Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.304 E Hopkins Ave.HPC21-93- r. --5 b W 6 Ng p 949 Renaissance Minor Development HPC21-93 \1 1 80*- t--1 P -5- c P 4 L_ CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee DATE RECEIVED: CASE NUMBER: HPC21-93 DATE COMPLETE: PARCEL ID#: 2737-073-75-002.. PROJECT NAME: Renaissance Minor Development Review Project Address: 304 E. Hopkins; Lot L, Block 80, City & Townsite APPLICANT: Charles Dale 920-1901(h) 925-7439(w) Applicant Address: 155 Lone Pine, Apt A3, Aspen REPRESENTATIVE: Representative Address/Phone: TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 STEP: 2 STEP: 3 STEP: HPO Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption: HPC Meeting Dates: P&Z Meeting Date: CC Meeting Dates: 1st 2nd REFERRALS: Planning Building Zoning City Engineer Parks Dept. City Attorney DATE REFERRED: INITIALS: DUE: FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: INITIAL: City Atty City Clerks Office Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: COMMENTS: MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer Re: 304 E. Hopkins Avenue, Renaissance Restaurant, Minor Development Review Date: July 14, 1993 SUMMARY: Applicant requests Minor Development approval to cover the existing staircase with a transparent cover, to install new windows which will conform to the existing design of the building, and to create a double door entrance connecting the upstairs and downstairs and to install new exterior doors on the terrace. APPLICANT: Charles C. Dale. LOCATION: 304 E. Hopkins Avenue, Lot L, Block 80, Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. OTHER PLANNING DEPARTMENT ACTION: The applicant has requested a GMQS exemption for 80 square feet of restaurant space. PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 7-601 of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. Attached are the applicant's description of the proposed project and drawings. NOTE: The attached elevation does not depict the doors opening onto the terrace. Amended drawings will be provided at review. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in character with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H, " Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to a Historic Landmark... Response: This structure was built in 1981-1983, and is located in the Commercial Core Historic District. It stands between an inventoried parcel (the John Harkins House, a.k.a. La Cocina) and a Landmarked parcel (the A.G. Sheperd/Chatfield House, a.k.a. Museums of the World) , and is opposite the Landmarked Katie Reid parcel. As it exists now, 304 E. Cooper is not particularly compatible with the surrounding historic buildings, in terms of its setbacks and materials. The proposed change will neither improve nor lessen compatibility with the rest of the historic district. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The proposed development adds variety to the main facade and encourages outdoor activity, which is a benefit to the district. It does appear, however, that the entrance to the restaurant will be extremely dominant visually, and perhaps out of scale with the surrounding buildings. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: The changes proposed do not enhance or further impact the value of the surrounding buildings and district to the Aspen community. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposal has no direct impact on any historic structure. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any of the following alternatives: 1) Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. 2) Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be met prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3) Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy (specific recommendations should be offered.) 4) Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the development review standards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the HPC approve Minor Development as submitted. Additional Comments: LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project Name: R-Od A 151 -+FA) Ci:< fah::14 d-.A-A) T~ 2. Project Location: 304 -42. 4-le,PK-'OS , L. of U BLO Clk go, 1 ) (Indicate street address, lot and block number, legal description where appropriate) 3. Present Zoning: CoMME(Ze I,vb 4. Lot Size: 3.000 32 5. Applicant's Name, Address & Phone No.: C H AR-LES C. b.& c€- / <-« L.-c)Ali- 9,0 E /2-4- APY- AS (H) 9 2.0 -/90/ ~ 9 2 5 - 3- 4 59(G)) 1 6. Representative's Name, Address & Phone No.: N 1 47 7. Type of Application (Please check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA Conceptual Historic Development Special Review Final SPA Final Historic Dev. 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD Minor Historic Dev. Stream Margin Final PUD Historic Demolition Mtn. View Plane Subdivision Historic Designation Condominiumization Text/Map Amendment GMQS Allotment Lot Split/Lot Line GMQS Exemption by Adjustment Planning Dir. 0/ GMQS Exemption 8. Description Of Existing Uses (number and type of existing structures; approximate square feet; number of bedrooms; any previous approvals granted to the property): .ST-,2-ocr-r\) AJE- Cd'M Mate i &1.- 23 I CT- 1 9 8/ - 83 - 3, ODD s f- -15*12- 4/kl 6,46 cir~ 9. Description of Development Application: ~bbi d € A- 2-00-E -r© 6< (ST-,/8& 00'-rt©Of- 91'ka t'23 . 10. Ha¥e you attached the following? / Response to Attachment 2, Minimum Submission Contents -~ Response to Attachment 3, Specific Submission Contents June 24, 1993 To whom it may concern, Attached please find my application for a GMQS Exemption Development. La Dolce Vita, Inc, Dba Renaissance Restaurant, hereby appoints Charles C. Dale, of 155 Lone Pine Rd, Aspen, Co; tel (303) 920-1901; work (303) 925-7439, as its representative. Renaissance Restaurant is located at 304 East Hopkins, Lot L, Block 80, Townsite of Aspen, State of Colorado. Also attached please find a lease including the right to cover the outside stairs, assigned from the landlord. We propose to cover the existing staircase with a transparent cover and windows which will conform to the existing design of the building. We also propose to create a double door entrance in order to connect the upstairs and ithe downstairs. The exemption we are requesting is for approximately 80 square feet. Thank you for your attention to our request. Sincerely, , cks_-22 Charles C. Dale FOURTH ADDENDUM TO LEASE THIS FOURTH ADDENDUM TO LEASE entered into this day of May, 1993 between WILLIAM L. SEGUIN ("Lessor") and LA DOLCE VITA, INC., a Colorado corporation ("Lessee"). RECITATIQNA A. Reference is made to the following documents which, unless specifically referred to, shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Lease": (i) Lease dated March 5, 1990 between the Lessor and Charles Dale "as Lessee", (ii) Addendum to Lease dated May 16, 1990, (iii) Assignment of Lease dated May 26, 1990, assigning the Lease from Charles Dale to Lessee, (iv) Second Addendum to Lease dated May , 1990, and (v) Third Addendum to Lease dated December , 1992. B. The Lease demised from the Lessor to the Lessee Condomin- ium Unit 2, the Seguin Building, a portion of the ground level patio and Space 5A, all of such space being located in the Seguin Building located at 304 East Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, Colorado, 81611, such space constituting the "Premises" pursuant to the Lease. C. The parties desire to modify the Lease to add and demise additional space in the Seguin Building and to make other additions all as contained herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum of TEN DOLLARS AND 00/100 ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, together with the covenants herein contained, it is agreed as follows: 1. Recitations. The above recitations are true and correct. 2. Additional Premises. Attached hereto and made a part hereof is a sketch of the second floor of the Seguin Building. Reflected on such sketch is a portion of the second floor designat- ed as "Unit 5'°, "Larry Brooks' Office" and "bath" . Such space shall constitute the additional premises herein demised from the Lessor to the Lessee pursuant to this Fourth Addendum. Such additional demise shall include the second floor patio. The additional space demised consists of approximately 702 square feet, exclusive of the patio area, all of such space to constitute the "Additional Premises". 3. Rent. Rent for the Additional Premises shall be the sum of ONE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED SIXTY-SIX AND 00/100 DOLLARS ($1,666.00) per month which rental payment shall commence on the 1st day of July, 1993. Possession of Additional Premises shall be granted to the Lessee on May 1, 1993 and shall, with the exception of the obligation to pay utilities, be conveyed rent-free through June 30, 1993. The rental rate shall continue monthly on the first day of each month through and including the payment due on March 1, 1995. On April 1, 1995 such rental shall be adjusted in accordance with the provisions for adjustment of rent contained in the Lease. 4. Term. The Additional Premises shall be leased from the Lessor to the Lessee for a term identical to the term contained in the Lease, together with all extensions and options contained therein and herein. The initial term of the Lease is for a period of ten years and two months, expiring on May 31, 2000 and the Lessor has granted to the Lessee an option to extend such term for an additional period of five years. The parties desire to modify the month of expiration of the Lease (either the original term or any extension) from May 31 to April 30. As an additional consider- ation of the undertakings herein contained, the Lessor grants unto the Lessee an additional option to extend the term of the Lease for a five-year period which five-year period shall commence on May 1, 2005 and expire on April 30, 2010 and rent for such extended term shall be adjusted to reflect any inflationary increases in accordance with the provisions contained in the Lease. Each of the options granted to the Lessee must be exercised by it by the delivery of written notice to the Lessor no later than 90 days prior to the expiration of the then term. 5. Alteration of Stairwav. Lessee shall be entitled, at its option, to alter and/or enclose the existing stairway and entryway between the first floor and the second floor of the Seguin Building in such fashion so that Condominium Unit 2 and Space (Condominium Unit) No. 5 can be joined for purposes of conducting the Lessee's business. In the event this option is exercised by the Lessee, such alteration shall provide for the exclusive use of such stairway and entryway by the Lessee and by no other tenants of the Seguin Building. In the event the Lessee elects to accomplish such alteration, which election shall occur in its sole and absolute discretion, Lessee shall be entitled to receive a rent credit in an amount not to exceed FIVE THOUSAND AND 00/100 ($5,000.00) based upon its construction expenses which credit shall be amortized for a period of 33 months from the date such construction is completed. 6. Maintenance bv Lessee. Effective July 1, 1993, the Lessee shall, in accordance with the terms and provisions of the Lease, be responsible for maintaining (non-structural) and cleaning of both the second floor deck and the entry to Space No. 5. 7. Windows. In the event the Lessee elects, in the exercise of its sole and absolute discretion, to replace the windows leading to the ground level portion of the Premises, which option if elected shall be at the sole and exclusive expense of the Lessee, then the Lessor agrees to grant a rent credit to the Lessee in the 2 amount of ONE THOUSAND AND 00/100 ($1,000.00) which shall consti- tute a credit against the next ensuing month's rent after such windows are installed. 8. Lessor Credit. As additional consideration for the execution of this Fourth Addendum, the Lessee agrees to grant to the Lessor a credit at its restaurant in the amount of TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND 00/100 ($2,500.00) to be used by the Lessor or any person he may so designate. If used by any other person, such use is conditioned upon telephonic approval being given in advance from the Lessor to the Lessee. 9. Right of First Refusal. Lessor and Lessee hereby clarify the verbiage contained in paragraphs 29 and 36 of the Lease Agreement dated March 5, 1990 so as to make clear the fact that the Lessee has a right of first refusal to purchase the premises described in such Lease Addendum, any other premises leased to the Lessee and/or the Building or any other condominium units in the building wherein such premises are located. Such right of first refusal shall also extend to a right in the Lessee to lease any additional space in the Building or any additional condominium units in the Building wherein any of such premises are located. 10. Effect. Except as modified hereunder and as previously modified, the Lease remains in full force and effect. LESSEE: La Dolce Vita, Inc., a Colorado corporation By: >21- LIv-·=.--1.43 - Chafles Dale, President LESSOR: ~ / \1 \ \ 4/9-1/ v © By: / Av (./ I dl-l f> William L. Seguiy m®\temp\seguin 9 a- 3 1 lili 9·rk*u Fic0·e·*r> ~' PIA ~ MI* 44«14 \ d »j h«1 F- ILIE - *0rb-re#<5 III- INIZZ IZZZ IZLEL .1 1 . ==I==== /-- ~L == - - 1- =IZE= -I .- -- - --I =1- - -7- -4- . - nIZE f --- --1 - 91, - UIL_ » 1-' f 2 . D 0 + 7 £ -$-'- 1.--~)~1-- =t - It=L 1/ 11 I d 1 1 1 1 i 1 11 11 4 1 1 1 ; 4 1 1 1 11-- It 11 4 11 11 1- - -TI- --- - -1 1 11 11 11 1 11 24 · - -12 - -1 - - IL- - 1 J111111#tlill#Ittlitilitlt# 111;1!JI 1%1111*111*Ilillfllitli 1 Illillill#£111111 11 +- 91 +4 f,-#P *909\05< »FIX Watt dp,-1 »19 11£- 5,/4 0-A ' . 4,1>14 0+)»<Gr t·1+1 el€.I» 1-6 *tr-r*'tr'427' MIE-11 FaMp ,] EE, /JIM/"/ 14·fd,t>,1. 0 41 - %+ I*f,4 Fl»1-1-191'L xy 2, 4 / r H U U U <8#21»6»136>0 0>416'f, 4 1 1·' K 5 '1 - Aw»4 9 r.9>6 r-1 6-4- + feerp f'(u --- 4.*brid'58· i MU~ 4< K - - 1. -PE'/- 260 ; .0 L- 40 4 9,¥~prl\Te· f\B/'@'2*'\» r.>»68···'/ , k f 1--/-/Art' , ' r *4/ 1 FEL A. ha / 11' <id 12 foujyl Ner :p'fc .0,9~«1 0, F. 01 , 55 #-rf#» 145 M eft•+1 + " /-I .- 4 ~42 'Fht* i E-7,- 1.52-F 'c@r ·U>E@6, ~:_ f /7\ i Ad,-re.,p Frbo,4 2,1,2 KI ©:PPLP,# 0 , / f. -9 7 2 : 4 ./ 3~1 , t IN 24 / .1-- - ---7- .--- f-Jew .Fl-/,fa- er"fk,0 A/~ He,pr 12·r» \ 9 1/ -4 /.b-~ -- --- - // ./ ,#<:13<-'( '.40/-- , / 0 \<trz I M' ' ,» i r>,re For- FUTOF·*· ove,?2-HS,Pl> 12*9\, rt-r 1194,r' ~10-*+rep- 2,61*-r-24 B'-1 £0~ 1,4 LLs -41-L- 4 // #%.'-/. 2/i 2.4~ 2/. /, - / / -, , , 1rr M tr r 24+1 fl-P ti kir,6 f . f -- 400 F.11 emef *910.- 65·A/05 12- 13 tflu--- p~04«4 ' Ay! , .1 1 6 . ill 1 J 4-1 - 1.i. £/Ii 1 L H. <0 T -01 1 2.~, 21 L, t·LE. 1 I ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE ' ·I·+S :-·,94 4... % 1. 9 i Minutes of July 14, 1993 Meeting was called to order by chairman Bill Poss with Joe Krabacher, Donnelley Erdman, Les Holst, Jake Vickery, Roger Moyer and Karen Day present. Linda Smisek and Martha Madsen were excused. MOTION: Les made the motion to approve the minutes of June 23, 1993; second by Jake. All in favor, motion carries. COMMITTEE AND STAFF COMMENTS Amy Amidon, Preservationist: I received a call on the Vidor house at 232 E. Hallam regarding the carriage house. There was a lean- too addition on the back and the owner would like to move it to the front. Do you want the project monitors to handle this or have the HPC Board review it. Jake: I feel the review should come back to the board. Don: I also feel it is more than just a sign off. Roger: I had a call on 617 W. Main regarding some confusion about what was supposed to be done. ID Interior's are one of the tenants in the building and they have concerns. Joe: I will be the monitor and go to the site. Bill: I have had several calls on the new parking meters. Amy: There has been discussion on a custom made meter but that would increase the cost. Presently each one costs $10,000. Joe: I am here as the public and would like to be added to the agenda to discuss my fence at 706 W. Main. MOTION: Don made the motion to add 706 W. Main to the agenda; second by Jake. All in favor, motion carries. 304 E. HOPKINS - RENAISSANCE - MINOR DEVELOPMENT Amy: The applicant desires to cover an enclosed staircase with a glass and steel structure and the windows are to be the same as existing. They are also going to create a double door entrance on the terrace level and will not be obvious from the street level. Arion Ocean, architect: There is a door that leads to the restaurant at this time and behind which would be the new door is an existing stairway so the idea is to connect the two spaces and have an enclosure for the winter season that would allow people to come into a foyer that is in existence already and that would allow ' the people to go into the restaurant downstairs or upstairs. We would like to take the double glass doors to that element shown on , Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of July 14, 1993 the plan. There are four key elements that we would like to have approval for and that is the two double doors for the entry; metal free standing architectural element that mimics the arches that is a part of the design. The green house glass to cover the stairs. We are also requesting the change of existing mullions that had glass down to the floor to put doors in to open the terrace up to the interior of the restaurant. Roger: Are the radian heaters there now? Arion: No, above the doors there is an existing green house glass structure and we are emulating the materials and we are adding radian heaters above and we would like to have the operable doors instead of the fixed glass in order to allow the terrace to open. From the street there is little view of any of the changes that are back in the restaurant spaces. We intent to have the radian heaters matching in terms of existing. Bill: How would they be mounted and are they the typical heaters that have brackets. Arion: Within six inches of the existing mullion. Joe: Is the element visible as it is not on the plan? Arion: The heaters are adjustable. Bill: We need to make sure everything is on the plans for approval. Karen: What is the design of the doors? Arion: They are designed to be natural existing mullions in terms of the spacing and material. Les: This proposal is OK but I feel you are missing some opportunity to have some fun with this building. Jake: Being more playful with the mullions would be a suggestion. Joe: Since this is a non-historic building it is a tough one to apply historic standards too and my view would be to make it "disappear". Don: The lights have a strong architectural element and perhaps we should look at the location and detailing and their punctuation at night. Roger: If the door was changed to a wooden door you would have a 2 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of July 14, 1993 lot of problems unless you set it in three feet because the southern exposure would deteriorate the door and it would only last a year. Possibly some kind of etched glass work would be more practical. MOTION: Roger made the motion to approve the minor development for 304 E. Hopkins Ave. Lot L Block 80 Aspen, Colorado with the stipulation that the radiant heaters on the second level are such with the monitors approval that they blend in with the existing structure; second by Les. Karen: The scale of this building is in keeping with the white victorian next door and there is so much contrast between the styles of architecture that you truly see one then see the other. Don: I would like Roger to add to the motion something about the lights and signage that they be approved by Monitor and Staff. AMENDED MOTION: Roger amended the motion to include that the lighting and signage be approved by monitor and Staff; second by Les. All in favor of motion and amended motion. Motion carries. Karen and Don are the monitors. RESO. 3 - RECOMMENDING LANDMARK DESIGNATION UTE #4 Amy: After the motion of the meeting in June followed up was given to research the historic significance of this monument. This is not the public hearing to determine the landmark designation but you need the background before you can pass a resolution. The purpose of the resolution is to provide protection to the monument from demolition. As it stands now it is unprotected. Until such time as all the hearings are complete and the determination has been made whether it should be landmark or not. I have been in contact with Alice Horn who represents the potential purchaser of this land and we have talked about potential possibilities for this rock. The proposal originally, which you will hear in two weeks is to landmark the entire parcel, the new proposed lot. But there is a possibility that we would only landmark the rock if that was preferable to the applicant and to the HPc members. That way we would not have review over their new building. We would determine the radius around the rock so it would not be obstructed from public view. Les: Could they still derive benefits? Amy: That is why I suggested that we would landmark the entire parcel because I believe they would want the benefits of FAR bonus j but it has not been decided. Alice indicated to me that they were 3