HomeMy WebLinkAbout#coa.lu.hp.601 W Hallam St.0018.2014.AHPC THE CITY OF ASPEN
FILE 1 OF 3
City of Aspen Community Development Department
CASE NUMBER 0018.2014.AHPC
PARCEL ID NUMBERS 2735 1234 1002
PROJECTS ADDRESS 601 W HALLAM ST
PLANNER JUSTIN BARKER
CASE DESCRIPTION CONCEPTUAL HPC DESIGN
DEVELPOMENT
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN RICHMAN
DATE OF FINAL ACTION 9.11.14
CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 9.11.14
�-7 3 S t2�3 • �ob2 �tS• 2014- • 'C-
rW
f
Mp
Permits i/ �
Tile Edit Record Navigate Form Reports Format Tats Delp'
v� I .A;�• � � N' � lump 1
Main Custom Fields Routing Status :Fee Summary Actions Routing Flistory
0818,2814,AHPC
Permit h ahpc 'Aspen Historic Land Use Permit �—
Address 601 W HALLAM Apt/Suite
I a City ASPEtJ `� State CO Zip 81611
Q - —
I '.Permit Information
Master Routing eue aslu07 Applied 81162014
T I Project Status pending Approved
3 m
W
Qescnption`APFLICACTIOhJ FOR HPC COIJCEPTLIAI fw111JPR HISTOFJC OEELOP(�IEhJT Issued
Closed,!Final :
Clock Run ing ; Da Ys I Expires 42015
Submitted A1Af RICHMOND 8201125
;
Owner
Last name `rfIHIPPLE First name GEORGE ( 480 EAST HYNV41#x282
ASPEN CO 81611
Phone x;970;0281428 Address
3 b
�pPA i
lcant
�
3 [v�Owner is applicant? Contractor is applicant?
Last name
A,HIPFLE First name GEORGE : 400 EAST HY�IAR nA202
ASPEN CO 81611
Phone i9?819201920 Cust= 21+743 Addras�i
Lender
Last name First name
ff
Phone 1 4 Address' 'f
I
__
,Displays the permitlender's address W AspenWd5(server.angelas 1 of 1
P A
31 0
4—�—A !S
DEVELOPMENT ORDER
of the
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070,
"Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen
Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the
provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the
initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after
the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit application submittal is
accepted and deemed complete by the Chief Building Official, pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless
an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section
26.308.010, After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect,
excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to
any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order.
This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development
plan as described below.
601 W. Hallam LLC 121 S. Galena St. #203 Aspen, CO 81611
Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address
Lots H & I Block 23 City and Townsite of Aspen County of Pitkin State of Colorado; commonly
known as 601 W. Hallam Street. Parcel IN 2735-124-31-002.
Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property
The Applicant received mass and scale approval (as defined by HPC Resolution No. 5, Series of
1991), and three 3 Residential Design Standard Variances.
Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan
Approved by HPC via Resolution No. 21 Series of 2014 on July 23 2014.
Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions)
August 7 2014
Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.)
August 8 2017
Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and
revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of*the City of Aspen Municipal
Code.)
Issued this 1st day of August,2014, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director.
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.070 AND CHAPTER 26.306
ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: (ll�� V y � �""`-� 9— J� F
Aspen, CO
STATE OF COLORADO }
ss.
County of Pitkin )
(name, please print)
being or representing an Applicant to the Ci f Aspen, Colorado,hereby personally certify that
I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) or Section
26.306.010 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
_'y 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 no later than fourteen (14) days
after final approval of a site specific development plan. A copy of the publication is
attached hereto.
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 no later than fifteen (l 5) days after
an Interpretation has been rendered. A copy of the publication is attached hes eto.
Signature
The foregoing "Affidavit of Not' e"was acknowledged befor me thi day
o f , 200�`�by /
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
M s o xpires- t b
-PUBLIC NOTICE- - - - - - -Of
DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the
approval of a site specific development plan,and
the creation of a vested property right pursuant to o al ub C
the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title
24,Article 68,Colorado Revised Statutes,pertain-
ing Hallafollowing t,ILotsIIH described, l property:y and - CHRISTOPHER LUNDGREN
Townsite of Aspen,PID#2735-124-31-002. On NOTARY PUBLIC
July 23rd,2014,the Aspen Historic Preservation
Commission granted mass and scale approval as ATTACHMENTS: STATE OF COLORADO
defined by HPC Resolution No.5,Series of 1991,
and three(3)Residential Design Standard Vari-
ances NOTARY ID 20144000722
to build a new single-family home on the
property through Resolution No.21,Series of COMMISSION EXPIRES JAN.09,2018
2014.For further information contact Justin Barker, COPY�F THE P UBLICATIDNN
at the City of Aspen Community Development
Dept.130 S.Galena St,Aspen,Colorado(970)
429-2797,or justin.barker @cityofaspen.com. ,
s/City of Aspen
Published in The Aspen Times on August 71h,2014
(10436155)
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
APPROVING MASS AND SCALE AS DEFINED IN HPC RESOLUTION NO. 5 SERIES
OF 1991 AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 601 W. HALLAM STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS
LOTS H AND I, BLOCK 23, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,COUNTY OF PITKIN,
STATE OF COLORADO.
RESOLUTION 421, SERIES OF 2014
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-31-002.
WHEREAS,the applicant, 601 West Hallam LLC,represented by Alan Richman Planning
Services, requested mass and scale review and Residential Design Standard Variances for the
Property located at 601 W. Hallam Street, Lots H and I, Block 23, City and Townsite of Aspen,
County of Pitkin, State of Colorado; and
WHEREAS, HPC resolution numbered 5, Series of 1991, grants HPC the authority to
review the mass and scale of new development on the subject property, defined as follows:
Mass: "any new building will be designed so that it is not one big uninterrupted box
structure and will use appropriately pitched roof forms for residential buildings as
opposed to flat roofs;"
Scale: "window and door dimensions and building scale shall be consistent with the scale
of other buildings on the block;" and
WHEREAS, HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the
application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and
WHERAS, for variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040,
which meet Section 26.410.020.D, the HPC shall find that the variance, if granted, would:
a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in
which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In
evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider
the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate
neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board deems is necessary to
determine if the exception is warranted; or
b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints;
and
WHEREAS, Justin Barker, in his staff report to HPC dated July 23, 2014, performed an
analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the mass and scale met the intent of
RECEPTIONM 612263, 08/01/2014 at 601 W. Hallam Street
11:08:24 AM, HPC Resolution 421,Series of 2014
1 OF 5, R $31.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Page 1 of 3
Janice K.Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO
HPC Resolution numbered 5, Series of 1991 and found that the review standards for Residential
Design Standard variances were not met, and recommended continuation; and
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on July 23, 2014, the Historic Preservation
Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the
proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval by a vote of four to zero (4 -
0).
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC hereby grants mass and scale approval, pursuant to HPC Resolution numbered 5,
Series of 1991, and grants approval for the requested Residential Design Standard variances for
the property located at 601 West Hallam Street, Lots H and I, Block 23, City and Townsite of
Aspen, Colorado, as proposed with the-following_conditions: - - - - - - -
1. Residential Design Standard Variances are granted for the following:
a. 26.410.040.C.2.a. Garage width
b. 26.410.040.C.2.b. Garage setback
c. 26.410.040.D.2. Street oriented entrance and principal window
2. There shall be no deviations in scale and mass, as defined in HPC Resolution Number 5,
Series of 1991, from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and
approved by HPC.
3. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan
vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order.
However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to.this
approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise
exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be
recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development
order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the
development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits).
Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in
the creation of a vested property right.
No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews
necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City
Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the
jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public
of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property
right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form:
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific
development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of
three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24,
Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described
601 W.Hallam Street
HPC Resolution#21,Series of 2014
Page 2 of 3
property: 601 West Hallam Street, Lots H & I, Block 23, City and Townsite of
Aspen,County of Pitkin, State of Colorado.
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent
reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations
and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are
not inconsistent with this approval.
The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and
judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights
shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final
development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of
referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the
Aspen Home Rule Charter.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 23rd day of July,2014.
Y r�
Ja Maytin,Chair
Approved as to Form:
Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney
AT EST:
Linda Manning, City Cler
Exhibits:
A. Approved Drawings
601 W.Hallam Street
HPC Resolution#21,Series of 2014
Page 3 of 3
MAX BUILDING HEIGHT
x
W mn
PITCH TREATED
WOoo
SHAI(ES
' THIRD SPAN A�
MASONRY -
CHM/NEY
t
t
WOOD
SIDNN3
t
EAST ELEVATION
-- _
SOUTH ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION
601 W. HALLAM
ASPEN, COLORADO
MAX BUILDING HEIGHT
1212
TrP.
i
THIRD SPAN
LLI
1
1
WEST ELEVATION
}
I
601 W. HALLAM
ASPEN, COLORADO
Y
t
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF July 23, 2014
Chairperson, Jay Maytin called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Commissioners in attendance were Sallie Golden, John Whipple, Patrick
Sagal and Jim DeFrancia. Absent were Nora Berko and Willis Pember.
Staff present:
Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney
Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer
Justin Barker, Planner
Linda Manning, City Clerk
Patrick said he would like City Council to look into changing the rules so
that they can have the opportunity for review after final approval. Things
are being changed between conceptual and final and an elected body should
be able to look at them if they wanted to. Historical vegetation should be
looked at. Flat roofs should also be looked at. In the past 3 years HPC and
put flat roofs on Main Street which does not go toward the intent of the Main
Street plan.
Amy said call-up used to be at final but it was changed because council and
others felt it was too late to express an opinion about the project so it was
moved to conceptual and that seems to be working well.
Jay suggested an early November retreat for HPC to discuss issues.
Disclosure:
John will recuse himself on 601 W. Hallam
Amy said the City of Aspen received the HPC commission award. Sara was
present to receive the award. Jay congratulated the Community
Development department and the HPC for receiving the award.
601 W. HALLAM—Conceptual Major Development and Residential
Design Standard Variances, Public Hearing
Debbie confirmed that the public notice is appropriate and the applicant can
proceed.
Justin said the property is on the corner of 5th Street and Hallam Street. In
1991 this property was delisted. During the hearing the applicant voluntarily
1
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF July 23, 2014
agreed to grant HPC mandatory review of any future redevelopment on the
subject parcel in terms of mass and scale. Basically this means HPC has
conceptual review on this property but no final review. The applicant is
proposing to demolish the house that is currently on the property and to
build a new two story single family home. As part of that they are
requesting Residential Design Standard variances. In terms of mass and
scale staff finds that this is a very successful project. They have done a good
job breaking down the masses of the building through pitched roofs and
connecting element. The pitched roofs do match those in the neighborhood.
The scale of the doors and windows match the historic properties around the
area. Staff finds this proposal completely compliant with mass and scale.
Residential Design Standards
Justin said the first one deals with the street facing fagade with the living
area. The guideline says the width of the living area on the first floor shall
be at least five feet greater than the width of the garage or carport. This is
on the side that faces Hallam Street. The proposal has the garage at 23 feet
in width and the living area 14 feet and it is 9 feet narrower than the garage.
Another one is the front fagade of the garage. The guideline says the front
faVade of the garage or the front most supporting column of the carport shall
be setback at least ten feet further from the street than the front most wall of
the house. This again is on the Hallam Street side. The garage is about 2 %2
feet in front of the living area instead of being behind it. Staff feels there the
opportunity to meet these standards given the scrape and replace of the
property. The lot is 60 feet wide and 100 feet deep. Staff has provided a
few suggestions as to how this standard can be more closely met.
Justin said the last variance needed is for a street oriented entrance and
principle window. Looking at the neighborhood there is no real pattern as to
which side the front door faces and in fact the door on the property right now
faces 5' Street. Staff can accept either side for the door. Overall staff is
recommending continuation of the application in order to restudy the garage.
Jay said Hallam Street is a longer block line and the address is Hallam
Street.
Alan Richman represented the applicant Steve Whipple owner of the
property. We are here for a mass and scale review and the other is
residential design standard variances. The covenant gave clear definition to
what we are supposed to be compatible with in terms of mass and scale.
2
t
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF July-23, 2014
Mass means the residence needs to use appropriate roof pitches and not be
designed as an interrupted box. The scale addresses window and door
dimensions and consistency with the other buildings on the block. The roofs
are compatible with the surrounding buildings. We used one and two story
elements to break down the mass. Two of the residential design standards
relate to the garage and the third deals with the entry to the house. We do
have unusual factors on this property and site specific constraints. We
believe the design is appropriate for the site.
Alan stated the factors they are dealing with and one is that there is no alley
in place behind this property. The alley is behind the Wheeler Stallard
House which is not open and contributes to the park like features around the
Wheeler Stallard museum. If we were to try and have parking back there the
impacts would be quite significant. Since we have no alley we only have
two locations where we can put the garage, 5th Street or Hallam Street. The
Engineering Department did not want the driveway on 5' Street. They also
preferred that we not cross the irrigation ditch with a driveway so we placed
the driveway on Hallam Street and that is where the garage is located.
There are other pre-existing driveways on Hallam. The second factor is
where do you enter the house. The code states that Hallam is the longer
block line and that would be the front of the house. We believe that 5"
Street is the right place for the entry and there are three reasons why we
believe that. The primary purpose is to promote pedestrian friendly
environments and contribute to the neighborhood streetscape. We totally
agree with that principle. One way to achieve that is that you don't put your
garage and your entry porch on the same side of the house. That would be
the classic suburban design. If the garage is on Hallam then the porch
belongs on 5'. 5th Street is the heavily traveled street. The porch on 5th
street would interact with pedestrians. For those reason we would ask you to
vary the standard and have the porch on 5th Street. Alan said in the design
the Parks Dept. wanted us to step back from the drip line of the large
cottonwood trees. There is no alley on this property and it is a corner lot and
there are large trees on the site.
Steve Whipple passed around a model of the house. The garage door
doesn't have to be a garage door. We have fabricated a door on the garage
door to make it look like a living space which will require a lift system. We
feel our design is better than having two doors next to each other. I have
done two houses on 5th Street and both have the front doors on 51 Street.
The linking element reduces the scale of the building and breaks the fagade
3
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF July 23, 2014
up. The garage is a little forward and if it is moved back the mass starts to
compress and loose the separation element.
Chairperson, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing.
Kelly Murphy, Executive Director of the Aspen Historical Society
Mr. Whipple has been working with us as a good neighbor to get our input
to what we thought and what our needs are. We have seen the drawings and
model and we are pleased. The driveway entrance off of Hallam is where
our driveway entrance is and our parking lot. That is the industrial side of
the property. We have .a lot of weddings and very particular brides. From
our standpoint it would be better to have vehicles and garages on the back
side where we have our own coming and going activity as well.
Chairperson, Jay Maytin closed the public comments.
Jay identified the three issues:
Width of Hallam Street fagade compared to the 5th Street fagade being nine
feet shorter. The width of the garage to the width of the house.
The garage setback being in front of the smaller fagade.
The entrance on Hallam as compared to 5th Street.
Jim said he has no problem having the entrance on 5' Street. The garage
may have the appearance of disproportion to the house itself. Maybe it
should be pulled back instead of pushed forward.
Sallie also agreed that the front entry should be on 5' Street especially after
we have heard from the museum representative. I think I like the garage
being a garage. The fake garage is strange looking. I have no problems with
the entire project but feel P&Z should be looking at the design standards no
US.
Patrick agreed that the entry should be on 5th Street. The design is pulling
the house as far back toward the corner to leave more green space to the east
and north because of the trees. The design that was suggested by staff is a
good design because it is a dual purpose if the door is functional then people
parking in the driveway wouldn't have to walk around to the front door but
rather walk right into the garage and connector. There might be potential
moving it five feet to the west since there is a five foot setback and there is
4
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION -
MINUTES OF July 23, 2014
ten feet of space between the lot line and garage but I don't favor that
because it makes the house wider and more massive.
Jay said staff received a letter from Richard Greenberg. He doesn't
understand why the Engineering Department would recommend against one
more driveway crossing the ditch. The vacated alley could easily be
reopened. The majority of homes are constructed on an north/south axis.
The elimination of parking spaces on West Hallam due to the siting of the
two car garage will-further exacerbate parking issues. -
Jay said he agrees with Sallie that the garage should be a garage and not
confuse another entrance. A lot of corner homes have their address
east/west street but yet the front door is on the numbered street. The
argument stands strong why the entrance should be on 5" Street. I agree
that the garage can sit in front of the house to protect the trees. The garage
in front of the fagade makes for the view to the Stallard house behind it. The
shed roof eave of the garage makes the garage doors look smaller.
MOTION; Jay moved to approve 601 W. Hallam as presented in the packet
and to grant the 3 variances requested. Motion second by Jim. Roll call
vote: Jay, yes; Sallie, yes Jim, yes; Patrick, yes. Motion carried 4-0.
Amy pointed out that when they submit for a building permit they could
submit for different materials such as glass garage doors etc. because HPC
was limited to the shape of this project and the footprint and location of the
garage and entry door.
417 & 421 W. Hallam Street— Correction to Historic Designation,
conceptual Major Development, Demolition and Variances, Continued
Public Hearing
Sara said the subject project is a duplex property where half the duplex is
designated historic. There is a proposal to designate the entire property. In
staff's opinion the applicant has addressed all of HPC's concerns. We really
appreciate the applicant working with staff and the HPC. We feel this is a
great project and staff is recommending approval. The applicant did ad a
front door and front porch to the historic resource. They actually reworked
the entire floor plan to make the front entrance through the historic resource.
The connector has been lengthened from 8 feet to ten feet and now meets
our design guidelines and also pushes the two story mass further back on the
5
0
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
THRU: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer
FROM: Justin Barker, City Planner
RE: 601 W. Hallam St. — Mass and Scale Review, Residential Design Standard
Variances—Public Hearing
DATE: July 23, 2014
SUMMARY: 601 West Hallam Street ►
is located on the corner of Fifth Street
and Hallam Street in Aspen's West End
neighborhood. The reason for HPC's
purview over this property is unusual. _
In 1991, HPC adopted Resolution No. 5,
Series of 1991, which delisted 601 West
Hallam from the historic inventory.
During the delisting hearing, the
applicant voluntarily agreed to grant
HPC "mandatory review of any future
redevelopment on the subject parcel in
terms of mass and scale." HPC
Resolution No. 5, Series of 1991 and the
recorded covenant are included in the
application package. Basically, HPC is authorized to review and approve the project on a
Conceptual level,but the project will not return for Final HPC review.
The applicant proposes to demolish the existing residence and replace it with a 3,200 square foot
two story single family home. The project conforms to the dimensional requirements of the R-6
zone district. HPC is asked to grant Residential Design Standard variances for the proposed
project.
Staff recommends that HPC continue the application for a restudy of the garage to comply with
all Residential Design Standards.
APPLICANT: 601 W. Hallam, LLC, 121 S. Galena St. #203, Aspen, CO, 81611, represented by
Alan Richman Planning Services.
ADDRESS: 601 W. Hallam Street, Lots H and I,Block 23, City and Townsite of Aspen.
PARCEL ID:2735-124-31-002.
1
ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential).
DESIGN GUIDELINE REVIEW
HPC's purview is limited to mass and scale which is defined in the recorded covenants as
follows:
Mass: "any new building will be designed so that it is not one big uninterrupted box
structure and will use appropriately pitched roof forms for residential buildings as
opposed to flat roofs"
Scale: "window and door dimensions and building scale shall be consistent with the
scale of other buildings on the block"
Mass: The proposed design has the house broken down into two masses, connected by a linking
element. Both masses contain partial two story and one story elements. Several pitched roofs
break down the massing and accentuate different spaces throughout the building. Relevant
Design Guidelines for new development on historic properties are listed below to help guide
HPC's decision even though this is a unique situation since the property is not designated a
landmark. Staff finds that these guidelines are generally met.
11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property.
❑ They should not overwhelm the original in scale.
11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings.
The majority of roof forms in the neighborhood are traditional gables and sheds. The applicant
has proposed only pitched roofs for this project which generally match the pitch of the other
homes throughout the neighborhood. Design Guideline 11.6 is listed below for general guidance.
11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block.
❑ Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms.
❑ Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context.
❑ On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the
context.
❑ Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are
discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames.
Scale: 601 West Hallam Street is the only other building located on the block that contains the
Wheeler/Stallard Museum. There is a mix of residential development along Hallam and Fifth
Streets that includes a few designated 19th century landmarks, as indicated with purple hatching
on the map on the next page. HPC is required to review the scale of the proposed new
development in relation to the surrounding context, which includes both one and two story
Victorians.
2
Afti- 177!;L 4F 4W I
4r4F##Akb AIR co
WAN s Sr
W'*4
4°sr am__ 44 Fy
Ab
-M AMP
G3 M-M
" oil
Awl
AbIlk h
'R4l-y
A—glib
2
i
4
MAWNt.
The proposed design locates the one-story elements of the building on the street-facing facades to
reduce the visual impact and create a more pedestrian-scale appearance. As mentioned before,
the mass of the building is broken down into smaller modules by several pitched roofs. The
proposed height is more than two feet lower than what is allowed by zoning. The applicant has
chosen to incorporate windows and doors that are more vertical in nature, which is similar to
historic buildings. Overall, staff finds that the scale of the proposed project is consistent with the
scale of other buildings within the vicinity. Relevant Design Guidelines are listed below, even
though this property is not a designated landmark.
11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the
parcel.
❑ Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic
buildings on the original site.
11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building.
❑ The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure.
❑ The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch.
11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property.
❑ They should not overwhelm the original in scale.
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS
The applicant requests three (3) Residential Design Standards variances for the new project.
26.410.020.D.2 Variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040.
Projects which do not meet Section 26.410.020.1 above may be granted variances by the
Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, if the project is
3
subject to the requirements of Section 26.415. An applicant who desires a variance from the
Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate, and the deciding board shall find that the
variance, if granted, would:
a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in
which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In
evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider
the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate
neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board deems is necessary to
determine if the exception is warranted; or
b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints.
The Residential Design Standards were adopted to preserve residential neighborhood scale and
character and to promote pedestrian friendly environments through positive streetscape design
that emphasizes public to private space transitions. Interesting architecture and lively spaces that
contribute to the neighborhood streetscape are primary goals for residential development. The
form based Standards are prescriptive and apply to all new residential development. Variances
are approved when one of the criterion above are met. The three requested variances are listed
below:
1.) 26.410.040.C.2.a. For all residential uses that have access only from a public street, the
following standards shall apply:
On the street facing facade(s), the width of the living area on the first floor shall be at
least five (5) feet greater than the width of the garage or carport.
Staff Response: On the Hallam Street facing facade, the proposed width of the garage is about
23 feet, and the proposed width of the living area is about 14 feet. With this project being new
construction on a lot with prototypical dimensions, staff believes that there is opportunity to meet
the Standard. There is sufficient lot width to accommodate the Standard, particularly since a two-
car garage is not a requirement for the property. Some suggestions include reducing the garage to
one bay or designing one of the bays to appear more like living space.
2.) 26.410.040.C.2.b. The front facade of the garage or the front-most supporting column of
a carport shall be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front-most
wall of the house.
Staff Response: Also on the Hallam Street facing facade, the proposed garage is located in front
of the front-most wall of the house by about 2 %2 feet. Again, with this project being new
construction on a lot with prototypical dimensions, staff believes that there is opportunity to meet
the Standard. One suggestion includes moving the garage further south to more closely meet the
intent of the standard. This would most likely require relocation of the stairwells to maintain a
compliant linking element.
4
3.) 26.410.040.D.1. Street Oriented entrance and principal window. All single family
homes and duplexes, except as outlined in Section 26.410.010.B.4 shall have a street-
oriented entrance and a street facing principal window. Multi-family units shall have at
least one street-oriented entrance for every four (4) units, and front units must have a
street facing principal window.
On corner lots, entries and principal window should face whichever street has a
greater block length. This standard shall be satisfied if all of the following conditions are
met:
a. The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten feet (10') back from the
front most wall of the building. Entry doors shall not be taller than eight feet (8'.)
b. A covered entry porch of fifty or more square feet, with a minimum depth of six feet
(6'), shall be part of the front fagade. Entry porches and canopies shall not be more
than one story in height.
c. A street-facing principal window requires that a significant window or group of
windows face the street.
Staff Response: This is a corner lot, located at the southwest intersection between Fifth Street
and Hallam Street. According to the Standard, the entry and principal window should face the
street with the longest block length, which in this case is Hallam Street (Fifth — 220', Hallam —
270'). However, many of the other corner lots within the neighborhood face the streets with the
shorter block length, which is all of the north-south oriented streets such as Fifth Street. For
example, the current house on the property has the entrance facing Fifth Street, while the
property directly north across Hallam Street has the entrance facing Hallam Street. Staff believes
a case could be made for the entry and principal window facing either street, and HPC should
discuss which would be more appropriate.
The HPC may:
• approve the application,
• approve the application with conditions,
• disapprove the application, or
• continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC continue the application for a restudy of
the garage to comply with all Residential Design Standards.
Exhibits:
A. Relevant Guidelines
B. Resolution No. 5, Series of 1991
C. Application
5
Exhibit A
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS
26.410.040.C.2.a. On the street facing facade(s), the width of the living area on the first floor shall be at
least five(5) feet greater than the width of the garage or carport.
26.410.040.C.2.b. The front facade of the garage or the front-most supporting column of a carport shall
be set back at least ten(10)feet further from the street than the front-most wall of the house.
26.410.040.D.1. Street oriented entrance and principal window. All single-family homes and duplexes,
except as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.4 shall have a street-oriented entrance and a street facing
principal window. Multi-family units shall have at least one (1) street-oriented entrance for every four
(4) units and front units must have a street facing a principal window. On corner lots, entries and
principal windows should face whichever street has a greater block length.
HPC GUIDELINES
Building Orientation
11.1 Orient the primary entrance of anew building to the street.
❑ The building should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern of
the site.
11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a
front porch.
❑ The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a means of access to the entry.
❑ A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally.
❑ In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street; nonetheless, the
entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that orients to the street.
Mass and Scale
11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel.
❑ Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on
the original site.
11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building.
❑ The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure.
❑ The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch.
Building&Roof Forms
11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property.
❑ They should not overwhelm the original in scale.
11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block.
• Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms.
• Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context.
❑ On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context.
❑ Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are
discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames.
Architectural Details
11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings.
❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are
especially discouraged on historic sites.
6
EXHIBIT B
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
RESOLUTION NO. 5
(SERIES OF 1991)
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE DELET-
ING THE STRUCTURE AT 601 WEST HALLAM FROM THE INVENTORY OF
HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES.
WHEREAS, George Vicenzi ("applicant") , owner of the premises
at 601 West Hallam, Aspen, Colorado, has submitted a petition to
the Historic Preservation Committee seeking deletion of the
structure situated thereon from the Inventory of Historic Sites
and Structures; and
WHEREAS, public hearings on the deletion petition were duly
noticed and conducted on May 8 and June 26, 1991, before the
Historic Preservation Committee; and
WHEREAS, based upon the facts and circumstances presented
before the Historic Preservation Committee it has been determined
that: (1) the structure under consideration is not original to
the site; (2) that only a minor portion of the subject structure
retains historic significance; (3) that partial demolition of the
subject structure pursuant to a previously issued demolition
permit has resulted in the removal or destruction of previously
existing historic materials and/or features associated with the
structure; and
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Committee finds that the
structure at 601 West Hallam no longer has historic value; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has voluntarily offered to execute a
covenant burdening his parcel so as to allow the Historic Preser-
..rr
vation Committee to exercise mandatory review of any future
redevelopment on the subject parcel in terms of mass and scale;
and
WHEREAS, the applicant has further voluntarily offered to
utilize his best efforts to retain existing trees on the subject
parcel in the event of future redevelopment and to execute an
appropriate covenant reflecting same; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has voluntarily offered to provide
the Historic Preservation Committee with advance notification of
any future plans to demolish the subject structure and to under-
take certain repairs thereof in the near future.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMITTEE FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS:
1. The structure at 601 West Hallam, Aspen, Colorado, be
and is hereby deleted from the Inventory Of Historic Sites and
Structures subject to the following conditions:
a. The applicant shall execute and record with the
Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within ninety (90) days of the
date of this Resolution a deed restriction in a form satisfactory
to the City Attorney burdening the property at 601 West Hallam as
follows:
i. The Historic Preservation Committee shall
have binding review and approval authority
over redevelopment on the subject parcel in
terms of mass and scale. For purposes of
r 2
review, "mass" shall mean that any future
structure shall be designed to avoid an "un-
interrupted box-type structure" and will use
appropriately pitched roof forms for residen-
tial buildings as opposed to flat roofs.
"Scale" shall mean that window and door di-
mensions and building scale shall be consis-
tent with the scale of other buildings on the
block. Such review of mass and scale shall
not be allowed to reduce floor area ratio and
height for the building as otherwise allowed
by the applicable zoning at the time of the
building permit application.
ii. The applicant will use his best efforts to
retain to the extent possible all existing
trees situated on the subject parcel that
shield it from the Wheeler-Stallard House.
The applicant- shall provide reasonable ad-
vance notice to the Historic Preservation
Committee of his plans to demolish the exist-
ing structure so as to allow for a possible
relocation of the structure. Any inability
to relocate the structure shall not prevent
or forestall demolition at a time deemed
appropriate by the applicant.
3
b. That the applicant shall place the original siding
back on the structure and install a double-hung window in place
of the removed bay window within one-hundred twenty (120) days
from the date of this Resolution.
2 . The Historic Preservation Committee finds that the
removal of the 601 West Hallam Street from the Inventory of
Historic Sites and Structures is based solely on facts and
circumstances unique to the case before it and that the decision
to delete the structure as provided for herein shall have no
precedential value or gffect in regard to any future petition to
remove a structure from the inventory.
RESOLVED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1� day of
Ju��l
1991.
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION
CO TEE
By:
c airp son
ATTEST:
/ �%
"L
Secretar
jc72 . 1
4
Justin Barker
From: richard greenberg <remcaprealty @gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 1:53 PM
To: Justin Barker
Subject: 601 west hallam street
Dear Mr. Barker:
Thank you for taking the time to meet with my wife and I regarding the planned construction project across the street
from our home at 602 West Hallam Street (titled in the name of 602 West Hallam LLC., of which i am managing
member).
Your time and insight into the planning process were certainly appreciated.
We are happy that a new home will be built across from ours, however I have some concerns about the project as it is
currently is presented.
I hope you will be able to address our concerns at the meeting Wednesday night that I am unfortunately unable to
attend.
Since our meeting I have performed an informal survey of the homes form Bleeker to St. Francis and from 6th to 3rd (the
main area of the storm ditches) and have made the following observations which i believe are relevant to the above
referenced application.
1. Every alleyway and nearly 50 percent of the homes in this survey area have permanent walkways or driveways over
the ditch. I am at a loss for why the engineering department suddenly would recommend against one more driveway
crossing the ditch.
Piping the ditch under a single driveway is neither cost prohibitive nor unusual in the area.
2. The vast majority of homes in the survey area have garages in the alleyways; of those that do not, less than 10
percent have garages on the east-west streets---90 per cent of the garages are on the numbered streets.
3. the vacated alleyway between the subject site and the Ruth Whyte Park is populated by scrub trees and bushes and
could easily be reopened with the relocation of certain utility boxes to allow the garages to have access to an alleyway.
4.The majority of homes in this area are constructed on a north south axis as envisioned in the numbering system;
hence 601 west Hallam should face north as 602 west Hallam faces south (as does every other house in the vicinity of
5th and Hallam).
5. The elimination of parking spaces on west Hallam street due to the siting of a 2 car garage here will further
exacerbate parking issues during the summer music tent season and during special events held at the historical society.
In short I believe the city would be better served by having the project reworked and moving the garages to a recreated
alleyway (best option for all); or alternatively reworking the project putting the garages on 5th street,where they more
properly belong
Thank you for your help and kind consideration in this matter.
I can be reached at 925 1431 or on my cell at 201 513 0131.
1
602 West Hallam, LLC.
Richard 5 Greenberg
Managing Member
z
0 EXHIB
��I I T Z__I
-�44'
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:s� _ /' n
W oQ.�t A , Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
20
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
County of Pitkin )
(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, whit. was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six
(26) inches high,\and which was .composed of letters not less than one inch in
height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing
on the _ day of , 20_, to and including the date and time
of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto.
Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
WO2A_9T A9 CKe ail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the
31jo g y:1&&P su ct to the development application. The names and addresses of
0CIAAO.JO0 , c own rs shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they
sa�sooa���r� � ��.r
giros,dr�s,nde�z a�aq#1? a `Rio* ore than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A
ti<rern9vners 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)
Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt
requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the
date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development.
The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current
tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAs or PUDs that
create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially
-Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement.
Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any
way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this
Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be
made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or
otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map. or other sufficient legal
description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of
real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the
proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning
agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing
on such amendments.
I
Signa e
eg"Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged be ore me this 3 day
of , 20( ,by
�( of e�
PUBLIC NOTICE
"Lii onoevE aPLI AI+o�SAL WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
pESIGN STANDAROVARIANCF.S
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing
will be held on Wednesday,July 23,2014,at n jYjy commission expires:
meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m.before the Aspen
Historic Preservation Commission,in Council
Chambers,City Hall:130 S.Galena St.,Aspen to -
consider an application submitted by 601 W.Hal-
t' lam,LLC(121 S.Galena St.#203,Aspen,CO,
■I 81611),represented by Alan Richman Planning
HallamsStreettt,Lots Hrand I lock 23,aCityta W.
d
Townsite of Aspen, CO, Parcel ID
Notary Pu lie
#2735-124-31-002. The applicant proposes to de-
molish the existing building and construct a new KAREN REED PA TT
OD m nt single-family home. The applicant requests Con-
ceptual Development approval and Residential De- -NOTARY PU$L.�C
sign Standard Variances.This will be a one-step STATE OF COLORADO
hearing with only Conceptual Development review
of mass and scale required.For further information, NOTARY ID#19964002767
contact Justin Barker at the C ty o'As an Commu- 5,2 016
Aspen,CO�(970)D42p 2797 lust'.barke crtya- CAC$1YIENTS AS APPLICABLE: Exp ires perry
faspen.com LICATION
at' e
Ch ' THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
Chair,,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
(
IU0333M)in the Aspen Times on July 3,2014 ERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
BY MAIL
• APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE
AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. X24-65.5-103.3
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
10 0 l .J u`,� '1kAA'k'-1 , Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
'57u -1- ,2011
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
County of Pitkin nn )
1, A- L K` (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 'Y A , 20k4 , to and including the date and time
of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto.
Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the
property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of
property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they
appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A
copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(A k Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach,
summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as
required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the
neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and
a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt
requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the
date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development.
The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current
tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAS or PUDs that
create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially
Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement.
Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any
way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this
Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be
made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or
otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal
description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of
real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the
proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning
agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing
on such amendments.
_Zk Q—--,0
Signature
The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this r-day
of 20A, by N1.Avx
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
g EMILY ESSIG _y-
Notary Public My commission expires: 1� << , �o 177
State of Colorado
Notary ID 20094002055 1`
ommission Expires Feb 11, 2017
Notary Public
ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE:
• COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
• PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN)
• LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
BY MAIL
• APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE
AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. X24-65.5-103.3
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: 601 W.HALLAM STREET- CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, July 23, 2014, at
a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, in Council
Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen to consider an application submitted by 601 W.
Hallam, LLC (121 S. Galena St. #203, Aspen, CO, 81611), represented by Alan Richman Planning
Services,related to their property located at 601 W. Hallam Street, Lots H and I, Block 23, City and
Townsite of Aspen, CO, Parcel ID #2735-124-31-002. The applicant proposes to demolish the
existing building and construct a new single-family home. The applicant requests Conceptual
Development approval and Residential Design Standard Variances. This will be a one-step hearing
with only Conceptual Development review of mass- and scale required. For further information,
contact Justin Barker at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena
St., Aspen, CO, (970)429-2797,justin.barker @cityofaspen.com
s/Jav Maytin
Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on July 3,2014
City of Aspen Account
9
Ya
k�-
. ...... /id. C ,gyp,•a
y ,
�n r
3
{a
�f � a�$� k '�' E✓k F 2 f
nrd y,
d �
i
Easy Peel®Labels i ♦ Bend along line to Q AVERY 5160 i
j Feed Paper �� expose Pop-up Edge TM
Use Avery®Template 5160 1
323 N FIFTH ST LLC 501 WEST HALLAM LLC 602 WEST HALLAM LLC
555 KATIE PARK LN PO BOX 3389 17130 AVE LE RIVAGE
SNOWMASS, CO 81654 VAIL, CO 81658 BOCA RATON, FL 33496
605 W BLEEKER LLC ASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY BAILEY RYAN TANNER MCKENZIE TRST
101 S MILL ST#200 620 W BLEEKER ST 50%
ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 BAKER&HOSTETLER LLP
303 E 17TH AVE#1100
DENVER, CO 80203
BLAICH ROBERT I TRUST CITY OF ASPEN COLLETT JOHN &VIRGINIA C
319 N FOURTH ST 130 S GALENA ST 1111 METROPOLITAN AVE#700
ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CHARLOTTE, NC 28204
COOK ROBERT C& MARSHA N FELD ANNE S FERGUS ELIZABETH DAWSON
621 W FRANCIS ST 1700 PACIFIC AVE#4100 PO BOX 1515
ASPEN, CO 81611 DALLAS,TX 75201 ASPEN, CO 81612
GARCIA STEPHANIE L GLENN SALLY RAE HALLAM SIX LLC
4211 W 21 ST AVE 1 504 W HALLAM AVE 4430 ARAPAHO STE 110
DENVER, CO 80212 ASPEN, CO 81611 BOULDER, CO 80303
HENRY KRISTEN HERNANDEZ CECIL M&NOELLE C HILLMAN TATNALL L REV TRUST
525 W HALLAM ST PO BOX 1045 504 W BLEEKER ST
ASPEN, CO 81611-1246 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611
KAFRISSEN ARTHUR&CAROLE KEY R BRILL&ELIZABETH R 425E 5 TH SOTDORE A TRUST
310 N 6TH ST 715 W MAIN#304
ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10022
LORD KAREN &COURTNEY MAGGOS LAURA P MCCAUSLAND LINDA REV TRUST
631 W BLEEKER 317 NORTH 4TH ST 609 W FRANCIS ST
ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611
MINERS CABIN LLC MOSS CHARLES B JR MUSSELMAN JAMES&JULIANNE
403 ALEXANDER RD 1530 BROADWAY 8401 N CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY#400
LENOIR CITY,TN 37772 NEW YORK, NY 10036 DALLAS,TX 75225
NATIONWIDE THEATRES CORP NEWMAN DIANNE R REV TRUST P&L PROPERTIES LLC
120 N ROBERTSON BLVD 1320 OAK KNOLL DR 101 S 3RD ST#360
LOS ANGELES, CA 90048 AKRON, OH 44333-2232 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501
Re liez a la hachure afin de; www.avery.com '
Etiquettes faciles a peler ; P' '
® ® Sens de reveler le rebord Pop upT"' ' 1-800-GO-AVERY i
Utilisez le gabarit AVERY 5160 chargement J
Easy eelO Labels i ♦ Bend along ine to O ® '
y ® ® ' Feed Paper �� expose Pop-up Edg, ' AVERY 5160 1
Use Avery Template 5160 j j
PARFET DONALD R&ANNE V PDT PARTNERS LLC SCHWARTZ RACHEL KUKES&MARK
11000 RIDGEWOOD LN 601 E HYMAN AVE 1061 COUNTRY CLUB RD
RICHLAND, MI 49083 ASPEN, CO 81611 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 483042603
SHAFROTH ASPEN HOUSE LLC SHELBY LLC SWANSON LUCIA TRUST
3367 SUNSHINE CANYON DR 1201 WILLIAMS ST#6 425 E 58TH ST#25H
BOULDER, CO 80302 DENVER, CO 80218 NEW YORK, NY 10022
VES TRUST 50% WARE NINA COULTER LIV TRUST WOGAN WENDY
SWEENEY JOHN F TRUST 50% 13021 KING ARTHUR SPUR 533 W FRANCIS
1260 IVANHOE ST SAINT LOUSI, MO 68146 ASPEN, CO 81611
DENVER, CO 80220
ttiquettes faciles a peler ; A Repliez a la hachure afin de; www.avery.com
abarit AVERY 5160® Sens de rver e reorop up '
1800-GO-AVERY-
Utilisez le ® eel l bd P - T"'
'
9 j chargement j 1
City-Attorney Kern reported under the City Charter,.no member of-the City Council may .
serve on any permanent board or commission; therefore, the RSA cannot be considered as a
board or :commission. j
Councilman Walls moved that the RSA members as presently situated continue with terms toy
k1 expire the 1st of June, 1971. Seconded by Councilman Comcowich. Roll call vote - Councilme
`�- Whitaker aye; Walls aye; Scott aye; Griffin aye; Comcowich aye;-Mayor Homeyer aye. Motion
carried.
j Van's Liquor —Mayor Homeyer reported Attorney Stewart representing the applicant had
submitted criteria Council can consider in denying or granting a license.
City Attorney Kern called to Council's attention-no new evidence can be submitted, public
hearing was closed on October 14th.
Liquor Committe Council, agreed a-special meeting should be called to review standards for the isauance.of `I
licenses of all types. Councilman Whitaker suggest, a committee be -formed to study this
problem.
Councilman Whitaker moved that a committee be formed of 3 members of the City.Council; 3
members of the liquor industry; liquor control officer; City Attorney and.City Manager.
j Seconded by Councilman Griffin. Roll call vote - Councilmen Scott aye; Griffin aye;.
Comcowich aye; Walls aye; Whitaker aye; Mayor Homeyer aye. Motion carried.
Van's Liquor Councilman Griffin moved to table a decision on Van's Liquor ubtil the next regular meeting
of November 9th. Seconded by Councilman.Wal,ls. Roll call vote - Councilmen. Whitaker aye;
Walls aye; Scott aye; Griffin aye.; Comcowich aye; Mayor Romeyer aye. Motion carried.
.Liquor Committee The .£ollowing members were named to the committee: Ross Griffin, Chairman; Jack Walls,
Fitzhugh Scott III, Adolph Miklich.and Thomas Iacono.. Chairman Griffin to. appoint some
one owning a bar and restaurant license.
Special Meeting Councilman Scott moved that a special meeting be held next Monday at 5:00 p.m. to. take.up i
outstanding business of the Council. Seconded by Councilman Whitaker. All in favor, motion
carried. I
i
Business Business Licensing - councilman.Griffin recommended the Council consider the businea
Licensing license to cover all businesses, professional and services but to exclude thosebusinessea
i I now paying the franchise•:tax..Fee would be based on the gross receipts of the business on
e, sliding scale as, follows: $12.50, gross receipts $50,000; $25..00-,, gross-receipts $100,00
.$75.00, gross receipts $200,000; $100.00 gross receipts $300,000 and over.
City Attorney Kern reported this. is not a tax but a_control of businesses. Mr. Kern report
ed he would prepare an ordinance for consideration at the next regular meeting. .
Marathon Rece - Councilman Scott relayed a request to Council from Dr. Massucco for
.' p
j permission to use the City-streets for the race on Sunda November 8th at 1:00 p.m i
of the route to be followed was submitted.
Chief `Ritchey reported he had been contacted and would be on band at all.intereections
during the race. ,
Councilman Comcowich moved to grant. this request. Seconded-by. Councilman Griffin. All in
favor, motion carried. I J
I Budget reports were submitted.
j .Rate Increase Manager Wurl relayed a request to join with the City of Montrose in fighting the Rocky
Rocky Mountain Mountain Natural Gas rate increase.
Natural Gas / r .request. i
Councilman Griffin moved to pay the City of Montrose on thi Seconded by Falls l-
s man Walls.'Roll call vote.- Councilmen Comcowich aye; Griffin aye; Scott aye; aye;
1 Whitaker aye; Mayor Homeyer aye. _ I
Alley Block Mr. George Vicenzi was present and request the Council consider, vacating the alley in
23 Block 23. Request being made due to the following: (1) alley has never been used as each;
(2) alley has no function, fenced off at both.ends; Historical Society garage in the
middle of the alley; land can be more useful to the adjacent property owners.
�.., City Attorney gave the following background: The Probate Judge after the patent was issued
i deeded out the entire block to Paepcke; Paepcke deeded the.block to the Aspen.Company;
deeds included the alley; up to 1947 the alley has .always been deeded; Aspen Company
deeded Lots H & I to Bert Bidwell and Mayor's deed:;was obtained by Bidwell in 1959. The
Aspen Company deeded the remainder of the lots to Walter.Paspeke not including the.alley.
Walter Paepcke turned the property over to the Aspen Institute who in nurn MdeeRetrec�e
jistorical Society. This left the alley in the name' of the Aspen .Compa y:
on the alley.are between the adjacent property
the City not become involved. Negoiationa
owners and the Aspen Company. I
• II I
I
Mr. Vicenzi stated the nsamerica Insurance Company stated the ay is in CiT
Councilman Comcowich moved as per Attorney Kern's recommendation and that the f
a deed was issued the alley was deeded, the City not become involved. Seconded man Griffin.
Mr. Vicenzi stated he felt Mr. Kern has a conflict of interest as he represents Historical Society, feel the City shoul
d obtain another opinion.
Roll call vote - Councilmen Walls aye; Comcowich aye; Whitaker aye; Griffin ay
aye; Mayor Homeyer aye. Motion carried.
I
i
I Two-hour Parking - Manager Wurl relayed a request to the City Council on the part of the
Mountain States Telephone for special permit or disposition for telephone trucks in the
j two-hour parking zone when on service calls. Chief Ritchey submitted a memo to Council
outlining the Grand Junction ordinance which provides for this type of arrangement. Mr.
Krill of Mountain States Telephone was present and stated the telephone company would be
willing to pay for special permits. Manager Wurl recommend the fee for permits be -in
proportion to the fine now charged.
Councilman Scott moved to request Manager Wurl work out an administrative plan similar to
Grand Junction ordinance setting up suggested price of permit and restricting same to
those who pay the franchise tax to the City. Roll call vote - Councilmen Comcowich aye;
Griffin aye; Scott aye; Walls nay; Whitaker nay; Mayor Homeyer aye. Motion carried.
Sidewalks - Discussed the plowing of sidewalks. Manager Wurl outlined the following Sidewalks
problems in enforcing -the present ordinance: (1) When did it quit snowing; (2) Not all Snow Removal
of the downtown area has sidewalks; (3) absentee owners,
Manager Wurl to submit for Council's -consideration the cost of plowing sidewalks.
i
i Lost and Found Policy - Manager Wurl suggest Council consider that anything found by a Lost & Found jl
Policy
person, if not claimed within 6 months, be returned to the finder.
iDiscussed whether guns and contrband items should fall in this policy.
i
Councilman Griffin moved to fix the pplicy that articles, excluding contraband, after
six months be advertised by the City twice in the local paper and if not claimed be re-
turned to the finder. Seconded by Councilman Scott. Roll call- vote - Councilmen Whitaker
aye; Walls aye Scott aye;-Griffin aye; Comcowich aye; Mayor Homeyer aye. Motion carried.
t.
- t
Ma'tro Sewer District Request - Manager Wurl reported the district <.is asking for a Metro Sewer
i waiver of..the deadline on street cuts. They have 3 or 4 line extensions they have not District
i
completed. -Manager Wurl further reported he had sent a letter to the District, copies Request
submitted to Council, voicing the City's concerns relating to previous cuts in the
streets.
Councilman Whitaker moved that the waiver on street cuts as outlined from the Metro
Sanitation District be authorized and Council supports the attempts of the City Manager
and City Engineer to get Metro District to do a proper job as outlined in Leon Wurl's
letter to the district. Seconded by Councilman Scott.
I
Manager Wurl suggest the City contact the Municipal League as to possible changes in the
statutes as to districts paying permit fees and responsibility as to conditions that
exist when they are finished with a street cut.
Roll call vote - Councilmen Griffin aye; Scott aye; Comcowich nay; Walls aye; Whitaker
aye; Mayor Homeyer aye. Motion carried.
Registered
Registered Warrants - Manager Wurl submitted a breakdown to Council. Warrants
Traffic Signal Report - Manager Wurl reported sometime ago the City requested the Highway
Department make a study of Mill and Main. Report shows the traffic signal at this inter- Traffic Signal
section is warranted and justified. Traffic Signal would take 3 or 4 months to install Report
and would be no cost to the City.
Mr. Wurl reported the City Engineer sent to Council a memo recommending that we authorize
the State to -do a study of one way streets and traffic circulation. Study would cost
$364.00.
Council authorized Manager Wurl to contact the State Highway to proceed with the traffic
iI circulation study of the downtown area.
1 �
Leased Parking - Manager Wurl submitted map and names of property owners to which letters Leased
have been sent asking if they would be interested in leasing their property for parking Parking
during the winter. season. Results of the letters will be submitted to Council when
received.
i
I
f
i I
i �
() C') R? t7
\ , �) 1-; o O �) U1 ::r U C Q (, _,:(n I --I rt
1-j w I-1 (c1 cr F-'
CL
Ct ct, u) IV In .-� rh _ 1 :1i (D (U
I-� (-t C_{ (•.: 1-y •'=i' r... . ;� S% {-` ::1_ F'• 1_��; �'i ')) t� F••'
. I_♦ �� (1) P: till '.$ CT !� •� :T> (�1 '�� ll • r) f_1 •<
Iv
* v i C) •`-r l (D r.... r in .S (;
IIA
(r c; rCl i-'J J-, 1-'• I-' r(1 (P } i! C: C) 7� G N '9
1 c7
c; t?. rb c rt rp u) .� F� cr O
c-r ct
cr
(D (I) (:i
C) c
p U)
(ll (•j i'i 1rj (Ti QI rr i r 1:
GS 'ri <h G3 Q) tU c: rD
1_•.e 0 f_L I-j
rn tt
t�
' J A.M. Novsmber 18, 1969
_; 1 334 70 Pe88Y �• Nikllch,-Recorder.
SG�K��'} DACE
STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED NOV
- - - - - - - - - - - - - 5`.._. .. Crant
local
Tpii ALL MSN By THESE PRESENTS That,we, ELIZABETH H.
mentc
and ,7. V. SPACHNER, of the County of Cook and State of
memos
and gTgpoM MCR. DUBRUL, JR., of New York City, as
imprc
of the 1LTER P, pAEPCRE LIFE INSURANCE TRUST, for
be uc
asideration of Ten Dollars and other valuable considera- not 1
a in band paid, hereby sell and convey to ASPEN HISTORICAL
_• from
, of Aspen, County of Pitkin, and State of Colorado, the
� on tl
I
follovring real property situate in the County of Pitkin and State
{ to-wit;
of Colorado,
Block 23, including the platted alley,
City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado,
except Lots H and I in said Block 23,
and without warranty as to said alley,
together with all. improvements thereon
WNth all, its appurtenances and warrant the title to the same
{this warranty being in the capacity of Trustees, but not indi-
vidually). Subject to patent reservations, current taxes,
special assessments.
THIS CONVEYANCE is executed and delivered by Grantors
as the acting and qualified Trustees of the Walter P. Paepcke STAT
Life Insurance Trust, acting under powers conferred by Article COUN
IV of the Trust Instrument recorded in Book 146, Page 285, Office
this
of the Pitkin County Clerk & Recorder, Stephen McK. DuBrul, Jr., Trus
the duly appointed and acting successor Trustee to Paul
MENEM
y;k
?e
v
x. '
The conveyance of the above described premises is to
Grantee, its successors and assigns, so long as the improvements
located from time to time on the premises, including any improve-
ments thereof, shall be used for purposes of a public museum com-
memorating the history of Aspen, Colorado, and so long as the un-
improved land from time to time included in the premises shall
be used for purposes of a public park. These provisions shall
not be construed as preventing Grantee, its successors or assigns,
from altering, replacing or adding to the improvements now located
on the Premises.
i SIGNED and delivered this LL day of November, 1969.
c
°b �.�
•Elizabeth H. epake 1
x
f
v. S cheer
Stephen McK. DuBrul. Jr.,
All as the Trustees of the
WALTER P. PAEPCKE LIFE, INSURANCE TRUST
COLORADO
STATE OF EEKEW'tE91 )
PITKIN } ss
COUNTY OF CQSX )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me.
this � day of November, 1969 by ELIZABETH H. PAEPCKE, as
Trustee of the WALTER P. PAEPCKE LIFE INSURANCE TRUST.
My commission expires: Ml y ;:,^ ,, l sa,IM
WITNESS my hand and official seal..
Not�ry Pub i�c '
2 -
5
STATE OF ILLINOIS
COUNTY OF COOK
The foregoing instrument was acknewledge8 before ue
this day of November, 1969 by S. V. SPACBNER. as Tru•1"101*
of the WALTER P. PAEPCKE LIFE IMURhWl TS"T.
try commission expires: .3f.6//7/
WETNESS my hand and officia seal.
4
Notary Public
STATE OF NEW YORK j
) ss
COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) `
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me
this ':+:N day of November, 1969 by STEPIM MCK. DuBRUL, Jr.,
as 'trustee of the WALTER P. PAEPCKE LIFE INSURANCE TRUST.
My commission expires:
wITNE.SS my hand and official seal.
Notary Publie `•. :t r
J 11 3
MM6 w C.REICH `.
N04ry PYklk,$:.%0 New Yak ,'N 3 0 J y
No 31-3245000 r� G � I% '•.
County i tl d tu'
Elva es Na,en 30.1811 }� it
`y
— J —
E.
s
S '
$KC7'drilMt•...+�i�+7 .dctu�ek � ,.M s.SiFFS , e,>; 1.�.: ���I ,4 t•t'�1ri7 'd 1��� t
R+cr t44o Na 1ZUAZ l'aSrZY 8....G>31t1e.. RararMr
4
kNO1W AIL 1!f>Ex fdx T ss>i >ws>.hra, `Tb r �tl rip c: �ttrief
Nsrr Ito
' t t tb# C it Y' acrd "County at Nei Yarlf sad ltate at
Jo V
fertN¢r`ebd+cltraG7nnof ,Te#t'Dolit�re,a;sd'ather good'and.valusble
tdcte3deretion
ltiharisitt! Mgre6y�rl�a»t!`kaiiVry#u "john d PbkexS � �,
s
of tha Gt+uaty of P1 GkiTi' fu the St"ostfCoto fo,
e
s" -
#hni�tnaliig rafprslterty;sttna#afathe oot' yof Pibkir
dttti to#e atGoierattp,#aai#
t The northerly qne=half i the"vacated alley
jatent ti0"iota. fi�� . ,�ln.S1ook n
and .i a the City ac#d Townelt a .of'Aaperi.
y
X r
}
6
fl-
y if
a: x
i
� e
t
wtitiiatl iwiafa#tttrGrttaacee..
94medawkielivorrtt611 let day of 3egtemher
;d ur
tptlteltrthwnaeof � t� „(13#;ptiJ=
Alvin C._fiUrloh"-
`s'AfilE OF
Cv44Y or Thew Xark
the lor�tvtna ttrstrpramt saknmrlWt4d ueron m.eta
n p.'tu d7 hr' _`/iillCt bra Y�,r1ch.
�` "ICY'rwnmtr lnq aihdtla ,-t4 K'itno"ma •n4 oiri�l,i.e.t
N �
, w
49J�+w-
.� tt HI14tM-im
�.
Qvah4ts4 Fn hew
10 44111V
a 3FCri .nsl Mx#!
ere w nsoM k�r�Jn#sc%.. m�Yr�M�af*t t(aY t�'l, Sd i`�wt#tlr«yf dACtolkt w 1Lr o/Pis
sttb�. 1M dx,.rr oim►rtP a:.a4wr wow -In•MtaG x i`iuGri�y aMWn t 7!b otPb�rr. coR.
a tuen"' he of tncn r of s�th.+�.E�.nt w ntker nt++r+N ruc�
Na lOfF 4dk+t uk ANa 9nt-411 a lt 4►t-ib�td. aami"+c n
` r
t
s
yr,..
t
{� raeaat_.2sy5_.. ...da«t..g.__Y &eptaat�c 25.-191iI
J.
8aecptlrra t7a:�k2t3351.»•_ �ES1YltY 5•::.�� $ee[rrdar:+ _- �' y
l
ALVIN C. EttRICH f
f �
}, 'ahoaeadaremto 25 West 54th street, City of.. i
New York. County of, New York ,and Flat!44
New York for the edusi. ratio"of Ten—
titollara,iu'humps,iil,lrcrebya!Ills}uti+le'oticey(a};o JC}iN G.
PoWhK%
w6oae add"is,1110 Aspen Meadows, Co»n'tyo£
�'i tkin and State of Colorado the fallowing real pruprrey iu thx i
Cpunryo£ Pitkin aud8luteof Colorado,t u-µ'it:
Lots H and '1,: in,Block 23 in,and to'
the City and,Townalte of Aspen
r .td1U 01.418 upplittrhrttrecs,..unx{ warrant >S) tilt titll.lu 1110 sluue,'stdij,:ct to the lien of the
1967 'real property taxes end .reetrlctions set forth in instrument
rerrjrded In Book 189 at pare 115 of the real property records of
FIr.kin County, Colorado, prouldSnc, that the lots will not be used
for oLher',then private residential purposes
gignrll Ibis day or July •1167
C
AivAn C., Eurich'
MASSACNUSE'IT5
rl•rn�i lti u�����
f• CoUniy-itf
I'ifr Iurryuill inatniiturtt a rx,otknonh,ilzad bri,rrr tun Ibis,
any of July, 1167 .11>' Alvin C, F.urich,
111 vor.1,11millrrcxitires'DeSetsiher 3, 3.971.
14 ituDae my haurl 9ud ufrieial lees! ,,rr�
•
rt.4.rrPaLlr 1 .
r. !rr•ry A t >+ kdpinr [ H 1 r raturm j rr e,or yrrMiii.r,l n i lrri Ir LY p .U S 1 r•A ullN.>r ur
fl,'Igl I✓n It;.r. YIl I1!]1U t ff lM.IUMtI hal.Y f UI Ptt Y 1 1 INI T 1hV I 1 1, r 001 t1D
rr M 1S r1
7Fd,:
it iY,dth•tr r ut+,rat 4 the 1 Inrl n>t,a. 4 swh utft'rr vie rf[xrr .e'_[h Drr.1J ht r,a er 1 (d r�,yveh a r
yentlyn tlazuWt.11. .._ ..•`.. __ ;,� __....:__ ;: °--.._•-__.. ..r-,.,... M;1 :. _
Vac x91. *.rr..ir ii„a-dMri Y-.-4W,.ul-i•sl,.....DMI rt.r -'
w.Uw,.rrlhu.a Genur.102"4 Fast at+n' nr.er 6-W"I
Ordinance No. 8, Series of - density-,control - read in full for Ord. No. 8,• j
first time by Attorney Balcomb Emerson presented letter from the Aspe ging Series of 1964
Association dated July 6; -opposing this proposed amendment to the Zoning Code. I
Councilman Barnard said he is not in favor of this ordinance and he feels the lodge
owners have %cod points. Discussion followed in which Rana Gramiger said he
felt many people are opposed. to this. i
A motion was"then made by Councilman Barnard, seconded by Councilman Kuster !
to table Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1964. Bill Chambers, owner'of the Viking, said Motion to
the letter from the Lodge Owners'Assoeiation was the result of an association Table
meeting, and it expressed their feelings on this ordinance; He also said they.were
never contacted or consulted regarding any. density survey. The roll was then called I
on the motion - Councilmen Barnard aye; Kuster aye; McEachern aye; Stapleton aye, i
Bill Beyer referred to the Westerner - where no set-backs were provided.
Councilman McEachern said this motel could be rebuilt with the now required set-
backs - with a loss of only two units under the proposed density control.
Councilman.Stapleton felt there should be closer liaison between Council and [',
the Planning Commission. / ` i
Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1964, height restriction - read in full by Attorney Ord. No.
Balcomb for the first time and discussed. Mr. Gramiger felt this'would result Series of '
in preponderance of flat roofs. A motion was made by Councilman Barnard, seconded 1964
by Councilman Stapleton, to approve Ordinance No. 9,-Series of 1964, and to order
it published. Roll call - Councilmen Barnard aye; Kuster aye; McEachern aye; j
Stapleton aye.'
- I
Ordinance No. 10, curb cuts (-Series 1964) read for the first time in full by Ord. No. 10 i
Attorney Balcomb - and a motion was made by Councilman Stapleton, seconded by Series of 1964
Councilman McEachern, to approve Ordinance No. 20; Series of 1964, and to order
it published. Roll call Councilman Barnard aye; Kuster aye; McEachern aye;
Stapleton aye.
Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1964_ - Building Review - read in full for the Ord. No. 11
j first time by Attorney Balcomb - and a motion was made by eonncilman McEachern, Series of 1964
seconded by Councilman Barnard, to approve Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1964, and i
to order it published Roll call - Councilmen Barnard aye; Kuster aye; McEachern
i aye; Stapleton aye. j •
iOrdinance No. 12, Series of 1964 - To provide an R-15 Zone - read in full for Ord. No. 12,
the first time by Attorney Balcomb - and a motion to approve Ordinance No. 12,. Series of 1964
Series of 1964 was made by Councilman Barnard, seconded by Councilman Kuster, and j
to order it published. Roll call - Councilmen Barnard aye; Kuster aye; McEachern
aye; Stapleton aye.
Alley through Block 23.- Petition dated June 24, 1964, to Council from Elizabeth Alley BI 23
1 H. Paepcke and Alvin C. Eurich, requesting Council to vacate the alley. through
Block 23, and the opinion from Attorney Balcomb on this matter-were discussed.
Mr. Balcomb said, from the examination of the records in the office of the Clerk Attorney's
and Recorder for Pitkin County and the City Clerk, it is his conclusion that the opinion
alley through Block 23, City of Aspen, never became a public alley so no vacation
thereof by the Council is necessary or proper. He did recommend that the Mayor
execute a confirming deed to the present owner or owners. A motion was then made Motion
by CouncilmanP.arnard; seconded by Councilman Kuster, that the Mayor take appro-
priate action on the alley in Block 23, as recommended in the letter from Attorney
j Balcomb. Roll call vote - Councilmen Barnard aye; Kuster aye; McEachern aye; I
Stapleton aye, j
Balance of funds returned to City. from State - contributions that should Trans of Funds
I not have been made under FICA for policemen. A motion was madd by Councilman. to Police
j McEachern, seconded by Councilman Barnard, that such funds be transferred from Pension Fund
i u the General Fund to the Policamenrs Pension Fund. Roll Call - Councilmen Barnard
aye; Kuster aye; McEachern aye; Stapleton aye. j
j Sales Tax
Sales Tax Ordinance - discussed - that sales tax will probably not appear on Ord.
State ballot - proposed City ordinance will be ready for the next meeting.
Benedict Land and Cattle Co. - agreement.- Council is re-negotiating water- AgreementC
i line contract - to include Aspen (Irove and Riverside Subdivision. Benedict
I George Christensen requested a curb cut on Hyman Street, for entrance to Curb Cut- I
j driveway between the Cowenhoven Building and the Roman Lion building. A motion Hyman Ave.
was made by Councilman Barnard, seconded by Councilman Kuster, to instruct the j
City Administrator to handle this matter, with the cost to be borne by the property j
owners. All Councilmen voted aye j
I
j Robin Molney presented request for a covered sidewalk on the West side of the Covered side- j
Cowenhoven Building, and he was advised by Council to refer this matter to the walk=Cowenhoven
j Planning Commission. Bldg
j
j Letter from Hans Cramiger re land at the Glory read by Mayor Pabst, who said Land at
j
Planning Commission has been'asked to study use of City-owned land. Glory Hole
Mayor Pabst read letter from Jack Walls, Chairman of the Planning and ?oning Letter-Planniei -j
Commission, advising the City Council to cancel Colorado P-26, Aspen Area Master Cancel P-26
Plan, with Paul Lester Wiener.
The Mayor also read letter from Humble Oil and Refining Co., regarding pro- i.
j, posed gas station.
ice
I Letter dated July 2, 1964, from Jack Walls of the Planning Commission, recom- Brown/Palace t
mending denial of the request from the Brown Ice Palace to use approximately five encroachment I
feet of City property, was read and discussed. A motion was-made by Councilman
McEachern, seconded by Councilman Barnard, to deny this tequest. All Councilmen
voted aye.
H
N M
ROBERT DELANEY KENNETH BALCOMB
DELANEX & BALCOMB
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
POST OFFICE BOX 149
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLOI;ADO 81601
PHONE WHITNEY 5.6546
June 29, 1964
City Council
City of Aspen, Colorado
Gentlemen:
You have asked me, as City Attorney, to give you my opinion
concerning the petition dated June 24, 1964, made to the Council by Elizabeth H.
Paepcke, individually and as executrix of the estate of Walter P. Paepcke,
deceased, and Alvin C. Eurich, requesting the Council to vacate the alley
through Block 23, City of Aspen. The petition also requests a confirming
deed from the Mayor.
I have examined certain records in both the office of the Clerk
and Recorder's Office for Pitkin County,aColorado, and the City Clerk of the
City of Aspen. From my examination of these records, it is my conclusion
that the alley through Block 23, City of Aspen, Colorado, never became a
public alley, so that no vacation thereof by the Council is necessary or proper.
Two old maps of the Aspen Townsite in the'County Clerk's Office
and the map filed with the County Judge for Gunnison County, Colorado, in
connection with incorporation of the City of Aspen, antedate the deed to
J. B. Wheeler, hereinafter mentioned, and show an alley through Block 23.
Except for the Buchanan map. of 1958, this alley as an alley, does not
otherwise appear. • None of these maps show thereon that any dedication for
public use of streets or alleys was ever made, and no acceptance of any
dedication appears. Abstracts prepared by the ,Pitkin County Abstract Company
for various lots in the City of Aspen, Colorado, da not reflect a dedication
of streets and alleys, at least prior to 1888.
Patent from the United States for the Aspen Townsite issued to
the County Judge, in Trust, in' 1885.
The minutes of the meeting of the City Council on October 24, 1887,
reflect that J. B. Wheeler petitioned the Council to vacate the alley. Nothing
apparently, came of this petition, the last reference thereto being in the
minutes of the Council meeting of November 21, 1887.
On December 29, 1887, M. G. Miller, as County Judge, gave J. B. Wheeler
, a deed for all 18 Lots in Block 23, and "together with alley in said Block
according to the plat on file in the Office of the County and Probate Judge
of said County of Pitkin". (Underlining added for emphasis) .
On December 29, 1887, the County Judge had sufficient title to
such lots and the streets and alleys to make this conveyance.
n
a
City Council -2- June 29,1964
The 1889 assessment roll of Aspen property in file in the City Clerk's Office
shown J. B. Wheeler as assess'ed.for all of Block 23, with land value at
$2,500.00. Since the book reflects surrounding lot assessment values at
$125.00 per lot, one would naturally assume Wheeler was assessed fortthe
alley at the value of two lots.
In 1896, the "Willits" map was prepared and though the alley''
is shown, lines at the ends of the alley indicate it was closed, or at
least not to be considered as a public alley. The Willits map has been
used as the map of Aspen for many years, and until the Buchanan map was
prepared.
•A "bird's eye view" 'of Aspen prepared in 1893, shows the house
on Block 23 across the alley, _and no alley appears, though alleys are
evident in other blocks.
A map of Aspen prepared by Sanborn for insurance purposes in
1904, shows the alley in Block 23 as being not open.
It was on these facts that I based the conclusion heretofore
made.
However, I do recommend that the Mayor execute a confirming
deed to the present owner or owners. The execution of such ,a deed does
not require concil action and is a matter of course. Attorneys in Aspen
have for some years required such deeds because, on January 27, 1897,
the United States revoked the '1885 patent for errors, and issued a new
patent to the Mayor of Aspen. This revocation cannot, in my opinion,
affect prior conveyance by the County Judge, but the confirming deed
has become a custom.
Very truly yours,
KeAh;:�
Balcomb, City Attorney
. ✓r"` "^1 Lit..
t x (W40
'� pbeaQ p a IT—
x 7909.2
° � X
x ?9►0 X
ILL ,
. � k
Lao 1 I
11
7912.7
. S
Q
nin �
ji
Plea r5 n►.� 1 e13 �
Aspen, Colorado
June 24, 1964
The Ci t y Council
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado
Gentlemen:
The undersigned as the owners of all lots within Block 23, City
and Townsite of Aspen., Colorado, do hereby petition the City Council to
enact an ordinance vacating the alley through this block, and to authorize
the execution and delivery of Mayor's deed to the undersigned confirming
title, according to the usual practice followed in Aspen.
By way of explanation, in 1887 the County Judge conveyed to J. B.
Wheeler. Lots A kthrough S inclusive in Block 23 "together with the alley
in said Block according to the plat on file in the office of the County and
Probate Judge of�,said County of Pitkin." Subsequent conveyances included
all of Block •23, but- without specific reference to the alley. The plat on
file with the County.,Clerk and Recorder indicates an alley kthrough the
block. Also, proceedings subsequent to issuance of the County Judge's
deed.create title questions concerning the efficacy of such deed, and the
usual means of correcting this discrepancy is by Mayor's confirming deed.
The •alley in question was apparently never used as an alley, and
instead a structure was built upon it at the time of construction of the
"Stallard House." . An alley through this block serves rid useful or necessary
purpose'.
In view of the fact that the alley was conveyed to the former
property owner, and no dedication was apparently completed, permission is
requested to proceed with construction of the. two-car garage now being built
on the site of the old structure recently removed. On the basis of being
permitted to proceed with such construction, ;we hereby agree -that the rights of
the City and the undersigned will be expressly preserved; and no rights of
the City will be waived in the event the alley is not ordered vacated by
the City Council,
Very truly yours,
Indiv dually and as Executr x of the Estate
of Walter P. Paepcke, Deceased.
f
IN TtUi CUUttTY CuUitT LN .tNU FOR THii
COUIM Of PITKIN ANJ STATIC uF COWRAW
Nu. 813
l.-t 'fttt� WTT'tR tit TH. dl--TI-T,; OF }
a,tLTaH P. ?!isFCKg, i UNJFR FLK
i f
Uaceai.ra, j
,f Uut:agtu'i'a 19t,1 upua U,u t'uriti. teLotWA of i .i::..:.t[i 1.
,t Lilt L .,,i t ;aid Tastatilent of wuit:er F. ?-50t:i.r,
;ittr:;!5:e in .°ertf.:l taiuLribution ai 'ISLAt AJHUx9, eau xt,u t;,,ur. ,,.:•,.,;
the pcatai-+<+a,
FLND6,
t
'rhaL [h.: Laat t1Li, ,n.x TNUtataent of walLer ,•.r<�.
1
tuycchtrr with ci•,e first. :.nu secuud t'auic:la Li,eru:.o, +rut:.
IanLot in tar. i'rob.tte t:ouri of —01( ;0unxy, Iliiaui.. an +ty .i, l'J:• i
i.ftter truly rcWILCeo Go yroba(.t ns i. iuraiga wi.1 to ta.ld t:.,ure
s
:::,e :clef rtrClci•� iii of 3:13 :+ill ,ic>v1.le !
i
,
"i dovire anu be4UeitCU t,i t Cite raaLCue t ar
:11 properi.y in whit-,i I Tray h,.ve any Lntert. ,L it.. L:..'
my danth, wherever altuatt:l-, nU inclnuiak ;;ny .i,c.., + i,t •;
d or devise, Lo 4LLZAB4t11 H. ?"A;KKS vnd e'OL
F
suc:ce»r,ur> in .rust, Lruriaas under a TruoL ngrt•<:mvaL
I ,signed as Grantor ,ia Nugust 24, It13t, rrviLL;cr
Poepcka Liles Insurauce Trust., Lo be adthid L, an';
with the tru,t i)roperLy of Lh.,t trUAt. ana lua: +; ar ar••ti :.
in whole or Lu p irL, as it it kbu Ueen Fu
s
pro•-lded. L-,L if that
g the+ dens Of tbi& in.fUliJICnC and t)a:Ev'rE' Wy 1t:"L1 t.!tt a.••.u• .,
>,hitli hell! ,.:t•. at�ir.,:.c of Lhr. Nx'opr.rc.y 8jv ,n c L:-^,:
as a tieparete trt.•,t upon the LruaCs un•.:dr LnwC yS..•e-ea:at .,.. ,
CntiSCUd un t!,e ,Lrtt,t •,,` cats Ln.�Lrumoat. Ky w.t-.,.,'t
uvr:r my rewidui,ry 'eL.:te Lc, —11 LruyteVs
t.,uugtt .t:o trudtet i ,,,vc :tc,4 xLvan r:ny .• ••.'
t is i brsiors yr Lee, ;,put.nt,ed lay any lo"'t, .r.
tht, i rustttua ah::ti '-3 +ati%l•'_CC 'iluct, te;s :nt,' `.
to That the TruaL .,L.ryamc.:t +'L
r'..e•.,,tuae Lift: Lna.to „r e rrtt.0
f
6
STAI.L,,HD HOUSE:
Lot ll, C. D, E, F, G, K, E., M, N, ter V,
tv .cud Towniite of Aspen, Colorado.
POTTER HOUSIe.
C, li, 'md I, llloak 41, (:itv .:nd T))w:t3iL0 ,f
11 C.m;;tl)le zierson,il pr-),'orty of F"sr
i t w!.f�'t �du ll�•, i':�ca�+:Kt' li.�d .�n inLat—• L ;IL Lh)' lim<• 'f
Vic inLnetr:iL r)f ',Jn1Lc'r f'. P;+ —ko it: all t.<3�i;=iht, ;•G,r-. .
.I:=
J� �
W. HA Lt. AM ST.
a
r's HauSE \\ G
A
H Cl T Y. A LL t Y
NIST0P, CAL Z
soc E_T Y
ti
f
f .
W. $ LFK � ST. CITY 0y ASPS
: A s ep , Cots
ZoL
9C9 - OL
609
1
�OZ
4 4S OZ9
SZS ££5 80L
SOZ OZL
409
777 r
I I/
I _
0 G 9`
OZ9�
..
,
S 6ZS �£9
A�M�'?A�b������ � lr `l��•n �a
..
AW Mu
�
� -
ti�r4 4 '
}}
j7:� d1
.J /; Jl �..r � ��'.�.s. �-• L,•.. - 7 s�.ty"4».'"*.' rt � .•�'!,.
�
,Im
c y, .s;i �p-^� •}•i� � `t i�d.�� f� yr
yl
Of
£ ,
Kam: ;,;� .: � �,. �• .f; �� c ..,v
C IV E 0 001g - 20rLt
APP It 2014
'
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Agreement to Pay Application Fees
Anagreement between the City of Aspen ("City")and
Property 601 West Hallam LLC Phone No.:970-9204428
Owner("I"): Email:whipples @rof.net
Address of 601 West Hallam Street Billing 121 South Galena Street
Property: Aspen, CO 81611 Address: Aspen CO 81611
(subject of p (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.
For 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.
$,976 flat fee for Parks $0 flat fee for-Select Dept
$0 flat fee for Select Dept $ 0 flat fee for
Select Review
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 application. 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.
$
1,950 deposit for 6 hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time
above the deposit amount will be billed at$325 per hour.
265 deposit for 0 hours of Engineering Department staff time.Additional time above the deposit
amount will be bitted at$265 per hour.
City of Aspen: Property Owner:
Geoff eGq S WG�i,�,�Ge
Chris Bandon Steve Whipple
Community Development Director Name:
City use. 3190 Title; Manager
Fees Due:$ Received:$
2013 of • 1130 1 920-5090
L-)Co 18- 201, 4 • A-1-Pc. APR IV 2014
LAND USE APPLICATION G11 Y OF A;bNr-N
APPLICANT: ^( P
Name: (o sit w� 1�a`�A•.. 1. 1. �-
Location: b o \ �✓r.+ 4 W a �,_ S�tc ,�tom- \(� l
(Indicate street address, lot&block number, legal description where appropriate)
Parcel ID#(REQUIRED) a'l 3 a-�3 to-7;L
REPRESENTATIVE:
Name:
Address: Q o X5 rt..- L(n Z
Phone#:
PROJECT: �L R /� '1
Name: 1'L a4,j,C,,,, C-O& 4a \
Address: b o l 1-14AJ- jk*ttr,- S� t6 l
Phone #: Q U- LH:)g
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply):
❑ Conditional Use ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Conceptual Historic Devt.
❑ Special Review ❑ Final PUD(&PUD Amendment) ❑ Final Historic Development
❑ Design Review Appeal ❑ Conceptual SPA ® Minor Historic Devt.
❑ GMQS Allotment ❑ Final SPA(&SPA Amendment) ❑ Historic Demolition
❑ GMQS Exemption ❑ Subdivision ❑ Historic Designation
❑ ESA-8040 Greenline, Stream ❑ Subdivision Exemption(includes ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/
Margin,Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion
Mountain View Plane
❑ Lot Split ❑ Temporary Use Other: wj h S#4 S
❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Text/Map Amendment
EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description oo^f''existin buildings,uses,previous approvals, etc.)
, -c `4 4- 7(
PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings,uses,modifications,etc.)
slc *44-lu
H e you attached the following? FEES Dm s. 3 tq 0
[ Pre-Application Conference Summary
[� Attachment#1, Signed Fee Agreement
❑ Response to Attachment 43,Dimensional Requirements Form
Y Response to Attachment#4, Submittal Requirements-Including Written Responses to Review Standards
ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES, INC.
P.O. BOX 3613
ASPEN, COLORADO 81612
970-920-1125
k
4
April 14, 2014 APR 16 2014
Ms. Sara Adams, Senior Planner
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: APPLICATION FOR MASS AND SCALE REVIEW AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN
STANDARDS REVIEW FOR 601 WEST HALLAM STREET
Dear Sara,
Please consider this letter and the accompanying materials to be an application for mass
and scale review and residential design standards review for the property located at 601
West Hallam Street. The property is legally described as Lots H and I, Block 23, City and
Townsite of Aspen. It consists of approximately 6,000 sq. ft. of land that is zoned R-6.
The property is NOT a designated Historic Landmark nor is it located within any of the
City's designated Historic Districts. The property's Parcel ID # is 273512431002.
This application is being submitted by the property owner, 601 West Hallam LLC,
managed by Steve Whipple (hereinafter, "the applicant"). Proof of the ownership of the
property is provided by Exhibit #1, the recently-acquired deed to the property.
Authorization for Alan Richman Planning Services to represent the owner for this
application is provided in a letter attached as Exhibit#2.
We held several pre-application meetings with you prior to the submission of this
application. You issued a Pre-Application Conference Summary (attached as Exhibit #3)
in which you confirmed that the application is subject to the following review procedures:
♦ Mass and Scale Review, pursuant to the provisions of a Covenant imposed on the
property by a prior owner; and
♦ Residential Design Standards Review, pursuant to Section 26.412 of the Land
Use Code.
The applicant's responses to the review standards for these procedures follow below.
First some background information, setting the context for those responses, is presented.
Ms. Sara Adams
April 14, 2014
Page Two
Background
On July 10, 1991, HPC adopted Resolution No. 5, Series of 1991. This resolution
removed 601 West Hallam Street from Aspen's Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and
Structures. (see Exhibit #4). The adoption of Resolution No. 5 was the culmination of a
lengthy series of meetings between the then-owner (George Vicenzi) and the City
regarding the historic integrity of the house on the subject property and whether it should
remain on the Inventory. HPC made findings in the Resolution stating that it was
appropriate to remove this site from the Inventory because the structure was not original to
the site and because the structure no longer retained the historic integrity necessary for it
to be considered to be a significant historic resource.
Letters from the then-owner to the City found in the property file state that the house had
been moved to its present site in 1960 and that Mr. Vicenzi had added certain Victorian
features to the house in 1970. Mr. Vicenzi had also received a demolition permit for the
house 2 years earlier (in 1989) and had begun the demolition process. However, he
agreed to delay the completion of the demolition for a period of time, to allow the City the
opportunity to try to relocate the structure to another site. Those relocation efforts did not
prove to be successful. However, Mr. Vicenzi was willing to give the City the opportunity
to pursue relocation of the structure at a later date in return for having the structure
removed from the Inventory. Therefore, he entered into a Covenant (see Exhibit #5) that
placed the following burdens on the subject property:
1. The Covenant granted to the HPC "The binding right to review and approve any
new development of the Property with respect to mass, which shall mean that any new
building will be designed so that it is not one big uninterrupted box structure and will use
appropriately pitched roof forms for residential buildings as opposed to flat roofs".
2. The Covenant also granted to the HPC "The binding right to review and approve
the scale of any future development on the Property. Scale shall mean that window and
door dimensions and building scale shall be consistent with the scale of other buildings on
the block."
The Covenant went on to state that "Such review-of mass and scale...shall not be allowed
to reduce the floor area ratio and height for the building as otherwise allowed by the
applicable zoning at the time of the building permit application."
3. Mr. Vicenzi also agreed to use his best efforts to retain those trees on the subject
parcel that shield it from view from the Wheeler-Stallard House (located immediately to the
west of the subject property). Please note that there are no such trees on the property
today (the major trees are along Fifth Street and on the Wheeler-Stallard House property).
Ms. Sara Adams
April 14, 2014
Page Three
4. Mr. Vicenzi also agreed to "Provide reasonable advance notice to the HPC of his
plans to demolish the existing structure so as to allow for a possible relocation of the
structure. Any inability to relocate the structure shall not prevent or forestall demolition at a
time deemed appropriate by the Owner."
5. Finally, the Covenant stated that if the property should ever be placed back onto
the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or if the property should ever be made
subject to any HPC review process that is more restrictive than the terms of the Covenant,
then the Covenant would become null and void.
In 2009 a different applicant requested mass and scale review for a proposed new house
on the subject property. That applicant also requested certain residential design standards
variances for the proposed house. Staff supported the proposal and HPC granted the
requests pursuant to Resolution No. 8, Series of 2008 (see Exhibit #6). The approved
house was never built and the older house remains in place today.
Applicant's Proposal
The Applicant has recently completed the purchase of the property and wishes to re-
develop it with a new residence. Therefore, pursuant to the terms of the Covenant, the
Applicant hereby informs HPC of his intent to demolish the existing structure. The
Applicant will accommodate any efforts by HPC to relocate the structure prior to the
planned demolition, which is anticipated to occur following completion of this HPC review.
The Applicant proposes to build a new residence on the property, as shown on the
attached site plan, elevations, floor plans and renderings. The residence would be a two
story contemporary design, with building elements that have been purposefully chosen to
ensure its compatibility with neighboring structures. These include a series of peaked roof
forms with 12:12 pitches that are consistent with those of surrounding Victorian structures,
decks to break up the mass of the structure and a variety of human scale window
treatments. The primary exterior building material will be wood siding and the roof will be
made of treated wood shake shingles. The house will also have a prominent masonry
chimney.
The house will have a floor area of approximately 3,240 square feet, which is the
maximum allowable floor area for a 6,000 square foot lot in the R-6 zone district. The
height of the residence will be 22' 9" as measured to the one-third point of the roof. This is
more than 2' below the 25' maximum height allowed in the zone district. The house has
been situated to comply with all applicable zoning setbacks.
There are several key factors that helped to direct the site plan for the property, as follows:
Ms. Sara Adams
April 14, 2014
Page Four
1. There are some mature cottonwood trees along Fifth Street, some of which are in
the right-of-way but some of which are on this property. The applicant wishes to preserve
these trees. Following a meeting with the City Forester the house was moved away from
Fifth Street to accommodate the drip line of these trees.
2. The alley in this block was vacated and does not exist to provide access.
Therefore, the applicant had to choose between using Fifth Street or Hallam Street for the
garage location. During a pre-application meeting the Engineering Department stated its
preference for providing access via Hallam because Fifth is a major north/south access
street, whereas Hallam dead-ends 2 blocks west of the site. Having the garage on Hallam
will limit the number of vehicle conflicts that will occur when a car is backing out of the
driveway. In addition, there is a ditch along Fifth Street that the applicant has chosen to
leave in its historic state, since crossing it can cause unnecessary impacts on the ditch.
Furthermore, many other properties along Hallam have taken their access from Hallam
Street, including the Historic Society next door. The applicant therefore decided to follow
the staff direction and placed the garage on Hallam Street.
Mass and Scale Review
As explained above, the Covenant grants to HPC the right to review and approve any new
development on the property with regard to mass and scale. Following are the mass and
scale standards stated in the Covenant, and the applicant's responses to those standards
1. Mass shall mean that any new building will be designed so that it is not one big
uninterrupted box structure and will use appropriately pitched roof forms for residential
buildings as opposed to flat roofs.
Response: The elevations and renderings demonstrate that the proposed residence will
in no way resemble an "uninterrupted box structure". It has been broken up into smaller
masses through the use of appropriately pitched roof forms that break the overall mass
into a series of smaller modules. The design also utilizes a one-story linking element, and
several decks to break up the mass, and does NOT include flat roof forms.
2. Scale shall mean that window and door dimensions and building scale shall be
consistent with the scale of other buildings on the block.
Response: A photo-montage has been prepared (Exhibit #7) which shows that the
surrounding buildings range in scale from relatively smaller to relatively larger residential
buildings. The proposed residence falls well within the mid-range of this building scale.
The residence will have human-scale window and door treatments that comply with the
dimensions of the City's residential design standards. As noted above, the maximum
height of the building is 22' 9", which is more than 2' less than allowed in the zone district.
Ms. Sara Adams
April 14, 2014
Page Five
Residential Design Standards Review
The applicant has reviewed the residential design standards and prepared the following
responses to those standards.
A. Site Design
1. Building Orientation.
Response: The street facing facades of the proposed building are parallel to each of the
respective streets.
2. Build To Lines.
Response: The fagade along West Hallam Street is the frontage with the longest block
length. The minimum front yard setback in the R-6 zone district is 10'. More than 60% of
this fagade is within 5' of the minimum setback line.
3. Fences.
Response: The applicant will comply with the fence and landscaping standards
established in this section of the Code.
B. Building Form
1. Secondary Mass
Response: The applicant has provided a subordinate linking element that complies with
the dimensional standards of this section. This element is most clearly represented on the
west building elevation.
C. Parkinq, Garages and Carports
Response: This property does not have access from an alley or private road so the
design standards permit the garage to have access from the public street. As explained
above, the applicant has located the garage along Hallam Street for the following reasons:
• Fifth Street is a major north/south access street, whereas Hallam Street dead-ends
2 blocks west of the site. Having the garage on Hallam Street will limit the number
of vehicle conflicts that will occur when a car is backing out of the driveway. It
would also eliminate impacts on the ditch that would come from vehicles crossing
that water body.
Ms. Sara Adams
April 14, 2014
Page Six
• Many other properties along Hallam Street have taken their access from that street,
including the Historic Society next door, whose garage faces Hallam Street.
• The City Engineering Department prefers to have the garage along Hallam Street.
Following are the applicant's responses to the design standards for a residential use that
has access only from a public street:
(a) The width of the living area along Hallam Street is proposed to be less than, not
greater than, the width of the garage. This is due to the fact that the building has been
pulled away from the very large cottonwood tree near the corner, leaving not enough lot
width for the living area to be wider than the garage area. Therefore, the applicant
requests a variance from this standard.
(b) The front fagade of the garage is not proposed to be set back by more than 10'
from the front-most wall of the house. Therefore the applicant also requests a variance
from this standard.
(c) The lot is not greater than 15,000 sq. ft. so this standard does not apply.
(d) The floor of the garage is approximately at street level so the design complies with
this standard.
(e) The entrance to the garage will be less than 24' in width.
(f) The garage door will be two single- stall doors.
D. Building Elements
1. Street Oriented Entrance and Principal Window
Response: According to this Code section, the street-oriented entrance and principal
window should face Hallam Street, since it has the greater block length. The applicant
requests a variance from the technical requirements of this standard so the entry porch
and principal windows may face Fifth Street rather than West Hallam Street. Doing so will
allow the entry to be better integrated with the design of the house. More importantly,
since Fifth Street is the more heavily travelled street (Hallam Street is a dead end at
Seventh Street), having the entrance on this fagade is also the preferred design approach
from the pedestrian's point of view.
This point is reinforced by Exhibit#8, which is a neighborhood vicinity map that focuses on
Fifth Street and Sixth Street, from Main Street all the way north to Gillespie Street.
Ms. Sara Adams
April 14, 2014
Page Seven
The map identifies which of the houses along these two streets have a front door that
faces a north/south street, rather than an east/west street. It shows that 13 of the 21
houses along Fifth Street (including the existing house on the subject property) have a
front door facing Fifth Street while 11 out of 17 on Sixth Street have a front door facing
Sixth Street. This information demonstrates that this is the prevailing front-door orientation
for residences along these two north/south streets, reinforcing the applicant's decision to
place the front door for this residence along Fifth Street.
Following are the applicant's responses to the standards of this sub-section.
(a) The entry door is proposed to face Fifth Street. It is set back less than 10' from the
front most wall of the building. It is less than 8' tall.
(b) The design includes a covered porch that is more than 50 square feet in size and is
at least 6' deep. The covered porch is a one story element.
(c) There are significant windows planned that will face both Fifth Street and West
Hallam Street.
2. First Story Element.
Response: The porch is a first story element that comprises more than 20% of the
building's overall width and has a minimum depth in excess of 6'.
3. Windows
Response: Following are the applicant's responses to the window standards:
(a) The street facing windows do not span above the 9' to 12' range on either fagade of
the building. There are transom windows above the door in the 9' to 12' zone, but those
are explicitly permitted by this standard.
(b) The applicant does not propose to have any non-orthogonal windows on either
street facing fagade.
4. Lightwells
Response: No lightwells are planned that would be forward of the front most wall of the
residence.
Ms. Sara Adams
April 14, 2014
Page Eight
E. Context
1. Materials
Response: Following are the applicant's responses to the materials standards:
(a) Exterior materials and details will be consistently applied on all sides of the building.
(b) Materials will be used in ways that are true to their characteristics. Light or non-
bearing materials will not be used below heavy materials.
(c) Highly reflective materials will not be used on the exterior. Any reflective metals
that are applied to the exterior will be treated to reduce or eliminate reflectivity.
2. Inflection
Response: The adjacent building (the carriage house on the Wheeler-Stallard House
property, which is actually more than 30' from this lot and so not truly "adjacent") is not a
one story building. Therefore, this standard does not apply to this property.
Conclusion
I believe that this letter and the attached exhibits and drawings provide the information you
need to process this application and demonstrate that the proposal complies with the
standards applicable to this project. We look forward to having this application scheduled
for review by the HPC as soon as possible. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you
find there is anything else you require.
Very truly yours,
ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES, INC.
s
Alan Richman, AICP
EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT #1
RECEPTION#:609089,04/02/2014 at
01:14:36 PM,
1 OF s, R $21,00 OF S388,00 Doc Code
WD
Documentary Fee$388,00 Janice K.Vos Caudill,Pitidn county,CO
WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED,made April 2,2014,
Between DAVID NEWBERGER
of the County of TYr',r'11I ':State of TEMS,GRANTOR,
AND 601 W.HALLAM,LLG,GRANTEE
whose legal address is 121 SOUTH GALENA STREET,#203,ASPEN,CO 61611
of the County of PIT IUN,State of COLORADO
WITNESSETH,That for and in cordon of the sum of ten dollars and other good and vatuabte
consideration,the receipt and sutliciency of which is hereby,acknuaoledged,the grantor has granted,
bargained,sold and conveyed,and by these presents does grant,bargain,sell and convey and confirm
unto the grantee,its heirs and assigns forever,all the real property together with improvements,if any,
situate and lying and being In the County of PITKIN,State of COLORADO,described as follows:
Lots H and i,
Block 23,
CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
TOGETHER with all and singular the herwditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging,or in anywise
appertaining,and the reversion and reversiom,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;its heirs and
assigns forever And the Grantor,for himself,his heirs and assigns,does covenant grant bargain,and
agree to and with the Grantee,its heirs and assigns,that at the tme of the ensealing and delivery of these
presents:he its well seized of the premises above conveyed,has good,sure,perfect,absolute and
indefeasible estate of inheritance,In taw,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 alt former and other grants,bargains,sales,liens.taxes,assessments,encumbrances and
restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever,except those maths as set forth on Exhibit"K attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference.The grantor shag and will WARRANT AND FOREVER.
DEFEND the above bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grante%its heirs
and assigns,against all and every person or persons kmfutty claiming the whole or any part thereof.The
singular number shall include the plural,the plural the singular,and the use of gender shall be applicable
to all genders.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the grantor has executed this deed.
CITY OF ASPaj SIGNATURES ON PAGE 2
DA-,:E'0MET RAM =y ASPEtl
No. HRETr PAID
SIGNATURE PAGE TO WARRANTY DEED
PAGE 2
J
DAVID NEWBERGER
CANT ALIEN WRCHGAROT
K�Otwy PLC)ir-stwe of Texas
w pOw
STATE OF jorwary Coffimisoon 04,201Ex 7
COUNTY OF ss
OA
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2014,
by DAVID NEWBERGER.
A
WITNESS my hand and official seat
my commission expires: N*�tPub�
PCT23949W6
............. ..........
EXHIBIT`A"
I- Taxes for the year'20'14,and subsequent years,not yet due or payable'
2- Resemations and exoeptions as set forth in the Deed from the CIty of Aspen M=ded in Book 79 at Page 53
providing as follows:-That no title$hall be hereby acquired 10 any mine of gold,shver,cinnabar or copper or to any
valia mining claim Or Possession held under existing kms-.
3. Terms,conditions,provWons and obligations as set forth in Covenant Burdening Real Property recorded August
'14,1991 in Book 654 at Page 65,
4. Terms,conditions,provisions and obligations as set forth in Resolution No.8,Serless of 2009 recorded March 26,
2009 as Reception No.557533
............... ....... ................................. ...... ........... ..................... ............................
EXHIBIT#2
Ms. Sara Adams, Senior Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611 - - - - - - - -
RE: LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION FOR HPC APPLICATION FOR 601 WEST
HALLAM STREET
Dear Ms. Adams,
We are the owners of the property located at 601 West Hallam Street. I hereby authorize
Alan Richman Planning Services to submit an application for mass and scale review and
residential design standards review for a new residence on the property. Mr. Richman is
authorized to submit said application on our behalf and to represent us in meetings with
City of Aspen staff and the Historic Preservation Commission concerning said application.
Should you have any need to contact us during the course of your review of this
application please do so through Alan Richman Planning Services or you may contact us
directly at the address or phone number listed below.
Sincerely,
Geo'ge S kvh#i e
Steve Whipple, Manager
601 West Hallam LLC
EXHIBIT #3
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PLANNER: Sara Adams, 970.429.2778 DATE: 4.1.14
PROJECT: 601 W. Hallam Street
REPRESENTATIVE: Alan Richman Planning
DESCRIPTION: The subject parcel is 6,000 square feet in size and contains a single
family home which is proposed to be replaced. The existing home is a
Victorian era structure. Because it has been so heavily altered,
preservation is not required, but HPC Resolution #5, Series of 1991
mandates that HPC shall have conceptual level design review authority
over new construction.
Kit Development on the site is subject to the dimensional requirements of the
CJ vj ku R-6 zone district, the Residential Design Standards and the Historic
� `� Preservation Design guidelines (particularly Chapters 1, 11 and 14. The
0 it applicant is advised to consult with the Parks Department at an early date
UJ
regarding tree preservation requirements. The property currently does not
ac include any on-site parking and the Engineering Department will need to
review any proposed new curb cut or re-opening of the portion of public
right-of-way (alley) that appears to be available to access a new garage.
On-site parking is not technically required because none exists now.
Affordable housing mitigation is required for the new house.
If any variances to the Residential Design Standards are necessary, HPC
can review the request.
Relevant Land Use Code Section(s): 26.304 Common Development Review
Procedures
26.410 Residential Design Standards
26.415.070.D Major Development (Conceptual only)
26.515 Off-Street Parking
26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements
26.710.040 R-6 Zone District
Review by: Staff for completeness, HPC for review
Public Hearing: Yes, at HPC.
Referral Agencies: None.
Planning Fees: $1,950 for 6 billable hours (additional or less billable hours are at $245
per hour)
Referral Agency Fees: $975 Parks, $265/hour for Engineering
Total Deposit: $3,190.
• Proof of ownership with payment.
• Signed fee agreement.
• Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which
states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on
behalf of the applicant.
• 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.
• Total deposit for review of the application.
• 10 Copies of the complete application packet and maps.
• An 8 1/2" by 11" vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
• Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status,
including all easements and vacated rights of way, of the parcel certified by a registered land
surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. (This requirement, or any part thereof, may be
waived by the Community Development Department if the project is determined not to warrant
a survey document.)
• 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.
• Please include existing conditions as well as proposed. List of adjacent property owners within
300' for public hearing
• Copies of prior approvals.
• Applicants are advised that building plans will be required to meet the International Building
Code as adopted by the City of Aspen, the Federal Fair Housing Act, and CRS 9.5.112.
Please make sure that your application submittal addresses these building-related and
accessibility regulations. You may contact the Building Department at 920-5090 for additional
information.
Disclaimer:
The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is
based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations
that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right.
EXHIBIT#4
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
RESOLUTION NO. 5
(SERIES OF 1991)
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE DELET-
ING THE STRUCTURE AT 601 WEST HALLAM FROM THE INVENTORY OF
HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES .
WHEREAS, George Vicenzi ("applicant") , owner of the premises
at 601 West Hallam, Aspen, Colorado, has submitted a petition to
the Historic Preservation Committee seeking deletion of the
structure situated thereon from the Inventory of Historic Sites
and Structures; and
WHEREAS, public hearings on the deletion petition were duly-
noticed and conducted on May 8 and June 26, 1991, before the
Historic Preservation Committee; and
WHEREAS, based upon the facts and circumstances presented
before the Historic Preservation Committee it has been determined
that: (1) the structure under consideration is not original to
the site; (2) that only a minor portion of the subject structure
retains historic significance; (3) that partial demolition of the
subject structure pursuant to a previously issued demolition
permit has resulted in the removal or destruction of previously
existing historic materials and/or features associated with the
structure; and
WHEREAS , the Historic Preservation Committee finds that the
structure at 601 West Hallam no longer has historic value; and
WHEREAS , the applicant has voluntarily offered to execute a
covenant burdening his parcel so as to allow the Historic Preser
vation Committee to exercise mandatory review of any future
redevelopment on the subject parcel in terms of mass and scale;
and
WHEREAS , the applicant has further voluntarily offered to
utilize his best efforts to retain existing trees on the subject
parcel in the event of future redevelopment and to execute an
appropriate covenant reflecting same; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has voluntarily offered to provide
the Historic Preservation Committee with advance notification of
any future plans to demolish the subject structure and to under-
take certain repairs thereof in the near future.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMITTEE FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS :
1. The structure at 601 West Hallam, Aspen, Colorado, be
and is hereby deleted from the Inventory of Historic Sites and
Structures subject to the following conditions :
a. The applicant shall execute and record with the
Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within ninety (90) days of the
date of this Resolution a deed restriction in a form satisfactory
to the City Attorney burdening the property at 601 West Hallam as
follows:
i. The Historic Preservation Committee shall
have binding review and approval authority
over redevelopment on the subject parcel in
terms of mass and scale. For purposes of
2
I i
review, "mass" shall mean that any future
structure shall be designed to avoid an "un-
interrupted box-type structure" and will use
appropriately pitched roof forms for residen-
tial buildings as opposed to flat roofs.
"Scale" shall mean that window and door di-
mensions and building scale shall be consis-
tent with the scale of other buildings on the
block. Such review of mass and scale shall
not be allowed to reduce floor area ratio and
height for the building as otherwise allowed
by the applicable zoning at the time of the
building permit application.
ii . The applicant will use his best efforts to
retain to the extent possible all existing
trees situated on the subject parcel that
shield it from the Wheeler-Stallard House.
The applicant shall provide reasonable ad-
vance notice to the Historic Preservation
Committee of his plans to demolish the exist-
ing structure so as to allow for a possible
relocation of the structure. Any inability
to relocate the structure shall not prevent
or forestall demolition at a time deemed
appropriate by the applicant.
3
b. That the applicant shall place the original siding
back on the structure and install a double-hung window in place
of -the -remaved bay window within one-hundred twenty (120) days
from the date of this Resolution.
2 . The Historic Preservation Committee finds that the
removal of the 601 West Hallam Street from the Inventory of
Historic Sites and Structures is based solely on facts and
circumstances unique to the case before it and that the decision
to delete the structure as provided for herein shall have no
precedential value or effect in regard to any future petition to
remove a structure from the inventory.
RESOLVED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this () day of
1991.
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMITTEE
By:
Ch irpersof
ATTEST:
Secre ary
jc72 . 1
4
-` EXHIBIT#5
4335494 09/14/91•i2106 nor. 416100 8K 6" PA 65 i
611,via RAViu, Pitkin Cnty Ciurk, Doc 4.00
I..
HUFl4�{HINQ RZATj PROPERTY
George Vicenui being the fee aimple owner (hereinafter tt
referred to as the "Ownext') of the certain zeal property situate
In the City of Aspen, county of Pitkin, $tats of Colorados Lots
H and Y, block 23, City of Townsite of Aspen, pitkin County, sit
'Colorado also known as 601 Hest Hallam (the npiooperty"), and#
wHmm, cold Property was placed on the inventory of
1.
T,
Historic sites and 9truatures of the Historic Praaervation
r.*
+ Coelmittea of the City of Aspen ("HPC"), and, ,
ct
HHRAEAS, owner tiled an Application. with the NPC to ,ir' +'
' rer�ave the 'property from the Inventory' of Historic Sites '404
structures, and, .� s
_ R
µ�
HHRRSA9, on June 26, 19911 the HFC approved the Owner is .•
1
Application 'w permanently remove 601 Host Hallam from, the t
Inventory of Historic Slues and StrUetures, and,
: .tip•.
NHRREAB, Owner has voluntarily agreed to grant to the HPO
certain limited but binding powers of review with reapeot to the +
future development of the Property. 1'
NOW, THEREFORE, owner hereby declares as follOWBIJI
1. The Owner grants to the City' of Aspen through its, t,
Historio Preaorvation Committoo,("HBC"), the binding right" to review + {
and approve any now development of the property with respect to r
awes which shall fnean that any new building will ba designed so
i
that it is not one big uniilterrupt d box atruoture 'and will .uso p' .
appropriately pitched root forms ; or residential buildings as
�E opposed to flat roots.
,s uxv.t s:';.,.R:si.a�s�ih4a I tsr,Ig IS 'P'tN:}C,f. IM+n.€,:�i'!�i'i�•{1,s::.?.r•.'r e•>:F I#41-N.
k
1 1 /J .. :'•F.;In{tl,
}2^'_—.:1aL...-..^, __.�_�`_s �:1'�:.ila:ct:•..,�i .t: 1. ,as:lr•!•�tr+S�2 -j
i%!.•t•=t. ' , •1 A/f 17WUTil' '47d V. .. 4•.. *fl= :" , V S,
9-35494 08/14191 Ikjos Rec 415,00 5K 494 Pd 66
Silvia Aavls, Pithin Cnty Giertc, Doc 4.40
i
2. The owner grants to the Hpe the binding right to I
review and approve the scale of any future development on the ?
property. Scale shall mean that window and door dimensions and
building scale shall be uonaistent with the aaaY,a of other .,
buildings on the block.
3. Such review Of WN5 and scale as set forth above
shall not be allowed to reduce the floor area ratio and height for
the building as otherwise allowed by the applicable zoning at the `,� ),•
time of the building applioation. `tt
4. The owner agrees to use his best efforts with tilff
xeltpact to future development of the Property to retain all
existing trese situated on the subject parcel that shield it from
r
the pheeler••8tallaxd House. ' !
s. 'the Owner shall prbvide reasonable advance notice t
to the HVC of his plans to demolish the existing structure so as �(
to allow for a possible relocation of the atructure. Any inability
to relocate the structure shall not prevent or forestall oa%olition 1y
at a ttae deemed appropriate by the Owner.
6. This Covenant surdaning Real Property shall be a
covenant running with the Property and n burden and benefit k .
thereto, binding upon the Owner, hilt successors, Brat+tees and e• ; =*
agsigns iii and to the Property. Erovided, however, if the property �•
is ever relisted by the HPC or any other governmental entity on i .i
the inventory of Historio sites and structures, or if the Property ..`
ever becomes subject to any HPC >t•eviaw, which in more restrictive
than the review sat forth hereitk, this covenant surdenxng Real I1�:
Property shall be null and void and the Owner and his gucceaeo;rs �o
€ . 1
P
I
.I
i '
{`r '•� Y•r s, �• •S�• F'r• �.f{ v'Md '� �f'r •t(�•�: yy�1l"^ '; •` {, f •,f,.r.,f et
8333494'08/14/91 12103 Ree 113,00 SK W PR bT '
. " ' � etivta aavlts, Filkin enty C1:rk';'Ddci'•t.oO � ,
t
in interest shall not be bound by any of' the covenants contained
herein.
DATED thin 14th day of August, 1991.
4 oa rge V c a 4
Owner in flee Simple +
STATE OF COWRADO ) t
)) at; a I
COUNTY aF 1?ITXTN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before mo on `�R• ••
Ehin 14th of August, 1991 by Oeorle Vicenvi,
HITHE9S my hand and official seal. a
My commission expirear 04/19/95 f�
No WbIla
MARY OLAYMMER
Ca
1
i VM11,�I J i-ij� •ria
t ,
11 r
4,' • fv
'+•A�iMicil.'Ip1e+.IYi1�jj� $,1d"111tRNFx.a,rv.a. y4�a.:l�NilJ:yy4`.i��.455� S ;'' ' '•
',•r '�:, •,.y�4t�..{.. .�yy:,i,•'''•, .,{, ..' •ii.:J." "' "'�:il�:`• .. ,i �•r/\2.t.!i�5:�}!1 fr
, j. .. ;rl>i .r ii`iA'.. -�Ytii e's,iF`;i•:� '�•'{'YitY i�j-r - ..Lt::}a:::f.� �ti�{�I •6 4 1
��a„.•�'•,:.:'=-•�•fart'�(��r�:rY.,�t�f>.}: .5:iti-;;nr!%• i,`'it•1"7i#d:•;rr �f.���a l�1":..�.�,i: � ,.i�ti5�� '�514. I
�ikYSSii..:LG�,•4i:y' .t:'ti{rStdl{r.34.1-L�._.�.w�i,.�: .:�yj,y'':i'� '.�i:i' �LSanii4r•�r�'�•.�'EtILt�:3ii:�.�:i�atl�� �.,�
ri¢hthttnrlrul.rrul,:!!�/!� r- --ii dayOf.' i. is the ye—of our 14rdOw Abossand
the Carnty of Pitkin,in.tTu&Wa of Colorado,(Awl sctcc�ssor rh n ` aer Corwsty and Probate drudge of .
the ftnt part.,and �- �. !'� , :ry e uf.). W.!)eruee. G°ouaLy rtruL Prubafe Ju+tga ofaa<! 1'itleiA Caunt as pwLy
y of +I
of tfac Cou^0d of Pitkan 44a Stone of Cotarada,partr,I of the secu),d pr rt. I
WYTtr'ESSP-Tg-THAT WHEREAS, tsnrler the Prorrisiaas of fl r-da ar .on t 1
toaorrs upon the prcbU4 la d$,"a .' �ess.eatitlyd .Brr act for tTu relief of>lza tnbmbitants of oidiaa.Nara? 1
ppraraf�Etetrefr ',Ififi7,-T. ii' 7)eanr,rtx Coursht and Probate Jese..;¢e of said Ptt&I.rsCountg,ire,fha5tate aOf d 4W ld,did '
make a toranaate cash eretrt/ure+Ie;r date of Jtr►cc Z8SI,in the L'nittr;3taG I.nrul/l,�iee at LercdviLle•CaT.�rado,for the Itcrut described as flea do did
site erf-Aspen;se:irl entry bei40 marl0 in trust.far Lk.,srr sra 7 use aAd b,-r q*0f the O'• nts o f said tow"te� }to thr it reapaotive rtjhts esad f
interests thereiao TGkicla srticy entry tons.bfj orrlrx uj t3u Cumnr issioner of the Csenrrrcl 7.arvl € r
Z.A 138.7,suspended and,a the 4r d, OW of the Unfted Stake,made all the 19th.clay of July- j
ay of ff4X d-A 1814,by*ad Com ruts 4n4,.hcld for careodlratioa_
AND WHEREAS,on Late JBtly drvJ'of July„9.D.188/.the klanordle� o t �
ezllozaed said enAerj to be made. J f lu Ircteaior of the Unitut Sienna,by any order of that date.
ANO the said J. IY DReane th_,TJY&and Probe Ee JucZ a o,by e P do cZ,bonnier„ da&of J"arrls$.rL A 24IS5i,jfiv4 frmt and mmovy uxie
> f raaarid,is trash a$afa'csaid,and to ha arooeew”and as ixt in gust era aforesaid,tip said
!! treat above dwribed,to have and to h4U i7se same,foddlier zozrh etll the rights
i unto bdongirag M Lo the Said rl;�Dw^eR �'�i190w,£nZ71sKndW and appu Texan vt of L%G V&,rxa*Am&wr
1 CounLy.�rub Probecte Jurl�a era ajonsaxd,in treat rar aforesaid.and to his steoawora and rsssFus in Grs as
afonauud.
Alin WHEREASy by ran act of the taseaeral-4_cm bly of tJze State of Colorado,entitled '.&a ad to rovide or the I
proceeds of saZa M townsites e-aazd upon public lands.°' y f s f d.isparal of town Iota mxcl the
said, the deeds apPnivaL the 1c:day o Mae d.D.18S�T it is provided tha wh m land is er tenrd as of on,
-210f lee_ sTucleL be sif by the County rend Probate Ja &or his sucaesaor in ofTice, aster hza primates seal. ,Aneri mheraoM t7ks said
AND WHEREAS,
it appears . .. .i.,,,//��'' :.�, r°f�said J.W.Dleane as Carenty and Frobatt Jrrd�es of Pdtk¢ir Corrasty.
....... --_ -... .... ................._.. -- ... ._,. _..--..
ZesadL3r eatitlo l to Loth bTocTcs and pea ce7s of$round 7.ereiaea •....
1` a scrc�rdess the riglijw ocoapand thereof axd is entitled tota►a '-_._.._._-.
peasexston of tarn rend oaxrrJ ofsayidy�Tots� `dak of•k++d. oe° "�
1 IiOW,THEREFORE.I._L!4':.aYc. ai
�----------------------_--------county 11714 AF5VAaS9
tTre:rsabe+aor F(
' � in esompLiaaaoa rurth.tJte lama of the Statte C of Pit7cin.Coreedbt,•h►f7sa State o1`G�ioe+ado,
Of olorad and by virtue of Sw premimra' ared being W-
-We Judge a'a aforesm4 aria leis atceees9aor in m nsidwation of the cn°�of r.�'DW01e'county and Ps p-
pmmiaas and the=m of!$`_.ti-��{'.� .�D �> ;;;5
------
nw wed.ham fronAW,
LarofrelmorreyofdicellnitedStates,tomainshand
paid bythesaid party aftlic�rtiZprrrL�tJeerae�eiptsohartofix 7aarrb3lar�le
bargaimed,sold and conveyed,sad by these prments doImAt,bargairy,aelZ and conftrra tcasto t7seeucicL pang gf the seoored party esLi Sties fniioasise�
j cTxserz7>rd Zats,bloeka and partrZs of Lrsrtd.situate, Lyin'f ana beirsg in{tapes Iaronsitt and City of .Aspen. in the L'oxnty of PLllater dnd filets of 1
Colorado,to Wit,
�••`�•r�i'/7�C6. �.L,?, ✓ f75'?.i J/di6 /Gytlrls�lf� Q/��e ss!,
r..��-r:.4!`�/,l 6 r»'�c i"dP�ln�:.g' � ��,,,.�f�/I.>'�T-a••,,,!s%�/,d,�l�..C��C:'. 4 ��ZG �_'�G�'C• /' o f .,
f ; -�� � � .�/' � (/ - !ice.• Gl�-�`as�! .mom.t��o ��
RECEPTIONI#: 557533.,, ,3/26/2009 at 09:53:22 .AM, 1 OF � R $16.00
Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO
EXHIBIT#6
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION{HPC)
APPROVING MASS AND SCALE AS DEFINED IN HPC RESOLUTION NUMBERED 5
SERIES OF 1991 AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES WITH
CONDITIONS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 601 WEST HALLAM STREET,
LOTS H AND I,BLOCK 23,CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO.8,SERIES OF 2009
PARCEL ID:2735.124,31,002.
WHEREAS, the applicant, David Newberger, 2905 San Gabrielle, Suite 218, Austin, TX,
78705,represented by Harry Teague, 129 Emma road,Suite A, Basalt, CO 81621 requests mass
and scale review, pursuant to HPC Resolution numbered 5, Series of 1991, and Residential
Design Standard Variances for the property located at 601 West Hallam Street, Lots H and I,
Block 23,City and Townsite of Aspen,Colorado;and
WHEREAS,HPC resolution numbered S,Series of 1991,grants HPC the authority to review the
mass and scale of new development on the subject property,defined as follows:
Mass: "any new building will be designed so that it is not one big uninterrupted box
structure and will use appropriately pitched roof forms for residential buildings as
opposed to flat roofs;"
Scale: "window and door dimensions and building scale shall be consistent with the scale
of other buildings on the block;"and
WHEREAS,HPC may approve,disapprove,approve with conditions or continue the application
to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny;and
WHERAS, for variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040, which
meet Section 26.430.020.13,the HPC shall find that the variance,if granted,would:
a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in
which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In
evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider
the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures,the immediate
neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board deems is necessary to
determine if the exception is warranted; or
b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints;
and
WHEREAS, Sara Adains, in her staff report dated March l Ith, 2009, performed an analysis of
the application based on the standards, found that the review standards for Residential Design
Standard variances were not met, and recommended HPC deny the requested variances; and
RECEPTION#: 557533,, 3/26/2009 at 09:53:22 AM, 2 OF
Janice K. Vos Caudill., Pitkin County, CO
found that the mass and scale met the intent of HPC Resolution numbered 5,Series of 1991 and
recommended approval with conditions;and
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on February. 11, 2009, the Historic Preservation
Commission considered the application, found the application was consistent with the review
standards for the Residential Design Standard variances, and was consistent with the intent of
HPC Resolution Numbered 5, Series of 1991 and approved the application with conditions by a
vote of to 2.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED.
That HPC hereby grants mass and scale approval, pursuant to HPC Resolution numbered 5,
Series of 1991, and grants approval for the requested Residential Design Standard variances for
the property located at 601 West Hallam Street, Lots H and I, Block 23, City and Townsite of
Aspen,Colorado,as proposed with the following conditions;
I. Accessible space above the one story element is approved.
2. The solar panels proposed above the linking element are approved.
3. A Residential Design Standard variance is granted for 26.410.010.13.1 Secondary Mass.
4. The following Residential Design Standards; 26.410.040.D.2 First story element,
26.410.040.D.I Street Oriented entrance and principal window, and 26.410.040.D.3.a
Windows are granted.
5. There shall be no deviations in scale'and mass,as defined in HPC Resolution Number 5,
Series of 1991, from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and
approved by HPC staff and monitor,or the full board.
6. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan
vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order.
However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this
approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise
exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be
recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development
order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the
development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits).
Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in
the creation of a vested property right.
No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews
necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City
Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the
jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen,a notice advising the general public
of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property
right pursuant to this Title.Such notice shall be substantially in the following form:
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific
development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of
.three (3)years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24,
RECEPTION#: 557533,:,..; /26/2009 at 09:53:22 ,AM., 3 OF
Janica K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO
A licle 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described
Property:601 West Hallam Street.
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent
reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations
and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are
not inconsistent with this approval.
The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and
judicial review; the period of time permitted bylaw for the exercise of such rights
shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final
development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A).' The rights of
referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the
Aspen Home Rule Charter,
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the Ilth day of Mar h
2009.
Michae offman,Chair
Approved as to Form:
AJ1mTrue,=C:i:!
ty Attorney
ATTEST:
AX�rJ4 4;�Iel/Ce/l.-,.�
Kathy Strlc an ,Chief Deputy Clerk
r
Jill
MAA
I - y
Fr
f/ .
0
0 O EXHIBIT#8 •
1
• '` �._,:M:._,. �_. Vii Gillet'p
•
5 r
•
• ftwabnivst �
0 82
•
4 1
• C _ Homes with Principal Entrances
• Facing N. Sth St./N. 6th St.
•
M
Z_
O
•
_ ♦ • • • S • • • • • S • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • �
HPC REVIEW
11 APRIL 2014
MAX BUILDING HEIGHT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
12:1z
TYP.
THIRD SPAN
Fn
1111111111,
WEST ELEVATION
601 W. HALLAM
ASPEN, COLORADO
HPC REVIEW
11 APRIL 2014
PROPERTY LINE
S 14 50'49"W 100.00' 2
Y p-�
W Q =
� �m
10" D �W
7"D
LL �ALL � I
t WI
M 9 D
N
o PATIO
EL
3.
i U
$t .
O .
t
J m` _. .
.. PATIO -= }}
DRIVE
-- i
/ .
. .
>, REAR SETBACK ..
W ... . . _.
y"�
.
t ROROSED t W
t _ll
.
::. .RESDEN.CE
Q . _ .
. .
0
v FRONT SETBACK
W ;�..+9..D .... .
1, D I v Q
t t
I - J
V a
O m
Q
\ 12" D
PORCH
I t Fi I, 5• I _ �--
t 10" D fro t I d1 U)
— — L7d-j o W Ln
1a°+2o^+10°+a°D
6" D Nom Z
® N WALK 33"D
40" D
OWL 0
N 14 50'49"E 100.00'
10"+11" D
EXISTING STREET
10" c 9"+10" D TREES / LIGHT
(TYPICAL)
15" D 9 D op
DITCH 12"D O
1 " = 10'
BACK OF CURB
SITE PLAN
NORTH FIFTH STREET 601 W. HALLAM
ASPEN, COLORADO
HPC REVIEW
11 APRIL 2014
MAX BUILDING HEIGHT
iznz
PITCH
TREATED
WOOD
SHAKES
THIRD SPAN
MASONRY
CHIMNEY
EF D
❑❑ �JL�
WOOD
SIDING
EAST E L EVAT I O N
oI 00
- o0 00
SOUTH ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION
601 W. HALLAM
ASPEN, COLORADO
HPC REVIEW
11 APRIL 2014
MASTER
BEDROOM
0 BED OOM II
L2 II
Li
AL - - - - - - -
II T =TE 11-- - - - - - - - II II
b- - - - - - - - - -
UPPER FLOOR PLAN
0
ivi = low
601 W. HALLAM
ASPEN, COLORADO
HPC REVIEW
11 APRIL 2014
WORK
i
OUT BEDROOM O
BEDROOM 5
3 Till
loo BEDROOM i
4 L
MECH
O
GAME RO M
FrUNDR
- - - - - - - - - -�
LOWER FLOOR PLAN
0
s
1 " = 10'
601 W. HALLAM
ASPEN, COLORADO
HPC REVIEW
11 APRIL 2014
- - El - - - -
i
DINING ITC E
GARAGE
COURT ---
FT-T1 L�A
,o•
LIVING FOYER LINK
❑ OFFICE
PORCH
MAIN FLOOR PLAN
A�
2
1 " = 10'
601 W. HALLAM
ASPEN, COLORADO
LIOIND AND N09'3B
D FOUND SURVEY PDNUNENT At OESCR 190
• CITY MONUMENT
POSTED ADDRESS,
• WATER VALVE
A SURVEY CONTROL
• MIT UTILITY POLE
❑ UTILITY Box
TITLE INFORMATION FURNISHED IVY:
1'•10' P,AI•Tk IN COUNPCTYYT TITLE. INC.
fo;lCri3 DATI JAI�IUARr IS,2014
0 10 20 7� K1R1NO!RASSD ON THE CITY MONUMENT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNEA OF RLOCX
U.S. SURVEY FOOT RNE C 29 AND TNG YELLOW 2376 AT TNG NORTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCK 17:N 75.09'11.7
17 SLANTED TEXT DENOTES HOUSE TO BOUNDARY DISTANCE
A L ■ CULVERT
174•,0' T CALLS IN 1 1 FROM 116 OFFICIAL"Al CITY OF ASPEN
R B PENCE
STREET LIGHT
W ML CK2IF � � SETTBACK$:10,86 VERIFIED BY ARCHITECT
AM ID. FRONT 10'
17276 /M 7,,0Y °AEON 10'
AL4,�.7f.P, i4x
7161 �t,B OF
RPAR„at
`
ALUM.
Y I
DECN/ TILL
ASPEN HISTORIC SOCIETY HOUSE 1 B7yr j N�Tr�tDaT
74/R / NORI2.CONTROL gg
R 1
W / 7�1k14.aro 1416
w f7CIp0UALRpYpGAYDOpR�'S CfGRT IFICATG pp 1�}Fi�ARy NNE
l I f 1°/ i='I • �[i ✓1� k BNOWN A r,.X �E Y R7IPY-,TO YE IS Y 7At At0'jyNID MMP UAMAf�A 1E7eprr
j� U0 T Y N FR AOCURA 0
�j SURYGr ppFF BY NG MINES NY DIRECT SUPERVISION IN JANUARY,
/ A e y • 2014.TM• 71ON' BUILDINOB IMIPROVEMENTS EASIMENTS RIIIHTS
r 1ktRC ! o ar ! N1E1 i0 'Oe{M Tx8 RpA`P ���A'���pEIE��� E
° TIII I MLF INC�MP � 16hA1u440
1'Y M 7N - Y I WAS IIS P A N OF
µL ION IS 1N07N OR M0f60
i�1 bir
y /
1
SGT R®
PLS 25947
1°
1 F 00.00•, d SHED /
ALL,e SPIKE 6.7410
8 L O °ARAM!OP
ACA TEp
T /
R I IMPROVEMENT SURVEY
OF
LOTS H AND I,
BLOCK 23.
CITY AND TOWNS ITE OF ASPEN
ASPEN HISTORIC SOCIETY iYOOFCopta,,,
CONTAINING,6.000 SO. FT. •,-
PREPARED BY
ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS. INC.
210 SOUTH GALENA STREET
�W 1,,xMx ASPEN. COLORADO 61611
p" 300 NIV pl T MA IB��{M1/N.I�IPHONE/FAX (9701 92S-3016
ulx 18PI . TMpP Tiles 2,14 37:22[°
.. - •. �.. ale
1 f
4
w�
- � A
i
I� - -
i
�-E T
I � -
EAST ELEVATION
LML
WEST ELEVATION
i
r ti
MiS't3a
rll-, 5,19 K
y
V
W.A. i
1 w
Pill
I.
i ..
� i
J i it
- "
■■ .. ` '� Ii
IL
NORTH ELEVATION
I i
_ k
IIII I�I� � - •_ 2y A S
III t� I} N
SOUTH EAST F -