The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.HP.332 W Main St.HP-1991-16(21: 9- P- 1 *11 - l G 332 W. Main - Block 44 Showcase - Victorian -Â»tÂ« 533 4?/gy P 7 Al'TERMENT 1 ~ USE APMICATICN ]EOSM 1) , Ptoject' Name Showcase Victorian ~, 2) Project location 332 W. Main, Aspen, Colorado, Block 44. Lot K $ 1/2 Lei L (indicate street address; lot & block x=ber,*legal descripticn,diere . al?emporiate) 3) Present Zoning 0 4) Iot Size 4500 sa.ft. - 5) Applicant's Name, 1,11rpÂ« u phone # Thamor Co. Inc.. Showcase Properties. Bdtter Homes S Ga?dens, 332 W. Main St., Aspen, CO 920-1500 6) ' Bepresentativets Nanp, Address & Phone # Janet Leverson, Charl es Cunniffe & Associates, 520 E. .Hyman, Suite 301, Aspen, CO 81611 925-5590 7) 1[Ype of Application (please check all that apply): - Cooditional' Use. - Conceptual SPA .-' Con,Â»,al Histoda Dev. - Special Review ..1 Final SPA _ Final, Historic Dev. Conceptual POD - Minor Historic Dev. - Stream Margin -_ Firel EOD ' X Historic Demolition - Mountain View Plane Subdivision I[istoric resignation - Condominiumization - l'ect/Map Amendmetit - GalS Allotment - Int; Split/Int line, GICS Exâ€¢mpt; rg * Adjustment . 8) _ Descciption of Exia=ting ukes (ntmbet and ta?pe of eadstingÂ· st=ctiges; approodmate sq. ft.; number of bedroak;. any previous approvals granted â‚¬o the p=perty).... ' One residential building, used as office space since 1979. Approximately 3261 sq.ft. of existing FAR which includes a one bedroom apartmpnt nf approximately 640 sq.ft. - 9) Description of Development Application Addition .& remodel of existing building to a build out of approximately' 3375 sq.ft. FAR to include a one or two bedroom apattment nf apprnximatply 750 sq.ft. with the remaining sq.ft..to be office space. 10) Have you attached the following? Response to AttachmentÂ· 2, Minim.na Submission Oonterrts Response to Attachment 3, Specific Submission Oorrtents Response to Attadment 4, Review Standards for Your Application Â· . 0 B Lm - tv N 17 F Â«5 9 7-7 40 2 % 1 , 35 17--7 7705 - DE 4/ M- , Â»03 + A t\1 Â£36.B~ 1 47 in. & ., ID 1, x , 2 , ' %9.2 ~ * . â‚¬Â·11 /2 X 1 rit 1 0 limil-Li- LE- 211 4 27'* 1 9 4 1 1 1 . j 334-2 330-28 326-0 323:20 8/8-/6 8/442 3/0-8 3064 802 Soo ~ . 1 '30-32 230-28 226-24 222-20 2 122 .pliki / 244. 2/. Â»V.*7/ --:ze=&2~ t\ W.B -Â£127 /Â·17 81\ CXA . 335-3 331-29 32?-5 328-21 319-/7 3/5-/8 311-9 807-5 3081 ~ \ \ 22-39 23/-29 227-23 223-2/ 2 1 0 priz--1 - /J'Z , X1/ A / VZ X|,i 2 .2 JL -1-[5' l.4 1 X 4/ _:27 1 t m \ \ r \ 4 -L - 01 r; *1 - --- 7/ 0 7 1/1 1-1 1 ---I 1 'XI g 0 1, x 1-1 1 FA 9 - 2.- _ 21 - Ll* . F G H , t? s 4 0 I) -1. C D 1 2 91/\ 13=- F xil 1 , M 1 192 ~ 4 f 1 , 0 , ,; 11 1 1 - T- z r 44 90 0 % 1 1 , 1% 1 0 0 1/ b 1 3.1 : 1__3 [Tag,22..will l.2 121<Ifill X % Â£ i-Em /11 N / /3 K z q 0. C-/1 N L 0 \1 17 1 6 ['Fyi IT-6 16 21 krl_ L 1 L E 0 Al â‚¬ R /0 3. 12 % 1/1/ Ll j E -4-LÂ·-1 t @1 & i -21-~ r= b/Â· 4 12 -2) i 1 1 1 9 ,Â·W r 1/Ex 1 12 zz, 4 i -1X b * 7,1-0-- 1 ; 9-Â· 1 2-- 3' 2-_ M 1-9.*5 ---- f Z p x, E '/ x ~2 1' 7-7 2 L.-1 '. 0 -r - e /.1.11 1 1 ,- 1 . 4 i - 334-2 330-28 326-4 62 318-/6.3/4- /2 310-8 306-0- 30&300 D.H. ~34-32 Bo-28 226 -24 222-20 2/8 322-20 ST. VS 688 & 117. lin NG 11 8 1-HALER & 1-1-IALE~J.A. ' FLORIDA ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS ,=kNIBIT A 11,â€¢ply 10 11@UL p O. 8, ix Â·121; 1.100 14 1 edâ€¢,ial 11,Â·,v , 91,ile 212 Bora nalon. 1-Infida :11Â·132 0.06 407Â·368 180,1 1 800 226 Â·1805 (1-10 ,1 1 elecepinr Â·107 :34 1 0,7,1 July ](), 1991 Weâ€¢Â·,1 11â€ž11" 11,Â· â€ž h. 1 1,â€žâ€ž1, ,-1 11*,1 71)0 Noi ll, f W .Â·., Av, i,uâ€ž 'lf)7-65,1 1 Ntt 1 800Â·226 1 11'Â·: 11 1.,f 1.1.' 1,Â·Ii'cril,iiâ€¢, 41~/ P. T 5224 Charles Cunniffe Architect Aspen, Colorado Ite: Thamor Co. Property Our File No.: F-0430.1 332 Mai,1 St. Aspen, CO Dear Sir: As counsel for 'flianior Co., this is to confirm that the corporation has Fee Title Ownership to the above referred to property. If you need furtlier verification, we refer you to the 1117'KIN COUNTY Clerk's office, where there is a deed on record evidencing such ownership. Yours very truly, /Tut V. Â©[aht Manley H. Thaler MI-IT/jj <# . . EXHIBIT A July 17, 1991 To Whom It May Concern, As owner of Lot K & the West 1/2 of Lot L, Block 44 or 332 W. Main St., Aspen, Colorado, I authorize Charles Cunniffe & Associates/Architects, 520 E. Hyman, Suite 301, Aspen, CO 81611, (303) 925-559-0, to represent my interests in the development and partial demolition of the above mentioned property. SinceFely, -_c'L- i=-2>n.- <~1#~/\04- C..e ,-q>A.Â·-u~., _ ~ C- -7 i C Gary Feldman Thamor Company Inc. 332 W. Main Aspen, CO 81611 1 040â€ž No. 1340 luu Juj ALTP. Plain Language Commitment EXHIBIT B COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY ~>6633 h.=92 g agentfor FIRSTAMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY AGREEMENTTO ISSUE POLICY FIRSTAMERICAN TITLE INSURANCECOMPANY, referredtointhisCommitmentastheCompany, through itsagent, identifiedabove, referred to in thisAgreementastheAgent, agrees toissueapolicyto you according tothe terms of this Commitment. When weshow the policyamount andyourname asthe proposed insured in ScheduleA, thisCommitment becomeseffectiveasof theCommitment Dateshown in Schedule A. If the Requirementsshown in thisCommitmenthavenot been met within six monthsafterthe Com- mitment date, ourobligation underthisCommitment will end. Alsoourobligation underthisCommitment will end when the Policy is issued and then our obligation to you will be under the Policy. Our obligation under this Commitment is limited by the following: The Provisions in Schedule A. The Requirements in Schedule B-1. The Exceptions in Schedule B-2. The Conditions on the reverse side of this page This Commitment is not valid without SCHEDULE A and Sections 1 and 2 of SCHEDULE B. First American Title Insurance Company PRESIDENT f 02 .. 0 0 0.0 5 v- '. S[1'1[MfER 24, i 2 BY 1(/1- C. 37.%. SECRETARY j 1 1 1968 7 2 ' . . 4.04;2.4 405:'f ./Il,14/17 BY L~\~Â»~t,- COUNTERSIGNED Form,1756-A ,Commitment, Schedule A Showcase Properties Attn: Gary Feldman 300 West Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 SCHEDULE A Custcmer Reference No. 1. Effective Date: July 5, 1991 at 7:00 A.M. Commitment No: 401502-C SM/te 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: Amount (a) ~ ALTA Owner's Policy $ Proposed Insured: TO BE DETERMINED (b) ~ ALTA Loan Policy $ Proposed Insured: (c)El 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this commitment and covered herein is fee simple and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: THAMOR CO., a Florida corporation 4. The land referred to in this commitment is LEGAL DESCRI PTION SET FORTH ON SHEET ATTACHED HERETO AND BY TH I S REFERENCE I NOORPORATED HERE IN AND MADE A PART HEREOF. Owner's Premium: $ (Cts to: Lender's Premium: $ Showcase Properties Tax Certlf icate: $ Charles, Cunniffe & Associates Endorsement Chg: $ ATC TBD Ch a rges: $ 318.00 Additional Chgs: $ TOTAL CHARGES: $ 'Rer No. 401502-C Plat I.D. # SCHEDULE A (continued) Covering the Land in the State of Colorado, County of P,likin, Described as follows: Lot K and the West 15 feel- of Lot L, Block 44, CITY AND TOWNSI TE OF ASPEN % Form 1756 . 81 , Commitment, Schedule B-1 SCHEDULE B - Section 1 No. '<02-C Requirements The following are the requirements to be complied with: I tem (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to-wit: 1. Release.by the Public Trustee of Pitkin County of the Deed of Trust from Edmund Eisen for the use of Dwight F. Morss, Jr. and Jessie M. Morss, to secure $160,000.00, dated June 16, 1978, and recorded June 20, 1978, in Book 350 at Page 19. 2. Deed from Thamor Co., a Florida corporation to a buyer to be deierm ined. NOTE: Duly executed real properly transfer declaration, executed by either the Grantor or Grantee, to accompany tfie Deed mentioned above, pursuant to Article 14 of House Bill No. 1288 - CRA 39-14-102. 3. Evidence satisfactory to the Company or its duly authorized agent either (a) that the "real estate transfer te<es" imposed by Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979), and by Ordinance No. 13, (Series of 1990), of the City of Aspen, Colorado have been paid, and that the llens imposed thereby have been fully satisf led, or (b) that Oerilf icates of Exemption have been issued pursuant to the prov islons thereof. THE COMPANY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO CONDUCT AN ADDITIONAL SEARCH OF THE RECORDS IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLEl* AND RECORDER FOR PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO FOR JUDGMENT LIENS, TAX LIENS OR OTHER SIMILAR OR DISSIMILAR INVOLUNTARY MATTERS AFFECTING THE GRANTEE OR GRANTEES, AND TO MAKE SUCH ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AS IT [EEMS NECESSARY, AFTER THE IDENTITY OF THE GRANTEE OR GRANTEES HAS BEEN DISCLOSED TO THE COMPANY. NOTE: THIS COMMITMENT IS ISSUED UPON THE EXPRESS AGREEMENT AND UNDERSTANDING THAT THE APPLICABLE PREMIUMS, CHARGES AND FEES SIÂ·IALL BE PAID BY THE APPLICANT IF THE APPLICANT AND/OR ITS DESIGIEE OR NOMINEE CLOSES THE TRANSACTION CONTEMPLATED BY OR OTHERWISE RELIES UPON THE COMMITMENT, ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES AND SCHEDULES OF PATES ON FILE WITH THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE. Coletado .. Order No. 401502-C SCHEDULE B - Section 2 Exceptions 1l1e policy or policies to beissited will contaln exceptions lothe following unless thesamearedisposedollo Ilie satisfaction of the Company. Any loss or damage, including attorney fees, by reason of Ilie matlers shown below: 1. Any facts, rights, interests, orclaims whiclinienotshown bylliepublicrecordsbut whichcouldascer- tained by ati inspection of said lam] or by making inquity of persons Iii possession thereof. 2. Easements or claims of easement which ate not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, confliclsinboundarylities,shorlageinarea,encroachmentsandanyotherfactswhich a correct survey would disclose, and which ave nol shown by pul)llc recolds. 4. Any water }Ights or claims or title to water in, on or under the land. 5. Anylien, or right loa lion, lot services, laborormaterial hetetoloreorhereafter fumished, Imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 6. Defects, liens, encumblances, adveise claims or other malteis, 11 any, cleated, first appearing iii the publicrecordsorattaching subsequenl lo theelleclivedate hereof but prior to the dale theproposed insured acquites of recold for value the estate or interest or.morlgage thereon covered by tliis commitinent. 7. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessments, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service, or for any other special taxing district. 8. Any mine of gold, sil ver, cinnabar or oop per, or any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws, as reserved by M.G. Miller, County and Probate Judge of Pitkin County, Colorado, in the Deed to Abba Spencer recorded February 1, 1889 in Book 59 at Page 541. 9. Any and al l existing leases and tenancies, including but not limited to Lease between Thamor Company, Inc., as Lessor, and Aspen Snowmass Care, Inc., Lessee, as evidenced by Assignment of Lease recorded July 26, 1990 in Book 625 at Page 811. 10. Any and all unredeemed tax sales. NOTE: Upon receipt of a Certificate of Taxes Due evldencing that there are no existing open tax sales, the above exception will not appear on the policies to be issued hereunder. Exceptions number are hereby omitted. - .7 e. EXHIBIT C 3 1. 44'47 44 - j N 4 4 0 4.. A , 3 a ~a<\ 4.%% d .9 -,4.*, - - 4#,4 ..0 :n,1, Cl f To Basait . ~42Â£2*1060. .d ~~'et'~ 0 1/ SilÂ¥*tlon / 4% Aspen 1 ~ , Instltutâ€¢L-> 46 4~ 2 ~5 Hunlw 2 8004 \ : Â¥ 0 / 0111â€¢IN' St \ 2 82 Y Hallum \ 4 ~- PROJECT LOCATION k . s, buke * 332 W MAIN 0 \ - imt 4 4, 1 2 : 6 1 < 4 Fe net; St 03 1 44- . 4 4 2 2 44 1 $ 1 1.. u.,00" 0,"1 M ' ~ 8 ' h ef Smugglâ€ž MI, Ad Aspen 14.' St % '2 4 . ve 82 4 J 44 . 1 2 3 Â¥ 4/4,4. 2 13) sk d Hospital ' 4 #4 or-/ ..C 0.-4,/ I : 4 54 19 4 i 44~, .2 ' 24 Mal:-7 - 4 - / 0~'/~f ~ 8 8 08.4 2, 00'.0 . ) Ont.4 8, . -/4 6/4 , 4. 1,9 , 1.118 4, 1 ~ 4.6 WioN- . d 9,41 /0 1% .% "04 2,/ i ri ,'2 \<L-....1?4â€¢1'# LI . Ad .Uto ~1 G 10 i 1- li 4 f 9 -K 82 1 10 I0 Aspen R MUSIC 1 4 School F juountabl Â»-flies VICINITY MAP 281-1014(AgE VIC:[08&414 CHARLES CUNNIFFIE & ASSOCIATES/ARCHrTECTS _33,1 W. MÂ»l IN FASPEÂ·4 42-0 P.O. BOX 3534. ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 TELERÂ·iONE 303/925-5590 ..7 -.i r â€¢>â€¢ â€¢t.~ ...91941 .j/,S aÂ¥ PIMM .. 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer Re: Conceptual Development and partial demolition: 332 W. Main, Showcase Properties (Public Hearing) Date: August 14, 1991 APPLICANT' S REQUEST: Conceptual development and partial demolition approval for renovation and expansion of 332 W. Main, Showcase Properties. LOCATION: 332 W. Main St., Lot K and half of Lot L, Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. APPLICANT: Thamor Company, Inc., represented by Gary Feldman, Showcase Properties and Charles Cunniffe and Associates, Architects ZONING: "0" Office zone, "H" Historic District, Designated Landmark SITE, AREA AND BULK CHARACTERISTICS: Lot Size: 4,500 sq. ft. Allowable FAR: 3,375 sq. ft. Existing FAR: 3,261 sq. ft. Proposed Total FAR: 3,260 sq. ft. FAR proposed for demolition 1,000 sq. ft. (approx.) FAR of addition 1,600 sq. ft. (approx.) Proposed Basement 1,200 sq. ft. (approx.) Existing Net Leasable 1,771 sq. ft. Proposed Net Leasable 2,192 sq. ft. Max. allowable height 25' EXISTING CONDITIONS: The subject structure, a Queen Anne style built in 1888, is known historically as the F.M. Taylor residence. It currently is a mixed use (office/residential) structure, and contains a one bedroom (free market) apartment. The c.1965 rear addition is one story and includes a carport. PROJECT SUMMARY and REVIEW PROCESS: The applicable Guidelines are found in Section VI. Residential Buildings - Renovation and Restoration, beginning on page 47. The Development Review Standards are found in Section 7-601 (D) , and the Partial Demolition Standards are found in Section 7-602(A and C); 0 .- 4 I Development Review Standards 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. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area, HPC shall find that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. Response: Adaptive uses (conversions from residential to office use) are a primary character defining feature of the Main Street Historic District. In order to meet the functional demands of the applicant's business firm, an enlargement and addition is necessary to the landmark Taylor House. The Planning Office generally supports this proposal, and recommends the HPC study the plans carefully, to determine if Standards A-D have been met. The Guidelines address additions as follows: "Locate additions to original houses so that they do not alter the facade. Additions should not be designed so that they obscure the size or shape of the house. A possible option is setting back the addition so that it does not affect the building's front." The addition is taking place well to the rear of the structure, however, since this property occupies a corner location, the additional is more visible within the Main Street Historic District. Careful attention should be paid to mass, bulk, height, scale and siting. The design of the transition is critical in determining whether the addition is compatible or detracts from the integrity of the historic portion. Roof forms, fenestration, overall scale and use of materials must also be studied and approved in order for the HPC to find that this Standard has been met. Staff finds that the proposed fenestration and scale is compatible, however, we feel that a reduction in height is warranted in order to allow the historic portion to not be diminished in importance. We support the proposed roof forms and siting on the parcel. The second floor of the addition is cantilevered over the rear portion of the lot, utilizing brackets similar to those found supporting the west elevation bay window. A side entrance (west elevation) is also proposed; the general size and detailing of this entrance is important to keep simple, in order for the central entrance element (facade porch) to remain dominant. Streetscape and Landscape Material: It appears that no significant vegetation will be removed, however, we require that this be 2 . 0 clarified in the Final application on the site/landscape plan. Fences: The open picket fencing that currently exists meets the Guidelines. No changes in fencing are proposed. Alleys and Parking: The applicants are providing the additional parking spaces required by code for the new "net leasable" square footage that is created in this renovation, consisting of 421 sq. ft. = 2 spaces. A total of 5 off-street parking spaces will be provided, with alley access. No variations are necessary. Rooflines: The proposal generally meets the standards for roof pitch. The gables appear identical in pitch to the cottage. Doors: We recommend all original doors (if any) remain on the historic cottage, and be repaired as necessary. We are unable to determine the style of doors proposed on the new construction, and recommend this be clarified in the Final Development application. Windows: As with doors, we recommend all original windows remain on the structure, with storm windows installed on the interior as necessary. Should historic sills and frames require replacement due to excessive deterioration, restoration will be required. Staff recommends that the HPC require a preservation plan at Final review, detailing all maintenance and repairs proposed for historic windows, doors, materials, etc. The fenestration pattern proposed for the new addition is vertical and meets the Guidelines for compatibility. However, as the sketches are merely conceptual, precise scale shall be required in the Final plans. Rectangular awning windows are proposed within the shed dormers on the north and east elevations of the addition. The HPC should determine whether these are a compatible design for the structure. Staff finds them somewhat recessive and small, and they may help with the delineation between old and new. The facade of this handsome Queen Anne promotes the historic character of the Main Street Historic District and the entire Aspen community. The restoration of the upper gable end, and removal or remodel of the contemporary windows here will add greatly to the value and architectural integrity of this structure. Staff recommends that the HPC require the restoration of this gable end as one part of the overall renovation and expansion of this structure. We recommend the removal of the non-original "chalet-like" trim under the windows. Materials: The proposal calls for compatible materials, however, we are not able to discuss materials specifically as none have been called out. Basic materials should be clarified at this meeting. We recommend simple horizontal clapboard siding, wood trim and 3 . ' windows, and shingle roof, in order to be compatible with the historic resource. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The Planning Office feels that the proposal is generally consistent with the character of the Main Street Historic District. Rear additions are not uncommon among those adaptive use residential structures. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of designated historic structure located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: It is staff's opinion that a well designed addition to this landmark will not detract from its cultural value, or the value of the adjacent parcels. However, a large addition designed at the same height as the original landmark has the potential to compete with the historic form of the this corner Queen Anne and diminish the cultural value of the landmark itself, as well as its neighbors within the block. The 300 block of West Main is well noted for having the greatest High Style architectural integrity within the Main Street Historic District. We recommend that the HPC consider the cultural value question carefully in this case. The final treatment of the front porch will also determine whether the cultural value of the parcel and neighboring parcels is diminished as well. An original and carefully preserved (or restored) front porch may be the single most important "cultural value" feature to this district. 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: We find that architecturally, the principal design elements of the addition generally meet this standard. Staff's concern lies with the height of addition (25'), which is the maximum allowed by code. The height of the historic portion is also at 25'. Staff is recommending the applicant restudy this issue, and reduce the height of the addition in order to fully meet this standard. To be consistent with the review principals the HPC has incorporated in recent years, the height of the addition should be reduced to not compete, and allow the historic portion to clearly read through. The prominent corner location of this landmark creates some challenges in designing an addition that meets the applicant's programmatic needs, and at the same time not diminish 4 0 . or destroy the architectural integrity of this modest two + story Queen Anne. Staff recommends a height restudy for Final submission. Porches: The facade porch is an important and interesting character defining feature of this landmark. The excessive use of shingles to cover the columns and define this space has always been a curiosity to staff. It has been thought that the shingles were not original. However, we understand from the architect that they researched historic photos at the Historical Society archives, and even the earliest photos indicate the shingles were there. As that appears to be the case, and if no further documentation can be found to support an original porch design to the contrary, then the porch shall remain as it is. The proposal indicates the removal of the shingles, replaced with turned columns. Should the applicant wish to pursue a remodeled front porch, additional historic research will be required, and a compelling argument made to warrant the HPC approving the removal the original and construction of new. Partial Demolition Standards The Partial Demolition Standards are found in Section 7-602(C) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. The general provisions of Sec. 7- 602 allow the HPC to require a Performance Guarantee when deemed appropriate due to the significance of the project. No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met: 1. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure; and 2. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: a. Impacts on the historic importance of the structure or structures located on the parcel. b. Impacts on the architectural integrity of the structure located on the parcel. Response: A significant amount of the existing structure is proposed for demolition, which the applicant states is not historic. The portion of the building slated for removal is small scale (one story), and relatively quiet and non-competing. The HPC may find, in response to #2b. that: o although the addition to be removed is not 50 years old or older, it does not impact the overall integrity of the 5 . original form due to its small scale, and that o with the removal of this addition, the proposed new addition's height and massing may impact the architectural integrity of the landmark. The HPC should determine if the applicant has mitigated impacts to the landmark with the removal of this addition. We recommend that the HPC require a Performance Guarantee (bond or other form) to mitigate against potential loss or failure due to the partial demolition, excavation and foundation work proposed. This standard requirement will be made a part of the Final Development conditions. The Planning Office feels that the only architectural integrity -4 the additions have to the structure is in terms of compatible scale. The removal of these makes way for the large new addition proposed, which we find does impact upon the small scale character of the historic miner's cottage. The extent of the partial demolition proposed should be carefully considered in terms of the overall character to this parcel. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider the following alternatives: 2) Approve the Conceptual Development application as proposed, finding that the Development Review and Partial Demolition Standards have been met. 2) Approve the Conceptual Development application, finding that the Development Review and Partial Demolition Standards have been met, with the exceptions noted below as conditions which shall be met in the Final Development application: a) Compliance with Partial Demolition Standards found in Sec. 7-602(A and C). Performance Guarantee (according to Section 7-602-A) shall be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit. b) Restudy of addition height c) Denial of facade porch remodel, pending historic documentation to support porch remodel as proposed c) Detailed preservation plan for the historic portion of the landmark. d) Detailed site and landscape plan, indicating fencing 6 - 0 0 e) Massing model f) Specific material representation 3) Table action to a date certain, to allow the applicant time to restudy the additional height and front porch issues as discussed in this memo. Revised drawings shall be submitted to the Planning Office no less than two full weeks prior to the tabled public hearing date. 4) Deny Conceptual Development approval, finding that the Standards (Development Review and/or Partial Demolition) have not been met. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC approve the Conceptual Development application, finding that the Development Review and Partial Demolition Standards have been met, with the exceptions and conditions as stated in Alternate #2 above. Additional comments: memo.hpc.332wm.cd 7 r- - 4< 1 JUL 1 8 1991 f CHARLES CUNNIFFE AND ASSOCIATES i 1\ i ~ ~ , j ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING U Jil[EY FIEOM)tr tro?AÂ®SOEOFFAL BOX 3534, ASPEN, CO 81612 303-925-5590 ~te 7/l#)9/ Job # 9//2_ Tb: rlÂ¢P#-6.47 /!9,4 Att: WAAE- 7 K-(,n' pvÂ»al Jo OÂ©ALAF~ Pet Â»ta-1 Ac U c:nÂ»Â© (_rg .~ ate.h (sucenIAL Mec_. 9â‚¬180 tÂ»,\AC.Wl,c,-6 GENTLEMEN: WE ARE SENDING YOU p Attached O Under separate cover via ~*â€¢9 Z~LÂ«**le257 thâ€¢ following items: O Shop drawings O Prints O Plans - ~ O Samples O Specifications O Copy of letter O Change order fl Cbpies Date No. Description -2 Se* Nuc, 516 132*ul.*6 G lo &Â£6Â· 444-,~p-j es**er THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as citecked below: O For approval O Approved as submitted O Resubmit-copies for approval NO For your use - O Approved as noted O Submit-copies for distribution O As requested O Returned for corrections O Return--corrected prints O For review and comment 0 O FOR BIDS DNE 19 0 PRINTS RETURNED Afl-ER LOAN TO US Remarks: 115,â€¢*D FL -9 Aw, 1 V H.c- Matrpoch. 1 1 Copy To: Signed 15:9~ ,â€¢ . 476 9 Li PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 332 WEST MAIN ST., CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, REAR ADDITION FOR OFFICE SPACE AND A ONE BEDROOM DWELLING UNIT, PARKING VARIANCE AND APPLICATION FOR HISTORIC GRANT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, August 14, 1991, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Committee in the Second Floor Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, to consider an application by Thamor Co. Inc. represented by Cunniffe and Associates, Architects, requesting Conceptual Development approval for the partial demolition and rear addition to the historic structure for office space and a one bedroom dwelling unit, parking variance and application for Historic grant for the parcel located at 332 West Main Street, Aspen, Colorado, described as follows: Lot K and half of Lot L, Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office at 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, 81611. (303) 920-5090. s/William J. Poss, Chairman Aspen Historic Preservation Committee Published in the Aspen Times on Juvi 3 2/9 7 1991 City of Aspen account pub.notice.332WMAIN