The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.HP.420 W Francis St.HPC014-98- CASE STATUS SHEET Case No. #fc 8/9 -9 4 Representative's Name: ,-77., Ce/0.-4. /stf. 8-M-o w Representative's Phone: 70 r- 700(- Fax: K.4 on,ybr, 5 #Le,d 4 Â·LKA L.- 0 DATE ACTION OR ACTIVITY %4/9 B f'bueJ /7)#tfu cq o.w,=L,4.Li ..61 4.- /414 r.06,0, 4 2.4 A-=. le ( 0 (91> 44+1901 /6 . rr r.<c, AJ.1 Â«ch,ch ,1.k-,,..f Aâ€¢04) Ant:--71 -lp .10 L..a . k/1 0 - e'-f,â‚¬rn W . 6 3-1 1 25 - U Str....uLÂ·Â· f /'ep- Wtll?A 31 - 8.- Qn,ul,L r),r.021 , nk:=A- râ‚¬,>Â·w-=t 4 292- - Ot C tiett-' 12,9.7:4 . 2 3- 7,-,A , f 14 1,6 1 ,/,6 4 3 ,t:r.M A-*J.- i a e~ - ,1 7, ./. U. 3 LII t j-' fI ?Â£y'Â· h/LUR E Ck-ac) 26*-fk-1 - A ekto .1 6* 'yfÂ«6-~ 6 1 ''r, ar- 1 ~ h 6-11 3 h 92-â‚¬ - 3 V NV , ..th C., ,-0 4 0 W. Francis HPC Significant Review 2 35-124-13-005 HPC014-98 . PARCEL ID:|2735-124-13-005 DATE RCVD: ~05/14/98 # COPIES:j 10 CASENO~HPC014-98 CASE NAME:]420 W Francis St HPC Siginificant Review 1 PLNR:~Mitch Haas PROJ ADDR:~420 W Francis St CASE TYP:~Significant STEPS:~ OWN/APP: ADR] Cts/z:I 1 PHN:| REP:| ADR:] Cis/z:I PHNi FEES DUE:| FEES RCVD~ STAT: F- REFERRALS| REF] ' BY' ; DUE:~ MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED -- DATE OF FINAL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL: REMARKS~ PZ: - BOA: CLOSED:| BY:| DRAC: PLAT SUBMITD: | PLAT {BK,PG}:| ADMIN: .. June 12, 1998 ~* -iTRUB)/ca .4. BENEFICIARY: City of Aspen 130 S Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit No.1292 AMOUNT: $30,000.00 EXPIRES: 9/12/98 To Whom it May Concern: We hereby open our Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit in your favor available by your drafts at sight drawn on the Pitkin County Bank and Trust Company, 534 E. Hyman Avenue, P.O. Box 3677, Aspen, Colorado 81612, at sight, for any sum, not exceeding in total $30,000.00 U.S. Dollars for the account of Barry and Ellen Halperin. This letter of credit is issued for the purpose of guaranteeing the relocation and/or restoration of the above described Subject Property, more specifically, to perform the preservation and restoration obligations for the Subject Property contained in the approval of the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee dated 4/ ID I9~. Partial drawings are permitted. Each draft must bear on its face the clause "Drawn under Letter of Credit No.1292, dated June 12, 1998 of the Pitkin County Bank and Trust Company." Except so far as otherwise expressly stated herein, this Letter of Credit is subj ect to the " International Chamber of Commerce, Paris, France, Uniform Customs and Practices Publication No. 500 (1993 Revision) . " We hereby agree with you that drafts drawn under and in compliance with the terms of the Letter of Credit will be duly honored if presented to our office located at 534 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen, Colorado 81611 on or before the close of business on /4/4 . /9 gg< Sincerely, p.j 1.21 Li~~4 7~~~~~K & TRUST COMPANY 1 111... coifeen&ibbons Vice President CG/LDB MIDVALLEY BRANCH MAIN OFFICE SAN MIGUEL COUNTY BRANCH ORCHARD PLAZA 534 E. HYMAN AVENUE 127 W. COLORADO AVENUE RO. BOX 28428 P.O. BOX 3677 P.O. BOX 38 EL JEBEL, CO 81628 ASPEN, CO 81612 TELLURIDE, CO 81435 970/963-3600 970/925-6700 970/728-5475 FAX 970/963-3956 FAX 970/920-1675 FAX 970/728-5644 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RELOCATION, SIGNIFICANT (CONCEPTUAL/FINAL) REVIEW OF A NON-HISTORIC PORCH ENCLOSURE AND BAY WINDOW, AND NEW WINDOW WELLS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 420 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 1998 WHEREAS the applicants, Barry and Ellen Halperin, represented by Colombo International, have requested temporary relocation, significant (conceptual/final) review of a non-historic porch enclosure and bay window, and new window wells for the property located at 420 W. Francis Street, Lots N and O, Block 34, City and Townsite of Â· Aspen. The property is a designated historic landmark; and WHEREAS all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards of Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof; and WHEREAS, the proposed porch enclosure, bay window and window wells meet the above standards; and WHEREAS, no temporary relocation of any structure included in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of the City of Aspen, established pursuant to Section 26.76.090, or any structure within an "IiI" Historic Overlay District, shall be permitted unless the temporary relocation is approved by the HPC because it meets the applicable standards of Section 26.72.020(F), and 26.72.020(D)(3) and (4) as outlined below: 3. The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation. 4. A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security with the engineering department, as approved by the HPC, to insure the safe relocation, preservation and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation; and WHEREAS, the building is to be raised approximately four (4) feet vertically from its present location where it will be supported there on I-beams while the basement is excavated, and a drawing showing this temporary relocation is required prior to building permit, and is also a condition of approval; and WHEREAS, the applicant is required to submit a structural report addressing the capability of the structure to withstand the temporary relocation, and this should be submitted prior to building permit as a condition of approval; and WHEREAS, Julie Ann Woods, Acting Historic Preservation Officer, in her staff report dated June 10, 1998, recommended approval with conditions, and WHEREAS, a public hearing, which was legally noticed, was held at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission on June 10, 1998, at which time the Commission considered and approved the application, with conditions, by a vote of 7-0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That temporary relocation, significant (conceptual/final) review of a non-historic porch enclosure and bay window, and new window wells, for the project located at 420 W. Francis Street, Aspen, Colorado, be approved with the following conditions. 1. A letter of credit in the amount of $30,000 is to be provided prior to building permit to ensure the safe relocation of the building back onto the new foundation. 2. The window wells are to be located as shown on the east and west sides of the house as presented on drawings A5.2 and SP2 by the applicant. 3. The applicant shall provide information as to the current appearance of the foundation. This appearance must be retained or recreated when the building is set back in place. The foundation will be faced with the stone rubble as a veneer on a new . concrete foundation. The house will be placed back on the new foundation, set at the exact same elevation as the house currently sits. 4. The applicant shall provide a drawing showing the method of this temporary relocation, including the I-beam location and appropriate bracing, prior to building permit. 5. The applicant shall submit a structural report addressing the capability of the structure to withstand the temporary relocation prior to building permit. 6. No exterior materials on any part of the historic structure may be removed without the prior approval of HPC, excepting those areas that were approved for remodeling on November 12, 1997 and December 17, 1997. 7. All conditions of the November 12, 1997 and December 17, 1997 approvals must be met. 8. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public hearings shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a decision-making body having the authority to do so. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of June, 1998. Approved as to Form: City Attorney HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Chairman ATTEST: Chief Deputy Clerk t:Â»25 -t,Li s Loot-~ 1, (41 . 7 16,â€¢ele k-*40 ' PROTRUSION OF WINDOW FRAME 1â€ž , /1 ROPOSED SILL i f i, i. \1<-L,~ -- - 4% thi"Â»~ bra \\\. 3/4" # 2 1 /2" I * . I PROPOSED SILL APPLICATION FOR 420 W.FRANCIS 31 \j\J 7 1 1 19 IO'd ZL6ESZ6OL6 Leuc>Ll.eLLAE,C~ULOqU-toLOD VSE :OI 66-82--une EXISTING TRIM 1 1/2" g./pl:ming/:spen/resos.doc/hpc/42(h,Â·12.doc 0 *914 c tru Colombo International 520. E. Cooper St. Suite 205 Aspen, Colorado 81611 1-970-925-7806 Office 1-970-925-3972 Fax Amy Amidon Historical Preservation Officer Community Development Department 1/11 /99 Re: Halperin Residence Dear Amy, We would like to request a design change on the Rear Porch of the Halperin House at 420 W. Francis. We are now in the final construction phase of this project and have encountered several difficulties with the various elements we had intended. First, the existing structural members holding up the upper wall are forcing us to place the gable ridge of the Bay Window right under the deck. Therefore the trim and finishing of this piece run higher than we anticipated. Secondly, since we've been spending more time on Site, we have noticed that the Rear Deck would be better with a privacy hand ailing rather than the open design we previously showed. These changes occur on the non- historical part of the house that can't be seen from the Street front. Please see the attached existing and proposed North Elevations. Call with any questions. Thank you. ~31*0 aggl L /\2 117 .., IME,~IFt"V.Ve"Wik ... -. 1 l ji *- 'l EXISTING ASPHALT # ' ----- Â·- NEW WINDOWS TO PLACE WITH 11 r--1 MATCH EXISTING THROUGHOUT OD CLAPBOARD 1/ , . 4 11 1 , 1 , : 11 E-1 iLl 11 11 n'-1 1 lilli 8 4. ",- .4 4.11 7, t-~ t'' 1 -2 -444'44 ti 4 1 Li-.1,1. 1 - ,- 'ti-Â·t i]Â·# h i 111 li , I-Fl/-2.1 REMOVE EXISTING ASPHALT -- -- -- 6" REDWOOD CLAPBOARD 11 \\ SIDING,REPLACE WITH 4-4 4 0 0 9-- Al IL==d 1 lili 1 i i , 't~- P' - 1.- if P a : I -3-1- IF 1/,1 17 - '11 - i;-,11 ~ 1: I 1 'f- F I j : _ -/I.I.-----0-I.-I- REPLACE EXISTING STEP 'U- i - ' SURFACES-AS REQUIRED -L----- - , -,Â· 1 7 ucir.. 4-53-4 -I-*.-FF*Â·e f . -Â·i773,1 Â·r'- ...4 -..4.--22, . g_.Â·uÂ·Â· -Â·~Â·-: 1 . I * .- , r.. I-~- ' -.- -..-. * . EXISTING &FINISH GRADE NORTH ELEVATION SCALE:1/4"-------------------------------------1'-0" 0 . 0 / -Ill'.Il -=lill-.9.-I--i--li%--I ,\ .- ----* - - 1 I - -I'll--il-..F -Ill'll OUU ..1 -- f j - \4\ 1\ . ;TING ASPHALT - -T C .... .............*..u----1 NEW WINDOWS TO \CE WITH "--- --.--,---------*---1 - 17:9 - -- 1]14-11 MATCH EXISTING THROUGHOUT CLAPBOARD / / 1 1 11 10 Ill - 1[L-11 - L-- - REMOVE EXISTING ASPHALT \ 11>\ lili- \ 111 \\ SIDING,REPLACE WITH - 6,1 REDWOOD CLAPBOARD 04 F k==dll 16==4 hi . 1 & - t-#4Â· 1 -- i ' r-7/1--Ir C . il i , REPLACE EXISTING STEP . - --- 1 SURFACES-AS REQUIRED 1 r.4 - - EXISTING &FINISH GRADE NORTH ELEVATION SCALE:1/4"-------------------------------1'-0" i'. Colombo International 520. E. Cooper St. Suite 205 Aspen, Colorado 81611 1-970-925-7806 Office 1-970-925-3972 Fax Amy Amidon Historical Preservation Officer Community Development Department 1/20/99 Re: Halperin Residence Dear Amy, We would like to request another minor design change on the non-historic rear Porch area of the Halperin House at 420 W. Francis. We have encountered several further difficulties with the various elements we had previously intended. Structural difficulties have required us to lower the proposed Deck by 8" and to incorporate the Bay Window under the Deck. Please see the new drawing for the proposed North Elevation. Again these changes are on the non- Historical portion of the house and are not visible from the street. Call with any questions. Thank you. a.1 A AlÂ£-1 F- K*Â»19 < Eeveri-Buettow b>47*odet>\ 40\ he .. - .. 11 - ZI-:fil -1 :4 11 \0 - ;TING ASPHALT - - ------, - 111'/1 NEW WINDOWS TO \CE WITH --- r.-10 -I *....i-'- -.-- .---4 -1 MATCH EXISTING THROUGHOUT CLAPBOARD 1111 <Et> lili_ ----~ !11.12,1 1 4 0021~ -- -- - -- REMOVE EXISTING ASPHALT N \\ MA - 1 BO - SIDING,REPLACE WITH 14==41Â»*4|| ' -"<3> 0 / I 6" REDWOOD CLAPBOARD m / 0. - 9. $- U -I' --.. .. in- 5 11 ' 1 1 111 . 1 -la- 1 ; 1 - I ' 11 1 1 ;1 0 1 44 1 . 1 1.-4 4.-/ 11:1 ; --- REPLACE EXISTING STEP SURFACES:As REQUIRED 0 6 EXISTING &FINISH GRADE NORTH ELEVATION 0- 0 . MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission 2Â· rul W THRU: Stan Clauson. Community Development Director FROM: Julie Ann Woods. Deputy Planning Director \UMUC [Acting Historic Preservation Officer] 1/0 DATE: June 10.1998 RE: 420 W. Francis Street- temporary relocation, conceptual/final review of non-historic porch enclosure and bay window, and new window wells SUMMARY: The applicant is seeking approval for the following items: 1) to excavate a basement below the existing historic structure (which will require the lifting of the main house approximately 4' in order to complete the excavation and re-placement of the structure on a new foundation. This is considered a temporary relocation): 2) to add a bay window at the rear of the non-historic portion of the main house; 3) to enclose an existing non-historic porch and install new windows in this area; and 4) add three (3) new window wells for light and egress from the new basement space. This property is a designated local landmark. Only the front 2/3 0 f the house remains as a historic resource. The rear portion is non-historic as indicated in the staff memo dated November 12,1997. APPLICANT: Barry and Ellen Halperin, represented by Jim Columbo and Steve Buettow. LOCATION: 420 W. Francis Street. BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS ACTION: The HPC has reviewed this project twice in the last year. On November 12, 1997. the applicant requested approval of a minor review, partial demolition, and setback variances. The HPC approved a portion of those requests, tabling the variances, garage addition. demolition and reconstruction. On December 17, 1997, the HPC again reviewed the remaining items and approved them. (The original staff reports and minutes from each of these meetings is attached as Exhibit - A tor your reference). DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STANDARDS: No temporary relocation of any structure included in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of the City of Aspen, established pursuant to Section 26.76.090, or any structure within an "H" Historic Overlay District, shall be permitted unless the temporary relocation is approved by the HPC because it meets the applicable standards of Section 26.72.020(F). 1 0 0 F. Standards for review of temporary relocation. No approval for temporary relocation shall be granted unless the HPC finds that the standards of Section 26.72.020(D)(3) and (4) have been met. 3. The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation. Response: The applicant is required to submit a structural report addressing the capability of the structure to withstand the temporary relocation. This shopld be submitted prior to building permit as a condition of approval. 4. A relocation plan shall be submitted. including posting a bond or other financial security with the engineering department. as approved by the HPC. to insure the safe relocation, preservation and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. Response: The building is to be raised approximately four (4) feet vertically from its present location. It will be supported there on I-beams while the basement is excavated. According to the applicant. the same house-moving company that is lifting 234 W. Francis will also be lifting this house. A drawing showing this temporary relocation is required prior to building permit. This should be included as a condition of approval. Staff recommends that a letter of credit be provided in the amount of $30,000 to guarantee the safe replacement of the building onto the new foundation. The applicant shall provide information as to the current appearance of the foundation. This appearance must be retained or recreated when the building is set back in place. The applicant has indicated that the stone rubble foundation that is partially exposed on the south and east elevation will be recreated using the stone rubble as a veneer face on a new concrete foundation. The house will be placed back on the new foundation, set at the exact same elevation as the house currently sits. This should also be a condition of approval. As a general comment, the applicant must be aware that no exterior materials on any part of the historic structure may be removed without the prior approval of HPC, excepting those areas that were approved for remodeling on November 12,1997 and December 17, 1997. Significant Development All development involving historic landmarks, or within an "H," Historic Overlay District must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. 2 .. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design. massing and volume. scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard. side yard and rear yard setbacks. extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed tioor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent. HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). Response: The applicant is requesting approval for three items, which is why this project has ended up as a significant project. The three items are: 1) to add a bay window at the rear of the non-historic portion of the main house; 2) to enclose an existing non-historic porch and install new windows in this area: and 3) to add three (3) new window wells for light and egress from the new basement space. Please refer to the set of submitted plans dated received April 22,1998, attached as Exhibit "B". Bay window and porch enclosure: Please refer to the following drawings: A3.2. A5.1 and A5.2. Along the north (rear) elevation of the house, the applicant would like to install a bay window in the kitchen. The windows will be double-hung windows to match the new windows which were previously approved to be replaced on the house. Along the east elevation of the kitchen area, the applicant would also like to remove the existing covered porch and doors (please refer to drawing A8 in the November 12. 1997 packet) and replace these with two sets of new double-hung windows which will match those being replaced on the house. The rear portion of this house is not historic, and staff does not have concerns regarding this modification. The proposed modification is architecturally compatible with the existing house and uses identical materials. Window Wells: As part of the new basement and foundation, the applicant is proposing to install three (3) window wells, one (1) along the west elevation, and two (2) along the east elevation. The window wells will be approximately 6' deep, 8'-8" long and 3' wide. They will be faced with the same or similar foundation stone and will be covered with removable grates to allow emergency access. Please refer to sheet A5.2. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The proposal for the bay window, porch enclosure, and new window wells is consistent with the character of the neighborhood. The location of these modifications toward the rear and along the east and west elevations minimizes their relation to the original historic structure. M 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: Because the modifications are to be made to the non-historic portions of the landmark property, they will not detract from the historic significance of the historic resource. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposed changes will not detract from the architectural character or the integrity of the historic structure. The changes will be minimally visible from the street, alley or neighboring properties. RECOMMENDATION AND RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the temporary relocation of 420 W. Francis Street, conceptual/final review of a non- historic porch enclosure and bay window at the rear of the house, and three new window wells, with the following conditions: 1. A letter of credit in the amount of $30,000 is to be pror-ided prior to building . / permit to ensure the safe relocation of the building back onto the new foundation. 2. The window wells are to be located as shown on the east and west sides of the house as presented on drawings A5.2 and SP2 by the applicant. 3. The applicant shall provide information as to the current appearance of the foundation. This appearance must be retained or recreated when the building is set back in place. The foundation will be faced with the stone rubble as a veneer on a new concrete foundation. The house will be placed back on the new foundation, set at the exact same elevation as the house currently sits. 4. The applicant shall provide a drawing showing the method of this temporary relocation, including the I-beam location and appropriate bracing, prior to building permit. 5. The applicant shall submit a structural report addressing the capability of the structure to withstand the temporary relocation prior to building permit. 6. No exterior materials on any part of the historic structure may be removed without the prior approval of HPC, excepting those areas that were approved for remodeling on November 12,1997 and December 17,1997. 4 7. All conditions of the November 12, 1997 and December 17, 1997 approvals must be met. 8. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public hearings shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a decision-making body having the authority to do so." Attachments: Exhibit A Previous staff reports and minutes from Nov. 12, 1997 and December 17,1997 Exhibit B Applicant's submittal dated received April 22, 1 098 g:/pla,ining/aspewcases/HPC/partialden,0/420 relo 5 0 1283 â‚¬k,+i art- b A" MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission .r 0/ FROM: Amy Guthrie. Historic Preservation Officer RE: 420 W. Francis Street, Minor review, partial demolition. and request for setback variances. Public Hearing DATE: November 12,1997 SUMMARY: This house was built in 1886-1387 and is a designated landmark. It has had a series of small additions made to it, and some changes to exterior materials. The applicant proposes to replace the exterior materials on the house and to remove a storage area on the outbuilding and replace it with a carport. The location proposed for the carport requires setback variances on the rear and west sideyards. APPLICANT: Barry and Ellen Halperin, represented by Jim Colombo. LOCATION: 420 W. Francis Street. Lots N and O, Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: R-6 Significant Development PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development involving historic landmarks, or within an "H," Historic Overlay District must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale, and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than 1 Exhibit A i L 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The proposal involves modest changes to the building and some restoration. which will contribute to the character o f the West End. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: The proposal has no impact on the historic significance ottlle property. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated hiSIOriC structure or part thereof. Response: The proposal involves changes which will enhance the architectural character of the property. PARTIAL DEMOLITION Section 26.72.020, Demolition, partial demolition, off-site relocation, on-site relocation, or temporary relocation. No partial demolition of any structure included in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of the City of Aspen, shall be permitted unless the partial demolition is approved by the HPC because it meets the applicable standards of Section 26.72.020(C). For the purposes of this section, "partial demolition" shall mean the razing of a portion of any structure on an inventoried parcel or the total razing of any structure on an inventoried parcel which does not contribute to the historic significance of that parcel. 1. Standard: The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel. Response: The applicant proposes to remove a small addition to a non-historic structure. Staff has no concerns with this. 2. Standard: The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: A. Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions. Response: There will be no impacts to the historic significance of the property. 3 .. 1. The request for a setback variance on tile west sideyard is denied based on the Parks Departments comments. A rear yard setback variance may be appropriate for the new garage. The applicant must provide a revised plan. This portion of the application is tabled to November 26, 1997. 2. It must be determined whether or not the original siding still exists under the shingles. If so. HPC will work with the applicant to determine whether or not that siding can be restored. Otherwise. new clapboard siding may be installed. As part of this activity. staff also recommends that the shutters be removed from the house since they would not have been there originally. 3. All replacement windows on the historic portion of the house must match the existing windows as closely as possible. No window openings on the historic portion of the house may be widened. WindowsÂ· that must be retained have been Undicated on the building elevations which have been modifiect by staff.~ The applicant should consider the possibility of replacing the multipaned window in the bay on the south elevation with a large double hung, which is more likely what originally existed. 4. In regard to the railings proposed on the front decks. staff recommends that no railings. be installed unless an exception for historic structures cannot be granted from the UBC. or unless there is reason to believe that they were there historically. If rilings must be installed, they must be wood and should be simple, not turned balusters. 5. A variance is granted from Ordinance #30. volume, for the new windows on the ADU. The windows on the north of the ADU must be modified to be more in scale with those on the rest of the building and the house (narrower.) 1 6. No exterior materials may be removed from the building without the consent of HPC. With the approval of this application it is understoed that windows except for those identified on the attached plans as modified by staff may be replaced in kind. HPC will work with the \ applicant to determine the condition of the original clapboards if they exist. Deck boards and stairs may be repaired where necessary and replaced if beyond repair. No other exterior ~ materials may be removed without HPC consent. 1 4 3 -,3 . i.4_,~,L.-f 11.6-= 44--u, 4- , Exhibits: A. Staff's memo dated November 12,1997 B. Application C. Map ofproperty in 1904. D. Photo ofproperty from alley, circa 1970. E. Site plan and elevations modified by staff. F. Parks Department referral comments. 5 ATTACHMENT 2 DMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FON&1 Applicant: *e-r 4- LEN HALFE-144 Address: 4 v H. FAA+krl G 4-rgeT-r Zone district: F -Â£27 Lot size: 6 990 Cr Existing FAR: 1 6 6 -1 <f Allowable FAR: 1946 SM Proposed FAR: 154-1 LF Existing net leasable (commercial): 9 4- Proposed net leasable (commercial): Â»Ne Existing % of site coverage: 4 2 07, Proposed % of site coverage: 45 54 Existing % of open space: 36 6 - - Proposed % of open space: 1 95* Existing maximum height: Princical bldc: 2 9' Accesorv blda: 19 -Â» Proposed max. height: Princioal bida: 1 6' Accessorv bldg: IS'-b 11 Proposed % of demolition: G. lA Existing number of bedrooms: 1 Proposed number of bedrooms: 4 Existing on-site parking spaces: Hts a. On-site parking spaces required: 2. Setbacks Existing: Minimum required: Proposed: Front: 10.51 Front: 140 Front: 1%0 F~ Rear: - Rear: I o Rear: .... Combined Combined Combined 1 1 Front/rear: 1* 9 Front/rear: * Front/rear: 1 0, Â¢4 Side: -0- Side: 9 Side: -- Side: 01..el Side: 4 Side: 9. 6 Combined i Combined - ' Combined - 1 Sides: 461 Sides: 19 Sides: 4.17 ~ Existing nonconformities or encroachments: BE:AP- AOU %36 C>GT 24/1~4â‚¬Hlvt;!410 - .AQ-116'G-1- 4:76Â»Pi:2 EMGP,â€¢dAM EN -r, Variations requested: caN-rl Al !-*-6 0,4 64 *,41â‚¬0Â¢41 (HPC has the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.ft., site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations underthe cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone distMcts) . COLOMACb INTERNATIONAL, INC. 520 E. COOPER ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970 925-7806 FAX: 970 925-3972 Proiect Information Halperin Residence 420 West Francis Aspen, CO 81611 Proiect Description - On the main house we propose to upgrade the existing windows with pella double graded windows of the same size, color and style. In the bathroom and bath on the upper floor we are considering changing the window width from 2'0" to 3'0". These windows are hidden from the street scape and therefore would not be noticeable. Also on the main house, we are proposing to take off the existing asphalt shingle siding and replace it with 6" horizontal painted clapboard similar to what is on the ADU. This would be typical of this time period and neighborhood. On the ADU building we are proposing to replace the existing tool shed and ski room and replace it with a one car garage. In order to make this 50's style building more compatible with the main house and neighborhood, we: are proposing to make several facade changes to more appropriate doors and windows. 0 BAJ 44%zEXHIBEE)60 4 -1 1-,a.50*22 -:-- r-aft.823 - - Â· - Â·Â· 1-/2.-2.I- â€¢ GREG MOZIAN AND. ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Landscape Architecture Â· Environmental Planning November lE. 1997 Via Facsimile 923=3972 Columbo International Inc. 520 East Cooper Avenue. Suite 205 Aspen. Colorado 81611 Attn: Jim Coltlmbo R.: The Halperin Residence 420 West Francis Street Aspen. Colorado DearJim: After a brief site inspection of the proposed garage site for the Halperin project. the impact of the garage structure on the existing spruce trees on the neighboring property appears to be minor. The surface roor structure of the existing trees was not visible on the Halperin property. Your proposed footing design of the caissons and grade beam with slab on grade will minimize any impact to the root zone of the trees. The hand digging for the individual - caissons will also help minimize any impact to the trees. Using this method of construction I feel confident the trees will not be damaged. Please call with any questions or concerns. Thank you. Sincerelv. 1 1 - Greg Mozian. President 1 117 S. Spring Street. Ste. 28 Â· A5cen, CO 81611 Â· (970) 925-8963 ' 1 -- -. 0 ~ 1 /- /121* 72 3 ~ 6*buntaln (1141Â£ EFQÂ£Â£ i. f/=. P.C. Box 568 /â€¢9,1,Â· 2 - 2 , 1 5=V,mass, Color. .1. W - . , U. / - 37% $27-934' â€¢ (972: 927-42: 7 -1. ..7 / U J 9 2. / -+ 0 , C November 12 97 Columbe International 320 E. Cooper St. Aspen. CO 81611 Ph. #925-7806 Attir .Tim Columbc RE: Halperin Residence - 420 W, Francis St. Spruce Trees Dear Jim. In pursuant to our meeting at the proposed garage site at the Halperm Residence. I would like to make a few recommendations below: The footer system for the garage should be one in which whales are dug by hand or a Casion supported footer. By igging the whales by hand. if a mippoit anchor is found. the whole should be moved to avoid damage td any large roots found. It is my professional opinion that this method of construction will net jeopardize the health of the existing 3 Spruce trees. Any other method of foundation. such as using a backhoe, would cause unnecessary root damage to the Spruce trees. The person digging these Casions should take special care to prune any fibrous or smaller roots found wlâ‚¬le digging. I am confident that the trees will not be damaged with this method of confitrtiction. Sincerely, n 06 knne,5 v ./-1 Ed Booker -- - - 1 I. -I .- - ---------0- -- U.1 LU C =C CIO â‚¬ LOC- COCO 121 'C ./-;' .= ~. ~:LIZ 40 1 9 At_LEY BLOCK 34 tz es C - â€¢Er -1.1â‚¬ la SETâ€¢C i Mtu i , kil /0867 4 / - = e - / 9/;2 -- - 1 /4 4 g N i. .' 2 , Â»4 NÂ· ftp , 1/22* ;'~4 ~ MAIN AZZ-- HOUSE ~ 0 P SUE JIE 3 0 16 3;21 TO i 2 - , , --m- 1 . i! ' , 60.Cm, .HEET M71Â£ SITE PLIN uoly..01 lnS-97R ADDRESS 0111 Â»1 07 420 W. FMANGS STREEr ASPEN. COLORADO C.W. al 81611 0/Â¥Â·90. ///1IF/ Ma~ 9 CI/I.E 1*TE gY LEGAL DESCRIPTION A LOTS N & 0. SLOCK 34 77 CrrY AND TOWN SITE CF ASPEN Pm<IN COUNTY. COLORADO ZE WEST FRANCIS STREET- m C(/I'll' i-,90: -Â· ~- -9 ~ :6Â· STrEPLAN * SCALE:10 10'47 ~20,7 SR2 J! 11;11 11'1 J 21; r 1 3, K 9 1 100.00' N14Â°5049*E 10000' 61<5049'W r. : . t=EM es" 8Y . 20-8* 80-3' 8,-9. 6'-11' 14'-4' / 6'-1' 5'-11' iI U M 1 11 0 D i --- 3% E---â€ž CIO 1 - m * 82 1 ..M: 4 -- ..-97,"m,Vrnr j ) r- F 10. 0 0 1 .- z a, I - Flf ?-14-i . m 1 1 4 14 7 1. 1 P"-1 F P {Â£120 [Â« P -4-1 t_--- â€¢t, A m Ul I li SK 1 u: LE-1 0- O 3 :i: th Nom N C) T . i-*3~~-~:~IL~~ f_-Will.-- 11_ 139 28'-8' 5'-11' 50lg' 4. 4 u.....vÂ· =wÂ·'Â·-'33) 913:15)1*1943> # 1%& 1. 81/""""I""I"'llillilililillillillllililill' MA 11A1,PENUN lil(SIDENCE it ' m jp ~ .0.0 til ifa 420 W FRANCIS Sl HEE] ASPEN,COLORADO Alcil 1 11'-6= PORCH I.I.nOPME[a 1% DNLLSIXEEE Un018Â¥d 22- -- 2% 2640 I i I~ Str 16'â‚¬ 4'-2 *T 7-E 1 : i ./.= -- m m REMCVE ALL EXTERIOR â€¢90016 .4. ... , 1 c FEPLACE m MATCH EXISTDâ‚¬ .1. - ST,LE SIZE & COLOR BEDROOM 6 El 37 BIOVE SECTION OF WALL 9 ~ i C ~,/-- BUILD IN 001 M iii f FDOVE EXISTJG â€¢ALL 4 1 5 DOOR 0 jit--a:Â·>'.ii r ie=--â€¢,4, tAil l~ A i ~~TH 1211 - mOVE a~ i wALLS BEDRCCM .K-H i N -VAL *Eil . 4 K 6 EMOVE wall. SECTIOK -<1 U- 4 C.OSET 6 0001~ 11 WALK-iN ~ t!-1 1/=h.1 A Illillit Fi CLOSET \ It 12 67 30 ';0 BEDROOM L i : "BEr -m'LZ EXG UPPER FLR . L 171 SÂ·@7R DATE Jo-1 547 0"A* p F.V.,41 F./FO 1Â«11 C...., 11! UPPER LEMELFLOOR PLAN(EX[STING & DEMOLrrION) SCALE:1/4~- 1.7 'IET.Noâ€¢ A2 0 OEH/\10"100 L C.- 1 1 . 1 . . 1 . 623" 10'-2" ~ 2'-1. ----- - - -- -. .wiNG*w-16 1.uu'lu.;-7 11 1 op' 1 1 /3 I i M ~ -~Â·-"-- -- -- til;:2:tittti551Â·D:z*&12;t;D.%:1#12 4 2 / 130 . 1: \e :. 1 8 3 4 Ms U fig : #XX'Z*~~~1' % 44 i. 3 3 d g 0 9: rt 4 ,-t W . i -. ! 111 2.22112nllilliN 1 8rn 1 -: <4 < 4 9 (D \ 5'-2' 18.-6. 0 1 23'-8" r RA i 1 , ma , GN W 01 4.11,1 .' f. 1 ~COLOMBO IIALI'laaN [tleSIDENCE '1 1Â·1 1 1 11 , .1 .1 : "' 420 W.FRANCIS STREET ASPEN,COI ORADO 816ll 9NIEIX3 }01Â¥M 01 ;418"4 ~~OT T.r]OM3GÂ¥Â·DRU.SIV910-IcI kIO03:1.[~~ \ Cl~CX FC,1 liLLATÂ¤* ON EASTSBE 0 . 14Â¥1 3 v.. se-4 (i: W~OCK,1 ....'ll O --1*M#M (~) M'r-wr.ec.sly#'AYEORcur 18 c ,~ <CÂ»ae-unC,1 WO VIALL CAVrrES =a DETICâ„¢,1 S,STEDâ€¢ / - aq- â€¢Ecu,rrs,slal ..I- ck 0,-7 3E3 11'4 $1 15/7 NEW =~Â¥ME ON STEPS . 1143;C 510 74 34. AS REBOUNIED li ,\ 1 40 U . 1 - 7 - . \ 1 - /1 1-1 11 - !1 I . SET o DECK \ bi h I 0 <D!,1 ........ '11 IT ll. L- F-OVE EXISâ„¢G KITCIEN CAB,Ery b==k. Â¤ LAUNDRY/MUD *-~=) KITCHEN COUETEAS & ROO-G . 1- 1 - 1 -- 1 J 1 , TRASH. 1, - ' 1-9 1 1.. . IL mi pC REM.ACE ALL EGERIOR .04 WIWDOWS TO MATCH - ~ -C.ID EXETING IN STYLE, SIZE 1.----- *COLOR ~ 2;m LIVING 11 \=f CL - *1 9 1 1 4 U. 1 114 12 51,7 74â€¢-3>- 1 r .1 1 H i f j - - - 2., >==y..1 ,1 11 1 DINING LI-9- 2 -2?\7,4/-Â·94.f-'2 ' 'Â· ~eFLOOR 1\ U - NEF,V RADiANT HEE*TTNG BELOW , CLOSET 7 I 1 7Â«l CL _ - 1 -# 1 /1 Reâ€¢OVE EGSTO*3 b S i â‚¬ r - '2'EF HEATING ty--1=31 i 6 i DECK . -NEW MErAL RAILING Â® DECK mar=RE -rk- 1 DECK - 1 -- . FEW DETAL MAUÂ«3 _ -43< 4 H---= 1 PARLOR AT[EX 1 2>41: El<Â®~ <~ 7 ~_i[ ~ - , k ./BE/MIZE BM.LESTEBSCTYPICAU -------- SPRM(LING SYSTEM FOR LAWN AND R.OWEN BED(TYâ„¢CAL) NEW MAIN FLA 4 1-8 1715-GTR I .A Â®141 R|le ..0-~ A 1 OATE 0*.15-07 -I I Ii-' ~_ . - - Clu-4. .=/1 7- 1 - F~Â¥=01 0â‚¬0000 i .. . J 44 4'47 402' C~ 0-0/ OATE 7 Pe'LACE ALL EXTEFOOR ZE u. 1,8*fra-Fece 3799 1 - - W-DOWST[) MATCH WAL< i i EX;ST1NG A r r-- NEW A-AGSTONEWALKWAY -- -/06= - NEW ENTRY GATE I STREET FRONTAGE Â·1Â«ST,Â«1 MAINfLOOR PLAN(NEW CONSTRUCHON) * 84 CCâ€¢.e'll KALE:1140 - i EDGE OF CURB- 'NFIdSÂ¥ El=1'M (EK 1 *1( 1 Il Nill)Id'IVII Fl 1 OUINO"100 i 6611, 6,1 .l-23/4' 4~0 &4' 6/11/2' 1 12 ~J//r i 'll-/-\/11 -. 1 U E 59 1 e 4 ------Â®-- 7-1\ 1 AL '44-1,1 7 - -:X-- -TI- 1 2 1 11/1 4 1/2~ 247 N -- ----- *FAT~, Z ij~ i i 4.i 1 rl[ m <0 -_ y 132Â· IRKLE~ - ; 4-- - -- fl 2 1 2 00/ 4 [9rn ~F--L--0 --171 1& 11 -- -ju'll 6-9/*iN w ir#i.. 9-=- E nE /J 92\9 r 17-2 --_ _i ~li I -4 El i MÂ¢ 177- - -- --1 -12 i ' ilifily ' (%Ii___'43 i 1 ~10 1/t 641 2/40 3 4Â£0 3/40 4 ir . 1/2- 12' r 134. 10'-6. f,1 1 424. imm . 1 4. , MMAN># VID A 1 4 1 1 ,//AA:/ 51 HALI'ltltiN Itit it hiti .ENCI a 420 W.1-HANGIS STREE] 81611 ASPEN,COL OilADO ~ (NOIDAMLSNOD AE[N)NVId NOO'18 MEI 1 . ,Â§.Hil. . 1 114. 1 181.., l 210 Q C 2 1.1 1 3/4. 29 41/7 4 6 3 C 3 MUT.*52%1 Â§~ 2{ Al / 9--- 22. 8 - 4 8 1Â·74 "-> -1. Â»1 9 4 6 89 4 '71-/11 'A 8 1 1 8 19.â„¢ .-- 1 -- 4 1 HY 1 i~hAN \ 19,\1 -k)X j in Â® 0 4,/ 712 91 3-ME 2 Cl _e 1 J 9 - - 11 Ar .4 4-1 . .f Br ...0- 1 23'-r 41. '' 7'"-m-931. 1 *1*01 1 1 1 81 81 MM 0 UALPERIN RESIDENCE 420 W. FHANCIS STHEE1 ASPEN,COLORADO 818ll ~ (NOLIJAELSNOD JERAIRVId MOO'Id ~ ru=-1 0 AusÂ»mÂ»*tv-Ole,0,1-fACED =1 + ..1 0 0 -1 Ul SEZE SntE 4 COLOR @=1 = 3 OCE - 5 * 1 - - -0 1 u. 9 'LA -- 21 13 4 Re~OVE *BTTIG ASPHALT NEW WlfÂ«DOWS TO :-1 SED,â€¢G.AFFÂ£3I WITH - MATCH EXISTING TPIROUGHOUT < I f REDWOOD CAPBOARD _ - .Ctâ„¢E. Â· -.ELLQAYNÂ© *- 3 REMOVE EXISTING ASPHALT SONG.REPLACE WITH - 4~@@ 7 , > ~ ai * -2 =1 E L \ f REDWOOD CLAPSCARC) 1 F , .t EOCE Sasâ„¢G sTE' _ Sull=ACES.41* F.gcxâ€ž.ED Pet,CE Eml'ING STEP 1 -. EnSTING AF*CH GRACIE NORTH ELEVATION , SCALE:tw--rq - - MEW MFâ‚¬)OWS TO - --.. == 1 3 1 1 3 . - MATCH EXISTING THROUGHOUr REMOVE EX571NG ASPMALT - -- SIDING,REPLACE WTTH . r REDWOOD CLAPBOARD - /"'//rr.mu r . EEVATIONS-NaS . t "Â¤' 1715-07R DATI 08/12/97 1. \. 2--- 0.9 ... El i ... \\1 1 . SONG,REPLACE WrrH 41 ~.. .... 6- FIEDWOO[) CLAPBOARO ' Â® 3 3 : O,4,-e :*SE . tr I.EW DECK st-9 2 0 -7.00 REEMACEWOOD DEOONGAS AEOU-ED ;1 i REFiNISH eaSTâ€¢IG DOORS .//1 ' ' 4 i.'. & 349: â‚¬CSâ„¢G AF-SH GRAOE RÂ¢NISH EXBnNG OCCAS -'~ Ii<Adeaslia STEEP go,aerrn 1/Â¥~ACESâ€¢â€¢S Fâ‚¬1~IRED SOUTH ELEVATION ~me===~===R:y A . -"PELAÂ¥000Â¥-IX,Â¥20/BE,af ALS.ST.......TO'EEWS *ZE.SnuaCCU- i - 1 1 i ./ 1 U- U i-\ m! R 35 12 61 2 Â« .1 1 NEW WWOOWS TO -1 MATCH EX]ST!NG T}nOUGHOI~r -1 -1 -17Â·CM: - EL=101-11. 4 - --- ==9 6 =-El e laEF- I- REFNSH EX;STÂ».G DOCRS - - - 4.-il .. ~FOCE E)0511* STSâ€¢ i -- ~EPLACE EÂ»STVÂ«3 STEP ../ i 10-ACESAS Regulle EX]STÂ»â€¢G ;Fâ€¢â€¢SH GRADE REMOVE DOSTING ASPHALT SE)ING.REP-<E WITH ~ EAST-ELEVATION 6- REDWOCO CLAPBOARD SCAL.21$4--147- ---1 - - MEW WIFCOWS TO MATCH EXISTING THEIOUGHOUr I . 121 -* i -7 e - - - *SETTWAE ELEVATICNS-E-&W 1 n S-07R ~=08/12/97 - - - .. 4-lt=. e HI PÂ· li A . Â·Â· a==!1~ 1 . "rl . Â· . ....... ..... 2-- W 1=/,Â·11 0â€¢/Â·i' I - --- .- - :::. q:W.'=/*='= --- --- --~944$~MT- - - - - *00: i::O*.9 20/14: : * leÂ¥ DETAL 1-CaAL- SEEDETAIL - -~h_LIC.CE:K~ -- - ---- --_-- - _ --------~ -- 'A MEN STEPS DOWN ' SEE DETAL Re,LOVE EXISTING ASPHALT â‚¬~r,0 laeS,4 GE,OE - i 1 -- - I .. D-,1.i . 1 SE)â€¢40.REPLACE WTTH Iâ‚¬W DECK 31-:ACE Â· REFâ€¢ISM SUSTIC DOORS C REDWOCC) CLAPBOARD F~EFLâ‚¬E WOOD 0022*48 AS An-ID WEST ELEVA1ION =mmc======Ey 1 ABIZ -- JN~(TIREfit N I 1% 4 . IONÂ¥,1 rtit: I~ 7" -'. i. i,2 . . 1 Alle)"In"'1"1'1110'le'Â¤INERACI 2,/ Ii"'IME'LAÂ¥40Â¤0Â¥~401'.0",T- i#Ii -1 - -1 1 LU 71 W Q Z: 58-3 =1 EES mi *11 1 - 11 7 = 1 - Ill. i,r J================ -1 111-1 91 1 5 1 Eli @\IE-Zil~ r- - - ...1 - liÂ·Â·ll- _ .-1U R -= --6 -ilinill: 1Ull'Â®71111 1 IL_ 1 - 1 E.'Ht:'It 1 181.---IMIi[ 4111_-i NEW Â¥~00 GNIAGE DOOR 1 2=1<DIE!11Â· _ --- ]HU IKI-iL .10 --1Mtr-,Hr--el Z~~~ - - ' 1 Iri...111-ZI Â·Â·i r = 11. Ful.~1. IMIll ..1'll -Al - 1 1 r. L *w GARAGE To -Te,1 t T-=1â€¢2:Fillijaifitilill--.................. EAST ELEVATION t NORTH ELEVATION isllill-----Ill--77 .a . 6055 SEE - -1==--- - -- - - ---- E2%2==~ ' i~ illgal ofT-mÂ·nri-Â· A =2 - 11=9=i -*Er-nt,2 .- EEVATIONSÂ·CNTASE ' 0 '.. Â· .011Â«1 ---- :ns,7. -~ 08/12/97 Ir=...~ 11 tip--liwi H IHIB --4*- - 11---__11 - .INg*inowam L m-*: intl%.: i â€žâ€¢: EXISTâ€¢â€¢G Fâ€¢*96 1 SOUTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION 3122"/Z~~~~i7- L FAg . - 1 \ _3\21-rl 11 \ Dr S \ *51 9 0 8 , E- ---\\ 66 ~ 7 1 - ~>31 * - A 61 H r = i 2 I 5 -----2:. 4 1-* 1 0..4 12 1., 1- 0 --L 1-.1 ,-- ------52 0 It 11 - 11 2 15<21 1 1- .1 % 11 1 920001444 4. <0%~0. 8 11 - H 1 9 CD li 1 C 1 0 IA -17- 11 t.9 - RER k m *: 0 .SL 1 1 Pe7 ozt gltr 000# .SL - ===== ====== = = = == ===i= = = ====- ------ =-=-=-74%102.3 === = 11 ll / 907/0 in \904 11 11 -Pry 1%9 Ct' 11 /1 1 11 - 17 .; 1-. 1- 4 hpy Â°11'< A *12 A . . 3 1 6 11 191 0 in.1 1Â·z--4 * 1 - 4 3 2' . 11 1--- 4 CO ZM U % 44- 4- ~Ci k Z l% 1 1 1 + 1 -7 [b.~~ ' I ~ J 4 11 4 - pr ~ Ir=1-~3~ - 4 D><2 It rt . C 4 c.01 N .1 1/ - .1 *<:4 1: 2 1 1 +41 1 r.x' -Ch u 3-zs><----9 7 *-0 - 11 1- 1 *-<,~420 G 0 1 . . 1 - a -.-, 11 \ li 1 - i--- 1 4 " 1 06 Â· *f 1 :1 1-13 --I . 1 -~--.- 1 2Â©-I* LL-r-# 4 A --- 1.23 11 t 0 3 9 - , 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 A - 1 1 VE; 047 % Ze Jd,4 Â·M ";,+ Exhibit C (2)11 .--.. le) - 4, ,-02 - /9Â£ *Sk/'X. c, 7 1 01 QI wl <1 01 21<1 .06 ~ .ls 501 1, VZ .- -â‚¬~Â·43 9 ~ 2#Giq . - ,-2225722.-2,72Â¥CAL .- 1 -. 4:. i ral.4-9544: - -:#Eff/4 -: 7/2 b F.Â·22./.- - 49-e' , fi. 9:;.3, 24,11*,- ..':.6%9(17- 11 - /:,2 - - - n. 7 .../.- I. *44/W I 1._~U,6#2521&d,#*ikEN .1 Â·9 1- tj ;-TiVAL-~-~ _ 96 Flil.Ell -1 ffit |ilit ~ilit:WIEffil/"/54/jbitillt-~ L-77- -1/ B.M~ej*----5.- ..- -.. . - -- ., .~7 r . 0 1 .. Memorandum THE CITY oF AsPEN TO: Amy Guthrie, Community Development FROM: Kevin Dunnett, Park' s Department RECE'V THRU: JeffWoods, Rebecca Schickling -- NOV Â£ 80 RE: Barry and Ellen Halperin Application. 420 West Frahcis ce**/~~sp~~;- 1997 DATE: 5 November 1997 04Â©74 0412 47 I visited the site this morning and prepared the attached drawing showing the conflict between the proposed ADU garage/car port structure and the existing coniferous tree@ to the west. It is evident that construction work shown on the proposed plans is within the trees drip-line zones and will have serious impacts on the existing root systems. It is the Park's Department's recommendation to deny the application for the ADU Â·building portion of the application. The applicant may wish toÂ· pursue a:n option with the garage/car port to the east of the existing ADU building; however a tree permit and mitigation plan may need to be incorporated as there are several existing trees to the east of the existing structure. Please call with any questions. - I , Exhibit F 13.0 SOUTH GALENA STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611-1975 Â· PHONE 970.920.5000 Ax 970.920.5197 Pnnted on Recycled Paper ---- Fi#7/% r*â€¢â€¢4 \ N AfJ.Â¥727Â»-=,01 -=01 : / 4 -15 4 -1 --4 9 MI 4.049_tuaA,4,/W-I -4/416,4 114 9-lâ€¢-44 .-VIC "11 . V/al,01' C " 49#6 .1~41*9 1 . 1 /9/- , 7 .0 -'+3 C 4 l -A" 19 -411 a.1.11 4 , - Â¥ 9- 4 1Â° _c.f=69 I W O-4 J.1 V -- . 1 7/1 r 1 69 9-al1 '".Ve WIN 09 AN 11~nt a ' 7. L . U. a,411 4144 - 7 rli --1-90,-We/, 4 v:WV.; \ U. 4-1/W,-7 datodj-2/4- 4-&11 0-Ovlâ‚¬ 61 d V 1'191_161* a i 0 0 2 - LU a ks r-1 cO =E .= C : Z5 */. r Z --- 2- U .... , - %2 ) 1 AU.EY BLOCK 34 **30-3-90-=FGRAVEL -1 6 1% /Gues .r,C. 360*-- :Elly'â‚¬ - ' 8 /4004. 2/ / h - -- - . 2 6-4/ ,/., ap. 't /14 fu ~ . 2 3 Nij Â»2 .~ '. S j 152 ti~~ i - l WA~ i. fÂ«-1 HDuke 7 0 f 1 i g , /04 P 4, P e J k . TO . tl! 41- - 94 V\VT f.1 ! *4! L Naeog, 9% 27~ poÂ» uv\7*41 Ge-, . 60.(JO' U 2,â‚¬ -TU SfTE PLAN O jltwA ADDRESS a01 17!54â„¢ DATE *16Â·07 420 W. FRANCIS STREET EDGEOPP 81811 ASPEN COLORADO Â©F.-1. 41'EVE,7 Mal Câ€¢-01 . LEGAL DESCRIPTION â‚¬3 WEST FRANCIS STREET 275-N & 0. BLOCK 34 CATY ANDI'OWN SITE OF ASPEN h Pm<IN COUNTY. COLORADO ale-,TS . .: SITE PLAN 4/& SCALE:1" 10'-Â·C0 k~~ 1: s p2 ..... Exhibit E vu '105 4, - =1 All 97377M M~<DOVe 70 N MS'IACED 0 0 -1 W I . =1 + s,ZE snuâ€¢ ocul,4 ZI Lu E r-M ' --1 CO 0 201 2 - -1 3% ---/ & ...ik --1 REMOVE EXIST~GASPHALT rIEW -POOWS TO < ~ SONG.REPLACE W,TH - r REDWC)00 CAPeONO I MATCH 8(STTNG *=0 . -1 . ..1 - - Ent"f '210;: - -1 - EL=*W-"r-- . . REMOVE EXEâ„¢G ASPHALT 1 - N. 4 1- - SONG~REPLACE-TH --- \ r REDWOOD CLAPBOAAO C , - a , . ./.- 1 1.0, Bel*CE EXÂ¤r~B STSÂ» _ Pet.â€¢g:E EXI~le STEP _ _ _ _ St,ENCES-AS"Elial'& ----- -- - 1 , , Emâ„¢G UNSH GRACIE NORTH ELEVATION ' ~ EABWZ:3:ZF'- . - MEWWmÂ©OWS TO - MATCH EaSTING 11Â·40:OUGHOUT == - el 1 el -- - REMOVE EXST.NG ASPHALT SONG.REPUCEWrTH Â· O 6- REDWOOD CLAPSOARO /4//r 17/U E-EVATICNS-66&S 1- ,=â€¢C. 17! S-@7A . OK'I 08tl287 -... =7 ... Re.OOVE SOSTING ASPHALT -\ ... .... SIOING.REPLACE WITH 4 a h f ---- CÂ»Ullet 01â€¢38 lÂ¥ 1]1] . ~ 4 ~elâ€¢â‚¬E %4000 DECKÂ»Â«3 AS REOU~ED - --::::: REFâ€¢â€¢SH eaSTNG DOORS - U .... EXSâ„¢G #FNSH GRAOE ReBM~H EasnNG OCCAS ./'f Reva Â®011â€ž,Le STEP U = 244,42\ng 4-0 - 31.-*:ESÂ·/â€¢8 f~BOUâ€¢MED \Â· hies 7 SOUTH EUMATION . o v LA\ \AD ~~iÂ·-cÂ· . 00Â¥801 . 2i i. 0 v.â„¢PEUA -1 ! .-1 1 - 97 CCE f r-1 L._ & , i 0-0 SOC- . k .1 zi ?SE .-1 =Z , =AL X\\44 .-1 4 LU 0-1 3: 35 =1 0Â« - - -1 NEW W.DOWS TO ,./1 _ _ MATCH EXEnNG TWKXK3HOUT -1 - 42 , Serripe 'Et.4 -- -- . --1 Im=,-~L liEÂ» 07 - 4~ -= i... 4 =-- - -2--t=il?\ 11=-* Egir 1.t=! .-- EM! A 1 EE=*111 1 - --i. - - - --- - =111 99 Ii=1-- . Â® Remâ€¢:SH EXISTNG OCORS --31=-- A-=14 l=i'~--7 - -- , - -- - I. A TOR YWD O DINNGAOOM i 9*â€¢8 SrEP SUFF.JESâ€¢*S FIEOL~E) Fel.*:E vame greâ€¢ S.rÂ¥*ZES.438///U'.60 eaSTIOG ;FNSH GRADE k Reâ€¢OVE EXETING ASPHALT EAST ELEVATION X SDING.REPLACE WITH . r REDPICO CLU'BOARD - Â·-- -- ---1 30 - - NEW WIICDWS TO MATCH SCSâ„¢G TI,4OLG,OUT - 1 ELEVATIONSâ‚¬AW_ -08.C - 1715-07'n W.08/12/97 ley METAL}WOWL- -_ - 1 SIEDErAL LL- --- . -------EL.'17*r Â¤'Obr- * I-. - Ne" DOWN *MG- SEE DETAL co-ely,- Re*OVEEXET,IGASPMACT ,/ ECSTING U.SH GRADE SIC)ING.REPLACE WTTH - #â€¢24Â¥ 01**313,9*,~CE REFNSH EXISTING OOCRS 5- REDWOOD CLAPBOARD REMACE Â¥<00013CKÂ»O AS REQU-D 1*'ST"X = &23141(*\1ut<4 40 i :. WEST ELEVATION A8 SCA,21,VZ~re- thv=\ 9.06 1 J33 1~ 970963 0135 ~ 970963 9643 Frum 1.)an b raker To: J ulic Ann 12:33 Ph{Il Frt, Jun 1 9.1998 1[U.-ill .. ~~ Mag gen & Associates, Inc. Structural Engineer, 5110 Main Street, Suite 3008 (970) 963-9643 â€¢ Fax (970) 963-0135 Carbon,late, Color,ul,â€¢816212{)35 wwip.MaggertEnginerr..com June 19, 1998 Julie Ann Woods Community Development Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Halperin Remodel 420 W. Francis Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Julie Ann: Per your request this letter is to infc)rm you that a representative from Maggert & Associates, [ne. has observed the existing structure at a partial demolition stage, and the existing stud walls appear to be in good condition to support the dead weight of the structure during the proposed on site house moving to be performed by Bailey House Movers. The process that will be used is to attach Micro-lam members to all the interior face of the existing studs and slide steel beams under the Micro-lams. William Bailey will instruct the contractor where to place the Micro-lam beams using his judgment and experience. The interior structure of the home should be demolished to a point where the house mover is comfortable with the dead weight of the structure. The structure will be placed on jacks and the jacks shall bear on the soil at the perimeter of the property. The contractor shall retain a soils engineer, per the request of the house mover, to give recommendations an how to stabilize the soil under the lacks during excavation for the basement Maggert & Associates will coordinate with contractor duing the construction of the projd. Sincerely, Reviewed By: jl 77-/c T~Â»Â«22Â»-~ Dan Fraker Barry Maggert, P.E. danyel@maggertengineers. com barry@maggertenginefers.com Historical Preservation Commission Att'n: Amy Guthrie CITY HALL 130 S. Galena Aspen, Colorado Halperin Main House 420 W. Francis Aspen, Colorado WINDOW SUMMARY: Dear Amy, Here's a Summary of what changes we're making to the Halperin Windows. Immediately after entering the house, window J on the left is a unique pass thru window that we're keeping intact. A new piece of double pane glass will be installed. Entering the Living Room, windows K, L, N, O, P, & Q are historic windows and will be replaced by custom made Pella Units to exactly match the existing sizes with 3 1/4" sill pieces (see window profiles). Following the HPC request window M will be replaced with two Pella custom Double Hung Units with a 3 1/2" mullion between. This arrangement will be similar to the existing windows GG & HH directly above. Moving into the Family Room, windows F&H will be replaced by Pella custom Double Hung Units. These windows are not Historical windows but replacement windows installed at alater time. Window G will be replaced by 2 Pella custom Double Hunge Units that match window M. In the Kitchen, windows A, B&R are not historical windows and each will be replaced by 2- Pella Standard Units placed together. Windows C&D will remain in place. Window E will be replaced with a Pella Standard Double Hung Unit. Window I will be replaced with Pella custom Double Hung Unit. On the Upper Level, in the Front Bedroom, windows FF, GG, HH, & 11 are historical windows and will be replaced be Pella custom Double Hung Units with 31/4" Sill and will appear exactly like the originals. Windows EE & JJ are unique diamond shaped windows that will be kept intact. A new piece of double pane glass will be installed. Windows AA, BB, CC, DD, KK, LL and MM are not historical windows and will be replaced by Pella standard Double Hung Units. The windows in the Accessory Dwelling Unit will be Pella standard Double Hung Units. These windows will be Pella Clad Units. The color will be Hunter Green. The existing windows are dark green. j WINDru" 901.4g:~'LE MANUF. IJ MARK DESCRIPTION No ROUGH JAMB SIZE MODEL REMARKS ~ OPENING VALUE (TOTAL) PELLA 2 4'10 1/4- X 310 3/4 36 NOT HISTORICAL A 2 36 NOT HSTORICAL 8 4'10 1/4- 1 3'10 3/4" 1 .36 REMAIN AS IS 1 36 D REMAIN AS IS 1 2'5 1/2-X 3'2 3/4- 38 NOT HISTORICAL 1 F 1'10 1/4- 1 6'3 3/4- CUSTOM 36 NOT HISTORICAL 2 G 3'2 1/4- X 5'10 3/4- CUSTOM 36 NOT HISTORICAL - ---- i-i~---- - -- 1 H 1'-101/4- X 6'3 3/4- CUSTOM 36 NOT HISTORICAL 1 2,6 1/4~ X 6'3 3/4- CUSTOM 36 HISTORICAL - 1 36 NEW DUAL PANE GLASS J - K 1 2Â·6 1/4- X 6'3 3/4" 36 HISTORICAL 1 36 HISTORICAL L 1 1'10 1/4- X 69 3/4- - 2 2.11 1/4- x 6'3 3/4- 36 HISTORICAL M -1 -- - - N 1 1'10 1/44Â» X 6'3 3/4" 36 HISTORICAL 6 1 206 1/4-X 6'3 3/4" HISTORICAL 36 P 1 2'6 1/4" X 6'3 3/40 36 HISTORICAL 6 1 2'6 1/4- X 63 3/4- 36 HISTORICAL R 2 4'101/4-X 3'10 3/4" 36 NOT HISTORICAL- 1 1 AA 1 2'9 1/2" X 5'2 3/4- 36 NOT HISTORICAL 1 .36 NOT HISTORICAL BB 2'9 1/2- X 5'2 3/4" CC 1 2.61/2" X 5'7 3/4" 36 NOT HISTORICAL- DD 1 3'0 3/4" X 5'7 3/4" 36 NOT HISTORICAL 1 .36 NOT HISTORICAL EE -- 1 2Â·61/20 X 57 3/4" FE NEW DUAL PANE 36 1 2'6 3/4" X 5'7 3/4" .36 HISTORICAL GG HH 1 2Â·61/4" X 5'7 3/4" 36 HISTORICAL 1 2,6 1/4â€ž X 5,7 3/40 36 HISTORICAL 1 36 NEW DUAL PANE 1 3'0 3/4" X 5'7 3/4- .36 NOT HISTORICAL- KK LL 1 2'9 1/2" X 5'2 3/4" 36 NOT HISTORICAL 1 MM 2'9 1/2" X 5'2 3/4" NOT HISTORICAL- 1 1 1 1 1 5010 ROAD Â¢154 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 81601 9701,945-2289 WATS 1Â·800-233-5797 FAX 970/945-4419 Window and Door Schedule A-10- & Sk,104 Date: 111 6 ~ R Z Page: 1 of: 1 1 -l Bill To: Ship To: IA Ate e a r ri aer . Lirie 4 Location Qty Model # Configuration ILTs Temp . Rough Opening Width X Special Instructions Glass - Height %O en- 41 2,991 Als ni i 14 I 2'k' i~ i A,334 i i ,; 1/ \ 50 19,Â£6 3 M 1 34 4 1 770\ ri 3; H 79 2 A '3 34 j ,2 9 1 41 *. h T \0 \ i i 04.. ,< 2'6' 4 94 4 1.3 * #+2 11/6<100*\ i Hi 0 1 0'| 4 x Â£ 73 3/4 2 31 '4 x noc; i i H 3' 1' ' v Â£ El\24 1 1496 Oil. i r-@r 14 9 il 079 -K 5\014 TE..i Â£ 4 1 1946 0,1 1 . 0%- 4*,Ll 94 3 %O 9 \ ARK LÂ©#1 - ; f Â« 4'ic?4 * 3 40'4 ;~~ s aqÂ° l~ x 41 0 \ F-1 i i 24 11 x 5th:4i * 3 334 X S '33/1 og.te 2 36 X..61 c i .... - 4- 71 x 31?4 E . 1 2.,33 Â©\ 3 t. 1 4 D 5 \ 608& ag.)82 1 I'k > x .5 0 K (Â·, c O .. ; WAG * 9 124 i fit iE 1 , C J 1/12! Notes: 4,10@0904. h:k' 110Â©ors Windows Eict. Material' tj*73 9 13 Â© 41 3 -v'. .1 .ARD-IrEECT Scale 6" = 1' 0" Unit Sections * <. R ./ / 5 AS3-9 5- All unit dimensions are approximate. . l,ZE -,1Â·6/160 , , , 3-11/16- 5- L ....-1 33) ' (941 027 1.1 \ ./I'-'--izzrri2Eze##1 :a 0, lied F I ' T 'Â·8 al - i ,91,/Â·941<0> 44/4%;d/-9 2 01 d .- .5;) 6*4; ....... - 7. 6 7.21 p- p 1%12 HEAD ft A 4 t 4 ~ . 1- i/4,1 , 1 ~ 9 JAMES 644 u.1 = LL ' 1 4'' b & ES ' - . 6-, Cal I 5 6/ . *r U O12- - -A -*./-~1 '~ 4 1, 1 Nh-)24- Arui -ter- 1 - L_*J~, A- AC'adL,--1-: ' . 14 1 , \ CHECKR,All , T *L-Zn ----e---*- - A . / 1, / ; ath . 49=1 4 Â· 21 2 -3-/4. I u k 1 32/7. 1- 71 - C_ 1 L- J / 1 1 ks 9 Y 3/8' Â·c) 7' IE ~ -12* 1 j SILL FHAME HIEIGHT < %~-4-ji.)(-l -1~{11)ity-fillil# 6 6 L--1 H -Windows - . AIHnECT scale 6" = 1 0" Unit Sections ; SER;Ez AS9-9 ~ 1-3/8. 4-3i8. p*, Clp) i .6 ilk , //- bi - 1 6'- tor_ ./ =15 1 1 318. S a . r... ~ r,~~C:, 1 Â·N ' 1 Ir----1 ' Ik 1 \ 1 li 1 HEAD -i E n' ,/t ; 14 1 - R i V 1-3/4 JAMBS a l44] ~ 1- -1/ ~ 1 11 1 i .- r. % MrÂ·1 i i 1 11 1 't X1~ 40~- -i '1 / t ' 11- .U, A /04 44 u F *=-' Â· 7/7 1 1 1 301- p tj B , 1 ---- 1 &,t I-* -% Ail *imensions are aporoxirrate. CHECKRAIL 1 Â· 1 H il i 1 1 #S <71 CJ ~- 41 -5,321. 29~ 1 1 32- k- 1Â»:- I - 1 4 6 Lr, 1 11 \ 1- 1 : . . - . ..6.432" J - - Icq, 4 , . 21.4 . i 2!12Â· 2.2 34 b.- 951 .. / . - 1 -- 1 35.9 I 0-94 , 1 %~ 27 1 -0 . Â¥ 1, , Â¥ 41 =1= , 1 31- t .-1 7- 51 1 - 1 'â€¢ 2. 3/16Â· - -5 SILL 4 V 1.3, 9 - - 9 r. 9 1-7/8" BRICKMOULD 3-1/2" BRICKMOULD 1-HAME HEIGH.I__ - il-. \ ~Â»32 r \ \ \ \ 8-7 15-7- 4-7 \ 7-8 W 512 7'43* \ \ Â® AS 'Eal.fe 7/4Le--Â·-=:E=,2 J . \ \ LII \ 0 9,/2899// 4 8 DECK ,# ~ Â® m=J~ . h . ~ Â® llS 6 071 L "1 yvv -=; ~ f *DME AlliN~ r _1 19!97 E 122 KITCHEN - - Or WINg.wsÂ·: Al -ir 83'Â® Â¥.EW-67-f -- I :1 -r-4-1 0 9 :1 =li - U --l| TRASH FV'LACE ALL EXTEF~CR I i CO//1 C.a~ETS PBIAâ‚¬ E]0871,0 KITOEN CAIDITI -100-TO MATCH I EXISTINQ I STÂ¥LE SCZE g OE] 1.-3 - - Pr#.-- Ca,NTERS & FLOCANO & ColoRR 1 El EAMILY_EKX)M ~71- NEW'.000 FLOCH Â¥ Fi31 ,â‚¬)1 3=4--- ~ReW<.718*.OW 0 1 1~, 5..r 31/2- 3Â·4 i ~ (D fuu--77 "' -f 1 - IÂ® .(c - 'to) 1- 1 111\ / g DINING N -STAIR-13 A LL.9. : 121-3/ 3 J 0 Â® I -- . 11 95 el#.=am- NEWSUFFICE ON ~ glan T : 11 1-TEFT 6(1 i i\ Uft 0â‚¬0<9 8 04.FO - ciEZ-1 < 1.1 L~Z'-7 0 - F DECK N . 11 1 :2:1,0 ~ 'El METAL RAMJÂ»3 O DECK l.c DECK NEW METAL FAIL.NG ) ------ - - UMINGBQQM [TiTI AT DECK - STEPS 1-7671 Â® b I 0 ..5rE-r.Ac~/~ rm-~ 1 9 /7 DECK 1 Â® BEV,a,/ACE(,4 - DEÂ¢*S AS /OUPED 14/4. 1 7 r b j STEPS N STEPS \J UP b UP N 1 - llmiNGSYSTEM FOALA- 410 FLOIEM BED(rYPICAL) . 5. l 4. 1 7-8' 1 ... 4. C~Ts Â© 1 NEWFLAOSTONE WALKWAY - 1 WINOC>w8 TO MATCH < FEAKI All EXTEFICR NEWMETAL FENCE EX,Sn,Â«3 37'-10' r *Aah f Le'IT POSTS <N NEW ENTRY CITE I STFEET FRCNTAGE MAIN FLOOR PLANCNEW CONSTRUCTION) 21& SCALE:1/4Â» 1,-0Â· 42.37 EDGE OF CURB 20-C 1 "i .2 AVABALCONY A l l : BE p 1,*c a rl EniT- 1 01,2/ 9 0 Li; 1 14 0 1-W i @1 6 18 MASIER BE[laQQM Iâ‚¬> PEW VAIATED CEUâ€¢G e Fler e k .J-AE-~00 Â® fr .Fur) 3 e.~ 19 Â© 11 L/12 0= 1 - e = 7(1â€ž. 0 1 084 .0Puttv ; rn ~ M 19~T~2671 01 1 b 6=i= A Â® 4 6ET 0 11 6 r-It O A 1 1-F - 744 82 BEDBQQM LIpPER FLOOR PIA N(NEW CONSTRUCHON) gi SCALE:lur 1'.2 L .*21 2, .9-01 . ~ EjrGA ( ~<lad_Â»;hble -Hung p.-p-i : 1 \Â·\ 1I1(lOWS , 4 4 ~ - .N~ Scale 60' = 1' 0" Unit Sections $.R 94 AS3-9 3 All unit dimensions are approximate. - l'Er 1-5/16" , 3-11/16- 6 - a. L . -1 94) (127 4 4,3 % .- I ' I. Itl L 1 9/16- L 6,: - 4 Â·~~-r~~---'-I ,-*-, 1 A Wt f T '41 , i - 611,11 Il , 1 : 4.-I - 1... 6, : Ba SIS I - 11 \ 1 <Rk HEAD 1 r. 0/ 1 ill I- b y l 1-3/4' - JAMBS '44, 9, '' =h i 121 - %7 ,. 1-- 111 -6 . le el 'tt 14 a Â· 1-6 L -Van. 3.3 ---- : r-1 jin I,-7 ..==2=--~ t! :~ 2,/// 1 1. 14 1 K n -.k=:sj V ; 24 1 Ur r CHECKRAIL - '1 1 1 -CE=>1 A t li 11-.J 1 L ' i Lf T , 3/8 'c) 7,-2f~ l_,33, 9 1 SILL I---i-------------I---I---------------9---Il---I-*-I------I-9- i - .91 /1 -2 im;62Â· T i - Woi-4 -laible-I-Uzzly 6-- Windows .AK>IrrECT Scale 6" = I w Unit Sections , SER El ' AS9-9 ~ 1-31 4-18. 1 - 314 - I 11 - - i 1 - -I- , .1/ - .-g . /61 /9=41=> U.//Â»El i 1 1 -1 44 1 ZIZ -Jp j: 4- -> 5 li Vf; B. i ,/1 4,14 1 1 1 7 1 lili . .. .1 1 $ I HEAD -' 1 . Â¥ 11 1 -3/4. JAMBS 1 - . 041 1 1 1 1 . C 11 i *i 2 1 ,-I 1 1 'F..6 t. Ull Â·. 2 , . , + ~C' .1.~*3,:\ /", L ,~ .m /\C , 61 - L.- --IA).9&...A >=6#fl--1 I 1. I. 11 - -- 1 Â¥ 9 V -- %'. :imensions are aporcxtrate CHECKRAIL / 11 1 1 /110 , . .1 -5,324 1 ' / 69= [ : 29) i, be g , -i-- 1 , 1 32 Â· 11. 1. . - 1 T / 1 ' L ''. , ' -6.Â·'32'~- - 1 - - . 1 24 " 29, I C Elw-=45 . I -1 .----- 21.8 '. 11 %2 % 5 -- 1 L ~1 *- t /5 - 11Â© /'. . , -1 Â· _ 533% 1 4 I 7 i ' 1 9 r- 2-----2-3 L ' 0 . - - 1 r- , -- 36. -4 .. 1 , .-. - 0 _J 4 - 4. i 3/16' 1 SILL 1,4 6. - -- -- 2 .. t. 9 1-7/8" BRICKMOULD 3-1/2" BRICKMOULD ----------1- .. RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, AND VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 420 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 1997 WHEREAS the applicants, Barry and Ellen Halperin, represented by Colombo International, have requested significant development, partial demolition, and variance approval for the property located at 420 W. Francis Street, Lots N and O, Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen. The property is a designated historic landmark; and WHEREAS all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards of Section 26.72.010(D) ofthe Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof; and WHEREAS, all applications for partial demolition of any structure included in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of the City of Aspen, or any structure within an "H" Historic Overlay district, must meet all of the Development Review Standards of Section 26.72.020(C) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 1.Standard: The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel; and .. 2.Standard: The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: a.Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions. b.Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions so that they are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure; and WHEREAS, all applications for appeal from the Residential Design Standards of Section 26.58.040 must meet one of the following statements in order for the Design Review Appeal Committee or other decision making administrative body to grant an exception, namely the proposal must: a) yield greater compliance with the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan; b) more effectively address the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to; or c) be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints, and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff reports dated November 12, 1997 and December 17, 1997, recommended approval with conditions, and WHEREAS, public hearings, which were legally noticed, were held at regular meetings of the Historic Preservation Commission on November 12, 1997 and December 17,1997, at which times the Commission considered and approved the application with conditions by a vote of 7-0 at both meetings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That significant development, partial demolition, and variances for the project located at 420 W. Francis Street, Aspen, Colorado, be approved with the following conditions. 1. The required rear yard setback is reduced to 0 feet for the new garage and Accessory Dwelling unit, which is approved to be a maximum height of 17 feet. 2. It must be determined whether or not the original siding still exists under the shingles. If so, HPC will work with the applicant to determine whether or not that siding can be restored. Otherwise, new clapboard siding may be installed, with approval by staff and monitor. As part of this activity, staff also recommends that the shutters be removed from the house since they would not have been there originally. .. 3. All replacement windows on the historic portion of the house must match the existing windows as closely as possible. Windows identified on the plans as modified by staff in the November 12, 1997 packet, may not be replaced. No window openings on the historic portion of the house may be widened, excepting the window on the east elevation, second floor may be altered as presented to HPC. The applicant should consider the possibility of replacing the multipaned window in the bay on the south elevation with a large double hung, which is more likely what originally existed. Any new window in the bay must be approved by staff and monitor. 4. In regard to the railings proposed on the front deck and porches, no railings may be installed unless an exception for historic structures cannot be granted from the UBC, or unless there is reason to believe that they were there historically. If railings must be installed, they must be wood and should be simple, not turned balusters. 5. Deck boards and stairs may be repaired where necessary and replaced if beyond repair. 6. A variance is granted from Ordinance #30, volume, for the new windows on the ADU. 7. No exterior materials other than those described above may be removed from the building without the consent of HPC. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the day of ,1997. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Chairman ATTEST: Chief Deputy Clerk ASPEN HISTORiE PRESERVATION COMMIS~N MINUTES OF December 17. 1997 Chair-person Suzannah Reid called the meeting to order with Roger Moyer, Mary Hirsch, Susan Dodington, Heidi Friedland and Jeffrey Halferty present. Gilbert Sanchez and Melanie Roschko were excused. 114 NEALE ST. - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING Assistant City Attorney David Hoefer received the affidavit (Exhibit I) of notice and HPC has jurisdiction to proceed. Chair-person Suzannah Reid opened the public hearing, no comments. MOTION: Roger moved to table 114 Neale Street and continue the public hearing to January 14, 1998; second by Susan. All in favor, motion carried. 420 W. FRANCIS -CONCEPTUAL & FINAL - PARTIAL DEMOLITION - PUBLIC HEARING David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney received the affidavit (Exhibit I) of notice and the jurisdictional requirement of the Historic Preservation Commission and HPC has jurisdiction to proceed. Amy Guthrie relayed that the applicant will retain the existing shed and demolish the rest of the building and in its place will build a two stall garage with an ADU above it. It is a slight expansion but will not damage the trees. P&Z approved the ADU. Staff recommends approval and the ADU will make a nice contribution to the alley. A rear yard setback variance is requested. Chair-person Suzannah Reid opened the public hearing. No comments from the public. The chair closed the public hearing. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMIS~N MINUTES OF December 17. 1997 MOTION: Roger moved to approve the application for conceptual and final review, partial demolition and compliance with Ord. #30 for 420 W. Francis to include a variance on the rear yard setback to five feet which means it is the same as the existing structure as submitted Dec. 17, 1997; second by Jeffrey. All in favor, motion carried unanimously. 920 W. HALLAM - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney stated that the affidavit of notice has been provided (Exhibit I) and it meets the jurisdictional requirements and HPC can proceed. Mitch Haas, planner presented. Mitch, a New York native, noted that the New York Yankees are the best baseball franchise ever. The preliminary site plan is Exhibit II. Mitch relayed that the applicant is requesting relocation of the garage structure on-site, partial demolition ofthe addition on the back of the historic house and to relocate the shed off the site. The AH portion of the project has been withdrawn. On the site is the historic structure, garage and a shed. The garage was moved there in the 1930's and the shed was moved there in the 1940's. Staff feels the partial demolition standards for the removal of the addition on the back and the off- site shed relocation have been met. The on-site relocation of the garage is recommended with a bonding condition and a structural report at the building permit issuance time. The Board asked the applicant for the overall view of the site i.e. lot split etc. David Guthrie, potential owner stated that the design was for an AH component but that was withdrawn and the intention is an historic lot split with two small houses in addition to the historic house on the property. The historic house would need to be moved on the site. 2 .. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 420 W. Francis Street- Conceptual & Final, partial demolition, Ordinance #30, Public Hearing DATE: December 17, 1997 SUMMARY: The property is a designated landmark, and contains a historic house and an outbuilding/accessory unit which is not considered historically significant. The applicant originally proposed minor changes to the living unit and the addition of a garage stall on the west side of the outbuilding. It appeared through the review process that the proposal was likely to have some negative impacts on large trees which surround the area. As a result, the project has been redesigned. The applicant now proposes to demolish the existing outbuilding, except for a storage shed, and to build a new two car garage with an accessory dwelling unit above. Staff recommends approval as proposed. Please note that Conceptual and Final review have been combined into one meeting for this case since HPC has reviewed the design in a worksession and because of the quality of the proposal. APPLICANT: Barry and Ellen Halprin. LOCATION: 420 W. Francis Street. ZONING: R-6 Significant Development PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development involving historic landmarks, or within an "H," Historic Overlay District must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. 1 .. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). Response: The new building retains essentially the same footprint as the existing structure. Impacts to the surrounding trees have been avoided. The proposed building is architecturally compatible with the existing house and uses identical materials. Staff finds that it is very well designed and will contribute to the character of the alley. The applicant is to be commended for redesigning the project to avoid impacts to the trees and for voluntarily providing an accessory dwelling unit. In terms of dimensional requirements, the applicant proposes to retain a non-conforming shed on the west side of the garage. This non-conformity may be maintained as long as it is not increased. A variance is needed on the rear yard setback. Although the existing structure sits on the rear lot line, it is being demolished and a variance must be granted to replace the building in the same location. Staff is in favor ofthis variance. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: "Cottage-Infill" housing is typical of the West End and encouraged. Also, the applicant is providing on-site parking spaces which have not been present before. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: The proposal does not impact the historic significance of the parcel. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. 2 .. Response: The garage is detached from the historic house and is architecturally compatible with it, therefore the integrity of that structure is not diminished. PARTIAL DEMOLITION Section 26.72.020, Demolition, partial demolition, off-site relocation, on-site relocation, or temporary relocation. No partial demolition of any structure included in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of the City of Aspen, shall be permitted unless the partial demolition is approved by the HPC because it meets the applicable standards of Section 26.72.020(C). For the purposes of this section, "partial demolition" shall mean the razing of a portion of any structure on an inventoried parcel or the total razing of any structure on an inventoried parcel which does not contribute to the historic significance of that parcel. NOTE: Demolition of an outbuilding is reviewed as a partial demolition. 1. Standard: The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance ofthe parcel. Response: The applicant proposes to demolish an outbuilding which is not considered historically significant. 2. Standard: The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: A. Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions. Response: The outbuilding is not historic. B. Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions so that they are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. Response: The structure which replaces the outbuilding is architecturally compatible with the house. Ordinance #30 Staff finds that Ordinance #30 has been met by the proposal. 3 .. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe following alternatives: 1) Approve the Development application as submitted. 2) Approve the Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (specific recommendations should be offered) 4) Deny Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. Recommendation and Recommended Motion: "I move to approve the application for Conceptual and Final Review, Partial Demolition, and Ordinance #30 for 420 W. Francis Street as submitted on December 17,1997 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMIS~N MINUTES OF November 12. 1997 Chairperson Suzannah Reid called the meeting to order at 5:05 with Mark Onorowski, Susan Dodington, Roger Moyer, Melanie Roschko, Gilbert Sanchez, Jeffrey Halferty and Mary Hirsch present. Heidi Friedland was excused. MOTION: Roger moved to approve the minutes of Sept. 24th; second by Suzannah. All in favor, motion carried. 920 W. HALLAM - LANDMARK DESIGNATION Hitch Hass, planner presented. The site has three separate structures and the principal structure was built in 1888. One ofthe structures was moved in 1940 and is currently used as a garage. In order to designate two or more standards have to be met. Staff recommends designation finding standard B, architectural importance; D, neighborhood character and E, community character are met. Gilbert was not seated for this item. MOTION: Roger moved to approve the landmark designation for 920 W. Hallam St. finding that standards B,D and E of section 26.76.020 have been met; second by Mary. All in favor, motion carried 7-0. 420 W. FRANCIS - PUBLIC HEARING Three exhibits - two letters and one affidavit. Gilbert seated at 5:30 p.m. Jeffrey did not vote. Amy Guthrie, planner stated that the applicant is requesting a variance and partial demolition. The house was built in 1886 or 1887. There have been a few additions on the west and north side of the building and some change of materials. Asbestos removal, repairing clapboard and window replacements 1 . . ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMIS~N MINUTES OF November 12. 1997 are proposed. Railings on the front porch are proposed and a low deck. On one of the out buildings at the back of the site a window replacement is proposed and Staff has no objection as it is not historic. A construction of a car-port is proposed and requires a variance. The Parks Department reviewed the car-port due to the impact on the large trees in the same location and recommend against it. Staff recommends restoring the siding or replacing it if it isn't in good condition. Staff also recommends that no window openings on the historic house may be widened. The windows on the front most portion of the house should be retained and restored. Staff recommends against railings on the front as they are not an historic feature. A variance from the volume standard on the windows on the ADU is needed. Added to the conditions are penalties if materials from the site are removed. Assistant City Attorney, David Hoefer stated that the affidavit has been presented and HPC has the jurisdiction to proceed. Jim Colombo presented for the applicant. All clapboard that can be salvaged will be restored. The unrestorable clapboard will be replaced with a clapboard that is consistent with what is existing. The single pane double hung windows are to be replaced with the same size insulated windows. The window on the east may not be historic and is proposed to be enlarged to let more light into the bathroom area. Metal railings are proposed and the west window could remain the same size. Regarding the trees the applicant recommends hand dug caissons to minimize any impact on the trees in order to construct the garage. Chairperson Suzannah Reid opened the public hearing. Public comments: Bill Stirling, neighbor relayed to the board that he is opposed to the variance for the garage. The character ofthe west end is defined by the irrigation ditches, historic character and the blue spruce and cottonwood trees. The evergreen trees are 50 years old and 60 feet high and are part of what defines that neighborhood. The other issue is open space within sites. Bill 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMIS~N MINUTES OF November 12. 1997 suggested that the guest house be raised that is not historic and build a garage in that location. Colombo relayed that an existing structure exists in the location of the proposed garage. He also discussed the trees and how the caissons work. Commissioners concerns: Snow load onto the neighbors property. Use of existing shed without making it taller and eliminating a variance for the garage. The window replacements will be the same size and double hung except the one on the west elevation which will be enlarged slightly. That particular window is small and not visible. The shutters are not historic. Staff indicated that the bay window was probably a replacement window and typically you would see a double hung window. The applicant stated that he looked into replacing the bay window with a double hung to bring it back to the original but it is difficult to find a window of that size as it is about six feet across. They would entertain two three foot windows across. The board inquired about moving the garage to the other side but the applicant explained that there are several 30 foot trees in that vicinity that would have to be removed. Railing issues. The code requires railings on porches and decks over 30 inches from grade and the front porch on the west elevation shows a railing closing offthe entry porch. The front porch and deck next to it do not have to have a rail by code. The applicant requests a railing around the deck which is not of historic significance. The Board feels that the railing impacts the historic structure. The Board is against variances for the garage. Gilbert requested more clarification on why the garage is not possible on the east side. They had no problems with the window replacements and siding. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMIS~N MINUTES OF November 12. 1997 It was suggested that the railings be wood where needed and none on the front and they should be consistent. Possibly do a hedge in the front as an alternative to a railing. The majority of the Board was in favor or tabling partial demolition. MOTION: Roger moved (1) to allow the applicant to proceed with items 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Stajf's memo dated Nov. 12, 1997. 2. It must be determined whether or not the original siding still exists under the shingles. If so, HPC-willwork with the applicant to determine whether or not that siding can be restored. Otherwise, new clapboard siding may be installed. As part of this activity, staff also recommends that the shutters be removed from the house since they would not have been there originally. 3. All replacement windows on the historic portion of the house must match the existing windo-ws as closely as possible. No window openings on the historic portion of the house may be -widened. The pella replacement -windows are to be reviewed by Staff and Monitor. The applicant should consider the possibility of replacing the multipaned window in the bay on the south elevation with a large double hung, -which is more likely what originally existed. A. Window on the east elevation can be replaced. B. Window on the -west elevation which is an existing historic window cannot be changed. 4. In regard to the railings proposed on the front decks, stajfrecommends that no railings be installed unless an exceptionfor historic structures cannot be granted from the UBC, or unless there is reason to believe that they were there historically. Ifrailings must be installed, they must be wood and should be simple, not turned balusters. 5. A variance is granted from Ord. #30, volume, for the new windows on the ADU. The windows on the north of the ADU must be modified to be more in scale with those on the rest of the building and the house (narrower.) 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISM~N MINUTES OF November 12. 1997 6. No exterior materials may be removed from the building without the consent ofHPC. With the approval of this application it is understood that windows except for those identified on the attached plans as modified by staff may be replaced in kind. HPC will work with the applicant to determine the condition of the original clapboards if they exist. Deck boards and stairs may be repaired where necessary and replaced if beyond repair. No other exterior materials may be removed without HPC consent. Also that Staff and monitor investigate the siding after the shingles are removed and a good solution is determined as to whether the siding can be used or a new siding is installed and what the dimensions are etc. The applicant, staffand monitor work together regarding a better solutionfor the bay window on the south side. Roger moved (2) to table the variances, garage addition, demolition and reconstruction until November 24, 1997; Motions 1&2 second by Melanie. All in favor, motion carried. Clarifications: Jim Colombo asked that the HPC reconsider the railing on the deck that is not required and is not historic. He would like to put the railing on the non- historic portion of the deck to give continuity to the deck. The request was denied. Windows that are to be replaced with pella windows are to be reviewed by Staff and monitor. MOTION: Suzannah moved to adjourn; second by Roger. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 5 .. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 420 W. Francis Street, Minor review, partial demolition, and request for setback variances, Public Hearing DATE: November 12,1997 SUMMARY: This house was built in 1886-1887 and is a designated landmark. It has had a series of small additions made to it, and some changes to exterior materials. The applicant proposes to replace the exterior materials on the house and to remove a storage area on the outbuilding and replace it with a carport. The location proposed for the carl? ort requires setback variances on the rear and west sideyards. APPLICANT: Barry and Ellen Halperin, represented by Jim Colombo. LOCATION: 420 W. Francis Street, Lots N and O, Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: R-6 Significant Development PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development involving historic landmarks, or within an "H," Historic Overlay District must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale, and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than 1 .. would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2); Response: The applicant proposes to remove the asphalt or asbestos shingle siding from the house and replace it with clapboards. Staff finds that returning to clapboard siding is appropriate. It must be determined whether or not the original clapboards still exist under the shingles. If so, HPC will work with the applicant to determine whether or not it can be restored. Otherwise, new clapboard siding may be installed. As part of this activity, staff also recommends that the shutters be removed from the house since they would not have been there originally. In terms of window replacement, staff finds that windows that are readily visible from the street must be retained, but the remainder of the windows may be replaced. All replacement windows on the historic portion of the house must be double hung and match the existing windows as closely as possible. No window openings on the historic portion of the house may be widened. Windows that must be retained have been indicated on the building elevations which have been modified by staff. The applicant should consider the possibility of replacing the multipaned window in the bay on the south elevation with a large double hung, which is more likely what originally existed. In regard to the railings proposed on the front decks, staff recommends that no railings be installed unless an exception for historic structures cannot be granted from the UBC, or unless there is reason to believe that they were there historically. If railings must be installed, they must be wood and should be simple, not turned balusters. On the ADU, staff has no concerns with the window and door changes proposed since this is not a historic structure. A variance from Ordinance #30 is required for the windows in the west end ofthe building. This is discussed below. The request for a carport on the east side of the building was referred to the Parks Department. They recommend that the carport be located on the west side of the ADU because of the very large tree on the east. Staff defers to the Parks Department on this issue and recommends that the carport be relocated. This will still require the removal of trees, since conifers have been planted across the rear of the property, however the trees are fairly new (planted within the last two decades) and should be allowed to be removed or relocated. The new windows proposed on the north of the ADU must be modified to be more in scale with those on the rest of the building and the house (narrower.) 2 .. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood o f the parcel proposed for development. Response: The proposal involves modest changes to the building and some restoration, which will contribute to the character of the West End. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: The proposal has no impact on the historic significance of the property. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposal involves changes which will enhance the architectural character of the property. PARTIAL DEMOLITION Section 26.72.020, Demolition, partial demolition, off-site relocation, on-site relocation, or temporary relocation. No partial demolition of any structure included in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of the City of Aspen, shall be permitted unless the partial demolition is approved by the HPC because it meets the applicable standards of Section 26.72.020(C). For the purposes of this section, "partial demolition" shall mean the razing of a portion of any structure on an inventoried parcel or the total razing of any structure on an inventoried parcel which does not contribute to the historic significance of that parcel. 1. Standard: The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel. Response: The applicant proposes to remove a small addition to a non-historic structure. Staff has no concerns with this. 2. Standard: The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: A. Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions. Response: There will be no impacts to the historic significance of the property. 3 .. B. Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions so that they are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. Response: The new carport, which cannot be constructed in the exact location proposed, will have no impact on the architectural character or integrity of the property. Ordinance #30 The proposal is in conflict with one area of Ordinance #30; the volume standard. 1. Standard: "All areas with an exterior expression of a plate height greater than ten (10) feet, shall be counted as two (2) squarefeet for each one (1) squarefoot offloor area. Exterior expression shall be defined as facade penetrations between nine (9) and twelve (12) feet above the level ofthefinished floor..." Response: The proposed modifications for the ADU include small windows in the west gable end which fall into the "no window zone," between 9-12 feet above the finished floor. This is a one story building and staff finds there will be no impact to the scale of the building as a result of these windows. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe following alternatives: 1) Approve the Development application as submitted. 2) Approve the Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (specific recommendations should be offered) 4) Deny Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. Recommendation: Staff recommends HPC table the carport review and approve the remainder ofthe application with the following conditions: 4 .. 1. The request for a setback variance on the west sideyard is denied based on the Parks Departments comments. A rear yard setback variance may be appropriate for the new garage. The applicant must provide a revised plan. This portion of the application is tabled to November 26, 1997. 2. It must be determined whether or not the original siding still exists under the shingles. If so, HPC will work with the applicant to determine whether or not that siding can be restored. Otherwise, new clapboard siding may be installed. As part of this activity, staff also recommends that the shutters be removed from the house since they would not have been there originally. 3. All replacement windows on the historic portion of the house must match the existing windows as closely as possible. No window openings on the historic portion of the house may be widened. Windows that must be retained have been indicated on the building elevations which have been modified by staff. The applicant should consider the possibility of replacing the multipaned window in the bay on the south elevation with a large double hung, which is more likely what originally existed. 4. In regard to the railings proposed on the front decks, staff recommends that no railings be installed unless an exception for historic structures cannot be granted from the UBC, or unless there is reason to believe that they were there historically. If railings must be installed, they must be wood and should be simple, not turned balusters. 5. A variance is granted from Ordinance #30, volume, for the new windows on the ADU. The windows on the north of the ADU must be modified to be more in scale with those on the rest of the building and the house (narrower.) 6. No exterior materials may be removed from the building without the consent of HPC. With the approval of this application it is understood that windows except for those identified on the attached plans as modified by staff may be replaced in kind. HPC will work with the applicant to determine the condition of the original clapboards if they exist. Deck boards and stairs may be repaired where necessary and replaced if beyond repair. No other exterior materials may be removed without HPC consent. Exhibits: A. Staffs memo dated November 12,1997 B. Application C. Map ofproperty in 1904. D. Photo ofproperty from alley, circa 1970. E. Site plan and elevations modified by staff. F. Parks Department referral comments. 5