The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.19990224AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 24, 1999 REGULAR MEETING, 5:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:00 I. Roll call II. PUBLIC COMMENTS III. COMMISSIONER AND STAFF COMMENTS IV. Disclosure ofconflict of ~nterest (,ctual and apparent) 14) Put--1- 1 4.6 N j } 91 9 4 r)RazaL V. BUSINESS f'Gr 30. 805 A.4 5 920 E. Hyman Avenue -Final Development 5 9*-li 1 6/ /5 7-0 *j*+19Â£47 5:36 B. 4 4735 W. BleÂ¢ker Street - Final Development -/ual 04 :/3 L 0-,1 ~y 3 7 06,6 4< 9- ch. 6:05 C. 330 Lake Avenue - Worksession -no rn i rl 'do S 6:35 D. 7234 W. Francis Street - W*iiI --igion 7:05 E. ADJOURN 2*â‚¬-2 LOJECT MONITORING Roger Moyer 303 E. Main, Kuhn ISIS 514 N. First 112 S. Mill St. Susan Dodington 712 W. Francis 918 E. Cooper, Davis Meadows Trustee and Tennis townhomes 234 W. Francis 203 S. Galena, Gucci 516 E. Durant Suzannah Reid . 303 E. Main, Kuhn 702 W. Main, Pearsen 218 N. Monarch, Zucker 414 N. First 1008 E. Hopkins, Bellis Mary Hirsch Meadows, Trustee and Tennis townhomes 420 W. Francis Street 203 S. Galena, Gucci 920 W. Hallam Gilbert Sanchez 1008 E. Hopkins, Bellis 414 N. First 303 E. Main 520 E. Hyman 112 S. Mill St. 307 S. Mill 232 E. Hallam 117 N. 6th St. Jeffrey Halferty 234 W. Francis, Mullin 414 N. First 701 W. Main 101- 105 E. Hallam 920 W. Hallam 240 Lake Ave. eidi Friedland 420 W. Francis Street 712 W. Francis Street 514 N. First 232 E. Hallam St. 117 N. 6th St. Lisa Markalunas 520 Walnut Street Christie Kienast 520 Walnut Street CONCEPTUAL APPROVALS WHICH HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL: 34 W. Hallam (Poppie's), expires April 26, 1999 123 W. Francis, Lot B (Vickery), expires May 13,1999 214 E. Bleeker Street (Greenwood), expires August 12, 1999 920 W. Hallam Street, expires August 12, 1999 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS 1999 1. 117 N. 6th ST. Coulter 2. 920 E. Hyman Ave. Lot N. Block 32 3. 435 W. Main St. Lot A-I, Block 38 4. 930 King St. 5. f 4 /|s / rm=n MEMORANDUM ..=.......' TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 920 E. Hyman Avenue- Final review DATE: February 10, 1999 SUMMARY: The applicant requests Final approval in order to remodel and make an addition to the existing building, which is to be landmark designated. Conceptual approval was granted on January 13, 1999 with conditions. On February 10, 1999 final approval was tabled so that HPC could verify existing conditions on the building. Staff is in support of final approval, with conditions. APPLICANT: Veronika Inc., represented by Roger Kerr, architect. LOCATION: 920 E. Hyman Avenue, Lot N, Block 32, East Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, City of Aspen. SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) ofthe 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 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 coverage 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). 1 Response: HPC reviewed and rejected a proposed design for an addition to this house in October 1998. Subsequently the architect attended two worksessions to present alternative schemes, one of which involved landmarking the property and asking for a rear yard setback variance to reduce the visibility of the addition. HPC encouraged the applicant to pursue that alternative, which received conceptual approval on January 13, 1999. Old House The existing cottage has had several modifications, including replacement of many windows, installation of skylights, and an addition on the back of the original cottage. (From the 1904 Sanborne Map, 1896 Willit's map, and Building Department records, it appears that a one story lean to which was added onto the house sometime between 1896 and 1904 was either removed or consumed by the second story addition made in 1977.) The applicant proposes to remove all of the construction at the rear of the house and to restore the original cottage. On the original cottage, the applicant proposes to remove the skylights and fill in with shingles, to retain existing materials and repair what cannot be salvaged, and to replace original features that have been removed, including installing more historically appropriate windows. Staff is in support of these actions, with the condition that all window replacements on the original cottage are based on physical evidence such as cuts in clapboards, framing evidence once the structure is exposed, or photographs. Additionally, it should be investigated whether one of the two original front doors (the one that would have faced E. Hyman Avenue) has been filled in. If so, it must be recreated, with the character and placement of the second door to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. The applicant proposes to rebuild the roof and fascia over the front porch, and to replace the existing porch posts and railing, representing that none of this material is historic. HPC has done a second site visit and agrees that the porch and porch railing are not historic and can be replaced, with the exact replacement materials and design to be approved by HPC staff and monitor (turned posts and a simple bracket are shown on the proposed plans.) In regard to the porch roof, it is agreed that the current configuration is not historic, however the architect must continue to work with HPC staff and monitor to determine an appropriate solution. Following the HPC site visit, the applicant will retain all existing windows on the front of the house, since they are historic. The existing front door has been modified and can be replaced, with the design of the new door to be reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. The drawings now show all exterior vents and list the HPC conditions of approval on the cover sheet. The architect has done an excellent job of clarifying this information on the drawings. 2 New Addition The applicant proposes to add approximately 1500 square feet onto the 500 square foot cabin; a substantial addition, although about 400 square feet less than the maximum that would be allowed by zoning. One variance was requested; a five foot rear yard setback variance to allow some flexibility in the placement of the addition. The lot is only 3,000 square feet and the house is set back 23 feet from the street, causing some restrictions on where the new square footage can be placed and what character if will have. Generally speaking, staff finds that the project raises the same "hunchback" addition issues that HPC is very opposed to allowing to continue. The situation is mitigated on this site because the property is dwarfed by adjacent construction and the addition will not be easily viewed from anywhere, however this argument should not be used to allow inappropriate construction. Acknowledging that the applicant has a right to a certain amount of square footage, it is therefore required that the architect be very creative in how that square footage is handled. The architect has addressed this by pushing the addition back on the site to the extent possible, and by lowering upper floor plate heights. Following the HPC site visit, the architect has been directed to reconstruct the north roof slope on the old house to avoid serious drainage problems at the new deck. This change is shown on the plans. Site Plan In terms of the site plan, the storage and trash areas at the rear of the site are not historic structures and are to be demolished. The applicant must work with the Engineering Department to move the utility pedestals currently in the alley onto private property. The gravel parking space in front of the house must be removed and all parking shall be accessed from the alley. The area in front of the house must be revegetated. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood ofthe parcel proposed for development. Response: The site is located in the East End, where relatively few of the original Victorian homes still remain. The entire neighborhood is in great transition and very affected by large-scale redevelopment. 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. 0 Response: The house will be preserved as a representation of Aspen's history and the history of the East End neighborhood. 3 e 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 improves the architectural character of the cottage by restoring some of its original features. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe following alternatives: â€¢ Approve the Development application as submitted. â€¢ Approve the Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. â€¢ Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) â€¢ Deny Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. 0 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC grant final approval, including partial demolition and a setback variance, for 920 E. Hyman Avenue, as presented to HPC on February 24, 1999 with the following conditions: 1. The front porch roof and fascia may be rebuilt, with the exact configuration to be reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor, after further research on the original design of the porch. The existing porch posts and rail mayÂ·be removed, with new porch posts and any trim to be reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monito;p 4 1 S A porch railing cannot be installed because there is not historical basis for it. 2. The existing windows on the south faGade of the house may not be replaced. 3. The existing front door on the south faGade of the house may be replaced, with the new door to be reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 4. The north facing slope of the roof on the historic cottage is to be reconstructed and the second floor deck redesigned as represented in the approved plans. 5. Any future amendments to the landscape plan as approved by HPC will require review and approval by HPC staff and monitor. 6. A five foot rear yard setback variance has been granted. 7. New windows may be installed on the east and west sides of the old house, based on physical evidence of original window locations such as cuts in clapboards, framing, or photographs, to be approved by HPC staff and monitor. 0 4 0 8. Investigate the framing to determine whether one of the two original front doors (the one that would have faced E. Hyman Avenue) has been filled in. If so, it must be recreated, with the character and placement of the door to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 9. The storage and trash areas at the rear of the site are not historic structures and are to be demolished. 10. The applicant must work with the Engineering Department to move the utility pedestals currently in the alley onto private property. 11. The gravel parking space in front of the house must be removed and all parking shall -accessed from the alley, 12. Submit a[emoIRionTFIan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating exactly _~eas oi the histoi:TEhouse are to be-removectarpartÂ·Â·04*heÂ·Â·:enQxation,Â» -m~ 13. Submit a preservation plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating how t* existing materials, which are to be retained, will be restored. The requirementjlto - - . , .._wtain/repair all original materials and replicate only those that are determi~LbfHPC 14. No elements are to be added to the historic house that,did not previously exist. No existing exterior materials other than what has been spdtifically approved herein may fe removed without the approval of staff and monitor. an mom or 16. There shall be no deviations from the exterior blevations as approved without first being ~ ~ reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 17. The preservation plan described above, as well as the language of certain conditioyot / approval will be required to beintedon the cover sheet of the buildingpe~Ji~r~ and all-ath@Eprinta.maÂ£kfor the mlrpose-oteenstruetieczs:=------a-- 18. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 19. All representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Historic Preservation commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to grant final approval for 920 E. Hyman Avenue with the conditions outlined in Resolution No. , Series of 1999." Exhibits: Resolution No. , Series of 1999 A. Staff memo dated February 24, 1999. B. Conceptual approval. 0 C. Final application. 5 1-=71 APPLICANT: Veronika Inc. represented by Roger Kerr, architect LOCATION: 920 E. Hyman 6.0--- ACTION: Significant Development (Final) SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) Significant development in an "H," Historic Overlay District must meet allfour of the development review standards in order for HPC to grant approval: Standard 1: 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 coverage 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). Standard 2: the proposed development reflects and is consistent with the 474Â»F character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Standard 3: 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. Standard 4: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. . EXHIBIT777- N a. 2- 0 99 TIP:131 4:i G,7,94Â£allip,1361Â·9191Â·fÂ·Aifi' (3* 'f,Ati) M 'Viii &44*,-'. ~-97 - NAME OF PROJECT: CITY CLERK: STAFF: WITNESSES: (1) El 0 564. An n/ (2) (3) (4) (5) EXHIBITS: 1 Staff Report (l/50 (Check ifApplicable) 2 Affidavit of Notice ( ) (Check if Applicable) 3 Board Criteria Sheet ( ) (Check if Applicable) 4 5 'lis MOTION: ,, r, ] 5 2)1 ~ VOTE: YES NO SUZANNAH REID YES L No_ ROGERMOYER YES Lf NO_ MARY HIRSCH YES INNO _ JEFFREY HALFERTY YES ~ZIL NO_ SUSAN DODINGTON YES k-NO _ GILBERT SANCHEZ YES,45 NO _ HEIDI FRIEDLAND YES - NO - MAUREEN MACDONALD YES - NO - LISA MARKALUNAS YES .10 No _ CHRISTIE KIENAST YES _ NO _ RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION, FINAL DEVELOPMENT, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND A VARIANCE AT 920 E. HYMAN AVENUE, LOT N, BLOCK 32, EAST ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. ~_, SERIES OF 1999 V WHEREAS, the applicant, Veronika Inc., represented by Roger Kerr, has requested final approval, landmark designation, partial demolition, a variance, and Residential Design Standards review for the property located at 920 E. Hyman Avenue. The property is listed on the historic inventory with landmark designation pending. The project involves removing a non-historic addition at the back of the house, restoration of the original cottage, and construction of a new addition to the rear ofthe cottage; 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: 0 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; 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 ofthe 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 Historic Landmark Designation shall meet two or more of the following Standards for Designation of Section 26.76.020 in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: A. Historical Importance: The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or event of historical significance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. B. Architectural Importance. The structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type (based on building form or use), or specimen. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. D. Neighborhood Character. The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. E. Communi) Character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance; 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, a public hearing, which was legally noticed, was held at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission on January 13, 1999, at which time the Commission reviewed and considered a conceptual proposal from the applicant and approved the application with conditions by a vote of 6-1; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staffreport dated February 24, 1999, recommended final approval with conditions. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That landmark designation, final review, partial demolition, a variance, and Residential Design Standards review for 920 E. Hyman Avenue, Lot N, Block 32, East Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, as presented at the February 24, 1999 meeting, be approved with the following conditions: - 1. All conditions of Resolution No. , Series of 1999, which granted conceptual approval for the project at 920 E. Hyman Avenue are listed herein. 2. HPC supports the concept ofrestoring the original cabin. All existing materials are to be retained and repaired as needed. Any materials which must be replaced due to deterioration must be replicated to match. HPC staff and project monitors must be consulted before any exterior materials are approved for replacement. 3. The front porch roof and fascia may be rebuilt, with the exact configuration to be reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor, after further research on the original design of the porch. The existing porch posts and rail may be removed, with new porch posts and any trim to be reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. A porch railing cannot be installed because there is not historical basis for it. 4. The existing windows on the south faQade ofthe house may not be replaced. 5. The existing front door on the south faQade of the house may be replaced, with the new door to be reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 6. The north facing slope of the roof on the historic cottage is to be reconstructed and the second floor deck redesigned as represented in the approved plans. 7. Any future amendments to the landscape plan as approved by HPC will require review and approval by HPC staff and monitor. 8. A five foot rear yard setback variance has been granted. 9. New windows may be installed on the east and west sides of the old house, based on physical evidence of original window locations such as cuts in clapboards, framing, or photographs, to be approved by HPC staff and monitor. 0 10. Investigate the framing to determine whether one of the two original front doors (the one that would have faced E. Hyman Avenue) has been filled in. If so, it must be recreated, with the character and placement of the door to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 11. The storage and trash areas at the rear of the site are not historic structures and are to be demolished. 12. The applicant must work with the Engineering Department to move the utility pedestals currently in the alley onto private property. 13. The gravel parking space in front of the house must be removed and all parking shall be accessed from the alley. 14. Submit a demolition plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating exactly what areas of the historic house are to be removed as part of the renovation. 15. Submit a preservation plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating how the existing materials, which are to be retained, will be restored. The requirement is to retain/repair all original materials and replicate only those that are determined by HPC staff and monitor to be beyond salvage. 16. No elements are to be added to the historic house that did not previously exist. No existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor. 17. HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures. 18. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 19. The preservation plan described above, as well as the language of certain conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 20. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 21. All representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Historic Preservation commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 24th day of February, 1999. Approved as to Form: 0 David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved at to Content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chairman ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk . Ill - I. 4. -01 r r. 1 a u = b Â·:9 AM 970.925.8289 970 925 8289 P.01 i d EXHIBIT - -00 I )01*211 poS13 g<,Â¢ Produced from clear. kiln-<leted '2 7 m T 1% ' 11 Western *,fiwood- Anger-joil}led . * 4 0 Â° 2 P and laminaled with 4 32:,ilow 4 Re Â· <inter on 5. and 6- 14'118. )F /321 1 1 r. : Available in dtred Square GIZes: '~ 4" (surfaced to 34" net); 1 5" (4447; and 6Â» (5449. - T , f - ,-'.1-a.....1.----- U ... U Post41- brandiax t'Ensmittal memo Â¥114,1.6 , . N -: 3 R.B 16 5â„¢m j /k,Â¥052.- a *4 6 1 4 1 F 2"10,02*e (0,- 7 i 1 kt pharre # 'Depl â€ž : i >1 /./. : 11 7Tze- 5l.irliplil-. fliE I.wil.Irlii.'ll:Jill:/11.-i ..R fal hi 74, 1 R PON, Considerutlous: 2 44. 1. Gendrally, the 5= and 0' 8 41 B , Posts *re bat for residential i ~ ~?, ~ 1- cunatruction. The 4" appearm '1 too light. 2. Alluw enough .'041" al top.a:,d . INAÂ»e to aceummodald the lItÂ· - Â·Â· Â· :! ' .:f,PL . 7 'Â·14: a tended gingerbread and 43. NEW 1%Fi;'TRAD10't,Â©tk~&60 ~!. '. : , balustrade (handrail sect.lon) fORLE;47988%*,(NiA Â· ' - 40'~*C td . 1>ort.4. Poi.13 Carried in Otock, 4%45'1 Â¥ 1 4% ... .El , 4 Erot ' K NU;IBER lÂ· ' ..:ip t *plaCE: ~~Â· . w 10#j %8,1~ <TRADITIO* . :ICL@SIC .Y;'. ::*,:'.29. he 4" g 96" 32" 24" .- 1 121 - 010 121-068 $44.99 4" x 96" 36" 20" 121 - 090 p 121 - 015 121 - 070 44.99 4" 1 96Â» 42" 14. - 121 -020 : 44.99 IC" 4- x 120" 49*' 31" .--- 121 - 005 121-067 54.99 : 5" 1 96" 82" 24" m.Â· * 121 -036 121 - 076 69.99 L a â€¢ 5" x 96" 36" 20" 121 - 100 121 -040.,2 121-080 69.99 11 . 5",gr J ~42" 14:'- 4='-9 4*~ ,121-0459 121'96,i *mi#*: 9 de 5- 1 120" 49" 31" 1211595 121 - 030 121.082 89.99 61 x 96" 32" 24" 121 -066 121-084 89.99 13" R 95" 36. 20" - 121 -060 4 121-085 89,99 6" 1 95* 42" 144 121.062 89.89 .. :Se , 8"1120" 49" 31* 1 121~.10,1 121 -058 121 -083 99,99 11 to - --' b AllPosts haw 46" Tuntiogs ,.22648%4f" . -fial/Post (Split)1860%'*fllstedi>04* ~ ~ Motor freight i hurge nittiÂ· be r. t.; im:d flrt tufy 1411*41 pomt z.irder,1. We Ki:l ziel,1 6< ! 4 - 44 i L.- F - FEB-19-99 FRI 10:59 AM 970.925.8289 5 8289 P.02 1.-4. . : EXHIBIT A 2 1 2:@4444** 4* 4 1 , 4, ~ 1 1 9 -. e - ./ Â·1[DrackeÂ¢s Et:26*_ From simple to ornate, Our brackets will enhqnce yout perches and entryway. :i D,r Â·1 . , ' 4 Â·Â¢' 1 -:. 2..61 44. A -../6'WIll. I I I . CC:ittloz.. .., .... 4 Â· ;T'r Â· . ' 1, --1 1 .. 923 .... 90 , 1 - - \.2\1 4 ..1 5 4,1 i 1 '. 8 ~~, 4*1 00~. ,., 1/ A a : 'Â·:44* . U I.:'- i BR 100 BR 102 BR 1 7J 4. . I 1 72"x13"x-17" 1 /2 "A 1 2 '414" 1 92"x 1 00 0" BR 104 14"xl 20< 14" , , 1 4 4.*.. :11"wh . a .. ... I i M!, ,:.M.,; : 64~,4 :-Â· <*'F . 41*Ph.T . D J .4 1 r .---1 Â»F 327 - 24 -1 4 TiÂ©) 1 . MA ? 1 LIÂ· BR 106 BR 107 4 BR 109 BR 105 1,cxllx18" 114-x1 2"x 1 2 'i Â· 1 1 0*834"x 1 034" 1 19'x14"x16 4 % I -' ... , 41. . . 1 1 if .eis*- ..4 â€¢ .â€¢.... - I. -â€¢~4~ i â€¢â€¢ $ h 1 . O â‚¬3 1 1 0 44 -AF| h. -Â»47 ,Â®a 89/ /)fla f v Fj (k. cb (&, 12 1 00\ ~LAO'J 12, < 91 /AM. li) . 3 . to .,1. 4.. #42 -. 4 9, ' Â· 71 9 BR 111 1 BR 112 BR113 .r '. 1 : 1"x54"x'10': ~ 19(17"*9*" 1 W'*1 2"x 1 2' 9 BR 114 114" 114 "Xl 6" Ll ... . . ,. n ' 90/ -~ er //-/ ,h q il,4 f :i 1, 7. - BR 116 BR 115 4 ly,")(10'*10" -1 BR 117 '15[125[12# 1 14"x13"x16" 10 . Â·4 Â·.:1 4#au I - -1~_---__.3,1,7*ArI - - -1 1 1 t 1 - .- 1 /~ l 1 4 4- - a. / i all*Al; 4 *.6.,re. :* 'f- i Ile :129 - , . . 1 ' 4/ 42 ' - 1 ~ 1 8 1 IIi i l . / 1 1-. 10 liN - , S It -0- \ It ., $ 224-1 i , & - .-.i --LL ---LLL 4,/-Â·43*322-424924- 7-1 ' --- /2 :/2 - I L ' -- /2- 5/2- --4-Â£ 1. 1 , , 1 , . -4-LLY . il- . . . - iii1 -- 11 1 - ---- 1 ; 1 1 -LA--=4 b/*2 . i 111 11 - 1 1 -,, : 1 1 1 $ 1 1 1 1 1 I l.----- .-' 1 1,1 11- 1 1 '.i n mi : - 1 , f ~ 111 dritut, -Â«n i. . . , 1 1 ..! -. -r- _PIE--~~~1- . 1._-1 4- ,-- < /- -*.. I. ' / ' ./ 1 1 771 f ; 1 ' 1.-I-1 -11 ti i 1 4-.-- I -'-Ii - - - 1 4rr T -111 4- i --~ - -]f 1 --~ 1 1 r 4 111 11 11 111 .Ill- Il.i..I - I.-li.- -*..0 - + -i /1 [Li_-1 21 ' 4 --r...#.+-:i.--#-- A:- - --1-1.Irc.-I. . *.-. -. --. - c _UdEK~-6/--~L~~.f)Â£*s~L~)-t- /-L-- U - 1 1 1 . --- - pry , , ,~1-01,"u fk Â£-*v . - -Liwft*$~EL4 -7%- -/ 60 50*p,2 - . -!Mku *di 9 10 9 , +Aprra,Â« r.' 0 U'U LAÂ» 4 '.11 . ---. /444- 44ad't FAct,kct- I - 40 4 @A+r *i 04 AÂ¥#4 , 60 c. t.zi<64 -..f'- *x B. . * 4%** ..r/ 90* 'r-. ' , *':-1... d 0 I ?1 9, U.-11-4 - 79034942 --rÂ¥ - - 7-721-0-1921192t/ 9-V Villul, /14__ h I, CD -6-17 v 71 4 0 7 t ----- -7-.6-"1Â£-L-- - - 1 1 J .---1.- --0 , r.r 1 1 --i , 4. O - . -- Ii- 0- 7 2 1 1 1 k - t . 4 i 1 - \ 4 - f 'fl' 7 4 1, 11 - 1 1, + .1 \ \ 1 - 14- d 11 1 , 11/' 1 41 4 1, , 1 . '.0..0 - 1 1 /1 9 1 AÂ»U MN 0 . â€¢ - 1 Â· -Et<2**NÂ£'M-â„¢- - 4 0 - P ,-32**f . 4 1, 5 ~ 40 1*ur /1-5 .1, 9, 1 1 tl'. 1 J 4\ ' r....... - F , x. 1/ 1. 4 'I 40Â¢. 1 -- . tllk ..1 I 1 I '044 -0 1 1 Â· ID it:*.f l Â·b l 1 4 1 1 . 1 - 1 1. 1 j[ P 1 / fl 49 1 1 f 1 1. C ---- - Nweit- F: 7.46 .r . - - -fi- 1 - .4-1- * %. L 1 1 < -aeÂ¥ 1% 18 7 t -1 Â»40;2% 770 Â£ L 1 7 11=1.-7 - / ll) 1 4 ..It 1 1 6 . 1 . 1 1. 11 - 6 l . l . I 1 . . -.0- f U U t.,4-) 1- tl -17 _ 1& Ul+, tull\, Â»l, l/ft= t-â‚¬e~ + liwumb:4689 - 3,11/69 4/8. C J.S W 1 ./1 1 1 - 1 1 / , 1 as .se . --. -*.- -0----- .. 0- - 0-. 0.- .- -/9 .- - " , M. LA, -2.- L --g . i. F&Wl O 1 1 - r L- / X - =r=*=='. A 4 1 VL,-#J 7 , 2 1 #TA/T * 4 4 8 TR 1 . 1- ~- - t? h* 1 1 n 14 Et - 1 1 f . - 8.: 1 5 'J --L --1- 7- 6 1-- - a . 0. 4, M ZIP//%19.........Irm1F; 1, 1 . 1 4 I../.../..,1* --;44 2./ -a// 1 1 .. =--2= - * 1, . 1 -/- /00.86-0 i % 4 28' -Â« S",4, -%4 Act 11% . 0, ---- i# 5~Â»Â»2~4Â· 110 it F*7-- - 72 ir 'rue' 1 Mt , 0 709 - 494. . h , F > 1 . '49.4 21. Ir. a. 91) . 41 g j 0 , 2.9 -31- /--* 1 .1 .r=. -....... a -1 1 1 - . .=r . 63:44 i. ~ 1-lk. .M A -1- 1 45 Z ..l 1 1 0 0 40 I U , -Il Â· J . 1 1 f -- I JU- . - - r 1 . \ 2, .- \,0 . i 1-Ii. 0- .3 4 . . . /4/ 0 ., f. 9 j . 2- I el 72&Â¢P 96,qkâ‚¬/0----7- ...,LB)6 yg i / -O t E Agr. (?28 U a - /Â»06 3 - - 418.*h -*tlt;83.Â·eysÂ·ir.AmÂ·Â·Â·eÂ·L ,-1 -- 1 3.. /4/74 ff~ . i~4* /0 - r '4 41 fÂ¢ i, . r; Itil , 4,~c ~\ 44/ p - 47 .-*li -4Â» /0- , , 141,9 4* 2.~rp . .., 1. 444- I C # R - -4~9/9 V ,~141.8 A 9. 'llo< 1 + 0 , G , .,1 1'4'AP' \ Â©14*44 $-4.*,B,- 53/4426/9/~fl:494+i*&Â¥13%4~ I... tA Â·*2 4\ A 1 12; 47,4\ 4 RI, 4}'Be>.4 A ~*//ME' 4Â¢'~~~ts \" 491441 ' 'A '4 A.4...bil, 44..1...rf.4.V- 3 /*Att:42'~4~ - 41Mt% 5 -~ LLII- 60/3~ \ ..h ~. ~ - 4\V776<4-i- - - I I -4- ...1 - 4:>2 tr.. --' /3 // / 44-#.-- ~~F,.~ -4-4....i y , 1 41/1 1-'A -t:m~ : 1699%ig , 1'~*Alk/*. tw Eli /,6 4*:wa;Â£33(e~s~*~ 4~~k ~ ~jG;jia,~HANU\*g~\.\~\%1/AVIXAW/JAWW#//lig/Bll#f:,57~ A 4, Y Ji \~ti:96)42\\UIEr:,4,<991,1- --/~-*I ./ ..~~LE . -U ':1==12132%02â‚¬N~ M"'-It*1~ Â· i 1/. ./ .. ~Â¥+0\UNB.*az*eda,;LeaN,Nafwâ€žÂ»Ukâ€¢~Â»N*Â»~*Â«, **~;" ~it~~~12*1~ It I ff.Nt''ii;~~Ult**N~~~*2434}>t~~ 'im L~,i"f*.'.,,~'7543'~ 1 4 1 - Â¢t %11 1 10.1:-ir 0# 4/u..r .-=-5,- >v~u Â· giRES:tif-~1~*22>*MJ==~~~~=~~~~*722~'' ~ 1 1 7,/1~Illit~14!!~9.1~~~3;- 9{1.40 . I.k - NID,1 #/4 ' -"'Â· ,">07~ :lb -Um,i.-44:<p--*~â€ž;-&,kp,n i Â¢ . N t :..111141:,lii'/111 11111:11//1111.- I .... . .:.1.HI"I- 1i ., .1A- .6. --3 1 , ~ 4 .r P i \ ! ..1.111: :.Ir 75/17 1.!f .... $ lilli M tl!11,111!tillt;11111111.11'0 " .0. . 1,10,1.. 11 1. 11 i~ i Hemi Â«~/ljti ~*,54# 4# 44; ' 2:1 4 34 Il.:1 I; Iniprl\,11111'li,11 11~ - -1 :Il 1 11 :Ilii!!1 'IH.1.1 , ... 4 .Â» m m'.11;1'm 1 -3,41 5,0/t . 1 - 1 !881 ' I"Illl!~litlll / , $ 2 1 Icillkilin /11'5564'i, 4 1 ~ Â·ilitt'lim?)1.rl//"/* ':91;'tf' 94* - 1:42 *Vt fLF - 1 1 9.1 Ii; 1 Illit, ,\ illt l.- 1 , 91.11&1-9./. ~14'1111~ Ill~~â€¢~1111% I,~li~"I'tl~1~1 Bl ~2~~ 1Â»-1- dil: /1.liwi . 0/'ty -,2*k It A \ â€¢ 641 liRIX, ,-7.#br-4-;.42:~ ....--c-1,=*.#â€ž-=.... -zÂ»UBM*49; Â£4 78-:Â» u<-MA#,~--'-'~.*--P- -- -~ C=- . /----1 . Â»AÂ«fiÂ©Â¢, 04 \'?,935~31512Â»~ - ik>j 24. ...Imp,20* -*-I'l'/21~*folliatio~upf~/Â£1,1~. # 04 F lit> e .~ 9 ,-7.H ~ 1,/,2.~27&.=~ .. 0Â»~ l.iqff-;zj+,*.-2'.j--, NO~ 34- - , -- 5% ./i#f&3:.4*3.iES..,0 - ------ 99'53"Pr,+LA"U, -- 4.,op. RIJZI/7,, i d[\ _PROJECT DATA 0 Â».' t..M.J. APPREe: 120 8.1-|TMAA AVE: fl 5% ZON 9 5 KNIF - #fÂ¢GIAL: 1-06,+Ip +421< 28,14+floN fet4Â»61~ 4 FL.0 K Al<EA Â£561.6,1,1 1-~CFIOK| 6 5 3 F' +11310*Â·10 0[17~@ ; 52.0 0. FF Ge . r NEw LaweR FLoolÂ¢: 100 N. Fr; 4 zs N Ew Pkibl Fl#1â‚¬ : 970 * rrÂ· ~~~* 11 NEW +212 M.ele: 04 9, Fr h <FOTAL FA K.5 '2030 522. pr. MA. R 001,1.100 9 AFEA ; MAI<N:i & : 44* 0Â· f>1, ( 40 f'Af) Low EK LEVEL 850 00. PT: C KeT Bt.g) FIA.1< 41,1:WEPY Moo #'P *0 , Dvi Le 1114 040 4 4; 2.5 pr, . I I . 3..4. I 4 ...... . 2 . ... 04:. T#m/61 . .. ., L Vuwy /, .. \ 7/ /1 4 --2 . -- - /50 / .. , d 4 44/1,4- , + X -I ... 1 1 - 1 . 1- 1 4 1 "t '. 9 iIi . I. .,/ 1 - 1 116.Attft,+16 0 - m., \ Ill ./. 1 1< 01 .. Â¢ = 6 =1Â®M# ibirgrell . I *1*5*121050#!3 1 -' S 14. A.Â· ' A. I A. i JA. ./. . 2 A..4. AV 74.-*.*.#I-I - I. - . - ,. 1 .... 1 .% I I ... Â·C= -1.#.~ - 4 Â¥ I i . -Â·4 -1 . - - U 4 -%4444 L , -1 -4 '' , â‚¬ i fr 21*504$&Â»r 1 1 li L p 1 n (7 1 \* L'' CO-> AU,+ DRLfry 124- , E Â«1 -2-7 - -1 -- >tiA.LÂ»n.-n Li *-4 li F =t -i , -I , 8%#.40*,rn<#Ff,a# ~aq*Ava*u /**/#4#/glif~fi. $- -L.11*114+ Â¢91 9 >9 D-60 U I 1 0 HISTORICAL PRESERVATION C0MMI1 CONDITIONS ........................... â€¢ NEW WINDOWS MAY DE INSTALLED ON THE EAST SIDES OF THE ~ ~ ~ OLD HOUSE. BASED ON PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OF ORIGINAL WINDOW LOCAnONS SUCH AS CUTS IN CLAFBOARDS, FRAMING. OK '4:.. I INVESTIGATE THE FRAMING TO DETERMINE WHETHER ONE OF THE ~~;:Â· ~. , ?I g ~ TWO ORIGINAL FRONT DOORS HAS BEEN FILLED IN. IF 50. IT MUST BE 17 - F RECKEATED, WITH THE CHARACTER AND PLACEMENT OF THE DOOR TO BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY STAFF AND MONITOR. . k 1-/ 9 THE STOgAGE AND TAASH AREAS AT THE REAR OF THE SITE ARE 3,2 :NOT HISTORIC STRUCTURES AND ARE TO 61& DEMOLISHED. I ./ . 1 . -9-1~ Â· -fÂ¢'., .. ..C. --* >O THZ AFFLICANT MUST WORK WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPT. TO MOVE ~ '- .0 if .4 ~ 17 THE .UALLTY FEDESTALS IN THE ALLEY ONTO PRIVATE FROFERTY. ; 1 39- t; _ niE GRAVEL PARKING SPACE IN FKONT OF THE HOUSE MUST BE k /442,2 4.5, REMOVED,AN[>Â·ALL FARKING SHALL BE ACCESSED FKOM THE ALLEY. f h ~ Â© i SEE DEMOUTION AND PRESERVATION PLAN SHEET #6 FOR HOW THE 6 0, / 0 14. EXISTING MATERIALS. WHICH ARE -TO BE RETAINED WILL BE .. â€¢.r ../ -4 4 I ; u XESTORED. THE REQUIREMENT 15 TO RETAIN/REPAIR ALL ORIGINAL '-' fi:1.7:.,.r >'-,0> .MATE~ALS 74101'REPUCATE ONLY THOSE *THAT ARE DETERMINED BY PHOTOGRAPHÂ£ TO BE AFFKOVED BY HFC STAFF AND MONITOR. -. . . k - 1 tilt STAFF AND MONITOR TO BE BEYOND SALVAGE. . i *, -' ~ -O NO ELEMENTS ARE TO BE APPED TO THE HISTORIC HOUSE THAT DIP :~ 1 . 3 b'NoÂ¥ PREVIOUSLY EXISE NO EXISANG, EXTERIOR MATERIALS MAY BE 1_ : :'., *~ REMOVED WITHOUT THE AFFROVA OF STAFF AND MONITOR. .9 . c> 7 < 4 ID HFC STAFF AND MONITOR MUST APPROVE -THE TYFE AND LOCATION . ~ ' T V ' - 54'' r OF ALL EXTEK]OK UGHT1NG FIXTURES. 2- '- ~ e) THERE SHALL BE NO PEVIAnONS FROM THE EXTERIOR ELEYATIONS j Ar.'Â· AS APPROVED WITHOUT FIRST BEING REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY i HFC STAFF AND MONITOR. 0Â· ; THE APPLICANT SHALL DE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE CONTRACTOR WIr-1 COPIES OF THE HFC RESOLUTION .APPLICABLE TO THIS FKOJECT. THE COMTKACTOR MUST SUBMIT A LETTER ' ADDRESSED TO HFC 51'AFF AS PAZT OF THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION INDICATING I THAT ALI. CONDmONS OF APPROVAL ARE KNOWN AND UNDERSTOOD AND MUST MEET WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER PRIOR TO APPLYING FOK THE BUILDING FERMIT. O ALL KEFIESENTAnONS MADE BY THE AFFLICANT IN THE APPLICATION AND DURING PUBLIC MEETINGS WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SHALL BE AOHERED TO AND CONSIDEREJLCQNDITIONS OF APPROVAL. UNLESS OTHERWISE - .1 -3 1, t.....~r 1 42.9-44 Â·1 - .Â· . f Â· t. * GLAZING SCHEDULE 5 MIZE TOTAL SOUTH ADJUSTED MAAK TYPE ' Mfa. ~~~ ~GLASS QUANT. GLASS GLASS TOTAL GLASS WIDTH HEIGHT AREA AAEA AREA AREA . -(!) 4Â·:lo?4 619' woop Cojel# Pld#4 AL,a P ... .,9 t, 6 . 1 C) - R-_ 21~,0, *5" W~ 00#1*i *MW Â¢19-1 . 1 . -.al' 41 " -791 G.,O .... 1 -- ... t, R 960\4*/000 6#4*4*: 4*M -100- . g,d + 4/080 06Â¥Af *f 3 8240.1 , I v=0--- 54* A-*/040 Â¢;Wrr ji - *40-3 ~ ~ 0 . . 3 4. ... , ' I ' t.â‚¬ -946 +1090 -*t . ..4.LA 1' . . I. Al)011 93* Woo# 0% :\\ 13,4-1 - -- f .9'V - 310" gle' f*to lf'NQ<*tkY \\ *Q;-24 .i- -* , --~ * 11 a Afti" 71144*2017 fAEÂ¢? 11 , 1,1 4100 9[5'1 '0/*P cÂ»Upt.B HU*i~~. p.>04 6Â©et *1@p *861*fetÂ· 00 %#FLAget'- 46'512 h[~F +115Â®0Â») C . 4,/ I . I tri 1 2 -1 Nfly-atot- Ma,O F.kt' 2096 *4447 */ 1.- . . -' 4 Â·Â·41 14 "t..Al,. 4 h i i . .~. . '- ../. I .'* V. F.' i :i / I . -:./ * . ) Â· . . 0 I. 1 ./ .& 4., . {2:. : .. 44>27.4,1.,64*t :ti. Â· , ... f . 1.1.@2 z'eN:" 9 ..:M . : . - 1/ ,// I . .t - 1.- : .. I . Et., 1 : tÂ· ~. 1 1 .. r -1 ill t 1 'ti. U' 4 dll. 11-1 1-1, , 1.1-1-1 LI j lilli j 1 1 ~ ..IT-41 - . ., ... I. 2 11 , - '. 11 1 Â· Ll I i - 1 4 lit; ' . 1 1"1 1.-1 --- 4 -1 1-1 i~9-7-~3- - . - 9---1---1.--Lorr539\*U___ _ l - Ii---- - ! i 1 1. r- 11 . 3 .. i -1 1 . 1 1 . - ./ -r ap** 0*6 -. 1 I 1 1 . 4 ----- 1 -Ill-'I.- -t j 1 1 1 - f,j (,7-f[1 1-1 1 rt 1-1- - . UM .O, , frr-- 4 -- 2 ;41 *10'r @Â®.11 *41:2 11; - 51Â»/12 - Ar it - I !1 - #3441 srer- 41 ,1 1 101*1 6 61 1. i r r.R 1 -,E-/ - '1 '\ W~ i I -- ..1 *11 -42 1808 . i I : 4,1 1 - Ir. t. 1 . 1-1 - A tri- . - 011404- T - -- L 4-- -4-1 j -*EMove 5 - ~ mAe*1 k * -*~AF,Ab i 1 â€¢ 1 ' i' tli r - 1 4 . t,, MAIN- FLOOR PLAN kf 4. - t 19:411 1 0.11 9.0 - SMÂ«r 4wwÂ» 24.4 , , i 1 - f -- 4 iÂ¥&+404&.1*40 -9 1 -1111- 1 lit 11! r. f"Â·.9 . 1666 1 ~~0~ 12~~0 1-- 4 Fl Â£ 1*# 4 2 1 1 1 92 DeeRM *0 ' 114-14 1 '' * RlogTEA *WKM , *Â«19*k \1 X 1 .} 94 1.-h 1 - , 2 New *p 3 -, 1 - %8[i--Ek:-0 1 1 1 1 . 1* - -.-W---. 1- f .. Zkf L. 1 -43**1. S r ' *IN| 16 1 03 L 1 U1 : d i i _1*11,Le-(41 1 -il r i. 11 k 1- Â§2 p_=-11% *ABW.\ 7 V.01#B . n-- -9 111 r &609%1+ Il ~ L) _ â€žlirt 1 --1---- 1 , 1 : 1 Â» 1. 0 1 =*i- 1, - r:- t'' 11 1 t -- . // i . B 1*7-122 1 , 11 .At,Â»~7~i~t,p:t~~1*344 -, 1 -1â„¢.-,Crn=* A .1. lit *. 4 4, f ' Â·1 4 4 *+UPPER FLOOR PLAN-3 -L. .... - 10:101*OF -- 013-pg-o-M-fl fr.9>~ r-....7, Fet' 1 +60*AL< 7 - *1416Wfl,@0 - 1 2< REP,wee ed>'A . 14,INEÂ· ED<el; 9%11 3**4 - ./.Ii 1 - - --- --- T-1 * r r -1 - - ---1.-9 1 ~I 11, 1 - : - 1 ---77.T'r- 1 9- Â· I ' 1 , 1 7-1 11 , 1 -2 1.14 6 - - -2 -18*rt--/---11 . 1 : 111 l' Ill-1 IT 1 - --0- 11-Ifir=U--- -- --2133ILLILL--0 - 11-*lt_ pâ‚¬ 0 - 1L EL _-I-1 11 / F'*Pt - _.-: L d 7=20*2 -*41441&1- 6iow===:<=-- -i--1-2-_ -----i- -- --4 --- --- - --1.1--I--*- r.--1 -Â·=-~ I- 1 1 ! - - -.i.*-*i-.1---ij...I---1*.*--- . - . It (ID __.2, -- - 1 r .. - & , a -- -ti 6 - I- . 1 - 1'4 ~TIL 77/ 6/1,1, f F -1â€¢'1'-1 1 1 1 1 ~ --, 111-4-4- -1--.-- 1.--' 1.- 7-------,-----0-6....4 - ----- ------------ - .......7 4 " T--1 - - 1 #ruk*4Â¢ete- FoiJA# 2414 4441.-_ -- ... fIEW'Wl,|06/ 1 1 1. INSULMTWN -- -M E,<1*r; 04*LL 1+ _ . 1~ i - 1 44---Â«N 0-v/ -1*4114~41~ I Â® I veRI Fy KLEM.!EF L. i i - AL --1 $44 dep , 1 *) 1 1-1-- 1 -- . - 1 1-- - 1 - ---------- - 111IALL 111~1_1Â£1_ LIULJ 9.1111 t 11 T f 1 --4 -44%92%-- 4~ 1 -44*- 041*1 07120 3 999- 1 31960 .- 1 1 1, 1,1 1 1 1 1 1 - - 1-1 1 '31,1 1 1 -r (3 e _,_I ' F<jl 1 - 1 - --.-- - - -1.-- - A------ --- --------2 ---*lei#-1/ - 9 1 1 1 1.... -- - - .._ ---- - ---- ------7--- ----7-7-- ----F~-yl.MljiNS-39MTLIN_----~----- ' 4 1 -LI. 1 1- 11Â·1'1 -- tÂ» /01 66244 Â»0%1 L7tjAÂ« 7+Yaa MiN â€¢13&015 -- 41 -990 1311414 + 20'5 11 L-it 1410314 adel 91:1 hASH i - 11 WIN:' OR/V- *t---- 11:71 -- %414 104 *56 27-///7 I , 0 1 AU' 4 1 IUIN I U IME LI IT Al"' ' 1 UVVINbl I C Ut- t Cl, 3:41Â·T-Â¥?ROF }4 12:1.TKI<N #.STATeÂ¢fORNMAI~~ OR AD.h-6 Â¢ 11. f , '.. 1.i' I Â· I. 4././...' I , 4 ' ... r , $ - 1 . 4 -,1 ASPHAL T ALLEY , FOUND LS# 20151 1 375*0Ill'E 2.9' r.Â·20.29' SHED ~ -- ~ 1 77?AST7 PEBDUTY grALS 8.1' EZZI~:31?q- 1 , 91=10 1. â„¢--7.-fj U&~710 ''. ' '. 11 2. . NEIGHBOR'S 0, '/. ~ .. Â·Â·4 i 1. . . 9 . TWO STORY :i/, , WOOD FRAME ~ D,t' i. 7 l GRAVEL 4 . NEIGHBOR'S WOOD,DECK 1.3.-/.J 2. STONDY * 1 4 , ' ht ~ *~~ f 0, 21.7.-J 1 3 DECK -, ,. 10.4. P. , 3.60 , â€¢ lA |. ?11 . . , I 4 - A k 1 - 6/1 ,- S21'52'50'E 6.91' I N TWO STORY / Â· . WHOOUDSr'14Â¥~ CA PH * 11, / BASEMENT 3.40 1 . 3000.00 SQ. FT. Ft; 74< -64*kv~~22}'.41~?,-Rt:>Â·~4.4 i *~Â·..~0 .g,1, M'04.42.~ 414<&42 2''...t.;40Â·:,.;;.(6Â·7Â·?1; 0~Â·~;7-. ..4 Â· 9Â·~4 1.4.-: 'V, . ' , 2," '* . .A...,1 :. - 9,-.9 'w :. . 1.1 I '1 06&16,1/. : - *r ..7 14 1 . 4.0/ is 4 , 4 , 15' - LO.80 I. 'f- NOTE: . i -r-- , rvi Trv4 Â£ 4. i BOOK 355 PAGE 110 f DIRECTION IS NW 40- ~p ~ MA *Apco 4 . r CONC % t : 02*Â¥ .-th)'r 81 wALKI C 9 1 * :;710 n. , '.I- : I 4./2 41.. g ' 21 1 0 1,) r .4 r f I t ... is ' i. 1 0'. 'lÂ·'11, I TOUND 4 1. sPIKE S79977't 4.1 STMNÂ£--4"~,4"- ~ t | ft 'AVER 1 1 47 , OR*VE / j>1475*09'11'W 30.00, .. 487' . f ' 920 HYMXt,i ~~, : i CSAKI~I ~1 ~, . ADDRESS APPARENT 4 , 1 *1029* *'FL|on - wl,ing- V~-1- 7 1 4- T =*419, â‚¬ 0 1 Â·'3 ..AFÂ» -1 7 9.Â· 11 4'-/8- d,W ff#*Tirprr#+3+27 T*- --4.-- .W r , 11.-1- f r 1 --1- i 1 ~ 1 91 1 91< . 111'lly --- 1 1 -1.- 1.1 1 ~1 1 - It 1 -Ii b<ler' Glowl, 7 .. 1 Of 0 - 14 --47'411& 4 1 1 4 1 I fig] A *Aewl - fÂ»IllÂ¥ EM 1 , - , --BI,14rf - --- 4+ 1-~ - Â· 1 1 1 il 1 0 i , i. I . - - .il--r - 1 lili . . 1 11-0-1-61' 1 1 ' UL _ 11 _ _1-1 - _ 11, NaÂ¥ LOWERf FLOOR PLAN he--1 . rÂ»t f'* I IL--*Â£6 r *4.6. t flÂ·i*~ 4~ Mf Lk . f c:x~N--* 1/Â·-ZA. 1, 1 494; : 644*4 *60,6 &*74 . 7Â» 4 79#74*Â»ult (DD AAJ -01Â©f/17 P~L:-,- , HISTORIC RESTORATION AND ADDITION FOR k . VERONIKA INC. Â£ 3 :.:./ 4 , 4* f.6. . f.:, 4.~L'., 920 EASTÂ·HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, COLORADO ' 1 5 1 PÂ¢ 11 '.0 20:0111%18,/ *PALT At* 58, j . 99kul=- crei-'1â‚¬ 642, PO,Â®I ReF LME - - - 1/fefAA>,1 FIYER[5;'~ fe'*FB - 4.:* b , k Ver'-0 I , I. : * I ... oll P 1111 - Et ; ... 1 '4,1 - 1 ..'LA ''79. . 1 1 2 90 1 CE, . 41- ~ â€¢1411 Â· 4&44, LisH i :2 1 1 NEW-66 .T AT9~62%1 462 9,45 fr 1 I. 4 11 1 1 *l 1 4 '6&1 p L '. i V, '1, A 3 2 6/ / M A , / -1. P' 9 -./4/385884r / 1/ 9.+, 45 -'' , ./ 4 1 t ,/ 392./. /,54 lit// >, - 'VI ./.1 'tr 11 4 i - li e--Â·Â·~441<:AM/F.k'-t - ReFGA .KICME A-,c:~~~ f a k A 0/3 // -42 %4 11 + 49&5 -- /0 4 / , 1.4 Â¥ Ill Â¥-1 1 - 1 K 9 1 4 i' 13 - 10*22 1 9 4- I *4 1 WAN< If I 1 4 It I .<I J 30*1 H 1 -YAL 9 87 1 , MA *4%4 DEMPL 231 + er f'* i 4 t . '.4 '. . --7-1 i . 4 , 90\*f,Â»rÂ«cort,At_ - 4 -4 90,4 /47m'noN P ey,rle 1., . * *' r 17 --4 , L t.. ''1 . 2 . , 1 1 Â£ 1.L..__ t_2 TfT-1 / ' -4- 1 1- J. 1 +1- 11 Â· 1 1 4 Lil ILL. 1 rl. 1 '42-411.1--1--= 11 '113--t,jui +~t T- 1 --00/10Lt ,42. I 1.-1 1.1_1- ;.. - u.. ... - 510#14 -1 ~.Il.1 1 1 1 1 i ,i 1 i . /~ i 1 Â£ 1, 1 1,11 1 1 11 11 11 i .6- r , 1 Â·-1 14.1 L 1 1.1... Â· _11-111 , 71200* 1 - L.1 J , 1 11 1 -3.,I - .. . ~ .Tl'_13>Â· -i---1 11 I .1. -1 5,40 ; 1 1-1 1.-1.- - 1 Iii 1 1 1 - -t d#er 12 ;JZ 19â‚¬ / Â·- - 11 4 0<5-rld4 1 .L- .. ~<*,6,1161/r I lfLU B i h. / 73--,1=-1-t 5141 M tri .. I - - f 2 60#,RAVÂ£& / Â£*_~ tl _1_2 7. * -- - 0 1 - I ,\ â€¢<'14, L j_:' 1 ! . 'r . v= 4 4'VI+Idi, 0 t --U-- ' 6,#/. ----* ---1- 1,=kr 1 11 /- - . .. al blwlÂ»*IM*i~~222 , - *8* Fy +Ift> r -1=ZE - 0.- -'ll-. . .... - 11 F , 1 , -- - I- 1.-_t Â· . - 1 1 1 1 1 Â¢4'* 1 MÂ¢~jleÂ« # 0- #PWA~ 24 4%#01*4 1 ~_14* 14 -- jsÂ»*tÂ· t\W, _ 1 . ---1- . V 1Pf *f EXIP P JOÂ¢'F @41#r /2-111*0$ 4.140,vlp 0% -. _/t - . 10'Al,[1114-60:15 42- 48Â¥6 - liGN.#<4Â£m,#i*i. ~j.1~Z; 9 / 6,#R , *ftÂ»r C +IR, Kredigfpt#, A f,1'HEÂ·DIMI+1 wrl?~ c , F **'F# 4 01*01*r- NIW# a#w~~~~'%$%$,Mwl01* 4%Â»71 00 11441+ 14*TE Iff*Pr~w Fle!+1*Z0125 1Â·bâ€¢,0 ptti -*- '0 ' 49 1-0,Wld: 00712&#0gep, 41 G 40*t-* 40*Wit)0 * 0 Mi:tah.6*W+Vi: . . . >OUTH-ELEVATIO*r . < *AVE 8,<Pr, %*Der,-,1,4. ><1<*40% 44 2191>KW 'mÂ»' > 1 i.+ ... .0 -'. 1 1 - 1 ..... I .....:T..1 -:13..., 4 - .-- r . 1 <p~ Â· 2-K#VI#VE> %><901% #Fi/4tfP . _ _ Mt~~*S,1-G6~ULMÂ¢Â¥~16. - tÂ· a .-_1-94Â¢ff:*aff*9#%44Â¥. --ruvr-~:~90*673-3-' - --91/AÂ£"H,eMIER"IMP,t/* 7.1 ' 46/EXY) I 44",4124 (b - V . - '... . . , 4.........441:.44. 1; Y d " I. . ... .....04.4,9.0.'.:32'.. 'lA' 1 - 1 * 0 ...1 1 r 120Â»112 Â»12 01< â€¢41Â·t .6~ r- 6- 1 1 77/ -Â»- 1, /JE-1 / Â· 12 T-/ VI W 6%/169&(/Viwj'In:::/.9'::ill/ 1 .. . -... I. -11 1 ' &<, *folt - =- 1 11 1 n -11 11 i b l illi i 4 --1 1 -- ...14 i .Mr-Z~ 1 Â· -1[-1 . 1 . L -3. : b, :& 1 6 0.,k '7 *: ,-tt A:t--t- .-I .~=*u.....A 1â€¢1 ,+UJEâ€¢'~r..r-r--r, Â¥09? 4%248- â‚¬-Wh-e 4 'I -7 , P- - f , 1..AiR.rÂ¥,e'* 91 Vpqwr '2,1 .r",;ltt*Jl-1/&46 .- -~I ' '' --:* -Ille'l.i'*f -..Â£449- -t rewfwuÂ£*4101* r..4 - ;- . .--# ----B--a - 29$1. n I tr-M-- . Â· W // Z V. - ' .fr - . 1 1.. - I 1,-_ li I- i . 1 ./. U 1.-V %.41 1=7 / - Â¥11 110 7'.â€ž# 1 1- 11.1 U J.I., e "r : L..1 o 1.. . Â¥ 7 . ......1 ...3 -Â» . . . 4 r_1 770 1 , . , I '... I . I . , --1.1-- 2 = , ..1 i. -1 . 1 t-4 I Â· . r.-, . n--1- I' ./ .... ./. I ' 1. . .1 - . I f-jÂ·*WÂ¥ - U - -- 1 /-1 .- I . r.rz --I--1.-44.2-4. f-*4.3. 69. , *i - ,- -- ~_~~ 4: fis:* 4 f -2/1.-Â· . #Â· Â·' + -.- 1 I ./ - - ' 11.1 . , 1 ..2 . rt....42'.4-hey Â· 3, 7â€ž.7 , 7 . 1. ~, I J. 1 *84vt.4#2 vÂ· 1 1 i . =-1.Nyj.1-â€ž,Fl . 1 6 -M[P Â¢ *414144- 'I )* .. *$%44\,iltÂ¢Aff - . 9$946% 4414&â€¢1 43. 4 -1 1 4. s.1 -7 1 Â£L.2 d.,ME 3 0971,7-WNÂ·it Â¢2~~~~' #* *J .- L 1- f - 1 ... 1 )<- 144#WWUBF25Ti 4, -t , . W 16'Artw 4- -v 7/f; **0 *@*N j \ ~ f I -6tlter,12 -- - -p Â· *.f 2*\**74(*NE \1(Fr\*30 L I f~~ 0 - 4 - 7/11+10,2/Fq/20/154+ t'f/6 244 50#8 1 1 - 1 lr"I 7 *.*./. , r .1. :72~laififf/U 10111nf 1., -*104Â¥7 Â£ 228"[1416_ 61% +CL ~ 0- .K -1~~AN *Mi -Z , 4, - . 5 1 Â¥. \ -2-1 2&*M Wip##12 WA#94*4 4 ... r. . 1 4 - .. . t.- u-41 "-\ t- - 7 34--11 1, 4/4 j.-i- i X -. Hi 4 * 1. i ... \Vt 1*R ' 8 ./ 2 W ....4 . - \ 4 D. .- ... - -- . r 44- 7- 1--t_ -~4- - to =.-2- , . Â£7 - # r - i-- ,... " 4 ' p . '. 9,0.4 , '44 . t. - 1 424. 4. 4 -= --- rÂ·Â· r tâ€¢Â· 1. 1 - .., A t l. : ''....7,Â»9 1 112, -- -- tfE-- - I. .30:- -I- . B.r %., - 1 -Â· T --9 /Ii . i . . - 0 *. - #....'.4 . *. i I - - - I ./ -- --I. .. .1 ... ... ir-'ll- 'll -. -I. 10=-- ..- --- In.....--41-__ / I -' I t 4 r 2 -1---- - -: - 4 -4 . ../ 1 (1 - - . , irrn~11 I -rl- 11 - I. - .. - 17. t)~ vj~jo~,4-ton -ths knoMThn 1 11111!411 It ; 111 ill'l ;I /1 - - -2.4 7,-~-~-,~,~~~ ~-Â»i~:- - /JEWMA..#*tul~ 14 **fc/#Affulht I I . -- M t- - - -4 irÂ¥?0, 1-2 +' .1-- ALM*' 6 6,7-*&2.7.*Pt#f.~.8<>- 40212 7'. 1 -9~~ 321~11;0*221; FÂ·*~ 5 1 ',Â· aÂ«--1 - MHAilgitil*-i1.5,# a-t. 7 -:93 -Â·Ael~ - t *6 2, .. u-~ 1 1 10 -' 4- 7.Â«.2; hft-5~ 42- 94 ,;RK: ....-VE"ju/IrT//&.*;' '/ M / 3/.Il)/6 u;54:44.. t.â‚¬94*Tripitir .1.1_. . f/Amied*VFF:3 9.23*.9 492Â¥ Â· -- r .4- ..4, 4 9 - Â· wr. n . 51,29.1. 2&~4 -- --* .- - . I-/5 I . *trai>r.?:t:-4--Â·-:-iâ‚¬f~*.4-231 :~'~-fi:*Â¢i . ... . i~KN,!~fÂ£4â‚¬~;'4Â¥â‚¬4-9%â‚¬4Â·/St~ f -, - , - 3 . Â· 4 4.â€¢ Â· Va#c~ 06Â·- ,14,4-fa.:.Ci35.-~=*my<74.09 -r A . Â·18/2.Â· Ir 9 th 147" 1 ~Â·-T 1 X 4. . 94,1 FWHAY 11 - or 11 ~ _ ~ ' - 21#44- ~ *A----- I . 4 . fÂ°(%*40-lul gil if - l - ---MY.WN 6*f 1 1 1 4 1 1 9 , 2>leif 1]11 ~ 1 2-we#Ee - 4 -108+44 - . 1 > -1 7 -t,- - 1 1 - 1 geÂ® 11 S Â© -- rip/&61'. 84 J 4 1' 9 1 1 -1. 4/1 .1 - j' 1 1 1 < .>~1 Tti~ t 4- - I ': /Â£. -1 - 4 1// 4% \\E,9 04Â§ *1*\AA 2~ , r - - - f'f@%*erÂ®~m01 I. .LE . <: IJPPER FLOOR PIAN_ - i MAIN FLOOR PLAN LOWER_FLOOR r,- 1 322 43 ~--EXHIBIT0 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 735 W. Bleeker- Final Review, Unit B (New House) DATE: February 24, 1999 SUMMARY: The project involves shifting the existing historic house at 735 W. Bleeker Street forward and putting a basement below it, and construction of a second detached house on the property. Conceptual approval, landmark designation, on-site relocation, partial demolition, variances, conditional use approval for two homes on one lot, and approval for Accessory Dwelling Units have already been granted. The applicant requests final approval for the new house only (Unit B.) Since the HPC conceptual review, the property has been sold and a different architect hired. The owner wishes to go forward with the development of the new house, but will be living in the old building. Because the old house currently sits in the area of the new constuction, they will have to act on their partial demolition approval to remove a portion of the back of the old house to make room. The remaining components of the old house remodel will be completed in the future. APPLICANT: Randall Bone, represented by Jake Vickery Architects. LOCATION: 735 W. Bleeker St., Lots A & B, Block 18, R-6 zone district. SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) PROJECT SIJMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District and all development involving historic landmarks must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) ofthe 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 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 coverage b~y up to five (5) percent, HPC 1 -3*1Ao L 10 1 .' 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's initial proposal for this property was to demolish a large part of the existing building, move the house so that it would face South Seventh Street, and create a duplex and two ADU's on the site. The HPC gave direction to revise the proposal and the applicant responded to those comments. The project was revised so that the majority of the existing house is retained, the house maintains its placement on Bleeker Street and is moved just slightly forward, a relatively small addition is made to the old house, and a new, completely detached unit is proposed behind it. Only the new unit is being considered for final approval at this time. The conceptually approved drawings for the entire project, memo and minutes are attached. Because there is a new architect and owner involved, there are changes to the exterior ofthe new house, however staff found that the proposal is not a significant enough departure from conceptual to warrant a new review. In general, staff finds that the massing and overall character of the proposed new house has 0 improved considerably. Overall building height has been lowered and the detailing is more in character with the historic house on the site. On the other hand, staff finds that on some elevations, the detailing has been taking too far in the direction of mimicking historic architecture. In particular, the west elevation, which faces S. 7* Street, may create some confusion as to the age of the building. The leaded glass front door, shingles in the gable end, crown moldings, and central bay window in combination present a more ornate image than HPC has typically been comfortable with in new construction. While the same concern could be raised on the other facades, they are more simply detailed than the west fa~ade and therefore acceptable to staff. Staff recommends that the glass in the front door should be clear (not leaded, stained glass, etched, or other decorative glass,) and that the second floor window on the west side of the house be redesigned so that the center element is not identical to the type of bay window found on the miner's cottages. It should also be noted that two new lightwells have been added on the south side of the new house. Because they are located in the rear yard setback, they may only be the minimum size required by building code, and will probably have to be made smaller. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 2 Response: The character of the neighborhood is a mix of both mining cottages and large newer second homes with lots of glass. The applicant has developed a project where the scale of the historic house is preserved and the new development will be an appropriate and successful infill in the neighborhood. 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: By maintaining the old house in its original orientation and very close to its original location, and by taking most of the mass that could be added to it and placing that in a detached home, the applicant is protecting the building as a representation ofmining era housing. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereoÂ£ Response: Staff finds that this standard will be met with the revision of the detailing noted under standard one; the front door and upper story window. STAFF SUMMARY AND FINDINGS: Staff recommends HPC grant final approval to the new house only (Unit B), with the following conditions: 1. Unit A must receive final HPC approval by October 14, 1999 or the applicant must request an extension of conceptual approval. *2. Redesign the front door and upper floor window on the west faGade of Unit B to be / J 14 i ..2 less replicative of the historic structure. \ C AteÂ·,7 4-- Litto~ti,6- LiqfUn--~; i /7 4(A,4 ~09 3. Contact the Parks Department to obtain any tree removal permits needed. ---*137Â« h 2-4. A west sideyard setback variance of 0'8, " a rear yard setback variance of 5' and a combined front and rear setback variance of 5' have been granted. 5. Submit a partial demolition plan to HPC indicating which portions of areas approved for demolition on the historic house will be demolished prior to construction of Unit B. 6. HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures. 7. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 8. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC and P&Z resolutions applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 3 9. All representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Historic Preservation Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. Exhibits: Resolution No. ~ , Series of 1999. 1. Staff memo dated February 24,1999. 2. Final application. 3. Conceptual application, memo, minutes, and drawings. 4 APPLICANT: Randall Bone, represented by Jake Vickery Architects n LOCATION: 735 W. Bleeker ACTION: Signi#cant Development (Final) SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) Significant development in an "H," Historic Overlay District must meet allfour of the development review standards in order for HPC to grant approval: Standard 1: 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 coverage 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 pursuanr 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). Standard 2: the proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Standard 3: 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. Standard 4: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. EXHIBIT f7 1 li li 1:11 11:, i., 1, l, Al &'1 1'11 *1 r.'1.r,P'1 Al 11\~/i - 111'al CL 1 - 11 1.1 *46111~4~1Y NAME OF PROJECT: CITY CLERK: STAÂ¥V: WrrNESS,sÂ·. m Eapdd %30--pub O col,)4/ 1 (2) (3) (4) (5) EXHIBITS: 1 Staff Report ( ) (Check if Applicable) 2 Affidavit of Notice ( ) (Check if Applicable) 3 Board Criteria Sheet ( ) (Check if Applicable) 4 5 MOTION: VOTE: YES NO SUZANNAH REID YES - NO - ROGER MOYER YES - NO- MARY HIRSCH YES _ NO_ JEFFREY HALFERTY YES _ NO _ SUSANDODINGTON YES _ NO_ GILBERT SANCHEZ YES - NO _ HEIDI FRIEDLAND YES _ NO _ MAUREEN MACDONALD YES _ NO _ LISA MARKALUNAS YES _ NO - CHRISTIE KIENAST YES _ NO _ A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR FINAL DEVELOPMENT FOR UNIT B, 735 W. BLEEKER STREET, LOTS A AND B, BLOCK 18, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. ~ , SERIES OF 1999 WHEREAS, the applicant, Randall Bone, represented by Jake Vickery Architects, has requested final significant development for Unit B, a new house on a historic landmark property; 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, the project received conceptual approval at a legally noticed public hearing at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission on September 23, 1998; at which the Commission considered and approved the application with conditions by a vote of 6-0; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staffreport dated February 24, 1999, recommended final approval with conditions. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 0 That final significant development approval for Unit B, 735 W. Bleeker Street, Lots A and B, Block 18, Aspen, Colorado, be approved with the following conditions: 1. Unit A must receive final HPC approval by October 14, 1999 or the applicant must request an extension of conceptual approval. 2. Redesign the front door and upper floor window on the west faGade of Unit B to be less replicative of the historic structure. 3. Contact the Parks Department to obtain any tree removal permits needed. 4. A west sideyard setback variance of 6'8, " a rear yard setback variance of 5' and a combined front and rear setback variance of 5' have been granted. 5. Submit a partial demolition plan to HPC indicating which portions of areas approved for demolition on the historic house will be demolished prior to construction ofUnit B. 6. HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures. 7. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 8. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC and P&Z resolutions applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 9. All representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Historic Preservation Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the day of ,1999. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved at to Content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chairman ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Vectorspc H=Lativ,U Research / Planning & Architecture / Project Management FEB 1 7 1999 serving the best in communities since 1976 AbPEN/ PI TKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT February 16, 1999 Amy Guthrie Aspen Historic Preservation Commission 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 735 WEST BLEEKER Dear Amy, Please find attached our Land Use Application for partial HPC Final Review for House "B" at 735 West Bleeker. We have addressed all of the conditions from Conceptual Review. In addition we have lowered the overall building height and reduced the roof mass. In addition we are using details which are similar in scale to the historic house (House A) but simpler and a touch more modem so as to differentiate the new construction from the old. We have revised the windows and siding treatments to be more compatible with the historical house. Sincerely, Â«ditel Jake Vickery, Architect Jake Vickery Architects VectorsPC 100 South Spring Street #3, Aspen, Colorado USA 81612 tel & fax 001 970 925-3660; email: vectorspc@aol.com 5421\ G (tr 2_ 0 735 HPC FINAL Vectorspc Research / Planning & Architecture / Project Management serving the best in communitites since 1976 JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECTS 0 100 South Spring Street #3, Aspen, Colorado USA 81612 tel & fax 01 970 925-3660; email: vectorspc@aol.com 735covlloc AlTACHMENT 1 f *fktâ‚¬D - LAND USE APPUCATION FORM 1. Project name 12,5 IA)ser 18Â£-EEICE B- - 661ig'-5 031&7 2. Project location 716 5 11)647- A/,3-5/Ag /2- ; 4-5,26- 6/. Lars ArÂ¢ S gLOC.k Ial ~11-4 4 -rot,ONS,1-5 j ASPEN (indicate street address, lot and black number or metes ana bourlas aescrlotion) 3. Present zoning /Â¢ 6 4. Lot size G, 000 46 5. Aoplicanfs name. address and phone number RANDLE ,~0/VE, 165 9189-r 9)(-861Â£5(2-2 AsFEN 8,4,02.-3 94.4 -0111 6. Recresentatives name. address. and phone number 7#kE \40/<2724 1*449 v Ic.kE,R~ ARCH~Trur /00 Se SP/u Nq Trt- ,, AS|FerN 92 5 -664 o 7. Type of appiicaticn (check all that apply): Conditional Use Ccnceptual SPA Cancerrual HPC Soecial Review Final SPA . ~ Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD * Reiccation HPC Subdivision Tex#Map Amend. Histcric LancmarK GMQS allotment GMQS exemoricn Demc/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot Solit/Lot Line Appeal Ccmmittee - Adjustment . I. = 8. Description of existing uses (number and type cf existing structures. acoroximate sa. ft.. number cf bedrcoms. any previous acorcvals granted to the 7698*A ov F/Â£~E - #a CA/Â·AN 4 E Fer,Â¥\ 067\65P7UA'l-0. 9. Description of development application 01%) P 114 - ~0 CAtkN 47 / 2 SIN A Lf- -PhÂ¥A 101 ta Sl P EN ceâ‚¬j L / 10. Have you completed and attached the following? Attachment 1- Land use application form - Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form , Response to Attachment 3 , Response to Attachments 4 and 5 Illill LI '82Â»79 ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Â«1//Gp/~fj) Applicant SNOLe boNE Address: 76* tV &5Â·r gc-kE,Le fi- Zene disuict FLA Lot size: 4,000* Existing RAR: U FILEÂ· Allcwable FAR: - 4 j 66Â¢10 9' 4 Prcposed FAR: Existing net leasable (ccmmercat): N (A Proposed net leasabie (c.mmercial): 74/Pr Existing % of site ccverage: C>N'Pl,LeÂ·4< Prccosed 36 of site coverage: Existing % of open space: . 0/4 FILE Prccosed 94 cfc;]98 spagR;- Existing maximum height: Princicai bicc: OA,/ F/&6 Accescri cidc: Priccsed max. height: Prlncical bidc: Accesscr, bida: P=eased % ar demcliticn: OK) PILE . Existing number of bedrccms: u r . P=ccsed number of bearccrns 4- 860/2<Â»Ms (##1/96 8 '>160 Existing on-site pan<ing scaces: 00 Pl.LE Cn-site parking spaces recuired: U- 2 X Sertacks -Â·-0,(/ P/di DA fluE Existing: Minimum required: Proccsed: O/U 29LE Frcnt: FrcnE Front: Rear Rear: C Rear. -3 Comoined Combined Nkitibiried--I.......-- Frcnt/rear: Fron#rean Front/rear: Side: Side: Side: Side: - Side: Side: Combined Combined Combined Sides: - Sides: Siaes: Existing noncinformities cr encrcachments: DA F I Uâ‚¬ Variaticns requested: ON F/LE . 1-e;<z_ , At- 0 k ... 4.,79 tjÂ» i (HPC has the abiiity 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 under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts) 4 %6Peâ‚¬ ERâ‚¬ CoNceerupru Vitpu q,Aeried ~906~~j 4 Appk)\IAÂ¢u â‚¬ No CHANRE TRON\ 06{â‚¬,2/9-rOpt,0, A-T'200\IM--- W02 SUNRISE-COLONY ID:19709204433 FEB 17'99 9:11 No.002 P.01 To Whom It May Concern: February 17, 1999 This letter is to acknowledge that i have purchased the residence at 735 West Bleeker Street from Drew Dolan. I am living in the existing home and continuing the planning process with the intention of restoring and improving the property in accordance with the preliminary approvals granted by tlic HPS and P&Z Towards this end, 1 am working with Jake Vickery who is the architect for the project, having taken over from Charles Cuniffc Associates. 1 authorize him to act on my behalf with the HI'C and PSZ towards the completion ofthe planning and permitting of the project. T assume all obligations for reviews, permits and the other costs associated with his actions to this end. Thank you for your cooperation, rDS A AA b I 10*Ol >tullts Ra;Mall Bone 735 West Bleeker Street Aspen, CO 81611 0 FEB-17-89 07:28 From:THE ARIZONA BILTMORE 6023817600 T-154 P. 02/04 Job-656 - WARRANTY DEED | THIS DEED, Made this 4 th day of January . 1999 . between 1 JEFFREY T. DOLAN AND ANDREW C. DOLAN of the *aid County of PITKIN and State of COLORAPO . grantor.and RANDALL BONE whose legal address 12 552 6 NORTH LAKE BOULEVARD CARNELIAN BAY. CA 96140 of thÂ® said County of and State of IDAHO . grantee: WlTNESSETH. That me grantar for and in consideration af the sum of TEN DOLLARS AND OTHER GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION DOLLARS. the reccip: and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted. bargained. sold and conveyed. and by thesâ€¢ presents does grant. bargain, sell. convey and confirm, unto the arantes, his heirs and *gulans forever, all *he real proporty loge,her wi,h improvements. if any. situate, lying and being in the said County of PITKIN and Slate of Colorado described as follows: Lots A and 8. Block 18. CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN COmrrÂ¥ 07 PITKIN. STATE 02 COLORADO also known bystrceÂ¢ and number 38: 735 W. BLEEKER STREET. ASPEN. CO 81611 TOGETHER with all and singular the hercdimments and appurlenances theme belonging. or in anywise appenaining. and the reversion and reversions. remainder and remaindars, rents. 1*sucK and profits ther=of. and all thâ€¢ =tats, rish:. tille. interest. claim and demand what- soever of the grantor. either in law or equity, of. In and to the above bargained premises. with the heredimments and appurenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described. with the appurtenances. unto the grantee, his heirs and asâ€¢ians forever. And the grantor. for himself. hishcirÂ¥. and personal repres:Matives, docs covenant, Brant. bargain, and agree to and with the grantee, his heirs and assigns. that al :hetime ofthe enscaling and delivery of mesa prescnim. ho is well seized ofth. premies above conveyed. has good. sure. perfect. absolute and indefcasible estale of inharitance. in law, in fee simple. and has good right. full power and lawful authorily to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and fonn as ofornsaid, ana thal the samo arc frto and clear from all form=r and ether granis. barping. wales. liens. taxes. assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whagever kind Dr nature soever, except TAXES FOR THE CURRENT YEAR NOT YET DUE AND PAYABLE AND THOSE SHOWN ON =*21*nott â€¢Aâ€¢ ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN SY TRIS REFERENCE. Â·rhe grantor uhall and will WARRANTY AND FOREVER DEPEND :he above-baraained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee, his heirs and assigns. agatnu all ami evory perion or persong lawfully claiming the whot= or any pan thereof. The singular number shall include the Diural. the/,If~d~to singular, and the 1150 of any gen*r shall tic applicable to all genders. It *Andr has execu,ea thls d=d unthe .Ingift forth above. 4 2_ AU- 4.1,~ - 45UIDREW C. DOLAN /'U Stage of COLORADO ) ) SS. Coumy of PZWKIN ) ThÂ© loregotng Ins:n:men, w.i *cknowledged before .14 ihig â€¢=4*lr- day af January , 1999 0 by JEFFREY T. DOLAN AND ANDREW C. DOLAN 444.1.'ll: i.. 'PA My commission expires .. 9* Witness my hand and officlul Beal. ,/;7 : ..0-3 1 a- 77-aed> 1 tle jA /7:Ux *6.-bfA,U. 4}r, Notary Public - FU,Ne. 00025221 St.... 11,1. 0, A.pen. 1.1, No. 93,A WARIZANTÂ¥ DEED Wor Photagraphk Record) Rev. gm 15- .- w. : 6 1 - ,~4Â·, i ~it liti~i; ....... 1117- . 4 :,2. . .16... 1... . r'D ....'. . Â·Â· ..C. 1, . 15 I . ./. Â· virwi#9:~~.&.1, 4. U.% 4.0..4. *Albus ./. ...Ce-,Mittr -1 -0 ! r.â‚¬ Â· 1/91&414:141*.-,fil . 6. 1-1 ~-1. 1,41, 5 pulgivk'VAMB 11 '+4 \Â·, A. ' * I:-Â· 0,Â·I.. 14Â·.+.-L. vÂ·-ft a & f -h'/ / 4-t ,(}...3 lilf37-6. 3*st, \42* :.*j: '*311 7- 2 -** ~53,3,//52+EVT:-.. /; AS . 2 \ ,+...>t > 11&.' i l- V -Â·1: 4-3 . , ,\! ...17 0,< f : --Â·-- \ ki-.â‚¬:EMÂ« lig4i .-, :04Â·**Â·. 5... .Â·#.i' ....ho . f 1.... ~Â¥-l'-~.. .:--7=. '1Â·.:'::'- :-P Â£:10 'iI , -4-, <*5416-1,:â‚¬..%8:~~ff; V,ef Â£ "-*- i,Â«tior Â·iÂ»Cir, I 74.2 2% 839. 42-1 * IiÂ·~Â·nâ€ž.1 '3 '\,)v:4*'0"-~-JpK v.' 11~4,1441* ;I .... . r ..... t . I Y It..,i r Â·. '1'. r.-. r ' N ... 2. .....97-7.9 .:+1:78-L-=.., i :k.17112,Â·ii=~ - 1 1 13:.... .... . :, 2 -Riki,+or ! LE-4. , r-,~ '.5,1~---~=~t:mÂ·=: pr~-1. 'v ,-2~Â·: t- \ 3''f, \A Â» i. -72 ---.....9-.- .';.uxÂ·-GU=*--/ W ---Â·-- 7,9 " 7-U~k r..1 rl r J ..W71,~l- 1*U *~*F ./.2./ / 1 . - 1 1 E <.3 L} ructâ‚¬~1~i 1.-ju [-- 9%/ Li 1 ky 'St Â·tu n?..... '. ...212==17=.U. '.--I- ~ Ff.0:., Â· 7, ..het,301.1-..3.. -'{. i.*: ...kR~/Prill If=-.fet !23.,112-ip.9.7"m- lilli- 11-Â· tt.';.V~ ~ // c. k. E-':r . 44.. I * '" ..* it .: ;r-- /' * rÂ·=i/6j4#&-1,J= ,- P ; LF. i.q.i C fit*~ ~ ~----- 1 1 44 OLL.,1 11 I: ./'Prh Â·1 :Fffa~3-7- -'t# Â·4=9;Â·,994-Ft; 5~f-.r-33f~33 27*i b:*fk-~1 9'Imi/AP- Â· ' . , r: 3-2 12 , (411~ 182-I~lE'L...,C FL'â€¢.7-LL- ..171 //7.b F...,i--t: .T. ... *-0.--=.,<r~~~i~~==23----1.- --*0 .-2~J~-ih' Lihij~#;;Z~ L.21.1.._.-4 nrr--=Hri - - --31 (imilf=FR D.=11Â·.J, W ; ril A 1 #T-,112--; 1; 1~//// crita.51134 !-:~i ilild/. 5442.3 644=43 6.-- --J~ i~ [114;91 4 221-4 .A. 4 ...2 :' 41/6 n LFL j_Â·4; 4, . ~ 11 ; 'S Ar . k L r . 1: 31 u F ' I Â·'1 I Ki i.11.] Rjlt4 1 I i â€¢jad/j Ile! 1!53 - U:'6 t i i u.,21; 5 1 FK'g! A i 1 ; 1, ... 3 i )i: -f-pull- i:J, 41-: 4,(: D- 4Â· /4.41 i w ff 1 ~~~,' <:,~~~flU~.ri~T,~44~.~ ,~-fIV~.O~~-=21- t. 4 UorÂ·: a Â·1, r.,1 1.10 ,.if. :>p Â·. . *â€ž-13--r-~.T.*:*fi - A~~WN * Ji#7110.19 ,-Cru.ZLE &,411Â¥12*Filwi4/Â£. *B.-U*Â·6~~ .. 01 MTM*Wl 4 f~l=#141â€ž1IE,Ir:1Elv, 2 . 1 1. 1 (424. f il& 5.. :t '' ji.I}R.JUY*]i~.-Â°f j.kÂ» 2~liai?GE-~ :<,\, i--Â·Tri~,i.==â€¢ailiw... ......u:.cri-iff-.-IZEAU-1*.2 *2=~ak-~ ~222-I 2 12=:~ .j-~~hâ€¢â€¢ . 2*2*~~~ ggst .41,2.*Â·:*E:' 5~23 E----:.'*'1 +''b 6. Ap 2-11[fle ip~righE ourM[j ~51301 & 1~ 4,=m 42. '91 MEN:' IiÂ»189 7-93fEFi *246~~9.~ i ,7- F J \ f AlÂ·. V i 3:12.4.::*52=~itb~,~,M",% 224=:Wa v-kilia-8 ..=9=#654 ~21442 1 0â€¢l~ 'W,1.. C Irm r 1 \442 A 4 4 05-~4949 :2*4.4.4.. ,t +:. , 2 ...k-+ 3.-4~--llc..i.73 2%311=2.* 1-~1 '~.AG< *. < ....1.-177974 1.rot*i 2---~I~~ ~~~1--~*~:.~.#.*,4 90 --766 -- we,1- Rtegtza#-r - 1121* EtÂ·E~ -isivE:ji.1 4 VA u .---.-- . 1 *-'- I~ ~ .t-1 0 ..... * ...;.27 + ~.. 1, ~Cwf i *11'#*11 40/31 0- "/foo\) 164 N l.e 'MA.11 _ - t .1,14. )) ri \ .7-'l,-- - 6. 9 0 I 5.....42- 4 4,14:. .\ fFEN, In [LEE .. . Â·,IN 2004:#Sf~) j C~ Â· 1 immr _ -7, 1 Hilif:1#~tlka:-~ Â· ...r.' 14 4 Pr w . 12 ASPEN'S HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTBICTS ./ (;4>:.t./:5;4,..f\ Fjej> ~, 0-4 .. 09=,9-4 Vill- l-all Â·1 . J .,0,0 . h *he City of Aap,en has two loce'..1 ~hist~oric dietrict,. The Co mime râ‚¬ i â€¢,1 . ./.-Â· -â€¢â€¢--~Â¢:tÂ¤ 1--/.- , :'2.-~:,* : 5'N..4.>f - A-3..*.---: .fil 5245-1 In reaÂ·EEST-t Core,Hietoric Di,trlot wai created\In 1974:(Ordinance #49). The Ain i n S t r.e e t , l,0. 25Â£*8Â¥Â·*42-- - fo .-. 0-. .... . r , 4-, ... 1 . ... 7 -- \ / \ / 1 0 -99- 0 -- \ i.\ , 1 f --1- f --12-241 1 \ 6 1 1--- --- 1 1 1 1\ i 1 It Ic . 1\ U --- 1 1 1 1 t 1-11- 1 4-1--4 11 1 Il I / 3 \ -12- / I :4; 1/ 1.-- i 2 il 2 -i 134 h 1 13*n A 4,1 -- t OR 4 1\ I / I[ o M. 4 f 1 *34440 9 + 1 --49*44.3.4041\ 1 1 4 i XE V--J k---- 44557<bvzi,rn J ~44[ , ,-\1 ---,-1 1 0 9/7 I 1 1 2- b 0 RÂ«4444499 ' f 0 1 $ 4-* -.....0 -4-19-~Â»*Â»=K~OV# | 1 U r : m u 11 11 1 0 01 PO Ct-\ 1 9 1 l . 0 -4 , 1 1 I ./lic- i i Ut 1 \ 1 \ I F 2 6 \l 1 / e ri .:1 1 ' 1 / 1 & r./ \ 11 --- 1 \ %-' 1 1 - 1 00 -- 0 0 I / 1 - - 4 1 -1 C (* 1 m m 70 Ill . 1 11 X 5m zz 1 1 41 . 3 1 1 7 1 VECTC RSpc RES EARCH ....1. -JAKEFICKERY ARCHITECTS 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET #(U.â‚¬,1.4 ASPEN, CO 81612; (970)925-3660 30236 bn No f i O 6 0 1-_-4 - '1 r 1 1 1 1-. 1 - 1 1 J. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 2 1- 1= i i 1 1 ' 1 11 1 1{ 1 "-1 /1 11 1 - .1 1 1 1, 1 1% T i -- 1 1 1 14% 1 4 MI*Â« ' 0. 1 1 1 11 1 1 \ 1 1 , 1 ! P O m R 1 CD CO \ A- Â·Â· O 0005 1 1 1 CDr / 1 i ~ **tk | T -mG Mwk /7 -41- ...1 rÂ« 1 1 -om: 1 1 1 %11 4 1//1 42 A' 1 1 $ 26 -$#4 -1 ,.43 i . 1 1 VECTORSpc RESEARCH JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECTS * 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN, CO 81612; (970)925-3660 Rouse A- -1111111111 lilli' 4- 663 L/2 VI .lAi 1 6 kb .-I 3 0 2 k T 9 W -1 44& t! 1 I lit 4 11 J 1 -1 4----,1 --+1 -lit- i 1 \i \ / 1 1 ) 11 \ / / 1 1,1 =F- - -1- i - 1- , 1 1 11 -11 11 1 ~ / ..1 ---_.... 4.-=+ -1 - - br f-,-61 VECTORSpc RESEARCH JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECTS 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN, CO 81612; (970)925-3660 E+5>13't * 808â‚¬n 2 4 . 4 4-1- I r 1 j I; -4, -- A 10 I , 1 1 +- - -T 1 1 4 1 -./ 1.4 k- 1 1../ C I-, . P#4 4- --4 - 1 E ---11 44 1 1 \ -----1 3 U T - ' ~ <AÂ« ' PEL. t - I 1 - %-1 --r-r ' ; -1 "1 1 9- $ 1 , = 1 P 141/ 1* 'i i : 1 1 I 7 -1- - - -- .-3 -7 4* 4- - --7 iIi 41 - L- -1 - f + 11 \ 1 1 - f 5 1 .- u Li ./1 -----1 4- CÂ· , ip 1 -1- . . -- M 0, 2.6 1I Eacoa . Trt - 4,---+ - f= 7-- - (050] f - rL! 00 f/3 Or : 2~2 -- i -0 m r # 31 2 4-11 5% -1 - Z 3 VECTORSpc RESEARCH JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECTS 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN, CO 81612; (970)925-3660 L~I Ullâ‚¬,~~L-- I ... . . 11 -41 -- -- 11 11 1 1 j j. L i 1 , 0 0 1 . 1 -I 1 1- T -T- -4 1[ 1 1 .--- 1/- 1 X X. - 1Â·,- I F~-133 9 -7 4. 0 ') 1 . 9 . 1 1 2==1 1 - - .. I /1 . 1 1- 1 1 -- . 1 42. i 1 , 1 1 - -26'/ . 4 42 N C-4..,- 2 -0 e -C Â® 70 Cn 0- 1 em*X , 11 0 ' r--1 03, ~ 37 5i Z '- - VECTORSpc RESEARCH 01 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET j JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECTS ASPEN, CO 81612; (970)925-3660 83>I3318 0998-966(0Â£6) :E L9 L8 OO 'N3dSV 133H1S 9NlydS HlnOS 00 L S1031IHOHÂ¥ AHEI>IOIA 3>IVr HOHV393bl odSH0103A 1 4+ 4214 1 1/rilÂ· ft 1** 1 11 11 - . -- 1 -1 1 1 7 , . /4 -t \ U - 11. i 7 - / \. \ 11 - 4 <61 4 104 4 11 2 1 9 11 11 11 11 (01 7 2 . 4. 11 ' 61-t- 3 482~ 941 1 11 / 1 - fig 3& 0 2 Â¢ 11 , \ fl \ /4 11 +aF 1/ 4 11- 11 tr =7- --4 1- - Â»tr 4 49 41.-1 i__ 3-11 - -- . -4 -1. r- - 4- -- -- -.-- - 4 1- 1 ---- 11 1=[ |1 11 It 11 1 11 - -7 4 ial 'l 1 11 . 9 1 0 1 1 1 .' -----Ii- - 1 \ C 11 4 ii d 11 11 Il 4 11 2 Il t, 11 11 11 11 11 11 E .Pr-4- 12 34- 1 Le 4 -1-1- 1 i. 4-9 i 1 0 0 0 X . <r e . \ .\\ 2 1 . 1\\1 1 1 1 11 ' 117 - 1.4 ' 1 'Ti 1 -1- I , il , 1 17 1 1 1 /. Ii-~- 1 1 - 11 511 1 1'- , 11:i'-1. - 1 1 -- - 1 It kill l; 1 4! 1 1 1 1 11 - TI'l, 1- 7-1- - ti~! N i - . - 1\ al - 1 -- - ' l- p ' \754 I --- 1 1, 9 - - 1 11 -1 III..0-1 1 1 M b A *.. ,--f 1 I 1, ./ //A< 1 N. iii - U 1 1 4~=9 - r '. . 1 --h 0 P -- - _ Fii .w4kk # 1 *#If 1,/ 71-IT-f= ' 1 1 r Â· I , , -. " 0 1Â© 27 1% V Rt *f m cn 1 1 - 1 , 5. 1 I --- 1 - ///liAiL l qj K - 1~-A-,71- - ' i r. r 4 1 -1, 11 4- X -12 2 m E E Z 5 03 m 16 - 3> 71 & Z VECTORSpc RESEARCH JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECTS 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN, CO 81612: (970)925-3660 66/9 L/E 8333318 1 . +31 1 .L.1 _-1 TI --1 ' I 1 11 i i ; i 5 - 1 1x . , / - I m i I â€ž,' lilli h --- I --- 1 - 41 -. - 'Th 7/ /9 .:/Aptuj</ PA El. /. li 1 ) 4 , ,- '11- / / ' 1 Â»,447 /7 /' L -1 ..1 -- .. . 111 >â€¢LÂ»o - - 41,7 9, '~:u_u i -./Â·~ 3 i ./ \~ ! 1 1 1. P 3/< 2 ... 1 X4# 1 ; 1 ./.P 2/' AK r. ! Â·i< .'/AY, %0 1 t . i.. -- "A AN ' ' //7\\ . i ' Yi -24.44 1 1 <f Â¥/ 1 4 4.>41 'A 2 - -1.1 ------ -Ill---- --I.- . l. /=41 2;61 1 3644 .-I 1 1 / 1 /0, 1/' m . a HI ZEOJ VECTORSpc RESEARCH JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECTS 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN, CO 81612; (970) 925-3660 LA *-- l.11' OllVA313 Hll:ION â‚¬6' wmrr 0 0 0 4 . 1 f 1 \ M --1 1Â«[ 4:1 kili#4125~T.,i.L ,11 1 171... 2 \\ M . i.7 % #7 - \ 14< -1-' i .\ 1% k\\ 1\ \\\\ \\\\ / - 1.A\\ 1 1 Al':Â·/ -- - --- J/, .11 j , /24NX V /2 1Nxl I /2/ 1/' iN J - - 11 7%. 777 . - - - Vt:t y./01 , l> 1_ i i , 9 \34'jry - --, -a /. 0\ 4 2 4-Â·-4 1 4 . - T (9 -- ---#i - 9 3 lili t'j ---- /11 01 1 1 9//rm - / '.111~1 L I. liti 121 li j -Â· 2 1 i ~ 14 7~71 {1 1,]1~r 1 6 4 , '1 :!1Â»1 1, i ; 0 11 1 114 1. ! 9 L.. . 1 1 lili i 1 1 01 - - - --liLi-~ = M\ .M - f T ' VECTORSpc RESEARCH JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECTS 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN, CO 81612; (970)925-3660 i/4 -6 1'2104 C Â·p 1 1 3 4- --- -1 14 1, U 7----- 4 jh 6 - IL -A * I . Â·/h 1- -:lia , /1 1 1 , --4-- - - 1 ; -0 . , 1 . -- 1 - .13 . 1 -. - -' LI , 1 -- 4. 1. .4 --&-i I. -t -1 . 1 . - - - 47 1 8 I I - 024_ 1-1, 'fi.~ 1 . ' ' 1 10 , -1=T77-ha 1 J [2 __ __- -- 11 -1 1 1 1 I . SMA: 1 C 'Ji - 2 M N rn CO â€¢ m oo <r : >m -1.m 3 OX 2 zm V . VECTORSpc RESEARCH JAKE VICKERY ARCHITECTS 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN, CO 81612; (970)925-3660 //F. 11 - -i 66/9 L/2 rul MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Interim Community Development Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 735 W. Bleeker- Landmark Designation, Conceptual Review, Partial Demolition, On-site Relocation, Variances, Residential Design Review- Public Hearing (Continued from September 9,1998) DATE: September 23, 1998 SUMMARY: HPC has held a worksession on this property, made two site visits, and held conceptual review hearings on July 22 and August 12. At these meetings, the applicant was directed to revise the proposed project in order to retain more of the existing structure, physically detach the existing unit and new unit from each other, and maintain the current orientation of the existing house. A revised proposal has been submitted to address these points. The applicant requests landmark designation, conceptual review approval, partial demolition, and on-site relocation approval, as well as variances. Planning and Zoning Commission approval is also needed for the two detached houses on a 6,000 square foot lot, for two ADU's (one in the basement of each house), and for a waiver of one parking space. As part of the redesign of the proposal, the applicant has eliminated the need for a site coverage variance. However, setback variances which were not needed initially are required by the new design. A new notice was created for this meeting. The public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission is scheduled for October 6th. APPLICANT: Drew Dolan, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects. LOCATION: 735 W. Bleeker St., Lots A & B, Block 18, R-6 zone district. HISTORIC LANDMARK Section 26.76.020, Standards for designation. Any structure that meets two or more of the following standards may be designated "H," Historic Overlay District, and/or Historic Landmark. It is not the intention of HPC to landmark insignificant structures or sites. HPC will focus on those which are unique or have some special value to the community: 1 ~ 441/1(64 -1 A. Historical Importance: The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or event of historical significance to ' the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. Response: This standard is not met. B. Architectural Inwortance. The structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type (based on building form or use), or specimen. Response: This structure is a good example of housing built in Aspen in the late 1800's. It has a typical floor plan, gabled roof, a front porch which has been enclosed, and detailing which was common to these buildings. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. Response: This standard is not met. D. Neighborhood Character. The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. Response: At one time, there were many miner's cabins in this neighborhood. There are several others located along West Bleeker Street, and several similar small houses along Main Street, behind the building. Staff believes that the preservation of these small houses is important to maintaining the character of the area. E. Community Character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance. Response: The structure is representative of the modest scale, style, and character of homes constructed in the late 19th century, Aspen's primary period of historic significance. It is located on a prominent corner at 7th and W. Bleeker (southeast corner) and is surrounded by several mature evergreen trees and a white picket fence. The structure exemplifies an earlier era of Aspen architecture, and is representative of miner's cottage vernacular. Staff finds that the structure is eligible for landmark status as it meets criteria B, D, and E. 2 SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) PROJECT SIJMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District and all development involving historic landmarks must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) ofthe 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 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 coverage 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's initial proposal for this property was to demolish a large part of the existing building, move the house so that it would face South Seventh Street, and create a duplex and two ADU's on the site. The HPC gave direction to revise the proposal and the applicant has responded to those comments. 'the project has been revised so that more of the existing house is retained, the house maintains its placement on Bleeker Street and is moved just slightly forward, a relatively small addition is made to the old house, and a new, completely detached unit is proposed behind it. Staff finds that the concept has improved significantly. The proposal for the historic house now includes retaining all of it except for an addition on the east side of the building. As stated at the last meeting and at the most recent site visit, staff believes that this addition was built before 1904 and appears on the Sanborne map (attached), although somewhat modified from its earlier appearance. As a policy, HPC has generally required that all additions to a historic building which are at least fifty years old are to be retained. If this were required ofthe 735 W. Bleeker project, than the addition that would likely be requested would have to placed behind the historic building, probably eliminating the option to keep the two units detached from each other. For that reason, staff is willing to support removal of the current addition if what is constructed in its place is appropriate. The applicant shows a kitchen extension and single stall garage with a master bedroom suite above as the proposed addition. The resulting FAR for the house is 1,403 square feet (plus a 250 square foot garage), so that the addition is approximately 655 square feet larger than the current building. The drawings reviewed at the August 12, 1998 meeting, along with 3 the minutes of that meeting are attached. At that time the direction recommended by staff 0 was as follows: â€¢ Look at ways to lower or eliminate the second floor pop up on the old house. â€¢ Replace the windows at the porch on the front of the old house with a historically appropriate window. Eliminate the porch railing. â€¢ Look at varying materials on the new house. â€¢ Meet with the Parks Department regarding tree removal. â€¢ Staff is in support of the setback variance, partial demolition, and on-site relocation, and Ordinance 30 variances if the above issues are addressed. Revised drawings have been submitted to address these concerns. In regard to the historic house, the addition has been redesigned and simplified. The height of the addition has dropped by several feet. This has been accomplished in part by flattening the pitch of the roof on the new addition, which staff finds is not as compatible with the historic house as a more steeply pitched roof is, however the drop in height is significant and will preserve the appearance ofthe historic house particularly from the street front view. The windows in the new addition should be primarily double hung to match those in the original house. The applicant is proposing toÂ· reopen the front porch on the old house, which will be a significant improvement. The front windows have been changed from the last review to address the staff concern that a more historically appropriate double hung window be placed 0 in this location, however, staff recommends that only one double hung, of a more tall and narrow proportion be installed per the photos of other historic houses that were supplied at the last meeting. The proposed new railing on the porch has been eliminated. A window should be added on the first floor, south elevation so that the garage area is more in character with the house. In terms of the new unit, staff found that the previous design was generally acceptable and recommended some variations in wall materials to tie the building in with the historic house better. The applicant has subsequently made a number of changes to the new house. A mix of materials are now shown as requested, however staff recommends against the choice of brick since it is not present on the old house, and also recommends against the large brick chimney mass on the street facing (Seventh Street) facade, since this is an element which is not compatible with the miner's cottage style. The new unit has increased in height, windows have been added which violate the "volume" standard of the "Residential Design Standards," the windows have all become multi-paned, a side porch has been removed and the front door no longer faces the street. Staff finds that all of these changes decrease the compatibility of the new house with the existing house. The applicant should be directed to revise the current design to meet these concerns or return to the previous design. Staff and the HPC have asked for information which shows the two units in comparison to each other, such as elevations or a model, but it has not been provided yet. Staff is 0 concerned that although the buildings may appear architecturally compatible on paper, the 4 height of the new house must not oven,~elm the historic home. The applicant has committed that a model will be provided for the September 23rd meeting. The site plan has improved greatly from the original proposal, which had the two buildings attached to each other. From the information provided on the survey, it appears that the large trees at the front of the property will be protected, but several trees which are interior to the site will be removed to make way for the new construction. The applicant should contact the Parks Department as soon as possible to begin discussing what their requirements will be. A sideyard setback variance is needed on the west side of the new house. Although the applicant is providing a five foot setback from the property line, which is the typical minimum requirement, a corner lot requires a setback of 6'8" from the property line. To meet the required distance between buildings, the new house has also been pushed back 5', requiring a rear yard setback variance of 5' and a combined front and rear setback variance of 5'. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood ofthe parcel proposed for development. Response: The character of the neighborhood is a mix of both mining cottages and large newer second homes with lots of glass. The applicant has revised this proposal so that the scale of the historic house is preserved and the project will be an appropriate and successful infill in the neighborhood. 0 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: By maintaining the old house in its original orientation and very close to its original location, and by taking most of the mass that could be added to it and placing that in a detached home, the applicant is protecting the building as a representation of mining era housing. 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: Staff has previously suggested some ways that the applicant could restudy the character of the proposed addition in order to achieve an even greater preservation of the architectural character of the house. The applicant has responded by revising the design to lower the ridge height and simplify the design of the new addition. PARTIAL DEMOLITION 1. Standard: The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or 0 rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance ofthe parcel. 5 Response: The applicant has reduced the area that is proposed to be demolished to an addition which appears to have been at least partly constructed before 1904. As described above, given the overall approach to the project, staff is in support of this partial demolition if the replacement construction is compatible with the house. 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 area to be demolished is not original. It may have significance in that it is an old addition and all changes to the house which are more than fifty years old are thought to have some importance as evidence of how the house has changed over time. 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: This issue is discussed in detail under the conceptual review standards. ON-SITE RELOCATION 1. Standard: The relocation activity is demonstrated to be the.best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure, and the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures will not be diminished due tb the relocation. Response: Staff believes that on-site relocation is probably the best approach if the intent is to excavate a basement. 2. Standard: 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: Said report will be a condition of approval. 3. Standard: 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 relocation plan and bond will be a condition of approval. 6 ORDINANCE 30 Previously, the applicant had shown a lightwell near the front of the historic house, which required a waiver from the Residential Design Standard related to lightwells. The lightwell has been relocated to the side of the house to eliminate the need for a variance, however staff has determined that no openings, for the lightwell or the stairwell will be allowed in this east sideyard setback area by the UBC. The applicant will need to address this issue as soon as possible. STAFF SIJMMARY AND FINDINGS: Staff is in support ofthe project, and feels that the applicant and HPC are very close to an acceptable solution, but there are numerous issues which must be resolved prior to conceptual approval. The areas to be addressed are: l. HPC must find that the flattening of the roof pitch on the addition to the historic house is the appropriate solution to lowering the height ofthat addition. 2. The windows in the new addition should be primarily double hung to match those in the original house. A window should be added on the first floor, south elevation so that the garage area is more in character with the house. 3. Only one double hung window of a more tall and narrow proportion shall be installed at the front porch area of the old house. The front porch shall not have a railing. 4. Eliminate the use of brick on the new house since it is not present on the old house, and also eliminate the large brick chimney mass on the street facing (Seventh Street) facade, since this is an element which is not compatible with the miner's cottage style. 5. Restudy the new house to address the concerns discussed above; namely height, windows which violate the "volume" standard of the "Residential Design Standards," multi-pane windows, elimination of the side porch, and relocation of the front door away from the street. 6. Demonstrate with a model that the height of the new house will not overwhelm the historic home. 7. Contact the Parks Department as soon as possible to begin discussing what their requirements with regard to tree relocation or removal will be. 8. A west sideyard setback variance of 6'8, " a rear yard setback variance of 5' and a combined front and rear setback variance of 5' are appropriate assuming that HPC finds that the above issues have been sufficiently addressed. 9. Recommend landmark designation finding that the property meets criteria B, D, and E. 10. Address the UBC issue with the proposed lightwell and stairwell on the east side of the old house. 11. At building permit submittal, demonstrate that the structure is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting by submitting a structural report by a licensed engineer or a plan drawn by the housemover demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation and the protection methods that will be used for the relocation. 7 12. At building permit submittal, post a bond or letterof credit in the amount of $30,000 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. Exhibits 1. Staff memo dated September 23, 1998 2. Sanborne Map 3. Minutes ofAugust 12,1998 4. Revised application 5. Drawings ofthe old house and new house from the August 12, 1998 review 8 \ .. I. '1. U. (0 \ li 9 4- 7 i El. Li B [A D ' 726 7/2 EEK E R ~' 5064<i Corp,ze. . .,Q ========-==== 4= =======-=-----====---.== ... 10.W 54- 9 ?IF 36- 27 7/9 fEE .0/1 0 Al 1 1 -'. --1 0 rx 6-9 Iii / /1 1*2 g . 1 c IMIN 0 0 2-1- C .01 m Z A 1-41 ' 11 1 64 1 1 -- It EZZ E F. G. N. 0 'ti 4. Z 17-71 , 18 1 Z .21 ID<â‚¬ 2.4 3,<E X >41 R. S. L. M. M. 0. R Q. R. u. 7 271 71 -L__1 1--[ 0 1 6 0,1 12 p f -- 1- - 10. \/ 0 D. 10 A Â· ,- ". 1/. 7, 6 4 1 800 720 710 72 ~0) IAIN 97 .. '.EI42\0 \ \ 4--32>1 235 715 4 277Â¥ 1 u--4 1-u=r 0 0 ~ .1 D . 17771 77:Â¥ , '.#41-11% n~/ 3 u-irT- .t Il *a . -1 1. el 1. 1 -- t.w el D. E. F. 6. 'If. -lizzi - ...-2~7CcpL. 7-11 r---- M - -71 4 k 1 6 <Af RECEIVED ATTACHMENT 2 AUG 2 - 1998 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Aort=, 7,1,"Â·4 COMMUNITY DEVELOP.VIENT Applicant: PIC.Ed tb LAA - Address: 736- +EsÂ»T~ 2,(-SE,<g< ST, . Zane district 2.- (P i - Lot size. . (00.02 , A /001 Ecisting FAR: 1,084.5 -- - Allcwable EAR: 3,240 Prccosed FAR: - 1, raD , Existing net !easable (cdmmercal) :Ej i flu A Proccsed ne! leasabie (commercian: NA Exismg % of site coverage: 2 - . 201.- Prcocsed % cf site c.verage: 1 (1, _ Existing % of coen space: KIA- P==sec 1/0 of coen scace: Existing maximum Meight: PÂ·Incicai :icc: /4 1--3" - Accescri =c: NA - Prccosed max. height: Poricical ticc: 22 '- 2" Accesscr, ticc: A/;4 P.ceased Â°' / 27 % .o cr Cemctittcrt: Existing number of becrccrns: 2 P=cosed number cf bearccms: Existing on-site par<ing spaces: 2 Crl-site parking spaces recuired: _ 9 Settacks Exisring: Minimum sect:ired: Prcocsed: Frcnt: /5 L 0 * Frcm Ut- oR Frcrir. / 4 '-,9 ' Rear: 31'-0* Rear: /0 '- 0# Rear: /3'-00 Cerncined Ccm timed Camcinec Frcnt/rear: 5 9 '-O 0 Fromirear.30'-0,1 Promirear.OS'.00 Side: /9 L 00 S ice: 6.- 64'll Side: â‚¬ '- 0 1 Side: U '-O. Sit~. 10+ _ On S ide: /0 '-0 4 Cerntined Cambined Combined Sides: 30'-00-1 S ides: /5-'- D "- Sices: / 5 L.0 * Existing ncncarrform ines cr encrcachmartis: A,44 Variaticns requested: WÂ· SLDâ‚¬Vp,El> berpkk #F /'- B~,'Re<. 5â‚¬,adec. A .gmlmli op 64. 1 , Coma,40 %.wr/eg.*,4 0, 61-0. .. 7mI<t6) F60- Dble Mpeg. 1 (HFC has the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up ta soo sq.ft. site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations underthe ccttage imill program. parking waiven for residertual uses in the R-6. R-15. RMF, CC. and O : zone dismcs) 4 Â·64Aill.#A#t ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 23. 1998 735 W. BLEEKER ST. - CONCEPTUAL, PARTIAL DEMOLITION- ON-SITE RELOCATION, VARIANCES, PUBLIC HEARING continued from Sept. 9, 1998. Gilbert stepped down. Amy Guthrie, planner relayed the directions that were given to the applicant from the previous meeting: 1) Look at ways to lower or eliminate the second floor pop up on the old house. 2) Replace the windows at the porch on the front of the old house with a historically appropriate windows. 3) Eliminate the porch railing. 4) Look at varying materials on the new house. 5) Meet with the Parks Department regarding tree removal. 6) Staff is in support of the setback variance, partial demolition and on-site relocation, and Ord. #30 variances if the above issues are addressed. The applicant has a model with the flatter roof pitch and staff feels it is successful. Staff has concerns with some windows on the old house. The new design in staff s opinion steps away from being compatible with the older house particularly the brick and they also no longer have a front door that faces the street. A porch has been eliminated and some windows are in the no window zone of Ord. #30. Some ofthe changes are not positive changes. Sworn in were Drew Dolan, Charles Cunniffe and Rich Pavcek. Charles relayed that the flatter roof when looking at the house, the steepness somewhat goes away. From 7th Street you don't see everything due to the trees etc. and hopefully it will read as a distant house as opposed to an attachment to the historic house. The windows are double hung. He also submitted new drawings addressing Staff s memo. Rick Pavcek, addressed the 12 points in Staffs memo. The porch is reattached to unit 2. The entry doors were redirected to 7th St. The windows were changed. The ridge height was lowered on the second unit and is four feet above the historic unit addition which makes it at 29 feet. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MI1NUTES OF SEPTEMBER 23. 1998 Melanie's concern is the staircase on the east. Her concern is ifthe applicants come back and want the staircase covered it would be a structural element sticking out. Another concern is the configuration of the metal roofs in relationship to the snow load as the area is the entrance to the ADU. Charles said he thinks it is not required to be covered and they would do a snowmelted stairwell. The ice would not built up at that point. Regarding the roofs, heat would be generated between the two buildings that would help keep the snow down. A gutter with a drain could be constructed. Drew addressed Susan's concern about the porch and the use o f the historic posts. They will be moved and used on the front porch. The board has concerns with the pitch of the roof on the new house. Chairperson Suzannah Reid opened and closed the continued public hearing. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Jeffrey relayed his concern about the addition to the historic house. Squatting the ridge height down gives it a suburban look. The mass is approximately 30 feet wide on the east and it is engulfing the historic house. Heidi and Melanie had the same concerns as Jeffrey. Susan preferred the lower roof height. The ADU will be in the basement under the new addition to the historic house and the house lifted for the new foundation. There will not be a basement under the historic house. Suzannah agreed that the roof pitch is a concern and possibly the roof pitch does not need to be continuous. The board discussed roof options with a combination of elements; peaked and shed pieces as opposed to all one element on the addition to the historic house. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 23. 1998 MOTION: Heidi moved to table the application until Oct. 14, 1998 to restudy the roofform on the addition to the historic house, Unit I. Unit 2 is acceptable as presented in the new drawing, Exhibit III. Motion second by Susan. Roll call vote: Roger, yes; Suzannnah, yes; Susan, yes; Melanie, yes; Heidi, yes; Jeffrey, yes. Approved 6-0. 240 LAKE AVENUE - FINAL, FAR bonus, Public Hearing Assistant City Attorney, David Hoefer reviewed the affidavit and HPC had jurisdiction to proceed. A mailing list will be presented to the City Clerk's office the following day. Amy Guthrie, planner stated that the house was built in 1957 and designed by Herbert Bayer. Conceptual was granted with variances and to look at the stairway and design of the stair tower and the mullions that divide the glass. Restudy pushing the addition back toward Hallam Lake due to the concern of one of the neighbors that their views were being affected by the design. More mullions were added and Staff recommends a reduction o f the mullions as it would be less competitive on the historic house. Instead of moving the addition back on the property they have instead removed the front 1 foot 6 inches from the addition itself to open up the view corridor. The FAR request is 500 feet due to the steep slopes on the site. Staff recommends approval with conditions. Sworn in was Jennifer Cohen from Charles Cunniffe's office. Chairperson Suzannah Reid opened and closed the public hearing. Charles Cunniffe, architect relayed that the central issue is the stair tower. More mullions were added due to the study of snow buildup and the flashing on the roof. The stair tower is a new element and a regular pattern of mullions was added and then the house was left to be different. The mullions will be a steel gray and the glass will be a solar gray. The roof of 5 , . t. im# CA --1#la.- '..11/AY.Rrifeit~,T:'::':::':':::::':::'M'Al'267'.--I . , -1-1~l'-Il=IA'- ilillillillimillill'.1/:Ill/::Ill::::I/:1.1==~ . - ....=--- 4 - -I---I- -===== - . .........:imil::::: ~~ - -~- illillim -- . ~1-1-91== ---- .1 / - . ..... . 0- A . ....... A. 1. -I--0.--.5,--si-=--=-=--~---------~ a Â»44 . ~Â»~ ---=-1-1- lilli"'lillillillillillillillili lim - ~ 1 - 6----I- ......Ill.......1..... ........ A . .. 0 i. , 1.1 ~ lilli =~1 44'r 111 IIIIIIIIIIII . 111Â® < 9 - *124*496? d A...uty,Â·AÂ·~ .4 FrE' 14 IK*Za,TAL WOOD SEEING -MICM EXISTING COLOR U 4 h HORZOIAL WOOD o SIDING - WICH 00 m 0 LL' 1 Ir]IE]1 E , TURNED WOOD POSTÂ» 61.. 5 E=nw-Z-\ 2 i 8 RE-OSE FROU DENO ~ OF REAR PORCH E EX,SrING HORIZONTAL SONG SONG 0 11@ U = 21 L* UNIT 1 - UNIT 1 - PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION % fi U @A 01 4 a 01 6 . d Lu U Z 41 38 2 Mi! 3 EM 00 m 0 Q HORIZONTAL WOOD HORIZONTAL WOOD SIOING - M/CH StÂ©Â»16 - MATCH EXISTING COLOR EXISTING COLOR 00 0 Elml EXISTING HORIZONTAL SIDING /DRANNG____/ El B E B lul"r I ~811 lea_ 1 SHEEr NO. UNIT 1 - UNIT 1 - PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION A3.1 4 0 3---IN @arma. aa,25 a.cm /worECS Q:>l-42), 1 -TaRrdolajldE-lit.09.-199813321FE----~ 9205-Â·%6026 :xyd . 0695-9260Â£6 alit . U910 00 Â£956-QUÂ©Â£6 0(%41 1.~)0*0 I. 4 @8 LEGEND : WEST BLEEKER STREET ~ EX/ST/NG CONSTRUCTION TO BE DEMOUSHED * "1~ EXISTING CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN 4 . EZEZZ~ PORCH TO BE RE-OPENED ~ Â¢ 0 F 'd r 0 O 5 , -ERF?.,RE . gr re' a. '44 7% .t .2 ' U, 3% MA,0 -9 9 ' 13 'E 3462*4707 0 Uic.~ct.S*kt ' I . =,Pr:0-,NER-* .4-OV' " 4 . ..Al-5 L 46Â·- /- 9,292 , -3...61% . Â· c Irr 1 4 Â«493 FROI,r SETWCK FZ~ZA 4-0 / r.4 22 - 4 L - U i 1 ---7- 1-1 lu 7 - B - - EXISTING LOCATION OF mSTGRI STALETURE . I.-I . tÂ»ST 1 1 PROPOSED LIATDÂ¥ OF 3-~ L- 1 m i EXISTING HISTORIC STRUCTURE , 15 - EL--11- = .. -.: 1 fÂ» 9.-7 *1.9 13 1 . : 3 1 L ye. \ i - ' 11.Â·ir' E 0 1 1 =fÂ» 1/ - 11 1 Z Mf 1 - r==il L-41 I - : i \ 1% = - 1 1 k -=- - 9 1 **{ dit , 1 I 1 1 1 % L *17 21 1 1& m =T* 1~ )11111111111 _-1 M i- ~Â·~~Av vÂ¢~ ~ UIT 2 -/ L 2 4 /1/ 1 REAR SETBAct.J SITE COVERAGE: 1 - UNfr h . 121 SF '.' GRNEL UNIT 24 1188 SF 1 amve#AY Â· P*UNS 7DDÂ£, 2,485 / 8002 - 41X ' 2 FLOOR AREA RATIO: MUâ€¢ENTY UNE UNIT h 1.403 SF DKAWING M.trf BLOCK s TOTAL UNIT 2: 17!4 SF DI,571118 Ft,Â¤, PUNS P-OSED SITE FUN /U,WASLE. 3240 SF JOB NO. 9836 DATE 9-14-98 - W - 1-0" 96" - 14 X2.2 PROPOSED SITE PLAN fil EXISTING FLOOR PLAN SHEET NO. U - 3-y : 1-3. i': . Â· . SHEET OF *com,Off "410 C.101*' I'le -1 Â£@Els- :UL Â»11 - Sl)31IHZ)MV 3=IdINNrE) 5313VHD 3DNEICHS321 NVIOCI 9Â£05-526026 M . 0655-5140Â£6 1131 . tt910 03'NUSÂ¥ . toE allinS . MÂ¥ NVWAH US M3>13318 153AA SEL UllÂ¥?!UIUJ IN_NIN 8.4.46-..'. f 2>Â·,ty#-41{ itta.~. jftâ‚¬.' 1 1.14 4.~Â·:. ~1Â·~r.(i.4, ,,Â·-Â· Â·i:~Â·~Â· Â·Â· - ./ .." ~ Â· ~Â· LIP'T'.~ ~S ' 4,Â·Â· 1. 4 Â· /â‚¬114r- 1- Â· 9Â· l'~ 27-Â·.~'49" 149,>Et,I, Â·j*Ikjll*.0 1 K - C 2 - _11 i 8 ... 2 13 L 13 ;*frrl_ H 4.1 i 5 F-- 0 - 0- *m - LIGHr WEU mm - - UGHT WEU \P 9- I -74 -n 1 - 7-t- ri :1 Â»-4 0 0 2 L7 j. A. 0 2 0 7- C m E: 5 8 - <1 Ip 2 13 Z 1 im,mY: mi DOLAN RESIDENCE CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 1 1 1 ill ASPEN, Cal ORADO 320 t.COLORAIX} AVI * -Intl)KIDE ('O 81135 â€¢ ItltÂ·9Vli: nfl â€¢ MX+97()738 ';C,67 =-/.1..Â· Â·-** 735 WEST BLEEKER ST. 520 EAW HYMAN AVE. ' SUffE 301 ' ASPEN, CO 81611 â€¢ TELE: 970925-5590 â€¢ FAX: 970925-5076 ur ~] 1 1 2 1-INA =77.72.3/'Volvi/~CliW -, 4, 1.- ~- ..79.L . I - - I 7 1 . - .. ..... / 1 0, 11 Â¤ 0 L . ===.===1 0 -1 +}1 -1 I / I m 0/ C m Z 9 =i . .-I 1~ 17--- -1 - _ _.1 Unf-2. T . % Â© 7 lili // \U - L - 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 - \5 ZE= 7 1/~97 \i = 101 n 0 Ll 1\- 2 1 Gl 3 --7 -0.11011 ~ -- + 0 -1. 1-4 'Ir:3~ 9.. Â«4,J BLA 1/ . -0 ,/ ?14 5.1. 1 1 .-8 L VI 1 ) I i Il ju -1 1 7- 1 1? lA K > 2 1 4,1 1 r- Â¢11. 3, , '.% 1 2 --4 4 I r 3 0 hmm â‚¬ 70 9 1 -- -7 - RJE . r - 3 d â€¢ *C I 4 :i~ 1 1 4 1, 'r l Ill 11 DOLAN RESIDENCE CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS , IR/:1 4,1 1 735 WEST BLEEKER ST. 520 EAST InMAN AVE.'SUITE 301 'ASPEN, CO 81611 â€¢ TELE: 974923-5590 â€¢ MX: 97(*15-5076 W. I ASPEN, COLORADO 220 E. COLORAIX)Â· AVE. â€¢ TEUWRIDE, CO 81435 * Tilt: 970728 3715 * MX: 970728 9*,1 ._ 2 1'NA MU ....dill.-lill-*..Illk --'14'41 ~ """"4*1MY;'4;55%3&:Ek'ZE<jeti:A+92*6##frkf*42.~tji;~*-ceii,~.*, :. , ' F ..4.--9/.3-1,1/..,1 1- B.'.:Â·.-Â»C- - -:. 1 4- AE Â·Â· Â»N Â£ Â·Â·.1 Â· 44 I a I / Il n 1 9.1 i / \:a:1 6== 4 1 1 / 1 1 lili -6 4 \ r# 9 i 1 12 0 W C i P 27-4 - 1~01 li=11 Z 10 . lu m .10 c - #a m . 1 A i P A. ? (D 6 T > il ~ I I ~ M' DOLAN RES/DENCE CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 0 1-11*Fll M rl (*izicii*i 083: 41: ;hs - 1 735 WEST BLEEKER ST. 520 EAS[ 11YMAN AVE.' btillk 301 â€¢ AbPEN, CO 81611 â€¢ Im. 9704.,5 559,1 â€¢ MX: 970925 5076 NV-Id ~ 13A31 Sent By: STUDIO B ARCHITECTS; 970 920 7822; Feb-19-99 4:OOPM; Page 2 30 b_) architacts 19 February 1999 Remedial Plan for 234 West Francis Street The Davis Waite House: * The fouowing remedial plan was devised by Studio B Architects. It addresseb the 24 poinim mitlined in the Hi'C findings and consolidales many of the overlapping imues. Studio B Airchitects shall be retained by the owners to oversee these directives on a weekly basis and shall coordinate site meetings with HPC staff tn insure these directives gre adhered to. 1. South Bacade: Front Fetch: The front porch shall be bfought back to its original character via the following; a. 'Ihe exisfidg secondary cornice fascia trim is larger than the original and shall be replaced with a new trim that matches exactly that of the original An existing piece of that trim waf, salvaged and new trim will be made from that by At)W Design Works. Please Hee the sample This trim xhall wrap the front porch and returnback to the house itself a.s per the original porch. b. The 2 free-standing columns and the 2 pilaster columns have been Balvaged and arc currently installed with new top and bottom poftions that are identical in proportiun to the previous columns. A small wood detail relief needs to be added to the top and bottom to match the historic columns and that is also provided us a sample. The new piece of vertical wood behind the pllaster has been added which matches the historic This i. consistent and MerVE* a. blocking for the siding to butt into. c. The detailed casâ€¢, and comer blocking around the frÂ©int door shall be removed and replaivell with the same flat car that measured 5 1/4 inches. This can be replicated from the photographs. d. The front door and transom are in storage and will be re-installed. The proposed stained glass window transoms will not beused. The original doorhardwareignot ope]mble or lockable and the owners wish to replace it with a proper locking hardware. The architerts shall select an entfy hardware that iw compatible with historic standards and review the selection with staff for approval. e. The detailed scrollwork has been saved and will be installed per the same detailing. Â£ The underside of the porch shall have the sante 2 1/4 inch beadboard ceiling installed per the historic porch. 6. The roof of the porch shall have a copper roof installed at the same 1/12 pitch as the previous porch. The copper shall be patined to a dark brown and will not be visible from the street because of the low roof pitch. The former porch had a metal roof with 'I.ally leaks repaired by tar. The eviderce of leaking is visible in the photographs from the rotted wood behind the pilasters. Heat mell shall be used as in the previous porch. 555 n. mill st. alpen co. 8101 i 070 920 9428 fa, 970Â·920Â·7822 Sent By: STUDIO B ARCHITECTS; 970 920 7822; Feb-10-90 4:DOPM; Page 3/5 South Facade continued: h. The porch floor material thatwas nonÂ·historic was removed. This was a patterned ccmerete to represent 12" x 127 tiles The clients would like to replace this with either recycled red brick or Colorado red flagstone, both are historic applications. i. The new siding above the front porch shall be removed and replaced with file remaining salvaged historic Siding. Some of this siding will require patching, epoxy's, and sanding. 1, The added small trim detail around tho case of the large picture window ghall be removed. k. The new window trim, Bills, and comerboards are new but are of Ihe same dimensions and profile as the removed historic material. 'Ihese were measured by Studio B Architects at the sibe on 17 February, 1999 to verify. These dimensions are; 4 1/2" window trim. 5 1/4" door easing, 11/4" window sills, and 4 F/16" forthe comer boards. This is typical throughout the project and address many of the same points on other clevations: L The small fixed window at the upper portion of the facade i, a single pane window that has been cracked prior to the owners pu/chasing the house. Can Ihis cracked pane be replaced? m. The new siding that haA replaced the removed aiding is of the exact same dimensions and profile as the historic. 'Ithis is typical throughout ihe project. Please see the sample of new and old. n. The copper roof flashing, and win,dow glidesshall all bc patined to a dark birown, There needs to be a metal at all of these locations to avoid moisture problemi and allow 1he windows to operate. This solution would be applicable throughout all of the elevation concerns. o. The copper window head dcip caps *hall be removed above all windows on the historic main house to match the historic window detail. It should be noted that this is not compatible with current building codes and the longevity of this detail is in queslion because of future moisture problems. Instead of a metal flashing, the window head would simply be caulked. The large picture windows at the south and west clevations have a much larger head profik of 5 3/4" and we would like tu retain the existing copper flashing cap detail because of greater moisture potential. Thesc two historic window detail had a tin cap. We could either patina the cupper of paint it to match the window trim. 2. Easâ€¢ Facade: a. 7hc direct vent fireplace flues will be chariged and brought up through the roof instead of venting directly out the wall. The vella alt 8" jn diameter per the manufacturer's apecifications and will rise 4 feet above the roof per code. Tile melal flues can be painted to minimize their vilibility. Theac will need to be tied back to the roof via tie rods or with a metal cridket to avoid them being torn from the roof from snow/ice. We researched wheâ‚¬her the two flues could be coupled into one flue and they cannot because of the venting requirements. Sent By: STUDIO B ARCHITECTS; 970 920 7822; Feb-19-99 4:O1PM; Page 4/5 b. The historic window thal was saved north of the door%tray ihall be re-installed and a new cutom window to match it in all dimensions shall replace the other new window. c. The scalloped shingles at the kitchen area shall be removed and replaced with siding to Inatch. d. The two smaller window pancs that were accidentally broken, are to be replaced with the samc histolie glass supplied by the Bendheim Glass Company. 3. West Facade: a. The three vent renetrations are one dimet vent fireplace with two striatter 5" bathroom fan vents. The fireplace vent will be changed and re-routed to the roof and the smaller vents shall remain and be painted out. This fireplace vent will again be the 8" diameter with the 4 foot high flue, Another optickn would be to screen the fireplace vent with a conifer tree in order to avoid another low n,of penetration. b. The large broken window pane is to be replaced wilh a new 'seedy glass' pane that replicates historic glass and is being made by Bendhelm Glas& Company of New York city that specializes in historic renovations. c. The small historic porch shall be ze-built per the drawings and incorporate the saved columns and door. The same door trim as the front door shall be used. The same detailing will be used per the photog,aphs. Like the frant porch, the floor materials were a non-hiâ€¢toric concrete and will be replaced by either the used red b,ick or the red Colorado Ilagslone 4. North Facade: a. Similar procedures previously mentioned. 5. General Notes: a. The historic fence has been saved and is under protection on site. This shallbe installed upon completion. Il should be noted that some portions of the fence maybe re- built because some areas of the fence were weathered beyond repair, but will be built to the same dimensions. b. The approved drawings show a small 6-5" stone veneer at the base of the house. The original house had a metal flashing at this Med beenuae the rubble stone foundation had settled and water cau,ied significant damage to the crawl space. Ihe current detail is a copper flaahing that shall be patined and once backfilled will reveal approximately 6 inches. To use an applied stone veneer is not really practical and the copper fla:*hitig better replicates the historic house- e. The landscape pathways are to be either recycled red brick or md Colorado flagatone. Is there a preference? d. All gutters and downspouts shaR be painted per the historic house. Sent By: STUDIO 8 ARCHITECTS; 970 020 7822; Feb-19-99 4:01 PM; Page 5/5 e. Scott Lindenau personally visited the site on February 17th and reviewed them directives with the owners and contractor. Scott also measured all of the siding, trim, comerboards, Bills, gutters, and other details of concern to verify dimensions. f. It should be noted that prior to the Mumns purchasing the house, the remote water meter readout wa, installed on the west side of the house and is located so the water company can read the meter. STIPULATED FINDINGS OFFACT AND ORDER REGARDING BUILDING PERMIT NO. 8-49 / ISSUED FOR 234 WEST FRANCIS STREET, a.k.a. THE, WAITE HOUSE COME NOW Don and Gwen Mullins, by and through their attorney of record Charles Brandt, and the City of Aspen, by and through their attorney of record, David Hoefer, to stipulate to the following Findings ofFact and Order. BACKGROUND INFORMATION On February 1, 1999, Stephen Kanipe, the Chief Building Official for the Aspen Community Development Department issued an Order to Show Cause to Don and Gwen Mullins, the owners of 234 West Francis, Aspen, Colorado, and to Gary Wheeler, the contractor on the project at 234 West Francis, as to why building permit No. 8-49 for 234 West Francis Street should not be suspended or revoked. (Please note that the title for 234 West Francis is in the name of Don Mullins only). The hearing was scheduled for and held on the 108 day of February, 1999, with Stephen Kanipe presiding. At issue were alleged violations of the resolution of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission approving the project located at 234 West Francis Street, Aspen, Colorado. The alleged violations were detailed in a summary, which*is ' attached hereto as "Exhibit A." / The matter was heard pursuant to Section 106.4.5 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code, which reads as follows: Suspension or revocation. The building official may, in writing, suspend or revoke a permit issued under the provisions of this code whenever the permit is issued in error or on the basis of incorrect information supplied, or in violation of any ordinance or regulation or any Of the provisions of this code. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Owners, Don and Gwen Mullins, were represented by attorney Charles Brandt. Assistant City Attorney David Hoefer represented the City of Aspen. . , I. 2. Witnesses were called, including Historic Preservation Officer Amy Guthrie, ' Historic Preservation Commission members Suzannah Reid, Gilbert Sanchez, Susan Dodington, and Jeffrey Halferty, contractor Gary Wheeler, professional engineer Bob Pattillo, and home owner Don Mullins. 3. Twenty-eight exhibits were offered including a copy of the Order to Show Cause, the City Clerk's file for the HPC application at 234 West Francis, the Building Department permit file for 234 West Francis, the minutes from each of the HPC meetings pertaining to the project at 234 West Francis, HPC Resolution No. 2 and No. 17, Series of 1-998, letters from interested parties (both pm and con), window trim, posts, and siding from the project at 234 West Francis, a summary of the alleged violations of HPC approvals for 234 West Francis, a video tape of the house as it currently exists, and photos, including those mounted on a poster board, of the house (both before and after the commencement of the project). 4. The house located at 234 West Francis, commonly referred to as the "Waite House," is on the National Register of Historic Places and is a locally designated landmark. Consequently, the house was subject to development review by the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission. 5. The property at 234 West Francis is owned of record by Don Mullins. The Mullins hired an architect, Scott Lindeau, and a contractor, Gary Wheeler, to take the proposed development at 234 West Francis through the review process. 6. The first HPC meeting concerning the proposed project at 234 West Francis occurred on October 8, 1997. Six more meetings were held: November 24, 1997; December 10, 1997; January 28, 1998; May 13, 1998; May 27, 1998, and June 10, 1998. A final hearing concerning alleged violations of the Historic Preservation Commission approvals and conditions occurred on January 27, 1999. All eight meetings were attended by Lindeau and Wheeler. In addition, the Mullins attended "two or three meetings." 7. The meetings resulted in two HPâ‚¬ resolutions permitting development: Resolution No. 2, Series of 1998 (January 28, 1998) and Resolution No. 17, Series of 1998 (June 10, 1998). 8. The evidence presented'at the Order to Show Cause Hearing established by a preponderance of the evidence that certain of the violations alleged in "Exhibit A" did in fact occur. 9. Consequently, violations of Building Permit No. 8-49 did in fact occur providing the hearing officer with a basis to revoke or suspend the building permit pending remediation of the alleged violations; however, no evidence was presented with respect to any violations relating to the interior work on the historic portion of the house as well as the exterior work on the breezeway, kitchen, and garage. 2 . 10. However, the Mullins and the City of Aspen mutually agree that the "red tag" may be lifted and that the building permit not be revoked pursuant to the Mullins' compliance with the conditions set forth herein in the Order. Stephen Kanipe or his designee shall retain jurisdiction over the subject matter of this proceeding until compliance with all conditions has been accomplished. ORDER Don and Gwen Mullins and the City of Aspen, by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby agree to the following Order: The "red tag" on the building permit for 234 West Francis, Aspen, Colorado, is hereby . lifted and the building permit is not revoked or suspended subject to the following conditions being complied with: 1. A plan for remediation of the violations set forth in "Exhibit A" shall be submitted to the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission for their review and approval. Until approval of the remediation plan, no construction, demolition, or other alteration of the historic exterior of 234 West Francis shall occur; construction of the breezeway, kitchen, and garage exteriors may continue. The plan shall address the twenty-four violations set forth in "Exhibit A," including but not limited to the following: a. Where acceptable replication has not already occurred, a plan to replace the destroyed historic window trim, sills, and detailing with new materials that replicate the original as depicted in photographs and as represented by any existing original materials. b. The interior location of the gas fireplace appliances as shown on the approved plans for the property need not be altered. However, there shall be a proposed redesign of the exterior venting through the roof of the historic portion of the structure to provide alternative yenting solutions to those in the west and east walls. c. A plan to refurbish existing historic materials for the west entry porch and to replicate materials that were destroyed. The porch posts, if used in the restoration, shall be made structurally sound as recommended by the Mullins' structural engineer in conjunction with the Historic Preservation Commission. d. A plan for the use of replacement glass in the large double hung on the west side. e. A plan regarding the area above the front entry porch which replaces the new siding with the remaining historic siding. - 3 f. The front entry porch fascia, soffit, and detailing shall be reconstructed to match original materials. The entry columns sh311 retain as much original material as possible. g. The historic window on the east wall must be installed and the new double hung must match the original window. 2. Interior work at 234 West Francis may continue. However, if the subsequent approvals for the exterior made by the Historic Preservation Commissiod necessitates interior changes, the owners assume the risk of venting the gas appliance fireplaces through the roof and the n6w double hung window requirement of subparagraph 1.g. above. 3. All remedial historic exterior work approved by the Historic Preservation Commission shall be performed by subcontractors approved and supervised by the owner's architect Scott Lindenau. As remedial work fur the exterior is approved by HPC (by a majority vote) that remedial work may begin, even as other issues are being discussed. 4. From this point forward, all exterior work on the historic house shall be performed in consultation with the architect of record, Scott Lindenau, and a Weekly plan of action and a report ofprogress shall be submitted to the Historic Preservation Officer, Amy Guthrie. 5. The owners have already paid an estimated sixty thousand dollars in costs, fees, and interest in resolving this matter. In addition, the owners shall pay the costs and fees of the City of Aspen expended in resolving this matter. This amount is agreed upon in the amount of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00). 6. The owners shall, if necessary, increase the present letter of credit from thirty thousand dollars ($30,000.00) to an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost (prepared by the owner's architect Scott Lindenau) of the completion of the exterior work. The language shall be amended to clearly reflect the purpose of the letter of credit. The letter of credit will automatically terminate upon the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the house. . $ 7. The owners shall write a letter of apology to the community concerning the damage to the historic resource, which shall be reviewed as to form by the City Attorney and which shall be submitted to the Aspen Times and the Aspen Daily News no later than ten (10) days after receipt of HPC approval of the remediation plan. 8. This agreement does not prevent the Historic Preservation Commission from addressing violations regarding the historic (main) house not previously discovered or that may be discovered in the future. 1 4 9. Stephen Kanipe will continue to have jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case _ and shall be called upon to assist in the resolution of disputes that may arise between the owners and the Historic Preservation Commission. Assistant City Attorney David Hoefer and Historic Preservation Officer Amy Guthrie shall utilize their best efforts to expedite the consideration by the Historic Preservation Commission of the plan forremediation submitted by the owners in order to obtain a reasonable resolution of the matters addressed in the remediation plan. The matter shall be placed on the agenda of each HPC meeting until the matter is resolved. A - Dated thisl#day of February, 1999. Ld Charles Brandt for Don and Gwen Mullins ~ IIi- David Hoefer for the City%f Aspen The "Stipulated Findings of Fact and Order Regarding Building Permit No. 8-49 Issued for 234 West Francis Street, a.k.a. the Waite House" is hereby approved as to form and ordered on the date cited above. 3 Lâ€¢-AriV- StepheA Kanipe ~ / Chief Building Official . Aspen/Pitkin Community Development 5 Waite/Mullins House 234 West Francis St. Site survey of historic materials: 1/29/1999 West Side - a All historic window trim and sills have been replaced with new, new details added, no Original materials exist- a Three vent penetrations were made through the historic walls. â€¢ Historic porch materials, posts and roof structure, have been removed. Posts are in storage, otherwie materials have been destroyed. West historic door is in storage. â€¢ New copper guides in historic dcuble hung windows. â€¢ Large pane of historic glass was broken, at large double hung. â€¢ All historic siding, comer boards and fascia trim on the one story section have been destroyed. e Areas of historic iding, on the main house. were relocated to this area hom original locations, corner boards have been replaced. â€¢ Pre existing porch "floof materials were demolished, materials which have been represented to be installed were never approved. North Side â€¢ All historic siding and corner boards have been removed. . All new window trim, new details added. none oi tile historic materials exist e New copper guides in historic double hung windows. East Side ' All historic $iding has been removed and replaced.with new siding and comer boards. â€¢ All new window trim, new details added. no original materials remain. â€¢ An existing historic window, iust north of the docrway, has been replaced with a new one, the historic window Still exists and is in storage. â€¢ Two vent penetrations have been made through the historic wall, with large trim details. â€¢ New copper guides in historic double hung windows. South Side â€¢ Historic siding has been relocated frcm other areas to this fa,ade. Siding in the area above the entry roof has been removed. New window trimÂ·in this area. . I. a All new window sills and trim, with additional details, have been installed, none of the historic materials exist â€¢ Entry porch fascia, soffic, and expressed structure have all been reconstructed, new materials do not match the historic materials in size or profile New materials continue along one story element at entry. One piece of historic cnown molding still exists, in storage. Historic roor framing is apparently intact below the new construction. â€¢ Entry columns have beert altered at the base anc! ac the top with materials which do not replicate the original posts. While pcrticns of the posts remain, the historic integrity has been destroyed: New boards behind the 'pilafters' adjacent to the door are new. Scroll work from entry still exists and is in storage. â€¢ New door trim, with more elaborate detail,Has been added, historic trim materials were destroyed. Historic door and transom are in stcrage. â€¢ All historic siding in tile area above the entry porch roof has been removed and partially replaced with new. â€¢ Pre existing porch floor' materials were demolished, materials which have been represented to be installed were never approved. â€¢ Areas of comer boards are new. - .. In -27.144* E*=muump/RE A HPC Work Session 234 West Francis Street Revised Elevations Depicting Fireplace Vents at the Roof Surface 23 February 1999 Studio B Architects 555 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado . +193 - pir vi *35 7 @ 0 r.100 C6(7fb, (Fjo . 0 <6 /6~d 7 %410 (2(;uu fob) 9 190 0 4 /7 2 6 62 D /9 1 1 -*. . / \ r . 1 / P t L / \ 1 - id 41,1 _L _A qv- .il 6, -- - - 6\ 1/ _ de< 9 0 09 ... :\X *91 6- A-_ - - -- 5. // ~f#,0 t. tou i.j*â‚¬Â£, /7{ 30 a lu 1 I 'WN>Â£ 10 36~97 1 11 Un '''U'It /1 0 ... ilfc iN Fil' 1 to (lith. --4 4 -34 * 7. 0%0~ 4 14pfu * --* 4* r - - C' 00'pve 9,001 ~ \, flfrodolD \D 'Jel lrJU---=if'-li------- - -rrni L 7-3--*- TO I. i'' 11- 100 i<00*01. P , /11'1164*iLLJi ,, -- 1 :Ii: 1 1. lk- -- ~~~fititi~. '~ , 31 -4 2 943* 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 lili 1 I , ------- 1 1 1 L_ _____ _--- -- -1 9% 1/Al Avj /7 5 0 , (14 0 /10 + I 43/ 4 e S# 40/ 1 (> d L- R*940,/ *4571/6. 174/s..red + Wl U .67 D 05>mACA- *- aMOTAL)Cr tÂ« Pal" 9*6/#B_ &,01 ApitÂ¢- WOF 1- _ 0 -P BCMN N AD IS 11 - 14 1 1 - 1 1/\1 1 / lili 1 1 1.I l / 14 . 0 /7 Â· S / r--7 4 U n . ,-/ - h --1 -d-J 14 . 1 14-F- . 1 - -- 999 -i AdeW )(,962&34/ - 1> Â¥*PA Â¥â€¢y#6. , ?60% 418 - 1 4 fltg 2 2- - (// -095$7& 1*74*71 1 27-3 1 11 1 / - j ' Â©4~ 1 1 @ 44pe 39 1 1 1 1 Of#UQUE~ ~ 1 - 1-- - 0/J**,Â»Â«* 1.-1 WeeoleÂ» -0/8 046 %4 00804 -- 14'LING 4 176. 6,1,Â» .SEE 2A-8 1 WO MA . - . 4 - .. .' . .4 -. 4 . .. crlÂ· '' : 1-1 1 1 1 i~ il . 1 1 - 1 1 '. 1 ill 1 .1 i 'P_1'113111 - j I -1. <i> 7 1 401-- . 1 - -1 .Il l -i-Ill--Ill.- I--I- I-- 11' -mUNUM-1014 f . 1 1 1 . 'SE#~ *44 -0 Â»Ar 44*1~25 ,*00 f 2 i f- Lle,*E L.I-4 1 1 . 1 1 . 11 Ill Â· Z/&49Â»444 5 Wah,ViEL#ft *// 1Â·~~ -rt_ - -1- A - 4-- 11 - --1- I .1 : ir /Â·Lwi r Â·Â· - I.--i- ---I.0-- _~~â‚¬tuilkÂ®-OP_OS+11__11144119-N. th 01 1 7 Al *411*A 2041 + -11 0 - 1 [r==7 . r 11 4 It p ---- Woot) v/Wn unow 6004Aa 00 t ----' 82-Fug**N *(141 6 **66 + , 1 PORe.4 +44 0 9460RPOR.krEE *9*7----1 wl NeN '9TR,k=RJAE t ~~ r- 8/*RED Â¢&**DE 1 1 - .- '. '' t. f L.- . -1<.bl :- . -i... 2 -Tr_-T 1, 1 I i 1 1 Â»7*5 *Aw/A* I 1 1 1 .56*60 10Â£1 1 Ay--444â‚¬64:ae /4-02 SEE Â¥>19 1 1 1 1-1 11 1 1 1 1 3 1 11 \\ I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 It 11 1 1 1 1 Ill 1 . 11 ~=22~1 . I L - ---4 - 4 4!Wlt6Â·, Pcoe'/9 #19.- ?PMd__Â« 1 *ktmt @<IMI~id,--,pfi,1-- - Hivg, 741*f *#A Alb-- #---- 22_ _ 0/ -- - 1 -Ii j - \[-/ 14 1 -- I ltv 11 1 - 7-41 -: 9 I I 'C~ 1 11 /1 - [\11 -1- \ 4&4* 2 5,1246 \ , - 0 Â· . ' . 00>,g 1 1 % 1 - -- - - ---- - - --7 - - - ---=- - 1-11 1 . .9469,4986,7,0*~pr Br/5Fla - 1*44,424:W Â» te ~ 1 mABORE ANO HcoAPORNFfâ‚¬) /**@W *26*724*55 1\- J-- -7 -- --- 1-- ---- -- Â«c~47,1~ST:,PROPOSED ELEVATIO-N