Page 12 - Breckendridge, CO Design Standards

Scenario 4
This scenario includes a more contemporary connector that
is mostly transparent and has a shallower roof slope. This
addition also contains a primarily two-story addition, with a
small portion that is one-story and an alley-accessed garage.

• Lessons Learned: Discourage additions that extend beyond
the wall planes of the historic building by assigning negative
points. Provide images and illustrations of more transparent
connectors that create the illusion of two separate structures
on the site. Allow for a shed roof form for a connector.

Scenario 5a
This scenario incorporates a long connector and an addition
that is oriented perpendicularly to the historic building.

• Lessons Learned: Refine the standards to address the
benefits of a cross-gable design for some conditions. Edit the
formula for a connector to include a maximum length so that
additions that incorporate connectors do not project across
the entire site.

Scenario 5b
Similar to Scenario 5a, this scenario incorporates an addition
oriented perpendicularly to the historic building. However, the
connector is moved underground.

• Lessons Learned: Update the standards to incentivize below-
ground connectors so that the historic building and the new
building read as separate structures.

Scenario 6
This scenario was developed on a site with a larger slope,
as a number of sites in the District include this condition. In
this scenario, the building projects across the full site, with an
alley accessed garage. The addition remains one or one and a
half stories across the full site, with the ridgeline only slightly
extending above the ridgeline of the historic building in the
first module of the addition.

• Lessons Learned: Incorporate stronger massing standards
in addition to reducing the allowable UPA in the District.
Incentivize placing more of the massing underground.

12