Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20070613 '~~>---"~'--"--'----~"~'--~'._-"_._---~----- ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING June 13, 2007 5:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 130 S. GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO SITE VIS1T: Please site visit all the properties on your own. NOON - Wed. 6/13 visit the Holden Marolt Mining Museum I. Roll call ' A II. Approval of minutes - April 25th, 2007 wlU--{jI III. Public Comments IV. Commission member comments V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) VI. Project Monitoring VII. Staff comments: Certificate of No Negative Effect issued (Next resolution will be #23 ) VIII. OLD BUSINESS A. Caribou Alley- Open and continue to 6/27 to B. Holden Marolt - continued public hearing (30 min.) ~I/j I!:; ff0 C. 332 W. Main Street - Major Development, Final, continued public hearing from 5/23 (45 min.) /71./ ScJ. ,}.3 IX. NEW BUSINESS A. Smuggler Cabin Rel/ocation -lOOOMatchless Drive - Public Hearing (30 min.)ci ';,dV> (lUtLfj,,-<L (L(i(),J1f B. 980 Gibson Ave. - Conceptual, Major D~velopmeJ,lt - Public Hearing (45 min.) Ith)ol\ 1l/14iSl.{ci LJVrLL (). 7 ilr C. 300 W. Main Street - Minor Development - Public Hearing (30 min.) d \- X. WORKSESSIONS A. NONE IX. ADJOURN 8:00 p.m. Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) Staff presentation Applicant presentation Board questions and clarifications Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) Board comments Applicant rebuttal (comments) Motion No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at leastfour (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of the members ofthe commission then present and voting. 1:1:: C\. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Holden Marolt Museum, Minor Development- PUBLIC HEARING DATE: March 14,2007 SUMMARY: The Holden Marolt Ranching and Mining Museum is owned by the City and leased to the Aspen Historical Society (AHS) for the long-term. The site is a local landmark and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Historical Society has invested a good deal of time in discussing their mission related to the several properties they oversee. It is staffs understanding that Holden Marolt is envisioned to be a "living history" site, with hands on opportunities. To this end AHS has acquired equipment that they wish to display and make operable. Two items in particular are the topic of this meeting; a sawmill and a steam engine. They have been installed outdoors because running them inside the existing structures would present numerous issues related to building code, venting, etc., however AHS built open air sheds to provide some protection to the artifacts, and neglected to seek HPC approval in advance. Drawings and photographs depicting the work are attached. HPC's role in this discussion is not related to how the Historical Society chooses to interpret the property, but rather the positioning and design of permanent improvements that are made to the site. Staff can support approval of the shed covering the saw mill, but finds that the structure over the steam engine is too close to the historic salt shed building. APPLICANT: Aspen Historical Society. PARCEL In: 2735-123-63-853. ADDRESS: 40180 Highway 82, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. ZONING: Public. MINOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation I Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. Staff Response: The design guidelines offer limited direction for a project of this nature. The sheds are new buildings on a landmarked property, however the chapter of the design guidelines that deals with that issue is really directed at residential infill projects. Staff has included the relevant guidelines as "Exhibit A." Within the text of Chapter 14, it is expressed repeatedly that new buildings must be compatible with adjacent historic structures so that their historical integrity is maintained. A new building in close proximity to a landmark structure should not impede one's ability to interpret the character of the historic property. These policy statements are part of HPC' s review criteria. The Holden Marolt property contains remnants of a very large 19th century ore processing complex. It used a unique process called lixiviation. All but a few of the original buildings are gone, although there are substantial archaeological remains downhilI from the museum site. This photo depicts the property as it remained in circa 1940. 2 Staff finds that the sheds are clearly distinguishable as new and meet the design guidelines in terms of their form and materials. The shelter for the saw milI is sufficiently distanced from the other structures on the site, however the steam engine shelter is too close to the Salt Shed. It blocks the view of the west fayade of the building and diverts snow and water directly at the building. We cannot support this location. DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: . approve the application, . approve the application with conditions, . disapprove the application, or · continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC approve the saw mill shelter, but not the steam engine shelter. Altematives should be discussed with the applicant Exhibits: Resolution #_, Series of2007 A. Application Exhibit A: Relevant HPC Design Guidelines 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. D Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. D They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. D Roof materials should have a matte, non-reflective finish. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. D Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. D Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. D These include windows, doors and porches. D Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. D This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. D Highly complex and omately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) APPROVING MINOR DEVELOPMENT FOR THE HOLDEN MAROLT RANCHING AND MINING MUSEUM, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. _, SERIES OF 2007 PARCEL In: 2735-123-63-853 WHEREAS, the applicant, the Aspen Historical Society, has requested approval for Minor Development for two open air sheds at the Holden Marolt Ranching and Mining Museum, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Minor Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.C of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated March 14, 2007, performed an analysis of the application based on the review standards and the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and recommended approval for only one of the two sheds (sawmill shed); and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on March 14,2007, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found that the sawmilI shed was consistent with the review standards and "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and granted approval with conditions by a vote of _ to _' . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC approves Minor Development allowing for the construction of an open air shed over the sawmill display at the Holden Marolt Ranching and Mining Museum, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION on the 14th day of March, 2007. Approved as to Form: ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Steam Engine shelter from the west. (note the aged patina the older timber structure has developed) Structural detail ilIustrating building materials. Scaled elevation and drawings are attached. Lighting Plan, there is no lighting systems for the shelters. 4 City of Aspen Zone Districts Page I of I City of Aspen Zone Districts r,r;1w:'1 a=J I:::J ~~ Q4t ~1 0" f40 tJ~ - --- c ~';. [ Refresh Map ] Pan ht+n'I/'JI'I~ 171'1 ~ 1 ?,O/website/asoenzone/viewer.htm 11/6/2006 1Jl[ c. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 332 West Main Street, Major Development Review (Final) - Public Hearing continued from May 23, 2007 DATE: June 13, 2007 SUMMARY: The subject property is a large two and a half story Queen Anne Style house located on the northeast comer of Third and Main Streets. It is a contributing resource in the Main Street Historic District. The historic structure was built in 1889 as a residence for 1. W. Taylor and his family and is considered one of the more prestigious buildings in Aspen with it's decorative barge board and exterior shingles. The building has undergone various alterations since the 19th century including a 537 square foot rear addition, a flat roof carport, and window alterations on the main street fayade. The dates of the alterations are unknown and they are considered non-historic. HPC has granted approval for Demolition of the non-historic rear addition and carport, Conceptual design for a new addition, and Setback Variances. The historic house will be maintained in it's existing location, which is an advantage in terms of historic integrity, but does limit the buildable area for the new addition, and the ability to create a new connector element. This was considered acceptable to the board. As a benefit to the streetscape, the applicant proposes to remove the curb cut and the parking space along Third Street, and to create a single car garage and uncovered parking along the alley. Staff finds that the project meets the design guidelines and recommends approval with conditions. APPLICANT: Alice Brien, represented by L. John Muir of John Muir Architects, Inc. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-41-007. ADDRESS: 332 West Main Street, Lot K & the west Y, of Lot L, Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: MU, Mixed Use. 1 MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Final level, is asfollows. StajJreviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the stajJ analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: Recently, the HPC has been contemplating new tools to analyze the appropriateness of proposals to alter historic structures. The following questions are likely to be the center of future discussions, and may be helpful for HPC to at least reference for this project (note that the questions do not serve as formal decision making criteria at this time): 1. Why is the property significant? 2. What are the key features of the property? 3. What is the character of the context? How sensitive is the context to changes? 4. How would the proposed work affect the property's integrity assessment score? 5. What is the potential for cumulative alterations that may affect the integrity of the property? This large Queen Anne style house was the residence of 1. W. Taylor; an influential businessman during Aspen's mining days. Taylor was a partner in the prominent Taylor and Bruton Sampling Works, a company that dealt with handling and marketing ores and occupied a full city block in Aspen. The property is locally significant in its association with an individual person and its contribution to the Main Street Historic District. Key features of the property include the unconventional use of shingles instead of the typical horizontal clapboard siding, decorative barge board, half timber in attic and gable ends, corbelled chimneys with flared tops and the original wrap around porch with square posts with flared tops. The house is located within the Main Street historic district among modest miner's cottages and larger Victorian buildings. It is a distinct landmark along Main Street which contributes to a positive relationship between the low scale of the miner's cottages and that of new construction. 2 The owner has completed some repair work on the historic house and plans to restore a group of windows on the front fayade as part of this project. These actions will increase the property's integrity assessment score. Mixed Use zoning for this neighborhood allows for the possibility of a significant amount of FAR, which may be difficult to fully achieve and be in compliance with the Historic Preservation Guidelines. The approximate proposed FAR for this project is 3,498, which is 1,000 square feet less than the maximum allowed. Desi2n Guideline review Final review focuses on materials, landscape, and lighting. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit A." Only those guidelines with which staff finds the project may be in conflict are included in the memo. Before addressing the Final review areas, the board should be aware of some deviations from the elevations that received Conceptual approval. The proposed addition has the same footprint as viewed previously, however the as-built conditions were slightly off in terms of the size of the historic lean-to addition on the house. The lean-to is slightly longer in the north/south dimension than was represented earlier, and so now, if nothing is done to change the proposed new construction, it inserts into the north wall of the historic form rather than butting into it. Staff has concerns with this and the affect on the historic integrity of the Victorian. We suggest that the applicant pull back the upper floor of the addition to be more consistent with the prior approval. The cricket between the new and old has moved higher up the roof, which was a concern at Conceptual. It should be minimized as much as possible. The most relevant guideline is: 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. o For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. At Conceptual, the roof of the addition terminated in a ridge, however to actually accomplish that appearance and stay below the height of the historic building, it has been amended to a flat roof. Staff supports this rather than allowing the addition to be taller. The form of the roof will change slightly if the upper floor is modified as suggested above. The proposal replaces/reconfigures existing windows and doors on the street-facing wall of the lean-to addition. This should not be undertaken until framing is exposed to indicate which openings are original and which require preservation. The guidelines state: 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. o Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining feature. o Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls. o Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. The landscape plan is appropriate, however, for clarification, no trees can be added in the right- of-way without Parks Department approval and no alterations should be made to the historic ditch. The application does not include a lighting plan, which will require staff and monitor review prior to building permit. DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: · approve the application, · approve the application with conditions, · disapprove the application, or · continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC approve the application for Major Development (Final) for 332 West Main Street, Lot K & the west Y, of Lot L, Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, with the following conditions: I. Pull back the upper floor of the addition to align with the north wall of the historic lean-to. Provide amended elevations and roof plan for HPC review. 2. No window/door changes are approved for the west fayade of the historic lean-to until the original openings that require preservation are determined in the field. Framing evidence will be reviewed by staff and monitor. 3. HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of exterior lighting fixtures by reviewing a plan prior to wiring, purchasing, or iristalling the fixtures. 4. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the information is available. 5. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor, or the full board. 6. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 7. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 8. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit. 4 Exhibits: A. Relevant Design Guidelines B. Conceptually approved elevations, May 10,2006 C. Minutes from HPC Conceptual Review D. Application "Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines for 332 West Main Street, Final Review" 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. o This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. o Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. o Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. o The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod, and not covered with paving, for example. 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. o Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. o If a tree must be removed as part of the addition or alteration, replace it with species of a large enough scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. o Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. o Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. o Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials. 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are inappropriate. o Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. o Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. o It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. o Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes. 1.16 Preserve historically significant landscape designs and features. o This includes the arrangement of trees, shrubs, plant beds, irrigation ditches and sidewalks in the public right-of-way. 1.17 Maintain historic irrigation ditches as an integral component of the streetscape. 5 The character of an irrigation ditch should be maintained. o It is inappropriate to use an irrigation ditch as a planting bed, or to fill it with another material. o Ditches cannot by culverted except where crossed by a walkway or driveway, and a culvert must be approved by the Parks Department. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. o Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled buildings. o If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. o Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. o If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non-reflective finish. 9.7 A lightwell may be used to permit light into below-grade living space. o In general, a lightwell is prohibited on a wall that faces a street (per the Residential Design Standards). o The size of a lightwell should be minimized. o A lightwell that is used as a walkout space may be used only in limited situations and will be considered on a case-by-case basis. If a walkout space is feasible, it should be surrounded by a simple fence or rail. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. o A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. o An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. o An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. o An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. o An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. o A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. o An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. o A I-story connector is preferred. o The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. o The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. o Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. 6 o Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. o For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. o The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 12..16 Use roofing materials that are similar in appearance to those seen historically. 12..17 Use building materials that are similar to those used historically. o When selecting materials, reflect the simple and modest character of historic materials and their placement. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. o The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. o All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. o Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. o Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. o Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. o Do not wash an entire building facade in light. o A void placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. o A void duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. o Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. o Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights-of-way. 14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way. o Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. o Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of the building itseIf. o Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges. o A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. o Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the street or alley. Also minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Use smaller satellite dishes and mount them low to the ground and away from front yards, significant building facades or highly visible roof planes. 7 o Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds. 14.16 Locate standpipes, meters and other service equipment such that they will not damage historic facade materials. o Cutting channels into historic facade materials damages the historic building fabric and is inappropriate. Do not locate equipment on the front facade. o If a channel must be cut, either locate it on a secondary facade, or place it low on the wall. 8 .. I \ i' -:! ~. ~ Sl' ~ !Z " '. . .' :::.....~ ._...~;;r._ '. .~~ ~~ rW ". ..,. h .!' ,,,,\ - -c: ' . j L.. ~4 ( ~ " ~ ~j~2-~ ~~~~IJ~~(. - .;J -:;;- ~. ~ - Ct;;..\ ~ Jro. ~i'" 1(\, ., -- ..~~ -.:,.~<;.V ~ =-.~ .~ ( - ~v ~ L NOI~IaaV - .. 00..... 0 '" ~ " ~ " ~~~~~ ~~~~~ 0. ~ ~ ~ ;g \l ~ U "- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :I: 0 ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ..... :;it!. I .. - ~ 'D\ . . ~ I ~J ~. 11 ,.-"---' " - J I ~ "It ~. ) .;" , ~{ .~~ ~.. ~~ (' ." ", t , ~~ ".~ :;:2- ~)i 11 Jtn 1= . 'ft >-- , ~ . > ~ "r. '" I ,; ". ~ 5 ~ ~~ Q . CJ .- o · ~J.- -ltiz;IOTi ~N--( ,~. . '$3'... I I ?-:=~.: -~ ''''''. ~::'::~0 . I \~:_. '_, . '. r . ~::c:':r . i .......;:; _'__"-, . \ "', ~', ) . eJ'\1 ~ --:'::"~"',._."', . '. . r . . '. C:C<==-.__:..._ .( ""'\ . t?:l,.: . ,----.' '.~_ . .-,;,' "" ft.c>~c . ,oJ:~.' j~~. '!:'h.~. '~". '~J.~-.~ '~~~ . .) 4 ~';;~r ~. ~-Y. f, . _,', . '~~H-4[ . ~. 'J '{I.' . ....:;;:.. . 4~~~-";"'rS ~s: f-.' . ""'. V '1. /loll- . ' . .. . . ~. o ,:- "":' C\ \-'.... ~ t'. " ','>""oJ. , ~r ...\.- .'_.\ ."-.. i(..l ~ 0-g tt~ Y-"~ ....') .......~ -" IT, ,.. . ~~. i ..... "?r \;:,"f:i~~ }}>k~ ~~.. '\ %~1'/-',i \t.. J.... ~ &r' -=t~ ~ . ..... _ __;:::;;i. d> t.,~.i~ ) 'C....-4 ".Y ~ <.;" f' {'" 'l" . .. .".91"1f M'..p..r ~~ . ..., ~. '.'8:t"~ .),':'( ..... .,...' ~.. ... t~. . i:..1:1.~V'-": · . ~>t . .."l:jS~j.-/~11 '1/' V' .. . .~'i.;~ ,J~.J~... . :L.... ...(.,...4o."'}.,p.. .'t 'C.."", c (C-("', ",-( . ..;".~ ~.. .C:i.....1f. ~.~2.:"'<{. .,.{i..... ~~. ~.vL "'i- Jj.",..,'1..-~~~. . .:rt.g h~G-. '~lr ,. . It~.. . ~~( ;;.cr ... .. "" . . Y'o ... ~f ..~ 'o~~ ::: . . ~!: ~~ . . ';"w~ ;i::..o E!!. g !"':' .. IC STRUCTURE ~ET ADO ~._- 3 <0<0 .. ....,...., @88 II> ....,,,, .g 00 ... >1>0>1>0 _. I I y.. ceo ;:IN'" ~000l ....,0 ~J -~J: :~ ~U Q1 'o. 7-. ~ ~.V! $ 11 .' \J!~ffi . c> t ...r:. . ~N ~~~8 ~f:; .g.p; ....,()~ ~@g; ~~E:l ~6=1t oc/> o 00>1>0 - '" N C/> ]X A. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner RE: 1000 Matchless Drive, Historic Cabin on Smuggler Tennis Property, Relocation, Public Hearing DATE: June 13, 2007 SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to redevelop a portion of the Smuggler Racquet Club property into affordable housing. Until recently, a mapping error has led to the belief that this parcel was in the County, however, it is within city limits. Currently a small gable roofed cabin sits in the development area along Park Circle. Staff finds that the location, size, and form of the small cabin are identical to a building evident in historic photographs and maps of the Smuggler Mine. The Smuggler Mine was listed on the National Register in 1987. The applicant initiated designation of the cabin; and on January 10,2007, HPC recommended by a vote offour to zero (4 - 0) that City Council add the cabin, with a 10 foot setback around the to the Historic Inventory. City Council has yet to hear the designation application. Also during the January 10th hearing, HPC voted four to zero (4 - 0) denying the application to relocate the cabin 25 feet west on the property. HPC decided to hear the application to relocate again, with the condition that the affordable housing proposal for the entire site be presented in order to accurately assess relocation. Staff has carefully looked at the site and weighed the options about whether relocation is appropriate. It is important to have a sensitive site plan that incorporates the historic cabin as a significant structure and does not relegate it as a burdensome "shanty." The site plan and program that is intended for the Smuggler Racquet Club property makes it difficult to retain the cabin in its current location while at the same time highlighting its importance. Staff finds that relocation ofthe cabin is appropriate for the site with the conditions that the orientation toward the Smuggler Mine is maintained and the two facades facing the cabin are redesigned for approval by staff and monitor to ensure that the cabin remains prominent and is highlighted on the site. An interpretive marker explaining the connection of the cabin with the Smuggler Mine is a condition of approval. ADDRESS: 1000 Matchless Drive, the Southeast V. of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Tract A, Aspen Township Addition. PARCEL ID: 2737-074-00-018 1 APPLICANT: Aspen Land Fund II, represented by Kim Weil ofPoss Architecture and Planning RELOCATION The following standards apply for relocating a historic property as per Section 26.415.090.C of the Municipal Code: C. Standards for the Relocation of Designated Properties Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets anyone of the following standards: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; Q! 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; Q! 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionallv. for approval to relocate all ofthe followin2 criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Response: The applicant proposes to move the building thirty (30) feet to the west and five (5) feet to the south, and will maintain the current orientation toward the Smuggler Mine. An engineer assessment is included in the application, which confIrms the ability to relocate the cabin safely. At the request of HPC, the applicant included elevations and a site plan for the affordable housing development. This is not a typical HPC application where the Commission has purview over the entire parcel. HPC is considering the relocation of the cabin; however Staff finds that the new context of the cabin is integral to the discussion of relocation, as implied in Guideline 9.2 below: 9.2 Moving an existing building that contributes to the character of a historic district should be avoided. . The si2nificance of a buildin2 and the character of its settin2 will be considered. . In general, relocating a contributing building in a district requires greater sensitivity than moving an individually-listed structure because the relative positioning of it reflects patterns of development, including spacing of side yards and front yard setbacks, that relate to other historic structures in the area. 2 Staff finds that the character and integrity of the building are largely related to its association with the Smuggler Mine. The context of the historic Mine is located much farther up the hill, which creates a difficult visual connection with the cabin. After multiple site visits, Staff finds that moving the structure meets criteria 4 above, as "an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building," with the conditions that the history of the building to the Smuggler Mine shall be incorporated on the site with an interpretive marker; and the two facades facing the cabin (page 14 of the application) be redesigned to better highlight the importance of the historic cabin, to be approved by HPC Staff and monitor based on comments tonight. Staff proposes that the HPC has purview over the two facades that face the cabin and the open space around the cabin in perpetuity. To help guide the discussion for the surrounding new development, the following Historic Preservation Design Guidelines relate to new buildings on historic properties: 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. o They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. o Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. o Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. o These include windows, doors and porches. o Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. o This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. o Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. Staff is concerned that the current proposal degrades the cabin to a secondary building and "artifact." An acceptable preservation method should include an active use for the building, which historically was an assay office; however HPC does not have purview over use. A children's play area is proposed for the space adjacent to the cabin. Staff recommends that Staff and monitor approve the location of the play equipment, benches, etc. to ensure the appropriate preservation of the cabin. No rehabilitation measures are proposed with this application, but will be pursued once the cabin is relocated and stabilized and a use is determined for the structure. Staff recommends that a rehabilitation plan be submitted to Staff and monitor prior to the Final approval of the PUD from City Council. Guideline 9.1 states that "rehabilitation of the building must occur as a first phase of any improvements." 3 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. . In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures, than those in a historic district. . It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative . Rehabilitation of a historic buildin2 must occur as a first phase of anv improvements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the HPC approve the application to relocate the cabin located at 1000 Matchless Drive, the Southeast V. of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Tract A, Aspen Township Addition, thirty (30) feet west and five (5) feet south with the following conditions: 1. The cabin will maintain the same orientation toward Smuggler Mountain in its new location. 2. Staff and monitor will approve the facades of the new development, including materials, details, scale and form, that face the cabin- Block A, south elevation; and Block B, west elevation- as indicated on the application, in perpetuity. 3. Staff and monitor will approve the landscaping around the cabin and entire play area, including equipment, hardscape, materials, benches, lighting. 4. The applicant will post an interpretive marker on the property that will be approved by staff and monitor, and will explain the historic significance of the cabin and its connection to the Smuggler Mine. 5. A rehabilitation plan for the cabin will be submitted to staff and monitor prior to the approval of the Final PUD by City Council. 6. A structural report demonstrating that the building can be moved and/or information about how the house will be stabilized from the house mover must be submitted with the building permit application. The applicant must provide information as to whether or not the existing floor structure will be maintained and the pro's and con's of the decision for review and approval by staff and monitor. 7. A bond or letter of credit in the amount of $30,000 to insure the safe relocation of the structure must be submitted with the building permit application. 8. A relocation plan detailing how and where the building will be stored and protected during construction must be submitted with the building permit application. 9. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 10. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit to relocate the cabin. 11. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit to rehabilitate the cabin. 4 12. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 1000 Matchless Drive. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Exhibits: Resolution # _, series of 2007. A) Design Guidelines B) HPC minutes, January 10,2007. C) Application Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines for 1000 Matchless Drive. 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. . In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures, than those in a historic district. . It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative 5 . Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements. . A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details and materials. 9.2 Moving an existing building that contributes to the character of a historic district should be avoided. . The significance of a building and the character of its setting will be considered. . In general, relocating a contributing building in a district requires greater sensitivity than moving an individually-listed structure because the relative positioning of it reflects patterns of development, including spacing of side yards and front yard setbacks, that relate to other historic structures in the area. 9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HPC, a structure must remain within the boundaries of its historic parcel. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. . It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. . It may not, for example, be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. o They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. o Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. o Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. o These include windows, doors and porches. o Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. o This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. o Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. 6 rx: 8. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner RE: 980 Gibson Avenue, Major Development Review (Conceptual), Demolition, Relocation, Variances DATE: June 13, 2007 SUMMARY: The subject property is located at 980 Gibson Avenue, near the base of Smuggler Mountain. The approximately 13,000 square foot lot is part of the Alpine Acres Subdivision and contains two historic resources. The lot is condominiumized: Lot lB recently completed a rear addition to a historic resource. The application before HPC is for Lot lA, which contains a historic l880s miner's cabin that was moved to its current location from an unknown lot. The front fayade of the cabin is oriented east, away from Gibson Street. As it currently sits, the rectangular form is difficult to distinguish due to a number of alterations and a car port. The applicant proposes to relocate the cabin 90 degrees, and orient the front fayade toward the street. HPC is asked to review Demolition of the non-historic addition and car port; Conceptual Review of a new addition; the Residential Design Standards and Setback Variances. A 221 square foot FAR bonus is requested for rehabilitation and high quality design. The applicant presented the design in a worksession with HPC last fall. Staff finds that the criteria are met and recommends that HPC approve the application with conditions. APPLICANT: MDI, LLC, 109 ABC, Aspen, CO 81612, represented by Scott Bartleet of Flux Design Studio, P.O. Box 2611, Basalt, CO 81621. PARCELID: 2737-074-10-001. ADDRESS: 980 Gibson Avenue, Unit #1, Alpine Acres Subdivision, Lot #1, City of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6 is the underlying zone, and there are zoning restrictions in the Alpine Acres Subdivision Agreement. MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance 1 with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: The following questions provide background context and history about the property in question, and do not serve as formal criteria. 1. Why is the property significant? The property represents a late Victorian era residence. 2. What are the key features of the property? The structure has the characteristics of typical mining era structures- size, simple rectangular plan, front gable roof. 3. What is the character of the context? How sensitive is the context to changes? A historic cabin is located to the west. The neighborhood has changed dramatically with new residential development. Historic cabins are randomly scattered throughout the Smuggler neighborhood, the majority of which have additions and alterations. 4. How would the proposed work affect the property's integrity assessment score? The proposed work will remove existing additions that do not conform with the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and will add a front porch and an addition that meets the Guidelines. This work will positively affect the integrity assessment score. The house is not in its original location, so moving it on the site will not have an adverse impact. 5. What is the potential for cumulative alterations that may affect the integrity of the property? The proposal before HPC will not leave any unbuilt development rights for 980 Gibson. The Alpine Acres Subdivision has a maximum FAR cap per dwelling unit of 2,486 square feet, which is the amount of countable development before HPC. DESIGN GUIDELINE REVIEW Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. A list of the design guidelines relevant to Conceptual Review is attached as "Exhibit A." Only those guidelines which staff finds the project may be in conflict with, or where discussion is needed, are included in the memo. 2 Staff Response: The applicant proposes a two story addition to the rear of the historic resource, with a first floor plate height of 11 feet and a second story plate height of 9 feet. Overall, Staff finds that the form and massing of the addition meets the Design Guidelines. The proposal balances the gable roof form of the historic resource with contemporary details that distinguish the addition as new. Staff finds that Guidelines 10.3, 10.4 and 10.8 are met: 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. . A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. . An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also in inappropriate. . An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. . An addition that covers historically significant features in inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. . An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. . A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. . Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate . Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. . Set back an addition from primary fayade in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. Connector piece: Staff is concerned about the second floor corridor that is located above the linking element. The intent of the connector piece is to spatially separate the old and new building. Due to site constraints, Staff is in favor of the horizontal connector piece, but recommends that the second story be removed from the proposal to comply with the intent of Guideline 10.7 below: 3 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. . A I story connector is preferred. . The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. . The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. Garage: The location of the garage on the north property line does not comply with the International Residential Code that prohibits openings within three feet (3') of the property line. Staff is not in favor of moving the garage forward three feet toward the south lot line, and recommends that the applicant reduce the length of the garage to nineteen feet (19') rather than the twenty-two feet (22 ') proposed. Staff is in favor of the curb cut off of Matchless Drive, and requests more information regarding a surface easement permitting a driveway over the adjacent parcel to the north. DEMOLITION Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets anyone of the following criteria: a. The property has been determined by the city to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen, or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance, and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic district in which it is located, and b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c. Demolition ofthe structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. Staff Response: The applicant requests approval to demolish the non-historic addition to the west and the non-historic carport to the east. Both additions are pre-1980 and are not historic. Staff finds that criteria d and Guideline 10.2 are met, and recommends demolition approval. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 4 RELOCATION The following standards apply for relocating a historic property as per Section 26.415.090.C of the Municipal Code: C. Standards for the Relocation of Designated Properties Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets anyone ofthe following standards: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; !!! 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionallv. for approval to relocate all of the followin2 criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Response: The historic resource is not in its original location. The applicant requests approval to rotate the structure 90 degrees, which will orient the historic front fayade toward the street. Staff finds that the proposal is an acceptable preservation method that will not adversely affect the integrity of the house, rather the project will clarify the representation of this structure as part of Aspen's mining heritage. Staff recommends that the applicant present a foundation detail, existing and proposed for the cabin, for approval at Final Review. FAR BONUS The applicant is requesting a 221 square foot floor area bonus. The following standards apply to granting an FAR bonus as per Section 26.4l5.ll0.E: 1. In selected circumstances the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; and b. The historic building is the key element ofthe property and the 5 addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building and/or c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; and/or d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; and/or e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; and/or g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. 2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor area. 3. The decision to grant a Floor Area Bonus for Major Development projects will occur as part of the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan, pursuant to Section 26.415.070(D). No development application that includes a request for a Floor Area Bonus may be submitted until after the applicant has met with the HPC in a work session to discuss how the proposal might meet the bonus considerations. Staff Response: Rehabilitation: The applicant proposes to re-orient the front fa~ade of the house toward Gibson A venue, and remove existing additions to the house. The applicant is adding a front porch that is typical to the mining era. Staff has been unable to locate a historic photograph of this house, as it was relocated to this site at some point. Staff finds that the proposed rehabilitation of the house fulfills this portion of the Bonus criteria. Design: Staff finds that the proposed design accurately distinguishes new from old construction. The historic home is prominently featured at the front of the property with the addition toward the rear. Staff finds that with a reduction in height of the linking element, the design meets the Design Guidelines. SETBACK VARIANCES The criteria for granting setback variances, per Section 26.415.1l0.B of the Municipal Code are as follows: In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or 6 architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Response: The applicant requests a zero foot (0') north rearyard setback for the proposed development where ten feet (10') is required. A west sideyard setback of ten feet (10') is required, where 15 feet (15') is required. Staff finds that granting the variances allows the development to be pushed farther away from the historic resource. The proposed garage openings that are located on the northern property line, and the windows in the stairwell, are in violation of the International Residential Code, which prohibits openings within 3 feet of the property line. Staff recommends that the applicant resolve these issues by removing the window openings in the stairwell and reducing the size of the garage by three feet (3 '). A rearyard variance of three feet (3') is required, should the applicant decide to reduce the garage length. DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: . approve the application, . approve tbe application with conditions, . disapprove the application, or . continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: 1. The second story on top of the linking element will be removed. 2. Demolition of the non-historic addition and car port is granted. 3. An FAR Bonus of22l square feet is granted for rehabilitation and high quality design. 4. The following setback variances are granted: ten feet (10') for the west sideyard and three feet (3') for the north rearyard. 5. Relocation of the historic house is granted, with the condition that the applicant will present a detail of the foundation, existing and proposed for the historic resource, for approval at HPC Final Review. 6. A structural report demonstrating that the building can be moved and/or information about how the house will be stabilized from the house mover must be submitted with the building permit application. The applicant must provide information as to whether or not the existing floor structure will be maintained and the pro's and con's of the decision for review and approval by staff and monitor. 7. A bond or letter of credit in the amount of $30,000 to insure the safe relocation of the structure must be submitted with the building permit application. 8. A relocation plan detailing how and where the building will be stored and protected during construction must be submitted with the building permit application. 7 9. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. Exhibits: Resolution # _' Series of 2007. A.) Relevant Design Guidelines B.) Application "Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines for 980 Gibson Avenue, Conceptual Review" 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. . In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures, than those in a historic district. . It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative . Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements. . A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details and materials. 9.2 Moving an existing building that contributes to the character of a historic district should be avoided. . The significance of a building and the character of its setting will be considered. . In general, relocating a contributing building in a district requires greater sensitivity than moving an individually-listed structure because the relative positioning of it reflects patterns of development, including spacing of side yards and front yard setbacks, that relate to other historic structures in the area. 9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HPC, a structure must remain within the boundaries of its historic parcel. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. . It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. . It may not, for example, be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. . 9.5 A new foundation should appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. . On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a modest miner's cottage is discouraged because it would be out of character. . Where a stone foundation was used historically, and is to be replaced, the replacement should be similar in the cut of the stone and design of mortar joints. 9.6 When rebnilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic elevation above grade. 8 . Raising the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable. However, lifting it substantially above the grade level is inappropriate. 9.7 A lightwell may be used to permit light into below-grade living space. . In general a lightwell is prohibited on awall that faces a street. . The size of the lightwell should be minimized. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. . A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. . An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also in inappropriate. . An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. . An addition that covers historically significant features in inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. . An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. . A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. . An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building IS preferred. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. . A 1 story connector is preferred. . The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. . The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. . Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate . Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. . Set back an addition from primary fayade in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. . Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate . Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs 9 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important features. . F or example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eave lines should be avoided. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. . They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally on the block. . On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. 10 ~c. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams, Preservation Planner RE: 300 West Main Street- Minor Development- Public Hearing DATE: June 13, 2007. SUMMARY: The Minor Development application before HPC is for exterior repairs to a historic log cabin . located on Main Street. On May 9, 2007, HPC adopted Resolution No. 18, Series 2007, which places a four (4) year moratorium on obtaining a building permit as a penalty for work without a permit, with the condition that the property owner repair the damage to the cabin. The scope of the repair project is as follows: 1. repair porch columns and footings. 2. repair/replace header over porch. 3. repair and restore the tailings along the east facade. 4. repair northeast corner. APPLICANT: Corene McGovern of Mittel Europa Company, represented by B. Phinizy Spalding of Aspen Constructors. PARCELlD: 2735-124-41-006. ADDRESS: 300 West Main Street, Lots Q, R, and S, Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: MU, mixed use. MINOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. 1 Staff Response: The wood species at 300 West Main Street is spruce, which is a soft wood that is nonresistant to decay. It is also categorized as one of the more difficult species to treat with preservatives that will prevent decay. Repair porch columns and footinas: Due to water damage, the applicant removed and replaced the frontmost porch column, on the southside of the porch, with a large log column last fall. The frontmost column on the northside of the porch exhibits a severely deteriorated log column, with the majority of the deterioration at the base where it sits on a concrete pad. The applicant proposes to replace the northern column in kind, with beetle-killed spruce, and does not propose any changes to the southern column that was recently replaced. To mitigate water damage to the northern column, and conform with IBC requirements, the applicant proposes the addition of a simpson strong tie base that will lift a new wood column off of the concrete base approximately 6 inches. Staff is concerned about changing the aesthetic of the columns by adding a 6 inch high gap between the concrete and the column. The other option is to reduce the size of the base horizontally and place a capillary break between the wood and the concrete, to prevent capillary action and water backsplash from penetrating the structural wood column. The auestions before HPC are the followina: 1. Which option should be used to mitigate future water damage to the columns at the front of the porch and meet IBC code requirements? a1 'Ii inch gap between the concrete and the column base using the simpson strong tie b. Reduce the size of the column base horizontally to be flush with the column, and build the base to a minimum of 8 inches tall from grade to minimize backsplash. Put a capillary break between the column and the concrete base. 2. Should the columns (both frontmost columns, including the one that was replaced in the fall) be replaced with bark covered spruce to restore the original appearance of the porch? Should all three columns be replaced to match the old photograph (Exhibit A)? 3. Should the footings that are exposed above grade have a stone veneer similar to the old photographs? Reoairlreplace header over Dorch: overhanaina tailinas alona the east facade: northeast comer: The applicant proposes to replace and restore the front facade of the cabin to its previous appearance by using a half-lap joint and in kind wood Dutchmen. Staff recommends that all of the new material be treated with preservatives, including joints, and that wood dowels are used where possible. Staff recommends that staff and monitor perform a site visit with the licensed HP contractor to identify the overhanging tailings on each facade of the historic cabin that need to be replaced in this manner, as part of this repair project. The northeast corner will be repaired in kind and the removed chinking will be replaced with a similar composition. Mitiaatina future water damaae: Staff recognizes that the environment, wood species and aesthetic of 300 West Main Street promote water damage, rot, and insect infestation. In order to avoid demolition by neglect in the future, Staff recommends that the applicant compose a longterm maintenance plan for mitigating water damage. Heat tape, regular snow removal, and possibly adding an interior drainage 2 system could create positive drainage that diverts water from the exposed beams. No interest loans are available from the City for historic property owners for up to $25,000. DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: . approve the application, . approve the application with conditions, . disapprove the application, or . continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the HPC approve the application for Minor Development for the property located at 300 West Main Street, Lots Q, R, and S, Biock 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO, with the following conditions: 1. The two front columns on the porch will be replaced with bark covered Spruce, using the technique described in Option B above. 2. A stone veneer that matches the old photograph will be applied to the concrete bases of the frontmost columns on the porch. 3. All deteriorated tailings, as identified by staff and monitor, will be replaced in kind with treated wood, 4. A longterm plan will be submitted before building permit submittal that explains a solution to the water damage, HPC staff and monitor must approve the plan before a building permit will be issued. 5. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor, or the full board. 6. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 7. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 8. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit. 9. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a 3 newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 300 West Main Street. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Resolution # Series of 2007. Exhibits: A. Old photograph B. Application 4 ~k. WVtJfJ! <SrULt. PA\i~\\ A. Land Use Application ,..". RETAIN FOR f'ERMAKEMT REC""O [!fJ THE CITY OF ASPEN PROJECT: Name: Location: ~<~ s L-, [. C, CK4 (Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED)-llitJ. I ~I' 000 ApPLICANT: Name: ~LC. (e~\--- V o (6 \ \ Address: Phone #: E-mail: Address: Phone #: E-mail: ," .). (0""-'" Name: TYPE OF ApPLICATION: ( lease check all that a I): o Historic Designation q Certificate of No Negative Effect ~ Certificate of Appropriateness JL:!-' -Minor Historic Development o -Major Historic Development o -Conceptual Historic Development o -Final Historic Development o -Substantial Amendment o Relocation (temporary, on or off-site) o Demolition (total demolition) o Historic Landmark Lot Split EXISTING CONDITIONS: (descri tion of existin ~"'~J C; ?.\- rovals, etc.) ~ co~~~~ Existing Conditions 300 West Main Street is a mixed-use building containing an interior decorating business, Mittel Europa Company, and a private residence. The original structure is a log home that has been converted into office and display space for the owner's company; I believe it was a restaurant previously. All the repairs to the building are intended to restore the character and original look. They include extending rafter tails past the eaves, extending 3 outlookers past the eaves, replacing the timber header on the front porch, and replacing a badly decomposed column and its footing. Proposal There are no significant modifications to the property included in this proposal. The only total replacements are the right side column on the front porch and the header that runs the length of the porch. Both have been determined to be in a deteriorated state by our structural engineer, Matt Monger of Maggert and Associates, and our timber framer, Paul DiMento of Mountain Log and Timber. All other repairs of the rafter tails and outlookers are strictly cosmetic issues and will help the look of the building tremendously. We hope to bring back several key features of this rustic structure in order to preserve the feel ofthe Main Street corridor. "~",,,,,,,,, :'-~~~ . ", .-=-.". ~ . ,._~~~,. ~- ,:'o'_~;';';_'.' ;::;;;:';' " ...... " iA.LMaggert & AssoCiates,]nc. : _ . ,580"Mam.Stt'l'et;Suite 300. . ,Crirbundille, C/)I~do~ 8162~2065 _".:._,~_!.r\.l.ctu La I,En gine.er~' " (910) 963-9.;43. Fax (!l'10) 963.01:15 ~ W\hv'.Ma~ertE~neers._~~ ',October 23, :Z006 .' Co~eneMCGovern . ,'" , 'MitteJEuropa COInPanY.' 300 West Main Street ASPElti;.Colorado 81611 Re:300W~si: Main, OJ.dLog Home/Restaurant ", ' ,', - '- - . ", ..,' -,'. --. DearCorene: On Angust17,-Barry Maggert an4 Matthew M~ng~rofMagg;ert & i}sso<iates;Inc.made '~f .~s~e}"~ti?n_Yi,~~r~g;_tp~.~P..q>,'t~.[~Wecrlog, b&1clin~_-weun:terst~~.that you are ;C,?~c_~:nfg.~\~\~,~:~~~:~ ~_~~ge}~~~t.~~~~)~t:1B,v,'lfl~ws'JeJ<,~~PJ'&9.~ti9~S~, ',' ,'.' ' "The -~h;uct~e.in' qtieatiOh1i~ ;<lrii ~1iierfQgkaTiffi: th~tq~'moteiliim.'li1<eli:corisfrJct~dof ' , Jocallyharvested. tirrtJjets ~n the,eaili~r; stages; of Aspen' sdeveiopment Additiotiai square footage was latter addedbbth aboV'eandbelgwgnideon the North'&West enq of the building. This1?ecti()n o! thebuilclingwaS:w6odfrarried using conventioniU coristructionpracticesandwas notilI1'.ar~!:l ofconce'rtL ' , .-",' ' " ' T~eolder ,log' structiu'e "sho\Vs.()b0o~s~igrts' 6frQtand' has.' not. beeJ:1.. .prQperly maintaifled, :The decay found on the. Strl1.ctute isares~lt of. two. conditions where- water .' is.being trapped. One is to beJoun&onthe roof, ph~a3e ,see photo #1, here the log 'roof :. rqiters and hi;>rizontallogs that ext~nd beyond the roof line are exposed to moisture . whenitrain1?.or Snow rnelts. Secort(ithelog collirr}rls rest directly on concrete or stone, \Yicking watetirol).1 rain, snowartd-from watering the yard, please see photo #2; If these moistUrecol1.~itlonsarenot ';1ddres~ed 1:h~ fungi responsible fOr the decay will continue " to groW-and expand, ' , ' ,- . . . ,To prevent fu.rtherdecay alid stfucturaldaffiaging strengi:hlo€s th.efolio~ingi~eIIlsare 'suggested: TheTOO~;5houldl;:>eJlashed,t() di;5chafge' watetawflY ,ft()IIl the ~o()&:The, ' , "P-l1Qtruding' ,WQCid"that ~,ig' is'getting:We:fshOuld be'capF~d,~th'~. sTbMd~lt~et~iTIeta1 -, 'su,.~,~':lf~;M(. 4,t:he.~,gl~~ shqW8,.~e,,~ePMflt~~.,frOI)l,tl1, eEe,C\gtenHle~$'~N:S using.a. '~fppr6'j:i'tilit~'Wat~i!sta.rlqoffb'<i:se~R1~t~:.'-,::~~ ,'" " ", ',' ",' 'r< . '>,"~~l;/):l'!/~~_::'J":: '{-__,_~~~C', . .:",-, ~""~'.',f_./,h' ;..:1':-,..:- -' '~" . ,;- j . ' ' . ,..., . ~ .' .... :/, . 4--1 . . " '.--,- "~:??,~.-.' '~;,., .'''~ .=. ..;;.~. . . - , , . , , - Of greatehtructu,ral cOI1cemisthetop horizontallogatthe NorthEast cOrner oillie. pt):ucture.Please see Photo #3, here theqe~ayisreachiflg fuitherthan the fjTst roofrafj:er .. .. and wiUrequire the member tope replaced 'l:vithanother 10g,.rnatChing size aIlci speci~s:. . . Therepiacement o.ftr(e log tnaybe.do.ne'by tempciarily shOriri~ther~oftha.tbears OIl. .. thelog.Inadditiont6th~sesSti~gestions:it isaJ.soreconuneridedthiit the wood be. . .. .treatedwith a~opicalthemicalpreservaj:ive on aregularl;>a.sis.. .. . . It should be Iio.ted:that the abovereportisbasedonvishai1;)bs~rvation$ .a,s stated. N6 physical testing or calculations were. performed l;>yMaggert & Associates, Il1c.Thereis . no claim, either stat.ed or implied, that all conditionswereobseI-yed.lf there are any.. . . questions Or commeritsconcerning. this letter or latter wncems Or issues regarding. this. .' . log structurepl"easecallaieNTlail.. . . .. . . . . . , .- ,'. .Sj:ilcerely, . Revi,ewed By:. . Matthe;v Monger' . . mat.t@maggettengine€rs.coill' ~ _.. _ -r...!L '.:1. ~~/"\'~,o;.J:.;..~. ....:-~-.,..,~ . ",.. . ','. . Barry Maggert, P,E/ . JjClI'1'j@mag~ertei1gineers;com . .. ., ',' . ~-?-: ~ll ~. ',' ""- ." ~ . r " d- - / / "-.. / 1,0' , , , / ,'ii/ {, / J / I .' / / / , ,~ :~i I j j" ,4 ,- I , ! \, , j : Q , . ~ tl 1 . . '~ " ~- "---._-~....- -. __'i~'; ~~"'~ .,~ - -_..~.-.,~;~ .-,-"'. ._~.-~ ~ ."~j..,,,,:" f' - .~' .~ ~{F- .' . ;ti." " :~! --zrt~.. . ~. " ":t. : l,.t .~~ I ~. ",- . , . (,-). UJL. Jr 1"\\...oL.r\J 3" I MINUS 2" @ CENTER LINE COL AS REQ'D 3" T. PIER S" ABOVE FINISH GRADE 2-1/2"" THRU BOLTS 4 - #4 DOWELS J x FULL HT. , wi 9 GA. WIRE 6' TIES @ 10" O.c. .... . -1111-=1111=1111 :<<: "II :>>: I' 'III :<<:11' PLATE 1/4" xCOLAREAwl 4 -3/4" EPOXY ANCHORS S 1/2" MIN. EMBD. 1011121 CONC. PIER .... . .... . .... . .... . 1 1/2" CLR. .... . .... . SEE PLAN FOR FTG. & REINF. .... . .... . B. FOOTING BELOW FROST DEPTH "" ~ --' MU ........ .... ...... . ........ .... ...... . ........ .... ...... . ........ .... ...... . ........ .... .......... . ............ . .......... . ............ . .......... . Concrete Pier @ Footin Pad & Column Base 15 3/4"= 1'-0" CF-308.7 LOG COL SEE PLAN PLATE 1/4" x 4" @ CENTER OF COL N I I --pol I I ---I 1 1'1 I 3/4"" BOLTS ;,- PLATE 1/2" x 8" x 8" SQ '" 3"" PIPE x STAND OFF SEE FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION ('~ \ ;; 'I ' IIII (4) 3/4" EPOXY ANCHORS WI S 1/2" MIN. EMBD. II11 II Concrete Pier @ Footir}g Pad 3/4"= "-0" c'_31211161 306 S. Garmisch Dwn by: MA.M. Chkd by: B.K.M. Job#: Date: Maggert & Associates, Inc. Structural Engineers S80 Main Street, Suite 300 Carbondale, Colorado 81623-2035 (970) 963-9643 . FAX 963.0135 6-7-06 SHEET C3.2 2 OF 2 Co-~ 00 ~ " " '" ~ '" ~ PLAN <r '" '" V(2L/~fV\ ~~\ 0 Ii L I f< VD'[. , "^- ::ri IN\ f 1Y' 9'1 31/2" 1 1/4" rr II II II II II II II II II II II II ~., " M' .4. .N. ..... .... .... .... -.... ... . .. - ........~... .. ......... ... ... ......... ... \~. ~ _--J .... -.... .... ... .. . .... -.... ~........ .. ........ .. .fI~^.. ".,,;/ ....:..~ :j-;.,.,., .' . ~.~ .' .. ~'.~.~~~W." ...~., ~........~..,.....~.. ;. .,;;...... ~ ... ......;. ... ';.' .... .. ~ ......,:. ...;. ...... ELEVATION ~ Column Base 3/4"= 1'-0" Maggert & Associates, Inc. Structural Engineers 580 Main Street, Suite 300 Carboudale, Colorado 81623.2035 (970) 963-9643 . FAX 963.0135 306 S. Garmisch PLATE 3/8" EACH WAY 3/4" EPOXY ANCHORS WI S 1/2" MIN. EMBD. 3" 0 X 12" PIPE COL. @ CENTER LINE OF WOOD COL. COLUMN 3/4" BOLTS WI BRIDGE WASHERS 1/211 PLATE NON-SHRINK GROUT CONCRETE PAD SEE SCHEDUEL FOR SIZE & REINF. WL-J 14\ Own by: M.A.M. Chkd by: B.K.M. Job#: Date: 6-7-06 SHEET C3.1 1 OF 2 (;-4 Page I of 1 foe; ....._.II................H .................rri-:.,. ...,,"".........I...............l..:.........I__~...I.._._n__~_Ir"nC' DD1:T ^ n~ ....:.c 1""l/11/".""f\L Page 1 of 1 It of All Thread Rod 4*" Min. : n , 'l ' .'. ~ . - .-' I .':. ..... .' 1.':"~.\~.' .~~, ."<< II' , ,;.,.~..:":''''-- . <. - . .:-:) . ;'. . ...... .' ;.~ .jj. ; . . '.' (,- c, '-~.II.__._.. n....^~....;~ ^nm/,",onh;,.../nTnill1,..J.I1~rp-e/CPS-PBV APG2.l!if 12/11/2006 Page 1 of 1 .~ .. f' ~ . , ~ 6-7 httn"//UJUJU.! ~fT[)notip. ~nm/OT:::tnhiC'l;;!/nTnil11('.t(1.I1~rap.IPRV ina 17/11/")/1/1;; Page 1 of 1 10d Nail c-~ http://www.strongtie.com/graphics/products/large/CPS-PBV_ APG3 .gif 12/11/2006 Page 1 of 1 r'''- "'-, f/ ) \ ':, ..\ . '\. . . . r \ " ';-.. '10-. ,I \ . .... :':-.. .:--- . . ) \-\'..';::.J:.. . ;../ Y.....:. .J ~ :{;;..." '-~'- .. ".:: -J;~. ;.; .:,.... .' \.--.......................--.---.-- (,-C{ http://www.strongtie.com/graphics/products/large/CPS-PBV _ APG4.gif l2!l1/200fi Page 1 of 1 (-10 http://www.strongtie.com/graphics/products/large/CPS.jpg 12/11/2006 Post or Dimensions I Model I I . No. . c~i~~n ,L . W _ H I CPS4 ,- 4x4 f 3v.. ijY' 1 1 CPS46 4x6 I 5:'.- 3'1'61 1 6~~~.': '.-=~~ff .~~. ,~~'I = i-' .CPS7 . ; 8xe. -I. 7.'0 J10 .I.: ~ '~~~~~~C -1~ 6i~~T~~: f-=.t+. Page 1 of 1 fasteners Allowable Loads Posl Anchor U l'lt Do\vn" Boll pi Code ReI 4-10d f}" 4490 5195 -e 4-10d fl:'.' 4490 5865 , ,~ _____n__m ... . 4-10d :~';-, ' 4490 5865 170 - .-- 4-10d [}t.' 4490 7745 4.10d r,:,' 4490 8315 _..-..--,.... --- --". ~-_._._._-_... . ----.. 4.S0S'f.,X3 ~:.~ . 3800 9250 9 ____...___d__..._.____ ..----- -."',--"-'--- -------.-- 4-S0SI~X3 ~: ~ . 3300 19225 (,-ll http://www.strongtie.com/graphics/products/tables/CPS-PBV _ APG.gif 12/11/2006 Exhibit 2 Porch header -Scope of repair to include replacement of timber header with another beetle killed spruce timber to be approximately one and a half inches wider than the existing in order to catch the existing porch rafters as recommended by the timber framer, Paul DiMento of Mountain Log and Timber, and Mathew Monger of Maggert and Associates structural engmeers. -The extent of rot is demonstrated by a measuring tape sticking into the rot spots indicating depth of deterioration. Also knocking on the beam itself indicates its hollowness. 7-1 $r ,. 7-J- J - , ' .-, '-: --- - ... . - - '---~- '"'''!t :._..,,,,~. ~~_ :....l"~_)> :'-;~/~----, ;... 1'::i-. h-L I ~ " I .".. / I iI B! ~r:f ~<l ~"'ii ; :1:' ~ 1 ! ~d Ij:~~, IH iI1'~ ~H i/~::- ~:'!~ ~:-~-) ~L 0/ o 6' ( 9 'J " '~ ( "i '"(.':-: 1..:." ~- ,~if~>2>:: ~5:~ '~'~:":: '.' ,#:.,-,. .' ".l(- ~:~~;,S.~-.i ~::,<~ L~:' ~~:''7;{-:',~''~:::~'':~-'' l-~~:"~'c-~'_"'.~i'~ , ~~;!~~ '~d~~1..- ,-.a:~" - ''''''~l;i S-L ',;. t'. "J. , .; . ,,,,' '':~" , :2t~" ,,~'\_ji'.' ''',~, \~~~~~t", ,)I:~ 'tit' , .' ,,; _~~)o. " . <-':I'" "l''to'- a 1-'" ._~ ' '>J,' ''Y/.i'" 'p' :y J , / ,I / J/ , ' -1- ..., -. c~ ,,, ~ ,., r; : \ ~~.~'2~:~"'~,3. ?~"- ~~2;~~~.~~~~ ~""".L_ -~,~" -~- ,-.. ..--".,".; >-* -'>1, ~ t:Q .,1:" \J ..J :,.,.../' / ,_.\ III '1 -~<~\ Exhibit 3 Outlookers -The scope of repair for the two outlookers on the south side that show severe weathering is to cut back the rot to create a timber frame joint, most likely a half lap joint(see diagram) to allow a dutchman to be sistered in. This joint should be protected from exposure to weather by positioning it under the eave. The length of the existing outlookers is shown in the pictures following this page. The eastern outlooker is approximately 27 inches long from the wall to the end, with around 12 inches of material missing. The western outlooker is approximately 30 inches long from the wall to the end, with around 12 inches of material missing. -The scope of repair for the north side outlooker is more involved. It has more deterioration than the southern exposure and meets a purlin to form the eave. This has been observed by the structural engineer and the timber framer and has been deemed a cosmetic repair. A dutchman sistered into the existing member with a half lap joint and pegged appropriately will produce the desired effect. The joint should be under the eave in order to provide some protection. . ~-1 - ---.,.,ij " . S,(.'L, r- r.~"'-:,~~" , " \.-\ \! ,'- ()L/ '. '_'L..j -',j 1,1.... --1JiI'~' . I;-i .A " .. - ... . .0' ----.~ / .~1,.;{:,t .if ,\. . , .",..,..-"",": .'" ;,,6(1 ._J'Jf ...,-~ -' ~ i ::~:;",_~: \. 1 '" ~, ; , ,,; )~ ",'" ;,,'" J' ~ ~ ~'~!'t~.U _,,":~i~' 'r<':;-i",\ ,~~{.~~\ t .11 .U \. . '...... t. .....-4 1.."' \.l .",,~ ~" ..... .'1,,' .n Q """'* f ~. ' , ~;; ~ ~-~ " \ \\ \ t." ."....'...\ ,,- :,. , JC- e1'". 'l.~ :-':ic::,~;_~ \ '" \ '" /1"(, !~ , , " L~, ;'. '.1. (.j; (}.)i ) .' \ \! r "\ "-/ / ' '- ,~J'. \. _ '6-) ill ~.~ -I'. ",- / ~ -"': .... ....,ii. f(O ' ~ ,-".,,,, ~ I , / .' ..'.".(' ! I ,:.-, .'"),;.." -"- ,:{Y; ,,~~ of;,. ' , of! :j/!Ip ,,;. I 'I :'<"i :/',.,r" ";_.;/'/ . _;//'i 'L'_ " i , q:r~' ~ - , 'J ~.)). . "'- '~ .. '."" . ',-. ., ~".... -., ., . . t". ~ ~<., ,-.~~.. "'" . - ~ , , . ;. !\ ~\ ~' . "- ~."".'.. " ;--:;.'5. '" ~ ,~. - " ., .-~- .:. -". -l! ,~. - ~- . .~..;J' ~ :~. "":~:: '~.1tIP"- '. _~~~i~ '..,...-' ''_'' _ '''':''.'- AJO/~U~S\0V'- 0../ ~\ oiMt! III ., ~. " ~ ',- . .' <:6-3 " '- ' ", 'CY.:.~" ':,~\};~~ . ~ ~ ; -~~.-' ~, "',...,,<~ ..' '" J"... , ".':.. ............~'r\ ... I!:~'- '.~ _,!i.<; '" Page 1 of 1 .~~ I ,/ \ -- NET CROSS SECTION AT PEGS < 50% OF GROSS IID.IlER CROSS SECTION ~- \D \~\~ - L~ CSj);,,~ I.++-'//nnmu tf'hrt' a(lvl<tmrtllr/nllh<!040QR/im~"e~/fi!!1 03. iu!! 12/11/2006 Page 1 of 1 / -= ~-- -("--' . Ha1f tap SplICe o ro-....J.:J , :..----.. i~ Bevel lap Splice I I ,~~ ~j ~.- ~ Tabled SpiKe Joint (J ~- t\ http://upload. wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3c/W oodworking~joint-splice.gifl300p... 12/11/2006 Exhibit 4 Rafter tails -The scope of repair for the three sections of rafter tails is strictly cosmetic. There is a section to the left of the porch with 6 tails, a section across the front of the porch with 8 tails, and a section on the North side above the outlooker repair consisting of2 tails. The repairs entail making a square cut that will be protected by the eave on each rafter tail, drilling a hole, placing a dowel, securing with a wood friendly epoxy, and splicing in a new log. We feel the rafter tails should extend past the eaves 6-8 inches but would like a recommendation from the historical committee. This technique is showcased on the National Parks Service website in the preservation briefs section chapter 26; The Preservation and Repair of Historic Log Buildings, written by Bruce Bomberger. q-i ..-: ., -"'~. ."........<- -... ,~. ,..---' - '. ....... ~' 1t ,,~,.r - . - ",1 " .,~.....-.t J.."-',"\ .- :'.;Jf'~' -... f'~ ~~-'~ '/q':~ " '.i.clf t 1 .. t.&; ." ., ,_ -:~:!J_,"- -"Z"'. . h,!".' .-~ ,.,,- .~ "/ ' -, ".,~..~,:t ill: , - .......... ,~. .............. .-. . . ,...,_~.-,o'_':';";."'.., ,",' i.. ~~~.$'~~;:;;:="'~~. "~~'-'--"lo'i~"~~D_ .;,<".~::~~~~~':: ~_.:.;-___~ --..- .:.:.0., .----:-.~..'_:~~.":'..'_, t~'~:f~i\I:. ';::;-~5'~"""~\. n"~'::~~D'.--. :, ~<"D. . " ~ , ; t I , .r ~-~ ~ )"',' "., ;.,,-"" t ,..\. . ,+" "j;j ,,' /# .;"'J . ."'-I.t. ' '.' . $" ,~ '-1,.... ... - 'I '-.' . './,' ..', 1)Jf.; ..: -:;' .~..~~.'..;.,- ._ , ';d-.:r-,~ ,r -=."_, _.!'l.....1'", .. ;<"flt.:.' . .:/~-_ ,,'<-', .c~';".; .; -t:. >"';' "'rJ.{ Ii. ~~-- '.-." ,"[.,' ""'''::It.'''' ~','-';.~-'" ,.......-.~.. ~'-:,..:~-''*..''';i'>;r-::- ""-~ ~ <--:' 1-.' " ",-.-:; , " .' i..... "'.< ';.1:'~ 9'.t-Jr..- J#'"'' ~ . ....::."".;.;~"~J1:..,,,.. :r:;:~~~ ~~;j/jr~.4' r.. .J --$" ..",. ..i f4\}j'r ,.:' . . { l1'fi',~ . "';., ,€<' , } ~r' :i r...... ~'." . . ~i5' ~. ~ "';1 ~.' ~~~- 1 ':f, ;..r '" ~' .. ~,,, '~-- ~ "'""",,",,'" it:, ;I- ~, , 'T.. r l~t ;.Jl;{,_..-~ .'" ".,-.- \ q-~ \; \ \ " c.'c' ~-~