Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.HP.520 E Cooper Ae.1990-HP-26-1-1\ u-Uvrlt-/1/Vt t-1 Bok d P - 5-1 7 0 . r .. MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Planner Re: Minor Development: Black Diamond Saloon, 520 E. Cooper, Awning Date: < August 22,2990 APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Minor Development approval for entrance and storefront level awnings at the new Black Diamond Saloon. LOCATION: 520 E. Cooper Ave. APPLICANT: Black Diamond Ltd., represented by Jan Rogers DISCUSSION: A total of four awnings are proposed. The applicant has submitted three color choices - the first choice being tan with black trim and lettering. This building is not historic, is considered by staff to be bland architecturally and in color. Only one other awning is attached to the building - the Molterer barrel entrance awning which is dark charcoal gray/white letters. The styles of these two entrance awnings are very similar, and even though they do not match in color, they are both neutral and do not conflict with one another. The first is a replacement barrel canopy over the entrance. The applicant indicates that no change in the framework is proposed, however, the framework encroaches into the right of way. Both the Planning and Zoning Department do not support retaining this encroachment, for safety and design reasons, and are recommending the framework be cut back to allow the awning material to align exactly with the first floor facade. The second set of awnings are a retractable shed style (three), running horizontally across the entire storefront level. The applicant is proposing 4' wide awnings, which staff does not support. We find this width to be inappropriate with awnings found throughout the Commercial Core Historic District for applications similar to this, and recommend 2.5' - 3' wide awnings, at the most. A drop valance is appears to be proposed, however, staff is not clear on the design. A simple, straight edge valance of minimum width would be appropriate. All lettering must conform with the sign code, and be approved by the Zoning officer. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider the following alternatives: 0 . 6. 1) Approval subject to the following conditions: a) The entrance framework be cut back to align with the first floor facade that additional b) The shed awnings be no wider than 2 1/2'. 2) Table action 3) Deny the proposal, finding it to be incompatible with the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC grant Minor Development approval subject to the following conditions: a) The entrance framework be cut back to align with the first floor facade that additional b) The shed awnings be no wider than 2 1/2'. . memo.hpc.520ec 2 t· . fS-/. 3 : .4 9719- ATEACHMINT 1 4 AMS- LAND USE APPLEATION FORM :~ 1 = ~ (3&24-At 61. 5-»¥0 . (indicate street address, lot & block nlmber, legal description where appropriate) 3) Present Zoning 4) Iot Size 5) Applicant' s Name, Address & Phone # «A, ~Ounwa_-t, 62£j LE .(10 02,6, Cr·-' 9,6 // , 4,29- 697 8858 6) Fe~,psentative's Name, Address & Ihone # 91,---, 4 lf,k~)0-'f~y//91,gl 12-0,c-, 9/ GIL 4 %25-- -7414 ¥ i 7) Type of Application (please check all that apply): Oorditional Use Conceptual SPA Oonceptual Historic Dev. Special Review Final SPA Final Historic Dev. 8040 Greenline - Conceptual RJD 1/ Minor Historic Dev. 1 Stream Margin - Final PUD Historic Demolition Mountain View Plane Subdivision Historic Designation . Ocixic,niniumization Text/Map Amendment 00 Allotment Iat Split/Lot Line GUS E]DEption Adjustment 8) Description of histing Uses · Bimher and type of ovi=ting struchires; approocimate sq. ft.; mmber of bedroans; any previous approvals granted to the property). L~e,~ J + LL, 0101210 07l26¥-r~Lu- SMU Eti,_n, 3 ( ADIGN % Looi-k,JEU ) 9) Description of Develognent Application SLk g'rn-~*bet,UY©C~r*$ A-OAKjA 9-- a#~2~2,81~1~ 67 LOh-UO Xholl- cL'\ i,/hill (0£A_, /6/6&„~U- lA/421*- V V 10) Have you attac:hed the following? Response to Attachment 2, Minimum Submission Contents Response to Attachment 3, Specific Suinission Contents Response to Attachment 4, Review Standards for Your Application * 46 k A-]ta-cj of,rgw Aud /i®/tottct_ akt.,1-6,·e lt/*- 4 ,<logeja~ t Clute 7 2¥+024 api A r,26,caft 30)11 011 64 /3 0 - /4- caa I /ltd, c_% 0,7 Cf t 1 ~t~.04 144-_- 64- < EA 0&1. -~/,(-19 A<*lo~Ve 0% r 14 442 c o 11 . ,f)©.4-- 61 ut©4 I t dk 4 9*7 . /304-2 ¢ 9 * 4- A *i f 441 P ' E .(c 1 9 Mily -f» atek , 4 16 0 0 olcul *_ r C oot le-_ ~witut (141.-/ L/4-t (-6ML; 1 bul ijr '. / 1 - /'tfi~L 3 71 ' ~ #lioLL 9 }MO '> ~ ->91~U~741 I ·0§111 LIE - .. h ' il I;A.Of.3 2 11 6 CODiN 3 g?(i€7!k)6 10*:...ue.>lk)© ]7 yF T- EL ---f) c A• *AC E·. th &/-, J ¥49 '6'. 364' , 1 f --/ *- / pt:>Qi -515€w*CK. 3 KAI F fC, / Eak' 6©2- h / 4-6 ' 1 ' :7 \ 96-oft_ ULE(17€11 033 Lon 11 L 4,2 - 1 Folk_ 13©TM Alok)) EG Witil ift·,662- 'Tiz 're·, / 4.: 2 2 .-% '301-64 03 ik)6003 Puy.),46.5 9- 6/1A-Tot-t VE,6 M T 51 · 4 Burtmete \,61 LO 1 1 1 -1 - j COL 6 (L u.)\WL -ID Lt 1114 0.11.50- il 1 . 1 1 ,, 50/Lbiwip APPE A [9:1€ I f A r Nor B,ZEN SELECE D 6 - 2. P=5(BUL Stir 21.1 Fbra DER-¢9* iC- . 02- l.trl £ Q._ LU £ L. - 3 21 3 rt t ) C.:hL ·3> P 1 1 1 .4 1 10. * .a 1 .4--11.1.1 1|11| 1191 4,!L, 4 '1 1 11 - 7111 91 tril, 1 111 · hi 1 1.- 111 -2!. I'll Il 1 11 11111 11 111 1 Iii' 1 1 16 + '15 41 1 \- l.;*.l , 1 1/-I . 4.- ' L.'l...Ul- J 6 k»-1 11·..r DJE A-·T- AL>jN '3,9 b 'DROO 26 -7 -3 '1-12- L y· y"if -0, - 91 2*401 e=*Al ki % PROF: -V E< 2.3 I Lbi /0 0 FAC L 7 / 1.11111 1111111 111 lili lili IT'11 . 1 Auju.,6 €860('4 /50~.7.-r ·60.0&.£,4~.IT<-lut ) i - i. , 130 Ad El 'L - 6. i 9 i.,~-1 F~ Auf Ou D- 11· c.•r.. 4/ 1 1 - ·7?00@~ Ajeau t . I'J. 1;:mil- 91.-A, L L u . - .. ~ 111111 -16 119 ?f~ 920 --'21 z·,0..- ,- , W ...':.. /6.2-/4/*ela-zi//3//„431*lum:344/v.!a•cm