Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the 212 N Monarch topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Aspen preservation panel continues review of 212 North Monarch after questions on foundation, massing and trees

Aspen Historic Preservation Commission · February 11, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission continued consideration of a major-development permit for 212 North Monarch Street to April 8, asking the applicant for detailed relocation/shoring plans, a preservation plan with photographic monitoring, a drainage plan and tree-impact analysis; staff had recommended some setback variances and a 250-sq-ft floor-area bonus.

The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission voted to continue consideration of a conceptual major-development certificate of appropriateness for 212 North Monarch Street to April 8 after extended questioning of the applicants plan to excavate a basement, replace the historic foundation and build a one-story rear addition.

Garrett Larimer, the applicants lead planner, described the proposal as a program to "remove non historic additions," "restore the front porch" and "excavate a new basement and pour a foundation" beneath the historic house. He told commissioners the team would "salvage the historic material" and reuse stone as an exterior veneer around the new foundation. Staff recommended support for the applicant on the north-side garage setback and for a 250-square-foot floor-area bonus if the commission found preservation benefits were met.

Commissioners raised repeated concerns about destroying an apparently intact historic foundation to create subgrade living space. One commissioner said the historic foundation had not been shown to be failing and asked why the board should approve removing it; another argued relocation-in-place is consistent with precedents for basements as long as the visible exterior fabric is restored. Multiple commissioners required a detailed relocation and shoring plan, an engineers report at final review and a preservation plan with photographic monitoring before any final vote.

The commission also asked the applicant for a drainage plan, for analysis of retaining-wall and tree impacts along the propertys north slope, and for clearer drawings showing porch post rhythm and fenestration details. The panel set a date certain of April 8 for the item to return. The motion to continue passed unanimously; the clerk read a roll-call vote with the commission recorded as voting in favor.