Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.HP.213 W Bleeker St.0004.2014.AHPC 4w THE CITY OF .ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0004.2014.AHPC PARCEL ID NUMBERS 2735 124 40 005 PROJECTS ADDRESS 213 W. BLEEKER PLANNER AMY SIMON CASE DESCRIPTION RECINDING LANDMARK DESIGNATION REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HOFFMAN DATE OF FINAL ACTION 3.10.14 CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 4.714 ocoq• 2©I 1+ -M-Pc, e ahpc • Aspen Historic Land Use 0004 2014 AHPC BLEEKER aslu(}7 .0112212014 AL�AT1ON FOR RECINDING LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTY-*PLEASE NOTE'THIS APPLIC9ON WAS ENTERED AND RECIEPTED UNDER 0001.2014.OSLU-PLEASE REFERENCE RECEIPT#35376 tst Runn� 0 0111712015 Fkt 1 � name ApAM 213 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN CO 81611 (808j 2ss 6157 Adbm AWkW Owner is applicant? 0 Contractor is applicant? Last name name ApAp� 213 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN CO 81611 Phone {808129m—i 5-7-7 Oust# 27423 — Ad&sq Last name First name Phone _ Address of �2co,0 a ed �.r�Cc,.�iP '`y •� sz_n NOW 0004. 2014 -AAPC- � 3 � i �� Permits Ble Edit Record Navigate Form Repots Format Tab Delp — I` 1 lump 1 1 , main Custom 1=refd� `Routing Status Fee Summary Robing History " .' Permit xOOg1.201 f.CSLU j Address 213 t`.'6LEE��ER ST APEIi CO 31611 'Fe€mit type ©Id Asoen Land lJse fees only Total calculated , (Initial fees) ....._,i3..3 Total billed (including adjustments) Total unbilled Total - (including adjustments) Total€eceipt (including adjustments) a Total refunded (including adjustments) A Billed balance = Total balance Total aiisory ,$ Last bill date 1. Last penalty date i 3 Aspen&16(server;anger 1 of 1 CITY OF ASPEN y e r Permit Receipt RECEIPT NUMBER 00035376 Account Number: 27423 Date: 1/15/2014 Applicant: ADAM GLICKMAN Type: check # 1366 Permit Number Fee Description Amount 0001.2014.OSLU Cal fee to Receipt HPC Deposit 3,250.00 Total: $3,250.00 A �E °an A E601a "y nue GARFIELD &HECHT, P.C. Aspen.Colorado 81611 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Telephone(970)925-195-19 36 Facsimile(970)925-3008 Since 1975 www.garfieldheclit.com E. Michael Hoffman E-mail: mhoffman(4)garfleldhecht.com Phone: (970) 544-3442 March 10, 2014 Ms. Amy Simon Aspen Community Development Department 1')0 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Withdrawal of Request for Delisting of 213 West Bleeker Street, Aspen, Colorado Dear Amy: Adam Glickman hereby withdraws his request to remove 213 West Bleeker Street from the City's Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. Please provide an accounting for the deposit paid with his application and refund any unused portion of the deposit. Sincerely, E. Michael Hoffman • MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 213 W. Bleeker Street- Request to remove Historic Designation from a portion of the property, PUBLIC HEARING DATE: March 12, 2014 SUMMARY: 213 W. Bleeker Street is a historically designated property located in the West End of Aspen. In 2000, an owner-builder remodel of the Victorian era house that was on this site at the time evolved into an unapproved total demolition. The City initiated an enforcement process. Penalties, including a large fine, were assessed as part of a settlement agreement. HPC made recommendations to Council regarding the settlement and suggested that a new house design should be required, but Council elected to allow construction of the originally approved project, which meant creating a replica of the Victorian. The redevelopment was permitted to proceed, including several setback variances and a parking waiver that had been granted as preservation incentives. A 19th century shed that existed on the site had not been demolished and was required to be retained, as planned, along the alley. Council determined that the property should not be expanded in the future, and that no further incentives would be allowed. HPC was to maintain purview over the site in perpetuity, like all other landmarks. The current owner of 213 W. Bleeker bought the property in 2006 and has no connection to the unfortunate demolition that took place. He requests removal of the historic designation except for the shed and a 10' boundary around it. According to the application, HPC would no longer review exterior work on the primary house, and if it were ever remodeled in a way that increased or decreased the existing floor area by 5% or more, the house would have to be brought into conformance with dimensional requirements. Removal of historic designation from part or all of the property requires review by the HPC, who makes a recommendation to City Council. City Council will make the final determination. APPLICANT: Adam Glickman, owner, represented by Michael Hoffman, Garfield and Hecht, P.C. ADDRESS: 213 W. Bleeker Street, Lot G, Block 51, City and Townsite of Aspen. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-40-005. ZONING: R-6. 1 Regarding Criterion B, there is no adopted integrity score sheet to use because the forms that have been created for 19th century buildings generally refer to primary, rather than secondary structures. During the renovation in 2000, this shed was considered to be a historically significant structure. It was lifted for basement excavation and replaced in the location and orientation that it was found in. The south and east sides of the shed are visible to the public and retain historic materials. Portions of the west and north sides of the structure have been removed or changed by new construction. All of the homes on this block-face are Victorian landmarks, and four, including 213 W. Bleeker, have original outbuildings. This small shed contributes to the association of the neighborhood with 19th century Aspen. Staff finds that the property still meets criteria A and B, and that removal of the historic designation of any of the property should be denied. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC oppose removing historic designation from any part of the property. The designation criteria are met, therefore "de-listing" the property is inappropriate. There are many new structures in town that are subject to HPC review to ensure that Aspen's valuable collection of historic resources are supported by their surrounding context. Exhibits Resolution# , Series of 2014 A. Application B. Public comment 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF A REQUEST TO REMOVE HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION FROM ANY PORTION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 213 W. BLEEKER STREET,LOT G,BLOCK 51, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION # , SERIES OF 2014 PARCEL ID: 2735-124-40-005 WHEREAS, the property owner, Adam Glickman, represented by Michael Hoffman of Garfield and Hecht, P.C., has requested removal of historic designation from a portion of the property located at 213 W. Bleeker Street, Lot G, Block 51, City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.050 of the Aspen Municipal Code establishes the process for Rescinding Designation and states that an application shall be approved if City Council, after a recommendation from HPC, determines sufficient evidence exists that the property no longer meets the designation criteria; and WHEREAS, Amy Simon, in her staff report to HPC dated March 12, 2014, performed an analysis of the application and recommended that HPC oppose removal of historic designation from any portion of this property; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on March 12, 2014, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application was not consistent with the review standards for removal of historic designation and made that recommendation to City Council by a vote of—to NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby recommends Council deny the request for removal of historic designation from any portion of the property at 213 W. Bleeker Street, Lot G, Block 51, City and Townsite of Aspen. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 12th day of March, 2014. Jay Maytin, Chair Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 213 W. Bleeker Street HPC Resolution# , Series of 2014 Amy Simon From: maggielee @qdewolf.com Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 12:58 PM To: Amy Simon Subject: Re: 213 W. Bleeker thank you Amy for letting me know about this possible removal of yet another victorian reminder of our past history much of which grounds us so that tomorrow and all tomorrows to come can give us a unique sense of having a past to belong to as well as a future always ahead. Nick and I came here from Boston's Beacon Hill and we picked Aspen to move to because of its history and its visible ties to the past as well as its future prospects which looked bright and full of promise. I am against removing the historic land mark designation from any portion of the property at 213 west Bleeker St. Margaret DeWolf 233 West Bleeker St -----Original Message----- From: Amy Simon Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 10:10 AM To: maggielee(d)gdewolf.com Subject: 213 W. Bleeker Amy Simon City of Aspen Historic Preservation 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 429-2758 www.aspenpitkin.com Notice and Disclaimer: This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and exempt from disclosure pursuant to applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error and then delete it. Further, the information or opinions contained in this email are advisory in nature only and are not binding on the City of Aspen. If applicable, the information and opinions contain in the email are based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The opinions and information contained herein do not create a legal or vested right or any claim of detrimental reliance. i February 25,2014 Mrs. Amy Simon City of Aspen Community Development 130 South Galcna Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Request for Delisting 213 West Bleeker Street,Aspen,CO Dear Amy— I do not support delisting of the property at 213 West Bleeker Street and removing the stipulations listed in Stipulated Order from the City in 2001. The stipulations I am most concerned with are maintaining the existing FAR with no increase or decrease from the existing, maintaining a design consistent with the existing historic shed,and lifting all variances and exemptions granted under the l,listoric Preservation provisions of the Code. I strongly encourage the board to review the City Council Stipulations and why it was imposed. I would a �the board to vote no on supporting this application. Th l You for taking the time to hear our comments. i Regards, West Main Veitures, LLC Jamie-L. Brewster McLeod Amy Simon From: Junee Kirk <junee.kirk @comcast.net> Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 9:42 AM To: Amy Simon Subject: FW: Letter for HPC on March 12th,Wednesday To: Members of Aspen's Historic Commission City of Aspen Historic Commission Amy Guthrie Ref. HPC meeting Wed. March 12th March 8, 2014 Dear Members of HPC and Ms. Guthrie I am writing this board and the city to urge you, as responsible citizens,to vote this application down for removal of the little miner's house at 213 Bleeker and have its lot removed from historic designation, retaining only historic designation on the alley. This makes no sense at all, and appears to be only a financial incentive to sell or built an inappropriate structure on the historic lot, breaking up the unity of the three little mining cottages/houses. These three mining houses serve as an entire package, complementing each other giving any visitor to the block the feeling of our history of mining houses, how they once lived close together in a neighborhood of surrounding Victorians of denizens from the working to middle and upper classes of the times. The three mining cottages are crucial as a grouping to maintaining the story of its past. By dividing up the three cottages or eliminating any one of them,you change the character, charm and rhythm of a statement of our past. Having two cottages, plus a modern building or some other structure ruins that statement and feel for how the miners lived, their adjoining lots and their neighbors etc. You have only to look at what an accomplished developer in town, Greg Hills, has done. He always has maintained the rhythm of three Victorian, cottages,( never two or one) in order to create the complete statement of what mining cottages were. Take a visit to the cottages/houses next to the Armory building and park of City Hall and the small Victorian miner's houses behind Sandy's office supply. Each development has a groupings of 3 , small lots,with 3 similar miner houses, repeating many of the same elements and features. This is an important story for future generations. IT is unheard of—an owner/developer trying to remove historic designation of a structure which is part and parcel of these important historic structures, already established. If you remove this, what does it do as a precedent for the other remaining and structures and Victorians on the block? Bleeker Street is one of the most historic Streets in Aspen, with the Historic Society, Wheeler/Stallard Victorian, and many other great Victorians and large lawns/parks which belonged to Aspen's contributing fathers and patrons during the mining/Victorian period. IT shows the mixture of the built environment during the 1800's including the miners, as well as a mixture of post World War II , modern lodges which represents Aspen's history and development during the Ski years in the 40's and 50's. 1 As members of HPC you have a responsibility to represent the public's interest in maintaining these last few vestiges of our history and past, and not yield to developer's short term interest in profit, rather than preservation of Aspen's past. This owner bought this lot with the designation on it and knew what he had. So to try and delist it now for whatever reason is unconscionable and only self-serving. To this end, I hope each and every member of HPC will see what is behind this request to delist this very parcel from a grouping at 213 Bleeker St,and understand its vital importance in keeping this house on site, as a contributing function to the remaining three little miner's cottages and other Victorians along this street. We should all fight to save Aspen's historic character. This miner's house must be retained on this lot. Thank you for your attention and time. Junee Kirk 47 year resident Member of Historic Preservation Committee 2007-2009 2 ATTORNEYS&COUNSELORS AT LAW JEROME PROFESSIONAL BUILDING 320 WEST MAIN STREET ASPEN,COLORADO 81611 Sherman & Howard L.L.C. TELEPHONE:(970)925-6300 FAX:(970)925-1 181 OFFICES IN: DENVER COLORADO SPRINGS ASPEN VAIL STEAMBOAT SPRINGS PHOENIX SCOTTSDALE RENO LAS VEGAS ST.LOUIS ATLANTA Over 120 Years of service and commitment to our clients B.Joseph Krabacher Office Number(970)300-0123 E-mail: ikrabacher(ashermanhoward.com Website: www.shermanhoward.com March 6, 2014 Amy Simon Historic Preservation Officer Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 213 W. Bleeker Street Request for Delisting Dear Amy: We represent the owners of the property located at 215 W. Bleeker St., Aspen, CO 81611 —David and Sarah Pesikoff. The purpose of this letter is to object to the Application dated December 31, 2013 (the "Application') for delisting of the residence at 213 W. Bleeker Street, Aspen, CO (the "Property") from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures (the "Inventory"). 1. History of Intentional Demolition of Historic Landmark. As described in the Application of Adam Glickman (the "Applicant"), a prior owner of the Property - Ron Schelling - received approvals for a remodel of and historic landmark. Instead of remodeling the historic landmark, it was demolished without the consent or approval of the HPC or the City of Aspen. As noted in Resolution No. 13, Series of 2001, which constituted the findings of fact and recommended order from the HPC, the only portion of the structure that remained included chimney bricks, a window, some framing materials, the shed, eave molding, porch decking, soffit material and the siding water table. Resolution No. 13, Series of 2001, Findings of Fact, § 15. After the Property was red tagged, the HPC and the City determined that the Property should remain listed on the Inventory although the residential structure itself was removed as an historic landmark. Resolution No. 48, Series of 2001 at p.1. BUS RE/3461043.1 Amy Simon Historic Preservation Officer March 6, 2014 Page 2 The owner was required to submit a remediation plan to the City which essentially required a replica of the historic landmark structure to be built in accordance with the approved HPC plans. Stipulated Order§1. The Stipulated Order stated that the Property shall remain on the Inventory but would not be eligible for any further HPC benefits other than the variances originally granted by the HPC. Stipulated Order§1. 2. Application, The Application seeks to remove the principal residence from the Inventory based upon a claim that the principal residence is not historic as it is a replica. However,the Application seeks to preserve the variances that were granted solely as a result of the fact that the Property was on the Inventory, and now seeks to retain the benefit of the variances, but no longer subject to the principal residence to any HPC controls, unless there is a"material change" to the residential structure. The Application then proposes a formula for determining when a material change occurs. Finally, after acknowledging that the Property contains a truly historic shed, the Application seeks to apportion some of the Property to the shed (specifically a 10-foot footprint around the shed) and otherwise to remove the Property from the Inventory. At a minimum, such an Application has no precedent and is not supported by the City of Aspen Land Use Code (the "Code"). 3. Noncompliance with Standards. Aside from the fact that this Property should remain on the Inventory to avoid circumventing the prohibition on demolition of Inventory properties without approval of the HPC, the Application fails to satisfy the standards for delisting of the residential structure or the Property. The first criteria of Section 26.415.030.B.La) of the Code states: "(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" The Applicant cannot demonstrate compliance with this standard because as admitted in the Application, the Property continues to contain the historic shed. There is no precedent to treat the Property as proposed by the Applicant,where only the shed and some small area around the shed is deemed historic, but the rest of the Property and residential structure is deemed non- historic. The express language of the Code as stated above requires the analysis to focus on the Property, not some portion of the Property. The second criteria of Section 26.415.030.B.1.b) of the Code states: "(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 any other devices which BUS RE/3461043.1 Amy Simon Historic Preservation Officer March 6, 2014 Page 3 shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. " The Applicant argues that because the replicated residential structure is only 10 years old, it lacks all integrity relating to the period of significance for bona fide Aspen Victorians. However, the standard above is not focused strictly on the age of a structure located on an Inventory property, it also requires a consideration of location, setting, and design, as well as other factors. Based upon the entire standard, the Applicant will be unable to establish there is no integrity of location because in fact the location is next to 215 W. Bleeker which is historically designated, and although the replica is new construction, it complements the location, and enhances the setting and design of adjacent historical structures, including the shed located on the subject Property. Furthermore, there is no evidence in the record that the chimney bricks, a window, some framing materials, the shed, eave molding, porch decking, soffit material and the siding water table that were historic and were not demolished or deconstructed were not incorporated into the residential structure. Finally, Resolution No. 13, Series of 2001 acknowledges on page one that the demolition of the historic landmark resulted in a complete loss of historic integrity, so the rationale advanced by the Applicant for delisting was already considered and rejected by City Council in 2001. 4. Delisting is Inconsistent with the Settlement Agreement and Stipulated Order. The Application contends that there there is nothing in the record to indicate why the City Council decided against delisting the Property in 2001. Application at p. 7. However, the minutes and Resolutions, as well as the Settlement Agreement and Stipulated Order, debunk this argument. Contrary to the assertions of the Application, the City required the Property to remain on the Inventory for, among any other reasons, to insure compliance with the remediation plan. Resolution No. 48, Series of 2001 at p.l ("Council has determined that the property should remain on the historic inventory because of the historic shed and because of the need for HPC to review the remediation plan'). The demolition of the original historic landmark generated litigation, which was filed in 20011 and after an extended negotiation among the original owner, the City, and the neighbors (the predecessor in title to the Pesikoffs). To settle the litigation, the parties entered into a Settlement Agreement and Stipulation. It appears that the Settlement Agreement and Stipulation was not submitted with the Application and a copy is enclosed. The Settlement Agreement is binding on successors and assigns and therefore binding on the Applicant and is entitled to be enforced by the Pesikoffs or the City. In consideration for settling all of the claims, the prior owner,the City and the neighbors all agreed 1 Block et al. v. Schelling et al., Pitkin County District Court,Case No. 01-CV-131 BUS-RE/3461043 I Amy Simon Historic Preservation Officer March 6, 2014 Page 4 to abide by the provisions of the City approvals that allowed the project to proceed with the replication of the destroyed historic landmark. Settlement Agreement and Stipulation§1. Even if the City were to approve the Application, the parties that are successors and assigns to the Settlement Agreement would also have to approve any delisting of the residential structure from the Inventory. The Plaintiffs in the litigation (the predecessor in title to the Pesikoffs), agreed to support the approvals, and any change in those approvals requires the consent of the neighbors—David and Sarah Pesikoff. Nothing has changed since 2001 that would obviate the need for the Applicant to continue to comply with the remediation plan.2 The HPC approval of the remodel which became the replica required to HPC to retain control over the Property to make sure that there are no changes in the replicated residential structure that would, among other things, violate the remediation plan or adversely impact the historic shed. Numerous provisions of the Code have been adopted to prevent attempts to circumvent the City's historic preservation regime and the desire of owners to avoid HPC regulation of historic properties. For example, Section 26.415.080 establishes detailed procedures and standards for demolition of historic resources. None of these provisions were followed in 2000 and 2001 with respect to the Property, and approval of this Application would in effect allow circumvention to occur and would establish a dangerous precedent. As another example, Section 26.415.100 proscribes demolition by neglect. Allowing the Applicant to remove the residential structure and portions of the Property from the Inventory would sanction a method to circumvent the Code, and should be discouraged by denying this Application. In addition, the Applicant has not proposed to modify the Stipulated Order, which continues to bind the Property and expressly states that the Property will not be removed from the Inventory. Stipulated Order§3. The Applicant knew about the limitations when the Applicant purchased the Property in 2006, insofar as the deed transferring title to the Applicant contains a specific reference to the various resolutions of the HPC imposing the restrictions on the Property as a result of the voluntary demolition of the historic landmark. Warranty Deed recorded March 31, 2006 as Reception No. 522405, Exception No. 10. 5. Setback Variances Granted. A variety of variances were granted to the residential structure, and survived the replication of the historic landmark, but because the Property remained on the Inventory, it was determined that the Property was eligible for variances. As z The remediation plan was not submitted with the Application, and we have been unable to locate a full copy of it,although portions appear to be attached to Resolution No. 59, Series of 2001. BUS-RE/3461043 I Amy Simon Historic Preservation Officer March 6, 2014 Page 5 noted in the Application, there were a combined total of six setback variances granted, some of which related to the residential structure and some of which related to the historic shed. As a result, the variances have necessitated the goodwill and cooperation of the neighbors (the Pesikoffs next door at 215 W. Bleeker)when the Applicant wants to work on the western exterior of his house, for example for painting this past summer when the Applicant used portions of 215 W. Bleeker as a staging area. The use of portions of 215 W. Bleeker has been granted in the spirit of being a good neighbor, but is not a permission that the owners of 215 W. Bleeker are required to grant. In an interesting case of having your cake and eating it too, the Applicant has the temerity to suggest that most of the Property and the residential structure should be taken off the Inventory, but that the setback variances, which were granted solely because the Property was on the Inventory, should remain until some future date when the Applicant decides that he may want to redevelop the Property. The Applicant also proposes a new definition of material change and attempts to create a standard whereby any increase or decrease of more than 5% in existing floor area would constitute a material change that would require approval from the HPC or they Historic Preservation Officer. There is no provision in the Code that would permit such a result. The incentive for variances of setbacks benefits properties on the Inventory, and if the HPC were to consider delisting the residential structure or a portion of the Property, the HPC should condition that approval on the Applicant immediately bringing the Property and improvements in compliance with all setbacks and to revoke all variances that were granted with respect to the residential structure. We request that you add this letter and the enclosures into public record for the HPC hearing could you have any questions, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Sincerely, (101� B. Joseph Krabacher cc: David Pesikoff Sarah Pesikoff Enclosures: Resolution No. 13, Series of 2001; Resolution No. 48, Series of 2001; Stipulated Order; Resolution No. 59, Series of 2001 (including Settlement Agreement); Warranty Deed recorded March 31, 2006 as Reception No. 522405 BUS-RE/3461043,I CITY OF ASPEN CITY OF ASPEN HRETT PAID WPIETT PA10 431c `U 7>� NO. 1ad---- DATE o�&d- 522405 WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: TRANSFER DECLARATION RECEIVED 03/31/2006 Name: Adam Glickman Address: 3959 N. Lincoln Chicago, IL 60613 WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, made this 31 st day of March, 2006, between Ronald L. Schelling and Lori L. Schelling of the said County of Will and State of Illinois, grantor, and Adam Glickman whose legal address is 3959 N. Lincoln, Chicago, IL 60613 of the said County of Cook and State of Illinois, grantee: WITNESSETH, that the grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten dollars and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant,bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the grantee, his heirs and assigns forever, all the real property, together with improvements, if any, situate, lying and being in the said County of Pitkin and State of Colorado described as follows: Lot G, Block 51, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN 522405 County of Pitkin, State of Colorado JANICE K VOS CAUDILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 03/31/2006 D 11F 325.50 also known by street and number as: 213 W Bleeker St., Aspen, CO 81611 TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor, either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the grantee, his heirs and assigns forever. And the grantor, for himself, his heirs, and personal representatives, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the He number: 44628-C7 Stewart'title of Colorado,Inc.-Aspen Division Warranty Doed—Photographic Record(Individual) Page 1 of 2 grantee, his heirs and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents, he is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except See Attached Exceptions The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above-bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee, his heirs and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor has executed this deed on the date set forth above. Ronaldd L. Schelling Lori L. Schcllin STATE OF ID COUNTY OF )?v4k,IrN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this aC'1 day of _qj_0(5(Q_,by Ronald L. Schelling and Lori L. Schelling My commission expires —11 . Witness my hand and official seal, Notary Pu lic: 0,111111r" B ���i S AvBL G,r�p 5224 5 ••alibi-��Q• Page: 2 of 4 03/31/2005 12:11 F MU OOMAAIS9fON 6i JANICE K VOS CAUOILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 D 325.50 AUGusTi,2m File Number: 44629 Stewart title of Colorado,Inc.-Aspen Division Wan-anty Deed—Photographic Record(Individual) Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT I EXCEPTIONS 1. Distribution utility easements (including cable TV). 2. Those specifically described rights of third parties not shown by the public records of which Buyer has actual knowledge and which were accepted by Buyer in accordance with paragraph 8b of contract Form No. CBS 1-9-99 [Matters Not Shown by the Public Records]. 3. Inclusion of the Property within any special taxing district. 4. The benefits and burdens of any declaration and party wall agreements, if any. 5. Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents, or an act authorizing the issuance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water. 6. Taxes for the year 2006 and subsequent years not yet due and payable. 7. Exceptions and reservations as set forth in the Act authorizing the issuance of the Patent for the City and Townsite of Aspen recorded March 1, 1897 in Book 139 at Page 216 as Reception No. 60156. 8. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in Deed from the City of Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Page 52 as follows: "...that no title shall hereby be acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws." 9. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Ordinance No. 10 (Series of 2000) of the Aspen City Council granting approval for landmark designation recorded April 28, 2000 as Reception No. 442760. 10. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Resolution No. 11, Series of 2000 of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission recorded April 28, 2000 as Reception No. 442763, Resolution No. 18, Series of 2000 of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission recorded May 16, 2000 as Reception No. 443358 and Resolution #59, Series of 2001 of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission recorded March 6, 2002 as Reception No. 464740. 11. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Resolution #00-17 of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission recorded July 5, 2002 as Reception No. 469516. File Number: 44028 522-405 Stewart I itle of Colorado,Inc.-Aspen Owision Wan•anty Deed—Exhibit I (Exceptions) Page: 3 of 4 Page 1 of 2 03/31/2006 12:11Z � 111111111111, 325.50 JANICE K VOS CRUDIL.L PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 � 12. Any loss or damage due to possessory rights of fence along easterly property line as shown on Improvement Survey prepared by Tuttle Surveying Services dated March 3, 2006. 522405 l l 11 11 111 l� j� P 1 a j( e. �1 �1 1 4 1 R of NI � 4 �E �Jl K � 1f V os ll j CR iL� till#P 0 ITKIN COUNTY CO 3�3I/200& 12:I1F R 21.00 D 325.50 File Dumber: 44628 Stewart Title oft olorado,Inc.-Aspen Division Warranty Deed—Exhibit I (Exceptions) Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING A REMEDIATION PLAN FOR 213 W BLEEKER STREET,LOT G,BLOCK 51,CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,COLORADO Parcel Ideutmcatiou No.2735-124-40-005 RESOLUTION#59,SERIES OF 2001 Vi'IIEREAS, Ronald and Lon Schelhug, owners of the property at 213 W Bleeker Street, and the City of Aspen signed a Stipulated Agreement Order on May 29, 2001. which established the circumstances under which the stop work order could be lifted at 213 W Bleeker Street,Lot G,Block 51,City and Townsite of Aspen,and V'FIEREAS, said agreement required HPC review and approval of a "Remediation Plan,"to address design changes that would be needed to comply vnth outstanding UBC issues,and 'WHEREAS, the HPC discussed said plan at their regular meeting on December 12, 2001,and approved the plan with conditions THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED. That the HPC approves the"Remediation Plan," attached as `Exhibit A," for 213 W Bleeker Street, Lot G, Block 51, City and Townsite of P,spen with the following conditions 1 A building permit for this protect shall be obtained prior to any work beginning on the site The building permit application shall be submitted within two weeks of the date of this resolution The permit shall be nicked up within one week of the date that it is ready for issuance 2 The attached settlement between the Schellings and Margaret Block,the adjacent property owner,is hereby incorporated into this resolution as"Exhibit B" The Schelluigs shall complete backfill and soil compaction on their property and the Block property in a manner that satisfies the terms of the settlement and the Chief Building Official All other aspects of the agreement shall be complied with 3 The Stipulated Order between the City and Schellrng's is attached as`Exhibit C" and shall be complied with 4 The property owner shall be required to submit a construction plan, with milestones for completion of the project on a t.mely schedule, for review and acceptance'cy the Chief Building Official T1us plan shall be agreed upon before the permit is ready for issuance' 5 Drainage from the gutter bemg installed on the west side of the house shall be directed to a drywell in the front of the building,as represented in the meeting 111111111111 JiI 46a izae e5 :r SILVIR DRVIE°:Triw,"iy co R i25 06 C ¢ 6!7 EXHIBIT APPROVED BY irM CO�MNIJSSION at its regular meeting on the:2th da}' of December,2001. Approved as to Form. Davia Hoefer,Assest ad t City Attorney Approved as to Couteut HISTORIC PRESERVATIONN COR32vUSSION � 1 Su n a Rei CZial ATTEST: Kathy Strlcl Sand,Chief Deputy Clerk r 1�111 �Ill lll�IIEI�llii!111II�I III�[II lil 111 a c= 05 z:: E�LVIP DOVIS °ITKIW GOIRlTY GO R 175 00 G 0 00 4SFENI EnSTORI ":SERVATION COM-MISS ( Mi'\UTES OF DECEMBER 12.2001 Department, to insure the safe relocation,preservation, and repair (if required)of the structure,site preparanon and infrastructure connections as part of the Final Review Application, and 15)Replacement and desz,of windows on the historic pan abode buildings shall be review and approved by staff and monitor 16)The access well to crawl space on the historic cabin should be reconfigured to allow the north east corner of the cabin to sit on grade and the confzo ration shall be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor 17)Tower configuration shall be indicated as Alternate#a 18)The gabled roof for the four Alex is approved as AC 3 2 Melanie second the motion Motzon carried 7-0 i res vote Jeffrey Gilbert, Rally, Melanie,Neill,Michael, Suaannah 213 W.Bleeker, Remediation Plan I Sworn in were Stan Mattus,representing the SchellmQs Craig O'Brian,resident of 215 W Bleeker v Paul Taddune,attorney representing the adjacent neighbor;Margaret Block Tom Perry,Building Department David said pursuant to the stipulation order the applicant had to come before HFC for approval of the remediation plan Copy of the stipulated order entered into the record as Erlubit 1 David said in addition there is an agreement between the Schellmg's and Mrs Block Exhibit 11. Also building codes need to be complied with as pan of the approval David said he is going to request that the agreements be attached to the resolution as Exhibits Mr Schelhng is required to pay the City 5120,000 and the appropriate way to track that is through the Clerk &Recorder When recorded,these agreements would have to be complied with if ever the property was sold to another party Stan said he was asked to address how to reduce the overhang on the adjacent property to the west The overhang goes beyond the property line and at the same time maintam some resemblance as to what you originally t`jought you were going io get in elevation Stan +{saidt{lit cut the overhang G2 2 0- 0 :I- N IzISTOFtT� SERV.�TTON CGM?�1TSSa ( 1`UNUTES OF DECEMBER 12,2001 back to within one inch of the worst-case condition of the property line; so therefore its about eight inches Not only in the code but as a matte;of aood practice one needs a gutter because you really cannot drain water onto the neighbor's property,so it became obvious to be that I was going to out the entire overhang off and that is what the wail section indicates It is a custom gutter that is in the same shape as the fascia and soffet and to be painted the same as the fascia and soffet At the front of the building you will not see the end of the gutter,the gable fascia comes down and covers _ the end of the gutter That runs the inter length of the historic part of the structure In addition there needs to be.down spouts and code we have to have dry wells to take care of the runoff water There will only be one downspout on the lengthy gutter 1t will probably be like a secondary i gutter inside the fascia gutter that will drain all the water to Bleeker Street Iside !twill then go to some sort of drainpipe,preferably not a perforated 1 drainpipe to a dry well at the front of the house We are too close to the neighbor's property for any water to be spewed out Stan said he also raised the elevation of the bottom of the soffet to about two niches,and maybe three inches so now it aligns with the fascia that run across the face of the shed roof covering the entry That was actually offset in the anginal submission. The fascia that comes down on the side of the gables that returns back to the shed over the entry is what:s indicated on the drawings The onc--inal drawing was a foot and that put it two inches over the neighbor's property The reason the bottom of the soffet was raised up is to keep the vertical dimension of the fascia as it was approved previously The only difference is that the soffet is higher There are no alternations to any other part of the design Paul Taddune stated he represents 215 W Bleeker,the Block residence The Block house is an Ill stoncally designated structure The subject project jeopardized her foundation. Other impacts were the roof overhang and the higher pitched roof was causing snow to cascade against her house etc That caused hear to file legal action against the Schellmg's Paul agreed with David that the remediation plan is going to mcorporate the terms of the settierient ggreement Pau: stated that all of the settlement agreements have not been performed The Schelling's were to notify Mrs Block when the backfill was going to occur in order for them to contact HP Geotecb to observe the backfill The backfill which was done without a permit was not III I I II I,II PM COLIII IGI IIII E I�I It'�BI 00406 DZ0 004's ASPEN KISTOP.Ik ESEfiVATION COM.NISS, NfTNTUTES OF DECEMBER 12-2001 done properl} and does present some Jeopardy. The bacl<_fill needs to be redone and in adaition Panlio recommended mud grouting on Mrs Back's _`oundation ivhic i we do not feel was done A subsurface drain was to be installed that would drain out onto Bleeker Street which should be part of the settlement If those components could be rectified we could have compliance Jefsev asked what has to be done regarding the backfiW _ Tom Perry said it should have been inspected. 'We are tallong civil rather than building code issues as to which way to go It should be part of the process David said lus concern is that the compaction comply with the building codes Paul said unfortunately you have an histonc property that is m compliance and one that is not The fill should be removed and reinstalled and inspected as it is reinstalled and that would preserve both builtrigs We do not want to under.nir e the foundation of the Block residence. Stan Mathis said if there was a specification calling for a specific compaction density test and that wasn't tested as tine lifts were put in then by virture of the fact that the excavation is so close to other structures by not having the fight standard,the soil not being in a"fluffed"state you have the opportunity for the soil that was not excavated at the other structure to move Compaction is important The drainage is a building code issue Suzannah asked when the backfill was done? Paul said the backfilling was done after the agreement and the agreement calls for Mrs.Block to be ---notified Paul said he was dnving by and saw Schelling doing some work and that was in violation of his building pe=t. Jeffrey asked about Schelling's license'? Tom Perry said he has no license at all and he does not have a building permit for that structure at this time Everything is starting over He should be going through entrineering even for the drywell and erigineenng would =.-r �rrer*I:DIMT, X P. t?5 00 o 0 ae ASPEN,HISTGRR PSERVATIO?",` CONCMISS,_ MTNUTES 0 DECEMBER 12 3001 be loolang at the dr}nvell YThat is holding up the building permit is I PC's approval of the appearance of th.s structure. Drauiaae issues,structural issues,fire issues will be dealt with as part of the building permit process David said it is his position that it would be meaningless for this Board to basically approve a remediation plan that didn't incorporate both the concerns of Mrs Block and our concerns Unless the Schelhng's are in compliance with both of these agreements they basically have a situation where they cannot complete the house. David said he brought everyone together in the hopes of resolving these issues Stan Mathis said there are above grade issues which are visual and then there are issues below,grade that effect the stability of both structures actually Stan requested approval for the elevation presented and then work out the building issues. Amy said that is staffs recommendation,for HPC to give approval with the coadawn that they get a building permit;that they give us a construction schedule that sets up dates for completion of the project and that they address whatever they are out of compliance with on their agreement with the Block's Suzannah said the permit should include specifics on this agreement and somehow it is going to have to be shown that the construction complies wrath the permit MOTION Rally moved to approve Reso #59,2001 in which HPC recommends approval of the elevation section.provided at the Dec 12'h meeting with the following conditions 1 That the applicant is required to obtain a building permit and that they must apply for than pemit within one week of ihts date and they must pick up the permit within two weeks of it being ready to issue 2 Attached to this resolution shall be the agreement with the Block's, the adjacent neighbor and all aspects of that ao gement must be complied with particularly the compaction issues 3 Stipulated order berween the City and the Schelltng's shall be eeEE y!a5 attached and complied with �II�I ��t���I LIIIII I�I 1���11III �� III I�� 9 0 06 D 0 O 5 21. q Og1.5 .iK! 10 AS? N �iISTOPU tESERV�ATION COR'f1\USS� _. mTNUIT F,S OF DECEMBER 12.2001 4 The owner and the Building Dept will come to an agreenzent about an ongoing work plan for completion of the project Subsiuface drainage going out to Bleeker Street which is part of the gvTter drainage, the dry well in the front of the building 6 The Block agreement should be incorporated and addressed 171 the building department drawings Motion second by Melanie. Motion carried 6-0. Jeffrey, Gilbert, Rally,Melanie, Neill, Suzannah — 110 E.Bleeker—Conceptual,Partial Demolition,Variances Sworn in were Sven 6dstrom and Herb Klein Notice of publication was entered into the record as Exhibit I. .Amy said the proposal is to make an addition on the west side of the existing ig'century Victorian Staff has concern about the location of the addition,it is far to foiv,,ard on the lot to meet design guideline 10 8 It is too con petitive with the historic resource and changes the perception of the widih and overall size of the original building and it must be slipped back on the lot One of the reasons it has not been proposed that way is because the garage at the back of the property is side loaded After discussion with the EEngmeenng Dept it is conceivable that the City would allow relocation of the garage doors onto iae alley side in order for them to come nght ui from the alley The garage is not an historic building The applicant is requesting a 500 square foot FAR bonus. lZestoranon efforts need clarified in order for the recommendation of the FARbonus. On the partial demolition standards,where the addition is proposed the intent is to demolish an entire wall and staff doesn't feel the design is appropriate right now Staff recommends continuation with very specific direction. H Sven said since the last worksession the addition has been pushed back 14 feet behind the brick facade of the house and the porch is nine feet behind the brick facade The FAR bonus request has been reduced to 350 feet, which is rouglily 70°o of the bonus The access location cf the stair on the rear of the building has been changed so that the rear fagade,of the historic house is not altered at all They are proposing to leave the laundry room unaltered The length of the;addition has been reduced by three feet The 4 7 11 7j �li �4r��� l�l��f� 1� ���i �1�1 �� � 0Sa oze Z e5 ZiG 'l 54 w'n 1'h d' amm ) N ,J 4T I 1 I I, � 2 b�al 5�� — 8 s� Cc��iM dl 1111{ter .. - N� \ Bwb B B N O r [ST RICT COURT COUNT OF PITI_LN 1 E OF COLORADO 506E Main Street,SUlte E Aspen,Colorado 81611 _ RGARET W BLOCK TRUSTEE OF THE 1\dARGARET W BLOCK QUALIFIED PERSONAL RESIDENCE TRUST �2 MAGGIE TQCGOVERN11 AND DANIEL MCGOVERN A COURT USE ONLY A RONALD L SCHELLT.NG AND LORI L SCHELLING, CITY OF ASPEN,COLORADO,AND THOMAS MCCABE. JIM IvLgRKALUNAS,RACHEL RICHARDS,TONY HERSHEY,AIQD TERRY PAULSON AS NFEML ERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN I i i Paul I Taddirne,Esq Paul 7 Taddune,PC CASE NO Ol-CV-131 323 West Mam Street,Suit,301 Drvulon Two Asom,Colorado 81611 Telephone (970;925-9190 Telefax (970)925-9199 E-Mall taddunco-kolnouserve corn Arty Rcg No 1082A Dante]M Fowler,Esq Fowler Schimberg&Flanagan,P C 1640 Grant Street,SUITe 300 80203 Denver O I I{till If III�li�l�II{I�i118 II �I�II If l�illl Iii II6E T ephone (303)298-8603 tl l 96 1 5 0.06/20 0s i-lcfax (303)298-8748 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 125 00 21F D e 00 Atry Reg No 6357 i SET MT14T AGI2EEMEN'T.A.ND STI?ULATI ON THIS SETTLEN—ENT AGREEMENT AND STIPULATION is entered into as of the 213t day of September,2001 between the Plaintiffs,Margam 9V Block,Trustee of the Marearel W BlocL QualLSed Persona)Residence Trust r2 Asoen Residence Maggie McGovern and Daniel McGovern(hereinafter collecnv^_ly""Plaim ffs"),and Defendants Ron d L Schelhng and Lon L Schell:ng(hereinafter coIIectively the"Sohellnip") _. E itB(Tfi�^,. RECITALS A Plaintiffs own real property and the residence Cnereoti in the CITY of?.spea commonly known as 215'West Bieeker Street,Aspen,Colorado more specifically cescnbed ds Lot`7 Block 51_City and Township of Aspen County of Pitkin,State of Colorado B The Schelhng,are husband and wife and own real property in the City of Aspen commonly known as 213 West Bleeker Street,Aspen,Colorado,more specifically descnbed a.. Lot G,Block 5 1,City and Township of Aspen.Colorado_located to the east of and sharing a common boundary with Plaintiffs property C In or about August 2000,the Schellings commenced construction to restore a locally designated istoric landmark miner s cottage located on them property During the course of construction,the Schellrngs demolished the bistonc landmark structure,excavated two large i basements upon then property which caused subsidence on Platnuffs'property and reconstructed a pitched roof which overhangs onto Plaintiffs'property D In or about October 2000,a stop work order was issued to the Scbellings by skit City of Aspen Buiidmg Department on the basis that the historic structure preViously located on the Schellings property had been totally demolished,contrary to City approvals for the restoration of the historic structure and landmark designation E This civil action has bCe;n filed by the plaintffs in which their claims against the Scheliings are for teespass,nuisance,negligence,unlawful forcible entry and detainer,mlunction and declaratory relief,ansma,out the demolition of the historically designated structure on the Schellrngs property and the reconstnicuon of a residence thereon,all as more specifically alleged in the Complaint.which Is incorporated herein by this reference The Complaint further alleges that le City Defendants unlawfully re-instituted governmental approvals and entered into an unla-,,fui settlement agreement _ F Plamuffs and Scheltmgs desire and intend to settle all claims ansing out 01 the aforesaid htiga7on,whereby the Schelltngs have weed to remediate and repair all damage in accordance with recommendauens from Parrllo Associates Engmeers,Inc dated August 1,2001, a ropy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit"A'and to pay to Plamn$s foe costs incurred by them,as set forth m this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation G If the Ciry_of Aspen is wilhag to grant approva s to tae Schellings, the Plamtiffi a shall support said approvals,subject to the terms of this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation •' IJOW,11-1EREPORE,in consideranon of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth below,the parties agree and stipulate as follows f5 III 11 g[� I1 Ii; ��l L�I�I I II II III �1f III BI�ll�l l J � mE = 40'pe00 "i Ali 'A. n TK N N"Ty r l In consideration for the Plamuffs'support of the approval of the reined3at3on plan to he submitted to the CA) of Aspen Historic Preservaton Commission and the setvement of the hngauon,the Schellings hereby agree to perform,comply with and complete at iheu sole cos and e,,pense the following re-mcdiation to assure that the construction occumng on their piopeM, trill not encroach upon or cause aamage to the Plaintiffs'property (a)There shall be no encroachments into,on the surface of or aoove the surface of Plamuffs property by the Schel4ugs Although it is the intent ofthis Settlement Agreement and Stipulation that there be no encroachments,Plaintiffs agree that no legal action will be taken aQamst Schellings or their successors or assigns by Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs'successors or assigns to remove an concrete foundanon material below the surface of the ground that may have seeped updergound onto 2I5 West ee er This estoppel,however,shall not prec u e lamtaff or Plaintiffs'successors c.assigns hereto from iemovmg said concrete to the extent that it might encroach onto Plaintiffs pi operty,in any respect,such that Plaintiff may represent to future property owners that any such underground encroachment may be removed by such subsequent owners The overhang encroachment shall be iemoved as promptly as practicable and the Scbellings shall request the gas company to remove,at the Scheiling's expense,the gas service pipe hutting onto Plaintiffs'property All such encroachments shall be removed no later than thirty(3 0)days after the City of aspen issues a permit allowing the reconstruction to proceed Any and all clamis for the tight to continued mcioachiments by adverse possession or othervnse shall be deemed to be waived and abandoned by the Schellmgs and the Schellmgs shall be estopped from asserung any such presently exrsnmg or future claims (b) The Schcllings shall place and maintain ice breaks and gutters and down spouts feeding to the engineered dry wells on the Schellings'property to avoid snow ice and water cascading onto the Plaintiffs'property, (c)The Schellmgs shall resod,at their sole cost and expense the front yard east of the Plamuffs' sidewalk and north of the Plamtiffs'residence after the water tap is mace,but in no event later than June 1,2002, (d)A new fence,approved by either Margaret W Block or Margaret Saunders McGovern,the daughter of Margaret W Block,who cuuently resides in Pacific Grove, California shall be constructed along the boundary line between the Schellin;'s propert) and the Plamtiffs'property, J (e)The Schellmgs shall,as soon as practicable but not later than sixty(60)days after approval of the remedranon plan by the City of Aspen,remediate the subsidence that has occur, strict ed on Plaintiffs property rn strict conformance with the report of Pattjlo Associates nQ,,eers,Inc,a copy of rzhich is attached hereto and mane a part hereof as ExInbit"A" In addition,the walkway on Plamuffs'property shall be regraded by the Schellings so as to slope toward the Schelhngs oropeity.and the wooden boardwalk leading to the side entry shall be resumed to its normal height and proximiy to the wall of Planiil s':esidence 711t; ll\g rte`,f 25 11111111111111111IIIE I��IIIII I 4 /or zee0e s Y cc Z5 011 0 e z, - shall provide N i«en notice ro Magaret 4U Blocy and Margaret Saunders McGovern of all prises of construction.paricularl,the work to be performed pursuant to Exhibit"A' so that the P lamtri s can monitor the work tc assure that it is being satisfactorily performed (f)Plamn_fs shall cooperate with the Schellinss in order to allow the construction to be com»leted along the west facing side of the Schelltngs structure in a manner that shall cause no mierference with Plaintiffs'residence or property The completion of such construction requiring temporary use of Plamtiiis'propertyy shall take no loner than twenty(20)days to complete and shall be in strict accordance wrtb a plan to be subnutted to Pla huffs and approvetk-- in wr ing by either Margaret W Block or Margaret Saunders McGovern.whicb approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed (g) All such wort:and obliganons m be,performed by Schellings shall be of good quality and workmanship and shall not cause further subsidence or damage to Plamtifis' residence- 2 The Schellrngs,as a condition to the recommencement of construction shall pay the Plamuffs the stun of Twenty Thousand($20,000)Dollars as a contribution toward engmec:mg,surveying and legal expenses incurred by Plamtz Such amount shall be paid no later than ten(10)days following execution of this agreement oy Plaintiffs and Scheilmgs in ad iuon.the Scuellmgs shall pay all invoices for monitoring as required in the remediation plan 3 In consideration of the mutual covenants berem contained,Plantr$s agree that the above referenced lawsuit shall be settled in accordance with the terms of this mpulanou and the terms hereof shall be incorporated and enforced as an order of the Court 4 Each party hereby acknowledges and agrees that this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation is made:n order to amicably resolve the disputes heremabove referenced 5 Each party hereby acknowledges that he,she,or it has carefully read this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation,understands the contents of this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation,and has executed the same as then own free and voluntary act after having this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation explained to such party by such patty's counsel 6. This Settlement Agreement and Stipulation may be executed in counterparts and, as executed shall constitute one agreement bmdm,a upon all of the parties hereto, notwithstandm;that all said parties mad-not be signatory to the original or same counterpart The parties agree that telefa:,signed copies of this Settlement.Sgreement and Stipulation shall be deemed effective,and that each parry will forward o}ginals to the other parry,when -I reI{ane`Isi{{td 464 7'40 �III� 11I 1�1�1{I1�I�II�II�1�I ���II III O®III�I��I�I e9 6n2¢ 0ee25 Z'F ry�,,,/// V/� „w,a W'15 A. Tins Ser!eroent Agi-eement and Supulanon shall be deemed tc oe an agreement made under the laws of he State of Colorado and for all purposes it shall be(,onsuvsd rn accordance v,:th and governed by The laws of such state 9 The parties agree that the aforernenuoned civil action ano all claim-.including each and every claim for relief contained therein shall be settled and dismissed with preludiee upon full performance of the obligations of Schellmgs pursuant to this Sewero=Agreement and Stipulation 9 This Settlement_Agreement and Stipulation.s binding upon the heirs.successors and assrgms of all of the palZies { 10 The parties represent,warrant.and agree to each other as follows 1 (a) The facts stated in the reciial5 hereof are Me (b) Each party hereto has made(or his had the oppornrnit),to make)such investigation of the facts pertaining to this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation,the claims underlying this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation,and ail matters pertaining hereto as such parts'deems necessary,and no par'y relies upon any promise Or representation by any other party,or by any officer,agent,employee representauve or attorney of any other party with respect to any such matter (c) Each party hereto nas read this Setdctnent Agreement ana Stipulation and understands the contents hereof,and has taken such acnon as required by lavt,for the approval of she person so signing ldl Each party hereby represents and warrants that she or it has no;heretofore assigned or transferred,or purported to have assigned of transferred to and' person or enury not a signatory to this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation,any claims or matters herein released Each pain hereby agrees to indemnify,hold harmless,and defend the other parties,to the extent permitted by law,from and against any loss cost or expense, including,but not limited to,attorneys'fees ansnig out of or occasioned by,or ansmg in connection with,any such assignment or transfer,or any purported sucr asslg=mt or uansfer,of any claims or ocher matters released hereto ]7 This Se$lement Agreement and Stipulation contains the entire agreement for settlement between the parties hereto and any other poor agreements of whatever kind regarding settlement or comprormse o;the above-entitled actions are deemed merged into fnis Settlement kaeemeat and Stipulation J ��estiee*ea R 5 00 0 00 C.^.Vlc viiKlN:OVNTv CO - i2 The parties further 5upuiate and agree that the claims agams,the Schehhngs zO be dismissed t;:thout preladicc and an appropriate order may be enured disnnssuag said claims Mthout Ule;ttdloe as plaVlded hern-n'•x2thout further aonoc to or b) a y of ttic pan e5 1 i in the event of any iittgauon commenced to enforce the term,of this Ali ecneal, the oit�zihag party shall be enutled to costs,expen wnne;;s fees,and at`orney�'fees Dated dus c/ day of 2001 MargaiatBlock Ronal Schelling^ iAagg�e M C*oti e n Lon L.Schc (' J V Daniel McGovern Rep*eseuted by Represented by PAUL 7 T.kDDU_JE,°C ALLEN,WERTZ Fi FELDMAI,LLP BY. __ '�� ley. ?au1.T d u e,Esq Doug A11en,Esq 323 Wcst Main SGeet,Suite 301 520 t Cooper Avenue.Suite 230 Aspen,CO 81611 Asp CO 83 611 (970)925-9190 (970)925-8800 Ir eff{N I Ee{f 1 1 /eeF 4547^Q 00 o/ 05/200�3 ZIP c,vramurww.i.ic..cros..n� / �l Irk -i 6 �,% i v 12 The names further snpulate and aQxee that the claims against the Sc bellluigs shell be disrutssed without prejudice and an anpropnate order may be eritered dismissing said cauns withou:prejudice as provided herein witbout nirrher nonce to or by any of the parses 13 In Ire event of any lit gaton com_nenccd to enforce the terms of this A-areetnent Jae prevarltnu party shall be entitled to rests,expert witness fees,and attorneys'fees Dated this?!.;,, day of t rti 2001 Margaret Block Ronald L Schelling �� -- Mag`ne McGovern Lon L Schelhrag Dam--I McGovern Represented by Represented by PAUL 1 TADDiJI',TE PC ALLEN,WERTZ&FFLDMAlq,LLP By By Paul I Taddune,Esq Douglas P Allen,Bsq 323 West Mam Street Suite 301 520 East Cooper Avenue_Suite 230 Aspen.CO 816]1 Aspen,CO 81611 (970)925-9190 (970)925-8800 •�1�0I1I��Illl�lll6l�lllllC�i Ill�llI6IIIII tlI I 1$ 08 6 2O 0B 35 ZIP r C IwN/IYRIOV iu3..umer"-�N' I 5 12 The panes nether supulatc and agl-ee that the clauns against tore Schefflm.-,sbaB t o d:smzsed without pi e)udcu and ar.appropnate order may be entered dismissing said claims �iltout vIthcut{srrher nonce to of by any of Tine parues pie)udice as provided herein 13 in the event of any heganon co=enczd to enforce the terms of thi greement' the prevailmg pare'shall be enutied to costs,e%pern witness fees,and anomeys fees Dated thus": r da} of 'z< r = 2001 Marsaret Block Ronald L Schching Maggie McGovem Lon L Schelltng Damel MoGovem Represented by Represented by PAUL 1 TADDUNE,PC ALLENT,'WERTZ FELDMAN,LLP By By Pau)J Taddune,Eso Douglas P Allen,Esq 323'West Main Street,Suite 301 520 East Cooper Avenue Swte 230 Aspen,CO 81611 Aspen,CO 81611 (970)925-9190 (970)925-8600 `e 441`l1 1I II Wit Wh I}1 I 464740 T �I 11 0'/0612002 0 0 0038 21F R 125 6 ;� i r� 1' The parties further supulare and agree that the claims against the Sc,hellLngs stall be dismissed without prejudice and an apptonnate order mad be ent rad d:srmisstng said claims without prJudtce as provided herein without further notice to or by am of the paivcs 13 In the event of any hu¢atton cominenced to enforce the to ms of tl.is A.aeement. the prevailing part'shall be enutled to costs.expert wimess fees.and arcorueys fees Dated uus day of f e 2001 r Ronald L Schellmg Mazgaret �ocl: Maggie McGovern Lon L Schelling Daniel McGovern Represented by Represented by PAUL J TADDLNE.PC ALLEN,WERTZ 8 PELDMAI+,LLP By By Paul J Taddune,Esq Douglas P Allen,Esq 323 West Main Street.Suite 301 520 East Cooper Avenue,Suite 230 Aspen,CO 81611 Aspen,CO 81611 (970)925-9190 (970)925-8800 14 illll�ll{Itl II�I�I�II ��I 111�II�I�'��I�1�lII�4I P gt 18 of 5 /2 Z2-321E 'h l 6 C�~ SLR= 3Tj,'jCTURAL CGNSLLTANTS 715 g�nE a�L'9ne,9�atli^.e 3o'.Tit ylmwood!tinny,ee)oma�.x1602 DnoIIn(973)"1-90?5 tx 0970)9A5-+91'_a,ipamll �a"t"�Cam .Supnst 1,2001 C{1 f{! FtF 215i4� BlmkerStreet II�IIIIIIIIIIIIIILilllllllll'IIIi1�Il�IIIl llli 111 l 03//06//20e022 03 21F q pea,CO 51611 It: Residence at 215 Bleeper 7eaz MZ7a- vux office bar recantiy received additional mformanon regarding the excavation ' problem ar 213 rte+est Bletim-,Aaceut to the east side of 3 our noose Caries of ate )r-ocxh r or to Schellmo Drvclopment dried my 2Q,2901,ago DouE =.liens letter and amabments of Duly 27.2001,wax--forwarded To vs by?aui 7addlme's office, Olin coutmcuts and recommendations are pres�red h_,m, Tho Ap Geot.-ch report recommends that a far"foal dcPth of crushed rod, back5lj be-moved in die vicinity of the adjoznmg prope:nos,flier faenc al aced over the rerzxa>zung crushed rock and up the side o.the excavat>_on(adjacent to the finc_arainod soils or.Your prop_ty),arc well raced sari be compacted sp o naish grade elevaum Thor also rxorttmcnd improved surface drainage berwe= the rate!IoLdmgs. Our cornmrnts regarding rho uropose-d bar-kfrll Mtl;anon arc as follows: 1 Tius appears to be a reasonable proposal,ba;ed on onr tecnnical concerns. 2 T,'�_,ey.mvtjoa and backk5_11 reolacamanL rbould prabailly extend farther to the north,along tho pre ously back:Mled foundarion because of evidmca of Ell settlement and DnlaloNvn matexi3lloompactton e$orts. mirigadon should mclndc Blling anc malizg of tue gap between the Block found don anal the sdjaeoat soi,caused by the �cavrU- Slope fai?urn,to DtDventwaterinMvmtioa Paps a beIIionim clay sruay would be approanatc al. The proposal bachfill matenal should be t st'd and approved'uy z geotechtnc0 e,g-seer La="v1ewed/aaprovP4 by 1\irs.Block prior to consmc can. 5 The geacechmcal cn&ver should be rora,ned b,)Scholl ng DevelODlTnent to obs:ve the and bacJ`dll opwztlou*.o te s„ye m:Q-mane with pvoos-d repairs. Cons:rucuou observation rzports and compaca�in tm—ung r"Mi l B12:ei" �uEixst 1.2001 Page two o ?'hc a-ainage imprivcmant reraro>=twrlauans are an znnortaat pert of the proposdl- Because of The lnnited space between the bmldinp� The high r~adc of the alley,and the flat slopes to the north.cuective 2uprovemeai1 are difamilt to real, Wt Fumes, dtal gunm and downspouTs be employed far the west roof caves 0_':13 West Sleeker,conn.eonng to shallow subset=ace a um Pipes winch would Ieac to a sump or drYwell system It would be advanmg---ous to instaIl a concrete eaacb basin rraar the botmdar;' between the lots that will accept su Ace water runoff for both properties, i11c cetnii basin could also be copnc t> i to the subsurface drain sysmrz. A Plan for the dsaivage;r,'=v=ncuts 1 prVpardby a gimU:ried engin5er,should-be prov dt forts�. bloc's s re5new and approval Prior to oam-tru.tiou. The n o inailon included with lvir.Allen's lc>tcr o=7uly 2?,2003,describes a =tmica-1 gm j==nal that was spz,ifically dasigncd tv prati�cnt,1'uaa of c paztstve clay. his tS_rrobahly not apua oonate For-X 7avatrou�tabilizaticn nazpose< and we doubt is was used by an egperieaced grouhal,�co-tn--rTen coutoany such as Denver Grourir g Semites,Inc.,to this case., Ine grouting speci-Imtlon end in stalizb on mz3I be moot lmsues if the gropossd baci aL tnitinvn is cr trted- Nonethalesc,with addittoTral:nTOt nation It would be holpiul to understand wby Qic gouting[ailed ru the prnbl ru area i'b s norapletm our TzV-.cw+of the most recent submittals. Please contact he ; you have any questions or requue ftuthe;iuformatiora. Sfficrswy, '� 'x,3+6 ERFO.t.A oIo79 P.obeY Path]]o,a c f�9 NAL �oYa Pnacioal Hngineer pp co m _ r Nnclosu—;S, Plan and Section Drawings of Observed F:ca°ation 5(15/01(2 sheets,S 1&S2,dated'7111-7/O 1) 'ac 3xnilr cop'r Paui Tado na @ 925-9'_99 0 Q0 t) V2 035"' I� aITrlla COLOT CD P --5 ..l"IP OW IS 0 ATTACHMENT 2—LAND USE APPLICATION 014 PROJECT: Name: Adam Glickman 213 West Bleeker Street, Aspen, CO 81611 r Location: (Indicate street address,lot&block number,legal descri tion where a ro riate) Parcel ID#(REQUIRED APPLICANT: Name: Adam Glickman Address: P.O.Box 1207,Aspen, Colorado 81612 Phone#: 808 280-9499 REPRESENTATIVE: LAddress: Michael Hoffman 601 E. Hyman Avenue Aspen CO 81611 (970) 544-3442 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): E]❑ Conceptual PUD Temporary Use ❑ GMQS Exemption Text/1v1a Amendment ❑ GMQS Allotment ❑ Final PUD(&PUD Amendment) ❑ p ❑ Subdivision E] Conceptual SPA ❑ Special Review ❑ Final SPA(&SPA ❑ Subdivision Exemption(includes Amendment) ESA—8040 Greenline,Stream ❑ condominiumization) Margin,Hallam Lake Bluff, Mountain View Plane ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ ❑ Commercial Design Review ❑ Lot Split Expansion x Other: Request to Rescind ❑ Residential Design Variance ❑ ❑Lot Line Adjustment Historic Designation ❑ Conditional Use m part EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing,buildings,uses,2revious approvals,etc.) Pro ert was included on the Historic Invento in 2000. PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings,uses,modifications,etc.) Remove the residential structure from the Historic Inventory. A shed will remain on the Historic Invento FEES DUE: $ Have you attached the following? x❑ Pre-Application Conference Summary ❑ Attachment#1,Signed Fee Agreement ❑ Response to Attachment#3,Dimensional Requiremen�ncludin(I written K sponses ox eve wtanctardsview Standards) x❑ Response to Attachment#4,Submittal Requirements g ❑ 3-D Model for large project All plans that are larger than must . submitted d as part lof he application. Large scale projects should include an (Microsoft Word Format)mu electronic 3-D model. Your pre-application conference summary will indicate if you must submit a 3-D model. MKQMLI I 11110t 1111"" 10 , � • • Agreement to Pay Application Fees JAN 15 2014 ���Y �F Hsi}�l� An a reement between the City of Aspen ("City")and ) ITY OF ASPEN PEN Property Phone No.: Adam Glickman Owner("I"): Email: 8082809499 adg3 @me.com Address of Billing Po Box 1207 Property: 213 West Bleeker St Address: Aspen CO. 81612 (subject of 81611 (send bills here) application) I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. , Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and the payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. Fcr flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $ flat fee for $ flat fee for $ flat fee for $ flat fee for For deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the app I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review, and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for non-payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render an application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $ 3250 deposit for 10 hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above t deposit eposit amount will be billed at$325 per hour. $ deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at$265 per hour. City of Aspen: Property Owner: Chris Bendon Name: Adam Glickman Community Development Director Title: City Use: Fees Due:$__Received: 1 xt� i JAN 15 2014 GITY OP ASPEN CITY OF ASPEN WN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Amy Simon, 429.2758 DATE: November 29, 2013 PROJECT: 213 W. Bleeker Street REPRESENTATIVE: Michael Hoffman TYPE OF APPLICATION: Rescinding Landmark Designation DESCRIPTION: 213 W. Bleeker Street is a designated landmark property. In 2000, a remodel of the historic house and shed on the site evolved into an unapproved demolition of the home. An enforcement/settlement process took place. Ultimately, the property owner at the time was allowed to finish the construction project, creating a replica of the original house. The historic shed was preserved. The property was required to remain on the inventory of historic sites. A subsequent owner of 213 W. Bleeker would like to request de-listing, except for the shed and some boundary around it. the applicant must The process for rescinding designation is not mete Pleasegnote that Secti n 126 415.050 has an demonstrate that the review criteria are _ incorrect code citation, as follows. 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.B.2A an explanation shall be provided describing why the property no longer meets the criteria for designation. An application will be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission, who makes a recommendation to City Council. City Council will make the final determination. This review will be unique, in part because there are very few landmark designations in Aspen that only cover a portion of a property. In addition, the home enjoys several setback variances and a parking waiver that were granted as preservation incentives. Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.415.030.A,B&D Designation of historic properties 26.415.050 Rescinding Designation Land Use Code (including all code sections cited above): http'//www aspen )itkin com/Portals/0/does/City/clerk/munirode/coaspent26-400.pdf HPC application: / n2Fees 2011 20Historic%20L htt :/'www.as en itkin.com/Portals/0/does/Ci /Comdev A s% % and%20Use%20App%20Form.pdf Review by: Staff for completeness and recommendation, HPC for recommendation, Council for decision Public Hearing: Yes, at HPC and Council Second Reading Referral Agencies: None. Planning Fees: hours Oto be�efunded 10 hours of review at the rate of$325 pte�hour) hours, or Referral Agency Fees: None Total Deposit: $3,250 PLEASE SUBMIT 1. Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Applicant's name, address and esseand telephone rn mberl of the Irepresentat representative authorized to applicant stating the name, add act on behalf of the applicant. 3. Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, 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. 4. Completed Land Use Application. 5. Signed fee agreement. 6. Pre-application Conference Summary. 7. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 8. Existing elevation drawings and/or photographs and site plan that indicate the location of dimensional variances. 9. A site plan indicating the boundaries of the proposed designated area around the shed. 10.A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the 11.Applications shall be provided text and line drawings on a CD. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, what I The sucmmary does not ceeate a legal o p�ested factual rightepresentations that may or may not be accur . REIVED JAN 15 2014 1 Y :. A6 ASPFIVOFFICE Ave GARFIELD&HECHT,P.C. ti�q d� :,t, �=,, 6111 F apt Ilk man Auenue a aspen.Coloradca 81611 Telephone(970)925-1936 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Facsimile(970)925_3008 Since 1975 ,w%kNv-garfieldhecht.coni E. Michael Hoffman E-mail: mhoffman&)garfieldhecht com Phone: (970) 544-3442 Ms. Amy Simon December 31, 2013 Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Request for Delisting of 213 West Bleeker Street,Aspen, Colorado Dear Amy: This letter constitutes the application of Adam Glickman for removal of the residential structure located at 213 West Bleeker Street' (the "Property") from the City's Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures (the "Historic Inventory"). There are two structures on the Property at this time. A historic shed is located along the alley behind the primary residential structure. The request made in this application is to remove all of the Property from the Historic Inventory other than the historic shed. For the reasons set forth in the body of this application, the residential structure is not historic and may be removed from the Historic Inventory without diminishing Aspen's architectural legacy. Mr. Glickman has no current plans to materially modify the residential structure. The definition of"materially modify,"as used in this application, is provided in Section 2, below. As described in greater detail in Section 1, certain variances from the dimensional requirements of the R-6 zone district were provided to the Property at the time it was historically designated. This application proposes that those variances related to the residential structure be retained until such time as a material modification of the residential structure is requested. The variances related to the historic shed will not be affected by the approval requested in this application. Lot G,Block 51,City and Townsite of Aspen,Pitkin County,Colorado. Ms. Amy Simon December 31, 2013 Page 2 1. Procedural History of the Property's Historic Designation. Before Mr. Glickman became the owner, an historic structure was demolished on the Property by its owners at the time, Ronald and Lori Schelling (the "Schellings"). Demolition of the structure violated the City's land use regulations and represented an egregious breach of the City's historic preservation program. The Schellings acquired the Property from Don D. Pevehouse in September of 1999. Although the Property was not on the Historic Inventory at the time it was purchased by the Schellings, they requested landmark designation shortly after buying the property. At a meeting held on March 22, 2000,2 the City's Historic Preservation Commission ("HPC") approved the request and recommended to City Council that the Property be added to the Historic Inventory.3 Also at the HPC's March 22, 2000 meeting, approval was granted for certain variances for proposed new construction on the site. Specifically, the HPC granted the following variances (which shall be referred to herein as the "HP Variances"): A. A 2-foot west sideyard setback variance for the new construction. The existing historic resource was to remain as an existing non-conformity. B. A combined sideyard setback variance of 7 feet for the garage and shed (along the rear of the Property, adjacent to the alley). C. A rear yard setback variance of 10 feet for the shed and a rear yard setback variance of 7 feet for the new addition (again, each as measured from the alley). D. A combined front and rear yard setback variance of 15.3 feet for the existing shed. E. A combined front and rear yard setback variance of 11.7 feet for the new addition. F. A waiver of one of the required parking spaces. (The highlighted variances will be retained as they are associated with the historic shed.) Final Development Review approval for temporary relocation of the historic structure and for development of new construction on the site was granted in HPC Resolution No. 18, Series of 2000, at the HPC meeting of April 26, 2000. During renovation of the historic resource and construction of the new structure in late summer and early fall of 2000, Mr. Schelling caused the historic structure to be completely dismantled 2 A copy of HPC Resolution No. 11,Series of 2000,which memorialized the relevant approvals granted by the HPC at its March 22,2000 meeting,is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 3 A copy of Ordinance No. 10(Series of 2000)of the Aspen City Council,attached hereto as Exhibit B, memorialized City Council's adoption of the HPC's recommendation that the Property be added to the Historic Inventory. Ms. Amy Simon December 31, 2013 Page 3 and its original framing demolished. Although individual pieces of the structure could have been salvaged,the City determined that the historic structure was a complete loss. In response to the City's discovery of the demolition of the historic resource, the HPC issued findings of fact and a recommended course of action to the Aspen City Council.4 Council accepted the HPC's recommendations with one exception — the Property was to remain on the Historic Inventory.5 There is nothing in the minutes of the two City Council meetings which clearly identifies why Council opted to keep the Property on the Historic Inventory.6 Council permitted the Schellings to replicate the historic structure on Property. The Stipulated Order which was approved by the City imposed the following penalties on the Schellings and the Property: 1. A remediation plan was required which would "result in a residence conforming to the original approved plans . . . retaining the variances shown thereon pursuant to HPC resolution No. 11, Series of 2000." 2. "No increase in FAR, now or in the future, said covenant and agreement to be evidenced by a recorded covenant recorded against the property." 3. "The landmark status of the property is revoked and removed from the property. The property shall remain on the inventory but will not be eligible for any further HPC benefits other than the variances originally granted by HPC." In adopting the Stipulated Order, City Council made the following notation: "The City Council of Aspen hereby adopts the "stipulated order," which is attached hereto as Exhibit B, with the amendment that the property at 213 West Bleeker shall remain on the historic inventory." 4. The Schellings were required to pay a penalty in the amount of$120,000. 5. The Schellings were required to write a letter of apology to the community to be published in both the Aspen Times and the Aspen Daily News. The remediation plan was subsequently reviewed and approved by the HPC, and the improvements built in accordance with the plan. The Schellings paid the $120,000 penalty and wrote the letter of apology. 4 In its Resolution No. 13,Series of 2001,the HPC memorialized its findings of fact and provided a recommendation to City Council in response to the Schellings'violation of the prior approvals.A copy of Resolution No. 13 is attached hereto as Exhibit C. 'Council's acceptance of HPC recommendations was memorialized in Resolution No.48(Series of 2001).A copy of this Resolution is attached hereto as Exhibit D. 6 Copies of the minutes of meetings of the Aspen City Council held on April 23,2001,and May 29,2001 are attached hereto as Exhibits E and F. 'The Stipulated Order was a part of Council's Resolution No.48(Series of 2001),which is attached to this application as Exhibit D. Ms. Amy Simon December 31, 2013 Page 4 2. Details of the Request. This application requests that historic designation be immediately rescinded for the residential structure but designation be retained for the historic shed. The shed and that portion of the Property which is within 10 feet of the historic shed shall continue to be subject to HPC oversight. Proposed changes to this area shall be subject to all of the regulations which govern other structures listed on the Historic Inventory. The HP Variances related to the residential structure will remain in force until the owner of the Property begins work utilizing a building permit which allows a material change in the residential structure itself. The owner's application for such a building permit must include plans for modification, or demolition and reconstruction, of a residential structure which conforms to the dimensional requirements of the R-6 zone district, or which relies on variances other than the HP Variances. As used in this application, "material change" means any alteration of the residential structure which increases or decreases its existing floor area (as defined by the current Aspen Land Use Code [the "Code"]) by more than five percent (5 %). The owner of the Property will have the right to request such a change from the Building Department without receiving any approval from the HPC or the Historic Preservation Officer. The provisions of Chapter 26.415 of the Code will not apply to the owner's request. At the time a building permit is issued which allows a material change to the residential structure, the Building Department and the owner shall each report the change to the City's Historic Preservation Officer, who will then formally rescind the HP Variances related to the residential structure. Those HP Variances which are related to the historic shed shall remain in full force and effect. The provisions of the preceding paragraph will be memorialized in the ordinance granting the request made herein, a copy of which will be placed in the Building Department file for this Property. 3. Standards for Delistin . The HPC and City Council are required to review this application subject to the following relevant standards found in the Code: 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. A. Establishment of the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures. The Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures has been established by City s(Code provisions are shown below in italics.Our responses to each such provision follow the relevant standard and are shown in"normal"type.) Ms. Amy Simon December 31, 2013 Page 5 Council to formally recognize those districts, buildings, structures, sites and objects located in Aspen that have special significance to the United States, Colorado or Aspen history, architecture, archaeology, engineering or culture. The location ofproperties listed on the inventory shall be indicated on maps on file in the Community Development Department. B.Aspen Victorian 1. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example ofAspen Victorian, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality ofsignifzcance. The quality ofsignificance ofproperties 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 significantfor its antiquity, in that it contains structures which can be documented as built during the 19th century, and The subject residential structure was not built in the 19th century. It was constructed about ten years ago. 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. The 19th century Victorian structure originally designated was disassembled and removed from the site in the fall of 2000. The residential structure now on the property is a replica which has no historic integrity. It is about ten years old. Although the residential structure has integrity as a replica of the original,the structure lacks all integrity relating to the period of significance for bona fide Aspen Victorians. 2. Application. Property owners, the Community Development Director, the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) or the City Council may file an application for designation of an Aspen Victorian building, district, site, structure or object on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. The application for the designation of'a property or collection ofproperties shall include the following: a) The applicable information required in subsections 26.304.030.B.1., 2., 3. and 4. See Exhibit G, attached hereto. b)Site or historic district boundary map. See Exhibit H, attached hereto. Ms.Amy Simon December 31, 2013 Page 6 c)Property or district description, including narrative text,photographs and/or other graphic materials that document its physical characteristics. As referenced immediately above,the footprint of the residential structure, as well as the location of the historic shed, are shown on Exhibit H, attached hereto. Photographs of the various improvements on the Property are attached as Exhibit J. d) Written description of how the property meets the criteria for designation The residential structure does not meet the criteria for designation. The shed has already been identified as historic and as having sufficient integrity to merit continued listing on the Historic Inventory. D. Review,public hearings and notice. 1. An application for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall be transmitted to the Community Development Director to determine if the application is complete. For applications filed with sufficient information, a report will be prepared by City staff for transmittal to the HPC with the relevant information on the proposed historic property or district with a recommendation to approve or disapprove and the reasons for the recommendation. 2. A date for a public hearing on a complete application will be scheduled before the HPC. Notice of the hearing shall be provided according to the provisions of Subsections 26.304.060.E.3.a., b. and c., except when the Community Development Director., HPC or City Council is the applicant. When the Community Development Director, HPC or City Council is the applicant, notice of the hearing shall be mailed to the property owner(s) within three hundred(300)feet of the property and posted on the subject property for at least thirty (30)days prior to the hearing. Notice to the property owner shall be by registered mail. In the event that there is no evidence that the property owner received actual notice, the HPC may sped that additional measures be taken. Public notice will be provided pursuant to Code Subsections 26.304.060.E.3.a., b. and c. 3. The HPC shall evaluate the application to determine if the property or district meets the criteria for designation. At the public hearing, the property owner,parties of interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to provide information about the property or district's eligibility for designation. The HPC may recommend approval, disapproval or continuance of the application to request additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Their recommendation shall be forwarded to City Council. 4. Upon receipt of the decision, report and recommendations of the HPC, the City Council shall schedule a hearing on the application in accordance with the notice requirements for adopting an ordinance. The City Council shall evaluate the application to determine if the property or district meets the criteria for designation. At the public hearing, the property owner,parties of interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to provide information about Ms. Amy Simon December 31, 2013 Page 7 the property or district's eligibility for designation. The City Council may approve, disapprove or continue the application to request additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. S. If an application is denied, the Community Development Director, HPC or City Council may not file a reapplication for designation of the same property or district on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures for five (5)years from the date of the City Council disapproval. No response required on the provisions excerpted above. 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 26415.030.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 s unles there is a finding that the resource which originally caused the site to be landmarked meets the criteria for removal from the historic inventory. Other than the historic shed, which is located along the alley at the back of the Property, there are no structures on the parcel which justify inclusion of the Property on the Historic Inventory. The residential structure which provided the original justification for historic designation was demolished and wholly removed from the Property over 10 years ago. Designation of the historic shed and a buffer area of 10 feet adjacent to the shed within the Property shall continue. There was no historic lot split involving the Property. 4. Conclusion. The Schelling's demolition of the historic residence was a loss to the City of Aspen. For reasons not clear from the record, the Aspen City Council decided against delisting the Property in 2001. However, both Council and the HPC recognized that the structure now constructed on the site is a replica of the original miner's cabin, not independently worthy of historic designation. Our request to rescind designation of the residential structure is warranted. Current and future owners of the Property, who had nothing to do with the "bad acts" committed by the Schellings, should not be burdened by continuing HPC oversight of the home if they are willing to forego the HP Variances which accompanied historic designation. No changes in the regulatory status of the historic shed are proposed in this application. It will remain on the Historic Inventory and subject to preservation and the purview of the HPC. Thank you for your consideration. Ms.Amy Simon December 31, 2013 Page 8 Sincerely, E. Michael Hoffman Exhibit List Exhibit A—HPC Resolution No. 11, Series of 2000. Exhibit B—City of Aspen Ordinance No. 10 (Series of 2000). Exhibit C—HPC Resolution No. 13, Series of 2001. Exhibit D—City Council Resolution No. 48 (Series of 2001). Exhibit E—Minutes of Aspen City Council Meeting held April 23, 2001. Exhibit F -Minutes of Aspen City Council Meeting held May 29, 2001. Exhibit G—Documents required by Code Sections 26.304.030.B.1., 2., 3. and 4. Exhibit H—Survey of the Property Exhibit I—Photographs of the Improvements Located on the Property. JExhibit A 11111 OF IN 442763 04/28/2000 10:23A RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 1 of 4 R 20.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION, CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT,PARTIAL DEMOLITION,TEMPORARY RELOCATION, VARIANCES,AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS REVIEW FOR 213 W. BLEEKER STREET,LOT G, BLOCK 51, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,COLORADO RESOLUTION NO.J/, SERIES OF 2000 WHEREAS, the applicant, Schelling Development Corp., represented by Palomino Barth Architects has requested landmark designation, conceptual design approval, partial demolition, temporary relocation, variances, and "Residential Design Standards" approval for the property at 213 W. Bleeker Street, Lot G, Block 51, City and Townsite of Aspen. The project involves restoring the existing historic structures and creating an addition between the house and outbuilding; and WHEREAS, all applications for Historic Landmark Designation shall meet two or more of the following Standards for Designation of Section 26.420.010 in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: A. Historical Importance: The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or event 0-f historical significance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. B. Architectural Importance. The structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type(based on building form or use), or specimen. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. D. Neighborhood Character. The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. E. Community Character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance; and WHEREAS, all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards of 442763 04/28/2888 10:23A RESOLUTI SILVI 2 of 4 R 28.00 D 8.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY Section 26.415.01 O.C.5 of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, l, CO namely: I. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site coverage by up to five (5)percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood. than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development, 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof, and WHEREAS, all applications for partial demolition of any structure included in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of the City of Aspen, or any structure within an "H" Historic Overlay district, must meet all of the Development Review Standards of Section 26.415.010 of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: I-Standard: The partial demolition is required for the renovation; restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel; and 2.Standard: The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: a.Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions. 442763 04/28/2000 AMA RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 3 of 4 R 20.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO b.Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions so that they are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure; and WHEREAS, all applications for temporary relocation of any structure included in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of the City of Aspen, or any structure within an "H" Historic Overlay district, must meet all of the Development Review- Standards of Section 26.415.010 of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 1• Standard: The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation. 2. Standard: A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security approved by HPC with the engineering department, to insure the safe relocation, preservation, and repair {if required} of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated March 22, 2000, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found favorably for the application, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on March 22, 2000, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards, and approved the application with conditions by a vote of 7 to 0. THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED: That the review standards are met and HPC recommends landmark designation and grants conceptual design approval, partial demolition; temporary relocation, variances, and "Residential Design Standards" approval for 213 W. Bleeker Street, Lot G, Block 51. City and Townsite of Aspen, as presented at the March 22, 2000 meeting, as follows: 1. IIPC hereby grants the following variances: a 2 foot west sideyard setback variance for the new construction (the old house will maintain an existing non-conformity), a combined sideyard setback variance of 7 feet for the garage and shed, a rear yard setback variance of 10 feet for the shed, a rear yard setback variance of 7 feet for the new addition, a combined front and rear yard setback variance of 15.3 feet for the existing shed, a combined front and rear yard setback variance of 11.7 feet for the new addition, and waiver of one of the required parking spaces. 2. Any restoration efforts on the old house will have to be based on physical evidence to the extent possible. Framing should be examined to determine the size and location of the original bay window opening on the front gable end. Typically there is only one window under the porch, instead of a pair as shown, and this should be investigated. (These decisions will likely have to wait for the construction phase to be fully resolved.) 3. A cut sheet showing the profile of the windows that will be used in the restoration will be required for final,with the goal of choosing a window which reflects a historic double hung wood window. 4. The new front door, porch posts, trim and other detailing for the historic house will have to be addressed at final and '/<"scale plans will be required. 5. Study the materials for the new addition so that it does not overpower the old house or conflict with the historic shed. 6. Study the number of different window styles on the new addition and consider simplifying the design. 7. A landscape plan will be required for final. The applicant must verify that the project does not require removal of any trees or excavation within the dripline of any trees without Parks Department approval. 8. The applicant must discuss how the house will be stored during excavation at final review. 9. Provide a drawing showing the back (south side) of the old house and the new kitchen windows. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 22nd day of March,2000. Approved-as to Form: 442783 04/28/2000 10!23A RESOLUTI DAVIS SiLVI 4 of 4 R 20.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO David Hoefer,Assistant' ity Attorney Approved as to Content: HISTORIC PRESERV TI N COMMISSION S an?h Reid,Chair ATTEST: Kat y St ckland,Chief Deputy Clerk ExhibatB i frriri rr���rri�ir�r��i Will 11111111111111111111111 442760 04/28/2000 10:21A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 1 of 4 R 20.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO ORDINANCE NO. 10 (SERIES OF 2000) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING APPROVAL FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF 213 W. BLEEKER STREET,LOT G, BLOCK 51, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Parcel Identification No. 2735-124-40-005 WHEREAS, the applicant, Schelling Development Corp., represented. by Palomino Barth Architects, has requested landmark designation for the property at 213 W. Bleeker Street, Lot G, Block 51, City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.420.020, requests for landmark designation shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval by the Community Development Director, by the HPC, and by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing, and then approved. approved with conditions, or disapproved at a public hearing by the City Council; and WHEREAS,the Community Development Director performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found favorably for the application, and recommended approval of landmark designation; and WHEREAS,the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission reviewed and recommended approval of landmark designation by a vote of 7-0 on March 22, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of landmark designation on April 4, 2000; and WHEREAS, all applications for Historic Landmark Designation shall meet two or more of the following Standards for Designation of Section 26.420.010 in order for Council to grant approval; namely: A. Historical Importance: The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or event of historical significance to the cultural, social,or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. B. Architectural Importance. The structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type (based on building form or use), or specimen. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. 111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111 OF 1111 442760 04/26/2000 10:218 ORDINRNC DRVIS SILVI 2 of 4 R 20.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO D. Neighborhood Character. The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. E. Community Character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Landmark Designation, has reviewed and considered those recommendations made by the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, and the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing;and WHEREAS,the City Council finds that the Landmark Designation meets or exceeds all applicable development standards of the above referenced Municipal Code sections; and WHEREAS,the applicant requests, and Council hereby approves a one-lime $2,000 landmark grant pursuant to Section 26.420.030, if available in this fiscal year; and WHEREAS,the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the public health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,THAT; Section 1: Pursuant to Section 26.420.020 of the Municipal Code,the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Historic Landmark Designation and Grant Request: 1. The applicant's submission is complete and sufficient to afford review and evaluation for approval, and, 2. The landmark designation is appropriate,finding that standards B (architectural importance), D (neighborhood character)and E(community character) of Section 26.420.010 are met; and 3. The property is eligible for, and the applicant shall receive a$2,000 landmark designation grant, if funds are available in this fiscal year. Section 2: Pursuant to the findings set forth in Section 1, above, the City Council does hereby designate as an Historic Landmark 213 W. Bleeker Street, Lot G. Block 51, City and Townsite of Aspen,without conditions. 442760 04/28/2000 10:21A ORDINANC DRYS ILVI 3 of 4 R 20.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: This Ordinance 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. Section 5: A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the 24"' day of April, 2000 at T-00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers; Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 10"day of April,2000. Ra hel E. `Richards,Ma or � .r f A"I"I'ES T City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jahn orcester, City Attorney 111111111111111111111111115111 1111111 111 11111 1111 1111 442760 04/28/2000 10:21A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 4 of 4 R 20.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO FINALLY,adopted,passed and approved this 24"day of April, 2000. Rach 1 E. Ri hands, Mayor -ATTEST:'f" >��S. h,City Clerk G:planning/aspen/hpdcases/landmark/213wbord Exhibit C RISCILL-DKDN N0.13, SEP�T—.Z,CF, 7':N-DLNGS 0'P F .CT A_N-D RtC,-,,Nna,-Dr G PROPER n.,- OCATED A T 2-13-"rE.ST B'-ZEK-,-R ST-U--r T S P L Z,,E-7cbe;j�29 PT nE!T-Lcwte a 7?_ Ble!;- S,,. Asu!!-. CQlo-46t- R'Y the H'sion, ?Icard Ztsnmor�, -,v2dE:3Zt 7eSP-"--':!9-zhe'/'0!a!]cMs of M-C a "T:4 d:at St"tl, Cr the'-%crz pan,:�e fa,-!Df��t ca-11!-�ere ro-Ln Cill;::Ute ryes -n .:c=nm zreze-lled W,!Lte r,.tt=2 zrd Z c zhe 5-,.t the h2-, ard of zllt Irv;-t')IDUZ-h:he spe 15C acucm,0� cttases-,v:!h 7-nux of ale Ts --, Z�Ie OfAs?tn's Typi�al D--'Umc Se_ .s ( c 11 26 4 2 0,C,1 C',z i,--ht A m-r 22^ULC ccdcr, spt cl me- ear c e o- z;id Chara A'S a r-SILI 0i:he 7c^-tiv--c Set ba-p,- 'ht i C deveiop7nent ap�pnova-ls b 7f!0!'.Irf&a-,the-o;75"tI Cz - , C!jo, -dents onL-u--SP 15 M�-=aucn�Z:' a:--as 0fdf:=CLuoT,a--d the pien he 7ac-'resc—a--oz plaz, tn,- Zile c=5_H14,nnr.i�oc=e=to!,-a--I-�L-1%5:aztd slat pTuct-dwts and zzd eh ro----dze fD'ma"mg,czatagt!s Di-,-z,g u bnc ua t vzjec� dlsccve-t Ulm arzc vnii vnk p3aze to rr-icw thos-,cc.dn!oas ' h 17-xaz,, by S zzz tb�w tht pro-"o z C£. aa2 rv,--tw b)T-le HIPC A-f�r Do f,rtbc:com-lac�bcnve--n the-S aF,HPC aid owntz took plact-=-zil w -aazg2s tad-,a-zady b�-tn maue B,:h-z�. rhal ;me a S-T-,r�d It 5-'r�C7- nad hetz :us-m-qT,.Jtd. .ha.had 3e msvis-t-c' E. u-.-�2tmoirjo, Dt7mt cma-m�s du a -wtzt swaged�c Mies-, of:t v z S',- as 2 1� to t the.th's t:,�r-PrOject is A--,Jzn A-Imo ,,ZB cctsaf '_v and an~ oir,,:)t,c, Cf In, y f, -,c,:10,e�118t 1-2C mezbem and n-ff have wc-,-ktd,?--ry t—c zzatc z the nee-s L; .tae own :-s as we-7,as Dot-Ctm.the M, -eg:T:"oi o !u.-Ozc s 1c'ti-trns We ilp-c lam-guag -01 zJ.-zrp.-,vaz,r-equcsitc Specuic zmm z -,Lc=�-z ued fJ r�c cci="a:Zor-azd have a�roctjss jor y wf of c he �he c zstr c a plzlc°S,S,al."L az to ed-=we Lmonc o=,to --T3 and- or--!-or&to maamijze zad ro make a crz Lud positive process T:,.s cast 7me we s cl v,s peo-med coa the s-.-u:-Lre Zot r°y alated the cr�-Izlmom of the ap7mva!azid riyc the estavLshed proc!!d1,;7c's fc-chapel to -hast -tsuhed In th-t co-1pki't ioss of�L rz-a=aIt '-UIC fctLs t,zl o1`,U pmakcs L--wai72zatd -"-PCn S h15'.07 �JC=,,IC' ,�.rtS 27 L a 5]mificpmt n,set tc this co=�,,m oot'm Ru,--haracter and at,au.&ITic:rtco�,t�f Du:,-coinz-,LZUv basis u wzs a 7:co.-4 who lal d'e, at>aa -,.wba7 lvva's 70-4ey 7-1c loss of times 10-S --I,-A--,er TNTN ?F 0 F CT -118 t-artcz:ziey Dcu,71as A.'ea. -A-sSistpnt City David Hocfer Z-111`f-MC?7t5-:7iZM073 CG=I=SSj--D'cv tv a. -, 7 r : -- I j�W' t..:s.r. Wim--fscs wt��c zaLed io mazf-, p-my C,�Ct7 E�- a R so+-xnoz No 19,Semes of 2DOG,A-sper st,-rc P7tsw-vzzlQD C.. t KzS01-azl=NO Sene 0010,A37"ZZ Bui,,ding$-je=t pian. 213'v e,-t�jn:,tr,A,pcz� _Co., L--7,w djack da---d Dctob,-z.Y:..2000 c StpWmtd Am F%ct-zes of c at West Bittker,A47 tr-COOKC 4 iDe hoot lmmtd a 3 u s E31et. 2z, wzs ttt A,,;,,cn Hls�cnc 7hc P-Qp-,FA�4 as 2 :t,vTd an i sHielling Mu schelhll_'.-and as zTcLt--CL =ats Pa!Q—XO.Ic ke 1 e pmposza dt%e!Gp,r-ezt":--,13%ve:-k Blvtktz �-,ot�vr the t.,Jew pr�jcess scheiim?5me�az cosonmr on Kp-z,"C'a:zr CbraiLtng LhN reL uzzd 6 C'M Ma7ch,22 2000 !:,.*A-S-Den i2 .^-:l P71!StrtiZ::Qr appro-vet.by fm let Ler Strtn'-1--Ildmazk De�5gpaauorj.. Cmmctplual Farr e ;i rc ernrm-41-y- and F-Identaw Dm-p S�az6a�cs Rtv�tw-" 2WI tubt A-pt 'Islcnc Co:Z=5'slor,approved by tsop.1nom'.4z A PpLcanon is 7:n--Dcvticpm nt Re-,Ie-foT 213-W pleti-C.-str--e• Dl as Biock 51,civy ar'd To,,x--siup QfA-7p:R,C Iorad-o` Ihe kVPhCZtl0JC Wa5 aDZIOWV� a voic�--Lh-�-enry-one f:-I)�xndk:oas. dt=11"t,�z Flaln,-"Pan of:Le- Z"I-z5 Of Tice house and were m'De I-CI cved as pal,of E zl--st7-,E'-,Qz, --S-p�t a--h--buildinS t P k- mmmm;*IS own m be"=no most ye M,,d "nt 7 cmzmal-at rals azo szz5and moamm io bc bv-ond s -,0-tOPLzred�c Gmr.c-,;L!Cc=or and/or S3,Mtr=mdent I,,- na sz=lai ms°m. :-"on schei .1=g 10" oil th,-;hlsror---Rresfrva.,7on colnm;s2On Co!ldltlopu zfarproxai "r. she Frand t3ll eu q zrcmerll�,ide"mied icrcm -w`Sha?*"be 0110Wed WUhOU,,TV be:n,-rev,.ewej s. c-7RTer lcw;rg,coppe, roq(!,-M, r"�=C.-a cnd F"E SC�,"JiT e-z--r n-17- st-,---ng'w "We,'2nd at orAer-�:Iscgdaneous r=crzc,-rrzm re h2v--;c and nor 6e removed iroyr.she�, - u m-ST.,whErp fle--;or tyre !c,Ce �ejy7-r,SiTed and r-",oved,rom-Me bii*!dm ic m')Id f orclel" ,; dcmc c:hzm movmg of.-e vw1 ey Shall'�e-qmovt!,4 nn." or.hp-,-Ui iding in ke.;r or,jT,rr'.Ioc or :he HPC vfcrd mc—j�, ofx7y,r, --H-,almas,S dul?10 raz-,raf dF!2,-iOranor- sholl mlj,;�3e ri,?,eview and--p-r cc al by the F-PC vxN znd �ft4, fthe old use shmu be bzsea, e v ; f, vlzz'encf r p,q; o Sc proposed ccri-Tir-acrion work&enty-'ie--i-,,;the d,,T seroe 4-a 7 ggindi canny andzcr.al be�csexy crfiv"d ezcmjrzcncm 0,.-Ae of x-Y WPdO Operings Yo mod.,'icclon C, 17:s rMewed--nd 'hs HT-Ts-a,f=rd moracr =d T liamizic Tmt' coad,-:=s zzco"Lrn2 n ei ilz 9i u)c u a cha ges i,the rooEz 5.1 r wjndovWa,trr*<. Inds :-P d� 2 ed_:a'L?L�.a Shed floor_ at i Gtr.There.was !r - the 7355'Ile n=-; G;S'T•JC�7,C.of we,�.. tcric sm<ra.,fft r?:t C .- oznar S31 !.e v7`.?7 ..Y.^.'ta:5"Inzr':e IQ 3<;CAC the mete-lm V,tn bCi:S.£ud .I-r' ere;re. tv uL,e lei ._.a {I v,thot:th � Encl _ becailse of d?._sly czn t ofthe pmPOsed MGd'fraztacrs dW she could nct approve r_ She pH e akentjo 5 .^.,7.C.1an 3,']C1 t7alvmL o lis-,the.requests� _!hat Wo a" tll+' ere.F...K D'D pia Y' ti„:J7°v"tCW No 5'C.`7. -c!r W.'_S«G'7LS�!ied and nj"=ticdlko _ a yam =ctGO-a 1 �C+ z day aster Amy Gutlint discevci-tj tit the ;Si pcse'-Q-a,Gal a..e'ady n."x^.rdt tar Cv 7-=-s1tt wadi l^.-rtcii°d m O=tcl.:t..,C.". zt-L zi`� •SilSC tord-tiomz ooser':CG 01 ht Site In htr =,l zl--Z,,2300,;`C ✓' :i.Y'vSC=LYhC.T1fi:3 S73 C.r*,,-C'X.a.CG G.3 we sl: 1 rim . :'._20,00 he own !_er�acu€'s Gwr az ons in asz�a�u�.a anc the 4 sot ue j t�G at; `G,!P me s::zt=t,,e^sue,.mt if �.r,,�`:es c�c s;! als-s; .rdsae 'uevonc sa£vzn«��ai -ed Ca uluca t�G`tee wse^ t_t7*Liar: - pro a,Y n * r.e.l° v._at cru r <;,:� e z o^Scz ors <G ;'=try r �fi c.,� -._enn Abe In=home a �G e� - a cn x-lbs:d c .=u lay< HpcP suff..azµw7 :r ate._°2? Tat rmilt-Z:,,t7c Ie �j>twnc rs! a<de--m;—scied--izhctr uIc 's no lc:.i;zppmnai rm:---ncy v,mdov. Srir.'C _r".irr malt_ a:5,the s>a _.. c L d:ia.2.Ilvr_i do L.;zn --^3*-ii -..rl°, .c?`re st.rn�v.atc table c,! .�..-esr^wee �ie r-iaa.:�a^lclrellU i'+'e c uzs 'G-cG „_. sv t 04 the cr'_ -a!Sruds z.:lc ..Sters baC .«lcg,T' of K :asGrc%aL andG r0A f:-m had be z a°S7'v _."i.and a 1e L 21cm Cap. rr:^S 1 i l«Cl tr a4;.,.CMbt...Of to lhi'tc-,C:co and, men L IIa I.Le :b Bmmm Ate it - -.-lo xic-i-,r"zha budIzigoam,he popery ;._:s redv, o_c tr accct 0crace 20, ,0M R©Il Sca_ihn-g ed t=he gmkt MW PaIGr mo 2y:.6 -A;crk:�mce:ded he was,, der the L'='_ru.s;on Iz to 4 C had a?mraved i e acN-a,0rs r-m e ov r�-ecs°a>;ct<pia-.?_a _S,Lt t i tae Esc u^sc uGa ver ern the aer.%Cu cz . r v is Any ire Win m zot--=-:t.;1.iCazict wnh-t.i!:T c r, 13 he mdmv Famod a be has ag eaa';,isted by a yF.poadet-ice of the -.r. ce 4_„= ,.J�e.'?C_..S r_f:h 'hszonG TIr=s, 'adcn Cmr--us ion approva?S anL?v_ 7..1 di c.piar did Lz fkz occur sad-oiEzo LY °dic ie?ai -I oll at:Ons ht mat- �t�as i� Landmnall-,h�bet�-d.rs��ed RICO tor. se ra c ssTO hz,,,Mg cczcjjde.L,a ol e"Utnct'!=t-Rua SchtLmx�t vlola`ed bujdlng plar-htmCy;t=mend7,that Cii Cwmc.'llY1,Ose tk, Due v the co,.z-.c uo z-rlu,azm Fls:on e lis-,,!d L, =c7 a v r-,a,.z base- azccs and pazrki-) v"e^3 7"rs 'an L�;Cl tht! F-mv-.no=-&oo CA;shold Se mommmm*Ttnkey C-,,Mn-shall zllzcd to submit--co-ml;lett-o-w pzz--- h we cd;-tz-n5z.r%c-icr pzor:G an*:, der ac.v1 Or It Pr,,,)PCT- I'lat mdc-.:he appmp.a e zozc ms=z: isloac for chc pro—, =d S"40,tc.to-:.CT Oat , dmg-nd'-pro"m.,ons of the cm�of app1czz=SLL 1 -t,ltv,�,,y-Dt u f,-,- Imanc MmOng Pmsr. Cmja�:s5;cj,has a- i2 zh-,s caic,based u?cr Lbc N-:;r,�jjy loss 7tSQP,,!7Ce 11,e a p--d T-!o z3zl.-.g land t a,-:d cmc tssiozas--tm art prc-xiaLc by-VI;Tac Le Landinank, one lira; -xe and thcrtaftff,w-,wcm,an retard,o,-G z-.;ui:-tm--nTs of::re -h,,t-1 p; ,13cn �c rst, be _-ieaonT.sc"tb""- c,lcz3er,T+-g 11,U Ls ow-a words-a .hstQnc z'ztStrvz:-m O-dmarict i stars'P7 ts e Tvn a n C n:r=ss an!e--O=ends thx t L----pen C lry C 0 v,c =Pzse a One Ya�-,rata-mrnml on The cOn:=UStl-,n Ofany cozsy-,-Zlor or Wart on It wo UOT dan St mm=um a=c=r--f-Alark W-�nch be =bm:�t 1Lt cl-zy"cr a�l cusu, MdAms to yof Wd Somay zmn WT!Wc-0 msoivt zhas n=riv. Ell be rd a: by �k-acmty To =4 the A in ZIC sit On mEll ofte de=mom offt , A2PROVED BY TV Fcbmizr-y�2001. 1 aE �-ePar M;!vm'�GV-Tht 2®d d2-2 f Approved as t Corttrr: ATTEST Kno Ap p e r-I--5, C.F o rm TIM 7Vh1mr!Spec-ml aUmsel 'Tilt C--r y Ccu=j bv a 0' -11 nct Lhat k�,p Scbelm 41�-i .I I , :..1d,�t g ajtLi "OT2=551OZ,-RD—^aIS and ti--tjjjdmg mv A.7 tn C!-;v Cour,,:�A, al3d Ronald=j Lor, a ree, twat t° C_,y C M�ol mpme tht, --lDm Run d and I—r.SnbcUlng_--- L nc 3 ptq 17!�"!� -1-nd 5c Ing Sulb-r=a rtmtd�aucn to Lhc - f'..�:p 0 sts rmv�, and p'an tc yts'alt',-- 2 4es'6trzt n W tht o.-,g=,l plzu pursualit 127 2000'-ssuz�d August 2-1, 20�,10:eta 19 - E rj�t mct sh-, L�c-or: nur,�,atl ,--, ' Hr-C z-,salumn No 11, Se-.Its c t 2000 ii-,d * L wn 7tndtnng 2nA-bffd tc rfmddlar'.0r,pian as c3rls"Mc-00'r, at shall occul-n.z:.-pt Lht and bAckT-,I) '.-,as ben perr,!n-d as iinazd txctpon to t;t rnnd-lag Item..!of Safen,considtrations p= L. W12 cjmbtr for anv 'LenL,- It, gr,amaL'y sgamt�!by!VC Mr and MIS Schtllmg shLU D a per. i�v in it Oum,t�:,S, ZY al Zm DO L. ,0 D3Yabj! 1—rH` -er 2-rn, ce b, ti, ftmcd:anon Pllr.and:'e=-mt!--7==ofbuil2jng pe=i 10;znns"Cnon nava-'-Ic cae car::117':h & Of-jgnmg'f tz S:Zlpu altd Order, rwo tars tTOL- te date o-.,S,.gnLg ch.,Sz-.pulazed Or'-_T DA „5 0 010 payal-Ac vezi-s tn�-daze of Sir 5 St ulamd CT, 01) mg Lill Cofnmnro-amtcut v-wl;h rh f cifl'S;ag cf =a#e of te qzg— -scbvl-� 171 tht tytnl ffie Scheg t—ac'lla ts p2y.11c.=t of S;5,000 DO sha;l be e•idenced by a pmrnissc�.,note ze-ur!d i�y a nt--c-"d dtAc of e tnv=0t.-Ing--'nt pro tm; whicb'.5'<It Seb;=l o',t ardt, vt- arm;. ,:rs ScbcUmg wlit R lt'Ttr 01 aP InEy to uht cmmmunir 0 _, corstmi-T.Ire dz7,a2-t to Lht hmstoric rzsou=, whlrh 51-2h bt 7=2wc�� as zc cr• '%, Lea C3E) Ammey a_d W-j- ,jCn ,halll be s-zbml-&ed!0 2 e AbPcr,TMMS and Lht Amen L),=� News no lami than,thtn Cl 0',days af.,-r sip=g o::h s Sjjpaja*td ordez gLLcMg O � 2 �dCAPL CITY OF AMEN ATTEST e. '0200 01 Y—� Ti Koch,_ClerL rY Atmmty AGREED serum APPO-d lo F,-,r.—. 5G-1�--Tl Exhibit D r-~ RESOLUTION#48 (Series of 2001) RESOLUTION ADOPTING A STIPULATED ORDER REGARDING PENALTIES FOR THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION VIOLATIONS AT THE SCHELLING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 213 WEST BLEEKER STREET, ASPEN,COLORADO WHEREAS,the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission conducted hearings on the alleged demolition of a house on the historic inventory, located at 213 West Bleeker Street,Aspen, Colorado, and WHEREAS,the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission determined that sanctions against the owner/contractor were appropriate, and WHEREAS,the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission adopted Findings of Fact and a Recommended Order for the Schelling Property located at 213 West Bleeker Street, Aspen, Colorado,which were set forth in Resolution No. 13, Series of 2001 of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission and which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A, and WHEREAS,after a public hearing held before the Aspen City Council on April 23rd, 2001, at which Schelling and the City Council reached tentative agreement on a stipulated order resolving the issues and providing for penalties,and WHEREAS,attorneys for Schelling and the City have reached a proposed settlement order with only one outstanding issue, that of whether the property shall remain on the historic inventory, and WHEREAS,Council has determined that the property should remain on the historic inventory because of a historic shed and because of the need for HPC to review the remediation plan, and WIFEREAS, Council wants the minutes to go forward to HPC recommending that HPC carefully review the snow shedding from the house and that HPC review and address any building code violations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,COLORADO: Section 1. That the City Council of Aspen hereby adopts the"stipulated order,"which is attached hereto as Exhibit B, with the amendment that the property at 213 West BIeeker shall remain on the historic inventory. Dated: ? Rachel E. chards,Mayor 1,Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that nalution adopted by the City Council of the City of g Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held "'f.1!,2001. Kathryn S.K h, City Clerk STIPULATED ORDER The Aspen City Council has concluded by a preponderance of the evidence that Ron Schelling violated Historic Preservation Commission approvals and the building plan at 213 West Bleeker, Aspen. Thus, the Aspen City Council, and Ronald and Lori Schelling agree, that the City Council may impose the following penalties upon Ronald and Lori Schelling: l. Require Mr. and Mrs. Schelling to submit a remediation plan to the City of Aspen for its review and approval, said plan to result in a residence conforming to the original approved plans pursuant to permit #f 1379.2000 issued August 22, 2000 retaining the variances shown thereon pursuant to HPC resolution No. I L Series of 2000 and rendering attached to this Order. Until approval of remediation plan no construction, demolition, or other alteration of the property at 213 West Bleeker shall occur except completion of the foundation diaphragm and backfill that has been permitted as limited exception to the red-tag because of safety considerations. The remediation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission. 2. There shall be no increase in the FAR,now or in the future, said covenant and agreement to be evidenced by a recorded covenant recorded against the property. 3. The landmark status of the property is revoked and removed from the property . The property shall remain on the inventory but will not be eligible for any further HPC benefits other than the variances originally granted by HPC. 4. Mr. and Mrs. Schelling shall pay a penalty in the amount of$120,000.00. Said penalty shall be payable upon the first of the following to occur: A. (1) $25,000.00 payable contemporaneously with v�Titten acceptance by the City of the remediation plan and reinstatement of building permit for construction. REContracts.013 StipulatedOrderScheitingO6121 (2) $25,000.00 payable one year from the date of signing of this Stipulated Order; (3) $25,000.00 payable two years from the date of signing this Stipulated Order, (4) $45,000,00 payable three years from the date of signing this Stipulated Order,or B. Contemporaneously with the closing of a sale of the property by the Schelling. However, in the event that the Schellings are actually in receipt of money from either Palomino-Barth Architects or Jack Palomino, Architect, in connection with his activities relating to the property, to the extent the above sum is unpaid by the Schellings, all money from Palomino to the extent necessary to pay the balance, if any, of the penalty shall be paid to the City of Aspen by the Schellings to reduce the above amounts. Payment of the remaining$95,000.00 shall be evidenced by a promissory note secured by a second deed of trust encumbering the property which is the subject of this order. 3. Mr. and Mrs. Schelling shall write a letter of apology to the community concerning the damage to the historic resource, which shall be reviewed as to form by the City Attorney and which shall be submitted to the Aspen Times and the Aspen Daily News no later than then(10)days after signing of this Stipulated Order. AGREED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL at its regular meeting on the 29h day of May, 2001, REContracts.0l 3Stipulated0rderSchelling0612 t Agreed: CITY OF ASPEN �.-- ATTEST By: Terry Pau so ` ayor Pro Tem By: Kathryn Koc ity Clerk By: Dat Hoefer,Asses an ty Attorney JAGD: chelling Lori ScheIlzng o dasto o Dougla .Allen,Attorney afor Schellings REContracts.0I3 Stipulatedorde;ScbclIirn906121 Exh%bit E Regular Meeting Aspen City Council April 23, 2001 RESOLUTION #48, 2001 - Adopting HPC's Finding of Fact - 213 Bleeker Street Tian Whitsitt told Council he has been bred as special counsel on this item because it is considered a prosecution matter and it was deemed more appropriate that HPC and Council have special counsel. Councilman Hershey announced lie lead been contacted by Nick deWolfe, a neig hbor of the project; and had discussed the project with him. Councilman Markalunas said his daughter is a member of FIPC and if the appellant feels it would prgjudice the findings of Council, he will recuse himself The appellants stated they had no objection to Councilman Markalunas sitting on this hearing. David Hoefer, assistant city attorney, entered into the record a letter from Melanie Roschko, HPC nnernber, and a sun mary of HPC's position and the Schelling offer. Hoefer said he and Doug Allen have agreed this will been treated as an appeal from HPC. Hoefer told Council they have the authority to adopt HPC's finding of fact. Whitsitt told. Council there was an allegation of a violation by Schelli.ng oil the remodel and restoration of his house. A red tag was issued with a separate building department review. This hearing involves an HPC issue of whether Schelling was in violation of HPC approvals. There was a hearing at HPC, there are findings of fact, and a recommendation that Council issue sanctions. Whitsitt said there was not great disagreement before HPC as to what happened. During process of reconstruction at 213 West Bleeker, problems with the structure were discovered that heeded to be addressed and there needed to be an amendment of HPC's approval. Whitsitt said there was a discussion with the city historic preservation officer about what needed to be done. The owner of the house thought the architect got HPC's authorization to change the work. The owner then went ahead and dismantled the historic house. Whitsitt told Council this house was granted landmark designation and was also granted zoning and parking variances. When HPC found out the historic structure had been dismantled without their authorization, the project was stopped. The owner said this was his mistake; it was not approved by IIPC; it was a misunderstanding between the owner and the architect. HPC was not sure 6 Regular Meetina Aspen Citv Council April 23, 2001 what sanctions they could apply. Council is the final assessor of the penalty. The code states HPC can assess a moratorium for Lip to 5 years. Council could revoke the historic status and the variances. There is not significant authority in the code for Council to impose fines. HPC feels the historic value of the house has been lost, and they struggled to recommend sanctions within their power as well as to address the serious breach of the obligations of the owner. HPC recommended a one year construction inoratorium, Which was intended to start when work actually stopped in October 2000. Rich Shearer, representing Schelling, entered into the record exhibits, a large artist rendering, 4 X 6 photographs of the site, six photographs from the HPC record, a letter fi-oin Lori Schelling, which was read into the record. Shearer pointed out the differences between the Schelling offer and the HPC suggested sanctions. Shearer told Council the architect, Jack Palomino, took care of all the original approvals at HPC and was supposed to be responsible for getting the changes through IIPC. Shearer said the IIPC did not receive a letter from Paloinino until October 2000. In the meantime, the owner Schelling, was going forward with changes he thought were approved. Schelling went over his history as a builder and as a homeowner in the Roaring Fork- Valley. Schelling told Council lie was coordinating this project through his architect, Jack Palomino. Schelling explained what was r0i 11�1 discovered in the renovation, like burned beams, water rot, newly installed lumber. Schelling pointed out the roof shingles were totally dry rotted and fell apart on handling. Schelling told Council after discovering the state of the structure, he met on site with Airy Guthrie and with .Palommo. Schelling said he understood Palomino would prepare a letter for HPC and get formal approval. Schelling said lie had several discussions with Palomino in September regarding the letter to HPC and was assured this had been taken care of Schelling said when his structure was red tagged, lie was surprised as he thought everything was in order. Shearer asked if the structure as approved by the HPC can still be built. Schelling said it can be. Hoefer reminded Council because of past problems, the community development department set up a contractor licensing progyrain. Schelling was required to participate and did obtain an UPC contractor's license. Hoefer said Schelling is legally responsible for what happened to this structure, lie was the contractor for the project. Hoefer stated Ms. Guthrie made it clear they had to go back to HPC for approvals. 7 Re2ular Meeting Aspen City Council April 23, 2001 Hoefer told Council Schelling is requesting to do a replication of a historic structure and to pay a penalty. HPC believes replication is inappropriate and that the applicants Should come back with a new building plan. Array Guthrie, community development department- told Council she conducted a site visit August 23 with the owner and the architect. Ms. Guthrie said she told the owner and architect that the proposed changes needed to be submitted in writing and to be discussed by the HPC. Mayor Richards opened the public hearing. Jeffrey Halverty, HPC member, said he hopes this can be resolved and fully supports the HPC recommended action. Suzannah Reid, HPC Chair, told Council their findings are based on the evidence presented at the HPC meeting. Ms. Reid said one issue for this structure is not following procedure. There was work being done which was neither approved nor discussed. This all could have been resolved by meeting with HPC`. The contractor chose to dismantle the building, Ms, Reid told Council the HPC has worked on eductational materials, on improving their process, on communication, Ms. Reid said the HPC feels strongly that a collection of pieces of a building does not make a building. The historic integrity goes with the integrity of that structure. If that structure is dismantled, the historic integrity is gone, Ms. Reid noted this structure was not dismantled with the intention of reassembling in a historically accurate manner. The removal of the historic building Should result in the removal of any benefits gained. Gil Sanchez, HPC, said community members have expressed concern that this owner is buying their way out of historic demolition. Lisa Markalunas, HPC, supports the finding of fact of the HPC. Ms. Markalunas said the commLinity has lost an Irreplaceable historic resource with the demolition of this building, The HPC approvals were very clear. The variances were awarded because of the significance of the historic structure on site. Chris O'Brien, 215 West Bleeker, said there is a safety issue on site. There should not be a moratorium-, this needs to be fixed to take care of tile adjacent property owner. Mayor Richards closed the public hearing. 8 Regular Meetine Aspen City Council April 23, 2001 Shearer said the proposed stipulated order meets everybody's needs. There has already been a large penalty imposed on the Schelling's with a. 6 month delay, 6 months interest on the construction, attorney's fee, the site is an eyesore and Is dangerous. Shearer said to keep this properly historically designated because of the shed and then take away the variances because they have lost the historic structure is an inconsistent way to analyze this. Shearer agreed there is a need to have a deterrent against people tearing historic buildings down in the future. The applicants propose $75,000 plus up to $15,000 attorney's fees as a penalty. The applicants agree to a public letter of apology. Shearer said leaving a hole in the ground for one year is not the right solution for the neighborhood or for the city. Councilman Hershey said lie feels the one year moratorium on construction penalizes the neighbors as well as the owner. Councilman McCabe said he is not convinced ripping out the entire prQject serves the general public. Councilman McCabe said preserving the plan and getting some fines may be the best way to serve the community. Councilman Markalunas said the applicant has removed the historic value of the property by demolition so the city must remove any concessions granted under historic designation. Councilman Markalunas recommended revoking the setbacks. Councilman Hershey said he would like to look at what best serves the community; unfortunately, one cannot go back in time, Councilman Hershey said the applicant should be punished for what happened. Mayor Richards said the HPC is looking at this from a purely historic point of view and the Council needs to look at this from a broader community view. Mayor Richards said this is a replication-, however, it is a replication of a design already seen by the neighbors. Mayor Richards said the proposed penalty is not sufficient and should be closer to $100,000 and should also cover staff time and attorney's time. Councilman McCabe said tearing the structure down will be wasting resources, like materials and energy. Hoefer suggested part or all of the penalty could be designated to historic programs. Mayor Richards said some of the changes probably would have been approved when the applicant discovered the condition of the house. Councilman Mark-alunas said the applicant was given concessions on volumetrics, which have a development value, which Should be taken into account. Mayor Richards noted the applicants did not build out to the 9 Regulat• Meeting Aspen City Council April 23, 2001 maximum FAR so the -variances did not give a square footage that can be calculated. Councilman Paulson said he would like something in the motion that this footprint cannot be changed. Shearer stated the applicant would agree to that stipulation. Councilman McCabe moved the landmark status be removed, the variances stay, the structure cannot be changed beyond what has been approved and this be done in a deed restriction, that a substantial penalty is warranted and this penalty be S 120,000 and that staff and attorney's fees be taken out of this and the rest goes to historic preservation, that a public letter of apology be written, seconded by Councilman Hershey. Whitsitt suggested this offer be taken back to the applicant. Council agreed, Shearer requested they be able to pay the penalty over tirne. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Paulson, yes; McCabe, yes; Markalunas, yes, Hershey, yes, Mayor Richards. I , yes. Motion carried. ASPEN MOUNTAIN LODGE RESOLUTIONS #47 AND #50 Julie Ann Woods, community development department, told Council there are two sites - lot 3 Top of Mill and Lot 5 Grand Aspen, and they are being processed together. The major change for lot 3 is an additional lot around the existing carport with a deed restriction as parking. The major change for lot 5 is the type of ownership. The original approval was for 150 roorn hotel, this request is for 5l fractional fee ownership units. There are minor changes; parallel parking along Galena street to provide parking for the Silver Circle, the garage entrance will be on the front of the hotel, on Dean street. There are an additional 18 spaces in underground parking. There will not be a restaurant or conference space in the hotel; some commercial space will be eliminated. These may reduce the number of employees generated. Ms. Woods recorninended a corner space for commercial activity remains to reinforce life on the street. P & Z reviewed this and recommended approval of lot 3. P & Z recommended against the PUD amendment for lot 5 by a I to 4 vote over concerns about fractional fee ownership, Sunny Vann, representing the applicants, stated the new ownership is a partnership of locals, Hyatt Vacation Ownerships, and Colony Capital of Regular Meeting Aspen City Council May 29, 2001 Exhibit F_. LUTI4y #59, 2001 - Mall Restaurant Leases Councilman McCabe said lie would prefer not to raise the mail lease rate 6% since the last two winter seasons have not been that great for businesses. Council agreed to a 3% increase. Councilman McCabe moved to adapt Resolution 159, Series of 2401, at 3% increase; seconded by Councilmen Hershey. All in favor, motion carried. RESOLUTION #48, 2001 Shelling Settlement for Alleged HPC Violations Paul Taddune, representing the Black fatally, told Council in addition to the historically designated house being deniolished, there are other violations of the building code that are causing damage to the Black. house. Taddune requested this issue be continued for two weeks for more investigation. Taddune noted the roof overhangs onto the Black property and causes snow to cascade onto the Black property. Taddune said there has been subsidence on the Black property caused by overdigging. Taddune said the stipulation appears not to consider attorney's fees; it is to be paid over 3 years, and the city is going to take a promissory note. Councilman Hershey said it seems these issues should be solved between the two property owners., not the city. Taddune answered the city is giving concessions to a property that has no historic significance and these are affecting a house that has historic significance. Mr. Hinshaw, Black's son- in-law, told Council Shelling used her electrical connections, stored building materials on her yard, landscaping was trampled, and used her water connections. Hinshaw said the sideyard setback variances should be withdrawn. Hinshaw told Council allowing contractors to pav for demolishing historic Homes may become common practice in Aspen. Hinshaw urged Council not to sell out preservation in Aspen. Susann Siebert told Council she owns property across the alley and agreed with Hinshaw and stated they have had the same problems with Shelling and his disregard for private property. Margaret McGovern, representing her mother, asked how call a project with no historic integrity remaining be granted historic sideyard setback variances that require building and maintenance be done from the adjacent property. How can a roofline design 4 Reaular Meetinjz Aspen Citv Council Mav 29, 2001 be approved that dumps snow on the adjacent property. What assurance is there that Shelling will repair the damage to the adjacent property. David Hoefer, assistant city attorney, agreed there are litigation issues that can be resolved privately between these parties. Hoefer told Council the rernediation plan that is part of the settlement will address issues 11'k-e the roof, the over digging and the drainage issues. Hoefer reminded Council a building permit cannot be issued until the rernediation plan is approved. Doug Allen, representing the Shellings, told Council they will deal with issues raised in Taddune's letter. Allen said Shelling will comply with the building code in order to complete this house. The remediation plan will be approved by HPC. Taddune said the building code violations were not discovered until after Council's hearing on this issue, John Worcester, city attorney, told Council the promissory note will be secured by a second deed of trust on the property, which will be recorded with the agreement. Worcester said no building permit will be issued until the applicant can satisfy the building department there are no violations. Mayor Richards recapped after a public hearing, Council agreed to allow a replication rather than historic remodel. The attorney's fees are included in the settlement account. Besides the fines, there has been a 6 month work- stop and the applicant has been paying on a construction loan the entire time. The remediation plan will have to be reviewed and approved by HPC. Mayor Richards said Council expects to see the issues of snow shedding addressed in the remediation plan and that all building codes and technicalities should be abided by. Councilman Hershey moved to adopt Resolution #48, Series of 2001, amended to include the minutes of this meeting be foRvarded to FIPC for the remediation hearing, that this be retained on the historic inventory, and that the issues of snow shedding and building code technicalities be addressed, seconded by Councilman McCabe, Roll call vote; Councilinembers McCabe, yes- Hershey, yes; Paulson, yes; Markalurias, yes; Mayor Richards, ves. Motion carried.. ASPEN MOUNIXIN CONCEPTUAL PL ID Julie Ann Woods, community development department, reminded Council issues brought up at the last meeting were tax mitigation and height. Ms. . Exhibit G Adam Glickman P.O. Box 1207 Aspen, Colorado 81612 (808) 280-9499 December 31, 2013 Ms. Amy Simon Historic Preservation Officer City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Request to Rescind Historic Designation on Residential Structure—213 W. Bleeker Street,Aspen, Colorado Dear Ms. Simon, Please accept the enclosed application to rescind historic designation for my home located at 213 W. Bleeker Street in Aspen. If you have any questions concerning the application, please call Attorney Michael Hoffman, Esq., Garfield & Hecht, P.C., 601 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611. You may reach him at(970) 544-3442. Mr. Hoffman is authorized to submit and process the application to the City of Aspen. Sincerely, Adam Glickman Parcel Information Legal Description: Lot G, Block 51, City and Townsite of Aspen,Pitkin County, Colorado Street Address: 213 West Bleeker Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Parcel Identification No. 273512440005 ^SPENoFF[c ���� ELD&HECHT° P.C.m, tast Hyman*== Ave" Colorado 9 1611 Fe/"phone 117M 925-106 ATTORNEYS AT LAW rac,imxc,vrme�'/moo Since 1975 December 27, 20l3 City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 01611 Re: Ownership of Lot G. Block 51, City and Top/naitc of Aspen, County of Pitkio, State of Colorado (the ^^Pnoperty"). Ladies and Gentlemen: We represent Adam Glickman in connection with the Property referenced above. We have reviewed the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder and have determined that Adam Glickman is the owner of the Property, in fee simple, subject to the mortgages,judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements listed in Exhibit A, attached hereto. Based on our review,Mr. Glickman has the exclusive right to apply for removal from the City's"Historic Inventory"of the residential structure located on the Property. Please feel free|o contact nueif you need any additional information. Sincerely, 7J E. Michael Hoffman . ' City ofAspen Community Development Department December 27, 20\3 Page 2 Exhibit A 7. Exceptions and reservations as set forth in the Act authorizing the issuance of the Patent for dhe City and T*wosihu of Aspen cec*oiod March |` 1897 -in Book 139 at Page 216 as Reception No, 68l96. Q. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in Deed from the City o[Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Page 52 as follows: ".Ahat no title shall hereby be acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper mto any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws." 1 Tunoe. conditions, provisions and obligations as aX konb in Ordinance No. 10 (Smnca of 2000) of the Aspen City Council granting approval for landmark designation recorded April 2O. 200Ooa Reception No.44276O. lO. Iuomo` coudi600s, provisions and obligations as acc forth to Resolution No. ll, Series of 2000 of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission recorded April 28, 2000 as Reception No. 442763, Resolution Nu. 18, Scdcm of 2000 of the }\xpoo Historic Preservation Commission recorded May \6, 2U08as Reception No. 443]58 and Resolution 45g, Series of 2001 o[the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission recorded March 0, 2002 as Reception No. 464740. ll. Terms, conditions,provisions and obligations us set forth in Resolution #OO 17oftbc&upsu Planning and Zoning Commission recorded JuIv 5, 2002 as Reception No.469516, Deed of Trust toCidBunk,N./\., recorded May 27,2OO8u1 Reception No. j496l8. Deed of Trust to Morgan Stanley Private Bank, recorded October 7, 2011, at Reception No. 583373. IIuuennent Agrccnocxd for encroachment of historic shed onto udiucoo1 property, recorded March 20, 2OO7, u1 Reception No. 53557l. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: _ CA C� 131 K.5 1, Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: s STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) -7 I, V-)Ct ro I �.1 CI o g4-in (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, 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 (sigiz) 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, suminarized 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 077 next page) ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 213 W. Bleeker,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: March 12,2014 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, E. Michael Hoffinan, being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certifies 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: El 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 and was continuously visible from the 21St day of February, 2014,to and including the date and time of the public hearing.A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. O 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 po�Zeod the date of the public hearing.A copy of the owners and ,governrnental a�cies sdpio is attached hereto. E. Michael Hoffman t The foregoing`Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 21St day of February, 2014. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: fd Notary Public List of Attachments PIIOTOGRAPII OF TIIE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) MELANIE L. LOVE NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID#20134030953 My Commission Expires May 15,2017 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 213 W.Bleeker, Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Wednesday,March 12,2014 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, Kayla S. Hall (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, 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 and was continuously visible from the 22 d day of February, 2011, to and including the date and time of public hearing. Two photographs of the posted notice(sign) is attached hereto. [7x. 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. 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. Sig re The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 20th day of February, 2014,by Kayla S. Hall. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL MELANIE L. LOVE My commis ion expires: NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID#20134030953 My Commission Expires May 15,2017 Notary Public ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE NOTICE LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 213 W. BLEEKER STREET— REQUEST TO REMOVE HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION FROM A PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday,March 12,2014, at a regular meeting to begin at 5.00 p.m, before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, in Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen. HPC will consider an application submitted by Adam Glickman, P.O. Box 1207, Aspen, CO 81612, to remove the historic designation that applies to the residence, but retain it with regard to an outbuilding located on his property at 213 W. Bleeker Street, Lot G, Block 51, P1D#2735-124-40-005. For further information, contact Amy Simon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970)429-2758,amy.simon @cityofaspen.com. s/Jay Maytin Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on February 20,2014----- City of Aspen Account Easy l®Labels f A Bend along line to i /da AVERY®3160® i y Pee a ' Feed Paper rr....� expose Pop-up EdgeT'" j 1 Use AveryO Template 51600 j 132 WEST MAIN STREET ASSOC LLC 201 WEST HALLAM HOLDINGS LLC 212 N SECOND ST LLC PO BOX 6565 500 S DIXIE HWY#201 509 GUISANDO DE AVILA#201 SNOWMASS VILLAGE,CO 816156565 CORAL GABLES,FL 33146 TAMPA, FL 33613 BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED a CITY OF ASPEN CHISHOLM EDITH S 46/a ATTN FINANCE DEPT INC 205 W MAIN ST 130 S GALENA ST 4960 CONFERENCE WY NORTH#100 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ATTN:LEGAL DEPT BOCA RATON, FL 33431 i DEWOLF MARGARET LEE TRUST 81% ELKINS LESLIE KEITH TRUST GARMISCH LODGING LLC 223 W BLEEKER ST 1001 FANNIN#700 110 W MAIN ST ASPEN,CO 81611 HOUSTON,TX 77002 ASPEN,CO 81611 GUNGOLL CARL E EXPLORATION LLC INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC KETTELKAMP GRETTA M 6 NE 63RD ST#300 233 W MAIN ST . 3408 MORRIS AVE OKLAHOMA CITY,OK 73105 ASPEN,CO 81611 PUEBLO,CO 81008 KING LOUISE LLC KUMIN SOLOMON&ELIZABETH M D W ENTERPRISES INC PO BOX 1467 1500 BROADWAY 28TH FL 233 W B LEEKER 81611T BASALT,CO 81621 NEW YORK,NY 10036 MELTON DAVID MITTEL EUROPA PROPERTIES LLC 260 EY DAVID DR LAURA 135 W MAIN ST PO BOX 3678 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 LAS VEGAS,NV 89109 NEWKAM JAMES F&PATRICK C PESIKOFF DAVID&SARAH PI T ESOPRIS CREEK DR 211 W MAIN ST 1811 NORTH BLVD ASPEN,CO 81611 HOUSTON,TX 77098 BASALT,CO 81621 jl RILEY AMY CLARK 98.76% ROMANUS RAYMOND SEVEN SEAS INVESTMENT LLC CLARK AMY L 1.24% 19 RIVER OAKS DR 1120 MICHIGAN AVE 129 W BLEEKER ST CALUMET CITY, IL 60409 WILMETTE,IL 60091 ASPEN,CO 81611 I _ OFT LLC SPERAW ENDEAVORS LLC STEVENS BRUCE 95.75% SKIL 11 LOFT LLC Y PLAZA#2000 PO BOX 6575 214 W BLEEKER ST HOUSTON,TX 77046 SNOWMASS VILLAGE,CO 81615 ASPEN,CO $1611 STEVENSON KAREN H 27% TACO 2 LLC TYROLEAN LODGE LLC ST 220 W MAIN ST#202 200 W MAIN ST 205 W MAIN ASPEN,CO ST ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 r i. Repliez a le hachure afin de; N o9tri ttiquettes faciles a peter Sens de TM r 1-B00-GO-AVERY Utilisez le gabarit AVERY 51600 ' chargement r�vler le rebord Pop-up 7m j Easy PeelV Label i ♦ Bend along ine to A�RYO 5160® Use Avery Template 51604 Feed Paper expose Pop-up EdgeT1 t 1 WEESE KATE B IRV TRST 2 WELLS JONATHAN R&JANE I WEST MAIN VENTURES 37 KINGSTON RD 15 E 26TH ST PO BOX 11977 KESINGTON,CA 94707 NEW YORK, NY 10010 ASPEN,CO 81612 WEST PHILLIP N&SUSAN J TRUSTEES WOLKENMUTH EDWARD F JR&STEELE 1674 LAS CANOAS RD JULIANNE BELL REV TRUST SANTA BARBARA,CA 93105 121 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN,CO 81611 i I i I tiquettes facites a peter Repliez a fa hachure afn de www.averycom Sensde Utilfsez le gabarit AVERY0 5160® cha gement r6v6ler le rebord Pop-up*m j 7-1100-GO-AVERY