Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.330 E Main St.HPC15-941/LIL·-1-VFLIALILL- rF - 330 East Main HPC15-94 , Re< R P#53 H 1P 7 CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee DATE RECEIVED: 06/06/94 CASE NUMBER: HPC15-94 DATE COMPLETE: PARCEL ID#: 2737-073-21-001 PROJECT NAME: Hotel Jerome Minor Historic Development Project Address: 330 East Main APPLICANT: Pat Ryan Applicant Address: 330 East Main REPRESENTATIVE: Paul Anderson Representative Address/Phone: 1004 E. Durant #3 Aspen, CO 920-1596 TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 STEP: X 2 STEP: 3 STEP: HPO Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption: HPC Meeting Dates: P&Z Meeting Date: CC Meeting Dates: 1st 2nd REFERRALS: Planning Building Zoning City Engineer Parks Dept. City Attorney DATE REFERRED: INITIALS: DUE: FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: INITIAL: City Atty City Clerks Office Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: COMMENTS: MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer Re: 330 E. Main Street, Hotel Jerome- Minor Date: June 8, 1994 SUMMARY: The applicant must install a safety fence around the hotel pool for insurance reasons. The fence must be 60" tall by code. The new fence will replicate the existing wood fence. New gates will also be put in. NOTE: Please do a site visit to inspect the existing railing. Photographs will be provided at the meeting. APPLICANT: The Hotel Jerome, represented by Paul Anderson. LOCATION: 330 E. Main Street, Lots P,Q,R and S, Block 79,City and Townsite of Aspen. PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H, " Historic Overlay District must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 7-601 of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in character with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H, " Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark... Response: The proposed fence will be exactly the same as the existing wood fence, but will be sixty inches tall. The pool is at the rear of the Hotel Jerome courtyard, is set below natural grade and is totally obscured from view by trees. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The courtyard has a wrought iron fence at the sidewalk which is compatible with the character of the neighborhood. This fence is not visible from the street, is simple in design and will not create a stockade type of wall. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: Staff finds that the cultural value of the Hotel Jerome will not be affected. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: Staff finds that the architectural integrity of the Jerome is not affected. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any of the following alternatives: 1) Approve the Amendment to the Final Development application as submitted. 2) Approve the Amendment to the Final Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (specific recommendations should be offered) 4) Deny the Amendment finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC approve the application as submitted. i ATmCBMENT 1 .. IAND USE- APPLICATION ]FOEM 1) Project Name JA~c:FQG UQ<)14Lf 2) Project location 3 50 e. KAA [ AJ (indicate street address, lot & block ntmher, legal amcription Where aiprcpriate) 3) Present Zoning 4) Iat Size 5) Applicant' s Name, Address & Ehone # F*~T-- e,Lf''h-) - N£,-ret- JlglEe,u:a 53,0 17' KA»· 1*.3 1 +928.3 2 60 · 8 IR It 910-/900 6) Representativels Name, Address & phone # lE>,ft_, ,£419€9252,3 (Le,NIST-. 60. 10©4.- tt Ev#643T 41>S Aseaw, CO , 6/Gll 170- 1596 Typd of Application (please check all that amly): . 4 Conditional Use - Conceptnl SPA Corr.Ehial Historic Dev. Special Review Final SPA I.I.--1 Final Historic Dev. 8040 Greenline emceptual POD Minor Hi =toric Dev. . 1 Historic Dainlitirn Stream Margin - ·- Final IUD - M,mtain View Plane___ Subdivision Historic Designatirn Ocnianinilmization· - Ted:/Map Amenbent . - QUS Allotment Iot Spli:t/Iot line ag E:xemption Adjustment 8) Description of Existing IMes · (Il=ber and; type of existing structures; appraxinate sq. ft.; nmber of bedrocms; any previas approvals granted to the pmperty). \1·or€\- - 7901 - 432*BEA %11' 9) Description of Developnent Application A 1712 +AF~kn' CATeS f Figoe€ -TO Ve#TH fbot- ,4(267,4 70* 16)1•,A.#-A Ca 1269 l,fle€ 14Ae>1'5 10) Have you attached the following? - Besponse to Attadm™It 2, Minimm Suhnission ecntents Response to Attachment 3, Specific Sulnission Contents - Response to Atiadmert 4, Review Standards for Your Application 1111'lls -· 1 i .. 4 C 7 - y\ 1 1 * 1 % r 32 % 6-3 -is /< I *U . '- O, 51 -B" 6'-49 \ I. I. I Lj'_o" Paul Andersen UOTEL JUP>oble Detail: PlipdA r-U Sheet Construction Company POOL diATes A FEN,sm- Scale: !4 " = 1'-0 " No: Design Services Date: 9 - 14-94- 1004 East Durant #3 Drawn By: rAr Aspen, CO 81611 Revisions: 2-*** ·03*1 -A24 ~ 17 Z ~- M-71221- 18',oh-le Poer.-rye. 1 11 1 F 4 <1 b A t 1 9 12 1 1 -9 i 4-0 4- --r- =13 ~- - -TZ 1 ---11.ja=z, 11 -1 4 Z . ., j ill 11 ?TWK# ff#. eg,0 2¥5 - 3d*& ¢ r -1 311 0 / E - -R 6 13 . F t < Z 1 Paul Andersen A GraL JuEFLO»1 E Detail: FL.~yT r'»44 Sheet Construction Company FhpL SATES f ¥*-Bols Scale: 1.= 10£9* No: Design Services At:12/TIOA Date: 5 - PZ - 14- 1004 East Durant #3 Drawn By: 1*-r t Aspen, CO 81611 Revisions: <*~. UeraL- ler-·OMS 'e:>ull-DPIN-k~~~~ t- Ekn u~»1£614 1 - MA\U ST. 12==09