The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.205 S Spring St.0014.2011.AHPC c THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0014.2011.AHPC PARCEL ID NUMBERS 2737 18 2 12 002 PROJECTS ADDRESS 205 S SPRING ST PLANNER AMY SIMON CASE DESCRIPTION CONCEPTUAL HPC DEVELOPMENT REPRESENTATIVE MITCH HAAS DATE OF FINAL ACTION 09/21/2011 CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 3.25.15 2T 37 - 1 6 -2- 12- do 2- go lL.� . 2o File Edit Record Mvig& F" RWft Format Tab Help Rain fic _utirg Status Fee£ Fee Sudnary Mations Attachments Routing History Valuation Arch(Eng Custom Fields Sub Permitr j Parcels j i�tYPe Address,205 S SPRING ST 0 Cly ASPEN 0 ♦ 611 ° Permit Information p Master permit Ra""A- Ap*JW n F z Project Stag- Approyed 0 " Desoiption Conceptual Historic Development,Historic Demolition,Conditional Use Issued N UosedfFinal® _, Submitted Mitch-925-7819 aA M Days■ Expires'n6,4012 Submitted via Owner Last name ILLS Fist name Phone_ Address Applicant ©Owner is applicant? Q Contactor is applicant? Last name HILLS First name I Phone-Cush 25322 Address Lender Last name Fist name Phone O Address I Displays Bre perm ler&s akess F 2 g Lto C7 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL), RELOCATION, DEMOLITION AND VARIANCES APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 205 S. SPRING STREET, LOTS H & I, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO RESOLUTION #8, SERIES OF 2011 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-002 WHEREAS, the applicant, 635 E. Hopkins, LLC, represented by Oz Architecture and Haas Land Planning, has requested HPC Major Development (Conceptual), Relocation, Demolition and Variance approval for the property located at 205 S. Spring Street, Lots H & I, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, in order to approve Relocation, according to Section 26AI5.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property, it must be determined that: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 205 S. Spring Street HPC Resolution#8, Series of 2011 Page 1 of 4 0 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security; and WHEREAS, in order to approve Demolition, according to Section 26.415.080.A.4, Demolition of Designated Historic Properties, it must be determined that: a. The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel.or historic district in which it is located and b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area; and WHEREAS,the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties according to Section 26.415.110.F, Floor Area Bonus. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained; and 205 S. Spring Street HPC Resolution#8, Series of 2011 Page 2 of 4 0 WHEREAS, the HPC may approve setback variances according to Section 26.415.110.C.La, Variances. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district; and WHEREAS, the HPC may approve variances to the Residential Design Standard Variances according to Section 26.410.020(D)(2). HPC must make a finding that a variance: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and 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 feels 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, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report to HPC dated September 21, 2011, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards had been met, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on September 21, 2011, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and recommended approval with conditions by a vote of 4 to 1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants HPC Major Development (Conceptual), Relocation, Demolition and Variances for the property located at 205 S. Spring Street with the following conditions: 1. Materials and fenestration will be discussed more fully at Final Review. Restudy of materials that better address the specific context of this project is recommended. The proposed multi-paned windows on the new structure should be simplified to have a better relationship with the Victorian structures and should be designed to meet the Residential Design Standards, 2. The landscape plan will be discussed more fully at Final Review. Restudy the entry paths to emphasize the Victorian as an independent unit with its own walkway. Restudy the fence around the Victorian to reflect the type of fencing that was used historically. 3. Restudy the north fayade of the new structure to be more compatible in size and scale with the historic house, and to inflect towards the height of the historic house. 205 S. Spring Street HPC Resolution#8, Series of 2011 Page 3 of 4 . 0 4. A 500 square foot FAR bonus is approved. 5. A 7' reduction in the front yard (Hopkins) setback is approved. 6. A 5' reduction in the combined sideyard setback is approved. 7. Wavier of the Residential Design Standards for "Street oriented entrance and principal window" are approved. 8. New public notice that accurately reflects the proposed rear yard setback variance will be required at Final Review. The applicant is to study the character of the alley and consider the amount of rear yard setback that can be provided. 9. If a duplex is proposed, Conditional Use review will be conducted at Final Review. 10. If a duplex is proposed, review of waiver of two on-site parking spaces will be conducted at Final. 11. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of September 21, 2011, the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission. may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 21st day of September, 2011. Ann Mullins, Vice-Chair Approved as to Form: Jim True, Special Counsel ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 205 S. Spring Street HPC Resolution #8, Series of 2011 Page 4 of 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer .A J RE: 205 S. Spring Street- Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Demolition and Variances- Continued Public Hearing DATE: September 21, 2011 SUMMARY: The proposed project is to restore many features of the historic house at 205 S. Spring Street, to relocate it temporarily during basement excavation, and to build a new detached structure to the south. The applicant and architect are responsible for the successful Conner Cabins project behind City Hall and are taking a similar approach on this property. Options for developing the property as a single family house or as a duplex are still being considered. The application requires HPC design review approval and includes setback variances, a 500 square foot FAR bonus request, and Residential Design Standards variances. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC grant Conceptual, Relocation, Demolition and variances with conditions. APPLICANT: 635 E. Hopkins, LLC, represented by Oz Architecture and Haas Land Planning. PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-002. ADDRESS: 205 S. Spring Street, Lots H & I, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: C-1, Commercial, Historic Landmark MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve 1 205 S. Spring Street The Berg site and the immediate area are clearly . .r. different architecturally " UB L R/MF than the Commercial Core. 7 PUB At the last meeting, both staff and HPC members _ were concerned that the proposed new masonry ^' structure may not be entirely appropriate. For this hearing, the drawings have been revised to incorporate more siding on some elevations of the new building. Fenestration has 7 t been added on the west, Legend N adjacent to the shed, and =.historic P,/Mf, some windows have been RlMF scaled down to increase solid wall surface. The guidelines in question are: 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. ❑ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. ❑ Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. ❑ Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. ❑ Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. ❑ Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. ❑ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. Staff finds that the architectural changes are helpful in alleviating the scale concern at the Conceptual level. For Final, which is the review stage when materials and fenestration are more commonly addressed, we recommend additional consideration of materials that address the 3 encroach into that airspace. The Berg proposal will offer additional breathing room �E -- -- f. for the historic building. (Note that no third floor loft space is proposed at Berg and is not allowable due to lower height limits in the Berg site zone district.) The landscape plan will be reviewed at Final. At the last meeting, Staff expressed concerns that the Hopkins facade was being treated as the front door in the site plan, when Spring Street was more likely the main door into the house over the years. The landscape plan currently provides a shared entry for the two units off of Spring Street. Staff would prefer a path directly to the Victorian structure, but this can be resolved further at Final, and the applicant's approach may change if a duplex project is created. Fencing can be addressed at Final. The picture to the right shows a transparent _ wood fence. Staff would recommend _ wood as a more appropriate material in the foreground of the cabin than the heavy masonry columns and iron railing that is proposed. Restoration As described in the application, there are numerous changes that have been made to the Victorian house in the last ownership. All can be accurately reversed to the original condition based on photos and physical evidence on the building. Non-historic _r additions will be demolished on the back of the historic house, the enclosed front porches ` will be re-opened (all posts, trim, etc. are still : in place), non-historic windows will be LL replaced with the accurate design, a skylight will be removed, and the non-historic chimney will be reconstructed to the historic design. The work appears to meet all guidelines. Photo above, circa 1950s or 1960s (based on use of color photography), shows pathways to both entry porches. which has little architectural relationship to it. However, outbuildings contribute to the character of Aspen's alleys and relatively few are left in town. The shed is not proposed to be blocked by a fence and it sits forward of the new construction, giving it greater visibility. HPC did review alternative locations at the last meeting. Siting the shed closer to the Victorian appears to be impossible because of trees. Staff finds the proposed solution acceptable. Preserving the shed as a detached structure would be preferable. DEMOLITION It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a. The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic district in which it is located and b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. Staff Response: Staff agrees with the applicant's assessment that there are non-historic additions along the west facade of the house. This is supported by the Sanborne maps and is obvious from visual inspection. These are to be removed. More specific drawings indicating the exact area of demolition are needed to avoid miscommunication. Staff supports demolition of this non-contributing construction finding that it has no historic significance. 7 FAR BONUS In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. Staff Reponse: Staff finds that the project is worthy of an FAR bonus particularly under criteria c and g. There is substantial expense involved in the .restoration of the historic house and outbuilding. HPC does not have the ability to require the applicant to restore the structure. Incentives such as the FAR bonus were created for the specific purpose of encouraging high quality preservation efforts. SETBACK VARIANCES In granting a variance,the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Response: The applicant,requests a 7' reduction in the front yard (Hopkins) to maintain the _house in the original location, which is entirely appropriate. The project provides the minimum sideyard on the east and west, but falls 5' short of a larger combined sideyard requirement. The;applicant originally requested a 2' rear yard setback variance. The latest drawings.presented` to HPC require a 5' setback variance for the new house and an 8' setback variance for the attached shed. Staff supports rear yard setback variances because they allow more distance between the new ands old construction. Commercial/mixed-use development on the immediately surrounding parcels' does not require any setback from lot lines. The public notice for Final review,will need to 9 : . o o- Windows on the new construction are out of compliance with the "no window zone" that prohibits glazing to pass through the area where a floor level would historically occur. This issue can be addressed at Final. Staff does find that the glazing on the new construction is out of character with the Victorian and the neighborhood. 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 grant Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Demolition and Variances as proposed with the following conditions: 1. Materials and fenestration will be discussed more fully at Final Review. Restudy of materials that better address the specific context of this project is recommended. The proposed multi-paned windows on the new structure should be simplified to have a better relationship with the Victorian structures and should be designed to meet the Residential Design Standards. 2. The landscape plan will be discussed more fully at Final Review. Restudy the entry paths to emphasize the Victorian as an independent unit with its own walkway. Restudy the fence around the Victorian to reflect the type of fencing that was used historically. 3. A 500 square foot FAR bonus is approved. 4. A 7' reduction in the front yard (Hopkins) setback is approved. 5. A 5' reduction in the combined sideyard setback is approved. 6. Wavier of the Residential Design Standards for "Street oriented entrance and principal window" are approved. 7. New public notice that accurately reflects the proposed rear yard setback variance will be required at Final Review. 8. If a duplex is proposed, Conditional Use review will be conducted at Final Review. 9. If a duplex is proposed, review of waiver of two on-site parking spaces will be conducted at Final. 10. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of August 10, 2011, the date of approval.of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion arid for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received:no less than thirty (30),days prior to the expiration date. 11 8.5 Avoid moving a historic secondary structure from its original location. ❑ A secondary structure may only be repositioned on its original site to preserve its historic integrity. 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. ❑ In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. ❑ It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative. ❑ Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements. ❑ A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details and materials. ❑ Before a building is moved, a plan must be in place to secure the structure and provide a new foundation, utilities, and to restore the house. ❑ The design of a new structure on the site should be in accordance with the guidelines for new construction. ❑ In general, moving a building to an entirely different site or neighborhood is not approved. 9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HPC, a structure must remain within the boundaries of its historic parcel. ❑ If a historic building straddles two lots, then it may be shifted to sit entirely on one of the lots. Both lots shall remain landmarked properties. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. ❑ It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. ❑ It may not, for example, be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant maybe removed. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. ❑ A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. . ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. ❑ An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from"the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 13 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL);RELOCATION, DEMOLITION AND VARIANCES APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 205 S. SPRING STREET, LOTS H & I, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO RESOLUTION#_, SERIES OF 2011 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-002 WHEREAS, the applicant, 635 E. Hopkins, LLC, represented by Oz Architecture and Haas Land Planning, has requested HPC Major Development (Conceptual), Relocation, Demolition and Variance' approval for the property located at 205 S. Spring Street, Lots H & I, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the .application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, in order to approve Relocation, according to Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property, it must be determined that: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; or 4..The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated prop erties;and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 205 S-. Spring Street HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2011 Page 1 of 4 WHEREAS,the HPC may approve setback variances according to Section 26.415.110.C.La, Variances. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district; and WHEREAS, the HPC may approve variances to the Residential Design Standard Variances according to Section 26.410.020(D)(2).. HPC must make a finding that a variance: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in whicli the-development is proposed and 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 feels 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, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report to HPC dated September 21, 2011, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards had been met; and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on September 21, 2011, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal.consistent with the review standards and recommended approval with conditions by a vote of to NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants HPC Major Development (Conceptual), Relocation, Demolition and Variances for the property located at 205 S. Spring Street with.the following conditions: 1. Materials and fenestration will be discussed more fully at Final Review. Restudy of materials that better address the specific context of this project is recommended. The proposed multi-paned windows on-the new structure should be simplified to have a better relationship with the Victorian structures and should be designed to meet the Residential Design Standards. 2. The landscape plan will be discussed more fully at Final Review. Restudy the entry paths to emphasize the Victorian as an independent unit with its own walkway. Restudy the. fence around the Victorian to reflect the type of fencing that was used historically:; 3. A 500 square foot FAR bonus is approved. 4. A 7' reduction in the front yard (Hopkins) setback is approved. 205 S. Spring Street. HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2011 Page 3'of 4 t• R I' , r\�N1L\aw40\agw\p\v W%Mq\IXMVXOMMagars. p .� wv\\w4�\a\t4�o►\\wme4�\\\e\a\\q,4\�\\4wue,: 3 I n ii "Oft .\,� Q - ;awemoa4a\�?►m�a4e4cae\w\a\U�a\4\�a\\\4a: •ey W M ieHaw\\w4�\am�\ama\4w�a4��owrUe\�\4v, i�+y ai; x ar ill E: \\aww\n�\a\e\a\eos. f�".#• Ytci x „ ".: . �� ` araZleRaw4\aD4a\a�e4�\a41w\a\U1\\\e\No4a\a\rz ` ','9A4\\\\U\\\U1Q\mRa\U\\\\URal�w\\U,e'!'^. •. r� ySx��~ �fa it;t '•:�� fls - -- - ..� - 4�Pw1\\\w ♦ �w\a4U�\awe�\amm�. � �� - �\�4�\aw►m�w v►w\zp4ewa4Uia\aw „� � rM1t — �a\�\a\ _ e\maw4aRa\Uo�a\a\Uoa\w\aaw\a\�\�e A�a\. a ..�, e4aa\a� g,.\S�\U4� I rr14 OMW 1lop 10 `'f�,- �►;. .Y4 � -.�- :: .+ � +Yf moi• +1J � - -- � - �� +++iii t;t}'kA ""••r ��7t I � •MrYY s ,� a �•ii#* + r / �f2• tYttiy k �.. .�#1'ir�i� ;.._ +►rte +ice;.;a: ;�'# �+# ice`,• � _ �,.. r»��., w;:' �r ��"�,',•. ,."'�,.� iii�Ji#riY'%:; �+ �� t�� .:. iY ti�w•, �:it rft•"31� •i `i4i1Y,�y.�1F�� ''�„^ AV .llr�, ANN"— "W IiE MVA M 0111 CA kv, • •' • 9• 205 S.SPRING STREET ASPEN, CO PHONE:303.861.5704 PAGE HPC SUBMITTAL FAX:303.861.9230 .OZARCH.CO H-0 • •• � • 510128 • • 09.08.2011 • www.OZARGH.COM 1 I I / 1 IFHOT TUB/,'// F�ELOCATED SHE4- IF ♦i I •tom. N \� I TREE LAWN : w Lu \ TV _ Y I U) LU ♦ . .; Y Q _ 0 O Iw .� . •' ,i NEW RESIDENCE ❑ z J r ORCH EXISTING CABIN PORCH ° I ♦• �' may � + n ��, • • • , ,�'' '.��`w + ^`S.. LAWN `' LAWN NEW SIDEWALK •:� '• +' �.� ' �•'� TREE TREE +' L,.� ♦♦ ;' ,ti • ,. LAWN �+ •i ti LAWN ,. ;., ,i : ,i : , J. .• . . .• •� ♦ .• .• . .• ♦''.p ••;�7., 1 irZJ a.. -�� '1 /=J y RD jS i i i ?,.-,� ,a°;�, • �.� .�' . 's`�` ; ;a.••' ',Y•SPRINGSTREET : �?.ti� . �s1'° �,Z+.z' *_ti+,i',�'• ARCHITECTURE . • URBAN DESIGN 200 S.SPRING STREET /6PP1, Co FAX:303.861.9230 PAC F �® INTERIOR DESIGN 1 1 1 • 1 HOTTUB ONES UNION MINE I ■ _ I V� E' -•- iii I 1 I I e • 205 S . S P H I N G ST R E F I ASPEN, CO LEVEL 1 PHONE:303.86130 PAGE FAX: 303.861.9230 H-4 ' •' • • 510128 • 1/8"= l'-O" • 09.08.2011 • VJPHONE: I I I I I I I I \ I 1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 \ \ If -------- FAMILY `---- ' LQ KITCHEN -- 7 L_ P-J I � I � TI",1 11 1.11 IT H.- IIIH I P.R� �I Ll u DINING LIVING ------------- I I I I ti ARCHITECTURE , PHONE: 0. URBAN DESIGNLEVEL 2 0 INTERIOR DESIGN 1 510128 ; 0• 0; If I � I ROOF MECHANICAUSOLAR � I POOL W z a J 0_ l ® 11 ItIll-111J GREEN ROOF/ m LANDSCAPE DECK � I PLANTER �7 ARCHITEMR. , • • :. URBAN DESIGN SPRING STREET ASPEN, • • • • • INTERIOR DESIGN 510128 ; 1 1' 1; 1 • • ' T.O.p ROOF 1 ■1111 _ ==1111== TOP ROOF , • 1 \ 1111 1111�_r 1111 Level 2 `; IIIi 1111; 1111 ,� 111;� 1111� 1111 7,&T - Level 1 \ f w � I! �I ►� - - , • . 1 \ PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION 1 1 \ , ROOF • 1 IIIIi 111 1111 1111 �111� 1111 �1111 1111 1111 �111 1111 X1111 1111 1111 X111 1111 1111- 1181 �Il�l! �►�11 , . , - ' � aLevel ` 7,9271 011 . . ., �. r p' ' .., 1111 . , Leve , . 1 • SOUTHBERG EXISTING PROPOSED • • 2 0 5 S.SPRING STREET PHONE:303.861.5704 . . ASPEN, CO SOUTH-WEST ELEVATIONS FAX:303.861.9230 INTERIORDESIGN • 510128 • 1/8"= 1' 0" • 09.13.2011 • www.ozaRCH.coM H ,r 11°x' -r - �i 8 ,,' � ,� •�t.. T . sof • .�•. � � � ' 1f � `� � � � 7 I�I 1 V ;i' �1,''1 i ,'1 �I ,i -� 't` r� � f�.� In fi, di �:� ��: � ; ;,� — � � � _ _ � ,�� II g �li� lid •�� _� Ifs �� .��• � �� \ AF- •_ =''sem•'".._ �Z`'�'.eQ``�:`�: Mi- a\\� '.L�V�. mm ��►�mg r • ..o;; ''. =.r 1T s c,. .r _ I I ��►' .... �`►w„ � rat, �-' - �( �.� I I V oil r, 1111■ `,i � =� �,�' � •::Stip° � .t. 11111 �� , - - � _ .iJ%P�r !`` I I i7 1��W+•°'•2�1�p-• -4♦♦Q•c�. � r � ■�■ r :.. - - . C I of i�'R+dr••:�°O♦ ♦ i1i1 u � � � K I' �;i- � IIII II�1��•Pyy.°0.•�••i 0$ `♦� ,- j ay.' 111 111 1' 205 S .SPRING STREET ASPEN, CO PERSPECTIVES PHONE:303.861.5704 FAX:303.$61.9230 PAGE •' • 0 510128 0 0 09.13.2011 0 WWW.OZARCH.COM H 9 - I J INN 0 r 1 PORCH • REMOVE VESTIBULE ADDITION ! % EXISTING SHED STRUCTURE TO / REMOVE NON- BE RESTORED / HISTORIC WINDOW / REMOVE BAY WINDOW � j�� ' REPLACE GUTTERS AND RESTORE PORCHES BY REMOVE DOWNSPOUTS REMOVING EXISTING ADDITION ENCLOSURES REMOVE CIRCLE REMOVE NON-HISTORIC WINDOW SKYLIGHT / REMOVE CATHEDRAL WINDOW j RESTORE ORGINAL o WINDOW TRIM o� J L M.B,E EXISTING CABIN TO BE . 101 11 11 71 RESTORED REPLACE GUTTERS AN DOWNSPOUT ARCHITECTURE , • • URBAN DESIGN ASPEN, CO • • • • • �® I INTERIOR DESIGN 510128 : 1 1' 1: 1 • • 1 CONCRETE D Ij BLCI.----7914 ----�. ... '' Aq10, —71915 f� Z 3.0 r Q LLj " TORY co 0-0 _ SE W1 ll� ', 6 AND V E N tCK � tAd � e z QI— z _z — a tA �� m (A X w Q x W z V W �» 7915 , cc •• Of 4 �{3 FT\. In r Wzz o0 z Lu kA go cwn _j z0 J m N fI ILL 0 X Ll aC 10.3jp R`+ 1 SHE( 'r 14.0` p,$mix. -41k rROCK WALL 10 2.0 ASMILT W 1A L L mmuY ' .. .. z ' 1_ NDS CAFE P'LAbN ; 1 x r •1 1 +. Mr _~° ..'' -►._ .i'. � .ate ', t — S o . 36 .ate.. r ; V ELEVAnM :11 il i1.1LF1 MILtt '1 ''' ALIL A is 1 }r 1'14W.• 1lLt. e — ,o,, T,S t ttnw 41W Pr 4Mf IIntYtif ilY r * � rt_._ � _ { .�.. -•�. A%v t I 1^144IL"ll 1 46 r tstlh�r OYfi t 1 r r r � ►/ t c NORT11 w LIVA?1014 205 S. SPRING STREET '4, (%J LANDSCAPE PLAN r&a* K,la BPI EXHIBI Lisa Markatunas P.O.Box 8253,Aspen, CO 81612 (970)925-8623 lisam@reesehenry.com September 19,2011 Aspen Historic Preservation Commission 130 W. Galena Street Aspen,CO 81611 RE: 205 S. Spring Street Aspen,Colorado Members of the Historic Preservation Commission: I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed project at 205 S. Spring Street,the former Louise Berg home subsequently owned by Adam Walton. I am unable to attend the public hearing due to a conflicting board meeting for a non-profit on which I serve, but wish to express my concerns about the mass and scale of the new development on the property. There are no less than seven common rooms in the proposed project. Is it really necessary to provide an FARbonus that allows the developer to build a family room, a sitting room, a media room/office, a library, an exercise/cardio room and all of that in addition to the proposed five bedroom, five bath home that already includes a dining room and living room? I believe the height and scale of the addition are too massive in context to the historic structure. One shed is proposed for demolition and the second surviving shed bears no relationship to the existing home and is relegated to a back corner of the site completely out of sight and out of context to the historic home. Is this extravagance really necessary on a parcel that contains one of just a few historic residential buildings remaining in the downtown core of Aspen? Perhaps another empty parcel would be more suited to such a floor plan and level of development. I knew Louise Berg and have had many experiences with this property over the years. The site has always been a landscaped oasis of gardens in a sea of commercial buildings. I.know she would have been heartbroken to see her lovely home and gardens swallowed up into such an overreaching level of development. The excavation of most of the entire site for sub-grade development will leave little of the original landscaping and the historic home will be completely out of context, much like what has happened with the Lena Van Loon home, that now houses Matsuhisa, when its beautiful setting of gardens and trees were completely destroyed with redevelopment. I believe a number of mistakes were made on the Conner Cabins including the close proximity of the new construction to the old, the elimination of virtually all of the front yard set-back and the fact that they were allowed to build the third above grade loft level which has a detrimental impact on both the cabins and on St. Mary's Catholic Church. It would have been a much more successful preservation project had the third level been eliminated from this project; this is another example of a floor plan that contained multiple numbers of common rooms that could have been scaled back or pared down. Aspen Historic Preservation Commission September 19,2011 Page Two I encourage you to take a very careful look at the mass and scale impacts of this additional structure on the historic home. The Patio Building already contains an overwhelming amount of height across the alley. I hope that you will scrutinize the proximity of the new construction and its impacts on the historic home and its setting. I hope that you will consider eliminating the five feet in height the surrounds and disguises the rooftop deck and swimming pool. At the very least, the historic home should be of more importance than the additional height necessary to camouflage this type of an amenity on this size of a parcel of land. And lastly,please consider if the restoration effort is really significant enough to warrant an FAR Bonus. I am saddened to see what continues to be the degradation of Aspen's historic landscape. Sincerely, Lisa Markalunas Former HPC Board Member and 4h Generation Aspen Native r r : r K ri x' i IL Ills ORCH I ■ ■ lay- _- Irv'. 'V _ � ��S•f'�iy -,,j.�, •' �im h r �; '' ' �+� �t � ilei L Or ey aim—a I mail .�. t, ,�,�•'e ::, •r�rte' i�;�•`•�-��F�-` '_'� i .7' � fav , � �- -Y �� :4.i! �� `±`�R• •�=�•� A �4. r,• r'; •rte / � � �. ..�:+. x `.�'Y'� ... , . a ' I s T*� .trine ammi. 7-11 in- r�"+-." ��R i ;•� , �� mew.. r� ?Sy1' i.. t 7• . nor Y ��. 11 .f � • t . , - ill '• .� i .' .. •�t 1?d"+1,�+-�1 •`.'i 4 .fir Aw Rol..YI ♦ 4 {? .! y r / J.�1, •'. .'� � if t•\, ,t• � •�i�f� y"� �� C r ErY J•_ y \„ •, � t `� r 14 jib :,' :. - S. 1 i �C• 'a�'r• ;.v fT t�a -�, '�f` �t r" ,� :R� .' r • ,. Wit-, �• .. . ' � ��'^.�� i .'f , .•. ,• . � � ';��s .,;,, VIA 41, vote .1.1, • fir. � — 'J � t"•. • � �' � 1 A 1 R> � �-y .q •t�.. h T . [ f i Or .. �r; � . !I s• surr; l r Yom% -.��,�■ �'� ill II �� ;,� ;:��r �� law An Ole At �r ++' ;�- 1��`��•1�-e �y + ill ..•v r � R y. « - ••*�t�' rI r _`+i.+l rhe T Ir. Y °t. ♦r'+. i -" e .�:+ l .''b��ixt �\ +., ' \ ` ^. ` � \ �,r ,,.n = STS,,, i+ j,, �,�f +i•f4 i �,-"° 01 Aft ISA LAP -. ; ' '�� % t!• J '-.'�" °�• �Cy�! F. 'fes/ 'T II 1 �r 1m1Ill i■116moil I — s��l�l�� r' 1 ri, i ■ 1 ti s;. i. . .. _ .. + � • 1 IR Fir i. _ � �ryr�yq� � ; '� �� 's�' ' i �s+ �'!R!� ""a.�� ```a`� ,} � - _ x_ ''��' �'r.,�`,.�_ o♦ _ �'vL• Fs!:f:� >. �, ^�!,b! s+ t^ s^'` �J;�'}'yt• � �_`�h •!► _�c^_rim-- ,�,.. - ry - ... ��"y!�q�-°+r�y�'�'y 4' Z �'.�" �� r`:: ,S��ji� ��':� ^;nye.. �i`.^�{J._. �1��- � �" «F ��"_ar� _�„- .".!•=� . _,.f."�>-.i ,. ,a�• .+�.��,•� 'sle ?.w S .�'tea A .:F. ':�!. .'k' .HiQ"� _:y�1tR."- .� '!fi�`� + •.�V �-�v��-#!F K��\♦-fie _'i+{ s'� *!.-�f-'L+s wi-r - .1,""�4',{ �r.. y'�C,+•>f:�'h -.�" .�1. ♦.: `.ail a�_y �y+ i moi• +� � a' �.-�.+L'S1• -Li �\ .. y �• - r syr _ - g f � Vii.• 4'!- , ji` .•� f� �� LI � II 1 � t ;rr 'int • • • u ir 1 PL- •i► ...•� .fes � v .�� • f y .. • . i • I40 Ok . 1 . � �`:l•. L!..✓�'•�� '�+.• lam'.• •'• • �y; • � ' •. - �rte,d�'• �'� 1*�'~•-� "� �, �,"'• `'• �.-'t� r', AT 10 La j/ • �as •n t r iA. ` y 4 ' y,,. . r �� :.., y . .t 5 �1 _=� �y� �� .� 4. r A .�;� ,Y' �1 1K � �, • f 1 t.4 i ,! �.- � i I �. ��— � :� �`l s: , 4�• � � r. ',j ■� � !� �� .�� .� , — I , r �p�, �.► . �� ;,. �� , { ,`a!'" n ...u. . u .- x t Y 11 .. r- i �j i �. �� ;� r. .�_�, ,�,��; ;� ,.��M�1�� 1 � .fir;_ ;i•. - - ` *. g .�,. �i�i�7...f::. C �i�'..�..,t -�". '�t - - ,�� r'�S �• t .� . a� -�. vv�� .,t) o�r _ - - � S� �-�� . ., r ..y+ �,, `� ;,�, • U1 a .y7, UU � KEY NOTES: • • !�` �� o cj i O BRICK VENEER EXTERIOR WALL O ALUMINUM CLAD,DOUBLE HUNG WOOD MOM B.1 ALUMINUM CAO WOOD STOREFRONT. ®2 ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD FRENCH DOOR. I' 8.3 PANELED WOOD EXTERIOR DOOR-PAINT ECitI ®.4 ALUMINUM CLAD FIXED WOOD WINDOW 3001212 H Huron Street Suite 100 ©SIM O CHANNEL UNTEL/CANOPY/BALCONY Denver,Colorado 80202 PAINT. Q phone 303.861.5704 WOOD PANELING-PUNT. OB'SMOOTH HORIZONTAL HARD-I-PANEL SIDING SPACED r WTH EXPOSED FASTENERS-PAINT. OSMOOTH HARD-I-PANEL SIDING SPACED r 1WTH DFOSD FASTENERS-PAINT. ©ACCENTUATED SHEET METAL CORNICE-PAINT. ��Of Ot SIMPLE SHEEP TUFTAL CORNICE-PAINT, O STEEL PLATE FA SgA-W1TH ALUMINON DRIP AE-v O FLASHING PAINT. NODA OJ FLAGSTONE SILL/BAND. 82923�'D O WROUGHT IRON GUARDRAIL C'f. ( K.1 STEEL TUBE WITH WIRE MESH GUARDRAIL AR OSTEEL SECTIONAL DOOR-PAINT(SMOOTH FINISIi) O ALUMINUM GRATE OVER ENDOW WELL(HATCH RELEASIHIE FROM THE INSIDE,WITH LADDER PER CODE) RENOVATED CONNER CABIN 534-9(SUBIAITIED 6/15/05) Now—NEW 53-A LOFT O THIN BRICK VENEER AT WINDOW WELLS ONLY. ©STAINLESS STEEL CHIMNEY FLU. ; A O DECORATIVE STEEL ACCENT BAND. CB CA.1 8.1 w OMETAL DOORS TO ELECTRICAL/9NOWMELT EQUIPMENT CLOSET;PAINTED. i H ®WINDOW TYPE;REFER TO SHEET AB.1 A. �1 c U) TOP OF ROOF - - - - - �,/�� z M Q < O I U Q o THIRD FLOOR LEVEL - - _ - - - 'II— - W U - A A A _ LU J � � � Ffi ° co O 06U) II II I 11 11 1 11 +I 11 'FI II II +I II II +I I 11 �I II I I II I 11 +I I II �I I 11 +I II II 6 6 6 U N Q I I ' I ',1 6 6 6 I '+I III +I 1 11 +I 1 11 II I I 01111 1110 1111 11 ' M ' H 1 i"'I 1 'II I ' I I �_ K SECOND FLOOR LEVET _ I ' +I H I +1 II I ' it 1 I �I I 1 I HII 1 I : _ _ �- 110- Il''I]tillco i i ❑O° ; OB H F-1 ' A tt PROJ. NO. 54095.00 ® i 14 14 16 J DRAWN: OZ CHECKED: OZ FIRST FLOOR LEVET - - CADD FILE: •DWG CELE-7919.54 100-0 ; DATE August 19, 2005 ' REVISIONS: i I I ; 1 QOZ ARCHITECTURE LOWER LEVEL _ - - - - - - �--;- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CANNER LOFTS 9- - - ISSUE FOR PERMIT SHEET TITLE & IVwELEVATIOOFT 534-A - EAST ELEVATIBUILDING NS cALE:1/4•=t•-o L) SCALE: 1/4'=V-0' SEP 0 9 2005 SHEET NUMBER: Abt`tN A4.2 BUILDING DEPARTMENT L! i 4- yIUU1� KEY T O BRICK VENEEN EXTERIOR WALL • • 0 O ALUMINUM CUD,DOUBLE HUNG WOOD WNDOW. 1L1 ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD STOREFRONT. ®ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD FRENCH DOOR. T T PANELED WOOD EXTERIOR DOOR-PAINT. AHCHIIECIURE ®.3 ®4 ALUMINUM CLAD FIXED WOOD WINDOW 3012 Huron Street Suite 100 ©S�C.CHANNEL LKWCANOPY/BALCONY Denver,Colorado 80202 DO WOOD PANELLING-PAINr. phone 303.861.5704 OS'SMOOTH HORIZONTAL HARD-I-PANEL SIDING E SPACED f WITH EXPOSED FASTENERS-PAINT. OSMOOTH HARD-I-PANEL SIDING SPACED r WITH EXPOSED FASTENERS-PAINT. ©ACCENTUATED SLEET METAL CORNICE-PAINT. G7 SWPLE SHEET METAL CORNICE-PAINT, tiQ��OF O H STEEL PLATE FASCIA-WITH ALUMINUM DRIP I �O FLASHING PAINT. '1k. v O FLAGSTONE SILL/BAND. NODA O WROUGHT IRON GUARDRAIL 132923- IE1 STEEL TUBE WITH WIRE MESH GUARDRAIL V ��tisfp Aac�'`t� ©STEEL SECTIONAL DOOR-PAINT(SMOOTH `- FINISH.) O ALUMINUM GRATE OVER WINDOWWELL((HATCH RELEASABLE FROM THE INSIDE,WLH L.(DDER PER CODE) RENOVATED CONNER CABIN 534-8(SUBMITTED 6/15/05) No--NEW 534-A LOFT NO MIN BRICK VENEER AT WNDOW WELLS ONLY. ©STAM rcc STEEL CHIMNEY FLU. (�DECORATIVE STEEL ACCENT BAND. CB CA.1 W OMETAL DDDRS TO ELECTRICAL/SNOWMELT EQUIPMENT CLOSET;PANTED. ®WINDOW TYPE REFER TO SHEET AL1A TOP OF ROOF k 3W_6 Q 7f K 10 �• :�13 E I O U BOO I THIRD FLOOR LEVEL - - - - - - - - - - }--�- - - LU Q O W 121'-0' - A LU U_ A A I I J Z ter' Z B O ® L0 CL W O 06 Q II 11111 1110 01 111 Ilik dl 11 11 'd1 I II t1 1 11 d1 1 HI dl II II flIll Ili'hI I Ili,EI I II �I I 11 : fi 6 6 U N ' I I ' I I ' 1 Y;11011 ' I ' ' I I I I dl I 11 dl II I I dl I 11 dl I 11 !I II 11 dl I I I dl I I I dl I I I dl II 11 : 6 6 6 M IN SECOND BOOR LEVEL 1 ' dl I I _ O t10 LO J O ❑ ❑ ❑ k ; A bT I t1 tt 1t PROJ. N0. 54095.00 ® � 14 16 J DRAWN: OZ 14 e e N I J — _ CHECKED: OZ UI FIRST FLOOR LEVEL '— — CADD FILE: .DWG (EE--7919.54)too—o . DATE August 19, 2005 REVISIONS: I I I I i i I ; 1I SOZ ARCHITECTURE LOWER LEVEL - - - - - - - - - - �--�- - -�- - - - - - - - - - - - - CONNERLOFTS ISSUE FOR PERMIT SHEET TITLE LOFT 534-A- EAST ELEVATI BUILDING ELEVATIONS scAlE,1/4' SCALE: 1/4' = 1'-0' SEP 0 9 2005 SHEET NUMBER: Hbt'tN A4.2 BUILDING DEPARTMENT a I� i I WIT (II E I r b., MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 205 S. Spring Street- Conceptual Major Development, On-site relocation, Demolition and Variances- Public Hearing DATE: August 17, 2011 SUMMARY: The proposed project is to restore many features of the historic house at 205 S. Spring Street, to relocate it temporarily, and to build a new addition which is detached above grade, but connected underground. The applicant and architect are responsible for the successful Conner Cabins project behind City Hall and are taking a similar approach on this property, though the whole site will be used as a single family house instead of mixed use. The application requires HPC design review approval and includes setback variances, a 500 square foot FAR bonus request, and Residential Design Standards variances. Planning staff has determined that a Conditional Use review, mentioned in the proposal, is unnecessary. \ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC continue the hearing for amendments to the new construction and the shed location. APPLICANT: 635 E. Hopkins, LLC, represented by Oz Architecture and Haas Land Planning. PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-002. ADDRESS: 205 S. Spring Street, Lots H &I, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: C-1, Commercial, Historic Landmark MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code, Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve 1 with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit A." The subject lot is 6,000 square feet in size. It is zoned commercial, but the use has been a single family residence since the late 1800s. There have been only two previous owners of this property over 122 years. The Julius Berg family and descendants owned the property from 1887 to 1972. Adam Walton owned the property from 1972 until his death in 2009. There are three structures on the site; a house and two sheds, all of which appear on the 1904 Sanborne Map (at cll right). A small rectangular shed that the applicant plans to ••.•• keep was originally near the center of the lot and was moved towards the alley some time ago. The largest historic shed is proposed for demolition. .. There are clear historic photos documenting the history of the property, included in the application and this memo. ' The application provides limited information about the X surrounding context to assist in judging the compatibility of the proposal with the neighborhood. Except for the Berg house and the two Victorians immediately to the N west, the neighborhood is generally made up of two story, mostly flat roofed, mixed-use and multi-family structures. The three landmarked Victorians are of a much smaller scale and form. Like the approach taken at Conner Cabins, the proposed : new building at 205 S. Spring responds to the commercial nature of the surrounding blocks. Ideally the new construction will provide a transition piece to highlight the Victorian, rather than making it feel like the odd man out on the block. 2 i • 205 S. Spring Street The Berg site and the immediate area are clearly different architecturally than the Commercial Core. y BN PuQ' >k; Staff is concerned that the proposed new masonry structure may not be entirely appropriate and requires restudy at least in OCC terms of materials and ' fenestration for final review. Some step down in "✓�"` " ` ' height along Spring Street, adjacent to the Victorian would be appropriate. The i guidelines in question are: Legend +f .: FF- r N historic 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. ❑ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent.. ❑ Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. ❑ Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. ❑ Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. ❑ Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. ❑ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 3 0 Landscape The previous owner of this property landscaped substantially into the right-of-way, leaving only a minimal sidewalk for pedestrians. As part of this application, the edge of the private property will be properly defined, with right-of-way devoted to standard width sidewalk and street trees. Some existing trees will be removed in the process. The applicant is working with the Parks Department and Engineering. Existing trees will be preserved along the west lot line. The site plan maintains the Berg cabin in its original location, and creates completely r-.�-- detached new construction, which is very � `�---- commendable in terms of the historic preservation guidelines. The distance between the Victorian and the new building is 15.' Staff finds this appropriate and would =_ consider this the minimum acceptable distance. At Conner Cabins, as viewed along Hunter Street (right), the distance between �0 _ the buildings is 10' and upper story balconies encroach into that airspace. The Berg proposal will offer additional breathing room for the historic building. (Note that no third floor loft space is proposed at Berg and is not allowable due to lower height limits in the Berg site zone district.) The landscape plan will be reviewed at Final. There is one aspect that should be ironed out at Conceptual, however, and that is the pathways leading to the front porches on the Victorian. The house has front porches facing both Spring and Hopkins. It is staff's understanding that at least two generations of the Berg family may have lived in the house at once, so the space may have been divided up into a"duplex." It is staff's opinion that a primary entry path needs to be defined towards the porch that faces Spring Street. This is the more decorative side of the house and reads as the front door. The current site plan only shows a front walkway to the doors on Hopkins Avenue. Zoning requirements dictate that Hopkins must be the front yard because it is the =- long side of the block. Staff recommends entry paths on both sides of the house, or as an alternative, a primary path on the Spring Street side and only a minimal step stone path or no path on the Hopkins side. 4 Restoration As described in the application, there are numerous changes that have been made to the Victorian house in the last ownership. All can be accurately reversed to the original condition based on photos and physical evidence on the building. Non-historic additions will be demolished on the back of the historic house, the enclosed front porches will be re-opened (all posts, trim, etc. are still in place), non-historic windows will be replaced with the accurate design, a skylight will be removed, and the non-historic chimney will be reconstructed to the historic design. The work appears to meet all Photo above, circa 1950s or 1960s (based on use of color guidelines. photography), shows pathways to both entry porches. ON-SITE RELOCATION The intent of this Chapter is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. The following standards apply for relocating a historic property as per Section 26.415.090.0 of the Municipal Code: C. Standards for the Relocation of Designated Properties Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and 5 • • Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Response: The applicant proposes to temporarily lift the historic cabin to excavate a basement, then put the building back in place. Conditions of approval will include a letter of credit to ensure a safe relocation process, along with a plan from the housemover. The applicant also proposes to move a historic shed that is near the alley. The shed is to be moved to the southwest corner of the site, 5' from the west and rear property lines. The shed is not in its historic location, which was more at the center of the lot, close to the house. Staff finds that the proposed location does not particularly enhance the historic character of the shed as it will have no visual connection to the Victorian and is dwarfed by the new construction, which has little architectural relationship to it. Staff recommends that the she be placed near the historic house and would support sideyard setback variances to accomplish this. This concept was explored by the applicant in earlier site plans. The applicant has expressed interest in using the shed for a wildlife proof trash enclosure. In residential zone districts, this type of re-use could result in the building being exempt from FAR, but that option is not available in commercial zone districts. The shed will count in FAR whether it is located along the alley or not. DEMOLITION It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a. The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or 6 d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic district in which it is located and b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. Staff Response: Staff agrees with the applicant's assessment that there are non-historic additions along the west fagade of the house. This is supported by the Sanborne maps and is obvious from visual inspection. These are to be removed. More specific drawings indicating the exact area of demolition are needed to avoid miscommunication. Staff supports demolition of this non-contributing construction finding that it has no historic significance. A small new addition is planned to replace the demolished areas. It will contain a staircase to the basement and is modeled on the original rear lean-to on the house. y �1 rr r To be demolished To be replicated in form The applicant proposes demolition of a shed along the alley. It is apparent that this shed has experienced a fire in the past. Interior structure is charred. The building does appear to match one indicated on the 1904 Sanborne Map. Staff supports demolition finding that the building is not structurally sound. At 22' in length, it also occupies a significant footprint along the alley, 7 • • would count at over 300 square feet of FAR and could not be re-used for a purpose such as garage without changing the orientation of the building. Staff supports the demolition request. To be demolished FAR BONUS In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. Staff Reponse: Staff finds that the project is worthy of an FAR bonus particularly under criteria c and g. There is substantial expense involved in the restoration of the historic house and outbuilding. HPC does not have the ability to require the applicant to restore the structure. Incentives such as the FAR bonus were created for the specific purpose of encouraging high quality preservation efforts. SETBACK VARIANCES In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: 8 a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b.' Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Response: The applicant requests a 7' reduction in the front yard (Hopkins) to maintain the house in the original location, which is entirely appropriate. The project provides the minimum sideyard on the east and west, but falls 5' short of a larger combined sideyard requirement. Restudy of the location of the historic shed that is being preserved may reduce this variance. The shed location shown on the site plan also would require a variance because it is 2'6"too close to the new construction. The applicant requests a 2' rear yard setback variance. Staff supports this variance because it allows more distance between the new and old construction. Commercial/mixed-use development on the immediately surrounding parcels does not require any setback from lot lines. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS The project does not comply with Residential Design Standards related to Garage doors, Street Facing Elements, and Windows. All Residential Design Standard Variances, Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410.020(D)(2) must: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and 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 feels 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 design standards requiring variances are: Garages. For all residential uses that have access from an alley or private road, the following standards shall apply: b. If the garage doors are visible from a street or alley, then they shall be single-stall doors or' double-stall doors.designed to appear like single-stall doors. 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- 9 - i • 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. This standard shall be satisfied if all of the following conditions are met: b. A covered entry porch of fifty(50) or more square feet, with a minimum depth of six(6) feet, shall be part of the front facade. Entry porches and canopies shall not be more than one (1) story in height. c. A street-facing principal window requires that a significant window or group of windows face street. Windows. a. Street-facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor level would typically exist, which is between nine (9) and twelve feet (12) above the finished first floor. For interior staircases, this measurement will be made from the first landing if one exists. A transom window above the main.entry is exempt from this standard. Staff Response: Staff finds that the garage doors should be redesigned to meet the Residential Design Standards. A variance should be granted from the Street-Oriented Entrance standards. The historic porch that faces Hopkins is slightly smaller than the requirement, but should be preserved as-is, and no non-historic windows should be added on that fagade in order-to create a primary window. The features that are required exist on the Spring Street fagade. Windows on the new construction are out of compliance with the "no window zone" that prohibits glazing to pass through the area where a floor level would historically occur. This issue can be addressed at Final. Staff does find that the glazing on the new construction is out of character with the Victorian and the neighborhood. 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 hearing for amendments to .the new construction and shed location. More information about the surrounding context is also needed. Exhibits: A. Relevant HPC Guidelines B. Application 10 Exhibit A: Relevant HPC Design Guidelines, Conceptual Review Walkways 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. ❑ This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. ❑ Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. ❑ Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. 5.3 Avoid enclosing a historic front porch. ❑ Keeping an open porch is preferred. ❑ Enclosing a porch with opaque materials that destroy the openness and transparency of the porch is not acceptable. ❑ Enclosing porches with large areas of glass, thereby preserving the openness of the porch, may be considered in special circumstances. When this is done, the glass should be placed behind posts, balusters, and balustrade, so the original character of the porch may still be interpreted. ❑ The use of plastic curtains as air-locks on porches is discouraged. ❑ Reopening an enclosed porch is appropriate. 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. ❑ Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Instead, maintain the perceived line and orientation of the roof as seen from the street. ❑ Retain and repair roof detailing. 7.4 A new chimney should be the same scale as those used historically. ❑ A new chimney should reflect the width and height of those used historically. 8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved. ❑ When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. These include its primary and roof materials, roof form, windows, doors and architectural details. ❑ If a secondary structure is not historically significant, then its preservation is optional. 8.2 If an existing secondary structure is beyond repair, then replacing it is encouraged. ❑ An exact reconstruction of the secondary structure may not be necessary in these cases. ❑ The.replacement should be compatible with the overall character of the historic primary structure, while accommodating new uses. 8.5 Avoid moving a historic secondary structure from its original location. ❑ A secondary structure may only be repositioned on its original site to preserve its.historic integrity. 11 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. ❑ In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. ❑ It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative. ❑ Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements. ❑ A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details and materials. ❑ Before a building is moved, a plan must be in place to secure the structure and provide a new foundation, utilities, and to restore the house. ❑ The design of a new structure on the site should be in accordance with the guidelines for new construction. ❑ In general, moving a building to an entirely different site or neighborhood is not approved. 9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate Y ro riate b the HPC a structure must remain within the boundaries of its historic parcel. ❑ If a historic building straddles two lots, then it may be shifted to sit entirely on one of the lots. Both lots shall remain landmarked properties. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. ❑ It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. ❑ It may not, for example, be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 10.3 Design a new, addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. ❑ A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. ❑ An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A-change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. .❑ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 12 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. ❑ A 1-story connector is preferred. ❑ The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. ❑ The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. ❑ Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. ❑ Additional floor area may, also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. ❑ Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback•of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. ❑ Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. ❑ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 14.17Design a new driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. ❑ Plan parking areas and driveways in a manner that utilizes existing curb cuts. New curb cuts are not permitted. ❑ If an alley exists, a new driveway must be located off of it. 13 s t 0 • HAAS LAND PLANNING ,, LLC July 29, 2011 Ms. Amy Guthrie City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Conceptual Application for the Berg Residence at 205 S. Spring Street Dear Amy: Please consider this letter and the accompanying plan sets to constitute a formal request for Conceptual Approval of a Major Development to allow restoration and remodeling of, and an addition to, the single-family residence located at 205 South Spring Street (a/k/a 635 East Hopkins Avenue), Aspen. The property is legally described as Lots H & I, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen (Parcel Identification Number 2737-182-12-002). It is a 6,000 square foot lot in the Commercial (C-1) zone district, located at the southeast corner of E. Hopkins and S. Spring Streets and is a designated Historic Landmark. A vicinity map (not to scale) showing the location of the subject property is provided below. Wagner 82 "nitryl U mapcpest I' �f �. � �H 11 M•/QINR MRM"•oM NAV1Eq 205 S. Spring Street,Aspen • 201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 1 08 ASPEN, COLORADO • 8161 1 • • PHONE: (970) 925-7819 FAX: (970) 925-7395 • • 0 ` f In association with the conceptual major development, the applicant is also requesting approvals for: partial demolition and temporary on-site relocation of the home in order to fully restore it to its historical appearance and enable development of a new foundation with a basement, respectively; conditional use to maintain and legitimize the detached residential dwelling use under current zoning (although the use is already grandfathered); dimensional requirements variances; a 500 square foot Floor Area bonus; and a recommendation for a shed FAR exemption. Existing Conditions The plan sets provided herewith include an existing conditions site plan, and photographs of existing conditions have been supplied as well. The historic home is a one and a half (1%2) story Victorian built in the 1880s. This property was designated to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures (the Inventory) in June of 2000. The Architectural Inventory Form describes the home as a typical wood-frame Miner's Cottage with a gable-end facing the street, a pair of double hung windows, a cross-gable parallel to the street with a shed roof porch infilling the corner. Although the porch has been enclosed, the original posts and cutout frieze are still visible. Stained-glass, gothic- style windows have been added to the west and north facades, and a bay window has been added to the south fagade. There is also a small addition on the west side of the home. There are mature trees on the site, many of which sit in the public right-of-way (ROW) and will need to be removed. There are two additional shed-type structures located along the alley side of the property. A non-historic fence surrounds the other three sides of the property and but sits in the public ROW. The home was found to be significant for its position in the context of Aspen's mining era. It is considered to describe the nature of the life of an average family or individual during that period, while being representative of the construction techniques and materials available at the time. The home was found to be essentially in its original form, with the original scale and character of the building generally intact. However, alterations added some inappropriate window openings, a skylight and inappropriate additions but the additions were all considered to be compatible with the scale of the building and reversible. Similarly, the inappropriate windows, skylight and changes to porches were all found to be reversible. The Proposal As mentioned above, the property is located in the City of Aspen's C-1 Zone District. The proposed changes and development are all clearly depicted on the accompanying plan sets provided by Oz Architects. In addition, Oz Architects will walk the HPC through the proposal in detail during their presentation at the August 17, 2011, HPC hearing. Highlights of the proposal are also described below in narrative form. Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 2 The applicant proposes to remove non-historic portions and features on the existing historic home, and restore it to its original, historic appearance (see Plan Sheet H-10). The house will be relocated a short distance from its current location to accommodate construction of a new foundation and basement. When placed on the new foundation, the historic residence will sit in the same location it always has, for its 100+year history (see Plan Sheet H-11). A new two-story addition is proposed on the southern portion of the lot, and will be connected below grade to the historic residence, resulting in the appearance of two completely detached structures (see Plan Sheets H-2 through H-9). One of the existing sheds is proposed to be demolished (this shed is not depicted on the 1905 Sanborn Map), while the other is proposed to be moved closer to the alley and west property line, and be repaired/restored (see Plan Sheets H-8 through H-11). As explained in greater detail below, the applicant is seeking a recommendation from HPC for the Community Development Director to grant a Floor Area exemption for this structure as a historic shed/outbuilding and/or wildlife-resistant trash and recycling enclosure. .This application also requests a 500 square foot FAR bonus. , The restoration of the existing historic home; combined with the construction of the addition and the relocation of the shed requires the following variances: ® A seven (7) foot front yard setback variance (to allow a 3 foot setback where 10 feet are otherwise required) for the new subgrade space and to maintain the existing condition above grade after temporary relocation; • A five (5) foot combined side yard setbacks variance to allow 10 feet of combined side yard setbacks where 15 feet are otherwise required; - • A two (2) _foot rear yard setback variance to allow an 8 foot setback where 10 feet are otherwise required; and, • A two-and-one-half (21/2) foot minimum distance between"buildings on the lot variance to allow a 2%2 foot separation between the shed and the house addition where 5 feet are otherwise required. This development will require significant effort to restore historic integrity and return the home to its true historic appearance. The restoration efforts to be undertaken include: • The shed will need to be stabilized and fully restored as the siding and roof are in a state of rather severe disrepair: • On the house, non-historic additions will be removed from the southwest and northwest corners. • Similarly, a non-historic bay window addition and a non-historic window directly above it will be'removed from the rear, but still fully visible from South Spring Street, side; a double-hung window closely approximating that seen in historic photographs of the residence will be put back in place of the bay. • Two street-facing porches will be restored by removing existing wood and glass enclosures, and the secondary door on the front/Hopkins Avenue porch(but facing South Spring Street) will be restored. Also, the door and window locations on the Berg Property(PEN 2737-182-12-002) Page 3 porch facing South Spring Street will be reversed to restore their original, historic positions. ® The non-historic cathedral window (Spring Street fagade) and stained-glass circle windows (Hopkins Avenue fagade) will be removed from these street-facing fagades. The affected area on the South Spring Street fagade will infilled with appropriate, matching wood siding. A pair of simple double-hung windows will be placed in the Hopkins Avenue fagade to restore its historic appearance and fenestration pattern. • The original roof form will be restored by the removal of the non-historic, street- facing skylight as well as several other inappropriate skylights and roof vents. The brick chimney feature will be restored to match its original size and design(it has been capped and made approximately twice as wide as it was originally), as determined by historic photographs. Insensitively designed roof gutters and downspouts will be removed as well. Finally, decorative window surroundings will be restored to match those seen on historic photographs of the home. In addition, the fence that fronts both South Spring Street and East Hopkins Avenue, as well as quite a bit of landscaping will need to be removed per the direction of the City Engineering and Parks Departments, as all of these features sit in the public right-of-way, and not on the property (see Plan Sheets H-2, H-4 and H-12). Review Requirements Given the above described proposal, approvals are needed , for Conceptual Major Development, On-Site Relocation and (Partial) Demolition, the above-mentioned variances, the 500 square foot FAR bonus, and a o recommendation for the shed FAR exemption. Although a detached residential dwelling on a historic landmark property is a conditional use in the C-1 Zone District, and conditional uses are usually considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to Section 26.425.020 of the Code, since this is already an existing use and has been the sole use of the property for over 100 years, such approval should not be required (the .use was legally established and is effectively "grandfathered"). However, to the extent that such an approval is considered necessary by the Community Development Department, the applicant would ask that the,HPC be permitted to.make this determination pursuant to Code Section 26.304.060(B)(1), which allows for combined reviews where more than one development approval is being sought simultaneously in order to "eliminate or reduce duplication and ensure economy of time, expense and clarity... " Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 4 Conceptual Development Plan, Section 26.415.070(D)(3) Conceptual Review focuses on the height, scale, massing, and proportions of a proposal. Where additions and alterations are proposed to a historic structure, these changes must be in-character with, and sympathetic to, the historic structure. Since the.Code states that increases of more than 250 square feet to a historic building are considered a Major Development (see Code Section,26.415.070(D)(1)(c)), Conceptual Development Plan approval is required for the development proposed by .this application. The only applicable review standard for this Conceptual Review is a determination of consistency with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (hereinafter "the Guidelines"). Accordingly, ,the following 'portion of this application demonstrates adequate consistency with a sufficient number of relevant guidelines, as called for in the italicized print on the very first page of the Guidelines, which specifically state that, ...not every guideline will apply to each project, and some balancing of the guidelines must occur on a case-by-case basis. The HPC must. determine that a significant number of relevant guidelines have been adequately met in order to approve a project-proposal. The Guidelines include fourteen (14) chapters of standards for: Streetscapes and Lot Features• (Chapter 1); Rehabilitation of Historic Structures (Chapters 2-10), including historic building materials, - windows, doors, porches, architectural details, roofs, secondary structures, building relocation and foundations, and building additions; New Construction (Chapters 11-13); and, General Guidelines (Chapter 14). This proposed development project is consistent with the applicable HPC Design Guidelines (Chapters 1 though 10 and 14), as well as the dimensional requirements of the Commercial (C-1) zoning (as discussed later in this application); Chapter 13, New Construction, is not applicable. Chapter 1 of the Guidelines- addresses the streetscape and lot features on historic properties. The "policy" of this chapter states that, "Historic landscapes and landscape elements that remain intact should be preserved. Additions to the landscape should be compatible with the historic context of the district or landmark property. " The brick sidewalk and much of the existing lawn within the fenced area on both the South Spring Street and East Hopkins Avenue sides of the property reside within the public right-of- way and, as such, will need to be removed per the direction of the City Engineering and Parks Departments (see Plan Sheet H-12). Similarly, several of the large coniferous trees (9 of the 10 residing along the north and east boundaries of the property) appear to be on the subject property but are actually located in the public rights-of-way and are required to be removed per the direction of the City Engineering and parks Department. Historic landscape elements residing within the boundaries of the property, except for a single tree at the southeast corner but including the five very large coniferous trees located along the westerly property line and two large aspen trees will be preserved. The Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 5 walkways to the front door of the home will be simple and consistent with Guideline 1.9.. Replacement fencing along the property lines and proposed landscaping are depicted at a conceptual level on the accompanying plan sets (see Plan Sheets. H-2, H-4, and H-7 through H-9), and these features will be shown at a greater level of detail with the Final HPC application; that said, the envisioned design intent is intentionally and fully compatible with the historic context of the property while accentuating the distinction between the "new and old" of the property. Chapter 2 of the Guidelines addresses historic building materials. The "policy" of this chapter maintains that, "Historic building materials. should be preserved in place whenever feasible. When material is damaged, then limited replacement that matches the original in appearance should be considered." In accordance with this chapter, historic building materials will be maintained and preserved in place to the maximum extent reasonably practicable. Much of the existing exterior materials are either unoriginal or damaged beyond repair. Limited replacement to match original materials either in existence or as documented in historic photographs will be done. Where non-historic features are to be removed, they affected areas will be appropriately in-filled with materials to match original materials remaining in place. Details on usage, restoration and replacement of materials will be considered during Final Review. Consistent with Chapter 3, the distinctive arrangement of character-defining windows will be preserved in place. Several non-historic windows will be removed altogether, including the cathedral window and skylight on the east fagade, the circular stained-glass window on the north fagade, the bay window and gable-end window above it on the south fagade, all windows in the additions to be removed, and the glass enclosures on the two porches. The windows around the home that have been replaced with non-historic windows will again be replaced with wood clad windows matching the original in size and design. Fenestration patterns will be maintained. Any windows with character defining detailing or trim elements will be restored and/or preserved, as appropriate. The position, number and placement of historic windows in building walls will be preserved as well. Similarly, even with replacement windows, the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall will be preserved on historic facades. The character-defining features of the historic doors, and their distinctive materials and placement will be restored and preserved, thereby ensuring consistency with Chapter 4 of the Guidelines. Along with restoration of the front porches, the front doors will also be restored while their visibility as character-defining features will be greatly enhanced. As dictated by Chapter 5, the front porches will be restored to their original and long- since lost character. Historic photographs and guideline 5.5 will be used to provide direction in this effort. Similarly, great care will be taken to preserve the architectural detailing found on the posts, the cutout friezes, and elsewhere in accordance with the Guidelines and policies.of Chapter 6. Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 6 M 0 Chapter 7 provides that the character of a historical roof should be preserved, including its form and materials. The roofs of house and shed will both will need to be replaced, but the historical form and materials will be replicated to convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. Eave depths, ridge and eave heights, and roof pitches will all be maintained. Inappropriate and non-historic skylights and roof vents will be removed and new roofing will be installed; the current roofing is not original and is to be replaced in a manner that closely approximates the historic condition, as was done by this applicant on the Conner Cabins., The currently asphalt roofing on the west side of the house (the shed roof portion) will,be replaced with a muted metal roofing for not only functional purposes given its slight pitch but also to aid in differentiating between the new and old. Chapter 8 addresses treatment of secondary structures. One of the secondary structures is proposed to remain and will be renovated/rehabilitated. This shed structure will be relocated approximately five (5) feet to the south and nine (9) feet to the west, where it will sit on a new concrete slab foundation; the result of the relocation will have the shed sitting approximately five (5) feet from the alley property line and five (5) feet from the west property line. The slab foundation will need to be hand-dug and carefully poured to avoid harm to the root systems of nearby trees to be preserved. The shed to be relocated has already moved from its original location as evidenced by the 1905 Sanborn Map as compared with a current survey. The other secondary structure on the property (the tool shed) is in a severe state of dilapidation and not historically significant (it is not depicted on the 1905 Sanborn Map); it will be demolished. Please refer to Plan Sheets H-10 and H-11 and the"Demolitions" section of this application,below, for greater elaboration. Chapter 9 states that proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The proposed relocation plan is depicted on accompanying Plan Sheet H-11. The on-site relocation of the historic shed structure is described in the previous paragraph (above). The proposal involves only temporary and on-site relocation of the residence to allow for development of a proper foundation with a usable basement. Once the foundation is completed, the structure will be placed back in its current/original location with little to no visible or discernable change. Please refer to Plan Sheet H-11 and the "On-Site Relocation" section of this application, below, for greater elaboration. Chapter 10 provides the most relevant provisions of the Guidelines as it addresses building additions. The proposal is consistent with the Chapter 10 guidelines and policy statement, which holds that, "If a new addition to a historic building is to be constructed, it should be designed such that the early character of the original structure is maintained." The proposed addition has been designed in a manner ensuring that even the casual observer or layperson will have no difficulty differentiating the addition from the original structure. The original character of the historic structure will be restored and it will appear as a stand-alone, detached structure since its only connection to the addition will be located below grade. The proposal is consistent with the guidelines of Chapter 10 as follows: Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 7 • While existing additions will be removed, these additions have not achieved any historic significance and do not warrant preservation, thus consistency with guidelines 10.1 and 10.2 is provided. ■ As described above, one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is fully maintained and even enhanced by the removal of the non-historic features and additions; thus,the proposal is consistent with guideline 10.3. ■ As called for in guideline 10.4, the new addition will be easily recognizable as a product of its own time while also remaining visually compatible with the historic structure and neighborhood. It will also help with transitioning to the larger and more intense development patterns immediately to the south. ® Guideline 10.5 directs one to preserve historic alignments when planning an addition to a building in a historic district. Since this property is not in a historic district, this guideline is not applicable. Nevertheless, the proposal respects the spirit of this guideline as historic house will be placed back in its historic location where its facades remain parallel to the adjacent streets, and the addition will also respect the historic alignment patterns of buildings in the neighborhood. ® Guideline 10.7 is provided for cases where consistency with guideline 10.6 is not feasible. In the current case, consistency with guideline 10.6 is not feasible given the exceptionally small scale of the historic structure and the extent of effort and investment required for rehabilitation and restoration of this building. The applicant has instead sought to achieve consistency with guideline 10.7 by setting the addition back from the significant facades of the resource and using a below- grade connector to link the historic structure to the taller addition. ■ In accordance with guideline 10.8, the addition will be setback from the front facades of the resource to minimize visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain intact, visible and prominent. A good deal of the additional floor area is being located under the building, in a basement, so as not to alter the exterior mass of the historic building. In fact, the exterior mass of the historic building will actually be decreased by removal of non-historic and inappropriate additions. ■ Consistent with guideline 10.10, the addition has been designed such that it will not in any way destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. ■ Final selection of exterior materials will be accomplished with the Final HPC review, but the intention is to comply with guideline 10.11 by using exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. ■ Guidelines 10.12 through 10.14 are not applicable as the proposal does not involve a rooftop addition to the historic home. Chapter 11 of the Guidelines is not applicable to the proposed development; the proposal does not involve a historic landmark lot split or development of any new, free-standing buildings. Similarly, Chapters 12 and 13 are not applicable as the property is not located within the Main Street Historic District or the Commercial Core Historic District. Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 8 0 For the most part, the Guidelines of Chapter 14 are more applicable to Final review than they are to Conceptual reviews. Nevertheless, the project is and will be found consistent with Chapter 14's general guidelines addressing such topics as accessibility, color, lighting, on-going maintenance, and treatment of mechanical equipment, service areas, driveways and parking; the elements of the proposal relative to many of these features is depicted on the accompanying plan sets. In summary, the foregoing has amply demonstrated an exceedingly high level of consistency with more than a sufficient number of relevant guidelines. To the degree that any inconsistency with the Guidelines exists at all, such inconsistency is primarily the result of conflicting goals and guidelines. The proposed development maximizes the potential for consistency with the Guidelines. Demolition, Section 26.415.080(A)(4) Section 26.415.080(A)(4) of the Code provides that the HPC shall review the application, staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a. The property has- been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable'to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. . The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance, and Additionally,for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic district in which it is located, and b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. The subject structure/outbuilding cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen as, to the extent that it maintains any historic significance, such is Berg Property(PIN 2737-182-12-002) Page 9 a a largely tied to its current location; therefore, no other locations in Aspen would be appropriate. Moreover, the structure is in a severe state of disrepair and of no real functional use/value, making suitors willing to accept it and its floor area on their property less than few and far between. With regard to the house, the applicant proposes demolition of only the non-historic and inappropriate additions and alterations. There is no documentation to support or demonstrate that the building portions to be demolished have historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance. The tool shed structure and the non-historic elements of the historic home do not contribute to the significance of the parcel, and the loss of these structures (or portions thereof) will not adversely affect the integrity of either the resource or its relationship to adjacent designated properties. The proposed demolition plans are inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. The overall historic integrity and resource value of the property will be greatly enhanced by development of the proposed plans. On-Site Relocation, Section 26.415.090(0 The intent of Chapter 26.415 is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. Section 26.415.090(C) of the code provides the standards for the relocation of designated properties and states that, Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 10 Additionally,for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object in the provision of the necessary financial security. Please refer to Plan Sheet H-11 for a graphic depiction of the proposed on-site relocations. The applicant proposes only on-site and temporary relocation of the residence to allow development of a proper foundation with a basement. Once the foundation is completed, the structure will be placed back in its current location with little to no visible or discernable change. The structure is not built on an adequate foundation and seems to be settling unevenly, adversely affecting its structural integrity and long- term viability, and thereby necessitating construction of a proper, engineered foundation. The ability to develop basement space provides the main incentive to undertaking the cost and endeavor of stabilizing, and relocating the structure. Given the foregoing, it is fair to say that the relocation activity provides an acceptable Y t3' p p preservation method given the character and integrity of the building. In fact, the relocation activity and ability to place usable basement space below the structure provides an incentive for preservation. The move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties as the structure will be placed back in its historic location with little to no visible or discernable change. The shed structure will be relocated approximately five (5) feet to the south and nine (9) feet to the west, where it will sit on a new concrete slab foundation. The result of the relocation will have the shed sitting approximately five (5) feet from the alley property line and five (5) feet from the west property line. The'slab foundation will need to be hand-dug and carefully poured to avoid harm to the root systems of nearby trees to be preserved. In this final location, the shed structure will be stabilized and its severely dilapidated siding and roofing will be restored to match its historic appearance. This shed was already moved from its original location, as evidenced by the 1905 Sanborn Map as compared with a current survey. The structure's relationship to the alley as an accessory or service use storage shed will be maintained and its association with the property will be unaffected. The structures to be moved will be properly supported prior to any relocation activity. A letter from a building relocation expert will be provided with the Final HPC application to substantiate that the structures are capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the proposed relocations. Finally, a plan for safe relocation, repair and preservation of the Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 11 � a buildings, along with provision of the necessary financial security will be provided with the Final HPC application and/or building permit application, as required. Dimensional Requirements of the Commercial (C-1) Zone District, Section 26.710.150; and Variances, Section 26.415.110(B) The existing and proposed conditions and dimensional requirements of/for the subject property, as compared with the C-1 Zone District requirements are as follows: • Minimum Gross Lot Area: - C-1 Zoning: For detached residential dwelling; 3,000 square feet. - Existing Condition: 6,000 square feet. - Proposed: No change. • Minimum Net Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit: - C-1 Zoning: For detached residential dwellings: same as R-6 Zone District, which is 3,000 square feet for Historic Landmarked Properties. - Existing Condition: 1 detached residential dwelling on 6,000 square feet of net lot area. - Proposed: No change. O Minimum Lot Width: - C-1 Zoning: For detached residential dwellings: same as R-6 Zone District, which is 30 feet for Historic Landmark Properties. - Existing Condition: 60 feet. - Proposed: No change. • Minimum Front Yard: - C-1 Zoning: Same as R-6 Zone District, which is 10 feet for principal buildings, and 15 feet for accessory buildings. - Existing Condition: approximately 31/2 feet. - Proposed: No change from existing(approximately 3%2 feet). • Minimum Rear Yard: - C-1 Zoning: Same as R-6 Zone District, which is 10 feet for principal buildings, but only 5 feet for that portion of a principal building used solely as a garage (if applicable), and 5 feet for accessory buildings. - Existing Condition: Approximately 60 feet for the principal building, but less than zero (0)rear yard setback for the tool shed (encroaches into alley right-of-way). . - Proposed: 8 feet for the principal building (residence), 5-51/2 feet for the shed(accessory building). i Minimum Side Yard: - C-1 Zoning: For detached residential dwellings: same as R-6 Zone District, which is 5 feet,, and the two side yards must combine to provide a sum of at least 15 feet. - Existing Condition: The house has a 61/z foot east side yard setback and an approximately 16 foot west side yard setback (22%2 feet, combined); the Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 12 tool shed has an approximately one (1) foot west side yard setback; the effective combined side yard setbacks of existing improvements is, therefore, approximately 7'/2 feet total. Proposed: No change for.the principal structure (residence) except that the addition will have an approximately 5%2 foot west side yard setback and a 5 foot east side yard setback; the relocated shed will have a 5 foot west side yard setback; 10 feet of combined side yard setbacks. • Minimum Utility/Trash/Recycle Area: - C-1 Zoning: Pursuant to Section 26.575.060. - Existing Condition: No designated area for such uses. - Proposed: Either a portion of thegarage space on the addition will serve these purposes, or the relocated/restored historic shed will serve as a Wildlife-Resistant Utility/Trash/Recycling Enclosure if necessary to obtain the requested FAR exemption. • Maximum Height: - C-1 Zoning: For detached residential dwellings: same as R-6 Zone District, which is 25 feet. - Existing Condition: Less than 25 feet. - Proposed. 25 feet. • Minimum Distance between Detached Buildings on the Lot: - C-1 Zoning: Same as R-6 Zone District, which is 5 feet. - Existing Condition: Less than 3 feet between the tool shed and the carriage. house/shed structure; approximately 38 feet between the principal structure and the shed. - Proposed: 2%2 feet between the shed and the home addition. • Public Amenity Space: Pursuant to Section 26.575.030, this requirement does not apply to the existing/proposed residential use. • External Floor Area Ratio (FAR): C-I Zoning: For detached residential dwellings (as the sole use of the parcel and not cumulative with other uses), Eighty percent (80%) of allowable floor area of a same-sized lot located in the R-6 Zone District, which equates to 2,592 square feet. Existing Condition: Less than 2,592 square feet. Proposed: 3,092 square feet (the allowable FAR plus the requested 500sf FAR bonus). • Maximum Multi-Family Residential Unit Size: - C-1 Zoning: 2,000 square feet of net livable area. - Existing Condition: Not applicable since there is no multi-family residential use. - Proposed: Not applicable as this is only one single-family residence (not multi-family residential use). • Maximum Lodge Unit Size: Not applicable as the property does not and will not include any lodging use. Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 13 • Commercial/Residential Ratio: Not applicable as the properly does not and will not include any lodging or commercial components. As mentioned earlier in the Proposal section, the restoration of the existing historic home, combined with the construction of the addition and the relocation of the shed requires the following variances, which the applicant is hereby requesting: • A seven (7) foot front yard setback variance (to allow a 3 foot setback where 10 feet are otherwise required) for the new subgrade space and to maintain the existing condition above grade after temporary relocation; • A five (5) foot combined side yard setbacks variance to allow 10 feet of combined side yard setbacks where 15 feet are otherwise required; • A two (2) foot rear yard setback variance to allow an 8 foot setback where 10 feet are otherwise required; and • A two-and-one-half (21/2) foot minimum distance between buildings on the lot variance to allow a 2%2 foot separation between the shed and the house addition where 5 feet are otherwise required. Section 26.415.110 of the Code enumerates the benefits that historic properties can receive. Subsection B thereof states the following regarding variances: Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow: a. Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b. Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c. Up to five percent(S%) additional site coverage; d. Less open space than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. The requested seven (7) foot front yard setback variance (to allow a 3 foot setback where 10 feet are otherwise required) will simply enable and eliminate the nonconforming status of the existing condition above grade (after temporary relocation) and will allow the subgrade level to have the same front yard setback as the residence maintains, which is Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 14 helpful for foundation design and construction. This will maintain the existing/historic pattern of the property with respect to its front yard setback. A five (5) foot combined side yard setbacks variance to allow 10 feet of combined side yard setbacks where 15 feet are otherwise required enables the applicant to develop the proposed addition in a manner that provides a generous separation distance between the historic resource and the new construction. That is, if unable to utilize the side yard areas to accommodate the addition, more of the new square footage would be forced to the north side thereof and would, therefore, decrease the generous but appropriate separation distance currently proposed between the two portions of the residence. The same reasoning supports and is behind the proposed two (2) foot rear yard setback variance to allow an 8 foot setback where 10 feet are otherwise required; that is; the though it that is it better from a historic preservation perspective to decrease the rear yard setback by two feet than it would be to move the proposed addition two feet closer to the historic residence. Thus, these variances enhance/mitigate an adverse impact to the historic significance and architectural character of the historic property. Finally, with respect to the requested two-and-one-half,(2%2) foot minimum distance between buildings on the lot variance to allow a 21/2 foot separation between the shed and the house addition where 5 feet are otherwise required, the existing historic pattern will be maintained. That is, the shed structure.and the tool shed structure currently sit approximately 21/2 feet apart. A greater separation distance between the addition and the relocated shed can be provided but would only then result in the need for a side yard setback variance to move the shed further to the west. The proposed location for the shed will enhance its service oriented use and relationship to the alley frontage which, in,turn, enhances its character with respect to consistency with historic patterns for outbuildings located along alleys. In addition, the proposed location will enhance visibility of the restored historic outbuilding. Floor Area Bonus, Section 26.415.110(E) Another benefit available to designated properties that the applicant is seeking is the 500 square foot Floor Area bonus in order to enable development of the proposed addition. The applicant is already limited to just 80% of the FAR allowed in the R-6 zone district because of its location in the C-1 zone. In fairness, it should be noted that the subject property, with the exact existing/proposed usage, would be entitled to 100% of the FAR allowed in the R-6 zone if it were instead located immediately across the street, in the Mixed-Use (MU) Zone District. Accordingly, the allowable FAR for the subject property is only 2,592 square feet instead of 3,240 square feet; in other words, the property has been assessed a 648 square foot penalty as compared with neighboring properties. Section 26.415.110(E) of the Code addresses the specific requirements for the granting of floor area bonuses. Said Section states that, in select circumstances, the HPC may grant Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 15 0 up to 500 additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; and Consistency with all applicable design guidelines has been demonstrated above and that narrative should be referenced in response to this standard. All historic building materials will be preserved in place, where feasible. The specific recommendations of Chapter 2 of the Guidelines will be followed to the extent practicable. All historic windows will be preserved and their arrangement on the walls will not be affected on street-facing facades. The proposal entails maintaining all historic windows, eliminating non-historic and inappropriate windows that have been added, and restoring and/or replacing existing windows to match their historic appearance. The proposal involves restoration and preservation of the historic front doors and their orientations. The historic porches and their orientation as character-defining features of the front facades will also be restored and maintained. The architectural detailing features that lend distinct visual character to the residence will be preserved and enhances through restoration efforts. The roofing may need to be replaced, but the historical form and materials will be replicated to convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. Eave depths, ridge and eave heights, and roof pitches will all be maintained. As the existing foundation was not engineered and is inadequate, support for the structure is marginal. The new foundation will be designed to maintain an innocuous yet compatible appearance. The addition will be made using a subgrade connector, resulting in preservation of the historic structure, and providing for a distinct and overt separation between the new and historic building masses. In general, and as explained earlier herein, this development will require significant effort to restore historic integrity and return the home to its true historic appearance. The restoration efforts to be undertaken include: • The shed will need to be stabilized and fully restored as the siding and roof are in a state of rather severe disrepair. • On the house, non-historic additions will be removed from the southwest and northwest corners. • Similarly, a non-historic bay window addition and a non-historic window directly above it will be removed from the rear, but still fully visible from South Spring Street, side; a double-hung window closely approximating that seen in historic photographs of the residence will be put back in place of the bay. • Two street-facing porches will be restored by removing existing wood and glass enclosures, and the secondary door on the front/Hopkins Avenue porch(but facing Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 16 South Spring Street) will be restored. Also,the door and window locations on the porch facing South Spring Street will be reversed to restore their original, historic positions. a The non-historic cathedral window (Spring Street facade) and stained-glass circle windows (Hopkins Avenue fagade) will be removed from these street-facing fagades. The.affected area on the South Spring Street fagade will infilled with appropriate, matching wood siding. A pair of simple double-hung windows will be placed in the Hopkins Avenue fagade to restore its historic appearance and fenestration pattern. • The original roof form will be restored by the removal of the non-historic, street- facing skylight as well as several other inappropriate 'skylights and roof vents. The brick chimney feature will be restored to match its original size and design(it has been capped and made approximately twice as wide as it was originally), as determined by historic photographs. Insensitively designed. roof gutters and downspouts will be removed as well. ® Finally, decorative window surroundings will be restored to match those seen on historic photographs of the home. In summary, the proposal goes far above and beyond the normal call of duty to assure an outstanding and exemplary preservation effort that is fully consistent with the Guidelines and warrants the award of a 500 square foot FAR bonus. b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the. addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; and/or Responses demonstrating that the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building are provided throughout the foregoing. Again, the addition has-been designed to appear as a fully detached, separate structure which, combined with the extensive restoration and preservation efforts being undertaken, will not just maintain but enhance the visual integrity of the historic building. c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; andlor The proposal involves outstanding preservation and restoration efforts, as explained above. d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; and/or The new construction has been designed to be compatible with and sensitive to the historic building by virtue of both its physical separation there from and its forms, massing and solid-to-void patterns/ratios. It provides an appropriate transition from the Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 17 0 historic structure's residential character to that of the buildings and development patterns to the south. e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or All construction materials will be of the highest quality, and materials are not being downgraded in quality or appearance on any sides of the proposed structures. f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; and/or Again, the applicant has set the addition back from significant facades and used a sub- grade "connector" to link with but separate the historic structure from the addition. This design consideration provides an appropriate transition between the old and the new. The proposal also provides an appropriate transition from the historic structure's residential character to that of the buildings and development patterns to the south. g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or While one of the existing outbuildings (the tool shed in rather severe disrepair) will be removed, it is not considered historically significant (it is not depicted on the 1905 Sanborn Map). The applicant will relocated, restore and retain one historic outbuilding and use it for storage and/or a wildlife-resistant utility/trash/recycling enclosure, as explained below. h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. The proposal provides for preservation of the historic landscape and landscape elements that remain intact. Only one tree will be removed from within the property while five very large conifers will be preserved along the westerly property line as well as two significant aspen trees. Off-site features such as the brick sidewalk and much of the existing landscaping in the public rights-of-way, as well as the fence with frontage on South Spring Street and East Hopkins Avenue all reside within the public rights-of-way and, as such, will need to be removed per the direction of the City Engineering and Parks Departments. New detached sidewalks, parkway planting strips and street trees (12 new street trees are included on the proposed plans) will be installed in coordination with direction from the Parks and Engineering Departments. (See accompanying Plan Sheets H-2 and H-12.) In summary, to be eligible for a 500 square foot FAR bonus, the project must meet standard "a," above and one or more of standards b-h. The Code provides, at Section 26.415.110(E)(2), that projects which demonstrate consistency with multiple elements of standards b-h will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor area. The foregoing has demonstrated complete consistency with standard "a," as required. In Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 18 addition, consistency with standards b, c, e, f, g, and has been assured while consistency with standard d has also been addressed but to a slightly lesser extent. The proposal goes far above and beyond the normal call of duty to assure an outstanding and exemplary preservation effort that is fully consistent with the Guidelines and standards for the award of a floor area bonus. Accordingly, awarding of the requested 500 square foot Floor Area bonus is fully warranted. Floor Area Exemption for the Historic Shed, Sections 26.575.020(D)12) 13) The applicant is requesting that the HPC recommend the Community Development Director grant a Floor Area exemption for the uninhabitable and limited function historic shed which contributes to the integrity and resource value of the Berg property. Section 26.575.020(D)(12) of the Code explains that, The Community Development Director may provide a parcel containing an uninhabitable and limited function historic shed, outbuilding, or similar historic artifact with a Floor Area exemption to accommodate the preservation of the historic resource. The shed or outbuilding must be considered a contributing historic resource of the property. Functional outbuildings, such as garages, art studios, home offices, and the like shall not be eligible for an exemption. The Director may consult the Historic Preservation Commission prior to making a determination. The Director may require the property's potential to receive Floor Area bonuses be reduced to account for the structure. The exemption shall be by issuance of a recordable administrative determination and shall be revocable if the artifact is removed from the property. The Berg property contains an uninhabitable and limited function shed that has become significantly dilapidated over the years. The applicant intends to fully stabilize and restore the shed to substantially extend its viability and life-span. As such, not only will .this unheated and limited function outbuilding be restored but it will also be preserved. The applicant will not add heating or otherwise cause the structure to become habitable. The shed's exterior dimensions are and will remain 14.25' by 10.25' for a total of just 146 square feet (see attached plans). An unheated structure of this size can truly serve nothing more than a "limited function." In this vein, the applicant would prefer the ability to continue use of the shed structure for storage (as it has always and historically been used). To the extent that such use is considered too great a function to meet the criteria, then the applicant would be willing to limit its use to that of a wildlife-resistant trash and recycling enclosure only. Allowing this exemption will indeed accommodate the preservation of the historic shed as the exemption provides the needed incentive for the applicant to not only maintain an otherwise useless structure that would diminish highly valuable property rights but also to go to the added cost and trouble of actually stabilizing and restoring it first. Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 19 To date, there has been absolutely no debate as to the contributing nature of the shed structure to the historic resource value and integrity of the subject property. The City's historic maps indicate its presence as far back as the late 1800's and early 1900's. The City's Historic Preservation Planner has encouraged the shed's preservation since day one of discussions regarding the future of the subject property, and in two work sessions to date the HPC has similarly encouraged the applicant's goals of restoring and preserving this resource. The shed structure is described on the City's historic inventory form for the Berg property as an "associated," and therefore contributing, structure. It is too small to serve as a garage, and it will not be heated or finished on the interior in a manner necessary to provide for full function as an art studio,home office or the like. Since the subject property is zoned C-1, it is allowed only 80% of the Floor Area the identical parcel with the exact use would be allowed immediately across the street in the MU zone or anywhere in the R-6 zone, for that matter. Accordingly, the allowable FAR is only 2,592 square feet instead of 3,240 square feet; in other words, a 648 square foot "penalty," if you will, has already been assessed on the subject lot (which further translates to some 97 square feet less exempt deck space that would be allowed on the same property across.the street or in the R-6 zone). Coincidentally, the 500 square foot Floor Area bonus potential plus the requested 146 square foot Floor Area exemption for the historic shed sums to 2 square feet less than the already assessed "penalty." Therefore, it is felt that further diminishing the.useful value of this property's potential to receive a Floor Area bonus would be almost punitive, especially since any bonus awarded by the HPC will be fully earned only through the applicant's willingness and ability to achieve an"outstanding preservation effort," a top goal of this applicant. To the extent that the HPC would be more comfortable recommending the exemption of the FAR if the applicant agrees to limit this building's use to a Wildlife-Resistant Trash and Recycling Enclosure,the applicant would be willing to do so. Section 26.575.020(D)(13) of the Code states that, Wildlife-resistant trash and recycling enclosures located in residential zone districts are exempt from floor area requirements of the zone district regulations if the enclosure is the minimum reasonably necessary to enclose the trash receptacles in both height and footprint, is an unconditioned space not located inside other structures on the property, and serves no other purpose such as storage, garage space, or other purposes unrelated to protecting wildlife. Wildlife resistant dumpster enclosures located in commercial, mixed-use, or lodging zone districts are not exempt from floor area requirements and shall comply with zone district requirements for Utility/TrashlRecycle areas. Enclosures shall be located adjacent to the alley if an alley borders the property and shall not be located in a public right-of-way. Unless otherwise approved by Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 20 the Historic Preservation Commission, enclosures shall not abut or be attached to an historic structure. Enclosures may abut other non-historic structures. Although this property is not in a residential zone district, the use of the property has always been and will remain solely residential. Furthermore, although the applicant, cannot say that the "building" is the minimum reasonable necessary to enclose the trash receptacles in both height and footprint,the applicant is not in a position to make changes to reduce the height or footprint.of the building as it is considered to be significant to the historical designation of the property. Nevertheless, the applicant would be willing to limit the use of the structure if it would assist the HPC in recommending the Floor Area exemption. The final part of the adopted code language stipulates that; "The exemption shall be by issuance of a recordable administrative determination and shall be revocable if the artifact is removed from the property. " The applicant understands and encourages this requirement as a means of memorializing the 146 square foot Floor Area exemption and, further, as a means of attaching conditions to the approval, such as but not necessarily limited to a requirement that the shed remain unheated and uninhabitable, that its use be limited to only storage or that of a wildlife-resistant trash and recycling enclosure, and that it remain on the property and in a state of repair. Conditional Use Review, Section 26.425.040 Although a detached residential dwelling on a historic landmark property is a conditional use in the C-1 Zone District, and conditional uses are usually considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to Section 26.425.020 of the Code, since this is already an existing use and has been the sole use of the property for over 100 years, such approval should not be required (the use was legally established and is effectively "grandfathered"). However, to the extent that such an approval is considered necessary by the Community Development Department, the applicant would ask that the HPC be permitted to make this determination pursuant to Code Section 26.304.060(B)(1), which allows for combined reviews where more than one development approval is being sought simultaneously in order to "eliminate or.reduce duplication and ensure economy of time, expense and clarity... " Detached residential dwellings are a permitted Conditional Use in the C-1 Zone District for historic landmarked.properties, subject to the standards and procedures of Chapter 26.425 of the Code. Section 26.425.040 of the Code enumerates the standards applicable to all conditional uses. Said section states that, When considering a development application for a conditional use, .the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider whether all of the following standards are met, as applicable. Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 21 A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Community Plan, with the intent of the Zone District in which it is proposed to be located and complies with all other applicable requirements of this Title; and B. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development; and C. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems and schools; and E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use; and F. The Community Development Director may recommend and the Planning and Zoning Commission may impose such conditions on a conditional use that are necessary to maintain the integrity of the City's Zone Districts and to ensure the conditional use complies with the purposes of the Aspen Area Community Plan, this Chapter and this Title; is compatible with surrounding land uses; and is served by adequate public facilities. This includes, but is not limited to,. imposing conditions on size, bulk, location, open space, landscaping, buffering, lighting, signage, off-street parking and other similar design features, the construction of public facilities to serve the conditional use and limitations on the operating characteristics, hours of operation and duration of the,conditional use. The use has been in existence for more than 100 years and predates not only the current codes but the adoption of an Aspen Land Use Code in general. The property is on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, meaning it is not only consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity, but it is actually a defining part of this character. Adequate utilities and public services exist to accommodate the continued single-family residential use. The size, design and operating characteristics of the use are already being reviewed by the HPC for consistency with the Historic Design Guidelines, and the location of the use was established more than 100 years ago. Pedestrian and vehicular circulation, and parking, trash and service delivery needs associated with the use will only be enhanced with development of proper sidewalks and provision ,of alley access. No affordable housing is required for completing an addition to an existing residence. Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 22 The continued detached single-family residential use of the subject property is already "grandfathered" as an allowed use of the property and the request for conditional use approval is merely intended to formalize this grandfathering. The actual approval is not truly necessary but sought here merely as a means of cleaning and elucidating the record and bringing the property's use up to date with current codes. It is hoped that the information provided herein and in the accompanying plan sets proves helpful in the review and approval of this exceptional project and exemplary preservation effort. If you should have any questions or desire any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Truly yours, Haas Land Planning, LLC Mit Haas Owner/Manager ATTACHMENTS Exhibit 1: Completed Land Use Application& Dimensional Requirements Forms Exhibit 2: Pre-Application Conference Summary Exhibit 3: Proof of Ownership & Statement of Authority Exhibit 4: Authorization to Represent Exhibit 5: Architectural Inventory Form Exhibit 6: Agreement for Payment of Application Fees Exhibit 7: Affected Property Owners List ACCOMANYING PLAN SETS Sheet H-0: Cover Page Sheet H-1: Existing Survey Sheet H-2: Site Plan Sheet H-3: Level 0 (Basement) Plan Sheet H-4: Level 1 Plan Sheet H-5: Level 2 Plan Sheet H-6: Roof Plan Sheet H-7: North&East Elevations Sheet H-8: South&West Elevations Sheet H-9: Perspective Drawings Sheet H-10: Restoration Efforts/Plans Sheet H-11: Building Relocation Plan Sheet H-12: Tree Removal Plan Sheet H-13: Cabin Photographs (Existing&Historic) Berg Property(PID#2737-182-12-002) Page 23 d EXHIBIT ! LAND USE APPLICATION MEMMEW APPLICANT: Name: 3Jc EHopyugG, LLC. %1,13Ki;G lu s p53Qa/� Ib�-:l� Location: ®Z057 �7. gpk1� S-r• et R4 T !/ CIT IOW a (Indicate street address,lot&block number,legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID# RE Q UIRED) a - Q� REPRESENTATIVE: i Name: wawa LLf, Y Address: 20l A.�►1p,�ST#l0� Niw,Cp%m i 3 LpR/. ST Lama ad oaoS OlQ� Phone#: 7 ot5" �� 3 -n0 PROJECT: Name: � � ESl9E1J CF. Address: q0 �• �T• A �s �i• �tt�S Jii. Phone#: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Conditional Use ❑ Conceptual PUD Rf 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) V 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: ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings,uses,previous approvals,etc.) 3;X ACcompfu4YiA6 tn-tcirriwa i,r,-nz, PL&-i.l s��s, Asiv APc+trA5CWRAL. t9g99W PoW PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings,uses,modifications,etc.) �o Pi�►y�aG �Ltc��oa PLA-0 WIS Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ `� Pre-Application Conference Summary Attachment#1, Signed Fee Agreement Response to Attachment 0,Dimensional Requirements Form Response to Attachment#4, Submittal Requirements-Including Written Responses to Review Standards All plans that are larger than 8.5"x 11"must be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy of all written text(Microsoft Word Format)must be submitted as part of the application. 0 ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: &FGr &r'lvewog Applicant: -�$ CiL 5 SAve.. gl I Location: a0S S• SPR.ta6 S-r: (' IGA Koh G• 19S 119 Zone District: CA. r-OKMe'MAL Lot Size: 6,W0 c.�Gt, Lot Area: 6000 so. FT ( or the purposes of calculating Floor Area,Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: Ill/A Proposed.• ��q Number of residential units: Existing: 1 Proposed.• '( Number of bedrooms: Existing: `,Z Proposed: 5 Proposed% of demolition(Historic properties only): T69 DIMENSIONS: ��}} Floor Area: Existing: 4 zbAllowable: 2,5 4 Proposed: 57' t Principal bldg. height: Existing: 4 ;Z5 Allowable: oZ6r Proposed.• o'25' Access. bldg. height: Existing: 'T610 Allowable: 257' Proposed: Po c+%GE On-Site parking: Existing: ISO P e Required.• 2'--?AC-e5. Proposed.• 5FAcz-'- % Site coverage: Existing:Required: NWA6 Proposed. % Open Space: Existing: —QgV Required: Noy a Proposed: Front Setback: Existing: N 3'/a Required: ' Proposed: 5ft7 Jo c tg6E) Rear Setback: Existing:_Required: Id t5l Proposed: Combined F/R: Existing: ] Required: pl A Proposed.• !J q i r fA-5-rSide Setback: Existing: 1 r! Required. 5Proposed.• Jr lAesrSide Setback: Existing:Required: JC Proposed: ) Combined Sides: Existing: ^' VA' Required: 5r Proposed: tor Existing non-conformities or encroachments: L 1F41C&Aat G megr; PKY,146, MtT ARV, RSR.YAW I fXr rlfa t r Variations requested: fFQAT YAW) Rte.AP-0I (SDWIAIEV SM,YARO5,,A-00 AIAINkM VI�imw wrWye1 �OZf O 6o(�oiA6S0)1n to LVr 5;% A?PWCA=-f J BIZ. • � � EXh1161T TOD CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Amy Guthrie, 970.429.2758 DATE: 7.11.11 PROJECT: 205 S. Spring Street, Lots H and I, Block 99 DESCRIPTION: The subject parcel is 6,000 square feet in size and contains a Victorian era home and outbuilding. The applicant proposes to make an addition to the existing residence. The maximum allowable FAR is 2,592 square feet. Design review will be according to two sets of guidelines; the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and the Residential Design Standards. HPC will review the condition and history of the buildings on the site and must approve any alteration, on-site relocation, or demolition. HPC can consider variances, including an FAR bonus of up to 500 square feet, setback or parking waivers, if they are necessary to preserving the buildings. The applicant is advised to consult with the Parks Department at an early date regarding tree preservation requirements. Affordable housing mitigation is not required, so long as no more than 40% of the existing residence is demolished as part of the project. 5 Relevant Land Use Code Section(s): 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.410 Residential Design Standards 26.415.070.1 Major Development 26.415.090 Relocation of designated properties 26.415.110 Benefits 26.515 Off-Street Parking 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.710.150 C-1 Zone District Land Use Code: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Title-26- Land-Use-Code/ HPC Design Guidelines: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Historic-Preservation/Historic Properties/ Review by: Staff for completeness, HPC for determination of approval Public Hearing: Yes, at HPC. Referral Agencies: None. Planning Fees: $2,940 for 12 billable hours (additional or less billable hours are at $245 per hour) Referral Agency Fees: None. Total Deposit: $ 2,940. ❑ 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 3 Owner's Policv of Title Insurance ® Schedule A D E Issued by FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Successor by merger to Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation. File No.: PCT228771-2 Policy No.: 82306-81955880 Address Reference: 205 S SPRING ST,ASPEN, CO 81611 Date of Policy: September 23, 2010 @ 11:21 AM 1. Name of Insured: 635 E. HOPKINS LLC 2. The estate or interest in the Land that is insured by this policy is: IN FEE SIMPLE 3. Title is vested in: 635 E. HOPKINS LLC 4. The Land referred to in this policy is situated in the County of PITKIN, State of Colorado and is described as follows: LOTS H AND I, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Countersigned: Authorized officer or agent ALTA Owner's Policy Schedule A(Rev 6/06) Form 1190-134L SCHEDULE B-OWNERS CASE NUMBER DATE OF POLICY POLICY NUMBER PCT22877L2 September 23, 2010 @ 11:21 AM 82306-81955880 THIS POLICY DOES NOT INSURE AGAINST LOSS OR DAMAGE BY REASON OF THE FOLLOWING: 1. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession, or claiming to be in possession, thereof. 2. Easements, liens, encumbrances, or claims thereof,which are not shown by the public records. 3. Any encroachment, encumbrance,violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land, and that is not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, imposed by law for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, which lien, or right to a lien, is not shown by the public records. 5. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including but not limited to, easements or equitable servitudes; or, (d)water rights, claims or title to water(see additional information page regarding water rights), whether or not the matters excepted under(a), (b), (c)or(d)are shown for the public records. 6. Taxes or assessments which are not now payable or which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records; proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records 7. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance or construction charges for sewer,water, electricity, or garbage collection or disposal or other utilities unless shown as an existing lien by the public records. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: 8. Taxes and assessments (not including condominium or homeowners association assessments or dues) for the year 2010 and subsequent years only, a lien not yet due and payable. 9. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deed from the City of Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Page 304 providing as follows: "That no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws". 10. Encroachments of railroad rails, shed, rock wall and fences as shown on the Improvement Survey of subject property prepared by Alpine Surveys dated 11/2/09 as Job No. 74-85. 11. Deed of Trust from : 635 E. HOPKINS, LLC To the Public Trustee of the County of PITKIN For the use of : PHOENIX OF BASALT, INC. Original Amount : $1,300,000.00 Dated : September 22, 2010 Recorded : September 23, 2010 Reception No. : 573770 EXCEPTIONS NUMBERED 1 THRU 7 ARE HEREBY DELETED, EXCEPT FOR SUBSECTION (d) UNDER PARAGRAPH NUMBER 5 (WATER RIGHTS). Statement of Authority (Section 38-30-172, C.R.S.) 1. This Statement of Authority relates to an entity named :635 E. HOPKINS LLC 2. The type of Entity is a: _corporation —registered limited liability partnership _nonprofit corporation T registered limited liability limited partnership _X_ limited liability company _limited partnership association _general partnership _government or governmental subdivision or agency limited partnership trust 3. The entity is formed under the laws of COLORADO 4. The mailing address for the entity is: 5. The_X_ name_position of each person authorized to execute instruments conveying, encumbering, or otherwise affecting title to real property on behalf of the entity is: GREGORY P. HILLS, MANAGER OF AUSTIN LAWRENCE PARTNERS, LLC 6. The authority of the foregoing person(s) to bind the entity is_X_not limited _limited as follows: 7. Other matters concerning the manner in which the entity deals with interests in real property: 8. This Statement of Authority is executed on behalf of the entity pursuant to the provisions of Section 38-30-172, C.R.S. 9. This Statement of Authority amends and supersedes in all respects any prior Statement of Authority executed on behalf of the entity. Executed thisc;Q day of SEPTEMBER, 2010. Name:635 E. HOPKINS LLC RECEPTION#: 573768, 09/23/2010 at 11:20:12 AM, 1 OF 1. R $11.00 DF $0.00 Doc Code AUTH Y: G OR HI LS Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thisc�)D day of SEPTEMBER, 2010 By:GREGORY P. HILLS Witness my hand and official seal ys...., My commission expires: PCT22877 Notary Publi fDEXHIBIT d City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: 205 S. Spring Street, Aspen Lots H and I, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen(PID# 2737-182-12-002) Request for Conceptual Major Development, On-Site Relocation, Conditional Use Review, Demolition and Variances To whom it may concern: As applicant for the above requested approvals for 205 S. Spring Street, Aspen, 635 E. Hopkins, LLC hereby authorizes Haas Land Planning, LLC (HLP) and Oz Architecture (OZ) to act as designated and authorized representatives for the preparation, submittal and processing of the application requesting the approvals listed above and any incidental approvals that may be required, as well as any subsequent applications that may be associated therewith. HLP and OZ are also authorized to represent 635 E. Hopkins, LLC in meetings with City staff, the Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Aspen City Council. Should you have any need to contact us during the course of your review, please do so through Haas Land Planning, LLC. Yours truly, /- G regTHff' s635 Ea L C Mailing Address: Mr. Greg Hills, 635 E. Hopkins LLC 532 E. Hopkins Avenue Aspen,CO 81611 Phone: (970) 920-4988 EXHIBIT 3 OAHP1403 Official eligibility determination Rev.9/98 (OAHP use only) Date Initials COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY _ Determined Eligible-NR Determined Not Eligible-NR Architectural Inventors Form Determined Eligible-SR (page 1 of 4) tl' — Determine ^ Need Datad Not Eligible-SR Contributes to ellgible NR District Noncontributing to eligible NR District 1. IDENTIFICATION 1. Resource number: 5PT.182 2. Temporary resource number: 635.EHO (635.EH) 3. County: Pitkin 4. City: _ Aspen 5. Historic building name: Julius Berg Residence 6. Current building name: 7. Building address: 635 East Hopkins 8. Owner name and address: Lazy J Ranch LLC c/o WA Walton PO Box 665 ASDen CO 81612 11. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6 Township 10 South Range 84 West SW 1/4 of SE 1/4 of SW 1/4 of SW 1/4 of Section 7 10. UTM reference Zone 1 3 ; 3 , 4 3 2 0 0 mE 4 3 3 9 0 9 0 mN 11. USGS quad name: Aspen Quadrangle Year: 1960, Photo Rev. 1987 Map scale: 7.5' x 15' Attach photo copy of appropriate map section. 12. Lot(s): H & I Block: 99 Addition: Year of Addition: 13. Boundary Description and Justification: Site is comprised of Lot H & 1. Block 99 of the City and Townsite of Aspen. Assessors office Record Number: 2737-182-12-002 This description was chosen as the most specific and customary description of the site III. Architectural Description 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): L- shaped Plan 15. Dimensions in feet: Length x Width 16. Number of stories: One Story 17. Primary external wall material(s) (enter no more than two): Wood, Horizontal Siding 18. Roof configuration: (enter no more than one): Cross Gabled Roof 19. Primary external roof material (enter no more than one): Asphalt Roof 20. Special features (enter all that apply): . Porch. Chimney Resource Number: 5PT.182 j Temporary Resource Number: 635.EHO Architectural Inventory Form (page 2 of 2) 21. General architectural description: A typical wood frame Miner's Cottage A gable end facing the street with a pair of double hung windows as the principal window. A cross gable runs parallel to the street with a shed roof porch in-filling the corner. Single story with wood horizontal siding and a pair of the original vertically proportioned double hung windows. Porch has been infilled however, the original posts and cutout frieze is still visible. Stained plass gothic style windows have been added to the west and north facades. A bay window has been added to the south facade. A plexiglass skylight is flush with the roof, j on the street facing side. Building is turned 900 to the main street. Foundation is painted out materials are not evident. 22. Architectural style/building type: Late Victorian 23. Landscaping or special setting features: Mature trees on the site and large lilac in alley. Picket fence type of Victorian era style. 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: Small wood sided carriage house: wood tool shed. IV. Architectural History 25. Date of Construction: Estimate Actual 1885 Source of information: Pitkin County Assessor 26. Architect: Unknown Source of information: 27. Builder/Contractor: Unknown Source of information: 28. Original owner: Chas. Cram Source of information: Abstract Books, Pitkin County Clerk's Office 29. Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): Small addition to the west side, date unknown. Porch has been enclosed original reading and detailing of the porch is retained. Stained plass rose window added to north gothic arch shape window added to west dates unknown 30. Original location X Moved Date of move(s): V. Historical Associations 31. Original use(s): Domestic 32. Intermediate use(s): 33. Current use(s): Domestic 34. Site type(s): Commercial Core, Residential pattern j j 35. Historical background: This structure is representative of Aspen's mining era character. The building represents a typical type known locally as the "Miner's Cottage" Characterized by the size, simple plan, and front gable / porch relationship. i 'Resource Number: 5PT.182 Temporary Resource Number: 635.EHO Architectural Inventory Form (page 3 of 3) 36. Sources of information: Pitkin County Courthouse Records. Sanborn & Sons Insurance Maps City of Aspen Survey of Historic Sites and Structures Updated 1990. VI. Significance 37. Local landmark designation: Yes No X Date of designation: Designating authority: 38. Applicable National Register Criteria: A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history; B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; X C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Qualifies under Criteria Considerations A through G (see Manual) Does not meet any of the above National Register criteria 39. Area(s) of significance: Architecture 40. Period of significance: Late 1800's Silver Mining Era 41. Level of significance: National State Local X 42. Statement of significance: This structure is significant for its position in the context of Aspen's mining era. It describes the nature of the life of an average family or individual duringthat hat period as well as the construction techniques materials available and the fashion of the time 43. Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: The house is essentially in its original form. Alterations have added some inappropriate window openings but additions are all compatible with the scale of the original building. and the work is reversible The original scale and character of the building is generally intact. VII. National Register Eligibility Assessment 44. National Register eligibility field assessment: Eligible Not Eligible X Need Data. 45. Is there National Register district potential? Yes _ No X Discuss: If there is National Register district potential, is this building: Contributing — Noncontributing 46. If the building is in existing National Register district, is it: Contributing Noncontributing I Y Resource Number: 5PT.182 Temporary Resource Number: 635.EHO Architectural Inventory Form (page 4 of 4) VIII. Recording Information 47. Photograph numbers: R10, F14 Negatives filed at: Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept, 48. Report title: City of Aspen Update of Survey of Historic Sites and Structures 2000 49. Date(s): 6/24/200050. Recorder(s): Suzannah Reid and Patrick Duffield r 51. Organization: Reid Architects ' 52. Address: 412 North Mill Street, PO Box 1303, Aspen CO 81612 j 53. Phone number(s): 970 920 9225 !' . I NOTE: Please attach a sketch map, a photocopy of the USGS quad. map indicating resource location, and photographs. Colorado Historical Society - Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1300 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866-3395 I i • � � .EXHIBIT a � 9 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN(hereinafter CITY) and 635 E Hopkins,LLC, by Greg Hills (hereinafter APPLICANT)AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for Conceptual Maior Development, On-site Relocation, Conditional Use Review, Demolition, and Variances for 205 S. Spring Street,Aspen (PID#2737-182-12-002), (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration,unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ 2,940 which is for twelve (12) hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $245.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT ! By: By: _ z? Chris Bendon reg E. opkins, C Community Development Director 532 E. opt s Ave. Aspe , CO611 (970 920-4988 n l 091.8/0909®fJ9nV Dane alggdwoo ww Lg x ww 9Z teW101 ap attanbi13 EXHIBIT' -- — __ 918/09Lq@ AJanV qm algltetlwoo„8/9 Z x«G ozls I D 308 HUNTER LLC 530 HOPKINS LLC 610 EAST HYM . 490 WILLIAMS ST 5301/2 E HOPKINS C/0 CHARLES 610 E HYMAN DENVER, CO 80218 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 is 625 MAIN ASPEN LLC 630 EAST HYMAN LLC : 633 SPRING II LLC 106 W GERMANIA PL#230 532 E HOPKINS AVE 1 418 E COOPER AVE#207 CHICAGO, IL 60610 ! . ASPEN, CO 81611' ! ASPEN, CO 81611 11 ALEXANDER THOMAS L ALPINE BANK ASPEN ! ASHTON JONATHAN G ATTN ERIN WIENCEK 715 E HYMAN AVE#27 PO BOX 26 ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 10000 JAMES TOWN, CO 80455 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 i ASPEN BLOCK 99 LLC ASPEN PLAZA LLCPO BOX 1709 AUSTIN LAWRENCE CONNER LLC 532 E HOPKINS AVE 1 532 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 C/O STEVE MARCUS ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 I BAR TLETT KATY I BASS CAHN 601 LLC 1 : i BAUM ROBERT E ( 715 E HYMAN AVE#18 PO BOX 4060 PO BOX 1518 ASPEN, CO 81611-2066 ! ASPEN, CO 81612 ! STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 i i i BOOHER ANDREA LYNN BRYANT CAROLINA H i BULKELEY RICHARD C&JULIE J j 709 E MAIN STREET#303 PO BOX 5217 801 JOY ST ASPEN, CO 81611 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 RED OAK, IA 51566 i BURSTEN GABRIELLA CICUREL CARY CIPOLLINO NICHOLAS PO BOX 2061 2615 N LAKEWOOD 300 QUAIL RD ASPEN, CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60614 MERRITT, NC 28556-9641 � I CLARY EDGAR D IV CM LLC COLBY WARD 715 E HYMAN AVE#9 C/O ROGER MAROLT 715 E HYMAN#20 . i ASPEN, CO 81611 230 S MILL ST ! ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 COLORADO MTN NEWS MEDIA ` COLOSI THOMAS W CROSS JUDITH PO BOX 1927 715 E HYMAN AVE APT 6 PO BOX 3388 CARSON CITY, NV 89702 ! ASPEN, CO 81611-2099 ASPEN, CO 81612 i I , I DAILY CONNIE M DEVINE RALPH R DODEA NICHOLAS T 715 E HYMAN AVE#14 . ; 715 E HYMAN #13 j 715 E HYMAN AVE#19 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ! it label size 1"x 2 5/8"compatible with Avery°5160/81,60 ° ° Etiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery°5160/8160 09[8/OJ1�®fUOAV oaAe algltedwoo ww L9 x ww gZ}ewaof ap alled.0t3 o ° l • 09[8/0919®AJOAV ql!m algltedwoo„g/g Z x„1 azls la ROSENFIELD LYNNE CARYN ROSS NEIL ROTHBERG MARJORIE 709 E MAIN ST#203 100 S SPRING ST : ; 2006 N BANCROFT PKWY ASPEN, CO 81611-2059 ASPEN, CO 81611 : ;WILMINGTON, DE 19806 ROTHBLUM PHILIP&MARCIA RUDIN WEST LLC RUST TRUST i 40 EAST 80 ST#26A345 PARK AVE 33RD FLR 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD#760 NEW YORK, NY 10075 ; : 'NEW YORK, NY 10154 : ;BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 I � RYERSON GEORGE W JR SAHN KAREN R SAHR KAREN M 1 715 E HYMAN AVE#17 715 E HYMAN AVE#11 715 E HYMAN AVE#8 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611 SALET PHILIP S REV TRUST SCI ASPEN LLC I I SEID MEL i PO BOX 4897 i 3200 OHIO WY 1104 DALE AVE ASPEN, CO 81612 DENVER, CO 80209 ASPEN, CO 81611 I ; SELBY TROY E&MAY EYNON SELDIN CHRISTOPHER G SESTIC ZORAN PO BOX 8234 : '22 MOUNTAIN CT 530 E MAIN ST LOWER LEVEL ASPEN, CO 81612 BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81611 Jj SHOAF JEFFREY S SMITH ALICIA M SNOWMASS CORPORATION PO BOX 3123 715 E HYMAN AVE#16 PO BOX 620 ASPEN, CO 81612 : 'ASPEN, CO 81611 BASALT, CO 81621 I SPRING STREET LLC STEWART TITLE CO STRIBLING DOROTHY C/O BAXTER C/O JENNIFER SCHUMACHER WACHOVIA BANK NA FLO135 PO BOX 1112 PO BOX 936 PO BOX 40062 CRESTED BUTTE, CO 81224 TAYLORSVILLE, NC 28681 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32203-0062 TAYLOR FAMILY INVESTMENTS CO TRAVIS SHELBY J TROUSDALE JEAN VICK 602 E HYMAN#201 208 E 28TH ST-APT 2G 611 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10016 ASPEN, CO 81611 VANWOERKOM LAURIE VICTORIAN SQUARE LLC VRANA MALEKA PO BOX 341 C/O KATIE REED MGT PO BOX 4535 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 : i 418 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81612 : .ASPEN, CO 81611 WAGAR RICH WEEKS ROBIN WHITEHILL STEPHEN LANE C/O RICH WAGAR ASSOC LLC 526 RIDGEWAY DR 5320 W HARBOR VILLAGE DR#201 100 SPRING ST#3 ASPEN, CO 81611 METAIRIE, LA 70001 VERO BEACH, FL 32967 i I label size 1"x 2 5/8"compatible with Avery®5160/81,60 Etiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery°5160/8160 09[8/09[9©rJOAV Dane elqudwoo WW L9 x WW 9Z teW1of ep 9149ribit] ° 9[8/09[5®AaeAV ql!m eigitedwoo,,8/9 Z x,,[azis la DRESNER MILTON H REV LVG TRST EDGE OF AJAX INC 1 EDGETTE JAMES J&PATRICIA 28777 NORTHWESTERN HWY 201 E SILVER ST 19900 BEACH RD STE 801 SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 MARBLE, CO 81623 JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 i I � EDWARDS CHARLES N ETTLIN ROSS L FAATH CARLOS M&MOLLY G 189 BENVENUE ST 715 E HYMAN AVE#7 PO BOX 11435 WELLSLEY, MA 024827104 ;ASPEN, CO 81611 :ASPEN, CO 81612 i i i FARRELL SCOTT W FIGHTLIN JONATHAN D FURNGULF LTD 'PO BOX 9656 715 E HYMAN#46 A COLO JOINT VENTURE ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 616 E HYMAN AVE : 'ASPEN, CO 81611 I : GELD LLC GARRITY PATRICK&PAULA GAUBA ALENA 6126 CHES CT 1715 E HYMAN AVE#21 I C/O LOWELL MEYERi POBOX 1247 ORLANDO, FL 32819 'ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612-1247 I : I GLAUSER STEVEN JERRY&BARBARA GOODING SEAN A 80%&RICHARD L ;GROSFELD ASPEN PROPERTIES 460 ST PAUL ST 1 20% PARTNERS LLC DENVER, CO 80206 C/O PARAGON RANCH INC j 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD#2222 1 620 E HYMAN AVE#1 E LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 ASPEN, CO 81611 GURHOLT CHARLES J&VERNE HAYLES THOMAS - ; HESSELSCHWERDT BILL&TRISH I N5999 GURHOLT RD . 1715 E HYMAN.AVE#5 PO BOX 1266 SCANDINAVIA,WI 54977 ASPEN, CO 81611 BASALT, CO 81621 � I I HEWINS SAMUEL HEXNER MICHAEL T TRUSTEE HIMAN LLC 715 E HYMAN AVE#23 JUSTIS KAREN L TRUSTEE PO BOX 6159 ASPEN, CO 81611 2555 UNION ST j SWANBOURNE WA 6010 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94123-3832 AUSTRALIA, 11 I HONEA KATHARINE M HORSEFINS LLC HOVERSTEN PHILIP E&LOUISE B PO BOX 288 601 E HOPKINS AVE : ' 2990 BOOTH CREEK DR BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81611 VAIL, CO 81657 I : . I ' i . HUNDERT DANIEL G HUNT SARAH J HUNTER SQUARE LLC 90% 417-A MAIN ST 715 E HYMAN AVE #22 PO BOX 2 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 I ASPEN, CO 81611 SONOMA, CA 95476 I � � � I i HURST FERN K HYMAN STREET BROWNSTONES II LLC IDS PARTNERS LLC 1060 5TH AVE PO BOX 381 PO BOX 642 NEW YORK CITY, NY 10128 I WRIGHTVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 !! . . GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 label size 1"x 2 5/8"compatible with Avery 05160/8160 _ Etiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery 05160/8160 0918/091g®Aaany oau a1g11edwoo ww Zg x ww 93 teuaaot ap 91190113 0 4 G 9)•8/0919®AaaAV g11M alglledwoo„8/9 3 x,,1 ozls 19apig .. JARDEN CORPORATION I JENKINS ASIA JURINE LLC 10% 2381 EXECUTIVE CENTER DR I ! 734 E HOPKINS AVEPO BOX 2 BOCA RATON, FL 33431 j ASPEN, CO 81611 ' : j SONOMA, CA 95476 � I KANTAS NICOLETTE KASHINSKI MICHAEL R j LANDIS JOSHUA B 715 E HYMAN AVE#15 : 10343 GROVE CT j 715 E HYMAN AVE#4 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 8161.1 ASPEN, CO 81611 j LANDRY ELIZABETH J LEE GREGORY K&DEBBIE L ! LINK LYNN B ' PO BOX 3036 ; 9777 W CORNELL PL j PO BOX 7942 ;ASPEN, CO 81612 LAKEWOOD, CO 80227 ASPEN, CO 81612 is LUCKYSTAR LLC i LUNDGREN WIEDINMYER DONNA TRST MAHONEY SHARON A PO BOX 7755 PO BOX 6700 1 PO BOX 11694 ASPEN, CO 81612 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 j ASPEN, CO 81612 i MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP MANNING FREDERICK J&GAIL P MARTELL BARBARA j 317 SIDNEY BAKER S#400 233 S WACKER DR#700 j 702 E HYMAN AVE KERRVILLE,TX 78028 : j CHICAGO, IL 60606 ASPEN, CO 81611 t MAYLE KENNETH D MCDONALD FRANCIS B MCPHETRES RICHARD M 4671 7 YOUNG ST X 715 E HYMAN AVE#3 PO BOX BARTON ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 I ASPEN, CO 81612 ACT 2600 AUSTRALIA, i MONTANARO JOHN &SUSAN FAMILY MHT LLC MYSKO BOHDAN D PO BOX 25318 TRUST 615 E HOPKINS PO BOX 457 ST CROIX VIRGIN ISLANDS 00824, MALIBU, CA 90265 ASPEN, CO 81611 ORIGINAL CURVE CONDO#310 LLC NETHERY BRUCE C/O LAURA PIETRZAK PATTERSON VICKI j 715 E HYMAN AVE#25 PO BOX 8523 1796 E SOPRIS CREEK RD ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ! : BASALT, CO 81621 j ASPEN, CO 81612 i PINKOS DANNY&ANNA PITKIN CENTER CONDO OWNERS PRICE GAIL PO BOX 6581 ASSOC C/O ASPEN POTTERS INC SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 517 W NORTH ST 1 715 E HYMAN#10 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 QUARRY INTERESTS LTD RAINER EWALD REDSTONE SUSAN 9932 LAKEWAY CT 409 E COOPER AVE#4 i : 1 120 E 90TH ST#11-B DALLAS,TX 75230 ASPEN, CO 81611 1 . NEW YORK, NY 10128 i label size 1"x 2 5/8"compatible with Avery 05160/8160 r�' 1 W44, bigbette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery 05160/8160 WILSON STACE S WOODS FRANK J III WRIGHT CHRISTOPHER N PO BOX 5217 205 S MILL ST#301A 13 BRAMLEY RD SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81611 LONDON W10 6SP UK, dem!. MMUMA. Mir 1 I 1 � 111 �� ;' � ■.... � � l y -••. + I A I i -"I "'1 t +i�x frA• * tls� `` a ' %iii```.; _N O N ;ax& 4w j Nor W+ • A1y'�rr+1 .., "•:;r;as j t w ` ♦ .i �:.' 'LI� P r' s ,., Ott; •h►w ama2 . s RK � � t x t '• �' �! �...- _ ��iifi t'��4 � ,�sui;�%tom� !y••. �� "O, ��_ R•i+tr+•;?•��i>1t { T.R i•Riiyiii�+111Y �i'� #! � � ••'•+ - l,i�,//� �f77Rr j;•tt;�'� � a � �Xi••si%i��"� �# J 3.��R .� �� w st t�•t fl�rr.ii r �� *� • 11 " • •' • . 205 S.SPRING STREET HPC-SUBMITTAL PHONE:303.86130 . � ASPEN, �� FAX:303.861.9230 I WWW.OZARCH.COM H-0 • • 9 510128 0 0 07.26.2011 0 � MPROVE ENT SURVEY AND S E TE PLA OF AT 3 H & E y BILOC& 99 y C I TY AND TOWNS 1--T-&>gi3®ll ASPEN Is P Ak E N COUNTY , COLORADO o VICINITY MALS I m =400 r / 7914--__ 4SPHdLT -140 \ S1 D / FOUtq DIST ST BAR REAND CAP ttZ;�i`(t-(yv / 16129 / - -- , F FROM THE CITY OF A9PEN(WEBSI TE / CONCRETE 4 LANG USE REGULATIONS ijART 700 ZONING DISTRICTS s. _ Co "" 1 r� The ToUoeisg dtou eel requ lr•.osts shalt apply ,o all p/+rnitrad and j r .'r 7 CONCRETE y edit ioaal ua in/`•h•Co.osreiel fC-17 Zsn•Di a(r)c,: ; "G - FOUND m I.Minim°. ler•st.•/(•qua a feet): rm y.P:'%>ri,. ,: _ RE AND CAP 4_ .CK . D•+aohed nsid. rinl dosllisg. ,ae t27 duaehed .id•riel droll Ings. duplex dr•lling end be c ya Lill .S. 10129 ^ .nd brook fart: 3.0 �' / /:�,r DI n Is. All other .seaNe nqu firemen,, q - " ,L' - ,% 71 14 I 2. Mi.in.. let ar per dosllteg anis hgaare 915`f 1S• Y)- °.Ouach.d r i u iol du)))ng. lee(2f deraehed re•i�°tial dr•Il toga. duple. dealling a.d - p old b...kf.- S .•R-6 Zee•Dlurint. / vy+ gv 60 �S_ b, All .,he, • - No r•q.i .... - �•4i IF t. C::D 7,• 3. Mi.imum ler sdth fl �� Ts, ' NT °. O.taeMd n�du,lal dulling, tee(2f der nok•d r d.uiel doslitng•. duplex dullieg o _ e 4� and br•ekf.'r:(!ae•ea R-6 Ieee Dief ries. r/ (,k, �7p^u,•r r ( ,r *S+rr Y may. g FOVND\� b. All orha ,,66((•sr No ragoir•m•a,. // '�qt� `- rr.o m MONTY UMENT CURB 4. Ni nimum fr r d a<rb.ek ffemt7: I °. DeneMd •.idosrial duiiieg. tee 12) d.t°nh•d Y•c tdenefal drdling•. dapl•u da•I ling af ^'+m` 1, ( /I. osd brsokfa Sem•o•R-e Zoos District. !!! �^ .d� •/ �r"a FIRE Z® b. All erhs�r•sa: Mo roman t. (0 � e.e• 1' S. Mini Id yard .:716ach flat): 'e r'nt+q,^ `f PIT 'A QkE r r . D•t che�re•7dosHol d..11ing. d.taek.d ra•idon,ial silldupi.a dallial . NO(,�SET / Y a6aann...ddND•bI°edf o.99aLL6'•n""•dd brurnaraidkeosf:oNeuoia:l Sdaenae l o•ungR-.6 l2osZen•lDl Hiit/ !] . BRICK baeq.i-ol F OF- T qAil f•°r y.rd boh (feet): ASEyENb2) d•,. ad eid• ial dud.p1•• daDi•rr �- / •.q • rn Is. All Cher r.t: No r.qr ir•7n,. / ;" e•° / pp 7. Mln' om rtllity/t-Is/r•eyel.ores:Purtvapt to Section 26.575.060. _ ) ADA I a. D•fa<F•d +d•°rlal damning. rao (2) dei� ked reILE cidenti°I deep Ing•. duplez dl''�' •--.,� °°d bt;,Il�; and br.akfasr: Sam•As It 2...Dill I% - b. 4/I orMr ••u: r.en y- Igh, 1287 feel I�bI rao-•tory•I...... of A building. TING �•e'r o �(� "r qN q��`n,.�'�6� 1361 i.•r for thre.•s+.ry•lemne re of°bu Iding. •hick ley b• I.......d to ferry / +Pk r .�s , )9j5 thr�ogk eomm•rel°1 dssige rev tae. B4•Ch°�•r 26.412. 9. Inimnm dl N ore•bet•••a bei discs nn M ler (f•ar): •� / / Z •� /'D.,a.hed r••Idenriel d•ellieg. rao 121/d•taehad recid.a,l°1 duet)tog•. drplu _ aryO bnd and to i teat. Soma at R-6 Znn°�Ia tri... "i !/� I / r1.1 / / BRIE o b All a,h•r •••a: No regain...t. / / I 'c;f,r. �° ) $ CERTIFICATION sof /Dtmensi.aal regal naos,a. ih•Iollo•i"7d+di.en•ioaal r•qutnunt• shell apply �(/ •'•°^� 4 r C b a \� ^�' t I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP ACCURATELY DEPICTS A SURVEY MAGE UNDER NY SUPERVISION ON NOVEMBER 2tW. 2009 l and<°ndltie°°I •sea i. rhe N•dlun-De1•i,y Bell iaf 1R-67 Zenm Oi•trle+: �/ •`•"i P. fl ^ n / i✓/�d ` OF LOT)X d.1. BLOCK B. CITY AND TOWN9ITE OF ASPEN. PITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO. THE BUILDING WAS FOUND TO Be I t.Niniaos ler s1ze: a • ,heu end (6 0007 equal• feet.For lo+a ersatnd by 1 .j .� ,1y1 .* 1 vYl LOCATED ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BOUNDARY LINES OF THE ABOVE DESCRI BEO PROPERTY. THE LOCATION AND OINENSITS 26.480.030.A.4. Mister c taedurk 1 •plat: three ,h I., 13.0007 .gears ) ( <y % ®®6 ' I ryl5 I2 O I OF ALL BUILDING!. IMPR EASEMENTS. RIGHTS-OF-WAY IN EVIDENCE OR KNOWN i0 ME AND ENCROACHMENTS / , 1 // i BY OR ON THESE PREMI 9RQ: ELY SHOWN HEREON. Minimum let area pn dosli tag r: //1 Md r aidosriel doslliag: f then..d fin•hundred (4.5001 •qua Is ctor ie Tide k ti.•: thr• th°oe°sd 11.000) equal• fee+. • '� ,�„ �, ¢ � •A � t 1 61 Dup i•x: tour r d fie•hr. ed (4.500) •qs- fell.For hi•feria , v m ' BY: r4 00 theuaor. 13,0007 sq ee For prepertisa ••bdirlded o• of Apr' -. / �. y;� / V7 / 'y� (4.0001 quer• fosl. For proper, aezed auk•• t ra Jeaaor 1. 19 / i / til / �- / 2 JAMES F. RESER. L. LPI S YEMBER 2ND. 2009 h•ndnd f iffy (3.750) •qur• I- .1 - old Is IA faa r, bnardlegh.u•: No requlrem 3. Hill ler tldrh: •I.ry 1601 fur.Fer le,a erov+• bs..itee,%• Ienda.riem fronli,: thi1301 � of a7., r ED •` 3a�I mty ipaDESCRIPTION 4.Nmi fee,. 5. Mist...rear yard1Pr(neipal hu rtdings: Is (lot lost.For th. nod solely ar a gorIs lire ISI h.1.A.......y b.ildi.ge: file I .. i_}- i/' •'8 ,R�+�r r'•o / / ininun tide y.rd: 5? LOTS H A 1. BLOCK 99. CITY AND TCll.,TE OF Al PITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO Lo, Six• Mini..•St.. Total of Seth Sid.Yards• r r ^aeC��'r• / NOTES (S quay•Feer) for Sid. r +a-e / 1 vrr A Yerd SHIED I / '0 BASIS OF BEARING IS BETWEEN A FOUND CITY MONUMENT AT THE NE OF BLOCK 99 AND A REBAR.WITH CAP L.S. 16129 AT feet 0-4.500 5 fee + Ll t-r r' . o -\\V_ THE NO OF LOT F. THE BEARING IS N75.09'fl'W 4.500-0.000 5 Is r 10 iser, Is u oat ler each odditienal 300•quer.het .f A., 7 py. ler arw, to sal 15 foss of t.t•1 aid•yard •�_ r'�- ^ -�- //• 0 THIS SURVEY GOES NOT REPRESENT A TITLE SEARCH BY ALPINE SURVEYS OR JAPES F. RESER TO DETERMINE OWNERSHIP CAP LESA9184 / % 1 OR EASEMENTS OF RECORD. IS f.•,. los Inter ler oseh odd+ 1.200 Post of 9 Wt TNEB 6.000-8.000 5 i�at l., .na P •v,mem of 25 i or ei ret° •q.�red \, A/` \ \' CORNER / CLOSURE 19 LESS THAN r/10.000. e(O m " a7(� �.L q I OCK WjL ` THERE ARE NO•KNOWN NATURAL HAZARDS THAT IX19TS ON THIS SITE. STEEP SLOPES HAVE BEEN(DENT IF IED, 8,000-10.600 11 fee, 25 f.•r. pl//�s f toot for each eddlrieeol 200•gee r leer •_ ,LS .L`43PyAL7 \,. ler °nal YO°mmleua°i SS lee, et coral •tde y rd. PouAN •ye•� / j'„ PK AND W45NER_\. �.. `•. ��/`fy THE REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREON DOES NOT LIE WITHIN THE LIMITS OF A 100 YEAR 10.000• �5 fee+ 35 feat. 91 ur 1 (....for •ash.dditi... 400 aqr • fu+ of L.S.15710 I' WC \, `\` FL0Go ti4ZARD:B0UN0ARY, j ler are 777ro a u,n•of 50 fat of rota) slid yard. RAILROAD MILS ` -_,_ .9`p` _ / , THIS SURVEY MEETS THE LATEST MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REOUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY / 0-7.500 /10 feel 20 h.,/ / _/ / / ` (�j.�, � � � VERTICAL DATUM IS FROM OP!-4(7920.20') OF THE CITY OF ASPEN 6P9 CONTROL SURFACE PLAIN MONUMENTAT!ON PLAT RAtl/rW,'MWrION/S FAW!/E'/919 OFF/C/AL A01'-V AS'C/7Y Od•'ASPEN. "IMIN LtNAY/Y. COL01PApo' BOOK O. PVG£O .` I FOUND LK AND It / /N Le dt••'1L JIL ND l / / l •P E PR ERTY MONUMENT / / I A WE 9 GA METER I / MPROV D FENCE LINE i/ I� s ` BLOCKK 99NTSP�SUCOLORADDO A AVERSE POINT / / / / PITKIN COUNTY.COLORADO. 19 /PAS METER------YELLO•PAINT / i 0 !CA TV PEDESTAL-�'•�ORANGE PAINT/ / / LS � �° ALPINE SURVEYS m !PHONE PEDESTAL ORANGE PAi^uIi / 1 JAWS F. RESER L.S. 9184 DI/ DRAIN INLET / / 3CPAL�,• 4m=t®r •7 l 415 S MpdARC}t AS-EX CO.81812 970-925-2086 CONTOUR INTERVAL = IDATE:t1-2-09 SCALE:r•Io• JOB NO;74-85 r ARCHITECTURE , ! 101,1161.171", URBAN DESIGN SPRING STREET ASP • EXISTING SURVEY ! �® INTERIOR DESIGN 510128 1 • 1 • • • ury i� I •.AII U � � u ' all mill li I: J II ► � •- �� ,�� '••i �� 'ri►�:�%`r� i wI %� s��%moi► �� ®� "��!� ' MIMI WWI MON 205 S.SPRING STREETSITE PLAN FAX:30 303.89230 aAU ASPEN, CO�� FAX:303.861.9230 H-2 ',' ' 0 510128 • 1/8" = 1'-0" • 07.26.2011 • ^/l•AJ 07ARCH.COM \ \ ice/ / I -✓ � � � \ \ \ i / ----'- BEDROOM ----�- WELL WELL El � -r�r-i-rrrT - BATH VIII ❑ - u :-� EXERCISE / , 11 ® BEDROOM CARDIO WINE ROOM--- ( LAUNDRY ❑ uP OFFICE -- rr7�� P.R. j I IW.LC. I I __LL11JJ L---- LIBRARY MEDIA ROOM/ OFFICE MECH. WELL BEDROOM BATH STRG. I ` � I I L-- Fa - I ti ARCHITECTURE , 0 URBAN DESIGN ASPEN, • LEVEL FAX:303.861.9230 H-3 ® INTERIOR DESIGN 0 510128 : 1 07.26.20 ' WWW.OZARCH.COM SHED Kill • •. im I® LI,LA ' __ II �• IIS - II r• �►I�_.i' ' ' ►��i'�1T'��i�D► r FBI�� i7►�%��►T��i7►�%��►��i'�1�'��1� �"�•�� _awl_�� Cit �� i� ►�� Cit i�� i�ir �� I� ally" 205 V. 1 1 1 205 S.SPRING STREET ?HONE:303.861 ASPEN, �o LEVEL 1 FAX::303.861.923300 N_; •' • • 510128 • 1/8" = 1'-0" • 07.26.2011 • vnnnv.o7cFcti co1.1. r i N FAMILY I LL I i I I I I I U I I KITCHEN L.P.- :1 .P•- PRs I I I . N DINING FF I LII VINE �x=- I I L--j I R-- ti ARCHITECTURE ' • • • URBAN DESIGN SPRING STREET ASPEN, LEVEL 2 • • �� INTERIOR DESIGN 0 5101281 07.26.2011 • • — I — — — --1— — — L — I r I I I I � I � 11 j /If ROOF ' MECHANICAUSOLAR I I POOL Hill DN lydlh 4 1 Hill 11 lil 11 11 11 11 LU O 6111111 m Q DECK 00 a11 Hill 11 I'll i I'll 11 I'll i Hill 11 GREEN ROOF/ LANDSCAPE DA PLANTER ti ARCHITECTURE , • 303.861.5704 URBAN DESIGN ' CO ROOF • 03.861.9230 PAGE �® INTERIOR DESIGN 0 510128 1 0 07.26.2011 • • T.O. ROOF 1 ��i11 �IIi 11�i� ��1111 ��111 1111 1111 1111 x=1111 =:1111 1111 1111 1111 -�1111 =1111 X1111 1111 1111 �� 1111 ��1111� Twl- Lavel 1 s =_ = 1111 1111 ==:111■ • 16 1 • , EAST ELEVATION 1 T.O.P • ' . z. —� - •• i - 1 ■1111 1111 ■■■■ 'il■ �; �■��1 ■1111 1111 ■■■■ `�■��1 1111 1111 ■■ �■ 1111 1111 1111 ■■ Illi ---. ...- ■■ �_ 1111 1111 ■■�� 111 �F 1111 1111 ;;�. 1111 1■_ � 1111 , _ _ ,, _ �■■■� .... �1111 ■■ ■ - ■■1111 _ - -- ■■■■ ■■1111Level_ 1 • _ ==ter � � - 1111 , , 1111 ■■ ■■ 1111 '' 1111 1111 ■■��■■ ��1111 'II ■■ 1111 � ' `,� 1111 ■� ■■ 1111 � , !� Irl . .::.. L- , ��r��r ■■.�■1 ■■111 II I� I!II'I { I I � i�iii 1111 ■■■■■■ ■■1111 � Level. 1 BERG EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION 1 ARCHITECTURE URBAN DESIGN 205 S.SPRING STREET ASPEN, �0 NORTH-EAST ELEVATIONS PHONE:303.861.5704 FAX:303.861.9230 INTERIOR • 510128 • 1/8"=1' 0" • 07.26.2011 • VJWW.OZARCH.COM H"7 TOP O L Level 2 ��\ - (( 11 ■� Level 1 4, SII I I li I II I _ 7,916 - 0 PROPOSEDWEST ELEVATION - .. � - • • • �� ■SIE ■■■■.. Level ''1 III! 1111 111 �_ 1111 d , 111! 1111 1111 � 1111 ��■ 111 1111 1111 = 1111■i !��' '' �� • 1 Level 1 BERG EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION 1 ARCHITECTURE URBAN DESIGN INTERIOR DESIGN ■ = i 1111 •" ��I , � 1111 v' - ��' �I 2 0 5 S.SPRING STREET SHONE•303.86L570a ASPEN. �o SOUTH-WEST ELEVATIONS PAGE AX:303.861.9230 WWW.OZARCH.COM H-8 • 510128 • 1/8" = 1' 0" • 07.26.2011 • W a i I ~ z; ��•I� � ! :i,F s-.r y.o,`a:,i s n a:-..�a,r.s...n.r,r.e:S: 11 0 � -waw--- M .G. -- -.- 1♦, W M N HI�f i I ar, i s7 -' Z AT 111yiil1 eis®/ri�yy�i RINUO _l ft�NIS all- I m wI,`TPIh�I��l�P�l�1��1��1�y�ljvldla+mem+� 111111111111111111111 111, 1 i ,y / i iil�lyi!P /,ih Pil�ij/�ihP i L lL---------- N.��!1�1!1� „ W iry C��1111 w t „-Pip �1 \ \ IL - V Z d LnQ a f a y , 1 W C� 000C z • oo rr- II III.,T J�.11 \` �;' • {{1'llI11l tltll tla iaw x111 I— - 11'"I't��Ih'lrrn�aw■„ C/ a. LO lit - II d; tl R it r =� ,�r � � -• �_ ,_ v � I � OPP NEW mi I BE � �II "� � � s t��H•I •-I Mel." II ' ' 111 � 'HO ' f 111 E I ! • C 'II, I II 20 .SPRING STREET RESTORATION EFFORTS FAX:30 .86.861.5704 ASPEN. CO FAX: .OZAR H.CO • 510128 0 1/8"= l'-O" 0 07.26.2011 • Www.oznaCH.coM CONC,RET : U I 7915 �---- L .a° 60. QLD ' 24. 70 -� � a LCT z ,0 U z F 4A, STORY SE W AND SMENT ICK • zm � z • —. �. z H 1 w WzUw13,2 95 '^ 791 -' „�, : c �• f � BRICK 49 `alb £fF a z _ © az ou � o � LU o J ,} a p RR ... �n T I 101L w X a W WiD t i CP M ROCK WALL � w 5 NE ,� .. ! -7-t O.9 V " a: z.a = W � r M - - W.�►' Ln� U W K ♦� W O •�.�r.Mn � M. .r'r+.w"Na w.•� �+Wgynrw ♦ � � � •.�w V m _ „�v.+rnr""'. rn,. ,i,�..pv.+1r' �. '.� +y�.y., �~••�'^"�r� . may.• .w wW�.�.•"• � _t M.IiwwrW� CC C ASPHALT uj EMI L L 2EX A.5...'. +wY. rr �.+w.M; w.w �,�,� .V'�hM Ytlwrrrr• IM �T�r+M IN Q REMOVE F I •.� w kf RA ; """'" TREE it t L REMAIN REMAIN W-AL� REMAIN � } ,i y REMAIN REMAIN' REMOVE TREE. � � � � - ' moi" `•- i � A �_ � / r? `! �,_- ,� , r wJ •,.x ! . JI i \. ,..../ _ ; REMOVE "fir +�t TREE Lp 14.3 14.3 BRICK ..,- � � REMOVES ._. .._....,.... ., .......,. , .,. ...., .. ,. , .. . TREE > 00 M on q 0 - ` I }. 1-4 ,...M. ---------- 12.4 ...` �. , REMOVE ROCK WA�..�. "^^�-�-� , 7916 ,"� -.... ..,.,.r.....w. .._.. . . TREDVE TREE 0 ifs ,c3 REMOVES } 0 TREE REMOVE TREE , REMK' �-�^^""" TREEOVE REMOVE ti TREE .art ARCHITECTURE ' . REMOVAL • . • 303.861.5704 URBAN DESIGN ASPEN, CO �® INTERIOR DESIGN 5101281 0 07.26.2011 - � i;• y _ J __ p ' W1 a EF m m ft i-1 Z,i 7722�� 'VZ7 11 E� Y _ _. ._ ', _ _ .mow •. , , `"'e, a� ..�'�'—.-i `�I�a � � � � � '"P� "'� • '"C ter, j•�. r �fC t 205 S.SPRING STREETABIN PHOTOGRAPHS iAX: E: 861.9130 PAGE � ASPEN, CO� =.1X:303.861.9230 • 510128 a 07.26.201 1 0 'A'Al 07ARCH COV. H-13 f '•Ywf 0 Vers ar �� ,,,, �. Mfr �•, � ;�, +� 41 . l �. � •std, � ,�•� "`� �' � � ,�,4 ,fj. -.�r� r„'•. rte,'!'i ♦ �tf>7 ��''� _ �, �- -. if:�L. SC s'3•!ii•., qtr: r;{ st� «r��if �•"�3jY._- v w _ - , �. op �� w• A 4 p '� � i I ELOCATE _ 0 4 UP D 0 DN_ - --- TV6) -- I Y ,, Q 0 FP _. m w . I W IN � NEW RESIDENCE PORCH EXISTING CABINir __ PORCH I d � I I Al i wi LAWN -�� LAWN i SITE PLAN NEW SID EWALK TREE TREE �- LAWN LAWN Spring St c �: -f• ♦. ;�•+ T.Ste' .J� f••'+• o '�� -r�' - �L ..ate � i �' � ._�„ti- •. � ..-1 'J �� .. i' � v. sir. I.•;.a'• :K�.,_ 0-. .,. ,. .. - •u' ''j,• it I� ��,.•-•• Zl AZ At 1 v n y 4kY"$ 2 so ter. � .nw V' ,�• - •��.. �� ' .�.�f ad ,n S — F '�ZL �' :- ��,+• rte' ,i�f,"F I^,'f►s _� -� t' ,! ,�i� i+'.` � l.� � ./+�� :� '.rte \, •,► ro ('3'�',� '�y H.• - � yr, � a� ��i r?•gyp' __ � C ,i/�' ,, 'I er" 'y�d b� I•9 Y i ii �.. n Irk` ,.; '� '�7 !t • � 1';.'`Z�_' r :. __ ! � Gln a s�.•s�'�,. � � y jI "� -- �'_- ��.� 'f ,♦ b"� ��Yr -t ) ��. .tiN � yt ♦i 4.�C - � Yap ♦ I � I � � . �' , , � I �r Ilk all- ` !-� S .'•,t`�'a.s '^� W ~`I Z� h.' __ -.'�..9t( ,F., 14 c 'viola ,`.a �SIt ''lY.•,i: R� - ;• r�T v 17 .. 4 t. �r 'Y 14. I Y?- I - "viii ''y'`.�, � y. Cy�� •4 �, :' '+ t..pr • r` �`�,� ...� � Iia ,� - �' ,j . � �r � •�«` ' _ }� F �'•�;�a .r' j 's��' Ca ''''r T .t' " 'JOS AL ol Ar ar TWA t: lop- or - 1 r: t �� I �r8 111 s }.. . , . • . ;�} -z ♦' ! sir a .r.■ ■oneas Ile, {: i'='s ti 'r., ; • '' .X'' all `�` w'� .•'�� •may•,-�'-`F• .? � .. .` � ' 1, . I r �t 1 • • • .L JL A�Mlh ...�� w rr�w r�r a��• i yM now •. mw� ��e i S"i Cali�r�� rye s • f � a f ♦ r . r w s � •V r w \ I 1 1 / Hl L pt. 1 -O pt. 2 Opt. 4 o - 0 I UP DN= Opt. 34 TV --- -- Y J J FP m w NEW RESIDENCE.�f�4 jI z -� rr W 4 PORCH EXISTING CABIN PORCH n- LAWN -� LAWN -� •- gyp'^ ,. ��'��<��.`«u-:�^�:>tig as Nri:Y.� M�C NEW SID WALK • .S . TREE TREE t LAWN LAWN ti ` • EXHIBI L AFFIDAVIT.OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: � S` Aspen,CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: u&L) G;—T 2011— STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, — (IT iit (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060(E)of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six(26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days.prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the P* day of -#qu6vS;-r , 201 , 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. )s lA 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 7ays prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Sig4ture The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this fist day of AuaUSt ,2011 by Lori Y/Noschel- LORI MOSCHET NOTARY PUBLIC WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFI IAL SEAL STATE OF COLORADO My commission expires: 10 a9 ac) I M,��ssbr,Expires 10/29/2011 bi Notary Public ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGl9 LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL r rw PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 205 S. SPRING STREET, CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, ON-SITE RELOCATION,CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW,DEMOLITION AND VARIANCES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, August 17, 2011, at a special meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by 635 E HOPKINS LLC, c/o 532 E. Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611, 970-920- 4988. The applicant is represented by OZ Architecture and Haas Land Planning, LLC. The project affects the property located at 205 S. Spring Street, Lots H and I, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, PID# 2737-182-12-002. The applicant proposes to remove non-historic portions and features on the existing historic home, and restore it. The house will be relocated a short distance from its current location to accommodate construction of a new basement; the house will then be moved back to its current location. One existing shed is proposed to be demolished and one is proposed to be moved closer to the alley and west property line and be repaired. A new addition to the existing single family residence (connected below grade only) is proposed on the southern portion of the lot. In addition to the Conceptual Major Development, On-Site Relocation and Demolition, the applicant requests conditional use approval to maintain the detached residential dwelling use; a front yard setback variance (to allow a 3 foot setback where 10 feet are otherwise required) for new subgrade space and to maintain the existing condition above grade after temporary relocation; a variance to allow 10 feet of combined side yard setbacks where 15 feet are otherwise required; a rear yard setback variance to allow an 8 foot setback where 10 feet are otherwise required; a minimum distance between buildings on the lot variance to allow a 2.5 foot separation between the shed and the house addition where 5 feet are otherwise required; and a 500 square foot FAR bonus. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2758, amy.guthrie@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Ann Mullins Vice Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on July 31. 2011 City of Aspen Account g PUBLIC NOTICE DA'f r 3. t 09 L5©CuaA.V pane alglt�dwaa Ww L9 x Ww 9Z tem�ot ap i}� 09�3L091 ae,�aand r1i1�n algyedwoo„Sl5 Z x«tails laq�i� EXI�iIBIl� 308 HUNTER LLC 530 HOPKINS LLC 610 EAST HYM sk' 490 WILLIAMS ST 5301/2 E HOPKINS C/O CHARLES DENY 6,10 E HYMAN ER,CO -80218 ASPEN;CO 81.611 ASPEN,CO, 81151 I i 625 MAIN ASPEN LLC 630 EAST HYMAN LLC_ 1 . 633 SPRING II LLC 106 W GERMANIA PL#230 532 E HOPKINS AVE 418 E COOPER AVE#207 CHICAGO, 1L- 60610 ;.ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 1 1 ALEXANDER THOMAS L I ALPINE BAN.KASPEN 'ASHTON JONATHAN G 715 E HYMAN AVE ATTN ERIN WIENCEK PO BOX 26 PO BOX 10000 ASPEN,CO 81611 GLENW,OOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 JAMES TOWN, CO 80455 ASPEN PLAZA LLC ASPEN BLOCK 99 LLC ; AUSTIN LAWRENCE CONNER LLC PO BOX 1709 5.32 E HOPKINS AVE 532 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 C/O STEVE MARCUS ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 i BARTLETT KATY 1 1 BASS CAHN 601 LLC ± BAUM ROBERT E 71,5 E HYMAN AVE#18 PO BOX 4060 PO BOX 1518 ASPEN, CO 81611-2066 i ASPEN;CO 81,612 STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 I BOOHER ANDREA LYNN BRYANT.CAROLINA H " BULKELEY RICHARD C&JULIE J 709 E MAIN STREET#303, PO BOX 5217 801 JOY ST ASPEN, CO 81611 SNOWMASS VILLAGE,CO 81615 RED OAK, IA 51566 BURSTEN GABRIELLA CICUREL CARY CIPOLLINO NICHOLAS PO BOX 2061 = 2615'N LAKEWOOD 3Q0 QUAIL.RD ASPEN, CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60614 MERRITT, NC 28556-9641 i CLARY EDGAR D.IV CM LLC COLBY WARD 715 E HYMAN AVE#9 C/O ROGER MAROLT 715 E HYMAN#20 ASPEN, CO 51611 230 S MILL ST ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 s I � i COLORADO MTN NEWS MEDIA COLOSI THOMAS W CROSS JUDITH PO BOX 1927 1715 E HYMAN AVE APT 6 PO BOX,3388 :CARSON CITY, NV 89702 ASPEN,GO 81611-2099 ASPEN,CO 81612 DAILY CONNIE M : DEVINE RALPH R DODEA NICHOLAS T 715 E HYMAN AVE#14 ; 715E HYMAN #13 715 E HYMAN AVE#1.9 ASPEN, CO 81611 ? ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611-2063 label size 1"x_2 5/ 8"compatible'wlth_Avery 05160/8160 Etiquette de.format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery x5160/8.160 0910�AaaAV:MR:olq!j0d goo UILU Z9 x LULU Cj:1PLUUof Op 0�j i09190i Saar q1iM algltelrrjoo.,0/07 x„ ozls 13Re1 ROSENFIELD LYNNE CARYN ROSS NEIL ROTHBERG MARJORIE 709 E MAIN ST#203 100 S SPRING ST 2006 N BANCROFT PKWY ASPEN,CO 81611-2059 ASPEN, CO 81611 WILMINGTON, DE 19806 ROTHBLUM PHILIP&MARCIA RUDIN WEST LLC RUST TRUST 40 EAST 80 ST#26A 345 PARK AVE 33RD FLR 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD#760 NEW YORK, NY 10075 NEW YORK, NY 10154 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 RYERSON GEORGE W JR SAHN KAREN R SAHR KAREN M 715 E HYMAN AVE#17 715 E HYMAN AVE#11 715 E HYMAN AVE#8 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611 SALET PHILIP S REV TRUST SCI ASPEN LLC SEID MEL PO BOX 4897 3200 OHIO WY 1104 DALE AVE ASPEN,CO 81612 DENVER, CO 80209 ASPEN, CO 81611 SELBY TROY E& MAY EYNON SELDIN CHRISTOPHER G SESTIC ZORAN PO BOX 8234 22 MOUNTAIN CT 530 E MAIN ST LOWER LEVEL ASPEN, CO 81612 BASALT,CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81611 SHOAF JEFFREY S SMITH ALICIA M SNOWMASS CORPORATION PO BOX 3123' 715 E HYMAN AVE#16 PO BOX 620 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 BASALT, CO 81621 SPRING STREET LLC STEWART TITLE CO STRIBLING DOROTHY C/O BAXTER C/O JENNIFER SCHUMACHER WACHOVIA BANK NA FLO135 PO BOX 1112 PO BOX 936 PO BOX 40062 CRESTED BUTTE,CO 81224 TAYLORSVILLE, NC 28681 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32203-0062 TAYLOR FAMILY INVESTMENTS CO TRAVIS SHELBY J TROUSDALE JEAN VICK 602 E HYMAN#201 208 E 28TH ST-APT 2G 611 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10016 ASPEN, CO 81611 VANWOERKOM LAURIE VICTORIAN SQUARE LLC VRANA MALEKA PO BOX 341 C/O KATIE REED MGT PO BOX 4535 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 418 E COOPER AVE ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 WAGAR RICH WEEKS ROBIN WHITEHILL STEPHEN LANE C/O RICH WAGAR ASSOC LLC 526 RIDGEWAY DR 5320 W HARBOR VILLAGE DR#201 100 S SPRING ST#3 METAIRIE, LA 70001 . VERO BEACH, FL 32967 ASPEN, CO 81611 label size 1"x 2 5/8"compatible with Avery 05160/8160 ` a _ Etiquette de format 25 rnm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery 0'5160/8160 _. Oc t,0,WAV 09A0 algited-we3 wtu L9 x URI 9�j2U3.10t ar;� OO14/0919c,f!ard iitln�algn�cE�.uoa,��ic�x„l 2zls lapel" �� ®,',.: DRESNER MILTON H REV LVG TRST EDGE OF AJAX INC EDGETTE JAMES J&PATRICIA 28777 NORTHWESTERN HWY 201 E SILVER ST 19900 BEACH RD STE 801 SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 MARBLE, CO 81623 JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 EDWARDS CHARLES N ETTLIN ROSS L FAATH CARLOS M&MOLLY G 189 BENVENUE ST 715 E HYMAN AVE#7 PO BOX 11435 WELLSLEY, MA 024827104 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 FARRELL SCOTT W FIGHTLIN JONATHAN D FURNGULF LTD PO BOX 9656 715 E HYMAN#46 A COLO JOINT VENTURE ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611-2063 616 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 GARRITY PATRICK&PAULA GAUBA ALENA GELD LLC 6126 CHES CT 715 E HYMAN AVE#21 C/O LOWELL MEYER ORLANDO, FL 32819 ASPEN,CO 81611 PO BOX 1247 ASPEN, CO 81612-1247 GLAUSER STEVEN JERRY&BARBARA GOODING SEAN A 80%&RICHARD L GROSFELD ASPEN PROPERTIES 460 ST PAUL ST 20% PARTNERS LLC DENVER,CO 80206 C/O PARAGON RANCH INC 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD#2222 620 E HYMAN AVE#1 E LOS ANGELES,CA 90024 ASPEN, CO 81611 GURHOLT CHARLES J&VERNE HAYLES THOMAS - HESSELSCHWERDT BILL&TRISH N5999 GURHOLT RD 1715 E HYMAN AVE#5 PO BOX 1266 SCANDINAVIA,WI 54977 ASPEN, CO 81611 BASALT, CO 81621 HEWINS SAMUEL HEXNER MICHAEL TTRUSTEE HIMAN LLC 715 E HYMAN AVE#23 JUSTIS KAREN L TRUSTEE PO BOX 6159 ASPEN, CO 81611 2555 UNION ST SWANBOURNE WA 6010 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94123-3832 AUSTRALIA, HONEA KATHARINE M HORSEFINS LLC HOVERSTEN PHILIP E& LOUISE B PO BOX 288 601 E HOPKINS AVE 2990 BOOTH CREEK DR BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81611 VAIL, CO 81657 HUNDERT DANIEL G HUNT SARAH J HUNTER SQUARE LLC 90% 417-A MAIN ST 715 E HYMAN AVE #22 PO BOX 2 CARBONDALE,CO 81623 ASPEN, CO 81611 SONOMA, CA 95476 HURST FERN K HYMAN STREET BROWNSTONES II LLC IDS PARTNERS LLC 1060 5TH AVE PO BOX 381 PO BOX 642 NEW YORK CITY, NY 10128 WRIGHTVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 label size 1"x 25/8"compatible with Avery 05160/8;60 ® Etiquette de format 25 mrn x 67 mm compatible avec Avery 05160/8160 091•R/( AJOAV OaAe 0igitedt1J00 LLIU]2.9 x into 9Z 1F tu10 0p a11a• << 8/OrJIOc FaOAt/t)11nn alglleduio0„8iq G x„1,01, Iagel JARDEN CORPORATION JENKINS ASIA JURINE LLC 10% 2381 EXECUTIVE CENTER DR 734 E HOPKINS AVE PO BOX 2 BOCA RATON, FL 33431 :ASPEN,CO 81611 SONOMA, CA 95476 KANTAS NICOLETTE KASHINSKI MICHAEL R LANDIS JOSHUA B 715 E HYMAN AVE#15 0343 GROVE CT 715 E HYMAN AVE#4 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 I LANDRY ELIZABETH J LEE GREGORY K&DEBBIE L LINK LYNN B PO BOX 3036 9777 W CORNELL PL PO BOX 7942 ASPEN, CO 81612 LAKEWOOD,CO 80227 ASPEN, CO 81612 LUCKYSTAR LLC LUNDGREN WIEDINMYER DONNA TRST MAHONEY SHARON A PO BOX 7755 PO BOX 6700 PO BOX 11694 ASPEN, CO 81612 SNOWMASS VILLAGE,CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81612 MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP MANNING FREDERICK J&GAIL P MARTELL BARBARA 317 SIDNEY BAKER S#400 233 S WACKER DR#700 702 E HYMAN AVE KERRVILLE,TX 78028 CHICAGO, IL 60606 ASPEN, CO 81611 � i MCPHETRES RICHARD M MAYLE KENNETH D MCDONALD FRANCIS B 7 YOUNG ST 715 E HYMAN AVE#3 PO BOX 4671 BARYON ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ':. ASPEN,CO 81612 ACT 2600 AUSTRALIA, MHT LLC MONTANARO JOHN&SUSAN FAMILY MYSKO BOHDAN D PO BOX 25318 TRUST 615 E HOPKINS PO BOX 457 ST CROIX VIRGIN ISLANDS 00824, MALIBU, CA 90265 ASPEN, CO 81611 I NETHERY BRUCE ORIGINAL CURVE CONDO#310 LLC PATTERSON VICKI C/O LAURA PIETRZAK 715 E HYMAN AVE#25 PO BOX 8523 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 1796 E SOPRIS CREEK RD ASPEN, CO 81612 BASALT,CO 81621 PINKOS DANNY&ANNA PITKIN CENTER CONDO OWNERS PRICE GAIL PO BOX 6581 : ASSOC C/O ASPEN POTTERS INC SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 517 W NORTH ST 715 E HYMAN#10 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 QUARRY INTERESTS LTD RAINER EWALD REDSTONE SUSAN 9932 LAKEWAY CT 409 E COOPER AVE#4 120 E 90TH ST#11-B DALLAS,TX 75230 ASPEN,CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10128 label size 1"x 2 5/8"compatible with Avery 05160/8160 m Etiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery 55160/8/60 WILSON STACE S WOODS FRANK J III WRIGHT CHRISTOPHER N PO BOX 5217 205 S MILL ST#301A 13 BRAMLEY RD SNOWMASS VILLAGE,CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81611 LONDON W10 6SP UK, AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060,(E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: - 20 Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: k d z4yAa1 �7 P 5:6 ArYt ,2011 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) (name, please print) being or representirib an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personallyL,., certify that l 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 sect onsof 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 publicationFis0duached hereto. 1+1 Y iP 11`� _ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was"obtained frTom the Community Development Department, which was made:.of:suitable;waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide,and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 20 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing,"A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (3 00) 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. (Continued on next page) 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. Signature The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this day . of 201 f , by Sc PUBLIC NOTICE RE:205 S.SPRING STREET,CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL _40 •SITE RELOCATION,CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW,DEMOLITION AND VARIANCES Pa�eYe e�U NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing :op My commission expires: .=Z� will be held on Wednesday,August 17,2011,at a` ° special meeting to begin at obefore the Cm Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, on,Council,. iVuA M. - Chambers,City Hall,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,to • consider an application submitted by 635 E HOP-:�'•t.'•i.:`SjNG KINS LLC,c/o 532 E.Hopkins Avenue,Aspen,COI o° 81611,970-920-4988. The applicant is represent-I - Notary Public ed b OZ Architecture and Haas Land Planning, �,•'_s LLC.The project affects the property located at 205 I. " ► _ S.Spring Street,Lots H and I,Block 99,City and Townsite of Aspen,County of Pitkin,State of Colo- rado,PID#2737-182-12-002. The applicant proposes to remove non-historic por- rcn Expires 0311912014 tions and features on the existing historic home, I and restore it. The house will be relocated a short distance from its current location to accommodate I construction of a new basement;the house will then be moved back its current location. One ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE i existing shed is proposed to be demolished and one is proposed to be moved closer to the alley and west property line and be repaired.A new ad- dition to the existing single family residence.(don- , THE �+ C southern below grade only)is proposed on the H OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) southern portion of the lot In addition to the Con- 11 6eptual Major Development,On-Site Relocation and Demolition,the applicant requests conditional (OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES NOTIED use approval to maintain the detached residential dwelling use;.a front yardsetbackvariance it al- low a 3 foot setback where 10 feel are otherwise I _ required)for new subga space and to maintain ERTICICATION OF MINERAL.ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE the existing condition above , grade after temporary �, relocation;a variance to allow 10 feet of combined side yard setbacks where 15 feet are otherwise re- quired;a rear yard setback variance to allow an 8 BY C.R.O. §24-65.5-103.3 foot setback where 10 feet are otherwise required; a minimum distance between buildings on the lot variance to allow a 2.5 foot separation between the shed and the house addition where 5 feet are oth- erwise required;and a 500 square foot FAR bonus. For further information,contact Amy Guthrie at the • City of Aspen Community Development Depart- ment, 130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,CO,(970) 429-2758,amy.guthrie@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Ann Mullins - Vice Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commis- sion Published in the Aspen Times on'July 31.2011. _ (6817919) PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 205 S. SPRING STREET, CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, ON-SITE RELOCATION, CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW,DEMOLITION AND VARIANCES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, August 17, 2011, at a special meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by 635 E HOPKINS LLC, c/o 532 E. Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611, 970-920- 4988. The applicant is represented by OZ Architecture and Haas Land Planning, LLC. The project affects the property located at 205 S. Spring Street, Lots H and I, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, PID#2737-182-12-002. The applicant proposes to .remove non-historic portions and features on the existing historic home, and restore-it. The house will be relocated a short distance from its current location to accommodate construction of a new basement; the house will then be moved back to its current location. One existing shed is proposed to be demolished and one is proposed to be moved closer to the alley and west property line and be repaired. A new addition to the existing single family residence (connected below grade only) is proposed on the southern portion of the lot. In addition to the Conceptual Major Development, On-Site Relocation and Demolition, the applicant requests conditional use approval to maintain the detached residential dwelling use; a front yard setback variance (to allow a 3 foot setback where 10 feet are otherwise required) for new subgrade space and to maintain the existing condition above grade after temporary relocation; a variance to allow 10 feet of combined side yard setbacks where 15 feet are otherwise required; a rear yard setback variance to allow an 8 foot setback where 10 feet are otherwise required; a minimum distance between buildings on the lot variance to allow a 2.5 foot separation between the shed and the house addition where 5 feet are otherwise required; and a 500 square foot FAR bonus. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2758, amy.guthrie@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Ann Mullins �- Vice Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on July 31. 2011 City of Aspen Account COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT w 130 S.GALENA STREET ASPEN,CO 81611 FAATH CARLOS M&MOLLY G �/��, 1 PO BOX 11435 ASPEN,CO 81612 NIXIE --eO2 DE 1 OO 09112#11 RETURN TO SENDER ATTEMPTED - NOT KNOWN UNAMLE TO FORWARD 0 sc: 91611190230 *X1688-05718-12-40 -(31611@1902; II�HI��iillilliiiHHllHiillHHillliliHlli HIHHliliillillHHjliilil HAAS LAND PLANNING , LLC RECEIVED JUL 2 0 2011 CITY OF OF ASPEN July 20, 2011 �' w COMMUMn Wt Mr. Chris Bendon, Director City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Floor Area Exemption Request pursuant to Code Section 26.575.020(D)(12), Historic Sheds and Outbuildings, for the Berg Property (205 S. Spring Street; Parcel Identification No. 2737-182-12-002) Dear Chris: This letter is submitted pursuant to the above-cited Code section as a formal request to exempt the Floor Area of an uninhabitable and limited function shed which contributes to the integrity and resource value of the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures listed property located at 205 South Spring Street (southwest corner of the S. Spring Street and E. Hopkins Avenue intersection). The attached plans and exhibits prepared by Oz Architecture depict the existing and proposed conditions of the shed and should be reviewed and considered in concert with the narratives provided below. Beginning with the adopted Code language, Section 26.575.020(D)(12) explains that, The Community Development Director may provide a parcel containing an uninhabitable and limited function historic shed, outbuilding, or similar historic artifact with a Floor Area exemption to accommodate the preservation of the historic resource. The shed or outbuilding must be considered a contributing historic resource of the property. Functional outbuildings, such as garages, art studios, home offices, and the like shall not be eligible for an exemption. The Director may consult the Historic Preservation Commission prior to making a determination. The Director may require the property's potential to receive Floor Area bonuses be reduced to account for the structure. The exemption shall be by issuance of a recordable administrative determination and shall be revocable if the artifact is removed from the property. • 201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108 ASPEN, COLORADO • 81 61 1 • PHONE: (970) 925-7819 FAX: (970) 925-7395 Since there is a good deal of regulation and criteria to consider in this language, the following will address each sentence individually and in the order presented. The first part of the codified language provides that, "The CommunityVq1 lbpment Director may provide a parcel containing an uninhabitable and limited f4tiction historic shed, outbuilding, or similar historic artifact with a Floor Aradexemption to accommodate the preservation of the historic resource. " :r' r The exemption contemplated in this part of the standard is ptet;isgly what the applicant is requesting. The Berg property contains an uninhabitable and limited function shed that has become significantly dilapidated over the years. The applicant intends to fully stabilize and restore the shed to substantially extend its viability and life-span. As such, not only will this unheated and limited function outbuilding be restored but it will also be preserved. The applicant will not add heating or otherwise cause the structure to become habitable (i.e., fit to be lived in). The shed's exterior dimensions will be a mere 14.25' by 10.25' for a total of just 146 square feet (see attached plans). An unheated structure of this size can truly serve nothing more than a "limited function." In this vein, the applicant would prefer the ability to place mechanical equipment inside this uninhabitable shed structure but if such is deemed to serve too great a function to meet the criteria, then it can be left to serve no use beyond that of a shed (i.e., storage), as it has historically. Allowing this exemption will indeed accommodate the preservation of the historic shed as the exemption provides the needed incentive for the applicant to not only maintain an otherwise useless structure that would diminish highly valuable property rights but also to go to the added cost and trouble of actually stabilizing and restoring it first. The next part of the codified language explains that, "The shed or outbuilding must be considered a contributing historic resource of the property. " To date, there has been absolutely no debate as to the contributing nature of the shed structure to the historic resource value and integrity of the subject property. The City's historic maps indicate its presence as far back as the late 1800's and early 1900's. The City's Historic Preservation Planner has encouraged the shed's preservation since day one of discussions regarding the future of the subject property, and in two work sessions to date with the HPC, they have similarly encouraged the applicant's goals of restoring and preserving this resource. The shed structure is described on the City's historic inventory form for the Berg property as a contributing structure. The third part of the codified language states that, "Functional outbuildings, such as garages, art studios, home offices, and the like shall not be eligible for an exemption. " As explained above, the proposal envisions keeping the shed as a limited function and uninhabitable shed. It is too small to serve as a garage, and it will not be heated or finished on the interior in a manner necessary to provide for full function as an art studio, home office or the like. Next, the Code explains that, "The [Community Development] Director may consult the Historic Preservation Commission prior to making a determination. " While the idea 205 South Spring Street, Shed FAR Exemption Request(PID#2737-182-12-002) 2 behind this language is understandable and logical, it is felt that consultation with the HPC in the current case would be unnecessary and impractical. First, as explained above, both the City's Historic Preservation Planner and the HPC have already had several occasions to consider this shed structure and both have consistently encouraged its preservation as well as the applicant's goals for restoring it. Moreover, consultation with the HPC is impractical as the applicant intends to submit a full application for Conceptual HPC review and those plans need to be designed with a known allowable Floor Area figure in mind. That is, if the Director has not yet granted the exemption, then the applicant cannot know the effective limitations applicable to their proposed designs. While a stand alone 146 square foot structure is certainly small, trying to determine how one must eliminate that much Floor Area from the design of a home can have great implications for a Conceptual HPC application. As such, it is hoped that the Director can approve this request based on this letter, the accompanying plans, previous input from the HPC (in work sessions), and the advice of his staff historic preservation planner. The fifth part of the code language provides that, "The Director may require the property's potential to receive Floor Area bonuses be reduced to account for the structure. " The applicant feels strongly that reducing the potential to receive Floor Area bonuses should not be required. Since the subject property is zoned C-1, it is allowed only 80% of the Floor Area the identical parcel with the exact use would be allowed immediately across the street in the MU zone or anywhere in the R-6 zone, for that matter. Accordingly, the allowable FAR is only 2,592 square feet instead of 3,240 square feet; in other words, a 648 square foot "penalty," if you will, has already been assessed on the subject lot (which further translates to some 97 square feet less exempt deck space that would be allowed on the same property across the street or in the R-6 zone). Coincidentally, the 500 square foot Floor Area bonus potential plus the requested 146 square foot Floor Area exemption for the historic shed sums to 2 square feet less than the already assessed "penalty." Therefore, it is felt that further diminishing this property's potential to receive a Floor Area bonus would be almost punitive, especially since any bonus awarded by the HPC will be fully earned only through the applicant's willingness and ability to achieve an"outstanding preservation effort," a top goal of this applicant. The final part of the adopted code language stipulates that, "The exemption shall be by issuance of a recordable administrative determination and shall be revocable if the artifact is removed from the property. " The applicant understands and encourages this requirement as a means of memorializing the 146 square foot Floor Area exemption and, further, as a means of attaching conditions to the approval, such as but not necessarily limited to a requirement that the shed remain unheated and uninhabitable, that its use be limited to only the housing of mechanical equipment or storage, and that it remain on the property and in a state of repair. In closing, it is respectfully requested that an administrative determination approving the requested 146 square foot Floor Area exemption for the historic shed be executed for 205 South Spring Street, Shed FAR Exemption Request(PID#2737-182-12-002) 3 recording in the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. If you should have any questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Truly yours, Haas Land Planning,LLC 7� 0 Mitch Haas Owner/Manager Attachments: Oz Architecture Plans and Exhibits (five sheets) cc: Greg and Jane Hills, Applicants Amy Guthrie, Aspen Historic Preservation Planner 205 South Spring Street, Shed FAR Exemption Request(PID#2737-182-12-002) 4 / a r M. hG y �/ RS 1 xw9 rr rk f k SHED AREAl 146 SQ FT ; +' SITE AREA= 6000 SQ FT cn N - N FAR OF SHE _ .025 fO M 4 44 1�I C 14.3 14.3 ` !i BRICK 7 15 m -� z z 1, � w 12.4 ROCK WALT"~- 7916 s /4'so 149"+W /00.00' 1� 1' p �o Nay t7 y . I mURO�w cNITCC-Df5URE!GN 623 i 635 HOPKINS nrttP�ON VMGN 0 0 07.19.2011 ` • • BRigC -........................... 7914 60.00' Fo* M � i I � � 6.4• I H I 3.0 1 3 kE TCVY : Y / • OFT AND ASEMENT e 1CK� I 6R i CK i m FTS - _ _ I .. ' S•c RR S • uv X-o► ., RO( Z O W0 Q g O o = F a ta - a inIAJ tA O OJ H 0 O 57<H a w i 1 '-3" DEEaoSHED �j 0 DN ® ' ' BA I � M.BA I I ® W.LC PR i I I Inl V I IIT I ' BEDROOM SITTING OM I LIBRARY / FP m FOYER D --GARAGE ENTRY MUD. 00 • A11111111 SIG14 623 & 635 E. HOPKINS ASPEN,CCI �a I a a LI• INTERIOR DESIGN BERG&SUSIES 0 510128OTIU011 PROPOSED , , • , ,w,, ,. � 11111111111. �� 11111111111 `- 111111111111 -' 111111111111 Lev 13 Lev _�__ .. ...... ...... .......... 111111111111 �� © PROPOSED" ' • X1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 Level 2 ,1111 1111 1111 1111 1111■ 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 � I .1111 1111 1111 1111 1111. /�\ I 11 1111 1111 11�■ ' � -_ /-%�= ��- '11 1111 1111 111' ®f �� _,_ ■ ■ I II I I I II III II II .II �i=i =is O PROPOSED ELEVATION AACHITECIURE URSANDEIGH623 & 635 W ASPEN,CO PROPOSED ELEVATIONS 1 BERG.SUSIES • 510128 • 1/B"=1'-0" • 07.19.2011 • 4 Lev 13 11 1`= iill ilii illi 1i11� 0 �"' 1111 1111 1111 1111. Illt` '�11 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111■ l Level 1 00 • © "PROPOSED Level 3 X1111 1111 !l��ili ��■tiir�i Lev 2" ill, 0 .1111 1111 �f�.i� ■.1111 ■1111 1111 Il..f� ®■1111 - --■■■� _.... 11 ��: 1111 1111 !!..l�'. ■■1111 x- 1111 Il !� 1111 II11� �f..i� ■�111� lI I I 1• 1111 Level 1 � • © "PROPOSED NORTH 1/8"=V-O" 623 & 635 E. HOPKINS <,SI'EI� CO PROPOSED ELEVATION 2 BERG&SUSIE'S • 510128 • 1/B"=1'-0' • 07,19.2011 •