Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.hpc.20180711
Agenda Amended 7/10/18 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING July 11, 2018 5:00 PM City Council Meeting Room 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. 12:00 SITE VISITS A. Please meet at 333 Park Avenue, continuing on to 931 Gibson Avenue, or visit on your own. II. 4:30 INTRODUCTION A. Roll call B. Draft minutes for June 13th C. Public Comments D. Commissioner member comments E. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) F. Project Monitoring G. Staff comments H. Certificate of No Negative Effect issued 501 E. Hyman, noticed for review on this agenda, has received an administrative approval and will not be heard by HPC I. Submit public notice for agenda items J. Call-up reports K. HPC typical proceedings III. OLD BUSINESS A. None IV. 4:45 NEW BUSINESS A. 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue- Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Rescinding Designation, Designation, Setback Variation and Stream Margin Review V. 7:00 ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: #9 TYPICAL PROCEEDING- 1 HOUR, 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA ITEM, NEW BUSINESS Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) Staff presentation (5 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Applicant presentation (20 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) (5 minutes) Applicant Rebuttal Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed (5 minutes) HPC discussion (15 minutes) Motion (5 minutes) *Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met. No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of the members of the commission then present and voting. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JUNE 13, 2018 1 Commissioners in attendance: Jeffrey Halferty, Bob Blaich, Roger Moyer, Willis Pember, Scott Kendrick and Richard Lai. Absent were Nora Berko, Gretchen Greenwood and Sheri Sanzone. Staff present: Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Planner Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Jen Phelan, Deputy Planning Director APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Blaich motioned to approve the draft minutes of May 9th, 2018, Mr. Moyer seconded. All in favor, motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Mr. Pember congratulated Mr. Blaich on his 65th wedding anniversary. DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICT: None. PROJECT MONITORING: Ms. Simon said she has one thing to show Mr. Blaich after the meeting. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon said there will be a special meeting a week from tonight on Lift 1A and the next regular meeting is cancelled. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None. PUBLIC NOTICE: Ms. Bryan said she will look it over and if there is anything wrong, she will address it. CALL UPS: None. OLD BUSINESS: None. NEW BUSINESS: 304 E. Hopkins Ave. Amy Simon Ms. Simon said this is a conceptual review to discuss the demolition and replacement at 304 E. Hopkins. It was built in 1980’s and is in the commercial core district. HPC has a number of review processes to consider. Staff’s recommendation is continuation. Ms. Simon handed out a resolution so the board has a starting point to add and modify. It is not historic so there is no issue with removal and it does meet the criteria for demolition. In terms of design for the replacement building, this is a 3000-sq. ft. lot. Staff is proposing a continuation to a meeting in July. There are two sets of guidelines at play: the commercial lodging and historic district guidelines and the historic preservation guidelines. For the commercial core, there are standards that must be met and some are more flexible than others. There are a numbers of standards which staff feels have not been met and some they feel deserve variations and some they don’t. One thing that is expected is the pedestrian amenity. 25% of the site must be open to the sky and street facing. They are proposing 435 square feet at the front of the property to be provided and 324 feet to be provided as a cash in lieu payment. One of their concerns is that a one- story masonry building with a porch is not typical in any part of Aspen’s historic districts. The only flat roof with a porch like this is the Mesa Store building on Main Street. We find this to be a unique condition and is not a good reference for the downtown area. We recommend a retractable awning P1 II.B. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JUNE 13, 2018 2 instead of the wood porch structure that is being proposed. Please consider the planters at the front, which are about 5 ft. 6 deep, but has been reduced by about 1 ft. 4, but they are still rather large masonry planters that are eating into the usable space. At the front of the property, there is access to the basement. The applicant is required to provide 2nd tier space because those elements which existed in the old building have to be brought back in the new building. The applicant has proposed a basement with street access to a 2nd tier commercial area. They are concerned with a gaping hole to the basement being part of the streetscape and feel this needs restudy. The project also requires mitigation of affordable housing. There are two affordable housing units in the existing building so they must be replaced. The applicant has not proposed to do that, but they want to provide affordable housing credits instead for a different location in town. It should be considered on this property because residential use downtown is traditional and valuable. We think there should be consideration of a building with greater stature here. There are other departments who are interested in providing feedback to the applicant move towards a building permit. The building department has exiting concerns and we want you to be aware that the building department has to make an exception regarding this basement entry. Environmental health also has concerns about the onsite trash requirements. The property is being developed by the same ownership as White House tavern next door and there will be some shared space in between the two buildings. Both properties require 300 square feet of onsite trash storage area and neither have that amount so there has been a lot of discussion about a shared trash space. There is a mitigation required for parking on this site and they are not proposing any parking, but they are proposing a cash in lieu fee. Overall, they are not currently in compliance with the design standards and guidelines so HPC needs to prioritize the issues. Mr. Pember asked Ms. Simon to explain the 2nd tier access and issues with the basement access. She said the applicant has to provide a specific square footage in the form of 2nd tier space at the basement level or upper floor. It must be accessible from the street so they are doing what the code asks, but leaving it as an open stairwell, raises some design concerns. There are also egress discussions going on with the building department. It is important that the 2nd tier and the primary space at grade, not mix or bleed into each other. Mr. Halferty clarified if staff is suggesting to move the front elevation more towards Hopkins. Ms. Simon said yes, some aspect of it and it was suggested 25 to 50 percent in the memo. Typically, downtown, their preference is to have storefronts on the sidewalk, but on this block, there are two residential structures. The building next door has a little notch out of it, so we think something similar here would work, gesturing to both neighbor buildings. They would like to see the building brought forward on the east side. APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Chris Bendon of Bendon Adams representing the Hillstone Restaurant Group alongside Brian Biel, VP of Hillstone, Matthias Lenz, Sr. Project Architect with Hillstone and Hunter Fleetwood of Fleetwood/Fernandez Architects. Hillstone is the owner and operator of White House Tavern next door so first of all, they are trying to lean towards a composting option. They want to not overdo things and focus on the product they are putting forward. It’s the first project under the new code that is triggering all requirements. There are strict view plane requirements along with pedestrian amenity. Mr. Biel said we are restaurant people P2 II.B. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JUNE 13, 2018 3 who love great food and great service as well as a good design. We like to do a few things really well. He showed another project on the screen, which is located in Montecito, called the Honor Bar. It’s similar because there are a lot of historic architectural elements in this location as well. He also showed a property in Arizona, Denver and Newport Beach. We want to improve what is next door to us here in Aspen. That building hasn’t been kept up with and this should now be a reflection on White House. They want to do a complimentary restaurant to White House. It won’t upstage White House and it will fit in the community. When looking at a two-story structure, things started to get very complicated. The space required an elevator, which would have to be separated from the main space. The restaurant itself was becoming consumed with lobbies, elevators, staircases, etc., so the restaurant experience was starting to be compromised. So, we are giving up space and views, but we’re not having a lot of extra stuff. This is more of a modest size and it harkens back to the past. Mr. Bendon spoke about the existing conditions and said there are three levels. The basement was Over Easy. The ground floor was most recently Over Easy and the upper floor was the Aspen Brewery. North of the third floor are the two studio housing units. You would go through the brewery to get to them and there is also a back entrance. They looked around for design cues they should take from the area and showed on screen pictures of 308 and 316. He showed a historic picture of where White House is now located and what was next to it and said they are taking cues from that as well. He showed the Sanborn map. He showed more examples of one story buildings in the downtown area. This is a simple plan and they are not trying to outdo anyone else. It is handsome and clean and welcoming and they we are respecting 302 by revealing the corner. This was an important design decision to use traditional materials in a modern way. This is a great outdoor dining space and will be well sought-after seating while creating a more comfortable waiting area. This puts energy on the street and provides good people watching. We keep looking at more planter designs that create a boundary from the sidewalk, but in a way that doesn’t disrupt the views into the property. We looked at relocating the affordable housing units due to parking and access complexities. There is just no restaurant left over when you are done mitigating for all of these items. The affordable housing is not currently occupied and we have worked through this with APCHA and the city because the building itself is not readily occupiable. The trash conversation is ongoing and we are working with environmental health on a shared trash situation with White House. We are looking to combine services and thought we were close to having this done. 25 sq. feet is Liz Chapman’s recommendation. The city wants to reduce the trips through the alleys and we ask HPC to please allow this conversation to go on because we may arrive at a number less than 25. There was a staff comment about the opportunity for a building of a greater stature and what was the best economic use of this building. It’s not normally something we hear from the city to build bigger, etc. We feel there should be some opportunity to build a simple one-story building. This team has looked at everything and they are not a group of idiots and have explored use of the second floor and decided to pull back into what they know best. They do feel this is the best use of the parcel and they don’t want to overstuff it with too many things, which would lead to functionality issues, etc. We’d love to be able to get to a vote tonight and we’d like to have some grounding on the four major points. Are we on the right path with a one-story building and placement? Are we on track with the pedestrian amenity space? We do not want to trigger a city council review. We only have a 35-ft. wide lot and we are trying to create the boundary with the planter edge and storm water obligations. Are we on the right track with the awning? Are we on the right path with off siting the affordable housing mitigation? P3 II.B. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JUNE 13, 2018 4 Mr. Halferty mentioned that Mr. Lai has joined the meeting. Mr. Lai said he is sorry for missing the staff presentation. He asked if the operation of the new restaurant is going to be separate from the White House and Mr. Bendon said it’s entirely separate in theme, delivery and makeup. The only connection is in the back-kitchen area. But it has its own identity. Mr. Lai said it does read as a separate entity. Mr. Blaich asked if they have other Colorado restaurants. Mr. Biel said yes, two in Denver in the Cherry Creek neighborhood. Bandero is one and Hillstone is a little bit further west. Mr. Pember asked under which conditions they would have to go back to council. Mr. Bendon said there is an allowance that HPC can play with for up to 50 percent of the 25-sq. foot area. If we wanted to have less than 50 percent, we have to go to council. 740 is the 25% and we’re currently at 435. Ms. Simon said they could decrease to 377 and still not have to go to council. They could occupy 50 square feet more before they’d have to go to council or they could provide a different configuration of pedestrian amenity onsite. There are so many solutions and a variety of ways to address it. Mr. Pember asked if the planters count in that calculation and Ms. Simon said yes as well as the porch area. Mr. Pember mentioned an elevator being required if there are units on the second floor and that encumbering the operation of a restaurant. Ms. Simon said she doesn’t know if any unit requires an elevator and Mr. Lenz said he’s pretty sure it does. He said they looked at a lot of options said they are only proposing nine tables, which is extremely small, so if we add an elevator, it will only allow seven tables. This would be a tough pill to swallow and make work financially. Mr. Kendrick about the covered area and if it is to be intended to be enclosed in the winter. Mr. Bendon said it will always stay open. Mr. Biel said they had proposed to have a winter vestibule and were told not to do that, so it will be open year-round. Mr. Halferty asked if they did a retractable awning, if they would recommend keeping the same looking façade and Ms. Simon said they have some concerns about glazing on the windows. We aren’t prepared to say the awning should be the reason for redesign, but a fabric awning is a better way to meld with earlier downtown traditions. PUBLIC COMMENT: Peter Fornell Mr. Fornell thanked Hillstone for their service and desire to further it. He said consistently, HPC, has supported protecting the view planes and we need to maintain this consistency. It might be the first time he has heard about violating the view plane. The two-story building does violate it and he wouldn’t want to see the building with employees living on top of it. He said he was the creator of the housing certificate program and we have an easy solution for the certificate program. Ms. Simon noted that there is no view plane violation in the current proposal and we are not suggesting a violation. We do think there is room for a second floor and we would not pierce that height restriction. Mr. Fornell mentioned with regard to an elevator, you would have to have ADA accessibility to a unit on the second floor. P4 II.B. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JUNE 13, 2018 5 Mr. Pember said that Peter Fornell started the housing program so he is the salesman and Mr. Pember wants to make sure everyone knows this. Mr. Bendon confirmed he would be purchasing credits with Mr. Fornell. PUBLIC COMMENT: Nicholas Kuhn Mr. Kuhn said he owned the property where Matsu is and the garbage is number one, for him. It’s important that it’s enclosed because if the birds get in there and sit on the top of the building, which causes droppings on his client’s cars. He doesn’t want the construction to block his tenant’s parking either so she can get out. He wished the applicant’s luck with their project. PUBLIC COMMENT: Bob Langley Mr. Langley thinks denying the affordable housing is a mistake and that it should be kept onsite. It’s the type of housing that is needed downtown and said no one will live there for more than five years. It’s a real advantage for being here and he doesn’t think we should deny it onsite since it’s been onsite since the program began. Public comment closed. Mr. Bendon said Ms. Simon is right, they aren’t proposing a view plane violation and he does agree it could be done without violating this. There are other complexities that lead us away from that. Mr. Halferty summarized the issues for the board. Mr. Moyer said we have an opportunity that we’ve missed on one of the most huge issues. Giving up housing on any unit is a bad idea. In this instance, it won’t be the most livable spot, but we can’t allow for this to go away. He concurs with staff’s recommendations. Don’t come back to us without employee housing. In 90’s to 2000’s it was hard to get people to say no. We said no to the White House three to four times and finally, we said yes. Mr. Blaich said he agrees, in principle, with Mr. Moyer. His concern is with a consideration to quality of life and affordable housing. We didn’t go inside today, but he wished they had. We don’t know how livable those units are. Quality of life in those units are highly questionable and should be acceptable, not just some minimal space, but we have to try, if possible, to have affordable housing. Mr. Kendrick is in favor of onsite affordable housing. It would have been nice to have seen some of the exploration of the second floor and why they say it won’t work. Mr. Lai said affordable housing is the number one concern with the community. We exclude a lot of people who could work at this restaurant because of housing. The argument to have a second floor to accommodate the housing and requiring an elevator, is a concern because he likes this façade. It has a scale that we are losing in Aspen because we have so many huge buildings being built. He’s torn between affordable housing argument and the façade. He would have to disagree with the majority of colleagues because he likes the intimacy of scale. If it’s possible to have the housing towards the back, he would be all for that. Mr. Pember followed up to Mr. Lai and said we can’t build 308 anymore, as it is out of question now. It’s a piece of history and has affordable housing in that building and Matsu as well. To Mr. Fornell’s point, there is a community of affordable housing in that area. Historically, we’ve had problems with P5 II.B. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JUNE 13, 2018 6 308, so he agrees with Mr. Lai, that the scale is fine, but feels the board is pushing for affordable housing. If it’s not possible to put all of that in the back, that’s a concern. We’re comfortable with hybrids, but not sure this is a happy one, for him. The planters look entirely commercial and are really at odds with the rest of the building. It doesn’t flow from the street level. He’s staying out of the ah debate for now, but he does think a one story could work. Having exposed open air stairs is very problematic. This would be the only time you see city staff asking for more FAR. He’s fine with parking and trash and is fine with granting public amenity. He doesn’t want to see them end up at City Council. Mr. Halferty echoed some of Mr. Pember’s comments concerning front elevation. He commended the developer for doing a modest addition, but he doesn’t like the planters. He said he was on HPC when they approved Walt’s project next door, but it was an unsuccessful attempt of us putting everything into one bag. The applicants are obviously aware of the sensitivity of the view plane and the second-tier space is well done. The offsite credits are still going to create spaces for employees just somewhere else. We need to come to terms with whether we want to pursue a continuance or accept as is. Overall, he commends this plan and said it’s a difficult site. Mr. Blaich said he’s not totally against off site housing. If it can be worked into this project without affecting the total function or view plane, he would like to see it approached. He does like the scale and he doesn’t really want to see a two-story building. He does feel there is something more that could be added regarding improvement as a visual aspect and approachable for people. White House is a success and he’s putting a certain amount of faith in Hillstone. He enjoys the Denver restaurants as well. He agrees the planters are a bit too much and look like a mini Berlin wall. Mr. Lai said he respects them as restaurateurs instead of developers and likes that they are presenting themselves that way. He also doesn’t like the planters out front. MOTION: Mr. Moyer moved to continue with the points from staff, Mr. Blaich seconded. Ms. Simon noted that July 25th would be continuation date. Roll call vote: Mr. Kendrick, no; Mr. Pember, no; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Halferty, no; Mr. Blaich, no; Mr. Lai, no. MOTION: Mr. Pember moved to continue with amendment to condition #4 with the word “analyze” instead of “provide”, seconded by Mr. Halferty. Roll call vote: Mr. Blaich, yes; Mr. Pember, yes; Mr. Kendrick, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes; Mr. Lai, yes. ______________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk P6 II.B. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JUNE 13, 2018 7 P7 II.B. C:\Program Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\E95805AA-E77B- 4B93-98CA-484A1E3BF79E\14340.doc 7/5/2018 HPC PROJECT MONITORS- projects in bold are under construction Nora Berko 1102 Waters 417/421 W. Hallam 602 E. Hyman 210 S. First 530 W. Hallam 333 W. Bleeker 51 Meadows Road Bob Blaich Lot 2, 202 Monarch Subdivision 232 E. Bleeker 609 W. Smuggler 209 E. Bleeker 300 E. Hyman, Crystal Palace 128 E. Main, Sardy House Gretchen Greenwood 28 Smuggler Grove 1280 Ute 124 W. Hallam 411 E. Hyman 300 E. Hyman, Crystal Palace 101 W. Main, Molly Gibson Lodge 201 E. Main 834 W. Hallam Willis Pember 305/307 S. Mill 534 E. Cooper Jeff Halferty 540 E. Main and Holden-Marolt 980 Gibson 845 Meadows, Aspen Meadows Reception Center 232 E. Main 541 Race Alley 310/330 E. Main (Hotel Jerome) 201 E. Hyman 208 E. Main 533 E. Main Roger Moyer 500 W. Main 223 E. Hallam Richard Lai 122 W. Main Scott Kendrick 533 E. Main Sheri Sanzone 135 E. Cooper Need to assign: 134 W. Hopkins 517 E. Hopkins 422/434 E. Cooper 529-535 E. Cooper, Stein Building 420 E. Hyman 110 W. Main, Hotel Aspen 301 Lake P8 II.F. TYPICAL PROCEEDING- 1 HOUR, 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA ITEM, NEW BUSINESS Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) Staff presentation (5 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Applicant presentation (20 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) (5 minutes) Applicant rebuttal (5 minutes) Chairperson identifies the issues to be discussed (5 minutes) HPC discussion (15 minutes) Motion (5 minutes) *Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met. No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of the members of the commission then present and voting. Procedure for amending motions: A “friendly amendment” to a Motion is a request by a commissioner to the commissioner who made the Motion and to the commissioner who seconded it, to amend their Motion. If either of these two do not accept the “friendly” amendment request, the requesting commissioner may make a formal motion to amend the Motion along the lines he/she previously requested. If there is no second to the motion to amend the Motion, there is no further discussion on the motion to amend, it dies for a lack of a second; discussion and voting on the Motion may then proceed. If there is a second to the motion to amend the Motion, it can be discussed and must be voted upon before any further discussion and voting on the Motion for which the amendment was requested. If the vote is in favor of amending the Motion, discussion and voting then proceeds on the Amended Motion. If the vote on the motion to amend fails, discussion and voting on the Motion as originally proposed may then proceed. P9 II.K. Page 1 of 11 Memorandum TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director THROUGH: Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner MEETING DATE: July 11, 2018 RE: 333 Park Avenue/931 Gibson Avenue – Conceptual Major Development Review, Relocation, Rescinding Designation, Designation, Setback Variation and Stream Margin Review, PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT /OWNER: BMH Investments, LTD REPRESENTATIVE: BendonAdams LOCATION: Street Address: 333 Park Avenue & 931 Gibson Avenue Legal Description: See Resolution Exhibit Parcel Identification Number: -333 PARK PID# 2737-181-00-017 -931 GIBSON PID#2737-074-00-004 CURRENT ZONING & USE -333 Park Ave: Medium-Density Residential (R-6) Zone District -931 Gibson Ave: Moderate-Density Residential (R-15A) Zone District PROPOSED LAND USE: Residential SUMMARY: The Applicant requests HPC approval for demolition of non-historic additions to the landmarked residence on 333 Park Avenue and to relocate the remaining historic building to 931 Gibson Avenue onto a new basement with a garage addition. Applicant requests rescinding the historic designation of 333 Park Avenue and designating 931 Gibson Avenue with the newly relocated historic residence. The project includes requests for setback variations and a floor area bonus. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval for the relocation and restoration of the historic resources but continuation to restudy the connector element and site placement of the garage addition on the new site. Staff recommends approval for the floor area bonus with conditions for allocation. Stream margin review for demolition of non-historic additions will a separate administrative process. Site Locator Map (333 Park and 931 Gibson) P10 IV.A. Page 2 of 11 Background: 333 Park Avenue is a landmarked historic property with a historic Victorian era residence that was moved to this location from Main Street in the 1960s. During this relocation, the front of the historic house was oriented to face the Roaring Fork River, and several bandit units were added to the historic residence over the years. This property is approximately 10,418 sq. ft. (Gross Lot Area) and located in the Medium-Density (R-6) zone district. Prior to the submission of this Land Use Application, the applicant fulfilled the conditions specified in the Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) exemption by decommissioning the kitchens within the bandit units and obtaining approval by a field inspector. 931 Gibson Avenue is located in the R-15A zone district, and recently had an active building permit to demolish the existing house and stabilize the site. This property is approximately 15,497 sq. ft. (Gross Lot Area), but is not a designated landmark nor located in a historic district. The owners of 333 Park Avenue are currently under contract to purchase 931 Gibson Avenue as a receiving site of the historic resources. Request of HPC: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals: • Relocation (Section 26.415.090) of a designated historic landmark to a new location. HPC makes a recommendation to City Council. City Council is the final review authority. • Rescinding Designation (Section 26.415.050) of 333 Park Avenue due to the proposed relocation of the historic structure. HPC makes a recommendation to City Council. City Council is the final review authority. • Historic Designation (Section 26.415.030) of 931 Gibson Avenue due to the proposed relocation of the historic structure. HPC makes a recommendation to City Council. City Council is the final review authority. • Major Development - Conceptual Review (Section 26.415.070.D) for new development on a property in the R-15A zone district. HPC is the final review authority, with City Council having a call-up option. • Setback Variation & Floor Area Bonus (Sections 415.110.C, 26.415.110.F), for 931 Gibson for the relocated historic buildings, and 500 square foot bonus for development of area adjacent to the historic building for preservation efforts. HPC is the final review authority, with City Council having a call-up option. • Stream Margin Review (Section 26.435.040) for the demolition of non-historic addition before the relocation of the historic resource to new lot is considered development in the stream margin. This is an administrative review. Project Summary: The Applicant proposes to demolish all non-historic additions built around the historic residence at 333 Park Avenue, and relocate the historic house and historic one-story addition to 931 Gibson Avenue. The historic buildings will be relocated onto a new basement and a two-car garage addition P11 IV.A. Page 3 of 11 connected by a 5’-1” long connector. The applicant plans to fully restore the historic residence and retain the floors to keep it two-stories. The original front façade will be re-oriented to face Gibson Avenue. The applicant also requests setback variations for the relocated buildings, and a 500 sf bonus for a potential second detached structure on 931 Gibson Avenue, potentially next to the historic residence. The calculations for Table 1 and 2 are based on staff’s calculations of Net Lot Area. The applicant will need to confirm the Net Lot Area for both lots. 333 Park Avenue (Gross Lot Area: 10,418 sf; Net Lot Area: 7,177.73 sf) R-6 Maximum Existing Proposed Allowable Floor Area (Single-Family Dwelling) 3,404.78 sf (max. 3,660 sf) 3,793 sf n/a Allowable Floor Area (Duplex or Detached Dwelling) 3,788.32 sf (max. 4,080 sf) n/a n/a Number of Units 2 1 n/a Height 25’ 27-7 ¾” n/a Setbacks (front, rear, side) Front: 10’ Rear: 10’ Side: 15’ non-conforming n/a Table 1. Existing and Proposed Dimensions for 333 Park Ave. 931 Gibson Avenue (Gross Lot Area: 15,497 sf; Net Lot Area: 15,180.55 sf) R-15A Maximum (without historic property) R-15A Maximum (with historic property) Existing Proposed Allowable Floor Area Single-Family Dwelling 4,510.8 + 250 (TDR) = 4,760.8 sf (one TDR allowed) 4,510.8 + 500 (Max. Floor Area Bonus) = 5,010.8 sf n/a 2,083.3 sf (includes 125 sf for garage) Allowable Floor Area Duplex Dwelling 4,930.8 (duplex*) + 500 (TDR) = 5,430.8 sf (250 sf per unit) 4,930.8 (duplex*) + 500 (Max. Floor Area Bonus) = 5,430.8 sf n/a n/a Allowable Floor Area Detached Dwelling n/a 4,510.8** + 500 (Max. Floor Area Bonus) = 5,010.8 sf n/a Potential: Historic Dwelling: 2,083.3 sf Non-Historic Dwelling: 2,427.5 + 500 (Max. Floor Area Bonus) = 2,927.5 sf Total: 5,010.8 sf Number of Units 1 2 1 2 P12 IV.A. Page 4 of 11 Height 25’ 25’ n/a 23’-3 1/8” for Historic Dwelling 25’ for potential future Non- Historic Dwelling Setbacks (front, rear, side) Front: 25’ Rear: 10’ Rear: 5’ for garage Side: 10’ Front: 25’ Rear: 10’ Rear: 5’ for garage Side: 10’ n/a Front: 14’ Rear: 5’-9” Rear: 5’-8” for garage Side: 10’ *duplex requires 50% of units to be deed restricted (Section 26.710.060.B). **lot size less than 20,000 sf is limited to single family dwelling floor area (Section 26.710.060). Table 2. Existing and Proposed Dimensions for 931 Gibson Ave. (Note: Deck allowance is based on allowable floor area without TDRs of Floor area bonus.) The following are primary issues which staff recommends HPC review and respond to at the Conceptual hearing. Staff recommends approval with conditions to restudy the new addition. STAFF COMMENTS: Overall, staff supports the general direction of the project, specifically the proposed relocation and demolition of non-historic additions. Generally, the proposed design meets the criteria and are sensitive to the historic resource. Staff does recommend restudy of the proposed setback variations and the proposed new connector element. Below are the primary considerations for HPC, broken down by topic areas. 1. Relocation. The intent for relocation of designated properties is to preserve and maintain the historic resource in its original location. In the case of 333 Park Avenue, the historic resources were moved to this site from Main Street in 1961. The applicant indicates steep slopes, stream margin, and utility/road easements as some of the site constraints found at 333 Park for designing on-site relocation. Any relocation process would include the moving the two-story Victorian house and the one-story addition separately. The applicant’s plan for off- site relocation attempts to restore the original footprint of the two resources, as seen on the historic Sanborn Maps (Figure 1). If the structure were to remain on 333 Park, the historic relationship of the two- story Victorian home and the one-story historic addition could not be accomplished due to the site constraints, particularly the stream margin requirements for increased setbacks and a progressive height limit from the top of slope measurement. P13 IV.A. Page 5 of 11 Figure 1: Configuration Study with Sanborn Map overlay, F&M Architects. According to the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines for Relocation, it is highly discouraged to relocate a building to a new site (HP Design Guideline 9.8), however, preservation values can vary from project to project, therefore, proposals for relocation are reviewed on a case-by-case basis (HP Design Guideline 9.2). When the historic buildings moved from Main Street (originally located across the street from Paepcke Park where the old library, now home to Design Workshop, was built), the resources went from being highly visible to hardly being seen. The proposed receiving site, 931 Gibson Avenue, is a middle lot on a relatively flat grade offering clearer views of the historic resources from the street. Staff believes 931 Gibson is an appropriate location for this historic resource, as it provides improved site conditions, opportunity for visibility and the relocation will not diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of any adjacent designated properties. One important technical factor to consider is the logistical process of relocation. The Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and the criteria for Relocation found in the code require safe relocation of the historic resource by requesting a developed plan for safe relocation and specialty contractors with experience (HP Design Guideline 9.7). The applicant has identified a specialty contractor who provided a document confirming the resource would withstand another relocation. The applicant is also developing a safe relocation route involving other relevant city departments to discuss community impact and mitigation. The Parks Department has expressed concerns regarding potential damage to trees along the potential relocation route (See Exhibit B). If relocation is approved, the Parks Department has indicated a number of conditions to ensure minimal impact to the trees. A finalized relocation/repair plan meeting these requirements will be required as part of the final design review application and has been included as a condition in the Resolution. With the proposed relocation and historic designation, the underlying R-15A zone district would allow two detached residential dwellings. Without the relocation, the lot could have one detached residential dwelling. It should be noted that the same applies to 333 Park – the lot is allowed two detached dwellings with the historic resource, but only one once it is moved. P14 IV.A. Page 6 of 11 Part of the criteria for evaluating if relocation is appropriate is ensuring the relocation results in the best preservation option for the historic resource given its character and integrity. In evaluating this, staff examines the physical relocation impacts (can the structure withstand the act of relocation), as well as what the final development opportunities for the site will be. In this case, the applicant has provided documentation from an experienced house mover confirming the historic resources can physically withstand relocation. However, staff has some concerns regarding the receiving site, which could allow nearly 722.48 square feet more Floor Area on the lot and adjacent to the resource than if the structure remained on 333 Park Avenue for a detached dwelling scenario. The applicant is proposing a minimal addition to the resource, and indicates remaining Floor Area and any Floor Area Bonus would be located in a separate detached dwelling unit. Staff supports the approach and the zone district’s requirement limiting allowable floor area to that of a single family residence for detached dwelling, plus any bonus granted. Typically, relocation of a historic resource to a new site is highly discouraged (HP Design Guidelines 9.8), however, the preservation plan to restore the two historic resources, restore the original configuration and re-introduce the front façade back to its street facing orientation offer the best preservation outcomes and promotes the goal of creating awareness and appreciation for Aspen’s Victorian Heritage. Figure 2: 333 Park Avenue, 1980 Figure 3: 333 Park Avenue, 2012 2. Demolition: The applicant proposes to remove all non-historic additions, including the bandit units, before the historic resources are located to 931 Gibson Avenue. As discussed below, the applicant also proposed restoring the structure following relocation. The demolition will trigger an administrative Stream Margin review, which will be completed following HPC’s and Council’s reviews. Staff supports the proposed demolition of non-historic additions on the building. 3. Design Review: Following the relocation and restored site placement of the resources to 931 Gibson, a new above grade garage addition and connector is proposed for the rear of the historic residence. The applicant proposes to retain the floors of the Victorian house and locate the majority of bedrooms to the P15 IV.A. Page 7 of 11 new basement level. The proposed new above grade addition includes a single-story flat roof connecting element and the two-car garage accessed from Gibson Avenue. The applicant proposes to restore and repair all historic materials and fixtures. Historic openings and building features will be restored to match historic photographs/maps and a certain level of on-site investigation is expected. Figure 4: Proposed East Elevation with New Addition, F&M Architects. Figure 5: Proposed North Elevation with Historic Details, F&M Architects. The proposed garage addition is one story element with a pitched roof design that is compatible with the historic building (HP Design Guideline 10.11). The addition is towards the rear of the primary resource to minimize visual impact and does not obscure historically important architectural features (HP Design Guidelines 10.10. 10.12). Although the placement of the addition directly behind the historic resource works well from a scale and mass standpoint, this alignment impacts the length of the connector and P16 IV.A. Page 8 of 11 requires a setback variation. This property does not have an alley towards the rear which leaves the new addition fairly close to the shared property line with the adjacent property owner. (See Figure 7.) Staff supports the mass, scale and overall design of the garage addition but recommends restudy of the location related to the site context, given the size of the lot and available open areas. Figure 6: Proposed West Elevation with Historic Details, F&M Architects. The connecting element is a suggested feature when there is an addition that is taller than the historic resource, with a recommended minimum length of 10 feet (HP Design Guideline 10.9). The applicant proposes a 5’-1” long connecting element (10’-3” in height) between the historic one-story addition (18’-0 ¾” in height) and the two-car garage (20’-11 ½” in height). Staff recommends restudy of the connecting element related to its length. Given the lot size, a different configuration is achievable, which could allow a longer connecting element and better site placement conditions. 4. Setback Variations: The required front yard setback is 25 feet for this zone district. The applicant’s proposal seeks a dimensional setback variation for the front and rear yards. The rear yard setback variation request is for the new basement to extend into the setback by 4 feet 3 inches. This rear yard setback variation will not create any visual impact. The front yard setback variation request will create a condition that will not follow the typical pattern for the surrounding area. This variation will allow for the entire porch and approximately 3 feet of the front façade to project into the setback by 11 feet. The long building footprint is partly due to the restored historic configuration of the two historic resources. Although the majority of the building footprint is dictated by the restored historic configuration of the two historic resources, the site has space for alternative design options that staff recommends be further explored. P17 IV.A. Page 9 of 11 HPC may grant dimensional variations to allow projects with designated properties to have a condition that is more consistent with the historic character of the property, however, in this case staff does not support the proposed front setback variation, as the building is being relocated to a new, vacant lot, and this neighborhood has a development pattern and setback rhythm that includes adherence to the prescribed setback requirements. Additionally, there are other open areas on the lot that fall within the buildable site that the applicant could utilize. Figure 8, below, shows a site plan that illustrates the setbacks and the large developable area to the east of the structure’s proposed location. Alternatively, HPC could require the building be limited to the 25 foot setback, and allow the historic porch to be in the setback. This approach could balance the importance of visibility of the historic resource with the current neighborhood development pattern. As mentioned above, the relocation of the historic structure to and designation of 931 Gibson will increase the allowed developable units from one to two. The lot is just over 15,000 sf in size, which, in staff’s opinion, could accommodate two detached dwellings that meet setback requirements. 931 Figure 7: Property Boundaries- 931 Gibson. P18 IV.A. Page 10 of 11 Figure 8: Proposed Site Plan with Building Footprint, F&M Architects. 5. Floor Area Bonus: The applicant requests a 500 sf bonus for historic preservation efforts regarding the restoration and rehabilitation of the historic resources. The proposal commits to preservation work that meets the criteria of b.), c.), d.), e.), f.), and g.). The total proposed floor area for the project is 1,958.3 sf plus 125 sf for the garage for a total of 2,083.3 sf. The allowable floor area for a single family dwelling on this lot is 4,510.8 sf, whereas the allowable floor area for a detached dwelling is 4,930.8 sf. With the historic designation of the property, the lot will now permit two detached dwelling units, however, the allowable floor area will remain the same as a single detached residential dwelling because the lot area is less than 20,000 sf. The maximum 500 sf bonus can increase the final allowable floor area to 5,010.8 sf for both a single family residential dwelling as well as the detached residential dwelling. Staff is concerned with the increased floor area and density created by the relocation and designation of the property creating conditions that will make the scale and mass of the detached dwelling unit out of character and not compatible with the historic resource. The applicant suggested the condition for the 500 sf bonus be allocated to the detached dwelling unit and not directly to the historic resource, which staff supports. Staff also recommends that this additional floor area be allocated to subgrade to ensure the mass and scale of the new unit be compatible with the adjacent historic resource. HPC will have purview over the design of the detached dwelling unit when built, and the detached dwelling must comply with the HP P19 IV.A. Page 11 of 11 Design Guidelines, particularly 10.8 which speaks compatible of size and scale between any new additions and historic resources. Exhibits A.1-A.5 identify the applicable review criteria and design guidelines, and the staff response. Due to the complexity of the proposal, the applicant has started the discussion with Engineering, Building and Parks. Additional feedback regarding the proposal from Parks is attached as Exhibit B. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends continuation to examine the design of the connector element and placement of the garage addition and the proposed setback variations, but recommends approval for the demolition of non-historic additions, relocation, restoration, designation, as proposed and floor area bonus with conditions. A Resolution is attached if HPC desires to approve the project. Staff recommends the following conditions: 1. Restudy the connector element and alternative site placement for the new addition that may address the design of the connecter and request for setback variations. 2. Allocation of the 500 sf floor area bonus to the detached dwelling at the subgrade level. 3. Meet allowable floor area for the lot as single family dwelling, as required by the R-15A zone district. 4. Submit finalized relocation plan to HPC as part of Final review. 5. Pruning of City trees for the relocation requires a certified arborist under the supervision of the City Forester, and paid for by the applicant. (See referral comments from Parks Department.) 6. Pursue Stream Margin review for 333 Park Avenue following final HPC and City Council reviews. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A.1 – Demolition Review Criteria/Staff Findings Exhibit A.2 – Relocation Review Criteria/Staff Findings Exhibit A.3 – HPC Major Development Review Criteria/Staff Findings Exhibit A.4 – Rescinding Designation & Historic Designation Criteria/Staff Findings Exhibit A.5 – Historic Preservation Benefits Criteria/Staff Findings Exhibit B – Referral Comments (Waiting) Exhibit C – 333 Park Designation, previous approval Exhibit D – GMQS Exemption Approval Exhibit E – Land Use Application P20 IV.A. HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2018 Page 1 of 5 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, DEMOLITION, VARIATIONS, AND FLOOR AREA BONUS AND RECOMMENDING RELOCATION, RESCINDING DESIGNATION, AND DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 333 PARK AVENUE AND 931 GIBSON AVENUE, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2018 PARCEL ID: 2737-181-00-017 PARCEL ID: 2737-074-00-004 WHEREAS, the applicant, BMH Investments, LTD, represented by BendonAdams, LLC., has requested HPC approval for Conceptual Major Development, Demolition, Relocation, Rescinding Designation, Designation, Variations, and Floor Area Bonus for the property located at 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue, as legally described in Attachment A; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;” and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for approval of Demolition, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.080.A, Demolition of a Designated Property; and WHEREAS, for approval of Relocation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property; and WHEREAS, for approval of Rescinding Designation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.050, Rescinding Designation of a Designated Property; and WHEREAS, for approval of Designation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.030, Designation of a Property; and WHEREAS, the HPC may approve setback variations according to Section 26.415.110.C.1.a, Variances; and P21 IV.A. HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2018 Page 2 of 5 WHEREAS, the HPC may approve a floor area bonus according to Section 26.415.110.F, Floor area bonus; and WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on July 11, 2018. HPC considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval and recommendations with conditions by a vote of __ to __. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby approves Conceptual Major Development, a Floor Area Bonus, and Dimensional Variations, and recommends City Council approve Demolition, Relocation, and Historic Designation reviews for 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue with the following conditions: Section 1: Historic Designation and Relocation HPC recommends the historic structure at 333 Park be relocated to 931 Gibson. Following Relocation, HPC recommends rescinding the Historic Designation of 333 Park and adding Historic Designation to 931 Gibson. Section 2: Conceptual Major Development Review and Dimensional Variations A. Floor area bonus and dimensional variations are conditioned on City Council approval of relocation of the historic resources. HPC hereby approves the following dimensional variations for 931 Gibson Avenue conditioned on Council approval of the relocation of the historic structure: 1. A ____ front yard setback to allow for the historic porch and front façade to project into the front yard. 2. A _____ rear yard setback to allow the basement level living space to project into the setback. This variation shall only apply to the subgrade space. 3. A ____ square foot Floor Area bonus for restoration of the historic structure. This square footage shall be limited to the detached non-historic single-family dwelling unit permitted on the lot under the R-15A zone district, preferably sub-grade. Final location of the bonus shall be determined as part of the HPC design review for that structure, and pursuant to the Land Use Code in place at the time of application for that structure. 4. The allowable floor area for the entire 931 Gibson lot shall be limited to the single family floor area allowances of the R-15A zone district, plus the bonus outlined in the condition above. If a Historic Lot Split is pursued in the future, City Council may review and alter the single-family floor area restriction as part of that Land use Review. However, the allowable floor area shall not be restricted below the single family floor area allowances of the R-15A zone district. Section 3: HPC Major Development – Final Review A. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual P22 IV.A. HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2018 Page 3 of 5 Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. B. The application for Final Development Plan shall include a finalized relocation and repair plan, pursuant to Section 26.415.090.C.additional criteria(3). This plan shall address the comments from Parks Department in their email, dated June 28, 2018. Any pruning of City trees for the relocation of the historic resources requires a certified arborist under the supervision of the City Forester, paid for by the applicant. Section 4: Building Permit A. As part of a building permit review, the applicant will be required to submit a report from a licensed engineer, architect or housemover demonstrating that the house and outbuilding can be moved, and the method for moving and protecting the structures, must be submitted with the building permit application. In addition, the applicant must provide a bond, letter of credit or cashier’s check in the amount of $30,000 to be held by the City during the duration of the relocation process. HPC must determine whether a $15,000 deposit is also necessary for the outbuilding. B. The current building permit for 931 Gibson, Permit Number 0117.2016.ARBK shall be withdrawn within 180 days following City Council approval of relocation and historic designation. Section 5: Impact Fees The allocation of any impact fee credits for demolition work on 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue as a result of the relocation shall be determined as part of the City Council review of this project. Section 6: Stream Margin Review The applicant shall apply for a Stream Margin review for the demolition work at 333 Park Avenue as an administrative review following HPC and Council reviews, and prior to submission of a building permit for the project. Section 7: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 8: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. P23 IV.A. HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2018 Page 4 of 5 Section 9: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the ____day of ____, 2018. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: ___________________________________ _____________________________ Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Gretchen Greenwood, Chair ATTEST: _________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk P24 IV.A. HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2018 Page 5 of 5 ATTACHMENT A: Legal Description of Addresses 333 Park Avenue A tract of land situated in the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7 and in the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado. Said tract is part of the Lone Pine M.S. 1910 and the Mollie Gibson Lode, M.S. 4281 Am and is more fully described as follows: Beginning at the West Corner of Lot 1, Sunny Park Subdivision, whence corner No. 3 of said Mollie Gibson Lode bears N 43°40'00" W 146.00 feet and S 38°00'00" W 100.00 feet; thence S 46°20'00" W 10.00 feet to a point on the centerline of a road easement as shown on a plat recorded in Book 4 at Page 398 of the records of Pitkin County; thence following said centerline 16.23 feet along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 40.00 feet, the chord of which curve bears S 55°17'30" E 16.12 feet; thence S 66° 55'00" E 49.99 feet along said centerline; thence S 32° 09'58" W 13.39 feet; thence S 50° 17'00" W 130.26 feet; thence N 34° 17'00" W 59.99 feet; thence N 52° 40'00" E 34.33 feet; thence N 43°40'00" W 32.60 feet; thence N 46° 20'00" E 86.00 feet; thence S 43° 40'00" E 32.00 feet to the point of beginning. 931 Gibson Avenue Parcel 1: A Parcel of Land situated in the Southeast ¼ of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th Principal Meridian more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point whence corner No. 11 of the East Aspen Additional Townsite bears South 54°52’17” East 58.10 feet; Thence South 34°54’00” West 46.63 feet to The True Point of Beginning; Thence North 63°58’00” West 185.12 feet; Thence South 15°30’00” West 86.60 feet; Thence South 63°54’00” East 155.54 feet; Thence North 34°45’00” East 88.30 feet to The Point of Beginning. Parcel 2: A Tract of Land situated in the Sunset Lode, U.S.M.S. No. 5310, being more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly side line of said Sunset Lode whence Corner No. 10 of East Aspen Additional Townsite bears North 34°45’ East 46.63 Feet; Thence North 63° 58’ West 185.12 feet to a point on the Westerly side line of said Lode; Thence following said Westerly side line North 15°30” East 17.03; Thence South 62°54’41” East 150.27 feet; Thence 39.76 feet along the arc of a curve to the right having a radius of 295.57 feet to a point on said Easterly side; Thence following said Easterly side line South 34°45’ West 10.70 feet to The Point of Beginning. Together with any property lying Northerly of the above described property and the Southerly line of Gibson Avenue. P25 IV.A. Page 1 of 2 Exhibit A.1 Demolition Staff Findings 26.415.080 Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.415.080 - Demolition of Designated Historic Properties or Properties within a Historic District NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 26.415.080 Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community.Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, NOT MET b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, NOT MET c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or NOT MET d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. YES YES YES YES MET Review Criteria for 333 Park Ave. Section 26.415.080 - Demolition of Designated Historic Properties or Properties within a Historic District P26 IV.A. Page 2 of 2 the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. Staff Finding: The applicant proposes to demolition all non-historic additions that have been made to the historic resource. These additions do not contribute to the cultural significance of the historic property, which meets criteria d.) and meet the three additional criteria for demolition because it is not contributing. Historic Preservation Guidelines 2.6 calls for the removal of non-historic layers that cover the original material. It is important to follow through with repairing the original, underlying material. Staff finds the applicable criteria are met. P27 IV.A. Page 1 of 3 Exhibit A.2 Relocation Staff Findings 26.415.090 Relocation of designated historic properties. The intent of this Chapter is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.415.090 - Relocation of Designated Historic Properties NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 26.415.090 Relocation of designated historic properties.The intent of this Chapter is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site.However,it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or N/A 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or NOT MET 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. YES YES YES YES YES MET Review Criteria for 333 Park Ave. Section 26.415.090 -Relocation of Designated Historic Properties P28 IV.A. Page 2 of 3 with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Finding: The proposed relocation will not adversely affect the integrity related to the site because it is not located in a Historic District or in its original location. Currently there are no apparent architectural relationships between 333 Park and the closest historic residence due to irregular building placement/orientation and building alterations. The applicant has met with other city departments to discuss a route for safe relocation, provided documentation determining the historic buildings would withstand the relocation, and a receiving site has been identified. Staff finds that the proposal meets criteria 1, 2, and 4. and the additional three criteria for relocation. A more detailed relocation/repair plan will be required at Final design review. P29 IV.A. Page 3 of 3 Part of the criteria for evaluating if relocation is appropriate is ensuring the relocation results in the best preservation option for the historic resource given its character and integrity. In evaluating this, staff examines the physical relocation impacts (can the structure withstand the act of relocation), as well as what the final development opportunities for the site will be. In this case, the applicant has provided documentation from an experienced house mover confirming the resources can physically withstand relocation. However, staff has some concerns regarding the receiving site, which could allow nearly 722.48 square feet more Floor Area on the lot and adjacent to the resource than if the structure remained on 333 Park Avenue for a detached dwelling scenario. The applicant is proposing a minimal addition to the resource, and indicates remaining Floor Area and any Floor Area Bonus would be located in a separate detached dwelling unit. Staff supports the approach and the zone district’s requirement limiting allowable floor area to that of a single family residence for detached dwelling, plus any bonus granted. Typically, relocation of a historic resource to a new site is highly discouraged (HP Design Guidelines 9.8), however, the preservation plan to restore the two historic resources to their original configuration and re-introduce the front façade back to its street facing orientation helps promote the goal of creating awareness and appreciation for Aspen’s Victorian Heritage. Staff finds the applicable criteria are met, with conditions. P30 IV.A. Page 1 of 14 Exhibit A.3 Design Review: Major Conceptual Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Staff Findings 26.415.070.D Major Development. No building, structure or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.415.070 - Major Development NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 26.415.070.D Major Development.No building,structure or landscape shall be erected,constructed,enlarged,altered,repaired,relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review.An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. 1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for major development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a major development. A major development includes one or more of the following activities: a) The construction of a new structure within a historic district; and/or NOT MET b) Alterations to more than three (3) elements of a building façade including its windows, doors, roof planes or materials, exterior wall material, dormers, porches, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim; and/or NOT MET c) The expansion of a building increasing the floor area by more than two hundred and fifty (250) square feet; and/or d) Any new development that has not been determined to be minor development. 2. The procedures for the review of major development projects include a two- step process requiring approval by the HPC of a conceptual development plan and then a final development plan. If a major development project involves additional City Land Use approvals, the Community Development Director may consolidate or modify the review process accordingly, pursuant to Subsection 26.304.060.B. YES YES MET Review Criteria for 333 Park Ave. & 931 Gibson Ave. Section 26.415.070 - Major Development P31 IV.A. Page 2 of 14 Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. 1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for major development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a major development. A major development includes one or more of the following activities: a) The construction of a new structure within a historic district; and/or b) Alterations to more than three (3) elements of a building façade including its windows, doors, roof planes or materials, exterior wall material, dormers, porches, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim; and/or c) The expansion of a building increasing the floor area by more than two hundred and fifty (250) square feet; and/or d) Any new development that has not been determined to be minor development. 2. The procedures for the review of major development projects include a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a conceptual development plan and then a final development plan. If a major development project involves additional City Land Use approvals, the Community Development Director may consolidate or modify the review process accordingly, pursuant to Subsection 26.304.060.B. Staff Findings: The applicant’s proposal qualifies as a major development because it involves the increase of floor area by more than two hundred and fifty square feet, which includes an above grade addition of a connector element and two-car garage, and a full basement underneath the entire resource. Both the plans for restoration and repair of the historic resource and the design of the new addition needs to comply with the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. A design proposal for the detached addition has not been provided in this application. HPC will have purview over the design of the detached dwelling unit when built, and the design must comply with all relevant HP Design Guidelines. Staff finds all applicable criteria are not fully met and require further restudy. The following is staff’s response to the applicant’s proposal according the relevant HP Design Guidelines supporting recommendation for restudy: P32 IV.A. Page 3 of 14 Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines: 1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. • If an alley exists at the site, the new driveway must be located off it. • Tracks, gravel, light grey concrete with minimal seams, or similar materials are appropriate for driveways on Aspen Victorian properties. Response: The applicant has designed a new driveway that is accessed by the street because an alley does not exist. The garage is recessed towards the back of the property and the grass paver driveway is proposed. Appropriate materials are tracks, gravel, and concrete. Additional material review will be required. 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. • Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical of the period of significance. • Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and install them in the manner that they would have been used historically. For example on an Aspen Victorian landmark set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete. Light grey concrete, brick or red sandstone are appropriate private walkway materials for most landmarks. • The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential properties. A wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an AspenModern property. Response: A simple concrete walkway is proposed running perpendicular from the street to the historic front entry through the porch which staff finds appropriate. 1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram. • Simplicity and restraint are required. Do not overplant a site, or install a landscape which is overtextured or overly complex in relationship to the historic resource, particularly in Zone A. In Zone A, new planting shall be species that were used historically or species of similar attributes. • In areas immediately adjacent to the landmark, Zone A and Zone B, plants up 42” in height, sod, and low shrubs are often appropriate. • Contemporary planting, walls and other features are not appropriate in Zone A. A more contemporary landscape may surround new development or be located in the rear of the property, in Zone C. • Do not cover areas which were historically unpaved with hard surfaces, except for a limited patio where appropriate. • Where residential structures are being adapted to commercial use, proposals to alter the landscape will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The residential nature of the building must be honored. • In the case of a historic landmark lot split, careful consideration should be given so as not to over plant either property, or remove all evidence of the landscape characteristics from before the property was divided. P33 IV.A. Page 4 of 14 • Contemporary landscapes that highlight an AspenModern architectural style are encouraged. Response: A simple site plan has been proposed and the historic property is surrounded by a soft scape plan, however, and detailed landscape plan will be required at Final review. 1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system. • Minimize the impact of new vehicular circulation. • Minimize the visual impact of new parking. • Maintain the separation of pedestrian and vehicle which occurred historically. Response: The site plan minimizes the visual impact of required parking by recessing it further back on the property, and there is a distinction between main pedestrian entry and the vehicular path. Staff supports the proposed circulation of pedestrian towards the street facing front of the historic resource and the proposed vehicular circulation towards the rear of the property. 2.1 Preserve original building materials. • Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. • Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. • Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place. Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. • Original AspenModern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy. 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. • Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer to protect it from the elements. Brick or stone that was not historically painted shall not be painted. • If masonry that was not painted historically was given a coat of paint at some more recent time, consider removing it, using appropriate methods. • Wood should be painted, stained or natural, as appropriate to the style and history of the building. 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. • If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish. • Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. For AspenModern buildings, sometimes the replacement of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent. 2.6 Remove layers that cover the original material. • Once the non-historic siding is removed, repair the original, underlying material. P34 IV.A. Page 5 of 14 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. • Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operations, and groupings of windows. • Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them. • Preserve the original glass. If original Victorian era glass is broken, consider using restoration glass for the repair. 3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. • Enclosing a historic window is inappropriate. • Do not change the size of an original window opening. 3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original. 3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. • Changing the window opening is not permitted. • Consider restoring an original window opening that was enclosed in the past. 3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. • A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window’s casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. • The historic profile on AspenModern properties is typically minimal. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. • Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. • Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. • If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. • Previously enclosed original doors should be reopened when possible. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. • Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height. 4.7 Preserve historic hardware. • When new hardware is needed, it must be in scale with the door and appropriate to the style of the building. • On Aspen Victorian properties, conceal any modern elements such as entry key pads. 5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony. P35 IV.A. Page 6 of 14 • Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions, material and spacing of balusters. • Expanding the size of a historic porch or balcony is inappropriate. 5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details. • Removing an original balustrade, for example, is inappropriate. 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. • Repair only those features that are deteriorated. • Patch, piece-in, splice, or consolidate to repair the existing materials, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. • On AspenModern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to preserve the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily deteriorated material. 6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. • Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of replacing the disassembled material in its original configuration. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. • Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features. • If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish. 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original designs. • The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a misrepresentation of the building’s heritage. • When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence, develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and maintains similar scale, proportion and material. 6.5 Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts. • Where scars on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is no other physical or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that are similar in character to related buildings. • Using ornate materials on a building or adding new conjectural detailing for which there is no documentation is inappropriate. 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. P36 IV.A. Page 7 of 14 • Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Preserve the orientation and slope of the roof as seen from the street. • Retain and repair original and decorative roof detailing. • Where the original roof form has been altered, consider restoration. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. • Overhangs contribute to the scale and detailing of a historic resource. • AspenModern properties typically have very deep or extremely minimal overhangs that are key character defining features of the architectural style. 7.7 Preserve original roof materials. • Avoid removing historic roofing material that is in good condition. When replacement is necessary, use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as physical qualities and use a color that is similar to that seen historically. 7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original. • If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. • Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. • Flashing should be tin, lead coated copper, galvanized or painted metal and have a matte, non-reflective finish. • Design flashing, such as drip edges, so that architectural details are not obscured. • A metal roof is inappropriate for an Aspen Victorian primary home but may be appropriate for a secondary structure from that time period. • A metal roof material should have a matte, nonreflective finish and match the original seaming. Response: The applicant proposes to demolish all non-historic additions and restore the historic resources according to the guideline on preservation of original materials and finishes. Original material will not be covered and any replacement material will match the original material. The applicant has indicated that original openings and the exterior dormer features will be restored. Details including sash profiles will match original. Openings for historic one-story addition will remain simple unless historic framing reveals original details. Staff supports the applicant’s preservation efforts and attention to the guidelines dealing with restoration and preservation. The applicant will be asked to provide a repair plan for review at Final. 8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved. • When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. These include its materials, roof form, windows, doors, and architectural details. • If a secondary structure is not historically significant, then its preservation is optional. The determination of significance is based on documentation of the construction date of the outbuilding and/or physical P37 IV.A. Page 8 of 14 inspection. A secondary structure that is related to the period of significance of the primary structure will likely require preservation. Response: The applicant has identified the secondary structure for restoration. This will include the restoration of the historic building, but also the restoration of the historic foot print configuration detailed in the Sanborn maps. Staff supports this restoration effort. 8.2 Preserve a historic secondary building as a detached structure. • Any proposal to attach a secondary structure is reviewed on a case-by-case basis. • The position and orientation of the structure Response: The applicant’s proposal to locate the secondary structure directly behind the main structure is the original spatial relationship between the two resources, as indicated on the historic maps. Staff supports the restoration of this relationship on the site. 8.3 Do not add detailing or features to a secondary structure that are conjectural and not in keeping with its original character as a utilitarian structure. • Most secondary structures are basic rectangular solids, with simple finishes and no ornamentation. Response: Staff supports the applicant’s response to design simple details for unknown features unless revealed by investigative demolition or supported by historic documentation. 8.5 Preserve the original building materials, or match in kind when necessary. 8.6 Preserve original door and window openings and minimize new openings. • If an original carriage door exists, and can be made to function for automobile use, this is preferred. Staff Response: Staff supports the same level and awareness of preservation and restoration principals be applied to the secondary structure as done with the main historic house. 8.8 Adaptation of an obsolete secondary structure to a functional use is encouraged. • The reuse of any secondary structure should be sensitive so that its character is not lost. Staff Response: Staff supports the incorporation of the secondary structure as a functional space for the house. 9.2 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis • In general, on-site relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. • In a district, where numerous adjacent historic structures may exist, the way that buildings were placed on the site historically, and the open yards visible from the street are characteristics that should be respected in new development. P38 IV.A. Page 9 of 14 • Provide a figure ground study of the surrounding parcels to demonstrate the effects of a building relocation. • In some cases, the historic significance of the structure, the context of the site, the construction technique, and the architectural style may make on-site relocation too impactful to be appropriate. It must be demonstrated that on-site relocation is the best preservation alternative in order for approval to be granted. • If relocation would result in the need to reconstruct a substantial area of the original exterior surface of the building above grade, it is not an appropriate preservation option. Staff Response: Staff supports the applicant’s proposal for relocation because the resources are now located on a site that is not original and in the incorrect configuration. The relocation would only require the removal of non-historic material, and there would be no impact to any historic district. The proposal includes the relocation of the resources to a site that can restore major qualities of the resource such as street presence and original massing, alignment and configuration. 9.3 Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. • It must face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. In general, a forward movement, rather than a lateral movement is preferred. HPC will consider setback variations where appropriate. • A primary structure may not be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. • Be aware of potential restrictions against locating buildings too close to mature trees. Consult with the City Forester early in the design process. Do not relocate a building so that it becomes obscured by trees. Staff Response: Staff supports the applicant’s proposal to relocate the historic structures back to the historic orientation. The historic resources are to be located towards to front of the parcel and the addition behind the front façade. The applicant will need to continue discussions with the Parks Department regarding specific trees on the site. 9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade. • Raising the finished floor of the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable if needed to address drainage issues. A substantial change in position relative to grade is inappropriate. • Avoid making design decisions that require code related alterations which could have been avoided. In particular, consider how the relationship to grade could result in non-historic guardrails, etc. 9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. • On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a miner’s cottage where there is no evidence that one existed historically is out of character and is not allowed. • Exposed concrete or painted metal flashing are generally appropriate. • Where a stone or brick foundation existed historically, it must be replicated, ideally using stone salvaged from the original foundation as a veneer. The replacement must be similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints. P39 IV.A. Page 10 of 14 • New AspenModern foundations shall be handled on a case by case basis to ensure preservation of the design intent. 9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells. • The size of any lightwell that faces a street should be minimized. • Lightwells must be placed so that they are not immediately adjacent to character defining features, such as front porches. • Lightwells must be protected with a flat grate, rather than a railing or may not be visible from a street. • Lightwells that face a street must about the building foundation and generally may not “float” in the landscape except where they are screened, or on an AspenModern site. Staff Response: There is living space located in the subgrade level addition that has five lightwells. They will need to meeting Building and Zoning requirements. They are all located in areas that do not seem to obstruct historic details, but more information will be needed in terms of height and width. 9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such buildings. • The specific methodology to be used in relocating the structure must be approved by the HPC. • During the relocation process, panels must be mounted on the exterior of the building to protect existing openings and historic glass. Special care shall be taken to keep from damaging door and window frames and sashes in the process of covering the openings. Significant architectural details may need to be removed and securely stored until restoration. • The structure is expected to be stored on its original site during the construction process. Proposals for temporary storage on a different parcel will be considered on a case by case basis and may require special conditions of approval. • A historic resource may not be relocated outside of the City of Aspen. Staff Response: The applicant has identified a building mover that has extensive experience moving historic structures in Aspen, and has submitted a document confirming the structures being able to withstand the relocation. Additional details may be requested for the relocation plan. 9.8 Proposals to relocate a building to a new site are highly discouraged. • Permanently relocating a structure from where it was built to a new site is only allowed for special circumstances, where it is demonstrated to be the only preservation alternative. Staff Response: Relocation of historic structures to a new site is typically not recommended preservation practice, however, there are circumstances where the option may prove to be the best preservation outcome for the resource. In this situation, a case was built because the resource is not in its original location and the initial relocation compromised the historic resource altering the historic alignment, massing, and configuration. P40 IV.A. Page 11 of 14 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. • For Aspen Victorian properties, HPC generally relies on the 1904 Sanborn Fire Insurance maps to determine which portions of a building are historically significant and must be preserved. • HPC may insist on the removal of non-historic construction that is considered to be detrimental to the historic resource in any case when preservation benefits or variations are being approved. Staff Response: Staff supports the applicants proposal to remove all recent, non-historic additions. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. • A new addition must be compatible with the historic character of the primary building. • An addition must be subordinate, deferential, modest, and secondary in comparison to the architectural character of the primary building. • An addition that imitates the primary building’s historic style is not allowed. For example, a new faux Victorian detailed addition is inappropriate on an Aspen Victorian home. • An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. • Proposals on corner lots require particular attention to creating compatibility. 10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. • The historic resource must be visually dominant on the site and must be distinguishable against the addition. • The total above grade floor area of an addition may be no more than 100% of the above grade floor area of the original historic resource. All other above grade development must be completely detached. HPC may consider exceptions to this policy if two or more of the following are met: • The proposed addition is all one story. • The footprint of the new addition is closely related to the footprint of the historic resource and the proposed design is particularly sensitive to the scale and proportions of the historic resource. • The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource. • The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as existed historically. • The project is on a large lot, allowing the addition to have a significant setback from the street. • There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions that aren’t being changed. • The project is proposed as part of a voluntary AspenModern designation, or • The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc. 10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. • An addition shall be distinguishable from the historic building and still be visually compatible with historic features. P41 IV.A. Page 12 of 14 • A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material, or a modern interpretation of a historic style are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from historic construction to new construction. • Do not reference historic styles that have no basis in Aspen. • Consider these three aspects of an addition; form, materials, and fenestration. An addition must relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response. • Note that on a corner lot, departing from the form of the historic resource may not be allowed. • There is a spectrum of appropriate solutions to distinguishing new from old portions of a development. Some resources of particularly high significance or integrity may not be the right instance for a contrasting addition. 10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. • An addition that is lower than, or similar to the height of the primary building, is preferred. Staff Response: Staff supports the dominant presence of the historic resource on the new site and the historic entry as the main entrance. The proposed floor area above grade addition is smaller than the floor area of the historic house and one-story addition. Staff supports the design of a new addition that is smaller in floor area and massing compared to the historic resources, but recommends restudy of site placement to better relate to its surrounding context. 10.9 If the addition is taller than a historic building, set it back from significant façades and use a “connector” to link it to the historic building. • Only a one-story connector is allowed. • Usable space, including decks, is not allowed on top of connectors unless the connector has limited visibility and the deck is shielded with a solid parapet wall. • In all cases, the connector must attach to the historic resource underneath the eave. • The connector shall be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. • Minimize the width of the connector. Ideally, it is no more than a passage between the historic resource and addition. The connector must reveal the original building corners. The connector may not be as wide as the historic resource. • Any street-facing doors installed in the connector must be minimized in height and width and accessed by a secondary pathway. See guideline 4.1 for further information. Staff Response: Staff does not support the design of the connecting element because it is less than the minimum length and recommends restudy of the element. The connecting element is connecting the garage addition that is taller than the historic one-story addition. 10.10 Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. • Locating an addition at the front of a primary building is inappropriate. P42 IV.A. Page 13 of 14 • Additions to the side of a primary building are handled on a case-by-case basis and are approved based on site specific constraints that restrict rear additions. • Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. Staff Response: Staff supports the new addition being located towards the rear of the property, but when placed directly behind the historic alignment, the connecter becomes half the required length, the new garage addition is very close to the shared rear property line, and a dimensional variation is needed. 10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building. • A simple roof form that does not compete with the historic building is appropriate. • On Aspen Victorian properties, a flat roof may only be used on an addition to a gable roofed structure if the addition is entirely one story in height, or if the flat roofed areas are limited, but the addition is primarily a pitched roof. 10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. • Loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices, and eavelines must be avoided. Staff Response: The scale and massing of the new addition does not obscure the historic resources and the features are compatible with the historic building. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. • The front porch shall be functional, and used as the means of access to the front door. • A new porch must be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic buildings on a parcel. • Subdivide larger masses into smaller “modules” that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. • Reflect the heights and proportions that characterize the historic resource. 11.6 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its time. • Consider these three aspects of a new building; form, materials, and fenestration. A project must relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response. • When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the historic resource. • When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site and use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. • When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic resource. P43 IV.A. Page 14 of 14 11.7 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. • This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. • Overall, details shall be modest in character. P44 IV.A. Page 1 of 8 Exhibit A.4 Designation Staff Findings 26.415.050 Rescinding Designation. A. Application and review. An application for the removal of a property from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall follow the same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation described in this Chapter except that with respect to Subsection 26.415.030.C.4 an explanation shall be provided describing why the property no longer meets the criteria for designation. The HPC and City Council shall determine if sufficient evidence exists that the property no longer meets the criteria for designation and, if so, shall remove the property from the inventory. A parcel created through an historic Landmark lot split cannot be de-listed unless there is a finding that the resource which originally caused the site to be landmarked meets the criteria for removal from the historic inventory. Staff Finding: 333 Park Avenue (also known as 101 Park) was designated in 1995, Ordinance 4, Series 1995, and added to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an individual Aspen Victorian Landmark. (See Exhibit C.) This property met the criteria for designation because it contained historically significant building from the 19th century. A property will be “delisted” or removed from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures list if it no longer maintains its integrity or Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.415.050 - Rescinding Designation NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY A.Application and review.An application for the removal of a property from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall follow the same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation described in this Chapter except that with respect to Subsection 26.415.030.C.4 an explanation shall be provided describing why the property no longer meets the criteria for designation.The HPC and City Council shall determine if sufficient evidence exists that the property no longer meets the criteria for designation and,if so,shall remove the property from the inventory.A parcel created through an historic Landmark lot split cannot be de-listed unless there is a finding that the resource which originally caused the site to be landmarked meets the criteria for removal from the historic inventory. a) The property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it contains structures which can be documented as built during the 19th century, and NOT MET b) The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. NOT MET MET Review Criteria for 333 Park Ave. Section 26.415.050 - Rescinding Designation P45 IV.A. Page 2 of 8 historic significance. If the historic residential buildings located at 333 Park Ave. are removed and relocated to another site, the property will no longer meet the criteria for historic designation. The property will no longer contain a significant structure from the 19th century nor posses historical integrity. Staff finds the applicable criteria for retaining designation are not met, if relocation is approved. 26.415.030 Historic Designation. The designation of properties to an official list, that is known as the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures which is maintained by the City, is intended to provide a systematic public process to determine what buildings, areas and features of the historic built environment are of value to the community. Designation provides a means of deciding and communicating, in advance of specific issues or conflicts, what properties are in the public interest to protect. B. Aspen Victorian Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.415.030 - Historic Designation NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 26.415.030 Historic Designation.The designation of properties to an official list,that is known as the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures which is maintained by the City,is intended to provide a systematic public process to determine what buildings,areas and features of the historic built environment are of value to the community.Designation provides a means of deciding and communicating,in advance of specific issues or conflicts,what properties are in the public interest to protect. B. Aspen Victorian 1. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of Aspen Victorian, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to the criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district shall meet the criteria described below: a) The property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it contains structures which can be documented as built during the 19th century, and b) The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. YES YES MET Review Criteria for 931 Gibson Ave. Section 26.415.030 - Historic Designation P46 IV.A. Page 3 of 8 1. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of Aspen Victorian, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to the criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district shall meet the criteria described below: a) The property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it contains structures which can be documented as built during the 19th century, and b) The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. Staff Finding: If a site becomes a receiving site for historically significant resources, historic designation of the property will ensure protection and benefits for the historic resource according to the municipal code. If the historic residential buildings from 333 Park Ave. are relocated to 931 Gibson Ave., the site will meet criteria a. and b. The public score sheet, conducted by staff, records a score of 90 where 50 is the required minimum score threshold for designation. (Public score sheet attached.) Staff finds the applicable criteria for historic designation are met, and supports designating 931 Gibson Ave. if the relocation is approved. P47 IV.A. Page 4 of 8 INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- 19TH CENTURY HIGH STYLE RESIDENCE Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. Address: 931 Gibson Avenue (after relocation of historic resources to site) Total Score = 90 (minimum threshold for designation is 50) ________________________________________________________________________ • LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. 5- The structure is in its original location. 4- The structure has been moved within the original site but still maintains the original alignment and proximity to the street. 3- The structure has been moved to another site, still within the historic Aspen townsite. 0- The structure has been moved to a location which is dissimilar to the original site. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 2 ________________________________________________________________________ • DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. BUILDING FORM : 7 10- The original plan form, based on Sanborne maps or other authenticating documentation, is unaltered and there are no recent additions. 8- The structure has been expanded but the original plan form is intact and the addition(s) would meet the design guidelines. 6- The plan form has been more altered, but the addition would meet the design guidelines. 4- The structure has been expanded in a less desirable manner, but if the addition were removed, at least 50% of the building’s original walls would remain. 2- The structure has been expanded and the addition overwhelms the original structure and has destroyed more than 50% of the building’s original walls. 0- Two historic structures have been linked together and the original character of the individual structures is significantly affected. ROOF FORM : 10 10- The original roof form and the original porch roof, if one existed, are unaltered. 8- The original main roof is intact, but the porch roof, if one existed, has been altered. 6- Dormers have been added to the structure or additions have been made that alter roof form, but the changes would meet the design guidelines. P48 IV.A. Page 5 of 8 2- Alterations to the roof have been made in a less sensitive manner, not in conformance with the design guidelines. 0- Less than 50% of the original roof form remains. SCALE : 5 5- The original scale and proportions of the building are intact. 4- The building has been expanded, but the overall impression of it as a 1 ½ or 2 story structure, with a relatively small footprint, is retained. 3- The building has been expanded and the scale of the original portion is discernible. 0- The scale of the building has been negatively affected by a large addition, whose features do not reflect the scale or proportions of the historic structure. FRONT PORCH : 10 10- The front porch is not enclosed and original decorative woodwork remains, or if there was no porch historically, none has been added. 8- The front porch is enclosed but maintains an open character and some original materials. 6- The front porch is not original, but has been built in an accurate manner, per the design guidelines. 2- The front porch has been enclosed and most original materials are gone. 0- The front porch is completely gone or replaced with a porch which would not meet the design guidelines. DOORS AND WINDOWS : 9 10- The original door and window pattern is intact. 8- Less than 50% of the doors and windows are new and the original openings are intact. 2- More than 50% of the doors or windows have been added and/or some of the original opening sizes have been altered. 0- Most or all of the original door and window openings have been altered. COMPLEXITY OF DESIGN : 5 5- The overall sense of “elegance” and intricacy in design and detailing is intact. 0- Detailing has been removed and the building has a “plain” appearance. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 50)= 46 P49 IV.A. Page 6 of 8 • SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. PROXIMITY TO SIMILAR STRUCTURES : 5 5- The structure is one of a set (at least three) of buildings from the same period in the immediate area. 3- The building is part of a neighborhood that has numerous remaining buildings from the same period. 0- The building is an isolated example from the period. HISTORIC LANDSCAPE FEATURES : 3 5- A number of elements of the original landscape are in place, including historic fences, walkways, plant materials and trees, and ditches. 3- Few or no elements of the original landscape are present, but the current landscape supports the historic character of the home. 0- The current landscape significantly obscures views of the structure. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 10) = 8 • MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. EXTERIOR WOODWORK : 6 10- Most of the original woodwork, including siding, decorative shingles, trim, fascia boards, etc. remain. 6- Original siding has been replaced, but trim and other elements remain. 6- Original siding is intact but trim or other elements have been replaced. 0- All exterior materials have been removed and replaced. DOORS AND WINDOWS : 8 10- All or most of the original door and window units are intact. 8- Some window and door units have been replaced, but with generally accurate reconstructions of the originals. 6- Most of the original windows have been replaced, but with generally accurate reconstructions of the originals. 0- Windows and/or doors units have been replaced with inappropriate patterns or styles. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20) = 14 ________________________________________________________________________ P50 IV.A. Page 7 of 8 • WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. DETAILING AND ORNAMENTATION : 5 5- The original detailing is intact. 3- Detailing is discernable such that it contributes to an understanding of its stylistic category. 0- New detailing has been added that confuses the character of the original house or the original detailing is gone. 0- The detailing is gone. FINISHES : 5 5- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry unpainted. 4- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry is painted. 3- Wood surfaces are stained or modern in appearance but masonry is unpainted. 2- Wood surfaces are stained or modern in appearance and the masonry is painted. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 10) = 10 • ASSOCIATION Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. 5- The property would be generally recognizable to a person who lived in Aspen in the 19th century. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 5 ________________________________________________________________________ • BONUS POINTS UNIQUE EXAMPLE : 0 5- The style of the building is unique or one of a small group among the19th century high style homes left in Aspen. (i.e. It is Second Empire, Dutch Revival, or another unusual style.) MASONRY : 0 5- Original brick chimneys and/or stone foundation remains. 5- The structure’s primary wall material is masonry. P51 IV.A. Page 8 of 8 OUTBUILDINGS : 5 5-There are outbuildings on the property that were built during the same period as the house. PATINA/CHARACTER : 0 5- The materials have been allowed to acquire the character of age and are obviously weathered. ________________________________________________________________________ MAXIMUM NUMBER OF POINTS= 100 (and up to 20 bonus points) MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR DESIGNATION= 50 POINTS Note: Each area of the integrity analysis includes a description of the circumstances that might be found and a point assignment. However the reviewer may choose another number within the point range to more accurately reflect the specific property. P52 IV.A. Page 1 of 4 Exhibit A.5 Historic Preservation Benefits Staff Findings 26.415.110.C Setback Variations. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow: a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage; d) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.415.110.C - Setback Variations and Section 26.415.110.F - Floor Area Bonus NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 26.415.110.C Setback Variations.Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow: a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage; d) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or NOT MET b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. NOT MET MET Review Criteria for 333 Park Ave. Historic Preservation Benefits - Section 26.415.110 P53 IV.A. Page 2 of 4 a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Finding: Part of the front façade and the restored porch will project into the setback by 11 feet in a zone district which requires a 25 feet front yard setback. Although this request would create a similar front yard condition that was seen historically, this is not a typical pattern for the area. The applicant also requests a rear yard setback variation for the new basement by 4 feet 3 inches. This dimensional variation will not be visible. Although the majority of the building footprint is dictated by the restored historic configuration of the two historic resources, the site provides space for alternative design options that the applicant could further explore. Alternatively, HPC could require the building be limited to the 25 foot setback, and allow the historic porch to be in the setback. This approach could balance the importance of visibility of the historic resource with the current neighborhood development pattern. Staff does not support the applicant request for a front setback variation as proposed, as the building is being relocated to a new, vacant lot, and this neighborhood has a development pattern and setback rhythm that includes adherence to the prescribed setback requirements. Staff is also concerned with the close proximity of the new garage addition in relationship to the adjacent neighbor’s property because they share a property line. Staff finds the all applicable criteria are not met, and require further study. P54 IV.A. Page 3 of 4 26.415.110.F Floor Area Bonus. 1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; 26.415.110.F Floor Area Bonus. 1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines;NOT MET b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e) The construction materials are of the highest quality; f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained.NOT MET 2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor area. 3. The decision to grant a floor area bonus for major development projects will occur as part of the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan, pursuant to Subsection 26.415.070.D. The floor area bonus may also be approved as part of a Historic Landmark Lot Split Review. 4. Floor area bonuses are cumulative. A property shall receive no more than 500 square feet total. YES YES YES YES YES YES Review Criteria for 333 Park Ave. Historic Preservation Benefits - Section 26.415.110 P55 IV.A. Page 4 of 4 e) The construction materials are of the highest quality; f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. 2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor area. 3. The decision to grant a floor area bonus for major development projects will occur as part of the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan, pursuant to Subsection 26.415.070.D. The floor area bonus may also be approved as part of a Historic Landmark Lot Split Review. 4. Floor area bonuses are cumulative. A property shall receive no more than 500 square feet total. Staff Finding: The applicant requests for the 500 sf bonus regarding their historic preservation efforts. The total proposed floor area for the project is 2,083.3 sf. The applicant has indicated that the floor area bonus shall be allocated to a future detached single-family home on the property. This would ensure no new building mass would be attached to the preserved, relocated historic structures. Staff supports this idea of allocating the bonus to the detached building, however, still have concerns on the potential scale and mass of the new construction related to the historic resource. The applicant does commit to a proposal that outlines preservation work which meets criteria b.), c.), d.), e.), f.), and g.). Staff supports the request for a floor area bonus with the condition that any awarded square footage is not applied to the historic resource, and preferably allocated to the subgrade level of the detached dwelling to retain a compatible relationship between mass and scale as called for by the HP Design Guideline 10.8. Staff finds most of the applicable criteria are met, with conditions. P56 IV.A. From:Ian Gray To:Sarah Yoon; Justin Forman; Ben Carlsen; Denis Murray; Patrick Harris Cc:Jessica Garrow Subject:RE: HPC Referral Comments: 333 Park/931 Gibson Date:Thursday, June 28, 2018 3:00:58 PM Attachments:image001.png image005.png Hi Sarah, I made notes regarding the third route for the house moving proposal. Please find my comments below for COA assets/trees which would be affected. I have not commented on any trees on private property which might require pruning – permission for this would be required from any affected property owners prior to Parks signing off on the plan. Some of the pruning proposed falls outside of recommended best practice for both clearance above roadways and live crown ratios. For this reason and from the point of view of tree health I am generally against pursuing this project. That said, should the project be approved, any pruning of City trees would need to be undertaken by a certified arborist, under the supervision of the City Forester, and paid for by the applicant. 410 Park, corner – remove 2 smaller stems of multi-stem cottonwood and remove two low branches 414 Park, Condos – remove 4 low limbs n multi-stem cottonwood 511-512 Spruce Street – raise and reduce 4 crabapple trees 851 Gibson – raise street side of lodgepole pine 931 Gibson – 2 or 3 cottonwoods on opposite side of the street to the receiving site would need raising I am not in favor of removing any of the cottonwoods stems at 927 Gibson west of the entrance to the receiving site. The contractor indicated that it should be feasible to roll past the entrance to the east and then back the unit into the site thereby avoiding the trees at the west side of the entrance. I hope this helps clarify the Parks Department position. Best Ian Gray City Forester Parks Department 585 Cemetery Lane Aspen, CO 81611 p: 970.429.2031 ian.gray@cityofaspen.com Exhibit B - Referral Comments (Parks Department) P57 IV.A. ORDINANCE NO. 4 Series of 1995) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPENt COLORADOt IDENTIFYING AND DESIGNATING THOSE SITES ANDSTRUCTURES CONSTITUTING THE CITY OF ASPEN INVENTORY OF NON-LANDMaRK HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES (ROUND II) AS AUTHORIZED PURSUANT TO SECTION24-?-?09 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE. WHEREAS, Section 24-7-709B of the Municipal Code requires the Aspen Historic Preservation Committee (HPC) to identify and evaluate the historic sites and structures situated within the City of Aspen at least once every five (5) years, prepare an official inventory of the same, and recommend revisions thereto for adoption by the City Council; and WHEREAS, management of the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures is considered to be a vital aspectof Aspen' s historic preservation program and meets an important goal of the HPC; to foster public awareness of Aspen's preservation program and to work in harmony with the community to preserve, protect, andenhance Aspen's historic resources and unique character; and WHEREAS, HPC and Planning Staff completed field studies and inventory documentation between September, 1990 and March, 1992,with the assistance of professional consultants as contractedlby the Planning Department; and WHEREAS, the Inventory adoption process was broken down into two rounds, and through duly noticed public hearings, the Citylof Aspen adopted the 1992 Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures Round I) on June 22, 1992; EXHIBIT C - 333 PARK DESIGNATION (KNOWN AS 101 PARK) P58 IV.A. WHEREAS, in undertaking Round II of the Inventory re- evaluation, Planning Staff held public meetings on August 31, September 1, December 7, and December 8, 1994 to assist property owners in understanding the inventory re-evaluation process and historic preservation program; and WHEREAS, the HPC conducted duly noticed public hearings on September 13, 1994 and December 14, 1994, to solicit citizen and property owner input in order to assist HPC in re- evaluating the Inventory; and WHEREAS, the HPC individually reviewed and evaluated the sites and structures on the Inventory and has recommended additions,deletions, and classification changes to the Inventory; and WHEREAS, the HPC recommends that Council ratify and adopt the Inventory of Non-Landmark Historic Sites and Structures (Round II),as proposed. These properties, along with those adopted through Ordinance ~34, Series of 1992, and those structures which have been designated historic landmarks shall constitute the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures," pursuant to Section 24-7- 709 of the Municipal Code.NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT:Section 1 The properties listed in Exhibit " 1," which is attached hereto and fully incorporated herein, shall be P59 IV.A. designated as the Inventory of Non-Landmark Historic Sites and Structures (Round II).Section 2 Pursuant to the review and re-evaluation of the Inventory as conducted by the Historic Preservation Committee and Community Development Department, the following properties have been added and included in the Inventory of Non-Landmark Historic Sites and Structures (Round II) as ratified and approved herein:557Walnut, a/k/a Lots 3 and 4, Block 3, J. R. William's Addition to the City of Aspen and an adjoining metes and bounds parcel. Owner: Angeline Griffith106Park, a/k/a Lot 1, Block 2, Riverside Addition and all that part of Regent Street. Also the northerly 15'ofLots 9,10,11 and the northerly 15' of the westerly half of Lot 12, Block 2, Riverside Addition. Owner: Tim Mooney MaroonCreekBridge, a/k/a northeast 1/4 of Section 11,Township 10 South, Range 85 West ofthe 6th P. M., on the Highway 82 right-of-way. Owner: Colorado Department ofTransportationAspen Grove Cemetery, a/k/a a tract of land in Section 18, Township 10 South, Range 84West of the6th P.M. Owner: c/o RamonaMarkalunasAspen Brewery Ruins, a/k/a Lot 1, Oden Lot Split.Owner: Oden andCompany101 Puppy Smith, a/k/a a tract of landsituated in the east 1/2 of Section 12, Township 10 South, Range 85West of the 6th P.M., and in the west 1/2 of Section 12,Township 10 South, Range 84West of the 6th P.M.Owner: Aspen Center for EnvironmentalStudies720 S. Aspen, a/k/a Lots 1,2,13 and 14, Block 9, Eames Addition. P60 IV.A. Section 3 The City Council hereby finds that the following municipally owned properties possess historic value and are important to the heritage of the City and the citizens of Aspen and are hereby included in the Inventory of Non-Landmark Historic Sites and Structures (Round II) as ratified and approved herein:107 Juan Street, a/k/a Lots 3-6, Block 11, Eames Addition.Owner: Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Section 4 Pursuant to the review and re-evaluation of the Inventory as conducted by the Historic Preservation Committee and Community Development Department, the following properties are hereby deleted from the Inventory of Non-Landmark Historic Sites and Structures Round II) as ratified and approved herein due to loss of integrity or historic significance:1001E. Hyman, a/k/a Lot A, Block 34, Townsite of Aspen.Owner: Mark Tache and Christen Cooper Tache1020E. Hyman, a/k/a Molny Condominiums, Townsite of Aspen.Owner: Mickie Flanigan824E. Hyman, a/k/a Lot Q, Block 31, Townsite of Aspen.Owner: Gregory Boelens and Mary Upton305W. Hallam, a/k/a Lots F- I, Block 43, Townsite of Aspen.Owner: VEJ and AJD Partnership, LLC327 W. Hallam, a/k/a Lots A- C, Block 43, Townsite of Aspen.Owner: John andAnnScheid 610 W. Francis, a/k/a Lot P61 IV.A. 390 Spring, a/k/a Lot 1, Volk Lot Split. Owner: Eugene and Judith Seymour 230 Spring, a/k/a Lots 1 and 2 and the south part of Lot 3, Block 1, and Lot 1 and the south 1/2 of Lot 2, Block 2, Oklahoma Flats Addition. Owner: Richard Volk Revocable Trust and Denise Reich Trust 831 W. Bleeker, a/k/a Lots A-C, Block 12.Owner: Herb and Marsha Klein 801 W. Bleeker, a/k/a Lots D-J, Block 12.Owner: Savanah Limited Partnership Section 5 The following properties that were once on the Inventory, but have since been demolished no longer have historic significance,and are hereby formally removed from the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures:915 S. Mill 1018 E. Hopkins 701 W. Smuggler 113 W. Bleeker 726 W. Bleeker 517 North 300 W. Hopkins 220 Puppy Smith 855 Gibson 407 W. Hallam 801 E. Hyman 225 W. Smuggler Section 6 A map depicting the properties included in the Inventory of Non-Landmark Historic Sites and Structures (Round II) shall be prepared by the Community Development Department and made available for public inspection during regular business hours in the offices of the P62 IV.A. Section 7 This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 8 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 9 A public hearing of the ordinance shall be held on the 27th day of February, 1995, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law!by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the /~ day of 1995. John S. Bennett, Mayor Kathryn S~Koch, Sity Clerk 6 P63 IV.A. John S. Bennett, Mayor Kathryn ~. K~ch, City Clerk P64 IV.A. INVENTORY OF NON-LANDMARK HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCT~ (ROUND II) FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AS ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO. __, (SERIES OF 1995)ADDRESS LEGAL OWNER AREA RATING 920 W. Hallam Lots M-P, and Skiff West End Significant Lot M, Block 4 629 W. Smuggler Lot A and the Marolt West End SupportingW 1/2 of Lot B, Block 21 421 N. 5th Lots H and I, Hall West End Supporting Block 21 633 W. Main Lot A, Block 24 Fleisher and P65 IV.A. Address Legal Are__aOwner Raling 165 N. Park A parcel being Bibbig Smuggler Smuggler part of Lot l, Sunny Park 1280 Ute Lot 16, Callahan Powdcrhouse East Aspen Contributing Subdivision Enterprises 950 Matchless Lot 4A, Block 1 Bishop Smuggler Supporting Dunn/Bishop Exemption 107 Juan Lots 3-6, Block 11Aspen/Pitkln Shadow Mountain Contributing Barnes Addition County Housing Authodty 314 Gillespie Easterly Tract, Earger West End (Lake) ContributingC.F. Murphy and Assoc., Hallam Addition 401No~lhLo~s g-10, Block Phelps West End Contributing 33. Hallam Addition 515 Gillerpie Lots 4-6, Block Beck Wes[ End Contribtnin~ 99, Hallam Addition 330 Lake Lot 1, Hume Lot Hume WeslEnd ( Lake) Conlributi*lg Split 990 E. Hymen Hyman Avenue Gameroff, East End Suppo~ ning Victorian Pierce,Spading Trust 101 Puppy Smith Lots 4-10, Puepke West End Supporting Block 4, Lakeview Addition 330 Gillespie Lot 2, Turley Horsey West End (Lake) Contributing 240 Lake Lot 15, Wogan Wogan West End ( Lake) Contributing Lot Split 233 W. Hallam Lots A-C and BennlnghofWest End Contributing W 6.64' of Lot D, Block 50223 E. Hallam Lots C~F, Block Berko West End Suppo~xing 72 209 E. Bleeker Lots C and D, Hayes West End (Church) Supporlthg Block 73304-308 S. Galena North I/ 2 of Arcades Commercial Cure Signdicant Lois A-C. Assoc.. Ltd.Block 95 625 E. Hopkins LotG. Block 99 Bogaer~ East Aspen Support'ling Family Trust 719 E. Hopkins Lots E-F, Okie Easl Aspen Supporting Block [ 04 101 Park Northeast part Bibbig Smuggler Suppoming of Lol I, Sunny ParkSubdivision Aspen Grove A tract of land c/ o Markalunas Smuggler SigniEaant Cemetery in Section 18 Township 10South, Range 84 West of the6thP.M.720 S. Aspen Lots 1, 2,13&14, Holland House Shadow P66 IV.A. Maroon Creek Northeast 1/4 of Colorado Depl. Aspen vicinity Significant Bridge Section 1 l, of Transportation Township 10 South the 6th P.M. on right- of-way Aspen Brewery Lot 1, eden eden and Co. Smuggler Supporting 557 WalnutLots 3&4, Gdffith Smuggler Significant Block3, J. R.Williams Addition to the City of adjoining metes and hounds parcel 106 Park Lot 1, Block 2 Mooney Smuggler Supporting Riverside Addition and all that part of Regent St. lying southerly of and adjacent to said Lot I projected southerly line of Regent St. Also the northerly 15' ofLots9,10,11 & the N 15'15' of theW 1/2 of Lot 12, Block 2 Riverside Addition 935 King A tract of land Kappelli Smuggler Supporting in Section 7-10-84, being a part of tract 40, East Aspen AdditionandSunsetLode, U.S.M.S. No. 5310, and alsopaCtof Lots 1,2&3,Block 5and part of Lots3&4, Block 6,and a part of P67 IV.A. P68 IV.A. P69 IV.A. 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM June 4, 2018 Aspen Historic Preservation Commission c/o Ms. Sarah Yoon City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue Applications Dear Commission and Ms. Yoon: Please accept our application for Historic Designation, Delisting, Demolition, Relocation, Major Development, a setback variance, and the 500 sf FAR Bonus. This application encompasses two properties: 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue. The proposal is to relocate the historic landmark located in its 1960s unoriginal location at 333 Park Avenue to a more prominent location at 931 Gibson meets the goals of the historic preservation program and is the best historic preservation approach for the compromised landmark. Background The building located at 333 Park Avenue was originally located at 112/114 East Main Street. The two story Victorian style residence was built in 1889 by M.C. Jacobs. The building has an interesting history that is documented in Exhibit A. While located at 112/114 East Main Street, the building was initially a residence Figure 1: circa 1890s Main Street. Page 1 of 101P70 IV.A. 333 Park and 931 Gibson HPC Review and was later operated as the Columbine Lodge by Mabel Beckerman in the 1950s. In the fall of 1961, Mabel ran an advertisement in the Aspen Times to sell the buildings on the property. The land had been purchased by Fritz Benedict to construct the Herbert Bayer and Fritz Benedict designed Pitkin County Library (currently Design Workshop). Dieter Bibbig and his mother Gertrude purchased the structures and moved them to their riverfront property at 333 Park Avenue. The front of the Victorian was positioned away from the road to face the Roaring Fork River and Aspen Mountain and the small one story addition shown below was moved to the side of the 333 Park property. Gertrude Bibbig operated a day care out of the house. Until recently, Dieter rented the property. In 2017 Dieter sold the home to the Hendry family. 333 Park property The 333 Park property is located off of Park Avenue on an access easement that provides vehicular access to three other properties. The landmark has various additions; however many of the architectural details and materials, including windows, the roof, front porch, etc. are intact. The 333 Park property has numerous site constraints that severely compromise the necessary historic preservation and restoration. The property is 10,418 sf in size; however the actual lot size is about 6,000 sf after deducting slopes, areas below the high water line and the access easement. The most restrictive requirement is the Stream Margin area that limits development height and location away from the river. Setback requirements for a 10,400 sf lot in the R-6 Zone District, the access easement running through the front yard, and a fire truck turnaround easement became challenges to historic preservation that were not able to be overcome on the 333 Park site. The drawing set in Exhibit Q highlights 4 different options (Option A – D) that the design team explored before proposing relocation. All options show the intrusions into other community goals such as stream margin height limitation or required setbacks from the edge of pavement. Historic Preservation Approach Over the past year, the Hendry family and their design team have looked at countless iterations for the 333 Park property. The top priority for the Hendrys is to restore the landmark and the one story historic addition in its original configuration. Figure 2: Columbine Lodge Figure 4: Aspen Times advertisement Figure 3: Photograph in Aspen Times of one story historic addition. Figure 5: November 1964. Photograph taken from Roaring Fork River facing Red Mountain. Page 2 of 101P71 IV.A. 333 Park and 931 Gibson HPC Review Turning the landmark 180 degrees to place the historic front facade perpendicular to the “street” (the street is really an access easement) did not allow enough space for the one story historic addition to be placed in its original location behind the landmark (sheets A04 & A05 in Exhibit Q). The design team turned the landmark and addition 110 degrees and also 90 degrees to fit the historic buildings onto the parcel, with setback variances (sheets A06 & A07 in Exhibit Q); however the building was facing the side of the neighboring building and the “street” paralleled the side of the landmark which adversely affected the context of the landmark and the site. The 110 degree and 90 degree options did not accommodate a garage without setback variances (a garage is not shown on sheets A06 & A07). Parking is very limited in this neighborhood, so adequate parking that meets Code requirements (2 onsite spaces) is imperative. The Hendrys are committed to the proper restoration of these buildings, which was impossible at 333 Park, and began to look for a different property that was more aligned with the landmark’s original location on East Main Street and highlighted the historic resources in a way that contributed to the streetscape. Requesting relocation of the historic resources to a different lot was not an easy decision – the Hendrys and the design team discussed the concept for months before meeting with Planning Staff and vetting the idea. When looking for a receiver lot, the goal was always to find a lot with frontage similar to its original location in order to meet best historic preservation practices. As stated in the Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines: The Hendrys found 931 Gibson Avenue, which is just down the street from Park Avenue, and is a rectangular lot with street frontage that is similar to East Main Street and aligns with the Design Guidelines. 931 Gibson has a 1980s single family home that would be demolished to accommodate the landmark. The City is currently processing a building permit to demolish the existing building and to construct a new single family home that was submitted by the current owner of 931 Gibson. This permit would be abandoned if the proposed relocation of the landmark is approved. The landmark and one story historic addition fit on the 931 property in their original configuration with the one story addition directly behind the two story landmark. The orientation of the landmark to the “The character of a historic structure is greatly influenced by the surrounding framework of streets and public spaces, the physical characteristics of the specific site, and the way in which the historic resource is situated on the lot.” Figure 6 – 9: Existing photographs of 333 Park landmark, and historic aerial photograph of landmark on Main St. Page 3 of 101P72 IV.A. 333 Park and 931 Gibson HPC Review street matches its original location on Main Street. A full basement, small connector and a garage are proposed as new construction for the landmark after it is relocated to 931 Gibson. The primary focus is to restore the landmark and addition to its original appearance using photographs included in Exhibit A and information uncovered during construction. The Hendrys are under contract to purchase 931 Gibson pending the ability to relocate 333 Park to 931 Gibson. There are numerous land use reviews associated with this request; however there are less requests than would have been associated with the landmark development if it stayed at 333 Park. Below please find a brief summary of the land use requests – detailed criteria for review are addressed in the exhibits. Historic Designation/Relocation/ Demolition of non-historic additions (Exhibits A, B & C) The request to relocate the two historic resources, after removing the non-historic additions, involves shifting the historic designation from 333 Park to 931 Gibson to guarantee that the property containing the landmarks is protected. The City requires the application include a request to “delist” 333 Park and to “list” 931 Gibson as part of the relocation request to track the designated parcel with the designated landmarks. This is similar to the request HPC reviewed for the Zupancis buildings on Main Street that were transferred to Holden Marolt Open Space except the Zupancis buildings were in their original location. The Hendrys interest in historic preservation was clear when they requested a comprehensive history be researched for the landmark after purchasing the property last summer. The history is included as Exhibit A and is responsible for the discovery of the one story historic addition that is currently engulfed in non- historic additions. All non-historic additions are proposed to be demolished prior to relocation of the resources. The design team has met with multiple city departments and Bill Bailey to discuss the preferred route to move the buildings to Gibson. The buildings were already moved once and Bill is confident that they can withstand another relocation (see letter included as Exhibit C). There are two different routes for the City to consider, both of which will ensure safe delivery of the resources. The design team will continue to vet the two different routes to determine the best pathway for the historic resources after relocation is approved by HPC and City Council. FAR Bonus (Exhibit D) In the future, the Hendrys plan to build a detached single family home adjacent to the restored landmark that will be subject to HPC’s Design Guidelines for new construction on a landmark lot. This achieves many historic preservation goals including removing development pressure from the landmark to a completely detached building, limiting new construction to the landmark to only the required two car garage (and 55 sf connector), placing all additional square footage in the basement with limited lightwells, and adding another residence adjacent to the landmark which reflects the traditional development pattern and context original to the resource. The extensive restoration work and limiting new construction to the basement and the required 2 car garage qualify for a request of the 500 sf FAR Bonus. The Bonus is not needed for the landmark or proposed project; however since the restoration work is considered as part of this application, we request the 500 sf FAR Bonus with the condition that it is applied to the adjacent detached single family residence only (which will be applied for in the future). Page 4 of 101P73 IV.A. 333 Park and 931 Gibson HPC Review Conceptual Major Development – two car garage (Exhibit E) The Hendrys request a two car garage to meet City Code requirements for off-street parking. In addition a full basement with lightwells for bedroom egress is proposed. A total of approximately 555 sf of new above grade construction (55 sf connector and 500 sf garage) is proposed to be added to the landmark. And the original second floor remains intact. The orientation of the garage is similar to the barn shown on the Sanborn Maps and the 1893 bird’s eye view rendering when the landmark was on Main Street. Setback variance (Exhibit F) A front yard setback variance is requested for the landmark in its new location at 931 Gibson to ensure that the landmark is in a visible and prominent location that is similar to its original relationship to the street. 14 feet of front yard measured form the property line to the steps of the front porch is proposed. 931 Gibson is within the R-15A Zone District which specifies a front setback of 25 feet. The required rear yard setback is 5 feet for garage and 10 feet for living space. The garage complies with the 5 feet rear yard requirement; however, the basement extends about 4’3” into the required 10 feet rear setback to accommodate a small 5 feet connector between the one story historic addition and the garage and to push all new living space subgrade as recommended in the Design Guidelines. In its original location on Main Street, the landmark was probably about 10 feet back from the street, and we felt it was important to maintain this relationship of the building to the street without creating a situation along Gibson that was incompatible with surrounding development. Another reason for the setback variance request is to accommodate the required parking on the property behind the landmark. There is no alley access, and two parking spaces are required by Code. A two car garage is proposed behind the landmark with a one story connection between the one story garage and the one story historic addition. Stream Margin Review (Exhibit G) The Land Use Code considers demolition to be “development” which means that stream margin review is triggered for the vacant 333 Park lot after the landmark is relocated and the non-historic additions are removed. The Hendrys plan to develop a single family home on the site that complies with the Code after the property has been delisted from the inventory. The new home will most likely be subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Commission due to its proximity to the Roaring Fork River. To summarize the proposal requests the following reviews: Figure 10: 1893 Bird’s Eye view map Figure 11: 1893 Sanborn Map Page 5 of 101P74 IV.A. 333 Park and 931 Gibson HPC Review • Exhibit A - Designation and Delisting to move the landmark to 931 Gibson & to remove the vacant 333 Park from the inventory • Exhibit B - Demolition of non-historic additions • Exhibit C - Relocation • Exhibit D - 500 sf FAR Bonus • Exhibit E - Conceptual Major Development for a two car garage • Exhibit F - Setback Variances • Exhibit G - Stream Margin Review We look forward to presenting this project to the Commission as we feel strongly this is the best preservation solution for this important landmark. We explored doing a worksession with HPC prior to submitting this land use application; however the Code requirements for a worksession are almost identical to a full land use application without a binding decision. Considering the time sensitive nature of the pending purchase contract, we decided that it was best to proceed through the formal binding review process with HPC at this time. We would like to schedule a site visit with HPC to the 333 Park and 931 Gibson properties prior to the first HPC hearing. Please contact me if you have any questions or would like more information to complete your review. sara@bendonadams.com or 970-925-2855. Kind Regards, Kind Regards, Sara Adams, AICP Principal BendonAdams, LLC Attachments: A - Designation and Delisting to move the landmark to 931 Gibson & to remove the vacant 333 Park from the inventory B - Demolition of non-historic additions C - Relocation (including letter from Bill Bailey confirming ability to relocate structures) D - 500 sf FAR Bonus E - Conceptual Major Development for a two car garage F - Setback Variances G - Stream Margin Review H – Agreement to pay form I - Land Use Application and Dimensional Requirements Form. J – Pre-Application conference summary K - Disclosure of ownership – both properties L - Authorization to submit – owner of 931 gibson M - Authorization to represent N - HOA compliance form – both properties O - List of owners within 300 ft. – both properties P - Vicinity Map Q - Drawings, Site plan, Survey, Renderings R - Streetscape Page 6 of 101P75 IV.A. Exhibit A Transfer historic designation listing from 333 Park to 931 Gibson Exhibit A – Historic Designation of 931 Gibson Ave. & Rescinding Designation of 333 Park Ave. The request to transfer the historic resources from 333 Park to 931 Gibson requires a determination that that 931 Gibson is added to the Historic Inventory and subsequently that 333 Park is rescinded from the Historic Inventory. Clearly, after the landmark is removed from the 333 Park Avenue property, 333 Park will have no historic significance as the property will be vacant. Excerpts from the Land Use Code are provided below: 26.415.030. Designation of historic properties. The designation of properties to an official list, that is known as the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures which is maintained by the City, is intended to provide a systematic public process to determine what buildings, areas and features of the historic built environment are of value to the community. Designation provides a means of deciding and communicating, in advance of specific issues or conflicts, what properties are in the public interest to protect. B. Aspen Victorian 1. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of Aspen Victorian, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to the criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district shall meet the criteria described below: a) The property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it contains structures which can be documented as built during the 19th century, and b) The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. 26.415.050. Rescinding designation. A. Application and review. An application for the removal of a property from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall follow the same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation described in this Chapter except that with respect to Subsection 26.415.030.C.4 an explanation shall be provided describing why the property no longer meets the criteria for designation. The HPC and City Council shall determine if sufficient evidence exists that the property no longer meets the criteria for designation and, if so, shall remove the property from the inventory. A parcel created through an historic Landmark lot split cannot be de-listed unless there is a finding that the resource which originally caused the site to be landmarked meets the criteria for removal from the historic inventory. Response: It is common practice throughout the country to designate the parcel that contains the historic resource(s) as historic, rather than just designating only the building because preserving both a sense of place, context, and setting is oftentimes just as important as preserving the actual building. The historic resources at 333 Park were relocated in 1961 from Main Street to Park Avenue, the two story building Page 7 of 101P76 IV.A. Exhibit A Transfer historic designation listing from 333 Park to 931 Gibson was turned 180 degrees to face the Roaring Fork River with views of Aspen Mountain, and the one story addition was turned 90 degrees and engulfed in new construction. While the buildings on the 333 Park property are historic and contribute to Aspen’s 19th century heritage, the 333 Park property does not contribute to the sense of place or setting. The atypical 333 Park property with steep slopes and river frontage detracts from the historic significance of the landmark which originally faced Main Street, was located on a relatively flat rectangular townsite lot with the one story historic addition at the rear and a barn along the alley. In its current location at 333 Park, the landmark is barely visible from Park Avenue (the heavily altered rear of the landmark faces the driveway) and is accessed from a vehicular access easement. The original front porch is no longer at grade, but is cantilevered above a basement walkout due to the steep slopes. The property at 931 Gibson Street is located in a residential neighborhood with other 19th century landmarks (indicated on map below with “H”) and is a mostly rectangular lot with direct street frontage. The integrity of setting would be exponentially increased in the 931 location as opposed to its current location at 333 Park. The landmark building is heavily altered, as shown in Exhibit Q (sheet A03), but retains enough evidence of historic characteristics to be properly restored. In addition the photographs included in the historic report below inform accurate restoration, including restoration of the building’s relationship to grade. In addition, the overall integrity of the resource is increased by restoring the one story historic addition to its original configuration and appearance with a side porch (based on the Sanborn Map footprint). There are only a handful of original one story historic additions left in town and it is imperative that we preserve the few remaining resources. In addition to restoring the two story Victorian relationship to grade, architectural details, original configuration and appearance of the addition, the visibility of the landmark at Gibson provides public benefit and enhances the historic preservation program. In its current location and condition at 333 Park, the building scores a 68 out of 100 on the integrity scoring sheets. In the proposed location at 931 with the proposed restoration, the building scores a 93. The level of integrity is severely compromised at 333 Park; however with the proposed relocation and restoration, the level of integrity is significantly increased to clearly meet the criteria for listing on the Historic Inventory. In addition, the 19th Century Victorian relates to the context of the neighborhood which includes many landmarks of the same time period. Top to bottom: Landmark on Main Street, Sanborn Map, current view of landmark from Park Ave., front porch overhanging slope and facing river, vicinity map to show access easement with arrow. Page 8 of 101P77 IV.A. Exhibit A Transfer historic designation listing from 333 Park to 931 Gibson A complete history of the buildings that demonstrate compliance with the review criterion A for designation is found on the preceding pages. Criterion B is met for the 931 Gibson property as it restores a similar context to Main Street with surrounding historic landmarks, a typical lot shape, and direct street frontage. The integrity score will be exponentially increased from 68 to 93 with the proposed relocation and restoration. After the buildings are relocated, 333 Park will not meet either criteria for listing on the Historic Inventory as it will be a vacant site. H H H H H H H H H H H H Page 9 of 101P78 IV.A. 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM History The property located at 333 Park Avenue was originally located at 112/114 East Main Street, Lot N, Block 66. The two-story Victorian was built in 1889 and is included in the September 1890 Sanborn Map shown below. M.C. Jacobs owned the property when the building was constructed. Figure 1: (top row, left to right)1890 Sanborn Map, 1893 Sanborn Map, (bottom row left to right)1898 Sanborn Map, 1904 Sanborn Map. Figure 2: 1890-1899 close up of Aspen aerial photograph. Page 10 of 101P79 IV.A. C.H. Jacobs While M.C. Jacobs is listed as the owner between 1888 and 1892, C.H. Jacobs lived in the home with his family between 1889 and 1892 1. The Aspen Weekly provides an account of a birthday party held at their home in November 1889. The Jacobs had at least two children – Dale Osman Jacobs, the first baby born in Aspen in 1881 2, and Edna Irene Jacobs born in 1883.3 Jacobs was a miner associated with many local mines and many notable people including Durant, Tabor, McPherson, Catherine Brown and Devereux. He was president of the School Board in 1881 4 and Pitkin County Treasurer in 1884. Jacobs, A. McPherson and James McPherson comprised the firm C.H. Jacobs & Co.5 Jacobs was also recognized and thanked for his work in bringing the first telegraph line to Aspen from Glenwood Springs as part of the Aspen and Glenwood Telegraph and Telephone Company in 1886 6 In the fall of 1887, C. H. Jacobs constructed a building in the middle of East Bleeker Street after receiving information that its was an abandoned street.7 He was ordered to remove the building within 10 days. In 1888 C.H. Jacobs sold the property where the Hotel Jerome sits to Mr. Phillips and Mr. Byxbee for $10,000.8 He and his family lived on a ranch in Sopris Creek. They traveled to Denver and Glenwood Springs frequently and returned to Aspen in 1889 to build a home on Main Street.9 According to an article in the Aspen Weekly Times in June 8, 1889, the architect and builder of the residences was Mr. Z. H. Bowles. The building is described as “a Queen Anne cottage, modernized somewhat on the Eastlake style of architecture.”10 The 1 The Aspen directories from 1889, 1890, and 1892 list 114 E. Main as the residence of C.H. Jacobs. 2 Rocky Mountain Sun. April 8, 1882. 2. 3 The Aspen Evening Chronicle. June 12, 1890. 4. “Birthday Party” 4 The Aspen Times. November 12, 1881. 2. “Rules: Governing the School.” 5 The Aspen Times. April 23, 1881. 1. 6 The Aspen Daily Times. April 12, 1886. “To Glenwood by Telegraph.” 7 The Aspen Daily Times. October 18, 1887. 1. “Council Meeting.” And Aspen Daily Times. January 17, 1888. 1. “Council Meeting.” 8 Rocky Mountain Sun. October 13, 1888. 2. “The New Hotel.” 9 Rocky Mountain Sun. May 25, 1889. 2. “Personal.” 10 The Aspen Weekly Times. June 8, 1889, 1. “Jacobs Residence” Figure 3: 1893 bird’s eye view rendering. The outbuildings look attached due to the perspective. Only the single story gable addition was attached to the main house. Page 11 of 101P80 IV.A. home was completed in September 1889.11 By 1892 he sold his popular Jerome Stables 12 and the family home to Mrs. Nevitt 13, and moved his family due to poor health of Mrs. C. H. Jacobs to the Pacific coast.14 S.L. Nevitt Edward Nevitt and Carey Nevitt are listed in the Aspen Directory as living in the home in 1893. Ed Nevitt opened a news and cigar stand in 1894 next to the Red Onion (formerly the Red Brick Saloon).15 Ed was a member of the local Elks Lodge and is pictured below (third row from the front far left). Figure 4: Local Elks Lodge. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society. 11 Rocky Mountain Sun. September 7, 1889. 3. “Locals.” 12 Aspen Daily Leader. February 28, 1892. 4 “The Jerome Stables are Sold” 13 Aspen Daily Times. May 24, 1892. 4. “Purely Personal.” 14 The Aspen Daily Times. February 28, 1892. 4 “Change of Firm.” 15 The Aspen Daily Times. September 27, 1894. 4 “Round About Town” Page 12 of 101P81 IV.A. According to the local directories and newspapers, George Runtz lived at the home in 1906 and Elsie Pierce lived at the home until 1939. Mabel Beckerman Mabel Beckerman moved to Aspen with her husband John in the late 1930s. They bought the house shortly thereafter and resided there until 10 years after John’s death in 1952. Mabel was active in local social circles and was listed in the paper as participating in the PEO Flower arrangement competitions 16 and as the President of the Ladies Auxiliary in 1951 17. After John’s death Mabel ran the Columbine Lodge, renting out rooms until 1961. She placed an advertisement in the Aspen Times in the fall of 1961 to sell the buildings 18. Tony Vagneur wrote of Mabel Beckerman that she “ran her own boarding house” and “on summer evenings she’d sit out on the porch, sipping whiskey and smoking cigarettes, occasionally hollering at a 9- or 10- year old kid running by, wondering if he had time for a smoke and a shot. Damned right he did.”19 Vagneur described her as “a slight, 70ish woman in a yellow dress who sat out on her porch most every afternoon, with her short, brown hair tied up in a knot on top of her head. Taking in the last vestiges of the day, she would be smoking a cigarette and sipping a glass of whiskey. Mabel had a three-story Victorian, the perfect mini hotel for seasonal ski bums, right where Design Workshop is currently located. From her perch, she could throw a colorful epithet at anyone 16 The Aspen Times. Thursday September 1, 1949. “PEO Announces Prize Winners” 17 The Aspen Times. Thursday February 15, 1951. “Ladies Auxiliary F.O.E” 18 The Aspen Times. September 8, 1961. 11. 19 Vagneur, Tony. Aspen Times. May 16, 2008. “The old women of the West End.” Figure 6: Photo of Columbine Lodge. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society. Figure 5: Mabel Beckerman on the front porch of the Columbine Lodge. Photo by Mary Esbaugh Hayes. Page 13 of 101P82 IV.A. who passed by and usually did. Sometimes, if she was feeling good, she’d share her afternoon libations with a scrawny kid of 9 or 10. Once her house was gone, Mabel wasn’t far behind.”20 20 Vagneur, Tony. Aspen Times. February 18, 2005. “Aspen’s ladies of reminiscence.” Figure 7: Advertisement on September 8, 1961 in the Aspen Times. Figure 8: Aspen Times May 18, 1962 photograph of home being moved. Figure 9: Undated photograph of front porch of Columbine Lodge. Mabel Beckerman is on the left. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society. Page 14 of 101P83 IV.A. Figure 10: 1953 photograph of car race down Main Street. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society. Bibbig Family In the early 1960s, the land was purchased and Mabel placed an advertisement to sell the home relocate it offsite. 1960s Clerk and Recorder records are unclear as to who purchased the land and who purchased the building; however, Dieter Bibbig said that he bought the house from Fritz Benedict. The Bibbig family purchased the structure and moved them to their current location at 333 Park Avenue. The photo shown in Figure 7 is thought to be the rear addition to the residence that is outlined on the Sanborne Maps. It Page 15 of 101P84 IV.A. appears that addition was moved to 333 Park and incorporated into the bandit units on the property. The main two story residence was turned 180 degrees to face the front façade toward the river. The home was placed on a full height walkout basement and the front porch was propped up to accommodate the sloped site. Many of the original features of the building, including the tin roof, interior stairway, pocket doors, hardware, front porch, stained glass window, and one dormer are intact. Dieter Bibbig purchased the home from Fritz Benedict. He immigrated from Kassel Germany in 1956 and initially worked at the Hotel Jerome. The Jerome sponsored his immigration papers which allowed him to stay in Aspen with his mother. Dieter taught skiing and flying gliders at the local airport. A 1959 Aspen Daily Times article headlines “Local Pilot Flies Small Plane NY-Aspen, Starts Business.”21 Dieter was president of Continental Aircraft Imports and marketed German-made aircraft throughout the west. Dieter sponsored his sister Inge when she immigrated to Aspen; however in 1959 she married and Englishman, Michael Brew and eventually moved to England with her husband and two children. Dieter’s mother Gertrude Bibbig ran childcare out of the Park Avenue house. An advertisement from the Aspen Daily Times in 1962 is shown at right.22 Dieter owned the home until 2017 when he sold it to the Hendry family. 21 The Aspen Times, November 19, 1959. “Local Pilot Flies Small Plane NY – Aspen, Starts Business.” 2. 22 The Aspen Daily Times, September 7, 1962. Advertisement, 3. Figure 31: 1962 Advertisement for childcare at 333 Park. Figure 42: Dieter Bibbig ski jouring behind a Volkswagon Beetle on Durant Avenue. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society. Figure 23: 1980s photograph of Dieter Bibbig (far back, center)and friends. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society. Page 16 of 101P85 IV.A. Figure 14: November 1964. Photograph taken from Roaring Fork River facing Red Mountain. Courtesy Dieter Bibbig. Figure 15: 333 Park Avenue. Courtesy Dieter Bibbig. Figure 16: 333 Park Avenue. Courtesy Dieter Bibbig. Page 17 of 101P86 IV.A. Title History 23: Date Grantor Grantee Location: Book/Pg type 1884 Annie Krapf(sp?) Alexander Allen 14/188 Land 1886 Alexander Allen C.W. Brooks 38/291 Land 1887 C. W. Brooks Alexander Allen 5/487 Land 1887 Alexander Allen John Killam 47/67 Land 1888 John Killam Alexander Allen 54/165 Land 1888 Alexander Allen Ryland Bowles 3/289 Land 1888 Ryland Bowles M.C. Jacobs 3/344 Land 1892 M. C. Jacobs S.L. Nevitt 119/53 Improvements 1892 S.L. Nevitt C.H. Jacobs 82/335 Improvements Unable to find transfer from Jacobs back to Nevitt 1912 S.L. Nevitt Nannie Phillips 147/406 Improvements 1942 Nannie Phillips Mabel Beckerman 170/50 Improvements 1960 Mabel Beckerman Public Trustee 190/532 Improvements 1961 Public Trustee Mabel Beckerman 195/224 Improvements 1962 Dieter Bibbig purchased the building from Fritz Benedict 24. The land was developed as the new home of the Pitkin County Library in a building designed by Benedict and Herbert Bayer. 23 Title history is based on Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder documents. Discrepancies were found between the recorded documents and the newspaper accounts. 24 Firsthand account by Dieter Bibbig, interview September 2017. Page 18 of 101P87 IV.A. Exhibit A Integrity Score Sheet INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- 19TH CENTURY HIGH STYLE RESIDENCE Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. 333 Park location is black 931 Gibson location is blue _______________________________________________________________________ • LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. 5- The structure is in its original location. 4- The structure has been moved within the original site but still maintains the original alignment and proximity to the street. 3- The structure has been moved to another site, still within the historic Aspen townsite. 0- The structure has been moved to a location which is dissimilar to the original site. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 0/2 ________________________________________________________________________ • DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. BUILDING FORM = 4/9 10- The original plan form, based on Sanborne maps or other authenticating documentation, is unaltered and there are no recent additions. 8- The structure has been expanded but the original plan form is intact and the addition(s) would meet the design guidelines. 6- The plan form has been more altered, but the addition would meet the design guidelines. 4- The structure has been expanded in a less desirable manner, but if the addition were removed, at least 50% of the building’s original walls would remain. 2- The structure has been expanded and the addition overwhelms the original structure and has destroyed more than 50% of the building’s original walls. 0- Two historic structures have been linked together and the original character of the individual structures is significantly affected. ROOF FORM = 8/10 10- The original roof form and the original porch roof, if one existed, are unaltered. Page 19 of 101P88 IV.A. Exhibit A Integrity Score Sheet 8- The original main roof is intact, but the porch roof, if one existed, has been altered. 6- Dormers have been added to the structure or additions have been made that alter roof form, but the changes would meet the design guidelines. 2- Alterations to the roof have been made in a less sensitive manner, not in conformance with the design guidelines. 0- Less than 50% of the original roof form remains. SCALE = 3/5 5- The original scale and proportions of the building are intact. 4- The building has been expanded, but the overall impression of it as a 1 ½ or 2 story structure, with a relatively small footprint, is retained. 3- The building has been expanded and the scale of the original portion is discernible. 0- The scale of the building has been negatively affected by a large addition, whose features do not reflect the scale or proportions of the historic structure. FRONT PORCH = 9/10 10- The front porch is not enclosed and original decorative woodwork remains, or if there was no porch historically, none has been added. 8- The front porch is enclosed but maintains an open character and some original materials. 6- The front porch is not original, but has been built in an accurate manner, per the design guidelines. 2- The front porch has been enclosed and most original materials are gone. 0- The front porch is completely gone or replaced with a porch which would not meet the design guidelines. DOORS AND WINDOWS = 9/10 10- The original door and window pattern is intact. 8- Less than 50% of the doors and windows are new and the original openings are intact. 2- More than 50% of the doors or windows have been added and/or some of the original opening sizes have been altered. 0- Most or all of the original door and window openings have been altered. COMPLEXITY OF DESIGN = 3/5 5- The overall sense of “elegance” and intricacy in design and detailing is intact. 0- Detailing has been removed and the building has a “plain” appearance. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 50)=36/49 Page 20 of 101P89 IV.A. Exhibit A Integrity Score Sheet • SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. PROXIMITY TO SIMILAR STRUCTURES = 0/5 5- The structure is one of a set (at least three) of buildings from the same period in the immediate area. 3- The building is part of a neighborhood that has numerous remaining buildings from the same period. 0- The building is an isolated example from the period. HISTORIC LANDSCAPE FEATURES = 0/3 5- A number of elements of the original landscape are in place, including historic fences, walkways, plant materials and trees, and ditches. 3- Few or no elements of the original landscape are present, but the current landscape supports the historic character of the home. 0- The current landscape significantly obscures views of the structure. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 10) = 0/8 • MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. EXTERIOR WOODWORK = 6/6 10- Most of the original woodwork, including siding, decorative shingles, trim, fascia boards, etc. remain. 6- Original siding has been replaced, but trim and other elements remain. 6- Original siding is intact but trim or other elements have been replaced. 0- All exterior materials have been removed and replaced. DOORS AND WINDOWS = 8/8 10- All or most of the original door and window units are intact. 8- Some window and door units have been replaced, but with generally accurate reconstructions of the originals. 6- Most of the original windows have been replaced, but with generally accurate reconstructions of the originals. 0- Windows and/or doors units have been replaced with inappropriate patterns or styles. Page 21 of 101P90 IV.A. Exhibit A Integrity Score Sheet TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20) = 14/14 ________________________________________________________________________ • WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. DETAILING AND ORNAMENTATION = 5/5 5- The original detailing is intact. 3- Detailing is discernable such that it contributes to an understanding of its stylistic category. 0- New detailing has been added that confuses the character of the original house or the original detailing is gone. 0- The detailing is gone. FINISHES = 5/5 5- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry unpainted. 4- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry is painted. 3- Wood surfaces are stained or modern in appearance but masonry is unpainted. 2- Wood surfaces are stained or modern in appearance and the masonry is painted. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 10) = 10/10 • ASSOCIATION Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. 5- The property would be generally recognizable to a person who lived in Aspen in the 19th century. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 5/5 ________________________________________________________________________ • BONUS POINTS = 3 points for one story historic addition that is hidden within the newer additions. = 5 points for restoring one story historic addition in original configuration UNIQUE EXAMPLE 5- The style of the building is unique or one of a small group among the19th century high style homes left in Aspen. (i.e. It is Second Empire, Dutch Revival, or another unusual style.) Page 22 of 101P91 IV.A. Exhibit A Integrity Score Sheet MASONRY 5- Original brick chimneys and/or stone foundation remains. 5- The structure’s primary wall material is masonry. OUTBUILDINGS 5-There are outbuildings on the property that were built during the same period as the house. PATINA/CHARACTER 5- The materials have been allowed to acquire the character of age and are obviously weathered. ________________________________________________________________________ Totals: 65 points + 3 bonus points for the historic one story building that is hidden within the new additions. 88 points + 5 points for the restored historic one story building. 68 points at 333 Park location / 93 points at 931 Gibson location MAXIMUM NUMBER OF POINTS= 100 (and up to 20 bonus points) MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR DESIGNATION= 50 POINTS Note: Each area of the integrity analysis includes a description of the circumstances that might be found and a point assignment. However the reviewer may choose another number within the point range to more accurately reflect the specific property. Page 23 of 101P92 IV.A. Exhibit B Demolition Exhibit B – Demolition Demolition of designated historic property 26.415.080. Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. Response: The application proposes to remove non-historic additions that have enveloped the landmark over time. After extensive research and a discussion with Dieter Bibbig, it was confirmed that the historic addition documented on the historic Sanborn Maps had been relocated to 333 Park at the same time as the two story historic building. A photograph of the one story historic addition was published in the Aspen Times while the buildings were being moved to Park in 1961 (Exhibit A). The non-historic additions added over time from the 1960s to 2017 by Dieter are proposed to be removed as demonstrated in the architectural set (sheet A03). The historic addition is proposed to be restored using the Sanborn Map and photograph in the Aspen Times from 1961 as a guide. Relevant Design Guidelines used to inform this proposal are found below. 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. • Such an addition is usually similar in character to the original building in terms of materials, finishes and design. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. Page 24 of 101P93 IV.A. Exhibit C Relocation Exhibit C – Relocation 26.415.090. Relocation of designated historic properties. The intent of this Chapter is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Response: The proposal to relocate the historic buildings to a different location was not decided lightly. After close to a year of research, discussions with Staff, analysis and design development, the best preservation decision for the buildings and for the community is to relocate the landmarks to a more traditional, flat lot with street frontage. As demonstrated in the architectural set, the current location of the historic buildings create competing community goals – the buildings infringe on the stream margin review area, sit within required setbacks, and are not in their original configuration. The historic front porch hangs over the steep slope above the river. The historic addition has been detached from the original location at the rear of the two story landmark and is enveloped completely in non-historic additions to the point that no one, not even the City, knew that the historic addition existed. Criteria 2 and 4 (of the first section) are met in this proposal. The location of 333 Park is not within a historic district and the building in its current condition does not contribute to the overall character of the Page 25 of 101P94 IV.A. Exhibit C Relocation parcel. Relocation will not have an adverse impact on the property. As discussed previously, relocating the building to a lot with similar characteristics to its original location on Main Street positively affects the integrity of the building and the surrounding historic buildings along Gibson. The only adjacent historic building to 333 Park is 401 Park, which was relocated from 820 East Durant Avenue in 1974. The one story miner’s cabin at 401 Park has been heavily altered. Further, 333 Park is not located on Park Avenue, but is accessed from a shared driveway easement at the bottom of a short hill off of Park Avenue. Relocating the historic landmarks to 931 Gibson is the best preservation method considering the current conditions, configuration, and Land Use Code requirements at 333 park. A comparison overlaying the Sanborn Map on top of the 333 Park survey and the 931 Gibson survey compares both properties. Before submitting this application, the design team met with Bill Bailey House Movers and with City referral departments to discuss the safe relocation of the historic buildings. First, a letter is attached from Bill Bailey determining that the historic homes are capable of withstanding relocation. There are two different routes that work for the safe relocation of the buildings. The design team will continue to work with the City to determine appropriate tree replacement, curb and gutter replacement and other minor mitigation measures required as part of the relocation route. Historic homes have been moved for decades in Aspen - most recently, the Zupancis historic homes were moved from their original location on Main Street to Holden Marolt Open Space. There are many examples for us to reference to determine an acceptable and safe route for these historic buildings. Applicable design guidelines are addressed below. 9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place may help to preserve the historic fabric. • This activity will require the same level of documentation, structural assessment, and posting of financial assurances as a building relocation. Page 26 of 101P95 IV.A. Exhibit C Relocation Response – n/a. 9.2 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. • In general, on-site relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. • In a district, where numerous adjacent historic structures may exist, the way that buildings were placed on the site historically, and the open yards visible from the street are characteristics that should be respected in new development. • Provide a figure ground study of the surrounding parcels to demonstrate the effects of a building relocation. • In some cases, the historic significance of the structure, the context of the site, the construction technique, and the architectural style may make on-site relocation too impactful to be appropriate. It must be demonstrated that on-site relocation is the best preservation alternative in order for approval to be granted. • If relocation would result in the need to reconstruct a substantial area of the original exterior surface of the building above grade, it is not an appropriate preservation option. Response – Relocation does not result in the loss of original historic material. The building has been moved before and is able to withstand another relocation without significant damage to the building. Non- historic additions will be removed and the few original windows will be protected during relocation. Below is a map showing adjacent historic landmarks adjacent to 931 Gibson (black star). Page 27 of 101P96 IV.A. Exhibit C Relocation 9.3 Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. • It must face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. In general, a forward movement, rather than a lateral movement is preferred. HPC will consider setback variations where appropriate. • A primary structure may not be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. • Be aware of potential restrictions against locating buildings too close to mature trees. Consult with the City Forester early in the design process. Do not relocate a building so that it becomes obscured by trees. Response – The new location at 931 Gibson allows the structure and historic addition to be placed in a position similar to its historic orientation. A similar setback to its original location on Main Street is proposed, which results in a requested setback variance because the required setback at 931 Gibson is 25 ft. The proposed front yard setback at 931 Gibson is 14 feet. 9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade. H H H H H H H H H H H H Page 28 of 101P97 IV.A. Exhibit C Relocation • Raising the finished floor of the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable if needed to address drainage issues. A substantial change in position relative to grade is inappropriate. • Avoid making design decisions that require code related alterations which could have been avoided. In particular, consider how the relationship to grade could result in non-historic guardrails, etc. Response – One of the main reasons to relocation the structure to 931 Gibson is to restore the historic relationship of the building to grade. The slopes at 333 Park render this goal impossible. The design team will use the historic photographs of the building in its original location to accurately recreate the relationship to grade. 9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. • On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a miner’s cottage where there is no evidence that one existed historically is out of character and is not allowed. • Exposed concrete or painted metal flashing are generally appropriate. • Where a stone or brick foundation existed historically, it must be replicated, ideally using stone salvaged from the original foundation as a veneer. The replacement must be similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints. • New AspenModern foundations shall be handled on a case by case basis to ensure preservation of the design intent. Response – The new foundation will match the original shown in the photographs. 9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells. • The size of any lightwell that faces a street should be minimized. • Lightwells must be placed so that they are not immediately adjacent to character defining features, such as front porches. • Lightwells must be protected with a flat grate, rather than a railing or may not be visible from a street. • Lightwells that face a street must abut the building foundation and generally may not “float” in the landscape except where they are screened, or on an AspenModern site. Response – With the exception of the garage, all new living space is located in the basement. Lightwells are minimized and pulled away from the front facade to avoid conflicts with the restored front porch. Lightwells are adjacent to building walls and will be protected with a flat grate as allowed by Building Code. 9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such buildings. Page 29 of 101P98 IV.A. Exhibit C Relocation • The specific methodology to be used in relocating the structure must be approved by the HPC. • During the relocation process, panels must be mounted on the exterior of the building to protect existing openings and historic glass. Special care shall be taken to keep from damaging door and window frames and sashes in the process of covering the openings. Significant architectural details may need to be removed and securely stored until restoration. • The structure is expected to be stored on its original site during the construction process. Proposals for temporary storage on a different parcel will be considered on a case by case basis and may require special conditions of approval. • A historic resource may not be relocated outside of the City of Aspen. Response – Bill Bailey House Movers is responsible for the majority of relocated homes in Aspen. All measures will be taken to protect the home to ensure safe relocation. 9.8 Proposals to relocate a building to a new site are highly discouraged. • Permanently relocating a structure from where it was built to a new site is only allowed for special circumstances, where it is demonstrated to be the only preservation alternative. Response – The buildings were relocated in 1961 to 333 Park which greatly compromised the historic integrity of the resources, not to mention violating many current Land Use Code requirements such as stream margin review and setbacks. The opportunity to restore the landmark and historic addition accurately in a location similar to its original lot on Main Street is a special circumstance that does not occur very often (if ever). This is the best preservation method for the historic buildings and the only preservation alternative to restore the historic addition behind the two story landmark and to maintain the historic building orientation to the street. Page 30 of 101P99 IV.A. Page 31 of 101P100 IV.A. Exhibit D FAR Bonus Exhibit D – FAR Bonus 26.415.110. Benefits. The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain, preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and programs for designated historic properties and districts. Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country. Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and maintaining their property. Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both economically vital and cherished by many. Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits. F. Floor area bonus. 1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e) The construction materials are of the highest quality; f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. 2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor area. Page 32 of 101P101 IV.A. Exhibit D FAR Bonus Response: The Hendrys have taken the preservation of these buildings to the extreme including entering into contract to purchase the property at 931 Gibson to ensure proper preservation and restoration of the landmarks that aligns with the Design Guidelines. The amount of restoration and preservation proposed is exemplary and worthy of the Bonus. The proposed project does not include a large addition to the landmark, instead a two car garage (2 parking spaces are required by Code) is proposed, with a small 55 square feet one story connector behind the restored one story landmark. The majority of new construction is located in the basement. The historic building is clearly the key element of the property. Even though it is not required, the second floor will remain intact within the landmark. All of the review criteria are met, with the exception of historic landscape or site features because none exist at 931. The proposed garage and small lightwells do not need the additional floor area associated with the FAR Bonus. The Hendrys would like to construct a detached single family home on the property in the future, and would like to apply the FAR Bonus to the new construction in order to sterilize the historic building and prevent any future changes or additions. The Bonus is requested at this time because the restoration and preservation are proposed in this application. A condition of approval that the 500 sf FAR Bonus is only applicable to a new single family home that meets the design guidelines, as determined by HPC, is acceptable to the Hendrys. Page 33 of 101P102 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review Exhibit E – Conceptual Design Review 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a historic district. No building, structure or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. b) The procedures for the review of conceptual development plans for major development projects are as follows: (1) The Community Development Director shall review the application materials submitted for conceptual or final development plan approval. If they are determined to be complete, the applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice of the hearing shall be provided pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. (2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Response: Applicable Design Guidelines are addressed below: Streetscape 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. • Building footprint and location should reinforce the traditional patterns of the neighborhood. • Allow for some porosity on a site. In a residential project, setback to setback development is typically uncharacteristic of the historic context. Do not design a project which leaves no useful open space visible from the street. Response – The proposed location of the landmark respects the original location on Main Street and is similar to other historic properties along Gibson Street and Matchless Street. 1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. When HPC input is requested, the following bullet points may be applicable. • Retain and preserve the variety and character found in historic alleys, including retaining historic ancillary buildings or constructing new ones. • Retain and preserve the simple character of historic ditches. Do not plant flowers or add landscape. • Abandoning or re-routing a street in a historic area is generally discouraged. • Consider the value of unpaved alleys in residential areas. Page 34 of 101P103 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Opening a platted right of way which was abandoned or never graded may be encouraged on a case by case basis. Response – n/a. 1.3 Remove driveways or parking areas accessed directly from the street if they were not part of the original development of the site. • Do not introduce new curb cuts on streets. • Non-historic driveways accessed from the street should be removed if they can be relocated to the alley. Response – n/a. 1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. • If an alley exists at the site, the new driveway must be located off it. • Tracks, gravel, light grey concrete with minimal seams, or similar materials are appropriate for driveways on Aspen Victorian properties. Response – A shared driveway is proposed for the landmark and the future detached single family home. The proposed material will be provided during Final Design Review to demonstrate compliance with this guideline. 1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. • Reflect the established progression of public to private spaces from the public sidewalk to a semi-public walkway, to a semi private entry feature, to private spaces. Response – The historic hierarchy of spaces will be restored at the 931 Gibson property, which is unattainable at the 333 Park property. A simple straight walkway from the street to the restored front porch, similar to that historically found along Main Street, is proposed at 931 Gibson. 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. • Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical of the period of significance. • Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and install them in the manner that they would have been used historically. For example on an Aspen Victorian landmark set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete. Light grey concrete, brick or red sandstone are appropriate private walkway materials for most landmarks. • The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential properties. A wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an AspenModern property. Page 35 of 101P104 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review Response – A simple walkway perpendicular from the street to the front porch is proposed. Paving material will be proposed as part of the Final Review application. The width of the walkway will be about 3 feet. 1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site. • Ensure that open space on site is meaningful and consolidated into a few large spaces rather than many small unusable areas. • Open space should be designed to support and complement the historic building. Response – Ample open space is proposed around the historic building as shown on the site plan. 1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. • When included in the initial planning for a project, stormwater quality facilities can be better integrated into the proposal. All landscape plans presented for HPC review must include at least a preliminary representation of the stormwater design. A more detailed design must be reviewed and approved by Planning and Engineering prior to building permit submittal. • Site designs and stormwater management should provide positive drainage away from the historic landmark, preserve the use of natural drainage and treatment systems of the site, reduce the generation of additional stormwater runoff, and increase infiltration into the ground. Stormwater facilities and conveyances located in front of a landmark should have minimal visual impact when viewed from the public right of way. • Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements. Response – Storm water design is considered as part of the new site as is positive drainage away from the landmark in its new location at 931. 1.9 Landscape development on AspenModern landmarks shall be addressed on a case by case basis. Response – n/a. 1.10 Built-in furnishings, such as water features, fire pits, grills, and hot tubs, that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. • Site furnishings that are added to the historic property should not be intrusive or degrade the integrity of the neighborhood patterns, site, or existing historic landscape. • Consolidating and screening these elements is preferred. Response – These features are not proposed at this time. Page 36 of 101P105 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. • Retaining historic planting beds and landscape features is encouraged. • Protect historically significant vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Removal of damaged, aged, or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. • If a significant tree must be removed, replace it with the same or similar species in coordination with the Parks Department. • The removal of non-historic planting schemes is encouraged. • Consider restoring the original landscape if information is available, including original plant materials. Response – n/a. 1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram. • Simplicity and restraint are required. Do not overplant a site, or install a landscape which is overtextured or overly complex in relationship to the historic resource, particularly in Zone A. In Zone A, new planting shall be species that were used historically or species of similar attributes. • In areas immediately adjacent to the landmark, Zone A and Zone B, plants up 42” in height, sod, and low shrubs are often appropriate. • Contemporary planting, walls and other features are not appropriate in Zone A. A more contemporary landscape may surround new development or be located in the rear of the property, in Zone C. • Do not cover areas which were historically unpaved with hard surfaces, except for a limited patio where appropriate. • Where residential structures are being adapted to commercial use, proposals to alter the landscape will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The residential nature of the building must be honored. • In the case of a historic landmark lot split, careful consideration should be given so as not to over plant either property, or remove all evidence of the landscape characteristics from before the property was divided. • Contemporary landscapes that highlight an AspenModern architectural style are encouraged. Response – Simple landscaping is proposed around the historic structures. Existing trees on the site are preserved. 1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. • Low plantings and ground covers are preferred. Page 37 of 101P106 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Do not place trees, shrubs, or hedgerows in locations that will obscure, damage, or block significant architectural features or views to the building. Hedgerows are not allowed as fences. • Consider mature canopy size when planting new trees adjacent to historic resources. Planting trees too close to a landmark may result in building deteriorate or blocked views and is inappropriate. • Climbing vines can damage historic structures and are not allowed. Response – Low plants and ground cover will be used around the landmark to not obscure the extensive restoration that is proposed. 1.14 Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting. • Landscape and pathway lighting is not permitted in Zone A (refer to diagram) on Aspen Victorian properties unless an exception is approved by HPC based on safety considerations. • Landscape, driveway, and pathway lighting on AspenModern properties is addressed on a case-by-case basis. • Landscape light fixtures should be carefully selected so that they are compatible with the building, yet recognizable as a product of their own time. • Driveway lighting is not permitted on Aspen Victorian properties. • Landscape uplighting is not allowed. Response – Landscape lighting is not proposed at this time. 1.15 Preserve original fences. • Fences which are considered part of the historic significance of a site should not be moved, removed, or inappropriately altered. • Replace only those portions of a historic fence that are deteriorated beyond repair. • Replacement elements must match the existing. Response – An original fence does not exist and there is no documentation of an original fence in the historic photographs. 1.16 When possible, replicate a missing historic fence based on photographic evidence. Response – n/a. 1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution. • Reserve fences for back yards and behind street facing façades, as the best way to preserve the character of a property. Response – No fence is proposed at this time. Page 38 of 101P107 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type and style. • The new fence should use materials that were used on similar properties during the period of significance. • A wood fence is the appropriate solution in most locations. • Ornate fences, including wrought iron, may create a false history are not appropriate for Aspen Victorian landmarks unless there is evidence that a decorative fence historically existed on the site. • A modest wire fence was common locally in the early 1900s and is appropriate for Aspen Victorian properties. This fence type has many desirable characteristics including transparency, a low height, and a simple design. When this material is used, posts should be simply detailed and not oversized. Response – n/a. 1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street. • A fence that defines a front yard must be low in height and transparent in nature. • For a picket fence, spacing between the pickets must be a minimum of 1/2 the width of the picket. • For Post-WWII properties where a more solid type of fence may be historically appropriate, proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. • Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment. Response – n/a. 1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of important features of a designated building. • A privacy fence should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts. Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing on the upper portions of the fence. • A privacy fence should allow the building corners and any important architectural features that are visible from the street to continue to be viewed. • All hedgerows (trees, shrub bushes, etc.) are prohibited in Zones A and B. Response – n/a. 1.21 Preserve original retaining walls • Replace only those portions that are deteriorated beyond repair. Any replacement materials should match the original in color, texture, size and finish. Page 39 of 101P108 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Painting or covering a historic masonry retaining wall or covering is not allowed. • Increasing the height of a retaining wall is inappropriate. Response – n/a. 1.22 When a new retaining wall is necessary, its height and visibility should be minimized. • All wall materials, including veneer and mortar, will be reviewed on a case by case basis and should be compatible with the palette used on the historic structure. Response – n/a. 1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will be reviewed on a case by case basis. Response – The site is not proposed to be regraded. The historic relationship of the building to grade is proposed to be restored. 1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations. • An analysis of the historic landscape and an assessment of the current condition of the landscape should be done before the beginning of any project. • The key features of the historic landscape and its overall design intent must be preserved. Response – n/a 1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its built features. • Do not add features that damage the integrity of the historic landscape. • Maintain the existing pattern of setbacks and siting of structures. • Maintain the historic relationship of the built landscape to natural features on the site. • All additions to these landscapes must be clearly identifiable as recent work. • New artwork must be subordinate to the designed landscape in terms of placement, height, material, and overall appearance. Place new art away from significant landscape features. • Avoid installing utility trenches in cultural landscapes if possible. Response – there is no historic landscape design at 931 Gibson. 1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system. • Minimize the impact of new vehicular circulation. • Minimize the visual impact of new parking. Page 40 of 101P109 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Maintain the separation of pedestrian and vehicle which occurred historically. Response – Parking is located behind the landmark at the rear of the property in a garage. 1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site. • Protect established vegetation during any construction. • If any tree or shrub needs to be removed, replace it with the same or similar species. • New planting should be of a species used historically or a similar species. • Maintain and preserve any gardens and/or ornamental planting on the site. • Maintain and preserve any historic landscape elements. Response – Existing trees are preserved and protected in this proposal. Restoration Materials 2.1 Preserve original building materials. • Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. • Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. • Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place. Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. • Original AspenModern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy. 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. • Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer to protect it from the elements. Brick or stone that was not historically painted shall not be painted. • If masonry that was not painted historically was given a coat of paint at some more recent time, consider removing it, using appropriate methods. • Wood should be painted, stained or natural, as appropriate to the style and history of the building. 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. • If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish. • Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. For AspenModern buildings, sometimes the replacement of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent. Page 41 of 101P110 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials. • Original building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with synthetic materials. 2.5 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate. • Regardless of their character, new materials obscure the original, historically significant material. • Any material that covers historic materials may also trap moisture between the two layers. This will cause accelerated deterioration to the historic material which may go unnoticed. 2.6 Remove layers that cover the original material. • Once the non-historic siding is removed, repair the original, underlying material. Response – Original material with integrity will be restored or repaired. Any replacement materials will match the original as described in Guideline 2.3 Original building materials will not be covered. Any non-historic layers will be removed and either replaced or repaired with matching material. Windows 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. • Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operations, and groupings of windows. • Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them. • Preserve the original glass. If original Victorian era glass is broken, consider using restoration glass for the repair. 3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. • Enclosing a historic window is inappropriate. • Do not change the size of an original window opening. 3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. • If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window must also be double-hung. If the sash have divided lights, match that characteristic as well. 3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original. 3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. • Changing the window opening is not permitted. • Consider restoring an original window opening that was enclosed in the past. Page 42 of 101P111 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. • A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window’s casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. • The historic profile on AspenModern properties is typically minimal. 3.7 Adding new openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed. • Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear or secondary walls. • New windows should be similar in scale to the historic openings on the building, but should in some way be distinguishable as new, through the use of somewhat different detailing, etc. • Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a façade. • Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character defining façade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than replace a historic window. • Install a storm window on the interior, when feasible. This will allow the character of the original window to be seen from the public way. • If a storm window is to be installed on the exterior, match the sash design and material of the original window. It should fit tightly within the window opening without the need for sub- frames or panning around the perimeter. A storm window should not include muntins unless necessary for structure. Any muntin should be placed to match horizontal or vertical divisions of the historic window. Response – Original windows openings will be restored, including the original dormers. Deconstruction of the interior will reveal original opening locations on the rear of the two story landmark. The one story landmark will have simple openings that would have been historically found on this type of addition, unless otherwise discovered during deconstruction. Sash profile and other window details will match the original windows found on the upper floors – these details will be provided in the Final design application for review. Doors 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. • Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. • Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. • If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. • Previously enclosed original doors should be reopened when possible. Page 43 of 101P112 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. • Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height. 4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. 4.4 When replacing a door or screen door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the building. • A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. • A historic door or screen door from a similar building also may be considered. • Simple paneled doors were typical for Aspen Victorian properties. • Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. 4.5 Adding new doors on a historic building is generally not allowed. • Place new doors in any proposed addition rather than altering the historic resource. • Greater flexibility in installing a door in a new location may be considered on rear or secondary walls. • A new door in a new location should be similar in scale and style to historic openings on the building and should be a product of its own time. • Preserve the historic ratio of openings to solid wall on a façade. Significantly increasing the openings on a character defining façade negatively affects the integrity of a structure. 4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, use a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry door. • Match the material, frame design, character, and color of the primary door. • Simple features that do not detract from the historic entry door are appropriate for a new storm door. • New screen doors should be in character with the primary door. 4.7 Preserve historic hardware. • When new hardware is needed, it must be in scale with the door and appropriate to the style of the building. • On Aspen Victorian properties, conceal any modern elements such as entry key pads. Response – Original door openings will be preserved and restored. The original front entrance and door will face the street and be restored as the primary entrance. Historic hardware remains on the exterior of the home, it will be stored during construction, and reused in its original location on the front door. Page 44 of 101P113 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review Porch 5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony. • Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions, material and spacing of balusters. • Expanding the size of a historic porch or balcony is inappropriate. 5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details. • Removing an original balustrade, for example, is inappropriate. 5.3 Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate. • Reopening an enclosed porch or balcony is appropriate. 5.4 If reconstruction is necessary, match the original in form, character and detail. • Match original materials. • When reconstructing an original porch or balcony without historic photographs, use dimensions and characteristics found on comparable buildings. Keep style and form simple with minimal, if any, decorative elements. 5.5 If new steps are to be added, construct them out of the same primary materials used on the original, and design them to be in scale with the porch or balcony • Steps should be located in the original location. • Step width should relate to the scale of entry doors, spacing between posts, depth of deck, etc. • Brick, red sandstone, grey concrete, or wood are appropriate materials for steps. 5.6 Avoid adding handrails or guardrails where they did not exist historically, particularly where visible from the street. • If handrails or guardrails are needed according to building code, keep their design simple in character and different from the historic detailing on the porch or balcony. Response – The front porch will be restored to match the historic photographs of Mabel when the house was on Main Street. Some original front porch materials and turned posts still exist at 333 Park. Form, character and details will be repaired or replaced as deemed necessary by staff and monitor. Sanborn Maps indicate a side porch on the one story historic addition which is proposed to be restored. The details of the porch are unknown, so simple turned posts are proposed. The footprint will match the measurements from the historic maps. Architectural Details 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. • Repair only those features that are deteriorated. Page 45 of 101P114 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Patch, piece-in, splice, or consolidate to repair the existing materials, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. • On AspenModern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to preserve the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily deteriorated material. 6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. • Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of replacing the disassembled material in its original configuration. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. • Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features. • If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish. 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original designs. • The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a misrepresentation of the building’s heritage. • When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence, develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and maintains similar scale, proportion and material. 6.5 Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts. • Where scars on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is no other physical or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that are similar in character to related buildings. • Using ornate materials on a building or adding new conjectural detailing for which there is no documentation is inappropriate. Response – Architectural details will be repaired when possible. Any replacement pieces will be based on original design. While the building is in a deteriorated state, there are many original architectural details that will guide accurate restoration of the landmark. Roof 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. • Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Preserve the orientation and slope of the roof as seen from the street. • Retain and repair original and decorative roof detailing. • Where the original roof form has been altered, consider restoration. Page 46 of 101P115 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. • Overhangs contribute to the scale and detailing of a historic resource. • AspenModern properties typically have very deep or extremely minimal overhangs that are key character defining features of the architectural style. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. • Skylights and solar panels are generally not allowed on a historic structure. These elements may be appropriate on an addition. 7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color. • Direct vents for fireplaces are generally not permitted to be added on historic structures. • Locate vents on non-street facing facades. • Use historic chimneys as chases for new flues when possible. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. • Reconstruct a missing chimney when documentation exists. 7.6 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. • A new dormer is not appropriate on a primary, character defining façade. • A new dormer should fit within the existing wall plane. It should be lower than the ridgeline and set in from the eave. It should also be in proportion with the building. • The mass and scale of a dormer addition must be subordinate to the scale of the historic building. • While dormers improve the livability of upper floor spaces where low plate heights exist, they also complicate the roof and may not be appropriate on very simple structures. • Dormers are not generally not permitted on AspenModern properties since they are not characteristics of these building styles. 7.7 Preserve original roof materials. • Avoid removing historic roofing material that is in good condition. When replacement is necessary, use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as physical qualities and use a color that is similar to that seen historically. 7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original. • If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. • Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. • Flashing should be tin, lead coated copper, galvanized or painted metal and have a matte, non- reflective finish. Page 47 of 101P116 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Design flashing, such as drip edges, so that architectural details are not obscured. • A metal roof is inappropriate for an Aspen Victorian primary home but may be appropriate for a secondary structure from that time period. • A metal roof material should have a matte, non-reflective finish and match the original seaming. 7.9 Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. • Adding ornamental cresting, for example, where there is no evidence that it existed, creates a false impression of the building’s original appearance, and is inappropriate. 7.10 Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent possible. • Downspouts should be placed in locations that are not visible from the street if possible, or in locations that do not obscure architectural detailing on the building. • The material used for the gutters should be in character with the style of the building. 8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved. • When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. These include its materials, roof form, windows, doors, and architectural details. • If a secondary structure is not historically significant, then its preservation is optional. The determination of significance is based on documentation of the construction date of the outbuilding and/or physical inspection. A secondary structure that is related to the period of significance of the primary structure will likely require preservation. Response – The roof is proposed to be restored to its original configuration with the original dormers and the decorative tin roof material. Gutters are not proposed at this time. The existing secondary structure will be restored to its original configuration behind the landmark. Current non-historic openings will be removed and a simple restoration to match the footprint on the Sanborn Maps is proposed. Secondary Historic Addition 8.2 Preserve a historic secondary building as a detached structure. • Any proposal to attach a secondary structure is reviewed on a case-by-case basis. • The position and orientation of the structure • should be maintained except when HPC finds that an alternative is the best preservation option. • Some AspenModern properties incorporated garages and carports into the architecture. This pattern should be maintained. 8.3 Do not add detailing or features to a secondary structure that are conjectural and not in keeping with its original character as a utilitarian structure. • Most secondary structures are basic rectangular solids, with simple finishes and no ornamentation. Page 48 of 101P117 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 8.4 When adding on to a secondary structure, distinguish the addition as new construction and minimize removal of historic fabric. • Additions to a secondary structure must be smaller in footprint than the original building and lower in height. Maintaining the overall mass and scale is particularly important. • Do not alter the original roof form. • An addition must be inset from the corners of the wall to which it attaches. 8.5 Preserve the original building materials, or match in kind when necessary. 8.6 Preserve original door and window openings and minimize new openings. • If an original carriage door exists, and can be made to function for automobile use, this is preferred. 8.7 If a new garage door is added, it must be compatible with the character of the historic structure. • The materials and detailing should be simple. 8.8 Adaptation of an obsolete secondary structure to a functional use is encouraged. • The reuse of any secondary structure should be sensitive so that its character is not lost. 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. • For Aspen Victorian properties, HPC generally relies on the 1904 Sanborn Fire Insurance maps to determine which portions of a building are historically significant and must be preserved. • HPC may insist on the removal of non-historic construction that is considered to be detrimental to the historic resource in any case when preservation benefits or variations are being approved. Response – The secondary historic addition was originally attached to the rear of the two story Victorian. The addition is proposed to be living space, which aligns with its historic use as an extension of the main house. Original openings are unknown with the exception of a door that is shown in the 1961 Aspen Time photograph. Simple openings and details are proposed in keeping with the simple nature of this secondary structure. Garage Addition 10.3 Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. • A new addition must be compatible with the historic character of the primary building. Page 49 of 101P118 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • An addition must be subordinate, deferential, modest, and secondary in comparison to the architectural character of the primary building. • An addition that imitates the primary building’s historic style is not allowed. For example, a new faux Victorian detailed addition is inappropriate on an Aspen Victorian home. • An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. • Proposals on corner lots require particular attention to creating compatibility. Response – The garage addition is linked with a short 5ft. long connector to create a clear distinction between the historic buildings and the new garage. The addition is located behind the landmark to not compete with the restored side porch of the one story historic building and to be similar to the outbuilding shown on the Sanborn Map when the buildings were located on Main Street. A comparison of the Sanborn footprint (left) to the proposed building placement (right) is provided below. 10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. • The historic resource must be visually dominant on the site and must be distinguishable against the addition. • The total above grade floor area of an addition may be no more than 100% of the above grade floor area of the original historic resource. All other above grade development must be completely detached. HPC may consider exceptions to this policy if two or more of the following are met: o The proposed addition is all one story o The footprint of the new addition is closely related to the footprint of the historic resource and the proposed design is particularly sensitive to the scale and proportions of the historic resource o The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource Page 50 of 101P119 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review o The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as existed historically o The project is on a large lot, allowing the addition to have a significant setback from the street o There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions that aren’t being changed o The project is proposed as part of a voluntary AspenModern designation, or o The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc. Response – the historic resource is the focal point of the property. The 500 sf garage and 55 sf connector are significantly less than the floor area of the historic buildings. 10.5 On a corner lot, no portion of an addition to a one story historic resource may be more than one story tall, directly behind that resource, unless completely detached above grade by a distance of at least 10 feet. HPC may consider exceptions to this policy if two or more of the following are met: • The connector element that links the new and old construction is a breezeway or transparent corridor, well recessed from the streetfacing side(s) of the historic resource and the area of two story construction that appears directly behind the one story historic resource is minimal • The footprint of the new addition is closely related to the footprint of the historic resource and the proposed design is particularly sensitive to the scale and proportions of the historic resource • The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource • The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as existed historically • There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions that aren’t being changed • The project is proposed as part of a voluntary AspenModern designation, or • The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc. Response – n/a. 10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. • An addition shall be distinguishable from the historic building and still be visually compatible with historic features. • A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material, or a modern interpretation of a historic style are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from historic construction to new construction. Page 51 of 101P120 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Do not reference historic styles that have no basis in Aspen. • Consider these three aspects of an addition; form, materials, and fenestration. An addition must relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response. • Note that on a corner lot, departing from the form of the historic resource may not be allowed. • There is a spectrum of appropriate solutions to distinguishing new from old portions of a development. Some resources of particularly high significance or integrity may not be the right instance for a contrasting addition. Response – The new addition is simple, secondary and subtle. A setback and short connector are proposed to create a break between new and old construction. The new building reads as a secondary building and does not compete with the Victorian and historic addition. 10.7 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the street. • Some roof lines and porch eaves on historic buildings may align at approximately the same height. An addition can not be placed in a location where these relationships would be altered or obscured. Response – n/a. 10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. • An addition that is lower than, or similar to the height of the primary building, is preferred. Response – The addition is one story in height and is well below the height of the main building. 10.9 If the addition is taller than a historic building, set it back from significant façades and use a “connector” to link it to the historic building. • Only a one-story connector is allowed. • Usable space, including decks, is not allowed on top of connectors unless the connector has limited visibility and the deck is shielded with a solid parapet wall. • In all cases, the connector must attach to the historic resource underneath the eave. • The connector shall be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. • Minimize the width of the connector. Ideally, it is no more than a passage between the historic resource and addition. The connector must reveal the original building corners. The connector may not be as wide as the historic resource. • Any street-facing doors installed in the connector must be minimized in height and width and accessed by a secondary pathway. See guideline 4.1 for further information. Page 52 of 101P121 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review Response – n/a. 10.10 Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. • Locating an addition at the front of a primary building is inappropriate. • Additions to the side of a primary building are handled on a case-by-case basis and are approved based on site specific constraints that restrict rear additions. • Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. Response – The addition is at the rear of the building. The majority of new floor area is located in the basement. 10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building. • A simple roof form that does not compete with the historic building is appropriate. • On Aspen Victorian properties, a flat roof may only be used on an addition to a gable roofed structure if the addition is entirely one story in height, or if the flat roofed areas are limited, but the addition is primarily a pitched roof. Response – A gable roof is proposed for the garage. The garage orientation is similar to the outbuilding shown on the 1893 Bird’s Eye View map of the property on Main Street (at right). 10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. • Loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices, and eavelines must be avoided. Response- The addition connects to the one story historic building at the rear in a way that is sensitive to the restored building. 10.13 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of the historic building. Response – n/a. 10.14 Set a rooftop addition back from the street facing façades to preserve the original profile of the historic resource. Page 53 of 101P122 IV.A. Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Set the addition back from street facing façades a distance approximately equal to its height. Response – n/a. 10.15 The roof form of a rooftop addition must be in character with the historic building. Response – n/a. Page 54 of 101P123 IV.A. Exhibit F Setback Variances Exhibit F – Setback Variances 26.415.110. Benefits. The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain, preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and programs for designated historic properties and districts. Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country. Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and maintaining their property. Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both economically vital and cherished by many. Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits. C. Variances. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow: a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage; d) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Response: The project requests a rear yard setback variance and a front yard setback variance. The front steps of the restored porch provide a 14 feet front yard setback, and project 11 feet into the required 25 feet front yard. The rear yard setback variance accommodates the placement of the basement 4’3” into Page 55 of 101P124 IV.A. Exhibit F Setback Variances the required 10 feet rear yard setback. The garage location complies with the required 5 feet setback for garages only. A front yard setback variance is requested to restore a front yard similar to its original location on Main Street. A 25 feet deep front yard is too large for this type of building that was located on Main Street. Restoring the relationship of the front façade to the street and the hierarchy of spaces from public to private is important to the historic character of the building. The front yard variance is similar to the pattern and character of the historic property when it was located on Main Street. Two parking spaces are required by Code for a single family home. Allowing a short connector enhances the restored landmark buildings. The rear yard variance accommodates a short connector to separate new and old construction which mitigates an adverse impact to the historic character of the property while meeting Land Use Code requirements for parking. Page 56 of 101P125 IV.A. Exhibit G Stream Margin Exemption Exhibit G – Stream margin exemption 26.435.040. Stream margin review. A. Applicability. The provisions of the stream margin review shall apply to all development within one hundred feet, measured horizontally, from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams and to all development within the Flood Hazard Area, also known as the 100-year flood plain. B. Exemptions. The Community Development Director may exempt the following types of development within the stream margin review area: 1. Construction of pedestrian or automobile bridges, public trails or structures for irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, bank stabilization, provided plans and specifications are submitted to the City engineer demonstrating that the structure is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during peak flows and the Community Development Director determines the proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with the stream margin review standards. 2. Construction of improvements essential for public health and safety which cannot be reasonably accommodated outside of the “no development area” prescribed by this Section including, but no limited to, potable water systems, sanitary sewer, utilities and fire suppression systems provided the Community Development Director determines the development complies, to the extent practical, with the stream margin review standards. 3. The expansion, remodeling or reconstruction of an existing development provided the following standards are met: a) The development does not add more than 10% to the floor area of the existing structure or increase the amount of building area exempt from floor area calculations by more than 25%. All stream margin exemptions are cumulative. One a development reaches these totals, a stream margin review by the Planning and Zoning Commission is required; and b) The development does not require the removal of any tree for which a permit would be required pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of this Code. c) The development is located such that no portion of the expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will be any closer to the high water line than is the existing development; d) The development does not fall outside of an approved building envelope if one has been designated through a prior review; and e) The expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will cause no increase to the amount of ground coverage or structures within the 100-year flood plain. Response – The existing building is proposed to be demolished. There is no additional floor area proposed, and no removal of any trees requiring a permit. No expansion is proposed nor any increase to ground coverage. 333 Park does not have an approved building envelope – the property is subject to regular setback requirements for the R-6 Zone District. Page 57 of 101P126 IV.A. Exhibit H Page 58 of 101P127 IV.A. City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Application PROJECT: Name: Location: (Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED)___________________________________________________________ Applicant: Name: Address: Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:_______________________________________________ REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:________________________________________________ TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Historic Designation Certificate of No Negative Effect Certificate of Appropriateness -Minor Historic Development -Major Historic Development -Conceptual Historic Development -Final Historic Development -Substantial Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 333 Park Ave + 931 Gibson Ave 333 Park: Sunny Park Subdivision, Lot 1 931 Gibson: Section: 7 Township: 10 Range: 84 LAND IN SE4 OF SEC 7-10-84 DESC BY M/B BK 513 PG 942, TRACT OF LAND IN THE SUNSET LODE USMS 5310 DESC BY M/B BK 513 PG 945 FROM THE BOARD OF PITKIN CO COMM 0% 0 ACRESSUNSET LODE, U.S.M.S. 5310 333 Park: 2737-181-00-017; 931 Gibson: 2737-074-00-004 BMH Investments 1001 Fannin St. #3850, Houston, TX 77002 713-725-1851 hendrybrian@mac.com BendonAdams, Sara Adams and F&M Architects, Flynn Stewart-Severy 300 So. Spring St., #202, Aspen, CO 81621 970-925-2855 x2 sara@bendonadams.com 333 Park: 1880s two story landmark with numerous modifications and additions 931 Gibson: single family home built in 1987. remove non-historic additions on landmark, demolish home at 931 Gibson, relocate landmark to 931 Gibson and complete full restoration of landmark, add garage to landmark. Delist 333 Park property from historic inventory and list 931 Gibson on historic inventory after landmark is relocated. Front and rear setback variances are requested for the landmark to be prominent in its new location. The 500 sf FAR Bonus is request for a future detached building at 931 Gibson. Relocation (temporary, on or off-site) Demolition (total demolition) Historic Landmark Lot Split setback variance FAR Bonus Exhibit I Page 59 of 101P128 IV.A. City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 General Information Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This information will help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that may be involved. YES NO Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions, new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration? Does the work you are planning include interior work, including remodeling, rehabilitation, or restoration? Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time? In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places Property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits? If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in Conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential properties are not.) If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Historical Preservation? Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use: Rehabilitation Loan Fund Conservation Easement Program Dimensional Variances Increased Density Historic Landmark Lot Split Waiver of Park Dedication Fees Conditional Uses Tax Credits Exemption from Growth Management Quota System Page 60 of 101P129 IV.A. City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form (Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.) Project: Applicant: Project Location: Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: (For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Number of residential units: Existing:___0_____Proposed:_____0____________ Existing:___1_______Proposed:______1________ Proposed % of demolition: __around 40%____ DIMENSIONS: (write N/A where no requirement exists in the zone district) Floor Area: Height Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ Principal Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ Accessory Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ On-Site parking: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ % Site coverage: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ % Open Space: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Front Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Rear Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Combined Front/Rear: Indicate N, S, E, W Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Combined Sides: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Distance between buildings: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued: _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): ______________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 333 Park and 931 Gibson BMH Investments, represented by BendonAdams and F&M Architects 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue R-6PD and R-15A333Park: 10,418 sf 931Gib: 15,497 sf 333Park: Note: existing is 333 Park and allowable/ proposed is 931 Gibson 4,530 25 25 2 n/a n/a 25' 10' living / 5' basement 10' 10' n/a 10' setback non-conformities, over allowable Floor Area, stream margin non-conformities front (for historic front porch) setback and rear setback (for below grade living space) variances. Page 61 of 101P130 IV.A. ASLU 333 Park & 931 Gibson HP- Relocation, Major Development (Conceptual) 2737-181-00-017 1 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Sarah Yoon, 970.920.5144 DATE: May 15, 2018 PROJECT: 333 Park & 931 Gibson REPRESENTATIVE: Sara Adams, BendonAdams, LLC DESCRIPTION: The property at 333 Park is a Victorian era home that was relocated from its original site on Main Street to its current location. The subject property is a designated historic landmark in the R-6 zone district, with a Planned Development (PD) overlay, and located within the Stream Margin Review Area. The lot has site specific conditions that include steep slopes, ditches, and road/utility easements. Over the years, the historic resource has been added onto with various structures creating several bandit units. A Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) exemption was granted and went into effect as of August 10, 2017 with an expiration date of August 11, 2020. The listed conditions for the exemption have been fulfilled and a Land Use Application may be submitted for review. The owner of 333 Park proposes to demolish all non-historic additions and relocate the historic resource to a non-historic lot on 931 Gibson as a receiving lot. This proposed receiving lot is located in the R-15A zone district with an existing single-family dwelling that is also proposed for demolition. The owner proposes to fully restore the historic resources after the relocation, build a detached garage towards the rear of the lot, and may request a historic landmark lot split. The proposal requires approval by both the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) and City Council to relocate the historic resources on 333 Park to an appropriate receiving site (Section 26.415.090.C), delist 333 Park (Section 26.415.050), designate 931 Gibson after receiving the historic resources (Section 26.415.030), and request for the historic preservation benefit of a historic landmark lot split (Section 26.415.110.A). The new construction will also be subject to Residential Design Standards for single-family development (Section 26.410). The combination of relocation and demolition at 333 Park is considered development and is therefore subject to Stream Margin Review. The proposal will likely qualify for an exemption, but the applicant needs to demonstrate that the project meets the review criteria for Section 26.435.040.B. The applicant will need to provide full details regarding the plan for safe relocation, repair and preservation of the historic resources as part of the requirements for relocation. (Please reference the code section below on relocation.) Municipal Code Section 26.415.090.C C. Standard for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: Exhibit J Page 62 of 101P131 IV.A. 2 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. The HPC reviews all development on historic landmarked properties, and will perform all reviews for this project. COMBINED REVIEW PROCESS (Section 26.304.060.B.1): Step 1: HPC review application and provide recommendation to City Council regarding the following land use reviews: - Historic Preservation Major Development (Conceptual Design) - Relocation of Designated Historic Properties - Stream Margin Review - Rescinding Designation - Designation of Historic Properties - Residential Design Standards - Historic Landmark Lot Split Step 2: City Council review and approval of all land use reviews: - Historic Preservation Major Development (Conceptual Design) - Relocation of Designated Historic Properties - Stream Margin Review - Rescinding Designation - Designation of Historic Properties - Residential Design Standards - Historic Landmark Lot Split Step 3: HPC review and provide final decision for Major Development (Final Design) dealing with design details including landscape, lighting and materials. Final Review will require a separate pre-application summary and land use application. Land Use Code Section(s): 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.410 Residential Design Standards 26.415 Historic Preservation 26.415.030 Designation of Historic Properties 26.415.050 Rescinding Designation 26.415.070.D Historic Preservation – Major Development 26.415.090 Relocation of Designated Historic Properties 26.415.110.A Historic Landmark Lot Split – Benefit 26.435.040 Stream Margin Review 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.710.040 Medium-Density Residential (R-6) 26.710.060 Moderate-Density Residential (R-15A) Page 63 of 101P132 IV.A. 3 Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience: Land Use Code: http://cityofaspen.com/276/Title-26-Land-Use-Code HPC Design Guidelines: https://www.cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/Home/View/310 Land Use Application: http://cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/Home/View/305 Review by: Staff for completeness and recommendation Referral Agencies for recommendations HPC for recommendation City Council for approval Public Hearing: Yes, at Conceptual and Final review Neighborhood Outreach: No. Referral Agencies: Engineering, Parks, and Environmental Health. Planning Fees: $3,250 for 10 billable hours of staff time. (Additional/ lesser hours will be billed/ refunded at a rate of $325 per hour.) Referral Agencies Fee: $325 for one hour deposit with Engineering, $975 Parks flat fee, $975 Environmental Health flat fee. Total Deposit: $5,525. Please submit the completed application to the Community Development Office on the Third Floor of City Hall: Completed Land Use Application and signed fee agreement. Pre-application Conference Summary (this document). Street address and legal description for both parcels (333 Park and 931 Gibson), consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application. Letter from the current owner of 931 Gibson acknowledging and allowing the proposed Land Use Application. Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. HOA Compliance form (Attached) for both properties. List of adjacent property owners for both properties within 300’ for public hearing. An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating both parcels within the City of Aspen. Page 64 of 101P133 IV.A. 4 Site improvement survey for both properties including topography and vegetation showing the current status, certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. A written description of the proposal (scope of work) and written explanation of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application and relevant land use approvals associated with the property. Detailed plan for safe relocation, repair and preservation of the historic resources. Sufficient evidence/explanation describing the property 333 Park no longer meeting the criteria for designation. Written description of how the property 931 Gibson meets the criteria for designation. Scaled drawings of all proposed structure(s) or addition(s) depicting their form, including their height, massing, scale, proportions and roof plan; and the primary features of all elevations. A proposed site plan. Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding both properties including photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location and extent of proposed work. Completed copy of the Residential Design Standard checklist: https://www.cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/View/1697/RDS-Application-Packet---SF-DX Once the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted: 1 digital PDF copy of the complete application packet by email to sarah.yoon@cityofaspen.com. Please separate the text and drawings into different files. 12 sets of all graphics printed at 11x17 Total deposit for review of the application. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. Page 65 of 101P134 IV.A. View your transaction progress 24/7 via Stewart Online Ask us about your login today! Stewart Title - Aspen 620 East Hopkins Ave Aspen, CO 81611 Date:May 24, 2018 File Number:01330-97252- Amendment No. C7 Property:333 Park Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611 Please direct all Closing inquiries to: Priscilla Prohl-Cooper Phone:(970) 925-3577 Fax:(866) 277-9353 Email Address:pprohl@stewart.com BMH Investments Ltd WIRED FUNDS ARE REQUIRED ON ALL CASH PURCHASE TRANSACTIONS. FEEL FREE TO CONTACT THE ESCROW OFFICE AS NOTED ON THIS PAGE TO OBTAIN WIRING INSTRUCTIONS. We Appreciate Your Business and Look Forward to Serving You in the Future. Exhibit K- 333 Park Page 66 of 101P135 IV.A. ALTA Commitment (6/17/06) ALTA Commitment Form COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued by STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, a Texas Corporation (“Company”), for a valuable consideration, commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the Proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges and compliance with the Requirements; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions of this Commitment. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the Proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A by the Company. All liability and obligation under this Commitment shall cease and terminate six months after the Effective Date or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue the policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. The Company will provide a sample of the policy form upon request. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by a validating officer or authorized signatory. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A. Countersigned by: Stewart Title - Aspen 620 East Hopkins Ave Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-3577 Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. File No. 01330-97252 004-UN ALTA Commitment (6/17/06) Page 67 of 101P136 IV.A. CONDITIONS 1. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquired actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy o r policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. This Commitment is a contract to issue one or more title insurance policies and is not an abstract of title or a report of the condition of title. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mo rtgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. 5.The policy to be issued contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amount o f Insurance is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties.You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at< http://www.alta.org/>. All notices required to be given the Company and any statement in writing required to be furnished the Company shall be addressed to it at P.O. Box 2029, Houston, Texas 77252. Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. File No. 01330-97252 004-UN ALTA Commitment (6/17/06) Page 68 of 101P137 IV.A. COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A File No.: 01330-97252- Amendment No. C7 1. Effective Date: May 21, 2018, at C7 2. Policy or Policies to be issued:Amount of Insurance (a) ALTA Owner's Policy 2006 (Extended) Proposed Insured: BMH Investments, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership (b) ALTA Loan Policy 2006 (Standard) Proposed Insured: 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: Fee Simple 4. Title to the said estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: BMH Investments, Ltd. a Texas limited partnership 5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: A tract of land situated in the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7 and in the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado. Said tract is part of the Lone Pine M.S. 1910 and the Mollie Gibson Lode, M.S. 4281 Am and is more fully described as follows: Beginning at the West Corner of Lot 1, Sunny Park Subdivision, whence corner No. 3 of said Mollie Gibson Lode bears N 43°40'00" W 146.00 feet and S 38°00'00" W 100.00 feet; thence S 46°20'00" W 10.00 feet to a point on the centerline of a road easement as shown on a plat recorded in Book 4 at Page 398 of the records of Pitkin County; thence following said centerline 16.23 feet along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 40.00 feet, the chord of which curve bears S 55°17'30" E 16.12 feet; thence S 66° 55'00" E 49.99 feet along said centerline; thence S 32° 09'58" W 13.39 feet; thence S 50° 17'00" W 130.26 feet; thence N 34° 17'00" W 59.99 feet; thence N 52° 40'00" E 34.33 feet; thence N 43°40'00" W 32.60 feet; thence N 46° 20'00" E 86.00 feet; thence S 43° 40'00" E 32.00 feet to the point of beginning. County of Pitkin, State of Colorado Purported Address: 333 Park Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 STATEMENT OF CHARGES These charges are due and payable before a policy can be issued Basic Rate Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. File No. 01330-97252 CO STG ALTA Commitment Sch A STO Page 1 of 1 STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Page 69 of 101P138 IV.A. File No.: 01330-97252- Amendment No. C7 The following are the requirements to be complied with: 1. 2. Payment to or for the account of the grantor(s) or mortgagor(s) of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record. 3. None NOTE: This product is for informational purposes only. It is not a title insurance product and does not provide any form of coverage. This product is not a guarantee or assurance and does not warrant, or otherwise insure any condition, fact or circumstance. This product does not obligate this Company to issue any policies of title insurance for any subsequent transaction based on the information provided or involving the property described herein. This Company’s sole liability for any error(s) relating to this product is limited to the amount that was paid for this product. COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B PART I Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. File No. 01330-97252 CO STG ALTA Commitment Sch B I Page 1 of 1 STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Page 70 of 101P139 IV.A. File No.: 01330-97252- Amendment No. C7 Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Rights or claims of parties in possession, not shown by the public records. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the public records. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the Effective Date but prior to the date the proposed Insured acquires for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) minerals of whatsoever kind, subsurface and surface substances, in, on, under and that may be produced from the Land, together with all rights, privileges, and immunities relating thereto, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b) or (c) are shown by the Public Records or listed in Schedule B. Water rights, claims or title to water. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. The effect of inclusions in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other district or inclusion in any water service or street improvement area. Reservations and Exceptions contained in United States Patent recorded May 20, 1949 in Book 175 at Page 168. Reservations and Exceptions contained in United States Patent recorded May 20, 1949 in Book 175 at Page 171. Mineral Reservation contained in Deed recorded November 10, 1958 in Book 185 at Page 492. Bibbig Survey recorded August 23, 1973 in Book 4 at Page 398. Ordinance No. 4., Series of 1995 Identifying and Designating Historic Sites and Structures (unrecorded). Bibbig Subdivision Exemption Lot Line Adjustment Plat recorded January 15, 1997 in Book 41 at Page 31 as Reception No. 400915. Agreement for Easements recorded October 7, 1997 as Reception No. 409237. Agreement for Construction of Sanitary Sewer Injection System and Grant of Easements recorded July 31, 1998 as Reception No. 420090. Shared Sewer Service Line Agreement recorded July 31, 1998 as Reception No. 420091. Any rights, easements, interests or claims that may exist by reason of or reflected by the following facts shown on survey dated March 2016 and revised July 2017 by Rocky Mountain Surveying: COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B PART II Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. File No. 01330-97252 CO STG ALTA Commitment Sch B II STO Page 1 of 2 STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Page 71 of 101P140 IV.A. 19. 20. Northeast corner of House, Stairways, Window Well and Gas Meter encroach into 20' Road/Utility Easement Ditch traversing property Communications line and Electrical line located outside of Utility Easement Any and all existing leases and tenancies. Deed of Trust recorded August 21, 2017 as Reception No. 640796 in the amount of $10,000,000.00 NOTE: Exceptions 1 and 4 may be deleted from the policies, provided the seller and buyer execute the Company's affidavits, as required herein, and the Company approves such deletions. If work has been performed on, or in connection with, the subject property (architectural drawings, soils testing, foundation work, installation of materials), and the Company has not reviewed and approved lien waivers and indemnitor financials, Standard Exception 4 (mechanic lien exception) will not be deleted and no mechanic lien coverage will be furnished. Exceptions 2 and 3 may be deleted from the policies, provided the Company receives and approves the survey or survey affidavit if required herein. Exception 5 will not appear on the policies, provided the Company, or its authorized agent, conducts the closing of the proposed transaction and is responsible for the recordation of the documents. COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B PART II Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. File No. 01330-97252 CO STG ALTA Commitment Sch B II STO Page 2 of 2 STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Page 72 of 101P141 IV.A. DISCLOSURES File No.: 01330-97252 Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: A. B. C. THE SUBJECT REAL PROPERTY MAY BE LOCATED IN A SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT; A CERTIFICATE OF TAXES DUE LISTING EACH TAXING JURISDICTION SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE COUNTY TREASURER OR THE COUNTY TREASURER’S AUTHORIZED AGENT; INFORMATION REGARDING SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND THE BOUNDARIES OF SUCH DISTRICTS MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER, OR THE COUNTY ASSESSOR Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-2-2, Section 5, Paragraph G requires that “Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed.” Provided that Stewart Title - Aspen conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner’s Title Policy and the Lender’s Title Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative Mechanic’s Lien Protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception No. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner’s Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A. B. C. D. E. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single-family residence, which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or materialmen for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against unfiled Mechanic’s and Materialmen’s Liens. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased, within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and/or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium; fully executed Indemnity agreements satisfactory to the company; and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. To comply with the provisions of C.R.S. 10-11-123, the Company makes the following disclosure: a. b. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner’s permission. NOTE: THIS DISCLOSURE APPLIES ONLY IF SCHEDULE B, SECTION 2 OF THE TITLE COMMITMENT HEREIN INCLUDES AN EXCEPTION FOR SEVERED MINERALS. Notice of Availability of a Closing Protection Letter:Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulation 8-1-3, Section 5, Paragraph C (11)(f), a closing protection letter is available to the consumer. x NOTHING HEREIN CONTAINED WILL BE DEEMED TO OBLIGATE THE COMPANY TO PROVIDE ANY OF THE COVERAGES REFERRED TO HEREIN, UNLESS THE ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE FULLY SATISFIED. File No.: 01330-97252 CO Commitment Disclosure Revised 1/1/17 Page 73 of 101P142 IV.A. STG Privacy Notice Stewart Title Companies WHAT DO THE STEWART TITLE COMPANIES DO WITH YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION? Federal and applicable state law and regulations give consumers the right to limit some but not all sharing. Federal and applicable state law regulations also require us to tell you how we collect, share, and protect your personal information. Please read this notice carefully to understand how we use your personal information. This privacy notice is distributed on behalf of the Stewart Title Guaranty Company and its title affiliates (the Stewart Title Companies), pursuant to Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA). The types of personal information we collect and share depend on the product or service that you have sought through us. This information can include social security numbers and driver's license number. All financial companies, such as the Stewart Title Companies, need to share customers' personal information to run their everyday business—to process transactions and maintain customer accounts. In the section below, we list the reasons that we can share customers' personal information; the reasons that we choose to share; and whether you can limit this sharing. . Reasons we can share your personal information.Do we share Can you limit this sharing? For our everyday business purposes— to process your transactions and maintain your account. This may include running the business and managing customer accounts, such as processing transactions, mailing, and auditing services, and responding to court orders and legal investigations. Yes No For our marketing purposes— to offer our products and services to you. Yes No For joint marketing with other financial companies No We don't share For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information about your transactions and experiences. Affiliates are companies related by common ownership or control. They can be financial and non-financial companies. Our affiliates may include companies with a Stewart name; financial companies, such as Stewart Title Company Yes No For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information about your creditworthiness.No We don't share For our affiliates to market to you — For your convenience, Stewart has developed a means for you to opt out from its affiliates marketing even though such mechanism is not legally required. Yes Yes, send your first and last name, the email address used in your transaction, your Stewart file number and the Stewart office location that is handling your transaction by email to optout@stewart.com or fax to 1-800-335-9591. For non-affiliates to market to you. Non-affiliates are companies not related by common ownership or control. They can be financial and non-financial companies. No We don't share We may disclose your personal information to our affiliates or to non-affiliates as permitted by law. If you request a transaction with a non-affiliate, such as a third party insurance company, we will disclose your personal information to that non-affiliate. [We do not control their subsequent use of information, and suggest you refer to their privacy notices.] SHARING PRACTICES How often do the Stewart Title Companies notify me about their practices? We must notify you about our sharing practices when you request a transaction. How do the Stewart Title Companies protect my personal information? To protect your personal information from unauthorized access and use, we use security measures that comply with federal law. These measures include computer, file, and building safeguards. How do the Stewart Title Companies collect my personal information? We collect your personal information, for example, when you ß ß request insurance-related services provide such information to us We also collect your personal information from others, such as the real estate agent or lender involved in your transaction, credit reporting agencies, affiliates or other companies. What sharing can I limit?Although federal and state law give you the right to limit sharing (e.g., opt out) in certain instances, we do not share your personal information in those instances. Contact us: If you have any questions about this privacy notice, please contact us at: Stewart Title Guaranty Company, 1980 Post Oak Blvd., Privacy Officer, Houston, Texas 77056 File No.: 01330-97252 Page 1 Revised 11-19-2013Page 74 of 101P143 IV.A. Form 5011000 (6-22-10) Page 1 of 2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment (6-17-06) Title Insurance Commitment ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Commitment INFORMATION The Title Insurance Commitment is a legal contract between you and the Company. It is issued to show the basis on which we will issue a Title Insurance Policy to you. The Policy will insure you against certain risks to the land title, subject to the limitations shown in the Policy. The Company will give you a sample of the Policy form, if you ask. The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurance is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or you as the exclusive remedy of the parties. You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/. The Commitment is based on the land title as of the Commitment Date. Any changes in the land title or the transaction may affect the Commitment and the Policy. The Commitment is subject to its Requirements, Exceptions and Conditions. THIS INFORMATION IS NOT PART OF THE TITLE INSURANCE COMMITMENT. YOU SHOULD READ THE COMMITMENT VERY CAREFULLY. If you have any questions about the Commitment, contact: FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 1 First American Way, Santa Ana, California 92707 TABLE OF CONTENTS AGREEMENT TO ISSUE POLICY 1 CONDITIONS 2 SCHEDULE A Insert 1. Commitment Date 2. Policies to be Issued, Amounts and Proposed Insureds 3. Interest in the Land and Owner 4. Description of the Land SCHEDULE B-I - REQUIREMENTS Insert SCHEDULE B-II - EXCEPTIONS Insert AGREEMENT TO ISSUE POLICY We agree to issue policy to you according to the terms of the Commitment. When we show the policy amount and your name as the proposed insured in Schedule A, this Commitment becomes effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A. If the Requirements shown in this Commitment have not been met within six months after the Commitment Date, our obligation under this Commitment will end. Also, our obligation under this Commitment will end when the Policy is issued and then our obligation to you will be under the Policy. Our obligation under this Commitment is limited by the following: The Provisions in Schedule A. The Requirements in Schedule B-I. The Exceptions in Schedule B-II. The Conditions on Page 2. This Commitment is not valid without SCHEDULE A and Sections I and II of SCHEDULE B. (This Commitment is valid only when Schedules A and B are attached) This jacket was created electronically and constitutes an original document Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. [[ Exhibit K- 931 Gibson Page 75 of 101P144 IV.A. Form 5011000 (6-22-10) Page 2 of 2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment (6-17-06) CONDITIONS 1.DEFINITIONS (a) "Mortgage" means mortgage, deed of trust or other security instrument. (b) "Public Records" means title records that give constructive notice of matters affecting your title according to the state statutes where your land is located. 2.LATER DEFECTS The Exceptions in Schedule B - Section II may be amended to show any defects, liens or encumbrances that appear for the first time in the public records or are created or attached between the Commitment Date and the date on which all of the Requirements (a) and (c) of Schedule B - Section I are met. We shall have no liability to you because of this amendment. 3.EXISTING DEFECTS If any defects, liens or encumbrances existing at Commitment Date are not shown in Schedule B, we may amend Schedule B to show them. If we do amend Schedule B to show these defects, liens or encumbrances, we shall be liable to you according to Paragraph 4 below unless you knew of this information and did not tell us about it in writing. 4.LIMITATION OF OUR LIABILITY Our only obligation is to issue to you the Policy referred to in this Commitment, when you have met its Requirements. If we have any liability to you for any loss you incur because of an error in this Commitment, our liability will be limited to your actual loss caused by your relying on this Commitment when you acted in good faith to: Comply with the Requirements shown in Schedule B - Section I or Eliminate with our written consent any Exceptions shown in Schedule B - Section II. We shall not be liable for more than the Policy Amount shown in Schedule A of this Commitment and our liability is subject to the terms of the Policy form to be issued to you. 5.CLAIMS MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT Any claim, whether or not based on negligence, which you may have against us concerning the title to the land must be based on this Commitment and is subject to its terms. Page 76 of 101P145 IV.A. Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All right reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 18003929 American Land Title Association ALTA Commitment Form Adopted 6-17-06 First American Title Insurance Co. Commitment No.: 18003929 SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: May 11, 2018 at 07:45 AM 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: Amount Premium A. ALTA Owners Policy (06/17/06)$4,950,000.00 $6,120.00 Proposed Insured:BMH Investments LTD, a _______________. Certificate of Taxes Due $25.00 Endorsements: CO-110.1 (Delete 1, 2, 3, 4)$75.00 Additional Charges:$0 Total $6,220.00 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is Fee simple. 4. Title to the Fee simple or interest in the land is at the Effective Date vested in: 931 Gibson LLC, a Colorado limited liability company 5. The land referred to in the Commitment is described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT A ATTACHED HERETO For informational purposes only, the property address is: 931 Gibson Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611. Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC By: Winter VanAlstine Authorized Officer or Agent FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES OR SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COMMITMENT, CONTACT: Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC, 715 West Main Street, Suite 202, Aspen, CO 81611, Phone: 970 925-7328, Fax: 970 925-7348. Page 77 of 101P146 IV.A. Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All right reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 18003929 American Land Title Association ALTA Commitment Form Adopted 6-17-06 First American Title Insurance Co. Commitment No.: 18003929 SCHEDULE B 1. Requirements: 1. Pay the agreed amounts for the interest in the land and/or the mortgage to be insured. 2. Pay us the premiums, fees and charges for the policy. 3. Documents satisfactory to us creating the interest in the land and/or the mortgage to be insured must be signed, delivered and recorded. 4. You must tell us in writing the name of anyone not referred to in this Commitment who will get an interest in the land or who will make a loan on the land. We may then make additional requirements or exceptions. 5. Payment of all taxes, charges and assessments, levied and assessed against the subject premises which are due and payable. 6. A Certification of Taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from the County Treasurer or an authorized agent (pursuant to Senate Bill 92-143, CRS 10-11-122). 7. Receipt by the Company of the appropriate affidavit as to new construction and indemnifying the Company against any unfiled materialmen's or mechanic's liens. 8. Warranty Deed must be sufficient to convey the fee simple estate or interest in the land described or referred to herein, from 931 Gibson LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, to BMH Investments LTD, a _______________, the proposed insured, Schedule A, item 2A. NOTE: C.R.S. Section 38-35-109(2) required that a notation of the purchaser's legal address, (not necessarily the same as the property address) be included on the face of the Deed to be recorded. 9. Release of the Deed of Trust from 931 Gibson LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County for the benefit of FirstBank, to secure an indebtedness in the principal sum of $2,200,000.00, and any other amounts and/obligations secured thereby, dated April 20, 2016, and recorded April 20, 2016, as Reception No. 628722. 10. Record a Statement of Authority to provide prima facie evidence of existence of 931 Gibson LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, an entity capable of holding property, and the name of the person authorized to execute instruments affecting title to real property as authorized by C.R.S. Section 38-30-172. 11. A copy of the properly signed and executed Operating Agreement if written, for 931 Gibson LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, to be submitted to the Company for review. 12. Certificate of Good Standing from the Colorado Secretary of State for 931 Gibson LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. Page 78 of 101P147 IV.A. American Land Title Association ALTA Commitment Form Adopted 6-17-06 First American Title Insurance Co. Commitment No.: 18003929 SCHEDULE B (Continued) Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All right reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 18003929 13. Record a Statement of Authority to provide prima facie evidence of existence of BMH Investments LTD, a _______________, an entity capable of holding property, and the name of the person authorized to execute instruments affecting title to real property as authorized by C.R.S. Section 38-30-172. 14. Certificate of Good Standing from the Colorado Secretary of State for BMH Investments LTD, a _______________. 15. Certificate of Incorporation, Certificate of Authority or Certificate of Limited Partnership, as certified by the Colorado Secretary of State, or Trade Name Affidavit, whichever is appropriate for BMH Investments LTD, a _______________. 16. Improvement Survey Plat sufficient in form, content and certification acceptable to the Company. Exception will be taken to adverse matters disclosed thereby. 17. This Title Commitment is subject to underwriter approval. 2. Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the Public Records, but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the Public Records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the Land would disclose, and which are not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown in the Public Records. 5. Any and all unpaid taxes, assessments and unredeemed tax sales. 6. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the Public Records. 7. Taxes and assessments for the year 2018, and subsequent years, a lien not yet due or payable. 8. Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States, as described in the United States Patent dated August 21, 1958, and recorded August 29, 1958, in Book 185 at Page 69, as Reception No. 106874. Page 79 of 101P148 IV.A. American Land Title Association ALTA Commitment Form Adopted 6-17-06 First American Title Insurance Co. Commitment No.: 18003929 SCHEDULE B (Continued) Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All right reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 18003929 9. The premises hereby granted, with the exception of the surface, may be entered by the proprietor of any other vein, lode or ledge, the top or appex of which lies outside of the boundary of said granted premises, should the same in its dip be found to penetrate, intersect, or extend into said premises, for the purpose of extracting and removing the ore from such other vein, lode or ledge and right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States, as described in the United States Patent recorded October 21, 1955, in Book 180 at Page 454, as Reception No. 103078. 10. Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under An Ordinance Providing for the Sale of Certain Real Property Owned by Pitkin County, recorded July 1, 1986, in Book 513 at Page 873, as Reception No. 279225. 11. Perpetual easement for the purpose of access, as described in the Quit Claim Deed, recorded July 2, 1986, in Book 513 at Page 945, as Reception No. 279255. 12. Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Memorandum of Contract, dated August 11, 2015, and recorded September 2, 2015, as Reception No. 622944. 13. Any existing leases or tenancies, and any and all parties claiming by, through or under said lessees. Page 80 of 101P149 IV.A. ALTA Commitment 18003929 Exhibit A First American Title Insurance Co. Commitment No.: 18003929 EXHIBIT A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: Parcel 1 A Parcel of Land situated in the Southeast ¼ of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th Principal Meridian more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point whence corner No. 11 of the East Aspen Additional Townsite bears South 54°52’17” East 58.10 feet; Thence South 34°54’00” West 46.63 feet to The True Point of Beginning; Thence North 63°58’00” West 185.12 feet; Thence South 15°30’00” West 86.60 feet; Thence South 63°54’00” East 155.54 feet; Thence North 34°45’00” East 88.30 feet to The Point of Beginning. Exception those portions which lies within the boundaries of Deeds recorded February 6, 1970 in Book 246 at Page 672 “Candreia Parcel” and recorded April 12, 1982 in Book 424 at Page 966 “Zupancis Parcel”. Also exception that portion as described in Quit Claim Deed recorded August 11, 1994 in Book 758 at Page 230, Pitkin County, Colorado. Parcel 2 A Tract of Land situated in the Sunset Lode, U.S.M.S. No. 5310, being more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly side line of said Sunset Lode whence Corner No. 10 of East Aspen Additional Townsite bears North 34°45’ East 46.63 Feet; Thence North 63° 58’ West 185.12 feet to a point on the Westerly side line of said Lode; Thence following said Westerly side line North 15°30” East 17.03; Thence South 62°54’41” East 150.27 feet; Thence 39.76 feet along the arc of a curve to the right having a radius of 295.57 feet to a point on said Easterly side; Thence following said Easterly side line South 34°45’ West 10.70 feet to The Point of Beginning. Together with any property lying Northerly of the above described property and the Southerly line of Gibson Avenue. Exception that portion as described in Quit Claim Deed recorded August 11, 1994 in Book 758 at Page 230, Pitkin County, Colorado. Page 81 of 101P150 IV.A. First American Title Insurance Company DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to C.R.S. 30-10-406(3)(a) all documents received for recording or filing in the Clerk and Recorder’s office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one-half of an inch. The Clerk and Recorder will refuse to record or file any document that does not conform to the requirements of this section. NOTE: If this transaction includes a sale of the property and the price exceeds $100,000.00, the seller must comply with the disclosure/withholding provisions of C.R.S. 39-22-604.5 (Nonresident withholding). NOTE: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that “Every title insurance company shall be responsible to the proposed insured(s) subject to the terms and conditions of the title commitment, other than the effective date of the title commitment, for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title insurance company, or its agent, conducts the closing and settlement service that is in conjunction with its issuance of an owner’s policy of title insurance and is responsible for the recording and filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed. Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, the company will not issue its owner’s policy or owner’s policies of title insurance contemplated by this commitment until it has been provided a Certificate of Taxes due or other equivalent documentation from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer’s authorized agent; or until the Proposed Insured has notified or instructed the company in writing to the contrary. The subject property may be located in a special taxing district. A Certificate of Taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer’s authorized agent. Information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owner’s policy commitments containing a mineral severance instrument exception, or exceptions, in Schedule B, Section 2. A. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and B. That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner’s permission. NOTE: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2, Affirmative mechanic’s lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner’s Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: NOTE: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2, Affirmative mechanic’s lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner’s Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. B. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic’s and material-men’s liens. D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium, fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. Page 82 of 101P151 IV.A. First American Title Insurance Company NOTE: Pursuant to C.R.S. 38-35-125(2) no person or entity that provides closing and settlement services for a real estate transaction shall disburse funds as a part of such services until those funds have been received and are available for immediate withdrawal as a matter of right. NOTE: C.R.S. 39-14-102 requires that a real property transfer declaration accompany any conveyance document presented for recordation in the State of Colorado. Said declaration shall be completed and signed by either the grantor or grantee. NOTE: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado division of insurance within the department of regulatory agencies. NOTE: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of an ALTA Closing Protection Letter which may, upon request, be provided to certain parties to the transaction identified in the commitment. Nothing herein contained will be deemed to obligate the company to provide any of the coverages referred to herein unless the above conditions are fully satisfied. Page 83 of 101P152 IV.A. ATTORNEYS TITLE INSURANCE AGENCY OF ASPEN, LLC 715 West Main Street, Suite 202 Aspen, CO 81611 Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC Privacy Policy Notice PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE Title V. of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, directly or through it affiliates, from sharing non-public personal information about you with a nonaffiliated third party unless the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such as the type of information that it collects about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, we are providing you with this document, which notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC. We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources: Information we receive from you, such as on application or other forms. Information about your transactions we secure from out files, or from our affiliates or others. Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate agent or lender. Unless it is specifically stated otherwise in an amended Privacy Policy Notice, no additional nonpublic personal information will be collected about you. We may disclose any of the above information that we collect about our customers or former customer to our affiliates or to nonaffiliated third parties as permitted by law. We also may disclose this information about our customers or former customers to the following types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or with whom we have joint marketing agreements: Financial service providers such as companies engaged in banking, consumer finance, securities and insurance. Non-financial companies such as envelope stuffers and other fulfillment service providers. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED BY LAW. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. TELEPHONE 970 925-7328 FACSIMILE 970 925-7348 Page 84 of 101P153 IV.A. 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM May 15, 2018 Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 931 Gibson Avenue; Aspen, CO. Ms. Garrow: Please accept this letter authorizing BMH Investments and BendonAdams to submit land use applications associated with the relocation of the 333 Park structure to 931 Gibson Ave. and associated reviews. If there are any questions about the foregoing or if I can assist, please do not hesitate to contact me. Property – 931 Gibson Avenue Legal Description – Section: 7 Township: 10 Range: 84 LAND IN SE4 OF SEC 7-10-84 DESC BY M/B BK 513 PG 942, TRACT OF LAND IN THE SUNSET LODE USMS 5310 DESC BY M/B BK 513 PG 945 FROM THE BOARD OF PITKIN CO COMM 0% 0 ACRESSUNSET LODE, U.S.M.S. 5310; Parcel ID # 2737-074-00-004. Kind Regards, 931 Gibson LLC 623 East Hopkins Aspen, CO 81611 Mark Friedland 05/15/2018 Exhibit L Page 85 of 101P154 IV.A. Exhibit M Page 86 of 101P155 IV.A. Exhibit NPage 87 of 101P156IV.A. Exhibit N Page 88 of 101P157 IV.A. Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. From Parcel: 273718100017 on 05/21/2018 Instructions: Disclaimer: http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com Exhibit O - 333 Park Page 89 of 101P158 IV.A. WEIGAND NESTOR R JR WICHITA, KS 67202 150 N MARKET ST BROOKS KERRI L ASPEN, CO 81611 112 MIDLAND PARK PL TROUSDALE MARGARET OB GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80121 7 ALEXANDER LN TAYLOR JOHN IAN ASPEN, CO 81611 331 MIDLAND AVE 315-317 PARK AVE CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 315 PARK AVE LDRAM 2 LLC PARADISE VALLEY, AZ 85253 3900 E BETHANY HOME RD HANSEN BETH ASPEN, CO 81611 811 MIDLAND PK PL # H11 KALNITSKY LINDA BUDIN TRUST WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 1701 S FLAGLER DR #1601 SUNIER ALAIN BRONXVILLE, NY 10708 29 VILLAGE LN MCKNIGHT SPENCER ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #10 IBARA RON CAYUCOS, CA 93430 PO BOX 776 SEID MEL ASPEN, CO 81611 1104 DALE AVE MCDONALD FRANCIS B ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 4671 BIBBIG DIETER ASPEN, CO 81611 333 PARK AVE ASPEN HILLS UNIT A-8 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 612 W MAIN ST LOWE GREGG & DIANA DURHAM, NC 277137599 483 ROSEMONT DR HEMMING GREGG S & KAREN S ASPEN, CO 81611 311 MIDLAND AVE GRUBBS MATT ASPEN, CO 81611-2412 333 MIDLAND AVE #3 GOODROE SHIRLEY A CAMP HILL , PA 17011 3503 MARGO RD HUMPHREY JESS ASPEN, CO 81611 811 MIDLAND PK PL # H11 MEBEL GREGORY REV LIV TRUST PAIA, HI 96779 46 S LAELUA PL STEIN DEBORAH ASPEN, CO 81611 710 MIDLAND PARK PL WHITE WILLIAM P ASPEN, CO 81611 326 MIDLAND AVE #204 KELLY JESSIE M LTD PARTNERSHIP #1 GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111 6295 GREENWOD PLAZA BLVD PITKIN COUNTY BASALT, CO 81621 123 EMMA RD #204 HRIVNAK THOMAS UNIONVILLE ONTARIO L3R6J3 CANADA, 6 HEDGEWOOD DR PHILLIPS ARTHUR R & HELEN B ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8245 COERDT CLINTON CLAUSS ASPEN, CO 816111595 726 VINE ST MCINTYRE GEOFF & LEE AMORY ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #7 FUENTES DAVID & KATHARINE D ASPEN, CO 81611 302 MIDLAND PARK PL Page 90 of 101P159 IV.A. RIVERVIEW CONDO 26 LLC BOULDER, CO 80301 1630 A 30TH ST PMB #387 KENNEDY WILLIAM W FAMILY TRST BARRINGTON HILLS, IL 60010 218 STEEPLECHASE RD CMTR LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 7631 LUPI-PEATE NATALIA ASPEN, CO 81611 121 MIDLAND PARK PL FARR TENA D SPRECKELS, CA 93962 PO BOX 7534 ASPEN HILLS CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 160 MIDLAND AVE HELBING ATHENA ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #6 ASPEN VIEW CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 326 MIDLAND AVE 328 PARK/327 MIDLAND CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 328 PARK AVE 165 PARK CIRCLE CONDO ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA CUNNINGHAM PAMELA M ASPEN, CO 81611 502 MIDLAND PARK PL GORBITZ HEIDI & PATRIC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 647 MCPHEE JAMES MICHAEL & ANNE MARIE ASPEN, CO 81611 401 MIDLAND PARK PL CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST BROWN DOUGLAS & ABBY FAM TRUST BOULDER, CO 80302 980 6TH ST WILLCOX DENNIS ASPEN, CO 81611 722 MIDLAND PARK PL HOLLINGER JONATHAN CARBONDALE, CO 81623 326 HWY 133 #270H NEARY DENNIS R & NANCY CENTLIVRE INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46236 8282 BOWLINE CT ARAPAHOE LLC ST PAUL, MN 55110 1201 N BIRCH LAKE BLVD LAWRENCE LARRY S QPR TRUST LA JOLLA, CA 92037 8560 RUETTE MONTE CARLO POST MARISA JOY ASPEN, CO 81611 403 MIDLAND PK PL # D3 KELLY JESSIE M LP #1 GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111 6295 GREENWOOD PLAZA BLVD SMITH DONALD NELSON ASPEN, CO 81611 501 MIDLAND PARK PL GOODMAN DREW I GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80121-1336 5721 GREEN OAKS DR ASPEN HILLS INVESTORS LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 1048 341 PARK LLC GLENCOE, IL 60022 303 SHORELINE CT DECRAY MARCELLA TRUST SANTA MONICA, CA 90405 1528 HILL ST SPONAR ANTON K & JUDY ASPEN, CO 81611-2486 222 MIDLAND PARK PL SACHSE TODD DETROIT, MI 48226 1528 WOODWARD AVE #600 990 KING ST UNIT #4 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 1295 RIVERSIDE DR Page 91 of 101P160 IV.A. RICH VICTORIA CREVE COEUR, MO 63141 455 RIDGECORDE BIRRFELDER BRIGITTE T ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3035 STEAR RONALD & MARIA F ASPEN, CO 81611 402 MIDLAND PARK PL WEISBARD MARK W WILMETTE, IL 60091 1706 CENTRAL AVE EPSTEN VIRGINIA H QPR TRUST KANSAS CITY, MO 64112 5038 WALNUT ST GOLDEN SALLIE ASPEN, CO 81611 325 PARK AVE ZORRITO LLC SARASOTA, FL 34239 1901 FLOYD ST WINKLER JILL C ASPEN, CO 81611 212 MIDLAND PARK PL KEARN ROBERT & ORENE FAMILY TRUST HILLSBOROUGH, CA 94010 1831 WILLOW RD LACROIX TIMOTHY ASPEN, CO 81611 113 MIDLAND PARK PL RUSSELL LYNN C ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8904 DODINGTON SUSAN M ASPEN, CO 81611 221 MIDLAND PARK PL 981 KING STREET LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3123 WERTZ LIMOR ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #2 KRIGEL SANFORD P TRUST KANSAS CITY, MO 64111 4520 MAIN ST CADWALLADER MICHELE C FAMILY TRUST SAN ANTONIO, TX 78209 250 GENESEO RD WAGAR RICHARD H ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9063 INDEPENDENCE CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 1104 DALE AVE KRIGEL SCOTT W TRUST KANSAS CITY, MO 64111 4520 MAIN ST RESTAINO BECKER TRUST SAN ANSELMO, CA 94960 72 ALDER AVE KENNEDY WILLIAM W REV LVG TRUST BARRINGTON, IL 60010 218 STEEPLECHASE RD MANUEL CATHERINE & LINCOLN ASPEN, CO 81611 409 PARK CIR #2 BESTIC JEFFREY B ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 2267 CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST LEE BARBARA C TRUST BROOKLINE, MA 02445 35 FISHER AVE LOWE SARA M & CORY J ASPEN, CO 81611 407 PARK AVE #B TERKUN MARK ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 329 EVERETTE JOHN ASPEN, CO 81611 712 MIDLAND PARK PL PEATE WILLIAM DOUGLAS ASPEN, CO 81611 121 MIDLAND PARK PL BROWNELL CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 996 GIBSON AVE Page 92 of 101P161 IV.A. HITCHCOCK SAMANTHA ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 329 BROOKE TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 1024 E HOPKINS #17 KROMELOW BASIL M & LAUREANNE L CHICAGO, IL 60610 55 W DELAWARE PL SCHROEDER PATRICIA A REV TRUST PINE RIVER, MN 56474 36261 SPRUCE TR MARTHINSSON NOSTDAHL CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE WHITE ROBIN ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 2771 311 PARK AVE LLC SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94123 3047 FILLMORE ST ASPEN ASSET LLC GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 816014395 2701 MIDLAND AVE #8312 MACCRACKEN SCOTT R ASPEN, CO 81611 403 MIDLAND PK PL # D3 WEBSTER DAVID H ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 10362 WESTERMAN JEFF & TERI ENCINO, CA 91316 5130 SHOSHONE AVE BAKKEN JOHN & LIZA N ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 12064 FARR TENA D 1989 TRUST SPRECKELS, CA 93962 PO BOX 7534 VICENZI HEATHER L TRUST ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 2238 TDR REVOCABLE TRUST ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314 201 N UNION ST #300 WELDEN TODD E & DEBORAH C ASPEN, CO 81611 503 MIDLAND PARK PL #E3 AUVIL PAUL R JR TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 1024 E HOPKINS AVE #14 KING WALLACE M OLATHE, CO 81425 PO BOX 590 EIS JENNIFER L ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 11315 PERLEY PAUL S ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 12155 FAT CITY APARTMENTS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 625 S WEST END STREET #4 P S W D INVESTMENT CO LTD ASPEN, CO 81611 215 S MONARCH ST #101 BIRACH KAREN ASPEN, CO 81611-2414 122 MIDLAND PARK PL ALVIS STEVEN D & MARCI L HOUSTON, TX 77008 1235 NORTH LOOP WEST # 205 990 KING ST UNIT #2 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 1295 RIVERSIDE DR KEARN ROBERT & ORENE FAMILY TRUST HILLSBOROUGH, CA 94010 1831 WILLOW RD FARRELL SCOTT W ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9656 DIBELLO JACQUELINE ASPEN, CO 81611 990 KING ST # 1 LEE JONATHAN O TRUST BROOKLINE, MA 02445 35 FISHER AVE CHAZEN DAVID FRANKLIN II NEW YORK, NY 10155 150 E 58TH ST 27TH FL Page 93 of 101P162 IV.A. PATTEN DAVID N ASPEN, CO 81611 810 MIDLAND PARK PL ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY ASPEN, CO 81611 210 E HYMAN AVE #202 KURNOS TIMOTHY A ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #9 NICHOLS SCOTT A ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3035 TORPEN CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 1018 E HOPKINS AVE TUSHINGHAM DARREN ASPEN, CO 81611 326 MIDLAND AVE #205 OLDFIELD BARNEY F GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 816014395 2701 MIDLAND AVE #8312 PICKARD NANCY S ASPEN, CO 81611 1020 E HOPKINS AVE #4 KENNEDY WILLIAM W CHILDRENS TRST BARRINGTON HILLS, IL 60010 218 STEEPLECHASE RD BALLOU JONATHAN ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #6 DELYNN JEAN J ASPEN, CO 81611 331 MIDLAND AVE MIDLAND PARK PLACE CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 112 MIDLAND PARK PL JOHNSTON PEGGY REV TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 111 MIDLAND PARK PL MCLAUGHLIN KEVIN ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #4 BLOMQUIST JENIFER L ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 12155 MCCOY CARLTON ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9349 622 OCEAN LLC ISLE OF PALMS, SC 29451 PO BOX 522 KOLBERG JUDITH A ASPEN, CO 81611 501 MIDLAND PARK PL SHERIDAN MARGARET BRONXVILLE, NY 10708 29 VILLAGE LN DECRAY MARCELLA IRREV PROPERTY TRUST SANTA MONICA, CA 90405 1528 HILL ST J2C LLC 1130 VIENNA AUSTRIA , PACASSISTRASSE 62 AUVIL CAROL A TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 1024 E HOPKINS AVE #14 LAWRENCE MARA B QPR TRUST LA JOLLA, CA 92037 8560 RUETTE MONTE CARLO COLAS CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 341 PARK AVE CARDWELL ROBERT A LAGUNA BEACH, CA 92651 1672 LOUISE ST HERMELIN ASPEN LLC FRANKLIN, MI 48025 32205 BINGHAM RD SURVIVORS TRUST ALAMEDA, CA 94501 1352 BAY ST RIVER HOUSE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 729 E BLEEKER ST MCGAVOCK MARGARET JANE TRUST ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 533 JEFFERSON GREG ASPEN, CO 81611 711 MIDLAND PARK PL Page 94 of 101P163 IV.A. KALNITSKY EUGENE TRUST WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 1701 S FLAGLER DR #1601 LIEN-TWO CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA PARK AVE CURRAN MIKE & VERONICA REV TRUST HOUSTON, TX 77019 2207 DEL MONTE DR HENDRICKS LYNDELL B ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 11152 LUPI-PEATE NATALIA ANDREA ASPEN, CO 81611 121 MIDLAND PARK PL # I 21 PARK AVENUE TOWNHOMES CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 407 PARK AVE UNIT A GOLDSTEIN GARY L LVG TRUST NO 1 ASPEN, CO 816114109 1020 E HOPKINS AVE #7 GARTON SARA B ASPEN, CO 81611 110 MIDLAND PARK PL COWLING LINDA ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9656 SEMPLE SASHA L ASPEN, CO 81611 601 E HYMAN AVE JOHNSON SHAEL ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3549 GLEASON AMY ASPEN, CO 81611 712 MIDLAND PARK PL HECK JAMES C ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8416 DAVIS D STONE ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8904 GOLDSTEIN BARBARA E SIMON LVG TRUST NO 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 1020 E HOPKINS AVE #7 KETAI JAMES A DETROIT, MI 48226 1528 WOODWARD AVE #600 ANDRULAITIS FIONA MCWILLIAM & TIMOTHY A ASPEN, CO 81611 409 PARK CIR #4 PARK AVENUE CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 102 PARK AVE KOCH KATHRYN S & JOHN F ASPEN, CO 81611 304 MIDLAND PARK PL C-4 PAGANO JOSEPH K & JOSEPH A ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 7785 KELLEY BRAD BUCKLEY & SHARI L EDEN, UT 84310 1736 N 6250 E GRIFFITHS THOMAS W ASPEN, CO 81611 504 MIDLAND PARK PL GRAHAM MARGOT ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 2254 CALK LAURA E ASPEN, CO 81611-2472 722 MIDLAND PARK PL RIVERVIEW CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA MITCHELL ELSA R ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 2492 337 MIDLAND AVE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 612 W MAIN ST EPSTEN BRADFORD M QPR TRUST KANSAS CITY, MO 641122757 5038 WALNUT ST BELLIS ARTHUR P ASPEN, CO 81611 1008 E HOPKINS AVE KENNEDY PATRICIA ANN REV LIV TRUST BARRINGTON, IL 60010 218 STEEPLECHASE RD Page 95 of 101P164 IV.A. CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST ARNAL ALVARO JOSE ASPEN, CO 816111595 726 VINE ST SMITH JACK L & DIANE M EVERGREEN, CO 80439 434 COTTONWOOD DR PARK 269 LLC LEAWOOD, KS 66211 2405 W 114 ST MCDONALD FRANCIS B ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 4671 FERLISI MARY SANDRA LIVING TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 326 MIDLAND AVE #307 PEATE WILLIAM DOUGLAS ASPEN, CO 81611 121 MIDLAND PARK PL # I 21 HAGEN CATHERINE ANNE ASPEN, CO 81611 210 MIDLAND PARK PL HOUBEN CYNTHIA MICHELE ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9616 SEID MEL ASPEN, CO 81611 1104 DALE AVE DUNIGAN PATRICK A DALLAS, TX 75205 4245 N CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY STE 460 MOONEY TIMOTHY ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8931 BELINDA BEE CONDO ASPEN, CO 81611 990 KING ST FEINSTEIN JEROME FAM TRUST LONGBOAT KEY, FL 34228 1211 GULF OF MEXICO DR #901 HIGGINS PAUL ASPEN, CO 81611 303 MIDLAND PARK PL #C-3 Page 96 of 101P165 IV.A. Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. From Parcel: 273707400004 on 05/21/2018 Instructions: Disclaimer: http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com Exhibit O - 931 Gibson Page 97 of 101P166 IV.A. ELA CHARLES S ASPEN, CO 81611 140 MAPLE LN ISAAC THOMAS D REV TRST ASPEN, CO 81611 975 KING ST CRAVEN ELLYN KATHLEEN ASPEN, CO 81611 124 MAPLE LN THALBERG K MARITAL INC TRUST BOZEMAN, MT 59715 128 HITCHING POST RD GIBSON MATCHLESS LLC ATLANTA, GA 30324 1924 PIEDMONT CIR NE BLEEKER STREET REV TRUST ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 22 DOUGHERTY THOMAS P WILMINGTON, DE 19808 5317 LIMESTONE RD HATANAKA HOWARD I ASPEN, CO 81611 980 KING ST LEILA KING LLC SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4 EMBARCADERO CTR # 1900 FOERSTER JAMES ASPEN, CO 81611 0134 MAPLE LN FARR TENA D SPRECKELS, CA 93962 PO BOX 7534 LANG DONALD W ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 4166 CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST BECKER ALAN K TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 950 MATCHLESS DR LAWRENCE LARRY S QPR TRUST LA JOLLA, CA 92037 8560 RUETTE MONTE CARLO BREBNER RICHARD ASPEN, CO 81611 124 MAPLE LN KASABACH JACQUELYN A ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 4166 WEISMAN FAMILY LP MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55406 2708 IRVING AVE S PATTERSON KAREN & CHARLES ASPEN, CO 81611 129 MAPLE LN HEARTSTONE LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 151 SACHSE TODD DETROIT, MI 48226 1528 WOODWARD AVE #600 990 KING ST UNIT #4 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 1295 RIVERSIDE DR GIBSON 910 LLC CHICAGO, IL 60614 1871 N HOWE JUNGQUIST DAVID J REV TRUST SAINT PAUL, MN 55128 6348 HWY 36 BLVD #8 SHEEBER AIMEE ASPEN, CO 81611 138 MAPLE LN WARMING SOLVEIG ASPEN, CO 81611 120 MAPLE LN GIRVIN LINDA A ASPEN, CO 81611 414 N MILL ST CAIN JOHN J TRUST SUNRIVER, OR 97707 18160 COTTONWOOD RD #375 981 KING STREET LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3123 DODARO CHRISTINE & PETER ASPEN, CO 81611 930 MATCHLESS DR Page 98 of 101P167 IV.A. WAGAR RICHARD H ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9063 CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST RYAN MARTHA ASPEN, CO 81611 127 MAPLE LN BECK JEFFREY L & JANET SUE DALLAS, TX 75254 6211 RAINTREE CT BROWNELL CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 996 GIBSON AVE BENZIGER KATHERINE ASPEN, CO 81611 1050 MATCHLESS DR #2 WAGAR RICHARD H ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9063 KNIGHT ERIC ASPEN, CO 81611 138 MAPLE LN BYARD ANNE/MORRIS JAMES LIV TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 860 GIBSON AVE HAT COLORADO LLC LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 10866 WILSHIRE BLVD #1100 SHOAF JEFFREY S ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3123 HARRIS DAVID E & PATRICIA ASPEN, CO 81611 117 NEALE AVE FARR TENA D 1989 TRUST SPRECKELS, CA 93962 PO BOX 7534 SMALLS RAY ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3197 MAPLE CHARLES A & BRYCE M ASPEN, CO 81611 1250 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR ALVIS STEVEN D & MARCI L HOUSTON, TX 77008 1235 NORTH LOOP WEST # 205 990 KING ST UNIT #2 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 1295 RIVERSIDE DR DIBELLO JACQUELINE ASPEN, CO 81611 990 KING ST # 1 MAINIAC PROPERTIES LLC SCARBOROUGH, ME 04074 201 US ROUTE 1 #226 17 QUEEN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 1315 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR RUGGIERI LISA ANN ASPEN, CO 81611 136 MAPLE LN JUNGQUIST TERRI L REV TRUST SAINT PAUL, MN 55128 6348 HWY 36 BLVD #8 CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL ASPEN, CO 816112179 130 MAPLE LN PATRICIA CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 980 KING ST HAMILTON VIRGINIA RUTH ASPEN, CO 81611 0134 MAPLE LN DWS FAMILY TRUST DALLAS, TX 75201 1918 N OLIVE STREET #1901 WALDRON K BRENT ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 4900 LAWRENCE MARA B QPR TRUST LA JOLLA, CA 92037 8560 RUETTE MONTE CARLO RACQUET CLUB CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 1000 MATCHLESS DR SURVIVORS TRUST ALAMEDA, CA 94501 1352 BAY ST Page 99 of 101P168 IV.A. URBAN BLIGHT CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 925 GIBSON AVE MEADOWS JEAN R & STANLEY H HIGHLAND PARK, IL 60035 538 HILLSIDE DR FUENTE DAVID & SHEILA BOCA RATON, FL 33431 701 TERN POINT CIR SNOW ORCHID LLC MENLO PARK, CA 94025 1125 SAN MATEO DR KETAI JAMES A DETROIT, MI 48226 1528 WOODWARD AVE #600 VARE DARLENE DESEDLE TRUST SANTA MONICA, CA 90403 1024 19TH ST #7 LIPSEY WILLIAM S ASPEN, CO 81611 955 KING ST ROCKY MTN PROPERTY II LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 73 SMUGGLER GROVE RD TEUSCHER JONATHAN W & ANNETTE L ASPEN, CO 81611 126 MAPLE LN GREENWOOD WILLIAM S ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 4778 SMUGGLER HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ASPEN, CO 81611 OAK LN, COTTONWOOD LN, MAPLE LN PERKINS WENDY LIVING TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 122 MAPLE LN BELINDA BEE CONDO ASPEN, CO 81611 990 KING ST Page 100 of 101P169 IV.A. Vicinity Map DATE: F & M A R C H I T E C T S COPYRIGHT 2018 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 970.987.2707 Beckerman House 6/1/18 333 Park Ave. 931 Gibson Ave. City of Aspen 333 Park Ave. & 931 Gibson Vicinity Map 1" = 600'1 Exhibit P Page 101 of 101P170 IV.A. ROARING FORK RIVERDDDSSOSWOSWCOCOGGWWWWWWWWCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS9.2'18.3'30'31.9'∆=23°14'52"R=40.00'L=16.23'ChB=S55°17'34"EChL=16.12'SLOPE TABLENUMBER123MIN. SLOPE0.000%20.000%30.000%MAX. SLOPE20.000%30.000%1000.000%COLOR7915792079257930793579407942 794 4794479407935 793079257920 SLOPE TABLENUMBER123MIN. SLOPE0.000%20.000%30.000%MAX. SLOPE20.000%30.000%1000.000%COLORAREA6114.44711.453141.11NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTIONBASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRSTDISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT INTHIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THECERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.ByNO.DateProject NO.RevisionDrawn By:Checked By:Date:Computer File:P.O. Box 1746Rifle, CO 81650Phone (970) 625-1954Fax (970) 579-7150www.peaksurveyinginc.comSNWEPeak Surveying, Inc.Since 2007170691 OF 1BMH INVESTMENTS, LTD.CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADOIMPROVEMENT & TOPO SURVEYLOT 1, SUNNY PARK SUB.333 PARK AVENUEJRNJRNNOV 02, 2017069.DWG105/22/18GENERATE SLOPE ANALYSISJRNIMPROVEMENT SURVEY STATEMENTI HEREBY STATE THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY WAS PREPARED BY PEAK SURVEYING, INC.FOR BMH INVESTMENTS, LTD, A TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP.I FURTHER STATE THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL ON THIS DATE,OCTOBER 26, 2017, EXCEPT UTILITY CONNECTIONS, ARE ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OFTHE PARCEL, EXCEPT AS SHOWN, THAT THERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS UPON THE DESCRIBEDPREMISES BY IMPROVEMENTS ON ANY ADJOINING PREMISES, EXCEPT AS INDICATED, AND THATTHERE IS NO APPARENT EVIDENCE OR SIGN OF ANY EASEMENT CROSSING OR BURDENING ANYPART OF SAID PARCEL, EXCEPT AS NOTED. I FURTHER STATE THIS SURVEY WAS PREPAREDWITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT, THEREFORE, ANY EXCEPTIONS THAT MAYAFFECT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAVE NOT BEEN RESEARCHED BY PEAK SURVEYING, INC.ERROR IN CLOSURE FOR THIS SURVEY IS LESS THAN 1:15,000.BY:___________________________________ JASON R. NEIL, P.L.S. NO. 37935IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYA TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SW1/4SE1/4 OF SECTION 7 AND THE NW1/4NE1/4 OF SECTION 18TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M.CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADOPROPERTY DESCRIPTIONA TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SW1/4SE1/4 OF SECTION 7 AND THE NW1/4NE1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 10SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, SAID TRACT IS PART OF THE LONE PINEM.S. 1910 AND THE MOLLIE GIBSON LODE, M.S. 4281 AM AND IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT THE WEST CORNER OF LOT 1, SUNNY PARK SUBDIVISION, WHENCE CORNER NO. 3 OF SAID MOLLIEGIBSON LODE BEARS N43°40'00"W 146.00 FEET AND S38°00'00"W 100.00 FEET; THENCE S46°20'00"W 10.00 FEET TO APOINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF A ROAD EASEMENT AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 4 AT PAGE 398OF THE RECORDS OF PITKIN COUNTY; THENCE FOLLOWING SAID CENTERLINE 16.23 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF ACURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET, THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS S55°17'30"E 16.12 FEET;THENCE S66°55'00"E 49.99 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE; THENCE S32°09'58"W 13.39 FEET; THENCE S50°17'00"W130.26 FEET; THENCE N34°17'00"W 59.99 FEET; THENCE N52°40'00"E 34.33 FEET; THENCE N43°40'00"W 32.60 FEET;THENCE N46°20'00"E 86.00 FEET; THENCE S43°40'00"E 32.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.NOTES1) THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS, BUILDINGSETBACKS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD, OR IN PLACE. THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED WITHOUTTHE BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT THEREFORE, EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE THAT MAY AFFECTTHE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAVE NOT BEEN RESEARCHED BY PEAK SURVEYING, INC.2) THE DATE OF THIS SURVEY WAS OCTOBER 26, 2017.3) BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF N46°20'00"E BETWEEN THENORTHWESTERLY CORNER, A #5 REBAR & CAP L.S. #16129 FOUND IN PLACE AND THE 1.90' W.C.TO THE NORTHERLY CORNER, A #5 REBAR & CAP L.S. #16129 FOUND IN PLACE.4) UNITS OF MEASURE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON IS U.S. SURVEY FEET.5) THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON THE SUNNY PARK SUBDIVISION PLAT RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 4AT PAGE 398 AND RECEPTION NO. 640394 IN THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'SOFFICE AND CORNERS FOUND IN PLACE.6) ELEVATIONS AND CONTOURS SHOWN ARE BASED ON TOPOGRAPHY SUPPLIED BY OTHERSYIELDING AN ON-SITE ELEVATION OF 7943.80' ON THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER AS SHOWN.FROM TOPOGRAPHY RECEIVED PSI GENERATED SLOPE ANALYSIS TO THE EXTENT CONTOURSWERE AVAILABLE. CONTOUR INTERVAL EQUALS 1 FOOT.NESW0306090120150180210240270300330P e a k Surveying, Inc.0101020405SUBJECTPROPERTYVICINITY MAPSCALE: 1" = 2000'COL OR A DO LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL LAND SU RVEYOR JA SO N R. NEIL3793505/22/18P171IV.A. XXXXXXX XX XEEEEE X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXGGGGG GG G G G GS 29°17'09" W 103.44'N 62°54'41" W 118.62'∆=7°42'27"R=295.57'L=39.76'ChB=N59°03'28"WChL=39.73'N 3 4 ° 4 5 ' 0 0 " E 9 5 . 0 7 'S 66°34'00" E 83.50'S 63°54'00" E 66.25'37.40'34. 4 0 '37.40'34. 4 0 '26.8'27.9' 35. 6 '87.3'GRAVELPARKINGCONCRETEDRIVEWAYADJOINER TENTSHEDSHEDADJOINER HOUSEADJOINER HOUSE#5 REBAR & CAPL.S. #16129TBM EL=7933.87'CATV PED.BOULDERBOULDERWALLTIE R E T . W A L L (T Y P . )PAVER PATIO (TYP.)UPPER LEVELWOOD DECKLOWERLEVELWOOD DECKCO N C R E T E W A L K TWO STORY WOODFRAME HOUSEWITH BASEMENT931 GIBSON AVENUEWINDOWWELLWINDOWWELLW O O D D E C K ST E P SWOODDECKCO N C . R E T . W A L L ST E P S ST E P S ST E P S TIE R E T . W A L L ( T Y P . )FENCE(TYP.)FENCE(TYP.)SINGLE WIRE FENCEESTABLISHED BYWESTERLY ADJOINERTO REPRESENT HISINTERPRETATION OFTHE REAL BOUNDARY LINEFENCEFENCESTONE WALKCONCRETEPATIOBOULDERPK NAIL& SHINERL.S. #37972CONC.WALLCONCRETEDRIVEWAYSH E D GIBSON AVENUEASPHALTPARCEL 1BK 513 PG 94215,497 S.F.±#5 REBAR & CAPL.S. #379721" IRON BAR#5REBAR#5REBARTELE.PED.MAILBOXELEC.METERGASMETERGASLINEBOULDERRET. WALLSTONE WALLCONCRETECURB & GUTTERGRAVELPARKINGC.O.A. GPSQ-159N89°10'36"W1612.08'C.O.A. GPSMONUMENT #4S31°13'19"W789.88'PARCEL 2BK 513 PG 942QUIT CLAIM DEEDBK 758 PG 230LOT ANO PROBLEM JOELOT BNO PROBLEM JOEBEATONBECKMAPLEF.F.EL=7939.65'F.F.EL=7930.40'RIDGEEL=7960.5'10'25'10'10'BUILDING SETBACK PER R-15ABUILDING SETB A C K P E R R - 1 5 A BUILDING SETBACK PER R-15ASTONEWALKRIDGEEL=7962.0'7933 793779367938793579347933793479327933793279327934 WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWOSWWATERSERVICETTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS SS SS SS SE W E R S E R V I C E P E R A C S D EX-UE EX-UE CTV CTV CTVCABLE TV LINEELECTRICLINETELEPHONELINEWATERLINESEWERMANHOLET1T2T3T4T5T6T7T8T9T10T11T12T13T14T15T16T17T18T19T20T21T22T23T24T25T26T27T28T29T30T31T32T33T34T35T36T37T38T39T40T41T42T43T44T45T46T47T48T49T50T51T52T53T54T55T56T57T58T59T60T61T62T63T64T65T66T67T68T69SLOPE TABLENUMBER123MIN. SLOPE0.000%20.000%31.461%MAX. SLOPE20.000%30.000%2000.000%COLORSLOPE TABLENUMBER123MIN. SLOPE0.000%20.000%31.461%MAX. SLOPE20.000%30.000%2000.000%COLORAREA14864.09271.78361.13NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTIONBASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRSTDISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT INTHIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THECERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.ByNO.DateProject NO.RevisionDrawn By:Checked By:Date:Computer File:P.O. Box 1746Rifle, CO 81650Phone (970) 625-1954Fax (970) 579-7150www.peaksurveyinginc.comSNWEPeak Surveying, Inc.Since 2007170341 OF 1931 GIBSON, LLC.CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADOIMPROVEMENT & TOPO SURVEYSIT. IN SE1/4 SEC.7, T10S, R84W931 GIBSON AVENUEJRNJRNAUGUST 28, 2017034.DWG105/22/18GENERATE SLOPE ANALYSISJRNIMPROVEMENT SURVEY STATEMENTI HEREBY STATE THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY WAS PREPARED BY PEAK SURVEYING, INC.FOR 931 GIBSON, LLC.I FURTHER STATE THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL ON THIS DATE,JUNE 16, 2017, EXCEPT UTILITY CONNECTIONS, ARE ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THEPARCEL, EXCEPT AS SHOWN, THAT THERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS UPON THE DESCRIBEDPREMISES BY IMPROVEMENTS ON ANY ADJOINING PREMISES, EXCEPT AS INDICATED, AND THATTHERE IS NO APPARENT EVIDENCE OR SIGN OF ANY EASEMENT CROSSING OR BURDENING ANYPART OF SAID PARCEL, EXCEPT AS NOTED. I FURTHER STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THE TITLECOMMITMENT PREPARED BY PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., CASE NO. PCT24522W, DATEDEFFECTIVE AUGUST 17, 2015 AND FIND ALL EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE THAT AFFECT THE SUBJECTPROPERTY ARE SHOWN HEREON TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. ERROR OFCLOSURE FOR THIS SURVEY IS LESS THAN 1:15,000.BY:___________________________________ JASON R. NEIL, P.L.S. NO. 37935IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYA PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SE1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M.CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADOPROPERTY DESCRIPTIONPARCEL 1:A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SE1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE CORNER NO. 11 OF THE EAST ASPEN ADDITIONALTOWNSITE BEARS S54°52'17"E 58.10 FEET; THENCE S34°54'00"W 46.63 FEET TO THE TRUE POINTOF BEGINNING; THENCE N63°58'00"W 185.12 FEET; THENCE S15°30'00"W 88.60 FEET; THENCES63°54'00"E 155.54 FEET; THENCE N34°45'00"E 88.30 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.EXCEPTING THOSE PORTIONS WHICH LIE WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF DEEDS RECORDEDFEBRUARY 6, 1970 IN BOOK 246 AT PAGE 672 “CANDREIA PARCEL” AND RECORDED APRIL 12,1982 IN BOOK 424 AT PAGE 966 “ZUPANCIS PARCEL”.ALSO EXCEPTING THAT PORTION AS DESCRIBED IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED AUGUST11, 1994 IN BOOK 758 AT PAGE 230.PARCEL 2:A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SUNSET LODE, U.S.M.S. NO. 5310, BEING MORE FULLYDESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY SIDE LINE OF SAID SUNSET LODE WHENCECORNER NO. 10 OF EAST ASPEN ADDITIONAL TOWNSITE BEARS N34°45'00"E 46.63 FEET;THENCE N63°58'00"W 185.12 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY SIDE LINE OF SAID LODE;THENCE FOLLOWING SAID WESTERLY SIDE LINE N15°30'0"E 17.03 FEET; THENCE S62°54'41"E150.27 FEET; THENCE 39.76 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING ARADIUS OF 295.57 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID EASTERLY SIDE; THENCE FOLLOWING SAIDEASTERLY SIDE LINE S34°45'00"W 10.70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.TOGETHER WITH ANY PROPERTY LYING NORTHERLY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTYAND THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF GIBSON AVENUE.EXCEPTING THAT PORTION AS DESCRIBED IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED AUGUST 11, 1994IN BOOK 758 AT PAGE 230.COUNTY OF PITKINSTATE OF COLORADONOTES:1) THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS, BUILDINGSETBACKS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD, OR IN PLACE AND EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE SHOWN INTHE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., CASE NO. PCT24522W,DATED EFFECTIVE AUGUST 17, 2015.2) THE DATE OF THIS SURVEY WAS JUNE 16, 2017.3) BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF N29°17'09"E BETWEEN THESOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, A PK NAIL AND SHINER IN CONCRETEL.S. #37972 FOUND IN PLACE AND THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID SUBJECT PROPERTY,A #5 REBAR & CAP L.S. #37972 FOUND IN PLACE.4) UNITS OF MEASURE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON IS U.S. SURVEY FEET.5) THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON THE BOOK 513 PAGE 942, BOOK 513 PAGE 945 RECORDED IN THEPITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE, AN IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PREPARED BYROCKY MOUNTAIN SURVEYING DATED AUGUST 2015, FILE NO. 15530 AND CORNERS FOUND INPLACE.6) ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON A GPS OBSERVATION UTILIZING THE WESTERN COLORADORTVRN GPS NETWORK (1988 ORTHO DATUM) YIELDING AN ON-SITE ELEVATION OF 7933.87'' ONSOUTHEASTERLY CORNER AS SHOWN. CONTOUR INTERVAL EQUALS 1 FOOT.7) THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON FOUND CORNERS AND THE ABOVE MENTIONED SURVEYPREPARED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN SURVEYING. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BYPSI. ACCORDING TO THE WESTERLY ADJOINING OWNER THE CORNERS ESTABLISHED ARE NOTWHAT HE REMEMBERS AND HE BELIEVES THE BOUNDARY IS ALONG THE WIRE FENCEESTABLISHED BY SAID ADJOINER. PSI HAS CONVEYED THIS INFORMATION TO THE OWNER OFTHE SUBJECT PROPERTY.NESW0306090120150180210240270300330P e a k Surveying, Inc.0101020405SUBJECTPROPERTYVICINITY MAPSCALE: 1" = 2000'COL OR A DO LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL LAND SU R VEYOR JA SO N R. NEIL3793505/22/18P172IV.A. Beckerman HouseZoning Floor Area Calculations FSS-S JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS-S 18014 333Landmark on Gibson FAR.vwx 6/2/18 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-011931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.6/4/18Land Use ApplicationUP 2'-0"02 4'-9"03 16'-8 1/2"04 16'-2 3/4"05 17'-0"06 5'-1"07 20'-0"08 01 1'-11 3/4" B 4'-6 1/4" C 2'-0" D 5'-4 1/2" E 5'-5 1/2" F 2'-0" G 3'-7 3/4" HA 25'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1"Proposed Basement Level Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 SUBGRADE WALL CALCULATIONS Mabel Beckerman House - 333 Park Landmark on 931 Gibson Site Proposed Basement Level Exposed Wall Calculations Wall "A" Wall "B" Wall "C" Wall "D" Wall "E" Wall "F" Wall "G" Wall "H" Wall "I" Wall "J" Wall "K" Wall "L" Wall "M" Wall "N" Wall "O" Wall "P" 284.4 32.9 153.0 18.0 57.8 50.9 156.0 213.0 156.0 76.6 57.8 18.0 153.0 58.6 284.4 213.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 0 0 0 0 18.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.0 0 PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS Mabel Beckerman House / 333 Park Landmark on 931 Gibson Site Basement Level Gross Floor Area (Sq Ft) (1630.7 sq ft x 4.5%) Main Level Deck/Porch Floor Area (Sq Ft) Exempt Deck Floor Area (Sq Ft)(4530 sq ft x 15%) Deck/Porch Countable Floor Area (Sq Ft) Basement Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) Main Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) Upper Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) 1630.7 1630.68 SQ FT 18 32.9 A B 284.4 153.0 C 18 18 A B C D 18.0 E 57.8 F 50.9 G 156.0 H 213.0 18 18 I 156.0 D E F G H I J J 76.6 K 57.8 L 18.0 M 153.0 N 58.6 K L M N O P P 213.0 O 284.4 18 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR -10'-0" LOWER LEVEL CLG. -1'-0" LOWER LEVEL FLOOR -10'-0" LOWER LEVEL CLG. -1'-0" EGRESS WELL -7'-0" LOWER LEVEL FLOOR -10'-0" LOWER LEVEL CLG. -1'-0" EGRESS WELL -7'-0" LOWER LEVEL CLG. -1'-0" LOWER LEVEL FLOOR -10'-0" LOWER LEVEL CLG. -1'-0" LOWER LEVEL FLOOR -10'-0" EGRESS WELL -7'-0" UP DN 2'-0"02 4'-9"03 16'-8 1/2"04 16'-2 3/4"05 17'-0"06 5'-1"07 20'-0"08 01 1'-11 3/4" B 4'-6 1/4" C 2'-0" D 5'-4 1/2" E 5'-5 1/2" F 2'-0" G 3'-7 3/4" HA 25'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1"Proposed Main Level Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS Mabel Beckerman House / 333 Park Landmark on 931 Gibson Site Main Level Gross Floor Area (Sq Ft) Garage Gross Floor Area (Sq Ft) Main Level Deck/Porch Floor Area (Sq Ft) Exempt Deck Floor Area (Sq Ft)(4530 sq ft x 15%) Deck/Porch Countable Floor Area (Sq Ft) Basement Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) Main Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) Upper Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) 1121.22 SQ FT 500 SQ FT 113.9 SQ FT Less than 30" Above Grade (Exempt)77.4 SQ FT 1121.2 0 UP DN DN Master BDR2002'-0"02 4'-9"03 16'-8 1/2"04 16'-2 3/4"05 17'-0"06 5'-1"07 20'-0"08 01 1'-11 3/4" B 4'-6 1/4" C 2'-0" D 5'-4 1/2" E 5'-5 1/2" F 2'-0" G 3'-7 3/4" HA 25'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1"Proposed Upper Level Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS Mabel Beckerman House / 333 Park Landmark on 931 Gibson Site Upper Level Gross Floor Area (Sq Ft) Upper Level Deck/Porch Floor Area (Sq Ft) Exempt Deck Floor Area (Sq Ft)(4530 sq ft x 15%) Deck/Porch Countable Floor Area (Sq Ft) Basement Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) Main Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) Upper Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) 763.7 SQ FT 763.7 LEGEND FLOOR AREA DECK FLOOR AREA FRONT PORCH - EXEMPT (Less than 30" Above Grade) GARAGE AREAP173 IV.A. RIVERBANK HOUSESITE PLAN PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 676215 Kearns Rd.Snowmass Village, CO 81615info@fandmarchitect.com970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RB_3_ParcelSchemes.vwx 5/18/18 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA1.05333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT01/17/18Site Plan Schemes333 PARK PROPE R T Y LINE TOP OF BANK TOP O F BANK SE T B A C K SETBAC K LINES333 Hi s t o r i c L a n d m a rk 33 3 His to r i c Landm a r kSeco n d a r y Bu i l d ing Deck PorchExis i t n g A d d i t i o n Option 3 Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"Park Ave.BECKERMAN HOUSE - HISTORIC LANDMARK Original address: 112-114 E. Main St. Current address: 333 Park Ave. Proposed address: 931 Gibson Ave. Beckerman House DATE:6/4/18 F &M A R C H I T E C T S COPYRIGHT 2018 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 970.987.2707112-114 E. Main St.333 Park Ave.333 Park Ave.112-114 E. Main St.112-114 E. Main St.1893 1890-1899 1959 2018 2018 House was moved in 1962 Proposed Location on 931 Gibson Ave.P174IV.A. 791 5 792 0 7925 7 9 2 9 7929 7933 793 3 793 4 793 4 793 5 7 9 3 6 793 7 793779387 9 4 0 7940 7941 794279437 9 4 3 79447944 MEAN HIGH WATER LINE DIT C H 15'-0"10'-0"TOP OF BA N K TOP OF BA N K SET B A C K SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0"EXISTIN G EASEM E N T EXISTI N G TURNA R O U N D / D RI V E W A Y 333 PARK PROPERTY LINE15'- 0 " 21'-0 " ROARING FORK RIVER SIDE YARD SETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK Empty 333 Park Scale: 1/32" = 1'-0"1 ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION STUDY Sanborn Fire Insurance Map depicting the original Main St. configuration. Maps have been scaled and overlayed onto both 333 Park Ave. and 931 Gibson Ave. sites. GIBSON AVE. FRONT YARD SETBACK BACK YARD SETBACKSIDE YARD SETBACK793179 3 2 79 3 3 793479 3 6 79 3 5 7937 7938931 Gibson Ave. W/ Fire Map Scale: 1/32" = 1'-0"2333 Park Ave. W/ Fire Map Scale: 1/32" = 1'-0"1 Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA00931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Original Configuration Study 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application*all topography in 1' incrementsP175 IV.A. 791 5 792 0 7925 79297929 7933 793 3 793 4 79 3 4 793 5 7936793 7 7937793879407940 7941 79427943794379447944 MEAN HIGH WATER LINE DIT C H 15'-0"33 3 Hi s t o r i c La n d m a r k 33 3 Hi s t o r i c La n d m a r k Se c o n d a r y Bu i l d i n g De c k Por c h 10'-0"TOP OF BA N K TOP OF BA N K SE T B A C K SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0"EXISTI N G TURN A R O U N D/ D RI V E W A Y 333 PARK PROPERTY LINE15'- 0 " 21'- 0 " ROARING FORK RIVER SIDE YARD SETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK Existing Landmark @ 333 Park Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 AA08AA08Por c hSIDE YARD SETBACKBeckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA01931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Exisiting Site Plan @ 333 Park Ave. 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationExisting 333 Park Site Plan Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEGEND HISTORIC LANDMARK EXISTING ADDITION AREA OF BUILDING ENCROACHING 45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMITP176 IV.A. East Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.2North Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.1 South Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.3 West Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.4 Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA02931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Exisiting Photos @ 333 Park Ave. 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationP177IV.A. Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA03931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Photos Showing Non-Historic @ 333 Park Ave. 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationEast Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.2North Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.1 South Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.3 West Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.4 Demo non-historical elements Restore historical elements Demo non-historical elements Restore historical elements Demo non-historical elements Restore historical elements Demo non-historical elements Restore historical elementsP178 IV.A. 791 5 792 0 7925 79297929 7933 793 3 793 4 79 3 4 793 5 7936793 7 7937793879407940 7941 79427943794379447944 MEAN HIGH WATER LINE DIT C H 333 Historic Landmark333 Historic LandmarkSecondary BuildingDeckPorch15'-0"10'-0"TOP OF BA N K TOP OF BA N K SE T B A C K SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0"EXISTI N G TURN A R O U N D/ D RI V E W A Y 333 PARK PROPERTY LINE15'- 0 " 21'- 0 " ROARING FORK RIVER SIDE YARD SETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK Landmark @ 333 Park Option A Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1333 Historic Landmark333 Historic LandmarkSecondary BuildingDeckBeckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA04931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.333 Site Constraints - Option A 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application333 Site Constraints - Option A:Original Configuration Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEGEND HISTORIC LANDMARK EXISTING ADDITION AREA OF BUILDING ENCROACHING 45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMITP179 IV.A. 791 5 792 0 7925 79297929 7933 793 3 793 4 79 3 4 793 5 7936793 7 7937793879407940 7941 79427943794379447944 MEAN HIGH WATER LINE DIT C H 15'-0"333 Historic LandmarkPorch33 3 Hi s t o r i c La n d m a r k Se c o n d a r y Bu i l d i n g De c k 10'-0"TOP OF BA N K TOP OF BA N K SE T B A C K SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0"EXISTI N G TURN A R O U N D/ D RI V E W A Y 333 PARK PROPERTY LINE15'- 0 " 21'- 0 " ROARING FORK RIVER SIDE YARD SETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK Landmark @ 333 Park Option B Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1333 Historic Landmark33 3 Hi s t o r i c La n d m a r k Se c o n d a r y Bu i l d i n g BA08BA08Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA05931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.333 Site Constraints - Option B 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application333 Site Constraints - Option B Modified Configuration Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEGEND HISTORIC LANDMARK EXISTING ADDITION AREA OF BUILDING ENCROACHING 45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMITP180 IV.A. 791 5 792 0 7925 79297929 7933 793 3 793 4 79 3 4 793 5 7936793 7 7937793879407940 7941 79427943794379447944 MEAN HIGH WATER LINE DIT C H 15'-0"333 His t o r i c Lan d m a r k 333 His t o r i c Lan d m a r k Sec o n d a r y Bui l d i n g Dec k Por c h10'-0"TOP OF BA N K TOP OF BA N K SE T B A C K SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0"EXISTI N G TURN A R O U N D/ D RI V E W A Y 333 PARK PROPERTY LINE15'- 0 " 21'- 0 " ROARING FORK RIVER SIDE YARD SETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK Landmark @ 333 Park Option C Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 AA09AA09Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA06931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.333 Site Constraints - Option C 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application333 Site Constraints - Option C 90 Degree Rotation Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEGEND HISTORIC LANDMARK EXISTING ADDITION AREA OF BUILDING ENCROACHING 45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMITP181 IV.A. 791 5 792 0 7925 79297929 7933 793 3 793 4 79 3 4 793 5 7936793 7 7937793879407940 7941 79427943794379447944 MEAN HIGH WATER LINE DIT C H 333 Historic Landmark333 Historic Landmark Secondary Building Deck Porch 15'-0"10'-0"TOP OF BA N K TOP OF BA N K SE T B A C K SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0"EXISTI N G TURN A R O U N D/ D RI V E W A Y 333 PARK PROPERTY LINE15'- 0 " 21'- 0 " ROARING FORK RIVER SIDE YARD SETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK Landmark @ 333 Park Option D Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 BA09BA09333 Historic Landmark333 Historic Landmark Secondary Building Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA07931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.333 Site Constraints - Option D 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application333 Site Constraints - Option D 110 Degree Rotation Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEGEND HISTORIC LANDMARK EXISTING ADDITION AREA OF BUILDING ENCROACHING 45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMITP182 IV.A. 7914 7919 7924 7929 7934 7939 7944 EXISTING BLDG. FOOTPRINTTOP OF SLOPEEXISTING BLDG. FOOTPRINTMEAN HIGH WATER LINETOP OF SLOPE SETBACK45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMIT15'-0" Top of Ridge 7974.3" Top of F.F. 7945.9"28'-4 3/4"Top of F.F. 7936.9"FRONT YARD SETBACKPROPERTY LINEEDGE OF PAVEMENTTop of Ridge 7973.4" Top of F.F. 7944"28'-4 3/4"HISTORIC BLDG. FOOTPRINTTOP OF SLOPEHISTORIC BLDG. FOOTPRINTTOP OF SLOPE SETBACK7914 7919 7924 7929 7934 7939 7944 15'-0"45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMITMEAN HIGH WATER LINEFRONT YARD SETBACKPROPERTY LINEEDGE OF PAVEMENTBeckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA08931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.333 Park Site Sections 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationOption B Site Section Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"B 333 Existing Site Section Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"A P183IV.A. Top of Ridge 7971.4" Top of F.F. 7943"28'-4 3/4"7914 7919 7924 7929 7934 7939 EXISTING BLDG. FOOTPRINTTOP OF SLOPEEXISTING BLDG. FOOTPRINTMEAN HIGH WATER LINETOP OF SLOPE SETBACK45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMIT15'-0"FRONT YARD SETBACKPROPERTY LINEEDGE OF PAVEMENT28'-4 3/4"7914 7919 7924 7929 7934 7939 EXISTING BLDG. FOOTPRINTTOP OF SLOPEEXISTING BLDG. FOOTPRINTMEAN HIGH WATER LINETOP OF SLOPE SETBACK45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMIT15'-0" Top of Ridge 7971.4" Top of F.F. 7943"FRONT YARD SETBACKPROPERTY LINEEDGE OF PAVEMENTBeckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA09931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.333 Park Site Sections 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationOption D Site Section Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"B Option C Site Section Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"A P184IV.A. Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA10931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.931 Gibson Ave. Survey 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Applicationpro p o s e d fo o t p r i n t P185IV.A. Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA11931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Routes 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationProposed Landmark Moving Route - Option A 1 Proposed Landmark Moving Route - Option B 2P186 IV.A. Existing Conifer Existing Decidious Removed Tree New Conifer Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA12931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Site Plan @ 931 Gibson Ave. 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application10'-0"10'-0" 10'-0"25'-0"14'-0"GIBSON AVE.4'-2 3/4"FRONT YARD SETBACK BACK YARD SETBACKSIDE YARD SETBACK12'-0"11'-0"793179 3 2 7933793479 3 6 79 3 5 7937 7938UP UP DN Proposed 931 Gibson Site Plan Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1AA19AA19B A19 B A19 KEY Grass Paver Drive Concrete Path Dry Set Stone PathP187 IV.A. Back Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 24'-10" 0201 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank House Craig.vwx 12/15/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-201333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 24'-10" 02 01 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Room 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"7'-0"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"Left Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" C A Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 25'-0"1'-3"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" x 23'-4 1/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"23'-3 7/8"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"6 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"Back Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 24'-10" 0201 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank House Craig.vwx 12/15/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-201333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 24'-10" 02 01 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Room 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"7'-0"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"Left Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" C A Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 25'-0"1'-3"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" x 23'-4 1/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"23'-3 7/8"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"6 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA13931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Historic Landmark Elevations 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationProposed Historic Landmark - West Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"4Proposed Historic Landmark - South Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 Back Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 24'-10" 0201 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank House Craig.vwx 12/15/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-201333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront ElevationScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"124'-10"02 01Main Level FF100'-0"2nd Level FF111'-0"Ridge of Existing Room127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge122'-0 1/8"ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT23'-3 1/8"25'-0"Assumed Final Grade98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer122'-1 1/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"7'-0"Right ElevationScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"26'-10"B 32'-9 1/4"CAMain Level FF100'-0"2nd Level FF111'-0"Ridge of Existing Roof127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge122'-0 1/8"ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof110'-5 1/4"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed11'-8 1/4"Left Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" C A Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 25'-0"1'-3"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" x 23'-4 1/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"Right ElevationScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"56'-10"B 32'-9 1/4"CAMain Level FF100'-0"2nd Level FF111'-0"Ridge of Existing Roof127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge122'-0 1/8"ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof122'-0 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof110'-5 1/4"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed11'-8 1/4"23'-3 7/8"Right ElevationScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"66'-10"B 32'-9 1/4"CAMain Level FF100'-0"2nd Level FF111'-0"Ridge of Existing Roof127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge122'-0 1/8"ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof110'-5 1/4"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed11'-8 1/4"Proposed Historic Landmark - North Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 Back Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 24'-10" 0201 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank House Craig.vwx 12/15/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-201333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 24'-10" 02 01 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Room 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"7'-0"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"Left Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" C A Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 25'-0"1'-3"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" x 23'-4 1/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"23'-3 7/8"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"6 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"Proposed Historic Landmark - East Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 P188IV.A. Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA14931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Accessory Landmark Elevations 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationRIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Small Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank ZONINGv2.vwx 11/30/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-202333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 16'-10" 04 03 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"RIght Elevation Small Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" FD Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Back Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 16'-10" 0403 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Left Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"19'-3 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" F D Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Small Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank ZONINGv2.vwx 11/30/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-202333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 16'-10" 04 03 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"RIght Elevation Small Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" FD Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Back Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 16'-10" 0403 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Left Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"19'-3 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" F D Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Small Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank ZONINGv2.vwx 11/30/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-202333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 16'-10" 04 03 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"RIght Elevation Small Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" FD Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Back Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 16'-10" 0403 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Left Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"19'-3 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" F D Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Small Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank ZONINGv2.vwx 11/30/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-202333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Small HistoricScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"116'-10"04 03Main Level FF100'-0"T. Posts107'-11"Ridge of Existing Roof118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge114'-4 3/4"ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade98'-9"1'-3"RIght Elevation SmallScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2Main Level FF100'-0"T. Posts107'-11"Ridge of Existing Roof118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge114'-4 3/4"ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8"E 14'-8"FDAssumed Final Grade98'-9"1'-3"Back Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 16'-10" 0403 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Left Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"19'-3 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" F D Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" Proposed Accessory Landmark - West Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"4Proposed Accessory Landmark - South Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 Proposed Accessory Landmark - North Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 Proposed Accessory Landmark - East Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 P189IV.A. Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA15931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Plans @ 931 Gibson Ave. 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationUPGame Room 001 BDR 002 Laundry 003 BDR 004 BDR 005 2'-0"024'-9"0316'-8 1/2"0416'-2 3/4"0517'-0"065'-1"0720'-0"08011'-11 3/4"B4'-6 1/4"C2'-0"D5'-4 1/2"E5'-5 1/2"F2'-0"G3'-7 3/4"HA2/A18 1/A182/A17 1/A1725'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1" Proposed Lower Level Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 UPDNLiving 100 Kitchen 101 Mudroom 103 Office 102 Garage 104 porchFront Entry and Porch2'-0"024'-9"0316'-8 1/2"0416'-2 3/4"0517'-0"065'-1"0720'-0"08011'-11 3/4"B4'-6 1/4"C2'-0"D5'-4 1/2"E5'-5 1/2"F2'-0"G3'-7 3/4"HA2/A18 1/A182/A17 1/A1725'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1" Proposed Main Level Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"2P190 IV.A. Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA16931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Plans @ 931 Gibson Ave. 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationDNMaster BDR 200 2'-0"024'-9"0316'-8 1/2"0416'-2 3/4"0517'-0"065'-1"0720'-0"08011'-11 3/4"B4'-6 1/4"C2'-0"D5'-4 1/2"E5'-5 1/2"F2'-0"G3'-7 3/4"HA2/A18 1/A182/A17 1/A1725'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1" Proposed Upper Level Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 garage below mudroom below flat roof 2:12 slope2'-0"024'-9"0316'-8 1/2"0416'-2 3/4"0517'-0"065'-1"0720'-0"08011'-11 3/4"B4'-6 1/4"C2'-0"D5'-4 1/2"E5'-5 1/2"F2'-0"G3'-7 3/4"HA2/A18 1/A182/A17 1/A1725'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1" Proposed Roof Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"211:12 slope12:12 slope11:12 slope11:12 slope 11:12 slope2:12 slopeflat roof12:12 slope11 3/4"11 3/4"10 1/2"11 1/4"10 1/2" 11 1/2"P191IV.A. Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA17931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Elevations @ 931 Gibson Ave 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationProposd North Elevation 1 12 11.2 12 11.2 4 1 1 4 11'-1 1/2"2'-0"7'-10 3/4"2'-0"1'-11 3/4" 25'-0" Proposed East Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"2newlandmark3 1 12 10.1 12 12 20'-0"5'-1"17'-0"32'-11 1/4"7'-9" 12 11 2 Legend 1. Egress Well 2. New-Landmark Connector with flat roof 3. Stained Wood Siding 4. Shake Roof P192IV.A. Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA18931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Elevations @ 931 Gibson Ave 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application12 12 Proposed South Elevation 1 12 11.2 4 11 3 25'-0"roof line beyondProsposed West Elevation 2newlandmark1 3 2 7'-9"32'-11 1/4"17'-0"5'-1"20'-0" 12 11 Legend 1. Egress Well 2. New-Landmark Connector with flat roof 3. Stained Wood Siding 4. Shake Roof Section A Looking North 3 8'-6"10'-10"5'-7 3/4" 12 12 212 2 8'-0"P193IV.A. Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA19931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Site Sections 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationGIBSON AVE.Property LineFront Yard SetbackBack Yard SetbackProperty LineT.O. F.F. 7534' T.O. Ridge. 7562.4'23'-3"1/2 Point from Eave and Ridge 7556' Proposed Site Section Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"A Property LineSide Yard SetbackSide Yard SetbackProperty LineT.O. F.F. 7534' T.O. Ridge. 7562.4' 1/2 Point from Eave and Ridge 7556' 22'-6 1/4"23'-3"Proposed Site Section Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"BP194 IV.A. P195IV.A. P196IV.A. P197IV.A. EXHIBIT 64 It II CITY OFASPEN City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, CO 8161 1 p: (970) 920.5000 f: (970) 920.5197 w: www.aspenoifkin.com NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RE: 333 Park Avenue & 931 Gibson Avenue Public Hearing: Wednesday, July 1111, 2018; 4:30 PM Meeting Location: City Hall, City Council Chambers, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO. Project Location: 333 Park Avenue, PID# 2737-181-00-017 and 931 Gibson Avenue, PID# 2737-074-00-004. Full legal description provided in Attch. 1. Description: The applicant requests approval for demolition of non-historic additions to the landmarked residence on 333 Park and to relocate the remaining historic buildings to 931 Gibson onto a new basement with a one story garage addition. Applicant requests rescinding of the historic designation of 333 Park and the historic designation of 931 Gibson with the newly relocated historic residence. The project requests setback variations for the historic front porch,for living space below grade at the rear of the property, and a floor area bonus for 931 Gibson. Land use Reviews Req: Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Rescinding Designation, Landmark Designation, Setback Variation and Stream Margin Review. Decision Making Body: Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). Applicant: BMH Investments, LTD, 1001 Fannin St. #3850, Houston, TX 77002. More Information: For further information related to the project, contact Sarah Yoon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, 970.920.5144, sarah.yoon@cityofaspen.com. Attachment 1 - Legal Description of Addresses 333 Park Avenue A tract of land situated in the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7 and in the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado. Said tract is part of the Lone Pine M.S. 1910 and the Mollie Gibson Lode, M.S. 4281 Am and is more fully described as follows: Beginning at the West Corner of Lot 1, Sunny Park Subdivision, whence corner No. 3 of said Mollie Gibson Lode bears N 4340'00" W 146.00 feet and S 3800'00" W 100.00 feet; thence S 4620'00" W 10.00 feet to a point on the centerline of a road easement as shown on a plat recorded in Book 4 at Page 398 of the records of Pitkin County; thence following said centerline 16.23 feet along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 40.00 feet, the chord of which curve bears S 55°17'30" E 16.12 feet; thence S 66° 55'00" E 49.99 feet along said centerline; thence S 32' 09'58" W 13.39 feet; thence S 50' 17'00" W 130.26 feet; thence N 34' 17'00" W 59.99 feet; thence N 52' 40'00" E 34.33 feet; thence N 4340'00" W 32.60 feet; thence N 46' 20'00" E 86.00 feet; thence S 43' 40'00" E 32.00 feet to the point of beginning. 931 Gibson Avenue Parcel 1: A Parcel of Land situated in the Southeast % of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th Principal Meridian more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point whence corner No. 11 of the East Aspen Additional Townsite bears South 54°52'17" East 58.10 feet; Thence South 34°54'00" West 46.63 feet to The True Point of Beginning; Thence North 63°58'00" West 185.12 feet; Thence South 15°30'00" West 86.60 feet; Thence South 6354'00" East 155.54 feet; Thence North 3445'00" East 88.30 feet to The Point of Beginning. Parcel 2: A Tract of Land situated in the Sunset Lode, U.S.M.S. No. 5310, being more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly side line of said Sunset Lode whence Corner No. 10 of East Aspen Additional Townsite bears North 3445' East 46.63 Feet; Thence North 63' 58' West 185.12 feet to a point on the Westerly side line of said Lode; Thence following said Westerly side line North 1530" East 17.03; Thence South 6254'41" East 150.27 feet; Thence 39.76 feet along the arc of a curve to the right having a radius of 295.57 feet to a point on said Easterly side; Thence following said Easterly side line South 34°45' West 10.70 feet to The Point of Beginning. Together with any property lying Northerly of the above described property and the Southerly line of Gibson Avenue. 2 Background and Proposal: The building located at 333 Park Avenue was originally located at 112/114 East Main Street. The two story Victorian style residence was built in 1889 by M.C.Jacobs.The building has an interesting history that is documented in Exhibit A. While located at 112/114 East Main Street,the building was initially a residence and was later operated as the Columbine Lodge by Mabel Beckerman in the 1950s. In the fall of 1961, Mabel ran an advertisement in the Aspen Times to sell the buildings on the property. The land had been purchased by Fritz Benedict to ,��• _�"" construct the Herbert Bayer and Fritz Benedict designed Pitkin County Library .r' kt. (currently Design Workshop). Dieter Bibbig and his mother Gertrude purchased the structures and moved them to their riverfront property at 333 Park Avenue. The front of the Victorian was positioned away from the road to face the Roaring = Fork River and Aspen Mountain and a small one story historic addition was 1�9G t899 '`•��3 moved to the side of the 333 Park property. �� i:J�::1.1_ � :il• t Z: � l Gertrude Bibbig operated a day care out of the house. Until recently, Dieter ri �'1 ;,, I" " I (�. ' •, _Vll rented the property. In 2017 Dieter sold the home to the current owners, the Hendry family. The Hendrys are committed to the proper restoration of these buildings,which =11893 was impossible at 333 Park, and began to look for a different property that was more aligned with the landmark's original location on East Main Street and --—————4 highlighted the historic resources in a way that contributed to the streetscape. I _ Requesting relocation of the historic resources to a different lot was not an easy decision —the Hendrys and the design team discussed the concept for months f `, J before meeting with Planning Staff and vetting the idea. When looking for a LU receiver lot,the goal was always to find a lot with frontage similar to its original i = location in order to meet best historic preservation practices.931 Gibson is the proposed receiver lot that will be considered as part of the application. I T-- House was moved in 1962 , n 41 d ' ' M i Proposed rendering at 931 Gibson to restore the historic building and to add a one story garage at the rear of the landmark. 201 , — ---- -- © BendonAdams 3 EXHIBIT D 9 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE D REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: �-- 333 P A e- ♦- �f'.31 Ci ibs�• / ,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 20 l STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, (name,please print) being or represen ing an Applicant to the City of CAspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section.of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15� days prior to the public hearing on the_day of , 20_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) FOR QUALIFYING SENIOR CITIZENS ANU ut'A Tom Isaac Pitkin County Assessor 506 E.Main St.#202 Aspen,CO 81611 The Colorado Constitution establishes a property t Ins.For those who qualify V50 .ctarw nftColto ado2 Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty(3 0) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAS or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and. new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended,whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. __SijnaKre The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this.21 day of ,20_1 4',by EARING RE:933N pails A�veEnPUBLIC j GWARING ibson A.enue - Pubre Hearing:Wednesday,July,,,h,zo16; WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL 4:30 PM asement w, Meeting Location:City Hall,City Council Chambers 130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,CO 81611 Project Location:333 Park Avenue PID#2737- 4 737- IVIy CommlSSlon expires. 181-00-017 and 931 Gibson Avenue PID#2737- 074-00-004.Legal description provided below. Description:The applicant's requesting appro- val for demolition of non-historic additions to the land marked residence on 333 Park and to relo- tate the remaining historic building to 931 Gibson asement with Applicant reque"a r cind'ng f the historic dndesig- nation of 333 Park and the historic designation of Notary Public 931 Gibson with the newly relocated historic resi- dence.The project includes requests for setback F" and a floor area bonus on 931 GibsoLand Use Reviews n. or Development,Relocation,Rescinding Detual s gna- tion,Designation,Setback Variation and Stream KAREN REED PA'TTERSON Margin Review. NOTARY PUBLIC Decision Making Body: Historic Preservation ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICAS STATE OF COLORADO Commission(HPC). St.#App3850, BMH Investments,LTD,1001 Fannin NOTARY ID#19964002767 M re Info Houston. or 77002. ►F THE PUBLICATION to the More Information:For further information related of My Commission EXpIMS February 15,2020 Aspen Community De eact aopmenrah �Depart en at the nt,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,Co,970-920.5,44, tGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN Llaisarahyoom Description: 333 Pam. F THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED Legal Description:a tract of l Park Avenue;Legally Southwest 1/4 of the Sotheaituated st 1/4an the f Section 7 and in the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of IL Section the 6th P.M Pitkin County,10 Colorado..Said tract CANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE is part of the Lone Pine M.S.1910 and the Mollie n�* Gibson Lode,M.S.4281 Am and is more fully BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 scribed as follows:Beginning at the West Cornerer QUIn�'D of Lot 1,Sunny Park Subdivision,whence comer No.3 of said Mollie Gibson Lode bears N 43°40'00"W 146.00 feet and S 38°00'00"W 100.00 feet;thence S 46°20'00"W 10.00 feet to a point on the centerline of a road easement as shown on a plat recorded in Book 4 at Page 398 of the records of Pitkin County;thence following said centerline 16.23 feet along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 40.00 feet,the chord of which curve bears S 55°17'30'E 16.12 feet; thence S 66°55'00"E 49.99 feet along said cen- terline;thence S 32.09'58'W 13.39 feet;thence S 50°17'00'W 130.26 feet:thence N 34°17'00" W 59.99 feet;thence N 52.40'00'E 34.33 feet; thence N 43°40'00"W 32.60 feet;thence N 46° 20'00"E 86.00 feet;thence S 43.40'00"E 32.00 feet to the point of beginning. 931 Gibson Avenue;Legally Described as Parcel 1:A Parcel of Land situated in the Southeast''/.of Section 7,Township 10 South,Range 84 West of the 6th Principal Meridian more fully described as follows:Beginning at a point whence comer No. 11 of the East Aspen Additional Townsite bears South 54°52'17"East 58.10 feet;Thence South 34'54'0"West 46.63 feet Point of Beginning Thence North 63 58'00"West 185.12 feet;Thence South Then a South 63'54'00"East 55"West 15 .54 feet;Thence North 34°45'00"Fact AA qn f.,,n._.,_:_.