1 1 111 +11..:11. '1 0 1 /h ., 1 - -1 4 r 213 t. M Â«7"2 21*94 | Â·~ 31 EL:k5'.71-44-,3 ilip i : - i 3 (=1 Il 1 i 1 ,[ . Iff -1SU- 1 1>.4Ed#1 1 71 â€ž 1- 21-11, 511 1 .Aâ€¢Â¥N ST , I -Â·~. ~ .1 ' #r ' -22 1 , --- 1 Il ll-1 . 1 I i \4/4 Of>/ , -P f 1.7--- 11 1//, 1 '1 1 27314 1 4 r~ A 0 cil,l'21 .! 1 _i. r -3 Ilt! 1 Â«Rty Ill]1111 -61 fo 1M . 34 ,%,fult, 1 2 -1 1 1 1 1 1 'L L.. 11 -113Â» 1,Li2 1~ . -- !- -m \ - Â· â€ž ./5* 1 .- 1 1 1 --1 ---~ -6===--- 1 ~ / 742:,~re~ 1 1 4 1 . Ii.-I , I.--1 , . ..>. 42 1 1-cd 1 1 :e Gl! MF 7- 7. k.1-_. L._L r-1-ifill--r-17---I..-4 1 JMLA-.5 Cm 15 --~--5 I .- -I- 1 ; . 11 11.1 1 lk-!.3 1 - 11 1 9 1 1. 1 .0, 'I -- ! Utl ./39 - 6f / / i 1 0 1.~ 1 hs j lili31.1 * 4 4 .0- 1 . 1 '9 I ID ~ D - 1 r \\41(01'fa} 941\ // -9 f 1 47 , , /7 'F 4p-* 1 1 4 F., j t .?21 I f 1 1 2 Z2 94 1 . ' f 4Â»r - ..4 1 /9 2 4, 42\ ii/ Ft L / 1 twe - r.--% \ '47 j ,-7 r & Â·. ; 1 L. I. 1 i .il *.*%i 3 . 5 , /~\ e .... .- 1 1/ 4, i ' â€¢D ;M ~-0 1 T't'-7 2_311 --~' - 11 14/ 3 ./. ASPEN VICINITY MAP 4#N411'dCH ON) 15â„¢ PLANTERS , | PATIO 01 SOUTH SIDE - Er T'PE *T NO /-JfNEW WINDOWS TO MATCH EASTD,G - 1 32 1 0~3 2 1 / It ~ ~- -1 -24 1 1 ET 8:0: W .:: ~1-Mt -4 --I'l- - i * 42 RAMP DOWN 7-41/2' F i.i:HARNG 1 ///Imp f i WArrER- %â‚¬ Â· Z n--2-,4/ - 1 - ;TTENG 1. 900. I 9 2.-7 4 | ' - FICH I ' ' x'~01\ r-F i.-4- 14 ATTING \ED<]STNG 20 ROOM 11<CHANALCHASE / 1 : 19Â£ DATE 1, 1 TO \ \ 1 1 - -9 1 -' ON- '1 il: P 1 / 1 !iIi 7--li DN 1 i ~t \ EMERGEMY E)(IT - I.P 19 - 1 . 4 141, - I \1 SJRY TO ' -E 1 \ 1 GIADO'S - SIâ‚¬n -1 1 21Â¤POSED MAN FLOOR '91 ' 1/ 1 L. 1 1 Ii#KI 201 0- 2000C DATE 39/05/00 ORA'-4 8Â¥ Eveo. 0*OOF. W| Â·Ot.* i DATE . 1 1 8-EVAT&R L % 1 Â·Â·EW NIACOW TO MATCH EWST[~IG 2 1 1 1 -CMMENTS ./. . *Â«r â€¢,0 Â·Â·Â·Â· Â· H 11 t.-' 2 4 H./.* 1 A..0 11 1 .. ... . 1-1 L.1.-~ -1.-* NEW ENTRY DOOR & ~ . J WINDOWS PROPOSED FLOORPLAN ....... SCALE: 1 /4â€¢ -1'0â€¢ ZINEIWI IS-VO 5,031-HNVIN 00Â¥H0100 'NldSV - L P - 1 er- 7 tE - illull aw"Mi#:A: .r: ili#timilmit im=:2323Â£336 Era*Mitiii.....:E: L \4 / 14 (1 4 Iil 11 4 iN~ WOOD SIDING , :i: ' 3 1 l -:a:.:.=::::#:m 31 - 11,111 Mm Il'l 111 'Ad..A#&36:=i:=65.:E:E:.i 1 14 -i- iii ~:ii: 'fl':11 11,1,1 J,11,1 . 1.,1 ISZLE DATE 2% To E-1 1/2- 4.-I/4,4 ~ 7-6Â· i i , DRYSTACK SANDEONE PLANTERS 1 S'-2. 12'40 r 15'-2' . 43'4' 9iEr TiTLE DOSHNG NORTH El-EVATON J<;04/BEA 00'0Â·200X DATE 09/06/00 1* BY /viSCNFECRD EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION C,Wileâ‚¬ ]ArE ir SCALE 1 /4" 1'0. eC- ENCS 3 >131/\I 2-2- 5Â·-0- mâ€ž01 - 12 \ -9.: - il/./57 \44 \\ " - :: a.:.: 1/1 - - -- [\3 111 4 1'1 111 Ii l li' i'l i~ 1 il ill iiii A,4- i m 0-FR -V Z E Z= 1 4 1 1[-711 M! 11 , 11 - 11 3 11. mir"FMMER 1 / 11\ EXISTING STUCCO WALLS Â» 1 --- -\ 611 1 \ STUCCO HEADERS 11 1 3'-0" 1'-4/' i 10'-10. 191-9â€¢ 1 3â€¢aâ€¢ 19-9 BE DATE TO 42'-6 EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION Sfr n-LE SCALE: 1 /4" 1 ' 0. .,68 U.IBER 0010-2000C DATE 09/06/00 0144,IN. REVISICN RECCK 04*4OE DATE B. CO*MENTS . 21Nyll/\11]SVE) SIC).-)INNVIN OaÂ¥110103 'Nl,ISV Er - 1 9ET i,< 1 1 =Â®*Emit DOSTING SÂ·EEr},ErAL. ROOANG * qiER@iQ?figgli?i}fiti:it 1 1 ~ 1*Emi}im Mi?i?i{:: in*.la:/:I : 46*ft; Ef-titiE* , .4 i-: -2, miBi*:i ; 5...... 92 ?224:Â· Ii!I 11 I'II Il' Il' #, f: A 0494*H:Wmil ORZONTAL WOOD SONG ar~%2:~Di~i~ ~ *ii?diki i ~ ~, 9~..1 I ~ ilai: A-: 1 ~ I firr ' 1 b DISTING STUCCO WALLS 6 f [Â£1Â£ f ~ f ~ L.1 ~Â£1Â£ 1/*vii:i iiiliiii iii*-3â‚¬:01 9 1 11 1 1';'''I'J 1, pl I , I., 611; 2 1 1 P.-4 ' /*/" '',;,':'; p~' I : 'N InEDATE 1 , 1 TO 1 1 1 1 1 ~ ~\ NEW WINDOW TO MATCH E.XErING ' | ~ EXOSTNG STUCCO SILLS 1 ~ x 3'-7 4/ 5Â·-0' i 3'-0. 5'-0Â· 1 ! 3' -OIl 8'-7 1 3'-0Â· 40-2, 1 8'-2Â· 7-9" ' 3Â·-3Â· PI . 4. ~ORYSTACK SANDSTONE PLANTERS ' I J 17'-7 1/77 14' e | 2418â€¢ 1 f. r \ENTRY TO GUIDOS RESTAURANT PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4â€¢ 1,0. SHEET TrrLE PROPOSED EAST ELEVATÂ»â€¢ JCS MAIBER 0016200X DATE 09/0&'00 DA/-1 82 REVISCN FECOFÂ© 04Â»96 ' DeE S 00â€¢~leÂ·rIE VVIN r T ?211 I. - p= F NO f 11 f I , m Lk : 1,41 f j 11: 11,. ::iÂ·:i~i-::::i:: i:i ,/ 4/ 4/ 1 -: EXISTINa,teIZONIALWOOD SIDING '' :' 3 /N -/7 Al 11/ 7 7 ? 1~ E)<911*G Al co 4 li' -- C 4 MT--7- .1,1 '4 1 1.;.i râ€ž.21 1.11, 1 . 11!'11 ImuE DATE TC 8-11/r ~ ~ 20-5" ~ 9-0â€¢ F-5â€¢ N 1 7-5- - f .r 1 DRYSTACK SANDSTONE PLANTERS 1 5'-2. 12â€¢4â€¢ . 15'-2' 43'-0' NEW ENTRY TO MATCH 8<STING SIiEET TIZE PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION 28 4.â€¢taER 0010-200oc DATE 09 06/00 DAA- 6Â¥ 1 FWISON *XRD PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION CHANGE D.A. I. SCALE 1/4" 1'0" IC.war-S ... MASm 3>131NHSVE) fal)]>INVIN 00VHO 103 'N3dSV ~ 12 ~ SET TOE ~ GET NO / //7 6\/ 10 ~ 4, :u*ii:*i g //4444\ 1J - r: 43.{ii#:i: .4 i{ I~ /4 /,&1 /4 14 3,1/4 /} ,: /4 I{ /4 .f;i-h:i:1::i Zii: I-:iE.:ill 4: ,:i:Â·i :i: : :Iii:.i. NEW WINDOW TO MATCH EASTING ~~~~TUÂ¥WAICt!~ &:i? i..:ii:.ii:ii:i: Imi ti~7 f 7'F r# FR- Ii: I /4~ 4 112,-eli 4 Ill'Al D-3::~ti:.: s: IE 1 ,E -----------i.... STUCCO HEADERS $EW WIPâ‚¬)0Â¥'S TO MATCH EXISTING 34 3'*0" ~ 1Â·-4' 30-00 1'-4, r 10'-10. I 1 ma'inimim 19â€¢-9' 3-0~ 19'-9" 1//Â£/ATE -C 42'-6â€¢ PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION 52â‚¬ET m-LE SCALE: 1/4" 1'0" JCB FA-MBER 001 32000C IiATE 091 06/CIO C.AWN SY #EMICA RECCAD I C}Â·IANG,E I DAn GY A DCD.MENTS 1:ED':32.EfE 1:~titi Ei:~*4 ... 28'-7 5/8 8 0 3'.GÂ·' 5Â·.0 12' 1 5/8" 10 4" 5 4 \ 1 , 1 1 1 .7. - 1 - 1 O 1 .1 - - 1 h .J 4410 I - f -Â· B ; 27<2 - 11 1 1 .\ Z '9 -Tr... I..: - - <3Â· Â¥1,31*iMMÂ·> w w b Y 1 M 0 1 * -- 7 I 4 3%@ ASPFN, C.01 ORADO R g .67.7.7.'.'A'.7.7.7.+.'.'.7.'.'.'.'.7.7.+.t'.L-A'.'.'.W.'.7.*.'.77.*.V.'.7.W,V.4 N.A~ 7.VAW,WIC.V. ............... 9 lil ..,/ L ~37, NOI1VA313 1SV3 9NllSI 80571NG S-EETh ETAL ROOR 46 Soc21/NEr IHORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING SEL.Nrkd ~01SONYS NOViSAH[k~ .2- g .0- * ~ -,9 #,G ~ .O-.9 ~r A-,6 1 s-nis ocof'LLS DN-LSDG $ ~ .. %~- a.2 --4 ..\ th N t \ I. 1 \\.\ .-I:..... .. - --4. :--42. :.. fijii: I. C. . I I Â£ : \. \P 141#. - I.- C-Â· WEST ELEVATION ... Fl f' / Y 6 K'k N , 4. 1 , I r- Eli I . -: I'ly 1, . 7-1 7 4 - l 1 -6-1' ir _~ So UTH St.EVA:no N . r.4 .. 5.-fy (354 Llear; e-/ cor Â¢,r 43 L' fr - rf ,\01 Y o 1 0 t aft 1 0 0 O \49. I 0 0 1 0 00 3 0 3 1 1 1 1 \ 145 6 1 I 01 1 d ' '11 ..op A-=--0 , 1 91 dor t O 1 L 61 k I 1 1 4 1 I _1 r i . 1 6,00 Osf 1 66+ 1 91 2- f i 1 LA A-4 6 9 iS't .~ i 2-6 42 8-y 51 . 1 5/5-- G tle>t vs' >r 9' 4 \90" 0 9 \OX 0 61 1 01 0 . 1 I e 4 5- i i P . 34 k e .,p 1 0 1 -- 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 E -1 I 6,00 OsF 1 1 -- - --1 r 1 1 1 1 1 j â‚¬ 11 i 4 L- -It -1 \ 1 2.6 - r r r