Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.HP.520 E Durant Ave.HPC18-95D&E Snowboard Shop Minor Hist. Der HPC18-95 520 E. Durant Ave. 60 11 2-51 Eli·-l 1. .. CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee DATE RECEIVED: 7/18/95 CASE NUMBER: HPC18-95 DATE COMPLETE: PARCEL ID#: PROJECT NAME: D & E SNOWBOARD SHOP MINOR HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT Project Address: 520 E. DURANT AVE. ASPEN APPLICANT: DEREK JOHNSON & ERIC BERGSTROM Applicant Address: 45 VILLAGE SO. SNOWMASS VILLAGE 923-2337 REPRESENTATIVE: DAVID RITCHIE Representative Address/Phone: 1101 VILLAGE RD. SUITE UL3D CARBONDLAE, CO 81623 963-4335 TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 STEP: 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: .. a i . MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission From: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer Re: 520 E. Durant- Minor Date: July 26, 1995 SUMMARY: The applicant requests HPC approval to replace existing double doors with 1/2 panel of glass with double doors with a full panel of glass and to install new awnings. This building is not historic, but it lies within the Commercial Core Historic District. APPLICANT: D&E Snowboards, represented by Dave Ritchie, architect. LOCATION: 520 E. Durant Avenue , PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development within 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 general design, massing and volume, scale, and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H, " Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark... Response: The proposed awning will match the existing awnings in form, materials and color. It must be retractable in order to meet zoning code. The applicant wishes to replace existing double doors which have a half pane of glass with double doors which have a full pane of glass, in order to maximize light into the space. There is another single door into this shop that is a full pane of glass. Staff finds that the change is not objectionable, however, HPC should consider whether it is important to have a certain uniformity to the building. There are some other shops that have doors like those proposed, one that has metal frame doors, the Chanel shop which has plexiglass doors, but the majority of the doors in the building are wood with a half pane of glass. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the .. parcel proposed for development. Response: Awnings are traditional in the Commercial Core. The change in doors does not affect the character of the historic 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 or on adjacent parcels. Response: This proposal has no impact on the cultural value of any adjacent historic resource. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposal has no impact on the architectural integrity of any historic structure. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any of the following alternatives: 1) Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. 2) Approve the Minor 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 Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC approve the Minor Development application as proposed. Additional Comments: ATTACHMENT 1 . ~ND USE APPIIaTION REM 1) - Project Nalne ~ 9 ~ 6 N 0 03 -2_~P AW-D ~ H--0 P 2) Project Iocation AJAN MouNTAI,4 801 LDIKILi S zo E. Dog.Ar.1 -r A-g E , A-be €-A - (indicate street address, lot & block nmber, legal Aescripl!ion tere appropriate) 3) Present Zoning 6 63 4) Lot Size DE-REK Jo WArE>OA 5) Applicant's Name, Arifiress & I?tiorie # 11)-·r€ 5,50.0.2>0/9.0 9>e·op Egle- 6€RG,ST-A) M 0,0 N •£2.35 45 V/LL-ft-6£ €>a.,,<E>No.av4465 ~ILLA<05 ,, d© al61€ (970~115-233>7 6) Representative's Name, Address & Ehone # '~Ar1£, D F~ 0 -rt•+1 E DAp o f2101(ttlf + As soc \\01 Su,66€ Ap, sorr€ U L'LIP 6,"-2,0,4 DA-L€ f OD ai c:,1.1 (174 1 63 - 9335- 7) Type of Application (please check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA Conceptual Historic Dev. Special Review Final SPA Final Iiistoric Dev. 8040 Greenline - Conceptal FUD ~ Minor Historic Dev. Stream rfargin Final POD I{istoric Demolition Motlntain View Plane Subdivision ~ Historic Designation ex'xleminiumization - Thxt/Map Amendment GUS Allotment Iat Spli-~Iat Line - QI]S E]omption Adjustment 8) Description of Existing Uses (number and type of existing structures; approximate sq. ft.; number of bedrooms; any previous appmvals granted to the property). EXIST-1,16, 2, €bo %,F. 6€1-8 IL. TE•1 ANT S.~AC-,E- 1,1 . Air-)<- AD 0,11-Mfl BUPCa. C flo,Ent €ILLy en-Z--A HOT / FoR. r~ eLLy mA-M A- YM A-·,2-, A-'S ~ / Ip 9) Description of Develoiment Application 1 - A-p D e.01-€32-1 0,2- Au.1 B I A 6- 2. 12'EfiA€£ EXI STIA 6 \+Atp GL,ALS Poott- Le 1-11+ roli. 6 0-65 1-7 Pe· 160 nt To M Ask H «l EAILA£ €KIST146 €L€AA €ul" alr €AIST"4 6- 10) Have you attached the following? BULP\.3 6--. Response to Attachment 2, Mininum Submission antents Response to Attachment 3, Specific Submission Contents Response to Attadment 4, Review Standards for Your Application L E-2€\ ST-1 4 6 1 k-F>Ropos€ D AJAX Molt 41-Al A - AWN»46 PLANT€ g EL),1-· Unklca LocAll D 4 620 E. DUR-ANT ~<.8-Xlfl,Tihka FLA 2.,6,, -~ 1 1 1 i D. 1 9 A L al- P LARre A- - - Drd I , PA > up · 1-F . - PA 1 1 71 0 FLAA-rE A de -* Dr4 PN 6 \U> €, \,-\ A L.¥1 6- . DUKANT Av€' 0 \1- 6 .el-AN 1 4. 1 1 f -1 1 0 E » 4-41 £ It 1 ' #--- ShisT:jiG FULL, L~__~ 1 69 AE.,5 60012- / 1/\ 1 NEW AWNI,44 L 0 - ----Fi€P LA CE -c>51- AALp r B LASS I>002 14/ 1 £ 12> L.-+ 2. A ,,~) DEL· FULL GLAGE. p ODK- TO ,-1 A TOf EXISTING F U L. L, 4 AA€,6 POOL ~~ 15?E,/f/A.rL ·FLAINJ 09 5 /4.-5,32 loK f/into 1 ---6 6/42<AL LT 29 1 1 ~61--AP Lff-6 4 P+E. 3hlok'E'OARD SHOP * ALL 602.0 FRaurihics OR b) PA a Al 6 + 00 -r k 360€· A\AN\1\1(06 , C TD M Afcd £>ClsT. 6 E U u- - -- a 9 3 g I , TEXE MA7 WA 9 1 / guiuoi~ 4 -1 9 9 f J<'eull £i-,4 fOF --Uc>caD 0,1 1 - / -222 COFFEE SHOP K---ky ENP FAW€1,5 CO< LU, Faal R ca EAST 0' AWNING DLEVAflohdo .. STEPHENJ. MARCUS P.O. Box 1709 ASPEN, COLORADO 81612 (303) 925-7615 July 21, 1995 Historic Preservation Commission Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department 130 South Galena Aspen, Co. 81611 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: This letter is written to verify that Ajax Mountain Associates, Ltd., owner of the Ajax Mountain Building at 520 East Durant Avenue, Aspen, Colorado has reviewed and approved the request for building modifications submitted by D&E Snowboard Shop. Specifically, permission is granted to add an exterior awning in the same color and style as existing awnings on this building and to replace the existing exterior wood half glass double door to the tenant's space with a wood full glass double door matching other similar full glass doors in this building. If there are any further questions, please contact Paula at 925-7615. Sincerely, AJAX MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATES, LTD., AL_ k..u.~ Stephen J. Marcus General Partner SJM/p r A l VuL 2 4 1995 \ ~44 :DEVE,1,*3.'t¢,t-.f-1. i r f /*ir., .QDA. 'r. .. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 26, 1995 520 E. DURANT - MINOR DEVELOPMENT Amy: The proposal is to change an existing set of double doors that only have a half pane of glass to a full pane of glass and to install new awnings. I recommend approval. I mentioned in the memo that building is starting to have numerous changes and there is sort of a mish-mash there. It is something to keep in mind as I feel the building needs some unity. Donnelley: It is consistent to what exists. MOTION: Martha moved to approve the minor development for 520 E. Durant with an awning change to match the existing and changing a door of half glass to full glass; second by Melanie. All in favor, motion carries. Martha: The awning would be the same color as the existing awnings which is blue and gold printing. Martha: Does the glass have to be tempered for safety. Donnelley: I believe that is a code requirement. 205 S. MILL - MINOR DEVELOPMENT - CHANIN'S Amy: Mechanical equipment is usually a staff signoff but I am bringing it to you because it was done without a permit. It is a new vent for the Elizabeth Lock Shop. It goes up the side and out on the roof. It blends with the Chanin's building but when it turns out onto the roof it is right at the edge and is silver. Tom Marshall was the contractor on the contract and I asked him to come in and explain why it has to be in that location if it does and suggest ideas on how to screen it. Tom Marshall: I did apply for a permit and it was at the time building inspectors were changing hands. I did not know it had to go to the HPC. The permit was submitted and they came over to inspect and said by the way it has to go before HPC. Let me give you the history. The Lock Shop was to get air conditioning but Chanin's decided to use the deck and Tony Maza runs the building and asked me if we could run the duct on the outside of the building. I said you can't. The duet comes out of Locks and goes along the deck and is painted out and goes into the attic space and curved roof. I could not put the cooler on the curved roof so we put it behind the parapet and ran the duct across. It was the least obtrusive. We had already started and Steve Kanipe said he didn't see any problem mechanically. Donnelley: The real problem is on the roof deck level. It is too 2