Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Land Use Case.HP.420 E Hopkins Ave.HP-1988-16
...................65, CLE , 4 f ' i %, 1/1 - 1-6 OFFICE EXTERIOR TRF ATMENT -NOCK W -HP47 420 E. HOPKINS, FIRE DIqT- ZEn to~ Pltte,r 67 5(,iz,2-* H ~b,< t~-~-8-4 0 i 14 If .- ,.. 44 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE Minutes Regular Meeting City Council Chambers, City Hall January 26, 1988 2:30 p.m. Meeting was called to order by chairman Bill Poss with Georgeann Waggaman, Nick Pasquarella, Augie Reno and Joe Krabacher present. Excused were Patricia O'Bryan, Charles Cunniffe and Charlie Knight. Zoe Compton was absent. MOTION: Nick made the motion to approve the minutes of Nov. 10, 1987.- Augie second the motion. -All approved. Motion carries. MOTION: Augie made the motion to approve the minutes of Jan. 12, 1988. Nick second the motion. All approved. Motion carries. The HPC Committee welcomes our new alternate Joseph Krabacher. STAFF COMMENTS Steve: We have three good size projects for the Feb. 9 meeting and they are all public hearings. Bill: Your memos help expedite the meetings. Augie: What is the status on our part time employee. Steve: No decision has been made and we had three or four applicants. MONITORING PROJECTS Georgeann: I would like to monitor the log house on 300 W. Main St. owned by Caroline and Scott McDonald. I will also try to have a report on the guidelines for next meeting. Bill: What is the status on the roof of Elli's. Nick: There is new installations going on the roof and the four swamp coolers are still there. I think the new installations have something to do with the restaurant that is supposed to go UP. Steve: We told Elli's that they need approval for the restaur- ant equipment. Bill: Steve would you please call Elli's on the restaurant equipment. Augie: Jesse Graber had two meetings with me; the first one was cancelled and the second meeting he never showed up. HPC MINUTES January 26, 1988 FINAL REVIEW FIRE STATION OFFICE ADDITION 420 E. HOPKINS Bob Walker: We met with the P&Z and they recommended that the SPA overlay be adopted with some conditions that mostly had to deal with parking. The SPA is an agreement with the City, our district lawyer drew it up and a copy has been given to the City Attorney and Steve Burstein. This agreement outlined the agreement between the City and the district as far as how the building will be used and all of the SPA criteria that had to be met. We have had our surveyors do a final plat which show the building size and location; the whole building will be moved back around 1 1/2 feet and the front wall be moved back another 1.9 feet and the over hang being moved back to the minimum of 2.6 feet The plat will also show the landscaping and benches. We hope to start as soon as the weather breaks. The lighting will be a stemmed type of light, incandescent. Two concerns of the P&Z: That the rear parking spaces be demarcated with bumper blocks and that two of them be reserved for the Fire Chief and the Fire Marshal. One of the P&Z members suggested that we size the footings for a second story in case the property ever changed hands. We had the district lawyer send a letter to our engineer and we have the revised foundation plan. HPC thought we should look into some sort of coloration on the block. We have the window trim, the facade of the overhang and the block itself to deal with as far as color. I think all of HPC should look at it and see what would be the best approach. It may look fine as gray. Bill: So you will put it up gray then look at it. Steve: The memo and prior process has taken care of this project. I wanted to thank Bob for considering the colored block. Bill: The Committee is ready to hear a motion to recommend the approval of the final review of the construction of the fire station office addition as presented subject to the condition that the applicant agrees to either select a colored concrete block or to experiment with painting or staining of the concrete block and discuss the results with the HPC. MOTION: Nick made the motion to approve the final review of the fire station office. Georgeann second the motion. All approved. Motion carries. 2 ' Fa·OPEUP( L.-INE 7 0 - . 0 .... 0 0 0 --- 0 0 01 \ At'PaN F.(26 2201-6 C.TiON WOOD 661 faNLE 1 L.)19'r-:2-~Cr- O,==toa -3 A V h 1 | X 2 =27 6 k Jah.//0;25£5 93' JACAE' 1/ ® A¥'fil.2 Ixi .72:7 e.e .OPPL-6 . ANW'LED \ _1 To BE REMOVED , .\-JUN £ PEES ~ JO'Al-'PE26 i # 732 8,6 =22/VA«/22 / 1 4-" 6,-ue OF'20'oe \ 1 4 ®LA.16 902006 TO Ba €82.-OCA--260 t (22 1~/ 0.\ 2.1 .49/664 - To 2£ 6 -22 AL, $28+4 5 1. AepaN 1-0 ee FAMovat; 22 A¢,829 ·6>Al«f{ k.169 :3] 56" A'Epl;t;2.,~·.~'~~ ····'D ee £2*A'e/E 25.32 FN 26: g~~g.N 2©47 70-4;21, F 7-* Ifi I C>Hoe lityl 1-- 97%-AJI.kie-e) * P: E.6 tbA»-4 0%\ €¥4 97 ~ r.·KED h Z"ASFER r-n i ® 44' \ RELLACArds e x l -4-E, A Co . lf-h # 4-' 84-UE OPI-luce -TA 22* r OHOP 5 11~ 0*Ae; APPL·a 07* © U* 6, 4.0-rc~ 4. 4,COT-CH -9 OBAe Fppl-•21 P i N E- ifkx P:NE 11 0 13& 0 'hu 413& 4 EL-064722 Wl-41 \' \~~ W k-,·53- C »Pah/ ...Ah '21"ASPEA./ fx~~ \1/ t.•2~.ic.VE S i 'll 0 /,1/// 0 1/1 U »* /ll/el 41~~* 94 6%2Ae, APPUR 1-' FiC (-70 9 6 2AE!, APOL-a 2. Fi'C (\~ Nav FLA6912>NE • 7.--19/ 0/AL-*2 41 JuN {Pezip 4" eu,e Ae~; PAT- H £./a,crki, *Ar 9 7 9 b ~~AUN:Pag,2 €23 #non Over, i 000 e .t . 1 a, 14'r. 9*51.- ./ 564- 6741 «r (NCO ey- ir'*. CONG I 00#-40 • AP> 12-0 N A F>*.C*-4 'illf L, 13?1 -,r-4 E.*- :6-Ft Nap %9;«9 r =27· 9'N~. 1 ®3 EXP< Ad,5. 606/6.- \ \UP ~ / \NAL-L hd'*\ . 1 , 90 1 ete~- + Peol Puoub . 3--//.7 4 9€uouout, /, e . 1/T lip 1 1 OV . '22*252 <37 X /il. 1 .. 4 8 - 7 4- //. >311 / 71 < A ' <uN ·· fl /4 + 0 V > 2.91 , i[ 741 .r 1 , ..4 -1- 7.. - c.-4* / r- l. '· · k ./til I. P=Of*Azry- 2 u/ l. 1 r -- ~40 409 -3 \ i.,ry.V f.. - --4-0- l'---» 1 06<Lit)LafS .,·A \ ~ -30 - Ve:C.\OUOLf~\ - 3 - / ~ .. . .6 0 =-i~~~----339» LOW JUN IF'>212.6 <CIN(putteot- 4,Mieu5436-'' 4 i PEWAAE- e /ve WALL. .UL.,. HOPHINS AVE. 80'%-1,49 A/E, A€,PaN Flea Pao-racrrioN plinyalcur opp:oe LOTS <R-GE. ·AU</71 r-le LANOSCAPI NCD FLAN I /Zf = 14. Na\,9 4,!Tel GANOSCAPE PLAN 1/6. -- 1 -: O. ,.. AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE January 26, 1988 - Tuesday 2:30 P.M. City Council Chambers 1st Floor City Hall REGULAR MEETING 2:30 I. Roll Call and approval of Nov. 10th and Jan. 12th minutes. II. Committee Member and Staff Comments III. Monitoring of Projects IV. Public Comments V. OLD BUSINESS A. Final Review: Fire Station Office Addition, 420 E. Hopkins Bob Walker VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Minor Development Review: Columbine of Aspen Storefront Awning, 408 E. Hyman Gary Reed B. HPC Scoring: Reconsideration of 222 E. Hallam Historic Evaluation (Tabled to 2/9/88 upon request of the applicant) VII. Adjourn 1.26agenda .. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office RE: Fire Station Office Addition DATE: January 22, 1988 BACKGROUND: HPC gave conceptual review approval for the office design on November 24, 1987 subject to the condition that the applicant further study (1) the proposed open space off Hopkins Avenue and (2) different coloration of the concrete blocks prior to submittal of a final review application. The applicant returned to HPC on December 8, 1987 with revisions to increase the front yard setback, reduce front porch overhang and explain the applicant's reluctance to use colored concrete blocks. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested SPA and GMP exemption on December 22, 1987. City Council will have reviewed and taken action on the proposed SPA and GMP Amendment on January 25, 1988, prior to your final review hearing. STAFF COMMENTS: The Planning Office believes that the basic architectural concepts for this office addition are appropriate. There does not appear to be an opportunity for the design of this structure to bring the entire four lots (and three buildings) into better visual harmony with the Commercial Core Historic district. Surrounded by two concrete block buildings, brick and stone on this small addition would look audacious and out of place, as argued by the architect. We still encourage considera- tion of colored block so to not overly amplify the cold gray character of the Thrift Shop building, while the addition's design features will mainly repeat those of the Thrift Shop. We find the height, massing and bulk of the building to be princi- pally compatible with its neighbors. In Bob Walker's December 2, 1987 letter he states the applicant is willing to experiment with samples of painting or staining the concrete block. This may achieve a better relationship of the office building materials to the materials found in the Historic District and would better meet Guideline V.F.1., stated as follows: "Use building materials that are similar in texture and finish to those found historically." 1 .. P&Z asked the applicant to look at the possibility that some day a second floor may need to be added. The Fire Protection District has agreed to size the footings and foundation to accept a second floor. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval of final review for construction of the Fire Station office addition as presented subject to the condition that the applicant agrees to either select a colored concrete block or to experiment with painting or staining of the concrete block and discuss the results with HPC. sb.firedis2 2 0 . --- 1 f 1 A JU...iF.62'S -1 -R*y.. U==ata 20 -O E,€ , Mah.Jaut 4' e.1-2 GAL:-2 ~ 1 70 ea FELeciA·-St> 1-r, 1// =2 .84 _ 4'A .2/E 8 1- .,3,29 -1-0 ea 22*AC>Ve* 0 5&. At,Fid»29 Xle QIEL.VO/£2, ew-ki< 1 49 P:$26 e.*44 1 70,6,4 C 21\ 0 A-'% As.4. CU , 4 L.AL.AE O' t. LAS<5 --7.-.* .- 0--3¥' e«.i e f; 4"' G kle· Mrr-2 P:Na 6 G O 0. f \ p< 4 to=Ag \. Xy. 6 . to- ,SE*a-=59 -2-* ASPEN 0 £%2*k' 43;'42..C,C:Ag• AP:· -t . 1€C \-1'U 0 »Wr ' 13 4 /VE#V €·AC;,S** Oau,De f '1, i 1 4 ·JUNTE.U., L._L, \ <pnnin i 14,1 -'All 11...~, 4 / I 654 42140 *r. . E1 r.-44 - ------ e* M// 6/0/.IC . .3 k i 6-/6-1 -2, , ./ m AP r.2_© N ' AP Ae> CE¢*vC. ..._ \~ 42 2 t C, Puoub l *-1/ / 4.dti -g #111 1 f delt \34. r' -4\ «54.4 '· 11 1» t r:, 't-·/>A ...4. 1 C . 7/7...1 •/ - /2.. / 3 - Asvear·r I -0+~©r/ ' --iti<-179-"- -~#C=. 14> '-- f.b j 4-/~4'6 -~ 4 I .r \ i,„3/ .//420.-} Vec-loux.r.2.--> ) 'y \\ ------3:~9» 6.1 JUN.·PEZr,(Cli.*4.25=0 - 4-Luttt..2.- I L '87/VeNALC_ -----1 - .-Ii MOP,LU,-44 446. A€,PeN Plea Pe.crrecrrtoN prbratcr app:- ,(0b~'~ t 1. E-,'C-/1,VP:54.4,=65 91(A,N' '>8" • /-O- ' tA | '41 1 1 E i J &41*r. F/%2 #Achl P/ALL- 5 0.5 w K.. elke{,8 Mog·rATZ. m:LUV# ; Al.·(cn4 w 1 ToF CIH Rt F-7 9*40¥' /- 1 1 /31% 1 1 1 1 1 , 4 P * 1 \ i /% $ 7 1 1 -1 -7/Jl ¢~0;ZI== Ck \·AFPD ==1 11--«23> i-- / \1 -1 4/ 48 K Vt -V 0t \% 4 2 I. .\ 413-1 //4 ~ \ : 1 14 lili 1 -1 1 1 . 1116 e € , €'-U. 12'-,90' tho' . '2-cr . d' t *r . . I , 0 ·· V22/Pr Vae! Fty Z'- 60•"r 41 -2. 4.d* A. Ct 4 -cr 4.82 I . I #\,0 Al.0, . ,+1.62, 26'-4. 4 . Ve=/My P 600-r M ELeVATION 1/4" u IL D' O- 671 .O - 03 'Fo<MT~ 6/6/8 /10'69 ~ ~~~~~ e t. I ri 14-% : Fl.. P. 4 t. . A./. 9 <2. - .- -- · - --2 --- r. F 1 1 --73 . OF, 166 AporTION •~ 1 . 1 \\.arce*~L Zood=QU.50 9 10 Y_ 6,94.49- d 8-99 ' \ 14421.0.- t, --71/-*-7 -- » g,Vt</Al / / / f, I *9-&4»~el i .. / . FARTHEST 64 wa_-JL , Llee / # luE / / j ' . -0/..lotat- EMOA:PS•AL- .. - ·- /9 / 1\1 111 F 'cze eAR-N . -TH=-ter OHOP . __ 2 «11 - f 0004 6419-. C,ONC . APCO•-1 1- AS,PeN e/26 PacT-acrION.4 019're-ICT - \ Opt# SPAC- 6 offic-6 400 i-Ttor--1 r jeoe sp / / / 26VISED 0,1-r-6 FLAN 1.\ 1 i / 1 1 l l; 1 O 00 I t DA--a · Vac., 9,, f-16-1 Fcore=.TY LINA •D' -PE,vit-IL- .. - C C 1.1-:,11.-,·,- 41.-r,h Ulit,°r·ru-icr·< T„,-· GENERAL CONTRACTORS BOB WALKER PHONE (303) 927-4262 DARRYL GROB PHONE (303) 923·3428 Oct. 26, 1987 Conceptual Submission Aspen Fire Protection District Office Addition Site Location: Portions of Lots Q,R, Block 87, 420 E. Hopkins, City of Aspen, Co. Background Information: The Aspen City Council of Aspen, Colorado adopted Ordinance No. 51 on Nov. 8, 1982, rezoning Lots 0,P,Q, and R in Block 87 from CC to Public/ SPA which provided for "the expansion of two uses which benefit the community, those being the Fire Station and the Thrift Shop." The original proposal is shown on drawings prepared by J. R. McCarthy, Architect, dated Aug. 11, 1982 which show three additions to the site: 1.New Fire Barn Bay 2. Thrift Shop Building 3.Fire Station Office/Fire Station Housing The Fire Barn Bay of 1347 SF, single story, was constructed. The Thrift Shop of 1424 SF, single story, was constructed. The second floor of the Thrift Shop, designated "Future Office, 1000 SF" was oot constructed. The Fire District Office/Housing structure consisting of 504 SF of office space on the first floor and 1646 SF of living space on the second floor was notconstructed. In addition five parking spaces are provided at the rear, alley, side of Lots Q and R. Further, open space and planting, including trees and shrubs, is provided in the area bounded by the Fire Barn, the Thrift Shop, the Office Structure (unbuilt) and Hopkins Ave. Revised Conceptual Plan: The Fire Protection District Offices in this revised proposal consist of 723 SF, on one story, located between the existing east Bay of the Fire Barn and the west side of the Thrift Shop. This differs from the original proposal in the following aspects: 1.One story instead of two is proposed, 2.The living area has been eliminated, 3.The front (south wall) of the proposed Office is located. an addition-al five feet towards Hopkins Ave. Sheet One of the attached construction drawings gives information regarding set-backs, parking, height, floor area, and open space for the proposed Office Addition. This data is in conformance with.the.require- ments set forth in the 1982 Rezoning. PO Box 12369 • ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 .. . .. I C C GENERAL CONTRACTORS 808 WALKER PHoNE (303) 927-4262 DARRYL GROB PHONE (303) 923+3428 It is the intention of the Fire Protection District to retain the park/ open space as recommended in the original SPA approval. Any trees, planting, or furniture which may be disrupted or destroyed by the construction process will be replaced or repaired and the park returned to its present condition less the area occupied by the proposed Office Addition. It is also proposed that ground level illumination be provided along the pathway leading from Hopkins to the proposed Office Addition. The Fire Protection District feels that the Addition should be similar in character tothe existing Thrift Shop structure; i.e., grey 8x8 grid concrete block with similar window and door details. Because of office use requirements the storefront fixed glass of the Thrift Shop is not being used, rather operable units are proposed. The height of the Addition south wall matches that of the Thrift Shop (14 feet). Elevations are shown on Sheet Five of the construction drawings. Re~915*P i tbj~ / Robert L. Walker, Project Architect PO Box 12369· · ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 .. C C GENERAL CONTRACTORS BOB WALKER PHONE (303) 927·4262 DARRYL GROB PHONE (303) 923-3428 Request for Exemption from Nov. 15, 1987 The Growth Management Plan Aspen Fire Protection District Office Addition The AFPD requests that its Office Addition be considered for exemption from the Growth Management Plan as provided for in Sec. 24-11.2(e) of the Aspen Municipal Code. The criteria for exemption are addressed below: 1.The project represents an essential public facility. Response: The Office Addition provides needed office space for the Fire Chief, District Secretary, and Fire Marshall, all of whom provide an essential service to the community. Existing office space is inadequate as well as dispersed. 2. The project provides facilities in response to growth and is not itself a growth generator. Response: The general growth of the community has necessitated an increase in the complexity and responsibilities of the Fire Department and the enforcement of the fire codes. The Office Addition provides work space as a direct responce to this growth for those involved in maintaining the safety of the community. Since the Addition will be used by the existing Fire Chief, Secretary, and Fire Marshall, thus adding no new employees, it does not by itself generate growth. 3.The facility is available for use by the general public, serves the needs of the community, and is a not-for-profit venture. Response: By their very nature the Aspen Fire Protection District and the office of Fire Marshall serve the needs of the community; i.e., protection from and prevention of life and property damaging fires as well as general emergency and rescue services. The Office Addition provides needed space with which these respon- sibilities may be more efficiently and effectively executed. The Addition is accessible to the public in the same way that any governmental facility would be: it exists for the benefit of the community, providing an essential space in which the above mentioned officials may *work and respond to community ' . needs. The AFPD operates as a not-for,profit organization. 4.Mitigation of project imacts on various services. .. Responses: a. Water and sewer: The Addition of 723 SF contains one toilet and one bathroom lavatory. The impact on water' and sewer use are negligible. b. Parking demand/new employees: Since the number of employees using the Addition is not being increased,but merely being transferred from existing (inadequate) space in the Fire PO. Box 12369 • ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 .. T. . • ' l. l.lu. .....'I ,.... GENERAL CONTRACTORS BOB WALKER PHONE (303) 927 4262 DARRYL GROB PHONE (303) 923-3428 Station and City Hall, there is negligible impact on off- street parking; the five existing spaces at the rear of the site will be retained. c. Drainage control: Site drainage is not affected by the presence of the Addition. There are no surface water flow paths that would be affected by the Addition. Water obldected bytthe additional roof area is to be handled by a large drywell on the park site and engineered to be adequate for the roof of the east bay of the Fire Station as well as the Addition. d. Fire and police protection: The Addition is to be constructed of one-hour materials as dictated by the building and fire codes. Its location in close proximity to the fire and police departments would ensure adequate protection in this regard. e. Solid waste disposal: The Office Addition would generate primarily paper waste. There is an adequate refuse disposal area to the rear of the Thrift Shop for this purpose. f. Impact on air, water, and land resources: The Addition con- tains no wood or coal burning devices and will not contribute to the pollution of city air. The Addition has no proximity to any stream, river, or lake and in general has negligible effect on water resources other than the above mentioned bathroom facilities. Retention of the park/open space in accordance with- the re- quirements of the 1982 Rezoning Ordinance ensures the existence of open space in the City Core as originally intended by the public/SPA overlay. g. Compatibility with surrounding areas: Please refer to our enclosed letter of Architectural Design Intent. Re ctfu,J>r z#i~mit d, Walker, ~-- - Project Architect PO Box 12369 • ASPEN, COLORADO 81612 ./ .. f <1 11' fillc pr "Firr,Ch 17•al:-,·r-•1·r·<LA€qc 1 1,• GENERAL CONTRACTORS BOB WALKER PHONE (303) 927·4262 DARRYL GROB PHONE (303) 923-3428 Construction Schedule/Landscaping Nov. 15, 1987 Aspen Fire Protection District Office Addition The proposed schedule for the AFPD Office Addition once construction commences is 10-12 weeks to completion of the building. This schedule may be subject to delays caused by winter weather. At this time all trees and shrubs have been removed or relocated to their permanent positions. The benches will be stored for winter. Reinstallation of the benches as well as re-seeding of the grass will be done in the spring of 1988 (Apri 1/May) as weather and frozen ground conditions permit. The bell located at the front of the site will remain in its present location. Moving the bell would be potentially damaging, costly, and unnecessary insofar as the layout of the park is concerned. - ted / , / MUUel L L. Wall~.el f Project Architect ' PO Box 12369 · ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 U.,,11.-1-··. 71.-f 'b [.1. 7 i.•-f,ri.4,.4 Tur GENERAL CONTRACTORS BOB WALKER PHoNE (303) 927-4262 DARRYL GROB PHoNE (303) 923-3428 Architectural Design Intent Nov. 15, 1987 Aspen Fire Protection District Office Addition As stated in our Conceptual Submission letter dated Oct. 26, 1987, the Aspen Fire Protection District wishes to procede with the approval process for an Office Addition located between the Fire Station and the Thrift Shop. Aspen City Ordinance No. 51 (series of 1982) rezoned lots 0, P, Q, and R of Block 87 to "Public/SPA" to provide for the expansion of the Fire Station and construction of the Thrift Shop. Included in the conceptual plans for the Thrift Shop was a two story office/housing structure of 2150 SF as well as requirements for building floor areas, open space, heights, and setbacks. The District wishes to complete the Office Phase of the construction with some revisions to the 1982 Plan. The present plans call for a single story office structure only of 723 SF with the front (south wall) located an additional five feet towards Hopkins Ave. Heights, setbacks, and open space requirements are in accordance with provisions set forth in the 1982 Rezoning Ordinance. The design of the building is intended to be an extension of the Thrift Shop as it is now constructed. Identical materials will be used; i.e., a facade of 8x8 grid concrete block to be painted grey to match the Thrift Shop. The Office facade facing Hopkins will be at the same height as the Thrift Shop parapet (14 feet). Window detailing and trim color will also be similar to that of the Thrift Shop with the exception that the Office windows will be operable. We feel that the location of the Office Addition between the Fire Station and the Thrift Shop limits the use of materials to those of the structures which are connected to it at either end of the south facade. The facade itself is 26 feet long by 14 feet high and is the "public face" of the building. The north facade faces the alley to the rear of the lot, looking at the back of the gas station building. The south facade of the Office bridges the space between the Fire Station and the Thrift Shop, both structures being constructed of painted concrete block. While other build- ings adjacent to the Fire Station (Isis Theater) and the Thrift Shop (new structure replacing·Little Cliff's old building) are of brick it was felt that introducing brick between the Fire Station and the Thrift Shop would , be an anomaly. In reality the Office Addition reads as a facade connecting the buildings on either side. Therefore it seems that precedence for com- patibility lies with its immediate neighbors. These are the Addition's direct historical antecedents·in both form and use. PO Box 12369 ..ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 C € 0 GENERAL CONTRACTORS BOB WALKER PHONE (303) 927-4262 DARRYL GROB PHONE (303) 923·3428 The siting of the Office Addition bears consideration. In order to main- tain the park/open space originally intended in the rezoning ordinance, the Addition has been sited to the rear of the lot. The open space as it now exists is bounded at the north end by a short wood fence which only partilly blocks a rather dismal view of the back of the gas station buil- ding. Even though there is some planting with trees and shrubs, the park seems more of a narrow vacant lot without any particular character other than a way to get between the buildings from Hopkins to the alley. The Office Addition closes off the lot, in effect making the park a part of Hopkins Ave. rather than a slot from street to alley. This device is often used in creating urban open space where most of the building facades are at or close to the street line. Because of its location to the rear of the property as well as the screen of trees in the park in front, the Office Addition is somewhat hidden, not revealing its presence unless one is standing directly in front of it. The Addition does not wish, nor is there a need, to call attention to itself. We hope: that this will clarify our intentions with regard to the design of the Office Addition. ResI}€6~0~~.y Sudlitted, / 1 =V VUL- //Robert L. Walker, Project Architect PO BOX ]2369 • ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 .. 11'al]:.,r. '(-1,-nh Th,t·~r·,·.4(cr~C T., . GENERAL CONTRACTORS BOB WALKER i.J!*•ONE 603) 927-4262 DARRYL GROB PHONE (303) 923-3428 Historic Preservation Committee Dec. 2, 1987 City of Aspen Aspen, Colo. Conceptual Revisions Aspen Fire Protection District Office Addition To the Committee: After reviewing the written transcript of our conceptual approval meeting of Nov. 24, 1987 and meeting with the AFPD Board, we are proposing the following revisions to the AFPD Office Addition: 1. The Committee expressed concern about both physical and visual encroach- ment on the park/open space by the south facade and the front overhang. Revised proposal: We will move the entire building 1'- 8" back towards the alley. This does not encroach on the required parking space of 18'. In addition we are reducing the building depth from 25'- 3" to 24'- 6" by moving the south facade back away from Hopkins 1'- 9". We are also reducing the overhang from 4'- 1" to 2'- 6". This revision places outside front line of the structure (the overhang) 9" farther towards Hopkins than the original proposal of 1982. The required open space fronting Hopkins is 15% of the lot area or 1805.4 SF. We have provided 1806 SF. 2. The Committee felt that the height of the building should be addressed. Reply: We feel that the parapet should remain as designed; i.e., to align with the top of the Thrift Shop. Wefeel that this parapet helps to screen the back of the building in the alley behind the addition and therefore visually defines the park more clearly. 3. The Committee felt that the addition should be less a part of the Thrift Shop visually as well as having a "softer" look. Response/revised proposal: In general we feel that there is nothing wrong with the design as it now stands. The use of the terms "natural" and "soften by using wood" seems to be somewhat influenctd by personal preference and may not be a. legitimate design parameter. The most Out- standing boildings in the core area of.Aspen.(the Wheeler, the Brand Building, Ute City Bank, the Jerome, the·Court House, and the new buil- dings at Cooper and Hunter). employ little-wood on their exteriors. Any wood tr'im used* is painted. The severity of these structurei is mitigated by the use of texture, color, and ornamen€ in the brick and stone .whicb are the primary materials in these buildings as well as in the painted detailing of the cornices and the window and door openings. The Thrift PO. BOX 12369 •.ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 -- . - - .. 1.15! 11: c .1. '/ f 1 ,-r, h, 17 .1 + pr•, ,- ; f , . c T ·- GENERAL CONTRACTORS BOB WALKER PHONE (303) 927-4262 DARRYL GROB PHONE (303) 923-3428 Shop is acknowledgedly a visually severe structure and the Committee felt that this severity should not be extended to the Office Addition. We do not agree with this in principle (it seems to us that it may not be appropriate to introduce a third facade into this group of three buildings). However we feel that since the Committee expressed such a strong concern about color as an antedote to the Thrift Shop coldness we should reconsider this aspect of the design. We would therefore propose the following revisions: a. We will retain the 8x8 grid concrete block but paint or stain the block a terra cotta or similar color; samples to be approved by the Committee. Budget Considerations preclude the use of integral color (too few blocks for a run), or cut stone or brick. We will also have more color options with the paint or stain. b. The overhang fascia will be either of painted wood or painted sheet metal (similar to the material used on the Hotel Jerome porch cornice). in a warm dark maroon or burgandy color (not a bright red like the Fire Barn). c. The windows, doors, and trim will be painted the same color as the overhang fascia. The resulting facade will appear warmer by contrast to the grey of the Thrift Shop. We hope that these revisions will answer the concerns of the Committee. RespectfuiAy sabmittedb Ptl Robert L. Walker, /' Project Architect PO BOX 12369 • ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 .. WAYNE L. VANDEMARK, FIRE MARSHAL 420 E. HOPKINS STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (303) 925-2690 TO: To Whom It May Concern L From: Aspen Fire Protection District 1; i Date: January 4, 1988 .). Re: P&Z Conditional Approval at Fire Marshal Office Annex, Condition #4 P & Z requests in condition #4 that we consider building this annex to accept a future second story with minimal reconstruc tion. The Aspen Fire Protection District has no plans for a second story. To cover any eventuality however, we are instructing the contractor to size the footings and foundation to aucept the added bearing of a future second story. This minimizes remodel work. APPD .. MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Burstein, Steve From: Bob Anderson Postmark: Jan 26,88 12:03 PM Status: Certified Previously read Subject: Forwarded: Reply to: Forwarded: Historic Guidelines Appropriation Comments: From Bob Anderson: Previous comments: From Kathryn Koch: Council approved Resolution #2, 1988, on the consent agenda at the 1/11/88 meeting, which contained an approval of $2,000 to print the historic guidelines. Message: From Bob Anderson: please check and respond!! bob From Steve Burstein: Did Council approve appropriation of $2,000 for publication of Historic Guidelines on Janua ry 12, 1988? X - 0 VT 8 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office RE: Aspen Fire District Office: Final Review of Exterior Treatment DATE: April 21, 1988 / 44?0. E · c , 4 The Fire District office addition was given final approval by HPC on January 26, 1988. The only condition of approval was that the applicant shall either select a colored concrete block or experiment with painting or staining of the gray concrete block and discuss the results with HPC. Attached is a letter from Bob Walker, project architect, presenting final colors of the trim of the front facade and proposing to paint the concrete block with a color equal to the existing Thrift Shop.4 He will present a sample of the painted block at your April 26 meeting. .. Walker/ Grob Enterprises, Inc. GENERAL CONTRACTORS BOB WALKER PHONE (303) 927-4262 DARRYL GROB PHONE (303) 923-3428 April 20, 1988 Historic Preservation Committee City of Aspen Aspen, CO 81611 To the Committee, Regarding: Final finishes for the exterior of the Aspen Fire Protection District office addition. We are enclosing a schedule for the final colors. We feel that the concrete block should be painted with a color equal to the existing Thrift Shop. This would keep the relatively small office facade as a "quiet," neutral background to the park. The window, door and fascia details would receive the colors indicated,.which'with the black "AFPD" sign would visually relate the office to the Firebarn (red) as.well as picking up some of the gric brick color of adjacent and surrounding buildings. We will be painting a sample window area which will be available for your consideration on April 26th, in time for your next meeting. Thank --yeQ /j t44, V v v - ~ L. .Robert Walker / Project Architect PO. Box 12369 • ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 A ' • MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee FROM: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office RE: Minor Development Review of the Aspen Community Church, 200 East Bleeker St. DATE: April 26, 1988 Location: 200 East Bleeker St., Lots K, L, and M, Block 47, Townsite and City of Aspen, Colorado Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting approval for minor development involving restoration and maintenance of the bell tower, including re-roofing and restoring the wooden louvres, and re-roofing the area above main entry with copper sheathing. These activites are necessary to help preserve the structure and halt deterioration. No exterior changes are proposed. Historic Designation Status: Designated, rated "Exceptional", and is individually listed on National Register. Note: Reference is made to the Secretary of the Interior's STANDARD FOR REHABILITATION as this structure is individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Procedure for Project Review: This is a one-step process, with HPC approval based on the proposed development meeting the standards in Sec. 24-9.4 (d). The application is for restorative maintenance only, and could be determined exempt under Sec. 24- 9.4 (c)(2) - Exemption; however, as the Community Church is an extremely significant structure in Aspen's historic fabric, Staff's decision was to include HPC in the development review process. Staff has required applicant bring representative materials to the HPC meeting for review. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in character with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels. Response: The planning office finds the proposed development to be compatible with the historic structure, specifically in the areas of restoration materials to be utilized and in the staining and repainting. No exterior changes are proposed, and all surfaces Will be treated similarly as they now appear. The work is necessary in order to correct inadequate (original) roofing to prevent eventual complete failure, and to halt deterioration of the wooden louvers located in the bell tower. The problem roof .. area is located directly above the main entrance; the applicant Will be re-roofing this area with copper sheathing. Further material details are discussed under "Response" to Standard #4. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood. Response: The planning office feels the continued restoration efforts of the Aspen Community Church are in keeping with the Goals and Objectives of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Historic Preservation Element, and sets an excellent example of preservation maintenance and restoration to the community. Staff finds this particular immediate neighborhood surrounding the Community Church exemplary of early Aspen architecture with the Church serving as the centerpiece of this potential district. 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 of adjacent parcels. Response: Staff finds the proposed development necessary for properly preserving this historic landmark, and we feel the methods and materials proposed will enhance the cultural value of the structure. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not dminish or detract from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: Staff finds that the materials proposed for maintenance and restoration will enhance the architectural integrity of the Church. The bell tower will receive all new shingles which will be individually dipped in stain, prior to application, and will be coated completely to prevent future uneven breathing and expansion/contraction. The color will be specially prepared to match as accurately as possible the existing. The question arose as to what percentage of the existing shingles are in good enough shape to be re-used and integrated into the new. The roofing company reports the existing shingles are original and are in very bad shape. To integrate old with new where possible would create a patchy appearance, and would become a continual repairing problem, replacing old ones here and there as they fail. As this is not a certified rehabilitation project, Staff feels the approach to reshingling with new materials which replicate precisely the old is a logical economic approach, and handles very well to problem of deterioration due to water damage. wouldWe do, however, strongly urge the applicant be sensitive in his methods of replacement, repair and staining. The original .. bell tower shingles appear to be treated with a graphite dip, a treatment process used in the late 1800's with good long term results. Great care should be taken to replicate the shingle appearance in texture and color. The bell tower louvres will be restored and reconstructed where necessary, repainted in the same color as currently exists. Copper sheathing is proposed for re-roofing that portion of the roof directly above the main entrance. This is the problem area, and has been in the architect's opinion since the Church was built. This area has been continually patched inadequately over the years after the original tin roof failed. Copper is recommended for a number of reasons, aesthetics and proper maintenance being of prime importance. Copper has been found to be more pliable and the preferred materials in re-roofing smaller difficult areas as is this. It is recommended that sheathing be checked for proper venting to prevent moisture condensation and water penetration, and that all roofing material be adequately anchored to guard against wind damage and moisture y penetration. Roof repairs with limited replacement in kind, or with compatible substitute material of those extensively deteriorated portions are recommended. The Planning Office sought assistance from the State Historical Society's architect, Jay Yanz, whose recommendations on the copper roofing were: In consideration of Aspen's high altitude and intense ultra violet light, treating copper is no longer recommended, due to the coating being a short term solution requiring a great deal of maintenance. Spotting can also a problem. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval of the minor development of the Aspen Community Church, 200 East Bleeker St. with the provision the new shingles replicate the - existing in texture, shape and color, the width and angle of the new louvers match the existing, and that the new copper roofing above the main entrance be allowed to weather naturally. 0 1 i , , , Int APR12 APPLICATION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - I Applicant's Name and Address: ASPEN COMMUNITY CHURCH Proof of Ownership: Rocky Mountain Conference of the United Methodist Church 2 Statement of Applicant's Interest in Property if not owner: Property Address, Legal Description and Name: 200 El. Bleeker St. ... Lots K.L.M. Block 47. Aspen. Colorado Type of Review (Minor or Significant): Minor f«.1. Description of Proposed Development Activity, including but not 4.3*., !'91311, limited to: architectural elements effected, additional square t.:*1? N footage (if applicable), height, building materials and illumina- tion: Thig prnjert involves re-ronfing and regtnration nf the hell tnwer. RFerifir wnrk tn he tinne iq. 1) replarempnt nf the enriqting wnn,9 qhinglp,t nn th* ronf and girle walls nf hell tnwer, 2) re-rnnfing the arpaq ahnve +hp main r pntry with enpper qhpathing;9) reqtnr,1-inn nf thA wnn,9 ln,11,prq in fhA hpll 4-r,wfr anrl.A) rppminting nf All nAw Anrl rlictivrhor .roAC Statement of the Effect of the Proposed Development on the Original Design of Structure (if applicable) and/or Character of the Neighborhood, and why the Proposed Development meets the Review Standards of Section 24-9.4(d) (pertaining to compati- bility in character of historic landmarks on the site, contis- - tency with character of the neighborhood, and whether it enhances or detracts from the cultural value or architectural integrity of the structure) : The above mentioned work is being undertaken with restoration of the original design being the only intention. This work is necessary in order to correct inadequate roofing that is 100 years old and to halt deteri- oration of the wooden louvers. Materials will be as close to the original 24·~ · F- as possible. Paint color will not be changed. We feel that completion of r€: this work will rejuvenate this historic structure. K. Any other City Approvals needed by Applicant, such as encroach- ment licence, GMP or Special Review: Building permit only. SB.APP A»-fr··-4·qi:rl-1.ti';r-1 ~•:~€ft~ pm 99 .. 2 22"Mt 3"4"46•% 1 911&'00/ t.44)815 . 3 :U l 1 . 1 ..r I.-i'/I ' I ,n T. I '·.7.lit·..,11:·..·~ - ·.4UALEP-aijt ....,1. - -m-- 1 4%29,234.-1- 6 .. [. 03·21.J :- ...·f.-~,ti. CiTE;,414~27~.4.- - "·~ -~ ~4.1 1'.(.... ~FfiL:·· 1.?02·4·f·% :.0. *· ~'2<J · w 4'SU.234-3-93.-42- . 49:-t= ·f':-1 - . J<~ <·0-{}0),---2--TuQA :·- 2 ' -09-' ·drf.93274N-g2_12-123629/2 - ·75;-7---2--=·ar,IZZ;ki-·7.4.:.C... · r..Ef- . A·- -15-frl·<7.5_zir--~ : -~--~ 2.·· 1.4- 0»53,. f . .=1. 593-22»31-1. It. 06 --. 4. J J. r ..-..·3*it-h A-----.3&2 ....11: t~ 7100.~~...hvt/Sty-:t . 9 1»- - t. - .-~ ' - -EL-3.-.21-2411-tr5.12~92*'C ' ' ' ...L•· 4 ...t- r.. J -.,-, . ..i,-E- - .5.. . -i'I..; ·~·-~ -4--362 7- -,,:·I.~·-fa.·«~~1.-~942:''i,~-:~ -- ,-'·-- 4- tut 0:(glh»'·' 4 '- .7-·0' ---··-A.,---<-4.' -1-0--7 £1-«U.,tAL.424'*, . .. : ,-- 11 - . -1 -.1 ---L/.... L, 2--=2-1·j'*.'.. :>.- ., 1 ,-. -- - /.4.-- . ...1 -t' ~ 2- . r .LL_.1-1L 7/4 9 V \ 01 ''. ARnA oP . ..2 - 4.:T¢i:„. i. :st-MEE-Eg--4 ~823Jmfild#L v 2 -2..3:t.1 AIN~ M ; I p,Nup 3 t< 58#.1.' ~'·.:4 1---=UE,ZT,Er-=E€GE-Z+NE/#L 0.1 '-'7:&.'1 ·.t.·~·.,91*342-Crv--43-2'li~ --'·~052%L'-'------ ·, t .i , 42.2311 :Re ct ~' --==V - -- 0 W,- 6·. *-73.-;,34.XE)%<64-- Lo·rb-rE--2 974-IN><-~.1-1~: hi E ··· 2~r"tl't-' ·72*·914752·,2,4 4 9.32.115..7,=14~5 -1-. - ,,-3--72-·- 1 t.ki ST'13©€4>3· :2~*.Roif_512 ' 5 FL . .. I 1-~;t:.41.92-AEO?jU.4* 21-3-319.21 SP»- :.5 4: 94--M-" . --'· -. ·-- ··-· ' W 9.:-2-Ji n .ent .'~r;f·2'.i'tgs: 1 t~.~.,-~: -9.-f.i,-ji);%.Ii*33,30= if 21vu-1»% *fl»f ~ 21 514 ., , G-2.uiggiER**f@*43«Rl Lfiur ~< a<or-~-2 ElizED-FE'-01«3 -- 1_6- ~-~.=r-»4*, 7_10~202 2-1-2.42#6~·3--9 -116~ f ,~~i f» 3 9 V.'d 11 2 =11.1//1 [\-1 h\/-,-10.-1 -210(-33-1 \ \\· 1 /1 \\ Il/ \ . \ 1//, 1 1 -al 1 1.1 : I i 13/~_~---------92+91' /(5;Arrb),30 ~ 1-- \: 1 1 . Ic// rh)12(1,3 1 /i Ii/ 1 PX ' . f . - ~\4222233 1 . - --71 1 !, 1 1. /~ f 1;1 £\1\ - /