HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20071010
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
October 10, 2007
5:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
130 S. GALENA
ASPEN, COLORADO
SITE VISIT: NOON-
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
Roll call
Approval of minutes - September 26th.
Public Comments
Commission member comments
Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent)
Project Monitoring - Conner Cabins - fence (15 min.)W
Staff comments: Certificate of No Negative Effect issued
(Next resolution will be #37 )
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
A. 435 W. Main Street, Aspen Jewish Community Center-
Major Development - amendment (30 min.)
IX. NEW BUSINESS
A. Parking Meters - Minor Development (30 min.) 37
B. 604 W. Main Street - Major Development (Conceptual),
Demolition, Relocation, Commercial Design Review and
Variances (1 hr.)
X. WORKSESSIONS
A. NONE
IX. ADJOURN 7:15 p.m.
Provide proof oflegal notice (affidavit of notice for PH)
Staff presentation
Applicant presentation
Board questions and clarifications
Public conunents (close public conunent portion of hearing)
Board conunents
Applicant rebuttal (conunents)
Motion
No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting
of at least four (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 of the commission then present and voting.
PROJECT MONITORING
Jeffrey Halferty
555/557 Walnut
701 W. Main
640 N. Third
314 E. Hyman, Motherlode
930 Matchless
205 S. Galena- Brand deck
134 W. Hopkins
212 W. Hopkins
920 W. Hallam
114 Neale Ave.
Mike Hoffman
308/310 Park
640 N. Third
Jewish Community Center
202 N. Monarch
320 W. Hallam Ave.
426 E. Main (Main and Galena)
507 Gillespie
Sarah Broughton
811/819 E. Hopkins
110 E. Bleeker
530,532,534 E. Hopkins (Connor Cabins)
100 East Bleeker
Doerr Hosier Center @ Meadows
406 E. Hopkins (Isis)
304 E. Hopkins (Elevation Restaurant)
Brian McNellis
629 Smuggler
Hotel Jerome
Jewish Community Center
Doerr Hosier Center @ Meadows
233 W. Main (Innsbruck)
Alison Agley
529 W. Francis
214 East Bleeker Street (historic house)
205 S. Mill Street (Bruno's Deck)
710 N. Third
Boomerang
501 W. Main Street (Christiana)
214 East Bleeker (new house)
520 E. Durant (Ajax Bldg)
~-"--"'''''''-''_..-.>'
CONCEPTUAL APPROVALS THAT HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL REVIEW:
508 E. Cooper (Cooper St. Pier Redevelopment)- Ouly 12, 2006) extended 6 months
'\1llL~
-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE:
435 W. Main Street, Aspen Jewish Community Center- Amendment to Major
Development- Public Hearing
DATE:
October lO, 2007
SUMMARY: The Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen requests HPC approval for an
Amendment to their planned Community Center at 435 W. Main Street.
Final approval was granted in December 2006 after a lengthy HPC review that looked at
numerous possible configurations for the program desired by the applicant. The board
emphasized breaking down the construction into at least two buildings (with a modest connector
piece), restoring some of the historic open space at the front of the site, and maintaining a
sympathetic height relationship directly adjacent to the historic cabins on the site as priorities.
The project accommodates a number of functions including a pre-school, community meeting
spaces, sanctuary, library, offices, etc. Six of the 1940's era cabins will be retained and used for
affordable housing and lodging. Three other cabins have been approved for off-site relocation,
with their final landing site yet to be determined.
The proposed Amendment reduces the size of the project by 2,500 square feet, as a result of
consolidating lobby/circulation areas. The development is nearly lO,OOO square feet below the
maximum allowable FAR for the site. In addition, the reduced footprint of the project means that
there is an additional 2l foot buffer between the east end of the new building and the historic
cabins.
Staff finds that this Amendment to Final HPC approval is appropriate and a great improvement to
the project. Approval is recommended, with conditions.
APPLICANT: The Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen, represented by Arthur Chabon,
architect and Design Workshop, Inc.
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-81-001 through -009.
ADDRESS: 435 W. Main Street, Lots A-I, Block 38, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado.
ZONING: MU, Mixed Use.
1
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT
The procedure for an Amendment to Major 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.
Staff Response: A great deal of time and effort has gone into the design of this project, which
will be a prominent addition to Main Street and the community. Staff finds the reduction in the
size of the project to have several benefits in terms of the scale of the building and the
relationship to the historic cabins. Our only concern with this aspect of the revision is the
character of the raised patio on the far east end of the social hall. In order to comply with ADA
requirements and not create significant ramps, the patio is a few feet above grade. We propose
that the alternatives be discussed with HPC in detail to ensure that the new building has an
appropriate relationship to the grade level of the cabins.
The Amendment includes some changes to building materials which staff finds may not be
consistent with Final approval. First, HPC determined that wood shingle roofs, rather than
standing seam metal, are the more authentic choice for the cabins. The applicant has asked to re-
visit that issue. Staff supports HPC's previous decision based on the following guideline and
historic evidence.
12.16 Use roofing materials that are similar in appearance to those seen historically.
It is difficult to determine from this
photograph whether the cabins had a
shingle roof or a rolled asphalt roof. The
original character of the cabins should be
maintained and distinguishing their roof
material from that of the larger project is
arguable a good way to maintain their
identity.
The application represents that repairs will be made to the historic cabins as needed. This will
require staff and monitor review during construction. At this time, no materials are approved for
replacement.
2
New buildinl!:
HPC has approved the use of stone as a primary exterior material on the new building. Staff
believes that the board indicated a preference for sandstone, consistent with the historic district,
however the applicant will be presenting a field stone mock-up. The board is encouraged to view
the mock-up on the site. It will also be available at the meeting.
Staff has some concerns with the proposed use of cement board siding instead of wood.
In general, we continue to feel that the new building successfully balances the concerns of
compatibility with the Main Street context, in addition to the character of this particular site. The
attached written materials address several outstanding conditions of approval. Staff appreciates
the applicant's progress to resolve these conditions prior to applying for building permit. With
regard to the off-site relocation of the cabins, HPC discussed this issue some months ago and
indicated a preference for either the Red Brick property or the Deaf Camp, a non-profit located in
the County who are apparently very interested in re-using the structures. Staff is researching the
properties and will bring information back to the board.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC approval for Major Development
Amendment with the following conditions:
~ I. The hi,tOOc cabins are to retain wood shingle roofs.
2. HPC must review and approve stone samples and mock-ups for the new structure.
3. Confirm that the use of cement board siding is appropriate on the new structure.nil( I( "("
4. Review other options for thi ili. ti"ll &hhe east patio. f 1 P,\+liJ l\ \I-
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 hist01;jc presfrvation prior to re9Tivi~ a building permit.
9 _ q Q\ (}}u'1LZ ~Lu a.......... [v L{u.. VCi...Jt"'.d;
_ RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution #_, Series of 2007."
Exhibits:
A. Relevant guidelines
B. Current application
3
Exhibit A
Relevant Design Guidelines for Final Development Review, 435 W. Main
1.2 A new replacement fence should use materials that appear similar to that of the
original.
D Any fence which is visible from a public right-of-way must be built of wood or wrought iron.
Wire fences also may be considered.
D A wood picket fence is an appropriate replacement in most locations. A simple wire or metal
fence, similar to traditional "wrought iron," also may be considered.
D Chain link is prohibited and solid "stockade" fences are only allowed in side and rear yards.
1.3 A new replacement fence should have a "transparent" quality allowing views into the
yard from the street.
D A fence that defines a front yard is usually low to the ground and "transparent" in nature.
D On residential properties, a fence which is located forward of the front building facade may
not be taller than 42" from natural grade. (For additional information, see the City of Aspen's
"Residential Design Standards".)
D A privacy fence may be used in back yards and along alleys, but not forward of the front
facade of a building.
D Note that using no fencing at all is often the best approach.
D Contemporary interpretations of traditional fences should be compatible with the historic
context.
1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally.
D Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment.
1.6 Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along the alley should be
compatible with the historic context.
D A side yard fence is usually taller than its front yard counterpart. It also is less transparent. A
side yard fence may reach heights taller than front yard fences (up to six feet), but should
incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts.
D Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the
appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on.
D Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing, on the upper portions of the fence.
1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a
rehabilitation project.
D 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.
D 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.
D 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.
D The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod,
and not covered with paving, for example.
4
~~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM:
Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner
RE:
Parking Meter Replacement, Minor Review- Public Hearing
DATE:
October 10, 2007
SUMMARY: The proposal is to put solar powered triangular disks on top of the existing
parking meters in the Commercial Core Historic District.
APPLICANT: City of Aspen
ZONING: CC, Commercial Core
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.
Staff Response:
HPC previously approved parking meters that were attached to the existing light poles to allow
the meters to use their energy source. New technology now allows the parking meters to be free-
standing. The applicant proposes to place solar panels on top of the existing light post mounted
parking meters.
Staff is in favor of using solar power technology for the parking meters; and recommends that
the parking meters are free-standing with the solar panel on top. Placing a solar panel on the
parking meters that are mounted on the light poles adds more mass and clutter that is not
consistent with the Commercial Core historic district.
1
Parking meter mounted on light pole.
Free standing parking meter with solar panel on
top.
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 addition of solar panels to
the parking meters with the conditions that the parking meters are removed from the light posts
and are free-standing.
Exhibits:
A. Memo to City Council, dated September 10, 2007
2
'1Y.1! a
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM:
Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner
RE:
604 West Main Street- Major Development (Conceptual), Demolition,
Relocation, Commercial Design Standards Review, Variances
DATE:
October 10, 2007
SUMMARY: The subject property is a 9,000 square foot lot located within the Main Street
Historic District. There are currently five buildings on the property: a circa 1880s historic
miner's cabin that fronts Main Street (the Rebecca Wylie house) and 1880s outbuilding/barn
located along the alley and Fifth Street, a 19th century shed straddling the property line between
604 and 612 West Main Street, and two 1950s structures located in the northwestern portion of
the parcel.
The applicant is interested in developing the property to include Commercial and Affordable
Housing uses- no free market residential units are proposed. The proposed design is
approximately .85:1, where 1:1 is the maximum cumulative FAR for the Mixed Use zone
district.
A worksession with HPC took place on July 27, 2007 to discuss the overall project, site planning,
massing and height. The applicant requests the following:
. Major Development Conceptual Review
. Commercial Design Standard Review
. Demolition of two 1950s buildings
. Relocation of the primary historic residence and a 19th century shed
. Dimensional Variances
Staff commends the applicant for proposing a project that is significantly under the allowable
floor area on the site. Staff finds that the application is moving in the right direction and
recommends that HPC continue the application to study the plate heights, dialogue between new
and old along Fifth Street, and to bring the design into compliance with Building Code regarding
egress from the roof decks.
APPLICANT: 604 West LLC, c/o Neil Karbank, Manager, represented by Alan Richman
Planning Services.
PARCELID: 2735-124-44-008.
ADDRESS: 604 West Main Street, Lots Q, R and S, Block 24, City and Townsite of Aspen,
Colorado
I
ZONING: MU, Mixed Use
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
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: 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?
This property features a typical Victorian era miner's cottage built for Rebecca Wylie and
two 19th century accessory structures- a barn structure located at the corner of Fifth Street and
the alley, and a shed straddling the west property line. The main distinction of this property
from other historic landmarks in Aspen, especially along the Main Street corridor, is the
collection of three historic structures from the same era in their original locations. See
Exhibit B for a copy of this block from a 1904 Sanborne map.
2. What are the key features of the property?
The Wylie residence conveys the typical form of the era with a gable end facing the street and
a front porch across the front fayade. The barn along the alley and Fifth Street represents a
common one and a half story gable roof accessory building, and the shed that straddles the
property line is a deteriorated small wood shed. The historic resources have been altered over
time, but rehabilitation and restoration are feasible.
3. What is the character ofthe context? How sensitive is the context to changes?
The property is located in Aspen's Main Street Historic District, which is under the purview
of HPC. Adjacent to 604 West Main are two designated miner's cottages, and directly across
the alley to the north are two designated miner's cottages. See Exhibit C for a GIS map of
the historic context.
2
4. How would the proposed work affect the property's integrity assessment score?
The applicant proposes to rehabilitate and restore all three historic structures on the property,
which will greatly increase the integrity assessment score. Moving the historic residence and
the shed will decrease the property's integrity score.
4. What is the potential for cumulative alterations that may affect the integrity of the
property?
The applicant proposes a total floor area of 7,600 square feet where 9,000 square feet is
allowed by Code. In terms of future development potential, 1,400 square feet of unbuiJt floor
area will remain on the property and the property is still eligible for the 500 square foot FAR
Bonus incentive offered to historic landmarks.
DESIGN GUIDELINE REVIEW
HPC 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.
The following review encompasses both HPC Conceptual Review for Major Development and
Commercial Design Objective and Guidelines at a Conceptual level. Please refer to the
Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines booklet- Chapter
7, Main Street Historic District.
Parking: The applicant proposes a total of six parking spaces, where six spaces are required-
one is accessed off of Fifth Street next to the historic barn and five are located beneath the
affordable housing units, accessed off of the alley. Staff recommends that HPC discuss the idea
of removing the existing parking space next to the historic barn, accessed off of Fifth Street.
Removal of this space would meet Guidelines 7.3 and 7.7, remove curbcuts, and reduce the
hardscape proposed for the historic property.
7.3 Parking shall not be positioned between the building and the street. Visual impacts
shall be minimized in one or more of the following ways:
. Parking shall be placed underground or in a structure wherever possible.
. Where surface parking must be provided, it shall be located to the rear or the interior of the
property, behind the structure.
. Surface parking shall be externally buffered with landscaping, and internally planted and
landscaped to soften parking areas.
7.7 Minimize the use of curb cuts along the street.
. Provide auto access along an alley wherever possible.
. New curb cuts are not permitted.
. Whenever possible, remove an existing curb cut.
A reduction of the parking requirement by one space will be necessary, should HPC omit this
parking space. HPC has the authority to waive in lieu parking fees.
3
Site planning (see Exhibits Band C for maps): The site planning for a corner site like 604
West Main is extremely important since there are essentially two front yards. Along Fifth Street,
the front fayade of the new construction is setback from the Wylie house and the historic barn.
The proposed new building on Main Street meets the 10 foot front yard setback, which will be
consistent with the Wylie house should it be relocated.
Staff finds that the proposed site plan and spacing between buildings is appropriate for this
historic property, considering the two historic resources and the proposed program. Setback
variance requests for this project are addressed in the Variance portion of the Staff memo.
Height: The applicant proposes one large rooftop deck that connects all of the new construction;
therefore all of the new buildings are roughly the same height. The first floor plate height
proposed for the Fifth Street residence is about 10 feet and the second floor is about 13 feet,
while the adjacent historic resources are proportionately shorter. Staff recommends that the
applicant reduce the plate heights to better reflect the abutting historic resource.
The elevator shafts and stairwells leading up to the rooftop need to be addressed. The applicant
proposes elevator towers that reach a maximum height of 38 feet for the "shed roof' version in
your application. Staff finds that this height is in violation of our height requirements, which
allow an additional 5 feet over the height limit (which is 28 feet, with the ability to increase to 32
feet) for mechanical equipment. Increasing the height limit to 32 feet from the 28 feet
requirement must meet the following criteria in italics:
7.13 A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation in building height of
the Main Street Historic District.
. Refer to the zone district regulations to determine the maximum height limit on the subject
property.- the mixed use zone district is 28 ft.
. A minimum second story floor to ceiling height of 9 ft. should be used in a method that is
respectful to historic buildings.
. Additional height, as permitted in the zone district, may be added for one or more of the
following reasons: the mixed use zone district allows an increase UP to 32 ft
. The primary function of the building is civic. (i. e. the building is a Museum,
Performance Hall, Fire Station, etc.)
. Some portion of the property is affected by a height restriction due to its proximity
to a historic resource, or location within a View Plane, therefore relief in another
area may be appropriate.
. To benefit the livability of Affordable Housing units.
. To make a demonstrable (to be verified by the Building Department) contribution
to the building's overall energy efficiency, for instance by providing improved
daylighting.
Staff finds that the property does not meet the reasons listed for increasing the height reqUIrement
to 32 feet, and recommends that the applicant restudy the height of the elevator shafts to comply
with Code (i.e. a maximum of 33 feet).
4
According to the Building Department, an additional stairwell is required for the rooftop deck for
egress. Staff is concerned about the addition of another form on top of the roof. Staff finds that
the flat roof (see color pages added to the application) proposed for the elevator shaft and
stairwell seem more appropriate in scale and height atop the Fifth Street building than the shed
roof option included in your packet.
Scale/Massing: The proposed scale and massing of the new development fronting Main Street
strikes a balance that is reminiscent of Main Street character and contemporary architecture. The
one story element is sensitive to the context, and complies with Guideline 7.12:
7.12 A new structure should step down in scale where it abuts a single story historic
structure
The new building proposed for Fifth Street is in a challenging location between two small
historic resources, and is visible from Main Street behind the primary Wylie building. Since the
work session, the applicant added a front porch element to both address Fifth Street and act as a
first story element. Staff finds that the applicant is making positive changes to this fayade and
recommends that the design have a stronger dialogue with the historic resource, possibly through
material changes, while maintaining contemporary features since it is a separate building.
The proposed alley elevation is broken up in the center to minimize the visual impact of the
second story mass. Staff finds that this is successful and recommends that the applicant continue
to study the alley elevation to create interest along the rear of the property.
Overall, Staff finds that the design proposal is moving in a positive direction.
DEMOLITION
The applicant proposes to demolish an existing detached structure located along the alley and
South First Street. 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
5
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 of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs
of the area.
Staff Response: The applicant requests approval to demolish two buildings built circa 1950,
illustrated below. Staff finds that criterion d "no documentation exists to support or demonstrate
that the property has historic, architectural,
archaeological, engineering or cultural significance" is
met. The two subject buildings do not contribute to the
significance of the parcel or the Historic District, both
of which represent Aspen's mining era. The loss of
these buildings will not adversely affect the integrity of
the district, the historic property, or the preservation
needs of the area. Staff finds that the criteria are met for
demolition and recommends approval.
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; 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 adj acent designated
properties; and
Additionallv. for approval to relocate all of the followinl! 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
6
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:
Shed: The historic 19th century shed proposed for relocation currently
straddles a lot line- between 604 and 612 West Main Street. It sits in
its original location- refer to Exhibit B and Exhibit C for illustrations
of the existing site location. Shoring and bracing are in place to
prevent the shed from collapse.
The applicant owns both 604 and 612, and requests approval to
relocate the shed to the 612 West Main Street property. Staff finds
that the proposal to relocate the shed to the adjacent property is an
appropriate preservation method, which meets criterion 4. The shed
is in its original location; however, it straddles a property line, which
could create a complex issue regarding ownership and maintenance. Staff finds that it is
appropriate to avoid this by relocating the shed entirely onto the 612 West Main property.
Historic Preservation Design Guideline 9.3 states:
9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HPC, a structure must remain within
the boundaries of its historic parcel.
D If a historic building straddles two lots, then it may be shifted to sit entirely on one
of the lots. Both lots shall remain landmarked properties.
It will remain a contributing structure in the district and after it is relocated, and it will be
rehabilitated as suggested in guideline 9.1 below. Staff recommends that the applicant produce
an engineer assessment determining that the shed can be successfully relocated, and that the shed
maintain its current orientation when it is moved. Staff finds that the criteria above are met and
recommends HPC approve relocation.
7
9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
D In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than
those in a historic district.
D It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative.
D Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any
improvements.
D A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural
details and materials.
D Before a building is moved, a plan must be in place to secure the structure and
provide a new foundation, utilities, and to restore the house.
D The design of a new structure on the site should be in accordance with the
guidelines for new construction.
D In general, moving a building to an entirely different site or neighborhood is not
approved.
Residence: The applicant proposes to shift the primary residence toward Main Street about 13
feet, which allows a ten foot (10') front yard setback, and to the east about 10 feet, which allows
a 5 foot setback.
Staff finds that relocating the residence forward on the lot, toward Main Street, is an acceptable
preservation method that is consistent with the Design Guidelines that refer to minimal variation
in front yard setbacks on Main Street that create a sense of rhythm. Exhibit C illustrates the
current setbacks along the Main Street corridor. While the best preservation method is to leave
the historic resource in its original location, the criteria reference an "acceptable preservation
method" that is compatible with the integrity of the Historic District while allowing for changes.
The central location of the historic resource on the 9,000 square foot lot makes it difficult to
construct new buildings that are sensitive to the historic resources. Staff fmds that relocation is
appropriate in this case, and recommends that the applicant produce a document ensuring the
ability to pick up and move the house. Staff also recommends that the current foundation height
be documented prior to relocation, and replicated for both the shed and the residence.
9.2 Moving an existing building that contributes to the character of a historic district
should be avoided.
D The significance of a building and the character of its setting will be considered.
D 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 setbacks,
that relate to other historic structures in the area.
9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation.
D It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback.
D It may not, for example, be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new
building in front of it.
8
SETBACK VARIANCES
The criteria for granting setback variances, per Section 26.4I5.IIO.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 architectural
character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic
district.
Staff Response: The applicant requests the following setbacks:
Wvlie house: I foot setback along Fifth Street, where 5 feet is provided and 6 feet is required for
a corner lot with two front yards. Staff finds that this variance is necessary to provide ample
space between buildings, which mitigates an adverse impact on the historic district.
Historic barn: 6 feet sideyard and 5 feet rearyard setback along Fifth Street and the alley for the
existing condition, where 0 feet is provided. The barn is in its original location- Staff finds that
granting this variance meets both criteria above.
Historic shed: 5 feet sideyard setback and 5 feet rear yard setback to relocate the historic shed
onto 612 West Main Street. 0 feet are provided for both setbacks. Staff finds that the proposed
location for the shed moves the resource the minimal amount required, and recommends
approval of the variance.
New building fronting Fifth Street: About 1 foot setback along Fifth Street (5 feet are provided),
where 6 feet is required for a corner lot with two front yards. Shifting the Fifth Street building
back one foot to meet this requirement would reduce the distance between buildings onsite,
which in Staffs opinion would have an adverse impact on Main Street. Staff finds that criterion
b is met and recommends approval.
New building fronting Main Street: The stairway to below grade space proposed for the west
sideyard setback requires a 4 feet setback variance, where 5 feet is required and 1 foot is
provided. Staff recommends that the applicant look into other locations for the stairwell to the
subgrade space rather than the sideyard setback.
Distance between buildings: A distance of 10 feet is required between buildings on this site. A
variance of 6 feet is requested for the distance between the Wylie house and the new Fifth Street
building; and a variance of approximately 6 feet is requested for the distance between the historic
barn and the new Fifth Street building. Staff finds that the variances mitigate an adverse impact
on the historic district, which could result from a contemporary addition to the historic resources
rather than a free standing new building.
9
COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS
An application for Commercial Design Review may be approved, approved with conditions, or
denied based on conformance with the following criteria:
26.412.050 Review Criteria
A. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060,
Commercial Design Standards or any deviation from the Standards provides a more-
appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is
proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a
deviation from the Standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested Design
Elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the Standards.
B. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the
proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial Design
Standards, to the greatest extent practical. Changes to the fayade of the building may be
required to comply with this section. .
C. The application shall comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging and
Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines as determined by the appropriate
Commission. The guidelines set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that
are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The City shall determine when
a proposal is in compliance with the criteria, standards and guidelines. Although these
criteria, standards and guidelines are relatively comprehensive, there may be
circumstances where alternative ways of meeting the intent of the policy objectives might
be identified. In such a case, the City must determine that the intent of the guideline is still
met, albeit through alternative means.
Staff Response: The criteria are listed in Exhibit A.
Pedestrian Amenity Space:
The applicant proposes 28% pedestrian amenity space onsite, where 25% is required. Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
Trash/RecvclelUtility Space:
The applicant proposes trash and utility areas that are accessible from the alleyway. The
dumpster and recycling are setback from the alleyway to minimize visual impacts. Staff finds
that the standard is met.
Staff recommends that HPC continue the application for further design study.
Exhibits:
A: Guidelines and Standards
B: 1904 Sanborne Fire Insurance Map
C: 2007 GIS Map of historic context
D: application
10
._~,j--
Exhibit A: Relevant Desig:n Standards and Guidelines
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines:
9.5 A new foundation should appear similar in design and materials to the historic
foundation.
D 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.
D 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 the mortar joints.
. 9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic elevation
above grade.
D Raising the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable. However, lifting it
substantially above the ground level is inappropriate.
D Changing the historic elevation is discouraged, unless it can be demonstrated that it
enhances the resource.
Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines:
Street Grid
7.1 Preserve the historic district's street plan.
o Three distinct street grids intersect in the neighborhood (Main Street, side streets and alleys).
This layout should be retained.
Alleys
7.2 Maintain the traditional character and function of an alley where it exists.
o Locate buildings and fences along the alley's edge to maintain its narrow width.
o Paving alleys is strongly discouraged.
o Closing an alley is inappropriate.
Parking
7.3 Parking shall not be positioned between the building and the street. Visual impacts shall be
minimized in one or more of the following ways:
o Parking shall be placed underground or in a structure wherever possible.
o Where surface parking must be provided, it shall be located to the rear or the interior of the
property, behind the structure.
o Surface parking shall be externally buffered with landscaping, and internally planted and
landscaped to soften parking areas.
7.4 Underground parking access shall not have a negative impact on the character of the street.
Underground parking access shall be:
o Located on a secondary street where feasible - except where alley access is feasible.
o Designed with the same attention to detail and materials as the primary building fa~ade.
o Integrated into the building design.
11
Setbacks & Building Alignment
The pattern of principal and side street, as well as the alley, should be retained and enhanced.
The predominant pattern and scale of development is varied but well defined. Building
alignment varies along the street, but in larger buildings perpendicular ridge lines and street
facing gables predominate. The slightly varying setbacks create an orchestrated visual vitality
which, along with building scale, should be respected in further development. Mature trees
also should be safeguarded.
Comer sites present the scale of the building in a very public three dimensions. Particular
attention to design and building configuration to accord with this scale and presence will be
required.
Site design features
. Residential buildings have relatively uniform front-setbacks. Although front setbacks are not
identical, the minimal variation creates a sense of rhythm along the street.
. Larger homes along Main Street generally have larger front-setbacks, while the smaller miner
cottages have smaller front-setbacks.
. Larger residential units are generally located on multiple lots, and centered within the lots.
. Side-setbacks of larger homes are often half-or full lot width.
. Smaller homes have minimal side-setbacks and fill most of the lot width.
. Despite the variety in setback patterns between house sizes, houses generally are oriented
towards the street, with their primary entrance facing the street.
. Secondary structures are set towards the rear and sides of the lots along the alleys.
. Commercial units were historically located on comer lots and fronted the sidewalk. More
recent commercial buildings are sited similarly to residential patterns.
7.5 Respect historic settlement patterns.
. Site a new building in a way similar to historic buildings in the area. This includes
consideration of building setbacks, entry orientation and open space.
7.6 Where a sidewalk exists, maintain its historic material and position.
. Historically, sidewalks were detached from the curb, and separated by a planting strip.
7.7 Minimize the use of curb cuts along the street.
. Provide auto access along an alley wherever possible.
. New curb cuts are not permitted.
. Whenever possible, remove an existing curb cut.
Site
7.8 Provide a walk to the primary building entry, perpendicular from the public sidewalk.
Orientation
7.9 Orient a new building in a manner that is similar to the orientation of buildings during the
mining era, with the primary entrance facing the street.
. The building should be oriented parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid
pattern of the block.
12
. A structure, or each street-facing unit in the case of a multifamily structure.. should have a
primary entrance that faces the street. The entrance to the structure should be at an
appropriate residential scale and visible from the street.
Building Alignment
7.10 When constructing a new building, locate it to fit within the range of yard dimensions seen
in the block historically during the mining era.
. These include front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks.
. Setbacks vary in some areas, but generally fall within an established range. A greater variety
in setbacks is inappropriate in this context.
. Consider locating within the average range of setbacks along the block.
Secondary Structures
7.11 Locate a new secondary structure in a manner that is similar to those seen historically in
the district.
. Secondary structures should be placed along the alley edge.
Building Form
A similarity of building forms also contributes to a sense of visual continuity along Main Street.
In order to maintain this feature, a new building should have basic roof and building forms that
are similar to those seen traditionally. Overall facade proportions also should be in harmony
with the context.
The character of the roof is a major feature of historic buildings in the Main Street District. The
similar roof forms contribute to the sense of visual continuity when repeated along the street. In
each case, the roof pitch, its materials, size and orientation are all important to the overall
character of the building. New construction should not break from this continuity. New
structures and their roofs should be similar in character to their historic neighbors.
Building Height, Mass & Scale
The well-defined pattern of building height, mass and scale on Main Street should be
preserved. Here the building spacing, scale, height and roof profiles create a design discipline
for the form of future development. Larger buildings within the area should step down in scale
next to residential units.
7.12 A new structure should step down in scale where it abuts a single story historic structure.
7.13 A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation in building height of the
Main Street Historic District.
. Refer to the zone district regulations to determine the maximum height limit on the subject
property .
. A minimum second story floor to cieling height of 9 ft. should be used in a method that is
respectful to historic buildings.
. Additional height, as permitted in the zone district, may be added for one or more of the
following reasons:
_ The primary function of the building is civic. (i.e. the building is a Museum,
Performance Hall, Fire Station, etc.)
13
- Some portion of the property is affected by a height restriction due to its proximity to a
historic resource, or location within a View Plane, therefore relief in another area may
be appropriate.
- To benefit the livability of Affordable Housing units.
- To make a demonstrable (to be verified by the Building Department) contribution to the
building's overall energy efficiency, for instance by providing improved daylighting.
Building Scale
7.14 Design a new building to appear similar in scale to those in the district during the mining
era.
. Generally, a new building should be one to two stories in height.
7.15 On larger structures, subdivide the mass into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to
single family residences or Victorian era buildings seen traditionally on Main Street.
. Other subordinate modules may be attached to the primary building form.
26.412.060 Commercial Design Standards. The following design standards, in addition to the
Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines, shall apply to
commercial, lodging, and mixed-use development:
A. Public Amenity Space. Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an
attractive, exciting, and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and
entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational
improvements to public rights-of-way or private property within commercial areas.
On parcels required to provide public amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030 - Public Amenity,
the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the method
or combination of methods of providing the Public Amenity shall be at the option of the Planning
and Zoning Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission as applicable, according to
the procedures herein and according to the following standards:
I. The dimensions of any proposed on-site public amenity sufficiently allow for a variety of uses
and activities to occur considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses.
2. The public amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this characteristic,
public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade trees, solar access, view
orientation, and simple at-grade relationships with adjacent rights-of-way are encouraged.
3. The public amenity, and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights-
of-way, and uses, contributes to an inviting pedestrian environment.
4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls,
sidewalks, or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian
environment.
14
5. Any variation to the Design and Operational Standards for Pedestrian Amenity, Section
26.575.030(F) promote the purpose of the pedestrian amenity requirements.
B. Utility, Delivery, and Trash Service Provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a
commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success
of the district. Poor logistics of one building can detract from the quality of surrounding
properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The
following standards shall apply:
1. A utility, trash, and recycle service area shall be accommodated along the alley meeting the
minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060 Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Areas,
unless otherwise established according to said section.
2. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property and along the alley.
Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be
minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions,
such as a historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly
licensed.
3. Delivery service areas shall be incorporated along the alley. Any truck loading facility shall be
an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged.
4. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof.
The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the Street as practical.
5. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the
building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a
parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a public right-of-way
at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and
ducting needs.
15
~
~
~-~ 0;r-'-r- ~.:i"~.'
c (,J~' - ,
J ~) J *
i"-r-"-._-~:..
~ . ----.r~ ~,
, ,- ;:.... ] . k II r...,
~ , -.. - l:..
'I :-., -!J f<
----; _ M'--.",
, ! r~
~ . j -<\ ~~
>--- -"'i
_._--_.~
-;;;>
,
----'"----.
------;
~
~! LY,i
---".. ,,,-,,
" i tv
10l
--".~
---.--.--.---;
"':.'~i!
. ll\!
:;:;---_.~
,
~
,..-J .
::...; ;.., i
~
1<3 2;;r
.....
c:':Z__~L~;
>
_.~
..-~
<I-'~-/I
/:J
.
."
--~
,
" ,
,-...--1
~~. -'k' .'f(
!\
1r9 /2
--"---,
I
:o,r"~
! ,I
{ r:;
I!
--L..::.!
,
.,
, it.:>
':o~c:1
'Xj
L-.:J
--!
-.,-...:....2
-d
.::: L4
'--...: ~
,":
"
~
,>
, ._____l~
RY~ : S;~<~j r::;
i/\! ... ~"'0:::;~._!?-.;
i.~ .",,"
lJ j tJ:j I~;"
;-'; ,.., l !I:;;
! .1 ----.J t~
B-:-~ ~: [
:::: ...r----i'-,~::
_;;~0 ::
~
. ~
.. ,
'1 ...,
~
..:::I.. '1"'10)
" i<:..
;.-:::] '6!: b
<. j ---........J..~-f:;
r::~:-:"~., ~
~~~----J::; ~
[.~;~~.-~j h:. -,-_-c:..
,~ , ~ b' :r
f..L ,!'-:,--1clI;,..
" , - ,_i o1~
L ~~,j R) ~'.
,y;g--/~~-:r'z/'J ;Z..:
cl
1"; I..,
ST.
'flY ,.J:~ ,~~ _ ""__~
------~---..
-2",
L:
~
L--.----_Ji
>
r--
r:
'~"
---"----_,J~
2~
I....-
,
I
"'-~
_1l'J
~
"
f:;
,t ~
;",
-~
f,'~;}-
L,."L... ,.
"" 'v,
"
.!:)
f.;
-R;
.(;.J II),'
J:
ST.
~. J,;o (//1 Iff:.?!
r ~ 'I I ,>
'71 - ~ -,~~~
r,j " ,....,,,,
~ b L....'; I _:~
.-.... i:~
,
ri ,,', R
I - "" i"
L-___.~._~
k~
"
F~~
~
1,71
II' ,.
L~
~
~
Q
,
i
L
!
~
~
~
-----'~
i-t-<
~
~
~~
$.
M
~
-~
~
~
~
,
'---
~
A.>
;:r
t
%-
;~)
I. "l.~
>, ~1'
i c,:;
Lj
~ ,
I ~
~.
(T~---'-"
I
!
I
I
I
""' ['.'q
-tit! ::;;:----; ~i
~l " """'"
;:;l...-~ ~ :~;
:~I -
9
~ '" '
~ ..-;:-~
<>{ b:tif ....n ,
~ c"'~ l!:~ ~ :
~ ~~-~
",7"'.J .T'I Fl:
~~ ~ >" t.!J ;: _.... i
~K __ .,'~ "'- )
~'. '-";
;j~'
~
'>>l
o:r~--r~
~ ~LW1
~ ;', ,f 'I
~~ hV~r ~
't<4;! t;~-:'~ rrl
~ (' r
~ . ~,
~- -.J
t~_-ry ~.,.,:,
"" "'"-' "'w "'{ ~
t", ~ "i. ~
-4'; '!/~'--;;o;-";;r>'Z
'"
....""'~_.-
..--- ';;"_i
s
-
," '..----=i
>-
,.
H
---..---:.,,>
~
l~
"
:::::
9
l^~
~
:"L-
, '
b.J,
L
i::::>
.,
~
b
p;L- ~
L. 1_.1.,--..___---:--_;e;
'" ~":.".-
f:: ..._""w....._:+--..,j' ~ '-:
i't>
"::-J
, ,
!.::-J
i
--"-'---"
',. , .7',
."._"~,~---", ----:~,.q
,
___..;e
pj
N -TH
.0 _
=:
:s::
>
z:
~~-_.2Z._".~..../;::,,,;: ~
':<I ;,,~---P;-'::.1 _". " )
"'->----- :.).... L ..L ~
. ,!-' ~ "
'~. ~ '0.1
~4 0..-._.---< ~
~ il
,"
~."-' ,.....r----;--~I i:.)
.... C S ;:t .'.. ~~
~ t:L..Lzl I .i I ~3
;j _J r---'i" _ ,~,--:~
'". ~ 1- ~ L-..~,.,.J ~
~ J I ';~ J r~'
~ -J ~ I l' ~ ~_~"1 ~
l..j- ~ U- 4-
~ , "" "-.<i
~J e;: r." l ~.'..
It: W ...... , ~~. .
"" "''''--,-,p ---4 0 ~ ~
I;' ~- [ ~ L",; -1 - I D;;J, ~." ~! ~
~ ~~ ___U _.~ ~."_ L---=J ~
r .~, '~..'
"".'\ '~"J---, ~~
~, ~'g: "':'\i~'k!' 'i ~ G i 0;
~.' "":-~..:-'-;\;,..,;,~-II.i .....l-.2! '-----'--.._._._
"k2 'LJ i --!
:~:q,~# ~I ~ ~i
~*:\' .. ~::.c~, iil
:~'t'" (, +1
. ~~;,; it:S --:/;:.0 ',{;.~ ",;1
~
.
r.,'-'
.:-:::... "::"f:.:__!0~ i'f
~+~~l;
~L.D.: ~
'.
;".---l
-...
!,:J~
,~
..-"---_._-f~
:';.~
-~';-;
~
<..
2'
-'k.:
'"
<..
L"7r--:'j~T //j~q.J~
,
,-
~Zl
L~.:?J
,
N.4~H
j/J,;; "'.V /';:"".'f;~
>.[.~-~----~.
. ,
~ :>, ;
;t . :
0__ -.....;
f4
(t lit!
I".~
I~~"'-
~
'. ;,
1?
",",
i/,('
115
I~
)J:;,
~.. . '.:',- ,,~-~
<. -," X;::" !, \';
'.~"j ~
~
r-:- i't
...J
'''>i
'"'--
,.~
'~
.~
~J
"
'"
'0
'"
~
("A
Yi
,. ,
~9
;::'j~ :;>\;
1::1 t:"
" ,
-7:...i...I"
,
,
c
l:;
----..--
~
it:!: ;.:~..; ~
~J L~~'j
~~ :.;J _.-._~'-: ...;
Lt:'~~'" ~"'ic..J' ,,",,
~ i-Jl
~, ~_._'~ j:l II ':1
i" i.1 >~ ' ~
~~,-, Li ~.,
--::;...,,,,j V<i
~L"'1
,~ ~
10, ! t'.... k.
-~ ~
~
~
---,"'~
~
~
~
<iii
~_.
"
::>i
~'~~:~~ ~.~
'.
~
,
~
.
i""
;~
~
t::
-c",
~~1
~
<c.
"
~;.
,~
"t:.J:1
\..::,/
.
g ~
. "
!
,
",y
~~"~-"'-
~
-<;;.;
r";
~t._
~
~
.""
:;:
~---
",.i
'>-'Ii
<
::E '.
. ~..
tD;;;;
r .,
Mil
I"l
;>:;
1'1!
:nil
'"
~
1:;1-
~..; '-:-.
~
~1--
'"
;;j
~
~--
:}i
O';"j
,,J
f8
;',
:1
.:L:'i!-'~
':'::, .."'I :':.
,.
,.'.j '.!')" ',;
'.
.,"-i
.
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ !
/~i?!;!
i -<
.' II.J. i
L -----:;~.----LJ