The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.council.regular.20180827 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA August 27, 2018 5:00 PM I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Scheduled Public Appearances IV. Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT scheduled for a public hearing. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) V. Special Orders of the Day a) Councilmembers' and Mayor's Comments b) Agenda Amendments c) City Manager's Comments d) Board Reports VI. Consent Calendar (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion) a) Resolution #116, Series of 2018 - Electrical Standards Update b) Resolution #125, Series of 2018 - Contract with HDR Engineering, Inc. for SHIFT Data Support and Data Collection c) Resolution #123, Series of 2018 - CORE REMP Request d) Resolution #124, Series of 2018 - Shift Contract with Miles App e) Resolution #114, Series of 2018 - Third Party Engineering Development Review Services f) Resolution #126, Series of 2018 - 7th and Main St Concrete Paving and Waterline Improvements g) Resolution #103, Series of 2018 - Galena and Main Street Bus Stop and Pedestrian Improvements Project h) Minutes - August 13, 2018 VII. Notice of Call-Up VIII. First Reading of Ordinances IX. Public Hearings a) Ordinance #18, Series of 2018 - 500 W. Main Street - Historic Landmark Lot Split, Transferable Development Rights, Special Review and Variations b) Ordinance #22, Series of 2018 - 333 Park/931 Gibson - Relocation c) Resolution #122, Series of 2018 - 305 S. Mill St. - Grey Lady Restaurant, Temporary Use d) Ordinance #19 & #20, Series of 2018 - Ballot language to amend Section 10.5 of the Charter regarding enterprise fund bonding. Ordinance #21, Series of 2018 - Ballot language to amend Section 11.4 of the Charter regarding franchises. P1 X. Action Items a) Resolution #128, Series of 2018 - Potential Contract Termination XI. Executive Session a) Executive Session - C.R.S. 24-6-402 (4) (a) The purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of any real, personal, or other property interest; (b) Conferences with an attorney for the local public body for the purposes of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions; (e) Determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations; developing strategy for negotiations and instructing negotiators related to Goshorn & Goldenberg v City of Aspen 2017CV12 and 2017CV20, and the Contract for purchase of 517 E. Hopkins and 204 S. Galena spaces. XII. Adjournment Next Regular Meeting September 17, 2018 COUNCIL’S ADOPTED GUIDELINES · Make Decisions Based on 30 Year Vision · Tone and Tenor Matter · Remember Where We’re Living and Why We’re Here COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. P2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM : Michael Horvath, PE, CFM, Civil Engineer II THRU: Tyler Christoff, PE, Deputy Director of Utilities DATE OF MEMO: August 20, 2018 MEETING DATE: August 27, 2018 RE: Resolution #116, Series of 2018 - Electrical Standards Update: Evaluation and Adjustments, Professional Services Contract Approval for RMH Group, Inc. SUMMARY: Staff recommends that Council approves the contract for RMH Group, Inc. in the amount of $29,520.00 for Phase I of a professional services contract to update Aspen’s Electrical Standards Manual. BACKGROUND: The City’s current electrical standards and specifications have not been updated nor significantly amended for more than 10 years. Staff feels that current standards can be confusing, missing pertinent detail, and do not adequately represent current industry best practice. Updating this material will allow applicants and reviewers to efficiently and consistently navigate the development review process. The objective of this project is to evaluate, revise, and, in some cases, create, the City’s electrical requirements and technical criteria to address both consistency and quality of the City’s electrical distribution system. DISCUSSION: Proposals were received from four consultants summarized below: BCER ESC Engineering RMH Group, Inc. Lassiter Electric, Inc A team of four employees from the engineering and utilities departments performed independent reviews of the proposals. The proposals were then ranked as a group based on the rankings of each reviewer. Proposals were evaluated based on qualifications, experience, project understanding, approach, and familiarity with current standards. Based on the evaluation criteria the team identified two finalists for consideration; RMH Group and BCER. Both RMH and BCER’s proposals thoroughly addressed all aspects of the City’s scope of P3 VI.a work. An addendum was issued to both firms, clarifying scope and roles within the project. Final proposals were supplied from each firm as summarized below: BCER $69,500.00 RMH Group, Inc. $52,744.50 RMH group was selected based on the its expertise in the subject matter, experience with similar and relevant projects, innovation demonstrated in other projects, understanding of the project and of Aspen’s desired approach, and the quality and detail of their proposal and former work. Based on the proposed scope and timeline staff determined that a phased approach would best meet the objectives of this project. Staff proposes awarding the initial phase of the project to RMH group, Inc at a cost of $29,520. Phase 1 includes the following deliverables: · Written summary of goals for the revisions and additions to existing documents · Written list of suggested standard detail sheet additions/revisions · Written summary of code language revisions to support the proposed design standard changes Based on vendor performance staff may elect to contract with RHM group, Inc. for subsequent phases of the Electric Standards project. Staff anticipates future phases to include: · Final copies of entire document · Future recommended refinements based on industry trends FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Staff intends to use planned utility funding for this work. Staff proposes the following funding and expenditures for this project: Total Project Expenditures RMH Group Proposal $29,520.00 Funding Budgeted Electric Masterplan (Acct# 431.323.81200.52199.50765) $100,000.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approves the contract for RMH Group, Inc. as summarized above. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Attachment A: Agreement for Professional Services (between the City of Aspen and RMH Group, Inc.) P4 VI.a RESOLUTION #116 (Series of 2018) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND THE RMH GROUP INC AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract for Electrical Standards Update between the City of Aspen and The RMH Group Inc, a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that Contract for electrical standards update between the City of Aspen and The RMH Group Inc, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of August, 2018. Steven Skadron, Mayor I, Linda Manning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held August 27, 2018. Linda Manning, City Clerk P5 VI.a P6 VI.a P7 VI.a P8 VI.a P9 VI.a P10 VI.a P11 VI.a P12 VI.a P13 VI.a W. Eric Bunce Vice President July 24, 2018 P14 VI.a P15 VI.a P16 VI.a Page 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Karen Harrington, Director of Quality THROUGH: Barry Crook, Assistant City Manager DATE OF MEMO: August 20, 2018 MEETING DATE: August 27, 2018 RE: Resolution #125, Series of 2018 - Approval of Data Support and Data Collection Contract with HDR for SHIFT Project REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Approval of contract with HDR Engineering, Inc. for Data Support and Data Collection for the SHIFT project. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The Aspen Mobility Lab has been discussed with the City Council in multiple work sessions. Most recently, on August 20, 2018, the Council discussed the budget for the SHIFT project and affirmed the use of funds for the project and the direction of the project. BACKGROUND: The SHIFT Steering Committee formed a Data Group to focus attention on the data-related needs for the project. The Data Group includes Karen Harrington (Lead, Quality Office), Trish Aragon (Engineering), John Krueger (Transportation), Chris Menges (Environmental Health and Sustainability), Mitch Osur (Parking), Ben Sachdeva (Parks), and Paul Schultz (Information Technology). During the first quarter of 2018, the Data Group released three RFPs: 1. Data Support (for data related project management assistance and survey development) 2. Data Collection (for collection of field data on mode use and patterns) 3. Database and Data Management Services (for data aggregation and advanced data analysis) Collectively, these RFPs are intended to provide the City with the information it needs to understand not only mode shifts per se, but their impact on the community and their potential to be a part of the long-term mobility landscape here. P17 VI.b Page 2 DISCUSSION: The goal of the Data Group is to provide the information needed to do the following: · Understand whether the SHIFT goals were achieved; that is, to provide data on the magnitude and type of mode shifts that occurred, why, and how satisfied participants were · Understand the costs and benefits of the mobility options employed · Understand the impact of the mode shifts on the community o Non-participant and business community satisfaction o Economic, environmental and safety impacts o Parking changes · Understand the likelihood for long-term, community-accepted behavior change · Set the stage for data-based mobility policymaking (helping us to know what to do next, why and how) Toward those ends, the SHIFT Data Group has reviewed and evaluated proposals received in response to the Data Support and Data Collection RFPs. The Group has selected HDR Engineering, Inc. as the successful proposer in both cases. The primary tasks associated with the Data Support portion of the proposed contract include the following, for a total of $146,000: Data Support Tasks: 1.1 Develop and Implement the Data Group Project Management Plan 1.2 Develop and Implement a SHIFT Evaluation Plan 1.3 Develop and Implement a SHIFT Data Collection Plan 1.4 Collaborate with other SHIFT groups and staff 1.5 Provide data analysis and data integration support 1.6 Reimbursables The primary tasks associated with the Data Collection portion of the proposed contract include the following, for a total of $139,500: Data Collection Tasks (vehicle, bike and ped counts and characteristics) 2.1 Confirm Data Collection Locations 2.2 Confirm Data Collection Approach 2.3 Data Collection Results 2.4 IDAX data collection 2.5 Bike/Ped Data Collection 2.6 Reimbursables The total contract not-to-exceed price is $285,500 for activities in 2018 and 2019. P18 VI.b Page 3 The contract is written in a manner that allows the specifics of each task to be negotiated, if desired, via Task Orders, so long as the budget is not exceeded. This provides the City with the assurance of a specific body of work, while retaining the ability to shift the work if/as new or different needs associated with the project develop and as requirements are defined in more detail. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The Council has previously agreed to commit $450,000 to the data-related tasks of the SHIFT project, including $125,000 in FY 2018 to start those tasks. On August 20, 2018, the Council affirmed the budget for the project. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The Aspen SHIFT project could positively impact numerous environmental quality measures, including PM levels, ozone levels, GHG emissions, traffic counts, mass transit use, and walkability and bike-ability. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval of the contract with HDR Engineering, Inc., for SHIFT Data Support and Data Collection services. PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve Resolution #125, Series of 2018, on the Consent Agenda calendar of date August 27, 2018. ATTACHMENT: Attachment A, Contract with HDR for SHIFT Data Support and Data Collection Services. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: P19 VI.b RESOLUTION #125 (Series of 2018) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A PROPOSED CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND HDR ENGINEERING, INC., AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A FINAL CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to City Council a proposed contract between the City of Aspen and HDR Engineering, Inc. which is attached hereto as Attachment “A”; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the entry into a Contract for 1) SHIFT project Data Support Services and 2) certain SHIFT project Data Collection Services between the City of Aspen and HDR Engineering, Inc. a copy of which is attached hereto, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute a final contract on behalf of the City of Aspen in substantially the form attached hereto, subject to the approval of the City Manager and the City Attorney. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of August 2018. ______________________________ Steven Skadron, Mayor I, Linda Manning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolutions adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held, August 27, 2018. ______________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk P20 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 0 ATTACHMENT A: CONTRACT FOR SHIFT DATA SUPPORT AND DATA COLLECTION SERVICES BY HDR ENGINEERING, INC. P21 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 1 CITY OF ASPEN STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT V 2009 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES City of Aspen Contract Numbers: · SHIFT Data Support (2018-13) and · SHIFT Data Collection (2018-017) AGREEMENT made as of 27th day of August, in the year 2018 BETWEEN the City: Contract Amount: The City of Aspen c/o Karen Harrington 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone: (970) 920-5079 And the Professional: HDR Engineering, Inc. c/o _David Millar 1670 Broadway, Suite 34000 Denver, CO 80202-4824 Phone: 303-764-1520 For the Following Project: SHIFT Project Data Support and Data Collection Services Exhibits appended and made a part of this Agreement: If this Agreement requires the City to pay an amount of money in excess of $25,000.00 it shall not be deemed valid until it has been approved by the City Council of the City of Aspen. City Council Approval: Date: 08/27/2018 Resolution No.: 125, Series of 2018 Exhibit A: Scope of Work. Exhibit B: Fee Schedule. Exhibit C: Sample Task Order Total: $ 285,500.00 P22 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 2 The City and Professional agree as set forth below. 1. Scope of Work. Professional (HDR Engineering, Inc.) shall perform in a competent and professional manner the Scope of Work as set forth at Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 2. Completion. Professional shall commence Work immediately upon receipt of a written Notice to Proceed from the City and complete all phases of the Scope of Work as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and care and the orderly progress of the Work in a timely manner. The parties anticipate that all Work pursuant to this Agreement shall be completed no later than December 31, 2019. Upon request of the City, Professional shall submit, for the City's approval, a schedule for the performance of Professional's services which shall be adjusted as required as the project proceeds, and which shall include allowances for periods of time required by the City's project manager for review and approval of submissions and for approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over the project. This schedule, when approved by the City, shall not, except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Professional. 3. Payment. In consideration of the work performed, City shall pay Professional on a time and expense basis for all work performed. The hourly rates for work performed by Professional shall not exceed those hourly rates set forth at Exhibit B appended hereto. Except as otherwise mutually agreed to by the parties the payments made to Professional shall not initially exceed the amount set forth above. Professional shall submit, in timely fashion, invoices for work performed, normally monthly. The City shall review such invoices and, if they are considered incorrect or untimely, the City shall review the matter with Professional within ten days from receipt of the Professional's bill. 4. Non-Assignability. Both parties recognize that this Agreement is one for personal services and cannot be transferred, assigned, or sublet by either party without prior written consent of the other. Sub-Contracting, if authorized, shall not relieve the Professional of any of the responsibilities or obligations under this Agreement. Professional shall be and remain solely responsible to the City for the acts, errors, omissions or neglect of any subcontractors’ officers, agents and employees, each of whom shall, for this purpose be deemed to be an agent or employee of the Professional to the extent of the subcontract. The City shall not be obligated to pay or be liable for payment of any sums due which may be due to any sub-contractor. 5. Termination of Procurement. The sale contemplated by this Agreement may be canceled by the City prior to acceptance by the City whenever for any reason and in its sole discretion the City shall determine that such cancellation is in its best interests and convenience. 6. Termination of Professional Services. The Professional or the City may terminate the Professional Services component of this Agreement, without specifying the reason therefor, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party, specifying the effective date of the termination. No fees shall be earned after the effective date of the termination. Upon any termination, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other material prepared by the Professional pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of the City. Notwithstanding the above, Professional shall not be relieved of any liability to the City for damages sustained by the City by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by the Professional, and the City may withhold any payments to the Professional P23 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 3 for the purposes of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Professional may be determined. 7. Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in, or be construed as establishing an employment relationship. Professional shall be, and shall perform as, an independent Contractor who agrees to use his or her best efforts to provide the said services on behalf of the City. No agent, employee, or servant of Professional shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City. City is interested only in the results obtained under this contract. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the sole control of Professional. None of the benefits provided by City to its employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, are available from City to the employees, agents or servants of Professional. Professional shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Professional's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of this contract. Professional shall indemnify City against all liability and loss in connection with, and shall assume full responsibility for payment of all federal, state and local taxes or contributions imposed or required under unemployment insurance, social security and income tax law, with respect to Professional and/or Professional's employees engaged in the performance of the services agreed to herein. 8. Indemnification. Professional agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, insurers, and self-insurance pool, from and against all liability, claims, and demands, on account of injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily injury, personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss of any kind whatsoever, which arise out of or are in any manner connected with this contract, to the extent and for an amount represented by the degree or percentage such injury, loss, or damage is caused in whole or in part by, or is claimed to be caused in whole or in part by, the wrongful or negligent act, omission, or error, of the Professional, any subcontractor of the Professional, or any officer, employee, representative, or agent of the Professional or of any subcontractor of the Professional, or which arises out of any workmen's compensation claim of any employee of the Professional or of any employee of any subcontractor of the Professional. The Professional agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for and defend against, any such liability, claims or demands at the expense of the Professional, or at the option of the City, agrees to pay the City or reimburse the City for the defense costs incurred by the City in connection with, any such liability, claims, or demands, but only to the degree of fault for which Professional is liable. If it is determined by the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was caused in whole or in part by the act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or its employees, the City shall reimburse the Professional for the portion of the judgment attributable to such act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or employees. 9. Professional's Insurance. (a) Professional agrees to procure and maintain, at its own expense, a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. Such insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract or by law. The Professional shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations P24 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 4 assumed pursuant to Section 8 above by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance, or by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance in sufficient amounts, duration, or types. (b) Professional shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of the Professional to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed below. Such coverages shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurance acceptable to the City. All coverages shall be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. In the case of any claims-made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall be procured to maintain such continuous coverage. (i) Workers’ Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) for each accident, ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) disease - policy limit, and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) disease - each employee. Evidence of qualified self-insured status may be substituted for the Workers' Compensation requirements of this paragraph. (ii) Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits of TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000.00) each occurrence and TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be applicable to all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage (including completed operations), personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, independent contractors, products, and completed operations. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. (iii) Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate with respect to each Professional's owned, hired and non- owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the Scope of Work. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. If the Professional has no owned automobiles, the requirements of this Section shall be met by each employee of the Professional providing services to the City under this contract. (iv) Professional Liability insurance with the minimum limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) each claim and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) aggregate. (c) The policy or policies required above shall be endorsed to include the City and the City's officers and employees as additional insureds, except for Workers’ Compensation and Professional Liability. Every policy required above shall be primary insurance, and any insurance carried by the City, its officers or employees, or carried by or provided through any insurance pool of the City, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by Professional. No additional insured endorsement to the policy required above P25 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 5 shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage arising from completed operations. The Professional shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above. (d) The certificate of insurance provided to the City shall be completed by the Professional's insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits are in full force and effect, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of the contract. No other form of certificate shall be used. The certificate shall identify this contract and shall provide that the coverages afforded under the policies shall not be canceled, terminated or materially changed until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City. (e) Failure on the part of the Professional to procure or maintain policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its discretion City may procure or renew any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay any and all premiums in connection therewith, and all monies so paid by City shall be repaid by Professional to City upon demand, or City may offset the cost of the premiums against monies due to Professional from City. (f) City reserves the right to request and receive a copy of any policy with sensitive information redacted and any endorsement thereto. (g) The parties hereto understand and agree that City is relying on, and does not waive or intend to waive by any provision of this contract, the monetary limitations (presently $350,000.00 per person and $990,000 per occurrence) or any other rights, immunities, and protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-10-101 et seq., C.R.S., as from time to time amended, or otherwise available to City, its officers, or its employees. 10. City's Insurance. The parties hereto understand that the City is a member of the Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency (CIRSA) and as such participates in the CIRSA Proper- ty/Casualty Pool. Copies of the CIRSA policies and manual are kept at the City of Aspen Risk Management Department and are available to Professional for inspection during normal business hours. City makes no representations whatsoever with respect to specific coverages offered by CIRSA. City shall provide Professional reasonable notice of any changes in its membership or participation in CIRSA. 11. Completeness of Agreement. It is expressly agreed that this agreement contains the entire undertaking of the parties relevant to the subject matter thereof and there are no verbal or written representations, agreements, warranties or promises pertaining to the project matter thereof not expressly incorporated in this writing. 12. Notice. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand delivered or mailed by certified mail return receipt requested to the respective persons and/or addresses listed above. 13. Non-Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or P26 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 6 religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform services under this contract. Professional agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, Section 13-98, pertaining to non-discrimination in employment. 14. Waiver. The waiver by the City of any term, covenant, or condition hereof shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term. No term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement can be waived except by the written consent of the City, and forbearance or indulgence by the City in any regard whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver of any term, covenant, or condition to be performed by Professional to which the same may apply and, until complete performance by Professional of said term, covenant or condition, the City shall be entitled to invoke any remedy available to it under this Agreement or by law despite any such forbearance or indulgence. 15. Execution of Agreement by City. This Agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, this Agreement shall not be binding upon the City unless duly executed by the Mayor of the City of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in his absence) following a Motion or Resolution of the Council of the City of Aspen authorizing the Mayor (or a duly authorized official in his absence) to execute the same. 16. Illegal Aliens – CRS 8-17.5-101 & 24-76.5-101. (a) Purpose. During the 2006 Colorado legislative session, the Legislature passed House Bills 06-1343 (subsequently amended by HB 07-1073) and 06-1023 that added new statutes relating to the employment of and contracting with illegal aliens. These new laws prohibit all state agencies and political subdivisions, including the City of Aspen, from knowingly hiring an illegal alien to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a subcontractor who knowingly hires with an illegal alien to perform work under the contract. The new laws also require that all contracts for services include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes. The following terms and conditions have been designed to comply with the requirements of this new law. (b) Definitions. The following terms are defined in the new law and by this reference are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the City of Aspen. “Basic Pilot Program” means the basic pilot employment verification program created in Public Law 208, 104th Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law 156, 108th Congress, as amended, that is administered by the United States Department of Homeland Security. “Public Contract for Services” means this Agreement. “Services” means the furnishing of labor, time, or effort by a Contractor or a subcontractor not involving the delivery of a specific end product other than reports that are merely incidental to the required performance. (c) By signing this document, Professional certifies and represents that at this time: P27 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 7 (i) Professional shall confirm the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment in the United States; and (ii) Professional has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Program in order to verify that new employees are not illegal aliens. (d) Professional hereby confirms that: (i) Professional shall not knowingly employ or contract new employees without confirming the employment eligibility of all such employees hired for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (ii) Professional shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to confirm to the Professional that the subcontractor shall not knowingly hire new employees without confirming their employment eligibility for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (iii) Professional has verified or has attempted to verify through participation in the Federal Basic Pilot Program that Professional does not employ any new employees who are not eligible for employment in the United States; and if Professional has not been accepted into the Federal Basic Pilot Program prior to entering into the Public Contract for Services, Professional shall forthwith apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify such application within five (5) days of the date of the Public Contract. Professional shall continue to apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify same every three (3) calendar months thereafter, until Professional is accepted or the public contract for services has been completed, whichever is earlier. The requirements of this section shall not be required or effective if the Federal Basic Pilot Program is discontinued. (iv) Professional shall not use the Basic Pilot Program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while the Public Contract for Services is being performed. (v) If Professional obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with a new employee who is an illegal alien, Professional shall: (1) Notify such subcontractor and the City of Aspen within three days that Professional has actual knowledge that the subcontractor has newly employed or contracted with an illegal alien; and (2) Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to this section the subcontractor does not cease employing or contracting with the new employee who is an illegal alien; except that Professional shall not terminate the Public Contract for Services with the subcontractor if during P28 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 8 such three days the subcontractor provides information to establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with an illegal alien. (vi) Professional shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment made in the course of an investigation that the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment undertakes or is undertaking pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8-17.5-102 (5), C.R.S. (vii) If Professional violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services pertaining to the duties imposed by Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. the City of Aspen may terminate the Public Contract for Services. If the Public Contract for Services is so terminated, Contractor shall be liable for actual and consequential damages to the City of Aspen arising out of Professional’s violation of Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. (ix) If Professional operates as a sole proprietor, Professional hereby swears or affirms under penalty of perjury that the Professional (1) is a citizen of the United States or otherwise lawfully present in the United States pursuant to federal law, (2) shall comply with the provisions of CRS 24-76.5-101 et seq., and (3) shall produce one of the forms of identification required by CRS 24-76.5-103 prior to the effective date of this Agreement. 16. Warranties Against Contingent Fees, Gratuities, Kickbacks and Conflicts of Interest. (a) Professional warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Professional for the purpose of securing business. (b) Professional agrees not to give any employee of the City a gratuity or any offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering advice, investigation, auditing, or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, request for ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other particular matter, pertaining to this Agreement, or to any solicitation or proposal therefore. (c) Professional represents that no official, officer, employee or representative of the City during the term of this Agreement has or one (1) year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof, except those that may have been disclosed at the time City Council approved the execution of this Agreement. (d) In addition to other remedies it may have for breach of the prohibitions against contingent fees, gratuities, kickbacks and conflict of interest, the City shall have the right to: P29 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 9 1. Cancel this Purchase Agreement without any liability by the City; 2. Debar or suspend the offending parties from being a Professional, contractor or subcontractor under City contracts; 3. Deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the value of anything transferred or received by the Professional; and 4. Recover such value from the offending parties. 17. Fund Availability. Financial obligations of the City payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made available. If this Agreement contemplates the City utilizing state or federal funds to meet its obligations herein, this Agreement shall be contingent upon the availability of those funds for payment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 18. General Terms. (a) It is agreed that neither this Agreement nor any of its terms, provisions, conditions, representations or covenants can be modified, changed, terminated or amended, waived, superseded or extended except by appropriate written instrument fully executed by the parties. (b) If any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of any other provision. (c) The parties acknowledge and understand that there are no conditions or limitations to this understanding except those as contained herein at the time of the execution hereof and that after execution no alteration, change or modification shall be made except upon a writing signed by the parties. (d) This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado as from time to time in effect. 19. Electronic Signatures and Electronic Records This Agreement and any amendments hereto may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which together shall constitute one agreement binding on the Parties, notwithstanding the possible event that all Parties may not have signed the same counterpart. Furthermore, each Party consents to the use of electronic signatures by either Party. The Scope of Work, and any other documents requiring a signature hereunder, may be signed electronically in the manner agreed to by the Parties. The Parties agree not to deny the legal effect or enforceability of the Agreement solely because it is in electronic form or because an electronic record was used in its formation. The Parties agree not to object to the admissibility of the Agreement in the form of an electronic record, or a paper copy of an electronic documents, or a paper copy of a document bearing an electronic signature, on the ground that it is an electronic record or electronic signature or that it is not in its original form or is not an original. P30 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 10 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorized officials, this Agreement in three copies each of which shall be deemed an original on the date first written above. CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: PROFESSIONAL: ________________________________ ______________________________ [Signature] [Signature] By: _____________________________ By: _____________________________ [Name] [Name] Title: ____________________________ Title: ____________________________ Date: ___________________ Date: ___________________ Approved as to form: _______________________________ City Attorney’s Office P31 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 11 EXHIBIT A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Scope of Work (SOW) This agreement for services for the SHIFT project encompasses: 1. Project support on behalf of, and as specified by, the City Project Manager 2. Collection of data for use in the SHIFT project 3. Task order approach for verifying, modifying and executing work under this agreement The approach taken to the agreement includes this general scope of work, supplemented by more specific and detailed Task Orders, which must be jointly agreed upon in writing prior to undertaking said work. Further, the general scope is intended to provide the full set of services requested in the Data Support and Data Collection RFPs, as outlined in the professional’s proposals and more directly highlighted here. To that end, the following documents are hereby incorporated by reference into this agreement: 1. City of Aspen Data Support RFP 2018-013 2. City of Aspen Data Collection RFP 2018-017 3. HDR Engineering Data Support Proposal, submitted to the City on 2/28/2018 4. HDR Engineering Data Collection Proposal, submitted to the City on 3/12/2018 A lack of detail in this general scope of work does not give permission to exclude key requirements of the RFPs or to exclude commitments made in the proposals. Rather, it is intended to provide flexibility in the details of implementing the commitments, allowing for adjustments in the SHIFT project focus. PART 1: DATA SUPPORT TASKS Data support refers generally to those tasks outlined in the professional’s Data Support Proposal, as described in Exhibit D. An outline of included tasks is provided below. In the event this SOW omits a task, the Proposal shall be considered the primary document unless otherwise mutually agreed upon by both parties in writing. 1. Develop and implement the SHIFT Data Group Project Management Plan Collaborate with the SHIFT Data Group to craft a Project Management Plan for the data-related aspects of the SHIFT project. The plan shall include at least the following elements: The mission, vision and goals for the data-related project management components of the SHIFT project The overall project management assistance approach Tasks, roles and responsibilities, detailing which project management, data collection, data analysis and other tasks the City will undertake and which the professional will undertake A communication plan, detailing how and when key stakeholders will be kept apprised of project status and needs P32 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 12 A chart of accountabilities (similar to a RACI chart) for those involved with data collection and management, including City staff, mobility service providers, project partners, and the database management consultant A task list and timeline for data-related tasks for the SHIFT project Project deliverables list How and when status updates will be provided to the Data Group This task includes participation, either in person or remotely, in meetings of the Data Group, as well as a meeting with SHIFT project leaders to verify the mission, vision and objectives of the project. Typically, Data Group meetings will be held twice a month. However, during peak work periods, they may be more frequent. In addition, this task includes providing Data Group with meeting summaries, updates and tracking of tasks against the project plan, and collaboration with data providers. Primary Deliverables: · Kickoff meeting with the Data Group, SHIFT project leadership team, and key contacts · Project Management Plan, including tools mentioned above · Status Updates · Meeting Attendance · Completion of agreed upon project management tasks 2. Develop and implement a SHIFT Evaluation Plan The purpose of the Evaluation Plan is to determine how to gauge the success of the SHIFT project comprehensively, as reflected in data collected during the project by the professional and by other SHIFT project vendors. Evaluation Plan development will be based on the SHIFT project’s overarching mission, vision, goals and objectives, as well as the more specific goals and objectives of the Data Group. The Evaluation Plan will guide tasks such as data collection, data analysis, and summary reporting. The evaluation plan will include the measures by which the goals and objectives will be assessed, based on a refined understanding of the linkages between the SHIFT project goals and available data. Metrics and measurement categories will be finalized during development of this plan. Primary Deliverables: · Evaluation Plan · Status reports on execution of evaluation plan (may be included with project status report from Tasks 1.1) 3. Develop and implement a SHIFT Data Collection Plan The SHIFT project will collect data from a wide variety of sources, ranging from City staff and contractors, to mobility service providers, to project partners (for example, an incentive app provider) who collect data to encourage participation in and/or to assess the success of the project. The purpose of the Data Collection Plan is to identify those data elements needed to execute the Evaluation Plan, and the means of collecting, storing, scrubbing, and assuring the quality control of the data. The data collection plan will identify the quantity, type, source, and P33 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 13 location of data to include as a part of the evaluation of the SHIFT project. This may involve identification of new, as yet anticipated, data collection options and/or scaling back of some existing data collection expectations. The Data Collection Plan will also include determination of the appropriate resolution of the data, such as the number of days of collection, time splits, and other factors influencing the complexity, cost and quality of data collection. As with the Evaluation Plan, the Data Collection Plan will include data elements from all SHIFT partners, including but going beyond the direct data collection work of the professional. The Data Collection Plan may further identify the anticipated methods of analysis, which will affect data quantity and sample size needs. Coordination will be necessary with mobility service providers, other project stakeholders, and the SHIFT project database vendor. Note: This Data Collection Plan focuses on the identification and management of specified data associated with the SHIFT project. It does not supplant or supercede the specific field data collection activities by the professional as described in Part 2. Primary Deliverables: · SHIFT Data Collection Plan · Status reports on execution of evaluation plan (may be included with project status report from Tasks 1.1) 4. Collaborate with other SHIFT groups and staff Project management for the data-related portions of the SHIFT project is inherently connected to the broader goals and activities of the project. The City has hired other vendors and has involved other staff, beyond the Data Group, to develop an outreach program, partner with vendors, refine goals and objectives, collect data, and conduct certain other activities. As requested by the City Project Manager, the professional will participate in meetings and events with such vendors and staff, to assure clarity and coordination regarding their activities and the activities and focus of the Data Group. Primary Deliverables: · Meeting attendance with key stakeholders · Summaries of coordination activities and needs 5. Provide data analysis and data integration support The data collected during the SHIFT project will be aggregated into one or more major systems. The contractor will provide analytical support as directed by the City Project Manager, within the allowed budget, as well as provide review and oversight of data analysis and reporting conducted by others. Collaborating with the Data Team, as a part of this task the professional will assess analytical needs, recommend analysis strategies and tasks, draft a data analysis plan and execute the plan. A component of this plan will be actions to help assure that data collected by SHIFT service providers and partners is uploaded into the central database(s) on a timely and accurate basis, in support of the database vendor and the Data Team. Deliverables: · Data analysis plan P34 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 14 · Completion of data integration activities agreed upon · SHIFT project evaluation report, including assessment of lab success and recommendations for future actions PART 2: HDR-SPECIFIC DATA COLLECTION TASKS Data collection in this section refers to those tasks described in the Professional’s Data Collection proposal, Exhibit E. An outline of included HDR-specific data collection tasks is provided below. In the event this SOW omits a task, the proposal shall be considered the primary document unless otherwise mutually agreed upon by both parties in writing. This set of tasks provides some, but not all, of the data being collected for the SHIFT project and discussed in Part 1 above. 1. Confirm Data Collection Locations This SOW includes 9 physical locations for data collection by the professional. The professional will collaborate with the Data Team to discuss and confirm the data collection locations, based on the SHIFT goals and objectives and locational characteristics. The professional will produce a map of collection locations as a deliverable for this task, to be approved by the City Project Manager. Deliverables: · Location Agreement Document and Map 2. Confirm Data Collection Approach Baseline/control: The full baseline year data collection has been withdrawn from the project. However, the professional will collaborate with the Data Team to identify whether and how to collect data on a smaller scale, such that control data is available. This may include volumes on roadways before or after the lab is executed for instance. Data points: This task involves verifying the specific data points to be collected by the professional at each location, or in the case of origin/destination information, for each segment. Resolution: This task includes determination of the appropriate resolution of the data collected by the professional, such as the number of days of collection, time splits, and other factors influencing the complexity, cost and quality of data collection. A document outlining the data resolution will be produced for approval by the Data Team. Data Collection Methods and Equipment: At the locations agreed to in Task 2.1 above, the professional will use the methods and equipment agreed to in Table 1 below. Changes to this data collection scheme may be made by written agreement by the parties. The specific data points to be collected will be determined as a part of this task. Table 1. Data Collection Methods and Equipment P35 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 15 Method of Collection Data Collected IDAX Automated Traffic Counts using Metrocount pneumatic tubes at all sites, radar and video · Vehicle Volume: Hourly and Daily Counts · Vehicle Average Speed Data · Vehicle Turn Movement Counts · Classification data (vehicle type, ped, bike) Travel time runs with Holux M-241 GPS data logging devices, INREX if appropriate; staff volunteers using an app · Vehicle Travel Times · Vehicle origin/destination EcoCounter system · Bike and Pedestrian volumes · Bike and pedestrian origin/destination HDR to update existing tools, including stratification and classification for road types, creating data for use in GHG modeling · Vehicle Miles Travelled One on-line traveler survey, 2019 Two field interview traveler surveys, 2019 · To be determined during the Evaluation Planning and Data Collection planning steps in Part 1 Data collection approach and timing: During the project, the professional will collaborate with the city to finalize when, where and how any equipment needed for this set of tasks will be placed and removed. At a minimum, data will be collected on Thursday, Friday and Saturday, on a 24-hour basis, during the months of the SHIFT project, unless otherwise mutually agreed upon in writing. The data shall be collected 24 hours a day during those dates, with the data aggregated on an hourly basis. As well the professional will collaborate with the city to finalize survey instruments, survey sampling and execution methods, and survey analysis expectations. Finally, the professional will collaborate with the city to determine how the data collected will be integrated with the central project database. Data collection results: The professional will provide the results of the data collection to the City in a summary document. In addition, the contractor will provide the results to the Database vendor in the format needed to upload the information to the central database, and according to the schedule needed for the lab (at least weekly uploads). Key Deliverables: · Final HDR-specific data collection plan for the information professional is collecting directly · Final survey instruments, execution plans and analysis plans · Methods for uploading the collected data to the central database · Completion of tasks to upload the data to the central database P36 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 16 · At least twice monthly updates on status of data collection by the professional · Written summary of data collection results PART 3: TASK ORDERS To assure clarity and provide flexibility, the tasks outlined above will be performed under written task orders. No work will be started without a written task order. Upon mutual agreement of the City and the Professional, the tasks in Parts 1 and 2 may be modified by the task orders. In the event that the tasks are modified, the Task Orders shall take precedence. This approach shall apply to as many project tasks as City and Professional agree will be performed under the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Each task order will include the following components: TASK ORDER NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: PART 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: PART 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY PROFESSIONAL FOR THIS TASK ORDER: PART 3.0 OWNER’S RESPONSIBILITIES: PART 4.0 PERIODS OF SERVICE: PART 5.0 PROFESSIONAL’S FEE: PART 6.0 OTHER: A Sample Task Order is attached to this Agreement and marked as Exhibit C. No Task Order shall be binding or enforceable unless and until it has been properly executed by both OWNER and PROFESSIONAL. Each properly executed Task Order shall become a separate addendum to this Agreement. Complete Project - To ensure that the overall project scope can be completed within the identified project budget, the initiation of each new Task Order will include a review and update of the overall project progress, project budget and project schedule. This will track progress of remaining tasks and remaining budget and schedule. P37 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 17 EXHIBIT B: PAYMENTS The professional agrees to provide the listed services at the prices outlined in Table 2 below, with a not to exceed amount of $285,500.00. Modifications to tasks listed, and the amounts associated with specific tasks, can be made only by written mutual agreement, including as outlined in Task Orders. Payments will be made on a time and materials basis. Professional will complete all tasks outlined here and elsewhere in this agreement at the prices outlined below or less. Table 2. Payment Schedule By Major Task Part 1: Data Support Tasks: 1.1 Develop and Implement the Data Group Project Management Plan $ 35,000.00 1.2 Develop and Implement a SHIFT Evaluation Plan $ 15,000.00 1.3 Develop and Implement a SHIFT Data Collection Plan $ 20,000.00 1.4 Collaborate with other SHIFT groups and staff $ 16,000.00 1.5 Provide data analysis and data integration support $ 55,000.00 1.6 Reimbursables $ 5,000.00 DATA SUPPORT SUBTOTAL $ 146,000.00 Part 2: Data Collection Tasks: 2.1 Confirm Data Collection Locations $ 5,000.00 2.2 Confirm Data Collection Approach $ 13,000.00 2.3 Data Collection Results $ 20,000.00 2.4 IDAX data collection $ 50,000.00 2.5 Bike/Ped Data Collection $ 50,000.00 2.6 Reimbursables $ 1,500.00 DATA COLLECTION SUBTOTAL $ 139,500.00 CONTACT TOTAL $ 285,500.00 Compensation for Professional’s Services shall be in accordance with Part 5 of each Task Order, and in accordance the provisions of this Professional Service Agreement. The cumulative "not to exceed" amount for all additive tasks under this Contract shall be $285,500.00. The City's financial obligation is limited by this amount, and the Professional shall accept no Task Orders which result in a cumulative contract value which exceeds the "not to exceed" value. Any other modification or amendment to the terms and conditions of this Contract other than as specified in this paragraph, must be in writing, and executed by both parties. 10% of fees shall be retained by the City, and released upon successful completion of all tasks encompassed in this agreement. P38 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 18 Hourly fees associated with this agreement are outlined in Table 3. Should additional hours of service be requested and agreed to in addendums to this agreement, these same rates will apply: Table 3. Table of Hourly Rates by Role LABOR CATEGORY RESPONSIBILITIES HOURLY RATE National Discipline Leader A senior officer of the company; Has signature authority and authority to dedicate resources; Has extensive knowledge of industry practices; Has knowledge of HDR resources and expertise companywide $320 Contract Manager Develops and manages project scopes and budgets; Manages multidiscipline tasks and coordinates between technical disciplines; Provides day-to-day project management; Develops assignments for staff; Coordinates directly with the client project manager; More than 12 years of experience $238 Senior Technical Advisor Internal and/or national expert and presenter on discipline specialty; Oversees mid-level staff and provides technical quality review of their work; 15-30 years of experience $235 Senior Project Manager II A registered professional; Develops and manages scopes and budgets; Manages multidiscipline tasks and coordinates between technical disciplines; Provides day-to-day technical management; Coordinates directly with the client project manager and task managers; 15-30 years of experience $220 Senior Project Manager I A registered professional; Develops manages scopes and budgets; Manages multidiscipline tasks and coordinates between technical disciplines; Provides day-to-day technical management; Coordinates directly with the client project manager and task managers; 10-15 years of experience $206 P39 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 19 Project Manager II Develops and manages scopes and budgets; Manages multidiscipline tasks and coordinates between technical disciplines; Provides day-to-day technical management; Coordinates directly with the client project manager and task managers; More than 12 years of experience $194 Project Engineer, Level IV A registered professional engineer; Fully trained within a specific discipline; Develops scopes and budgets; Manages technical resources and tasks; Directs the works of junior and mid-level staff; 15-20 years of experience $178 Senior Project Professional II Develops and manages scopes and budgets; Works on multidiscipline projects and manages complex project deliverables; Directs work with mid-level and junior staff; Coordinates directly with client project manager and task managers; 20-30 years of experience $174 Senior Project Professional I Develops and manages scopes and budgets; Works on multidiscipline projects and manages complex project deliverables; Directs work with junior staff; Coordinates directly with client project manager and task managers; 10- 20 years of experience $158 Project Engineer, Level II A registered professional engineer; Fully trained within a specific discipline; Develops scopes and budgets; Manages technical resources and tasks; Directs the works of junior staff; 8-15 years of experience $146 Technical Writer Works with technical staff to develop and produce written deliverables; Performs technical editing and writing, quality reviews, and document production; 15-20 years of experience $136 Project Professional I Works on multidiscipline projects and manages complex project deliverables; Directs work with junior staff; Coordinates directly with client task managers; 10-20 years of experience $128 P40 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 20 Designer II A professional with specific experience in CAD design, mapping, technical graphics, GIS, and/or computer applications; 2-10 years of experience $118 Planner II Develops scopes and budgets; Manages individual task orders; Directs technical work with junior staff; Coordinates directly with client task managers; More than 8 years of experience $112 EIT II A recent college graduate; Performs work assigned by mid-level and senior staff; 1-5 years of experience $108 Project Controller II Provides support for invoicing, accounts payable/receivable, project controls, budgeting, and scheduling; More than 8 years of experience $104 Planner I Manages individual work tasks; Performs work assigned by mid-level and senior staff; Coordinates directly with client task managers; Supports others in the preparation of technical reports, GIS maps, graphics; 4-8 years of experience $94 Project Controller I Provides support for invoicing, accounts payable/receivable, project controls, budgeting, and scheduling; 5-10 years of experience $90 Environmental Specialist I Manages individual task orders; Directs technical work with junior staff; Coordinates directly with client task managers; 5-10 years of experience $88 Planner Jr. Manages individual work tasks; Performs work assigned by senior and mid-level staff; Supports others in the preparation of technical reports, GIS maps, graphics; 0- 4 years of experience $84 Project Coordinator Performs research and data collection; Coordinates and performs work assigned by mid-level and senior staff; Supports others in the preparation of technical reports, GIS maps, graphics; 0-5 years of experience $78 Administrative Provides support for word processing, spreadsheets, graphics, scheduling, budget control, and communications; 0-10 years of experience $65 P41 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 21 EXHIBIT C Sample task order (non-binding) This Task Order pertains to an agreement by and between the City of Aspen, Colorado, (“OWNER”), and HDR Engineering Inc., (“PROFESSIONAL”), dated xxxxx, (“the Agreement”). PROFESSIONAL shall provide services on the project task described below as provided herein and in the Agreement. This Task Order shall not be binding until it has been properly signed by both parties. Upon execution, this Task Order shall supplement this Professional Services Agreement as it pertains to the project tasks described below. This Task Order pertains to an agreement by and between the City of Aspen, Colorado, (“OWNER”), and HDR Engineering Inc., (“PROFESSIONAL”), dated xxxxx, (“the Agreement”). Professional shall provide services on the project task described below as provided herein and in the Agreement. This Task Order shall not be binding until it has been properly signed by both parties. Upon execution, this Task Order shall supplement the Agreement as it pertains to the project task described below. Task Order Number: 1 Project Task Name: Project Management and Program Support Part 1.0 Task Description: Develop and implement the Data Group Project Management Plan Part 2.0 Scope of Work Collaborate with the Data Group to craft a Project Management Plan for the data-related aspects of the Lab. The plan shall include at least the following elements: The mission, vision and goals for the data-related project management components of the SHIFT project The overall project management assistance approach Tasks, roles and responsibilities, detailing which project management, data collection, data analysis and other tasks the City will undertake and which the contractor will undertake A communication plan, detailing how and when key stakeholders will be kept apprised of project status and needs A chart of accountabilities (similar to a RACI chart) for those involved with data collection and management, including City staff, mobility service providers, project partners, and the database management consultant A task list and timeline for data-related tasks for the SHIFT project Project deliverables list How and when status updates will be provided to the Data Group This task includes participation, either in person or remotely, in meetings of the Data Group, as well as 2 meetings with SHIFT project leaders to verify the mission, vision and objectives of the project. Typically, Data Group meetings will be held twice a month. However, during peak P42 VI.b Agreement Professional Services Page 22 work periods, they may be more frequent. In addition, this task includes providing Data Group meeting summaries, updates and tracking of tasks against the project plan, and collaboration with data providers. Part 3.0 Owners Responsibilities OWNER will coordinate the meetings of the Data Group and SHIFT project leaders. OWNER will provide background documents to inform the project management process. OWNER will provide meeting space for meetings. OWNER will provide existing, historic data that may influence the process. Part 4.0 Periods of Service This Task Order will expire December 31, 2019 Part 5.0 Payment to Contractor This Task Order will be conducted for a fee not to exceed $xxxxxxxxx. Professional will bill for services monthly, based on a time and materials basis. Payments are due within 30 days of receipt. 10% will be retained until completion of all tasks associated with the main contract. Funds not used for this Task Order may be reallocated to other Task Orders. Part 6.0 Other Deliverables: · Monthly Progress Reports and Invoices · Meeting Notes · Project Management Plan with Schedule and Elements identified in Part 2 above. P43 VI.b Page 1 of 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: CORE - Community Office for Resource Efficiency Mona Newton, Executive Director THRU: Ashley Perl, Climate Action Manager DATE OF MEMO: August 17, 2018 MEETING DATE: August 27, 2018 RE: Resolution #123- A Resolution Authorizing the Expenditure of Funds Generated Through the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program _____ REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests City Council approval of attached Resolution #123 as forwarded by the Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE) Board of Directors, which recommends the expenditure of funds generated through the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (REMP) for identified 2018/2019 projects and programs. BACKGROUND: The Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE) was founded in 1994 as a result of the Energy 2000 conferences held years prior. The organization is a unique 501© 3 non-profit as it was founded with support of an interorganizational agreement signed by the founding entities: City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Town of Snowmass Village, Holy Cross Energy and KNEnergy (now Black Hills Energy). During the past 24 years CORE has been on the forefront tackling climate change with innovative and community accessible programs. Some of the programs have included: one of the first efforts to support renewable energy including one of the first solar rebates in the country, WindPower Pioneers program in partnership with Holy Cross Energy, and the Renewable Energy Program (REMP), which was developed in partnership with the Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development Department. CORE also works with municipalities to adopt policies that support sustainability such as the bag bans adopted by City of Aspen and voter passed initiative in the Town of Carbondale. On December 13, 1999, the Aspen City Council passed Ordinance No. 55 of 1999, which adopted the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (REMP) as a component of the Aspen/Pitkin Energy Conservation Code. The program gives property owners the choice of mitigating energy use through the installation of on-site renewable energy systems, or paying an optional impact fee. CORE manages the funds collected through REMP, providing programs and incentives designed to address the impacts of the added energy consumption and reduce carbon emissions. Among a variety of other CORE initiatives, REMP revenues are used to fund an annual major grant cycle, known as The Randy Udall Energy Pioneer Grant, in honor of the late James “Randy” Udall, CORE’s founding director. These grants support government, non-profit, commercial and residential projects located within the Roaring Fork Valley delivering tangible results in carbon emissions reduction, energy efficiency and renewable energy generation. P44 VI.c Page 2 of 3 The Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE) is responsible for developing proposals for spending funds collected through REMP. Those proposals must be reviewed and approved by the CORE Board. The CORE Board of Trustees includes: George Newman (Pitkin County), Adam Frisch (Aspen), Dave Hornbacher (Aspen), Cindy Houben (Pitkin County), Dave Munk (Holy Cross Energy), Tom Goode (Snowmass Village), Auden Schendler (Basalt) and Bill Stirling (Energy 2000 Committee). A resolution adopted by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners and a resolution adopted by the Aspen City Council is required for final approval of the proposed REMP expenditures. On August 8, 2018, the Pitkin BOCC unanimously passed the first reading of a resolution matching the funding authorizations outlined in the draft Council resolution. The BOCC will hold a public hearing and consider a second reading approval on September 12, 2018, following the Council action on August 27, 2018. DISCUSSION: In 2017, and into 2018, CORE has expanded the breadth of its work to support communities in Pitkin County (other than Aspen) by conducting carbon emissions inventories. With those inventories in hand, communities adopted goals for emissions reductions and climate action plans (Aspen had already adopted a reduction goal and Climate Action Plan). They also joined larger efforts including Colorado Communities for Climate Action and Compact for Colorado Communities. Roaring Fork Valley communities Carbondale to Aspen also updated building codes to 2015 IECC. Below are several highlights and accomplishments of CORE’s efforts in 2018: · Randy Udall Grants for 2019 – evaluation criteria emphasized energy savings · Emissions inventories – emissions reduction goals –emissions inventories to be updated in 2018 · Meeting with Pitkin County communities to discuss regional climate action synergies · Sustainable Building Symposium – Nationally recognized speaker discussing net zero building codes, opportunities · Basalt Vista Habitat project – technical and financial support for 27 net zero affordable homes · Support for 5MW solar project in Pitkin County · Outreach & Engagement - You are Powerful Campaign – local storytelling event, Changemakers Challenge · Hunter Creek – Affordable housing phase – nearing completion of boiler replacement and PV installation CORE has begun using the adopted community goals as a lens with which to drive and support projects that help communities in achieving their goals and will continue to in 2019. The projects and programs recommended for funding this year support the goals defined in the City of Aspen’s and other communities’, climate action plans. They contribute to preserving a vibrant, healthy, and sustainable community by improving energy efficiency or adding renewable energy to the grid, thereby resulting in significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. P45 VI.c Page 3 of 3 CORE will also continue its foundational programs that incent energy efficiency and renewable energy in the residential and business sectors partnering with the Climate Action Office in Aspen. Participation in these programs has remained steady year over year since their start in 2005. These programs reduce emissions in the buildings sector, the largest source of carbon emissions. In 2019 CORE will partner with the City of Aspen Climate Department and APCHA to develop an efficiency project that will target affordable housing, one strategy identified in Aspen’s CAP. Planning for the project will take place later in 2018 and will be implemented in 2019. With the project scoped and the budget developed we will return to the city of Aspen and Pitkin County Commissioners seeking supplemental funding, if needed. Resolution #123 of 2018 details the projects and programs recommended for REMP funding by the CORE Board of Directors for a combined total of $2,585,958 in expenditures. As of July 22, 2018, the REMP Fund Balance, after subtracting the balance owed to CORE for 2018 and funds requested by the Climate Action Office, will be approximately $7,045,131. The CORE Board recommends approval of REMP funds to accomplish the programming included in Attachment A. P46 VI.c 1 RESOLUTION #123 (Series of 2018) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS GENERATED THROUGH THE RENEWABLE ENERGY MITIGATION PROGRAM. WHEREAS, on December 13, 1999, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 55 Adopting the Aspen/Pitkin Energy Conservation Code, and WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin Energy Conservation Code allows that funds collected through the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (REMP) be spent in accordance with a resolution passed by the Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners, and WHEREAS, at its meeting on July 19, 2018, the Board of Trustees of the Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE) approved the REMP spending proposals described herein, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen finds that the funding requests are appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the funding request from the Community Office for Resource Efficiency that sets forth the terms and conditions of the use of Renewable Energy Mitigation Program funds, a description of which is incorporated herein. Dated: August 27, 2018 ______________________________ Steve Skadron, Mayor I, Linda Manning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held August 27, 2018. ______________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk P47 VI.c Attachment A: 2018/2019 Grants and Programming 2018/2019 Randy Udall Energy Pioneer Grants CORE received 8 Randy Udall Energy Pioneer Grant applications, seeking $1,129,458 in support this year. Five of these projects are recommended to receive Randy Udall Energy Pioneer Grants totaling $508,458. Completion of the recommended 2018/2019 Randy Udall Energy Pioneer Grant projects is estimated to eliminate, or avoid, 26,478 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions over the life of the projects. The Randy Udall Energy Pioneer Grant application filing deadline was May 2, 2018. The requests were first reviewed and evaluated by the Citizens Grant Review Committee on May 22, 2018, using a set of criteria adopted by the CORE Board of Directors. The Committee’s recommendations were then forwarded to the CORE Board of Directors who discussed and concurred with most of the recommendations, and revised some. Please refer to the attached DRAFT Resolution for detailed descriptions of the 2018/2019 Randy Udall Energy Pioneer Grant projects recommended for funding from the REMP Fund. Furthermore, all of the 2018/2019 grant applications can be viewed in full at the following link: 2018/2019 Udall Applications. The following list includes all of the 2018/2019 grant applications received, and the funding status/recommendation being presented for consideration by the County Commissioners: 2018/2019 Randy Udall Energy Pioneer Grant Applicants Grant Applicant Project Memo Requested Recommended City of Aspen Installation of advanced meters to enhance EERE programs $200,000 $200,000 Farm Collective Carbon sequestration - energy savings based on kWh equivalence $51,000 $25,000 Four Winds Phase I of Net Zero Campus $200,000 - RFSD - Cardiff Mesa Efficiency + Electric IR heating + 32 KW PV system $63,458 $63,458 Roaring Fork Club 160 KW PV system - 63% offset $160,000 $110,000 TOSV - Mountain View II Mtn View Apts - 47KW PV system - 470% offset $114,000 - TOSV - Public Works Public Works - 69 KW PV system $167,000 - TOSV - Town Hall Town Hall - 83KW PV System $174,000 $110,000 $1,129,458 $508,458 P48 VI.c 2018/2019 REMP Programs CORE continuously works to increase adoption of energy efficiency and renewable energy across all sectors. CORE and our partners serve the residential and commercial market with rebates and technical assistance through a variety of programs. CORE proposes to continue offering Community Grants and Design Assistance Grants. This year we are requesting funding for 2018/2019. CORE would like to build on the success of our Income-Qualified Program, which serves low-to-moderate income homeowners. This year’s funding request reflects the continuing partnership with Energy Outreach Colorado, who now provides some funds to serve this very important market segment in the Roaring Fork Valley from Aspen to the Eagle County boarder along Hwy 82. · Community Grants ($100,000 Requested) Community Grants aim to support a broad spectrum of environmental and energy projects with tangible results for the Roaring Fork Valley. The aim of Community Grants are to reduce energy consumption, reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, offset greenhouse gases, promote the use of renewable energy, educate the community on energy issues, and develop more sustainable energy technologies. Community Grants range from $1,000 – $10,000 and are awarded at the discretion of CORE’s Executive Director. · Design Assistance Grants ($80,000 Requested) The Design Assistance Grant is made available to aid commercial and institutional development projects in implementing integrative efficient design. These grants serve the purpose of promoting new technology and innovation during the design phase of new building construction. These grants are also awarded on approval from CORE’s Executive Director. · Income-Qualified Grant Program ($37,500 Requested) This program offers assessments, and energy efficiency services to income qualified households, whose incomes are below 80% AMI (Area Median Income). · Net Zero Homes Grant Program ($60,000 Requested) The Net Zero Homes Grant was initiated in 2016, This program provides design advising services, and a tiered grant, up to $8,000 for a “net zero” energy use home, and is based on a final HERS rating. As HERS ratings come in, grant amounts may be lowered, so additional funding could be made available. P49 VI.c · CORE’s Residential and Commercial Programs ($660,000 Requested) Residential o Assessments $80,000 o Quick Fix Items $10,000 o Residential Rebates $310,000 includes energy efficiency and renewable energy Commercial o Rebates $210,000 includes energy efficiency and renewable energy o Small Lodge Program $50,000 CORE’s Energy Efficiency and Renewable Programs continue to grow at a steady pace. Typically, the commercial sector represents approximately 50% of the energy consumption in buildings. CORE continues to offer incentives to the commercial sector and partners with City of Aspen Utilities and Holy Cross Energy to expand these efforts. CORE will continue to leverage the impact of our resources by offering larger rebates to owners of large buildings, which include public and private buildings and multifamily complexes. This program enables CORE to work directly with building owners and operators to help them implement big energy savings projects. Funds will also be used to target multi-family unit complexes since many have sought out our services and we would like to be able to incent them to invest in a complete building retrofit for the greatest efficiency gains. · Other Programs · Climate Action Planning ($50,000 Requested) These funds will be used to assist the county and member communities in developing regional climate action tools. · Engagement & Marketing ($90,000 Requested) · New Initiatives ($100,000 Requested) The CORE Board and staff have discussed the development of a new initiative that would contribute significantly to the decrease of carbon emissions in the Roaring Fork Valley. These funds will be used toward that project. Any expenditure would be approved by the CORE Board of Directors. This year funds were awarded to the Basalt Vista Habitat Project to make that project net zero. · Administrative · Program Management ($200,000 Requested) · Program Delivery ($700,000 Requested) For each of the recommended programs, specific guidelines and eligibility standards will be applied. CORE staff will continue to work closely with our partners to identify and reach targets with the greatest need and the greatest opportunity for improvement. P50 VI.c TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ashley Perl, SHIFT Project Director Candice Olson, SHIFT Project Manager THROUGH: Barry Crook DATE OF MEMO: August 21 MEETING DATE: August 27, RE: Resolution #124, Series of 2018 App REQUEST OF COUNCIL: In June, Council approved a 2018 planning approach and budget for the rollout of Shift in 2019. An important line item in this budget is the introduction and test of an incentive program, Miles, that can be used to effectively encourage new transit behavi change. Staff seeks approval of the Miles a four-month test of the Miles app and data, PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION The Aspen Mobility Lab has been discussed with the City Council in previous work the Council appropriated $429,000 recently renamed Shift. The Miles contract and related direct city approved budget. BACKGROUND: Refined 2019 Shift Objectives Over the last six months, the Mobility to four clear objectives, with a significant promotional and educational effort to engage citizens and commuters in the new options, encouraging both trial and new long has been renamed, is designed to achieve 1) Reduce traffic in the AM/PM commute periods by some 800 vehicles parking at Brush Creek, 200 from additional carpooling, and 200 from increased bike commuting). 2) Reduce car traffic in the core by 200 cars a day by service to and from the core from nearby residential areas proven effective and popular, with on-demand rides would replace a car trip. Page 1 MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council Ashley Perl, SHIFT Project Director Candice Olson, SHIFT Project Manager Barry Crook, Assistant City Manager August 21, 2018 August 27, 2018 Resolution #124, Series of 2018 - Contract Approval App Fall Test 2018 to support Shift 2019 In June, Council approved a 2018 planning approach and budget for the rollout of Shift in 2019. An important line item in this budget is the introduction and test of an incentive program, Miles, that can be used to effectively encourage new transit behaviors and measure the cost of the Miles contract and related city expenses totaling of the Miles app and data, enrollment promotion, and local incentives. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Mobility Lab has been discussed with the City Council in previous work $429,000 in June, 2018, to support planning for the Summer 2019 Lab, The Miles contract and related direct city expenses are line items in this Mobility Lab has been refined into a set of new transit options tied a significant promotional and educational effort to engage citizens and commuters in the new options, encouraging both trial and new long-term habits. is designed to achieve four interconnected objectives: in the AM/PM commute periods by some 800 vehicles parking at Brush Creek, 200 from additional carpooling, and 200 from increased bike car traffic in the core by 200 cars a day by creating and expanding on to and from the core from nearby residential areas. In town on-demand services have with half of the trips saving a car trip. At longer distances, most demand rides would replace a car trip. Contract Approval for Miles In June, Council approved a 2018 planning approach and budget for the rollout of Shift in 2019. An important line item in this budget is the introduction and test of an incentive program, Miles, the cost of behavior totaling $63,000 for incentives. Mobility Lab has been discussed with the City Council in previous work sessions and in June, 2018, to support planning for the Summer 2019 Lab, expenses are line items in this set of new transit options tied a significant promotional and educational effort to engage citizens term habits. Shift, as it a day (500-600 parking at Brush Creek, 200 from additional carpooling, and 200 from increased bike expanding on-demand demand services have . At longer distances, most P51 VI.d Page 2 3) Increase the use of bicycles as a mobility option. Recognizing that a bicycle is not an option for everyone, the city believes that bike use can be increased through new options and education. The city believes e-bikes will become an increasingly attractive option for people of all ages. The city wants to provide e-bike trial and share options, promote bike shop sales, increase storage capacity for bikes, and provide support for e-bike users so they will feel this is a viable mobility option. Outreach has also indicated a desire for cargo bike options to make biking a practical option beyond recreational use, and the city is currently exploring e-bike cargo bike options. 3) Increase the quality, quantity and analysis of transit data and public opinion through a new data management system and the introduction of the Miles App, which produces granular consumer data on the transit challenges facing the city of Aspen, including the cost and effectiveness of behavior change efforts. The Central Role of Miles To accomplish Shift's behavioral, promotional and data objectives, significant incentives are required. The initial concept of physical vouchers for intercept lot parking has evolved over the last four months into a more comprehensive and flexible incentive program that can be used to incent all of the new transit behaviors offered in Shift, and to further incent habit-formation and long-term adoption. The Shift team began a search for this kind of capability in existing or custom transit apps last October. Through the foremost experts in the transportation field, the city learned of a unique app called Miles. Staff has been evaluating Miles (and ascertained that there is no similar functionality in the market) for several months, and is recommending a four- month live test launching October 1 after integration beginning September 1. This timing will allow the city to begin broader rollout of Miles by February 1, 2019, leaving just enough time to engage a critical mass of commuters and Aspen residents in time for the Shift launch on June 1, 2019. In choosing Miles, Aspen is benefitting from a program that has been developed and tested for three years by an experienced tech team, including a CEO who formerly ran an $800mm division for Cisco, and which has been endorsed by progressive municipalities like San Francisco and Sacramento after in-depth review. What is Miles Supposed to Accomplish? In the simplest terms, Shift seeks to change behavior--to entice people to try new options and then make new habits. Miles draws on decades of learning from airline reward miles programs, now a powerful tool in shifting consumer behavior. Miles adapts these proven and sophisticated principles to enable cities to incent the use of specific transit options, including carpooling, public transit, on-demand services, biking and walking. How does Miles Work? The basic concept of Miles, as with all successful reward programs, is to first engage the people whose behavior you want to change. As an example, if you designed a reward system to incent 100 people to stop smoking, the first step would be to get 500 smokers hooked on your app by offering some kind of reward that makes them check it frequently. Only then would you have the engaged audience you would need to effectively incent 100 of the smokers to stop smoking. This is somewhat counter-intuitive to those of us who don't build apps and reward programs. But this is the initial goal of Miles: to engage as many people as possible who currently commute by single occupancy vehicle, drive from residential areas into town, and drive in situations where P52 VI.d Page 3 biking might be an option, and to provide a level of Foundational Rewards adequate to get them to engage with the app on a frequent basis. Tests of Miles in other cities have proven that this is possible, and determined the minimum Foundational Rewards needed for retention. Once this is achieved, between October and May, the real work of Miles begins: to use powerful, targeted Challenges, daily, weekly, and monthly, to change this behavior in the direction of Shift's objectives. The city can design Challenges such as the following, which closely mirror Shift objectives: Examples of first-time trials (the hardest thing to incent) 1. Parking in the Intercept Lot to take the bus to Aspen or Castle Creek 3. Carpooling up-valley 4. Commuting by bike 5. Ordering an on-demand service 6. Trying an e-bike through a bike share program or bike shop rental 7. Grocery shopping with a cargo bike instead of a car 8. Signing up for a daily van from the intercept lot that carries your dog or kids 9. Completing a Shift survey 10. Signing up for bike storage Examples of Challenges rewarding habit formation: 1. 5 days of a new behavior 2. Going from 2 to 4 carpoolers in your car 3. 10-15-20-25 days of a new behavior Examples of Challenges rewarding long-term adoption of new transit behaviors (using high-level Aspirational Rewards (e.g. reduced ski pass, gift passes, etc.) 1. Combination of multi-modal choices (commuting by bus, e-bike trial, etc.) all summer 2. Parking at the intercept lot for more than 80% of the 66 commuter days of the summer How a Commuter Uses Miles The city promotes enrollment in the app Miles, which is done by downloading the app from the app store. From that point the app records each trip and mode of transit automatically, from a RFTA trip of 15 minutes to a bike commute of 10 minutes, to carpooling 30 miles. The technology underlying the app allows Miles to automatically "know" if someone is riding a bike, carpooling with others, taking a RFTA bus, walking, using WeCycle or taking a Downtowner. The user checks the app to see how many miles they have earned, and to see and redeem rewards--and in so doing, get used to checking the app and is therefore attentive to Challenges, which the city designs to drive the use of Shift's new transit options. At the same time, all trips are aggregated (no names or personal information attached) and shared with the city, providing detailed and granular transit information. Miles becomes an invaluable source of data about transit patterns and behavior throughout Shift. Types of Rewards: Immediate vs. Aspirational Rewards P53 VI.d Page 4 Reward programs have learned that some people prefer immediate rewards, like a cup of coffee the day the reward is earned, while others prefer to accrue points for virtuous behavior over time toward some kind of "grand prize." Miles is designed to accommodate both, and the city is working with local partners like SkiCo to create a local model of aspirational rewards. Foundational vs. Challenge Rewards Foundational Rewards are ongoing and automatically given for accruing miles in any transit mode, and are used to get people signed up and engaged with the app. Miles applies the following multipliers for transit alternatives to Single Occupancy Vehicles: Carpooling 2x On Demand 2x Buses 3x Biking 5x Walking 10x These Foundational Rewards are built into the Miles product, which is now available to all consumers in the App Store, and they are designed to get people excited about the app and checking in regularly (which they accomplish in tests so far). They are paid for by Miles through their relationships with over 30 national partners. There is no longer a version of the app that does not include national partners for the Foundational rewards. Challenge Rewards are the heart of the program. They are rewards offered once a critical mass of single occupancy vehicle users are enrolled and engaged with the app. They are designed by the city, using local gift cards and offers from local merchants, for the very specific behaviors the city wants to promote. If Foundational Rewards are background, then Challenge Rewards are foreground: the real action that drives Shift, because they allow the city to reward people for specific actions in a certain timeframe, completely independent of distance travelled and the fixed ratios of the Foundational Rewards listed above. They support and promote local businesses while supporting and promoting Shift objectives. In the Challenges, for example, someone could win a special offer for bike commuting 1/2 mile, whereas a car commuter would receive nothing for driving 30 miles. (See Attachment A). Support of Local Businesses 100% of the city's investment in incentives will support local businesses (with a later option to include down valley businesses in the 2019 roll-out). For the test, the city will be investing $20,000 for $5-$10 gift cards (October-November) and subsidized offers (December-January) for local businesses, merchants and restaurants to be used for Challenges between October and January. One of the advantages of Miles is that the Challenge "prizes" can be highly targeted offers to fill in low spots in a business that is otherwise at capacity. For example, if a local restaurant is full every night, but is introducing a new lunch menu to build day-time traffic, and Mondays-Tuesdays are the lowest volume days, the restaurant can design a Challenge offer to drive traffic during those times. Alternatively, offers can be worth more if redeemed in off- P54 VI.d Page 5 season. The Challenges thus provide a significant, targeted promotional opportunity for local businesses. Miles has advised that the city subsidize the Challenge offers during year one, but anticipates that businesses will take on the cost in subsequent years once they experience the positive impact. The Miles team participates in signing up local merchants, and has created a simple template for doing so. What are the Cost Components for 4-month Miles Test? Direct Cost of Miles Contract: $23,000 Additional Miles Contributions: Miles will commit $20,000 toward the national incentive program which supports the foundational miles - $10,000 for the internal city test phase; $10,000 for the expanded phase of the test. Miles also provides guidance on the promotional plan for enrollment. Indirect Cost to the City: 1. $20,000 during the 4-month test period to subsidize local incentives during this period, assuming that local businesses are going to be included in this phase; $10,000 in $5 and $10 gift cards for the initial two months, and $10,000 in merchant rewards for the second two months. 2. $20,000 in promotion spending to acquire 750 commuters and residents for the December-January test. Total Cost to the City: $63,000 Test Plan September-October 1. Implement 30-day integration phase, using weekly onboarding calls to facilitate. 2. City signs up 250-300 city staff members, beginning October 1, along with several representatives from local partners and consultants working with the city on Shift. 3. Miles advises the city on the appropriate rewards and challenges for maximizing activation of this group for the 120-day test period. 3. The city will purchase gift cards from local businesses, valued at $10,000, for the challenges during this period, and Miles will match with $10,000 for national rewards for the Foundational Miles rewards. 4. Miles advises the city on an effective promotion plan for an expanded sign-up beginning December 1, with the goal of adding an additional 750 commuters as quickly as possible. This is envisioned as coordinating with, but going beyond, the Transportation Department’s fall promotion, and involving the use of a qualified marketing agency. 3. Miles provides data, and analytical insights to the team on a bi-weekly basis during the 4-month test period. November Activate promotion to add 750 additional commuters and residents. December 1. Provide analytical insights for a presentation to Council. 2. Renew contract. 3. Plan roll-out to additional local merchants and 2,000-2,500 additional commuters and residents. January 4-month test complete P55 VI.d Page 6 ------------ February Begin expanded 2019 enrollment to reach critical mass for Shift by June 1, 2019 FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: This contract and the related expenses of $63,000 are included in the Lab Planning Budget of $429,000 approved by Council in June, 2018. The cost of the anticipated rollout, including direct and indirect costs of $315,000 (January-October) was presented in the 2019 Shift Council Memo submitted for the August 20 work session. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The Aspen Mobility Lab positively impacts numerous measures from City Council’s Sustainability Dashboard including: Air Quality (PM levels, ozone levels); Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Castle Creek Bridge Counts; Acres of Trails; Mass Transit Use; Walkability and Bike-ability Rating; Health and Well Being; and Community Connections. RECOMMENDED ACTION and PROPOSED MOTION: Approve the Miles contract and related city expenses that are part of the approved 2018 Shift Planning Budget and the test plan for the rest of the year. ALTERNATIVES: City Council can choose not to approve the Miles contract and direct staff to proceed with Shift without incentives. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Attachments: Attachment A – Contract and Scope of Services Attachment B – Resolution #124 P56 VI.d Page 7 Appendix 1 Miles 2019 Rollout The Miles contract will be extended for an additional 12 months, if 3 criteria are met: 1. Early results are promising, based on metrics established in the contract. 2. Single source arguments continue to be valid. 3. Council approves Shift for 2019, and the extended Miles contract for 2019. 2019 Deliverables: 1. Review test phase and make any needed adjustments with the project team (October). 2. Set refined goals for sign-ups, along with a promotion budget; for the business incentive program, for weighting of behaviors leading up to the Shift period, June-August, 2019; and for weighting during the Shift program (October). 3. Refine indirect budget (rewards) for full implementation (October). 4. Complete contract and obtain Council approval for the year-long implementation stage (November) 5. Participate in city partner planning meeting, expected to fall in early October. 6. Participate in city operations meeting, expected to fall in December or January. 7. Daily data updates to city's transit data base. 7. Weekly review calls with the project team to review progress and make adjustments. Direct Cost to City of Aspen $90,000 for one-year Miles renewal, including all aggregated data on transit patterns and behavioral response to incentives. $160,000 for Challenge rewards, all from local businesses or the city, to meet intercept lot, on-demand, and bicycle objectives vs. original budget of $170,000 for just intercept incentives $50,000 in promotion, integrated into the overall Shift promotional effort. $15,000 for part-time analyst designing Challenges with Miles Miles Contributions: $20,000 in rewards for the foundational miles Projected Total Cost to City: $315,000 currently budgeted in 2019 Shift Projections Timeline: Assessment of Test Phase (December 2018 and January 2019) Expanded Miles sign-up promotion and redemptions (February-August) P57 VI.d Page 8 3-month Shift program, with Challenges rewarding specific behaviors (June-August, 2019) Potential School Lab using Miles (September-October, 2019) After-program to evaluate changes in behavior as incentives are reduced (September-October, 2019) Evaluation of Shift metrics with project team (November, 2019). Decision whether to recommend Miles as an ongoing component of Aspen's transit programs Appendix 2 Examples of Foundational and Challenge Rewards (attached excel spreadsheet) P58 VI.d RESOLUTION #124 (Series of 2018) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AND CONNECTIQ LABS, INC. DBA DRIVERMILES, SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE SOFTWARE AND PROJECT AGREEMENT. WHEREAS, the City of Aspen is committed to maintaining a high quality of life for residents and providing a superior visitor experience, and WHEREAS, quality of life and experience is greatly influenced by the way community members and visitors move into, out of, and around Aspen, and WHEREAS, Aspen’s current mobility options are not competitive with the personal automobile, which encourages the use of single-occupancy vehicles, and WHEREAS, single occupancy vehicles lead to traffic, air quality and safety concerns, and an overall reduced experience, and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen aims to experiment with new mobility services with the hope that new mobility options can compete with the personal automobile and provide better options for community members to move, and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen supports residents and visitors in choosing low carbon transportation options, and WHEREAS the City of Aspen seeks to test new modes of transportation during a lab in the summer of 2019, and WHEREAS encourage the use of these modes and to lead to lasting behavior change, incentives and motivators must be offered to community members and commuters, and WHEREAS a specific software program is needed to organize and facilitate these incentives and support the City of Aspen staff in making the project a success, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 P59 VI.d That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the Contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado and ConnectIQ Labs, Inc. DBA DriverMiles that sets forth the terms and conditions of the software use for the Aspen Mobility Lab, Shift, a copy of which is incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute said Contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: August 27, 2018 ______________________________ Steven Skadron, Mayor I, Linda Manning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held August 27, 2018. ______________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk P60 VI.d EVALUATION AGREEMENT This Evaluation Agreement (this “Agreement”) is made and entered into as of July 1, 2018 (the “Effective Date”) by and between the City of Aspen (“Customer”) and ConnectIQ Labs, Inc. DBA DriverMiles (“Company”). In consideration of the mutual covenants contained in this Agreement, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Grant of Software License. Company grants to Customer a nonexclusive, nontransferable, non-sublicensable, revocable and limited license to use and distribute the software (“Software”) as part of a program implementation plan described in Exhibit A solely to evaluate the Software. Company will deliver the Software to Customer on July 1, 2018. Upon Customer’s request, Company may, but is not obligated to, provide the Software to employees of the Customer prior to the beginning of the Evaluation Period. 2. License Restrictions. Except as expressly authorized by this Agreement, Customer may not: (a) modify, copy, disclose, alter, translate or create derivative works of the Software; (b) license, sublicense, resell, distribute, lease, rent, lend, transfer, assign or otherwise dispose of the Software; (c) use the Software or allow the transfer, transmission, export or re-export of the Software in violation of any export control laws or regulations administered by the U.S. Department of Commerce; (d) decompile, disassemble, decode or reverse engineer the Software, translate the Software or otherwise attempt to learn the source code, structure, algorithms or internal ideas underlying the Software or reduce the Software by any other means to a human-perceivable form; (e) access the Software in order to (i) build a competitive product or service, or (ii) copy any features or functions of the Software; (f) interfere with or disrupt the integrity or performance of the Software or any third party data contained therein; (g) attempt to gain unauthorized access to the Software; (h) disclose to any third party any performance information or analysis relating to the Software; (i) remove, alter or obscure any proprietary notices in or on the Software, including copyright, trademark, or other proprietary rights notices; or (j) cause or permit any third party under Customer’s control to do any of the foregoing. 3. Ownership. As between the parties and subject to Section 1, Company will own all right, title and interest in and to the Software and any and all Intellectual Property Rights (as defined below) embodied in or related to the foregoing. Company reserves all rights not expressly granted in this Agreement, and no licenses are granted by Company to Customer under this Agreement, whether by implication, estoppel or otherwise, except as expressly set forth herein. For the purpose of this Agreement, “Intellectual Property Rights” means all patents, copyrights, moral rights, trademark rights, trade secret rights and any other form of intellectual property rights recognized in any jurisdiction, including applications and registrations for any of the foregoing. 5. 4. Nondisclosure. “Confidential Information” means (1) the Software; (2) log files and/or error reports related to the Software; (3) the components of Company’s business plans, financial plans, know- how, information from other Company customers and business strategies; (4) benchmark and other testing results related to the Software; and (5) other similar information. Customer will maintain, during the term of this Agreement and thereafter, in confidence all Confidential Information and will not use such Confidential Information except as expressly permitted in this Agreement. Confidential Information does not include information to the extent that such information: (i) is or becomes generally known to the public by any means other than a breach of the obligations of the Customer hereunder; (ii) was previously known to the Customer as evidenced by its written records; (iii) is rightly received by the Customer from a third party who is not under an obligation of confidentiality; or (iv) is independently developed by the Customer without reference to or use of the Company's Confidential Information. Confidential Information shall also not include any information that is subject to disclosure under theColorado Open Records Act, provided, however, that Customer will provide notice to Company prior to disclosure. Customer will use the same degree of care in protecting Confidential Information as Customer uses to protect its own confidential and proprietary information from unauthorized use or disclosure, but in no event less than reasonable care. Confidential Information will be used by Customer solely for the purpose of carrying out Customer’s obligations under this Agreement. Any suggestions, comments or other feedback including the results of any benchmark or other testing, provided by Customer to Company with respect to the Services or Company (collectively, “Feedback”) will constitute confidential information of the Company and may not be disclosed to any third party unless subject to the Colorado Open Records Act and Company acknowledges that Customer intents to discuss the Pilot at public meetings with Customer’s Board and other public agencies. Company will be free to use, disclose, reproduce, license and otherwise distribute and exploit the Feedback provided to it as Company sees fit, entirely without obligation or restriction of any kind, on account of Intellectual Property Rights or otherwise. Customer acknowledges that any unauthorized disclosure of Confidential Information will result in irreparable injury to Company, which injury could not be adequately compensated by the payment of money damages. In addition to any other legal and equitable remedies that may be available, Company will be entitled to seek and obtain injunctive relief against any breach or threatened breach by Customer of the confidentiality obligations hereunder, Intellectual Property Rights. Company warrants to Customer that it has the full right, authority and power to enter into this Agreement and to grant to the Organization the licenses and rights conveyed by this Agreement. Company further warrants that neither the Software in the form delivered by Company to Customer, nor any modifications, enhancements, updates or upgrades thereto, nor the normal use thereof by Customer pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, will infringe any patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret or other proprietary right of any third party. In the event there is a third party claim against Customer alleging that Customer’s use of the Software in accordance with this Agreement constitutes an infringement of a patent, copyright, trademark or trade secret or other intellectual property that is valid and enforceable in Customer’s jurisdiction, Company shall, at its expense, defend and indemnify Customer and pay any final judgment (including all damages awarded against Customer) against Customer or settlement agreed to by Company on Customer’s behalf. 6. Disclaimer. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” AND “AS AVAILABLE” BASIS WITHOUT ANY REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, COVENANTS OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND. COMPANY AND ITS SUPPLIERS DO NOT WARRANT THAT ANY OF THE SOFTWARE WILL BE FREE FROM BUGS, ERRORS OR OMISSIONS. COMPANY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL OTHER WARRANTIES AND REPRESENTATIONS (EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ORAL OR WRITTEN) WITH RESPECT TO THE SOFTWARE, WHETHER ALLEGED TO ARISE BY OPERATION OF LAW, BY REASON OF CUSTOM OR USAGE IN THE TRADE, BY COURSE OF DEALING OR OTHERWISE, INCLUDING ANY AND ALL (A) WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND (B) WARRANTIES OF FITNESS OR SUITABILITY FOR ANY PURPOSE (WHETHER OR NOT COMPANY KNOWS, HAS REASON TO KNOW, HAS BEEN ADVISED OR IS OTHERWISE AWARE OF ANY SUCH PURPOSE). P61 VI.d 2 7. Limitation of Liability. EXCEPT FOR THE INDEMNITY OBLIGATIONS UNDER SECTION 5 OF THIS AGREEMENT, IN NO EVENT WILL: (A) EITHER PARTY BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER PARTY OR ANY THIRD PARTY FOR ANY LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF USE, LOSS OF REVENUE, LOSS OF GOODWILL OR INTERRUPTION OF BUSINESS, OR FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, EXEMPLARY, PUNITIVE OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OF ANY KIND ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT OR THE SOFTWARE, REGARDLESS OF THE FORM OF ACTION, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT, STRICT LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE, EVEN IF THE PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OR IS OTHERWISE AWARE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES; AND (B) EITHER PARTY’S TOTAL LIABILITY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT OR THE SOFTWARE EXCEED THE TOTAL AMOUNT RECEIVED BY COMPANY FROM CUSTOMER PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT (IF ANY). MULTIPLE CLAIMS WILL NOT EXPAND THIS LIMITATION. THIS SECTION WILL BE GIVEN FULL EFFECT EVEN IF ANY REMEDY SPECIFIED IN THIS AGREEMENT IS DEEMED TO HAVE FAILED IN ITS ESSENTIAL PURPOSE. 8. Term and Termination. Unless earlier terminated as set forth in this Agreement, this Agreement is only effective during the Evaluation Period. In the event of a breach of Sections 2 or 4, Company may immediately terminate this Agreement. Upon any expiration or termination of this Agreement: (a) all rights granted to Customer under this Agreement will immediately cease; and (b) Customer will promptly provide Company with all Confidential Information then in its possession or destroy all copies of such Confidential Information if permitted by state law, at Company’s sole discretion and direction. In addition to this sentence, the following sections will survive any termination or expiration of this Agreement: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9. 9. General Provisions. 9.1 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including all exhibits to this Agreement, all of which are incorporated herein by reference, sets forth the entire agreement and understanding of the parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous agreements, proposals, negotiations, conversations, discussions and understandings, written or oral, with respect to such subject matter and all past dealing or industry custom. 9.2 Independent Contractors. Neither party will, for any purpose, be deemed to be an agent, franchisor, franchise, employee, representative, owner or partner of the other party, and the relationship between the parties will only be that of independent contractors. Neither party will have any right or authority to assume or create any obligations, to make any representations or warranties on behalf of any other party (whether express or implied), or to bind the other party in any respect whatsoever. 9.3 Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado applicable to agreements made and to be entirely performed within the State of Colorado, without resort to its conflict of law provisions. The state or federal court in Pitkin County, Colorado will be the jurisdiction in which any suits should be filed if they relate to this Agreement. Prior to the filing or initiation of any action or proceeding relating to this Agreement, the parties must participate in good faith mediation in Pitkin County,Colorado. If a party initiates any proceeding regarding this Agreement, the prevailing party to such proceeding is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs for claims arising out of this Agreement. 9.4 Assignment. Neither this Agreement nor any right or duty under this Agreement may be transferred, assigned or delegated by Customer, by operation of law or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Company, and any attempted transfer, assignment or delegation without such consent will be void and without effect. Company may freely transfer, assign or delegate this Agreement or its rights and duties under this Agreement. Subject to the foregoing, this Agreement will be binding upon and will inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective representatives, heirs, administrators, successors and permitted assigns. 9.5 Amendments and Waivers. No modification, addition, deletion, or waiver of any rights under this Agreement will be binding on a party unless made in a non-preprinted agreement clearly understood by the parties to be a modification or waiver and signed by a duly authorized representative of each party. No failure or delay (in whole or in part) on the part of a party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder will operate as a waiver thereof or effect any other right or remedy. All rights and remedies hereunder are cumulative and are not exclusive of any other rights or remedies provided hereunder or by law. The waiver of one breach or default or any delay in exercising any rights hereunder will not constitute a waiver of any subsequent breach or default. 9.6 Notices. Any notice or communication required or permitted to be given hereunder must be in writing, signed or authorized by the party giving notice, and either delivered by hand, deposited with an overnight courier, sent by confirmed email, or mailed by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested, postage prepaid), in each case to the address of the receiving party as identified on this Agreement or at such other address as may hereafter be furnished in writing by either party to the other party. Such notice will be deemed to have been given as of the date it is delivered. 9.7 Publicity. Company shall not use, in its external advertising, marketing programs, or other promotional efforts, any data, pictures, or other representation of the Customer unless Company receives specific written authorization in advance from Customer. However, nothing in this clause shall preclude Company from listing the Customer on its routine client list for matters of reference or from using Customer’s Feedback without reference to Customer’s name and logo. 9.8 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is invalid, illegal or incapable of being enforced by any rule of law or public policy, all other provisions of this Agreement will nonetheless remain in full force and effect so long as the economic and legal substance of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement is not affected in any manner adverse to any party. Upon such determination that any provision is invalid, illegal or incapable of being enforced, the parties will negotiate in good faith to modify this Agreement so as to effect the original intent of the parties as closely as possible in an acceptable manner to the end that the transactions contemplated hereby are fulfilled. 9.9 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed: (a) in two or more counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original and all of which will together constitute the same instrument; and (b) by the parties by exchange of signature pages by mail or email (if email, signatures in Adobe PDF or similar format). P62 VI.d 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Evaluation Agreement to be executed as of the Effective Date. CUSTOMER NAME CONNECTIQ LABS, INC By: By: Jigar Shah Title: Title: CEO Date: Date: February 21, 2018 Address: Address: 75 E. Santa Clara Street, San Jose, CA 95113 Phone No.: Phone No.: 408-250-9031 Facsimile: Facsimile: E-mail: E-mail: jigar@drivermiles.com P63 VI.d 3 Exhibit A Implementation Plan For details of the Program Implementation Plan (PIP), please see the attached plan document. Below you will find, details of the total cost, cost breakdown as well as payment terms. Incen ves Details Proprietary and Conﬁdential, 2018 Items Descrip on Incen ves Budget • Aspen City: $20k for the en re 4 month pilot period • DriverMiles: Contributed another $20k worth of incen ves of its own Deploying Incen ves • Aspen City’s Budget of $20k: • Recommenda on: 2 rewards of $5 each targeted for 2k users. Typically, each user redeems 1 $5 reward in a month. • Takes care of user acquisi on and reten on for first two months • DriverMiles Budget of $20k: • Recommenda on: 2 rewards of $5 each targeted for 2k users. • Takes care of user reten on for months 3 and 4 Type of Incen ves Contribu on • Aspen City can choose from the following for the user of its $20k budget • Cash budget provided to DriverMiles to procure gi cards of popular products/services such as Amazon/Starbucks etc. DriverMiles responsible for integra on of gi cards and reward fulfillment • Aspen City procures digital gi cards of popular brands and provides them to DriverMiles. DriverMiles responsible for integra on of gi cards and reward fulfillment • DriverMiles will be primarily using its $20k budget on digital gi cards from Starbucks/Amazon. Other popular brands could be considered based on the City’s request Addi onal Incen ves from City • No addi onal incen ves required from the City beyond $20k for the en re pilot period • Aspen City to help facilitate introduc ons to local businesses that DriverMiles can bring to the pla orm • DriverMiles en rely responsible for educa ng and onboarding the local business partners Addi onal Rewards from DriverMiles • DriverMiles to provide rewards from several major na onal brands. • Expected count to be more than 50 rewards from various ver cals P64 VI.d MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Hailey Guglielmo, EIT, Development Engineer THRU: Justin Forman, P.E., Senior Project Manager Trish Aragon, P.E., City Engineer DATE OF MEMO: August 20th, 2018 MEETING DATE: August 27th, 2018 RE: Resolution #114, Series of 2018 - Third Party Engineering Development Review Services – Consent for Professional Services Contract REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Engineering Staff requests an extension of an existing contract with J3 Engineering for third party building permit plans review. There is an existing contract for $22,000. This request seeks to extend the contract by $15,000 to a total of $37,000. BACKGROUND: The Engineering Department currently holds a contract with J3 Engineering. The contract is not to exceed $22,000 per year for Development Review Services on an as- needed basis. An RFP was placed on Bidnet on 12/29/17. The Department received three proposals and a contract was awarded to J3 Engineering on 2/26/18. The yearly contract can be renewed for up to two years. Resolution 114 will only increase the contract amount for the current year which ends 2/26/19. A copy of the existing contract is attached. DISCUSSION: Five permits have recently been submitted that require an expedited review. Including 834 W Hallam (Poppies), the Pitkin County Ambulance Facility, and three affordable housing projects (517 Park Circle, 802 W Main St, and 488 Castle Creek Rd). Review of these expedited permits will use staff time and push back the review and issuance of other residential and commercial permits. In addition, the number of permits submitted continues to grow. A change order for additional funding is needed for additional review services from J3 Engineering to keep up with permit reviews and to issue permits with code compliant plans in a timely manner. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The additional funds are already within the budget and would not require an amendment. Funding Development Review Purchased Professional and Technical Services P65 VI.e Account 001.327.12110.52130 Total Budget: $74,130.00 Spent to Date: $22,553.00 Remaining Balance $51,577.00 Resolution 114 Change Order Requested Amount: $15,000.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a Change Order with J3 Engineering for Development Review Services in the amount of $15,000. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution No. 114, series of 2018.” CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: ATTACHMENT A - Resolution 114 and Change Order Contract with J3 Engineering ATTACHMENT B - J3 Professional Services – City of Aspen Contract No 2017-157 P66 VI.e RESOLUTION #114 (Series of 2018) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CHANGE ORDER BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND J3 ENGINEERING AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CHANGE ORDER ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a change order for Engineering Development Review Services between the City of Aspen and J3 Engineering, a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the change order for Engineering Development Review Services, between the City of Aspen and J3 Engineering, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of August 2018. Steven Skadron, Mayor I, Linda Manning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held, August 27, 2018. Linda Manning, City Clerk P67 VI.e Ken S. Cecil Principal August 2, 2018 P68 VI.e P69 VI.e P70 VI.e P71 VI.e P72 VI.e P73 VI.e P74 VI.e P75 VI.e P76 VI.e P77 VI.e P78 VI.e P79 VI.e P80 VI.e 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM : Hailey Guglielmo, EIT, Development Engineer, Engineering Dept THRU: Trish Aragon, PE, City Engineer, Engineering Dept Tyler Christoff, PE, Deputy Director of Utilities, Utilities Dept DATE OF MEMO: August 20th, 2018 MEETING DATE: August 27th, 2018 RE: Resolution #126, Series of 2018 - 7th and Main St Concrete Paving and Waterline Improvements REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recommends Council approve the 7th and Main Street Intersection Concrete Pavement Project Contract with Gould Construction in the amount of $677,996.48. DISCUSSION: Currently the intersection of 7th Street and Main Street is prone to potholes or ruts given the high traffic loads and vehicle turning movements coming around the S-turn curve. The City and CDOT typically repair this intersection in patches which typically improve the asphalt condition for relatively short periods. P81 VI.f 2 The S-curve at 7th St and Hallam Street was paved in concrete as a part of the improvements project being constructed currently. This decision was made to reduce the need for annual maintenance within this section of roadway and reduce the rutting around the S-curve. Asphalt is typically maintained every 3 to 4 years while the concrete section utilized at the corner of 7th and Hallam Streets is expected to last 20 years before maintenance is required. The successful implementation of this design has led to discussions between CDOT and the City of Aspen to continue a similar implementation for the 7th and Main Street intersection. CDOT recommended to City Staff that they would be willing to enter an IGA that would cover 50% of the cost for replacing this intersection in concrete. City staff received an estimate for the replacement of the intersection from Gould Construction. The cost estimate for the concrete replacement of the intersection is $488,316.15. The City will pay up front and through the IGA be reimbursed by CDOT for $244,158 which is half of the cost of concrete in the intersection. The remaining sum of $244,158 would be paid by the City. In addition, a water main within the boundary of the intersection is scheduled for replacement and would be included within this project scope for an additional estimated cost of $101,246. Staff believes updating the aging subsurface utility infrastructure prior to pavement resurfacing efforts yields the greatest economies of scale, minimize disturbance, and produce the highest quality finished product for the community. P82 VI.f Similar to the intersection that was constructed at 7 flows and residential neighborhoods is complicated within the S in the fall period on the Hallam Street Improvements project, the detours, outreach and contractors are in place to make this required work as seamless as possible. A concrete intersection would also alleviate the need for major maintenance and minimize disruptions through the S-curves for years. The community is impacted a great deal by the S goal is to minimize disruption in the upcoming years. Castle Creek Bridge Improvements project of this intersection. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS Additional Funds Requested from Central Savings Change Order - 7th and Main Street Improvements Listed below is project costs. This includes a request for additional funds from central savings for roadway improvements. A portion of the roa CDOT in the approximate amount of $ Roadway Improvements* (from Central Savings) Water Line Replacement (Water Fund Contingency (15%) *CDOT will reimburse the City $24 Similar to the intersection that was constructed at 7th and Hallam Streets, coordination of traffic flows and residential neighborhoods is complicated within the S-curves. Due to the planned work in the fall period on the Hallam Street Improvements project, the detours, outreach and make this required work as seamless as possible. A concrete intersection would also alleviate the need for major maintenance and minimize disruptions curves for years. The community is impacted a great deal by the S ruption in the upcoming years. A change order to the Hallam Street and Castle Creek Bridge Improvements project is recommended by staff to complete the construction /BUDGET IMPACTS: from Central Savings and Main Street Improvements – Construction This includes a request for additional funds from central savings A portion of the roadway improvements will be reimbursed by CDOT in the approximate amount of $244,158. (from Central Savings) (Water Fund – Distribution Replacement 50750) Total Requested *CDOT will reimburse the City $244,158 through a subsequent IGA. 3 and Hallam Streets, coordination of traffic curves. Due to the planned work in the fall period on the Hallam Street Improvements project, the detours, outreach and make this required work as seamless as possible. A concrete intersection would also alleviate the need for major maintenance and minimize disruptions curves for years. The community is impacted a great deal by the S-curves and the A change order to the Hallam Street and is recommended by staff to complete the construction This includes a request for additional funds from central savings dway improvements will be reimbursed by $488,316.15 $101,246.00 $ 88,434.33 $677,996.48 P83 VI.f 4 RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends Council approve the 7th and Main Street Intersection Improvements Project contract with Gould Construction in the amount of $677,996.48. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution No. 126, Series of 2018.” CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Attachment A – Resolution #126 P84 VI.f RESOLUTION # 126 (Series of 2018) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND GOULD CONSTRUCTION INCORPORATED AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract for the 7th and Main Street Intersection Improvements Project between the City of Aspen and Gould Construction, Inc., a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as Attachment “A”; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the contract for 7th and Main Street Intersection Improvements Project, between the City of Aspen and Gould Construction, Inc., a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of August 2018. Steven Skadron, Mayor I, Linda Manning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held, August 27, 2018. Linda Manning, City Clerk P85 VI.f P86 VI.f Main and 7th Street Improvements - Budget Estimate 6874 HWY 82, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P.O. Box 130, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Paul Jacobson 970-945-7291 970-945-8371 Contact: Phone: Fax: Job Name:Quote To:City of Aspen Main and 7th Street 8/15/2018Date of Plans:Attn:Hailey Guglielmo Address: Phone:Proposal Date:8/20/2018 Email: AMOUNTITEMDESCRIPTIONQUANTITYUNITUNIT PRICE Mobilization 55,000.00LS 1.00 10 55,000.00 Removal of Asphalt 17.20SY 979.00 20 16,838.80 Removal of Concrete Pavement 66.00SY 168.00 30 11,088.00 Removal of Asphalt (Planing) 40.00SY 45.00 40 1,800.00 Removal of Sidewalk & ADA Ramps 36.90SY 43.00 50 1,586.70 Removal of Curb and Gutter 16.10LF 187.00 60 3,010.70 Removal of Boulders 800.00LS 1.00 70 800.00 Scarify and Recompact 4.90SY 1,088.00 80 5,331.20 Unclassified Excavation (CIP) 55.70CY 778.00 90 43,334.60 Topsoil 85.00CY 4.00 100 340.00 Stormwater Management 2,500.00LS 1.00 110 2,500.00 Seeding (Native) 1.00SF 360.00 120 360.00 Mulch 1.00SF 360.00 130 360.00 Tree protection 5,500.00LS 1.00 140 5,500.00 ABC (Class 6) 114.25CY 319.00 150 36,445.75 HMA Overlay 315.00TON 5.00 160 1,575.00 HMA Full Depth 190.00TON 6.00 170 1,140.00 Concrete Pavement (10 inch thickness) 203.40SY 1,120.00 180 227,808.00 Concrete Jointing 2.55LF 1,700.00 190 4,335.00 Protect Existing Utilities 5,000.00LS 1.00 200 5,000.00 8" DIP 232.00LF 191.00 210 44,312.00 8" GV 2,100.00EA 4.00 220 8,400.00 8"x6" Reducer 700.00EA 3.00 230 2,100.00 8" Tee 850.00EA 1.00 240 850.00 Tie Rod Restraint System 5,000.00EA 3.00 250 15,000.00 Thrust Block 250.00EA 1.00 260 250.00 Waterline Testing 10,000.00LS 1.00 270 10,000.00 Temp Water Service to Hick House 7,500.00LS 1.00 280 7,500.00 New Water Service for 734 Main St 5,000.00EA 1.00 290 5,000.00 Concrete ADA Curb Ramp 1,835.00EA 1.00 300 1,835.00 Page 1 of 2 P87 VI.f AMOUNTITEMDESCRIPTIONQUANTITYUNITUNIT PRICE Concrete Sidewalk (6inch) 166.50SY 6.00 310 999.00 Barrier Curb and Gutter (COA Type A) 47.20LF 187.00 320 8,826.40 Construction Surveying 8,900.00LS 1.00 330 8,900.00 Traffic Control 32,000.00LS 1.00 335 32,000.00 Pavement Marking Paint (Water Based) 1,500.00GAL 1.00 340 1,500.00 Air Spade Tree Roots 76.00LF 30.00 350 2,280.00 Relocate Light Pole 2,500.00EA 1.00 360 2,500.00 Removal of Concrete Valley Pan 56.00SY 52.00 370 2,912.00 Concrete Valley Pan (8inch) 197.00SY 52.00 380 10,244.00 GRAND TOTAL $589,562.15 NOTES: Qualifications/Notes: 1. Proposal is valid for (30) calendar days. 2. Davis-Bacon and/or prevailing wages are excluded. 3. Any item not specifically mentioned in the scope of work is excluded . 4. Survey/Staking/Engineering is included. 5. Material/Soils testing is excluded. 6. Special Insurance (Can be provided at additional cost). 7. Shoring is excluded. 8. Purchase of construction water is included. 9. Due to market volatility, we reserve the right to adjust pricing for fuel increases . 10. This is a unit price proposal. Final billings will be determined by quantities for unit price items installed/measured in the field. 11. Permits/Fees are excluded. 12. Winter Conditions will be billed on a T&M basis. 13. Progress billings net 30 days and due 30 days after. A finance charge of 1.5%/month (18%APR) will be charged on unpaid balances. 14. No retention is to be held unless agreed upon in writing. 15. Bond rate is 1.5% if not included in proposal. 16. All Taxes are excluded. 17. Boulders/Rock Shelves that can not be excavated with conventional equipment will be billed on a T&M basis . 18. Traffic Control is included. 19. Dewatering is excluded. 20. Subexcavation/stabilization of soft areas is excluded. 21. Gould Construction reserves the right to postpone work progress for ANY unsafe conditions . 22. This proposal is submitted as a package. Any scope shall not be removed without permission of Gould Construction . 23. These bid conditions in their entirety shall become a governing part of any contract or subcontract agreement . This will be accomplished by including a copy of this proposal in the contract. Page 2 of 2 P88 VI.f 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Jordan Gray-DeKraai, EIT, CAMP, Project Manager THRU: John Krueger, Director of Transportation Pete Rice, PE, Senior Project Manager Tricia Aragon, PE, City Engineer DATE OF MEMO: July 30, 2018 MEETING DATE: August 27, 2018 RE: Resolution #103, Series of 2018 - Galena and Main Street Bus Stop and Pedestrian Improvements Project - Consent for Construction Contract REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recommends Council approve the 2018 Galena and Main Street Bus Stop and Pedestrian Improvements Project Contract with Excavation Services, Inc. in the amount of $224,120. BACKGROUND: Engineering and Transportation staff along with the Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Team (PABST) have identified the Galena and Main Street bus stop as an area in need of improvements to increase pedestrian safety and upgrade failing infrastructure. The corner of Galena and Main Street has historically had several drainage issues that tend to ice up near the ramps until staff can break it down and remove it. Citizens have raised safety issues with the considerable amount of icing present. A local bus stop is located on the Main Street edge of the corner that has difficult interactions between people exiting the bus and taking their ski gear from the side of the bus during the winter seasons. Staff have identified this area as a candidate to present for electrical snowmelt due to safety concerns for pedestrians during the heavy snow periods. A snowmelt option will be provided as an alternative for this project. Each additional bus stop candidate for snowmelt that will be incorporated into future projects will also be provided as an additional alternative to that project and presented to Council. DISCUSSION: The Galena and Main Street Bus Stop and Pedestrian Improvements Project will improve the existing bus stop, replace curb and gutter, sidewalk, ADA ramps, install new storm infrastructure and permeable pavers. Snowmelt for the bus pad will be listed as an alternative with an additional cost associated with snowmelt system, junctions and the routing for an electrical connection to the City system. P89 VI.g 2 The 2018 Galena and Main Street Bus Stop and Pedestrian Improvements Project was advertised for bid on April 5, 2018. Two (2) bids were received and opened on April 30, 2018. Bids were received from two (2) Contractors as summarized below (Including Add Alt #1 Snowmelt): Excavation Services, Inc. $203,745.00 Gould Construction $288,478.45 Excavation Services, Inc. was identified by staff as the lowest qualified bidder. Excavation Services, Inc. has experience in various City infrastructure improvement projects and has performed well in previous contracts. Excavation Services, Inc. is on contract for the 2018 ADA improvements Project. Excavation Services, Inc. is also As-needed Contractors for the City and performs miscellaneous tasks for the Engineering Department throughout the year. Staff recommends that it is in the City’s best interests to award the final construction contract to this vendor. Snowmelt Add Alt #1: Staff is proposing heated pavers at the Galena and Main bus stop to alleviate ice and snow buildup in the winter for the areas that bus users exit the vehicle. There is frequent snow plowing along this corridor which requires Parks Department Staff to clear this area by hand and pile snow to one corner of the bus stop to allow room for bus users. Snowmelt would eliminate hours of staff time dedicated to clearing snow and ice at this location and their time could then be allocated to other areas with safety concerns. This bus stop is primarily used as a passenger drop off location and in the winter skiers and snowboarders get off at this location in their boots and an ice packed surface may increase the chances of a fall. Snowmelt placed beneath the pavers along this bus drop off location is requested to keep RFTA’s bus users safe and free of preventable slips or falls. The cost for snowmelt with Excavation Services is $81,192. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: Funding 2018 Galena and Main Street Bus Stop and Pedestrian Improvements Project (000.327.81200.52130.50470) $133,000 TOTAL $133,000 Expenditures Base Bid -Excavation Services, Inc. Construction Bid $122,553 Contingency (9%) $ 12,255 TOTAL $132,980 P90 VI.g 3 Additional Funds Requested for Snowmelt Alternative Project Funds $ 133,000 Base Bid Project Costs $ 132,980 Snowmelt Alternate -Excavation Services, Inc. Construction Bid $ 81,192 TOTOL REQUESTED $ 81,172 Staff has full funding for the base bid of this project, the additional $81,172 would be funding from Central Savings. Staff will request supplemental funding for this portion of the project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council approve the 2018 Galena and Main Street Bus Stop and Pedestrian Improvements Project contract with Excavation Services, Inc. in the amount of $224,120. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution No.103, Series of 2018.” CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENT A – Resolution and Contract with Excavation Services, Inc. ATTACHMENT B – Excavation Services Bid Proposal ATTACHMENT C – Galena and Main Street Construction Documents P91 VI.g RESOLUTION # 103 (Series of 2018) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND EXCAVATION SERVICES INCORPORATED AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract for the 2018 Galena and Main Street Bus Stop and Pedestrian Improvements Project between the City of Aspen and Excavation Services Incorporated, a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as Attachment “A”; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the contract for 2018 Galena and Main Street Bus Stop and Pedestrian Improvements Project, between the City of Aspen and Excavation Services Incorporated, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of August 2018. Steven Skadron, Mayor I, Linda Manning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held, August 27, 2018. Linda Manning, City Clerk P92 VI.g P93 VI.g P94 VI.g P95 VI.g P96 VI.g P97 VI.g P98 VI.g P99 VI.g P100 VI.g P101 VI.g P102 VI.g P103 VI.g P104 VI.g P105 VI.g P106 VI.g GALENA AND MAIN ST BUS STOP IMPROVEMENTSGENERAL NOTES:1.ALL WORK SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CDOT AND THE CITY OFASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, CITY OF ASPEN WATER DISTRIBUTION STANDARDS,ENGINEERING DIVISION, GENERAL PROVISIONS, SPECIAL PROVISIONS, ENGINEERINGSPECIFICATIONS, REVISIONS TO STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND SUPPLEMENTALSPECIFICATIONS, CDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, LATEST REVISION.2.IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THAT ALL WORKIS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND REGULATIONSAS SET FORTH BY THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION(O.S.H.A.).3.NO FIELD CHANGES SHALL BE MADE WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL OFTHE ENGINEER.4.SUBMITTALS SHALL BE MADE FOR ALL MATERIALS TO BE INCORPORATEDINTO THE PROJECT.5.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AN APPROVED TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANPRIOR TO COMMENCING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. COA TO OBTAIN ROW PERMIT.6.THE PHYSICAL FEATURES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE PROJECT HAVE BEENSHOWN BASED ON THE BEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION AT THE TIME OF DESIGN.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY EXISTING PHYSICAL FEATURES ANDELEVATIONS THEMSELVES OF THE CONDITIONS TO BE ENCOUNTERED DURING THECONSTRUCTION.7.SURVEY PROVIDED BY BOOKCLIFF SURVEY ON AUGUST 25TH 2017.8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LIMIT ALL WORK AND STORAGE AREAS TO THEAPPROVED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAYS, THE PROJECT SITE, AND EASEMENTS. USE OFANY PRIVATE AREAS FOR THIS PROJECT BY THE CONTRACTOR MUST BE APPROVEDIN WRITING BY THE PROPERTY OWNER WITH A COPY OF THIS APPROVAL PROVIDEDTO THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO USAGE.9.ALL CONSTRUCTION IS TO INCLUDE COMPACTION AND FINISH GRADING INTHE UNIT PRICE RELATED WORK ITEM.10.ALL WORK SHALL BE DONE TO THE LINES, GRADES, SECTIONS, ANDELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THE PLANS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED OR APPROVED BYTHE ENGINEER.11.ALL MATERIALS AND WORKMANSHIP SHALL BE SUBJECT TO INSPECTION ANDAPPROVAL BY THE CITY OF ASPEN AND THE ENGINEER.12.THE ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED WITHIN 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THECOMMENCEMENT OF ANY CONSTRUCTION.13.DIMENSIONS AND RADII ARE SHOWN TO THE FLOW LINE OF CURB UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED.14.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LIMIT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES TO THOSE AREASWITHIN THE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE AND/OR TOES OF SLOPE AS SHOWN ON THEPLANS. ANY DISTURBANCE BEYOND THESE LIMITS SHALL BE RESTORED TO ORIGINALCONDITIONS BY THE CONTRACTOR AT HIS/HER OWN EXPENSE.15.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT THE EXISTING DRAINAGE STRUCTURESAND REROUTE ANY RUNOFF AS NECESSARY DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES TOPREVENT EROSION AND DAMAGE.16.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SAFE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS AT ALL TIMESDURING THE PROJECT.GENERAL NOTES (CONTINUED):16.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CLOSELY MONITOR ACCESS FOR HEAVYCONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT THROUGH THE PROJECT.17.WHERE PAVEMENT IS TO ABUT EXISTING PAVEMENT, THE EXISTING PAVEMENTSHALL BE REMOVED TO A NEAT VERTICAL LINE BY FULL DEPTH SAWING. SAWING WILLNOT BE PAID FOR SEPARATELY BUT SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO “REMOVAL OF ASPHALTPAVEMENT”. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE REQUIRED TO PAINT THE EDGE OF CUTPAVEMENT WITH DILUTED EMULSIFIED ASPHALT (SLOW SETTING) PRIOR TO PAVINGOPERATIONS. VERTICAL EDGES SHALL NOT REMAIN OVERNIGHT. DILUTED EMULSIFIEDASPHALT FOR TACK COAT SHALL CONSIST OF ONE PART EMULSIFIED ASPHALT ANDONE PART WATER.18.A DUST PALLIATIVE SHALL BE UTILIZED WHERE REQUIRED. LOCATIONS SHALL BEAS ORDERED. THE COST SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO OTHER BID ITEMS.19.THE PHYSICAL FEATURES REQUIRING REMOVAL OR OBLITERATION WITHIN THEPROJECT SHALL BECOME THE PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND BE DISPOSED OFOFF-SITE.20.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PRESERVING ANY MONUMENT,RANGE POINTS, TIES, BENCHMARKS AND/OR SURVEY CONTROL POINTS WHICH MAYBE DISTRIBUTED OR DESTROYED BY CONSTRUCTION. SUCH POINTS SHALL BEREFERENCED AND REPLACED WITH APPROPRIATE MONUMENT BY A REGISTEREDPROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR AUTHORIZED TO PRACTICE LAND SURVEYING IN THESTATE OF COLORADO.21.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE A COPY OF ALL APPLICABLE STANDARDS ON SITEFOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT.GALENA & MAIN ST BUS STOP IMPROVEMENTS EngineeringDepartmentC1.0COVERSHEET22.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT STOCKPILE MATERIAL WITHIN 10FEET OF THE EDGE OF TRAVELED WAY.23.ANY LAYER OF BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT THAT IS TO HAVESUCCEEDING LAYER PLACED THEREON SHALL BE COMPLETED FULLWIDTH BEFORE SUCCEEDING LAYER IS PLACED.24.BEFORE PLACEMENT OF THE TACK COAT, THE CONTRACTORSHALL CLEAN THE PRESENT ROADWAY AS DIRECTED. CLEANING WILLNOT BE PAID FOR SEPARATELY, BUT SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE COSTOF THE PROJECT.25.A TACK COAT OF EMULSIFIED ASPHALT (SLOW SETTING) IS TOBE APPLIED BETWEEN PAVEMENT COURSES TO IMPROVE BOND.DILUTED EMULSIFIED ASPHALT FOR TACK COAT SHALL CONSIST OF 1PART EMULSIFIED ASPHALT AND 1 PART WATER.26.STORM INLET STATIONING AND ELEVATION REFERENCE CENTEROF BOX. STORM MANHOLE STATIONING REFERENCE CENTER OFMANHOLE.27.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH, INSTALL, AND MAINTAINTEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES NECESSARY THROUGHOUTTHE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION.28.ANY DISCREPANCY WITHIN THESE PLANS SHOULD BE BROUGHTTO THE IMMEDIATE ATTENTION OF THE ENGINEER AND WORK SHALLSTOP UNTIL THE DISCREPANCY IS DISCUSSED ANDDECISIONS/AGREEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE.29.AS BUILTS ARE TO BE INCLUDED IN CCST FOR SURVEY PER COAREQUIREMENTS.P107VI.g GALENA AND MAIN ST BUS STOP IMPROVEMENTSUTILITY GENERAL NOTES:1.ANY CONTRACTOR-CAUSED DAMAGE TO UTILITY AND/OR SERVICE LINESSHOWN OR NOT SHOWN ON THE PLANS, SHALL BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED ATNO COST TO THE CITY OF ASPEN AND SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY THECONTRACTOR, SUBCONTRACTOR OR AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. THECONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR NOTIFYING ALL UTILITY COMPANIESPRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK IN THE PROJECT AREA. LIKEWISE, THECONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING HIS WORK AND THAT OF THEINVOLVED UTILITIES IN THE PROJECT AREA.2.UTILITY LINES SHOWN ON THE PLAN SHEETS ARE LOCATED FROM THE BESTAVAILABLE INFORMATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEVERIFICATION AND PROTECTION OF ALL UTILITIES IN PLACE.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OFCOLORADO AT 811 TWO BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE OF ANY EXCAVATION ORGRADING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE COA UTILITY FRONT DESK AT(970) 920-5110 FOR LOCATES AND WORK REQUESTS. CDOT SHALL BECONTACTED AT (970)379-0539 FOR CDOT OWNED FACILITIES.4.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT AND MAINTAIN ALL UTILITY ANDSTRUCTURES AFFECTED BY THE WORK AND ANY DAMAGE SHALL BE REPAIREDAND RESTORED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN. THE CONTRACTORIS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LOCATION AND PROTECTION OF ALL UTILITIES DURINGCONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL UTILITYRELOCATIONS WITH UTILITY OWNER AS NECESSARY.5.EXCAVATION AT GAS LINES: TEMPORARY COVER DURING CONSTRUCTIONSHALL BE AT LEAST 18 INCHES OVER THE GAS CONDUIT. FINISH GRADE MUST BEAT LEAST 2 FEET AND NO MORE THAN 6 FEET OVER THE GAS CONDUIT.6.EXISTING UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE, FIBER AND CABLE TELEVISIONFACILITIES MAY BE LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE WORK. THECONTRACTOR MAY, IF NECESSARY TEMPORARILY DISPLACE THE CABLES DURINGCONSTRUCTION AND REINSTALL THEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROPRIATETELEPHONE, FIBER OR CABLEVISION COMPANY'S GUIDELINES. COORDINATIONWITH BOTH THE TELEPHONE AND CABLE TELEVISION COMPANY IS REQUIRED TOBE DONE BY THE CONTRACTOR.7.ALL WORK DONE ON OR AROUND WATER OR SEWER FACILITIES MUST BEINSPECTED BY A CITY OF ASPEN INSPECTOR OR DESIGNEE. THE CONTRACTOR ISREQUIRED TO NOTIFY THE CITY OF ASPEN TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TOBEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL AT THEIR EXPENSE, SUPPORT AND PROTECT ALLWATER MAINS SO THAT THEY WILL FUNCTION CONTINUOUSLY DURINGCONSTRUCTION EXCEPT THOSE DESIGNATED TO BE TEMPORARILY SHUT DOWN.TEMPORARY WATER SERVICE DISRUPTION SHALL BE DONE TO MINIMIZE THEEFFECTS ON CITY OF ASPEN UTILITY CUSTOMERS. SHOULD A WATER MAIN FAILAS A RESULT OF THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS, IT WILL BE REPAIREDIMMEDIATELY BY EITHER THE CONTRACTOR OR THE WATER DEPARTMENT AT THEFULL COST OF LABOR AND MATERIALS TO THE CONTRACTOR. REPAIR SHALL BE ATTHE NOTICE, INSPECTION, DIRECTION AND APPROVAL OF THE COA WATERDEPARTMENT OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE.9.ALL VALVE BOXES, CLEANOUTS, MANHOLES, GUYWIRES, SHALL BEADJUSTED TO FINAL GRADE.10.ALL USES AND CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF ASPENWATER DISTRIBUTION STANDARDS. 11. TWO (2) DAYS PRIOR TO WORKCOMMENCEMENT A PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING SHALL BE SCHEDULED WITHTHE COA WATER DEPARTMENT.NPDES DRAINAGE WATER QUALITY NOTES:1.THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR THEIR AUTHORIZED AGENTS SHALL REMOVE ALLSEDIMENTS, MUD, AND CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS THAT MAY ACCUMULATE IN THEFLOWLINES AND PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY AS A RESULT OF THIS CONSTRUCTIONPROJECT. SAID REMOVAL SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN A TIMELY MANNER.2.THE DISCHARGE OF WATER CONTAINING WASTE CONCRETE TO THE STORMSEWER IS PROHIBITED.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL STORM SEWER FACILITIES ADJACENT TOANY LOCATION WHERE PAVEMENT CUTTING OPERATION, INVOLVING WHEELCUTTING, SAW CUTTING OR ABRASIVE WATER JUST CUTTING ARE TO TAKE PLACE.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE AND PROPERLY DISPOSE OF ALL WASTE PRODUCTSGENERATED BY SAID CUTTING OPERATIONS ON A DAILY BASIS. THE DISCHARGE OFANY WATER CONTAMINATED BY WASTE PRODUCTS FROM CUTTING OPERATIONS TOTHE STORM SEWER IS PROHIBITED.4.THE CONTRACTOR MUST KEEP ALL POLLUTANTS, INCLUDING TRENCH BACKFILLMATERIAL, FROM WASHING INTO THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM.5.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING A STORM WATERMANAGEMENT PLAN PERMIT IF THE PROJECT MEETS MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FORA PERMIT.GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES:1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FURNISHING ALL LABOR,MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT AND INCIDENTAL ITEMS NEEDED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATECONSTRUCTION SIGNING, BARRICADES, TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND OTHERRELATED ITEMS FOR THE PROJECT AREAS, DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.2.ALL SIDEWALK AND PAVED DRIVEWAY REMOVALS SHALL BE BOUNDED BYJOINTS OR SAWCUTS. SAWCUTTING IS TO BE CONSIDERED AN INCIDENTAL ITEM ANDTHE COST OF THIS ITEM IS TO BE INCLUDED IN OTHER PAY ITEMS.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE SPECIAL CARE NOT TO DAMAGE TREES ANDSHRUBS UNLESS SO DIRECTED BY THE PROJECT ENGINEER.4.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS PRIOR TOTHE START OF WORK.5.ANY SURPLUS EXCAVATION TO INCLUDE BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE REMOVALOF LANDSCAPING FOR SIDEWALK INSTALLATION SHALL BECOME THE PROPERTY OFTHE CONTRACTOR, AND DISPOSAL SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY ATNO ADDITIONAL COST.6.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SURVEYING ANDCONSTRUCTION STAKING FOR THE PROJECT. ALL GRADING AND SURFACING SHALL BEIN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAN SHEETS.7.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE AND STOCKPILE ALL SALVAGED TOPSOIL TOBE USED LATER AS BACKFILL BEHIND CURBS AND DRIVES OR IN THE RESTORATION OFDISTURBED AREAS. THIS WORK IS TO BE CONSIDERED AN INCIDENTAL ITEM AND THECOST OF THIS ITEM IS TO BE INCLUDED IN OTHER PAY ITEMS.8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LEVEL ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITH TOPSOIL ANDHAND-RAKE TO A UNIFORM APPEARANCE. THE AREA SHALL BE SEEDED WITHPROTECTIVE STRAW MAT COVER DURING WINTER MONTHS OR SODDED ALL OTHERTIMES. THIS WORK IS TO BE CONSIDERED AN INCIDENTAL ITEM.EARTHWORK:1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LEGAL DISPOSALOF ANY EXCESS SOIL, DEBRIS AND WASTE MATERIAL OFF OF THE PROJECTSITE.2.ANY MATERIAL NOT SUITABLE FOR BACKFILL SHALL BE REMOVEDFROM THE SITE AND DISPOSED OF, BY AND AT THE EXPENSE OF THECONTRACTOR.BENCHMARK AND SURVEY CONTROL:1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTIONSTAKING OF BOTH HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL LAYOUT ON THIS PROJECT.COORDINATES ARE REFERENCED IN THE COORDINATE LIST SHOWN ONTHESE PLANS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE PROJECTENGINEER FOR INTERPRETATION AND INFORMATION IN STAKING OF THEPROJECT FOR CONSTRUCTION.2.PRIOR TO PROJECT COMPLETION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BERESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF ANY PROPERTY MONUMENTATIONDISTURBED OR REMOVED BY CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS. THIS WORKSHALL BE PERFORMED BY A LAND SURVEYOR LICENSED IN THE STATE OFCOLORADO. PROPERTY CORNERS WHICH FALL WITHIN NEW CONCRETEFLATWORK SHALL BE DURABLE AND SET FLUSH. THIS SHALL BE CONSIDEREDINCIDENTAL TO THE PROJECT.TRAFFIC GENERAL NOTES:1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL NEW,TEMPORARY AND EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNS FROM THE START OFCONSTRUCTION PROJECT UNTIL ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY ENGINEER.2.ALL TRAFFIC SIGNS, PAVEMENT MARKINGS, AND TRAFFIC SIGNALSSHALL MEET OR EXCEED MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES(M.U.T.C.D.) STANDARDS.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE A DETAILED TRAFFIC CONTROLPLAN, SUBMIT TO THE TOWN FOR APPROVAL, AND OBTAIN A ROW PERMIT.4.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL WORK ZONETRAFFIC CONTROL. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FURNISHING,INSTALLING, AND MAINTAINING THE TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROLDEVICES THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT.STRIPING AND SIGNAGE GENERAL NOTES:1.INSTALLATION OF ALL STRIPING, SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGSHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL REMOVAL OFEXISTING PAVEMENT MARKINGS (SCARRING OF PAVEMENT IS NOTPERMITTED). AT NO TIME WILL IT BE ACCEPTABLE TO PAINT OVER EXISTINGPAVEMENT MARKINGS.3.ALL TRAFFIC SIGNS SHALL HAVE MINIMUM HIGH INTENSITY GRADESHEETING.4.ALL SIGNS SHOWN ON THE PLANS SHALL BE NEW SIGNS PROVIDEDAND INSTALLED BY THE CONTRACTOR, EXCEPT FOR EXISTING SIGNSSPECIFICALLY INDICATED TO BE RELOCATED OR TO REMAIN.5.STRIPED CROSSWALKS SHALL HAVE AN INSIDE DIMENSION OF 10 FEETAND CONTINENTAL CROSSWALKS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM WIDTH OF 9FEET UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE.6.ALL CROSSWALK LINES SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 90MIL THICKNESSTHERMOPLASTIC OR PREFORM PLASTIC TAPE.GALENA & MAIN ST BUS STOP IMPROVEMENTS EngineeringDepartmentC1.1NOTESP108VI.g LEGENDEXISTING CONCRETE TO BEREMOVEDEXISTING ASPHALT TO BEREMOVEDEXISTING CURB AND GUTTERTO BE REMOVEDDEMOLITION KEY NOTES123ASPHALT TO BE REMOVED. AREAPER PLANCURB AND GUTTER TO BEREMOVED. AREA PER PLANCONCRETE TO BE REMOVEDAND REPLACED. AREA PER PLAN4BRICKS TO BE REMOVED. AREAPER PLAN.DEMOLITION NOTES1.CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT ANDBECOME FAMILIAR WITH THE SITECONDITIONS AND REQUIREDDEMOLITION.2.THE SURVEY DID NOT INCORPORATEEXISTING UTILITIES. IT SHALL BE THECONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TOLOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES ANDTAKE CARE NOT TO DAMAGE ANYEXISTING UTILITIES THAT ARE TOREMAIN IN PLACE.3.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FORCOORDINATING THE RELOCATIONAND REMOVAL OF EXISTINGUTILITIES WITH THE APPROPRIATEUTILITY COMPANIES AT LEAST 72HOURS BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION.CDOT SHALL BE CONTACTED AT(970)379-0539 FOR CDOT OWNEDFACILITIES.4.CONTRACTOR MUST PROTECT THEPUBLIC AT ALL TIMES WITH FENCING,BARRICADES, ENCLOSURES, ETC. ASAPPROVED BY THE CITY OF ASPENAND CONSTRUCTION MITIGATIONOFFICER.5.CONTINUOUS ACCESS SHALL BEMAINTAINED FOR SURROUNDINGPROPERTIES AT ALL TIMES DURINGDEMOLITION. SIGNAGE SHALL BEPOSTED TO DIRECT THE PUBLIC TOTHE PATH OF TRAVEL.EXISTING STORM135 SF250 SF SAW CUT 2' MIN235 SF275 SF5LANDSCAPING TO BE REMOVED.AREA PER PLAN.EXISTING BRICKS TO BEREMOVEDEXISTING LANDSCAPING TOBE REMOVEDMAIN STREETEXISTING DRIVEWAY65 SFEXISTING SANITARYFeet0816GALENA AND MAIN ST BUS STOP AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS EngineeringDepartmentC2.0DEMOLITIONPLANSCALE 1:8915 SFP109VI.g LEGENDPROPOSED ASPHALTSITE PLAN KEY NOTES123ROW OF WAY LIMITSFULL DEPTH ASPHALT PER CITY OFASPEN ENGINEERING DESIGN ANDCONSTRUCTION STANDARD 207,AREA PER PLAN4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK PER CITYOF ASPEN ENGINEERING DESIGNSTANDARD 203, AREA PER PLAN.SITE NOTES1.REFERENCE NOTES SHEET FORADDITIONAL REQUIRED NOTES.2.SIDEWALK AND RAMPS SHALL BECONSTRUCTED IN COMPLIANCE WITHTHE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIESACT AND CDOT M&S STANDARDS.HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE ROUTESSHALL SLOPE NO MORE THAN 1:20 INDIRECTION OF TRAVEL AND NOMORE THAN 1:50 CROSS SLOPE.3.ALL ACCESSIBLE RAMPS SHALLHAVE TRUNCATED DOMES INACCORDANCE WITH CDOT M&SSTANDARDS.4.CONTRACTOR IS NOT TO PLACE AJOINT ALONG THE FLOWLINE. JOINTSSHALL BE PLACED AT THE EDGE OFPAVEMENT.5.CURB RAMPS SHALL BE MONOLITHICPOUR.6.ALL INSTALLATIONS ANDMATERIALS USED IN THE CDOT ROWSHALL CONFORM TO CDOT'SSTANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONSUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. COMPLYWITH ALL APPLICABLE FEDERAL,STATE, AND LOCAL CODES,REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES.5TYPE A BARRIER CURB ANDGUTTER. LENGTH PER PLAN.230 SF735 SFPROPOSED PERMEABLE PAVERS4PERMEABLE PAVERS PER SHEETC6.1 AREA PER PLAN.425 SF55 SFMAIN STREET55 SFPROPOSED CURB & GUTTERPROPOSED 4" CONCRETESIDEWALK11 LF15 LF62 LFPROPOSED TRENCH DRAINTREE GRATERE: SHEET 6.1 FOR DETAILSEXISTING STORMEXISTING SANITARYGALENA AND MAIN ST BUS STOP AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS EngineeringDepartmentC3.0SITEPLANSCALE 1:8Feet0816P110VI.g LEGENDSITE NOTES1.REFERENCE NOTES SHEET FORADDITIONAL REQUIRED NOTES.2.ALL CURB AND GUTTER CONTROLINFORMATION IS TO THE FLOWLINE.3.CONTRACTOR IS NOT TO PLACE AJOINT ALONG THE FLOWLINE. JOINTSSHALL BE PLACED AT THE EDGE OFPAVEMENT.4.MATCH EXISTING GRADES AND ATCONNECTION POINTS, AS SHOWN.5.SEE SHEET C5.0 PROPOSED STORMLINE ELEVATIONS AND SLOPESWATER QUALITY NOTES1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVEALL SEDIMENTS, MUD, ANDCONSTRUCTION DEBRIS THAT MAYACCUMULATE IN THE FLOWLINESAND PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY AS ARESULT OF THIS CONSTRUCTIONPROJECT.2.THE DISCHARGE OF WATERCONTAINING WASTE CONCRETE TOTHE STORM SEWER IN PROHIBITED.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECTALL STORM SEWER FACILITIESADJACENT TO ANY LOCATIONWHERE PAVEMENT CUTTINGOPERATION, INVOLVING SAWCUTTING ARE TO TAKE PLACE. THECONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ANDPROPERLY DISPOSE OF ALL WASTEPRODUCTS GENERATED BY SAIDCUTTING OPERATIONS ON A DAILYBASIS. THE DISCHARGE OF ANYWATER CONTAMINATED BY WASTEPRODUCTS FROM CUTTINGOPERATIONS TO THE STORM SEWERIS PROHIBITED.4.THE CONTRACTOR MUST KEEP ALLPOLLUTANTS FROM WASHING INTOTHE STORM SEWER SYSTEM.*CONTOUR LINES AT 0.5FTINTERVALSPROPOSED CONCRETEPROPOSED ASPHALTPROPOSED PERMEABLEPAVERSPROPOSED CURB & GUTTERPROPOSED TRENCH DRAINEXISTING STORMEXISTING SANITARYGALENA AND MAIN ST BUS STOP AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS EngineeringDepartmentC4.0GRADINGPLANSCALE 1:7Feet0714P111VI.g Proposed Storm LineLEGENDPROPOSED PERMEABLE PAVERSPROPOSED CURB & GUTTERPROPOSED 4" CONCRETESIDEWALKPROPOSED TRENCH DRAINEXISTING SURFACEFeet036Feet048GALENA AND MAIN ST BUS STOP AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS EngineeringDepartmentC5.0STORMLINEPROFILESCALE 1:4SCALE 1:3P112VI.g StationProposed Flow LineC5.1FLOW LINEPROFILELEGENDPROPOSED ASPHALTPROPOSED PERMEABLE PAVERSPROPOSED CURB & GUTTERPROPOSED 4" CONCRETESIDEWALKPROPOSED TRENCH DRAINSILVA CELLEXISTING STORMEXISTING SANITARYFeet01224GALENA AND MAIN ST BUS STOP AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS EngineeringDepartmentP113VI.g LEGENDPROPOSED ASPHALTSITE NOTESPROPOSED PERMEABLE PAVERSMAIN STREETLinden cordata 'GreenSpire'1.TREE INSTALLATION TO USE SOILSPECIFICATION SET FORTH BYTHE WATER EFFICIENTLANDSCAPING STANDARDS.2.SILVA CELL REQUIREMENTSBASED OFF OF A MEDIUM SIZETREE CATEGORY.3.IF SNOW MELT IS USED, ENSURERUNOFF FLOWS TO CURB ANDGUTTER TO REDUCE FREEZE ANDTHAW ON PEDESTRIAN AREAS.CONSIDER THE ICE BUILD-UP ATBACK OF CURB. IF POSSIBLEWATER CAN BE DIRECTEDTOWARDS TREE FORADDITIONAL WATERING.PROPOSED 4" CONCRETESIDEWALKPROPOSED CURB & GUTTERTREE GRATEPROPOSED TRENCH DRAINGALENA AND MAIN ST BUS STOP AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS EngineeringDepartmentL1.0LANDSCAPEPLANSCALE 1:8Feet0816MHP114VI.g 12600WestColfaxAveLakewood,CO80215PhoneFax303-239-0909303-235-0218www.rmhgroup.comengineeringagreenerfutureE0.1 LEGENDN P115VI.g 12600WestColfaxAveLakewood,CO80215PhoneFax303-239-0909303-235-0218www.rmhgroup.comengineeringagreenerfutureE1.0 EXPANDED SITE PLANN P116VI.g E. Ma i n S t r e e t S. Galena Street12600 West Colfax AveLakewood, CO 80215PhoneFax303-239-0909303- 235-0218© 2018www.rmhgroup.comengineering a greener futureMechanical and Electrical EngineeringEnergy Consulting Sustainable DesignENGINEERINGDEPARTMENTE2.0 SITE PLANN P117VI.g 12600 West Colfax AveLakewood, CO 80215PhoneFax303-239-0909303- 235-0218© 2018www.rmhgroup.comengineering a greener futureMechanical and Electrical EngineeringEnergy Consulting Sustainable DesignENGINEERINGDEPARTMENTE3.0 SCHEDULES AND DETAILSP118VI.g GALENA AND MAIN ST BUS STOP AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS EngineeringDepartmentC6.0DETAILSHEETP119VI.g 3'-634"3'-612"PAVER COLOR 1PAVER COLOR 2016'51.PAVER TYPE, COLOR AND FINISH PER SPECS2.LAYOUT - BASKET WEAVE UNLESS DIRECTEDOTHERWSIE BY ENGINEER3.PAVER COLOR MIXING TO BE RANDOMHMA Depth variesExisting Pavement24" From Edge of Trench orAny Cracked Pavement(All Edges of Trench)Maximum Slope: 1.5112"8" MIN8" MINGraded and CompactedBackfill in Lifts Not toExceed 12" (Suitable ScreenedNative Material May be Permitted)Geotextile at interfaceStructural Backfill(Including Bedding)Scarified and RecompactedTrench Bottom6"(See "Exhibit F" of Constructionand Excavation Standards)Scarified and RecompactedRoadway Base MaterialBASE COARSE = 18" - CL6 ABCNotes:1. Trench must be sloped as shown or braced for the safety of construction workers. Trenching will besubject to most recent Confined Space and OSHA regulations2. Existing pavement shall be sawcut and replaced to create the full depth replacement shown. Sawcuttingmust occur after backfilling and before paving. "T" patch may be an acceptable alternative.3. Stress cracking of existing pavement may occur during excavation for a variety of reasons. If thisoccurs, the contractor must sawcut at leat 12" beyond the limit of visible cracks and remove all stressedpavement.4. Hot bituminous patch shall be a minimum of 5" thick and placed in two lifts as shown. Thicker patchesmay be necessary depending on the type of street -- see Construction and Excavation Standards"Exhibit F" for more information.5. For a major utility project, a full set of modified proctor curves must be submitted, and backfill must becompacted to within 92%-96% of maximum density within 2% of optimum moisture as defined by ASTM1557 Method "C". If curves are not submitted, backfill for trench and base for patch shall conform toCDOT's aggregate base course class 6 (ABC CL-6) designation and shall be compacted to 92%-96%of maximum density within 2% of optimum moisture. Flow fill may be used as an alternative, but mustcontain at least 80 lbs. of cement per cubic yard and retain a 9" maximum slump. Use of flow fill mustbe approved by utility provider and City of Aspen Engineering Department.6. Bedding for flexible lines shall be 3provider.4" crushed screened rock, free of fines. Or per direction of utility7. Trench bottom must be scarified and recompacted after excavation or after any dewatering action toensure adequate support of utility bedding.8. Patching of trenched areas within the City of Aspen Right of Way must also meet the requirements setforth in the Construction and Excavation Standards.9. Water lines shall be a minimum of 7 feet below the ground surface. Refer to the Water DistributionStandards for additional water line requirements.ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT517 E HOPKINS STREETPHONE: (970) 920-5080ASPEN, CO 81611CREATION DATE: 11/01/13INITIALS: GCSTRENCH AND PATCHING DETAILSCITY OF ASPENSTANDARD DETAILS#:ENG - 207ALAST MODIFICATION DATE:WWW.ASPENPITKIN.COM/DEPARTMENTS/ENGINEERING/DESIGN-CONSTRUCTION/INITIALS:DATE COMMENTSREVISIONSxx/xx/xxTreeSidewalkKEY PLAN(for reference only)Notes:1. Silva Cell may not be required in areas where there is a landscape buffer between thesidewalk and the building. Silva Cell installation in these cases will be determined by theParks Department.2. Installation to be completed in accordance with manufacturers specifications. Refer tothe following website for additional details and specifications:http://www.deeproot.com/products/silva-cell/resources.html3. Consult the City of Aspen Engineering Department if alternative walkway surfacesmay be used and/or if installation of silva cells are to be constructed within areasexperiencing vehicular loading.Tree trunk, size varies4.0'Curb & Gutter / Roadway prepper COA Engineering StandardsConcrete barrier separatingback of curb and tree grate(Alternative materials may be approved)DeepRoot UB18-2 Root barrierTree root ball, size variesAngle of repose, varies perproject specificationsPlanting soil below root ballUndisturbed Soil0.5'2.0'Varies1"-3"3.6'Screw cell decks to frames after snapping in place (typ)316" x 14" zip ties, attaching Geogrid to Silva Cells ateach level and at cell deckBackfill, installed in 8" lifts, within 4"-6" from top of decks,compacted to 95% modified proctor densityAnchor each Silva Cell to ground with (4) 10"spike, see Cell base for spike holeSilva Cell base slope to max. 5%Planting soil per Silva Cell specifications, installed in 8" lifts (2 lifts per cell)Geotextile on compactedsubgrade4" -34" Crushed Screened Rock, compacted to 95% Modified Proctor DensityRIGHT OF WAY PLANTING SCENARIOS - SILVA CELL STANDARDSCENARIO 1B: TREE PLANTING ADJACENT TO SIDEWALK, STREET, AND LANDSCAPINGENGINEERING DEPARTMENTCITY OF ASPEN517 E HOPKINS STREETPHONE: (970) 920-5080ASPEN, CO 81611CREATION DATE: 11/01/13INITIALS: GCSSTANDARD DETAILS#:ENG - 302BLAST MODIFICATION DATE:WWW.ASPENPITKIN.COM/DEPARTMENTS/ENGINEERING/DESIGN-CONSTRUCTION/INITIALS:DATE COMMENTSREVISIONSxx/xx/xxGeotextile, 1.5' minimumoverlap past excavation1" air space between SilvaCell deck and planting soil1.5'Grass / LandscapingTop soil3" Mulch above tree pitUse tree grate as needed.If used, lower top of rootball 6"4" Concrete walk (Sidewalk application)4" - 34" Crushed Screened RockCENTER LINE6"5'-8'Sidewalk2%5' (MIN)LandscapingSpace5%(MAX)6" ABC CL-6or 3/4" crushedscreened rockHMA and ABC Layer DepthAccording to Exhibit F (Construction and Excavation Standards)59'-87' ROWNOTES:1. This design is to be used on residential streets where an urban design is appropriate.2.Materials and finishing are to be governed by COA Engineering Design and Construction Standards, mostrecent edition.3.Travel lane width dependent on existing lane widths and site conditions.4.Sidewalk width dependent on zoning designation. See City of Aspen Design Standards.8'-18'Parking Lane11'-12'Travel Lane2%-3.5%11'-12'2%-3.5%Travel Lane8'-18'Parking Lane5% (MAX)2%(MAX)6"5' (MIN)5'-8'SidewalkLOCAL/RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL STREET CROSS SECTION (W/ C&G)ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTCITY OF ASPEN517 E HOPKINS STREETPHONE: (970) 920-5080ASPEN, CO 81611CREATION DATE: 11/01/13INITIALS: GCSSTANDARD DETAILS#:ENG - 205ALAST MODIFICATION DATE:WWW.ASPENPITKIN.COM/DEPARTMENTS/ENGINEERING/DESIGN-CONSTRUCTION/INITIALS:DATE COMMENTSREVISIONSxx/xx/xxGALENA AND MAIN ST BUS STOP AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS EngineeringDepartmentC6.1DETAILSHEETP120VI.g STREET2.5'5' (MIN)SEE DESIGN STANDARDS5% (MAX)2% (MAX)0.33' (MIN)DEEPROOT UB18-2ROOT BARRIERSEE SYLVA CELLDETAILSCARIFIED ANDRECOMPACTEDSUB-BASE0.5' DEPTH - ABC CL-6OR 3/4" CRUSHEDSCREENED ROCKPRIVATE PROPERTYPROPERTY LINENOTES:1. Base for flatwork shall be at least 6" of CDOT ABC CL-6 compacted to 95% of modified proctor density within 2% ofoptimum moisture using ASTM D-1557 Method "C" or compacted 34" crushed screened rock2. Detached sidewalk shall be placed immediately adjacent the property line.3. Sub-base soils must be scarified and compacted to prevent settling.4. Where detached sidewalk is found to be unfeasible, determination of landscape buffer width shall be made by cityengineering staff.ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT517 E HOPKINS STREETPHONE: (970) 920-5080ASPEN, CO 81611CREATION DATE: 11/01/13INITIALS: GCSDETACHED SIDEWALK DETAILSCITY OF ASPENSTANDARD DETAILS#:ENG - 203ALAST MODIFICATION DATE:WWW.ASPENPITKIN.COM/DEPARTMENTS/ENGINEERING/DESIGN-CONSTRUCTION/INITIALS:DATE COMMENTSREVISIONSxx/xx/xxSTORM GRATE DETAILENGINEERING DEPARTMENT517 E HOPKINS STREETPHONE: (970) 920-5080ASPEN, CO 81611CREATION DATE: 11/01/13INITIALS: GCSCITY OF ASPENSTANDARD DETAILS#:ENG - 301BLAST MODIFICATION DATE:WWW.ASPENPITKIN.COM/DEPARTMENTS/ENGINEERING/DESIGN-CONSTRUCTION/INITIALS:DATE COMMENTSREVISIONSxx/xx/xxACO DRAINKlassikDrain - KS100 Stainless steel edge rail channel systemOne meter channel39.37" (1 meter)4.72” (120mm)to12.60” (320mm)3.74” (95mm)1.33” (34mm)6.69” (170mm)8.66” (220mm)10.63” (270mm)12.60” (320mm)Knock-outs included on every 5th channelK1-0103K1-0203K1-0303K1-04035.12” (130mm)3.94” (100mm)3.94” (100mm)to11.81” (300mm) Half meter channel19.69” (0.5 meter)EType K901S In-line catch basin19.69” (500mm)10.06” (255mm)22.67” (576mm)5.12” (130mm)3.98” (100mm)kefghijlpmnoqrsJHIOutlet flow ratesOutletAABBCCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTJTotal capacity =10.49 gallonsProductBottom outlet - KS00Bottom outlet - KS40Bottom outlet - KS00Bottom outlet - KS40End outlet - KS20End outlet - KS40KS1-308-6 6” outlet capKS1-408-6 6” outlet capType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SType KS1-901SOutlet size Invert GPM CFS(Sch. 40) Depth4” round4” round6” oval6” oval4” round4” round6” oval6” oval4” round4” round4” round4” round6” round4” round4” round6” round6” round8” round6” round4” round4” round4” round6” round3.94”11.81”3.94”11.81”7.87”11.81”9.84”11.81”19.30”25.67”25.30”18.56”25.85”26.43”19.36”27.30”19.99”27.30”26.43”27.17”20.68”18.99”27.17”10818717730613217123326422626526322258626922760450510515932732352246020.240.420.390.680.290.380.520.590.500.590.590.491.300.600.511.351.122.341.320.610.520.501.34Note: These are the pipe flow rates at the specified outlet, NOT channel flow rates. Catch basinflow rates are without trash bucket - using trash bucket reduces flow.End Cap0.125" (3mm)Bell end to fit4" Sch. 40 pipeC1.85" (47mm)6” Oval inlet cap1.2" (30mm)DEK304/30811.02" (280mm)K404/40812.99" (330mm)5.3" (134mm)6” Oval outlet capPlain end to fit6" Sch. 40 pipeDecember 2017www.ACODrain.us29.03” (737mm)12.41" (315mm) ACO Specification Information GALENA AND MAIN ST BUS STOP AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS EngineeringDepartmentC6.2DETAILSHEETINFOACO Specification Information ACO DRAINType 478Q Longitudinal ductile iron grate (ADA)EPlan view19.69” (500mm)0.27” (7mm)1.77” (45mm)Side elevation4.84” (123mm)0.79” (20mm)DescriptionPart No.QuickLok grateType 478Q Ductile iron longitudinal grateQuickLok locking barQuickLok grate removal toolLengthinches (mm)03314028990131819.69 (500)--Widthinches (mm)4.85 (123.1)--Weightlbs.12.80.50.3‘QuickLok’ locking mechanismChannelGrate‘QuickLok’ lockingstud (fixed to grate)‘QuickLok’ lockingspring (fixed tolocking bar)‘QuickLok’ lockingbar (side and planviews)ACO ‘QuickLok’ is a patentedboltless locking system, gratesare removed and replaced with theminimum time and effort for easeof maintenance. The unique designprovides a positive ‘snap down’ fitinto the locking bar. A stud is fixedto the grate which ‘locks’ into thespring clip in the locking bar.The ‘QuickLok’ stud is made fromstainless steel and high densitynylon, the locking bar and clip arestainless steel, for use in bothgeneral purpose and corrosiveenvironments.ACO Polymer Products, Inc.Northeast Sales Office9470 Pinecone DriveMentor, Ohio 44060Tel: (440) 639-7230Toll free: (800) 543-4764Fax: (440) 285-7005West Sales Office825 W. Beechcraft St.Casa Grande, AZ 85122Tel: (520) 421-9988Toll Free: (888) 490-9552Fax: (520) 421-9899Southeast Sales Office4211 Pleasant RoadFort Mill, SC 29708Toll free: (800) 543-4764Fax: (803) 802-1063Follow us onSPECElectronic Contact:info@ACODrain.uswww.ACODrain.us© April 2017 ACO Polymer Products, Inc. This information is believed to be accurate but it is not guaranteed to be so. We cannot assume liability for results that buyer obtainswith our product since conditions of use are beyond the control of the company. It is the customer’s responsibility to evaluate suitability and safety of product for his own use.ACO Polymer Products Inc. reserves the right to change the product and specifications without notice.April 2017www.ACODrain.usP121VI.g P122 VI.g P123 VI.g P124 VI.g P125 VI.g P126 VI.g P127 VI.g P128 VI.g P129 VI.g P130 VI.g Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 13, 2018 1 CITIZEN COMMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 2 CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS ................................................................................................................... 2 BOARD REPORTS ...................................................................................................................................... 3 CONSENT CALENDAR ............................................................................................................................. 3  Resolution #109 and #110, Series of 2018 – As-needed HVAC and Plumbing Services .................... 4  Resolution #120, Series of 2018 – Community Broadband – Mammoth Networks MSA Approval ... 4  Resolution #117, Series of 2018 – Stage Two Water Shortage ............................................................ 4  Resolution #112, Series of 2018 – Consulting Services for the Uphill Recreation Plan ...................... 4  Resolution #118, Series of 2018 – Early approval of 2018 Fall Supplemental Budget for ARC Boiler replacement ................................................................................................................................................... 4  Resolution #113, Series of 2018 – Coordination of November 6, 2018 General Election to execute IGA 4  Board Appointment ............................................................................................................................... 4  Minutes – July 23 and July 30, 2018 .................................................................................................... 4 ORDINANCE #18, SERIES OF 2018 – 500 W. Main Street – Historic Landmark Lot Split, TDRs, Special Review and Variations ..................................................................................................................... 4 ORDINANCE #22, SERIES OF 2018 – 333 Park/931 Gibson Avenue Relocation .................................... 4 ORDINANCE #16, SERIES OF 2018 - Purchasing Threshold Increase .................................................... 6 ORDINANCE #17, SERIES OF 2018 – Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance ......................................... 6 RESOLUTION #115, SERIES OF 2018 – Setting the ballot title of a Charter amendment submitted by petitioners regarding election dates............................................................................................................... 6 ORDINANCE #19 AND #20, SERIES OF 2018 – Ballot language to amend Section 10.5 of the Charter regarding enterprise fund bonding ................................................................................................................ 7 ORDINANCE #21, SERIES OF 2018 – Ballot language to amend Section 11.4 of the Charter regarding franchises ...................................................................................................................................................... 8 P131 VI.h Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 13, 2018 2 At 5:00 p.m. Mayor Skadron called the regular meeting to order with Councilmembers Frisch and Mullins present. CITIZEN COMMENTS 1. Roy Saba, president of two boards of the Hunter Creek Condo Association, said they handle all the grounds outside the drip lines. We have some land we want to put up for sale including portions of parcels 1 and 2. Approximately half an acre in each. You own parcel #3. APCHA suggested I make that offer to you here. I need some help from council in my meetings with the parking department to change the parking on Lone Pine Rd. Currently it is 24 hour parking. About two weeks ago I went to the open space and trails meeting and suggested to them that we would offer them parking if they could look in to patrolling the trail. 2. Courtland said she recently moved here. She is reading a book and asked council about their views on immigration. 3. Lee Mulcahy spoke about another enforcement issue and asked why he can’t be given a hearing. 4. Toni Kronberg passed out handouts. She said she supports the county, sheriff and police being at Galena plaza. The community supports that because there are buildings there now. There are two lawsuits asking for a vote on the city offices. She put together a score card for the six properties council can consider. She wants council to do a score card so the community can see what council is considering. 5. James Hoggie, homeless since 2011, said he is functioning in the community with the help of Lee bringing food to the homeless center. They are caring and good people. Everyone deserves a second chance. 6. Sandy Mulcahy said you’ve heard us complain about APCHA since last June. 10 days ago there was a work session with the BOCC about APCHA. One of our biggest issues is with the rules and deadlines. It needs to be reorganized. We just ask you for a hearing. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilwoman Mullins gave a thanks to Roy. She said she wishes we had a better response to the Mulcahys. I would like to get this resolved too. We are not the governing body of APCHA. There is not a whole lot we as city council can do. There is a severe water shortage, the ditches are about half full. It is a very serious issue and everybody needs to be thinking about how they can save water. She asked if we can we change how we irrigate at Cozy Point. Ben Carlson, parks, said the plan has been to irrigate from 6am to noon or 1 at which point the ditch is given over to other users. There are a number of fields we have to get through in a week to produce the forage for the horses. We can draw back the time by three hours each day. Councilwoman Mullins said she wants to make sure we are being as judicious as we can. Mr. Carlson said in a typical season we would be watering 24 hours a day. Councilwoman Mullins said Roaring Fork Conservancy, a non profit in Basalt, just had its grand opening and it is impressive what they are doing to preserve water. Thursday I’m testifying in front of Colorado Air Quality Control Commission to support legislation and suggest it get expanded. Councilman Frisch said we are putting in a stage 2 water enforcement shortage. Does the city have set guidelines to follow as the different stages come in. Mr. Carlson replied there is a plan in place. When the first restrictions came in we found we could meet the guide and reduce by 20%. In July we found we could reduce by 29%. There is a plan in place. It doesn’t mean you might not see a brown space. Councilman Frisch gave a hats off to Rotary for a successful Ducky Derby and the Salvation Ditch for some extra water. Hats off to Nancy and Sandra for a great back country marathon. Mayor Skadron said the Aspen community picnic is Wednesday 4:30 to 7 at the Red Brick. It’s free. P132 VI.h Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 13, 2018 3 BOARD REPORTS Councilwoman Mullins attended the RFTA meeting where the board voted unanimously to put a 2.65 mill levy on the November ballot. We had started with a much higher amount. There are a lot of projects to keep the service up to expectations. The first meeting about outreach will be this Thursday. Councilman Frisch said CORE will be at the work session tomorrow. Nordic is a bit quiet at the moment. He will be reporting back on Sister Cities and CCLC. CONSENT CALENDAR Reso #112 - Uphill plan Councilman Frisch said people have been asking about this and it is much more that what is being chatted about. Jessica Garrow, community development, said the current work stems from an economic development plan at the end of 2015. Ongoing work includes attending the outdoor retailer show and support of the Friday meet ups to uphill during ski season. The big ticket items include a symposium pulling industry leaders together and an uphill plan to what would uphill look like in the valley. Phillip Supino, community development, said the larger approach is important to understand what the existing conditions are including trail and access points and the 10th mountain hut system. The effort is understanding what we have to work with and targeted areas. Mayor Skadron asked for a comment on the symposium. Mr. Supino said from the development plan it is building on the 2014 symposium. The idea is to bring together a combination of development people as well as idea and cultural side people. Bring them to Aspen and facilitate a conversation and demonstrate how great our existing assets and amenities are. Reso #117 – stage 2 water shortage Councilwoman Mullins asked what is the goal you are trying to attain and summarize the restrictions. Are there enforcement consequences. Margaret Medellin, utilities, said we are recommending stage 2 shortage conditions. We came to you in May in response to snow pack conditions and we recommended stage 1. After a warm and dry spring and summer, conditions have deteriorated and we are recommending stage 2. Stage 1 was voluntary, stage 2 requires mandatory restrictions. These restrictions will be mandatory and will have consequences with a written warning for the first violation with a $500 fine for a second violation. The list of prohibitions and restrictions are geared to maintaining healthy landscapes. We are asking people to be thoughtful about water use. Ryland French, utilities, said the focus of the restrictions are on lawn watering to three days per week and 30 minutes per zone. Native zones to two days a week. 10 am to 6 pm. No washing paved areas and a requirement to repair leaking irrigation systems. Councilwoman Mullins asked when was the last time we went to stage 2. Ms. Medellin replied this is the first time. Mayor Skadron asked how much moisture do we need to move out of stage 2. Ms. Medellin stated there are different forecasts. It will be a very significant amount to bring us back to normal. We will need a normal snowpack to bring us out of stage 2. Even though we welcome the rains it is not doing much to help our supply it will only lower our demand. We need a good snowpack. Mayor Skadron said this is a result of a low snowpack. Ms. Medellin replied absolutely. Councilman Frisch said we are in this for the remainder of the season. Ms. Medellin replied we anticipate we are in this for the remainder of the season. Reso #118 – boiler replacement Mayor Skadron said it seems to me that much of the work that was done on the original ARC, we are replacing all too often components of the building that were to last far longer than they are. Cory Vander Veen, recreation, replied they were to be 30 year boilers. It is a combination of wear and tear and how we are using the facilities. Jack Wheeler, asset, said we have had problems with the boilers from the start. P133 VI.h Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 13, 2018 4 The team at the ARC has done a great job of holding the manufacture accountable. It makes more sense to take this step than to do a blanket replacement.. · Resolution #109 and #110, Series of 2018 – As-needed HVAC and Plumbing Services · Resolution #120, Series of 2018 – Community Broadband – Mammoth Networks MSA Approval · Resolution #117, Series of 2018 – Stage Two Water Shortage · Resolution #112, Series of 2018 – Consulting Services for the Uphill Recreation Plan · Resolution #118, Series of 2018 – Early approval of 2018 Fall Supplemental Budget for ARC Boiler replacement · Resolution #113, Series of 2018 – Coordination of November 6, 2018 General Election to execute IGA · Board Appointment · Minutes – July 23 and July 30, 2018 Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt the consent calendar; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #18, SERIES OF 2018 – 500 W. Main Street – Historic Landmark Lot Split, TDRs, Special Review and Variations Councilwoman Mullins moved to continue Ordinance #18, Series of 2018 to August 27, 2018; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #22, SERIES OF 2018 – 333 Park/931 Gibson Avenue Relocation Sarah Yoon, community development, told the Council this will relocate the historic residences to a new lot at 931 Gibson. The home is located in the R6 zone. The property contains two historic resources where the original site of the historic home was located on Main Street. The home was originally relocated in the 1960’s. It was designated in 1995. 931 Gibson is the receiving property and is zoned R15A and currently has a residence located on the property. There is a demolition permit that has expired. The requests are to demo the non historic additions, relocate to the new site and rescind the designation. Once relocated to 931 Gibson the property will be designated and the existing residence will be demolished. HPC is the recommending body and they reviewed the application on July 11th. It was a unanimous 7-0 vote for demolition of the non-historic home and relocation. They also recommended to rescind the designation if the relocation is approved as well as designation if the historic home is relocated to 931 Gibson. They also said a separate application for 931 would be needed for a secondary home. There were four public comments received, two expressing concern of what would be built on 931. One spoke in support for relocation and one spoke against relocation and the award of potential floor area bonus of any future applications. One additional comment of support was received after the packet was submitted and will be included with the second reading packet. Staff and HPC find that the applicant does meet all of the required criteria for demolition, relocation and designation. With relocation, 333 Park is not a historic district and the lot is not the original location. The relocation itself will not present any adverse impacts on the area and staff and HPC also find that the relocation is an acceptable preservation method in this case because it provides the best preservation outcome. The applicant had a number of conversations with engineering and the parks department to determine an appropriate relocation route. The public hearing is scheduled for August 27th and a site visit is scheduled for that day as well. Chris Bendon, representing the applicant, said they have had a good process with HPC resulting in unanimous support. We are continuing to work with referral agencies on the logistics of the move and route. We are continuing to do outreach with the neighbors to let them understand what the proposal is. We have reviewed the draft ordinance and are comfortable with it. We will have a full presentation on the 27th. P134 VI.h Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 13, 2018 5 Councilwoman Mullins said tonight we are just being asked to consider relocation, demolition, rescinding and reinstating designation. Ms. Garrow replied for first reading and setting the public hearing for August 27th. Councilwoman Mullins said in terms of any kind of incentives, floor area bonus. Ms. Garrow said that would be part of a future application to HPC if the relocation is approved. Councilwoman Mullins said her understanding is the house at 333 was relocated from Main Street where the library is now and we need to rescind that designation so we can relocate it and once it is on the new lot. Ms. Garrow said there would be designation on the new lot. Councilwoman Mullins asked how big is the lot that it is leaving and how big is the lot it is going to and what is the zoning. Ms. Garrow replied the Gibson lot is just over 15,000 square feet in size and the Park lot is just over 6,000 square feet. Councilwoman Mullins asked what would be allowable development on those lots. Ms. Garrow said allowable floor area are identified on page 132 of the packet. For Park Avenue, allowable is between 3,246 square feet for a single family up to 3,607 for a duplex. Councilwoman Mullins said you can do two units. Ms. Garrow replied yes. For the Gibson lot it is 4,529 square feet. Councilwoman Mullins said with the historic property there, then it would be a split lot. What about HPC review. Would they be reviewing the historic building and the development on the lot adjacent to it at 931. Ms. Garrow replied yes. Councilwoman Mullins asked if they have any purview over 333. Ms. Garrow stated once the designation would be removed they would not. Councilman Frisch asked about how often we are creating new historic lots. Is this a new model of development going forward that we are going to see a lot. Is this supported because it is legally allowed but a loop hole that we are not thrilled about or is it something that we are actually proactively promoting as a way to benefit and focus on the historic preservation program. Ms. Garrow said we can provide more detail at second reading. What we have done as staff is look closely at the relocation criteria and HPC did as well during their review and believe that in this very unique instance it is maybe one of very few instances that makes sense to relocate off site as a way to better preserve the structure. Councilman Frisch said there are a few comments that I’m reading as a historic structure is better if it is more prominent as opposed to where it originally was. Maybe not everyone wants to be prominent and I take a little concern that trying to trophy size every historic property we can. If they happen to be in a humble place, so be it. If it is in a place that is going to have the place fall apart then we can have that discussion but there are a few comments about prominence and I’m worried about that as a direction that we are giving. Councilwoman Mullins asked is there any precedence for this. Ms. Garrow said there was a relocation in 1998 regarding 134 ½ w Hopkins and the Zupansis property. Councilwoman Mullins said not just relocation but the lot split as well. Ms. Garrow said we do lot splits all over. Councilwoman Mullins said she would like to have some conversation about is it appropriate for the neighborhood. Councilman Frisch said we have seen historic structures move from one historic property to another property. We are being asked to waive a magic wand and deem the lot historic. I’m concerned minimally about what direction that is being done and what are those ramifications. Mr. Bendon said I think it will be helpful of us to walk through our reconnaissance of the property as well. There is a lot of back story we owe you to how did we get here. Mayor Skadron asked do you live on the property. Brian replied we will live on the property. Mayor Skadron said one of the hardest things for council is grasping historic preservation principles. What value is a historic preservation designation if the designation can be rescinded simply upon request of a developer or property owner. Mr. Bendon said the value is in the resource itself not the dirt. Councilwoman Mullins said you could do a lot split on the property where it currently sits. Mr. Bendon said it is a 15,000 square foot lot. We are not proposing a lot split. You start to run out of places to add on to the resource. Councilwoman Mullins said to me it looks like at 333 Park you could restore the P135 VI.h Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 13, 2018 6 house, split the lot and add one. Ms. Garrow said it is very difficult to do because of the steep slopes and the stream margin you can’t restore the historic placement without running in to competing values. Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #22, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO 22 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING DEMOLITION, RELOCATION, RESCINDING DESIGNATION, DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 333 PARK AVENUE AND 931 GIBSON AVENUE, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT A Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #22, Series of 2018 on first reading; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #16, SERIES OF 2018 - Purchasing Threshold Increase Mayor Skadron said we have been through the details. He asked if there are any questions. Mayor Skadron open the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #16, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Mullins, yes; Frisch, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #17, SERIES OF 2018 – Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance Lee Ledesma, utilities, said this will modify the ordinance that was passed 15 months ago. Primary changes are to extend the pilot program to the end of 2018. We are also recommending changes to the standards as a response to community input. This will increase the water budget from 7.5 to 8.5 and provide rain barrel incentives. It will just modify what was already adopted. Ben Carlson, parks, said one benefit from the ordinance is we found low to medium turf grass that will be available to applicants. The city is also using this grass. Councilman Frisch said thanks for the hard work on this. I got a tour of the different grass options. We will see some installs this fall. Mr. Carlson said there are handouts in the back. Councilman Frisch said he is supportive of this and wants to make sure the grasses work long term. Jeff Woods, parks, said Ski Co used it at Elk Camp last year. We are very confident. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #17, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. RESOLUTION #115, SERIES OF 2018 – Setting the ballot title of a Charter amendment submitted by petitioners regarding election dates Jim True, city attorney, stated this involves a charter amendment submitted by petitioners to move the election day from May to March. They submitted petitions and obtained the appropriate number of signatures. Council has to act at their next regular meeting. This is that meeting. This resolution sets the ballot title that will be submitted to the county clerk. Note that what I proposed is the entire language of the amendments be submitted on the ballots. Because this does affect the term for upcoming elected P136 VI.h Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 13, 2018 7 individuals, that should be clearly set forth in the title itself. We had to address the terms for people previously elected to and a few other provisions regarding the organizational meeting. Art Daily, representing the petitioners, said this is the opportunity to increase voter participation across the board. He whole heartily supports it. It is good for the community and widens the opportunity. Mr. True said just to make sure we are clear, the terms for anyone elected in March will be shorter by two months. Mayor Skadron said nothing is ever easy. As I mentioned to the Next Gen committee, I generally support the spirit. I’m working through some things that may be an issue. One of the issues is the actual election cycle. I’m fearful of what it does to the quality of the candidate and forces a campaign through a busy holiday season. One of the benefits of the current May election is that it is off season. This forces campaign issues through a holiday ski season. Mr. Daily said I understand that point. I prefer to support maximum voter participation. Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Resolution #115, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Mullins, yes; Frisch, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #19 AND #20, SERIES OF 2018 – Ballot language to amend Section 10.5 of the Charter regarding enterprise fund bonding Mr. Ture said both of these address the same issue. As discussed in the work session we discussed bringing the charter up to speed with TABOR. When adopted in 1992 there were inconsistencies that led to a requirement that led to any effort by an enterprise to go out an obtain any financing, our charter would require it to go to a vote, TABOR would exempt that. Our charter would allow enterprises to fund through general obligation bonds but TABOR prevents that. We are trying to put them in sync. This would allow a utility enterprise to obtain financing without going to a vote. During the work session Councilman Myrin wanted to put some limitation on that. Councilman Frisch agreed with that. I have prepared two options, one with no limitations and one with a funding under an amount of 10 million dollars. I recommend you adopt both at first reading and when the entire board is here you discuss both alternatives. You could put both on the ballot then the one with most positive votes would go into effect. I’m not sure I would recommend that. The 10 million, I think Bert had mentioned that. Councilman Frisch said I’m supportive of passing these on first reading. Mayor Skadron said this is our version of getting in line with tabor. Mr. True replied correct. Because of our charter and the amendment that was pre tabor. Tabor envisioned certain things should be run as a business. Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #19, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 19 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER OF THE CITY OF ASPEN BY AMENDING SECTION 10.5. TO ALLOW A DULY CREATED ENTERPRISE TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS WITHOUT SUBMISSION TO THE ELECTORATE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE COLOADO CONSTITUTION KNOWN AS THE TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS (TABOR) P137 VI.h Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 13, 2018 8 Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #19, Series of 2018 on first reading; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. Councilwoman Mullins moved to read Ordinance #20, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO 20 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER OF THE CITY OF ASPEN BY AMENDING SECTION 10.5, TO ALLOW A DULY CREATED ENTERPRISE TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT IN EXCESS OF $10,000,000 WITHOUT SUBMISSION TO THE ELECTORATE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION KNOWN AS THE TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS (TABOR) Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #20, Series of 2018 on first reading seconded by Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Mullins, yes; Frisch, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #21, SERIES OF 2018 – Ballot language to amend Section 11.4 of the Charter regarding franchises Mr. True said we have a very unusual provision that requires any franchise to be submitted to a vote of the electorate. There are other communities that have that but it is more and more rate. In certain instances it can cause problems with trying to present to the electorate a complicated franchise agreement. We are always worried that we get the information out so the electorate can process it. It will come up with Comcast. What we are proposing is we get the city in line so that Council adopts franchises. We would not that the deadline for any other ballot issues that don’t require adoption by ordinance is September 7th. Councilwoman Mullins moved to read Ordinance #21, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 21 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER OF THE CITY OF ASPEN BY AMENDING SECTION 11.4, TO MODIFY THE MANNER IN WHICH FRANCHISES ARE GRANTED. Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #21, Series of 2018 on first reading; seconded by Councilman Frisch. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. Councilman Frisch moved to adjourn at 6:45 p.m.; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried. Linda Manning, City Clerk P138 VI.h Page 1 of 9 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Skadron and City Council FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer THROUGH: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director MEETING DATE: August 27, 2018 RE: 500 W. Main Street- Historic Landmark Lot Split, Transferable Development Rights, Special Review and Variations Second Reading of Ordinance #18, Series 2018 APPLICANT /OWNER 500 W. Main Street, LLC, Represented by Rowland + Broughton LOCATION Street Address: 500 W. Main Street Legal Description: Lots R and S, Block 30, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado Parcel Identification Number: 2735-124-43-007 CURRENT ZONING & LAND USE MU, Mixed Use Office PROPOSED LAND USE: Office SUMMARY: The applicant proposes subdivision of a 6,000 square foot lot into two 3,000 square foot lots. The eastern lot will contain the Mesa Store, a large Victorian-era false front commercial building, as well as parking, bike racks, and trash/recycling for the business. The western half of the lot is currently not proposed to be developed other than as a garden. Some or all of the allowed floor area on the west lot is to be removed in the form of Transferable Development Rights to be constructed elsewhere in town. To facilitate the proposal, Special Review, Commercial Design Review, Setback and Parking Variations are requested to accommodate the Mesa Store on its new, smaller parcel. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with conditions. SITE LOCATER MAP P139 IX.a Page 2 of 9 RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS AT FIRST READING: Historic Development Pattern on Main Street: At First Reading, Council members asked for more information about the history of vacant lots on Main Street. Below is a historic map and a current map indicating that open lots were present in this area of Main Street even at the high point of Victorian development. Few open yards are left today and development is generally much larger in footprint and massing than it was historically. It appears from historic photographs that the proposed west lot has been vacant for at least 100 years. Historic Benefits: Council members also asked what historic preservation benefits will be available to either lot after this approval. Both lots will remain designated. The lot containing the Mesa Store could request up to 300 square feet of additional floor area through Special Review and could request setback variations to facilitate expansion, however there is no viable area to add on to the structure given requirements for parking, utilities and circulation. The west lot could be eligible for setback variations, a parking reduction, Conditional Uses, GMQS Exemptions, and Waiver of Impact Fees. None of these benefits would be applicable if all the floor area is removed from the lot as TDRs. If some floor area remains P140 IX.a Page 3 of 9 on the west lot, development will be significantly restricted, mostly by building code provisions which will require any new structure to be limited to a width of approximately 16 feet for much of the lot. The applicant may want to pursue a small structure on the site in the future, but is not committing to that option at this time. Subdivision: Staff was asked whether the Subdivision is creating any non-conformities. To the extent that the east lot will result in a setback encroachment and a floor area increase, provisions of the land use code allow for approval where appropriate. Referendum 1 Information: Staff received one public comment related to this application, attached as Exhibit H. The comment suggests that the requests related to floor area and parking are subject to public vote as a result of Referendum 1. All of the land use requests related to this application are specifically within Council’s authority and do not represent variations. An increase in allowable floor area is specified in the Mixed Use Zone District and permitted through Special Review, Chapter 26.430. This request is not a variation, but is allowed in the underlying zone district. The applicant is proposing to mitigate for parking as provided in Transportation and Parking Management, Chapter 26.515. Therefore this is also not a variation and does not trigger a Referendum 1 vote. Setback reductions, which are requested, are not subject to Referendum 1. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REFERRAL COMMENT: HPC discussed the proposal on July 25th and recommended in favor of the lot split, creation of TDRS and approval of all requested variations, by an 8-0 vote. HPC recognized the costs involved in restoring Mesa Store and found that removing development from the west lot helps make preservation financially viable and also preserves the resource without an addition. The board indicated that this project is the perfect example of TDRs as an appropriate preservation tool. HPC’s preference is that the property owner sells all of the TDRs. NOTE: The remainder of this memo, and the exhibits, are unchanged from First Reading. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from City Council: • Historic Landmark Lot Split- (Chapter 26.480) for the subdivision of the existing 6,000 square foot lot into two 3,000 square foot lots, the east lot to contain a historic structure and the west lot to be vacant. • Transferable Development Rights– (Chapter 26.535) for the creation of up to 7 TDRs, representing all of the development allowed on the west lot. • Special Review -(Chapter 26.430) to allow the Mesa Store to exceed the floor area allowed for a commercial structure on a 3,000 square foot lot in the Mixed Use Zone District. • Commercial Design Review- (Chapter 26.410) allowing a waiver of Pedestrian Amenity on the east lot, where the historic structure and required on-site parking leave no opportunity for amenity space. P141 IX.a Page 4 of 9 • Setback Variation- (Chapter 26.415) allowing a reduction of the required distance between the west side of the historic resource at 500 W. Main and the new property line resulting from the Historic Landmark Lot Split. • Transportation and Parking Management-(Chapter 26.515) allowing a cash-in-lieu fee waiver of 0.26 parking units, the portion of the parking unit requirement that cannot be accommodated on the east lot, where it is required as mitigation for the commercial use. Council is the final decision-making authority. A recommendation from HPC will be provided to Council at Second Reading. BACKGROUND: Local architecture firm Rowland + Broughton has purchased the subject property and is underway with an interior renovation to locate their offices in the historic Mesa Store building. In 2017, Rowland + Broughton received HPC approval for an expansion to Mesa Store, including commercial space and a free market residential unit. Subsequently, the firm determined that office space in the historic structure alone would serve their needs and looked to scale back their expenditure. Rowland + Broughton determined that two aspects of the historic preservation benefits program; the Historic Landmark Lot Split and the Transferable Development Right program, would allow them to avoid development of the site but still make their ownership of the property feasible. The lot split allows the western portion of the property, which is currently open space, to be subdivided and either developed modestly, or not at all, with the value of unbuilt floor area to be captured through the conversion and sale of square footage to owners of non-historic properties elsewhere in Aspen. Council approval is requested for a lot split, reverting to the original platting of the property as two separate townsite lots, approval of Transferable Development Rights, and variations to accommodate the Mesa Store on a 3,000 square foot lot, rather than the current 6,000 square foot lot. Following is a summary of each land use provision requiring Council action. More detailed criteria and findings are provided in exhibits to this memo. Historic Landmark Lot Split The minimum lot size for all properties in the Mixed Use Zone District is 3,000 square feet. The applicant is proposing two 3,000 square foot lots, conforming with zoning and meeting the criteria for subdivision. Both parcels resulting from the lot split will remain historically designated. Following approval of the subdivision, the applicant must record a plat depicting the new lot line and other notes and conditions specific to this approval. Staff finds the criteria for a Historic Landmark Lot Split to be met. P142 IX.a Page 5 of 9 Transferable Development Rights The proposed new east lot will contain the Mesa Store building, which will consume all development rights available to that lot. The proposed new west lot is to function as a garden amenity to the adjacent office. The applicant requests approval to sever all of the development rights on this parcel in the form of 7 TDRs. Approval of TDRs does not require the applicant to remove them all. Approval allows the applicant the option to execute 1 to 7 certificates, at the pace that they wish. Each certificate will permanently reduce development potential on the new lot by 250 square feet. For the purposes of creating Transferable Development Rights, the applicant is required to determine the maximum residential development that could occur on the west lot and use that allowed floor area as the basis for TDRs. If the applicant ultimately does not sell all the TDRs and retains some for construction on the west lot, they can choose commercial or residential use, but the maximum floor area will remain capped at the residential level. The maximum residential development of the new west lot is a single family home. New single family homes are discouraged in the Mixed Use zone district, where commercial use is preferred. As a result, the floor area calculation for the maximum house allowed on the site includes a 20% reduction as a disincentive. The maximum home size for the proposed west lot is 1,920 square feet of floor area. TDRs are created in 250 square foot increments. The applicant requests approval for seven TDRs, which will consume all but 170 square feet of allowed development rights on the site (1,920 square feet of floor area – 1,750 square feet of TDRs = 170.) Staff finds the criteria for creating TDRs to be met. Special Review The historic Mesa Store contains 3,451 square feet of floor area, which is well below the maximum 6,000 square feet of floor area allowed for commercial use on the current 6,000 square foot site. With the proposed subdivision, the historic structure will be unchanged in size but located on a 3,000 square foot lot, exceeding the 3,000 square foot floor area limit on that lot by 451 square feet. The Mixed Use Zone district, where the property is located, allows Special Review for any property, historic or not, to be permitted a 25% increase in floor area if applicable criteria are met. There will be no increase in the size or impact of the existing building. The premise of this application is to reduce development occurring on this property. Whether or not all of the development is ultimately transferred away from the west lot, the severing of even one TDR on that parcel will permanently restrict the site to a maximum floor area allowed for residential, rather than commercial development. Instead of the current maximum opportunity of 6,000 square feet on the 500 W. Main parcel, the applicant would be permitted a maximum of 3,451 square feet on the west lot (with Special Review P143 IX.a Page 6 of 9 approval) and 1,920 square feet of floor area on the west parcel (the development cap that will be created as a result of TDR approval.) The application results in a net loss of at least 630 square feet of development that could occur at 500 W. Main. Staff finds the criteria for Special Review to be met. Commercial Design Review 25% of a property in the MU Zone District is required to meet the definition of Pedestrian Amenity space, and meet the design guidelines for such spaces. Currently, 500 W. Main, a 6,000 square foot lot, provides less than half the 25% minimum because much of the open area on the west side of the property is devoted to a parking lot, which does not count as amenity. The applicant intends to relocate all parking to the alley, devoting much of the west yard to a garden, which will bring the site into compliance with this code section and greatly enhance the streetscape of the historic district on this blockface. With the subdivision of the property, each 3,000 square foot lot must meet the 25% Pedestrian Amenity Requirement by providing the equivalent of 750 square feet of Pedestrian Amenity area. The new west lot is not currently proposed to be developed and will meet the Pedestrian Amenity requirement by providing street-level open space which has great solar access, landscaping which provides for active use of the space, and a low fence to preserve views into the open area for passersby. Historic Preservation Staff has reviewed and approved the garden design, which has also been verified to meet the City’s Water Efficiency standards. The historic structure and parking will occupy almost all of the east lot, so no qualified on- site Pedestrian Amenity space can be accommodated. The applicant could propose to mitigate for the east lot Pedestrian Amenity through off-site amenity (such as placing the obligation for the east lot on the west lot for a total of 1,500 square feet of Pedestrian Amenity on the west), cash-in-lieu payment of $75,000 (750 square feet required x $100 code required fee-in-lieu value), alternative method, or reduction of requirement, as described in the Municipal Code. The applicant requests reduction of requirement based on Section 26.412.070.C.3, wherein the redevelopment or expansion of a historic landmark constitutes an exemplary preservation effort deserving of an incentive or reward. The applicant is restoring a prominent historic building, including reinforcing the structure, repairing deteriorated exterior materials, and taking significant measures to restore the front porch, windows, exterior stair and chimneys to their historic configuration. The full list of historic preservation benefits requested from Council for this project are Reduction of Pedestrian Amenity, Setback Variations and waiver of a portion of the parking requirement. Staff find the criteria for full reduction of the Pedestrian Amenity requirement on the east lot to be met. P144 IX.a Page 7 of 9 Setback Variations The historic Mesa Store was built on the south (front) and east (side) property lines. Today’s dimensional standards would require a 10’ front setback and a 5’ side setback. This legally established non-conformity can continue, however with the proposed creation of a new lot line immediately west of the historic structure, variation review becomes necessary. The applicant’s proposal is a 0’ setback on the south and east, as currently exists, and a full waiver of the 5’ required setback from the proposed new lot line subdividing this parcel into two 3,000 square foot lots. No variation is needed at the rear lot line. The historic landmark lot split cannot result in lots smaller than 3,000 square feet, and the new lots are to be uniform rectangles, in keeping with the orientation of the historic townsite platting. The applicant could not move the proposed new lot line further west, away from the historic structure, and still meet the subdivision criteria. An important consideration in the granting of a west sideyard setback reduction is conformance with Building Code. Staff has consulted with the Building Department, who will require an easement on the new west lot to ensure that no future development, should it occur, would violate minimum requirements for separation between detached structures. The following requirement of the Building Department will be a condition of approval and must be depicted on the subdivision plat. “An easement measured 10 feet out from the exterior stair on the historic structure will be required. That easement line will be an assumed property line for fire separation distance for any future development on the west lot.” The 5’ setback that should be provided on the east lot is simply being slid westward and combined with the side setback on the west lot in the form of an easement. Staff finds the criteria for setback variations to be met. Parking The Mesa Store contains 4,260 square feet of net leasable space, requiring mitigation in the form of 4.26 parking units. The applicant initially intended to address the entire requirement with on-site parking, however with the proposed subdivision, no more than 2 spaces can be accommodated within the width of the 3,000 square foot lot which will contain the Mesa Store. The applicant has provided a Transportation Impact Analysis in their application. Because the Mesa Store net leasable area is not increasing beyond what has existed historically, no trip mitigation is actually necessary, but at least two TDM (Transportation Demand Management) measures must be fulfilled. The applicant proposes to achieve seven measures focused on providing options for employees to commute to work through other means than single occupancy vehicle. P145 IX.a Page 8 of 9 The applicant is also voluntarily pursuing five actions which will reduce trip generation through MMLOS (Multi-modal Level of Service) measures. These actions involve physical changes to the property that will improve sidewalks and crosswalks and will provide new bicycle racks. As a result of these efforts, the applicant qualifies to provide mitigation for one of their parking units as a TIA credit. Only one credit is allowed. The remaining 1.26 parking units that must be addressed by some means could be accomplished in one of two ways. The applicant could provide 2 parking spaces on the new west lot and dedicate them to the office use by an easement. An easement area this large (approximately 300 square feet) would reduce allowable floor area on the west lot and affect the number of TDRs that may be created. It appears that one parking space provided by easement would not reduce the floor area to the extent that a TDR would be lost, but two spaces would. Staff recommends the applicant consider providing one space on the west lot. The remaining 0.26 parking units could be accomplished through a cash-in-lieu payment of $7,800 (0.26 x $30,000, the standard mitigation for parking). Council could also waive the cash-in-lieu fee as a landmark benefit, in recognition of the applicant’s restoration of the Mesa Store and their effort to reduce or eliminate development that will occur on the west side of the property. Staff finds the criteria to be met through provision of two parking spaces on the east lot, one TIA credit, one parking space on the west lot- dedicated to the east lot via easement, and a Council approved waiver of the $7,800 cash-in-lieu fee completing the balance of the mitigation requirement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council adopt Ordinance #18, Series 0f 2018. The ordinance includes conditions necessary to meet all applicable review criteria. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to adopt Ordinance #18, Series 2018. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________. P146 IX.a Page 9 of 9 ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance #18, Series of 2018 Exhibit A –Review Criteria/Staff Findings Historic Landmark Lot Split Exhibit B – Review Criteria/Staff Findings Transferable Development Rights Exhibit C – Review Criteria/Staff Findings Special Review Exhibit D – Review Criteria/Staff Findings Commercial Design Review Exhibit E – Review Criteria/Staff Findings Setback Variations Exhibit F – Review Criteria/Staff Findings Parking and Transportation Management Exhibit G- Application Exhibit H- Public Comment P147 IX.a Ordinance #18, Series 2018 500 W. Main Page 1 of 5 ORDINANCE #18 (Series of 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT, TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, SPECIAL REVIEW AND VARIATIONS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 500 W. MAIN STREET, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 30, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2735-124-43-007 WHEREAS, 500 W. Main Street LLC, owner of 500 W. Main Street, Lots R and S, Block 30, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, requested City Council approval for the following: • Historic Landmark Lot Split- (Chapter 26.480) for the subdivision of the existing 6,000 square foot lot into two 3,000 square foot lots, the east lot to contain a historic structure and the west lot to be vacant. • Transferable Development Rights– (Chapter 26.535) for the creation of up to 7 TDRs, representing all of the development allowed on the west lot. • Special Review -(Chapter 26.430) to allow the Mesa Store to exceed the floor area allowed for a commercial structure on a 3,000 square foot lot in the Mixed Use Zone District. • Commercial Design Review- (Chapter 26.410) allowing a waiver of Pedestrian Amenity on the east lot, where the historic structure and required on-site parking leave no opportunity for Pedestrian Amenity space. • Setback Variation- (Chapter 26.415) allowing a reduction of the required distance between the west side of the historic resource at 500 W. Main and the new property line resulting from the Historic Landmark Lot Split. • Transportation and Parking Management-(Chapter 26.515) allowing a cash-in-lieu fee waiver of the portion of the parking unit requirement that cannot be accommodated on the east lot, where it is required as mitigation for the commercial use; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department performed an analysis of the application, found that the review standards were met, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, P148 IX.a Ordinance #18, Series 2018 500 W. Main Page 2 of 5 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Historic Landmark Lot Split Pursuant to the findings set forth above, the City Council does hereby authorize the subdivision of 500 W. Main Street, Lots R and S, Block 30, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado into two lots of 3,000 square feet each as depicted on the Mesa Subdivision plat. Section 2: Transferable Development Rights Pursuant to the findings set forth above, the City Council does hereby authorize the creation of up to 7 TDRs from the west lot of the Mesa Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. Commencing with the severing of the first TDR from the property, the maximum floor area for the lot shall be 1,920 square feet minus 250 square feet for each TDR Certificate issued. 2. Upon satisfaction of all requirements, the city and the applicant shall establish a date on which the respective Historic TDR Certificates shall be validated and issued by the City and a deed restriction on the property shall be accepted by the City and filed with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. The property owner may decide when and if, as warranted by the TDR market, the development rights will be converted into certificates and sold. 3. On the mutually agreed upon date, the Mayor of the City of Aspen shall execute and deliver the applicable number of Historic TDR Certificates to the property owner and the property owner shall execute and deliver a deed restriction lessening the available development right of the Sending Site by 250 square feet per TDR together with the appropriate fee for recording the deed restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder’s Office. Section 3: Special Review Pursuant to the findings set forth above, the City Council does hereby authorize the floor area for the east lot of the Mesa Subdivision a maximum floor area of 1.15:1. Section 4: Commercial Design Review Pursuant to the findings set forth above, the City Council does hereby authorize a full waiver of Pedestrian Amenity on the east lot of the Mesa Subdivision in P149 IX.a Ordinance #18, Series 2018 500 W. Main Page 3 of 5 recognition of the applicant’s restoration of the Mesa Store being an exemplary preservation effort deserving of an incentive or reward. Section 5: Setback Variations Pursuant to the findings set forth above, the City Council does hereby authorize a waiver of the east, south and west setback requirements for the east lot of the Mesa Subdivison with the condition that the plat reflect an easement on the west lot of the Mesa Subdivision measured 10 feet out from the exterior stair on the historic structure. Note that the easement line will be an assumed property line for fire separation distance for any future development on the west lot. Section 6: Parking and Transportation Management Pursuant to the findings set forth above, the City Council does hereby authorize provision of two parking spaces on the east lot of Mesa Subdivision, provision of one unit of parking mitigation using one TIA credit as demonstrated in the land use application, one parking space on the west lot- dedicated to the east lot via easement, and a Council approved waiver of the $7,800 cash-in-lieu fee completing the balance of the mitigation requirement. Section 7: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 8: Existing Litigation This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 9: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. P150 IX.a Ordinance #18, Series 2018 500 W. Main Page 4 of 5 No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 500 W. Main Street. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 10: Public Hearing A public hearing on the ordinance was held on the 13th day of August, 2018, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 23rd day of July, 2018. ______________________ Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk P151 IX.a Ordinance #18, Series 2018 500 W. Main Page 5 of 5 FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this ___ day of _________, 2018. _______________________ Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ James R. True, City Attorney P152 IX.a 1 Exhibit A Historic Landmark Lot Split Staff Findings B.Historic Landmark Lot Split.The split of a lot that is a designated Historic Landmark for the purpose of creating one additional development parcel shall be approved,approved with conditions,or denied by the City Council,pursuant to Section 26.480.030 –Procedures for Review,after a recommendation is provided by the Historic Preservation Commission pursuant to Section 26.415.110(A)Historic Landmark Lot Split,and according to the following standards: *Note –Historic properties eligible for a standard lot split are not required to proceed through the historic lot split process. NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 1. The request complies with the requirements of Section 26.480.040, General Subdivision Review Standards. 2. The fathering parcel is listed in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. 3. No more than two lots are created by the Historic Landmark Lot Split. No more than one historic landmark lot split shall occur on any one fathering parcel. 4. In residential zone districts, the allowable Floor Area for each new residential lot shall be established by allocating the total allowable Floor Area of the fathering parcel to each of the new lots such that no overall increase in Floor Area is achieved and no individual lot allows a Floor Area in excess of that allowed a similarly-sized lot in the same zone district. An equal distribution is not required. The allowable Floor Area for each new lot shall be noted on the Historic Lot Split Plat. Any Floor Area bonus already granted by the Historic Preservation Commission shall be allocated to each individual parcel and shall also be noted on the plat as a square footage bonus. If the properties remain eligible for a Floor Area bonus from the Historic Preservation Commission, the plat and subdivision agreement shall specify the manner in which this potential bonus shall be allocated to the two properties if received. In non-residential zones districts, the Floor Area shall be calculated according to the limitations of the zone district applied to each new lot as permitted for the use. The total Floor Area shall not be stated on the plat because the floor area will be determined by the use established on each parcel. 5. The Historic Lot Split Plat shall be reviewed and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, pursuant to Chapter 26.490 – Approval Documents. No subdivision agreement need be prepared or entered into between the applicant and the City unless the Community Development Director determines such an agreement is necessary. 26.480.040. General subdivision review standards. All subdivisions shall be required to conform to the following general standards and limitations in addition to the specific standards applicable to each type of subdivision. NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY A. Guaranteed Access to a Public Way. All subdivided lots must have perpetual unobstructed legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed subdivision shall not eliminate or obstruct legal vehicular access from a public way to an adjacent property. All streets in a Subdivision retained under private ownership shall be dedicated to public use to ensure adequate public and emergency access. Security/privacy gates across access points and driveways are prohibited. B. Alignment with Original Townsite Plat. The proposed lot lines shall approximate, to the extent practical, the platting of the Original Aspen Townsite, and additions thereto, as applicable to the subject land. Minor deviations from the original platting lines to accommodate significant features of the site may be approved. C. Zoning Conformance. All new lots shall conform to the requirements of the zone district in which the property is situated, including variations and variances approved pursuant to this Title. A single lot shall not be located in more than one zone district unless unique circumstances dictate. A rezoning application may be considered concurrently with subdivision review. D. Existing Structures, Uses, and Non-Conformities. A subdivision shall not create or increase the non-conformity of a use, structure or parcel. A rezoning application or other mechanism to correct the non-conforming nature of a use, structure, or parcel may be considered concurrently. YES YES Review Criteria for 500 W. Main Street The applicant is requesting Historic Landmark Lot Split, which is also considered a minor subdivision. The application must satisfy the all of the review criteria for Historic Landmark Lot Split listed in Section 26.480.060(B) and the General Subdivision review standards in Section 26.480.040. YES MET MET YES Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.480.060(B) - Historic Landmark Lot Split YES YES YES YES YES P153 IX.a 2 26.480.060. Minor subdivisions. The following types of subdivision may be approved by the City Council, pursuant to the provisions of Section 26.480.030 – Procedures for Review, and the standards and limitations of each type of subdivision, described below: B. Historic Landmark Lot Split. The split of a lot that is a designated Historic Landmark for the purpose of creating one additional development parcel shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.480.030 – Procedures for Review, after a recommendation is provided by the Historic Preservation Commission pursuant to Section 26.415.110(A) Historic Landmark Lot Split, and according to the following standards: 1. The request complies with the requirements of Section 26.480.040, General Subdivision Review Standards. 2. The fathering parcel is listed in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. 3. No more than two lots are created by the Historic Landmark Lot Split. No more than one historic landmark lot split shall occur on any one fathering parcel. 4. In residential zone districts, the allowable Floor Area for each new residential lot shall be established by allocating the total allowable Floor Area of the fathering parcel to each of the new lots such that no overall increase in Floor Area is achieved and no individual lot allows a Floor Area in excess of that allowed a similarly-sized lot in the same zone district. An equal distribution is not required. The allowable Floor Area for each new lot shall be noted on the Historic Lot Split Plat. Any Floor Area bonus already granted by the Historic Preservation Commission shall be allocated to each individual parcel and shall also be noted on the plat as a square footage bonus. If the properties remain eligible for a Floor Area bonus from the Historic Preservation Commission, the plat and subdivision agreement shall specify the manner in which this potential bonus shall be allocated to the two properties if received. In non-residential zones districts, the Floor Area shall be calculated according to the limitations of the zone district applied to each new lot as permitted for the use. The total Floor Area shall not be stated on the plat because the floor area will be determined by the use established on each parcel. P154 IX.a 3 5. The Historic Lot Split Plat shall be reviewed and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, pursuant to Chapter 26.490 – Approval Documents. No subdivision agreement need be prepared or entered into between the applicant and the City unless the Community Development Director determines such an agreement is necessary. *Note – Historic properties eligible for a standard lot split are not required to proceed through the historic lot split process. Staff Response: The minimum lot size for all properties in the Mixed Use Zone District is 3,000 square feet. The applicant is proposing two 3,000 square foot lots, conforming with Zoning. Both parcels resulting from the lot split will remain historically designated. Following approval of the subdivision, the applicant must record a plat depicting the new lot line, easements and other conditions of approval as appropriate. Allowed floor area will not be stated on the plat. Staff finds this criteria to be met. 26.480.040. General subdivision review standards. All subdivisions shall be required to conform to the following general standards and limitations in addition to the specific standards applicable to each type of subdivision: A. Guaranteed Access to a Public Way. All subdivided lots must have perpetual unobstructed legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed subdivision shall not eliminate or obstruct legal vehicular access from a public way to an adjacent property. All streets in a Subdivision retained under private ownership shall be dedicated to public use to ensure adequate public and emergency access. Security/privacy gates across access points and driveways are prohibited. B. Alignment with Original Townsite Plat. The proposed lot lines shall approximate, to the extent practical, the platting of the Original Aspen Townsite, and additions thereto, as applicable to the subject land. Minor deviations from the original platting lines to accommodate significant features of the site may be approved. C. Zoning Conformance. All new lots shall conform to the requirements of the zone district in which the property is situated, including variations and variances approved pursuant to this Title. A single lot shall not be located in more than one zone district unless unique circumstances dictate. A rezoning application may be considered concurrently with subdivision review. P155 IX.a 4 D. Existing Structures, Uses, and Non-Conformities. A subdivision shall not create or increase the non-conformity of a use, structure or parcel. A rezoning application or other mechanism to correct the non-conforming nature of a use, structure, or parcel may be considered concurrently. In the case where an existing structure or use occupies a site eligible for subdivision, the structure need not be demolished and the use need not be discontinued prior to application for subdivision. If approval of a subdivision creates a non-conforming structure or use, including a structure spanning a parcel boundary, such structure or use may continue until recordation of the subdivision plat. Alternatively, the City may accept certain assurance that the non-conformities will be remedied after recordation of the subdivision plat. Such assurances shall be reflected in a development agreement or other legal mechanism acceptable to the City Attorney and may be time- bound or secured with a financial surety. Staff Findings: The proposed subdivision creates two conforming lots which have street frontage and alley access. The property currently consists of two merged historic townsite lots. The applicant proposes to split the lot in half, reverting to two individual townsite lots. Staff finds this criteria to be met. P156 IX.a 1 Exhibit B Transferable Development Rights (TDR) Staff Findings 26.535.070 Review Criteria for Establishment of Historic TDR. A historic TDR certificate may be established by the Mayor if the City Council, pursuant to adoption of an ordinance, finds all the following standards met: NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY A. The sending site is a historic landmark or property identified on the AspenModern Map, on which the development of a single-family or duplex residence is a permitted use, pursuant to Chapter 26.710, Zone Districts. Properties on which such development is a conditional use shall not be eligible. B. It is demonstrated that the sending site has permitted unbuilt development rights, for either a single-family or duplex home, equaling or exceeding two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates requested. C. It is demonstrated that the establishment of TDR certificates will not create a nonconformity. In cases where a nonconformity already exists, the action shall not increase the specific nonconformity. D. The analysis of unbuilt development right shall only include the actual built development, any approved development order, the allowable development right prescribed by zoning for a single-family or duplex residence, and shall not include the potential of the sending site to gain floor area bonuses, exemptions or similar potential development incentives. E. Any development order to develop floor area, beyond that remaining legally connected to the property after establishment of TDR Certificates, shall be considered null and void. F. The proposed deed restriction permanently restricts the maximum development of the property (the sending site) to an allowable floor area not exceeding the allowance for a single- family or duplex residence minus two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates established. For properties with multiple or unlimited floor areas for certain types of allowed uses, the maximum development of the property, independent of the established property use, shall be the floor area of a single-family or duplex residence (whichever is permitted) minus two hundred fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplies by the number of historic TDR certificates established. The deed restriction shall not stipulate an absolute floor area, but shall stipulate a square footage reduction from the allowable floor area for a single-family or duplex residence, as may be amended from time to time. The sending site shall remain eligible for certain floor area incentives and/or exemptions as may be authorized by the City Land Use Code, as may be amended from time to time. The form of the deed restriction shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. G. A real estate closing has been scheduled at which, upon satisfaction of all relevant requirements, the City shall execute and deliver the applicable number of historic TDR certificates to the sending site property owner and that property owner shall execute and deliver a deed restriction lessening the available development right of the subject property together with the appropriate fee for recording the deed restriction with the County Clerk and Recorder's office. H. It shall be the responsibility of the sending site property owner to provide building plans and a zoning analysis of the sending site to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Certain review fees may be required for the confirmation of built floor area. I. The sale, assignment, conveyance or other transfer or change in ownership of transferable development rights certificates shall be recorded in the real estate records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder and must be reported by the grantor to the City of Aspen Community Development Department within five (5) days of such transfer. The report of such transfer shall disclose the certificate number, the grantor, the grantee and the total value of the consideration paid for the certificate. Failure to timely or accurately report such transfer shall not render the transferable development right certificate void. Review Criteria for 500 W. Main Street The applicant is requesting approval to create up to 7 Transerable Development Rights (TDR). The proposal must satisfy all of the criteria found at Section 26.535.070. MET YES YES YES YES Summary of Section 26.535.070 - Review Criteria for Establishment of Historic Transferable Development Rights (TDR) YES YES YES YES YES P157 IX.a 2 26.535.070 Review criteria for establishment of a historic transferable development right A historic TDR certificate may be established by the Mayor if the City Council, pursuant to adoption of an ordinance, finds all the following standards met: a. The sending site is a historic landmark or property identified on the AspenModern Map, on which the development of a single-family or duplex residence is a permitted use, pursuant to Chapter 26.710, Zone Districts. Properties on which such development is a conditional use shall not be eligible. b. It is demonstrated that the sending site has permitted unbuilt development rights, for either a single-family or duplex home, equaling or exceeding two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates requested. c. It is demonstrated that the establishment of TDR certificates will not create a nonconformity. In cases where a nonconformity already exists, the action shall not increase the specific nonconformity. d. The analysis of unbuilt development right shall only include the actual built development, any approved development order, the allowable development right prescribed by zoning for a single-family or duplex residence, and shall not include the potential of the sending site to gain floor area bonuses, exemptions or similar potential development incentives. e. Any development order to develop floor area, beyond that remaining legally connected to the property after establishment of TDR Certificates, shall be considered null and void. f. The proposed deed restriction permanently restricts the maximum development of the property (the sending site) to an allowable floor area not exceeding the allowance for a single-family or duplex residence minus two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates established. For properties with multiple or unlimited floor areas for certain types of allowed uses, the maximum development of the property, P158 IX.a 3 independent of the established property use, shall be the floor area of a single-family or duplex residence (whichever is permitted) minus two hundred fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplies by the number of historic TDR certificates established. The deed restriction shall not stipulate an absolute floor area, but shall stipulate a square footage reduction from the allowable floor area for a single-family or duplex residence, as may be amended from time to time. The sending site shall remain eligible for certain floor area incentives and/or exemptions as may be authorized by the City Land Use Code, as may be amended from time to time. The form of the deed restriction shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. g. A real estate closing has been scheduled at which, upon satisfaction of all relevant requirements, the City shall execute and deliver the applicable number of historic TDR certificates to the sending site property owner and that property owner shall execute and deliver a deed restriction lessening the available development right of the subject property together with the appropriate fee for recording the deed restriction with the County Clerk and Recorder's office. h. It shall be the responsibility of the sending site property owner to provide building plans and a zoning analysis of the sending site to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Certain review fees may be required for the confirmation of built floor area. i. The sale, assignment, conveyance or other transfer or change in ownership of transferable development rights certificates shall be recorded in the real estate records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder and must be reported by the grantor to the City of Aspen Community Development Department within five (5) days of such transfer. The report of such transfer shall disclose the certificate number, the grantor, the grantee and the total value of the consideration paid for the certificate. Failure to timely or accurately report such transfer shall not render the transferable development right certificate void. Staff Findings: The proposed new east lot will contain the Mesa Store building, which will consume all development rights available to that lot. The proposed new west lot is to function as a garden amenity to the adjacent office. The applicant requests approval to sever all of the development rights on this parcel in the form of 7 TDRs. Approval of TDRs does not require the applicant P159 IX.a 4 to remove them all. Approval allows the applicant the option to execute 1 to 7 certificates, at the pace that they wish. Each certificate will permanently reduce development potential on the new lot by 250 square feet. For the purposes of creating Transferable Development Rights, the applicant is required to determine the maximum residential development that could occur on the west lot and use that allowed floor area as the basis for TDRs. If the applicant ultimately does not sell all the TDRs and retains some for construction on the west lot, they can choose commercial or residential use, but the maximum floor area will remain capped at the residential level. The maximum residential development of the new west lot is a single family home. New single family homes are discouraged in the Mixed Use zone district, where commercial use is preferred. As a result, the floor area calculation for the maximum house allowed on the site includes a 20% reduction as a disincentive. The maximum home size for the proposed west lot is 1,920 square feet of floor area. TDRs are created in 250 square foot increments. The applicant requests approval for seven TDRs, which will consume all but 170 square feet of allowed development rights on the site (1,920 square feet of floor area – 1,750 square feet of TDRs = 170.) Staff finds the criteria for creating 1- 7 TDRs on the proposed new west lot are met. The applicant has demonstrated that there are unused development rights that are eligible to be converted into TDRs. As each TDR is executed, deed restrictions reducing the allowed floor area on the site will be secured in exchange for the issuance of the TDR certificate. P160 IX.a 1 Exhibit C Special Review Staff Findings 26.430.040. Review standards for special review. No development subject to special review shall be permitted unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all standards and requirements set forth below. A. Dimensional requirements. Whenever the dimensional requirements of a proposed development are subject to special review, the development application shall only be approved if the following conditions are met. 1. The mass, height, density, configuration, amount of open space, landscaping and setbacks of the proposed development are designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of A. Dimensional requirements. Whenever the dimensional requirements of a proposed development are subject to special review, the development application shall only be approved if the following conditions are met. NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 1. The mass, height, density, configuration, amount of open space, landscaping and setbacks of the proposed development are designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of surrounding land uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. 2. The applicant demonstrates that the proposed development will not have adverse impacts on surrounding uses or will mitigate those impacts, including but not limited to the effects of shading, excess traffic, availability of parking in the neighborhood or blocking of a designated view plane. YES MET Review Criteria for 500 W. Main Street The applicant is requesting Special Review to increase the allowed floor area on the proposed new east lot from 3,000 square feet to 3,451 square feet. The applicant must satisfy both reivew criteria for Special Review according to Section 26.430.040(A). Summary of Section 26.430.040 - Review Standards for Special Review 26.430.040 Special Review. No development subject to special review shall be permitted unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all standards and requirements set forth below. YES P161 IX.a 2 surrounding land uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. 2. The applicant demonstrates that the proposed development will not have adverse impacts on surrounding uses or will mitigate those impacts, including but not limited to the effects of shading, excess traffic, availability of parking in the neighborhood or blocking of a designated view plane. Staff Findings: The historic structure at 500 W. Main is 3,451 square feet of floor area, which is well below the maximum 6,000 square feet of floor area allowed for commercial use on the current 6,000 square foot site. With the proposed subdivision, the historic structure will be unchanged in size but will be located on a 3,000 square foot lot, exceeding the 3,000 square foot floor area limit on that lot by 451 square feet. The Mixed Use Zone district, where the property is located, allows Special Review for any property, historic or not, to be permitted a 25% increase in floor area if the criteria above are met. The applicant requests approval and staff supports the request finding that there will be no increase in the size or impacts of the existing building, and the premise of this application is to reduce development which will occur on this property. The application includes creation of a new west lot and approval of Transferable Development Rights to remove floor area from the property. Whether or not all of the development is ultimately transferred away from the west lot, the severing of even one TDR on that parcel will permanently restrict the site to a maximum floor area allowed for residential, rather than commercial development. Instead of the current maximum opportunity of 6,000 square feet on the 500 W. Main parcel, the applicant would be permitted a maximum of 3,451 square feet on the west lot (with Special Review approval) and 1,920 square feet of floor area on the west parcel (the development cap that will be created as a result of TDR approval.) The application results in a net loss of at least 630 square feet of development that could occur at 500 W. Main. Staff finds this criteria to be met, finding that the increased floor area that would be allowed on the new east lot will be offset by a reduction of what can occur on the west lot. To the extent that TDRs are created, all the development impacts represented by those TDRs will be removed from this highly visible historic property and dispersed to properties where historic resources are not impacted. P162 IX.a 1 Exhibit D Commercial Design Review Staff Findings 26.412.060 Review Criteria. An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 1. The Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines are met as determined by the appropriate Commission. The Standards and Guidelines include design review criteria that are to be used to determine whether the application is appropriate. 2. All applicable standards in the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines shall be met unless granted a Variation pursuant to Section 26.412.040.D, Variations. N/A 3. Not every guideline will apply to each project, and some balancing of the guidelines must occur on a case-by-case basis. The applicable Commission must: NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY a.) determine that a sufficient number of the relevant guidelines are adequately met in order to approve a project proposal; b.) weigh the applicable guidelines with the practicality of the measure. C. Reduction of requirement. The Historic Preservation Commission may reduce the required pedestrian amenity amount, pursuant to the procedures and criteria of Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Review, for historic landmark properties upon one (1) of the following circumstances: NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 1. When the Historic Preservation Commission approves the on-site relocation of an historic landmark such that the amount of on-site public space is reduced below that required by this Chapter. N/A 2. When the manner in which an historic landmark building was originally developed reduces the amount of on-site public amenity required by this Chapter. N/A 3. When the redevelopment or expansion of an historic landmark constitutes an exemplary preservation effort deserving of an incentive or reward, as provided in the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. YES MET Review Criteria for 500 W. Main Street The applicant is requesting approval to provide Pedestrian Amenity as required on the newly created west lot and full Reduction of Pedestrian Amenity on the newly created east lot. To do so, the applicant must satisfy all of the criteria of Section 26.412.060, and one of the three reivew criteria for reduction of Pedestrian Amenities in Section 26.412.070.(C). MET YES on West Lot. Reduction on east MET YES on West Lot. Reduction on east YES on West Lot. Reduction on east 26.412.070 Pedestrian Amenity. Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, vital, human-scale downtown commercial district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Pedestrian amenity space can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of-way or private property within commercial areas Summary of Section 26.412.060 - Review Criteria for Pedestrian Amenity P163 IX.a 2 26.412.060. Review Criteria. An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: A. Guidelines and Standards 1. The Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines are met as determined by the appropriate Commission. The Standards and Guidelines include design review criteria that are to be used to determine whether the application is appropriate. 2. All applicable standards in the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines shall be met unless granted a Variation pursuant to Section 26.412.040.D, Variations. 3. Not every guideline will apply to each project, and some balancing of the guidelines must occur on a case-by-case basis. The applicable Commission must: a. determine that a sufficient number of the relevant guidelines are adequately met in order to approve a project proposal; b. weigh the applicable guidelines with the practicality of the measure. B. Pedestrian Amenity The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.070, Pedestrian Amenity. 26.412.070. Pedestrian Amenity. Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, vital, human-scale downtown commercial district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Pedestrian amenity space can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of-way or private property within commercial areas. A. Applicability and Requirement. The requirements of this Section shall apply to the development of all commercial, lodging and mixed-use development within the CC, C-1, MU, NC, S/C/I, L, CL, LP and LO Zone Districts, as well as any Essential Public Facility pursuant to section 26.412.020(A). This area represents the City's primary pedestrian-oriented downtown, as well as important mixed-use, service and lodging neighborhoods. Development in these zone districts consisting of entirely residential uses is exempt from these provisions. Remodel and renovation activities that do not trigger demolition, and which maintain 100% of the existing pedestrian amenity present on the site are exempt from this Section. Changes to pedestrian amenity space as a result of required accessibility or building code P164 IX.a 3 compliance are exempt from compliance with the 25% requirement if demolition is not triggered. Twenty-five percent (25%) of the Gross Lot Area of properties within the applicable area shall be provided as pedestrian amenity regardless of existing onsite pedestrian amenity amount. A project that qualifies as demolition, as defined in Section 26.104.100, must meet the requirements of this Section. Vacated rights of way do not count toward pedestrian amenity requirements. Calculation of pedestrian amenity shall include stairs, walkways or other means of accessing pedestrian amenity space from rights-of-way or internal circulation ways counted as non-unit space per Section 26.575.020. Airlocks providing access to internal pedestrian amenity space, and which meet the criteria provided in Section 26.575.020 may be included in the calculation of pedestrian amenity space. B. Provision of pedestrian amenity. Unless specified, the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission shall determine the appropriate method or combination of methods for providing this required amenity. One (1) or more of the following methods may be used to meet the requirement. 1. On-site pedestrian amenity. On-site pedestrian amenity options are provided within the Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines. a. For properties located on rights-of-way designated as pedestrian malls including Hyman and Cooper Streets between Galena and Mill Streets, and Mill Street between Hyman Street and Durant Street, new pedestrian amenity is limited to second floor or street level. Existing on- site pedestrian amenity may be maintained, with any difference between the existing amount and the 25% required to be provided as cash-in-lieu. 2. Off-site pedestrian amenity. These may be improvements to private property, public property or public rights-of-way. a. An easement providing public access over an existing public amenity space for which no easement exists may be accepted if the easement provides permanent public access and is acceptable to the City Attorney. P165 IX.a 4 b. Off-site improvements shall: i. equal or exceed the value of an otherwise required cash-in-lieu payment as determined by the City Engineer, and ii. be consistent with any public infrastructure or capital improvement plan for that area. 3. Cash-in-lieu provision. Cash-in-lieu for pedestrian amenity requirements may be provided, subject to the following requirements: a. For properties located on rights-of-way designated as pedestrian malls including Hyman and Cooper Streets between Galena and Mill Streets, and Mill Street between Hyman Street and Durant Street, cash-in-lieu of on-site public amenity space is encouraged. Fees collected as cash-in- lieu for public amenity of designated pedestrian malls shall be held in reserve by the City for the maintenance and improvement of the pedestrian malls. b. For properties not located adjacent to the pedestrian malls, where on- site public amenity is not appropriate or may not be feasibly provided due to site or development constraints, cash-in-lieu may be accepted as an alternative. Such conditions shall be determined on a case-by-case basis at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission. c. A cash-in-lieu payment for 50% or more of the required pedestrian amenity for properties not located on a pedestrian mall or less than 100% for properties located on a pedestrian mall requires City Council approval. 4. Alternative method. The Commission may accept any method of providing a pedestrian amenity not otherwise described herein if it finds that the alternative method meets the intent of pedestrian amenity, equals or exceeds the monetary value, or meets the purpose and intent of these regulations to an equivalent extent, of an otherwise required on-site amenity space or cash-in-lieu payment. P166 IX.a 5 5. Pedestrian links. If the City has adopted a trail plan incorporating mid-block pedestrian links, any required public amenity space must, if the City shall so choose, be applied and dedicated for that use. The development of mid- block walkways to access second tier commercial spaces located off the primary street frontage, which are not part of an adopted trail plan, may be counted towards public amenity space requirements for a property and must be designed in accordance with the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Standards and Guidelines. C. Reduction of requirement. The Historic Preservation Commission may reduce the required pedestrian amenity amount, pursuant to the procedures and criteria of Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Review, for historic landmark properties upon one (1) of the following circumstances: 1. When the Historic Preservation Commission approves the on-site relocation of an historic landmark such that the amount of on-site public space is reduced below that required by this Chapter. 2. When the manner in which an historic landmark building was originally developed reduces the amount of on-site public amenity required by this Chapter. 3. When the redevelopment or expansion of an historic landmark constitutes an exemplary preservation effort deserving of an incentive or reward, as provided in the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Staff Findings: 25% of a property in the MU Zone District is required to meet the definition of Pedestrian Amenity space, and meet the design guidelines for such spaces. Currently, 500 W. Main, a 6,000 square foot lot, provides less than half the 25% minimum because much of the open area on the west side of the property is devoted to a parking lot, which does not count as amenity. With the subdivision of the property, each 3,000 square foot lot must meet the 25% Pedestrian Amenity Requirement by providing the equivalent of 750 square feet of Pedestrian Amenity area. The new west lot is not currently proposed to be developed and will serve as a garden, providing outdoor area for the office in the historic structure and meeting the Pedestian Amenity requirement by providing street-level open space which has great solar access, landscaping which provides for active use of the space, P167 IX.a 6 and a low fence to preserve views into the open area for passersby. Historic Preservation Staff has reviewed and approved the garden design, which has also been verified to meet the City’s Water Efficiency standards. The historic structure and alley parking will occupy almost all of the east lot, so no qualified on-site Pedestrian Amenity space can be accommodated. The applicant could propose to mitigate for the east lot Pedestrian Amenity through off-site amenity (such as placing the obligation for the east lot on the west lot for a total of 1,500 square feet of Pedestrian Amenity on the west), cash-in-lieu payment of $75,000 (750 square feet required x $100 code required fee-in-lieu value), alternative method, or reduction of requirement, as described in the code language provided above. The applicant requests reduction of requirement based on Section 26.412.070.C.3, wherein the redevelopment or expansion of an historic landmark constitutes an exemplary preservation effort deserving of an incentive or reward. The applicant is restoring a prominent historic building, including reinforcing the structure, repairing deteriorated exterior materials, and taking significant measures to restore the front porch, windows, exterior stair and chimneys to their historic configuration. The full list of historic preservation benefits requested from Council for this project are Reduction of Pedestrian Amenity, Setback Variations and Waiver of a portion of the parking requirement. Staff recommends Council approve full mitigation of the on-site Pedestrian Amenity on the west lot and full reduction of the Pedestrian Amenity requirement on the east lot, finding the criteria for reduction of amenity in the case of exemplary historic preservation effort to be met. P168 IX.a 1 Exhibit E Setback Variations Staff Findings 26.415.110. Benefits. C. Variances. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow: a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage; C.Variances.Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow:NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY a.) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b.) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings;N/A c.) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage;N/A d.) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties.N/A 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance:NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY a.) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b.) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. MET YES Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.415.110(C) - Variances Review Criteria for 500 W. Main Street The applicant is requesting setback reductions on the south, east and west sides of the historic resource to in order to address historic conditions as well as new conditions created by the proposed subdivision. The application must satisfy the one of the two review criteria for dimensional variations listed in Section 26.415.110(C). YES YES MET P169 IX.a 2 d) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Findings: The historic Mesa Store was built on the south (front) and east (side) property lines. Today’s dimensional standards would require a 10’ front setback and a 5’ side setback. This legally established non-conformity can continue, however with the proposed creation of a new lot line immediately west of the historic structure, variation review becomes necessary. The applicant’s proposal is a 0’ setback on the south and east, as currently exists, and a full waiver of the 5’ required setback from the proposed new lot line subdividing this parcel into two 3,000 square foot lots. No variation is needed at the rear lot line. The historic landmark lot split cannot result in lots smaller than 3,000 square feet, and the new lots are to be uniform rectangles, in keeping with the orientation of the historic townsite platting. The applicant could not move the proposed new lot line further west, away from the historic structure, and still meet the subdivision criteria. An important consideration in the granting of a west sideyard setback reduction is conformance with Building Code. Staff has consulted with the Building Department, who will require an easement on the new west lot to ensure that no future development, should it occur, would violate minimum requirements for separation between detached structures. The following requirement of the Building Department will be a condition of approval and must be depicted on the subdivision plat. “An easement measured 10 feet out from the exterior stair on the historic structure will be required. That easement line will be an assumed property line for fire separation distance for any future development on the west lot.” Staff recommends Council approve the requested reductions of the front and east setback requirements, which are existing historic conditions not proposed to be changed. Staff recommends Council approve the requested reduction of the sideyard on the west of the historic structure finding that the easement on the P170 IX.a 3 west lot will ensure a total of 10’ of separation between buildings. The 5’ setback that should be provided on the east lot is simply being slid westward and combined with the side setback on the west lot. Staff finds this criteria to be met. P171 IX.a 1 Exhibit F Parking Staff Findings D. Parking. Parking reductions are permitted for designated historic properties on sites unable to contain the number of on-site parking spaces required by the underlying zoning. Commercial designated historic properties may receive waivers of payment-in-lieu fees for parking reductions. NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY In addition to the review criteria listed in Chapter 26.515, the parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district. A special review for establishing, varying or waiving transportation, mobility, or off-street parking requirements may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on its conformance with all of the following criteria: NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 1. The transportation, mobility, and off-street parking needs of the residents, customers, guests and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel, the projected traffic generation of the project, any shared parking opportunities, expected schedule of parking demands, the projected impacts on the on-street parking of the neighborhood, the proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area and any special services, such as vans, provided for residents, guests and employees. 2. An on-site mitigation solution meeting the requirements and guidelines is practically difficult or results in an undesirable development scenario. 3. Existing or planned on-site or off-site facilities adequately serve the needs of the development, including the availability of street parking. YES Review Criteria for 500 W. Main Street The applicant must provide 4.26 parking units for the Mesa Store office space according to the Mixed Use Zone District and Transportation and Parking Management provisions. The applicant proposes mitigating three parking units through on-site parking and TIA crediits. As a commercial designated historic property, the applicant may receive wavier of the remaining 1.26 parking units as a Historic Preservation Benefit, Section 26.415.110.(D). The applicant must clarify whether they request the full 1.26 parking units to be waived or whether they will provide one space on the west lot of the lot split. The applicant must satisfy all three reivew criteria for Special Review in Section 26.515.080. MET MET YES Summary of Section 26.415.110(D) - Parking Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.515.080 - Special Review Whenever the transportation, mobility, and parking impacts of a proposed development are subject to special review, an application shall be processed as a special review in accordance with the common development review procedures set forth in Chapter 26.304 and be evaluated according to the following standards. Review is by the Planning and Zoning Commission. If the project requires review by the Historic Preservation Commission and the Community Development Director has authorized consolidation pursuant to Subsection 26.304.060.B, the Historic Preservation Commission shall approve, approve with conditions or disapprove the special review application. YES YES Summary of Section 26.430.040 - Review Standards for Special Review 26.430.040 Special Review. No development subject to special review shall be permitted unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all standards and requirements set forth below. D. Off-street parking requirements. Whenever a special review is conducted to determine a change in the off-street parking requirements, it shall be considered in accordance with the standards set forth at Chapter 26.515. P172 IX.a 2 26.415.110. Benefits. D. Parking. Parking reductions are permitted for designated historic properties on sites unable to contain the number of on-site parking spaces required by the underlying zoning. Commercial designated historic properties may receive waivers of payment-in-lieu fees for parking reductions. In addition to the review criteria listed in Chapter 26.515, the parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district. Staff Findings: The Mesa Store, currently being remodeled for use as office space, contains 4,260 square feet of net leasable space, requiring 4.26 parking units to be provided. The applicant initially intended to address the entire requirement with on-site parking, however with the proposed subdivision, no more than 2 spaces can be accommodated on the 3,000 square foot lot which will contain the Mesa Store. The applicant has provided a Transportation Impact Analysis in their application. Because the Mesa Store net leasable area is not increasing beyond what has existing historically, no trip mitigation is actually necessary, but at least two TDM (Transportation Demand Management) measures must be fulfilled. The applicant proposes to achieve seven measures focused on providing options for employees to commute to work through other means than single occupancy vehicle. The applicant is also voluntarily pursuing five actions which will reduce trip generation through MMLOS (Multi-modal Level of Service). These actions involve physical changes to the property that will improve sidewalks and crosswalks and will provide new bicycle racks. As a result of these efforts, the applicant qualifies to provide mitigation for one of their parking units as a TIA credit. Only one parking unit credit is allowed. The remaining 1.26 parking units that must be addressed by some means could be accomplished in one of two ways. The applicant could provide 2 parking spaces on the new west lot and dedicate them to the office use by an easement. An easement area this large (approximately 300 square feet) would reduce allowable floor area on the west lot and affect the number of TDRs that may be created. It appears that one parking space provided by easement would not reduce the floor area to the extent that a TDR would be lost, but two spaces P173 IX.a 3 would. Staff recommends the applicant consider providing one space on the west lot. The remaining 0.26 parking units could be accomplished through a cash-in-lieu payment of $7,800 (0.26 x $30,000, the standard mitigation for parking). Council could also waive the cash-in-lieu fee as a landmark benefit, in recognition of the applicant’s restoration of the Mesa Store and their effort to reduce or eliminate development that will occur on the west side of the property. Staff finds this criteria to be met through provision of two parking spaces on the east lot, one TIA credit, one parking space on the west lot- dedicated to the east lot via easement, and a Council approved waiver of the $7,800 cash-in-lieu fee completing the balance of the mitigation requirement. P174 IX.a City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 Agreement to Pay Application Fees An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and Property Phone No.: Owner (“I”): Email: Address of Billing Property: Address: (Subject of (send bills here) application) I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No., Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $___________flat fee for ____________________ $____________ flat fee for ____________________________________ $___________ flat fee for ___________________ $_____________ flat fee for____________________________________ For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no-payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $________________ deposit for_____________ hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. $________________ deposit for _____________ hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. City of Aspen: Property Owner: ________________________________ _______________________________________________ Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director Name: _______________________________________________ Title: ____________________________________________________ City Use: Fees Due: $____Received $_______ P175 IX.a City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Application PROJECT: Name: Location: (Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED)___________________________________________________________ Applicant: Name: Address: Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:_______________________________________________ REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:________________________________________________ TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Historic Designation Certificate of No Negative Effect Certificate of Appropriateness -Minor Historic Development -Major Historic Development -Conceptual Historic Development -Final Historic Development -Substantial Amendment Relocation (temporary, on or off-site) Demolition (total demolition) Historic Landmark Lot Split EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ P176 IX.a City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 General Information Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This information will help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that may be involved. YES NO   Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions, new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration?   Does the work you are planning include interior work, including remodeling, rehabilitation, or restoration?   Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time?   In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places Property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits?   If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in Conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential properties are not.)   If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Historical Preservation? Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use:  Rehabilitation Loan Fund  Conservation Easement Program  Dimensional Variances  Increased Density  Historic Landmark Lot Split  Waiver of Park Dedication Fees  Conditional Uses  Tax Credits  Exemption from Growth Management Quota System P177 IX.a City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form (Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.) Project: Applicant: Project Location: Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: (For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing:__________Proposed:_________________ Number of residential units: Existing:__________Proposed:_________________ Proposed % of demolition: __________ DIMENSIONS: (write N/A where no requirement exists in the zone district) Floor Area: Height Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ Principal Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ Accessory Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ On-Site parking: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ % Site coverage: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ % Open Space: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Front Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Rear Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Combined Front/Rear: Indicate N, S, E, W Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Combined Sides: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Distance between buildings: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued: _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): ______________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ P178 IX.a AHPC Historic Lot Split 500 W Main St. 1 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Amy Simon, 429.2758 DATE: January 9, 2018 PROJECT: 500 West Main Street APPLICANT: R+B TYPE OF APPLICATION: Historic Landmark Lot Split DESCRIPTION: The Applicant is interested in pursuing a historic landmark lot split for the property at 500 W. Main. The site is a designated landmark located within the Main Street Historic District. It is zoned Mixed Use (MU) and is 6,000 square feet in area. The historic resource, a large false-front structure known as Mesa Store, occupies the east 3,000 square feet of the lot, Lot S, while the west 3,000 square feet of the lot, Lot R, is undeveloped except for parking. A Historic Landmark Lot Split requires that the newly created lots each be at least 3,000 square feet in size and the lot configurations are expected to mimic the original townsite platting. This pre-application assumes that no specific development of the newly created west lot will be proposed at this time. A separate pre-application will be prepared when requested. Options for development of the west lot include commercial use, a free market single family home, affordable housing, or commercial use and affordable housing. Affordable housing mitigation will be required and no historic preservation benefits or variations will be available to the west lot. The existing development which is to remain on the new east lot will be required to meet all dimensional requirements, including maximum floor area, setbacks, pedestrian amenity, parking, and Trash and Recycling Storage. Variation requests are possible for some of these topics. Regarding floor area, the previous land use application for this property indicated that existing floor area of the Mesa Store is 3,451 square feet. The maximum floor area by right on the new east lot for commercial use would be 1:1 or 3,000 square feet. The applicant could take actions on the interior of the building to try to reduce floor area to 3,000 square feet or may ask HPC for an increase to 1.25:1 via Special Review, Section 26.430.040.A, which allows an increase if it is found that the impacts of the additional space are appropriate. The lot split would result in a request for variations on the east, front and west yards because of the siting of the historic building. These variations are among the benefits that HPC can approve, however potential building code implications to the structure such as new fire protection requirements along the west side will have to be fully understood. In terms of requirements for Pedestrian Amenity, 25% of the new east lot must meet the design characteristics of Pedestrian Amenity space, as described in the Commercial Design Guidelines. It appears that the applicant will not be able to meet this requirement to a meaningful degree as the historic building, parking and trash storage will occupy much of the 3,000 square foot lot. The applicant would need to receive approval for either cash-in-lieu payment, which would require Council authorization, or an P179 IX.a 2 improvement on other private property, public property or right-of-way which is found to be beneficial and of an equal value to on-site amenity. Parking must be provided for the east lot in the form of approximately 4.49 parking units, based on an existing net leasable area of 4,493 square feet and a required mitigation rate of 1 parking unit per 1,000 square feet of net leasable area. Section 26.515 of the land use code allows one parking unit to be provided through a TIA credit, to be demonstrated through the completion of the TIA Trip Generation Tool. The lot split is not expected to generate new trips because no new net leasable space is created, however the lot split is considered to be development and therefore the TIA Tool must be completed, at least two TDM measures identified in the tool must be accomplished, and a TIA credit must be generated if it is to be applied towards the 4.49 parking unit requirement. The remaining 3.49 parking unit requirement must be addressed through the provision of at least 2.09 on site parking spaces (60% of the parking units), up to 1.4 parking units provided by a cash-in-lieu payment at $30,000 per unit (40% of the parking units), or variations to on-site parking and/or cash-in-lieu which may be considered by HPC. It is expected that the Building Department will require one van accessible parking space to be constructed behind the historic building and that there will not be enough room for any other code compliant parking spaces on the 30 foot alley frontage given the need to also address Trash and Recycling in that area. The applicant may be able to meet parking requirements by constructing parking on the new west lot and committing that it will be shared by the abutting properties as described at Section 26.515.050.6. The applicant could also dedicate parking on the west lot to the east lot via an easement, bearing in mind that future development of the west lot will likely generate its own on-site parking requirements. Adding to the demands along the alley, a transformer will likely be required on one of the two lots. Regarding Trash and Recycling, the applicant will be required to meet the requirements of Municipal Code Section 12.10, which would call for a 20’ long and 10’ deep area along the alley of the east lot devoted to the purpose. The applicant will work with Environmental Heath on this topic and will, at the least, need to request that the shorter length of the trash area be set along the alley so that there is room to accommodate an accessible parking space. Staff suggests that the applicant consider the possibility of addressing some of the variations described above on the west lot and limiting development of that lot by severing and selling TDRs from it. As already mentioned, parking could be established on the west lot. It could also serve as off-site Pedestrian Amenity and could provide the R+B office with outdoor space. If this scenario is pursued, the floor area available for TDRs would be based on the size of a single family home allowed on the site, which is currently 1,920 square feet. Up to seven 250 square foot TDRs could be sold, essentially sterilizing the lot, which would likely appeal to HPC. The applicant could elect to leave some square footage available for future construction on the west lot. Any use allowed by zoning would still be a possibility but the floor area would be approximately 1,920 square feet minus however many TDRs are removed. The process for this request will be a one-step review by HPC, at which time they will determine all variations and make a recommendation to City Council regarding the Subdivision. HPC will apply the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and Commercial Design Guidelines as relevant to the scope of the application. Council will make the final decision on Subdivision after a First and Second Reading of the Ordinance. Passage of the Ordinance will make the subdivision permanent unless the applicant does not file a plat within the required timeframe or later pursues a merger to combine the lots together again. Review of the plat will be subject to the standards provided in Chapter 26.490, Approval Documents. P180 IX.a 3 Following are links to the Municipal Code, Land Use Code, Land Use Application form and Design Guidelines. Land Use Code: https://www.cityofaspen.com/191/Municipal-Code Land Use Application: https://www.cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/Home/View/305 Commercial Design Guidelines: https://www.cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/Home/View/412 Historic Preservation Design Guidelines: https://www.cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/Home/View/310 Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.412.070 Pedestrian Amenity 26.415.110 Historic Preservation Benefits 26.430.040.A Special Review for floor area 26.480.060.B Minor Subdivision- Historic Landmark Lot Split 26.490 Approval documents 26.515 Transportation and Parking Management 26.535 Transferable Development Rights 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.710.180 Mixed Use Zone District and Municipal Code Section 12.10 Space Allotment for Trash and Recycling Storage Review by: Staff for complete application and recommendations HPC and City Council for determinations Public Hearing: Yes - publication, mailing and posting Referral Fees: $325 one hour deposit – Engineering $975 flat fee- Environmental Health Planning Fees: $3,250 (for a 10 hour deposit, billed at $325 per hour for over 10 hours) Total Deposit: $4,550 Following approval, the City will assess a separate deposit of $975 towards three hours of review of the final Subdivision Agreement and Plat. P181 IX.a 4 To apply, submit one complete copy of the following information:  Completed Land Use Application and signed fee agreement.  Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).  Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application.  Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.  HOA Compliance form (Attached)  A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application and relevant land use approvals associated with the property.  Written responses to all review criteria.  A Mobility Plan, meeting the requirements of Chapter 26.515 of the Aspen Municipal Code. Documentation showing the proposal meets all Transportation Mitigation Requirements as outlined in the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines and Mitigation Tool, available online at: https://www.cityofaspen.com/documentcenter/view/1781 A copy of the tool showing trips generated and the chosen mitigation measures should be included with the application.  An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.  Existing floor area and net leasable calculations and identification of any variation requests created by the proposal.  Improvement survey of existing conditions.  Proposed Subdivision Plat. Once the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted:  A printed copy of the full application.  An emailed copy of the full application.  12 sets of all graphics, printed at 11”x17.”  Total deposit for review of the application. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. P182 IX.a P183 IX.a P184 IX.a PROFORMA TITLE REPORTSCHEDULE A1. EffectiveDate: May 1,2018 at 8:00AM2. Policy or Policies to be issued:Case No. PCT24641PRO3Proposed lnsured:PROFORMA3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at theeffective date hereof vested in:5OO WEST MAIN STREET, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and isdescribed as follows:LOTS R AND S,BLOCK 30,CITYAND TOWNSITE OF ASPENPITKIN COUNTY TITLE INC.601 E. HOPKINg ASPEN, CO.8161197 0-925:17 66 Phone / 97 ù925 4527 F ax877-217-3158Toll FreeAGENTCountersigned:P185IX.a SCHEDULEB-SECTIONl.REQUIREMENTSTHIS REPORT IS FURNISHED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, IT IS NOT A CONTRACT TO ISSUE TITLEINSURANCE AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS SUCH. IN THE EVENT A PROPOSED INSURED IS NAMED THECOMPANY HEREBY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND/OR EXCEPTIONS ASDEEMED NECESSARY. THE RECIPIENT OF THIS INFORMATIONAL REPORT HEREBY AGREES THAT THECOMPANY HAS ISSUED THIS REPORT BY THEIR REQUEST AND ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE ALL INFORMATIONCONTAINED HEREIN IS ACCURATE AND CORRECT, THE COMPANY SHALL NOT BE CHARGED WITH ANYFINANCIAL LIABILITY SHOULD THAT PROVE TO BE INCORRECT AND THE COMPANY IS NOT OBLIGATED TOISSUE ANY POLICIES OF TITLE INSURANCEP186IX.a SCHEDULE B SECTION 2EXCEPTIONSThe policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of tothe satisfaction of the Company:1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records.2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records.3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, any facts which a correctsurvey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records.4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by lawand not shown by the public records.5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the publicrecords or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insuredacquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment.6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewerservice or for any other special taxing district.7. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deed from the Cig of Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Paqe223 providing as follows: "That no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar orcopper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws".B. Terms, conditions and obligations of Ordinance No. 32 and Ordinance No. 60, designating Lots R and S,Block 30, City and Townsite of Aspen as Historic District, recorded in Book 314 at Paqe 338 and in Book321 at Paqe 51.9. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Encroachment Agreement recorded in Book553 at Paqe 109.10. Easements, rights of way and all matters as disclosed on Survey of subject property recorded April 6,1998 in Plat Book 44 at Paqe 71.11. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the The AspenHistoric Preservation Commission recorded September 13, 1999 as Reception No. 435423 as ResolutionNo. 38 Series 1999.12. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Aspen HistoricPreservation Commission recorded October 19,2016 as Reception No. 633130 as Resolution No.32-2016.13. Easements, rights of way and all matters as disclosed on lmprovement Survey Plat of subject propertyrecorded November 10,2016 in Plat Book 116 at Paqe 43.14. Deed of Trust from : 500 W. MAIN STREET, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANYTo the Public Trustee of the County of PITKINFor the use of : ANB BANKOriginalAmount :$3,160,000.00Dated : June 30,2016Recorded : June 30,2016Reception No. : 63037815. Assignment of Leases and Rents given in connection with the above Deed of Trust recorded June 30,2016 as Reception No. 630379.16. Any existing leases and tenancies.17. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of theAspen HistoricPreservation Commission recorded August 21,2017 as Reception No. 640807 as Resolution No. 12-201718. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Aspen HistoricPreservation Commission recorded April 16, 2018 as Reception No. 646598.P187IX.a WIRING¡NSTRUCTIONS FORPITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC.601 E. HOPKINS, THIRD FLOORASPEN, CO 8161 197 0 -925-17 66 I 97 0 -925-6527 F þü,TOLL FREE 877-217-3158A¡ I TRANSACTIOGARDING THE CLOSING OF THIS F¡LENS REARE AS FOLLOWS:ALPINE BANK-ASPEN600 E. HOPKINS AVE.ASPEN, CO.81611ABA ROUTING NO. IO21O34O7FOR CREDIT TO:PITKIN COUNTY T¡TLE, INC., ESCROW ACCOUNTACCOUNT NO. 2021 012 333REFERENCE : PGT24641 PRO/PROFORMAP188IX.a il1ilililililüïilililrililillllfl ilililililililltilililililililr ff ililRECEPTIONf: 646598, R: 318.00, D: $0.O0DOC GODE: RESOLUTION35^lJ Í: $3j g3îii f i?,ïi'fj":ü, " oA R.ESOLUTTON OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATTON COMMTSSTON (HPC)GRANTING MINOR DEVELOPMENT AND VARIATIONS FOR THE PROPERTYLOCATED AT 5OO \ilEST MAIN STiIEET, LOTS R & S, BLOCK 30, CITY A¡IDTO1VNSITE OF ASPf,N, COLORADORESOLUTION #3, SERIES OF 2OI8PARCEL lD: 27 35-124-43-007\ryHEREAS, the applicant, 500 W. Main Street LLC., represented by Rowland + Broughton, hasrequested HPC approval for Minor Development and Variations for the prope4y located at 500West Main Street, Lots R & S, Block 30, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; andWHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structureshall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving adesignated historic property or district until plans or suflïcient information have been subminedto the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the proceduresestablished for their review;" andWHEREAS, for Minor Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staffanalysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformancewith the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.C.3.band c of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve,disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional informationnecessary to make a decision to approve or deny; andWHEREAS, rhe HPC may approve setback variations according to Section 26.415.1l0.C.l.a,Variances; and\üHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on March 28,2018. HPC considered the application, thestaff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standardsand granted approval with conditions by a vote of ó to 0.NOlry, THEREFORE, BE tT RESOLVED:That HPC hereby approves Minor Development and Variation review for 500 \ilest Main Str€et w¡ththe following conditions:l. HPC hereby grants the following dimensional variances:a. A 0'-0" front yard setback to allow for the rebuilding of the overhanging roof on thewest elevalion.2. The exact location of window I I will be based on review of framing once exposed.3. cut sheets for new windows and doors rnust be reviewed and approved by staff.HPC Resolution #3, Series of 2018Page I of2P189IX.a RECEPTION# 646598, O4t'1612018 at02:f.2:28 PM, Pgs 2 of 2, Janice K. Vos Gaudill, P¡tk¡n County, CO4. Provide plans confirming the location of the meterVequipment which are to be detached fromthe building to the extent possible, will be reviewed and approved by staff.5. Review historic photos and provide detail reconstructing all three chimneys to a historicallyaccurate appeafimce-6. Submit site work for Certifìcate of No Negative Effect.7. The previous approvals are vacated hereby as the Municipal Code does not allow multipleland use approvals to be valid at one time.APPROVED By THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 28ù day of March, 2018.Approved as toApproved as to ContentCityChairATTEST:Manning, CityHPC Resolution #3, Series of 2018Page2of 2P190IX.a Page 1 of 1 09 May 2018 Amy Simon City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Street, 3rd Floor Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Mesa Store – 500 W. Main Street – Historic Landmark Lot Split Dear Amy, As the property owner of 500 W. Main Street we submit this Land Use Application for a Historic Landmark Lot Split for the Mesa Store, located within the Main Street Historic District. Rowland+Broughton Architecture’s employees are authorized to act on behalf of 500 West Main Street, LLC. Thank you. Sincerely, John Rowland, AIA Rowland+Broughton Architecture / Urban Design / Interior Design 500 West Main Street, LLC 234 E. Hopkins Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 970-544-9006 P191 IX.a COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION COMPLIANCE FORM CITY OF ASPEN 130 S. GALENA ST | ASPEN, CO 81611 All applications for a building permit within the City of Aspen are required to include a certification of compliance with applicable covenants and homeowner association policies. The certification must be signed by the property owner or attorney representing the property owner. The following certification shall accompany the application for a permit. ___________________________________ _________ ___________________________ I, the property owner, certify as follows: (pick one) This property is not subject to a homeowners association or other form of private covenant. This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements proposed in this building permit do not require approval by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements proposed in this building permit have been approved by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. I understand the City of Aspen does not interpret, enforce, or manage the applicability, meaning, or effect of private covenants or homeowner association rules or bylaws. I understand that this document is a public document. Owner Signature ____________________________ Date _________________ Owner Printed Name ________________________ OR Owner’s Attorney Signature ___________________________ Date _________________ Owner’s Attorney Printed Name _______________________ ADDRESS UNIT #PARCEL ID # ADDRESS: ____________________________PERMIT NUMBER: _______________________________ January 2018 P192 IX.a P193IX.a P194IX.a Page 1 of 4 MEMORANDUM Project: Mesa Store, 500 W. Main Street – Historic Lot Split Subject: Description Date: 17 May 2018, updated 20 June 2018 500 W. Main Street LLC is undergoing a restoration and remodel of the historic Mesa building located at 500 W. Main Street, Aspen, Colorado. We are requesting a Historic Landmark Lot Split with the intention to request TDRs. Dimensional Requirements Summary: • Floor Area: o Existing FA: 3,451 SF o Allowed FA for 3,000 SF Lot: 3,000 SF (1:1) o Request: Increase to 1.25:1 via Special Review (3,750 SF allowable) o Proposed: • Setback Variations: o East, Front and West setbacks would all be infringed upon by the historic resource. o Only the West setback is new. • Pedestrian Amenity: o The East lot where the historic Mesa building sits will not be able to meet the 25% requirement for Pedestrian Amenity. o 387 SF will be remaining, 750 SF required. • Parking: o 4.49 spots required for the East lot. o TIA Credit will be gained through: o 60% of 3.49 parking units must be provided on site: 2.09 ▪ 2 spots (1 being van accessible provided) ▪ 1.4 spots must be paid for cash-in-lieu = $42,000 • Trash and Recycling: o The trash and recycling has been reviewed by Environmental Health as a part of the Building Permit #0012.2018.ACBK We plan on selling TDRs and utilizing the lot as off-site Pedestrian Amenity for the Mesa building. Responses to Review Criteria: • 26.412.070 Pedestrian Amenity. o With the proposed Historic Landmark Lot Split, (2) 3,000 SF lots would be created. 25% of the lot should be provided for Pedestrian Amenity. 3,000 SF x 25% = 750 SF o The restoration efforts being made on the historic resource is above and beyond what would be required to make the project feasible. Window restoration, entry restoration and substantial building structural upgrades will be completed. o 26.412.070.C – Reduction of requirement 3 – When the redevelopment or expansion of an historic landmark constitutes an exemplary preservation effort deserving of an P195 IX.a Page 2 of 4 incentive or reward, as provided in the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. ▪ Rehabilitation occurring on the Mesa building: • Windows • Porches • Architectural Details o The new 3,000 SF west lot will also be used as pedestrian amenity space for historic Mesa building with at grade landscaping and fences. These improvements have been presented with the current building permit for the restoration and renovation of the Mesa building. • 26.415.110 Benefits. o 26.415.110.A Historic landmark lot split. o The Historic Landmark Lot Split will follow the MU zone district lot size requirements which allows 3,000 SF lots. • 26.430.040.A Dimensional requirements. o The proposed development of a Historic Landmark Lot Split is subject to special review. o 1. The mass, height, density, configuration, amount of open space, landscaping and setbacks of the proposed development are designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of surrounding land uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. ▪ The historic Mesa Store building will be maintained and restored. The mass, height, density, configuration will all be maintained or reduced. ▪ The building floor area is requested to be increased to 1.25:1 or 3,750 SF in order to allow the existing density of the historic resource to work dimensionally on a 3,000 SF site. ▪ The existing exterior stair on the east façade of the historic resource will remain and will be within the new 5’-0” setback. It is an existing condition to remain. • 26.480.060.B o This request complies with the requirements of Section 26.480.040: ▪ The site has and will continue to have a guaranteed access to a public way. ▪ The subdivision lot lines follow the Original Aspen Townsite platting lines. ▪ The new lots conform to the requirements of the zone district including special review for FA and setback variances that are a result of existing historic conditions. ▪ The existing structure, the Mesa Store building will not be increased in non- conformity. o The Mesa Store Building is listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. o Only two lots are being created. o This building is not within a residential zone district. o The Historic Lot Split Plat will be submitted and recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder once approved. • 26.515 o Included in this application is the TIA. o Parking requirements are Parking: ▪ 4.49 spots required for the East lot. ▪ TIA Credit will be gained through: • 60% of 3.49 parking units must be provided on site: 2.09 P196 IX.a Page 3 of 4 • 2 spots (1 being van accessible provided) • 1.4 spots must be paid for cash-in-lieu = $42,000 • 26.535 o This land use application requests the creation of Historic transferable development right certificates. It is a designated historic landmark property. o Owner confirmation of the issuance of TDR certificates will be submitted as notarized affidavits if pursued. • 26.535.010 Purpose o The historic Mesa Store building stands as a lone commercial piece of architecture on the west end of Main Street. The purpose of preserving this iconic piece of architecture involves the establishment of Transferable Development Rights (TDR) in order to maintain and restore the existing building while decreasing density around the building. • 26.535.030 Applicability and prohibitions o 500 W. Main Street is a Sending Site and eligible for issuance of a Historic TDR Certificate. o 500 W. Main Street, the Mesa Store building is a designated Historic Landmark in the City of Aspen. o The allowable development extinguishment of a Historic TDR Certificate on this lot is as follows: ▪ 3,000 SF Lot ▪ FAR follows R-6 zone district: • • 3,000 SF / 100 = 300 x 80 = 2,400 SF (20%) = 1,920 SF Allowable • 1,920 SF / 250 SF (per TDR) = 7.68 / 7 TDRs Requested • 26.535.050 Procedure for establishing a historic transferable development right certificate. o Preapplication conference – Completed o Owner Confirmation – Owner confirms that at issuance a notarized affidavit from the sending site property owner will be submitted acknowledging: ▪ A deed restriction will permanently encumber the sending site and restrict that property's development rights to below that allowed by right by zoning according to the number of historic TDR certificates established from that sending site. ▪ For each certificate of development right issued by the City for the particular sending site, that property shall be allowed two hundred and fifty (250) square feet less of floor area, as permitted according to the property's zoning, as amended. P197 IX.a Page 4 of 4 ▪ The sending site property owner shall have no authority over the manner in which the certificate of development right is used by subsequent owners of the historic TDR certificate. o Application for issuance of historic TDR certificate. ▪ Application included: ▪ 1. The general application information required in Common development review procedures, Chapter 26.304. ▪ 2. A notarized affidavit from the sending site property owner signifying acknowledgment of the following: a) A deed restriction will permanently encumber the sending site and restrict that property's development rights to below that allowed by right by zoning according to the number of historic TDR certificates established from that sending site. b) For each certificate of development right issued by the City for the particular sending site, that property shall be allowed two hundred and fifty (250) square feet less of floor area, as permitted according to the property's zoning, as amended. c) The sending site property owner shall have no authority over the manner in which the certificate of development right is used by subsequent owners of the historic TDR certificate. ▪ 3. A site improvement survey of the sending site depicting: a) Existing natural and man-made site features. b) All legal easements and restrictions. ▪ 4. Dimensioned, scaled drawings of the existing development on the sending site and a floor area analysis of all structures thereon. ▪ 5. A proposed deed restriction for the sending site. ▪ 6. Written response to each of the review criteria. P198 IX.a = input = calculation DATE: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION: NAME, COMPANY, ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL Minor Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total Commercial (sf)0.0 sf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Free-Market Housing (Units)0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Affordable Housing (Units)0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lodging (Units)0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Essential Public Facility (sf)0.0 sf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Land Use Trip Rate %Entering %Exiting Trip Rate %Entering %Exiting Commercial 2.27 0.69 0.31 4.14 0.4 0.6 Free-Market Housing 0.67 0.29 0.71 0.82 0.56 0.44 Affordable Housing 0.75 0.48 0.52 0.89 0.55 0.45 Lodging 0.25 0.57 0.43 0.31 0.52 0.48 Essential Public Facility 0.86 0.62 0.38 1.66 0.4 0.6 DANA ELLIS, ROWLAND+BROUGHTON, 234 E HOPKINS AVE, ASPEN CO 81611, (970) 429 8707, DANA@ROWLANDBROUGHTON.COM Trip Generation MAY 25, 218 AM Peak Average PM Peak Average Trips Generated AM Peak-Hour PM Peak-Hour TOTAL NEW TRIPS ASSUMPTIONS ASPEN TRIP GENERATION Is this a major or minor project? 500 W MAIN STREET ASPEN CO 81611 MESA Net New Units/Square Feet of the Proposed ProjectProposed Land Use *For mixed-use (at least two of the established land uses) sites, a 4% reduction for AM Peak-Hour and a 14% reduction for PM Peak-Hour is applied to the trip generation. Instructions: IMPORTANT: Turn on Macros: In order for code to run correctly the security settings need to be altered. Click "File" and then click "Excel Options." In the "Trust Center"category, click "Trust Center Settings", and then click the "Macro Settings" category. Beneath "Macro Settings" select "Enable all Macros." Sheet 1. Trip Generation: Enter the project's square footage and/or unit counts under Proposed Land Use. The numbers should reflect the net change in land use between existing and proposed conditions. If a landuse is to be reduced put a negative number of units or square feet. Sheet 2. MMLOS: Answer Yes, No, or Not Applicable under each of the Pedestrian, Bike and Transit sections. Points are only awarded for proposed (not existing) and confirmed aspects of the project. Sheet 3. TDM: Choose the mitigation measures that are appropriate for your project. Sheet 4. Summary and Narrative: Review the summary of the project's mitigated trips and provide a narrative which explains the measures selected for the project. Click on "Generate Narrative" and individually explain each measure that was chosen and how it enhances the site or mitigates vehicle traffic. Ensure each selected measure make sense Minor Development - Inside the Roundabout Major Development - Outside the Roundabout Helpful Hints: 1. Refer to the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines for information on the use of this tool. 2. Refer to TIA Frequently Asked Questions for a quick overview. 2. Hover over red corner tags for additional information on individual measures. 3. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should be new and/or an improvement of existing conditions. A project will not receive credit for measures already in place. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should also make sense in the context of project location and future use. Transportation Impact Analysis TIA Frequently Asked Questions P199 IX.a = input = calculation 30 Category Sub.Measure Number Question Answer Points 1 Does the project propose a detached sidewalk where an attached sidewalk currently exists? Does the proposed sidewalk and buffer meet standard minimum widths? Yes 5 2 Is the proposed effective sidewalk width greater than the standard minimum width?No 0 3 Does the project propose a landscape buffer greater than the standard minimum width?No 0 5 4 Does the project propose a detached sidewalk on an adjacent block? Does the proposed sidewalk and buffer meet standard minimum widths? No 0 5 Is the proposed effective sidewalk width on an adjacent block greater than the standard minimum width?No 0 6 Is the proposed landscape buffer on an adjacent block greater than the standard minimum width?No 0 0 7 Are slopes between back of curb and sidewalk equal to or less than 5%?Yes 0 8 Are curbs equal to (or less than) 6 inches? No -5 9 Is new large-scale landscaping proposed that improves the pedestrian experience? Properties within the Core do not have ample area to provide the level of landscaping required to receive credit in this category. Yes 5 10 Does the project propose an improved crosswalk? This measure must get City approval before receiving credit. Yes 5 5 11 Are existing driveways removed from the street? No 0 12 Is pedestrian and/or vehicle visibility unchanged by new structure or column?Yes 0 13 Is the grade (where pedestrians cross) on cross-slope of driveway 2% or less?Yes 0 14 Does the project propose enhanced pedestrian access points from the ROW? This includes improvements to ADA ramps or creating new access points which prevent pedestrians from crossing a street. Yes 5 15 Does the project propose enhanced pedestrian or bicyclist interaction with vehicles at driveway areas?Yes 5 10 16 Is the project's pedestrian directness factor less than 1.5? Yes 0 17 Does the project propose new improvements which reduce the pedestrian directness factor to less than 1.2? A site which has an existing pedestrian directness factor less than 1.2 cannot receive credit in this category. No 0 18 Is the project proposing an off site improvement that results in a pedestrian directness factor below 1.2?* No 0 19 Are traffic calming features proposed that are part of an approved plan (speed humps, rapid flash)?*No 0 0 20 Are additional minor improvements proposed which benefit the pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff? No 0 21 Are additional major improvements proposed which benefit the pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff? No 0 0 20Pedestrian Total* MMLOS Input Page Subtotal SubtotalSidewalk Condition on Adjacent BlocksSidewalk Condition on Project FrontageSubtotal Instructions: Answer Yes, No, or Not Applicable to each measure under the Pedestrian, Bike and Transit sections. Subtotal Subtotal PedestriansSubtotalAdditional Proposed ImprovementsTOTAL NUMBER OF TRIPS MITIGATED:Pedestrian RoutesTraffic Calming and Pedestrian NetworkDriveways, Parking, and Access ConsiderationsP200 IX.a Category Sub.Measure Number Question Answer Points 22 Is a new bicycle path being implemented with City approved design? No 0 23 Do new bike paths allow access without crossing a street or driveway?No 0 24 Is there proposed landscaping, striping, or signage improvements to an existing bicycle path?No 0 25 Does the project propose additional minor bicycle improvements which have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff?No 0 26 Does the project propose additional major bicycle improvements which have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff?No 0 0 Bicycle Parking27 Is the project providing bicycle parking? Yes 5 5 5 Category Sub.Measure Number Question Answer Points 28 Is seating/bench proposed?No 0 29 Is a trash receptacle proposed?No 0 30 Is transit system information (signage) proposed? No 0 31 Is shelter/shade proposed?No 0 32 Is enhanced pedestrian-scale lighting proposed? No 0 33 Is real-time transit information proposed? No 0 34 Is bicycle parking/storage proposed specifically for bus stop use? No 0 35 Are ADA improvements proposed?Yes 5 5 36 Is a bus pull-out proposed at an existing stop? No 0 37 Is relocation of a bus stop to improve transit accessibility or roadway operations proposed?No 0 38 Is a new bus stop proposed (with minimum of two basic amenities)? No 0 0 5 Bicycles Total* Transit Total*BicyclesModifications to Existing Bicycle PathsTransitBasic AmenitiesSubtotal Subtotal Enhanced AmenitiesSubtotal Subtotal P201 IX.a Category Measure Number Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT Reductions Will an onsite ammenities strategy be implemented? NA Which onsite ammenities will be implemented? Will a shared shuttle service strategy be implemented? NA What is the degree of implementation? What is the company size?Small What percentage of customers are eligible? 3 Nonmotorized Zones Will a nonmotorized zones strategy be implemented? NA 0.00% 0.00% Category Measure Number Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT Reductions Will a network expansion stragtegy be implemented? No What is the percentage increase of transit network coverage? What is the existing transit mode share as a % of total daily trips? Will a service frequency/speed strategy be implemented? No What is the percentage reduction in headways (increase in frequency)? What is the existing transit mode share as a % of total daily trips? What is the level of implementation? Will a transit access improvement strategy be implemented? No What is the extent of access improvements? 7 Intercept Lot Will an intercept lot strategy be implemented?No 0.00% 0.00% Category Measure Number Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT Reductions Will there be participation in TOP?No What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a transit fare subsidy strategy implemented?No What percentage of employees are eligible? What is the amount of transit subsidy per passenger (daily equivalent)? Is an employee parking cash-out strategy being implemented? No What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a workplace parking pricing strategy implemented? No What is the daily parking charge? What percentage of employees are subject to priced parking? Is a compressed work weeks strategy implemented? Yes What percentage of employees are participating? 25% What is the workweek schedule?4-day/40-hour Is an employer sponsered shuttle program implemented? No What is the employer size? What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a carpool matching strategy implemented?Yes What percentage of employees are eligble?100% Is carshare participation being implemented?Yes How many employee memberships have been purchased? <100 What percentage of employees are eligble?100% Is participation in the bikeshare program WE-cycle being implemented? Yes How many memberships have been purchased?<100 What percentage of employees/guests are eligble? 100% Is an end of trip facilities strategy being implemented? Yes What is the degree of implementation? Low What is the employer size? Small Is a self-funded emergency ride home strategy being implemented? No What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a carpool/vanpool priority parking strategy being implemented? Yes What is the employer size?Small What number of parking spots are available for the program? 1 Is a private employer shuttle strategy being implemented? No What is the employer size? What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a trip reduction marketing/incentive program implemented? Yes What percentage of employees/guests are eligible? 100% 4.03% 0.00% 4.03% 1. 22% work trips represents a mixed-used site (SF Bay Area Travel Survey). See Assumptions Tab for more detail. Maximum Reduction Allowed in CategoryTransit System Improvements Strategies1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 4.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Maximum Reduction Allowed in Category Maximum Reduction Allowed in Category 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.75% 0.00% 7.50% 2.00% Bikeshare Program 0.20% TDM Input Page 1.50% 1.00% 0.00%Commute Trip Reduction Programs StrategiesOnsite Servicing Shared Shuttle Service Neighborhood/Site Enhancements Strategies0.00% 0.00% Network Expansion Service Frequency/Speed Transit Access Improvement Participation in TOP Transit Fare Subsidy Employee Parking Cash-Out Workplace Parking Pricing Compressed Work Weeks Employer Sponsored Vanpool Carpool Matching Carshare Program Self-funded Emergency Ride Home Carpool/Vanpool Priority Parking Private Employer Shuttle Trip Reduction Marketing/Incentive Program End of Trip Facilities Cross Category Maximum Reduction, Neighborhood and Transit Global Maximum VMT Reductions 11 12 13 14 15 21 16 17 18 19 20 Instructions TDM: Choose the mitigation measures that are appropriate for your project. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should be new and/or an improvement of existing conditions. A project will not receive credit for measures already in place. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should also make sense in the context of project location and future use. P202 IX.a DATE: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION: NAME, COMPANY, ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL Peak Hour Max Trips Generated MMLOS TDM Total Trips Mitigated PM 0.0 30 0.00 30.00 0.00 DANA ELLIS, ROWLAND+BROUGHTON, 234 E HOPKINS AVE, ASPEN CO 81611, (970) 429 -8707, DANA@ROWLANDBROUGHTON.COM Summary and Narrative: Narrative: MAY 12 2017 MESA STORE - ROWLAND + BROUGHTON STUDIO 500 W MAIN ST, ASPEN CO 81611 Trip Generation SUMMARY Trip Mitigation NET TRIPS TO BE MITIGATED Click on the "Generate Narrative" Button to the right. Respond to each of the prompts in the space provided. Each response should cover the following: 1. Explain the selected measure. 2. Call out where the measure is located. 3. Demonstrate how the selected measure is appropriate to enhance the project site and reduce traffic impacts. 4. Explain the Enforcement and Financing Plan for the selected measure. 5. Explain the scheduling and implementation responsibility of the mitigation measure. 6. Attach any additional information and a site map to the narrative report. Project Description In the space below provide a description of the proposed project. The project is a restoration and renovation of the historic Mesa building located at 500 W. Main Street. The project includes a Historic Landmark Lot Split, breaking the current parcel into two 3,000 SF parcels. MMLOS In the space provided call out the effective sidewalk width and the percentage of the site which meets or exceeds the minimum standard width. Explain the site constraints for areas which do not meet the minimum width. All sidewalks will meet the minimum standard widths. In the space provided desicribe what new landscaping is proposed and how the proposed landscaping plan enhances the pedestrian experience. This measure is only applicable to large scale projects and requires more extensive landscaping then a few plantings or lawn area. The project shall establish extensive landscaping which significantly benefits the site and improves the pedestrian comfort and experience. A new corner circulation pattern is planned with an ADA compliant ramp. New ground cover, maintenance of existing Aspen trees, and the addition of one new tree by the alley is planned along Fourth Street. The Main Street frontage will see sidewalk improvements and the maintenance of an existing street tree. Explain the proposed improved crosswalk and how this improvement benefits the pedestian experience and the site as a whole. An improved crosswalk includes measures such as incorporating a corner bulb out or defining a crosswalk path with colored concrete. Simply re-striping a crosswalk will not recieve credit. This measure must be pre-approved by City staff. P203 IX.a The crosswalk at Fourth will be upgraded at the corner, providing adequate turning radius for a person in a wheelchair. Describe the enhanced pedestrian access point(s). This measure is to improve pedestrian access to the site from the ROW. It includes adding additional access points which prevent pedestrians and bicyclists from crossing a street, improvements to the project's ADA ramps in the ROW, and improvements to existing access points. The crosswalk at Fourth will be upgraded at the corner, providing adequate turning radius for a person in a wheelchair. Explain the enhanced pedestrian interaction at driveway areas or alley crossings. There must be an existing deficiency on the proposed site to select this mesaure. If the project will increase interaction between pedestrians and vehicles at a driveway this should be mitigated by implementing improvements to that area. New signage, striping, mirrors, and other approved devices are examples to address pedestrian-vehicle conflicts at driveways. No current sidewalk exists at the alley crossing. One is planned that meets the alley requirements and standards. Explain the proposed bus stop ADA improvements. Currently no ADA compliant route exists on Main Street to the existing Fourth Street bus stop. The project includes improving the ROW to meet current accessibility standards. Include any additional information that pertains to the MMLOS plan in the space provided below. n/a TDM Provide details below for the proposed compressed work weeks strategy. Compressed work week schedules allow an employee to work the typical 40-hour workweek in an alternative manner such as 4/10s or 9/80s. This eliminates the need for work-related travel on the days not worked, thus reducing SOV trips. The successful project will demonstrate that it will offer compressed work week schedules to 25% of its employees. R+B has a culture that allows staff to work from home or have compressed work weeks limiting the commuting to the office to 4x week. Currently 6/24 employees utilize this = 25%. The goal is to have all employees on tablet computers by the time we move into this building, increasing that percentage. Provide details for the proposed carpool matching strategy below. Facilitating the formation of employee carpool groups is a method of reducing SOV trips. The successful project will include use the city of Aspen Commuter Connect service to allow for the formation of carpools as well as the sharing of other important transportation information via a custom employer web page. Employee carpool groups will be implemented. The Commuter Connect service will also be used. Provide details in the space provided for the proposed carshare participation. Carshare programs have been linked to increased use of alternative transportation modes and reduced SOV trips. The successful project will provide access to Aspen’s CAR TO GO carshare program. Trip reduction potential will depend on the level to which the development participates. Car share memberships can be provided to all employees or residents of new developments. P204 IX.a R+B is currently looking into the Car to Go program. We are currently working out the specifics. Provide details for the proposed bike share program participation. Bike sharing provides access to a fleet of bicycles for short trips, thus reducing SOV travel. The successful project will provide memberships to the existing WE-cycle program. Include details on how many WE- cycle memberships will be purchased and whether these will be made available to guests, employees, or both. R+B plans on purchasing 2 Sonos e-bikes as well as 2-4 Linus commuter bikes for employee use. We have also initiated conversation about a business WE-Cycle membership. Explain the proposed end of trip facilities strategy below. The provision of convenient facilities for pedestrians and cyclists encourages these types of alternative modes, thus reducing SOV trips. Non-residential projects may provide facilities such as showers, secure bicycle lockers, personal lockers, changing spaces, etc. There will be personal lockers, changing areas, bicycle parking (covered and with space to lock bikes). Explain the proposed carpool/vanpool priority parking strategy below. Priority parking for carpools and vanpools encourages and incentivizes employees to ride-share to work, thus reducing SOV trips. The successful project will located the carpool and vanpool spaces at the front entrances of the buildings and will monitor use of parking spaces to ensure compliance. One parking spot will be for carpools only. A sign will be posted. Explain the proposed trip reduction marketing/incentive program in the space provided. A trip reduction marketing programs should include a number of the following strategies: orientation to trip reduction programs and benefits; orientation to specific alternative transportation modes such as bus service information, bike/walk route maps, etc.; publishing of web or traditional informational materials; events and contests such as commuter fairs, new employee orientations, bike to work days, etc.; educational opportunities such bicycle commute/repair classes; web or traditional materials aimed at guests/customers such as bike/walk maps, free transit day passes, etc.; incentive programs such as prizes, rewards or discounts for alternative commuting. We would like to work with Lynn in Transportation to gain information on events, education and opporunities for trip reduction. Include any additional information that pertains to the TDM plan in the space provided below. n/a MMLOS Site Plan Requirements Include the following on a site plan. Clearly call out and label each measure. Attach the site plan to the TIA submittal. Sidewalk Width and Buffer Width Slopes Between Back of Curb and Sidewalk Landscape Plan Crosswalk Improvement(s) 2% Slope at Pedestrian Driveway Crossings Enhanced Pedestrian Access Point Enhanced Pedestrian Interaction at Driveway Areas Pedestrian Directness Factor (See callout number 9 on the MMLOS sheet for an example) Bicycle Parking P205 IX.a Bus Stop ADA Improvements Enforcement and Financing Provide an overview of the Enforcement and Financing plan for the proposed transportation mitigation measures. The work will be completed by the completion of construction. Summer 2018 - Work with the Transportation Department to fine tune opportunities. Fall 2018 - Car-To-Go and WE-Cycle memberships active. Winter 2019 - Project Complete, all site enhancements complete. Invite Transportation Department representative to do an orientation with the staff in the new building. Spring 2019 - Company bicycles purchased and on-site. Summer 2019 - Final review with Transportation Department. Scheduling and Implementation Responsibility of Mitigation Measures Provide an overview of the scheduling and implementation responsibility for the proposed transportation mitigation measures. The work will be completed by the completion of construction. Monitoring and Reporting Provide a monitoring and reporting plan. Refer to page 17 in the Transportation Analysis Guidelines for a list of monitoring plan requirements. Components of a Monitoring and Reporting Plan should include (1) Assessment of compliance with guidelines, (2) Results and effectiveness of implemented measures, (3) Identification of additional strategies, and (4) Surveys and other supporting data. P206 IX.a P207IX.a 1 DEED RESTRICTION AND AGREEMENT FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF A HISTORIC TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT PURSUANT TO ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE #___ , SERIES OF 20__ THIS DEED RESTRICTION AND AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 13th day of June, 2018, by 500 W. Main Street, LLC, (hereinafter referred to as “Owner”), whose address is 234 E Hopkins Ave Aspen, CO 81611, and The City of Aspen, a body politic and corporate pursuant to its Home-Rule Charter and the Constitution of the State of Colorado, acting through its City Council, (hereinafter the “City”); WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Owner owns real property more specifically described as 500 W. Main St. Aspen CO 81611; Parcel ID Lots R and S, Block 30, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, (hereinafter referred to as “Real Property”), which Real Property is designated as a Historic Site, as such are defined in the City of Aspen Land Use Code (“City Code”); and WHEREAS, Owner has submitted an affidavit, duly notarized, in compliance with Section 26.535.090.A.2 of the City Code, and supplied the necessary application materials identified in Section 26.535.090 showing compliance with the criteria set forth in Section 26.535.070 of the City Code; and WHEREAS, The Community Development Department has reviewed Owner’s application according to the review standards identified in 26.535.070 of the City Code, and has recommended approval of the application and the establishment of 7 (seven) approved Historic TDR Certificates as set forth herein; and WHEREAS, City Council Ordinance #____, Series of 20___ (the “Ordinance”) was approved on ___(date)__________, establishing the above referenced Historic TDR Certificates, and requiring that a Deed Restriction be recorded in real property records of Pitkin County, designating the Real Property as a Sending Site and permanently restricting the development of the Real Property (the Sending Site) to an allowable Floor Area not exceeding the allowance for a single-family residence or duplex if allowed, minus two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of Floor Area multiplied by the number of Historic TDR Certificates established; and WHEREAS, in consideration of the establishment of 7 (seven). Historic TDR Certificates pursuant to the Ordinance and City Code, Owner agrees to restrict the Real Property as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and obligations contained herein, Owner and the City hereby covenant and agree as follows: 1. Development of the Real Property (the Sending Site) is hereby permanently restricted to an allowable Floor Area not exceeding the allowance for a single- family residence or duplex as otherwise permitted by the City Code on the Real P208 IX.a 2 Property, minus any deductions resulting from previous issuance of TDR certificate(s) and minus 250 square feet, that being two hundred fifty (250) square feet of Floor Area multiplied by the one (1) Historic TDR Certificate hereby established. 2. In consideration of the foregoing, and pursuant to the City Code and the Ordinance, the City shall cause the issuance of one (1) Historic TDR Certificate, executed by the Mayor, allowing the transfer of development rights to a Receiver Site to be determined pursuant to the City Code. This Historic TDR Certificate may be sold, assigned, transferred, or conveyed. Transfer of title shall be evidenced by an assignment of ownership on the actual certificate document. Upon transfer, the new owner may request the City re-issue the certificate acknowledging the new owner. Reissuance shall not require adoption of a new ordinance. The market for such Historic TDR Certificates shall remain unrestricted and the City shall not prescribe or guarantee the monetary value of any Historic TDR Certificates. 3. This deed restriction shall not be construed to stipulate an absolute Floor Area on the Real Property, but only a square footage reduction from the allowable Floor Area, as that allowable Floor Area may be amended from time to time. 4. The Real Property (Sending Site) shall remain eligible for Floor Area inc entives and/or exemptions as may be authorized by the City Code, as it may be amended from time to time. 5. This restriction may be modified only in a writing signed by both the Owner and the City. 6. Unless modified as stated above, this Agreement shall constitute a covenant running with the Real Property as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the City Council of the City of Aspen by any appropriate legal action including, but not limited to, injunction or abatement. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGES] P209 IX.a 3 IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument on the date and year above first written. OWNER: By:___________________________ (property owner) STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ________ day of ______________, 20___, by ___________ Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires:___________________ _____________________________ Notary Public P210 IX.a 4 APPROVAL OF CITY ATTORNEY By:___________________________ James R. True, City Attorney THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO a body politic and corporate pursuant to its Home-Rule Charter and the Constitution of the State of Colorado By:____________________________ Date:______________ Steve Skadron, Mayor STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _________________, 20__, by_____________, as Mayor of the City of Aspen, Colorado. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires:___________________ _____________________________ Notary Public P211 IX.a 500 W. Main St. N VICINITY MAP P212IX.a P213IX.a P214IX.a P215IX.a LOT R LOT S LOT Q LOT P ALLE Y - B L O C K 3 0 LOT I LOT H LOT G FOURTH STREETMAIN S T R E E T LOT O NE CORNER OF BLOCK 30 FOUND 1-1/4" YELLOW PLASTIC CAP LS20151 NW CORNER OF BLOCK 30 FOUND 1" IRON PIPE N6 1 ° 0 5 ' 3 1 " W 1 4 7 8 . 9 0 ' ( T I E ) S73°46' 5 1 " W 6 9 5 . 3 6' ( T I E ) CITY OF ASPEN GPS 7 CITY OF ASPEN GPS 6 500 W E S T M A I N S T R E E TNORTH1 inch = ft. (IN U.S. SURVEY FEET) GRAPHIC SCALE 0010 5 10 20 40 10 BYNO.DATEBYPROJECT NO.OR 534 - 06700 IN METRO DENVERUNDERGROUND MEMBER UTILITIESEXCAVATE FOR THE MARKING OFBEFORE YOU DIG, GRADE, ORCALL 2-BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE1-800-922-1987CENTER OF COLORADOCALL UTILITY NOTIFICATIONREVISIONHIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC.PHONE (970) 945-8676 - FAX (970) 945-2555www.hceng.comdrawn by:checked by:date:file:1517 BLAKE AVENUE, STE 101, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601SHEET NUMBER 2171014 0932 1 of 1ROWLAND & BROUGHTON500 W. MAIN STREETMESA SUBDIVISIONCITY OF ASPENPITKIN COUNTY, COLORADOBNBWAB05-09-2018CLERK & RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE PARCEL OF LAND COMPRISED OF LOTS R & S, BLOCK 30, CITY OF ASPEN TOWNSITE BEING A PART OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST, OF THE 6TH P.M. CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR APPROVAL MESA SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP _______________ _____________ CITY OF ASPEN ENGINEER REVIEW PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PITKIN COUNTY TITLE , INC. CASE NO. PCT24641W EFFECTIVE DATE DECEMBER 28, 2015. TITLE COMMITMENT EXCEPTIONS NOTES PITKIN COUNTY TITLE , INC. CASE NO. PCT24641W EFFECTIVE DATE DECEMBER 28, 2015. SURVEYOR'S NOTES SITE VICINITY MAP P216IX.a P217IX.a P218IX.a Page 1 of 12 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Memorandum TO: Mayor Skadron and City Council FROM: Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner THROUGH: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director MEETING DATE: Second Reading, August 27, 2018 - Public Hearing Site Visit scheduled for 3:30pm RE: Ordinance #22, Series of 2018 - 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue – Relocation, Rescinding Designation, Designation and Demolition APPLICANT /OWNER: BMH Investments, LTD REPRESENTATIVE: Sara Adams, AICP, BendonAdams LOCATION: Street Address: 333 Park Avenue & 931 Gibson Avenue Legal Description: See Ordinance Exhibit A Parcel Identification Number: -333 PARK PID# 2737-181-00-017 -931 GIBSON PID#2737-074-00-004 CURRENT ZONING & USE -333 Park Ave: Medium-Density Residential (R-6) Zone District -931 Gibson Ave: Moderate-Density Residential (R-15A) Zone District PROPOSED LAND USE: Residential SUMMARY: The applicant requests City Council approval for demolition of non- historic additions to the landmarked residence on 333 Park Avenue and to relocate the historic buildings to 931 Gibson Avenue. Applicant requests rescinding the historic designation of 333 Park Avenue and designating 931 Gibson Avenue upon the relocation. STAFF AND HPC RECOMMENDATION: Staff and HPC find the applicant’s request for relocation as an appropriate preservation practice for the historic buildings at 333 Park. Staff and HPC recommend City Council approve relocation, demolition of non-historic additions and the request to rescind historic designation of 333 Park Avenue and designation of 931 Gibson Avenue following relocation. HPC voted unanimously (7-0) recommending in favor of the proposal. Site Locator Map (333 Park and 931 Gibson) P219 IX.b Page 2 of 12 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Response to Council Comments at First Reading: 1. Council requested clarification on the overall review process. For second reading City Council is ultimately asked to determine if relocation of the structures on 333 Park is acceptable, along with the subsequent decisions for designation and demolition. If relocation and designation are approved, the applicant will submit for Major Development of 931 Gibson in a new application. This will be a standard two-step review process consisting of conceptual and final design review through HPC. City Council call- up would also occur, following the Conceptual review. No Historic Preservation benefits are requested as part of the current application. Instead, any benefits would be part of the subsequent Major Development application, and reviewed by HPC according to the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and benefits criteria. It is important to note that the application would be subject to the code in place at the time of that application, and not vested in the current code. 2. Council requested additional information regarding HPC purview if designation was rescinded from 333 Park and 931 Gibson was designated. If relocation is approved, the historic designation would follow the historic resource because designation is designed to protect the specific historic resources. Without the historic resources on 333 Park, the lot will no longer qualify for retaining its historic designation and HPC will no longer have purview over future development. Underlying zoning requirements for R-6 would apply to any future development. If 931 Gibson contained the historic buildings, it meets the criteria for designation and will be subject to HPC review and design guidelines for any proposed development moving forward. Future requests for development and benefits would be subject to HPC review, as well as City Council call-up. 3. Council requested information on any relocation precedents where a historic resource was relocated to a new site and historic designation granted, and what possible ramifications for future projects might be. In the 60s and 70s, before the HPC was established, a number of historic buildings were relocated around town, but documentation depicting this activity is not available. When comparing historic maps with existing conditions, it appears that many historic structures were relocated to the Smuggler area of town. (See below, Willits Map, 1893) More typical relocation of historic properties seen today is the shifting of the resource within the original, designated lot. All the Victorian era buildings with historical integrity are protected through local historic designation with the intent to protect it by subjecting any proposed development or change to a board level review with design guidelines and criteria specific to preservation. Staff identified two projects that involved the relocation of a historic resource to a new site: 134 ½ W. Hopkins approved in 1988, and the more recent Zupancis Cabins in 2016. 134 ½ W. Hopkins was relocated from 120 N. Spring Street to West Hopkins, and the Zupancis Cabins were moved from the new Police Station on Main Street to Holden Marolt open space. In both cases the relocated historic resources were in their original location before relocation. The determining factor for relocation is directly related to the final preservation outcome of the resources themselves. The Zupancis Cabins were examples of resources demonstrating a high level of historic integrity, both interior and exterior, that could be fully restore and interpreted off-site – a unique opportunity not likely to be replicated in another existing building.. P220 IX.b Page 3 of 12 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Before relocation, 2016 (Photographer Skalko) After relocation, 2018 134 ½ W. Hopkins was identified as possessing architectural significance and the relocation to West Hopkins would “make the house more accessible to the public and increase its prominence in the new context, as we see it.” (Staff memo, 1988). At the time, the HPC evaluation of the resource on N. Spring Street resulted in a low evaluation score, whereas the proposed site for relocation enhanced the receiving neighborhood by restoring historic site conditions. The case file indicates that there was also large development that posed a threat to the resource if it remained on N. Spring Street. Before relocation, 1988 After relocation, 2012 Staff finds that these types of relocation requests have not been common because the combined conditions of a resource with a higher level of historic integrity benefiting from relocation is rare. Additionally, each historic preservation project is evaluated utilizing the HP design guidelines and review criteria on a case-by-case basis, therefore, using a past precedent may not render much support for future projects. 4. Council asked for clarification of allowable floor area for both properties and the allowed number of units, as well as additional information regarding the neighborhood context of the Gibson lot related to other historic resources. 333 Park, located in the R-6 zone district, has a gross lot area of P221 IX.b Page 4 of 12 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com 10,418 sf., but after slope and easement deductions are made the net lot area equals 6,048 sf 1. Based on these numbers, the allowable floor area for a single family dwelling is 3,246.72 sf. As a historic lot, a detached dwelling is permitted with an allowable maximum floor area of 3,607.68 sf. Any development on this lot will need to take stream margin review requirements into consideration. 931 Gibson, located in the R-15A zone district, has a gross lot area and a net lot area of 15,497 sf. The allowable maximum floor area for a single family dwelling is 4,529.82 sf and does not change with the relocation of the historic resource. One thing the historic designation will now allows is for two detached dwellings to exist on the lot. However, the allowable maximum floor area is limited to what is allowed for a single family home (4,529.82sf.) per underlining zoning requirements.2 The applicant conducted a number of conceptual design studies on 333 Park before pursuing the option of relocation. (See Tables 1 and 2 below.) The context surrounding the Gibson lot is unique in that a number of historic resources have been relocated to this area before the HPC was established. If relocated, the resource will be surrounded by other historic resources in the general vicinity. (See below, Map of Historic Resources near Gibson, 2018. Historic properties are outlined in orange, and 931 Gibson is identified by the red circle. ) Aspen Willits Map, 1896 Map of Historic Resources near Gibson, 2018 5. City Council members requested additional clarification on if similar types of relocation applications could become more common, and if staff’s recommendation is derived from a loophole in the system or if this is an active promotion of the Historic Preservation program. A proposal such as this is unusual because it requires the applicant to own two properties and commit to a preservation plan that justifies relocation and the added risk related to the logistics of the relocation. Additionally, this 1 The Land Use Code required reductions in Net Lot Area if steep slopes or easements exist. Floor area is calculated off of Net Lot Area, so large lots with significant slopes will have a lower allowed floor area than a large lot with no slopes. 2 It should be noted that 2 attached units (a duplex) is allowed by the zone district, but one half is required to be deed restricted. P222 IX.b Page 5 of 12 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com structure has previously been moved from another part of town, making this type of relocation more appropriate than if it were in it’s original location. Staff and HPC’s recommendation for approval of the relocation are based on the HP program’s review criteria and the historic integrity assessment value. (See Exhibit A.1 and A.3). The historic preservation program is in place to help maintain the historic character of the city by protecting the individual resources from future development pressures that may inappropriately impact the resource. The request of relocation from the applicant is an appropriate preservation method in this instance because the current location of the resource is inappropriate and the relocation will provide opportunities to restore original conditions such as site placement and visibility. Staff highlighted the importance of restoring visual prominence of the historic resource in the staff memo. After the house was relocated to Park Avenue, the once proud example of Victorian architecture was hidden from public view, which also made it difficult to monitor its physical condition as a historic resource. There are a finite number of historic buildings from the Victorian era that remain in Aspen to tell the story of its silver mining history. Prominence and the showcasing of historic resources does need to take surrounding context into account, but the program strives to promote the awareness and appreciation of Aspen’s heritage by creating a visual presence of the existing resources for public view. 6. Council members asked about the challenges and balance of historic preservation values with other community values. Historic designation, as well as rescinding designation is a structured public process with very specific code criteria that must to be met (Section 26.415.030, 26.415.050) and the final determination made by City Council. Historic Preservation is identified as an important community value that links to community character and growth and economy (pg. 55, Aspen Area Community Plan, 2012). In a recent community survey, more than 93% agreed that historic preservation projects contribute, on varying levels, to telling the unique story of Aspen’s past. (Q.8, Survey Results, 2018.) A vital community is always in the process of balancing its many different values. Staff believes this proposal balances the many competing community values that are articulated in the land use code. Relocation will not result in more density than could be built today on 931 Gibson. Relocation will create an improved opportunity for slope stabilization and sensitive development by the Roaring Fork River on 333 Park. And, relocation is the best preservation opportunity for the historic resource. P223 IX.b Page 6 of 12 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Background: 333 Park Avenue became a designated historic landmark in 1995 because of the Victorian era residence that was moved to this location from Main Street in the 1960s. During this relocation, the front of the historic house was oriented to face the Roaring Fork River, and several bandit units were added to the historic residence over the years. The lot is approximately 10,418 sq. ft. (Gross Lot Area) and located in the Medium-Density (R-6) zone district. Prior to the submission of this Land Use Application, the applicant fulfilled the conditions specified in the Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) exemption by decommissioning the kitchens within the bandit units and obtaining approval by a field inspector. 931 Gibson Avenue is located in the R-15A zone district, and recently had an active building permit to demolish the existing house and stabilize the site. The lot is approximately 15,497 sq. ft. (Gross Lot Area), but is not a designated landmark nor located in a historic district. The owners of 333 Park Avenue are currently under contract to purchase 931 Gibson Avenue as a receiving site of the historic resources if relocation is approved. Land Use Request and Review Process: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from City Council, all of which have received a recommendation from HPC: • Relocation (Section 26.415.090) of a designated historic landmark to a new location. City Council is the final review authority. • Demolition (Section 26.415.080) of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district. City Council is given final review authority. • Rescinding Designation (Section 26.415.050) of 333 Park Avenue due to the proposed relocation of the historic structure. City Council is the final review authority. • Historic Designation (Section 26.415.030) of 931 Gibson Avenue due to the proposed relocation of the historic structure. City Council is the final review authority. HPC Meeting Summary: The applicant presented a plan to demolish all non-historic additions built around the historic residence at 333 Park Avenue and relocate the historic house and historic one-story addition to 931 Gibson Avenue to HPC during the July 11th meeting for Conceptual Design. As part of the application the applicant prepared a conceptual design for 931 Gibson Avenue with the restored historic buildings including a connector element that linked the historic buildings to a one-story garage located towards the rear of the lot. With this design, the applicant included a request for a front setback variation and a floor area bonus for the extensive preservation work proposed. Although relocating a historic building to another site is typically not supported by the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, HPC determined the proposal for relocation was an appropriate preservation method in the case of 333 Park Avenue because it would restore the historic configuration of the two resources and place it back onto a site that would re-establish a visual presence the residence once had when it was on Main Street (Figure 1). The proposal also met all of the criteria for relocation in Section 26.415.090. P224 IX.b Page 7 of 12 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Figure 1 Historic Streetscape of Main Street, Aspen Historical Society The identified receiving site, 931 Gibson Avenue, is a significantly larger lot compared to the original 3,000 sf lot where the resources were on Main Street; however, the relatively flat site and the number of other historic resources surrounding the lot on Gibson Avenue brings it closer to the site context it once had on Main Street compared to where it is now on Park Avenue. The applicant provided conceptual designs for the historic residence but the design for a future detached dwelling was not presented at this time; however, it was made clear that any future designs for a detached dwelling unit would still be subject to the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and HPC review. This process is not uncommon and often seen when historic lot splits are granted, but HPC decided that they would like to review a conceptual design for Major Development that showed the site plan for the entire site, including any future detached dwelling unit. The applicant agreed to provide this information and will submit a new, separate application for Conceptual Major Development if this application for relocation is approved. HPC voted unanimously (7-0) in favor of the proposed relocation and associated reviews. In summary, City Council has the final authority to grant relocation of the historic buildings to the identified receiving site, demolition of non-historic additions on 333 Park Avenue, rescinding designation of 333 Park Avenue and designation of 931 Gibson Avenue after relocation. HPC was a recommending body for this review. Both HP staff and HPC recommend City Council approval for the relocation of the historic landmark buildings to the new site and the designation process and demolition required to achieve the relocation. (See Exhibit F – HPC Meeting Minutes for more details.) Allowable Floor Area: As a 15,497 sf lot on Gibson Avenue, the development potential that exists through underlying zoning for a single family dwelling is 4,529.82 sf with the potential to land one TDR of 250 sf. With the proposed relocation and historic designation, the underlying R-15A zone district would allow two detached residential dwellings, but the allowable floor area is limited to the same 4,529,82 sq. ft. of single-family dwelling floor area because the lot is less than 20,000 sf. Without the relocation, the lot could have one detached residential dwelling 3. It should be noted that the same applies to 333 Park – the lot is allowed two detached dwellings with the historic resource, but only once it is moved. (Details on floor area is outlined in Tables 1 and 2, below.) 3 The current owners of 931 Gibson Ave, applied for a Residential Design Standards review for a single-family home in October 2017, which does not include the articulation and break down of massing that two separate structures would provide if this relocation application is approved. P225 IX.b Page 8 of 12 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Table 1. Existing and Proposed Dimensions for 333 Park Ave. 333 Park Avenue (Gross Lot Area: 10,418 sf; Net Lot Area: 6,048 sf) R-6 Maximum Existing Allowable Floor Area (Single-Family Dwelling) 3,246.72 sf (Up to 3,496.72 sf with 1 TDR) 3,793 sf Allowable Floor Area (Detached Dwelling) 3,607.68 sf (Up to 4,107.68 sf with 2 TDRs) n/a Number of Units 2 1 Height 25’ 27-7 ¾” Setbacks (front, rear, side) Front: 10’ Rear: 10’ Side: 15’ non-conforming Table 2. Existing and Proposed Dimensions for 931 Gibson Ave. 931 Gibson Avenue (Gross Lot Area: 15,497 sf; Net Lot Area: 15,497 sf) R-15A Maximum (without historic property) R-15A Maximum (with historic property) Allowable Floor Area Single-Family Dwelling 4,529.82 sf (Up to 4,779.82 sf with 1 TDR) 4,529.82 sf (Up to 5,029.82 sf with max. floor area bonus) Allowable Floor Area Duplex Dwelling* 4,949.82 sf (Up to 5,449.82 with 2 TDRs) 4,949.82 sf (Up to 5,449.82 sf with max. floor area bonus) Allowable Floor Area Detached Dwelling** n/a 4,529.82 sf (Up to 5,029.82 sf with max. floor area bonus) Number of Units 1 2 Height 25’ 25’ Setbacks (front, rear, side) Front: 25’ Rear: 10’ Side: 10’ Front: 25’ Rear: 10’ Side: 10’ *duplex requires 50% of units to be deed restricted (Section 26.710.060.B). **lot sizes less than 20,000 sf is limited to single family dwelling floor area (Section 26.710.060). (Note: Deck allowance is based on allowable floor area without TDRs of Floor area bonus.) STAFF COMMENTS: P226 IX.b Page 9 of 12 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com The following is a summary of each land use provision requiring Council action. More detailed criteria and staff findings are provided in the exhibits to this memo. 1. Relocation. The intent for relocation of designated properties is to preserve and maintain the historic resource in its original location. In the case of 333 Park Avenue, the historic resources were moved to this site from Main Street in 1960s The applicant indicates steep slopes, stream margin, and utility/road easements as some of the site constraints found at 333 Park for designing on-site relocation. Any relocation process would include the moving the two-story Victorian house and the one-story addition separately. The applicant’s plan for off- site relocation attempts to restore the original footprint of the two resources, as seen on the historic Sanborn Maps (Figure 3). If the structure were to remain on 333 Park, the historic relationship of the two- story Victorian home and the one-story historic addition could not be accomplished due to the site conditions, particularly the stream margin requirements for increased setbacks and a progressive height limit from the top of slope measurement. This is illustrated in the application, as well as in the drawings, below. Figure 3: Configuration Study with Sanborn Map overlay, F&M Architects. Relocation of a historic structure to a new site is discouraged (HP Design Guideline 9.8), however, preservation values can vary from project to project, therefore, proposals for relocation are reviewed on a case-by-case basis (HP Design Guideline 9.2). When the historic buildings moved from Main Street (originally located across the street from Paepcke Park where the old library, now home to Design Workshop, was built), the resources went from being highly visible to hardly being seen. The proposed receiving site, 931 Gibson Avenue, is a middle lot on a relatively flat grade offering clearer views of the historic resources from the street. Staff finds 931 Gibson is an appropriate location for this historic resource, as it provides improved site conditions, opportunity for visibility and the relocation will not diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of any adjacent designated properties. P227 IX.b Page 10 of 12 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Part of the criteria for evaluating if relocation is appropriate is ensuring the relocation results in the best preservation option for the historic resource given its character and integrity. In evaluating this, staff examines the physical relocation impacts (can the structure withstand the act of relocation), as well as what the final development opportunities for the site will be. In this case, the applicant has provided documentation from an experienced house mover confirming the historic resources can physically withstand relocation. The preservation goal to restore the two historic resources, restore the original configuration and re- introduce the front façade back to its street facing orientation offer the best preservation outcomes and promotes the goal of creating awareness and appreciation for Aspen’s Victorian Heritage. Staff supports the proposed plan for relocation of the historic buildings from 333 Park Avenue to 931 Gibson because it meets the criteria for relocation and provides the best preservation outcome for the historic structures (Exhibit A.1). Figure 4: 333 Park Avenue, 1980 Figure 5: 333 Park Avenue, 2012 2. Demolition: Demolition refers to the loss of building fabric. The intent behind reviewing demolition for historic properties is to preserve and protect historic resources because of its significant to the community. The applicant proposes to remove all non-historic additions, including the bandit units, before the historic resources are located to 931 Gibson Avenue. The proposed areas for demolition does not demonstrate historical significance nor affect the integrity of the historic resource/property. The Historic Preservation Design Guidelines also encourage the removal of non-historic material that cover original material (HP Design Guideline 2.6). Demolition on 333 Park Avenue is considered development and will trigger an administrative Stream Margin review, which will be completed following HPC’s and Council’s reviews. Staff supports the proposed demolition of non-historic additions on the building because it meets the criteria for demolition and complies with the HP Design Guidelines on treatment of non-historic material covering historic material (Exhibit A.2). 3. Designation: Historic designation provides a means of deciding and communicating, in advance of specific issues or conflicts, what properties are in the public interest to protect (Section 26.415.030). It is a public process that first identifies significant historic properties in the community and reviews development for appropriateness using the adopted Historic Preservation Design Guidelines as a P228 IX.b Page 11 of 12 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com standard. The designation of 333 Park Avenue occurred in 1995 as part of a city wide historic sites and structures inventory update (Exhibit C under the address 101 Park). If the historic buildings on 333 Park Avenue are relocated to 931 Gibson Avenue, the property will no longer comply with the criteria for historic designation, therefore, rescinding the landmark status of the property would be appropriate. If relocation is approved and 931 Gibson becomes the receiving site for the historic buildings from 333 Park Avenue, the property will meet the all two criteria for historic designation because it will now contain a documented 19th century structure and the property will possess a resource of material integrity that demonstrates age and workmanship. The public score sheet conducted by staff records a score of 90 where 50 is the required minimum score threshold for historic designation (Please see end of Exhibit C). It is critical that the property containing the historic resources be historically designated to ensure its protection as offered by the municipal code. If the relocation is approved, staff supports the rescinding of 333 Park Avenue’s designation and the historic designation of 931 Gibson Avenue because they meet the required criteria (Exhibit C). 4. Referral Comments: One important technical factor to consider is the logistical process of relocation. The Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and the criteria for Relocation found in the code require safe relocation of the historic resource by requesting a developed plan for safe relocation and specialty contractors with experience (HP Design Guideline 9.7). The applicant has identified a specialty contractor who provided a document confirming the resource would withstand another relocation. The applicant is also developing a safe relocation route involving other relevant city departments to discuss community impact and mitigation. Due to the complexity of the proposal, the applicant has started discussions with Engineering, Building and Parks on the logistics of relocation and the necessary requirements following relocation. Comments provided by the other departments are attached as Exhibit B, and included as conditions in the Ordinance. The Parks Department initially expressed concerns regarding damage to trees along the potential relocation route. Since then, the applicant has worked extensively with the Parks Department’s forester to address specific concerns and requirements. The proposed relocation route via Park Avenue was identified as the route with the least impact on the trees. (See Exhibit B for detailed resolutions.) If relocation is approved, the Parks Department has indicated a number of conditions to ensure minimal impact to the trees. A finalized relocation/repair plan meeting these requirements will be required as part of the final design review application and has been included as a condition in the Ordinance. Engineering did not express any specific concerns related to the proposed relocation plan. They will continue to communicate with the applicant on the necessary process for relocation. Some of the items that will be requested includes a Traffic Control Plan (TCP) and additional coordination with RFTA, police escort, and agreements for electric shutoffs with Holy Cross during the scheduled date and time for the relocation of the buildings. Due to the potential impacts the relocation may have on the surrounding neighbors, Engineering also requires public notification of the proposed disturbance. (See Exhibit B for additional comments.) P229 IX.b Page 12 of 12 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com RECOMMENDATION: Staff and HPC recommends approval of Ordinance #22, Series of 2018. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to approve Ordinance #22, Series of 2018, on Second Reading. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance #22, Series of 2018 Exhibit A.1 – Relocation Review Criteria/Staff Findings Exhibit A.2 – Demolition Review Criteria/Staff Findings Exhibit A.3 – Rescinding Designation & Historic Designation Criteria/Staff Findings Exhibit B – Referral Comments Exhibit C – 333 Park Designation, previous approval Exhibit D – GMQS Exemption Approval Exhibit E – Land Use Application Exhibit F – HPC Meeting Minutes from July 11, 2018 Exhibit G – Public Comment P230 IX.b Ordinance #22, Series of 2018 333 Park Ave. & 931 Gibson Ave. Page 1 of 6 ORDINANCE #22 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING DEMOLITION, RELOCATION, RESCINDING DESIGNATION, DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 333 PARK AVENUE AND 931 GIBSON AVENUE, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT A PARCEL ID: 2737-181-00-017 PARCEL ID: 2737-074-00-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from BMH Investments, LTD, owner of 333 Park Avenue and contract purchaser for 931 Gibson Avenue, see Exhibit A for legal description, requesting approval for the following: • Relocation- (Section 26.415.090) for the relocation of the two historic buildings from 333 Park Avenue (R-6 Zone District) to 931 Gibson Avenue (R-15A Zone District). • Demolition- (Section 26.415.080) of non-historic additions found on 333 Park Avenue before the relocation of the historic buildings. • Rescinding Designation- (Section 26.415.050) of 333 Park Avenue if relocation of the historic buildings is approved. • Designation- (Section 26.415.030) of 931 Gibson Avenue if relocation of the historic buildings is approved; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received referral comments on the Application from the City Engineering, Building, and Parks Departments; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the proposed application, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the Application at a duly noticed public hearing on July 11, 2018, during which the recommendations of the Community Development Director and comments from the public were heard by the Historic Preservation Commission, and recommended approval with conditions by Resolution No. 9, Series of 2018, by a vote of seven to zero (7 – 0). WHEREAS, all required public noticing was provided as evidenced by an affidavit of public noticing submitted to the record, a summary of public outreach was provided by the applicant to meet the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.304, and the public was provided full access to review the Application; and, WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Community Development Director, the Historic Preservation P231 IX.b Ordinance #22, Series of 2018 333 Park Ave. & 931 Gibson Ave. Page 2 of 6 Commission, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, on August 13, 2018, the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 22, Series of 2018 with conditions, on First Reading by a three to zero (3 – 0) vote; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on August 27, 2018, the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 22, Series of 2018, by a _____ to _____ (_ – _) vote, approving Relocation, Demolition, changes to Historic Designations and associated land use reviews for 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue; and, WHEREAS, City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all the applicable development standards; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Approvals Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council grants 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue land use review approvals for Relocation of two (2) historic buildings from 333 Park to 931 Gibson, demolition of non-historic elements on 333 Park Avenue, and Rescinding of Designation at 333 Park Avenue and Designation of 931 Gibson Avenue following relocation, subject to the conditions of approval as listed herein. The designation on 333 Park Avenue shall be removed and the designation on 931 Gibson Avenue shall be added only upon safe relocation of the historic resources to 931 Gibson Avenue, as determined by the Chief Building Official and Historic Preservation Officer. The location of the historic landmark property designated by this ordinance shall be indicated on the official maps of the City that are maintained by the City of Aspen Community Development Department. Section 2: Historic Preservation, Major Review A separate application for Historic Preservation Major Development will be submitted for HPC review. The project shall be subject to applicable code requirements, in place at the time of application. The application shall include an updated Relocation Plan, for review by the Parks and Engineering Departments. Approval of the Relocation Plan is required prior to issuance of a building permit for work on 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue Section 3: Parks The relocation of the historic structures will require pruning to trees. The Relocation Plan shall address all applicable Parks Department requirements to ensure protection and minimal impacts to trees. Pruning of City trees for the relocation requires a certified arborist under the supervision of the City Forester, and paid for by the applicant. Permission for any pruning on private property will be P232 IX.b Ordinance #22, Series of 2018 333 Park Ave. & 931 Gibson Ave. Page 3 of 6 required from private property owners prior to Parks signing off on the plan. Any tree removals require owner permission as well as tree removal permits from the Parks Department. Section 4: Engineering The Applicant’s design shall be compliant with all sections of the Municipal Code, Title 21 and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. The project shall meet the Urban Runoff Management Plan Requirements. A major drainage report that meets URMP and Engineering Design Standards is required with building permit submittal. Section 5: Building Permit As part of a building permit review, the applicant will be required to submit a report from a licensed engineer, architect or housemover demonstrating that the house and outbuilding can be moved, and the method for moving and protecting the structures, must be submitted with the building permit application. In addition, the applicant must provide a bond, letter of credit or cashier’s check in a form acceptable to the City Attorney in the amount of $30,000 for the historic house and $15,000 for the historic outbuilding to be held by the City during the duration of the relocation process. Section 6: Impact Fees and School Land Dedication Any applicable fees shall be assessed at the time of building permit application submittal and paid at building permit issuance. The amount shall be calculated using the methodology and fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit submittal. The allocation of any fee credits for demolition work on 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue shall remain with the parcel where the structures are currently located. Credits shall only be given for legally established floor area. Section 7: Stream Margin Review The applicant shall apply for a Stream Margin review for the demolition work on 333 Park Avenue as an administrative review prior to submission of a building permit for the project. Section 8: Existing Litigation This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 9: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 10: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure P233 IX.b Ordinance #22, Series of 2018 333 Park Ave. & 931 Gibson Ave. Page 4 of 6 to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described properties: 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 11: Public Hearing A public hearing on the ordinance was held on the 27th day of August, 2018, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of August, 2018. ________________________ Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk P234 IX.b Ordinance #22, Series of 2018 333 Park Ave. & 931 Gibson Ave. Page 5 of 6 FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _____ day of __________, 2018. ________________________ Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ James R. True, City Attorney P235 IX.b Ordinance #22, Series of 2018 333 Park Ave. & 931 Gibson Ave. Page 6 of 6 ATTACHMENT A: Legal Description of Addresses 333 Park Avenue A tract of land situated in the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7 and in the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado. Said tract is part of the Lone Pine M.S. 1910 and the Mollie Gibson Lode, M.S. 4281 Am and is more fully described as follows: Beginning at the West Corner of Lot 1, Sunny Park Subdivision, whence corner No. 3 of said Mollie Gibson Lode bears N 43°40'00" W 146.00 feet and S 38°00'00" W 100.00 feet; thence S 46°20'00" W 10.00 feet to a point on the centerline of a road easement as shown on a plat recorded in Book 4 at Page 398 of the records of Pitkin County; thence following said centerline 16.23 feet along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 40.00 feet, the chord of which curve bears S 55°17'30" E 16.12 feet; thence S 66° 55'00" E 49.99 feet along said centerline; thence S 32° 09'58" W 13.39 feet; thence S 50° 17'00" W 130.26 feet; thence N 34° 17'00" W 59.99 feet; thence N 52° 40'00" E 34.33 feet; thence N 43°40'00" W 32.60 feet; thence N 46° 20'00" E 86.00 feet; thence S 43° 40'00" E 32.00 feet to the point of beginning. 931 Gibson Avenue Parcel 1: A Parcel of Land situated in the Southeast ¼ of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th Principal Meridian more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point whence corner No. 11 of the East Aspen Additional Townsite bears South 54°52’17” East 58.10 feet; Thence South 34°54’00” West 46.63 feet to The True Point of Beginning; Thence North 63°58’00” West 185.12 feet; Thence South 15°30’00” West 86.60 feet; Thence South 63°54’00” East 155.54 feet; Thence North 34°45’00” East 88.30 feet to The Point of Beginning. Parcel 2: A Tract of Land situated in the Sunset Lode, U.S.M.S. No. 5310, being more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly side line of said Sunset Lode whence Corner No. 10 of East Aspen Additional Townsite bears North 34°45’ East 46.63 Feet; Thence North 63° 58’ West 185.12 feet to a point on the Westerly side line of said Lode; Thence following said Westerly side line North 15°30” East 17.03; Thence South 62°54’41” East 150.27 feet; Thence 39.76 feet along the arc of a curve to the right having a radius of 295.57 feet to a point on said Easterly side; Thence following said Easterly side line South 34°45’ West 10.70 feet to The Point of Beginning. Together with any property lying Northerly of the above described property and the Southerly line of Gibson Avenue. P236 IX.b Page 1 of 3 Exhibit A.1 Relocation Staff Findings 26.415.090 Relocation of designated historic properties. The intent of this Chapter is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards:NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or N/A 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or N/A 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met:NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. YES YES YES YES YES MET Review Criteria for 333 Park Avenue & 931 Gibson Avenue Section 26.415.090 -Relocation of Designated Historic Properties Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.415.090 - Relocation of Designated Historic Properties 26.415.090 Relocation of designated historic properties. The intent of this Chapter is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. MET P237 IX.b Page 2 of 3 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Finding: The proposed relocation will not adversely affect the integrity related to the site because it is not located in a Historic District or in its original location. Currently there are no apparent architectural relationships between 333 Park and the closest historic residence due to irregular building placement/orientation and building alterations. The applicant has met with other city departments to discuss a route for safe relocation, provided documentation determining the historic buildings would withstand the relocation, and a receiving site has been identified. Staff finds that the proposal meets criteria 1, 2, and 4. and the additional three criteria for relocation. A more detailed relocation/repair plan will be required at design review. Part of the criteria for evaluating if relocation is appropriate is ensuring the relocation results in the best preservation option for the historic resource given its character and integrity. In evaluating this, staff examines the physical relocation impacts (can the structure withstand the act of relocation), as well as what the final development opportunities for the site will be. In this case, the applicant has provided documentation from an experienced house mover confirming the resources can physically withstand relocation. Typically, relocation of a historic resource to a new site is highly discouraged (HP Design Guidelines 9.8), however, the preservation plan to restore the two historic resources to their original configuration P238 IX.b Page 3 of 3 and re-introduce the front façade back to its street facing orientation helps promote the goal of creating awareness and appreciation for Aspen’s Victorian Heritage. Staff finds that all applicable criteria are met for the proposal for relocation. P239 IX.b Page 1 of 2 Exhibit A.2 Demolition Staff Findings 26.415.080 Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, N/A b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, N/A c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or N/A d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. YES YES YES YES MET Review Criteria for 333 Park Ave. Section 26.415.080 - Demolition of Designated Historic Properties or Properties within a Historic District Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.415.080 - Demolition of Designated Historic Properties or Properties within a Historic District 26.415.080 Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. MET P240 IX.b Page 2 of 2 approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. Staff Finding: The applicant proposes to demolition all non-historic additions that have been made to the historic resource. These additions do not contribute to the cultural significance of the historic property, which meets criteria d.) and meet the three additional criteria for demolition because it is not contributing. Historic Preservation Guidelines 2.6 calls for the removal of non-historic layers that cover the original material. It is important to follow through with repairing the original, underlying material. Staff finds the applicable criteria are met. P241 IX.b Page 1 of 8 Exhibit A.3 Designation Staff Findings 26.415.050 Rescinding Designation. A. Application and review. An application for the removal of a property from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall follow the same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation described in this Chapter except that with respect to Subsection 26.415.030.C.4 an explanation shall be provided describing why the property no longer meets the criteria for designation. The HPC and City Council shall determine if sufficient evidence exists that the property no longer meets the criteria for designation and, if so, shall remove the property from the inventory. A parcel created through an historic Landmark lot split cannot be de-listed unless there is a finding that the resource which originally caused the site to be landmarked meets the criteria for removal from the historic inventory. Staff Finding: 333 Park Avenue (also known as 101 Park) was designated in 1995, Ordinance 4, Series 1995, and added to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an individual Aspen Victorian Landmark. (See Exhibit C.) This property met the criteria for designation because it contained historically significant building from the 19th century. A property will be “delisted” or removed from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures list if it no longer maintains its integrity or historic significance. If the historic residential buildings located at 333 Park Ave. are removed and relocated to another site, the property will no longer meet the criteria for historic designation. The property will no longer contain a significant structure from the 19th century nor posses historical integrity. A.Application and review.An application for the removal of a property from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall follow the same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation described in this Chapter except that with respect to Subsection 26.415.030.C.4 an explanation shall be provided describing why the property no longer meets the criteria for designation.The HPC and City Council shall determine if sufficient evidence exists that the property no longer meets the criteria for designation and,if so,shall remove the property from the inventory.A parcel created through an historic Landmark lot split cannot be de-listed unless there is a finding that the resource which originally caused the site to be landmarked meets the criteria for removal from the historic inventory. NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY a) The property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it contains structures which can be documented as built during the 19th century, and NOT MET b) The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. NOT MET MET Review Criteria for 333 Park Ave. Section 26.415.050 - Rescinding Designation Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.415.050 - Rescinding Designation P242 IX.b Page 2 of 8 Staff finds the applicable criteria for retaining designation will no longer be met, if relocation is approved. 26.415.030 Historic Designation. The designation of properties to an official list, that is known as the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures which is maintained by the City, is intended to provide a systematic public process to determine what buildings, areas and features of the historic built environment are of value to the community. Designation provides a means of deciding and communicating, in advance of specific issues or conflicts, what properties are in the public interest to protect. B. Aspen Victorian 1. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of Aspen Victorian, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to the criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district shall meet the criteria described below: 1. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of Aspen Victorian, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to the criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district shall meet the criteria described below: NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY a) The property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it contains structures which can be documented as built during the 19th century, and b) The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. YES YES Review Criteria for 931 Gibson Ave. Section 26.415.030 - Historic Designation MET Summary of Review Criteria for Section 26.415.030 - Historic Designation 26.415.030 Historic Designation. The designation of properties to an official list, that is known as the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures which is maintained by the City, is intended to provide a systematic public process to determine what buildings, areas and features of the historic built environment are of value to the community. Designation provides a means of deciding and communicating, in advance of specific issues or conflicts, what properties are in the public interest to protect. B. Aspen Victorian P243 IX.b Page 3 of 8 a) The property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it contains structures which can be documented as built during the 19th century, and b) The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. Staff Finding: If a site becomes a receiving site for historically significant resources, historic designation of the property will ensure protection and benefits for the historic resource according to the municipal code. If the historic residential buildings from 333 Park Ave. are relocated to 931 Gibson Ave., the site will meet criteria a. and b. The public score sheet, conducted by staff, records a score of 90 where 50 is the required minimum score threshold for designation. (Public score sheet attached.) Staff finds the applicable criteria for historic designation are met, and s upports designating 931 Gibson Ave. if the relocation is approved. P244 IX.b Page 4 of 8 INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- 19TH CENTURY HIGH STYLE RESIDENCE Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. Address: 931 Gibson Avenue (after relocation of historic resources to site) Total Score = 90 (minimum threshold for designation is 50) ________________________________________________________________________ • LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. 5- The structure is in its original location. 4- The structure has been moved within the original site but still maintains the original alignment and proximity to the street. 3- The structure has been moved to another site, still within the historic Aspen townsite. 0- The structure has been moved to a location which is dissimilar to the original site. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 2 ________________________________________________________________________ • DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. BUILDING FORM : 7 10- The original plan form, based on Sanborne maps or other authenticating documentation, is unaltered and there are no recent additions. 8- The structure has been expanded but the original plan form is intact and the addition(s) would meet the design guidelines. 6- The plan form has been more altered, but the addition would meet the design guidelines. 4- The structure has been expanded in a less desirable manner, but if the addition were removed, at least 50% of the building’s original walls would remain. 2- The structure has been expanded and the addition overwhelms the original structure and has destroyed more than 50% of the building’s original walls. 0- Two historic structures have been linked together and the original character of the individual structures is significantly affected. ROOF FORM : 10 10- The original roof form and the original porch roof, if one existed, are unaltered. 8- The original main roof is intact, but the porch roof, if one existed, has been altered. 6- Dormers have been added to the structure or additions have been made that alter roof form, but the changes would meet the design guidelines. 2- Alterations to the roof have been made in a less sensitive manner, not in conformance with the design guidelines. 0- Less than 50% of the original roof form remains. P245 IX.b Page 5 of 8 SCALE : 5 5- The original scale and proportions of the building are intact. 4- The building has been expanded, but the overall impression of it as a 1 ½ or 2 story structure, with a relatively small footprint, is retained. 3- The building has been expanded and the scale of the original portion is discernible. 0- The scale of the building has been negatively affected by a large addition, whose features do not reflect the scale or proportions of the historic structure. FRONT PORCH : 10 10- The front porch is not enclosed and original decorative woodwork remains, or if there was no porch historically, none has been added. 8- The front porch is enclosed but maintains an open character and some original materials. 6- The front porch is not original, but has been built in an accurate manner, per the design guidelines. 2- The front porch has been enclosed and most original materials are gone. 0- The front porch is completely gone or replaced with a porch which would not meet the design guidelines. DOORS AND WINDOWS : 9 10- The original door and window pattern is intact. 8- Less than 50% of the doors and windows are new and the original openings are intact. 2- More than 50% of the doors or windows have been added and/or some of the original opening sizes have been altered. 0- Most or all of the original door and window openings have been altered. COMPLEXITY OF DESIGN : 5 5- The overall sense of “elegance” and intricacy in design and detailing is intact. 0- Detailing has been removed and the building has a “plain” appearance. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 50)= 46 • SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. PROXIMITY TO SIMILAR STRUCTURES : 5 5- The structure is one of a set (at least three) of buildings from the same period in the immediate area. P246 IX.b Page 6 of 8 3- The building is part of a neighborhood that has numerous remaining buildings from the same period. 0- The building is an isolated example from the period. HISTORIC LANDSCAPE FEATURES : 3 5- A number of elements of the original landscape are in place, including historic fences, walkways, plant materials and trees, and ditches. 3- Few or no elements of the original landscape are present, but the current landscape supports the historic character of the home. 0- The current landscape significantly obscures views of the structure. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 10) = 8 • MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. EXTERIOR WOODWORK : 6 10- Most of the original woodwork, including siding, decorative shingles, trim, fascia boards, etc. remain. 6- Original siding has been replaced, but trim and other elements remain. 6- Original siding is intact but trim or other elements have been replaced. 0- All exterior materials have been removed and replaced. DOORS AND WINDOWS : 8 10- All or most of the original door and window units are intact. 8- Some window and door units have been replaced, but with generally accurate reconstructions of the originals. 6- Most of the original windows have been replaced, but with generally accurate reconstructions of the originals. 0- Windows and/or doors units have been replaced with inappropriate patterns or styles. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20) = 14 ________________________________________________________________________ • WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. DETAILING AND ORNAMENTATION : 5 5- The original detailing is intact. P247 IX.b Page 7 of 8 3- Detailing is discernable such that it contributes to an understanding of its stylistic category. 0- New detailing has been added that confuses the character of the original house or the original detailing is gone. 0- The detailing is gone. FINISHES : 5 5- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry unpainted. 4- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry is painted. 3- Wood surfaces are stained or modern in appearance but masonry is unpainted. 2- Wood surfaces are stained or modern in appearance and the masonry is painted. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 10) = 10 • ASSOCIATION Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. 5- The property would be generally recognizable to a person who lived in Aspen in the 19th century. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 5 ________________________________________________________________________ • BONUS POINTS UNIQUE EXAMPLE : 0 5- The style of the building is unique or one of a small group among the19th century high style homes left in Aspen. (i.e. It is Second Empire, Dutch Revival, or another unusual style.) MASONRY : 0 5- Original brick chimneys and/or stone foundation remains. 5- The structure’s primary wall material is masonry. OUTBUILDINGS : 5 5-There are outbuildings on the property that were built during the same period as the house. PATINA/CHARACTER : 0 5- The materials have been allowed to acquire the character of age and are obviously weathered. ________________________________________________________________________ MAXIMUM NUMBER OF POINTS= 100 (and up to 20 bonus points) MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR DESIGNATION= 50 POINTS P248 IX.b Page 8 of 8 Note: Each area of the integrity analysis includes a description of the circumstances that might be found and a point assignment. However the reviewer may choose another number within the point range to more accurately reflect the specific property. P249 IX.b From: Ian Gray Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2018 5:35 PM To: Sarah Yoon <sarah.yoon@cityofaspen.com>; Patrick Harris <patrick.harris@cityofaspen.com>; Justin Forman <justin.forman@cityofaspen.com> Subject: RE: 333Park/931Gibson Hi Sarah, Attached is a copy of the site visit from last week for the latest tree discussion for the proposed house move. Beyond the house move, Parks will need the usual documents to process a removal/dripline excavation permit for the receiving location at 931 Gibson. The following documents will comprise the checklist of those required for construction-based tree removal / dripline excavation permit applications: 1) a landscape plan that shows all current trees, the existing buildings and an ’X’ on the center of the trees requested for removal; 2) a site construction or management plan that shows tree protection zones around trees being retained, utility ingress points and accurate trenching widths if new access is required, and survey-accurate drawing (to architectural plans) for the absolute limit of disturbance for shoring (micropile, soil nail, or layback excavation) and grading; 3) a landscape plan that shows the new building, retained trees and proposed new tree planting; 4) a spreadsheet for the tree removals with species, diameter at breast height (DBH) measurements in inches, condition rating, and reason for removal; 5) a spreadsheet with proposed tree planting, DBH in inches, and species; 6) A firm quote for the installed cost of proposed new tree planting on company letterhead of the installer if that cost is desired as an offset to the assessed mitigation for the trees proposed for removal. That should cover things from my end. Best, Ian Gray City Forester Parks Department 585 Cemetery Lane Aspen, CO 81611 p: 970.429.2031 ian.gray@cityofaspen.com www.cityofaspen.com EXHIBIT B - REFERRAL COMMENTSP250 IX.b From:Ian Gray To:Sarah Yoon Cc:Flynn Stewart-Severy; David Radeck Subject:333 Park - 931 Gibson Date:Tuesday, July 31, 2018 1:27:31 PM Attachments:image001.png Hi Sarah, I wanted to update my comments related to the 333 Park Landmark moving to the 931 Gibson site. I have had further meetings with the applicants and their designees in the past month to review and walk the proposed transportation route via Park Circle. As requested, the applicants have a certified arborist on their team and have verbally committed to working with Aspen Tree Service. These services will be paid for by the applicant. Some of the pruning that will be required falls outside of recommended best practice for both clearance above roadways and live crown ratios; however, it is reasonable to believe that these trees will survive the required pruning to move the house. My original comments related to COA assets/trees which would be affected during the move are included below as well additional notes to other trees requiring attention not previously addressed. I have not commented on any trees on private property which might require pruning— permission for any pruning would be required from any affected property owners prior to Parks signing off on the plan. Any tree removals would also require owner permission as well as tree removal permits from the Parks Department. - 410 Park, corner - remove 2 smaller stems of multi-stem cottonwood and remove two low branches higher in the canopy - 414 Park, Condos - remove 4 low limbs on multi-stem cottonwood - 511-512 Spruce Street - raise and reduce 4 crabapple trees - 860 Gibson Street – multi stem cottonwood near entrance to trailer park would need raising by removing 3 or four low branches - 851 Gibson - raise street side of lodgepole pine - 931 Gibson - 2 or 3 cottonwoods on opposite side of the street to the receiving site would need raising I am not in favor of removing any of the cottonwood stems at 927 Gibson west of the entrance to the receiving site – these trees should be protected. With a modicum of pruning I believe trees on both sides of the road in the vicinity of the receiving site can be protected from impacts from the house moving. The contractor indicated that it should be feasible to roll past the entrance to the east and then back the unit into the site thereby largely avoiding the trees at the west side entrance. The Park Circle route is an improvement over the two previous routes proposed by the applicant and has the least amount of tree impacts. The overall scope of the project is fairly straightforward. Parks will not need to issue any permits for the COA trees/assets, but I will need to process a work order for the necessary pruning. I hope this helps clarify the Parks Department position. As with any new development/construction, my previous comments regarding the document P251 IX.b submission requirements for the receiving site still apply. Kind regards, Ian Gray City Forester Parks Department 585 Cemetery Lane Aspen, CO 81611 p: 970.429.2031 ian.gray@cityofaspen.com www.cityofaspen.com P252 IX.b Memorandum From: Justin Forman, PE Senior Project Manager City of Aspen Engineering Department To: Sarah Yoon Historic Preservation Planner Community Development Department Date: July 27, 2018 RE: 931 Gibson – 333 Park Historic Conceptual Comments These comments are not intended to be exclusive, but an initial response to the project conceptual packet submitted for purpose of the HPC meeting. General: 1. Sheet A11 shows the 2 moving routes for the project (King or Gibson), it was deemed from site visit with applicant team that these would not work. A 2nd site visit was performed and the new proposed moving route is up Park Circle to Gibson. 931 Gibson Avenue: 1. Reference A7.0 dated 7/10/18. This project is not within the sidewalk deferred zone. Applicant to provide a sidewalk the entire length of the property along Gibson Avenue. This may require relocation of utilities. Applicant may need to coordinate design with Engineering & Parks Departments to minimize tree impacts. 2. Curb & Gutter will be required along the entire length of the property along Gibson Avenue. 3. Applicant will be required to follow the requirements of a major development within the Urban Runoff Management Plan. 333 Park Avenue: 1. Applicant will be required to provide a slope stabilization plan and revegetation plan with native vegetation tied to the appropriate permit(s) during house demolition/relocation. Applicant should be prepared for temporary irrigation for extended period until vegetation establishment. 2. Water service line to the property will need to be abandoned per City of Aspen Water Standards at the main line and this entire service line removed from the ground. P253 IX.b ORDINANCE NO. 4 Series of 1995) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPENt COLORADOt IDENTIFYING AND DESIGNATING THOSE SITES ANDSTRUCTURES CONSTITUTING THE CITY OF ASPEN INVENTORY OF NON-LANDMaRK HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES (ROUND II) AS AUTHORIZED PURSUANT TO SECTION24-?-?09 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE. WHEREAS, Section 24-7-709B of the Municipal Code requires the Aspen Historic Preservation Committee (HPC) to identify and evaluate the historic sites and structures situated within the City of Aspen at least once every five (5) years, prepare an official inventory of the same, and recommend revisions thereto for adoption by the City Council; and WHEREAS, management of the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures is considered to be a vital aspectof Aspen' s historic preservation program and meets an important goal of the HPC; to foster public awareness of Aspen's preservation program and to work in harmony with the community to preserve, protect, andenhance Aspen's historic resources and unique character; and WHEREAS, HPC and Planning Staff completed field studies and inventory documentation between September, 1990 and March, 1992,with the assistance of professional consultants as contractedlby the Planning Department; and WHEREAS, the Inventory adoption process was broken down into two rounds, and through duly noticed public hearings, the Citylof Aspen adopted the 1992 Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures Round I) on June 22, 1992; EXHIBIT C - 333 PARK DESIGNATION (KNOWN AS 101 PARK) P254 IX.b WHEREAS, in undertaking Round II of the Inventory re- evaluation, Planning Staff held public meetings on August 31, September 1, December 7, and December 8, 1994 to assist property owners in understanding the inventory re-evaluation process and historic preservation program; and WHEREAS, the HPC conducted duly noticed public hearings on September 13, 1994 and December 14, 1994, to solicit citizen and property owner input in order to assist HPC in re- evaluating the Inventory; and WHEREAS, the HPC individually reviewed and evaluated the sites and structures on the Inventory and has recommended additions,deletions, and classification changes to the Inventory; and WHEREAS, the HPC recommends that Council ratify and adopt the Inventory of Non-Landmark Historic Sites and Structures (Round II),as proposed. These properties, along with those adopted through Ordinance ~34, Series of 1992, and those structures which have been designated historic landmarks shall constitute the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures," pursuant to Section 24-7- 709 of the Municipal Code.NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT:Section 1 The properties listed in Exhibit " 1," which is attached hereto and fully incorporated herein, shall be P255 IX.b designated as the Inventory of Non-Landmark Historic Sites and Structures (Round II).Section 2 Pursuant to the review and re-evaluation of the Inventory as conducted by the Historic Preservation Committee and Community Development Department, the following properties have been added and included in the Inventory of Non-Landmark Historic Sites and Structures (Round II) as ratified and approved herein:557Walnut, a/k/a Lots 3 and 4, Block 3, J. R. William's Addition to the City of Aspen and an adjoining metes and bounds parcel. Owner: Angeline Griffith106Park, a/k/a Lot 1, Block 2, Riverside Addition and all that part of Regent Street. Also the northerly 15'ofLots 9,10,11 and the northerly 15' of the westerly half of Lot 12, Block 2, Riverside Addition. Owner: Tim Mooney MaroonCreekBridge, a/k/a northeast 1/4 of Section 11,Township 10 South, Range 85 West ofthe 6th P. M., on the Highway 82 right-of-way. Owner: Colorado Department ofTransportationAspen Grove Cemetery, a/k/a a tract of land in Section 18, Township 10 South, Range 84West of the6th P.M. Owner: c/o RamonaMarkalunasAspen Brewery Ruins, a/k/a Lot 1, Oden Lot Split.Owner: Oden andCompany101 Puppy Smith, a/k/a a tract of landsituated in the east 1/2 of Section 12, Township 10 South, Range 85West of the 6th P.M., and in the west 1/2 of Section 12,Township 10 South, Range 84West of the 6th P.M.Owner: Aspen Center for EnvironmentalStudies720 S. Aspen, a/k/a Lots 1,2,13 and 14, Block 9, Eames Addition. P256 IX.b Section 3 The City Council hereby finds that the following municipally owned properties possess historic value and are important to the heritage of the City and the citizens of Aspen and are hereby included in the Inventory of Non-Landmark Historic Sites and Structures (Round II) as ratified and approved herein:107 Juan Street, a/k/a Lots 3-6, Block 11, Eames Addition.Owner: Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Section 4 Pursuant to the review and re-evaluation of the Inventory as conducted by the Historic Preservation Committee and Community Development Department, the following properties are hereby deleted from the Inventory of Non-Landmark Historic Sites and Structures Round II) as ratified and approved herein due to loss of integrity or historic significance:1001E. Hyman, a/k/a Lot A, Block 34, Townsite of Aspen.Owner: Mark Tache and Christen Cooper Tache1020E. Hyman, a/k/a Molny Condominiums, Townsite of Aspen.Owner: Mickie Flanigan824E. Hyman, a/k/a Lot Q, Block 31, Townsite of Aspen.Owner: Gregory Boelens and Mary Upton305W. Hallam, a/k/a Lots F- I, Block 43, Townsite of Aspen.Owner: VEJ and AJD Partnership, LLC327 W. Hallam, a/k/a Lots A- C, Block 43, Townsite of Aspen.Owner: John andAnnScheid 610 W. Francis, a/k/a Lot P257 IX.b 390 Spring, a/k/a Lot 1, Volk Lot Split. Owner: Eugene and Judith Seymour 230 Spring, a/k/a Lots 1 and 2 and the south part of Lot 3, Block 1, and Lot 1 and the south 1/2 of Lot 2, Block 2, Oklahoma Flats Addition. Owner: Richard Volk Revocable Trust and Denise Reich Trust 831 W. Bleeker, a/k/a Lots A-C, Block 12.Owner: Herb and Marsha Klein 801 W. Bleeker, a/k/a Lots D-J, Block 12.Owner: Savanah Limited Partnership Section 5 The following properties that were once on the Inventory, but have since been demolished no longer have historic significance,and are hereby formally removed from the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures:915 S. Mill 1018 E. Hopkins 701 W. Smuggler 113 W. Bleeker 726 W. Bleeker 517 North 300 W. Hopkins 220 Puppy Smith 855 Gibson 407 W. Hallam 801 E. Hyman 225 W. Smuggler Section 6 A map depicting the properties included in the Inventory of Non-Landmark Historic Sites and Structures (Round II) shall be prepared by the Community Development Department and made available for public inspection during regular business hours in the offices of the P258 IX.b Section 7 This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 8 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 9 A public hearing of the ordinance shall be held on the 27th day of February, 1995, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law!by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the /~ day of 1995. John S. Bennett, Mayor Kathryn S~Koch, Sity Clerk 6 P259 IX.b John S. Bennett, Mayor Kathryn ~. K~ch, City Clerk P260 IX.b INVENTORY OF NON-LANDMARK HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCT~ (ROUND II) FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AS ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO. __, (SERIES OF 1995)ADDRESS LEGAL OWNER AREA RATING 920 W. Hallam Lots M-P, and Skiff West End Significant Lot M, Block 4 629 W. Smuggler Lot A and the Marolt West End SupportingW 1/2 of Lot B, Block 21 421 N. 5th Lots H and I, Hall West End Supporting Block 21 633 W. Main Lot A, Block 24 Fleisher and P261 IX.b Address Legal Are__aOwner Raling 165 N. Park A parcel being Bibbig Smuggler Smuggler part of Lot l, Sunny Park 1280 Ute Lot 16, Callahan Powdcrhouse East Aspen Contributing Subdivision Enterprises 950 Matchless Lot 4A, Block 1 Bishop Smuggler Supporting Dunn/Bishop Exemption 107 Juan Lots 3-6, Block 11Aspen/Pitkln Shadow Mountain Contributing Barnes Addition County Housing Authodty 314 Gillespie Easterly Tract, Earger West End (Lake) ContributingC.F. Murphy and Assoc., Hallam Addition 401No~lhLo~s g-10, Block Phelps West End Contributing 33. Hallam Addition 515 Gillerpie Lots 4-6, Block Beck Wes[ End Contribtnin~ 99, Hallam Addition 330 Lake Lot 1, Hume Lot Hume WeslEnd ( Lake) Conlributi*lg Split 990 E. Hymen Hyman Avenue Gameroff, East End Suppo~ ning Victorian Pierce,Spading Trust 101 Puppy Smith Lots 4-10, Puepke West End Supporting Block 4, Lakeview Addition 330 Gillespie Lot 2, Turley Horsey West End (Lake) Contributing 240 Lake Lot 15, Wogan Wogan West End ( Lake) Contributing Lot Split 233 W. Hallam Lots A-C and BennlnghofWest End Contributing W 6.64' of Lot D, Block 50223 E. Hallam Lots C~F, Block Berko West End Suppo~xing 72 209 E. Bleeker Lots C and D, Hayes West End (Church) Supporlthg Block 73304-308 S. Galena North I/ 2 of Arcades Commercial Cure Signdicant Lois A-C. Assoc.. Ltd.Block 95 625 E. Hopkins LotG. Block 99 Bogaer~ East Aspen Support'ling Family Trust 719 E. Hopkins Lots E-F, Okie Easl Aspen Supporting Block [ 04 101 Park Northeast part Bibbig Smuggler Suppoming of Lol I, Sunny ParkSubdivision Aspen Grove A tract of land c/ o Markalunas Smuggler SigniEaant Cemetery in Section 18 Township 10South, Range 84 West of the6thP.M.720 S. Aspen Lots 1, 2,13&14, Holland House Shadow P262 IX.b Maroon Creek Northeast 1/4 of Colorado Depl. Aspen vicinity Significant Bridge Section 1 l, of Transportation Township 10 South the 6th P.M. on right- of-way Aspen Brewery Lot 1, eden eden and Co. Smuggler Supporting 557 WalnutLots 3&4, Gdffith Smuggler Significant Block3, J. R.Williams Addition to the City of adjoining metes and hounds parcel 106 Park Lot 1, Block 2 Mooney Smuggler Supporting Riverside Addition and all that part of Regent St. lying southerly of and adjacent to said Lot I projected southerly line of Regent St. Also the northerly 15' ofLots9,10,11 & the N 15'15' of theW 1/2 of Lot 12, Block 2 Riverside Addition 935 King A tract of land Kappelli Smuggler Supporting in Section 7-10-84, being a part of tract 40, East Aspen AdditionandSunsetLode, U.S.M.S. No. 5310, and alsopaCtof Lots 1,2&3,Block 5and part of Lots3&4, Block 6,and a part of P263 IX.b EXHIBIT D - GMQS EXEMPTION APPROVALP264 IX.b P265 IX.b 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM June 4, 2018 Aspen Historic Preservation Commission c/o Ms. Sarah Yoon City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue Applications Dear Commission and Ms. Yoon: Please accept our application for Historic Designation, Delisting, Demolition, Relocation, Major Development, a setback variance, and the 500 sf FAR Bonus. This application encompasses two properties: 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue. The proposal is to relocate the historic landmark located in its 1960s unoriginal location at 333 Park Avenue to a more prominent location at 931 Gibson meets the goals of the historic preservation program and is the best historic preservation approach for the compromised landmark. Background The building located at 333 Park Avenue was originally located at 112/114 East Main Street. The two story Victorian style residence was built in 1889 by M.C. Jacobs. The building has an interesting history that is documented in Exhibit A. While located at 112/114 East Main Street, the building was initially a residence Figure 1: circa 1890s Main Street. Page 1 of 101 EXHIBIT E - LAND USE APPLICATIONP266 IX.b 333 Park and 931 Gibson HPC Review and was later operated as the Columbine Lodge by Mabel Beckerman in the 1950s. In the fall of 1961, Mabel ran an advertisement in the Aspen Times to sell the buildings on the property. The land had been purchased by Fritz Benedict to construct the Herbert Bayer and Fritz Benedict designed Pitkin County Library (currently Design Workshop). Dieter Bibbig and his mother Gertrude purchased the structures and moved them to their riverfront property at 333 Park Avenue. The front of the Victorian was positioned away from the road to face the Roaring Fork River and Aspen Mountain and the small one story addition shown below was moved to the side of the 333 Park property. Gertrude Bibbig operated a day care out of the house. Until recently, Dieter rented the property. In 2017 Dieter sold the home to the Hendry family. 333 Park property The 333 Park property is located off of Park Avenue on an access easement that provides vehicular access to three other properties. The landmark has various additions; however many of the architectural details and materials, including windows, the roof, front porch, etc. are intact. The 333 Park property has numerous site constraints that severely compromise the necessary historic preservation and restoration. The property is 10,418 sf in size; however the actual lot size is about 6,000 sf after deducting slopes, areas below the high water line and the access easement. The most restrictive requirement is the Stream Margin area that limits development height and location away from the river. Setback requirements for a 10,400 sf lot in the R-6 Zone District, the access easement running through the front yard, and a fire truck turnaround easement became challenges to historic preservation that were not able to be overcome on the 333 Park site. The drawing set in Exhibit Q highlights 4 different options (Option A – D) that the design team explored before proposing relocation. All options show the intrusions into other community goals such as stream margin height limitation or required setbacks from the edge of pavement. Historic Preservation Approach Over the past year, the Hendry family and their design team have looked at countless iterations for the 333 Park property. The top priority for the Hendrys is to restore the landmark and the one story historic addition in its original configuration. Figure 2: Columbine Lodge Figure 4: Aspen Times advertisement Figure 3: Photograph in Aspen Times of one story historic addition. Figure 5: November 1964. Photograph taken from Roaring Fork River facing Red Mountain. Page 2 of 101 P267 IX.b 333 Park and 931 Gibson HPC Review Turning the landmark 180 degrees to place the historic front facade perpendicular to the “street” (the street is really an access easement) did not allow enough space for the one story historic addition to be placed in its original location behind the landmark (sheets A04 & A05 in Exhibit Q). The design team turned the landmark and addition 110 degrees and also 90 degrees to fit the historic buildings onto the parcel, with setback variances (sheets A06 & A07 in Exhibit Q); however the building was facing the side of the neighboring building and the “street” paralleled the side of the landmark which adversely affected the context of the landmark and the site. The 110 degree and 90 degree options did not accommodate a garage without setback variances (a garage is not shown on sheets A06 & A07). Parking is very limited in this neighborhood, so adequate parking that meets Code requirements (2 onsite spaces) is imperative. The Hendrys are committed to the proper restoration of these buildings, which was impossible at 333 Park, and began to look for a different property that was more aligned with the landmark’s original location on East Main Street and highlighted the historic resources in a way that contributed to the streetscape. Requesting relocation of the historic resources to a different lot was not an easy decision – the Hendrys and the design team discussed the concept for months before meeting with Planning Staff and vetting the idea. When looking for a receiver lot, the goal was always to find a lot with frontage similar to its original location in order to meet best historic preservation practices. As stated in the Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines: The Hendrys found 931 Gibson Avenue, which is just down the street from Park Avenue, and is a rectangular lot with street frontage that is similar to East Main Street and aligns with the Design Guidelines. 931 Gibson has a 1980s single family home that would be demolished to accommodate the landmark. The City is currently processing a building permit to demolish the existing building and to construct a new single family home that was submitted by the current owner of 931 Gibson. This permit would be abandoned if the proposed relocation of the landmark is approved. The landmark and one story historic addition fit on the 931 property in their original configuration with the one story addition directly behind the two story landmark. The orientation of the landmark to the “The character of a historic structure is greatly influenced by the surrounding framework of streets and public spaces, the physical characteristics of the specific site, and the way in which the historic resource is situated on the lot.” Figure 6 – 9: Existing photographs of 333 Park landmark, and historic aerial photograph of landmark on Main St. Page 3 of 101 P268 IX.b 333 Park and 931 Gibson HPC Review street matches its original location on Main Street. A full basement, small connector and a garage are proposed as new construction for the landmark after it is relocated to 931 Gibson. The primary focus is to restore the landmark and addition to its original appearance using photographs included in Exhibit A and information uncovered during construction. The Hendrys are under contract to purchase 931 Gibson pending the ability to relocate 333 Park to 931 Gibson. There are numerous land use reviews associated with this request; however there are less requests than would have been associated with the landmark development if it stayed at 333 Park. Below please find a brief summary of the land use requests – detailed criteria for review are addressed in the exhibits. Historic Designation/Relocation/ Demolition of non-historic additions (Exhibits A, B & C) The request to relocate the two historic resources, after removing the non-historic additions, involves shifting the historic designation from 333 Park to 931 Gibson to guarantee that the property containing the landmarks is protected. The City requires the application include a request to “delist” 333 Park and to “list” 931 Gibson as part of the relocation request to track the designated parcel with the designated landmarks. This is similar to the request HPC reviewed for the Zupancis buildings on Main Street that were transferred to Holden Marolt Open Space except the Zupancis buildings were in their original location. The Hendrys interest in historic preservation was clear when they requested a comprehensive history be researched for the landmark after purchasing the property last summer. The history is included as Exhibit A and is responsible for the discovery of the one story historic addition that is currently engulfed in non- historic additions. All non-historic additions are proposed to be demolished prior to relocation of the resources. The design team has met with multiple city departments and Bill Bailey to discuss the preferred route to move the buildings to Gibson. The buildings were already moved once and Bill is confident that they can withstand another relocation (see letter included as Exhibit C). There are two different routes for the City to consider, both of which will ensure safe delivery of the resources. The design team will continue to vet the two different routes to determine the best pathway for the historic resources after relocation is approved by HPC and City Council. FAR Bonus (Exhibit D) In the future, the Hendrys plan to build a detached single family home adjacent to the restored landmark that will be subject to HPC’s Design Guidelines for new construction on a landmark lot. This achieves many historic preservation goals including removing development pressure from the landmark to a completely detached building, limiting new construction to the landmark to only the required two car garage (and 55 sf connector), placing all additional square footage in the basement with limited lightwells, and adding another residence adjacent to the landmark which reflects the traditional development pattern and context original to the resource. The extensive restoration work and limiting new construction to the basement and the required 2 car garage qualify for a request of the 500 sf FAR Bonus. The Bonus is not needed for the landmark or proposed project; however since the restoration work is considered as part of this application, we request the 500 sf FAR Bonus with the condition that it is applied to the adjacent detached single family residence only (which will be applied for in the future). Page 4 of 101 P269 IX.b 333 Park and 931 Gibson HPC Review Conceptual Major Development – two car garage (Exhibit E) The Hendrys request a two car garage to meet City Code requirements for off-street parking. In addition a full basement with lightwells for bedroom egress is proposed. A total of approximately 555 sf of new above grade construction (55 sf connector and 500 sf garage) is proposed to be added to the landmark. And the original second floor remains intact. The orientation of the garage is similar to the barn shown on the Sanborn Maps and the 1893 bird’s eye view rendering when the landmark was on Main Street. Setback variance (Exhibit F) A front yard setback variance is requested for the landmark in its new location at 931 Gibson to ensure that the landmark is in a visible and prominent location that is similar to its original relationship to the street. 14 feet of front yard measured form the property line to the steps of the front porch is proposed. 931 Gibson is within the R-15A Zone District which specifies a front setback of 25 feet. The required rear yard setback is 5 feet for garage and 10 feet for living space. The garage complies with the 5 feet rear yard requirement; however, the basement extends about 4’3” into the required 10 feet rear setback to accommodate a small 5 feet connector between the one story historic addition and the garage and to push all new living space subgrade as recommended in the Design Guidelines. In its original location on Main Street, the landmark was probably about 10 feet back from the street, and we felt it was important to maintain this relationship of the building to the street without creating a situation along Gibson that was incompatible with surrounding development. Another reason for the setback variance request is to accommodate the required parking on the property behind the landmark. There is no alley access, and two parking spaces are required by Code. A two car garage is proposed behind the landmark with a one story connection between the one story garage and the one story historic addition. Stream Margin Review (Exhibit G) The Land Use Code considers demolition to be “development” which means that stream margin review is triggered for the vacant 333 Park lot after the landmark is relocated and the non-historic additions are removed. The Hendrys plan to develop a single family home on the site that complies with the Code after the property has been delisted from the inventory. The new home will most likely be subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Commission due to its proximity to the Roaring Fork River. To summarize the proposal requests the following reviews: Figure 10: 1893 Bird’s Eye view map Figure 11: 1893 Sanborn Map Page 5 of 101 P270 IX.b 333 Park and 931 Gibson HPC Review • Exhibit A - Designation and Delisting to move the landmark to 931 Gibson & to remove the vacant 333 Park from the inventory • Exhibit B - Demolition of non-historic additions • Exhibit C - Relocation • Exhibit D - 500 sf FAR Bonus • Exhibit E - Conceptual Major Development for a two car garage • Exhibit F - Setback Variances • Exhibit G - Stream Margin Review We look forward to presenting this project to the Commission as we feel strongly this is the best preservation solution for this important landmark. We explored doing a worksession with HPC prior to submitting this land use application; however the Code requirements for a worksession are almost identical to a full land use application without a binding decision. Considering the time sensitive nature of the pending purchase contract, we decided that it was best to proceed through the formal binding review process with HPC at this time. We would like to schedule a site visit with HPC to the 333 Park and 931 Gibson properties prior to the first HPC hearing. Please contact me if you have any questions or would like more information to complete your review. sara@bendonadams.com or 970-925-2855. Kind Regards, Kind Regards, Sara Adams, AICP Principal BendonAdams, LLC Attachments: A - Designation and Delisting to move the landmark to 931 Gibson & to remove the vacant 333 Park from the inventory B - Demolition of non-historic additions C - Relocation (including letter from Bill Bailey confirming ability to relocate structures) D - 500 sf FAR Bonus E - Conceptual Major Development for a two car garage F - Setback Variances G - Stream Margin Review H – Agreement to pay form I - Land Use Application and Dimensional Requirements Form. J – Pre-Application conference summary K - Disclosure of ownership – both properties L - Authorization to submit – owner of 931 gibson M - Authorization to represent N - HOA compliance form – both properties O - List of owners within 300 ft. – both properties P - Vicinity Map Q - Drawings, Site plan, Survey, Renderings R - Streetscape Page 6 of 101 P271 IX.b Exhibit A Transfer historic designation listing from 333 Park to 931 Gibson Exhibit A – Historic Designation of 931 Gibson Ave. & Rescinding Designation of 333 Park Ave. The request to transfer the historic resources from 333 Park to 931 Gibson requires a determination that that 931 Gibson is added to the Historic Inventory and subsequently that 333 Park is rescinded from the Historic Inventory. Clearly, after the landmark is removed from the 333 Park Avenue property, 333 Park will have no historic significance as the property will be vacant. Excerpts from the Land Use Code are provided below: 26.415.030. Designation of historic properties. The designation of properties to an official list, that is known as the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures which is maintained by the City, is intended to provide a systematic public process to determine what buildings, areas and features of the historic built environment are of value to the community. Designation provides a means of deciding and communicating, in advance of specific issues or conflicts, what properties are in the public interest to protect. B. Aspen Victorian 1. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of Aspen Victorian, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to the criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district shall meet the criteria described below: a) The property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it contains structures which can be documented as built during the 19th century, and b) The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. 26.415.050. Rescinding designation. A. Application and review. An application for the removal of a property from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall follow the same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation described in this Chapter except that with respect to Subsection 26.415.030.C.4 an explanation shall be provided describing why the property no longer meets the criteria for designation. The HPC and City Council shall determine if sufficient evidence exists that the property no longer meets the criteria for designation and, if so, shall remove the property from the inventory. A parcel created through an historic Landmark lot split cannot be de-listed unless there is a finding that the resource which originally caused the site to be landmarked meets the criteria for removal from the historic inventory. Response: It is common practice throughout the country to designate the parcel that contains the historic resource(s) as historic, rather than just designating only the building because preserving both a sense of place, context, and setting is oftentimes just as important as preserving the actual building. The historic resources at 333 Park were relocated in 1961 from Main Street to Park Avenue, the two story building Page 7 of 101 P272 IX.b Exhibit A Transfer historic designation listing from 333 Park to 931 Gibson was turned 180 degrees to face the Roaring Fork River with views of Aspen Mountain, and the one story addition was turned 90 degrees and engulfed in new construction. While the buildings on the 333 Park property are historic and contribute to Aspen’s 19th century heritage, the 333 Park property does not contribute to the sense of place or setting. The atypical 333 Park property with steep slopes and river frontage detracts from the historic significance of the landmark which originally faced Main Street, was located on a relatively flat rectangular townsite lot with the one story historic addition at the rear and a barn along the alley. In its current location at 333 Park, the landmark is barely visible from Park Avenue (the heavily altered rear of the landmark faces the driveway) and is accessed from a vehicular access easement. The original front porch is no longer at grade, but is cantilevered above a basement walkout due to the steep slopes. The property at 931 Gibson Street is located in a residential neighborhood with other 19th century landmarks (indicated on map below with “H”) and is a mostly rectangular lot with direct street frontage. The integrity of setting would be exponentially increased in the 931 location as opposed to its current location at 333 Park. The landmark building is heavily altered, as shown in Exhibit Q (sheet A03), but retains enough evidence of historic characteristics to be properly restored. In addition the photographs included in the historic report below inform accurate restoration, including restoration of the building’s relationship to grade. In addition, the overall integrity of the resource is increased by restoring the one story historic addition to its original configuration and appearance with a side porch (based on the Sanborn Map footprint). There are only a handful of original one story historic additions left in town and it is imperative that we preserve the few remaining resources. In addition to restoring the two story Victorian relationship to grade, architectural details, original configuration and appearance of the addition, the visibility of the landmark at Gibson provides public benefit and enhances the historic preservation program. In its current location and condition at 333 Park, the building scores a 68 out of 100 on the integrity scoring sheets. In the proposed location at 931 with the proposed restoration, the building scores a 93. The level of integrity is severely compromised at 333 Park; however with the proposed relocation and restoration, the level of integrity is significantly increased to clearly meet the criteria for listing on the Historic Inventory. In addition, the 19th Century Victorian relates to the context of the neighborhood which includes many landmarks of the same time period. Top to bottom: Landmark on Main Street, Sanborn Map, current view of landmark from Park Ave., front porch overhanging slope and facing river, vicinity map to show access easement with arrow. Page 8 of 101 P273 IX.b Exhibit A Transfer historic designation listing from 333 Park to 931 Gibson A complete history of the buildings that demonstrate compliance with the review criterion A for designation is found on the preceding pages. Criterion B is met for the 931 Gibson property as it restores a similar context to Main Street with surrounding historic landmarks, a typical lot shape, and direct street frontage. The integrity score will be exponentially increased from 68 to 93 with the proposed relocation and restoration. After the buildings are relocated, 333 Park will not meet either criteria for listing on the Historic Inventory as it will be a vacant site. H H H H H H H H H H H H Page 9 of 101 P274 IX.b 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM History The property located at 333 Park Avenue was originally located at 112/114 East Main Street, Lot N, Block 66. The two-story Victorian was built in 1889 and is included in the September 1890 Sanborn Map shown below. M.C. Jacobs owned the property when the building was constructed. Figure 1: (top row, left to right)1890 Sanborn Map, 1893 Sanborn Map, (bottom row left to right)1898 Sanborn Map, 1904 Sanborn Map. Figure 2: 1890-1899 close up of Aspen aerial photograph. Page 10 of 101 P275 IX.b C.H. Jacobs While M.C. Jacobs is listed as the owner between 1888 and 1892, C.H. Jacobs lived in the home with his family between 1889 and 1892 1. The Aspen Weekly provides an account of a birthday party held at their home in November 1889. The Jacobs had at least two children – Dale Osman Jacobs, the first baby born in Aspen in 1881 2, and Edna Irene Jacobs born in 1883.3 Jacobs was a miner associated with many local mines and many notable people including Durant, Tabor, McPherson, Catherine Brown and Devereux. He was president of the School Board in 1881 4 and Pitkin County Treasurer in 1884. Jacobs, A. McPherson and James McPherson comprised the firm C.H. Jacobs & Co.5 Jacobs was also recognized and thanked for his work in bringing the first telegraph line to Aspen from Glenwood Springs as part of the Aspen and Glenwood Telegraph and Telephone Company in 1886 6 In the fall of 1887, C. H. Jacobs constructed a building in the middle of East Bleeker Street after receiving information that its was an abandoned street.7 He was ordered to remove the building within 10 days. In 1888 C.H. Jacobs sold the property where the Hotel Jerome sits to Mr. Phillips and Mr. Byxbee for $10,000.8 He and his family lived on a ranch in Sopris Creek. They traveled to Denver and Glenwood Springs frequently and returned to Aspen in 1889 to build a home on Main Street.9 According to an article in the Aspen Weekly Times in June 8, 1889, the architect and builder of the residences was Mr. Z. H. Bowles. The building is described as “a Queen Anne cottage, modernized somewhat on the Eastlake style of architecture.”10 The 1 The Aspen directories from 1889, 1890, and 1892 list 114 E. Main as the residence of C.H. Jacobs. 2 Rocky Mountain Sun. April 8, 1882. 2. 3 The Aspen Evening Chronicle. June 12, 1890. 4. “Birthday Party” 4 The Aspen Times. November 12, 1881. 2. “Rules: Governing the School.” 5 The Aspen Times. April 23, 1881. 1. 6 The Aspen Daily Times. April 12, 1886. “To Glenwood by Telegraph.” 7 The Aspen Daily Times. October 18, 1887. 1. “Council Meeting.” And Aspen Daily Times. January 17, 1888. 1. “Council Meeting.” 8 Rocky Mountain Sun. October 13, 1888. 2. “The New Hotel.” 9 Rocky Mountain Sun. May 25, 1889. 2. “Personal.” 10 The Aspen Weekly Times. June 8, 1889, 1. “Jacobs Residence” Figure 3: 1893 bird’s eye view rendering. The outbuildings look attached due to the perspective. Only the single story gable addition was attached to the main house. Page 11 of 101 P276 IX.b home was completed in September 1889.11 By 1892 he sold his popular Jerome Stables 12 and the family home to Mrs. Nevitt 13, and moved his family due to poor health of Mrs. C. H. Jacobs to the Pacific coast.14 S.L. Nevitt Edward Nevitt and Carey Nevitt are listed in the Aspen Directory as living in the home in 1893. Ed Nevitt opened a news and cigar stand in 1894 next to the Red Onion (formerly the Red Brick Saloon).15 Ed was a member of the local Elks Lodge and is pictured below (third row from the front far left). Figure 4: Local Elks Lodge. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society. 11 Rocky Mountain Sun. September 7, 1889. 3. “Locals.” 12 Aspen Daily Leader. February 28, 1892. 4 “The Jerome Stables are Sold” 13 Aspen Daily Times. May 24, 1892. 4. “Purely Personal.” 14 The Aspen Daily Times. February 28, 1892. 4 “Change of Firm.” 15 The Aspen Daily Times. September 27, 1894. 4 “Round About Town” Page 12 of 101 P277 IX.b According to the local directories and newspapers, George Runtz lived at the home in 1906 and Elsie Pierce lived at the home until 1939. Mabel Beckerman Mabel Beckerman moved to Aspen with her husband John in the late 1930s. They bought the house shortly thereafter and resided there until 10 years after John’s death in 1952. Mabel was active in local social circles and was listed in the paper as participating in the PEO Flower arrangement competitions 16 and as the President of the Ladies Auxiliary in 1951 17. After John’s death Mabel ran the Columbine Lodge, renting out rooms until 1961. She placed an advertisement in the Aspen Times in the fall of 1961 to sell the buildings 18. Tony Vagneur wrote of Mabel Beckerman that she “ran her own boarding house” and “on summer evenings she’d sit out on the porch, sipping whiskey and smoking cigarettes, occasionally hollering at a 9- or 10- year old kid running by, wondering if he had time for a smoke and a shot. Damned right he did.”19 Vagneur described her as “a slight, 70ish woman in a yellow dress who sat out on her porch most every afternoon, with her short, brown hair tied up in a knot on top of her head. Taking in the last vestiges of the day, she would be smoking a cigarette and sipping a glass of whiskey. Mabel had a three-story Victorian, the perfect mini hotel for seasonal ski bums, right where Design Workshop is currently located. From her perch, she could throw a colorful epithet at anyone 16 The Aspen Times. Thursday September 1, 1949. “PEO Announces Prize Winners” 17 The Aspen Times. Thursday February 15, 1951. “Ladies Auxiliary F.O.E” 18 The Aspen Times. September 8, 1961. 11. 19 Vagneur, Tony. Aspen Times. May 16, 2008. “The old women of the West End.” Figure 6: Photo of Columbine Lodge. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society. Figure 5: Mabel Beckerman on the front porch of the Columbine Lodge. Photo by Mary Esbaugh Hayes. Page 13 of 101 P278 IX.b who passed by and usually did. Sometimes, if she was feeling good, she’d share her afternoon libations with a scrawny kid of 9 or 10. Once her house was gone, Mabel wasn’t far behind.”20 20 Vagneur, Tony. Aspen Times. February 18, 2005. “Aspen’s ladies of reminiscence.” Figure 7: Advertisement on September 8, 1961 in the Aspen Times. Figure 8: Aspen Times May 18, 1962 photograph of home being moved. Figure 9: Undated photograph of front porch of Columbine Lodge. Mabel Beckerman is on the left. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society. Page 14 of 101 P279 IX.b Figure 10: 1953 photograph of car race down Main Street. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society. Bibbig Family In the early 1960s, the land was purchased and Mabel placed an advertisement to sell the home relocate it offsite. 1960s Clerk and Recorder records are unclear as to who purchased the land and who purchased the building; however, Dieter Bibbig said that he bought the house from Fritz Benedict. The Bibbig family purchased the structure and moved them to their current location at 333 Park Avenue. The photo shown in Figure 7 is thought to be the rear addition to the residence that is outlined on the Sanborne Maps. It Page 15 of 101 P280 IX.b appears that addition was moved to 333 Park and incorporated into the bandit units on the property. The main two story residence was turned 180 degrees to face the front façade toward the river. The home was placed on a full height walkout basement and the front porch was propped up to accommodate the sloped site. Many of the original features of the building, including the tin roof, interior stairway, pocket doors, hardware, front porch, stained glass window, and one dormer are intact. Dieter Bibbig purchased the home from Fritz Benedict. He immigrated from Kassel Germany in 1956 and initially worked at the Hotel Jerome. The Jerome sponsored his immigration papers which allowed him to stay in Aspen with his mother. Dieter taught skiing and flying gliders at the local airport. A 1959 Aspen Daily Times article headlines “Local Pilot Flies Small Plane NY-Aspen, Starts Business.”21 Dieter was president of Continental Aircraft Imports and marketed German-made aircraft throughout the west. Dieter sponsored his sister Inge when she immigrated to Aspen; however in 1959 she married and Englishman, Michael Brew and eventually moved to England with her husband and two children. Dieter’s mother Gertrude Bibbig ran childcare out of the Park Avenue house. An advertisement from the Aspen Daily Times in 1962 is shown at right.22 Dieter owned the home until 2017 when he sold it to the Hendry family. 21 The Aspen Times, November 19, 1959. “Local Pilot Flies Small Plane NY – Aspen, Starts Business.” 2. 22 The Aspen Daily Times, September 7, 1962. Advertisement, 3. Figure 31: 1962 Advertisement for childcare at 333 Park. Figure 42: Dieter Bibbig ski jouring behind a Volkswagon Beetle on Durant Avenue. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society. Figure 23: 1980s photograph of Dieter Bibbig (far back, center)and friends. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society. Page 16 of 101 P281 IX.b Figure 14: November 1964. Photograph taken from Roaring Fork River facing Red Mountain. Courtesy Dieter Bibbig. Figure 15: 333 Park Avenue. Courtesy Dieter Bibbig. Figure 16: 333 Park Avenue. Courtesy Dieter Bibbig. Page 17 of 101 P282 IX.b Title History 23: Date Grantor Grantee Location: Book/Pg type 1884 Annie Krapf(sp?) Alexander Allen 14/188 Land 1886 Alexander Allen C.W. Brooks 38/291 Land 1887 C. W. Brooks Alexander Allen 5/487 Land 1887 Alexander Allen John Killam 47/67 Land 1888 John Killam Alexander Allen 54/165 Land 1888 Alexander Allen Ryland Bowles 3/289 Land 1888 Ryland Bowles M.C. Jacobs 3/344 Land 1892 M. C. Jacobs S.L. Nevitt 119/53 Improvements 1892 S.L. Nevitt C.H. Jacobs 82/335 Improvements Unable to find transfer from Jacobs back to Nevitt 1912 S.L. Nevitt Nannie Phillips 147/406 Improvements 1942 Nannie Phillips Mabel Beckerman 170/50 Improvements 1960 Mabel Beckerman Public Trustee 190/532 Improvements 1961 Public Trustee Mabel Beckerman 195/224 Improvements 1962 Dieter Bibbig purchased the building from Fritz Benedict 24. The land was developed as the new home of the Pitkin County Library in a building designed by Benedict and Herbert Bayer. 23 Title history is based on Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder documents. Discrepancies were found between the recorded documents and the newspaper accounts. 24 Firsthand account by Dieter Bibbig, interview September 2017. Page 18 of 101 P283 IX.b Exhibit A Integrity Score Sheet INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- 19TH CENTURY HIGH STYLE RESIDENCE Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. 333 Park location is black 931 Gibson location is blue _______________________________________________________________________ • LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. 5- The structure is in its original location. 4- The structure has been moved within the original site but still maintains the original alignment and proximity to the street. 3- The structure has been moved to another site, still within the historic Aspen townsite. 0- The structure has been moved to a location which is dissimilar to the original site. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 0/2 ________________________________________________________________________ • DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. BUILDING FORM = 4/9 10- The original plan form, based on Sanborne maps or other authenticating documentation, is unaltered and there are no recent additions. 8- The structure has been expanded but the original plan form is intact and the addition(s) would meet the design guidelines. 6- The plan form has been more altered, but the addition would meet the design guidelines. 4- The structure has been expanded in a less desirable manner, but if the addition were removed, at least 50% of the building’s original walls would remain. 2- The structure has been expanded and the addition overwhelms the original structure and has destroyed more than 50% of the building’s original walls. 0- Two historic structures have been linked together and the original character of the individual structures is significantly affected. ROOF FORM = 8/10 10- The original roof form and the original porch roof, if one existed, are unaltered. Page 19 of 101 P284 IX.b Exhibit A Integrity Score Sheet 8- The original main roof is intact, but the porch roof, if one existed, has been altered. 6- Dormers have been added to the structure or additions have been made that alter roof form, but the changes would meet the design guidelines. 2- Alterations to the roof have been made in a less sensitive manner, not in conformance with the design guidelines. 0- Less than 50% of the original roof form remains. SCALE = 3/5 5- The original scale and proportions of the building are intact. 4- The building has been expanded, but the overall impression of it as a 1 ½ or 2 story structure, with a relatively small footprint, is retained. 3- The building has been expanded and the scale of the original portion is discernible. 0- The scale of the building has been negatively affected by a large addition, whose features do not reflect the scale or proportions of the historic structure. FRONT PORCH = 9/10 10- The front porch is not enclosed and original decorative woodwork remains, or if there was no porch historically, none has been added. 8- The front porch is enclosed but maintains an open character and some original materials. 6- The front porch is not original, but has been built in an accurate manner, per the design guidelines. 2- The front porch has been enclosed and most original materials are gone. 0- The front porch is completely gone or replaced with a porch which would not meet the design guidelines. DOORS AND WINDOWS = 9/10 10- The original door and window pattern is intact. 8- Less than 50% of the doors and windows are new and the original openings are intact. 2- More than 50% of the doors or windows have been added and/or some of the original opening sizes have been altered. 0- Most or all of the original door and window openings have been altered. COMPLEXITY OF DESIGN = 3/5 5- The overall sense of “elegance” and intricacy in design and detailing is intact. 0- Detailing has been removed and the building has a “plain” appearance. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 50)=36/49 Page 20 of 101 P285 IX.b Exhibit A Integrity Score Sheet • SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. PROXIMITY TO SIMILAR STRUCTURES = 0/5 5- The structure is one of a set (at least three) of buildings from the same period in the immediate area. 3- The building is part of a neighborhood that has numerous remaining buildings from the same period. 0- The building is an isolated example from the period. HISTORIC LANDSCAPE FEATURES = 0/3 5- A number of elements of the original landscape are in place, including historic fences, walkways, plant materials and trees, and ditches. 3- Few or no elements of the original landscape are present, but the current landscape supports the historic character of the home. 0- The current landscape significantly obscures views of the structure. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 10) = 0/8 • MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. EXTERIOR WOODWORK = 6/6 10- Most of the original woodwork, including siding, decorative shingles, trim, fascia boards, etc. remain. 6- Original siding has been replaced, but trim and other elements remain. 6- Original siding is intact but trim or other elements have been replaced. 0- All exterior materials have been removed and replaced. DOORS AND WINDOWS = 8/8 10- All or most of the original door and window units are intact. 8- Some window and door units have been replaced, but with generally accurate reconstructions of the originals. 6- Most of the original windows have been replaced, but with generally accurate reconstructions of the originals. 0- Windows and/or doors units have been replaced with inappropriate patterns or styles. Page 21 of 101 P286 IX.b Exhibit A Integrity Score Sheet TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20) = 14/14 ________________________________________________________________________ • WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. DETAILING AND ORNAMENTATION = 5/5 5- The original detailing is intact. 3- Detailing is discernable such that it contributes to an understanding of its stylistic category. 0- New detailing has been added that confuses the character of the original house or the original detailing is gone. 0- The detailing is gone. FINISHES = 5/5 5- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry unpainted. 4- All exterior woodwork is painted and masonry is painted. 3- Wood surfaces are stained or modern in appearance but masonry is unpainted. 2- Wood surfaces are stained or modern in appearance and the masonry is painted. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 10) = 10/10 • ASSOCIATION Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. 5- The property would be generally recognizable to a person who lived in Aspen in the 19th century. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 5/5 ________________________________________________________________________ • BONUS POINTS = 3 points for one story historic addition that is hidden within the newer additions. = 5 points for restoring one story historic addition in original configuration UNIQUE EXAMPLE 5- The style of the building is unique or one of a small group among the19th century high style homes left in Aspen. (i.e. It is Second Empire, Dutch Revival, or another unusual style.) Page 22 of 101 P287 IX.b Exhibit A Integrity Score Sheet MASONRY 5- Original brick chimneys and/or stone foundation remains. 5- The structure’s primary wall material is masonry. OUTBUILDINGS 5-There are outbuildings on the property that were built during the same period as the house. PATINA/CHARACTER 5- The materials have been allowed to acquire the character of age and are obviously weathered. ________________________________________________________________________ Totals: 65 points + 3 bonus points for the historic one story building that is hidden within the new additions. 88 points + 5 points for the restored historic one story building. 68 points at 333 Park location / 93 points at 931 Gibson location MAXIMUM NUMBER OF POINTS= 100 (and up to 20 bonus points) MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR DESIGNATION= 50 POINTS Note: Each area of the integrity analysis includes a description of the circumstances that might be found and a point assignment. However the reviewer may choose another number within the point range to more accurately reflect the specific property. Page 23 of 101 P288 IX.b Exhibit B Demolition Exhibit B – Demolition Demolition of designated historic property 26.415.080. Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. Response: The application proposes to remove non-historic additions that have enveloped the landmark over time. After extensive research and a discussion with Dieter Bibbig, it was confirmed that the historic addition documented on the historic Sanborn Maps had been relocated to 333 Park at the same time as the two story historic building. A photograph of the one story historic addition was published in the Aspen Times while the buildings were being moved to Park in 1961 (Exhibit A). The non-historic additions added over time from the 1960s to 2017 by Dieter are proposed to be removed as demonstrated in the architectural set (sheet A03). The historic addition is proposed to be restored using the Sanborn Map and photograph in the Aspen Times from 1961 as a guide. Relevant Design Guidelines used to inform this proposal are found below. 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. • Such an addition is usually similar in character to the original building in terms of materials, finishes and design. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. Page 24 of 101 P289 IX.b Exhibit C Relocation Exhibit C – Relocation 26.415.090. Relocation of designated historic properties. The intent of this Chapter is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Response: The proposal to relocate the historic buildings to a different location was not decided lightly. After close to a year of research, discussions with Staff, analysis and design development, the best preservation decision for the buildings and for the community is to relocate the landmarks to a more traditional, flat lot with street frontage. As demonstrated in the architectural set, the current location of the historic buildings create competing community goals – the buildings infringe on the stream margin review area, sit within required setbacks, and are not in their original configuration. The historic front porch hangs over the steep slope above the river. The historic addition has been detached from the original location at the rear of the two story landmark and is enveloped completely in non-historic additions to the point that no one, not even the City, knew that the historic addition existed. Criteria 2 and 4 (of the first section) are met in this proposal. The location of 333 Park is not within a historic district and the building in its current condition does not contribute to the overall character of the Page 25 of 101 P290 IX.b Exhibit C Relocation parcel. Relocation will not have an adverse impact on the property. As discussed previously, relocating the building to a lot with similar characteristics to its original location on Main Street positively affects the integrity of the building and the surrounding historic buildings along Gibson. The only adjacent historic building to 333 Park is 401 Park, which was relocated from 820 East Durant Avenue in 1974. The one story miner’s cabin at 401 Park has been heavily altered. Further, 333 Park is not located on Park Avenue, but is accessed from a shared driveway easement at the bottom of a short hill off of Park Avenue. Relocating the historic landmarks to 931 Gibson is the best preservation method considering the current conditions, configuration, and Land Use Code requirements at 333 park. A comparison overlaying the Sanborn Map on top of the 333 Park survey and the 931 Gibson survey compares both properties. Before submitting this application, the design team met with Bill Bailey House Movers and with City referral departments to discuss the safe relocation of the historic buildings. First, a letter is attached from Bill Bailey determining that the historic homes are capable of withstanding relocation. There are two different routes that work for the safe relocation of the buildings. The design team will continue to work with the City to determine appropriate tree replacement, curb and gutter replacement and other minor mitigation measures required as part of the relocation route. Historic homes have been moved for decades in Aspen - most recently, the Zupancis historic homes were moved from their original location on Main Street to Holden Marolt Open Space. There are many examples for us to reference to determine an acceptable and safe route for these historic buildings. Applicable design guidelines are addressed below. 9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place may help to preserve the historic fabric. • This activity will require the same level of documentation, structural assessment, and posting of financial assurances as a building relocation. Page 26 of 101 P291 IX.b Exhibit C Relocation Response – n/a. 9.2 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. • In general, on-site relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. • In a district, where numerous adjacent historic structures may exist, the way that buildings were placed on the site historically, and the open yards visible from the street are characteristics that should be respected in new development. • Provide a figure ground study of the surrounding parcels to demonstrate the effects of a building relocation. • In some cases, the historic significance of the structure, the context of the site, the construction technique, and the architectural style may make on-site relocation too impactful to be appropriate. It must be demonstrated that on-site relocation is the best preservation alternative in order for approval to be granted. • If relocation would result in the need to reconstruct a substantial area of the original exterior surface of the building above grade, it is not an appropriate preservation option. Response – Relocation does not result in the loss of original historic material. The building has been moved before and is able to withstand another relocation without significant damage to the building. Non- historic additions will be removed and the few original windows will be protected during relocation. Below is a map showing adjacent historic landmarks adjacent to 931 Gibson (black star). Page 27 of 101 P292 IX.b Exhibit C Relocation 9.3 Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. • It must face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. In general, a forward movement, rather than a lateral movement is preferred. HPC will consider setback variations where appropriate. • A primary structure may not be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. • Be aware of potential restrictions against locating buildings too close to mature trees. Consult with the City Forester early in the design process. Do not relocate a building so that it becomes obscured by trees. Response – The new location at 931 Gibson allows the structure and historic addition to be placed in a position similar to its historic orientation. A similar setback to its original location on Main Street is proposed, which results in a requested setback variance because the required setback at 931 Gibson is 25 ft. The proposed front yard setback at 931 Gibson is 14 feet. 9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade. H H H H H H H H H H H H Page 28 of 101 P293 IX.b Exhibit C Relocation • Raising the finished floor of the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable if needed to address drainage issues. A substantial change in position relative to grade is inappropriate. • Avoid making design decisions that require code related alterations which could have been avoided. In particular, consider how the relationship to grade could result in non-historic guardrails, etc. Response – One of the main reasons to relocation the structure to 931 Gibson is to restore the historic relationship of the building to grade. The slopes at 333 Park render this goal impossible. The design team will use the historic photographs of the building in its original location to accurately recreate the relationship to grade. 9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. • On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a miner’s cottage where there is no evidence that one existed historically is out of character and is not allowed. • Exposed concrete or painted metal flashing are generally appropriate. • Where a stone or brick foundation existed historically, it must be replicated, ideally using stone salvaged from the original foundation as a veneer. The replacement must be similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints. • New AspenModern foundations shall be handled on a case by case basis to ensure preservation of the design intent. Response – The new foundation will match the original shown in the photographs. 9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells. • The size of any lightwell that faces a street should be minimized. • Lightwells must be placed so that they are not immediately adjacent to character defining features, such as front porches. • Lightwells must be protected with a flat grate, rather than a railing or may not be visible from a street. • Lightwells that face a street must abut the building foundation and generally may not “float” in the landscape except where they are screened, or on an AspenModern site. Response – With the exception of the garage, all new living space is located in the basement. Lightwells are minimized and pulled away from the front facade to avoid conflicts with the restored front porch. Lightwells are adjacent to building walls and will be protected with a flat grate as allowed by Building Code. 9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such buildings. Page 29 of 101 P294 IX.b Exhibit C Relocation • The specific methodology to be used in relocating the structure must be approved by the HPC. • During the relocation process, panels must be mounted on the exterior of the building to protect existing openings and historic glass. Special care shall be taken to keep from damaging door and window frames and sashes in the process of covering the openings. Significant architectural details may need to be removed and securely stored until restoration. • The structure is expected to be stored on its original site during the construction process. Proposals for temporary storage on a different parcel will be considered on a case by case basis and may require special conditions of approval. • A historic resource may not be relocated outside of the City of Aspen. Response – Bill Bailey House Movers is responsible for the majority of relocated homes in Aspen. All measures will be taken to protect the home to ensure safe relocation. 9.8 Proposals to relocate a building to a new site are highly discouraged. • Permanently relocating a structure from where it was built to a new site is only allowed for special circumstances, where it is demonstrated to be the only preservation alternative. Response – The buildings were relocated in 1961 to 333 Park which greatly compromised the historic integrity of the resources, not to mention violating many current Land Use Code requirements such as stream margin review and setbacks. The opportunity to restore the landmark and historic addition accurately in a location similar to its original lot on Main Street is a special circumstance that does not occur very often (if ever). This is the best preservation method for the historic buildings and the only preservation alternative to restore the historic addition behind the two story landmark and to maintain the historic building orientation to the street. Page 30 of 101 P295 IX.b Page 31 of 101 P296 IX.b Exhibit D FAR Bonus Exhibit D – FAR Bonus 26.415.110. Benefits. The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain, preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and programs for designated historic properties and districts. Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country. Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and maintaining their property. Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both economically vital and cherished by many. Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits. F. Floor area bonus. 1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e) The construction materials are of the highest quality; f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. 2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor area. Page 32 of 101 P297 IX.b Exhibit D FAR Bonus Response: The Hendrys have taken the preservation of these buildings to the extreme including entering into contract to purchase the property at 931 Gibson to ensure proper preservation and restoration of the landmarks that aligns with the Design Guidelines. The amount of restoration and preservation proposed is exemplary and worthy of the Bonus. The proposed project does not include a large addition to the landmark, instead a two car garage (2 parking spaces are required by Code) is proposed, with a small 55 square feet one story connector behind the restored one story landmark. The majority of new construction is located in the basement. The historic building is clearly the key element of the property. Even though it is not required, the second floor will remain intact within the landmark. All of the review criteria are met, with the exception of historic landscape or site features because none exist at 931. The proposed garage and small lightwells do not need the additional floor area associated with the FAR Bonus. The Hendrys would like to construct a detached single family home on the property in the future, and would like to apply the FAR Bonus to the new construction in order to sterilize the historic building and prevent any future changes or additions. The Bonus is requested at this time because the restoration and preservation are proposed in this application. A condition of approval that the 500 sf FAR Bonus is only applicable to a new single family home that meets the design guidelines, as determined by HPC, is acceptable to the Hendrys. Page 33 of 101 P298 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review Exhibit E – Conceptual Design Review 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a historic district. No building, structure or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. b) The procedures for the review of conceptual development plans for major development projects are as follows: (1) The Community Development Director shall review the application materials submitted for conceptual or final development plan approval. If they are determined to be complete, the applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice of the hearing shall be provided pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. (2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Response: Applicable Design Guidelines are addressed below: Streetscape 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. • Building footprint and location should reinforce the traditional patterns of the neighborhood. • Allow for some porosity on a site. In a residential project, setback to setback development is typically uncharacteristic of the historic context. Do not design a project which leaves no useful open space visible from the street. Response – The proposed location of the landmark respects the original location on Main Street and is similar to other historic properties along Gibson Street and Matchless Street. 1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. When HPC input is requested, the following bullet points may be applicable. • Retain and preserve the variety and character found in historic alleys, including retaining historic ancillary buildings or constructing new ones. • Retain and preserve the simple character of historic ditches. Do not plant flowers or add landscape. • Abandoning or re-routing a street in a historic area is generally discouraged. • Consider the value of unpaved alleys in residential areas. Page 34 of 101 P299 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Opening a platted right of way which was abandoned or never graded may be encouraged on a case by case basis. Response – n/a. 1.3 Remove driveways or parking areas accessed directly from the street if they were not part of the original development of the site. • Do not introduce new curb cuts on streets. • Non-historic driveways accessed from the street should be removed if they can be relocated to the alley. Response – n/a. 1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. • If an alley exists at the site, the new driveway must be located off it. • Tracks, gravel, light grey concrete with minimal seams, or similar materials are appropriate for driveways on Aspen Victorian properties. Response – A shared driveway is proposed for the landmark and the future detached single family home. The proposed material will be provided during Final Design Review to demonstrate compliance with this guideline. 1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. • Reflect the established progression of public to private spaces from the public sidewalk to a semi-public walkway, to a semi private entry feature, to private spaces. Response – The historic hierarchy of spaces will be restored at the 931 Gibson property, which is unattainable at the 333 Park property. A simple straight walkway from the street to the restored front porch, similar to that historically found along Main Street, is proposed at 931 Gibson. 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. • Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical of the period of significance. • Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and install them in the manner that they would have been used historically. For example on an Aspen Victorian landmark set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete. Light grey concrete, brick or red sandstone are appropriate private walkway materials for most landmarks. • The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential properties. A wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an AspenModern property. Page 35 of 101 P300 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review Response – A simple walkway perpendicular from the street to the front porch is proposed. Paving material will be proposed as part of the Final Review application. The width of the walkway will be about 3 feet. 1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site. • Ensure that open space on site is meaningful and consolidated into a few large spaces rather than many small unusable areas. • Open space should be designed to support and complement the historic building. Response – Ample open space is proposed around the historic building as shown on the site plan. 1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. • When included in the initial planning for a project, stormwater quality facilities can be better integrated into the proposal. All landscape plans presented for HPC review must include at least a preliminary representation of the stormwater design. A more detailed design must be reviewed and approved by Planning and Engineering prior to building permit submittal. • Site designs and stormwater management should provide positive drainage away from the historic landmark, preserve the use of natural drainage and treatment systems of the site, reduce the generation of additional stormwater runoff, and increase infiltration into the ground. Stormwater facilities and conveyances located in front of a landmark should have minimal visual impact when viewed from the public right of way. • Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements. Response – Storm water design is considered as part of the new site as is positive drainage away from the landmark in its new location at 931. 1.9 Landscape development on AspenModern landmarks shall be addressed on a case by case basis. Response – n/a. 1.10 Built-in furnishings, such as water features, fire pits, grills, and hot tubs, that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. • Site furnishings that are added to the historic property should not be intrusive or degrade the integrity of the neighborhood patterns, site, or existing historic landscape. • Consolidating and screening these elements is preferred. Response – These features are not proposed at this time. Page 36 of 101 P301 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. • Retaining historic planting beds and landscape features is encouraged. • Protect historically significant vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Removal of damaged, aged, or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. • If a significant tree must be removed, replace it with the same or similar species in coordination with the Parks Department. • The removal of non-historic planting schemes is encouraged. • Consider restoring the original landscape if information is available, including original plant materials. Response – n/a. 1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram. • Simplicity and restraint are required. Do not overplant a site, or install a landscape which is overtextured or overly complex in relationship to the historic resource, particularly in Zone A. In Zone A, new planting shall be species that were used historically or species of similar attributes. • In areas immediately adjacent to the landmark, Zone A and Zone B, plants up 42” in height, sod, and low shrubs are often appropriate. • Contemporary planting, walls and other features are not appropriate in Zone A. A more contemporary landscape may surround new development or be located in the rear of the property, in Zone C. • Do not cover areas which were historically unpaved with hard surfaces, except for a limited patio where appropriate. • Where residential structures are being adapted to commercial use, proposals to alter the landscape will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The residential nature of the building must be honored. • In the case of a historic landmark lot split, careful consideration should be given so as not to over plant either property, or remove all evidence of the landscape characteristics from before the property was divided. • Contemporary landscapes that highlight an AspenModern architectural style are encouraged. Response – Simple landscaping is proposed around the historic structures. Existing trees on the site are preserved. 1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. • Low plantings and ground covers are preferred. Page 37 of 101 P302 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Do not place trees, shrubs, or hedgerows in locations that will obscure, damage, or block significant architectural features or views to the building. Hedgerows are not allowed as fences. • Consider mature canopy size when planting new trees adjacent to historic resources. Planting trees too close to a landmark may result in building deteriorate or blocked views and is inappropriate. • Climbing vines can damage historic structures and are not allowed. Response – Low plants and ground cover will be used around the landmark to not obscure the extensive restoration that is proposed. 1.14 Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting. • Landscape and pathway lighting is not permitted in Zone A (refer to diagram) on Aspen Victorian properties unless an exception is approved by HPC based on safety considerations. • Landscape, driveway, and pathway lighting on AspenModern properties is addressed on a case-by-case basis. • Landscape light fixtures should be carefully selected so that they are compatible with the building, yet recognizable as a product of their own time. • Driveway lighting is not permitted on Aspen Victorian properties. • Landscape uplighting is not allowed. Response – Landscape lighting is not proposed at this time. 1.15 Preserve original fences. • Fences which are considered part of the historic significance of a site should not be moved, removed, or inappropriately altered. • Replace only those portions of a historic fence that are deteriorated beyond repair. • Replacement elements must match the existing. Response – An original fence does not exist and there is no documentation of an original fence in the historic photographs. 1.16 When possible, replicate a missing historic fence based on photographic evidence. Response – n/a. 1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution. • Reserve fences for back yards and behind street facing façades, as the best way to preserve the character of a property. Response – No fence is proposed at this time. Page 38 of 101 P303 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type and style. • The new fence should use materials that were used on similar properties during the period of significance. • A wood fence is the appropriate solution in most locations. • Ornate fences, including wrought iron, may create a false history are not appropriate for Aspen Victorian landmarks unless there is evidence that a decorative fence historically existed on the site. • A modest wire fence was common locally in the early 1900s and is appropriate for Aspen Victorian properties. This fence type has many desirable characteristics including transparency, a low height, and a simple design. When this material is used, posts should be simply detailed and not oversized. Response – n/a. 1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street. • A fence that defines a front yard must be low in height and transparent in nature. • For a picket fence, spacing between the pickets must be a minimum of 1/2 the width of the picket. • For Post-WWII properties where a more solid type of fence may be historically appropriate, proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. • Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment. Response – n/a. 1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of important features of a designated building. • A privacy fence should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts. Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing on the upper portions of the fence. • A privacy fence should allow the building corners and any important architectural features that are visible from the street to continue to be viewed. • All hedgerows (trees, shrub bushes, etc.) are prohibited in Zones A and B. Response – n/a. 1.21 Preserve original retaining walls • Replace only those portions that are deteriorated beyond repair. Any replacement materials should match the original in color, texture, size and finish. Page 39 of 101 P304 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Painting or covering a historic masonry retaining wall or covering is not allowed. • Increasing the height of a retaining wall is inappropriate. Response – n/a. 1.22 When a new retaining wall is necessary, its height and visibility should be minimized. • All wall materials, including veneer and mortar, will be reviewed on a case by case basis and should be compatible with the palette used on the historic structure. Response – n/a. 1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will be reviewed on a case by case basis. Response – The site is not proposed to be regraded. The historic relationship of the building to grade is proposed to be restored. 1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations. • An analysis of the historic landscape and an assessment of the current condition of the landscape should be done before the beginning of any project. • The key features of the historic landscape and its overall design intent must be preserved. Response – n/a 1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its built features. • Do not add features that damage the integrity of the historic landscape. • Maintain the existing pattern of setbacks and siting of structures. • Maintain the historic relationship of the built landscape to natural features on the site. • All additions to these landscapes must be clearly identifiable as recent work. • New artwork must be subordinate to the designed landscape in terms of placement, height, material, and overall appearance. Place new art away from significant landscape features. • Avoid installing utility trenches in cultural landscapes if possible. Response – there is no historic landscape design at 931 Gibson. 1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system. • Minimize the impact of new vehicular circulation. • Minimize the visual impact of new parking. Page 40 of 101 P305 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Maintain the separation of pedestrian and vehicle which occurred historically. Response – Parking is located behind the landmark at the rear of the property in a garage. 1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site. • Protect established vegetation during any construction. • If any tree or shrub needs to be removed, replace it with the same or similar species. • New planting should be of a species used historically or a similar species. • Maintain and preserve any gardens and/or ornamental planting on the site. • Maintain and preserve any historic landscape elements. Response – Existing trees are preserved and protected in this proposal. Restoration Materials 2.1 Preserve original building materials. • Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. • Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. • Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place. Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. • Original AspenModern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy. 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. • Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer to protect it from the elements. Brick or stone that was not historically painted shall not be painted. • If masonry that was not painted historically was given a coat of paint at some more recent time, consider removing it, using appropriate methods. • Wood should be painted, stained or natural, as appropriate to the style and history of the building. 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. • If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish. • Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. For AspenModern buildings, sometimes the replacement of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent. Page 41 of 101 P306 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials. • Original building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with synthetic materials. 2.5 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate. • Regardless of their character, new materials obscure the original, historically significant material. • Any material that covers historic materials may also trap moisture between the two layers. This will cause accelerated deterioration to the historic material which may go unnoticed. 2.6 Remove layers that cover the original material. • Once the non-historic siding is removed, repair the original, underlying material. Response – Original material with integrity will be restored or repaired. Any replacement materials will match the original as described in Guideline 2.3 Original building materials will not be covered. Any non-historic layers will be removed and either replaced or repaired with matching material. Windows 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. • Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operations, and groupings of windows. • Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them. • Preserve the original glass. If original Victorian era glass is broken, consider using restoration glass for the repair. 3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. • Enclosing a historic window is inappropriate. • Do not change the size of an original window opening. 3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. • If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window must also be double-hung. If the sash have divided lights, match that characteristic as well. 3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original. 3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. • Changing the window opening is not permitted. • Consider restoring an original window opening that was enclosed in the past. Page 42 of 101 P307 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. • A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window’s casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. • The historic profile on AspenModern properties is typically minimal. 3.7 Adding new openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed. • Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear or secondary walls. • New windows should be similar in scale to the historic openings on the building, but should in some way be distinguishable as new, through the use of somewhat different detailing, etc. • Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a façade. • Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character defining façade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than replace a historic window. • Install a storm window on the interior, when feasible. This will allow the character of the original window to be seen from the public way. • If a storm window is to be installed on the exterior, match the sash design and material of the original window. It should fit tightly within the window opening without the need for sub- frames or panning around the perimeter. A storm window should not include muntins unless necessary for structure. Any muntin should be placed to match horizontal or vertical divisions of the historic window. Response – Original windows openings will be restored, including the original dormers. Deconstruction of the interior will reveal original opening locations on the rear of the two story landmark. The one story landmark will have simple openings that would have been historically found on this type of addition, unless otherwise discovered during deconstruction. Sash profile and other window details will match the original windows found on the upper floors – these details will be provided in the Final design application for review. Doors 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. • Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. • Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. • If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. • Previously enclosed original doors should be reopened when possible. Page 43 of 101 P308 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. • Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height. 4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. 4.4 When replacing a door or screen door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the building. • A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. • A historic door or screen door from a similar building also may be considered. • Simple paneled doors were typical for Aspen Victorian properties. • Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. 4.5 Adding new doors on a historic building is generally not allowed. • Place new doors in any proposed addition rather than altering the historic resource. • Greater flexibility in installing a door in a new location may be considered on rear or secondary walls. • A new door in a new location should be similar in scale and style to historic openings on the building and should be a product of its own time. • Preserve the historic ratio of openings to solid wall on a façade. Significantly increasing the openings on a character defining façade negatively affects the integrity of a structure. 4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, use a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry door. • Match the material, frame design, character, and color of the primary door. • Simple features that do not detract from the historic entry door are appropriate for a new storm door. • New screen doors should be in character with the primary door. 4.7 Preserve historic hardware. • When new hardware is needed, it must be in scale with the door and appropriate to the style of the building. • On Aspen Victorian properties, conceal any modern elements such as entry key pads. Response – Original door openings will be preserved and restored. The original front entrance and door will face the street and be restored as the primary entrance. Historic hardware remains on the exterior of the home, it will be stored during construction, and reused in its original location on the front door. Page 44 of 101 P309 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review Porch 5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony. • Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions, material and spacing of balusters. • Expanding the size of a historic porch or balcony is inappropriate. 5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details. • Removing an original balustrade, for example, is inappropriate. 5.3 Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate. • Reopening an enclosed porch or balcony is appropriate. 5.4 If reconstruction is necessary, match the original in form, character and detail. • Match original materials. • When reconstructing an original porch or balcony without historic photographs, use dimensions and characteristics found on comparable buildings. Keep style and form simple with minimal, if any, decorative elements. 5.5 If new steps are to be added, construct them out of the same primary materials used on the original, and design them to be in scale with the porch or balcony • Steps should be located in the original location. • Step width should relate to the scale of entry doors, spacing between posts, depth of deck, etc. • Brick, red sandstone, grey concrete, or wood are appropriate materials for steps. 5.6 Avoid adding handrails or guardrails where they did not exist historically, particularly where visible from the street. • If handrails or guardrails are needed according to building code, keep their design simple in character and different from the historic detailing on the porch or balcony. Response – The front porch will be restored to match the historic photographs of Mabel when the house was on Main Street. Some original front porch materials and turned posts still exist at 333 Park. Form, character and details will be repaired or replaced as deemed necessary by staff and monitor. Sanborn Maps indicate a side porch on the one story historic addition which is proposed to be restored. The details of the porch are unknown, so simple turned posts are proposed. The footprint will match the measurements from the historic maps. Architectural Details 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. • Repair only those features that are deteriorated. Page 45 of 101 P310 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Patch, piece-in, splice, or consolidate to repair the existing materials, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. • On AspenModern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to preserve the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily deteriorated material. 6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. • Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of replacing the disassembled material in its original configuration. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. • Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features. • If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish. 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original designs. • The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a misrepresentation of the building’s heritage. • When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence, develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and maintains similar scale, proportion and material. 6.5 Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts. • Where scars on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is no other physical or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that are similar in character to related buildings. • Using ornate materials on a building or adding new conjectural detailing for which there is no documentation is inappropriate. Response – Architectural details will be repaired when possible. Any replacement pieces will be based on original design. While the building is in a deteriorated state, there are many original architectural details that will guide accurate restoration of the landmark. Roof 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. • Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Preserve the orientation and slope of the roof as seen from the street. • Retain and repair original and decorative roof detailing. • Where the original roof form has been altered, consider restoration. Page 46 of 101 P311 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. • Overhangs contribute to the scale and detailing of a historic resource. • AspenModern properties typically have very deep or extremely minimal overhangs that are key character defining features of the architectural style. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. • Skylights and solar panels are generally not allowed on a historic structure. These elements may be appropriate on an addition. 7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color. • Direct vents for fireplaces are generally not permitted to be added on historic structures. • Locate vents on non-street facing facades. • Use historic chimneys as chases for new flues when possible. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. • Reconstruct a missing chimney when documentation exists. 7.6 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. • A new dormer is not appropriate on a primary, character defining façade. • A new dormer should fit within the existing wall plane. It should be lower than the ridgeline and set in from the eave. It should also be in proportion with the building. • The mass and scale of a dormer addition must be subordinate to the scale of the historic building. • While dormers improve the livability of upper floor spaces where low plate heights exist, they also complicate the roof and may not be appropriate on very simple structures. • Dormers are not generally not permitted on AspenModern properties since they are not characteristics of these building styles. 7.7 Preserve original roof materials. • Avoid removing historic roofing material that is in good condition. When replacement is necessary, use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as physical qualities and use a color that is similar to that seen historically. 7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original. • If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. • Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. • Flashing should be tin, lead coated copper, galvanized or painted metal and have a matte, non- reflective finish. Page 47 of 101 P312 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Design flashing, such as drip edges, so that architectural details are not obscured. • A metal roof is inappropriate for an Aspen Victorian primary home but may be appropriate for a secondary structure from that time period. • A metal roof material should have a matte, non-reflective finish and match the original seaming. 7.9 Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. • Adding ornamental cresting, for example, where there is no evidence that it existed, creates a false impression of the building’s original appearance, and is inappropriate. 7.10 Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent possible. • Downspouts should be placed in locations that are not visible from the street if possible, or in locations that do not obscure architectural detailing on the building. • The material used for the gutters should be in character with the style of the building. 8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved. • When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. These include its materials, roof form, windows, doors, and architectural details. • If a secondary structure is not historically significant, then its preservation is optional. The determination of significance is based on documentation of the construction date of the outbuilding and/or physical inspection. A secondary structure that is related to the period of significance of the primary structure will likely require preservation. Response – The roof is proposed to be restored to its original configuration with the original dormers and the decorative tin roof material. Gutters are not proposed at this time. The existing secondary structure will be restored to its original configuration behind the landmark. Current non-historic openings will be removed and a simple restoration to match the footprint on the Sanborn Maps is proposed. Secondary Historic Addition 8.2 Preserve a historic secondary building as a detached structure. • Any proposal to attach a secondary structure is reviewed on a case-by-case basis. • The position and orientation of the structure • should be maintained except when HPC finds that an alternative is the best preservation option. • Some AspenModern properties incorporated garages and carports into the architecture. This pattern should be maintained. 8.3 Do not add detailing or features to a secondary structure that are conjectural and not in keeping with its original character as a utilitarian structure. • Most secondary structures are basic rectangular solids, with simple finishes and no ornamentation. Page 48 of 101 P313 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review 8.4 When adding on to a secondary structure, distinguish the addition as new construction and minimize removal of historic fabric. • Additions to a secondary structure must be smaller in footprint than the original building and lower in height. Maintaining the overall mass and scale is particularly important. • Do not alter the original roof form. • An addition must be inset from the corners of the wall to which it attaches. 8.5 Preserve the original building materials, or match in kind when necessary. 8.6 Preserve original door and window openings and minimize new openings. • If an original carriage door exists, and can be made to function for automobile use, this is preferred. 8.7 If a new garage door is added, it must be compatible with the character of the historic structure. • The materials and detailing should be simple. 8.8 Adaptation of an obsolete secondary structure to a functional use is encouraged. • The reuse of any secondary structure should be sensitive so that its character is not lost. 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. • For Aspen Victorian properties, HPC generally relies on the 1904 Sanborn Fire Insurance maps to determine which portions of a building are historically significant and must be preserved. • HPC may insist on the removal of non-historic construction that is considered to be detrimental to the historic resource in any case when preservation benefits or variations are being approved. Response – The secondary historic addition was originally attached to the rear of the two story Victorian. The addition is proposed to be living space, which aligns with its historic use as an extension of the main house. Original openings are unknown with the exception of a door that is shown in the 1961 Aspen Time photograph. Simple openings and details are proposed in keeping with the simple nature of this secondary structure. Garage Addition 10.3 Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. • A new addition must be compatible with the historic character of the primary building. Page 49 of 101 P314 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • An addition must be subordinate, deferential, modest, and secondary in comparison to the architectural character of the primary building. • An addition that imitates the primary building’s historic style is not allowed. For example, a new faux Victorian detailed addition is inappropriate on an Aspen Victorian home. • An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. • Proposals on corner lots require particular attention to creating compatibility. Response – The garage addition is linked with a short 5ft. long connector to create a clear distinction between the historic buildings and the new garage. The addition is located behind the landmark to not compete with the restored side porch of the one story historic building and to be similar to the outbuilding shown on the Sanborn Map when the buildings were located on Main Street. A comparison of the Sanborn footprint (left) to the proposed building placement (right) is provided below. 10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. • The historic resource must be visually dominant on the site and must be distinguishable against the addition. • The total above grade floor area of an addition may be no more than 100% of the above grade floor area of the original historic resource. All other above grade development must be completely detached. HPC may consider exceptions to this policy if two or more of the following are met: o The proposed addition is all one story o The footprint of the new addition is closely related to the footprint of the historic resource and the proposed design is particularly sensitive to the scale and proportions of the historic resource o The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource Page 50 of 101 P315 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review o The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as existed historically o The project is on a large lot, allowing the addition to have a significant setback from the street o There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions that aren’t being changed o The project is proposed as part of a voluntary AspenModern designation, or o The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc. Response – the historic resource is the focal point of the property. The 500 sf garage and 55 sf connector are significantly less than the floor area of the historic buildings. 10.5 On a corner lot, no portion of an addition to a one story historic resource may be more than one story tall, directly behind that resource, unless completely detached above grade by a distance of at least 10 feet. HPC may consider exceptions to this policy if two or more of the following are met: • The connector element that links the new and old construction is a breezeway or transparent corridor, well recessed from the streetfacing side(s) of the historic resource and the area of two story construction that appears directly behind the one story historic resource is minimal • The footprint of the new addition is closely related to the footprint of the historic resource and the proposed design is particularly sensitive to the scale and proportions of the historic resource • The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource • The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as existed historically • There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions that aren’t being changed • The project is proposed as part of a voluntary AspenModern designation, or • The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc. Response – n/a. 10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. • An addition shall be distinguishable from the historic building and still be visually compatible with historic features. • A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material, or a modern interpretation of a historic style are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from historic construction to new construction. Page 51 of 101 P316 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Do not reference historic styles that have no basis in Aspen. • Consider these three aspects of an addition; form, materials, and fenestration. An addition must relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response. • Note that on a corner lot, departing from the form of the historic resource may not be allowed. • There is a spectrum of appropriate solutions to distinguishing new from old portions of a development. Some resources of particularly high significance or integrity may not be the right instance for a contrasting addition. Response – The new addition is simple, secondary and subtle. A setback and short connector are proposed to create a break between new and old construction. The new building reads as a secondary building and does not compete with the Victorian and historic addition. 10.7 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the street. • Some roof lines and porch eaves on historic buildings may align at approximately the same height. An addition can not be placed in a location where these relationships would be altered or obscured. Response – n/a. 10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. • An addition that is lower than, or similar to the height of the primary building, is preferred. Response – The addition is one story in height and is well below the height of the main building. 10.9 If the addition is taller than a historic building, set it back from significant façades and use a “connector” to link it to the historic building. • Only a one-story connector is allowed. • Usable space, including decks, is not allowed on top of connectors unless the connector has limited visibility and the deck is shielded with a solid parapet wall. • In all cases, the connector must attach to the historic resource underneath the eave. • The connector shall be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. • Minimize the width of the connector. Ideally, it is no more than a passage between the historic resource and addition. The connector must reveal the original building corners. The connector may not be as wide as the historic resource. • Any street-facing doors installed in the connector must be minimized in height and width and accessed by a secondary pathway. See guideline 4.1 for further information. Page 52 of 101 P317 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review Response – n/a. 10.10 Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. • Locating an addition at the front of a primary building is inappropriate. • Additions to the side of a primary building are handled on a case-by-case basis and are approved based on site specific constraints that restrict rear additions. • Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. Response – The addition is at the rear of the building. The majority of new floor area is located in the basement. 10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building. • A simple roof form that does not compete with the historic building is appropriate. • On Aspen Victorian properties, a flat roof may only be used on an addition to a gable roofed structure if the addition is entirely one story in height, or if the flat roofed areas are limited, but the addition is primarily a pitched roof. Response – A gable roof is proposed for the garage. The garage orientation is similar to the outbuilding shown on the 1893 Bird’s Eye View map of the property on Main Street (at right). 10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. • Loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices, and eavelines must be avoided. Response- The addition connects to the one story historic building at the rear in a way that is sensitive to the restored building. 10.13 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of the historic building. Response – n/a. 10.14 Set a rooftop addition back from the street facing façades to preserve the original profile of the historic resource. Page 53 of 101 P318 IX.b Exhibit E Conceptual Design Review • Set the addition back from street facing façades a distance approximately equal to its height. Response – n/a. 10.15 The roof form of a rooftop addition must be in character with the historic building. Response – n/a. Page 54 of 101 P319 IX.b Exhibit F Setback Variances Exhibit F – Setback Variances 26.415.110. Benefits. The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain, preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and programs for designated historic properties and districts. Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country. Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and maintaining their property. Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both economically vital and cherished by many. Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits. C. Variances. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow: a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage; d) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Response: The project requests a rear yard setback variance and a front yard setback variance. The front steps of the restored porch provide a 14 feet front yard setback, and project 11 feet into the required 25 feet front yard. The rear yard setback variance accommodates the placement of the basement 4’3” into Page 55 of 101 P320 IX.b Exhibit F Setback Variances the required 10 feet rear yard setback. The garage location complies with the required 5 feet setback for garages only. A front yard setback variance is requested to restore a front yard similar to its original location on Main Street. A 25 feet deep front yard is too large for this type of building that was located on Main Street. Restoring the relationship of the front façade to the street and the hierarchy of spaces from public to private is important to the historic character of the building. The front yard variance is similar to the pattern and character of the historic property when it was located on Main Street. Two parking spaces are required by Code for a single family home. Allowing a short connector enhances the restored landmark buildings. The rear yard variance accommodates a short connector to separate new and old construction which mitigates an adverse impact to the historic character of the property while meeting Land Use Code requirements for parking. Page 56 of 101 P321 IX.b Exhibit G Stream Margin Exemption Exhibit G – Stream margin exemption 26.435.040. Stream margin review. A. Applicability. The provisions of the stream margin review shall apply to all development within one hundred feet, measured horizontally, from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams and to all development within the Flood Hazard Area, also known as the 100-year flood plain. B. Exemptions. The Community Development Director may exempt the following types of development within the stream margin review area: 1. Construction of pedestrian or automobile bridges, public trails or structures for irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, bank stabilization, provided plans and specifications are submitted to the City engineer demonstrating that the structure is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during peak flows and the Community Development Director determines the proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with the stream margin review standards. 2. Construction of improvements essential for public health and safety which cannot be reasonably accommodated outside of the “no development area” prescribed by this Section including, but no limited to, potable water systems, sanitary sewer, utilities and fire suppression systems provided the Community Development Director determines the development complies, to the extent practical, with the stream margin review standards. 3. The expansion, remodeling or reconstruction of an existing development provided the following standards are met: a) The development does not add more than 10% to the floor area of the existing structure or increase the amount of building area exempt from floor area calculations by more than 25%. All stream margin exemptions are cumulative. One a development reaches these totals, a stream margin review by the Planning and Zoning Commission is required; and b) The development does not require the removal of any tree for which a permit would be required pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of this Code. c) The development is located such that no portion of the expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will be any closer to the high water line than is the existing development; d) The development does not fall outside of an approved building envelope if one has been designated through a prior review; and e) The expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will cause no increase to the amount of ground coverage or structures within the 100-year flood plain. Response – The existing building is proposed to be demolished. There is no additional floor area proposed, and no removal of any trees requiring a permit. No expansion is proposed nor any increase to ground coverage. 333 Park does not have an approved building envelope – the property is subject to regular setback requirements for the R-6 Zone District. Page 57 of 101 P322 IX.b Exhibit H Page 58 of 101 P323 IX.b City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Application PROJECT: Name: Location: (Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED)___________________________________________________________ Applicant: Name: Address: Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:_______________________________________________ REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:________________________________________________ TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Historic Designation Certificate of No Negative Effect Certificate of Appropriateness -Minor Historic Development -Major Historic Development -Conceptual Historic Development -Final Historic Development -Substantial Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 333 Park Ave + 931 Gibson Ave 333 Park: Sunny Park Subdivision, Lot 1 931 Gibson: Section: 7 Township: 10 Range: 84 LAND IN SE4 OF SEC 7-10-84 DESC BY M/B BK 513 PG 942, TRACT OF LAND IN THE SUNSET LODE USMS 5310 DESC BY M/B BK 513 PG 945 FROM THE BOARD OF PITKIN CO COMM 0% 0 ACRESSUNSET LODE, U.S.M.S. 5310 333 Park: 2737-181-00-017; 931 Gibson: 2737-074-00-004 BMH Investments 1001 Fannin St. #3850, Houston, TX 77002 713-725-1851 hendrybrian@mac.com BendonAdams, Sara Adams and F&M Architects, Flynn Stewart-Severy 300 So. Spring St., #202, Aspen, CO 81621 970-925-2855 x2 sara@bendonadams.com 333 Park: 1880s two story landmark with numerous modifications and additions 931 Gibson: single family home built in 1987. remove non-historic additions on landmark, demolish home at 931 Gibson, relocate landmark to 931 Gibson and complete full restoration of landmark, add garage to landmark. Delist 333 Park property from historic inventory and list 931 Gibson on historic inventory after landmark is relocated. Front and rear setback variances are requested for the landmark to be prominent in its new location. The 500 sf FAR Bonus is request for a future detached building at 931 Gibson. Relocation (temporary, on or off-site) Demolition (total demolition) Historic Landmark Lot Split setback variance FAR Bonus Exhibit I Page 59 of 101 P324 IX.b City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 General Information Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This information will help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that may be involved. YES NO  Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions, new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration?  Does the work you are planning include interior work, including remodeling, rehabilitation, or restoration?  Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time?  In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places Property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits?  If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in Conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential properties are not.)  If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Historical Preservation? Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use:  Rehabilitation Loan Fund  Conservation Easement Program  Dimensional Variances  Increased Density  Historic Landmark Lot Split  Waiver of Park Dedication Fees  Conditional Uses  Tax Credits  Exemption from Growth Management Quota System Page 60 of 101 P325 IX.b City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form (Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.) Project: Applicant: Project Location: Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: (For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Number of residential units: Existing:___0_____Proposed:_____0____________ Existing:___1_______Proposed:______1________ Proposed % of demolition: __around 40%____ DIMENSIONS: (write N/A where no requirement exists in the zone district) Floor Area: Height Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ Principal Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ Accessory Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ On-Site parking: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ % Site coverage: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ % Open Space: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Front Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Rear Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Combined Front/Rear: Indicate N, S, E, W Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Combined Sides: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Distance between buildings: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued: _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): ______________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 333 Park and 931 Gibson BMH Investments, represented by BendonAdams and F&M Architects 333 Park Avenue and 931 Gibson Avenue R-6PD and R-15A333Park: 10,418 sf 931Gib: 15,497 sf 333Park: Note: existing is 333 Park and allowable/ proposed is 931 Gibson 4,530 25 25 2 n/a n/a 25' 10' living / 5' basement 10' 10' n/a 10' setback non-conformities, over allowable Floor Area, stream margin non-conformities front (for historic front porch) setback and rear setback (for below grade living space) variances. Page 61 of 101 P326 IX.b ASLU 333 Park & 931 Gibson HP- Relocation, Major Development (Conceptual) 2737-181-00-017 1 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Sarah Yoon, 970.920.5144 DATE: May 15, 2018 PROJECT: 333 Park & 931 Gibson REPRESENTATIVE: Sara Adams, BendonAdams, LLC DESCRIPTION: The property at 333 Park is a Victorian era home that was relocated from its original site on Main Street to its current location. The subject property is a designated historic landmark in the R-6 zone district, with a Planned Development (PD) overlay, and located within the Stream Margin Review Area. The lot has site specific conditions that include steep slopes, ditches, and road/utility easements. Over the years, the historic resource has been added onto with various structures creating several bandit units. A Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) exemption was granted and went into effect as of August 10, 2017 with an expiration date of August 11, 2020. The listed conditions for the exemption have been fulfilled and a Land Use Application may be submitted for review. The owner of 333 Park proposes to demolish all non-historic additions and relocate the historic resource to a non-historic lot on 931 Gibson as a receiving lot. This proposed receiving lot is located in the R-15A zone district with an existing single-family dwelling that is also proposed for demolition. The owner proposes to fully restore the historic resources after the relocation, build a detached garage towards the rear of the lot, and may request a historic landmark lot split. The proposal requires approval by both the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) and City Council to relocate the historic resources on 333 Park to an appropriate receiving site (Section 26.415.090.C), delist 333 Park (Section 26.415.050), designate 931 Gibson after receiving the historic resources (Section 26.415.030), and request for the historic preservation benefit of a historic landmark lot split (Section 26.415.110.A). The new construction will also be subject to Residential Design Standards for single-family development (Section 26.410). The combination of relocation and demolition at 333 Park is considered development and is therefore subject to Stream Margin Review. The proposal will likely qualify for an exemption, but the applicant needs to demonstrate that the project meets the review criteria for Section 26.435.040.B. The applicant will need to provide full details regarding the plan for safe relocation, repair and preservation of the historic resources as part of the requirements for relocation. (Please reference the code section below on relocation.) Municipal Code Section 26.415.090.C C. Standard for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: Exhibit J Page 62 of 101 P327 IX.b 2 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. The HPC reviews all development on historic landmarked properties, and will perform all reviews for this project. COMBINED REVIEW PROCESS (Section 26.304.060.B.1): Step 1: HPC review application and provide recommendation to City Council regarding the following land use reviews: - Historic Preservation Major Development (Conceptual Design) - Relocation of Designated Historic Properties - Stream Margin Review - Rescinding Designation - Designation of Historic Properties - Residential Design Standards - Historic Landmark Lot Split Step 2: City Council review and approval of all land use reviews: - Historic Preservation Major Development (Conceptual Design) - Relocation of Designated Historic Properties - Stream Margin Review - Rescinding Designation - Designation of Historic Properties - Residential Design Standards - Historic Landmark Lot Split Step 3: HPC review and provide final decision for Major Development (Final Design) dealing with design details including landscape, lighting and materials. Final Review will require a separate pre-application summary and land use application. Land Use Code Section(s): 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.410 Residential Design Standards 26.415 Historic Preservation 26.415.030 Designation of Historic Properties 26.415.050 Rescinding Designation 26.415.070.D Historic Preservation – Major Development 26.415.090 Relocation of Designated Historic Properties 26.415.110.A Historic Landmark Lot Split – Benefit 26.435.040 Stream Margin Review 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.710.040 Medium-Density Residential (R-6) 26.710.060 Moderate-Density Residential (R-15A) Page 63 of 101 P328 IX.b 3 Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience: Land Use Code: http://cityofaspen.com/276/Title-26-Land-Use-Code HPC Design Guidelines: https://www.cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/Home/View/310 Land Use Application: http://cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/Home/View/305 Review by: Staff for completeness and recommendation Referral Agencies for recommendations HPC for recommendation City Council for approval Public Hearing: Yes, at Conceptual and Final review Neighborhood Outreach: No. Referral Agencies: Engineering, Parks, and Environmental Health. Planning Fees: $3,250 for 10 billable hours of staff time. (Additional/ lesser hours will be billed/ refunded at a rate of $325 per hour.) Referral Agencies Fee: $325 for one hour deposit with Engineering, $975 Parks flat fee, $975 Environmental Health flat fee. Total Deposit: $5,525. Please submit the completed application to the Community Development Office on the Third Floor of City Hall:  Completed Land Use Application and signed fee agreement.  Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).  Street address and legal description for both parcels (333 Park and 931 Gibson), consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application.  Letter from the current owner of 931 Gibson acknowledging and allowing the proposed Land Use Application.  Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.  HOA Compliance form (Attached) for both properties.  List of adjacent property owners for both properties within 300’ for public hearing.  An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating both parcels within the City of Aspen. Page 64 of 101 P329 IX.b 4  Site improvement survey for both properties including topography and vegetation showing the current status, certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado.  A written description of the proposal (scope of work) and written explanation of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application and relevant land use approvals associated with the property.  Detailed plan for safe relocation, repair and preservation of the historic resources.  Sufficient evidence/explanation describing the property 333 Park no longer meeting the criteria for designation.  Written description of how the property 931 Gibson meets the criteria for designation.  Scaled drawings of all proposed structure(s) or addition(s) depicting their form, including their height, massing, scale, proportions and roof plan; and the primary features of all elevations.  A proposed site plan.  Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding both properties including photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location and extent of proposed work.  Completed copy of the Residential Design Standard checklist: https://www.cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/View/1697/RDS-Application-Packet---SF-DX Once the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted:  1 digital PDF copy of the complete application packet by email to sarah.yoon@cityofaspen.com. Please separate the text and drawings into different files.  12 sets of all graphics printed at 11x17  Total deposit for review of the application. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. Page 65 of 101 P330 IX.b View your transaction progress 24/7 via Stewart Online Ask us about your login today! Stewart Title - Aspen 620 East Hopkins Ave Aspen, CO 81611 Date:May 24, 2018 File Number:01330-97252- Amendment No. C7 Property:333 Park Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611 Please direct all Closing inquiries to: Priscilla Prohl-Cooper Phone:(970) 925-3577 Fax:(866) 277-9353 Email Address:pprohl@stewart.com BMH Investments Ltd WIRED FUNDS ARE REQUIRED ON ALL CASH PURCHASE TRANSACTIONS. FEEL FREE TO CONTACT THE ESCROW OFFICE AS NOTED ON THIS PAGE TO OBTAIN WIRING INSTRUCTIONS. We Appreciate Your Business and Look Forward to Serving You in the Future. Exhibit K- 333 Park Page 66 of 101 P331 IX.b ALTA Commitment (6/17/06) ALTA Commitment Form COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued by STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, a Texas Corporation (“Company”), for a valuable consideration, commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the Proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges and compliance with the Requirements; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions of this Commitment. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the Proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A by the Company. All liability and obligation under this Commitment shall cease and terminate six months after the Effective Date or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue the policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. The Company will provide a sample of the policy form upon request. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by a validating officer or authorized signatory. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A. Countersigned by: Stewart Title - Aspen 620 East Hopkins Ave Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-3577 Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. File No. 01330-97252 004-UN ALTA Commitment (6/17/06) Page 67 of 101 P332 IX.b CONDITIONS 1. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquired actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy o r policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. This Commitment is a contract to issue one or more title insurance policies and is not an abstract of title or a report of the condition of title. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mo rtgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. 5.The policy to be issued contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amount o f Insurance is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties.You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at< http://www.alta.org/>. All notices required to be given the Company and any statement in writing required to be furnished the Company shall be addressed to it at P.O. Box 2029, Houston, Texas 77252. Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. File No. 01330-97252 004-UN ALTA Commitment (6/17/06) Page 68 of 101 P333 IX.b COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A File No.: 01330-97252- Amendment No. C7 1. Effective Date: May 21, 2018, at C7 2. Policy or Policies to be issued:Amount of Insurance (a) ALTA Owner's Policy 2006 (Extended) Proposed Insured: BMH Investments, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership (b) ALTA Loan Policy 2006 (Standard) Proposed Insured: 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: Fee Simple 4. Title to the said estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: BMH Investments, Ltd. a Texas limited partnership 5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: A tract of land situated in the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7 and in the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado. Said tract is part of the Lone Pine M.S. 1910 and the Mollie Gibson Lode, M.S. 4281 Am and is more fully described as follows: Beginning at the West Corner of Lot 1, Sunny Park Subdivision, whence corner No. 3 of said Mollie Gibson Lode bears N 43°40'00" W 146.00 feet and S 38°00'00" W 100.00 feet; thence S 46°20'00" W 10.00 feet to a point on the centerline of a road easement as shown on a plat recorded in Book 4 at Page 398 of the records of Pitkin County; thence following said centerline 16.23 feet along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 40.00 feet, the chord of which curve bears S 55°17'30" E 16.12 feet; thence S 66° 55'00" E 49.99 feet along said centerline; thence S 32° 09'58" W 13.39 feet; thence S 50° 17'00" W 130.26 feet; thence N 34° 17'00" W 59.99 feet; thence N 52° 40'00" E 34.33 feet; thence N 43°40'00" W 32.60 feet; thence N 46° 20'00" E 86.00 feet; thence S 43° 40'00" E 32.00 feet to the point of beginning. County of Pitkin, State of Colorado Purported Address: 333 Park Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 STATEMENT OF CHARGES These charges are due and payable before a policy can be issued Basic Rate Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. File No. 01330-97252 CO STG ALTA Commitment Sch A STO Page 1 of 1 STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Page 69 of 101 P334 IX.b File No.: 01330-97252- Amendment No. C7 The following are the requirements to be complied with: 1. 2. Payment to or for the account of the grantor(s) or mortgagor(s) of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record. 3. None NOTE: This product is for informational purposes only. It is not a title insurance product and does not provide any form of coverage. This product is not a guarantee or assurance and does not warrant, or otherwise insure any condition, fact or circumstance. This product does not obligate this Company to issue any policies of title insurance for any subsequent transaction based on the information provided or involving the property described herein. This Company’s sole liability for any error(s) relating to this product is limited to the amount that was paid for this product. COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B PART I Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. File No. 01330-97252 CO STG ALTA Commitment Sch B I Page 1 of 1 STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Page 70 of 101 P335 IX.b File No.: 01330-97252- Amendment No. C7 Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Rights or claims of parties in possession, not shown by the public records. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the public records. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the Effective Date but prior to the date the proposed Insured acquires for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) minerals of whatsoever kind, subsurface and surface substances, in, on, under and that may be produced from the Land, together with all rights, privileges, and immunities relating thereto, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b) or (c) are shown by the Public Records or listed in Schedule B. Water rights, claims or title to water. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. The effect of inclusions in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other district or inclusion in any water service or street improvement area. Reservations and Exceptions contained in United States Patent recorded May 20, 1949 in Book 175 at Page 168. Reservations and Exceptions contained in United States Patent recorded May 20, 1949 in Book 175 at Page 171. Mineral Reservation contained in Deed recorded November 10, 1958 in Book 185 at Page 492. Bibbig Survey recorded August 23, 1973 in Book 4 at Page 398. Ordinance No. 4., Series of 1995 Identifying and Designating Historic Sites and Structures (unrecorded). Bibbig Subdivision Exemption Lot Line Adjustment Plat recorded January 15, 1997 in Book 41 at Page 31 as Reception No. 400915. Agreement for Easements recorded October 7, 1997 as Reception No. 409237. Agreement for Construction of Sanitary Sewer Injection System and Grant of Easements recorded July 31, 1998 as Reception No. 420090. Shared Sewer Service Line Agreement recorded July 31, 1998 as Reception No. 420091. Any rights, easements, interests or claims that may exist by reason of or reflected by the following facts shown on survey dated March 2016 and revised July 2017 by Rocky Mountain Surveying: COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B PART II Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. File No. 01330-97252 CO STG ALTA Commitment Sch B II STO Page 1 of 2 STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Page 71 of 101 P336 IX.b 19. 20. Northeast corner of House, Stairways, Window Well and Gas Meter encroach into 20' Road/Utility Easement Ditch traversing property Communications line and Electrical line located outside of Utility Easement Any and all existing leases and tenancies. Deed of Trust recorded August 21, 2017 as Reception No. 640796 in the amount of $10,000,000.00 NOTE: Exceptions 1 and 4 may be deleted from the policies, provided the seller and buyer execute the Company's affidavits, as required herein, and the Company approves such deletions. If work has been performed on, or in connection with, the subject property (architectural drawings, soils testing, foundation work, installation of materials), and the Company has not reviewed and approved lien waivers and indemnitor financials, Standard Exception 4 (mechanic lien exception) will not be deleted and no mechanic lien coverage will be furnished. Exceptions 2 and 3 may be deleted from the policies, provided the Company receives and approves the survey or survey affidavit if required herein. Exception 5 will not appear on the policies, provided the Company, or its authorized agent, conducts the closing of the proposed transaction and is responsible for the recordation of the documents. COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B PART II Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. File No. 01330-97252 CO STG ALTA Commitment Sch B II STO Page 2 of 2 STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Page 72 of 101 P337 IX.b DISCLOSURES File No.: 01330-97252 Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: A. B. C. THE SUBJECT REAL PROPERTY MAY BE LOCATED IN A SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT; A CERTIFICATE OF TAXES DUE LISTING EACH TAXING JURISDICTION SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE COUNTY TREASURER OR THE COUNTY TREASURER’S AUTHORIZED AGENT; INFORMATION REGARDING SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND THE BOUNDARIES OF SUCH DISTRICTS MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER, OR THE COUNTY ASSESSOR Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-2-2, Section 5, Paragraph G requires that “Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed.” Provided that Stewart Title - Aspen conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner’s Title Policy and the Lender’s Title Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative Mechanic’s Lien Protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception No. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner’s Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A. B. C. D. E. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single-family residence, which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or materialmen for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against unfiled Mechanic’s and Materialmen’s Liens. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased, within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and/or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium; fully executed Indemnity agreements satisfactory to the company; and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. To comply with the provisions of C.R.S. 10-11-123, the Company makes the following disclosure: a. b. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner’s permission. NOTE: THIS DISCLOSURE APPLIES ONLY IF SCHEDULE B, SECTION 2 OF THE TITLE COMMITMENT HEREIN INCLUDES AN EXCEPTION FOR SEVERED MINERALS. Notice of Availability of a Closing Protection Letter:Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulation 8-1-3, Section 5, Paragraph C (11)(f), a closing protection letter is available to the consumer. x NOTHING HEREIN CONTAINED WILL BE DEEMED TO OBLIGATE THE COMPANY TO PROVIDE ANY OF THE COVERAGES REFERRED TO HEREIN, UNLESS THE ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE FULLY SATISFIED. File No.: 01330-97252 CO Commitment Disclosure Revised 1/1/17 Page 73 of 101 P338 IX.b STG Privacy Notice Stewart Title Companies WHAT DO THE STEWART TITLE COMPANIES DO WITH YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION? Federal and applicable state law and regulations give consumers the right to limit some but not all sharing. Federal and applicable state law regulations also require us to tell you how we collect, share, and protect your personal information. Please read this notice carefully to understand how we use your personal information. This privacy notice is distributed on behalf of the Stewart Title Guaranty Company and its title affiliates (the Stewart Title Companies), pursuant to Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA). The types of personal information we collect and share depend on the product or service that you have sought through us. This information can include social security numbers and driver's license number. All financial companies, such as the Stewart Title Companies, need to share customers' personal information to run their everyday business—to process transactions and maintain customer accounts. In the section below, we list the reasons that we can share customers' personal information; the reasons that we choose to share; and whether you can limit this sharing. . Reasons we can share your personal information.Do we share Can you limit this sharing? For our everyday business purposes— to process your transactions and maintain your account. This may include running the business and managing customer accounts, such as processing transactions, mailing, and auditing services, and responding to court orders and legal investigations. Yes No For our marketing purposes— to offer our products and services to you. Yes No For joint marketing with other financial companies No We don't share For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information about your transactions and experiences. Affiliates are companies related by common ownership or control. They can be financial and non-financial companies. Our affiliates may include companies with a Stewart name; financial companies, such as Stewart Title Company Yes No For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information about your creditworthiness.No We don't share For our affiliates to market to you — For your convenience, Stewart has developed a means for you to opt out from its affiliates marketing even though such mechanism is not legally required. Yes Yes, send your first and last name, the email address used in your transaction, your Stewart file number and the Stewart office location that is handling your transaction by email to optout@stewart.com or fax to 1-800-335-9591. For non-affiliates to market to you. Non-affiliates are companies not related by common ownership or control. They can be financial and non-financial companies. No We don't share We may disclose your personal information to our affiliates or to non-affiliates as permitted by law. If you request a transaction with a non-affiliate, such as a third party insurance company, we will disclose your personal information to that non-affiliate. [We do not control their subsequent use of information, and suggest you refer to their privacy notices.] SHARING PRACTICES How often do the Stewart Title Companies notify me about their practices? We must notify you about our sharing practices when you request a transaction. How do the Stewart Title Companies protect my personal information? To protect your personal information from unauthorized access and use, we use security measures that comply with federal law. These measures include computer, file, and building safeguards. How do the Stewart Title Companies collect my personal information? We collect your personal information, for example, when you ß ß request insurance-related services provide such information to us We also collect your personal information from others, such as the real estate agent or lender involved in your transaction, credit reporting agencies, affiliates or other companies. What sharing can I limit?Although federal and state law give you the right to limit sharing (e.g., opt out) in certain instances, we do not share your personal information in those instances. Contact us: If you have any questions about this privacy notice, please contact us at: Stewart Title Guaranty Company, 1980 Post Oak Blvd., Privacy Officer, Houston, Texas 77056 File No.: 01330-97252 Page 1 Revised 11-19-2013Page 74 of 101 P339 IX.b Form 5011000 (6-22-10) Page 1 of 2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment (6-17-06) Title Insurance Commitment ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Commitment INFORMATION The Title Insurance Commitment is a legal contract between you and the Company. It is issued to show the basis on which we will issue a Title Insurance Policy to you. The Policy will insure you against certain risks to the land title, subject to the limitations shown in the Policy. The Company will give you a sample of the Policy form, if you ask. The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurance is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or you as the exclusive remedy of the parties. You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/. The Commitment is based on the land title as of the Commitment Date. Any changes in the land title or the transaction may affect the Commitment and the Policy. The Commitment is subject to its Requirements, Exceptions and Conditions. THIS INFORMATION IS NOT PART OF THE TITLE INSURANCE COMMITMENT. YOU SHOULD READ THE COMMITMENT VERY CAREFULLY. If you have any questions about the Commitment, contact: FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 1 First American Way, Santa Ana, California 92707 TABLE OF CONTENTS AGREEMENT TO ISSUE POLICY 1 CONDITIONS 2 SCHEDULE A Insert 1. Commitment Date 2. Policies to be Issued, Amounts and Proposed Insureds 3. Interest in the Land and Owner 4. Description of the Land SCHEDULE B-I - REQUIREMENTS Insert SCHEDULE B-II - EXCEPTIONS Insert AGREEMENT TO ISSUE POLICY We agree to issue policy to you according to the terms of the Commitment. When we show the policy amount and your name as the proposed insured in Schedule A, this Commitment becomes effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A. If the Requirements shown in this Commitment have not been met within six months after the Commitment Date, our obligation under this Commitment will end. Also, our obligation under this Commitment will end when the Policy is issued and then our obligation to you will be under the Policy. Our obligation under this Commitment is limited by the following: The Provisions in Schedule A. The Requirements in Schedule B-I. The Exceptions in Schedule B-II. The Conditions on Page 2. This Commitment is not valid without SCHEDULE A and Sections I and II of SCHEDULE B. (This Commitment is valid only when Schedules A and B are attached) This jacket was created electronically and constitutes an original document Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. [[ Exhibit K- 931 Gibson Page 75 of 101 P340 IX.b Form 5011000 (6-22-10) Page 2 of 2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment (6-17-06) CONDITIONS 1.DEFINITIONS (a) "Mortgage" means mortgage, deed of trust or other security instrument. (b) "Public Records" means title records that give constructive notice of matters affecting your title according to the state statutes where your land is located. 2.LATER DEFECTS The Exceptions in Schedule B - Section II may be amended to show any defects, liens or encumbrances that appear for the first time in the public records or are created or attached between the Commitment Date and the date on which all of the Requirements (a) and (c) of Schedule B - Section I are met. We shall have no liability to you because of this amendment. 3.EXISTING DEFECTS If any defects, liens or encumbrances existing at Commitment Date are not shown in Schedule B, we may amend Schedule B to show them. If we do amend Schedule B to show these defects, liens or encumbrances, we shall be liable to you according to Paragraph 4 below unless you knew of this information and did not tell us about it in writing. 4.LIMITATION OF OUR LIABILITY Our only obligation is to issue to you the Policy referred to in this Commitment, when you have met its Requirements. If we have any liability to you for any loss you incur because of an error in this Commitment, our liability will be limited to your actual loss caused by your relying on this Commitment when you acted in good faith to: Comply with the Requirements shown in Schedule B - Section I or Eliminate with our written consent any Exceptions shown in Schedule B - Section II. We shall not be liable for more than the Policy Amount shown in Schedule A of this Commitment and our liability is subject to the terms of the Policy form to be issued to you. 5.CLAIMS MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT Any claim, whether or not based on negligence, which you may have against us concerning the title to the land must be based on this Commitment and is subject to its terms. Page 76 of 101 P341 IX.b Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All right reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 18003929 American Land Title Association ALTA Commitment Form Adopted 6-17-06 First American Title Insurance Co. Commitment No.: 18003929 SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: May 11, 2018 at 07:45 AM 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: Amount Premium A. ALTA Owners Policy (06/17/06)$4,950,000.00 $6,120.00 Proposed Insured:BMH Investments LTD, a _______________. Certificate of Taxes Due $25.00 Endorsements: CO-110.1 (Delete 1, 2, 3, 4)$75.00 Additional Charges:$0 Total $6,220.00 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is Fee simple. 4. Title to the Fee simple or interest in the land is at the Effective Date vested in: 931 Gibson LLC, a Colorado limited liability company 5. The land referred to in the Commitment is described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT A ATTACHED HERETO For informational purposes only, the property address is: 931 Gibson Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611. Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC By: Winter VanAlstine Authorized Officer or Agent FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES OR SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COMMITMENT, CONTACT: Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC, 715 West Main Street, Suite 202, Aspen, CO 81611, Phone: 970 925-7328, Fax: 970 925-7348. Page 77 of 101 P342 IX.b Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All right reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 18003929 American Land Title Association ALTA Commitment Form Adopted 6-17-06 First American Title Insurance Co. Commitment No.: 18003929 SCHEDULE B 1. Requirements: 1. Pay the agreed amounts for the interest in the land and/or the mortgage to be insured. 2. Pay us the premiums, fees and charges for the policy. 3. Documents satisfactory to us creating the interest in the land and/or the mortgage to be insured must be signed, delivered and recorded. 4. You must tell us in writing the name of anyone not referred to in this Commitment who will get an interest in the land or who will make a loan on the land. We may then make additional requirements or exceptions. 5. Payment of all taxes, charges and assessments, levied and assessed against the subject premises which are due and payable. 6. A Certification of Taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from the County Treasurer or an authorized agent (pursuant to Senate Bill 92-143, CRS 10-11-122). 7. Receipt by the Company of the appropriate affidavit as to new construction and indemnifying the Company against any unfiled materialmen's or mechanic's liens. 8. Warranty Deed must be sufficient to convey the fee simple estate or interest in the land described or referred to herein, from 931 Gibson LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, to BMH Investments LTD, a _______________, the proposed insured, Schedule A, item 2A. NOTE: C.R.S. Section 38-35-109(2) required that a notation of the purchaser's legal address, (not necessarily the same as the property address) be included on the face of the Deed to be recorded. 9. Release of the Deed of Trust from 931 Gibson LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County for the benefit of FirstBank, to secure an indebtedness in the principal sum of $2,200,000.00, and any other amounts and/obligations secured thereby, dated April 20, 2016, and recorded April 20, 2016, as Reception No. 628722. 10. Record a Statement of Authority to provide prima facie evidence of existence of 931 Gibson LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, an entity capable of holding property, and the name of the person authorized to execute instruments affecting title to real property as authorized by C.R.S. Section 38-30-172. 11. A copy of the properly signed and executed Operating Agreement if written, for 931 Gibson LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, to be submitted to the Company for review. 12. Certificate of Good Standing from the Colorado Secretary of State for 931 Gibson LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. Page 78 of 101 P343 IX.b American Land Title Association ALTA Commitment Form Adopted 6-17-06 First American Title Insurance Co. Commitment No.: 18003929 SCHEDULE B (Continued) Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All right reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 18003929 13. Record a Statement of Authority to provide prima facie evidence of existence of BMH Investments LTD, a _______________, an entity capable of holding property, and the name of the person authorized to execute instruments affecting title to real property as authorized by C.R.S. Section 38-30-172. 14. Certificate of Good Standing from the Colorado Secretary of State for BMH Investments LTD, a _______________. 15. Certificate of Incorporation, Certificate of Authority or Certificate of Limited Partnership, as certified by the Colorado Secretary of State, or Trade Name Affidavit, whichever is appropriate for BMH Investments LTD, a _______________. 16. Improvement Survey Plat sufficient in form, content and certification acceptable to the Company. Exception will be taken to adverse matters disclosed thereby. 17. This Title Commitment is subject to underwriter approval. 2. Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the Public Records, but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the Public Records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the Land would disclose, and which are not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown in the Public Records. 5. Any and all unpaid taxes, assessments and unredeemed tax sales. 6. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the Public Records. 7. Taxes and assessments for the year 2018, and subsequent years, a lien not yet due or payable. 8. Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States, as described in the United States Patent dated August 21, 1958, and recorded August 29, 1958, in Book 185 at Page 69, as Reception No. 106874. Page 79 of 101 P344 IX.b American Land Title Association ALTA Commitment Form Adopted 6-17-06 First American Title Insurance Co. Commitment No.: 18003929 SCHEDULE B (Continued) Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All right reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 18003929 9. The premises hereby granted, with the exception of the surface, may be entered by the proprietor of any other vein, lode or ledge, the top or appex of which lies outside of the boundary of said granted premises, should the same in its dip be found to penetrate, intersect, or extend into said premises, for the purpose of extracting and removing the ore from such other vein, lode or ledge and right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States, as described in the United States Patent recorded October 21, 1955, in Book 180 at Page 454, as Reception No. 103078. 10. Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under An Ordinance Providing for the Sale of Certain Real Property Owned by Pitkin County, recorded July 1, 1986, in Book 513 at Page 873, as Reception No. 279225. 11. Perpetual easement for the purpose of access, as described in the Quit Claim Deed, recorded July 2, 1986, in Book 513 at Page 945, as Reception No. 279255. 12. Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Memorandum of Contract, dated August 11, 2015, and recorded September 2, 2015, as Reception No. 622944. 13. Any existing leases or tenancies, and any and all parties claiming by, through or under said lessees. Page 80 of 101 P345 IX.b ALTA Commitment 18003929 Exhibit A First American Title Insurance Co. Commitment No.: 18003929 EXHIBIT A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: Parcel 1 A Parcel of Land situated in the Southeast ¼ of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th Principal Meridian more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point whence corner No. 11 of the East Aspen Additional Townsite bears South 54°52’17” East 58.10 feet; Thence South 34°54’00” West 46.63 feet to The True Point of Beginning; Thence North 63°58’00” West 185.12 feet; Thence South 15°30’00” West 86.60 feet; Thence South 63°54’00” East 155.54 feet; Thence North 34°45’00” East 88.30 feet to The Point of Beginning. Exception those portions which lies within the boundaries of Deeds recorded February 6, 1970 in Book 246 at Page 672 “Candreia Parcel” and recorded April 12, 1982 in Book 424 at Page 966 “Zupancis Parcel”. Also exception that portion as described in Quit Claim Deed recorded August 11, 1994 in Book 758 at Page 230, Pitkin County, Colorado. Parcel 2 A Tract of Land situated in the Sunset Lode, U.S.M.S. No. 5310, being more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly side line of said Sunset Lode whence Corner No. 10 of East Aspen Additional Townsite bears North 34°45’ East 46.63 Feet; Thence North 63° 58’ West 185.12 feet to a point on the Westerly side line of said Lode; Thence following said Westerly side line North 15°30” East 17.03; Thence South 62°54’41” East 150.27 feet; Thence 39.76 feet along the arc of a curve to the right having a radius of 295.57 feet to a point on said Easterly side; Thence following said Easterly side line South 34°45’ West 10.70 feet to The Point of Beginning. Together with any property lying Northerly of the above described property and the Southerly line of Gibson Avenue. Exception that portion as described in Quit Claim Deed recorded August 11, 1994 in Book 758 at Page 230, Pitkin County, Colorado. Page 81 of 101 P346 IX.b First American Title Insurance Company DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to C.R.S. 30-10-406(3)(a) all documents received for recording or filing in the Clerk and Recorder’s office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one-half of an inch. The Clerk and Recorder will refuse to record or file any document that does not conform to the requirements of this section. NOTE: If this transaction includes a sale of the property and the price exceeds $100,000.00, the seller must comply with the disclosure/withholding provisions of C.R.S. 39-22-604.5 (Nonresident withholding). NOTE: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that “Every title insurance company shall be responsible to the proposed insured(s) subject to the terms and conditions of the title commitment, other than the effective date of the title commitment, for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title insurance company, or its agent, conducts the closing and settlement service that is in conjunction with its issuance of an owner’s policy of title insurance and is responsible for the recording and filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed. Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, the company will not issue its owner’s policy or owner’s policies of title insurance contemplated by this commitment until it has been provided a Certificate of Taxes due or other equivalent documentation from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer’s authorized agent; or until the Proposed Insured has notified or instructed the company in writing to the contrary. The subject property may be located in a special taxing district. A Certificate of Taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer’s authorized agent. Information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owner’s policy commitments containing a mineral severance instrument exception, or exceptions, in Schedule B, Section 2. A. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and B. That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner’s permission. NOTE: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2, Affirmative mechanic’s lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner’s Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: NOTE: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2, Affirmative mechanic’s lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner’s Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. B. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic’s and material-men’s liens. D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium, fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. Page 82 of 101 P347 IX.b First American Title Insurance Company NOTE: Pursuant to C.R.S. 38-35-125(2) no person or entity that provides closing and settlement services for a real estate transaction shall disburse funds as a part of such services until those funds have been received and are available for immediate withdrawal as a matter of right. NOTE: C.R.S. 39-14-102 requires that a real property transfer declaration accompany any conveyance document presented for recordation in the State of Colorado. Said declaration shall be completed and signed by either the grantor or grantee. NOTE: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado division of insurance within the department of regulatory agencies. NOTE: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of an ALTA Closing Protection Letter which may, upon request, be provided to certain parties to the transaction identified in the commitment. Nothing herein contained will be deemed to obligate the company to provide any of the coverages referred to herein unless the above conditions are fully satisfied. Page 83 of 101 P348 IX.b ATTORNEYS TITLE INSURANCE AGENCY OF ASPEN, LLC 715 West Main Street, Suite 202 Aspen, CO 81611 Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC Privacy Policy Notice PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE Title V. of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, directly or through it affiliates, from sharing non-public personal information about you with a nonaffiliated third party unless the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such as the type of information that it collects about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, we are providing you with this document, which notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC. We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources: Information we receive from you, such as on application or other forms. Information about your transactions we secure from out files, or from our affiliates or others. Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate agent or lender. Unless it is specifically stated otherwise in an amended Privacy Policy Notice, no additional nonpublic personal information will be collected about you. We may disclose any of the above information that we collect about our customers or former customer to our affiliates or to nonaffiliated third parties as permitted by law. We also may disclose this information about our customers or former customers to the following types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or with whom we have joint marketing agreements: Financial service providers such as companies engaged in banking, consumer finance, securities and insurance. Non-financial companies such as envelope stuffers and other fulfillment service providers. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED BY LAW. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. TELEPHONE 970 925-7328 FACSIMILE 970 925-7348 Page 84 of 101 P349 IX.b 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM May 15, 2018 Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 931 Gibson Avenue; Aspen, CO. Ms. Garrow: Please accept this letter authorizing BMH Investments and BendonAdams to submit land use applications associated with the relocation of the 333 Park structure to 931 Gibson Ave. and associated reviews. If there are any questions about the foregoing or if I can assist, please do not hesitate to contact me. Property – 931 Gibson Avenue Legal Description – Section: 7 Township: 10 Range: 84 LAND IN SE4 OF SEC 7-10-84 DESC BY M/B BK 513 PG 942, TRACT OF LAND IN THE SUNSET LODE USMS 5310 DESC BY M/B BK 513 PG 945 FROM THE BOARD OF PITKIN CO COMM 0% 0 ACRESSUNSET LODE, U.S.M.S. 5310; Parcel ID # 2737-074-00-004. Kind Regards, 931 Gibson LLC 623 East Hopkins Aspen, CO 81611 Mark Friedland 05/15/2018 Exhibit L Page 85 of 101 P350 IX.b Exhibit M Page 86 of 101 P351 IX.b Exhibit NPage 87 of 101P352IX.b Exhibit N Page 88 of 101 P353 IX.b Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. From Parcel: 273718100017 on 05/21/2018 Instructions: Disclaimer: http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com Exhibit O - 333 Park Page 89 of 101 P354 IX.b WEIGAND NESTOR R JR WICHITA, KS 67202 150 N MARKET ST BROOKS KERRI L ASPEN, CO 81611 112 MIDLAND PARK PL TROUSDALE MARGARET OB GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80121 7 ALEXANDER LN TAYLOR JOHN IAN ASPEN, CO 81611 331 MIDLAND AVE 315-317 PARK AVE CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 315 PARK AVE LDRAM 2 LLC PARADISE VALLEY, AZ 85253 3900 E BETHANY HOME RD HANSEN BETH ASPEN, CO 81611 811 MIDLAND PK PL # H11 KALNITSKY LINDA BUDIN TRUST WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 1701 S FLAGLER DR #1601 SUNIER ALAIN BRONXVILLE, NY 10708 29 VILLAGE LN MCKNIGHT SPENCER ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #10 IBARA RON CAYUCOS, CA 93430 PO BOX 776 SEID MEL ASPEN, CO 81611 1104 DALE AVE MCDONALD FRANCIS B ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 4671 BIBBIG DIETER ASPEN, CO 81611 333 PARK AVE ASPEN HILLS UNIT A-8 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 612 W MAIN ST LOWE GREGG & DIANA DURHAM, NC 277137599 483 ROSEMONT DR HEMMING GREGG S & KAREN S ASPEN, CO 81611 311 MIDLAND AVE GRUBBS MATT ASPEN, CO 81611-2412 333 MIDLAND AVE #3 GOODROE SHIRLEY A CAMP HILL , PA 17011 3503 MARGO RD HUMPHREY JESS ASPEN, CO 81611 811 MIDLAND PK PL # H11 MEBEL GREGORY REV LIV TRUST PAIA, HI 96779 46 S LAELUA PL STEIN DEBORAH ASPEN, CO 81611 710 MIDLAND PARK PL WHITE WILLIAM P ASPEN, CO 81611 326 MIDLAND AVE #204 KELLY JESSIE M LTD PARTNERSHIP #1 GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111 6295 GREENWOD PLAZA BLVD PITKIN COUNTY BASALT, CO 81621 123 EMMA RD #204 HRIVNAK THOMAS UNIONVILLE ONTARIO L3R6J3 CANADA, 6 HEDGEWOOD DR PHILLIPS ARTHUR R & HELEN B ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8245 COERDT CLINTON CLAUSS ASPEN, CO 816111595 726 VINE ST MCINTYRE GEOFF & LEE AMORY ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #7 FUENTES DAVID & KATHARINE D ASPEN, CO 81611 302 MIDLAND PARK PL Page 90 of 101 P355 IX.b RIVERVIEW CONDO 26 LLC BOULDER, CO 80301 1630 A 30TH ST PMB #387 KENNEDY WILLIAM W FAMILY TRST BARRINGTON HILLS, IL 60010 218 STEEPLECHASE RD CMTR LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 7631 LUPI-PEATE NATALIA ASPEN, CO 81611 121 MIDLAND PARK PL FARR TENA D SPRECKELS, CA 93962 PO BOX 7534 ASPEN HILLS CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 160 MIDLAND AVE HELBING ATHENA ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #6 ASPEN VIEW CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 326 MIDLAND AVE 328 PARK/327 MIDLAND CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 328 PARK AVE 165 PARK CIRCLE CONDO ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA CUNNINGHAM PAMELA M ASPEN, CO 81611 502 MIDLAND PARK PL GORBITZ HEIDI & PATRIC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 647 MCPHEE JAMES MICHAEL & ANNE MARIE ASPEN, CO 81611 401 MIDLAND PARK PL CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST BROWN DOUGLAS & ABBY FAM TRUST BOULDER, CO 80302 980 6TH ST WILLCOX DENNIS ASPEN, CO 81611 722 MIDLAND PARK PL HOLLINGER JONATHAN CARBONDALE, CO 81623 326 HWY 133 #270H NEARY DENNIS R & NANCY CENTLIVRE INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46236 8282 BOWLINE CT ARAPAHOE LLC ST PAUL, MN 55110 1201 N BIRCH LAKE BLVD LAWRENCE LARRY S QPR TRUST LA JOLLA, CA 92037 8560 RUETTE MONTE CARLO POST MARISA JOY ASPEN, CO 81611 403 MIDLAND PK PL # D3 KELLY JESSIE M LP #1 GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111 6295 GREENWOOD PLAZA BLVD SMITH DONALD NELSON ASPEN, CO 81611 501 MIDLAND PARK PL GOODMAN DREW I GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80121-1336 5721 GREEN OAKS DR ASPEN HILLS INVESTORS LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 1048 341 PARK LLC GLENCOE, IL 60022 303 SHORELINE CT DECRAY MARCELLA TRUST SANTA MONICA, CA 90405 1528 HILL ST SPONAR ANTON K & JUDY ASPEN, CO 81611-2486 222 MIDLAND PARK PL SACHSE TODD DETROIT, MI 48226 1528 WOODWARD AVE #600 990 KING ST UNIT #4 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 1295 RIVERSIDE DR Page 91 of 101 P356 IX.b RICH VICTORIA CREVE COEUR, MO 63141 455 RIDGECORDE BIRRFELDER BRIGITTE T ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3035 STEAR RONALD & MARIA F ASPEN, CO 81611 402 MIDLAND PARK PL WEISBARD MARK W WILMETTE, IL 60091 1706 CENTRAL AVE EPSTEN VIRGINIA H QPR TRUST KANSAS CITY, MO 64112 5038 WALNUT ST GOLDEN SALLIE ASPEN, CO 81611 325 PARK AVE ZORRITO LLC SARASOTA, FL 34239 1901 FLOYD ST WINKLER JILL C ASPEN, CO 81611 212 MIDLAND PARK PL KEARN ROBERT & ORENE FAMILY TRUST HILLSBOROUGH, CA 94010 1831 WILLOW RD LACROIX TIMOTHY ASPEN, CO 81611 113 MIDLAND PARK PL RUSSELL LYNN C ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8904 DODINGTON SUSAN M ASPEN, CO 81611 221 MIDLAND PARK PL 981 KING STREET LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3123 WERTZ LIMOR ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #2 KRIGEL SANFORD P TRUST KANSAS CITY, MO 64111 4520 MAIN ST CADWALLADER MICHELE C FAMILY TRUST SAN ANTONIO, TX 78209 250 GENESEO RD WAGAR RICHARD H ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9063 INDEPENDENCE CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 1104 DALE AVE KRIGEL SCOTT W TRUST KANSAS CITY, MO 64111 4520 MAIN ST RESTAINO BECKER TRUST SAN ANSELMO, CA 94960 72 ALDER AVE KENNEDY WILLIAM W REV LVG TRUST BARRINGTON, IL 60010 218 STEEPLECHASE RD MANUEL CATHERINE & LINCOLN ASPEN, CO 81611 409 PARK CIR #2 BESTIC JEFFREY B ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 2267 CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST LEE BARBARA C TRUST BROOKLINE, MA 02445 35 FISHER AVE LOWE SARA M & CORY J ASPEN, CO 81611 407 PARK AVE #B TERKUN MARK ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 329 EVERETTE JOHN ASPEN, CO 81611 712 MIDLAND PARK PL PEATE WILLIAM DOUGLAS ASPEN, CO 81611 121 MIDLAND PARK PL BROWNELL CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 996 GIBSON AVE Page 92 of 101 P357 IX.b HITCHCOCK SAMANTHA ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 329 BROOKE TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 1024 E HOPKINS #17 KROMELOW BASIL M & LAUREANNE L CHICAGO, IL 60610 55 W DELAWARE PL SCHROEDER PATRICIA A REV TRUST PINE RIVER, MN 56474 36261 SPRUCE TR MARTHINSSON NOSTDAHL CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE WHITE ROBIN ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 2771 311 PARK AVE LLC SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94123 3047 FILLMORE ST ASPEN ASSET LLC GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 816014395 2701 MIDLAND AVE #8312 MACCRACKEN SCOTT R ASPEN, CO 81611 403 MIDLAND PK PL # D3 WEBSTER DAVID H ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 10362 WESTERMAN JEFF & TERI ENCINO, CA 91316 5130 SHOSHONE AVE BAKKEN JOHN & LIZA N ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 12064 FARR TENA D 1989 TRUST SPRECKELS, CA 93962 PO BOX 7534 VICENZI HEATHER L TRUST ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 2238 TDR REVOCABLE TRUST ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314 201 N UNION ST #300 WELDEN TODD E & DEBORAH C ASPEN, CO 81611 503 MIDLAND PARK PL #E3 AUVIL PAUL R JR TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 1024 E HOPKINS AVE #14 KING WALLACE M OLATHE, CO 81425 PO BOX 590 EIS JENNIFER L ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 11315 PERLEY PAUL S ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 12155 FAT CITY APARTMENTS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 625 S WEST END STREET #4 P S W D INVESTMENT CO LTD ASPEN, CO 81611 215 S MONARCH ST #101 BIRACH KAREN ASPEN, CO 81611-2414 122 MIDLAND PARK PL ALVIS STEVEN D & MARCI L HOUSTON, TX 77008 1235 NORTH LOOP WEST # 205 990 KING ST UNIT #2 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 1295 RIVERSIDE DR KEARN ROBERT & ORENE FAMILY TRUST HILLSBOROUGH, CA 94010 1831 WILLOW RD FARRELL SCOTT W ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9656 DIBELLO JACQUELINE ASPEN, CO 81611 990 KING ST # 1 LEE JONATHAN O TRUST BROOKLINE, MA 02445 35 FISHER AVE CHAZEN DAVID FRANKLIN II NEW YORK, NY 10155 150 E 58TH ST 27TH FL Page 93 of 101 P358 IX.b PATTEN DAVID N ASPEN, CO 81611 810 MIDLAND PARK PL ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY ASPEN, CO 81611 210 E HYMAN AVE #202 KURNOS TIMOTHY A ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #9 NICHOLS SCOTT A ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3035 TORPEN CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 1018 E HOPKINS AVE TUSHINGHAM DARREN ASPEN, CO 81611 326 MIDLAND AVE #205 OLDFIELD BARNEY F GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 816014395 2701 MIDLAND AVE #8312 PICKARD NANCY S ASPEN, CO 81611 1020 E HOPKINS AVE #4 KENNEDY WILLIAM W CHILDRENS TRST BARRINGTON HILLS, IL 60010 218 STEEPLECHASE RD BALLOU JONATHAN ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #6 DELYNN JEAN J ASPEN, CO 81611 331 MIDLAND AVE MIDLAND PARK PLACE CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 112 MIDLAND PARK PL JOHNSTON PEGGY REV TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 111 MIDLAND PARK PL MCLAUGHLIN KEVIN ASPEN, CO 81611 403 PARK AVE #4 BLOMQUIST JENIFER L ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 12155 MCCOY CARLTON ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9349 622 OCEAN LLC ISLE OF PALMS, SC 29451 PO BOX 522 KOLBERG JUDITH A ASPEN, CO 81611 501 MIDLAND PARK PL SHERIDAN MARGARET BRONXVILLE, NY 10708 29 VILLAGE LN DECRAY MARCELLA IRREV PROPERTY TRUST SANTA MONICA, CA 90405 1528 HILL ST J2C LLC 1130 VIENNA AUSTRIA , PACASSISTRASSE 62 AUVIL CAROL A TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 1024 E HOPKINS AVE #14 LAWRENCE MARA B QPR TRUST LA JOLLA, CA 92037 8560 RUETTE MONTE CARLO COLAS CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 341 PARK AVE CARDWELL ROBERT A LAGUNA BEACH, CA 92651 1672 LOUISE ST HERMELIN ASPEN LLC FRANKLIN, MI 48025 32205 BINGHAM RD SURVIVORS TRUST ALAMEDA, CA 94501 1352 BAY ST RIVER HOUSE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 729 E BLEEKER ST MCGAVOCK MARGARET JANE TRUST ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 533 JEFFERSON GREG ASPEN, CO 81611 711 MIDLAND PARK PL Page 94 of 101 P359 IX.b KALNITSKY EUGENE TRUST WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 1701 S FLAGLER DR #1601 LIEN-TWO CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA PARK AVE CURRAN MIKE & VERONICA REV TRUST HOUSTON, TX 77019 2207 DEL MONTE DR HENDRICKS LYNDELL B ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 11152 LUPI-PEATE NATALIA ANDREA ASPEN, CO 81611 121 MIDLAND PARK PL # I 21 PARK AVENUE TOWNHOMES CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 407 PARK AVE UNIT A GOLDSTEIN GARY L LVG TRUST NO 1 ASPEN, CO 816114109 1020 E HOPKINS AVE #7 GARTON SARA B ASPEN, CO 81611 110 MIDLAND PARK PL COWLING LINDA ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9656 SEMPLE SASHA L ASPEN, CO 81611 601 E HYMAN AVE JOHNSON SHAEL ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3549 GLEASON AMY ASPEN, CO 81611 712 MIDLAND PARK PL HECK JAMES C ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8416 DAVIS D STONE ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8904 GOLDSTEIN BARBARA E SIMON LVG TRUST NO 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 1020 E HOPKINS AVE #7 KETAI JAMES A DETROIT, MI 48226 1528 WOODWARD AVE #600 ANDRULAITIS FIONA MCWILLIAM & TIMOTHY A ASPEN, CO 81611 409 PARK CIR #4 PARK AVENUE CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 102 PARK AVE KOCH KATHRYN S & JOHN F ASPEN, CO 81611 304 MIDLAND PARK PL C-4 PAGANO JOSEPH K & JOSEPH A ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 7785 KELLEY BRAD BUCKLEY & SHARI L EDEN, UT 84310 1736 N 6250 E GRIFFITHS THOMAS W ASPEN, CO 81611 504 MIDLAND PARK PL GRAHAM MARGOT ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 2254 CALK LAURA E ASPEN, CO 81611-2472 722 MIDLAND PARK PL RIVERVIEW CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA MITCHELL ELSA R ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 2492 337 MIDLAND AVE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 612 W MAIN ST EPSTEN BRADFORD M QPR TRUST KANSAS CITY, MO 641122757 5038 WALNUT ST BELLIS ARTHUR P ASPEN, CO 81611 1008 E HOPKINS AVE KENNEDY PATRICIA ANN REV LIV TRUST BARRINGTON, IL 60010 218 STEEPLECHASE RD Page 95 of 101 P360 IX.b CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST ARNAL ALVARO JOSE ASPEN, CO 816111595 726 VINE ST SMITH JACK L & DIANE M EVERGREEN, CO 80439 434 COTTONWOOD DR PARK 269 LLC LEAWOOD, KS 66211 2405 W 114 ST MCDONALD FRANCIS B ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 4671 FERLISI MARY SANDRA LIVING TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 326 MIDLAND AVE #307 PEATE WILLIAM DOUGLAS ASPEN, CO 81611 121 MIDLAND PARK PL # I 21 HAGEN CATHERINE ANNE ASPEN, CO 81611 210 MIDLAND PARK PL HOUBEN CYNTHIA MICHELE ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9616 SEID MEL ASPEN, CO 81611 1104 DALE AVE DUNIGAN PATRICK A DALLAS, TX 75205 4245 N CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY STE 460 MOONEY TIMOTHY ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8931 BELINDA BEE CONDO ASPEN, CO 81611 990 KING ST FEINSTEIN JEROME FAM TRUST LONGBOAT KEY, FL 34228 1211 GULF OF MEXICO DR #901 HIGGINS PAUL ASPEN, CO 81611 303 MIDLAND PARK PL #C-3 Page 96 of 101 P361 IX.b Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. From Parcel: 273707400004 on 05/21/2018 Instructions: Disclaimer: http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com Exhibit O - 931 Gibson Page 97 of 101 P362 IX.b ELA CHARLES S ASPEN, CO 81611 140 MAPLE LN ISAAC THOMAS D REV TRST ASPEN, CO 81611 975 KING ST CRAVEN ELLYN KATHLEEN ASPEN, CO 81611 124 MAPLE LN THALBERG K MARITAL INC TRUST BOZEMAN, MT 59715 128 HITCHING POST RD GIBSON MATCHLESS LLC ATLANTA, GA 30324 1924 PIEDMONT CIR NE BLEEKER STREET REV TRUST ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 22 DOUGHERTY THOMAS P WILMINGTON, DE 19808 5317 LIMESTONE RD HATANAKA HOWARD I ASPEN, CO 81611 980 KING ST LEILA KING LLC SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4 EMBARCADERO CTR # 1900 FOERSTER JAMES ASPEN, CO 81611 0134 MAPLE LN FARR TENA D SPRECKELS, CA 93962 PO BOX 7534 LANG DONALD W ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 4166 CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST BECKER ALAN K TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 950 MATCHLESS DR LAWRENCE LARRY S QPR TRUST LA JOLLA, CA 92037 8560 RUETTE MONTE CARLO BREBNER RICHARD ASPEN, CO 81611 124 MAPLE LN KASABACH JACQUELYN A ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 4166 WEISMAN FAMILY LP MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55406 2708 IRVING AVE S PATTERSON KAREN & CHARLES ASPEN, CO 81611 129 MAPLE LN HEARTSTONE LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 151 SACHSE TODD DETROIT, MI 48226 1528 WOODWARD AVE #600 990 KING ST UNIT #4 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 1295 RIVERSIDE DR GIBSON 910 LLC CHICAGO, IL 60614 1871 N HOWE JUNGQUIST DAVID J REV TRUST SAINT PAUL, MN 55128 6348 HWY 36 BLVD #8 SHEEBER AIMEE ASPEN, CO 81611 138 MAPLE LN WARMING SOLVEIG ASPEN, CO 81611 120 MAPLE LN GIRVIN LINDA A ASPEN, CO 81611 414 N MILL ST CAIN JOHN J TRUST SUNRIVER, OR 97707 18160 COTTONWOOD RD #375 981 KING STREET LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3123 DODARO CHRISTINE & PETER ASPEN, CO 81611 930 MATCHLESS DR Page 98 of 101 P363 IX.b WAGAR RICHARD H ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9063 CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST RYAN MARTHA ASPEN, CO 81611 127 MAPLE LN BECK JEFFREY L & JANET SUE DALLAS, TX 75254 6211 RAINTREE CT BROWNELL CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 996 GIBSON AVE BENZIGER KATHERINE ASPEN, CO 81611 1050 MATCHLESS DR #2 WAGAR RICHARD H ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9063 KNIGHT ERIC ASPEN, CO 81611 138 MAPLE LN BYARD ANNE/MORRIS JAMES LIV TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 860 GIBSON AVE HAT COLORADO LLC LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 10866 WILSHIRE BLVD #1100 SHOAF JEFFREY S ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3123 HARRIS DAVID E & PATRICIA ASPEN, CO 81611 117 NEALE AVE FARR TENA D 1989 TRUST SPRECKELS, CA 93962 PO BOX 7534 SMALLS RAY ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3197 MAPLE CHARLES A & BRYCE M ASPEN, CO 81611 1250 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR ALVIS STEVEN D & MARCI L HOUSTON, TX 77008 1235 NORTH LOOP WEST # 205 990 KING ST UNIT #2 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 1295 RIVERSIDE DR DIBELLO JACQUELINE ASPEN, CO 81611 990 KING ST # 1 MAINIAC PROPERTIES LLC SCARBOROUGH, ME 04074 201 US ROUTE 1 #226 17 QUEEN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 1315 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR RUGGIERI LISA ANN ASPEN, CO 81611 136 MAPLE LN JUNGQUIST TERRI L REV TRUST SAINT PAUL, MN 55128 6348 HWY 36 BLVD #8 CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL ASPEN, CO 816112179 130 MAPLE LN PATRICIA CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 980 KING ST HAMILTON VIRGINIA RUTH ASPEN, CO 81611 0134 MAPLE LN DWS FAMILY TRUST DALLAS, TX 75201 1918 N OLIVE STREET #1901 WALDRON K BRENT ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 4900 LAWRENCE MARA B QPR TRUST LA JOLLA, CA 92037 8560 RUETTE MONTE CARLO RACQUET CLUB CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 1000 MATCHLESS DR SURVIVORS TRUST ALAMEDA, CA 94501 1352 BAY ST Page 99 of 101 P364 IX.b URBAN BLIGHT CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 925 GIBSON AVE MEADOWS JEAN R & STANLEY H HIGHLAND PARK, IL 60035 538 HILLSIDE DR FUENTE DAVID & SHEILA BOCA RATON, FL 33431 701 TERN POINT CIR SNOW ORCHID LLC MENLO PARK, CA 94025 1125 SAN MATEO DR KETAI JAMES A DETROIT, MI 48226 1528 WOODWARD AVE #600 VARE DARLENE DESEDLE TRUST SANTA MONICA, CA 90403 1024 19TH ST #7 LIPSEY WILLIAM S ASPEN, CO 81611 955 KING ST ROCKY MTN PROPERTY II LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 73 SMUGGLER GROVE RD TEUSCHER JONATHAN W & ANNETTE L ASPEN, CO 81611 126 MAPLE LN GREENWOOD WILLIAM S ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 4778 SMUGGLER HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ASPEN, CO 81611 OAK LN, COTTONWOOD LN, MAPLE LN PERKINS WENDY LIVING TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 122 MAPLE LN BELINDA BEE CONDO ASPEN, CO 81611 990 KING ST Page 100 of 101 P365 IX.b Vicinity Map DATE: F & M A R C H I T E C T S COPYRIGHT 2018 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 970.987.2707 Beckerman House 6/1/18 333 Park Ave. 931 Gibson Ave. City of Aspen 333 Park Ave. & 931 Gibson Vicinity Map 1" = 600'1 Exhibit P Page 101 of 101 P366IX.b ROARING FORK RIVERDDDSSOSWOSWCOCOGGWWWWWWWWCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS9.2'18.3'30'31.9'∆=23°14'52"R=40.00'L=16.23'ChB=S55°17'34"EChL=16.12'SLOPE TABLENUMBER123MIN. SLOPE0.000%20.000%30.000%MAX. SLOPE20.000%30.000%1000.000%COLOR7915792079257930793579407942 794 4794479407935 793079257920 SLOPE TABLENUMBER123MIN. SLOPE0.000%20.000%30.000%MAX. SLOPE20.000%30.000%1000.000%COLORAREA6114.44711.453141.11NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTIONBASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRSTDISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT INTHIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THECERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.ByNO.DateProject NO.RevisionDrawn By:Checked By:Date:Computer File:P.O. Box 1746Rifle, CO 81650Phone (970) 625-1954Fax (970) 579-7150www.peaksurveyinginc.comSNWEPeak Surveying, Inc.Since 2007170691 OF 1BMH INVESTMENTS, LTD.CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADOIMPROVEMENT & TOPO SURVEYLOT 1, SUNNY PARK SUB.333 PARK AVENUEJRNJRNNOV 02, 2017069.DWG105/22/18GENERATE SLOPE ANALYSISJRNIMPROVEMENT SURVEY STATEMENTI HEREBY STATE THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY WAS PREPARED BY PEAK SURVEYING, INC.FOR BMH INVESTMENTS, LTD, A TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP.I FURTHER STATE THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL ON THIS DATE,OCTOBER 26, 2017, EXCEPT UTILITY CONNECTIONS, ARE ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OFTHE PARCEL, EXCEPT AS SHOWN, THAT THERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS UPON THE DESCRIBEDPREMISES BY IMPROVEMENTS ON ANY ADJOINING PREMISES, EXCEPT AS INDICATED, AND THATTHERE IS NO APPARENT EVIDENCE OR SIGN OF ANY EASEMENT CROSSING OR BURDENING ANYPART OF SAID PARCEL, EXCEPT AS NOTED. I FURTHER STATE THIS SURVEY WAS PREPAREDWITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT, THEREFORE, ANY EXCEPTIONS THAT MAYAFFECT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAVE NOT BEEN RESEARCHED BY PEAK SURVEYING, INC.ERROR IN CLOSURE FOR THIS SURVEY IS LESS THAN 1:15,000.BY:___________________________________ JASON R. NEIL, P.L.S. NO. 37935IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYA TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SW1/4SE1/4 OF SECTION 7 AND THE NW1/4NE1/4 OF SECTION 18TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M.CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADOPROPERTY DESCRIPTIONA TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SW1/4SE1/4 OF SECTION 7 AND THE NW1/4NE1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 10SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, SAID TRACT IS PART OF THE LONE PINEM.S. 1910 AND THE MOLLIE GIBSON LODE, M.S. 4281 AM AND IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT THE WEST CORNER OF LOT 1, SUNNY PARK SUBDIVISION, WHENCE CORNER NO. 3 OF SAID MOLLIEGIBSON LODE BEARS N43°40'00"W 146.00 FEET AND S38°00'00"W 100.00 FEET; THENCE S46°20'00"W 10.00 FEET TO APOINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF A ROAD EASEMENT AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 4 AT PAGE 398OF THE RECORDS OF PITKIN COUNTY; THENCE FOLLOWING SAID CENTERLINE 16.23 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF ACURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET, THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS S55°17'30"E 16.12 FEET;THENCE S66°55'00"E 49.99 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE; THENCE S32°09'58"W 13.39 FEET; THENCE S50°17'00"W130.26 FEET; THENCE N34°17'00"W 59.99 FEET; THENCE N52°40'00"E 34.33 FEET; THENCE N43°40'00"W 32.60 FEET;THENCE N46°20'00"E 86.00 FEET; THENCE S43°40'00"E 32.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.NOTES1) THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS, BUILDINGSETBACKS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD, OR IN PLACE. THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED WITHOUTTHE BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT THEREFORE, EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE THAT MAY AFFECTTHE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAVE NOT BEEN RESEARCHED BY PEAK SURVEYING, INC.2) THE DATE OF THIS SURVEY WAS OCTOBER 26, 2017.3) BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF N46°20'00"E BETWEEN THENORTHWESTERLY CORNER, A #5 REBAR & CAP L.S. #16129 FOUND IN PLACE AND THE 1.90' W.C.TO THE NORTHERLY CORNER, A #5 REBAR & CAP L.S. #16129 FOUND IN PLACE.4) UNITS OF MEASURE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON IS U.S. SURVEY FEET.5) THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON THE SUNNY PARK SUBDIVISION PLAT RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 4AT PAGE 398 AND RECEPTION NO. 640394 IN THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'SOFFICE AND CORNERS FOUND IN PLACE.6) ELEVATIONS AND CONTOURS SHOWN ARE BASED ON TOPOGRAPHY SUPPLIED BY OTHERSYIELDING AN ON-SITE ELEVATION OF 7943.80' ON THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER AS SHOWN.FROM TOPOGRAPHY RECEIVED PSI GENERATED SLOPE ANALYSIS TO THE EXTENT CONTOURSWERE AVAILABLE. CONTOUR INTERVAL EQUALS 1 FOOT.NESW0306090120150180210240270300330P e a k Surveying, Inc.0101020405SUBJECTPROPERTYVICINITY MAPSCALE: 1" = 2000'COL OR A DO LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL LAND SU RVEYOR JA SO N R. NEIL3793505/22/18P367IX.b XXXXXXX XX XEEEEE X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXGGGGG GG G G G GS 29°17'09" W 103.44'N 62°54'41" W 118.62'∆=7°42'27"R=295.57'L=39.76'ChB=N59°03'28"WChL=39.73'N 3 4 ° 4 5 ' 0 0 " E 9 5 . 0 7 'S 66°34'00" E 83.50'S 63°54'00" E 66.25'37.40'34. 4 0 '37.40'34. 4 0 '26.8'27.9' 35. 6 '87.3'GRAVELPARKINGCONCRETEDRIVEWAYADJOINER TENTSHEDSHEDADJOINER HOUSEADJOINER HOUSE#5 REBAR & CAPL.S. #16129TBM EL=7933.87'CATV PED.BOULDERBOULDERWALLTIE R E T . W A L L (T Y P . )PAVER PATIO (TYP.)UPPER LEVELWOOD DECKLOWERLEVELWOOD DECKCO N C R E T E W A L K TWO STORY WOODFRAME HOUSEWITH BASEMENT931 GIBSON AVENUEWINDOWWELLWINDOWWELLW O O D D E C K ST E P SWOODDECKCO N C . R E T . W A L L ST E P S ST E P S ST E P S TIE R E T . W A L L ( T Y P . )FENCE(TYP.)FENCE(TYP.)SINGLE WIRE FENCEESTABLISHED BYWESTERLY ADJOINERTO REPRESENT HISINTERPRETATION OFTHE REAL BOUNDARY LINEFENCEFENCESTONE WALKCONCRETEPATIOBOULDERPK NAIL& SHINERL.S. #37972CONC.WALLCONCRETEDRIVEWAYSH E D GIBSON AVENUEASPHALTPARCEL 1BK 513 PG 94215,497 S.F.±#5 REBAR & CAPL.S. #379721" IRON BAR#5REBAR#5REBARTELE.PED.MAILBOXELEC.METERGASMETERGASLINEBOULDERRET. WALLSTONE WALLCONCRETECURB & GUTTERGRAVELPARKINGC.O.A. GPSQ-159N89°10'36"W1612.08'C.O.A. GPSMONUMENT #4S31°13'19"W789.88'PARCEL 2BK 513 PG 942QUIT CLAIM DEEDBK 758 PG 230LOT ANO PROBLEM JOELOT BNO PROBLEM JOEBEATONBECKMAPLEF.F.EL=7939.65'F.F.EL=7930.40'RIDGEEL=7960.5'10'25'10'10'BUILDING SETBACK PER R-15ABUILDING SETB A C K P E R R - 1 5 A BUILDING SETBACK PER R-15ASTONEWALKRIDGEEL=7962.0'7933 793779367938793579347933793479327933793279327934 WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWOSWWATERSERVICETTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS SS SS SS SE W E R S E R V I C E P E R A C S D EX-UE EX-UE CTV CTV CTVCABLE TV LINEELECTRICLINETELEPHONELINEWATERLINESEWERMANHOLET1T2T3T4T5T6T7T8T9T10T11T12T13T14T15T16T17T18T19T20T21T22T23T24T25T26T27T28T29T30T31T32T33T34T35T36T37T38T39T40T41T42T43T44T45T46T47T48T49T50T51T52T53T54T55T56T57T58T59T60T61T62T63T64T65T66T67T68T69SLOPE TABLENUMBER123MIN. SLOPE0.000%20.000%31.461%MAX. SLOPE20.000%30.000%2000.000%COLORSLOPE TABLENUMBER123MIN. SLOPE0.000%20.000%31.461%MAX. SLOPE20.000%30.000%2000.000%COLORAREA14864.09271.78361.13NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTIONBASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRSTDISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT INTHIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THECERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.ByNO.DateProject NO.RevisionDrawn By:Checked By:Date:Computer File:P.O. Box 1746Rifle, CO 81650Phone (970) 625-1954Fax (970) 579-7150www.peaksurveyinginc.comSNWEPeak Surveying, Inc.Since 2007170341 OF 1931 GIBSON, LLC.CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADOIMPROVEMENT & TOPO SURVEYSIT. IN SE1/4 SEC.7, T10S, R84W931 GIBSON AVENUEJRNJRNAUGUST 28, 2017034.DWG105/22/18GENERATE SLOPE ANALYSISJRNIMPROVEMENT SURVEY STATEMENTI HEREBY STATE THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY WAS PREPARED BY PEAK SURVEYING, INC.FOR 931 GIBSON, LLC.I FURTHER STATE THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL ON THIS DATE,JUNE 16, 2017, EXCEPT UTILITY CONNECTIONS, ARE ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THEPARCEL, EXCEPT AS SHOWN, THAT THERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS UPON THE DESCRIBEDPREMISES BY IMPROVEMENTS ON ANY ADJOINING PREMISES, EXCEPT AS INDICATED, AND THATTHERE IS NO APPARENT EVIDENCE OR SIGN OF ANY EASEMENT CROSSING OR BURDENING ANYPART OF SAID PARCEL, EXCEPT AS NOTED. I FURTHER STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THE TITLECOMMITMENT PREPARED BY PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., CASE NO. PCT24522W, DATEDEFFECTIVE AUGUST 17, 2015 AND FIND ALL EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE THAT AFFECT THE SUBJECTPROPERTY ARE SHOWN HEREON TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. ERROR OFCLOSURE FOR THIS SURVEY IS LESS THAN 1:15,000.BY:___________________________________ JASON R. NEIL, P.L.S. NO. 37935IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYA PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SE1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M.CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADOPROPERTY DESCRIPTIONPARCEL 1:A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SE1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE CORNER NO. 11 OF THE EAST ASPEN ADDITIONALTOWNSITE BEARS S54°52'17"E 58.10 FEET; THENCE S34°54'00"W 46.63 FEET TO THE TRUE POINTOF BEGINNING; THENCE N63°58'00"W 185.12 FEET; THENCE S15°30'00"W 88.60 FEET; THENCES63°54'00"E 155.54 FEET; THENCE N34°45'00"E 88.30 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.EXCEPTING THOSE PORTIONS WHICH LIE WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF DEEDS RECORDEDFEBRUARY 6, 1970 IN BOOK 246 AT PAGE 672 “CANDREIA PARCEL” AND RECORDED APRIL 12,1982 IN BOOK 424 AT PAGE 966 “ZUPANCIS PARCEL”.ALSO EXCEPTING THAT PORTION AS DESCRIBED IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED AUGUST11, 1994 IN BOOK 758 AT PAGE 230.PARCEL 2:A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SUNSET LODE, U.S.M.S. NO. 5310, BEING MORE FULLYDESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY SIDE LINE OF SAID SUNSET LODE WHENCECORNER NO. 10 OF EAST ASPEN ADDITIONAL TOWNSITE BEARS N34°45'00"E 46.63 FEET;THENCE N63°58'00"W 185.12 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY SIDE LINE OF SAID LODE;THENCE FOLLOWING SAID WESTERLY SIDE LINE N15°30'0"E 17.03 FEET; THENCE S62°54'41"E150.27 FEET; THENCE 39.76 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING ARADIUS OF 295.57 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID EASTERLY SIDE; THENCE FOLLOWING SAIDEASTERLY SIDE LINE S34°45'00"W 10.70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.TOGETHER WITH ANY PROPERTY LYING NORTHERLY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTYAND THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF GIBSON AVENUE.EXCEPTING THAT PORTION AS DESCRIBED IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED AUGUST 11, 1994IN BOOK 758 AT PAGE 230.COUNTY OF PITKINSTATE OF COLORADONOTES:1) THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS, BUILDINGSETBACKS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD, OR IN PLACE AND EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE SHOWN INTHE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., CASE NO. PCT24522W,DATED EFFECTIVE AUGUST 17, 2015.2) THE DATE OF THIS SURVEY WAS JUNE 16, 2017.3) BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF N29°17'09"E BETWEEN THESOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, A PK NAIL AND SHINER IN CONCRETEL.S. #37972 FOUND IN PLACE AND THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID SUBJECT PROPERTY,A #5 REBAR & CAP L.S. #37972 FOUND IN PLACE.4) UNITS OF MEASURE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON IS U.S. SURVEY FEET.5) THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON THE BOOK 513 PAGE 942, BOOK 513 PAGE 945 RECORDED IN THEPITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE, AN IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PREPARED BYROCKY MOUNTAIN SURVEYING DATED AUGUST 2015, FILE NO. 15530 AND CORNERS FOUND INPLACE.6) ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON A GPS OBSERVATION UTILIZING THE WESTERN COLORADORTVRN GPS NETWORK (1988 ORTHO DATUM) YIELDING AN ON-SITE ELEVATION OF 7933.87'' ONSOUTHEASTERLY CORNER AS SHOWN. CONTOUR INTERVAL EQUALS 1 FOOT.7) THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON FOUND CORNERS AND THE ABOVE MENTIONED SURVEYPREPARED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN SURVEYING. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BYPSI. ACCORDING TO THE WESTERLY ADJOINING OWNER THE CORNERS ESTABLISHED ARE NOTWHAT HE REMEMBERS AND HE BELIEVES THE BOUNDARY IS ALONG THE WIRE FENCEESTABLISHED BY SAID ADJOINER. PSI HAS CONVEYED THIS INFORMATION TO THE OWNER OFTHE SUBJECT PROPERTY.NESW0306090120150180210240270300330P e a k Surveying, Inc.0101020405SUBJECTPROPERTYVICINITY MAPSCALE: 1" = 2000'COL OR A DO LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL LAND SU R VEYOR JA SO N R. NEIL3793505/22/18P368IX.b Beckerman HouseZoning Floor Area Calculations FSS-S JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS-S 18014 333Landmark on Gibson FAR.vwx 6/2/18 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-011931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.6/4/18Land Use ApplicationUP 2'-0"02 4'-9"03 16'-8 1/2"04 16'-2 3/4"05 17'-0"06 5'-1"07 20'-0"08 01 1'-11 3/4" B 4'-6 1/4" C 2'-0" D 5'-4 1/2" E 5'-5 1/2" F 2'-0" G 3'-7 3/4" HA 25'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1"Proposed Basement Level Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 SUBGRADE WALL CALCULATIONS Mabel Beckerman House - 333 Park Landmark on 931 Gibson Site Proposed Basement Level Exposed Wall Calculations Wall "A" Wall "B" Wall "C" Wall "D" Wall "E" Wall "F" Wall "G" Wall "H" Wall "I" Wall "J" Wall "K" Wall "L" Wall "M" Wall "N" Wall "O" Wall "P" 284.4 32.9 153.0 18.0 57.8 50.9 156.0 213.0 156.0 76.6 57.8 18.0 153.0 58.6 284.4 213.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 0 0 0 0 18.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.0 0 PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS Mabel Beckerman House / 333 Park Landmark on 931 Gibson Site Basement Level Gross Floor Area (Sq Ft) (1630.7 sq ft x 4.5%) Main Level Deck/Porch Floor Area (Sq Ft) Exempt Deck Floor Area (Sq Ft)(4530 sq ft x 15%) Deck/Porch Countable Floor Area (Sq Ft) Basement Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) Main Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) Upper Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) 1630.7 1630.68 SQ FT 18 32.9 A B 284.4 153.0 C 18 18 A B C D 18.0 E 57.8 F 50.9 G 156.0 H 213.0 18 18 I 156.0 D E F G H I J J 76.6 K 57.8 L 18.0 M 153.0 N 58.6 K L M N O P P 213.0 O 284.4 18 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR -10'-0" LOWER LEVEL CLG. -1'-0" LOWER LEVEL FLOOR -10'-0" LOWER LEVEL CLG. -1'-0" EGRESS WELL -7'-0" LOWER LEVEL FLOOR -10'-0" LOWER LEVEL CLG. -1'-0" EGRESS WELL -7'-0" LOWER LEVEL CLG. -1'-0" LOWER LEVEL FLOOR -10'-0" LOWER LEVEL CLG. -1'-0" LOWER LEVEL FLOOR -10'-0" EGRESS WELL -7'-0" UP DN 2'-0"02 4'-9"03 16'-8 1/2"04 16'-2 3/4"05 17'-0"06 5'-1"07 20'-0"08 01 1'-11 3/4" B 4'-6 1/4" C 2'-0" D 5'-4 1/2" E 5'-5 1/2" F 2'-0" G 3'-7 3/4" HA 25'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1"Proposed Main Level Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS Mabel Beckerman House / 333 Park Landmark on 931 Gibson Site Main Level Gross Floor Area (Sq Ft) Garage Gross Floor Area (Sq Ft) Main Level Deck/Porch Floor Area (Sq Ft) Exempt Deck Floor Area (Sq Ft)(4530 sq ft x 15%) Deck/Porch Countable Floor Area (Sq Ft) Basement Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) Main Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) Upper Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) 1121.22 SQ FT 500 SQ FT 113.9 SQ FT Less than 30" Above Grade (Exempt)77.4 SQ FT 1121.2 0 UP DN DN Master BDR2002'-0"02 4'-9"03 16'-8 1/2"04 16'-2 3/4"05 17'-0"06 5'-1"07 20'-0"08 01 1'-11 3/4" B 4'-6 1/4" C 2'-0" D 5'-4 1/2" E 5'-5 1/2" F 2'-0" G 3'-7 3/4" HA 25'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1"Proposed Upper Level Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS Mabel Beckerman House / 333 Park Landmark on 931 Gibson Site Upper Level Gross Floor Area (Sq Ft) Upper Level Deck/Porch Floor Area (Sq Ft) Exempt Deck Floor Area (Sq Ft)(4530 sq ft x 15%) Deck/Porch Countable Floor Area (Sq Ft) Basement Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) Main Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) Upper Level Floor Area (Sq Ft) 763.7 SQ FT 763.7 LEGEND FLOOR AREA DECK FLOOR AREA FRONT PORCH - EXEMPT (Less than 30" Above Grade) GARAGE AREA P369IX.b RIVERBANK HOUSESITE PLAN PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 676215 Kearns Rd.Snowmass Village, CO 81615info@fandmarchitect.com970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RB_3_ParcelSchemes.vwx 5/18/18 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA1.05333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT01/17/18Site Plan Schemes333 PARK PROPE R T Y LINE TOP OF BANK TOP O F BANK SE T B A C K SETBAC K LINES333 Hi s t o r i c L a n d m a rk 33 3 His to r i c Landm a r kSeco n d a r y Bu i l d ing Deck PorchExis i t n g A d d i t i o n Option 3 Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"Park Ave.BECKERMAN HOUSE - HISTORIC LANDMARK Original address: 112-114 E. Main St. Current address: 333 Park Ave. Proposed address: 931 Gibson Ave. Beckerman House DATE:6/4/18 F &M A R C H I T E C T S COPYRIGHT 2018 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 970.987.2707112-114 E. Main St.333 Park Ave.333 Park Ave.112-114 E. Main St.112-114 E. Main St.1893 1890-1899 1959 2018 2018 House was moved in 1962 Proposed Location on 931 Gibson Ave.P370IX.b 791 5 792 0 7925 7 9 2 9 7929 7933 793 3 793 4 793 4 793 5 7 9 3 6 793 7 793779387 9 4 0 7940 7941 794279437 9 4 3 79447944 MEAN HIGH WATER LINE DIT C H 15'-0"10'-0"TOP OF BA N K TOP OF BA N K SET B A C K SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0"EXISTIN G EASEM E N T EXISTI N G TURNA R O U N D / D RI V E W A Y 333 PARK PROPERTY LINE15'- 0 " 21'-0 " ROARING FORK RIVER SIDE YARD SETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK Empty 333 Park Scale: 1/32" = 1'-0"1 ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION STUDY Sanborn Fire Insurance Map depicting the original Main St. configuration. Maps have been scaled and overlayed onto both 333 Park Ave. and 931 Gibson Ave. sites. GIBSON AVE. FRONT YARD SETBACK BACK YARD SETBACKSIDE YARD SETBACK793179 3 2 79 3 3 793479 3 6 79 3 5 7937 7938931 Gibson Ave. W/ Fire Map Scale: 1/32" = 1'-0"2333 Park Ave. W/ Fire Map Scale: 1/32" = 1'-0"1 Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA00931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Original Configuration Study 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application*all topography in 1' increments P371IX.b 791 5 792 0 7925 79297929 7933 793 3 793 4 79 3 4 793 5 7936793 7 7937793879407940 7941 79427943794379447944 MEAN HIGH WATER LINE DIT C H 15'-0"33 3 Hi s t o r i c La n d m a r k 33 3 Hi s t o r i c La n d m a r k Se c o n d a r y Bu i l d i n g De c k Por c h 10'-0"TOP OF BA N K TOP OF BA N K SE T B A C K SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0"EXISTI N G TURN A R O U N D/ D RI V E W A Y 333 PARK PROPERTY LINE15'- 0 " 21'- 0 " ROARING FORK RIVER SIDE YARD SETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK Existing Landmark @ 333 Park Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 AA08AA08Por c hSIDE YARD SETBACKBeckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA01931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Exisiting Site Plan @ 333 Park Ave. 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationExisting 333 Park Site Plan Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEGEND HISTORIC LANDMARK EXISTING ADDITION AREA OF BUILDING ENCROACHING 45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMIT P372IX.b East Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.2North Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.1 South Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.3 West Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.4 Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA02931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Exisiting Photos @ 333 Park Ave. 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationP373IX.b Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA03931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Photos Showing Non-Historic @ 333 Park Ave. 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationEast Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.2North Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.1 South Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.3 West Elevation - Existing 333 Park Ave.4 Demo non-historical elements Restore historical elements Demo non-historical elements Restore historical elements Demo non-historical elements Restore historical elements Demo non-historical elements Restore historical elements P374IX.b 791 5 792 0 7925 79297929 7933 793 3 793 4 79 3 4 793 5 7936793 7 7937793879407940 7941 79427943794379447944 MEAN HIGH WATER LINE DIT C H 333 Historic Landmark333 Historic LandmarkSecondary BuildingDeckPorch15'-0"10'-0"TOP OF BA N K TOP OF BA N K SE T B A C K SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0"EXISTI N G TURN A R O U N D/ D RI V E W A Y 333 PARK PROPERTY LINE15'- 0 " 21'- 0 " ROARING FORK RIVER SIDE YARD SETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK Landmark @ 333 Park Option A Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1333 Historic Landmark333 Historic LandmarkSecondary BuildingDeckBeckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA04931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.333 Site Constraints - Option A 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application333 Site Constraints - Option A:Original Configuration Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEGEND HISTORIC LANDMARK EXISTING ADDITION AREA OF BUILDING ENCROACHING 45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMIT P375IX.b 791 5 792 0 7925 79297929 7933 793 3 793 4 79 3 4 793 5 7936793 7 7937793879407940 7941 79427943794379447944 MEAN HIGH WATER LINE DIT C H 15'-0"333 Historic LandmarkPorch33 3 Hi s t o r i c La n d m a r k Se c o n d a r y Bu i l d i n g De c k 10'-0"TOP OF BA N K TOP OF BA N K SE T B A C K SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0"EXISTI N G TURN A R O U N D/ D RI V E W A Y 333 PARK PROPERTY LINE15'- 0 " 21'- 0 " ROARING FORK RIVER SIDE YARD SETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK Landmark @ 333 Park Option B Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1333 Historic Landmark33 3 Hi s t o r i c La n d m a r k Se c o n d a r y Bu i l d i n g BA08BA08Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA05931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.333 Site Constraints - Option B 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application333 Site Constraints - Option B Modified Configuration Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEGEND HISTORIC LANDMARK EXISTING ADDITION AREA OF BUILDING ENCROACHING 45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMIT P376IX.b 791 5 792 0 7925 79297929 7933 793 3 793 4 79 3 4 793 5 7936793 7 7937793879407940 7941 79427943794379447944 MEAN HIGH WATER LINE DIT C H 15'-0"333 His t o r i c Lan d m a r k 333 His t o r i c Lan d m a r k Sec o n d a r y Bui l d i n g Dec k Por c h10'-0"TOP OF BA N K TOP OF BA N K SE T B A C K SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0"EXISTI N G TURN A R O U N D/ D RI V E W A Y 333 PARK PROPERTY LINE15'- 0 " 21'- 0 " ROARING FORK RIVER SIDE YARD SETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK Landmark @ 333 Park Option C Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 AA09AA09Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA06931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.333 Site Constraints - Option C 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application333 Site Constraints - Option C 90 Degree Rotation Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEGEND HISTORIC LANDMARK EXISTING ADDITION AREA OF BUILDING ENCROACHING 45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMIT P377IX.b 791 5 792 0 7925 79297929 7933 793 3 793 4 79 3 4 793 5 7936793 7 7937793879407940 7941 79427943794379447944 MEAN HIGH WATER LINE DIT C H 333 Historic Landmark333 Historic Landmark Secondary Building Deck Porch 15'-0"10'-0"TOP OF BA N K TOP OF BA N K SE T B A C K SIDE YARD SETBACK20'-0"EXISTI N G TURN A R O U N D/ D RI V E W A Y 333 PARK PROPERTY LINE15'- 0 " 21'- 0 " ROARING FORK RIVER SIDE YARD SETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK Landmark @ 333 Park Option D Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 BA09BA09333 Historic Landmark333 Historic Landmark Secondary Building Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA07931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.333 Site Constraints - Option D 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application333 Site Constraints - Option D 110 Degree Rotation Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEGEND HISTORIC LANDMARK EXISTING ADDITION AREA OF BUILDING ENCROACHING 45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMIT P378IX.b 7914 7919 7924 7929 7934 7939 7944 EXISTING BLDG. FOOTPRINTTOP OF SLOPEEXISTING BLDG. FOOTPRINTMEAN HIGH WATER LINETOP OF SLOPE SETBACK45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMIT15'-0" Top of Ridge 7974.3" Top of F.F. 7945.9"28'-4 3/4"Top of F.F. 7936.9"FRONT YARD SETBACKPROPERTY LINEEDGE OF PAVEMENTTop of Ridge 7973.4" Top of F.F. 7944"28'-4 3/4"HISTORIC BLDG. FOOTPRINTTOP OF SLOPEHISTORIC BLDG. FOOTPRINTTOP OF SLOPE SETBACK7914 7919 7924 7929 7934 7939 7944 15'-0"45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMITMEAN HIGH WATER LINEFRONT YARD SETBACKPROPERTY LINEEDGE OF PAVEMENTBeckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA08931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.333 Park Site Sections 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationOption B Site Section Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"B 333 Existing Site Section Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"A P379IX.b Top of Ridge 7971.4" Top of F.F. 7943"28'-4 3/4"7914 7919 7924 7929 7934 7939 EXISTING BLDG. FOOTPRINTTOP OF SLOPEEXISTING BLDG. FOOTPRINTMEAN HIGH WATER LINETOP OF SLOPE SETBACK45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMIT15'-0"FRONT YARD SETBACKPROPERTY LINEEDGE OF PAVEMENT28'-4 3/4"7914 7919 7924 7929 7934 7939 EXISTING BLDG. FOOTPRINTTOP OF SLOPEEXISTING BLDG. FOOTPRINTMEAN HIGH WATER LINETOP OF SLOPE SETBACK45 DEGREE PROGRESSIVE HEIGHT LIMIT15'-0" Top of Ridge 7971.4" Top of F.F. 7943"FRONT YARD SETBACKPROPERTY LINEEDGE OF PAVEMENTBeckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA09931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.333 Park Site Sections 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationOption D Site Section Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"B Option C Site Section Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"A P380IX.b Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA10931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.931 Gibson Ave. Survey 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Applicationpro p o s e d fo o t p r i n t P381IX.b Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA11931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Routes 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationProposed Landmark Moving Route - Option A 1 Proposed Landmark Moving Route - Option B 2 P382IX.b Existing Conifer Existing Decidious Removed Tree New Conifer Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA12931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Site Plan @ 931 Gibson Ave. 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application10'-0"10'-0" 10'-0"25'-0"14'-0"GIBSON AVE.4'-2 3/4"FRONT YARD SETBACK BACK YARD SETBACKSIDE YARD SETBACK12'-0"11'-0"793179 3 2 7933793479 3 6 79 3 5 7937 7938UP UP DN Proposed 931 Gibson Site Plan Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1AA19AA19B A19 B A19 KEY Grass Paver Drive Concrete Path Dry Set Stone Path P383IX.b Back Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 24'-10" 0201 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank House Craig.vwx 12/15/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-201333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 24'-10" 02 01 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Room 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"7'-0"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"Left Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" C A Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 25'-0"1'-3"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" x 23'-4 1/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"23'-3 7/8"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"6 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"Back Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 24'-10" 0201 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank House Craig.vwx 12/15/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-201333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 24'-10" 02 01 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Room 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"7'-0"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"Left Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" C A Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 25'-0"1'-3"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" x 23'-4 1/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"23'-3 7/8"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"6 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA13931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Historic Landmark Elevations 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationProposed Historic Landmark - West Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"4Proposed Historic Landmark - South Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 Back Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 24'-10" 0201 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank House Craig.vwx 12/15/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-201333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront ElevationScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"124'-10"02 01Main Level FF100'-0"2nd Level FF111'-0"Ridge of Existing Room127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge122'-0 1/8"ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT23'-3 1/8"25'-0"Assumed Final Grade98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer122'-1 1/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"7'-0"Right ElevationScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"26'-10"B 32'-9 1/4"CAMain Level FF100'-0"2nd Level FF111'-0"Ridge of Existing Roof127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge122'-0 1/8"ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof110'-5 1/4"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed11'-8 1/4"Left Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" C A Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 25'-0"1'-3"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" x 23'-4 1/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"Right ElevationScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"56'-10"B 32'-9 1/4"CAMain Level FF100'-0"2nd Level FF111'-0"Ridge of Existing Roof127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge122'-0 1/8"ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof122'-0 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof110'-5 1/4"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed11'-8 1/4"23'-3 7/8"Right ElevationScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"66'-10"B 32'-9 1/4"CAMain Level FF100'-0"2nd Level FF111'-0"Ridge of Existing Roof127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge122'-0 1/8"ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof110'-5 1/4"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed11'-8 1/4"Proposed Historic Landmark - North Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 Back Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 24'-10" 0201 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank House Craig.vwx 12/15/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-201333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 24'-10" 02 01 Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Room 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"7'-0"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"Left Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" C A Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 25'-0"1'-3"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Dormer 122'-1 1/4" x 23'-4 1/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4"11'-8 1/4"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"23'-3 7/8"Right Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"6 6'-10" B 32'-9 1/4" CA Main Level FF 100'-0" 2nd Level FF 111'-0" Ridge of Existing Roof 127'-10"27'-10"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 122'-0 1/8" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 23'-3 1/8"25'-0"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 122'-0 7/8"23'-3 7/8"1'-3"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" 1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge Porch Roof 110'-5 1/4" Chimney Height and Massing to be Reviewed 11'-8 1/4"Proposed Historic Landmark - East Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 P384IX.b Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA14931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Accessory Landmark Elevations 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationRIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Small Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank ZONINGv2.vwx 11/30/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-202333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 16'-10" 04 03 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"RIght Elevation Small Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" FD Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Back Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 16'-10" 0403 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Left Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"19'-3 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" F D Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Small Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank ZONINGv2.vwx 11/30/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-202333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 16'-10" 04 03 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"RIght Elevation Small Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" FD Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Back Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 16'-10" 0403 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Left Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"19'-3 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" F D Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Small Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank ZONINGv2.vwx 11/30/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-202333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 16'-10" 04 03 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"RIght Elevation Small Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" FD Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Back Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 16'-10" 0403 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Left Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"19'-3 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" F D Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"RIVERBANK HOUSEZoning Heights Small Historic PBW JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2017 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEFSS 17042 RiverBank ZONINGv2.vwx 11/30/17 F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSZ-202333 Park AveAspen, CO 81611CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT11/30/17Historic ZoningFront Small HistoricScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"116'-10"04 03Main Level FF100'-0"T. Posts107'-11"Ridge of Existing Roof118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge114'-4 3/4"ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade98'-9"1'-3"RIght Elevation SmallScale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2Main Level FF100'-0"T. Posts107'-11"Ridge of Existing Roof118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge114'-4 3/4"ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8"E 14'-8"FDAssumed Final Grade98'-9"1'-3"Back Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 16'-10" 0403 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"18'-0 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"Assumed Final Grade 98'-9"1'-3"Left Elevation Small Historic Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 Main Level FF 100'-0" T. Posts 107'-11" Ridge of Existing Roof 118'-0 3/4"19'-3 3/4"1/2 Point From Eave to Ridge 114'-4 3/4" ZONE DISTRICT HEIGHT LIMIT 15'-7 3/4"25'-0"7'-11"6'-8 1/8" E 14'-8" F D Assumed Final Grade 98'-9" Proposed Accessory Landmark - West Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"4Proposed Accessory Landmark - South Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 Proposed Accessory Landmark - North Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 Proposed Accessory Landmark - East Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 P385IX.b Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA15931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Plans @ 931 Gibson Ave. 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationUPGame Room 001 BDR 002 Laundry 003 BDR 004 BDR 005 2'-0"024'-9"0316'-8 1/2"0416'-2 3/4"0517'-0"065'-1"0720'-0"08011'-11 3/4"B4'-6 1/4"C2'-0"D5'-4 1/2"E5'-5 1/2"F2'-0"G3'-7 3/4"HA2/A18 1/A182/A17 1/A1725'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1" Proposed Lower Level Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 UPDNLiving 100 Kitchen 101 Mudroom 103 Office 102 Garage 104 porchFront Entry and Porch2'-0"024'-9"0316'-8 1/2"0416'-2 3/4"0517'-0"065'-1"0720'-0"08011'-11 3/4"B4'-6 1/4"C2'-0"D5'-4 1/2"E5'-5 1/2"F2'-0"G3'-7 3/4"HA2/A18 1/A182/A17 1/A1725'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1" Proposed Main Level Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 P386IX.b Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA16931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Plans @ 931 Gibson Ave. 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationDNMaster BDR 200 2'-0"024'-9"0316'-8 1/2"0416'-2 3/4"0517'-0"065'-1"0720'-0"08011'-11 3/4"B4'-6 1/4"C2'-0"D5'-4 1/2"E5'-5 1/2"F2'-0"G3'-7 3/4"HA2/A18 1/A182/A17 1/A1725'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1" Proposed Upper Level Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 garage below mudroom below flat roof 2:12 slope2'-0"024'-9"0316'-8 1/2"0416'-2 3/4"0517'-0"065'-1"0720'-0"08011'-11 3/4"B4'-6 1/4"C2'-0"D5'-4 1/2"E5'-5 1/2"F2'-0"G3'-7 3/4"HA2/A18 1/A182/A17 1/A1725'-0"56'-8 1/4"25'-1" Proposed Roof Plan Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"211:12 slope12:12 slope11:12 slope11:12 slope 11:12 slope2:12 slopeflat roof12:12 slope11 3/4"11 3/4"10 1/2"11 1/4"10 1/2" 11 1/2"P387IX.b Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA17931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Elevations @ 931 Gibson Ave 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationProposd North Elevation 1 12 11.2 12 11.2 4 1 1 4 11'-1 1/2"2'-0"7'-10 3/4"2'-0"1'-11 3/4" 25'-0" Proposed East Elevation Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"2newlandmark3 1 12 10.1 12 12 20'-0"5'-1"17'-0"32'-11 1/4"7'-9" 12 11 2 Legend 1. Egress Well 2. New-Landmark Connector with flat roof 3. Stained Wood Siding 4. Shake Roof P388IX.b Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA18931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Elevations @ 931 Gibson Ave 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use Application12 12 Proposed South Elevation 1 12 11.2 4 11 3 25'-0"roof line beyondProsposed West Elevation 2newlandmark1 3 2 7'-9"32'-11 1/4"17'-0"5'-1"20'-0" 12 11 Legend 1. Egress Well 2. New-Landmark Connector with flat roof 3. Stained Wood Siding 4. Shake Roof Section A Looking North 3 8'-6"10'-10"5'-7 3/4" 12 12 212 2 8'-0"P389IX.b Beckerman HouseF&M JOB #: SHEET TITLE: COPYRIGHT 2018 PO Box 6762 15 Kearns Rd. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 info@fandmarchitect.com 970.987.2707 DRAWN: PRINTED: CHECKED:DATEF&M 18014 333Landmark on Gibson.vwx F&M ARCHITECTSREMARKSA19931 Gibson Ave.Aspen CO, 81611City of Aspen Building Dept.Proposed Site Sections 6/4/185/29/18Land Use Draft6/4/18Land Use ApplicationGIBSON AVE.Property LineFront Yard SetbackBack Yard SetbackProperty LineT.O. F.F. 7534' T.O. Ridge. 7562.4'23'-3"1/2 Point from Eave and Ridge 7556' Proposed Site Section Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"A Property LineSide Yard SetbackSide Yard SetbackProperty LineT.O. F.F. 7534' T.O. Ridge. 7562.4' 1/2 Point from Eave and Ridge 7556' 22'-6 1/4"23'-3"Proposed Site Section Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"B P390IX.b P391IX.b P392IX.b P393IX.b REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 11, 2018 1 Commissioners in attendance: Gretchen Greenwood, Jeffrey Halferty, Nora Berko, Scott Kendrick, Bob Blaich, Roger Moyer, Richard Lai. Absent were Sheri Sanzone and Willis Pember. Staff present: Linda Manning, City Clerk Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Planner Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Ms. Greenwood said she was not here for that meeting, but she read the minutes and it seemed interesting. Mr. Blaich moved to approve the draft minutes for June 13th, 2018, Mr. Moyer seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Mr. Halferty entered the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Berko said the Meadows is looking pretty amazing. They did it pretty quickly and amazingly. DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICT: Ms. Simon said she is recusing herself from 330 Park and 931 Gibson. PROJECT MONITORING: Ms. Simon said she will speak with Mr. Halferty and Mr. Kendrick tomorrow about St. Mary’s. She will discuss by email tomorrow along with two projects to show Mr. Blaich shortly. Ms. Greenwood asked if all the projects are covered. Ms. Simon said she doesn’t think so and she has a few upcoming requests. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon reminded everyone that they have been invited to an opening reception for St. Mary’s sanctuary project on Sunday. She also sent them an email asking for a special meeting on Aug 1st. We do have a quorum, but she would like to know if anyone cannot make it. Mr. Pember is unavailable. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: Ms. Simon issued one for 520 E. Hyman, which is the building where I Pro is for some work on the third-floor penthouse unit. We also issued one for a remodel of the space where BB’s kitchen was. She also received an application for 501 E Hyman for an addition between Clark’s and Marcus. This application is to add a new entry door to the non-historic addition. After discussing with the building department, we felt this was resolved in a way that met guidelines and did not need HPC review. PUBLIC NOTICE: Ms. Bryan said everything is in order. CALL UP REPORTS: None. NEW BUSINESS: 333 Park and 931 Gibson Sarah Yoon P394 IX.b REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 11, 2018 2 This involves the relocation of the historic residence to new lot on 931 Gibson. Currently, 333 Park is in the R6 zone district. The rear property faces the Roaring Fork River. 333 Park contains two historic resources, which are proposed to be relocated. It was located to this site in the 1960s from Main Street. It was designated historic in 1995. 931 Gibson is in R15A zone district. Currently, there is a residential building on this site with a demo permit that has expired. The applicant is exploring different routes for relocation. The review requests are as follows: approval of demo of non-historic additions, relocation of 2 historic resources to the new site and rescinding the historic designation from 333 Park. For 931 Gibson, the applicant is requesting approval of relocation to this site and the designation of the property to protect the historic resources, the design approval for a basement and above ground addition which has a 10-ft. connector and 10 ft. one car garage along with demolition of the residence on the current lot. The applicant is requesting dimensional variances for the front and rear yard setbacks and the 500- sq. ft. bonus. On page 2 of the staff memo, it outlines the review process as it will involve Council heavily in the review process. The applicant proposes to restore the original Sanborn map footprint configuration of the two historic resources and reorient the front façade back to street facing, which will increase its visibility. Ms. Yoon showed images of the original footprint. In reviewing the criteria for relocation, 333 Park is not in a historic district and the resource will not have any adverse impacts on area. It is an acceptable alternative in this case and they meet all three of the additional criteria. There is an argument that the current location is over 50 years and of historical importance. The applicant has proposed to restore the historical character. They have also proposed a minor addition to the rear of the resource, which is in compliance with HPC guidelines. With the relocation, staff has concerns with the changes in allowable floor area on the accepting site. The new calculations differ from what was in the packet and are being passed out at the meeting. The lot sizes are significantly different from each other so the relocation will increase the floor area by 922 ft., not including the floor area bonus. The historic resource will now allow two detached units on the site, which was not allowed prior to the relocation. Regarding the demo criteria, the demo of all non-historic additions is supported. The applicant expressed that the first design, is the preferred designed. Staff has concerns with the connector, the site placement of the garage and request of the front setback variation. The applicant has provided a revised design that redesigned the connector from 5 to 10 feet in length and the above grade addition has been reduced to a single car garage to 250 from 500. In this design, the applicant has extended the connecting element to 10 ft. and reduced the above grade addition. They also moved back the addition so the variation will only be for the front porch. They are still asking for the sub grade variation for the living space. They do request the 500-sq. ft. bonus for their preservation efforts and want it for the Gibson space and meets six of the eight criteria for the bonus. HPC may grant up to 500 sq. ft., not on rights, but merits. Staff supports relocation of the historic resource with exception of the sub grade variation. The lot can accommodate for the basement without a variation. HPC will need to determine the following issues: $150,000 deposit necessary for relocation of the outbuilding, the granting of the floor area and the total amount and the granting of the front and rear yard setbacks. Ms. Greenwood said they discussed at the site, the potential of the front porch as historic. She said it is not represented in the presentation. Ms. Yoon said the Sandborn map footprint indicated a porch. Ms. Greenwood said that needs to be communicated. She also asked what is your thinking on the setback variance for below grade and not supporting it. Ms. Yoon said the new site has the capacity for the basement and it would not require the variance. APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Sara Adams of Bendon Adams, Flynn Stewart-Severy of F&M Architects, Brian Hendry, owner and Monty Thompson of Thunder Construction Mr. Hendry introduced himself and said he has a wife, Michelle. We have four kids and two dogs and have been coming here for 16 years and spend three months a year here. We first saw the property P395 IX.b REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 11, 2018 3 about seven years ago and we saw it for sale last summer and jumped on it. We love the house and the location. We are looking forward to restoring it to its original condition and we have spent the last year developing a plan for what we can do with the house. Ms. Adams said they have a long list of requests on the screen, but it’s a basic concept to pick up the two historic resources, remove the non- historic additions and move them to a more appropriate location and swap the historic designations. We are requesting conceptual approval for a one car garage. We are requesting a floor area bonus with a condition that it be completely allocated to a future detached home on the Gibson property and we are fine with it being allocated to below grade space. This property was constructed in 1889 by the Jacobs family and was located on a 3K sq. lot., but proposed to be on a 5K lot. The setback was 14 feet so this is part of why we feel the variance is appropriate. You can see the one story historic addition from the street and the barn along the alley. It changed hands a few times after Jacobs constructed it and in 1961 the land under the house was purchased. Mable placed an ad to sell the historic building. The Bibbig’s purchased the property and moved it to Park in 1962. The historic building has survived till today. Ms. Adams showed images of the facades as they are today. They went through four iterations within 333 Park before asking for relocation and worked on this for about a year. There are stream margin setbacks, R6 and 45-degree angle progressive height setbacks to work within. All required a lot of variances and no visibility to the street. Flynn scaled the Sanborn map and Brian found the Gibson property and we found that the Sanborn fits on this property with some massaging. We have been working with parks to find an acceptable route and we have now met with them twice and are still working with them to come up with a route that will work with everyone. Priorities are to fully restore the landmark, bring back the original Main Street configuration and have some street presence. 931 Gibson is a large flat lot and the intention is to move all the floor area not used by the landmark and designate it to a detached single- family home. There would be two homes on this lot and the floor area of a duplex on this lot is comparable to what we are asking for and we think it is better for the neighborhood. The new building would be under HPC purview since it would be a designated lot. There would be less density than the original Main Street location. Looking at context, Ms. Adams showed a map of the designated properties and showed an image of the original proposal with a two-car garage and a five-foot connector. All of the new square footage is below grade and we would be requesting the 500-sq. ft. bonus be allocated to the new home. They are fine with the preference that the bonus be used below grade. The level of restoration is not just physical, but we would be restoring context. This is a serious preservation effort going on here. We are requesting two setback variations to realign the historic addition and add the garage. The garage meets the 5 ft. above grade setback but needs the below grade variation. For the front yard setback, the preservation approach was to have the landmark be prominent along the street. The new detached building, proposed in the future, will be required to meet the 25-foot setback line and this is just for the landmark. As for the alternate option, the only way to elongate the connector from 5 to 10 feet, is to lose a garage bay. We would be pulling the landmark façade to the 25-foot setback line. We are still requesting the below grade setback variance for 5 feet. We don’t prefer the one car garage option and feel strongly that the front yard setback should match those along Main Street. We are requesting a decision tonight as we have another step to go with City Council. This is a unique project and a great opportunity. Mr. Kendrick asked when was the property designated historic. Ms. Adams said 1995. Mr. Kendrick asked if there were any incentives given at that time and Ms. Adams said no, it was a blanket designation. P396 IX.b REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 11, 2018 4 Ms. Greenwood asked what part of 931 Gibson is being designated and Ms. Adams said the entire parcel. Ms. Greenwood asked why are we not seeing what is being proposed for the new building because this is a serious problem moving forward without that building. Ms. Garrow said when we looked at the code, we would prefer to see the 2nd building, but it is not required. The criteria for granting the floor area bonus are really about the preservation effort of the historic resource itself and not about the additions of the separate building, so they felt comfortable moving forward. The entire lot is being designated, so at whatever point in the future they decided to move forward with a second building, it would fall under HPC’s purview. Ms. Garrow said this is a unique proposal and made sense to them to move forward. Ms. Greenwood said she finds that to be very odd because we grapple with the bonus and mass and scale on historic properties so it feels contrary to what we do on this board. She said she has a serious problem with that and it probably should have been discussed. Ms. Garrow said that one option on the bonus is that the decision will not be made until the second structure is proposed. Ms. Greenwood said this is not what my clients have dealt with doing almost the same thing. The lack of consistency with interpretation of the codes is disturbing. Since it is in the R15 zone, when it is a duplex you can see the reason for a deep setback, so did you ever consider asking for less of a setback so you could maintain a two-car garage. Ms. Adams said we would be open to that. We wanted to be sensitive to the requests we came in with. We want to be sensitive to the neighbors and their 25- foot setbacks. Ms. Greenwood asked if they anticipate the new building will have a 25-foot setback. Ms. Adams said we would be coming in with the 25-foot setback and we understand how the board feels about setbacks. Mr. Stewart- Severy agreed with Ms. Adams and said because it comes under HPC purview, it would be addressed. Having the historic home sit in front of the new development is a nice gesture. Mr. Kendrick asked if the FAR can be based on the quality of the restoration, conditionally once the project is complete and Ms. Garrow said there is a lot of discretion given to HPC so if you wanted to add conditions based on additional review, you have the latitude to condition it. PUBLIC COMMENT: 1. Alan Becker, neighbor on Matchless Drive, concerned with additional structures. We don’t know what they are going to be or look like. Mr. Becker sked what the intention for the property is and said he is concerned with what the 5-foot setback on the rear of the property means. Ms. Greenwood explained. Mr. Becker said he generally likes to know the proposed usage and intent for the additional structures. He asked what the estimated timeframe for the historic and new structures would be. Ms. Adams said Brian and Shelly own the property and they are trying to figure out the intent. They are not sure if they can fit their four kids and two dogs on the property. The historic home is about 2000 square foot of floor area and the detached structure would be about 2500 sq. ft. and 500 with the bonus. If the bonus is allocated to the basement, that is what we will do. Ms. Garrow said as staff, we struggled a little bit with what you do with the bonus and it does meet the criteria. Not knowing what a 2nd building will look like, we said if the bonus is granted, we prefer it will be located in the basement knowing it will be difficult to parse out. If HPC is uncomfortable with that language, we can remove it. Ms. Adams said if you grant the bonus, it will be 3000 square feet of FAR and that is 1000 square feet more than the landmark. Mr. Becker said my old understanding was the bonus is up to 500 sq. ft. Ms. Greenwood said that is correct. 2. David Harris, lives at 117 Neale Ave in a historic resource. He said these kinds of projects are really good things as long as they are done in a complete manner. Regarding the front yard setback, my porch sits 10 feet off the sidewalk. In zones where you have a 25-foot setback, they are dead places, so I encourage you to take a look at that. What is better than having people P397 IX.b REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 11, 2018 5 enjoy each other. What goes along with that is a sidewalk, is there is “staff” who have decided that sidewalks are inappropriate in our neighborhoods, so please make sure there is a sidewalk. Ms. Greenwood asked if engineering is requiring you to put in a sidewalk. Ms. Garrow said it will be required. Because the zone allows there to be 2 separate buildings, you should try to master plan the site. Mr. Lai said he is not familiar with his house but if he prefers the traffic in front of your house, I would like to take a look at that. 3. Mike Maple asked when was the last time other than the relocation of Zupancis, that there was a relocation like this and how often does this happen. Ms. Garrow said it is a very unique project and there were two of these types of relocations, one in 1988 – 134 ½ West Hopkins moved and the Zupancis. There were a lot of properties moved in the 60s and 70s. This is a gigantic site and quite unusual. Mr. Maple said his family owned and occupied the adjacent property for 50 years. It’s a brilliant plan to create development in excess of 3 million dollars. This is asking for too much. The idea of two structures plus FAR bonus is asking for 18% increase of development potential. If the home was being relocated to a historic area, it may be appropriate. 4. Christine Dodaro, lives across the street. She doesn’t think the mailing said what will be built on the second part of the lot and is concerned about that. Ms. Greenwood closed the public comment. Ms. Adams said as for the development of the second lot, it would be a single-family home. It is nice to hear mike’s comments and we have put our best foot forward with a good solution. It comes with some tradeoffs and it will be a single-family home that will meet your design guidelines. We are open to phasing in the bonus. Mr. Hendry said he is not a developer and their intention was to buy one house, but this has escalated due to scenarios that developed once we built the house. Our intention is not to disturb or be a hindrance to your mother and father. Our intention is to stay in the house. Mr. Stewart- Severy said the garage we proposed is based off the Sandborn maps and it is depicted more off a barn than anything else. The vertical height is up for debate and the original barn was taller than the single- story structure. Ms. Greenwood summarized the issues and said that staff is asking for a demo of non-historic addition, relocation of Victorian to a non-historic site creating a new landmark designation where one never existed. Staff feels like we should give them a 500-ft. bonus. Mr. Halferty said the proposed development has strong merits. The relocation would add some prominence to Gibson. He is ok with some of the variances. The FAR bonus is hard to get his hands around since it is on a lot where there is no house. It is hard to allocate whether it is sub or above grade when we don’t know the architecture. He thinks the last iteration with the garage in the back is admirable and the connecting element works. It is a large lot and the proposed foot print works. The presence towards Gibson works and conforms to the guidelines. He needs to look more at site planning for garage access. In defense of applicants they have not gone through the design of the other lot, but it would be nice to see it. The project is on its way and it is a strong restoration effort. The FAR bonus is questionable, but he is not saying it is not warranted. He is curious as to where the receiving site would be. He is in favor of the partial demo and the setback variance. He is curious of the receiving area and site location of FAR bonus. P398 IX.b REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 11, 2018 6 Mr. Lai said regarding the rear setback, he is ok with it as it is reasonable with the garage. It is logical to put the barrier wall below, under it. At the beginning, he was in favor of keeping the 25 feet in the front, but has been persuaded by Mr. Harris that there may be a social advantage to it. He agrees with the chair on the 500-foot bonus, but is skeptical about bonuses generally. He would need to be persuaded that the preservation is exemplary. Mr. Kendrick said this is an interesting solution to a difficult problem. He likes that the two historic pieces are coming back together in an original configuration and is fine with the setback. He does have a problem with the FAR bonus with not knowing what the new building will look like. I know I will not be in favor of any setbacks for the new building. Moving the building is giving it a lot of value. Mr. Moyer said he is totally in favor of the renovation and removal of the additions of the resource and he is in favor of moving it to the new site. He would like to see a two-car garage and seeing it closer to the sidewalk. We know there will be a structure on the corner and recreating the vitality would be helpful. He has no issue with the rear setback. He does not have an issue with the bonus if it is underground. Most of the time, he is totally against giving any type of bonus especially redoing a resource that has been unknown for a number of years. It is interesting, we know we could have an 8000 plus structure and we are getting much less and it will creates more of a neighborhood and I’m willing to allow a little discretion. Ms. Berko said for her, underground doesn’t count and she doesn’t quite understand that. She thanked Ms. Adams for doing the research about the property. Thank you all for the public comment. It is a wonderful building that should be seen. Until Mr. Harris brought up the sidewalk and the setbacks, I wasn’t for them. I would like to see them tied to the requirement of a sidewalk. I like the revision of the 10-foot connector. I’m not sure why if you move it forward why you need the rear yard setback. He’s having a hard time with the bonus. I don’t know what is going to be there. Tying it to what Main Street was doesn’t mean much since none of us know it from there. It’s less important to recreate the Main Street situation. It leaves a potentially huge structure next door. Mr. Moyer said in the 1990s, we had a concept with shared driveways. That will happen here. Prior to that, there were a lot of projects that weren’t that great. I would like to see the sidewalk here and the new project will be set back 25 feet. Mr. Blaich said this is a commendable project. The owner and staff worked hard on getting it resolved. He heard some objections that he hadn’t considered. I would be in favor of a 2-car garage. I’ve watched that neighborhood change over the years. Ms. Greenwood personally feels, given a 6000-square foot lot, she is totally in favor of the demo and moving the structure. Being able to do that is your bonus. As Mr. Maple pointed out, you are getting a lot of development rights by getting a historic designation where one doesn’t exist. For me, you got a bonus by that. Not a square foot one, but a development one. Regarding the setbacks, I don’t think it is appropriate to have a 5 foot one for a garage you don’t access off the alley. Maybe the garage is in the wrong location. New construction should be a product of its own time. In an R zone, the rear yard setback is 10 feet. Given a site of this size, the rear set back should be 10 feet. I don’t think anyone is in favor of the 500-square foot bonus. I’m not in favor of the setback for the garage. I would rather see a lesser set back up front. The demo of the historic addition and moving it is a great idea. The whole site becoming historic is a lot to grant somebody. P399 IX.b REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 11, 2018 7 Ms. Garrow said that after listening to the comments, she has a suggestion. It seems like you are in favor of the demo and relocation. If you are inclined to approve the demo, relocation and change in historic designation, we can include an update to show both buildings after council approval then the floor area bonus could be awarded at conceptual. Ms. Greenwood said the conceptual major development is not ready to be assessed. Ms. Garrow said the suggestion is to take the bonus off the table. If HPC supports the design and grants the conceptual, we can make the recommendation to council to add a condition and there be an amended conceptual before final. Ms. Greenwood asked why we can’t approve the relocation and continue the conceptual. Ms. Garrow said you would only be making a recommendation to council. The issue is when council approves the ordinance, we would have no idea where the building is going. Ms. Greenwood asked what is wrong with that. She said she would push for a two-car garage. Ms. Garrow said it looks like the applicant is amenable to pulling the conceptual out and just making a recommendation on the relocation and partial demolition. Mr. Moyer said let’s keep it simple and give them the permission to move and come up with something better than what they have now. Ms. Greenwood said the restoration effort is excellent, but the garage could use some work. Mr. Stewart-Severy asked what she meant and Ms. Greenwood said this is just to be sensitive to the neighbors. With a site that large, it should be 10 feet off the property line. MOTION: Mr. Halferty motioned to approve resolution #9 for recommendation to City Council to approve the relocation from 333 Park to 931 Gibson, rescinding the designation at Park and adding designation to Gibson and landmark relocating building and removing non-historic parts. This is only section 1, 5, 7, 8 and 9. Sections 2, 3, 4 and 6 have been deleted. Mr. Kendrick seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Kendrick, yes; Ms. Berko, yes; Mr. Lai, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Blaich, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes; Ms. Greenwood, yes. 7-0, motion carried. Ms. Garrow stated that if council approves the demo and relocation, the applicant will come back after city council. MOTION: Mr. Blaich motioned to adjourn, Mr. Halferty seconded. All in favor, motion carried at 6:30 p.m. ___________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk P400 IX.b From:randy cadwallader To:Sarah Yoon Subject:333 Park Ave. Date:Friday, August 10, 2018 1:08:55 PM I am writing to support the relocation of 333 Park Ave. to Gibson. To allow this to happen is a win win for the city and our beautiful neighborhood. We live at 351 Park Ave and to allow this house to be relocated and brought back to a beautiful home and allowing new construction on the existing site will only enhance our beautiful neighborhood that we so enjoy. Thank you in advance for considering approving this; Michele and Randy Cadwallader EXHIBIT G - Public CommentP401 IX.b Page 1 of 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Skadron and Aspen City Council FROM: Ben Anderson, Planner II THRU: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director RE: Temporary Use Request – Grey Lady, 305 S. Mill, Resolution No. 122, Series of 2018 MEETING DATE: August 27, 2018 APPLICANT: Ryan Chadwick, 426 E. Hyman Ave. #301, Aspen, CO 81611 LOCATION: 305 S. Mill, Grey Lady CURRENT ZONING: Commercial Core (CC, Commercial Core Historic District) SUMMARY: The applicant is seeking temporary use approval for Grey Lady restaurant to place a plastic/canvas tent over the site’s public amenity space from December 15, 2018 through April 15, 2019, a total of one hundred and twenty (120) days. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council deny the applicant’s request for a one hundred twenty (120) day temporary use approval. Staff finds the structures is out of character with the historic district and does not wish to encourage structures constructed of such impermanent materials for such a length of time. Additionally, a condition of the 2017 approval required that the tent structure be removed following the period of approval. The roof has not been removed, meaning this condition was never fully met. Figure A. Grey Lady Restaurant, north view. Figure B. Grey Lady Restaurant, west view – trellis structure. Figure C. Grey Lady Restaurant, south view – trellis structure. P402 IX.c Page 2 of 4 REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL: • Temporary and Seasonal Use Review (26.450.030) The applicant is requesting Temporary Use approval related to two temporary structures in accordance with Chapter 26.450 of the Land Use Code for a period of one hundred and twenty (120) days. The Code allows City Council to grant temporary use approval for up to 180 consecutive days within a calendar year, for no more than ten years. City Council is the final review authority. LOCATION/BACKGROUND: The subject site is located within the historic Commercial Core zone district, at the corner of the Mill Street pedestrian mall and E. Hyman Avenue. The applicant has requested and received temporary use approval for the tent on this site during the 2014-2015 winter season, the 2015- 2016 holiday season, the 2017-2018 winter season, and now the 2018-2019 winter season. The history of requests are as follows: • In 2013 City Council granted a former restaurant owner of the subject location seasonal temporary use approval for a temporary custom fabric airlock from January through March of the same year. At Staff’s recommendation Council granted this as a one-time approval, and directed the applicant to find a permanent solution for future needs. • In December 2014, Staff approved a seven-day tent permit for the site. The tent was erected over the trellis, covering the site’s public amenity space, and was fully-enclosed with roll-down walls. After the tent was not removed the matter was directed to Council for review. • In January 2015 Council granted the applicant temporary seasonal approval for the tent to be erected on-site through April 15th of the same year. At the hearing Council was clear that this was a one-time approval and that the Applicant should not return to renew this request. • In October 2015 City Council denied the applicant’s request to erect this tent on the site for the duration of the winter season. Council was concerned with the tent’s use of plastic and canvas materials and questioned the temporary nature of a structure that kept reappearing seasonally. • In December of 2015 City Council granted the applicant an 11-day temporary use approval (December 24, 2015- through January 3, 2016) to erect the tent over the site’s public amenity space. • In December of 2016, City Council granted the applicant a 14 day, temporary use approval. The approved days were not required to be used consecutively. The applicant also requested an exterior airlock, which was not approved. • In November of 2017, City Council granted the applicant a 120-day temporary use approval for a significant portion of the winter season (Resolution 157, Series of 2017). The inclusion of a winter market on Saturdays within the tent structure was an addition to the 2017 request and approval. P403 IX.c Page 3 of 4 Since the previous Temporary Use approvals, the Land Use Code has changed, requiring additional design review be included for all proposals that cover Pedestrian Amenity space. CURRENT REQUEST: The applicant is requesting temporary use approval to cover the existing trellis with a grey canvas and plastic covering on the subject site for a period of one hundred and twenty (120) days, to begin on December 15, 2018 and end on April 15, 2019. The covering has been placed on the site’s trellis over various durations by the Applicant throughout the past three winter seasons. The temporary covering will be utilized by the restaurant during evening operating hours, and by a winter market on Saturdays/and or Sundays during the late morning and afternoon. STAFF COMMENTS: This Application is the fifth annual request for a covering of the trellis during the winter season at the Grey Lady. The Grey Lady is located in a prominent location at the intersection of the Mill Street and Hyman Avenue Pedestrian Malls within the Commercial Core Historic District. Staff does not support the request for a temporary enclosure over the trellis structure. A full analysis of the applicable review criteria can be found in Exhibit B. Commercial Design The Grey Lady is in a highly visible location at the intersection of two pedestrian malls within a historic district. The Commercial Core Historic District requires improvements that respect the 19th-century historic context. The trellis covering in years past, and as proposed this year, is essentially a canvas and plastic tent. The materials of the trellis covering do not reinforce the historic context and are not appropriate for this Character Area in the Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines. Furthermore, the tent would cover Pedestrian Amenity space for nearly one-third of the year. Temporary Use While Staff is appreciative of the Applicant’s representation that the space would be used as an indoor winter market on Saturdays during the winter season, Staff has recommended in past reviews of this temporary use request that the Applicant should consider pursuing a more permanent solution for their winter operations. This would allow for a design that is cohesive to the existing building, meets the Commercial Design Guidelines, and is constructed of durable, high-quality materials, rather than a temporary tent. GMQS The canvas tent will generate 788 sq. ft. of Net Leasable floor area for one hundred and twenty (120) days of the year. The applicant will be required to pay $5,562.30 (estimate) to mitigate for the covered area. The applicant is required to verify the size of the covered area prior to payment. Figure D. Previously approved temporary cover. P404 IX.c Page 4 of 4 Staff has one additional concern. A condition of last year’s approval was that the tent fabric be removed from the trellis following the period of approval. It is staff’s understanding that the tent fabric has remained in place until the present. The walls have been rolled up, and view into the space is open, however the ceiling covering the trellis remains in place. While no formal enforcement action has been taken, staff views this as being out of compliance with the terms of last year’s approval. Figure E. Current status of pedestrian amenity area. Photo taken 8/15/18. 129 days have passed since the period of the previous approval came to an end. This raises two specific concerns. 1) Under the code limitations, Council can only approve up to 180 days. In total, this tent structure has been up 249 days since December of 2017. 2) Additionally, days beyond the 120 days approved would accrue further GMQS mitigation requirements (estimate: $6,769.22). Because the tent does not meet the applicable criteria within the Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines for the Commercial Core character area and Pedestrian Amenity spaces, and the failure to remove the tent structure following the period of approval, staff is recommending denial of the temporary use request. While staff clearly understands the value of this area to the Grey Lady Restaurant, and that the covered and enclosed condition allows the area to be used year round, the Land Use Code and the Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines were written to reflect the community’s desire to generally prohibit, and if allowed, permit only the temporary use of fabric or tent-like enclosures. This is a very prominent location in the CC Historic District and continues to serve as precedent for the many other establishments that may desire this type of “temporary” structure over Pedestrian Amenity spaces. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the temporary use request. If Council desires to approve the temporary use, the resolution has been worded in the affirmative for another one (1) year approval. PROPOSED MOTION (WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): “I move to approve Resolution 122, Series of 2018 to allow the erection of a canvas/plastic tent over the public amenity space at 305 S. Mill St. from December 15, 2018 through April 15, 2019.” (note: the draft resolution also carries forward conditions from the 2017 approval related to the winter market) Attachments: Exhibit A – Staff Findings (Matrix) Exhibit B – Staff Findings Exhibit C – Application P405 IX.c 1 RESOLUTION NO. 122 (SERIES OF 2018) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A TEMPORARY USE OF TENT AND AIRLOCK STRUCTURE AT 305-7 S. MILL STREET, ASPEN COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUMS UNIT A AND COMMON AREA, BLOCK 19, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-17-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Ryan Chadwick requesting Temporary Use approval to maintain a plastic and canvas tent structure covering the trellis over the public amenity space at the north end of the existing commercial building from December 15, 2018 through April 15, 2019; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.450.050 of the Land Use Code, City Council may grant a temporary use approval for up to 180 days; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the application and considered the Temporary Use proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing; and, WHEREAS, The City Council considered the application during public hearing at a regular scheduled meeting on August 27, 2018 and by a X – X (X - X) vote approves Resolution No. 122, Series of 2018; and, WHEREAS, the City Council approves the tent structure, allowing for a temporary use for one hundred and twenty (120) days; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves a Temporary Use request to allow the erection of a plastic and canvas tent on the subject site, over the existing trellis, measuring approximately 788 sq. ft., from December 15, 2018 to April 20, 2019, for a period of one hundred twenty (120) days. The tent, including walls and roof, shall be removed in its entirety by April 21, 2018. Section 2: The temporary structure shall be made available as a “Local Vendor Market” on Saturdays and/or Sundays, for a minimum of one day per week until April 15, 2018, or until the tent P406 IX.c 2 enclosure is removed; whichever comes first. The additional conditions shall apply: a. The Applicant shall attend an ACRA Board meeting to discuss the Saturday Market concept. b. The Applicant shall contact Aspen Entrepreneurs and Maker + Place to discuss the Saturday Market concept. c. The Applicant shall contact Aspen Tree to discuss the Saturday Market, with the intent that the CSAs associated with Aspen Tree will be made privy to the Saturday Market. Section 3: Temporary structures that are approved on a site for a period greater than fourteen (14) days are subject to growth management review, resulting in affordable housing mitigation. The applicant is required to provide housing mitigation for each day above 14 that the tent is up. The estimated amount of affordable housing due for this site is $5,562.30 (based on methodology in LUC, 26.470.090.I). This fee must be paid prior to the placement of the structures on the site. Staff requires verification of the size of the structures prior to payment. Section 4: A tent permit approval, including verification from the Aspen Fire Department that the structure meets all necessary safety requirements, is required prior to the erection of the temporary structure. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the temporary use proposal as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 6: This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. P407 IX.c 3 APPROVED BY the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 27th day of August, 2018. Steven Skadron, Mayor Attest: Linda Manning, City Clerk Approved as to form: James R. True, City Attorney P408 IX.c Exhibit A Staff Review Criteria - Matrix Review Criteria for 305 S. Mill Street - Temporary and Seasonal Use Review The applicant is requesting Temporary Use Approval for a fabric and clear plastic enclosure over Pedestrian Amenity space for one-hundred and twenty (120) days during the 2018-2019 winter season. The application must satisfy the review criteria for the Temporary and Seasonal Use Section 26.450.030 When considering a development application for a temporary use or an insubstantial temporary use, the Community Development Director or City Council shall consider, among other pertinent factors, the following criteria as they or any of them, relate thereto: MET NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY A. The location, size, design, operating characteristics and visual impacts of the proposed use NOT MET B. The compatibility of the proposed temporary use with the character, density and use of structures and uses in the immediate vicinity. NOT MET C. The impacts of the proposed temporary use on pedestrian and vehicular traffic and traffic patterns, municipal services, noise levels and neighborhood character. NOT MET D. The duration of the proposed temporary use and whether a temporary use has previously been approved for the structure, parcel, property or location as proposed in the application. MET E. The purposes and intent of the zone district in which the temporary use is proposed MET F. The relation of the temporary use to conditions and character changes which may have occurred in the area and zone district in which the use is proposed. NOT MET G. How the proposed temporary use will enhance or diminish the general public health, safety or welfare. MET P409 IX.c 1 Exhibit B Review Criteria Temporary and Seasonal Uses: Section 26.450.030. Criteria applicable to all temporary uses. When considering a development application for a temporary use or an insubstantial temporary use, the Communit y Development Director or City Council shall consider, among other pertinent factors, the following criteria as they or an y of them, relate thereto: A. The location, size, design, operating characteristics and visual impacts of the proposed use. Staff Response: The proposed tent measures approximately 788 sq. ft. This structure has been erected on the site in the same location for some period over the past four winter seasons, giving Staff and the community the benefit of viewing the structure and its operational characteristics on- site. The proposed tent is adjacent to the indoor commercial space and will cover the outdoor trellis. The tent has been designed from a heavyweight gray canvas with clear plastic windows and sides that can be rolled up. The applicant intends to use the tent as an extension of the indoor heated seating space for the restaurant and for a Saturday winter market. The proposed structures will be highly visible with materials that would not be permitted by Commercial Design Review. The proposed tent will cover the approved public amenity space that was a requirement for the development of the commercial building on the site. In 2013, a former tenant of the space received approval from HPC (via Resolution No. 15, Series of 2013) to construct a wooden trellis over the public amenity space as a shade structure. Reviews included Minor Development Review and View Plane approval. The approval was granted in part on the trellis’ design - spaced wooden posts with no sides. The tent in the current proposal covers this light, airy structure with solid, opaque fabric which represents an increase in the commercial space of the restaurant using a material that would not be permitted as a permanent structure within the historic Commercial district. Temporary structures of this nature are considered by Staff for short-term approval (7 days); however, overall they are found to detract from the permanent architecture of the historic Commercial Core district, and therefore are not supported for longer periods of time. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. B. The compatibility of the proposed temporary use with the character, density and use of structures and uses in the immediate vicinity. Staff Response: The proposed tent will increase the commercial space of the Grey Lady restaurant. A restaurant is compatible with the character of the Commercial Core zone district and its historic overlay. However, as mentioned previously, the covered space is intended as public amenity space for the parcel, and in this sense, is incompatible with the approved use for this area of the site. The Code requires Pedestrian Amenity spaces to be open to the sky, open to view, and to contribute to an active street vitality. The closed sides of the tent create a private space P410 IX.c 2 that is neither open to the sky, nor contributing to the vitality of the area. Canvas and plastic structures are not materials that would be approved through Commercial Design review, and are out of character with the surrounding architecture. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. C. The impacts of the proposed temporary use on pedestrian and vehicular traffic and traffic patterns, municipal services, noise levels and neighborhood character. Staff Response: The proposed structures will be located on private property adjacent to the S. Mill St. pedestrian mall and E. Hyman Ave. Staff does not anticipate any impacts on pedestrian or traffic patterns, or on municipal services. Noise levels may increase in this particular area since the tent is made of fabric and not a permanent structure; however, the structure is generally compatible with the nature of commercial businesses in the surrounding area. The City’s noise ordinances will continue to apply. Staff finds these types of temporary structures negatively impact the neighborhood character, particularly when used for a longer period of time (more than seven days). Staff has worked with business owners to eradicate these temporary structures on other properties, from airlocks to awnings with sides, and encourages permanent solutions. The Commercial Core is a historic district and all buildings and structures are required to pass a heightened review process involving commercial design guidelines and historic preservation review. This fabric and plastic structure does not fit with the character of the district, particularly for a use that is greater than a short (one week) duration. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. D. The duration of the proposed temporary u se and whether a temporar y use has previously been approved for the structure, parcel, property or location as proposed in the application. Staff Response: The Applicant is proposing to maintain the tent on the site for a period of one hundred twenty (120) days - from December 15, 2018 through April 15, 2019. The applicant has requested and received temporary use approval for the tent on this site starting in 2013. It is important to note that a request for the duration of the winter season was denied in 2015, but approved during 2017. The history of requests is as follows. • In 2013 City Council granted a former restaurant owner of the subject location seasonal temporary use approval for a temporary custom fabric airlock from January through March of the same year. At Staff’s recommendation Council granted this as a one-time approval, and directed the applicant to find a permanent solution for future needs. • In December 2014, Staff approved a seven-day tent permit for the site. The tent was erected over the trellis, covering the site’s public amenity space, and was fully-enclosed with roll- down walls. After the tent was not removed the matter was directed to Council for review. • In January, 2015 Council granted the applicant temporary seasonal approval for the tent to be erected on-site through April 15th of the same year. At the hearing Council was clear that this was a one-time approval and that the Applicant should not return to renew this request. P411 IX.c 3 • In October of 2015, City Council denied the applicant’s request to erect this tent on the site for the duration of the winter season. Council was concerned with the tent’s use of plastic and canvas materials and questioned the temporary nature of a structure that kept reappearing seasonally. • In December of 2015 City Council granted the applicant an 11-day temporary use approval (December 24, 2015- through January 3, 2016) to erect the tent over the site’s public amenity space. • In December of 2016 City Council granted the applicant a 14-day temporary use approval (December 24, 2016 - through January 4, 2017) to erect the tent over the site’s public amenity space. • In November of 2017, City Council granted the applicant a 120-day temporary use approval for a significant portion of the winter season. (Resolution No. 157, Series of 2017). The inclusion of a winter market on Saturdays within the tent structure was an addition to the 2017 request and approval. E. The purposes and intent of the zone district in which the temporary use is proposed. Staff Response: The purpose of the Commercial Core (CC) Zone District is to allow the use of land for retail, service commercial, recreation and institutional purposes within mixed-use buildings to support and enhance the business and service character in the historic central business core of the City. This mix of uses is to encourage a high level of vitality throughout this district. Restaurant use fits the purpose of the zone district. Staff finds this criterion to be met. F. The relation of the temporary use to conditions and character changes which may have occurred in the area and zone district in which the use is proposed. Staff Response: The use of the tent as an extension of the restaurant is in itself not an incompatible use within the zone district. However, these types of temporary structures (fabric/plastic tents, airlocks, etc.) have been generally disallowed in the Commercial and Commercial Core zone districts. Staff encourages the applicant to explore a permanent solution to this issue of outdoor seating during the winter season. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. G. How the proposed temporary use will enhance or diminish the general public health, safet y or welfare. Staff Response: The proposed tent over the outdoor space will allow patrons of the Grey Lady restaurant to use the outdoor dining area during the cold weather months. The applicant has indicated that this space will continue to be used as a Saturday winter market. Staff finds this criterion to be met. P412 IX.c 4 Growth Management Quota System: 26.470.040.I; Temporary uses and structures. The development of a temporary use ore structure shall be exempt from growth management, subject to the provisions of Chapter 26.450, Temporary and Seasonal Uses. Temporary external airlocks shall only be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter if compliant with the applicable sections of Commercial Design Review – Chapter 26.412, and approved pursuant to Chapter 26.450 Temporary and Seasonal Uses. Tents, external airlocks, and similar temporary or seasonal enclosures located on commercial properties and supporting commercial uses shall only be exempt from the provision of this Chapter, including affordable housing mitigation requirements, if compliant with the applicable sections of Commercial Design Review – Chapter 26.412, if erected for 7 consecutive days or less in a 12-month period, and approved pursuant to Chapter 26.450 – Temporary and Seasonal Uses. Erection of these enclosures for longer than 7 consecutive days in a 12-month period shall require compliance with the Commercial Design Review – Chapter 26.412, and compliance with the provisions of this Chapter including affordable housing mitigation. Staff Response: The applicant is requesting a 120-day temporary use approval, requiring compliance with Commercial Design Guidelines (below), and affordable housing mitigation. Staff has calculated the appropriate affordable housing mitigation for 106 days (less the 14 day exemption) as $5,562.30 for the proposed use. This figure was calculated using updated cash-in- lieu figures for Category 4 – and the methodology described in 26.470.090.I; Temporary Uses and Structures. Commercial Design Guidelines: Commercial Core Historic District NOTE: Responses are only for the applicable review criteria for this project. 1.23 Building materials shall have these features: • Convey the quality and range of materials found in the current block context or seen historically in the Character Area. • Convey pedestrian scale. • Enhance visual interest through texture, application, and/or dimension. • Be non-reflective. Shiny or glossy materials are not appropriate as a primary material. • Have proven durability and weathering characteristics within Aspen’s climate. • A material with an integral color shall be a neutral color. Some variation is allowed for secondary materials. Staff Response: The applicant is proposing two structures made from canvas and plastic materials. These are not high quality materials typically found within the district. These are not a part of the block context nor are they seen historically in the area. The tent is appropriately scaled and generally non-reflective. As a temporary material, it does not have proven durability nor weathering characteristics suitable for a mountain climate. The tent is grey, which is a suitable neutral color. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. P413 IX.c 4 1.24 Introducing a new material, material application, or material finish to the existing streetscape may be approved by HPC or P&Z if the following criteria are met: • Innovative building design • Creative material application that positively contributes to the streetscape. • Environmentally sustainable building practice. • Proven durability Staff Response: The proposed material is not considered to be an innovative design nor a creative material that provides a positive contribution to the street scape. The canvas and plastic materials do not comply with any energy efficient building codes because they are temporary materials. As such, they are not durable because they are not intended for permanent structures. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. 2.14 Architectural details should reinforce historic context and meet at least two of the following qualities. • Color or finish traditionally found downtown. • Texture to create visual interest, especially for larger buildings. • Traditional material: Brick, stone, metal and wood. • Traditional application: for example, a running bond for masonry. Staff Response: Canvas and plastic are not traditionally found downtown, nor are they traditional material. There is no traditional application of said materials. The tent is grey, which is occasionally found downtown. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. P414 IX.c P415 IX.c P416 IX.c P417 IX.c P418 IX.c P419 IX.c P420 IX.c P421 IX.c P422 IX.c P423 IX.c P424 IX.c P425 IX.c P426 IX.c P427 IX.c P428 IX.c P429 IX.c P430 IX.c P431 IX.c P432 IX.c P433 IX.c P434 IX.c P435 IX.c Active/48619107.1 730 East Durant Avenue, Suite 200, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Telephone: 970.925.6300 Fax: 970.925.1181 www.shermanhoward.com Curtis B. Sanders Sherman & Howard L.L.C. Direct Dial Number: 970.300.0114 E-mail: csanders@shermanhoward.com June 26, 2018 City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: 305-7 Mill Street LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; Certificate of Ownership Dear Sir or Madam: I am an attorney licensed by the State of Colorado to practice law. This letter shall confirm and certify that 305-7 Mill Street LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, is the owner of certain improved real property located at 305-7 Mill Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611, and legally described as follows (the "Subject Property"): Units A, B and C, ASPEN COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUM, according to the Condominium Map thereof recorded November 6, 1974 in Plat Book 4 at Page 499 and as defined and described in the Condominium Declaration for Aspen Commercial Condominium recorded November 7, 1974 in Book 293 at Page 61. The entity 305-7 Mill Street LLC owns the Subject Property, subject only to the following matters of record: 1. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deeds from the City of Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Page 39 and in Book 59 at Page 350. 2. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations, easements, restrictions and assessments as set forth in the Condominium Declaration for Aspen Commercial Condominium recorded November 6, 1974 in Book 293 at Page 61. 3. Easements, rights of way, and all matters as disclosed on the Map of Aspen Commercial Condominium recorded November 6, 1974 in Plat Book 4 at Page 499. P436 IX.c 2 Active/48619107.1 4. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission recorded April 25, 2002 as Reception No. 466645 as Resolution No. 03 (Series of 2002). 5. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) recorded December 11, 2008 as Reception No. 554946 as Resolution No. 27 (Series of 2008). 6. Deed of Trust, Assignment of Leases and Rents and Security Agreement dated June 10, 2014 between Jefferies Loancore LLC and 305-7 Mill Street LLC, recorded June 18, 2014 as Reception No. 611186. 7. Assignment of Leases and Rents dated June 10, 2014 between Jefferies Loancore LLC and 305-7 Mill Street LLC, recorded June 18, 2014 as Reception No. 611187. 8. UCC-1 Financing Statement of Jefferies Loancore LLC recorded June 18, 2014 as Reception No. 611188. 9. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in the Assignment of Deed of Trust, Assignment of Leases and Rents and Security Agreement dated as of August 28, 2014 between Jefferies LoanCore LLC as assignor and JLC Warehouse V LLC as assignee recorded August 24, 2015 as Reception No. 622662. 10. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in the Assignment of Assignment of Leases and Rents dated as of August 28, 2014 between Jefferies Loancore LLC as assignor and JLC Warehouse V LLC as assignee recorded August 24, 2015 as Reception No. 622663. 11. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in the UCC Financing Statement Amendment recorded August 24, 2015 as Reception No. 622664. 12. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in the Assignment of Deed of Trust, Assignment of Leases and Rents and Security Agreement dated as of July 22, 2015 between JLC Warehouse V LLC as assignor and DIVCORE CLO 2013-1 LTD. as assignee recorded August 25, 2015 as Reception No. 622699. 13. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Assignment of Assignment of Leases and Rents dated as of July 22, 2015 between JLC Warehouse V LLC as assignor and DIVCORE CLO 2013-1 LTD. as assignee recorded August 25, 2015 as Reception No. 622700. 14. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in the UCC Financing Statement Amendment recorded August 25, 2015 as Reception No. 622701. 15. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution #27 (Series of 2015) of the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission recorded October 9, 2015 as Reception No. 624023. P437 IX.c 3 Active/48619107.1 16. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution #27 (Series of 2016) of the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission recorded December 1, 2016 as Reception No. 634268. Sincerely, Curtis B. Sanders P438 IX.c MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jim True, City Attorney and Linda Manning, City Clerk DATE OF MEMO: August 20, 2018 MEETING DATE: August 27, 2018 RE: Ordinance #19 and #20, Series of 2018 – Ballot language to amend Section 10.5 of the Charter regarding enterprise fund bonding. Ordinance #21, Series of 2018 – Ballot language to amend Section 11.4 of the Charter regarding franchises. SUMMARY: The attached ordinances contain the proposed ballot language that was discussed at the work session on July 24, 2018 and first reading on August 13, 2018 regarding several charter amendments. BACKGROUND: Over the past several months up to eight potential ballot issues have been considered as possible. However, several potential issues have been dropped or proponents have determined that the issues would be best considered at a later date. Currently, there are only three items that are being considered for the coordinated November election and each are discussed below. Resolution #15, Series of 2018 was adopted at the Council meeting on August 13, 2018 to set the ballot language for the citizen initiated petition to potentially move the general election date. DISCUSSION: Ordinance #19 and #20, Series of 2018 – Ballot language to amend Section 10.5 of the Charter regarding enterprise fund bonding. In 1992, the Colorado electorate adopted an amendment to the Colorado Constitution referred to as TABOR. This amendment greatly restricted the ability of government to increase taxes and spending without approval by the electorate. It also included provisions that required voter approval for issuances of new debt. One exception that TABOR provided was the ability of enterprise funds to issue revenue bonds without such election. The reason for this exception was so utility infrastructure projects would not be held up and that voters would not be voting on whether to replace utility lines or build water tanks. However, the Aspen City Charter, in Article X, an article that was P439 IX.d adopted and then amended prior to TABOR, provides Section 10.5 that “no revenue bonds shall be issued until the question of their issuance shall have been approved by a majority of the electors voting on the question at a regular or special election.” Thus, although TABOR would allow an enterprise fund to issue a revenue bond without an election, our Charter does not. It should be noted that the original Charter and its pre-TABOR amendments did allow the issuance of bonds for utility purposes without an election. However, this was through the issuance of a general obligation bond. See, Section 10.3. TABOR on the other hand, specifically requires that all general obligation bonds be approved by a vote. So, while our charter anticipated a mechanism for issuing debt for utilities without a vote, that mechanism was eliminated by TABOR. Thus, staff believes that it would be appropriate to ask the electorate to amend the Charter to conform to TABOR on this issue and to restore the original intent of the Charter. At the July 24th work session, Councilman Myrin felt that there needed to be voter approval for bonds issued over $10,000,000. Two ordinances are attached for consideration. Ordinance #19 allows an enterprise to issue revenue bonds without submission to the electorate without a dollar amount attached. Ordinance #20 allows an enterprise to issue revenue bonds in an amount not in excess of $10,000,000 without submission to the electorate. Ordinance #21, Series of 2018 – Ballot language to amend Section 11.4 of the Charter regarding franchises. The Aspen City Charter requires that franchise agreements be adopted by a vote of the electorate. This was a provision of the initial Charter and is quite rare among other communities. Given the nature and complexity of these agreements, as well as the legal issues that can arise if voters fail to pass such an agreement, many believe that the provision is outdated and should be removed from the Charter. This would allow the Council to approve any future agreement without a public vote. With the adoption of Resolution #113, Series of 2018 on August 13th, Council may at any time prior to the deadline to deliver ballot content to the County, September 7, 2018, add other ballot issues or questions. However, since this is the last regular meeting prior to that date, it would have to be done at a special meeting. P440 IX.d Page 1 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. 19 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER OF THE CITY OF ASPEN BY AMENDING SECTION 10.5, TO ALLOW A DULY CREATED ENTERPRISE TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS WITHOUT SUBMISSION TO THE ELECTORATE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION KNOWS AS THE TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS (TABOR). WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter to allow enterprise funds to issue bonds without submission to the electorate consistent with the provisions of the Colorado Constitution knows as the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR), and; WHEREAS, Article XX, Section 10 of the Colorado Constitution authorizes home rule municipalities to amend their home rule charters through such procedures as may be enacted by the state general assembly; and WHEREAS, the state legislature has enacted Section 31-2-210, C.R.S., which section sets forth the procedures for amending a city’s home rule charter requiring the adoption of an ordinance, including a ballot title for the proposed amendment, and submission of the proposed amendment to the electorate; and, WHEREAS, Section 13.10 of the City Charter of the City of Aspen authorizes amendments to the City Charter in the manner prescribed by the state constitution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL THAT: P441 IX.d Page 2 of 3 Section 1: Section 10.5 of Article X of the Home Rule Charter of the City of Aspen is hereby amended by adding at the end of the last sentence thereof the following: and provided further, however, that revenue bonds for a duly created enterprise may be issued without an election. Section 2. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: This ordinance shall become effective only upon approval of the electorate of the City of Aspen at the municipal election to be held on November 6, 2018, of a ballot question in substantially the form that follows: CITY OF ASPEN REFERENDUM NO. ____ AMENDMENT TO CITY CHARTER – TO ALLOW A DULY CREATED ENTERPRISE TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS WITHOUT SUBMISSION TO THE ELECTORATE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION KNOWS AS THE TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS (TABOR). Shall Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2018, be approved? Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2018, if approved, amends section 10.5 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter to allow a duly created City enterprise to issue revenue bonds without submission to the P442 IX.d Page 3 of 3 electorate consistent with the provisions of the Colorado Constitution knows as the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR). Yes /For [ ] No / Against [ ] Section 5: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 27th day of August, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, seven (7) days prior to which a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED FOR SECOND READING as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 13th day of August, 2018. Attest: _________________________ ____________________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this 27th day of August 2018. Attest: _________________________ ____________________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor P443 IX.d Page 1 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. 20 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER OF THE CITY OF ASPEN BY AMENDING SECTION 10.5, TO ALLOW A DULY CREATED ENTERPRISE TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT IN EXCESS OF $10,000,000 WITHOUT SUBMISSION TO THE ELECTORATE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION KNOWS AS THE TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS (TABOR). WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter to allow enterprise funds to issue bonds without submission to the electorate consistent with the provisions of the Colorado Constitution knows as the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR), and; WHEREAS, Article XX, Section 10 of the Colorado Constitution authorizes home rule municipalities to amend their home rule charters through such procedures as may be enacted by the state general assembly; and WHEREAS, the state legislature has enacted Section 31-2-210, C.R.S., which section sets forth the procedures for amending a city’s home rule charter requiring the adoption of an ordinance, including a ballot title for the proposed amendment, and submission of the proposed amendment to the electorate; and, WHEREAS, Section 13.10 of the City Charter of the City of Aspen authorizes amendments to the City Charter in the manner prescribed by the state constitution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL THAT: P444 IX.d Page 2 of 3 Section 1: Section 10.5 of Article X of the Home Rule Charter of the City of Aspen is hereby amended by adding at the end of the last sentence thereof the following: and provided further, however, that revenue bonds for a duly created enterprise in an amount not in excess of $10,000,000 may be issued without an election. Section 2. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: This ordinance shall become effective only upon approval of the electorate of the City of Aspen at the municipal election to be held on November 6, 2018, of a ballot question in substantially the form that follows: CITY OF ASPEN REFERENDUM NO. ____ AMENDMENT TO CITY CHARTER – TO ALLOW A DULY CREATED ENTERPRISE TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT IN EXCESS OF $10,000,000 WITHOUT SUBMISSION TO THE ELECTORATE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION KNOWS AS THE TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS (TABOR). Shall Ordinance No. 20, Series of 2018, be approved? Ordinance No. 20, Series of 2018, if approved, amends section 10.5 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter to P445 IX.d Page 3 of 3 allow a duly created City enterprise to issue revenue bonds in an amount not in excess of $10,000,000 without submission to the electorate consistent with the provisions of the Colorado Constitution knows as the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR). Yes / For [ ] No / Against [ ] Section 5: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 27th day of August, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, seven (7) days prior to which a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED FOR SECOND READING as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 13th day of August, 2018. Attest: _________________________ ____________________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this 27th day of August 2018. Attest: _________________________ ____________________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor P446 IX.d Page 1 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. 21 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER OF THE CITY OF ASPEN BY AMENDING SECTION 11.4, TO MODIFY THE MANNER IN WHICH FRANCHISES ARE GRANTED. WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter to modify the manner in which a franchise may be granted, and; WHEREAS, Article XX, Section 10 of the Colorado Constitution authorizes home rule municipalities to amend their home rule charters through such procedures as may be enacted by the state general assembly; and WHEREAS, the state legislature has enacted Section 31-2-210, C.R.S., which section sets forth the procedures for amending a city’s home rule charter requiring the adoption of an ordinance, including a ballot title for the proposed amendment, and submission of the proposed amendment to the electorate; and, WHEREAS, Section 13.10 of the City Charter of the City of Aspen authorizes amendments to the City Charter in the manner prescribed by the state constitution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL THAT: Section 1: Section 11.4 of Article XI of the Home Rule Charter of the City of Aspen is repealed in its entirety and readopted to read as follows: Section 11.4. Granting of franchises. A franchise may be granted by Resolution adopted by a majority of the City Council. P447 IX.d Page 2 of 3 Section 2. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: This ordinance shall become effective only upon approval of the electorate of the City of Aspen at the municipal election to be held on November 6, 2018, of a ballot question in substantially the form that follows: CITY OF ASPEN REFERENDUM NO. ____ AMENDMENT TO CITY CHARTER – GRANT OF FRANCHISE. Shall Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2018, be approved? Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2018, if approved, amends section 11.4 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter to allow the grant of a franchise by City Council and repealing the requirement that the grant of a franchise be approved by a vote of the electorate. Yes / For [ ] No / Against [ ] Section 5: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 27th day of August, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, P448 IX.d Page 3 of 3 Colorado, seven (7) days prior to which a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED FOR SECOND READING as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 13th day of August, 2018. Attest: _________________________ ____________________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this 27th day of August 2018. Attest: _________________________ ____________________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor P449 IX.d TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jack THROUGH: Scott Miller DATE OF MEMO: August 23, 2018 MEETING DATE: August 27, 2018 RE: 517 E. Hopkins REQUEST OF COUNCIL: To consider and resolve the status of the purchase contract for 517 E. Hopkins and 204 S. Galena. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Pursuant to Resolution # 111, Series of 2018, City Council approved the to Buy and Sell Real Estate (Commercial) between the City of Aspen and 517 Seller and 204 Seller “Contract”), for the purchase of property located at 517 E. Hopkins and 204 S. Galena, together with an agreement for the remodel of the current City Hall. The Contract provides a due diligence period in which the Contract can be terminated by period ends on September 1, 2018. This contract and current litigat session held by the City Council on August 20, 2018. DISCUSSION: As noted above, the Contract and the litigation involving Ordinance 4, Series of 2018 were discussed in an executive session with Council. No specific However, staff did suggest that it would be prudent to prepare a resolution to terminate the contract and have that available for consideration at the meeting scheduled for August 27, 2018. Such Re #128, is attached hereto. If council takes no action or if adoption of this resolution is moved then fails, then the Contract will stay valid and earnest money will be retained by the Seller. If the resolution passes by a majority vote of those present, then staff will take the appropriate action to terminate the contract. This item will be set as an action item at the end of the agenda and an executive session will be noticed if further confidential communication is needed. Page 1 of 1 MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council Jack Wheeler, Capital Asset Director Scott Miller August 23, 2018 August 27, 2018 517 E. Hopkins/204 S. Galena Contract Resolution To consider and resolve the status of the purchase contract for 517 E. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: ursuant to Resolution # 111, Series of 2018, City Council approved the Amended and Restated Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate (Commercial) between the City of Aspen and 517 Seller and 204 Seller “Contract”), for the purchase of property located at 517 E. Hopkins and 204 S. Galena, together with an model of the current City Hall. The Contract provides a due diligence period in which the Contract can be terminated by the City for any reason at its sole discretion. The due diligence period ends on September 1, 2018. This contract and current litigation were discussed at an executive session held by the City Council on August 20, 2018. As noted above, the Contract and the litigation involving Ordinance 4, Series of 2018 were discussed in an executive session with Council. No specific direction was given to staff following that discussion. However, staff did suggest that it would be prudent to prepare a resolution to terminate the contract and have that available for consideration at the meeting scheduled for August 27, 2018. Such Re If council takes no action or if adoption of this resolution is moved then fails, then the Contract will stay valid and earnest money will be retained by the Seller. If the resolution passes by a majority vote of those present, then staff will take the appropriate action to terminate the contract. This item will be set as an action item at the end of the agenda and an executive session will be noticed if further confidential communication is needed. Resolution To consider and resolve the status of the purchase contract for 517 E. Amended and Restated Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate (Commercial) between the City of Aspen and 517 Seller and 204 Seller (the “Contract”), for the purchase of property located at 517 E. Hopkins and 204 S. Galena, together with an model of the current City Hall. The Contract provides a due diligence period in City for any reason at its sole discretion. The due diligence ion were discussed at an executive As noted above, the Contract and the litigation involving Ordinance 4, Series of 2018 were discussed in direction was given to staff following that discussion. However, staff did suggest that it would be prudent to prepare a resolution to terminate the contract and have that available for consideration at the meeting scheduled for August 27, 2018. Such Resolution If council takes no action or if adoption of this resolution is moved then fails, then the Contract will stay valid and earnest money will be retained by the Seller. If the resolution passes by a majority vote of those This item will be set as an action item at the end of the agenda and an executive session will be noticed if P450 X.a RESOLUTION # 128 (Series of 2018) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER OR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER TO TAKE SUCH ACTION NECESSARY TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND 517 EAST HOPKINS, LLC, (“517 Seller”) AND, 204 SOUTH GALENA STREET, LLC, (“204 Seller”). WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution # 111, Series of 2018, City Council approved the Amended and Restated Contract To Buy And Sell Real Estate (Commercial) between the City of Aspen and 517 Seller and, 204 Seller; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City of Aspen to terminate the Contract pursuant to the terms thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby directs the City Manager or Assistant City Manager to take any and all action necessary to fully and finally terminate the Amended and Restated Contract To Buy And Sell Real Estate (Commercial) between the City of Aspen and 517 Seller and, 204 Seller, pursuant to the terms thereof. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of August 2018. Steven Skadron, Mayor I, Linda Manning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held, August 27, 2018. Linda Manning, City Clerk P451 X.a AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 1� Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: � ` V . STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, (name,please print) being or represgnting an Applicant to the City o Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: V Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing on the— day of 520 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested,to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty(30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAS or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and. new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this day of�SryL►Sk , 201 ,by Ai-.��,c_ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RE:333 Park Avenue 8 931 Gibson Avenue WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL Public Hearing: Monday,August 27th,2018:5.0( PM Meeting Location:City Hall,City Council Cham- 3ts 0 S.Galena St.,Aspen,CO 81611 My commission expires: Project Location:333 Park Avenue PID#2737-181 00-017 and 931 Gibson Avenue PID#2737-074-OC 004.Legal description provided below. Description: The applicant is requesting approval for demolition of non-historic additions to the land marked residence on 333 Park Avenue and to relo- cate the remaining historic building to 931 Gibson Not Public Avenue.Applicant requests rescinding of the historic designation of 333 Park and the historic designation i4D of 931 Gibson with the newly relocated historic resk dance. Land Use Reviews Req: Relocation, Demolition, Reacinding Designation and Designation. Decision Making Body: Aspen Ci% 1uncil. KAREN REED PATTERSON P.pplicant: BMH Investments, LTD, 1001 Fannia St.#3850.Houston,Tx 77002, NOTARY PUBLIC More Information: For further information related TTACNTS AS APPLICAB to the project.contact Sarah goon at the City of As STATE OF COLORADO pen Community Development Department, 130 S.'TDLICATION Galena St., Aspen, CO,970.920.5144, sarah.yoon�l� NOTARY ID#19964002767 Ociity�ofaspen.com. My Cofl11T1isWw EVAs FIbruary 15,2020 ac` a 'ribedl=rifact : 333 and situatedPark Ave n e:LSolfh e )F TILE POSTED NOTICE(SIG . 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7 and in theE+R,gAND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 10 South,Range 84 West of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County Colorado. Said tract is part of the Lone Pine M.S.1910 and the Mollie Gibson Lode,LPTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE M.S.4281 Am and is more fully described as fol- lows:Beginning at the West Corner of Lot 1,Sunny Park Subdivision,whence comer No.3 of said Mop C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 lie Gibson Lode bears N 43°40'00'W 146.00 feet and S 38°00'00'W 100.00 feet;thence S 46°20'00' W 10.00 feet to a point on the centerline of a road easement as shown on a plat recorded in Book 4 at Page 398 of the records of Pitkin County;thence following said centedine 16.23 feet along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 40.00 feet,the chord of which curve Clears S 55°17'30' E 16.12 feet;thence S 66°55'00'E 49.99 feet along said centedine; thence S 32° 09'58' W 13.39 feet; thence S 50°17'00'W 130.26 feet;thence N 34' 17'00'W 59.99 feet;thence N 52°40'00'E 34.33 feet;thence N 43'40'00'W 32.60 feet;thence N 46° 20'00'E 86.00 feet;thence S 43°40'00'E 32.00 feet to the point of beginning. 931 Gibson Avenue;Legally Described as Parcel 1 A Parcel of Land situated in the Southeast 'y of Section 7,Township 10 South, Range 84 West o the 6th Principal Meridian more fully described as follows:Beginning at a point whence corner No.11 of the East Aspen Additional Townsite bears South 54°52'17"East 58.10 feet;Thence South 34"54'00" West 46.63 feet to The True Point of Beginning; Thence North 63°58'00"West 185.12 feet;Thence South 15°30'00" West 86.60 feet; Thence South 63°54'00"East 155.54 feet;Thence North 34°45'00" East 88.30 feet to The Point of Beginning.Parcel 2: A Tract of Land situated in the Sunset Lode, U.S.M.S.No.5310,being more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly side line of said Sunset Lode whence Comer No.10 of East Aspen Additional Townsite bears North 34°45' East 46.63 Feet;Thence North 63"58'West 185.12 feet to a point on the Westedy side line of said ' Lode; Thence following said Westerly side line North 15'30"East 17.03;Thence South 62°54'41" East 150.27 feet;Thence 39.76 feet along the arc of a curve to the fight having a radius of 295.57 feet to a point on said Easterly side;Thence following said Easterly side line South 34°45'West 10.70 feet to The Point of Beginning.Together with any property lying Northerly of the above described property and the Southerly line of Gibson Avenue. Published in the Aspen Times on August 9,2018 0000286756 t CITY OF AsPEN COMMUNITY • ' DEPARTMEN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060(E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 333 Park and 931 Gibson ,Aspen,CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 2701, , 20 18 STATE OF COLORADO ) } ss. County of Pitkin ) 1, Sara Adams (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060(E)of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official Paper or paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. V Posting of notice: By posting of notice,which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable,waterproof Materials,which was not less than twenty two(22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) Inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15)days prior to the public hearing on the 8.11 day of August , 2018 ,to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign)is attached hereto: Mailing of notice. By mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department,which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E) (2) of The Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S mail to all owners of property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty(60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach,summarized and attached,was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) March,2016 City of Apen 1130 S.Galena St.1(970)920 5050 I, ' A11,, CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, CO 8161 1 p: (970) 920.5000 f: (970) 920.5197 w: www.aspenpitkin.com NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RE: 333 Park Avenue & 931 Gibson Avenue Public Hearing: Monday, August 27t', 2018; 5:OOPM Meeting Location: City Hall, City Council Chambers, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 81611 Project Location: 333 Park Avenue, PID# 2737-181-00-017 and 931 Gibson Avenue, PID# 2737-074-00-004. Full legal description for both properties provided in Attachment 1. Description: The applicant is requesting approval for demolition of non-historic additions to the landmarked residence on 333 Park and to relocate the remaining historic building to 931 Gibson. Applicant requests rescinding of the historic designation of 333 Park and the historic designation of 931 Gibson with the newly relocated historic residence. Land Use Reviews Req: Relocation, Demolition, Rescinding Designation and Designation. Decision Making Body: Aspen City Council. Applicant: BMH Investments, LTD 1001 Fannin St. #3850, Houston, TX 77002. More Information: For further information related to the project, contact Sarah Yoon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, 970.920.5144, sarah.yoon@cityofaspen.com. I' Wit PUBLICAOTI rl i C C Date: Aicn . August 27 2018 L. Time: 5 oop m. Place: 130 5 Galena St . Oty HaII, GcuWI C ..: Purpose: L,ty Council will corder ars � l.Tf�, -I1catton by @MH Inve~s, Bron.Th 0 00 1 Fannin St #3850, H0"' 77002), affecting this FroPe fly Applicant prol)05 :5 to dOM01"h _ Mn-historic adrf4,On5•reloc`ate 1 Gam,Avd St' residenfertinttc�n. Land Use nd desig aid , ted R AF3F,f�,vals bra r +.- iri 3 -0;r,t f �n t• Y r �� •t yy Y' l .. ��_w � • T ; x Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius From Parcel: 273707400004 on 07/30/2018 TKIN OUNT-1( Instructions: This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. Disclaimer: Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. hftp://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com WAGAR RICHARD H CITY OF ASPEN RYAN MARTHA PO BOX 9063 130 S GALENA ST 127 MAPLE LN ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 BECK JEFFREY L&JANET SUE BROWNELL CONDO ASSOC BENZIGER KATHERINE 6211 RAINTREE CT 996 GIBSON AVE 1050 MATCHLESS DR#2 DALLAS,TX 75254 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 WAGAR RICHARD H KNIGHT ERIC BYARD ANNE/MORRIS JAMES LIV TRUST PO BOX 9063 138 MAPLE LN 860 GIBSON AVE ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 HAT COLORADO LLC SHOAF JEFFREY S HARRIS DAVID E&PATRICIA 10866 WILSHIRE BLVD#1100 PO BOX 3123 117 NEALE AVE LOS ANGELES,CA 90024 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 FARR TENA D 1989 TRUST SMALLS RAY MAPLE CHARLES A&BRYCE M PO BOX 7534 PO BOX 3197 1250 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR SPRECKELS,CA 93962 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 ALVIS STEVEN D&MARCI L 990 KING ST UNIT#2 LLC DIBELLO JACQUELINE 1235 NORTH LOOP WEST#205 1295 RIVERSIDE DR 990 KING ST#1 HOUSTON,TX 77008 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 MAINIAC PROPERTIES LLC 17 QUEEN LLC RUGGIERI LISA ANN 201 US ROUTE 1 #226 1315 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR 136 MAPLE LN SCARBOROUGH,ME 04074 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 JUNGQUIST TERRI L REV TRUST CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL PATRICIA CONDO ASSOC 6348 HWY 36 BLVD#8 130 MAPLE LN COMMON AREA SAINT PAUL,MN 55128 ASPEN,CO 816112179 980 KING ST ASPEN,CO 81611 HAMILTON VIRGINIA RUTH DWS FAMILY TRUST WALDRON K BRENT 0134 MAPLE LN 1918 N OLIVE STREET#1901 PO BOX 4900 ASPEN,CO 81611 DALLAS,TX 75201 ASPEN,CO 81612 LAWRENCE MARA B QPR TRUST RACQUET CLUB CONDO ASSOC SURVIVORS TRUST 8560 RUETTE MONTE CARLO 1000 MATCHLESS DR 1352 BAY ST LA JOLLA,CA 92037 ASPEN,CO 81611 ALAMEDA,CA 94501 Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius From Parcel: 273718100017 on 07/30/2018 1' KIN COUNT' Instructions: This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. Disclaimer: Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com FUENTES DAVID&KATHARINE D RIVERVIEW CONDO 26 LLC KENNEDY WILLIAM W FAMILY TRST 302 MIDLAND PARK PL 1630 A 30TH ST PMB#387 218 STEEPLECHASE RD ASPEN,CO 81611 BOULDER,CO 80301 BARRINGTON HILLS,IL 60010 CMTR LLC LUPI-PEATE NATALIA FARR TENA D PO BOX 7631 121 MIDLAND PARK PL PO BOX 7534 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 SPRECKELS,CA 93962 ASPEN HILLS CONDO ASSOC HELBING ATHENA ASPEN VIEW CONDO ASSOC 160 MIDLAND AVE 403 PARK AVE#6 326 MIDLAND AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 328 PARK/327 MIDLAND CONDO ASSOC 165 PARK CIRCLE CONDO CUNNINGHAM PAMELA M COMMON AREA COMMON AREA 502 MIDLAND PARK PL 328 PARK AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 GORBITZ HEIDI&PATRIC MCPHEE JAMES MICHAEL&ANNE MARIE CITY OF ASPEN PO BOX 647 401 MIDLAND PARK PL 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 BROWN DOUGLAS&ABBY FAM TRUST WILLCOX DENNIS HOLLINGER JONATHAN 980 6TH ST 722 MIDLAND PARK PL 326 HWY 133#270H BOULDER,CO 80302 ASPEN,CO 81611 CARBONDALE,CO 81623 NEARY DENNIS R&NANCY CENTLIVRE ARAPAHOE LLC LAWRENCE LARRY S QPR TRUST 8282 BOWLINE CT 1201 N BIRCH LAKE BLVD 8560 RUETTE MONTE CARLO INDIANAPOLIS,IN 46236 ST PAUL,MN 55110 LA JOLLA,CA 92037 POST MARISA JOY KELLY JESSIE M LP#1 SMITH DONALD NELSON 403 MIDLAND PK PL#D3 6295 GREENWOOD PLAZA BLVD 501 MIDLAND PARK PL ASPEN,CO 81611 GREENWOOD VILLAGE,CO 80111 ASPEN,CO 81611 GOODMAN DREW I ASPEN HILLS INVESTORS LLC 341 PARK LLC 5721 GREEN OAKS DR PO BOX 1048 303 SHORELINE CT GREENWOOD VILLAGE,CO 80121-1336 ASPEN,CO 81612 GLENCOE, IL 60022 DECRAY MARCELLA TRUST SPONAR ANTON K&JUDY SACHSE TODD 1528 HILL ST 222 MIDLAND PARK PL 1528 WOODWARD AVE#600 SANTA MONICA,CA 90405 ASPEN,CO 81611-2486 DETROIT,MI 48226 BROWNELL CONDO ASSOC HITCHCOCK SAMANTHA BROOKE TRUST 996 GIBSON AVE PO BOX 329 1024 E HOPKINS#17 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 KROMELOW BASIL M&LAUREANNE L SCHROEDER PATRICIA A REV TRUST MARTHINSSON NOSTDAHL CONDO ASSOC 55 W DELAWARE PL 36261 SPRUCE TR 403 PARK AVE CHICAGO, IL 60610 PINE RIVER,MN 56474 ASPEN,CO 81611 WHITE ROBIN 311 PARK AVE LLC ASPEN ASSET LLC PO BOX 2771 3047 FILLMORE ST 2701 MIDLAND AVE#8312 ASPEN,CO 81612 SAN FRANCISCO,CA 94123 GLENWOOD SPRINGS,CO 816014395 MACCRACKEN SCOTT R WEBSTER DAVID H WESTERMAN JEFF&TERI 403 MIDLAND PK PL#D3 PO BOX 10362 5130 SHOSHONE AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 ENCINO,CA 91316 BAKKEN JOHN&LIZA N FARR TENA D 1989 TRUST VICENZI HEATHER L TRUST PO BOX 12064 PO BOX 7534 PO BOX 2238 ASPEN,CO 81612 SPRECKELS,CA 93962 ASPEN,CO 81612 TDR REVOCABLE TRUST WELDEN TODD E&DEBORAH C AUVIL PAUL R JR TRUST 201 N UNION ST#300 503 MIDLAND PARK PL#E3 1024 E HOPKINS AVE #14 ALEXANDRIA,VA 22314 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 KING WALLACE M EIS JENNIFER L PERLEY PAUL S PO BOX 590 PO BOX 11315 PO BOX 12155 OLATHE,CO 81425 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81612 FAT CITY APARTMENTS LLC P S W D INVESTMENT CO LTD BIRACH KAREN 625 S WEST END STREET#4 215 S MONARCH ST#101 122 MIDLAND PARK PL ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611-2414 ALVIS STEVEN D&MARCI L 990 KING ST UNIT#2 LLC KEARN ROBERT&ORENE FAMILY TRUST 1235 NORTH LOOP WEST#205 1295 RIVERSIDE DR 1831 WILLOW RD HOUSTON,TX 77008 ASPEN,CO 81611 HILLSBOROUGH,CA 94010 FARRELL SCOTT W DIBELLO JACQUELINE LEE JONATHAN 0 TRUST PO BOX 9656 990 KING ST#1 35 FISHER AVE ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 BROOKLINE,MA 02445 MCGAVOCK MARGARET JANE TRUST JEFFERSON GREG KALNITSKY EUGENE TRUST PO BOX 533 711 MIDLAND PARK PL 1701 S FLAGLER DR#1601 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 WEST PALM BEACH,FL 33401 LIEN-TWO CONDO ASSOC CURRAN MIKE&VERONICA REV TRUST HENDRICKS LYNDELL B COMMON AREA 2207 DEL MONTE DR PO BOX 11152 PARK AVE HOUSTON,TX 77019 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 PARK AVENUE TOWNHOMES CONDO ASSO( GOLDSTEIN GARY L LVG TRUST NO 1 GARTON SARA B 407 PARK AVE UNIT A 1020 E HOPKINS AVE#7 110 MIDLAND PARK PL ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 816114109 ASPEN,CO 81611 COWLING LINDA SEMPLE SASHA L JOHNSON SHAEL PO BOX 9656 601 E HYMAN AVE PO BOX 3549 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 GLEASON AMY HECK JAMES C DAVIS D STONE 712 MIDLAND PARK PL PO BOX 8416 PO BOX 8904 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81612 GOLDSTEIN BARBARA E SIMON LVG TRUST KETAI JAMES A ANDRULAITIS FIONA MCWILLIAM&TIMOTH` 1020 E HOPKINS AVE#7 1528 WOODWARD AVE#600 409 PARK CIR#4 ASPEN,CO 81611 DETROIT,MI 48226 ASPEN,CO 81611 PARK AVENUE CONDO ASSOC KOCH KATHRYN S&JOHN F PAGANO JOSEPH K&JOSEPH A COMMON AREA 304 MIDLAND PARK PL C-4 PO BOX 7785 102 PARK AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 KELLEY BRAD BUCKLEY&SHARI L GRIFFITHS THOMAS W GRAHAM MARGOT 1736 N 6250 E 504 MIDLAND PARK PL PO BOX 2254 EDEN,UT 84310 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 CALK LAURA E RIVERVIEW CONDO ASSOC MITCHELL ELSA R 722 MIDLAND PARK PL COMMON AREA PO BOX 2492 ASPEN,CO 81611-2472 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 EPSTEN BRADFORD M QPR TRUST BELLIS ARTHUR P KENNEDY PATRICIA ANN REV LIV TRUST 5038 WALNUT ST 1008 E HOPKINS AVE 218 STEEPLECHASE RD KANSAS CITY,MO 641122757 ASPEN,CO 81611 BARRINGTON,IL 60010 > 'o CD CD En CD 'r, , CD D cn (D 0 " 0 0-0 0 C-), 0,=3 -0 -2 Q— Co D Vo 0 Cf) 0 CF)(n N) > 3 in VI > C0 l) o m > 0 G) 0 U) n C) > cn r- > m 0 m (n z 0 rrj z -u > -n Cl) > m 0 r- > C, z 0 m cn z -0 > m Cf) z 7-- It ;c ;> nD y p°S"� p� -o ff�..11J Sl � iV n o O�o � � OCL ar 00] O o rn� � ONt N D CL CL r� 3 Y• W D w n (n o "0 U m ) z G) o D O z v D m cn z cry > W 0 t 0 m cn ft) Z C) 0 ,..,. n D D ,..,. ,..t? O m (n i�? l::t z -0 "t � f rri 73 aw f i A3 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 5 . �► Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: VAyQ& � A- ^c 21 e- 41-.'30,err\, 20� STATE OF COLORADO ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, (name,please print) being or repres nting an Applicant to the Ci of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: V Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height: Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing on the_ day of , 20____, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY- J6 ROPERTY-- ) e Z��l ��/� ,Aspen,CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Q S, _7 ,20 f D STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) (name,please print) being or representing 4n Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E)of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: t/Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. _✓ P u5di;2g of no*ic. Ry hosting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitabie, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen 115)days prior to the public hearing on the ;2 day of 20_! to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) RECEIVED AUG 16 2018 CITY OF ASPEN COW TY DEWtC0&NT Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty(30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, PDs that create more than one lot, and new Planned Developments are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended,whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature t, The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this t6 day of 1n51' ,20 It p,by B m it G•�� WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL F STEWART My commission expir : L 7 AOzl ARY PUBLIC OF COLORADOID#20174046196 Ext res NovwiW 7,2021 Nqt4 Public ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 RECEIVED AUG 16 2018 CITY OF ASPEN COWAAMI NVELOPIENT h A a fyt fvj 2 PUBLIC NOTICE N a 8.: r Date: August 27 2018 1 1sr Time: s 00 Pm 4 Y t Place:130 S Galena St.,City Hall,Council Chambers c� t Purpose: Ryan Chadwick,_426 E.Hyman Ave. #301,Asppn,CO 81611 is requesting City Councif._approvai of_a,_ emporary use(for the winter season) of a fabric enclosure of the patio at _ the Grey Lady,305 S.Mill St. For further information contact Ben Anderson with City of Aspen_. Community Development at 970-429-2765. t 3PEN I 415 EAST HYMAN AVE LLC LIMELIGHT SUB/PUD WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC PO BOX 4068 E HYMAN AVE 315 E HYMAN ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC KATIE REED BUILDING LLC 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 315 E HYMAN 407 S HUNTER ST#3 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC BARNETT FYRWALD HOLDINGS INC SILVER SLAM COMMERCIAL LLC 315 E HYMAN 2222 COTTONDALE LN#200 60 COLUMBUS CIR ASPEN,CO 81611 LITTLE ROCK,AR 722022017 NEW YORK,NY 10023 400 HYMAN LLC COLLINS BLOCK LLC THOR 228 S MILL ST LLC 1010 E HYMAN AVE 205 S GALENA ST 1000 WILSON BLVD#2100 ASPEN,CO 816112118 ASPEN.CO 81611 ARLINGTON.VA 22209 ASPEN GOLDEN HORN LLC WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC COLLINS BLOCK LLC 9420 WILSHIRE BLVD 4TH FL 315 E HYMAN 205 S GALENA ST BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90212 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 401 HYMAN AVENUE LLC COLLINS BLOCK LLC PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO 1435 LAWRENCE LN 205 S GALENA ST 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 NORTHBROOK,IL 60062 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN.CO 81611 COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS MEDIA CO COTTONWOOD VENTURES II LLC PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO 580 MALLORY WY 300 CRESCENT CT#850 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 CARSON CITY,NV 89701 DALLAS,TX 75201 ASPEN,CO 81611 NORTON LLC WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC DOWNTOWN 420 LLC 101 PLAZA REAL SOUTH#205-S 315 E HYMAN 23622 CALABASAS RD#200 BOCA RATON,FL 33432 ASPEN,CO 81611 CALABASAS,CA 91302 407 HYMAN LLC KANDYCOM INC F&M VENTURES LLC 51027 HWY 6&24#100 766 SINGING WOOD DR 415 E HYMAN AVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS,CO 81601 ARCADIA,CA 91006 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC IV__"-VER SLAM COMMERCIAL LLC PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO PO BOX 1248RECE LUMBUS CIR 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 ASPEN,CO 81612 NEW YORK,NY 10023 ASPEN,CO 81611 AUG 16 2018 CITY OF ASPEN CC A&mJ",j"TY D£VEL4 f T WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC ROARING FORK CONDOS ASSOC F&M VENTURES LLC 315 E HYMAN COMMON AREA 415 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 415 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 COLLINS BLOCK LLC F&M VENTURES LLC PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO 205 S GALENA ST 415 E HYMAN AVE 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 COTTONWOOD VENTURES II LLC 419 EAST HYMAN AVENUE LLC RUBEY PARK LLC 300 CRESCENT CT#850 2001 NORTH HALSTED#304 400 E MAIN ST DALLAS,TX 75201 CHICAGO,IL 60614 ASPEN,CO 81611 SILVER SLAM COMMERCIAL LLC 400 BUILDING LLC F&M VENTURES LLC 60 COLUMBUS CIR 306 N PLAZA REAL 415 E HYMAN AVE NEW YORK,NY 10023 BOCA RATON,FL 33432-3933 ASPEN,CO 81611 WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC KATIE REED PLAZA CONDO ASSOC PARAGON PENTHOUSE LLC 315 E HYMAN 301 E HOPKINS AVE 9950 SANTA MONICA BLVD ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90212 VALLEY INVESTMENTS LLC ELK MOUNTAIN HOSPITALITY LLC COLLINS BLOCK LLC 602 E COOPER#202 371 MARKET ST 205 S GALENA ST ASPEN,CO 81611 BASALT,CO 81621 ASPEN,CO 81611 FIERCELY LOCAL PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO 314 HEXAGON LLC PO BOX 8970 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 9401 INDIAN CREEK PKWY STE 800 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 OVERLAND PARK,KS 66210 ASPEN GOLDEN HORN LLC F&M VENTURES LLC COLLINS BLOCK LLC 9420 WILSHIRE BLVD 4TH FL 415 E HYMAN AVE 205 S GALENA ST BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90212 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC DOWNTOWN 420 LLC KATIE REED BUILDING LLC 315 E HYMAN 23622 CALABASAS RD 4200 407 S HUNTER ST#3 ASPEN,CO 81611 CALABASAS,CA 91302 ASPEN,CO 81611 3010E HEMAON AVE# 30 S FRACTIONAL NAL OWNERS ASSO CITY OGALENA ST RECEIVED3151EEHEMASQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 AUG 16 2018 ASPEN,CO 81611 CITY OF ASPEN COLLINS BLOCK LLC F&M VENTURES LLC MOTHER LODE CONDO ASSOC 205 S GALENA ST 415 E HYMAN AVE COMMON AREA ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 314 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 MOTHER LODE CONDO ASSOC INC F&M VENTURES LLC KANTZER TAYLOR FAM TRST#1 9401 INDIAN CREEK PKWY STE 800 415 E HYMAN AVE 216 SEVENTEENTH ST OVERLAND PARK,KS 66210 ASPEN,CO 81611 MANHATTAN BEACH,CA 90266 PARAGON BUILDING CONDO ASSOC KATIE REED BUILDING LLC KATIE REED BUILDING LLC COMMON AREA 407 S HUNTER ST#3 407 S HUNTER ST#3 419 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO 400 BUILDING LLC DOWNTOWN 420 LLC 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 306 N PLAZA REAL 23622 CALABASAS RD#200 ASPEN,CO 81611 BOCA RATON,FL 33432-3933 CALABASAS,CA 91302 KAUFMAN GIDEON I COLLINS BLOCK LLC PEYTON MARI 315 E HYMAN AVE STE 305 205 S GALENA ST 409 E COOPER#4 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 DOWNTOWN 420 LLC DOLE MARGARET M KAUFMAN GIDEON 1 23622 CALABASAS RD#200 400 E HYMAN AVE#302 315 E HYMAN AVE#305 CALABASAS,CA 91302 ASPEN,CO 816111989 ASPEN,CO 81611 PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO MOTHER LODE CONDO ASSOC INC KATIE REED BUILDING LLC 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 9401 INDIAN CREEK PKWY STE 800 407 S HUNTER ST#3 ASPEN,CO 81611 OVERLAND PARK,KS 66210 ASPEN,CO 81611 GORSUCH COOPER LLC KATIE REED BUILDING LLC 305-7 MILL STREET LLC 263 E GORE CREEK DR 407 S HUNTER ST#3 2001 NORTH HALSTED#304 VAIL,CO 81657 ASPEN,CO 81611 CHICAGO,IL 60614 DUVIKE CONDO ASSOC SILVER SLAM COMMERCIAL LLC F&M VENTURES LLC COMMON AREA 60 COLUMBUS CIR 415 E HYMAN AVE 420 E HYMAN AVE NEW YORK,NY 10023 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 VALLEY INVESTMENTS LLC 400 EAST HYMAN LLC MTN ENTERPRISES 80B 400 E HYMAN O BX 5739 ASPEN,OCOP 81161102 ASPEN CO .1611# ARECEIVE EAGLOE,CO 816315739 AUG 16 2018 CITY OF ASPEN C0140M, DEVELOPMENT KATIE REED BUILDING LLC COLLINS BLOCK CONDO ASSOC VALLEY INVESTMENTS LLC 407 S HUNTER ST#3 COMMON AREA 602 E COOPER#202 ASPEN,CO 81611 204 S MILL ST ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC VALLEY INVESTMENTS LLC PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO 315 E HYMAN 602 E COOPER#202 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO COTTONWOOD VENTURES I LLC 434 EAST COOPER AVENUE LLC 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 419 E HYMAN AVE 2001 N HALSTED STE 304 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 CHICAGO,IL 60614 KATIE REED BUILDING LLC RUBEY PARK LLC 314-PH HEXAGON LLC 407 S HUNTER ST#3 400 E MAIN ST 9401 INDIAN CREEK PKWY STE 800 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 OVERLAND PARK,KS 66210 F&M VENTURES LLC WENDELIN ASSOC WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC 415 E HYMAN AVE 1173 PITTSFORD VICTOR RD#250 315 E HYMAN ASPEN,CO 81611 PITTSFORD,NY 14534 ASPEN,CO 81611 VALLEY INVESTMENTS LLC ASPEN GOLDEN HORN LLC KATIE REED BUILDING LLC 602 E COOPER#202 9420 WILSHIRE BLVD 4TH FL 407 S HUNTER ST#3 ASPEN,CO 81611 BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90212 ASPEN,CO 81611 WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC 426 EAST HYMAN AVE LLC ASPEN COMMERCIAL CONDO ASSOC 315 E HYMAN PO BOX 4068 307 S MILL ST ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 COLLINS BLOCK LLC 413 EAST HYMAN AVENUE LLC WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC 205 S GALENA ST 2001 NORTH HALSTED#304 315 E HYMAN ASPEN,CO 81611 CHICAGO, IL 60614 ASPEN,CO 81611 PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO COLLINS BLOCK LLC HUDSON KAREN DAY 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 205 S GALENA ST 409 E COOPER AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 COLLINS BLOCK LLC COX ANTHONY E LIVING TRUST KAUFMAN GIDEON 1 205 S GALENA ST 1260 41 ST AVE#0 15 E ASPEN,CO 81611 CAPITOLA CA 9 010 RECEIVEE)SPEN COAG AVE#305 AUG 16 2018 CITY OF ASPEN OMI NM DEVELOPMENT F&M VENTURES LLC 410 AH LLC KATIE REED BUILDING LLC 415 E HYMAN AVE PO BOX 4068 407 S HUNTER ST#3 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO WHEELER SQUARE CONDO ASSOC GOLDEN HORN BUILDING CONDO ASSOC 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 315 E HYMAN AVE#305 COMMON AREA ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 400 E COOPER AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 PARAGON PENTHOUSE LLC KATIE REED BUILDING LLC 400 HYMAN LLC 9950 SANTA MONICA BLVD 407 S HUNTER ST#3 PO BOX 351 BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90212 ASPEN,CO 81611 RIFLE,CO 816500351 COLLINS BLOCK LLC RUBEY PARK LLC 414 422 EAST COOPER AVENUE LLC 205 S GALENA ST 400 E MAIN ST 2001 N HALSTED#304 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 CHICAGO, IL 60614 CARLSON BRUCE E TRUST 400 HYMAN LLC F&M VENTURES LLC PO BOX 3587 PO BOX 351 415 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 81612 RIFLE,CO 816500351 ASPEN,CO 81611 COLLINS BLOCK LLC GORSUCH COOPER LLC CITY OF ASPEN 205 S GALENA ST 263 E GORE CREEK DR 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN,CO 81611 VAIL,CO 81657 ASPEN,CO 81611 WHITE RIVER HOLDINGS LLC COLLINS BLOCK LLC TOM THUMB BUILDING CONDO ASSOC 415 E HYMAN AVE#401 205 S GALENA ST 400 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 KATIE REED BUILDING LLC 305-7 MILL STREET LLC WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC 407 S HUNTER ST#3 2001 NORTH HALSTED#304 315 E HYMAN ASPEN,CO 81611 CHICAGO,IL 60614 ASPEN,CO 81611 PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO 314-200 HEXAGON LLC PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 9401 INDIAN CREEK PKWY STE 800 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 ASPEN,CO 81611 OVERLAND PARK,KS 66210 ASPEN,CO 81611 KATIE REED BUILDING LLC 400 HYMAN LLC COLLINS BLOCK LLC 407 S HUNTER ST 1010 E AVE ST ASPEN, O 811611#3 ASPEN CO 81/6112118 RECEIVEPs5pEN CO GALENA1611 AUG 16 2018 CITY OF ASPEN COWWP DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO KAUFMAN GIDEON I F&M VENTURES LLC 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 315 E HYMAN AVE#305 415 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 WENDELIN ASSOC 400 BUILDING LLC ASPEN GOLDEN HORN LLC 1173 PITTSFORD VICTOR RD#250 306 N PLAZA REAL 9420 WILSHIRE BLVD 4TH FL PITTSFORD,NY 14534 BOCA RATON,FL 33432-3933 BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90212 PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO KATIE REED BUILDING LLC 419 EAST HYMAN AVENUE LLC 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 407 S HUNTER ST#3 2001 NORTH HALSTED#304 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 CHICAGO,IL 60614 DOWNTOWN 420 LLC 419 AH LLC 312 EAST HYMAN AVENUE LLC 23622 CALABASAS RD#200 PO BOX 4068 2001 N HALSTED#304 CALABASAS,CA 91302 ASPEN,CO 81612 CHICAGO,IL 60614 KATIE REED BUILDING LLC KATIE REED BUILDING LLC DOWNTOWN 420 LLC 407 S HUNTER ST#3 407 S HUNTER ST#3 23622 CALABASAS RD#200 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 CALABASAS,CA 91302 PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC COLLINS BLOCK LLC 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 315 E HYMAN 205 S GALENA ST ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO DOWNTOWN 420 LLC FOOTLOOSE MOCCASIN MAKERS INC 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 23622 CALABASAS RD#200 44 SILVERADO CT ASPEN,CO 81611 CALABASAS,CA 91302 CANON CITY,CO 812129484 F&M VENTURES LLC 411 EAST HYMAN AVENUE LLC KATIE REED BUILDING LLC 415 E HYMAN AVE 2001 N HALSTED#304 407 S HUNTER ST#3 ASPEN,CO 81611 CHICAGO,IL 60614 ASPEN,CO 81611 PARK PLACE CONDO ASSOC COLLINS BLOCK LLC WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC COMMON AREA 205 S GALENA ST 315 E HYMAN 408 S MILL ST ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC WENDELIN ASSOCC E'VtEYLLOW LAND CO LLC 315 E HYMAN 1173 PITTSFORD VICTOR RRELN ASPEN,CO 81611 PITTSFORD,NY 14534 CARBONDALE,CO 81623 AUG 16 2018 CITY OF ASPEN CMMTY DEVELOPMENT DOWNTOWN 420 LLC COLLINS BLOCK LLC COTTONWOOD VENTURES II LLC 23622 CALABASAS RD#200 205 S GALENA ST 419 E HYMAN AVE CALABASAS,CA 91302 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 MILL STREET PLAZA ASSOC LLC RUBEY PARK LLC PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO 602 E COOPER#202 400 E MAIN ST 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC COLLINS BLOCK LLC KAUFMAN GIDEON 1 315 E HYMAN 205 S GALENA ST 315 E HYMAN AVE#305 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS ASSO 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 ASPEN,CO 81611 RECEIVED AUG 16 2018 CITY OF ASPEN C=k", DMOPMENT