HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.304 E Hopkins Ave.0083.2017.aslua• `*MW '%✓ ,*ru+`
PATH: G/DRIVE /ADMINISTRATIVE/ADMIN/LANDUSE CASE DOCS
CITY OF ASPEN
City of Aspen Community Development Department
CASE NUMBER 0083.2017.ASLU
PROJECT ADDRESS 304 E HOPKINS AVENUE
PARCEL ID 2737 073 75 001
2737 073 75 800
PLANNER BEN ANDERSON
CASE DESCRIPTION ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION
OF PRIOR MITIGATION FOR
EMPLOYEE
GENERATION/AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
REPRESENTATIVE BENDONADAMS LLC
DATE OF FINAL ACTION 11/07/2017
CLOSED BY BONNIE SHILES 8/13/18
HILLST NE RESTAURANT ... h1ATHIS LEMZ 302 E Hfl� INS AVE
Pie (310) 385-0333 ASPEN CO 81612
s
A . icant
❑,► Owner is applicant? ❑ Contractor is applicant?
Last name I HILLSTONE RESTAURANT t�r_ First name MATH IS LENZ 302 E HOPKINSAVE
Phone (310) 3SS-0333 iCust 29192 .. Address ASPEN CO 81612
ErrW
Lender
Last name First name
V
ri
Ti IF. CITY of ASPFr,
Land Use Application
Determination of Completeness
Date: October 9, 2017
Dear City of Aspen Land Use Review Applicant,
chhu�
R
CEIVED
OCT It 2017
C i i I J F t�
CoMTY DEV
We have received your land use application for 304 E. Hopkins Ave., Determination and have
reviewed it for completeness (and not compliance).
Your Land Use Application is complete:
Please submit the following to begin the land use review process.
1) Digital pdf of the entire application (via thumb drive, emailed files, or file sharing)
2) Review deposit of $975.00
3) One additional hard copy of the application.
Other submission items may be requested throughout the review process as deemed
necessary by the Community Development Department. Please contact me at 429-2759 if
you have any questions.
ThDJenan, Deputy Planning Director
City of Aspen, Community Development Department
For Office Use Only:
Mineral Rights Notice Required
Yes No-�?<—_
GMQS Allotments
Yes No�
Qualifying Applications:
New PD
Subdivision, or PD (creating more than I additional lot)
Residential Affordable Housing
Commercial E.P.F. Lodging
`%W
CITY OF ASPEN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
AN ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION OF PRIOR MITIGATION FOR
EMPLOYEE GENERATION/AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT 304 E. HOPKINS
AVENUE, PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS THE SMITH BUILDING AND LEGALLY
DESCRIBED AS THE SEGUIN BUILDING, UNITS 1-5, CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF
PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO.
PARCEL ID #: 2737-073-75-001 and 2737-073-75-800
APPLICANT:
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE:
APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS:
Hillstone Restaurant Group, LLC
Sara Adams, BendonAdams, LLC
24-10.2; Exceptions and
24-10-4; Provision of Low, Moderate and Middle
Income Housing, as created by Ordinance No. 3,
Series of 1979
26.470.080.D.3; General Review Standards,
Affordable Housing Mitigation, as created by
Ordinance No. 33, Series of 2016
PRIOR APPROVALS: Growth Management Plan — Allotment Allocation
Council Resolution No. 21, Series of 1979
Growth Management Plan Exemption
Council Vote; July 26, 1982
DATE OF DETERMINATION: November 7, 2017
WRITTEN BY: Ben Anderson, Planner
APPROVED BY: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director
BACKGROUND:
The applicant has requested a determination to confirm that the mixed -use building at 304 E.
Hopkins previously met required mitigation for employee generation/affordable housing.
A development process that began in 1979 eventually resulted in the construction of the Seguin
Building (also known as the Smith Building), a building with five (5) condominiumized units.
Three of these units are commercial spaces in the basement, I't and 2nd floors. The remaining two
Affordable Housing Mitigation — Admin. Determination
304 E. Hopkins Avenue
Issued November, 2017
Page 1 of 2
'Ar ""W
units, located on the 2nd floor, are deed -restricted, affordable housing units of approximately 400
square feet each.
These two units were used to satisfy Growth Management Plan requirements in the scoring of the
units for allocation of Growth Management allotments in 1979, a City Council Resolution (No.
21, Series of 1979, Exhibit B) granting allotments to the Seguin Building, and then confirmed
finally with the approval of a Growth Management Exemption for the inclusion of the units by a
City Council vote on July 26, 1982 (Exhibit C). The sequence of approvals was, in part, dependent
on the inclusion of the two units to meet growth management requirements.
SUMMARY:
Ordinance 33, Series of 2016 placed a new requirement on the redevelopment of existing
commercial buildings. If redevelopment were to trigger demolition of the existing building,
commercial square footage that was not previously mitigated would now be required to be
mitigated as part of the redevelopment. As part of a redevelopment proposal, a property owner
must show evidence that a property was previously mitigated. Sara Adams, of BendonAdams,
LLC, submitted a request for a determination of previous mitigation on behalf of Hillstone
Restaurant Group, LLC (the owner of 304 E. Hopkins) in order to satisfy this requirement.
The application for the determination provided a comprehensive narrative of the Land Use
approvals for the development of 304 E. Hopkins that began in 1979 and was completed in 1982.
The end result (as it relates to this determination) was the approval of a Growth Management
Exemption for the Seguin Building based on the provision of two, deed restricted, studio
apartments. Staff concurs with this narrative.
DETERMINATION:
The development of two, on -site, deed -restricted, employee housing units in the Sequin Building,
304 E. Hopkins Avenue, provided required growth management mitigation consistent with the
Aspen Municipal Code in effect at the time of its approval and were approved by Council as
satisfying the requirements for a Growth Management Exemption. The two studio apartments are
condominiumized units (#4 and 5) and are depicted on the Seguin Building Condo Plat (Exhibit
A). These units provided mitigation for the existing net leasable space within the building.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A — Seguin Building Condominium Plat
Exhibit B — City Council Resolution No. 21, Series of 1979
Exhibit C — Minutes, City Council Meeting; July 26, 1982
Exhibit D — Application, Determination of previous mitigation
Affordable Housing Mitigation — Admin. Determination
304 E. Hopkins Avenue
Issued November, 2017
Page 2 of 2
ALLEY BLOCK 80
EDGE OF oloewALH ANO a cua6
(EAST IHI®PK NS AVENUE
VICINITY MAP
ASPEN - COLORADO
LOWER (FLOOR
NORTH ELEVATION
M.
13
UNIT 2
MIDDLE ]FLOOR
UPPER FLOOR
L-_______--_�i
II i� jl
II II
I
II I
II
i I i I � ITeas�el
WTEST ELEVATION
—iL
EAST ELE`
a -[
OWNER'S CERTIFICATE
DE50RAH L. SEGUIN AS OWNER OF IIIi BLOCK BO, cITY AND TowNSITE
OF ASPEN' PITKIN COUNTY, NLORADCi, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS
MAP OF THE SEGUIN BUILDING, A CONDOMINIUM MAS BEEN PREPARED
PURSUANT - THE PURPOSES STATED IN THE CONDOMINIUM
DECLAR RTNE SEGUIN BUILDIN6,,A{)DH)DOMINIUy1, �(
DATEDZ� to 3ANp RECORDED IN BOOK.HTY.AT PAGE 7%Z__OF �_, _ 0 _
THE RECORD DF Pfl"KIN COUNTY, COLORAD•O� � S��P c -�_ .4,A- .A�`� C _ � _
DEBORAH L. SEGUI OW - � ,
STATE OF mLOFSADO SS. /
COUNTY OF PITKIN ,
THE NEFDREGOIN�j OWNER'S C,Fjt_?IF,�SA. BB9A BY DE5 RtAH LSEGUIINN
ME THIS____ L MY OF_IFJf. (81R[931[
AS OWR THE SEGUI B IL I�,ACONDOMINIUM.
WITNESS MY HAND AND OTCIII4 SW
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES
ADDRESS OF
NOTARYEYX__�y��� / ♦F
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
5J8AME5 E —F , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT INH"ANUARY AND FEBRIWtY,
SUm A SURVEY wA5 PERFORMED Cl—Ay.'
l—A Y DIRECTION AND
SUPERVISION OF LOT L . BLOCK BO, CITY AND TDWNSRE OF ASPEN,
PITKIN COUNTY, COLOTED A SFI THE TWO STORY BRICK BUILDING
A 5 FOUND IO BE LOCATED AS 5 "" s' THIS MAP. THE LOCATION
-AND DIMENSIONS OF BOUNDARY LINES, UTILITIES, BUILDINGS,
IMPROVEMENTS IN EVIDENCE OR KNOWN TD ME ARE ACCURATELY
SHOWN ON THIS MAP, AND THE MAPACCNR LAN AND IcAL NTIAUY '
DEPICTS THE LOCATION AND THE A- ST NTAL AND OF —EL
DIMENSIONS OF THE INDIVIDUAL AIR SPACE UNITS O THE SEGUIN
BUILDING. A CONDOMINIUM, a REIN ANND THEREON, THE UNIT
FSIG E.D . S THEREOF UN R N I STR MEASUREMENTS ME BY THE OW MEASUREMENTS OF THE
SAID UNITS, AND THE EL I(t[lS Aav £FLOORS AND CEILINGS.
r
AyplyE SSUURRVEYS I - • ,
-FOE COS.
CITY OIFASPE NDOMINIUM
APPROVAL
TH15 CO OOMIN— MAP OF THE SEGUIN 9UILDING, A OO OOMINIUM AS
COUNTY. COLORADO, TH 5--- --OF THnxY Q,_pX------_-
KK THR KOCH HERMAN EDEL Ono
CITY - CITY CL K MAYOR
CITE' ENGINEER'S �..i
CONDOMINIUM APPROVAL O
THI5 CONDOMINIUM MAP OF THE SEGUIN BUILQING, A CONDOMINIUM WAS
APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINE a THE CITY OF P PITKIN
COUNTY, COLORADO. THIS_.____ DAY O _ 1B03.
]PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION CONDOMINIUM
APPROVAL
TNI5 CONDOMINIUM MAP OC�F��LTTfHE SEGUIN BUILDING, A CONDOMINIUM
COMMISSION T1191N%Y_ ASDAY OF�f AND I SING
CLERK AND RECORDER'S
CERTIFICATE
THIS CONDOMINIUM M OF THE SEGUIN BUILDING, A CONDOMINIUM WAS
ACCEPTED FOR FILING IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND
AND 5 OF r COUNTY OF PJTKLN, 6TAPA E LORADO
_ DAY
AND WAS DULY FILED IN BOOK__.�i%__AT PAGE[_.'
RECEPTION N^_jJ/_R9ayf
PI N COUNTY K
AND RECORDER
.1
N04�
0 5 10 OO w w 50
SCALE OF FEET: 1..'0'
BASIS OF BEARING: H.w. D+R tIIT I TO N.W. OJR, lOT D . BLOCK 75.
CATUM B.M. S.W. CNR. QIURTHOUBE. TSO"" .
L.G.E. LIMITED COMMON ELEMENT.
GC.E. GENERAL COMMON ELEMENT. .r
C.H. C. NG HEIGHT, '
NOTE: PROPERTY COR I-S NOT SET DUE TO CONSTRUCTION WORK
IN PROGRESS AT TI1E THE OF THIS SURVEY.
U �
��s Y
Alpine Surveys Surveyed FEB iwa, Revisions
Exalted FEB.ID,1055 Title THE SEGUIN BUILDING Job No 83-6
Post Orrice Box 1i3o A CONDOMINIUM a1Bft SEGUIN
Aspen, Colorado 81611
303 925 2688
exhibit 4.5
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO
Resolution No. -` /
(Series of 1979
WHEREAS, in accordance with Ordinance No. 48, Series of 1977, September 1,
1979, was established as a deadline for submission of 1979 applications for
commercial and office development within the City of Aspen, and
WHEREAS, in response to this ordinance six commercial projects were submitted
for a total of 28,669 square feet of commercial space within the 24,000 square
feet of commercial space available in 1979, and
WHEREAS, duly noticed public hearings were conducted before the Aspen
Historic Preservation Commission on October 4, 1979, and before the Planning
and Zoning Commission on October 23, 1979, to consider the Growth Management
applications and evaluate and score these applications in conformance with
criteria established in Ordinance No. 48, Series of 1977, and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission did evaluate, rank, and score
the projects submitted in the following order:
P and Z
HPC
Average
Average
Total
1.
Epicure Plaza Building
(10,041 sq. ft.)
18.6
14.0
32.6
2.
La Cocina Addn.
(1,300 sq. ft.)
15.4
12.4
27.8
3.
Bell Mountain Sports Addn.
(2,000 sq. ft.)
16.4
11.3
27.7
4.
Smith Building
(5,100 sq. ft.)
14.3
13.0
27.3
5. Ajax Mountain Assoc. Bldg.
(6,025 sq. ft.) 15.7 9.0 24.7
6. First National Bank Addn.
(4,203 sq. ft.) 16.2 7.9 24.1
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended, in accordance
with Section 24-10.3(a), that City Council authorize additional commercial
construction in the amount of 4,669 square feet so as to approve all six projects.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Aspen,
Colorado, hereby allocates commercial development allotment to the Epicure
Plaza Building in the amount of 10,041 square feet, to La Cocina in the amount
of 1,300 square feet, to Bell Mountain Sports in the amount of 2,000 square
M
n
feet, to the Smith Building in the amount of 5,100 square feet, to the Ajax
Mountain Assoc. Building in the amount of--5,025 square feet, and to the First
National Bank in the amount of 4,203 square feet and that these projects are
authorized to proceed further with any additional approvals needed by the
City of Aspen to secure building permits.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT special review approval be secured for
the employee housing proposals contained in the Epicure, Bell Mountain Sports
and Smith projects.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at its regular
meeting held on November 26, 1979.
ATTEST:
Az� Z
Kathryn S och, tity lerk —
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO
By
30in Herman Edel, Mayor
'To:
FROM:
RE:
•
fir►` exhibit 4.8
MEMORANDUM
Aspen City Council
Colette Penne, Planning Office
Smith Building - GMP Exemption, FAR Bonus, Parking Review,
Condominiumization
;1xATE:. July 20, 1982 , APPROVED AS TO FORM: FLU'
//,I
Location: 304 E. Hopkins
Zoning: CC
Lot Size: 3,000 ± square feet
.Applicant's
Request: The requests are for.(1) a GMP exemption for employee housing;
(2) the FAR bonus needed to allow that additional square footage;
(3) a parking reduction for the employee. housing; and (4) sub-
division exception for the purposes of condominiumization.
Planning
Office
Review:
This project received a 1979 GIP Commercial Allotment, and turned
in building plans in the fall of 1981. The building permit has
been extended and a construction start is imminent. The four
reviews before you were aspects of the original application
which•have never been completed.
The lot size is 3,000 square feet with the proposed FAR at
2:7. The buildout proposed is 5,100 square feet of commercial/
office space and 900 square feet of employee housing. The FAR
Bonus 'requested is appropriate, since the 0.5 bonus will be
0.3 employee housing and the ratio. of employee housing to
commercial space is as defined in the Code. In the original
GMP submittal, the 900 square feet of empioyee housing was shown
-as one unit. The change to two studio units of 450 square feet
each is preferrable in terms of the housing need. The units are
at the low end of the size scale for studio units (400-600
-square feet). The applicant has requested the middle income
category but due to the limited size of the units, the low
Income category is recommended. Since the lot is presently
vacant, there is no reduction in low or moderate income housing..
A parking reduction is requested. Considering that the units are
employee studios and the site is in the CC zone, an exemption
.from the provision of parking for the residential units is
acceptable.
Subdivision exception for the purposes of condomin•tt,m units will
be.fdrmed consisting of the following:
.r 1 Lower Level Office Space
" - 2 Main Level Commercial Space
3 Upper Level Office Space
4 Upper Level Employee Studio
S Upper Level Employee Studio
the 6-month minimum lease restrictions of Section 20-22 must be
complied with and,a statc!!cnt of Subdivision Exception and
Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions must be
filed through the City Attorney's Office, as well as a Deed
;Restriction. A final condominium plat must•be filed following
construction cn,npletion which complies with the Final Plat
provisions of Section 20-15 of the Municipai Code.
.. .-
Smith Building,
Two
- y 20, 1982
Planning &
�'
Zoning '
Commii ss i on
Action and
Planning Office
,
Recommendation:
The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this request
at their July M. 1982 meeting and took the following
action:
•
1. Granted an FAR bonus to increase the maximumallowed
_
from 1.5:1 to 2:1 with 1.7 commercial and 0.3 employee
housing.
They further recommended that Council:
1. Grant a GMP exemption for the two employee studios
of 450 square feet each at the low income category.
2. Grant an exemption from the provision of parking
spaces for the employee studios.
3. Grant subdivision exception for the purpose of
condominiumization of the five units subject to:
a) Compliance with the 6-month minimum leases as
per Section 20-22.
b) Production and recordation of a Final Condo-
minium Plat.
c) Filing of a deed restriction for two low-income
450 square 'foot studios with the City Attorney
prior to receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy.
d) Filing of a,Statement of Subdivision Exception
and Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and
Conditions.
Council
Action:
If Council concurs,with the action of -the Planning and
Zoning Commission and the recommendation of the Planning
Office, the appropriate motion is as follows:.
"I move to approve: .
1., A GMP exemption for the two employee studios of
450 square feet•each at the low income category.
2. An exemption from the provision of parking spaces
for the employee studios.
3. Subdi-vision exception for the purpose of condo-
miniumizati,on of the five units subject to:
a) Compliance with the 6-month,minimum'leases as
per Section 20-22.
b) Production and recordation of a Final Condo-
minima Plat.:
c) Filing of a deed restriction' for two'low-income
450 square foot studios with the City Attorney
prior to receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy.
d) Filing of a Statement of Subdivision Exception
and Docilrratioll of Covenants, M.-Arictiuns and
Cond 1 t i orv;.
wrrr �,..
. ,pf Meeting Aspen City Council July 26, 1982
y._421 and came up with xome designs for mall lighting.. Levy's proposal for lighting design
is approximately $20,000 and all phases of construction for the mall lights and Main stree
lights is $200,000. Levy has figured out a maintenance program for the whole thing.
City Manager Chapman -told Council he brought this up now because Council will be setting
a study session to look at the five year capital improvement program._ Council had asked �I
the staff to come up with an undergrounding project out of the electric fund. Chapman
recommended Council consider this as part of the five year capital improvement program out,
of the electric fund. Chapman said this program can be capitalized out of the electric
fund.
.ORDINANCE #35 and 06, SERIES OF 1982 - Municipal Borrowing from First National Bank
Councilwoman Michael moved to read Ordinance #35, Series of 1982, seconded by Councilman
.Knecht. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #35
(Series of 1982))
k-
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING LOANS OF,$150,000 AND $100,000 RESPECTIVELY TO
TWO KEY CITY EMPLOYEES TO ASSIST THEM IN FINANCING THEIR PRIMARIY
RESIDENCES was read by the city clerk
Mayor Edel pointed out there is not cost to the city; however, the city agrees to keep
on deposit at the FNB $100,000 which will bear no less than 2 per.cent-below the Federal
funds rate. Chapman said it is hard to predict what the market will do over a long term.'
The city is using Federal funds rates as guide posts. The city possiblly will make some
money on the whole deal. Councilman Collins said he felt the city was setting a poor
precedent by going into the mortgage business. Chapman pointed out a former city manager
.received a loan to build a house, and employees get rental advances from the city.
Chapman said he was not suggesting the city do this as a matter of course; the staff is
proposing a solution to a fairly difficult problem that some key employees have found
themselves in through no falut of their own, which is interest rates. These employees a -re
making a concession in terms of their sweat equity; they are using this to buy down interest
rates.
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #35, Series of 1982, on. first reading; seconded
by Councilwoman. Michael. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Collins, nay; Knecht, nay;
Michael, aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Edel, aye.
Councilwoman Michael moved to read Ordinance 136, Series of 1982; seconded by Councilman
Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #36
(Series of 1982)
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE BORROWING OF UP TO $250,000 FROM -THE FIRST
NATIONAL BANK.I?T ASPEN BY A NON RECOURSE PROMISSORY NOTE SECURED BY
ASSIGNMENT OF CERTAIN DEEDS OF TRUST ON REPS, PROPERTY TO FUND CERTAIN
LOANS TO KEY CITY EMPLOYEES FOR THE FINANCING OF THEIR PRIMARY RESIDENCES
was read by the city clerk_
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #36, Series of 1982, on first reading; seconded
ny Councilwoman Michael. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Michael, aye; Knecht,
aye; Collins, nay; Mayor Edel, aye.Motion carried.
-MOTHER LODE LEASE - -
.;.i.ty Manager Chapman told Council after the city closed on the two lots next to the Mother
,ode, Assistant City Attorney Gary Esary talked to appraisers and the owners of the Mother .
-ode regarding the leasing of the property to the Mother Lode for the balance of this
,,ear. After much negotiation, it was suggested to lease this for $1,000 for the remainder
Df the season. Chapman pointed out during the balance of this year, the. Mother Lode will
.tee subject to a great deal of construction; the city is trying to keep the lease.reason-
sble.
Councilwoman Michael moved to authorize and direct the Mayor to enter into a lease agree -
anent with the operators of the Mother Lode restaurant, calling for a lease term from
July 27, 1982, to September 30, 1982, for a total rent of $1,000 and according to the f
=erms and conditions of the lease presented at the Council meeting of July 26, 1982;
seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
I
-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - FIVE-YEAR EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE - IMPOUND LOT
a
Llity Manager Chapman suggested scheduling a work session for ,these three items.
.:ouncilman Collins moved to schedule a study session; seconded by Councilman Parry. All
._n favor, motion carried.
2MP EXEMPTION FAR BONUS PARKING REVIEW, CONDOMINIUMIZATION - Smith. Building
-)rake Jacobs told'Council this is three years old and has beep going through. all the various
c,rocesses.. This building is located right next to La Cocina. Colette Penne, planning
ffice, said they are requesting.GNP exemption for the two employee housing units, parking
zeview exemption since there are no spaces for the unit, and condominiumization of the
.,wilding .into five units; two employee units and three commercial spaces..
As. Penne told Council at the GMP submission in 1979, there one one employee unit at 700
square feet. There is a.change to two units at 450 square feet, which is better in terms
:f the housing market. P a Z was adamant that these units be put in the low income
mental guidelines. P & Z would only grant the FAR bonus if these were low income. Ms.
i
p
ti
I
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 26, 1982
told Council these units are conditioned upon meeting the minimum size. The Code requires
one parking space per bedroom; however, in the commercial core, this is often waived. ii
Councilman Parry moved to approve a GMP exemption for the two employee studios of at least
400 square feet each at the low income category; an exemption from the provision of parking
spaces for the employee studios; subdivision exception for the purposes of condomin.iumiza
tion of, the five units subject to: (a) compliance with thesix-month minimum leases as
per Section'20-22; (b) production and recordation of a final condominium plat; (c) filing
of a deed restriction for two low income at least 400 square feet studios with the city
attorney prior to receipt of a certificate of occupancy; (d) filing of a statement of
subdivision exception and declaration of covenants, restrictions and conditions; seconded
by Councilman Knecht. All in favor, motion carried.
AMENDMENT TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT - 700 South Galena
Assistant City Attorney Gary Esary told Council he had reviewed the history of this agree -
went and the problem is how to provide security to make sure this project moves forward
and completes. This is essentially a voluntary agreement between the applicant and the
city to deal with neighborhood concerns. The P 8 2 required a performance bond, what they
really want is a bond to restore the site to its previous, condition. Esary said the
applicant was not able to get a lender or insuror to come up with this 'type of bond. Also
the engineering deparment felt that with all the earth restraining work that will have to
be done, it would cost a tremendous amount of money to restore the site to the original
condition. Esary said the applicant tried to get these bonds, and carte into .Council in
April and asked if a performance/completion bond would do. The applicant was given approval
for this with additional liquidated damages clause. The contractor for the applicant is
not of the size to get a $4,000,000 completion bond and have offered as a substitute security
a letter of commitment calling for the bank to have a separately funded amount of money
in at least the amount of the contract to be able to complete the project.
Esary told Council the city attorney's office feels this security to complete the project
is the best that can be done. Esary explained the letter of commitment provides. that a -
sum of money would be available, the bank would guarantee as part of the financing package
the bank would step in an hire a contractor to complete the project.
Councilman Knecht moved to amend paragraph four of the 700 South Galena subdivision agree-
ment as requested by the applicant in the letter of July 2, 1982, to permit a change in
the form of security offered therein to an irrevocable letter of credit or equivalent with
liquidated damages which specific agreement shall be approved by the city attorney; seconded
by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE 031, SERIES OF 1982 - Appropriations, General Fund
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance 031, Series of 1982; seconded by Councilman
Knecht.
Finance Director Sheree Bonfield told Council these are both second readings. Mayor Edel
p 4 y
opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Edel closed the public hearing.
Roll. call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Collins, aye; Knecht, aye; Mayor Edel, aye.
it Motion carried.
d
I� ORDINANCE #32, SERIES OF 1982 - Interfund Transfers
i!
:Mayor Edel opened the public hearing. Where were no comments., Mayor Edel closed the
j public hearing.
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #32, Series of 1982, on second reading; seconded
by Councilman Knecht. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Knecht, aye; Michael, aye; Collins,
aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE _#37, SERIES OF 1982 - Personnel Change
City Attorney Taddune said this is a request from the Police Chief that the Council amend
a section of the code providing that city employees may engage in political activities but
' that have to take a leave of absence during the campaign and during the period of their
k office. Rob McClung told Council the purpose of this request is to allow him to run for
sheriff without taking a leave of absence from the job as police chief.• McClung said
under these conditions, it is difficult to run for any office, even school board: Taddune
told Council if they adopt this, Council is saying conceptually there should be flexibility
to allow employees to run for office without jeopardizing their job as a city employee.
Mayor Edel said this ordinance would have everyong judged on an individual basis.
Mayor Edel said he had no problems with this as a broader issue. However, this specific
issue has great implications and ramifications. Mayor Ed'el said he is unmitigatingly
opposed to this. Councilman Parry said this amendment is important to allow employees to
run for things like school board. Councilman Knecht asked if the way the ordinance was
originally written is constitutional. Taddune said there is a case in another jurisdic-
iion, almost identical to this, and it was found to be appropriate and enforceable.
Councilman Knecht said he felt any employee should be able to run for elected office and i
be able to retain their job until the election has been -decided.
Mayor Edel said the issue is whether the Council wants to have McClung run for sheriff of
Pitkin County and also be chief of"police., Also, does McClung keep his house. And what
is the rationale for running. Councilwoman Michael asked what'happens if McClung runs
and win. McClung said he is running on the, consolidation ticket. .McClung said his interest
is in putting consolidation together. McClung said if elected sheriff, he would take a
leave of absence as chief of police. McClung said he would like the right to run for
elected office.
vamp,
exhibit 4.9
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS
FOR THE SEGUIN BUILDING (A CONDOMINIUM)
DEBORAH L. SEGUIN (hereinafter "Covenantor"), for
herself and her heirs, personal representatives, successors and
assigns, in consideration for the granting of an exception from
the full 'subdivision process for the purpose of condominiumiza-
tion and exemption from the Growth Management Plan for employee
housing, and a waiver, after special review, of any requirements
for parking for said employee housing, all with respect to the
following described property, hereby covenants with the City of
Aspen, Pitkin ,County, Colorado, to restrict said property, and
hereby does restrict said property as follows:
1. Covenantor represents that she is the record title
owner of the following described property, together with the
improvements (including a commercial structure) located thereon:
Lot L, Block 80, original Aspen Townshite,
City of Aspen, County of Pitkin,
State of Colorado,
I
lso known as 304 E. Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, Colorado 81611.
. 2. The two (2) dwelling units located on the above -
described property and described as Units 3 and 4, THE SEGUIN
BUILDING (a Condominium) shall and hereby are restricted solely
to use as employee housing as described in Section 24-11.4(b)(4)
of the.Municipal Code of'the City of Aspen, as amended, and to
rental and sale terms and price guidelines, qualifications
guidelines, and to occupancy limitations within "low income"
housing eligibility guidelines now established by the City
Council of the City of Aspen, or as such guidelines may from
time -to -time be amended by the City Council; provided, however,
that if any such restrictions and/or guidelines are so amended to
become more restrictive as applied to owners, renters or
occupants of said units, then the restrictions and/or guidelines
in effect as of the date hereof shall -apply.
3. The two (2) dwelling units located on the above -
described property and described as Units 3 and 4, THE SEGUIN
BUILDING (a Condominium) shall be and hereby are restricted to
six (6) month minimum leases with no more than two (2) shorter
tenancies per calendar year, all as defined in the .Aspen
Municipal Code, as amended, so long as .this Declaration is in
effect and so long as such restrictions are requirements of the
City of Aspen.
4. The covenants contained herein shall run with the
land and shall be binding on all parties having any right, title
or interest in the said Units 3 and 4, THE SEGUIN BUILDING
(a Condominium) or any part thereof, and their heirs, representa-
tives, successors and assigns, for the period of the life of the
longest -lived member of the presently -constituted Aspen City
Council plus twenty-one (21) years, or for a period of fifty (50)
years, whichever period is less, from the date these covenants
are recorded.
5. None of the covenants contained herein shall be
released or waived in any respect ,during the period they are
binding without the prior consent of the City of Aspen reflected
by resolution of the City Council of the City of Aspen.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this declaration has been duly
executed thiS , day of February, 1983.
DEEBORAH LLB L/►�
L. SEG N
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me
this _O�X) day of February, 1983 by DEBORAH L. SEGUIN.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My Commission expires: s/'�36iA
�g�i
/xv _
otaryVu b 11s
Address of Not ry:
//}A ,�,
-2-
i
Ms. Jessica Garrow RECEIVED
Community Development
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena Street SEP 2 9 2017
Aspen, CO 81611 C17`y
�� F ASPEN
September 22, 201744� DM(1ff
Re: Affordable Housing Determination for 304 East Hopkins Avenue, Seguin Building
Condominium Parcel IDs #2737-073-75-001 to -005, and 2737-073-75-800
Dear Jessica,
We submit this letter on behalf of Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, the owner of
304 East Hopkins Avenue in its entirety, to request a determination of prior mitigation, specifically for
affordable housing, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470 Growth Management Quota Systems and
adopted via City Council Ordinance No. 33, Series of 2016. The subject property is located at 304 East
Hopkins Avenue, Parcel IDs #2737-073-75-001 to -005, and 2737-073-75-800.
The existing building is mixed use in the Commercial Core zone district. There are three levels of
commercial space within the two-story building, and two deed restricted residential studio units located
on the upper floor. The recorded condominium plat assigned Units 1, 2 and 5 to commercial use; and
Units 3 and 4 are assigned to the deed restricted studio units. Exhibit 1 illustrates the existing conditions
and denotes the two affordable housing units located on the upper floor.
The following summaries provide documentation for the Land Use Code requirements at the time of the
original submission and the approvals granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council
from 1979 through 1982 when a Certificate of Occupancy was granted:
February 28, 1979 (Exhibit 2)
City Council passed Ordinance 3, Series 1979, amending the Growth Management Plan requirements.
Specifically, Sections 24-10.2 Exemptions, was amended to read the following:
(g) All employee housing units constructed in the commercial, office, and lodge districts pursuant
to the density bonus provisions of this Code provided the housing units are constructed and deed
restricted in accordance with the provisions of Section 24-10.4 (b)(3)
(h) All housing units constructed pursuant to Section 24-10.10 subject to the special approval of
the City Council upon the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Commission which approval
shall include a determination of community need considering, but not limited to, the number of
units to be constructed, the type of units, and the rental/sale mix of the development,
BendonAdams 1 300 S. Spring Street, #202 1Aspen, CO 81611
11Page
Aspen Land Use Code, 1979 (Exhibit 2.1-2.3)
Growth Management Section 24-11.2 Exemptions only considered exempt development as the following
(see Exhibit 2.1): (a) remodeling, restoration, or reconstruction without expansion of commercial floor
area or creation of additional dwelling units; (b) all residential dwelling units constructed in a free
market/deed restricted housing project wherein at least seventy (70) percent of the units are constructed
and deed restricted; and (c) the expansion of an existing commercial or office use in a building by not
more than five hundred sf.
The project would not have met these Growth Management exemptions and therefore would have been
subject to Section 24-11.5 Commercial and office development application procedures (Exhibit 2.2), which
states that no development of commercial or office space shall occur within the City except office and
commercial development exempted pursuant to Section 24-1.2, until the proposed development shall
have received a development allotment pursuant to the following procedures:
(a) Complete applications containing the following information shall be filed with the city planning
office, on or before August 1't of each year. Prior to the filing date, applicants are encouraged to
engage in a pre -application conference with the planning office for the purpose of clarifying, as
necessary, the following requirements:
1. A written description of the proposed development including comments as to:
(h) The applicant's proposal to house employees which are generated as a result of
the commercial development.
Section 24.11.5(c) (Exhibit 2.3) further states that if a proposal does not meet the requirements in
subsection (b) of 24.11.5: 60% of the total points available under section 24-11.5(b)(1), (2), (3), and (4); or
a minimum of 30% of points available under 24.11.5(b)(1) and (2); or does provide deed -restricted housing
for a minimum of 35% of the employees generated by the project it shall no longer be considered for a
development allotment and the application shall be considered denied.
Submission, Growth Management, August 31, 1979 (Exhibit 4.1)
The project applied for a Growth Management allotment and requested a commercial building with
employee housing and a waiver of the employee housing parking requirement. The proposal requested
5,100 sf of commercial area and 900 sf of employee housing. The Application responded to all the
required criteria at the time of the submission.
Historic Preservation Commission Meeting, October 4, 1979 (Exhibit 4.2)
The Historic Preservation Commission, HPC, discussed the merits of the project and scored it accordingly
based upon applicable criteria. The Smith Building scored a 65 out of 75 total points, with an average score
of 13.
Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting October 23, 1979 (Exhibit 4.3)
The project (Smith Building) was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) requesting the
5,100 sf allotment with the additional 900 sf of employee housing and a reduction in parking requirements
for the employee housing units.
The Smith Building was approved by the Commission with an average score of 14.3 placing the Smith
Building at a combined HPC/P&Z score of 27.3/36 points placing it second in priority for Growth
Management allotments. Its score exceeded the minimum requirements by 15.8% in addition to the
provision of deed restricted employee housing units meetings the requirements in Section 24-11.5(b)(3).
BendonAdams 1 300 S. Spring Street, #202 1Aspen, CO 81611
2 1 P a g e
°`r' %we
Several other buildings were simultaneously considered for Growth Management with the total requested
square footage exceeding the annual allotment, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to
City Council that all buildings be approved, granting the discretionary 25% bonus allotment for the first
time in four years, in part due to the 'quality of the applications' being reviewed.
City Council Meeting, November 12, 1979 (Exhibit 4.4)
The Planning and Zoning Growth Management Plan (GMP) recommendations (including the Smith
Building) were presented to Council and resulted in unanimous approval of all six buildings. City Council
acknowledged and approved the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation to approve the
discretionary allowance for a 25% bonus allotment.
Resolution No. 21 Series 1979 (Exhibit 4.5)
City Council Resolution approving the requested Growth Management Plan to allocate commercial
development allotments, and to approve the employee housing for specific projects including 304 E.
Hopkins Ave. (Smith Building).
Submission, GMP Exemption, June 29, 1982 (Exhibit 4.6)
Project filed for a GMP Exception for Employee Housing, FAR Bonus Special Review, a parking waiver, and
subdivision exception for condominiumization. The application was referred to several agencies for
review.
Planning and Zoning Meeting July 20, 1982 (Exhibit 4.7)
The discussion between Planning Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission clarified that although
the proposal had received a GMP allotment approval it had not yet been granted the FAR bonus, the GMP
exception for the employee housing, the parking waiver, or the subdivision exception for
condominiumization.
The Planning and Zoning Commission approved, all in favor, all the requested reviews at this time.
City Council Meeting July 26,1982 (Exhibit 4.8)
The project subsequently received approval from City Council for a GMP exemption for the two employee
studios, per Section 24-10.2 Exemptions, a minimum of 400 sf each at the low-income category, an
exemption from parking, and a subdivision exemption for condominiumization of the commercial and
employee housing units. A condition of approval was the filing of deed restrictions with the City Attorney
prior to receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy. All City Council members were in favor.
Deed Restrictions (Exhibit 4.9)
The Exceptions outlining the approvals from the July 1982 Planning and Zoning and City Council meetings
were recorded on May 4 1983 (Book 444 at Page 468) and a Certificate of Occupancy was granted.
Conclusion:
In August 1979, the Land Use Code did not contain language regarding mitigation being provided off -site
or via cash -in -lieu —the only option was onsite mitigation. The subject property followed the requirements
for Growth Management in place at the time of their original submission which required onsite employee
housing mitigation that was generated by the commercial development. In summary:
BendonAdams 1 300 S. Spring Street, #202 1 Aspen, CO 81611
3 1 P a g e
• Onsite employee housing was a required form of mitigation for any commercial / office
development application, and
• The subject property far exceeded minimum scoring under the growth management
system at the time which included employee housing mitigation, and
• Both the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council granted approvals for Growth
Management (1979) certifying that the subject property met mitigation requirements,
and
• Both the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council granted approvals (1982) for
a GMP exemption for the affordable housing units (per Section 24-11.2 Exemptions), a
parking exemption for the provision of parking for the affordable housing units, and an
exemption for condominiumization, and
• A Certificate of Occupancy was granted upon the fulfillment of approval requirements.
Based upon the evidence provided it is contended that the employee housing located at 304 E. Hopkins
was considered mitigation for the commercial development.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best,
Sara Adams, AICP
sara@bendonadams.com
970-925-2855
Accepted:
Jessica Garrow, AICP
Community Development Director
City of Aspen
Exhibits:
1— Existing Floor Plans for Employee Units
2 — Land Use Code 1979 (Ordinance 3 Series 1979)
2.1 Exemptions
2.2 Commercial and office development application procedures
2.3 Minimum Requirements
3 — Pre -application summary
4 — Background documents
4.11979 Land Use Application
4.2 1979 HPC Approval
4.3 1979 P&Z Approval
4.4 1979 City Council Approval
4.5 1979 City Council Resolution 21
4.6 1982 Land Use Application
4.7 1982 Planning and Zoning Approval
4.81982 City Council Approval
4.91983 Restrictive Covenants and Declarations
5 — Land Use Application
6 — Authorization to Represent
BendonAdams 1 300 S. Spring Street, #202 IAspen, CO 81611
4 1 P a g e
n AkT
- a 40 dl
October 3, 2017
Jessica Garrow, AICP
Community Development Director
City of Aspen
130 So. Galena St.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: 304 E. Hopkins Ave; Aspen, CO.
Ms. Garrow-
you
R
r INT!
Cl-fy of
W@A1
C6 OW M\fEj0?
Please accept this letter authorizing and BendonAdarns, LLC, to represent our ownership
interests in 304 East Hopkins Avenue and act on our behalf on matters reasonably
associated in securing land use approvals for the property.
If there are any questions about the foregoing or if I can assist, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Property — 304 East Hopkins Avenue
Legal Description — Seguin Building units I — 5, parcel ID #s 2737-073-75-001 to
-005; and 2737-073-75-800.
Kind Regards,
Hillstone Restaurant Group Inc.
3539 Northside Parkway
Atlanta, GA 30327
300 SO SPRING Si 1 202 1 ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 1 BENDONADAMS,COM
'wr+
THE CITY OF ASPEN
Land Use Application
Determination of Completeness
Date: October 3, 2017
Dear City of Aspen Land Use Review Applicant,
RECEIVED'
OCT 112017
CITY OF ASPEN
COMML NITY DEEVEL PMENT
We have received your land use application for 304 E. Hopkins Ave., Mitigation Determination
request reviewed it for completeness.
Your Land Use Application is incomplete:
Please submit the following missing submission items.
1. A letter signed by the applicant, containing the applicant's name, address and telephone number
and the name, address and telephone number of any representative authorized to act on behalf
of the applicant. A letter authorizing representation was not included
Other submission items may be requested throughout the review process as deemed necessary by the
Community Development Department. Please contact me at 429-2759 if you have any questions.
�Tha>You,
fifer Ph la , Deputy Planning Director
City of Aspen, Community Development Department
For Office Use Only:
Mineral Rights Notice Required
Yes No�
GMQS Allotments
Yes Nor
Qualifying Applications:
New PD
Subdivision, or PD (creating more than 1 additional lot)
Residential Affordable Housing
Commercial E.P.F. Lodging
EXHIBIT
973
ATTACHMENT 2 — LAND USE APPLICATION
FKUJt:Ll: Administrative Determination: Prior mitigation
Name: BendonAdams LLC
Location: n/a
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) n/a :; cn
<: rn
APPLICANT:
Name:
Sara Adams/ BendonAdams to ■....
Address:
300 So. Spring Street, Ste. 202, Aspen, CO 81611 (Z1 rn
Phone #:
925-2855 sara@bendonadams.com
REPRESENTIVATIVE:
Name:
see above
Address:
Phone#:
E-1 GMQS Exemption
GMQS Allotment
Special Review
ESA-8040Greenline,Stream
0
Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff,
0
Mountain View Plane
Commercial Design Review
0 Residential Design Variance
0 Conditional Use
Conceptual PUD Temporary Use
Final PUD (& PUD Amendment)
Subdivision
Conceptual SPA
Subdivision Exemption (includes
Condominiumization)
Final SPA (&SPA
Lot Split Amendment)
0 Lot Line Adjustment 0 Small Lodge Conversion/
Expansion
X Other: Determination
EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.)
n/a
PROPOSAL: (Description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.)
n/a
Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ 975 flat fee
® Pre -Application Conference Summary
® Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement
Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form
Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements — including Written Responses to Review Standards
3-D Model for large project
All plans that are larger than 8.5" X 11" must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be
submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3-D model. Your pre -application conference
summary will indicate if you must submit a 3-D model.
March, 2016 City of Apen 1 130 S. Galena St. 1 (970) 920 5050
CM
CM
EXHIBIT
Agreement to Pay Application Fees
An agreement between the Citv of Aspen ("City") and
Property BendonAdams, LLC
Owner ("I"):
Phone No.: 970-925-2855
Email:
Address of
Property:
(Subject of (send bills here)
application)
not applicable
Billing
Address:
300 So. Spring Street, Ste. 202
Aspen, CO 81611
0 W
�M
m
-n
m
N
0
m M
2 0
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.
$. 975 flat fee for
$. flat fee for
Administrative Determinati
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.
$ 975 deposit for 3 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:
Jessica Garrow, AICP
Community Development Director
City Use:
Fees Due: $_Received $
Property Owner:
Name: Sara Adams
Title: principal, BendonAdams LLC
P!1
not applicable
Billing
Address:
300 So. Spring Street, Ste. 202
Aspen, CO 81611
0 W
�M
m
-n
m
N
0
m M
2 0
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.
$. 975 flat fee for
$. flat fee for
Administrative Determinati
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.
$ 975 deposit for 3 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:
Jessica Garrow, AICP
Community Development Director
City Use:
Fees Due: $_Received $
Property Owner:
Name: Sara Adams
Title: principal, BendonAdams LLC
P!1
0•9
exhibit 3
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PLANNER: Phillip Supino DATE: September 8, 2017
PROJECT: 304 E. Hopkins Ave. — Affordable Housing Mitigation Determination
REPRESENTATIVE: Sara Adams
DESCRIPTION:
The City of Aspen Land Use Code requires that affordable housing mitigation be provided for
existing commercial space for which mitigation was not previously provided. The applicant
requests an administrative determination and clarification of past approvals regarding whether the
existing commercial space at 304 E. Hopkins was previously mitigated. Administrative
determinations are a land use application that must be submitted for consideration by the
Community Development Director. Existing floor plans, prior approval documents, plats, narratives,
and other means to demonstrate whether affordable housing mitigation was previously provided
should be submitted with the Land Use Application to assist the Director in making this
determination.
Below are links to the Land Use Application form and the code section referenced above.
Land Use Application:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/Comdev/Apps%20and%20Fees/Land%20Use
%20Application%20Form. pdf
Relevant Ordinances:
Ordinance 31, Series 2016: Growth Management Quota System
Land Use Code Section(s)
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.470 Growth Management Quota System
Review by: Staff for complete application and determination
Planning Fees: $975 — for three hours of Staff Review time
Referral Fees: None
Total Deposit: $975 (additional/lesser planning hours are billed/refunded at a rate of
$325/hour; any needed referral hours are billed at a rate of $325/hour)
To apply, submit one copy of the following information:
❑ Attachments 1 and 2 of the Land Use Application (Agreement to pay and Land Use
Application form).
❑ Pre -application Conference Summary (this document).
❑ 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.
*40
❑ HOA Compliance form (Attached).
❑ Existing floor plans, prior approval documents, plats, narratives, and other means to demonstrate
whether affordable housing mitigation was previously provided.
Once the application is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be
submitted:
❑ Total deposit for review of the application.
❑ A digital copy of the application provided in pdf file format.
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.
V J
EXHIBIT
D
0.
Exhibit 1: Upper Level 304 East Hopkins Avenue.
Unit 4
Unit 3
EXHIBIT
2-
BRADFORD PUBLIBNINO CO., DENVER RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
ORDINANCE NO.
(Series of 1979)
AN ORDINANCE REVISING SECTION 24, ARTICLE X
OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE PROVIDING FOR
THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM BY AMENDING
SECTIONS 24-10.2, 24-10.4(b)(3), 24-10.4(b)(4),
24-10.4(e), and 24-10.10, AND BY THE ADDITION
OF SECTION 24-10.4(b)(5)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado,
desires to revise that section of the Municipal Code providing
for the Growth Management Quota System for the benefit of the
City of Aspen,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Rontinn l
That Section 24-10.2 shall be repealed and reenacted to read
as follows:
Section 24-10.2. Exceptions.
The following development activity shall be exempted
from complying with the allotment procedures herein-
after provided for:
(a) The remodeling, restoration or reconstruction of
any existing building (provided there is no
expansion of commercial floor area nor creation
of additional dwelling units);
(b) The enlargement of, or change of use in, a
structure which has received individual historic
designation;
(c) The construction of one single-family or duplex
structure on townsite lots or lot subdivided prior
to the effective date of this article;
(d) The construction of one single-family residence on
a lot subdivided after the effective date of this
article where the following conditions are met:
(1) The tract of land which was subdivided had a
pre-existing dwelling.
(2) No more than two (2) lots were created by the
subdivision;
(e) All construction of essential governmental
projects other than housing;
(f) All construction pursuant to valid building permits
issued prior to the effective date of this article;
BRADFORD PUBL1ENINC CO., DENVER RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
(g) All employee housing units constructed in the
commercial, office, and lodge districts pursuant
to the density bonus provisions of this Code
provided the housing units are constructed and
deed restricted in accordance with the provisions
of Section 24-10.4 (b)(3);
(h) All housing units constructed pursuant to
Section 24-10.10 subject to the special
approval of the City Council upon the recommen-
dation of the Planning & Zoning Commission which
approval shall include a determination of community
need considering, but not limited to, the number
of units to be constructed, the type of units,
and the rental/sale mix of the development; and
(i) All development not limited by the provisions of
Section 24-10.1;
provided that the building inspector shall, as required
by Section 24-10.8, annually report the amount of
residential, commercial, office and lodge construction
exempted by reason of Section 24-10.2(b), (c) and (d)
within the previous year and these totals shall be
deducted from the quota of allowable development in
succeeding years. When reporting exempted construction
pursuant to subsection (b), the inspector shall
calculate only the additional commercial floor area
or dwelling units resulting from such construction.
Section 2
That Section 24-10.4(b)(3) shall be repealed and reenacted
to read as follows:
(3) Provision for Low, .7oderate and Middle Income
Housing (maximum 40 points).
(aa) The Commission shall assign points to each
applicant who agrees to deed restrict all
or a portion of his development for a period
of 50 years to rental and sale price terms
within Housing Price Guidelines established
by the City Council and to occupancy limita-
tions within Housing Income-Lligibility
Guidelines established by the City Council.
(bb) Points shall be assigned according to the
following schedule:
2 points for each 5,% of the total development
that is restricted to low income price
guidelines and low income occupancy limita-
tions;
2 points for each 10% of the total develop-
ment that is restricted to moderate income
price guidelines and moderate income
occupancy limitations;
2 points for each 15% of the total develop-
ment that is restricted to middle income
price guidelines and middle income occupancy
limitations.
-2-
"ti�rr
on
RRADVORD. WUSNINOCO.,DKNV:R RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For the purposes of this section, 1%D of the total
development shall mean 1% of the total floor area
and 1%O of the total number of bedrooms within the
development. For the purposes of this section,
a studio shall be considered a 3/4 bedroom.
(cc) To be eligible for points within the
provisions of this section, the low,
moderate and middle income housing
units must comply with the following
size limitations or be restricted to
rental and sale price terms no greater
than that allowable had the housing units
complied with the following size limitations:
Minimum Maximum
Unit Square Footage Square Footage
Studio 400
One Bedroom 600
Two Bedroom 750
Three Bedrooms or Larger 950
Section 3
600
800
1,000
1,400
(dd) When an applicant agrees to restrict only
a portion of his development to low,
moderate or middle income housing and
the portion restricted is located adjacent
to an unrestricted portion, to be eligible
for points within the provisions of this
section the adjacent portions of the
development shall be constructed of the
same exterior building materials with
a compatable exterior architectural style.
(ee) The deed restrictions created above may be
removed or amended by agreement between
the property owner(s) and the City Council
upon the recommendation of the Planning and
Zoning Commission. No legal action shall
lie to compel the City Council to agree to
such removal.
That Section 24-10.4(b)(4) shall be repealed and
reenacted to read as follows:
(4) Provision for unique financing (maximum
10 points).
(aa) The Commission shall assign points to
each applicant who agrees to sell under
a unique financing program all or a
portion of his development to qualified
individuals as established by the City
Council within Housing Income -Eligibility
Guidelines.
(bb) Points shall be assigned according to
the following schedule:
-3-
BRADFOw ►USLISHM6 CO.. Dw„Q RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
95% Applicant Financing
it
Points
Studio 1/2
One Bedroom 1
Two Bedroom or Larger 1 1/2
100% Applicant Financing
Unit Point(s)
Studio 1
One Bedroom 2
Two Bedroom or Larger 3
(cc) To be eligible for points within the
provisions of this section, the mortgage
offered by the applicant must be freely
assumable, for a term of 30 years or more,
at an interest rate equal to the current
rate of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Corporation as determined on the date of
preliminary plat submission or final plat
approval whichever is greater, with no
closing points and no prepayment penalty.
Section 4
That a new Section 24-10.4 (b) (5) be added to the Aspen
Municipal Code:
(5) The commission may, when it shall determine
that a project has incorporated the criteria
of Section 24-10.4(b)(1), (2) and (3) and
achieved an outstanding overall design meriting
recognition, award additional points not
exceeding twenty (20) per cent of the total
points awarded under Section 24-10.4(b)(1),
(2) and (3) .
Section 5
That Section 24-10.10 shall be repealed and reenacted
to read as follows:
Section 24-10.10. Employee housing.
Low, moderate and middle income housing units
approved under the provisions of Section 24-10.4(b)(3)
shall be allowed in addition to those housing units
authorized by Section 24-10.1(a) above.
Section 6
If any provision of this ordinance or the application
thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications
of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid
provision or application, and to this end the provisions of
this ordinance are declared to be severable.
-4-
BR"FORO MBLISHINO CO., DKNVKR RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Section 7
A��//public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on
\�4.f✓t h , 19 F, at 5:00 P.M. in the
If
City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado,
15 days prior to which hearing notice of the same shall be
published once 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, Colorado, at
its regular meeting held at the City of Aspen on the
day of
Mayor
ATTEST:
C C
ZA'-ah�) yZte'x-,
Kathryn Koch
City Cle k
FINALLY adopted, passed and approved on the 42 #,day of
Qh.u— 7979
Stacy S ndl.ey III
Mayor P%
ATTEST:
Kathryn S Koch
City Cle
-5-
EM
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO., OMWR RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
STATE OF COLORADO ) CERTIFICATE
) ss
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
I, Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk of Aspen, Colorado,
do hereby certify that the above and foregoing ordinance was
introduced, read in full, and passed on
reading at a regular meeting of the City ouncil of the
City of Aspen on _g, 197?, and published
in the Aspen Times a weekly newspaper of general circul-
ation, published in the City of Aspen,, Colorado, in its
issue of Alk 197 q, and was finally adopted
and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council on
aAAt (
197 7, and ordered published as
Ordinance No. Series of 19791 of said City, as
provided by law.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand a4d
the seal of said City of Aspen, Colorado, this �Q�'i'/I_sL_JI
day of _, 197Y.
Kathyrn S Koch, City Clerk
— ---�
SEAL
uty Cit r
.sa!g4el
r erty or "y Dart of such
� bett�t'r�t�nt f 0rfl gta
X.
OVEIRLAY
i 0.1. Purpose.
The Purpose of this
for
levelOPment
uture urpon article is to
g needs of therovide of bona fide low, co°Mrnunity by authrA housing free from s , Moderate hnriln
peculative investrnen rI iddlC r 6
Primary residential use b
this article to Y local residents. inflpence promote such housing is the °
increased Tesidential densit ant ,,`.
unit land cost, for selected deveio d thereforey $licvf;ri :>
6) pment. (Ord, (,),
Sec. 24-10.2. Residential Bonus Overlay
created. District
There is hereby created a residential Bonus
District which, subject to the standards set frrtl m .
article, may be used as permitted in sections 24.10d
24-1.0.4. (Ord. No. 16-1980, § 6)
Sec. 24-10,3. Applicability.
(a) The Residential Bonus Overlay District ;hail r
if
applied according to the provisions of this article, and =a
have the effect of superimposing the perrnitterl uses ra
area and balk requirements of this article upon the;!te r
designated. The effect of applying the Residential °'$
Overl y District upon the site so designated is to � a
permitted uses and area and bulk requirements c"es
p of the Afus!c,
sections 24-8.2. and 4-, .4 within
respectively by . licable
of Aspen whicb were ap�p rior It)
Code of the City sits P: nation t� e
Overlay 131119of thi
zone district which was in existence for the e t
time of the Residential Benue and bulk reeluiren'
permitted rases and area
article,
a
i tr.r 11 zone districts except the L-3, thirty-five t 5)
{b) Within
hotel units.
lodge n
. the Z� 3 zone district, ten (10) lodge or tourist dor-
y
(c) rnitory units; ten thousand. (10,000)
the CC and C"1 zone districts,
(d) Within ercial and office space;
square feet of Comm
Within the NC and 8Cl zone districts, seven thousand
(e) Wit hi square feet of commercial and Office space;
to Within the O zone district, four thousand. (4,00) square
feet of commercial and office space; ne districts, three ,hc�rxsand
(g) Within the CL and all other zone
(3,000) square feet of commercial and office space-,
provided that these maximums may be deviated from under those
in section 24-11.3(a). No construction, except
conditions specified
for that described in section 24-11.2, shall proceed until the project
shall have been awarded a development allotment pursuant to
the provisions of this article. (Ord. No. 48-1977, § 1 Ord, No.
16-1980, § 5, Ord. No. 26-1982, § 1, Ord. No. 35-1.98 , § 1, Ord,
NO, 20-1985, § 5)
Sec. 24-11.2. Exemptions.
The following; development activity shall he exempted from
complying with the allotment procedures hereinafter provided
for, subject to the review of the planning and zoning coinniis-lion
and/or the Aspen City Council where it is so specifically indicated:
(a) The remodeling, restoration or reconstruction of any exist-
ing building, provided there is no expansion of commer-
cial floor area nor creation of additional dwelling units.
Applicants proposing to demolish and then delay the re-
construction of a building; shall be required to verify the$
commercial floor area and/or number of dwelling Breit
Which comprise the building to he demolished, and shall be
"united to reconstruction of no more than the verified total
Within five (5) years of the date of demolition, Any build-
ing which is demolished shall be
n limited d to re=e°on,sir eec°t srse
On sumo site or on a contiguous site owned hY thO 1"_Tne
idual Applicants proposing to de niolish sire),:. farnily
1" s�•.14i
1508.8.1
/AP
ZONING
24-11.2
and zoning commission. The review of any re
from the development. allot-
pl t for exemption of units
Site rpcedrii es shall include a determination of comrnu-
eirt Procedure"
but not limited to, the project's cony
ni • need ith any adopted housing plan, including the num-
ti '
Pl f units pr
ooposed and their location and the type of
b osed, specifically regarding the number of bed -
,,nits Propandroams in each otmenttandrthe proposedtpri e categoiies
niix of the dev p
hich the units are to be deed restricted.
24-10-5
rtial Bonus
i site within
Aructed on
to units constructed in a mixed fi•ee
dwellingherein
€� ,411 residential at
niar'kettdeed restricercenttofthe uning its s are�const acted and dc�ati ect w
�tial Bonus
�,�,enty (70) p
with the city's adopted ernplo- ee
site within
restricted in accordance
(in projects where seventy (70) percent
ne districts:
housing guidelines
proportions of units, from 0 to .49 are rounded
represents
down,.5 to .99 are rounded up to the next whole dwelling
unit), subject to the special approval of the city council3
based upon the recommendation of the planning and zon-
.1.
ing commission which approval shall include a determina-
tion of community need considering, but not limited to, the
project's compliance with any adopted housing plan, spe-
cifically the number of units to be constructed, unit type,
tructed on
unit mix, the rental/sale mix of the development, the pro-
11.4(b)(3).
posed price and rental categories. Applicants are recom-
mended to submit an application wherein there is main-
tained an average of one and one-half (11/0 to two () bedrooms
per unit within the deed restricted portion of the project (a
studio shall be considered a three-quarter bedroom) and
within a
th�yy®
where at least fifty (50) percent of the residential floor area
is devoted to deed restricted units.
� 6• r
, . ,
! } The expansion of an existing commercial or office use in a
Building by not more than five hundred (500) square feet,
excluding employee housing, for the purposes of providing~;
a small addition of space which can be shown to have
minimal or manageable impact upon the c°c minunity and
an he} Justified by the benefit will ill accrue tothe
'Ornn)unitt . For expansions which involve less than two
27
1,508.8.3
.t on.'
24-10.4
(b) The P
Overlay Dist
the R-15, R-
(1) Singlf
(2) Duplr
(3) Mult
(4) Towr
provided th
the site are
(c) The
Overlay Dit
the RMF, C
(1) Sing
(2) Dup
(3) Mul
(4) Tow
(5) Dor
provided t
the site arf
(Ord. No.
See. 24-
(a) Mir
Resident
minimun
the Mu1
applicab
for the of
(b) Re
areas ins
shall ha
rta�, Yee which 10 an
principal use, such h �` racc��o d ere for
stairs, the sa4 r� Mee
r� to
expansion shaall hsanicel 5 or aarci ' ,
ning director nand hc:: r tQr d"
sions which the ehiei baailcliaa VQ 11 ! %- , involve
space, or which re
involve 9aaetit fo tnti. `{{r
two hundred fifty t25oi e l)<ans1,or�� of ton,Lr� ,
the expansion shall lac to trve lass,#ir-t;tl,�
Planning and zonin = `ublcct to xta,
cc> rh,"
quest for the ex tranaIssic,►t. °fh
pansion of . e r
use shah include a dote xistin corlanar ;
able impact on the rn�aaa1ation ol"
to findings that a e com raaanrn
22'1Un1trV, CCita gl.derlil e ��� tYr P, c
Ill Illun ier of - Ing but will be generated by the exp€ansi 'a�le�.
Provide additional enxployee housing;
or thf tPtil?
of additional parking demand , cr nai
ing can be accommodated oar 4ucl'1 b at t hOr.
a ri• atc.d rp t}�
real visual impact oar the neighborhood h-
and that minimal new demand is placed
due tot.,�.
able at the site such as water, on `c icy
fire protection. Applications for er roads, dra;r
pansion 5ha1(E - f'.
to a rnaxinrum curnIllative commercial additionIbeli!
dreg (500) square feet within any building in thei...-;
Aspen, provided that the plannin r
uate the cumulative impact of thfc <, )lni�sionsh"
whole. tiparrsi
W All development, not limited by tlaa, ptovr i�E ..i,
24-I1.1.
:Provided that the building; inspector shall relaort to thepb',
ping office each month the amount cif con�;truc�t.ir,n sand demo;:
tion of residential and lodge dwellings unit: and cx,nanacrcrzet,.,,
office square footage exernpt.(_.�d from complying with the
opment allotment procedures hereinafter" provided f(w wliit . _, x
received building permits. The lahanning office shall coraipi;e Gh.x
monthly reports on an annual basis, providing a reportsttnr;d
sizing the amount, of exempted construction and deraaolitiw
residential and lodge dwelling units and etratatatercial ands
square footage which has received brtilclt7aa l)cT"nlits d(jr'n9`
SuPp No 27 If?$
3
4 24.11:3
riot to the date of submission �o#'the report
applicationi
It shall be the purpose
a elvett }ment al �untof construction which shall be deducted
c deg size the of ally xable development in succeeding years.
allotments which have
the alno Office shall also add any quota of allowable devel-
tr�,a} topping have c xpired to the q _
1'e p scind`'d or years- Any expansion of commercial or
= ent rn �,ucce dingdoes t increase the computation of floor area
,�, 11 S whichom the
4if`ce , long shall not bed years. rd. No. 46-g1977, § 1; uota of allowable
No.
or s ent in succeedin 1979, § 1; Ord, No. 4-1980, 1; Ord
aevelopm 1 2; Ord. No.
191 5 5; Ord. No. 24-1980 § 1; Ord, No.31983-36, §§fir, 2;
4a 69 1981, § 1; Ord. No. 53 1982, . 3 O 8 19#36, §
o. No.
19p+d 40, 4, Orel No. 9-1984 1�l Ae
lCfl• § j
Sec. 24-11.3. General provisions.
(a) In awarding development allotments in any given , s
city council may authorize construction in excess
year, the
or the maximum number of dwelling units, lodge units or
ed in section
commercial or office square footageSpec, dwelling units,
24-11.1 by as much as twenty (20) percent
twenty-five (25) per cent for commercial and off ice
square
footage and thirty-three (33) per cent for lodging
(211
to be rounded up to the next whole number) ; provided that
any such excess development be off -set by reduction in 311
cessive years such that every fifth year the total constru,
tion within the previous five (5) years shall not be in e c
eas
of the cumulative total permitted by section 24-11. , -
(b) The city council may (but need not) gran'; a ue.....,,
ment allotment for an entire project to be constructed over
a period of years provided that each year during the sched-
uled construction the annual allotment provided for in sec-
tion 24-11.1 shall be reduced by the amount of construction
Permitted by the approval.
all reject any application for de-
(c) The planning office sta
velopment allotment which fails to:
access requirements,
(1) Satisfy minimums utility or
"'UPII, No,
n
2 24� 1
X
W
-SMQqe4
it
amily, 8
101'
; one-hf
ted rest
lowing
ict whe
scl, I
family
milt',
)uses,
)ry,
me-f
dT
)8t,,
WQ
Upp
The Project
shall be de Ing the
cornrniss. erred to he th hi ,hcs
mis Ion, and the e hil;hest r14
S'on Shall be f, rankril r4
g t h U., February 1st of eaberhwarded to th ti
14 M
(e) year. lllh�,,N
1n the event tour, t
dle, that 4
moderate t any applicant
may impose, and low In 18a%3
se, as VOnle Are#,
a canoes
f, holls.,
tiOn 24-11-4(b)(4) Or
Such other ter un'tations or, I ok, po
ins or condition, reilt., rPt,
ing the purposesor %,J,
lishin Of sect,1-0, 24.,,nabs
9 such tau
and conditil,4(bX
A)�n
Otis, n local housing authority. Wk U�
Davin e,
g received the commis,
'hall consider any challenges thereto9 report, �Itt,-,,
ed, howne
ever, that the city cou by, Ican
ncil revie
determining whether there was a en,a' all
of
abuse of discretion by the co Issioll in its due
challenge must be filed with the plannin
teen (14) days of the date of the
1, p u lie hearin
ning and zoning commission. 9
(9) Subsequent to the conclusion of all protest hemq,
vided for in this section, during which the city coan'.
change the number of Points awarded to any protatc, lcl�ga,
plicant, the city council shall, by resolution and prvx
March 1st of each year, allocate development aj'cin.,-2
among eligible applicants in the order of priont',
lished by their rank. Those applicants haviql
allotments may proceed to apply for any furffie,,6
ment approvals required by the zoning, building""
l
regulations of the city. Unallocated
carried over to the following year for possible dig
at that (or a later) time.
,,,
of his aWica-v
(h) No applicant shall, after submissionchan.
suant to section 24-11.4(a), mend niodifYor
for PU
insubstantial Pa" 5 A
application except in The sta
Cal correction 0" a
clarification or techni determine whether or 'lot
section 24-11 7(b) shall
54-i982' § 4. 4- 2-1986,- §§ 1, 4)
NO
ro.ni,,,cjaj and 0
fr,,, develop
.ent apPli
st,t, cation procedures.
Ice space shall Occur within
,nercial or off exempted pur-
,qo development of COM1 commercial development 0 shall
office and conin
ept until the proposed development
the city except
24-11.2, u pursuant to the following
i,u!,tit to sec allotment
received a development
ocedureS: following informa-
ta) complete applications containing the on or before
tion shall be filed with the city planning office,
1st of each year. Prior to the filing date, applicants
August pre
are encouraged to engage in a -application conference
with the planning office for the purpose of clarifying, as
necessary, the following requirements:
(1) A written description of the proposed development in-
cluding comments as to:
(aa) Type of water system to be used including infor-
mation on main size and pressure and, if public,
the excess capacity available from such public sys-
lly 1
244
A i
a, a
it d
30f
and
OR
I
oNiNG
t. ration of the nearest main, the esti
4X teM; the lo'c demand of the building.
rnaied to be used and,
r5 of sewage treatment system
i l lie p excess capacity available
fbb. ublic, the existint,
�� - if P pub
system; the location of the near-
, .,; m��m m from such p
� e trunk or connecting sewer line the estimated
the building.
sewer den -and of
(cc) TYp
e of drainage system proposed to handle sur
face, underground and runoff waters.
(O Total development area including lot coverage,
GI
internal square footage, and areas devoted to open
space or landscaping.
(ec)Estiniatc'd traffic the count
tincreases on adjacent ttotal
resulting from proposed development;
number of vehicles expected to use or be stationed tut
in the proposed buildings, hours of principal daily
usage; on- and off-street parking to be supplied, f
location of alternate transit means (bus route, bike llg
paths, etc.); any auto disincentive techniques in-
24-9
corporated into the proposed developmei t. c
a,,
- -• (fl) All proposed uses for the structure identifying not it
only anticipated initial users but all uses that 3 of
potentially may be made of the building (descrip- u
tion by category is sufficient) without substantial ea
MR
building change.
(gg) Effects of the proposed development on adjacent 40M
uses and land uses in the vicinity of the project. MM
(hh)The proposed construction schedule including, if VAW
applicable, a schedule for phasing construction. VA I
ve�p�
60 The applicant's proposal to house employees which
are generated as a result of the commercial devel- ion
opment.
't3rm
(2) A site utilization map including
(aa) Preliminary architectural drawings in auffi-
cient detail to show building size, height., m
SOAP• No, 27
1508.18.5
.SZlqqel
f
V
r
v"
71'ld
r
i ri tpf,
I r) 1 v/1
xssra,r%
Uliv
rn f,.r,
'X
rraf,h t
;j
ri
J la
ir( trar;,+orta
orl-Aelf"rirL' qjf'. ability of the
A
mu
bf),q f()U
x t i n ty or (,()!Jrity _� W
n rnajor Arett
ty of t' e
er"
thp T)r0P(,,',f'd 67�J) I
J)
need ,
the e')64ting 0169t by
Ifdtnttroad network=
.,X tend the 2 Points) c xmhi,dering
in4e
dral facilities W ad""IRly
iddditor' , , of the drainag V-
the C'spacitY runott t1t the proposed devek
di#P00e (it Surface extension.
out systero g the pry
went withximurn 2 pwnts) c,"nsiderin
I I
feet parking (010 icng ( spaces to tweet the COr"Me"'c"a
Vigions of Pariof the prop
and/or residential needs 11*4ed dtVel"
Herat which are required by sect'On 24-4Z of tl"
considering the design Of said
,x,de, and t'(" the visual irnpact, al"tount, of Paved
with respect
Surface, convenlence and safetY,
, housing (MaXirnum
Pro,vi'sion of emplfyee
points),
faa� The commove ors bhaj, assign points u) each appli
cant who agrees to prDv-i&- l(jw, rr�rAerat,(,_ and
middle income housing which compliefi with the
housing size, type, income and occupancy guide-
lines of the City of Aspen and with the provisions,
of section 24- 11 - I O
(bb) Points shall be assigned according to the follow-
ing schedule:
We to 4,(Wt,- of the additional employees gener-
ated by the project are pmvidfA with housing- 1
point for each 4% housed;
41% to 100z f. of the additional employee-8 gen-
erated by the project are provided with bou:;jng.
I point for each 12% housed.
The commissi(g, shall use the f0llowing standar& in
Calculating the number Offull-time equivk1lert f,;Mploy_
eeS generated by the project:
�'2_7' �Mploye"11,06r� SHoare feet
raet leasable), ba-d or, review of the city councly
110using designee; 5
'_30emPl6YeeW1,(KJ()squ
employees/l ( are feet �Tj,�t Ieasabler,
.4uare feet (net leasable -,
X)()
'qu"'e fe and Other: 3,,5() employees et (n et
ollowing uses
xict when the
15A, R-30 an,
,-family dwel
S,
amity, and
Iovr `l
one-half o
ed restrict
lowing use
ct when tI
SCf, NC,
amity dw
oily,
uses, ant
ry,
ne-half
re- ` c
30, „ i;
Arete
re lot
)nus
zeta r
Co,
kin t
>r to
min
Witt
fo l
(C)
A, pt,
Provided thJN
c b �I
cil's h®usinat upon the
applieddesignee tha o tract
rt
icu
de nenlPlo�c n alteFhatiUht
, r pr c �a_ a .a.,.,
If the ur�dar he c
planning co
Posed protect mnlls,j o
award 'cnertcte, defno 11er
able within the applicant the full
In order to' this n.
the
deter`
generated nnine the
by the project Percent
Mg, the conmmi , who �. `�R( ,
Studio: «�r, l�ry
n shall use the
1,25 residents;
One-bedroo �,
Two -bedroom; 1. r 5 residenLj�
rn:2.25
Three -bedroom rca�idents;
or larger. 3.(jp
Dormitory: 1resident
,p0 resident per 15p square h.�„
space.
(4? Bonu` points (maximurn eight
(aa) The commission in sma points).
terraines that a project has not n he,
and met the substantive criteria of
11.5(bX 1), (2) and (3), but has also exct-A, ;
Provisions of these subsections and achieved, .
standing overall design meriting recognitic,- ,'i,s
additional bonus points not exceeding tscerjr
per cent of the total points awarded under lw',�v
24-11,5ftl), (2) and (3). Any commit
awarding bonus paints shall provide awritttnu,
fication of that award for the public hearing�x <
The commission shall consider all eligible applicat =':
public hearing at the close of which each memo
commission shall identify the number of
by hirn under each of the criteria hereinahu> S� ` k`
subsection rbi of this section 24-11.5. Any P j
ceivirz n
a inirzzt of sixty (60) Per cent of the wta
(} and ,
available under -section 24-12.5(b�1}, t )'
rots
so,
minimum of thirty (30) Per cent of the Is°
1, or n,t �r - ..
Lander each of section 24-ll. (bl(1) and
dhe1t3ndard ��.
deed -restricted houstn#,7 (accordant
2411-5
tl�Nlt' r r cent of
urn of thirty-five t3,3 Ae
tt )for a mir„xm the project (ur�l the criteria
I 24 I l,lp enera'ted b- longer be be
b for a
empty �5(bXV, Shallthe application shall e can
ov c J"ont allotment and
d denied mended far the award of �a develop -
de
side're with the following" ranking
shall be recotn
in accardancc voting' thereon shall
spent rxllotn'cnt rnlssion member priority such that
fnrn'ula` Fach corn the order of their P points
rank the prr�tects to the highest number of total
the project receiving priority project for such commis`
e deemed the first p thereon
shall be ter. Each commissian member voting in the
sign n'ern common number to each project
shall then X 1E priority li.e., the highest project for e<�ch
rank order of its p
etc.). For each project the common
mission member shall be assigned the common nu
"I", the next "2„ ro ect receiving
number assigned shall be averagd to be the highest
ed. Thep j
vo
eme
the lowest aert of thecomml ll °n eThe ankin; thuse
ranking prof
issian shall be forwarded to the city
tablished by the comm
councils or before l ober ranking, those projects tying shall
t of each year. In the event
of ties as to the overall
then be ranked according to the total points awarded to
each project by each commissian member voting thereon..
The project receiving the highest number i,f total points
shall be deemed to be the highest ranking project of the
commission, and the ranking thus established by the com-
mission shall be forwarded to the city council on or before
October 1st of each year.
(e) Having received the commission's report, the city council
shall consider any challenges thereto by applicants; provid-
ed, however, that the city council review shall he limited to
determining whether there was a denial of due process or
abuse of discretion by the commission in its scaring. Any
challenges must be filed with the planning office within four-
teen (14) days of the date of the public hearing by the plan-
ning and Zoning commission.
lf) Subsequent to the conclusion of all protest hearings pro-
vided for in this section, during which the; Cit, council may
_ 15Q�3_ l fi 11
§ 24-11,5
ASpp �
amend the
Plicant n rnber of
the c. point,
Noverrrber tat y council s}r,awarded
ato
mong' eligible Year, all }�� re of any
lishe gbei, applicant,all to ,- 4t,it,r, r�_
ing uses d by their r s in ttl� ����`���
allotrents rank. Thoso t ordFr
Chen the rnent proceed
PAlicr;f
rn,y r
i P approvals requirv`PAIy farrrzy. h�c�
�'eKulations oft the ,
Carrie furti' Y`
lydwe.' he city. Onall zt3nin.tu,ldi,
at thatover to the followin r ocatt'd K n
(01, a later) ti Year f allt,trner
No rne, for Potihl�
and $Aplicant shall
' suant to section 24 after sub of
mission
plication -I1.5(a) amend, mod�isaplit�rE .
except in insubstantial y or
Clarification ar technical correctiononly,
►alf o section 24 l l.7 and for Gur
strict deemed to be insubstantial. (Ord. whether ornot�tt�
taut,
ttsf 10-197$ Ord.l`Io.24-1979 No.48-19it,"
:n tl , P try
Ord. No. 48-1981 ;Ord. 1,
ve,4-1.982, 1; Ord. No. 49-1981 t
§§ 5--8; Ord. No. 40.1983, §§ 3 4 tam
dw 9-1984, § 5; Gird. No. 2-1986, § 1) >
Sec'. 24-11.6. Lodge development application prdcedum,,
The following procedures shall govern the award of
Int ment allotments for lodges:
(a) Complete applications containing the following rru
f Lion shall be filed with the city planning office,onorbn',r
it October 1st of each year. Prior to the filing dad *
cants are encouraged to engage in a pre,applicgt»l
frence with the planning office for the purpoyeo° :.e.
E uirerneats-
irag, as necessary, the fallowing req .
(1) A written description of the Proposed develope°
cl uding comments as to: x incitrd�: v t,
.., be used,
of water s stem to thee '
24-1 1.6
ION Irut,
to be used, the
treatmcut systemwage
Type of sera ag acity available in the t
(ltt3) r excess cap` Of the neare-5 trunk
existing stt n1; the location�} sewer de.
tr eatrncrzt .y ` rer line•, the estimate
or connecting sE r or the addition thereto.
inarrd of the build s stem proposed to handle sur-
(cc) Type t)f' drainage system
and runoff water from the build
face, underground
-
ing or the addition thereto, lot coverage, to
(dd)'iotal development area including
square footage, and areas devoted open
internal
space or landscaping. increaseon acent streets
tee) Estimated traffic cou bu lding or the addi-
tion from the proposed ,acted to
thereto; total number of vehicles ebuilding; hours
use or be stationed in the Prof
of principal daily usage; on and off street parking
to be supplied; location of alternate transit paeans
(bus route, bike paths, etc.); any auto disincentive
techniques incorporated into the proposed build-
ing or the addition thereto.
01) Effects of the proposed development on adjacent
land uses in the vicinity of the project,
(gg) The proposed construction schedule including, if
applicable, a schedule for phasing construction.
(2) A site utilization map including:
(aa) Preliminary architectural drawings in sufficient
detail to show building :size, height, materials,
insulation, fireplaces or solar energy devices (dem-
onstrating energy conservation, or solar energy
utilization features), type of commercial spaces or
units, and location of all buildings (existing and
proposed) on the development site.
(bb) Proposed landscaping, screening, attempts at pre-
serving natural terrain and open space, and
undergrrounding of utilities.
(cc) Motor vehicle circulation, parkiniz, bus; -inA s.--
NOW
cm
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PLANNER:
PROJECT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
EXHIBIT
1
Phillip Supino DATE: September 8, 2017
304 E. Hopkins Ave. —Affordable Housing Mitigation Determination
Sara Adams
DESCRIPTION:
The City of Aspen Land Use Code requires that affordable housing mitigation be provided for
existing commercial space for which mitigation was not previously provided. The applicant
requests an administrative determination and clarification of past approvals regarding whether the
existing commercial space at 304 E. Hopkins was previously mitigated. Administrative
determinations are a land use application that must be submitted for consideration by the
Community Development Director. Existing floor plans, prior approval documents, plats, narratives,
and other means to demonstrate whether affordable housing mitigation was previously provided
should be submitted with the Land Use Application to assist the Director in making this
determination.
Below are links to the Land Use Application form and the code section referenced above.
Land Use Application:
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/Comdev/Apps%20and%20Fees/Land%20Use
%20Application%20Form. pdf
Relevant Ordinances:
Ordinance 31, Series 2016: Growth Management Quota System
Land Use Code Section(s)
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.470 Growth Management Quota System
Review by: Staff for complete application and determination
Planning Fees: $975 — for three hours of Staff Review time
Referral Fees: None
RECEIVED
SEP 2 9 2017
CITY OF ASPEN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Total Deposit: $975 (additional/lesser planning hours are billed/refunded at a rate of
$325/hour; any needed referral hours are billed at a rate of $325/hour)
To apply, submit one copy of the following information:
❑ Attachments 1 and 2 of the Land Use Application (Agreement to pay and Land Use
Application form).
❑ Pre -application Conference Summary (this document).
❑ 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.
*4W Nwe
❑ HOA Compliance form (Attached).
❑ Existing floor plans, prior approval documents, plats, narratives, and other means to demonstrate
whether affordable housing mitigation was previously provided.
Once the application is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be
submitted:
❑ Total deposit for review of the application.
❑ A digital copy of the application provided in pdf file format.
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.
EXHIBIT
` GROWTH t•IAM6rill"T PLAII L1'AI.IIA'rlUfJ !'.LPUZf
CUhU-MMAL SLU IU11
1. Project Name: l�
p, Location:
:3. Parcel Size*
4, Current Zoning: .
.:
Zoning under which application is filed: t_}
Maximum buildout under current zoning: I.S +0 2
Proposed zoning:—
5. Total buildout proposed: 1l1!
6. Special procedures required:
Vier planes: o
Stream t4argin Review: -
�IJI,
Special Review:
Historic District t:eviear: _��{�1 �- ` •
Subdivision (condominiumization):
PUD:escr.
7. Program Narrative and associated
grtohicssub.atotted ?wibe hproposed
ththisapplication)
ataprojects impacts and other d
a. Existing water system, excess Water capacity, location buitding•
of the
nearest •rater vain and estimated -►•rater demr.nd of the
location of the nearest trunk line
:b. Capacity of tte sewage system,
T {.
and estimated sealer demand of the building. �
.irface drainage.
c ►�
d. Development srnmary including '`.�t size, irternal square footane
and open spuca. .t
by the
hicle
e. Estimated daily numbse �� tvrafficSvolumearndadjacent streets,?cd ,}
and estimates 'increase
number of on -street and off-street parking spaces to be supp
location of }•ublic transportation stc, o ;d a prop other al000ment,
disincentive techniques incorporated into the proposed dev€ P
and hours of principle daily usage of the development. .t
i and
f. Proposed uses for the f use)uJith utpsubstantialternative buildi1ng changes.
(by general category of use) i
g.
Types of lags uses adjacent and in the irm?ediate vicinity.
h, Construction schedule and schedule for phasing of construction if
t
applicable. J 1
4
8. List of drav,rings and maps submitted for nevi^w: i]
a
Submittal Date:
a i a� tea} 3 a
V I OU) S9
i&f he
SMITH B111LDING
304 B. Hopkins
Growth Management Plan Submission
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SUBMISSION
31 August 1979
Project:
Smith Building
304 East Hopkins
Aspen, Colorado
Submitted to:
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado
Applicant:
Fred G. Smith
131 East Durant
Aspen, Colorado
Architect:
Donald E. Ball AIA
Jacobs/Ball & Associates,
Architects
415 East Hyman Avenue
Suite 205
Aspen, Colorado
Approval Request
The enclosed GMP submission is for a passively solar -heated
commercial building with employee housing proposed for
Lot L, Block 80, at 304 East Hopkins Avenue. This request is for
5100 s.f. of commercial space, 900 s.f. of employee housing,
and a reduction from 1 to 0 parking stalls for the employee
housing portion of the project.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DRAWINGS
Page 1
Project Description
1. Project Location
2aa
Water System
Adjacent Zoning
2bb
Sewage System
Historic District Overlay
2cc
Storm Drainage
2. Bus Routes
2dd
Development Area
Parking
Zee
Transportation/Parking/
Pedestrial Malls
Pedestrian
3. Site Utilities
211
Proposed Uses
Neighborhood Context
2gg
Adjacent Uses
4. Perspective
2hh
Construction Schedule
5, Elevations
6. Elevations
3
Quality of Design
Building Section
3aa
Architectural Design
7. Plans
3bb
Site Design
3cc
Energy
3dd
Amenities
3ee
Visual Impact
4
Historic Features
4oa
Massing
4bb
Exterior Buiding Materials
4cc
Architectural Detail
4dd
Color
4ee
Architecture
4
Community Commercial Use
4aa
Employee Housing
4bb
Medical and Service Needs
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is proposed to be built on the vacant lot between La
Cocina (on the east) and the Beaumont Residence(on thewest).
The neighborhood context of the 300 block of Hopkins Avenue is
primarily commercial retail and office and one residence at the
northwest comer adjacent to the site. The commercial
establishments include a bank, restaurant, dry cleaners, toy store
and photography gallery, a clothes shop and the Mill St. Station
encompassing several retail shops and a restaurant. Three vacant
lots across the street are currently being used for contract parking.
The proposed two-story passive solar commercial office building
features a series of south -facing greenhouse buffers that
accommodate climatic and human concerns. The upper floor is
for employee housing and a small office. The project has been
submitted to the Department of Energy for a Passive Solar
Commercial Design Assistance and Demonstration Grant.
(Program Opportunity Notice DE-PN02-79CS30142.)
2
as WATER SYSTEM
Water will be supplied to the project by a tap from an
existing 6" diameter cast iron public main (pressure =
95 psi +) under Hopkins Avenue. The City Water
Department has indicated that the impact of the
proposed project on existing facilities will be negligi-
ble.
bb SEWER SYSTEM
The site is presently served by an 8" sanitary sewer line
located under the alley. The impact of nine (9) fixture
units is minimal on the capacity of the treatment plant.
cc STORM DRAINAGE
Roof, area and lower courtyard drainage will be piped
internally into an adequately sized drywell.
dd DEVELOPMENT AREA
Lot size:
Lot coverage:
Zoning:
Max. Buildout:
Proposed Buildout:
Net commercial/
office space:
Net employee housing:
Open space &
landscaping:
3000 square feet
2250 s.f.
CC (Historic District)
2:1 (w/Employee Housing)
6000 s.f.
5100 s.f.
900 s.f.
750 s.f.
Decks/landscaped deck: 200 s.f.
ee TRANSPORTATION/PARKING/PEDESTRIAN
In accordance with current CC zone requirements, no
off -site parking is required for Office Use. A review bythe
P&Z is required for the elimination of parking stalls for
the Employee Housing. The project location provides
easy access to the mall and the commercial core.
Public transportation is easily accessible. Within two
(2) blocks are three (3) alternate bus routes: Mountain
Valley, Silverking and Snowbunny. There is contract
parking directly across the street to the south. Truck
deliveries and trash service will occur at the alley ser-
vice area. It is not anticipated that traffic will increase
significantly as a result of this development.
ff PROPOSED USES
Uses of the project include commercial office and/or
commercial retail at the lower and main levels. The
second floor space will be for employee housing and
430 square feet for office. The owner is presently nego-
tiating lease arrangements with three local profes-
sional firms.
gg ADJACENT USES
Thee are a variety of commercial uses on the three -
hundred block of East Hopkins housed in a variety of
structures. On the northwest comer is a private Vic-
torian residence. The project siting and massing are
meant to compliment and enhance neighboring
uses. Of intensity of use and scale of development, this
project will be consistent with that of the neighboring
structures. (See project description.)
hh CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Construction is scheduled to commence April 15,1980,
with occupancy by November 1, 1980.
0�
3
QUALITY OF DESIGN
as ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
The building design is consistentwtth the architectural
diversity of the neighborhood. Specifically, the distinc-
tive solar features, the vertical and horizontal massing
will compliment the adjacent Victorian architecture
and emphasize its authenticity.
bb SITE DESIGN
The orientation of the project enables 750 square feet
of open space to occur at the main entrance on
Hopkins Street. This open, landscaped space is divided
into two levels. The street level is the public entry, while
the lower courtyard level is more private and allows
solar gain at the lower level. Additionally, the visible
landscape theme is carried at the upper deck level
with shrubbery, flowers and climbing vines. The brick
building material is repeated as paving for the entry
area.
All utility and drainage lines will be located under-
ground. Service, trash and vehicular access will be
available at the rear alley (consistent with the com-
mercial core).
cc ENERGY
The climate of Aspen is appropriate for the use of
increased insulation and passive solar technology. A
passive solar commercial demonstration grant has
been applied for through the Department of Energy. In
addition, the mixed -use aspect of the project spreads
out the energy consumption by reducing the problem
of peak loading. All passive solar and energy -con-
scious systems have been selected to provide
optimum thermal capability as well as the comfort for
the building users. This selection reduces the regular
mechanical and electrical output. Emphasis is on the
performance of the project as a total system. The re-
sulting demonstration will educate and illustrate to
both the public and the building users that economy
and good design are compatible.
dd AMENITIES
The open landscaped areas provide visual relief and
articulation of circulation patterns as well as private
spaces for building users to enjoy the southern
exposure. The east boundary is defined by a low brick
planter that enhances the view for La Cocina dinner
patrons of Shadow Mountain and the lower land-
scaped courthard. The south -facing greenhouses,
when filled with plants, will soften the visual impact of
the building.
The solar aspects of the proposed project offer many
Public amenities which are far-reaching in terms of
socially responsive design.
ee VISUAL IMPACT
By siting and stepping the project back ( both verticlaly
and horizontally), the visual impact is minimized.
Scale, choice of building materials and landscaping
design, repetitive architectural forms, and clean archi-
tectural detailing give a sense of modesty to this
building. The fifteenfootsetback allows the cornerVic-
torian house to become the predominent element.
3
3
HISTORIC FEATURES
as MASSING
As previously mentioned in (ee) (Visual Impact), the
building configuration (the curved greenhouse
glazing) creates a gradual and flowing transition from
the main level to the upper story. The flat roof does not
distract from the steep roof pitches of the neighboring
structures but remains harmonious on a scale with the
second level of the Bank of Aspen building on the
northeast corner.
bb EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS
Distinctive and curvilinear brick course work has been
chosen for its delicate detailing aspects, aesthetics
and thermal performance characteristics. Essentially,
this is an application of a historic building material in a
clear up -dated manner.
Additional materials include interior awnings and
solar collector panels held vertically within the
greenhouse glazing which is characterized by thin
metal mullion framing. Detail materials comprise dec-
orative downspouts and a metal handrail leading to
the lower courtyard.
cc ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL
Fenestration is distinguished by repetitive, curved
glazing at the upper two levels. Mullion and framing
details are held to a minimum in order to parallel the
scale of the masonry at the edges, to compliment the
adjacent Victorian detailing.
dd COLOR
Visual interest is maintained with a limited range of
colors. A dark -hued brick has been chosen for exterior
building skin and paving treatment. Bronze -colored
window framing will coordinate all glazing with
complimentary interior awning colors, Interest color
and texture is further punctuated by landscaping mo-
terials such as shrubbery and flowers.
ee ARCHITECTURE
the project design incorporates the detail, scale, pro-
portion. rhythm and massing of the neighboring
structures. It preserves both the Victorian integrity of the
block while contributing a new aesthetic dimension by
the use of solar and energy -conserving technologies.
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL USES
as EMPLOYEE HOUSING
Employee housing will be provided at the upper level
of the proposed project. A balcony is provided at the
south elevation, separated from the living space by a
continuous passive solar greenhouse. The close -in
location reduces auto impact on the Commercial
Core. The indirect effect will be positive for reducing air -
pollution in the core area, less downvalley traffic on
Highway 82, and implementing the auto -disincentive
concept of planning.
bb MEDICAL AND SERVICE NEEDS
As mentioned in (ff) ( Proposed Uses), above, the owner
is presently negotiating pre -lease arrangements with
three local professional concerns. The intent is to ac-
commodate local service needs for office space.
This report is submitted by the owner, Fred G. Smith, in cooperation
with the architect, Jacobs/ Ball & Associates.
—Fred G. Smith
EA
3
PROJECT LOCATION
L�
R EERER Sr
7M MM M777,
iLLjl ' ,
i
rm,,Tl� III"
LLLJ..L.L
MAN STREET MSTORIC 041R�CT HSTOgC PRESE7M%rOONN MTAICT
i � i i � I1_l.lilWJ = � L1ui11Ll
®�lliL1R- 0 ��+
R-MF '^ CC
� 1LLB 1111 LtL1L
HYMAN ACE • CI
40
I�IllJllllll �=RT77
r
j�0j�j�
z®W NIIIIII
N
_ R,f LI�ITI
COOPER /VEi
�!
® �= HT,
OIRPM LYE'=
®�®®®
rrTrrrrnT nrrrrrrn
s
rrm-rrrn
r-rrrrrrn
�N
d+
O
•O Os
Fps
1
RIO GRANGE PARKING
SLEEKER ST
EHI�
ID ® L-u-u-u-LL.i ® 11�111.1_lJ_l .
.. _...... ..�....�...... n4uvS�T"...jj...�.....
ID ®•• wRK • ®{® ® � �
= C SNOv1BUNNY '^ MTN. VALLEY : SILVERKNK, .- 4.)PKw`15 AiE
g®3�a® uLLlliL1L?
N
1, TXTVYG iWL MINPN WE
Li
v GMR .. COOPER A/E. �.�.}.�..-.�..-.r.
®®®..�.....r.._._FF=
Rpq�N
M
0
�01
2
•:i
0
..................................
............
............. III .... Rol ........... .......
CS
N�a
N ,z
Jvn
SOUTH ELEVATION
J � n
a�
m
N S
msn
11'IYIIIIIIIIN11111111111/1ANr
11n111111111111u11111111111I1111 Y11111111 _
F-11Z
•
EWLaVEE
ENTRY HOUSE ALLEY
U11111t1111111111111111Yltpllr•-� tlpt1111111111111111111111111 ICI
_� I III' IYIIIIYIIIYIu
I
s a
I�
cFna WCHANICAL
_ol _ 'SECTION
-
•
3d
�CCH
TRASH
OFFICE
E 4kZfEE
MOHF4NG LMT
OFFICE
CFFIC£
s
GREENHOUSE
DECK
A3EF1lCE fESTNIAHf
c
7500 OPEN
SPACE
y
a
LOWER LEVEL
MAW LEVEL UPPER LEVEL
06—w=6�
.1 3 f q
77]
.• *Moe I EXHIBIT
DRADVORD PUBLIONVYG C. , 01t vza RECORD O F PROCEEDINGS 1 �
Historic Preservation Committee, October 4, 1979, City Council Chambers
The Aspen Historic Preservation Committee held a regular meeting on October 4,
1979, at 1:00 PM in the City Council Chambers. Members present were Lary Groen,
Richard Cicero, Jon Seigle, Norm Burns and Jan Wirth. Staff member Sunny Vann,
represented the Planning Office.
Karen Smith, Planning Director introduced Sunny Vann
who is a new planner for the City. He also will be
replacing Jim Reents, as Reents is the new Housing
Director for the City.
Smuggler Trailer Park Seigle suggested that Vann write the Smuggler Trailer
Park owners, making them aware of possible changes or
violations in their plans from what was originally
submitted to the Committee. Representatives of Smug-
gler Trailer Park should be requested to come before
the Committee to justify any changes in plans.
Groen was concerned with the fact that any changes to
the exterior of a building should come to the Committee
for review, unless the Building Inspector decides
otherwise. Groen asked that the architect refer any
changes to the Committee to be reviewed. Seigle sugg-
ested the Planning Office write Smuggler Trailer Park's
representative requesting their architect's presence
at the next H.P.C. meeting to explain any changes that
have been made.
Growth Management Seigle listed the order of presentation for the
projects. He stated that each applicant would make a
presentation, the Committee would discuss the present-
ation and then vote. Seigle stated that Reents re-
quested the tally sheets be submitted to him to compile
for results. Smith made the suggestion that all pre-
sentations be scored at one time and on the same cri-
teria, so that presumable the same considerations will
be kept in mind on the particular element.
Ajax Mountain Building Groen asked if the Ajax Mountain Building would be
evaluated on a one phase and two phase basis, and if
so, when would those phases be constructed. Seigle
explained that they would be judged as if only one
phase was being constructed, but as if both were being
built within the next building season. Groen felt they
were being asked to OK anything they decided to do, the
overall impact of the project could be entirely differ-
ent.
Axel Russel, architect for the project, gave the pre-
sentation on the Ajax Mountain Building. The larger
of the two buildings he termed Ajax Mountain Building
(2). They presented two different buildings or two
separate projects. Russel requested separate scores
on the buildings. The site is located at the corner of
Durant Ave. and Hunter St. The building will involve
a number of smaller shops, which will create various
roof lines. Traditional building material will be
used, those which are compatible with the surrounding
area. The brick will match that of the Durant Ave. and
Galen St. building next door. The metal frame for the
windows and slope glazong will be a dark bronze. All
the materials are of very warm colors. A bronze
shaded glass will be used for the windows. The build-
ing stands below the Cooper Ave. view plane. Land-
scaping will accent the building with a combination of
planters, shrubbery, etc. The architects have aimed
to accommodate the public with the current shopping
needs and any possible transportation problems.
*ftw V440
-2-
Historic Preservation Committee, October 4, 1979, City Council Chambers
Since the project will be presented in two(2) parts,
the representatives may apply to build the second add-
ition at a later date. Building number one (1) is a
total of 13,500 sq. ft., building number two (2) is a
total of 26,000 sq. ft. They are also proposing to
demolish 7,500 sq. ft. of existing commercial space.
Bell Mountain Building Chuck Brandt, representing the applicant presented the
plans for construction of a second floor. A remodel of
the exterior face of the first floor of the building
was also included. They applied for construction of
approximately 2,000 sq. ft. Architect Bob Sterling
felt that while certain scale qualitites of the exist-
ing architecture creates a discordant note which
appears thin, temporary and inconsistant with the
Aspen tradition of well constructed structures. The
approach taken in this remodeling is to create a
better relationship between the old and the new. Ex-
terior building materials will consist of a brick mas-
onry compatible with that of the Crystal Palace build-
ing to the west. A clear glass with dark neutral metal
frames will complete the windows. There will be no
unfinished walls or exposed roofs visible. Signs will
exist on the street side and will be controlled in
terms of size. The street side will have a canvas
awning over the sidewalk. The architect's aim is to
harmonize with the surrounding buildings.
Epicure Building Jerry McCarthy gave the presentation. He distributed
a pamphlet containing his ideas for construction. The
building is two (2) lots wide and three (3) floors
high with an area of 12,000 ft. The ground floor is
the restaurant with the outdoor dining terrace to the
east. The second floor is office space and the third
is employee housing. From Mill St. looking into the
alley, they are interested in constructing an awning
entrance to provide for a neater appearance. McCarthy
stated the possibility of a uniform paving around the
Epicure building. The exterior of the building will
be of a middle value brick, compatible with the sur-
rounding buildings. In the future they would like to
sandblast the painting from the copings. The copings,
parapets, and the windowsills will be one element of
similarity between the two buildings. Wood will be
used in all windows with some detail. French doors
will be used in all windows with some detail. French
doors will be used on the ground floor to break up the
scale of the building. Awnings will be level, for a
visible accent of color (to be reviewed at a later
date). The building's color will be soft and muted.
McCarthy stated they would like to introduce a hedge
to bury the fence. There will be a tree in the court
which will also soften the appearance in the winter
time. Groen questioned the newspaper racks in front of
the Epicure. McCarthy suggested that with the approval
of the Committee, the newspaper rack be removed.
lst National Bank The presentation was given by Jim Gustinson. The Bank
applied for additional space or an extension. The
original building will remain the same. The new addi-
tion will be extended out within the same plane of the
main building. Planters and cottonwoods will line the
sidewalk in front of the building. The same materials
will be used as were in the original building. The
'1✓ `4r0
BRADFORD FYBLISVINO. CO., D[NV[R RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Historic Preservation Committee, October 4, 1979 City Council Chambers
new building will involve 4,000 sq. ft. or two (2)
lots.
La Cocina Restaurant Nick Lebby gave the presentation of the plans. La
Cocina applied for an extension. It will not be seen
from the street, but from the alley. The extension
will involve approximately 1,275 sq. ft., which will
leave 33% of open sapce. The exterior materials will
match those of the existing La Cocina. The purpose
for construction is to make the existing front dining
room a waiting area, the tables there could be moved
to the new addition. Lebby presented photographs of
the present appearance. The landscaping will be
maintained year-round. The porch will be extended dowr
but will be set back the same distance as existing.
Fred Smith Project Two (2) greenhouses will be of a sloping structure and
will allow the eye to graduate to the upper level.
he roof of the upper level is flat but does not seem
to distract from the Victorian roof lines of the struc-
ture to the left. Exterior materials will consist of
a dark maroon brick along with a dark aluminum framing.
Gargoyles disguise the overflow scuppers which are
required by the Uniform Building Code. The architect-
ural detail is basically very clean and of a delicate
nature. As soon as the solar characteristics are
determined, the glass and particular color shades will
be presented. It will most likely be a type of a
plexiglass. They have considered providing one inch
blinds for the inside of the greenhouse to give it a
uniform appearance from the street side. Awnings will
be provided and the color will be determined at a
later date. Emphasis will be placed on the historic
characteristics and compatibility with the surrounding
area.
The Committee then began to score the projects. The
scores were tallied and are as follows:
Epicure 14 Average Score
Smith Building 13 II II
La Cocina 12.4 of of
Bell Mt. Sports 11.26 II II
Ajax Mountain #2 9.1 It II
Ajax Mountain #1 9 II II
1st National 7.9 II II
See attached IIH.P.C. Growth Management Evaluation: for
a breakdown of individual scores.
The meeting adjourned at 3:30 PM.
r
iL W ;-A0-4
Tamira Matherly
Deputy City Clerk
•,wr++
Table 1
IIPC GROWTH
1VII;l;!:EI1F.1:1 I'VALUATiON
1.
Epicure
J.S.
J.W:
N.B.
t_.G.
R.C.
Total P verage
-
Points Score
Massing
3
2
3
3
3
External Building Materials
3
3
3
3
3
Architectural Detail
3
3
3
3
2
Color
3
3
3
3
2
Architecture
2
3
3
3
2
4
14
15
15
12
70/14
2.
Smith Building
,
Massing
2
1.
3
3
3
External Building Materials
3
2
2
3
3
Architectural Detail
2.5
1
3
3
3
Color
3
2
3
3
2
Architecture
2.5
3
3
3
3
13
• 9
14
2
14
65/13
3.
La Cocina
Massing
3
3
3
1
2
External Building Vaterials
3
3
3
2
2
Architectural Detail
3
3
3
1
2
Color
3
3
3
2
2
Architecture
3
3
3
1
2
15
15
15
7
10
62/12.4
4.
Bell Mt. Sports
Massing
3
2
2.8
2
2
External Building P1z:terials
2.5
2
2.5
3
2
Architectural Deta'i
2
1
2
2
3
Color
2.5
2
3
3
2
Architecture
2•
2
2
2 _
2
12
9
12.3
12
it
56.3/11.6
5.
Max Mountain 12
Massing
2
3
2.5
0
_0
External Building Materials
2
2
2
1
1
Architectural Detail
2.5
3
2
1
1
Color
3
2
3
2
2
Architecture
2
3
2.5
0
1
11.5
13
12
4
5
45.5/9.1
6.
Ajax Mountain #1
Massing
:2.5
1
2
0
2
External Building 'laterials
2
2
2
1
1
Architectural Detail
2.5
3
2
1
1
Color
3
2
3
2
2
Architecture
2.5
1
2.5
0
2
12.5
9
11.5
4
8
45/9
7.
1st National
Massing
2
2
1
0.
0
External Building Materials
2.5
3
2.5
2
2
Architectural Detail
1
2
2.5,
0
0
.Color
3
3
3
2
2
Architecture
1
2
1
0
0
9J. 55
12
-0-
4
~
4
39. 5/ 7.9
EXHIBIT
•"•".���.««a "�«.." RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Special Meetina Aspen Planninq and 'Zoning Conunission October 23, 1979
The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission held a special meeting on October 23,
1979, at 5:00 PM in the City Council Chambers.. Members present were Olof Hedstrom
Roger Hunt, Welton Anderson, Nancy McDonnell, Lee Pardee. and Perry Harvey. Also
present were Karen Smith and Sunny Vann of the Planning Office, City Attorney Ron
Stock, fIousing Director.Jim and City Engineer Dan McArthur.
Approval of Minutes Hunt moved to a pprove the minutes of September 4 with cor-
rections and the minutes of September 11 as presented,
McDonnell seconded: All in favor, motion approved.
Commissionmember
Comments
Pardee noted he attended the last Council meeting. After
some discussion, the Council agreed a moratorium on the
condominiumization of lodges and hotels was necessary. They
felt they need to
meet with the lodging community to find
a mechanism for fipancing the upgrading of lodges. He said
half the Council felt the lodge owners have the right to do
Anything they want and half felt that condominiumization
would result in a lbssof tourist accommodations and- the lodge
experience would be diminished by separate ownership.
Count Corral
1'
Review of Operations
Smith said this is a hearing that P&Z scheduled when the
Colorado Taxi
Company was allowed to use the -facilities for
y'ublic Hearing storage. This hearing was'a condition of the
approval.
The P&Z must determine if the -use is operating as proposed.
Other conditions included daily cleaning of the stalls, no
maintenance or repair of the horse cart on site,•no more
than two taxis on the property at one time and the Taxi
Company shall not occupy more than two stalls yet be respon-
sible for the
service maintenance of the structure.' The
Planning Office has -not received any complaints on the opera-
tion.
Hedstrom opened the public hearing, v
County Manager George Ochs {said they had not received any
complaints.
Hedstrom closed the public hearing. r-
i
_
Hunt moved to approve the continuance of use of the'County
Corral as previously approved with all the previous•condi-
tions
except for the one requiring review, Pardee seconded.
All in favor, motion
approved.
KSPN
Zonditional Use
Anderson stepped down from his position on the commission
du`e to a conflict of interest.
?ublic Hearing
-
Smith introduced the application. KSPN wishes to locate
their office in the Floradora Building. Broadcasting sta-
tions
are a conditional use in this zone. She recommended
the
approval be conditioned on all the representations made
in.'the KSPN application letter.
.
Hedstrom opened the public hearing.
Hedstrom asked about the six parking spaces requested by
Engineering. JT Shrigley,
representing KSPN, said there are f
three
•
spaces in the underground garage reserved for KSPN.
There
are also spaces in the back of the building. McArthur
said there 3
are parking spaces- per 1000 square feet of of-
fice space, total of six required:
Hedstrom closed the -public hearing.
McDonnell suggested conditioning their approval on the letter
of application and changing the "should's" to "will's", T
Hunt felt the HPC should review and approve the height and
impact of the
proposed antenna. Wells recalled that the P&Z
did require a certain numbee.of•parking spaces
per office
space in the approval of tte-expansion•of the Floradora.
No
-Z-
,*V,
Special Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission October 23, 1979
Hunt moved to approve the conditional use of up to 600
square feet of the Floradora Building for broadcasting
studios provided that, concerning the antenna system,
1) initial height, size and design are as represented by
the applicant's letter of September 20, 1979, and the HPC,
assisted by'the Engineering. and Building Departments, shall
have review and -approval authority so as to minimize the
visual impacts on Main Street and minimize the visual impact
for the neighboring residence as much as is practical, and
Z) any increase in height or any increase in visual area
greater than 10% of the originally approved design shall
require HPC approval. Otherwise, the application is in con-
formance with the principles of the Main Street uses under
. the existing zoning code and has no forseeable impact on
land use or public good, McDonnell seconded. All in favor,
motion approved.
Anderson resumed his position -on the commission
cA-1 TV.
Vann introduced the application. A=1 TV wishes to tlocate in
Conditional Use
the Trueman Neighborhood Commercial Center. They.request
:Public Hearing
approximately 1000 square feet in the basement. level. The
SPA plan allows this use as a conditional use. They Planning
Office recommends approval.'
Hunt felt it would only be�appropriate if sales and repair
Occur. T
_-•m:r,: ..
Hedstrom opened the public hearing. There were no comments.
Hedstrom closed the public Bearing.
Hunt moved to approve the conditional use of a TV Bales and
service facility in space 3•of the Trueman Neighborhood
Commercial Center as such use is consistent with the ap-
proved NC and S/C/I plan, Pardee seconded. All in favor,
motion approved. t j�
GNP Commercial Hedstrom explained the procedure for the benefit of the new
;Applications for P&Z members. Reents explained the criteria for evaluation.
1979, Public The Commission heard the applicant's presentations of their
Hearing projects.
Ajax fountain Ashley Anderson, representing the applicant, introduced
Associates Building Jack Lawlor, architect for the project. The site is across
frokn Little Nell on Durant. He felt this is a very impor-
tant portion of the commercial core. The Aspen A's will be
torn down which he felt was, an improvement to the City scape
He asked that they disregard the HPC results.
Hunt noted some open space -between the two buildings and
asked if they owned the property. Anderson said they do
own.:the property. Hunt asked if they intend to develop the
property in the future, Anderson said yes. Anderson noted
they could build up to 18,000 square feet and they are
building 13,500. The open'space is above the required. He
noted they will give the existing tenants priority for space
in the new building.
_Bell Mountain Sports Bob Sterling, architect, gage the presentation. Tliey are
modifying the facade of the building and adding a second
Story. He. felt they were cleaning up -the lines of the
building and noted it would serve as an example for the
building to be built between Bell Mountain Sports and the
Crystal Palace in a few years.
Epicure Jerry McCarthy made the presentation. He stated th,e buildin
was designed to allow the existing Epicure to dominate the
block. He felt the open space courtyard was an important
part of the building. There is employee housing on the
second floor. Ile noted the landscape plan for the open
'space. He noted they are considering a pedestrian access
-.3-
...��...�.,,.� RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Special meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission October 23, 1979
from the alley with lights and landscaping. He noted there
is an energy provision for hot water. He introduced Don
Fleisher.
rleisher spoke to the employee housing provisions. There
are three units,on the top 'floor. There is retail space on
the first floor and professional office space on the second
floor. Commercial uses in the building will be oriented
toward current needs in the community.
Hedstrom asked how much of_` the outdoor dining space will be
retained. McCarthy said they are cutting back the east -west
dimensions and increasing the north -south area. The area
should be equal or larger than that which exists. The new
restaurant will replace the old location and this will be-
come a beverage area. Pardee asked about solar considera-
tions. McCarthy said it is mostly passive since the buildinc
is north facing and the Isis block alot of the south sun.
Wells asked the commission=to make a finding on the openspace
question. The P&Z must approve their using their open space
for dining purposes or they' must remove the dining facili-
ties.
Pardee.moved•to allow the Epicure to continue use of their
= r_:
dining facilities in the open space courtyard, Anderson
:son_ _
seconded. All in favor, motion approved.
First National Bank
Ashley Anderson, representing the applicant, gave the pre-
sentation. He noted this addition does not have employee
housing but the Bank provides 13 employee housing units else.
where. He asked the P&Z 'td give the optional bonus points.
This is a locally oriented addition for banking use only.
Due to a revamping,of - the existing mechanical system, the
complete bank facility wilt -consume less energy than the
th=
existing building. Pardee `asked what would happen to the
existing office space. Anderson said it would remain as is.
_La Cocina
Nibk Lobby, an officer of the restaurant, presented the ap-
plication. They wish the addition to expand the dining room
and convert the existing front dining room to a waiting
lounge. They have a 6,000*square foot lot and they are
allowed 9,000 square feet of building. .Without the addition
the existing building is 4,,400 square feet. The new addi-.
tion is designed to be compatible with the existing La Coci-
na They are within their. "viewplane restrictions. They are
leaving 20' in the back to -'aid deliveries. The addition
will not be visible from Hopkins. Utilities are underground
-
they are..above the required open space, the building is well
insulated.
Smith Building
Don Ball gave the presentation. The building is proposed
for the lot to the west of *La Cocina. They are asking for
a 5100 square foot allotment with an additional 900 square
feet of employee housing space. They also request a reduc-
tion from 1 to 0 parking spaces for the employee housing.
units. It is surrounded by La Cocina and a Victorian house.
_
The building uses solar heating from the south facing green-
houses:.
•
The Commission began scoring the applications. After •scorin
'the Commission read their scores to Reents who tallied them
`
and announced the -average scores. During the tallying, the'
..Commission discussed the GMP process.
Pardee suggested requiring the applications be xeroxed in-
stead of printed booklets. McCarthy felt the HPC.& P&Z over
'
'
lapped in their reviews and', criticized'their ability to
evaluate architecture in the projects. He felt the entire
ordinance needed rewriting. Hedstrom agreed they needed to
Special Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission October 23, 1979
discuss possible amendments to the GMP ordinance and.pro-
cedures. '
r
Hunt moved to increase the area allotment this year to
28,644 square feet which is 4,644 square feet over that
allowed as it is a minimal increase that will allow coverin,
all the applications and in t)ie last three.years, the
applications have not approached the allotment level,
McDonnell seconded. All in favor, motion approved.
:a
Reents presented the results of the average scores. They
are as follows:
Epicure 32.65/36 points
:c
La Cocina 27.8 /36 points
c ---
Bell Mountain 27.7 /36, points
Smith Building 27.3 /36 points
Ajax Mountain 24.7 /36 points
First National 24.1 /36 points
•
Pardee moved to ask the Planning Office to draft a recom=.
mendation to City Council unanimously recommending from the
P&Z that the 25%-bonus allotment be granted.because, 1) it
is a small amount, 2) all the applications were quality
;i
applications, 3) for the last three .years, the applications
amounted to x-number of square feet with an allotment over
that number of square feet, and 4) included herein are ad-
ditiorfs and remodels that are not adequately dealt with in
the code and are very hard to objectively rate, McDonnell
seconded. 'All in favor, motion approved.
Housing Overlay
Hedstrom opened the public hearing.
Hunt moved',.to table action -and continue the public hearing
to -November 6 for the Housing Overlay, Anderson seconded.
s
All in favor, motion approved.
Harvey moved to adjourn the meeting, Pardee seconded. All
in favor, motion approved. Meeting.adjourned at 7:45 PM.
Sheryl eimmen,"Deputy City Clerk
EXHIBIT
CM
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 12, 1979
Commissioner Edwards called the joint meeting together at 4:10 p.m. with Councilmembers (I
Collins, Van Ness, Isaac, and Michael and Commissioners Child and Kinsley present. Also
present were \City Manager Wayne Chapman, and County Manager George Ochs.
1. Proposal to Create Community Greenhouse. Les Dawn told the Boards he would like to ✓
help the community to get started on a solar greenhouse. Dawn said he is trying to get an Camunity
office in town so that he could get the project going; Dawn asked the Boards for their Greenhouse
suggestions and reflections. Commissioner Kinsley said it was important to sell the Board
on why they should participate and to what extent. Dawn said a community greenhouse means
community government and the people themselves. 11
Transportation
school kids on
city buses
+�Cya1G1 aRCc{.1lty C+J iJC+a 1.1 LY I.V Ulf l:11 LVVVC1lW CL 1L, 17/1
,two, '
Dawn said he was asking the City and County to take the initiative to do something to get
moving. Dawn was not asking for money or grants; once this is started there will be
donations. Dawn said he knew of 5 major spots that could be used as a greenhouse; they ar
private, city or county owned. George Ochs asked about the Roaring Fork Resource Center
greenhouse at the high school. Someone answered they were working on the project with
John Stern, school district and the Resource Center and the project seems to be moving.
Councilman Isaac asked about working with the extension agent in the County. Commissioner
Kinsley said this is a terrific idea and is consistent with the County's idea of support=
ing agriculture in the community. It is also important because of the economic decline.
Commissioner Kinsley said he would personally be supportive of anyone who wanted a green-
house on their land and would work to get the barriers out of the way.
Dawn said all he was asking for is office space where he could get started coordinating
the greenhouse. Councilman Isaac said he did not think the city had any space available.
Councilman Isaac said he would like to see the project formulated, and was not ready to
commit city financing. Dawn said he needed to have Aspen and Pitkin County behind him to
get started. Councilman Parry pointed out the city's community garden was run through
the extension service. Commissioner Kinsley said he would encourage the extension agent
to provide any advise possible. Commissioner Edwards told the Boards after CSU was phased
out, the Roaring Fork Resource Center has been working on a solar greenhouse for a number
of years. Edwards said the County has not taken this as a high priority project but would
support it indirectly and philosophically. Edwards said the County is not interested in
doing anything differently than they have in the past. Councilwoman Michael agreed the
city is supportive of the idea but is not interested in giving someone a title. Also,
since another effort is being made the request is inappropriate.
2. Task Force for School Bus Review. Dick Hanson, representing the school, reminded the
Boards the school had given up a number of bus routes in town this year. At the last
school board meeting, the board decided to reinstate the routes. One of the concerns was
half full buses following half full school buses and the consumption of energy. The
school board asked that a community task force on transportation be started to coordinate
all the bus efforts. Hanson suggested the task force be made up of representatives from
school, city, county, parents with children and citizens who do not have children. The
objectives would be to (1) review the existing routes to identify duplications, (2) review
the differences in the safety requirements, (3) review the impact on skiers in existing
system, (4) review the city and county commitments to the Ski Corp, and (5) examine other
existing school and community systems working in a cooperative manner.
Commissioner Edwards pointed out the bus systems were combined and the parents went nuts,
and asked what this task force would do. Hanson said there are unanswered questions; they
need to address the safety of the children and the energy concern. Another point is the
duplication of system running part-time employment versus full-time employment of the
drivers. Hanson said all he is asking now is for authority to go ahead and set up a task
force representing the 3 groups. Councilman Isaac said he would like to keep this as
narrowly defined as possible and not get into the Ski Corp question. The main issue here
is the safety of the children and how the system can be more efficient. Commissioner
Child said they might want to bring in Snowmass Village also. Councilwoman Michael said
the task force was okay with her if the Ski Corp issue was not in it. Councilman Isaac
and Curt Stewart are to represent the city and county on the task force.
3. A-95 Reviews. (a) State Health Planning & Resource Development: Gene Marsh said this
would benefit the Pitkin County area; they are asking for 4 people to be employed which
would increase the efficiency of state health and planning in this area.
Commissioner Kinsley moved for favorable comment; seconded by Commissioner Child. All in
favor, motion carried.
(b) Colorado Congress of Senior Organizations: Commissioner Child stated this is an
organization of alliances of senior organizations in the state and.acts as a pass through
agency for Federal funds. Kinsley stated he wanted someone on the staff to investigate
this, and would like staff comments on any A-951s.
Commissioner Kinsley moved to table; seconded by Councilman Van Ness. All in favor,
motion carried.
(c) Family Planning Program: Ms. Marsh explained this benefits the Visiting;Nurses
Association and is for birth control program. The VNA-picks up about $5,000.
Commissioner Kinsley moved for favorable comment; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in
favor, motion carried.
(d) Pitkin County Community Development Project. Commissioner Edwards told the Boards
this is for a grant to try and get land for employee housing.
Commissioner Kinsley moved for favorable comment; seconded by Commissioner Child. All in
favor, motion carried.
(e) Region 12 Criminal Justice Planning: Councilman Isaac moved for favorable comment;
seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, motion carried.
COUNCIL MEETING
Councilwoman Michael moved to appoint Councilman Van Ness as'.chairman of the meeting;
seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
MINUTES
Councilman Parry moved to approve the minutes of September 24, 25, October 3, 4, and 9,
1979; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
Aspen City Council November 12, 19/9
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
Councilman Isaac moved to approve the accounts payable for October; seconded by Councilman
Collins. All in favor, motion carried.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
1. Mary Ward, representing the Roaring Fork Resource Center, said when it comes time to
plan the Wheeler Opera House, they would like to talk about what they can do about energy
planning and conservation measures. There are grants for public buildings which can pro-
vide 50 per cent of the technical assistance.
2. Stacy Standley told Council there was an advertisement regarding office supply sales
at the Meadows. Standley stated he did not think this was zoned for retail sales. Karen
Smith, planning director, said a complaint was filed Friday and they should have been
closed down on Saturday.
3. Mike Fitzgerald, representing a citizens' action committee, told Council they made a
proposal and invited Council and Commissioners to attend meetings. The county has agreed
to let the firm of Cresap, Paget and McCormick to review and make -management recommendatio:
on the operation of the sheriff's department, personnel department, land use code and
district attorney's office budgets and efficiency study. Fitzgerald aksed that the city
also do this. The county has committed $26,000 for efficiency study to streamline costs.
Councilman Van Ness pointed out the city has a new manager, and this request will be
gone over. The county has asked the city to participate in the study of the justice syste
however, no decision has been made. Councilman Isaac said the indication is that the city
will probably not joint the funding; it would cost another $12,000 to have the police
department included. Councilman Collins said one of the problems is that the city does
not have the money. The city had met with a representative of the firm and Mr. Evans was
going to come back with a proposal.
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
1. Councilwoman Michael requested the city manager look into music on the city buses.
There have been a number of complaints from bus users. Councilwoman Michael said ma
should talk to the transportation department, and it is his judgment whether the issue
comes back to Council.
Karen Smith introduced Sonny Vann, a new member of the planning staff. Vann will be work-
ing on various projects including HPC and joint city/county projects.
1980 BUDGET
Councilman Van Ness pointed out this is not the final budget hearing, and opened the
public hearing.
1. Bob Nuffer, coordinator for Aspen..•Mental Health Clinic, asked for reconsideration of
the preliminary amount established as a donation to the clinic. This was set at $8,000
which was less than half of last year. With the increased staff and costs, it is far belo
the level of services they have been providing. Gene Marsh, human resource coordinator
told Council the County has given the AMHC full funding requested and urged the Council
to participate with the county in this joint request. Ms. Marsh stated this is a basic
service to the community and is essential. This is a high stress community. Ms. Marsh
told the Council she has been extremely pleased with the level of service from the AMHC.
If the clinic does not receive funding, it will jeopardize one staff position.
Councilman Van Ness pointed out on the tentative budget almost everyone was cut. The
Council will be going over the budget again. Ms. Butterbaugh explained there is an increas
to the debt service to pay for properties purchased by the city. Ms. Butterbaugh is try-
ing to bring the reserves back up. And in a period of 17 per cent inflation, the city
has to have a tight budget. Ms. Butterbaugh illustrated on charts where the money comes
from and where it goes. There are restricted fund and enterprise funds such as water,
electric, golf course, ice rink. The arts contributions are comeing from the Wheeler
Opera House tax. There are bonds and proceeds for the Mill street project. Ms. Butter-
baugh stated a 6 per cent increase was budgeted for personnel services; there is no money
for a merit increases. The budget for 1980 is 13 per cent higher because the city has
added services such as bus service to Ski Corp, golf course of 18 holes, ice rink; there
are more employees. The contribution funding is approximately the same level as last
year.
Jon Busch addressed the Council about the expenditure of fluoride in the city's water and
asked that it be deleted. Busch stated this was like adding a poison to the water. Ther<
are more efficient ways of treating teeth; the city should not be in the fluoride business
Louette Lurvey and Winnie Broadhead spoke in support of funding the Aspen Mental Health
Clinic.
Richie Cohen, representing Friends of the Wheeler Opera House, told Council he was object-
ing to the use of those funds to certain items in the city budget that are a misuse of the
transfer tax. Cohen specifically objected to $59,OOO for the payment of a debt for the
completion of a city -owned building, the Visual Arts Center. The real estate transfer ta:
was not designed to be something to fund capital expenditures. The wording was obvious
it was to be used for the support of the visual and performing arts. Councilman Collins
noted it was the opinion of the city attorney the RETT funds could be used to retire the
debt on the VAC. Cohen stated the intent of the tax and the way is was presented to the
voters was not for that type of expenditure. Stacy Standley agreed this fund was being
misused and said the Council was badly compromising themselves if they consider using the
funds for anything other than the Wheeler or arts support. Councilman Van Ness requested
deferring this decision until the attorney returned.
Nieeler Opera
Haase -
energy
conservation
All Citizens
Action
government
study
Music on
buses
1980 Budget
1
Aspen Mental
Health Clinic
Real Estate
Transfer Tax
6teeler Opera
House report
Wheeler Opera
House study
Liquor License
transfer
(berkley/Aspen)
Liquor License
transfer
Fireside
Liquor License
transfer
Study Hall
neguiar Meecang r,eyc., .y ..... ��
Bill Martin commended the staff on the fine job of preparation of the budget and the
Council for the time in making the decisions. Martin stated he felt the budget was
excessive looking at the problems facing the country and Aspen. Martin said the problem
is that the city did not cut functions; that is the only way this budget could be cut.
Martin asked that Council pass a resolution that this is the budget and before they spend
any additional revenues, they have a budget review in which the public can contribute.
Phillip Yenawine, Visual Arts Center, pointed out there is no money allocated to the
program for buying sculpture. Yenawine asked Council to consider this expenditure if then
are excess funds. Yenawine stated the program of the city buying art from local artists
should be carried on.
Council scheduled a study session for November 19th at 8 p.m. to discuss and consider
changes to the budget.
ROARING FORK VALLEY FOUNDATION FOR PERFORMING ARTS UPDATE
Dick Moore presented a copy of the report for the development of the Wheeler and requeste
a study session to go over this with Brad Morrison. Council scheduled this study session)
for Monday, November 19th at 7 p.m.
WHEELER OPERA HOUSE STUDY
John Stanford told Council his report was p preliminary and sets. out7:parameters for historic
renovation and restoration; it does not give answers to a number of questions. This �l
report with the Moore report, the Citizens task force, as well as structural analysis
provides a tremendous wealth of information on the Wheeler. Each of the reports repre-
sents one aspect of the master plan. Stanford recommended the city hire someone to take
all the information and compile it into an architectural program. Stanford said he
would incorporate his information in the Monday night study session.
OCCUPANCY LIMITS OF RESTAURANTS AND BARS
Bob Jacobs, fire marshal, told Council he had assigned occupancy loads last year at 7
square feet per person. Jacobs said he feels the occupancy load on certain occasions hash
exceed the comfort zone. The building code allows for 15 square feet per person for
drinking and dining establishments not 7. Councilman Van Ness asked how this 15 square
feet per person stacks up against what normally goes on. Jacobs said there are only a
few places seating over capacity. Councilman Parry.pointed this problem comes from
places which said this would drastically reduce their seating, and Council felt these
places served their patrons well. Councilman Parry said he would like to see a comparison
of the two seating capacities. Jacobs said he.would do the rest of the establishments
with a tap and come up with actual occupancy figures for Council.
Councilman Van Ness questioned whether 15 square feet per person is a realistic and
reasonable number. If it is not, Council can change the number; to some extent it is
an arbitrary number. Councilman Isaac asked what the city's liability was. Bob Sproull,
owner of Jake's, told Council they would have to eliminat entertainment in the basement
if this square footage is kept. Sproull suggested there might be two different criteria
for determining square footage, one for restaurants and one for bar/lounge areas.
City Manager Chapman suggested letting establishments operate as they have been until
the staff comes up with data and recommendations.
Councilman Isaac moved to table until Council gets the information at the next meeting;
seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, motion carried.
LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS
Councilman Parry moved to approve the renewal for the Jolly Jester conditioned upon
Tom Dunlop's approval; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Collins moved to approve the liquor license renewals for Steak Pit, Of Grape
and Grain, Mine Company, Crossroads, Eagle's, Chart House, Mamma Brigitte's, Cooper
Street Pier; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
LIQUOR LICENSE TRANSFER - Berkley/Aspen (Slope)
City Clerk Koch explained this was a transfer of 100 per cent of the stock from Louis
Pintkowski to Ronald Riley and the documents on Riley were complete.
Councilman Parry moved to approve the transfer of stock; seconded by Councilman Collins.
All in favor, motion carried.
LIQUOR LICENSE TRANSFER - Fireside Restaurant
Councilwoman Michael moved to table until November 26 due to a question of citizenship;
seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. ,
LIQUOR LICENSE TRANSFER - ASTC Study Hall
Teddy Case, applicant for the transfer, told Council she had taken over the premises from
Stonehenge when they defaulted in July. She has the lease originally, it was transferred
to Stonehenge, transferred to ASTC Study Hall, repossessed by Stonehenge and then they
defaulted to Teddy Case. There is a memorandum in the packet from the city attorney II
stating, in his opinion, Ms. Case had possession of the premise. Councilman Collins
asked how the Council could take away the license if the previous tenants have not been C
evicted. Ms. Case said she had been paying the rent since July and Stonehenge has been
evicted. Councilman Van Ness pointed out that a liquor license went with a premise,
not a tenant.
o -y
auvemDer 1L, .ty/y
`fir► i�r --- - -
Councilman Isaac moved to approve the transfer of the liquor license; seconded by Council-
man Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
Hb�/Cfl �,11.y l.V LL11V 11
LIQUOR LICENSE TRANSFER - The Souper
City Clerk Koch told Council this is a purchase and sale by VIDCO, Inc. which is owned
100 per cent by Spencer Videon. The file and background information are complete.
Councilman Parry moved to approve the transfer of the Souper; seconded by Councilman
Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - Gordon
Richard Grice told Council the applicant requested this taken off the agenda; Councilman
Isaac moved to table this item until further notice; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in
favor, motion carried.
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Sams -Hall
Richard Grice, planning office, gave Council additional information from the engineering
department. Grice told Council this is a request for exemption of an existing duplex at
745 Cemetery Lane. The duplex has a history of being owner -occupied in the south unit.
The north unit has been rented at $.57 per square foot. The engineering deparment recom-
mended approval subject to review of the survey prior to this agenda; which has been
accomplished. The engineering department also requests a water meter be installed. The
city attorney has objected to this unit being condominiumized without deed restriction and
recommends denial because the north unit has been part of the employee housing pool.
Stock suggested the applicant submit a proposal for mitigation of the low, moderate and
middle income housing. The applicant's attorney did not feel it was within those price
guidelines. The P & Z did not feel this was part of the low, moderate and middle income
housing pool and they recommended approval subject to compliance with the engineer's
request and the six month minimum lease restrictions.
Councilman Isaac asked why P & Z went against the attorney's recommendation on the rental
guidelines. Jon Seigle, representing the applicant, told Council when P & Z looked at the
history of the unit and found that the rents had not been raised in 3 years and that the
rental rate was within $3 per month of being outside the guidelines, they did not want to
penalize the landlord for not raising the rents. Seigle told Council the unit has been
empty since May and is rerrented at $775. Seigle stated one of the reasons Stock denied
is it puts the burden on the applicant to show this is employee housing. This has never
been employee housing; it was rented previously to two doctors. Seigle told Council that
both sides are identical, 1170 square feet; the structure is 10 years old. Councilman
Parry pointed out the previous tenants would not have qualified for low, moderate and
middle incomes.
Liquor L
transfer
Souper
Subdivision
exemption
Sams -Hall
Councilman Parry moved to approve 'with the conditions outlined; seconded by Councilman
Collins. Grice pointed out the engineering conditions include the owner enter into an
improvement district for sidewalks if one should be formed; and six month minimum lease
restriction. All in favor, motion carried.
WESSON EMPLOYEE HOUSING PROJECT
Jim Reents, housing director, told Council this a-plication is for special review approval
to take advantage of the FAR bonus within the O, office district to build employee housing
and special review to reduce parking requirements for the employee housing from one parkin Wesson Employee
space per bedroom to none. The Code has been amended to allow for such reduction to get housing/TM
a trade off to provide space for employee units. A letter submitted from Dr. Wesson state bonus
the demand for parking should be reduced because he intends to maintain employee housing
for his own employees. Reents told Council the P & Z reviewed the application and approve
both special reviews, and made no recommendation of what level the units should be
restricted. Dr. Wesson intends to restrict them at the middle level bracket; under curren
quidelines this is $.58 per square foot.
Councilman Parry moved to approve the special review for employee housing at the middle
price range with no parking required; seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, motio
carried.
PRIVATE REZONING - Sears Building
Councilman Collins moved to table this upon the applicant's request; seconded by Council-
man Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
P'& Z, RECOMMENDATIONS RE: COMMERCIAL GMP ALLOCATIONS
Jim Reents told Council this the 1980 commercial growth management reviews were the first
year there was a competitive process within the applications. The current Code allows for (M Ccrnwrcial
approval of 24,000 square feet within the CC and C-1 districts per year. The amount allocations
applied for in 1980 was in excess of 28,000 square feet. The Code allows for a bonus 1980
provision of 25 per.cent, up to an additional 6,000 square feet in any additional year
with that amount subtracted from the next years. P & Z recommended the bonus provision
because for the previous three years, the commercial space approvaed was 31,000 square
feet out of 72,000 square feet that could have been approved. Less than 50 per cent of f
the allotment was used, Reents told Council the Code does not allow for differentiation .I
between proposed additions as opposed to new construction, and the scoring process is
weighted towards new construction as the projects can be designed around the scoring
process.
tcegutar Meeting aspen city YQUI1c11 1VVVCAWCt 1L, 1�/p
Reents told Council the highest possible score is 36 points, and the Epicure addition
scored the highest with 32 points. The projects in order are La Cocina, which is an
(
addition to the existing restaurant; Mountain Bell Sports, an,Jaddition; Smith Building,
j
occupying the site next to La Cocina a proposed office building; Ajax Mountain, replacing
the Aspen A's on Durant street (the approval for this included credit for the amount of
space which will be rebuilt); and First National Bank Building, an addition of a second
floor over the existing parking.
Councilman Van Ness asked if Council could go back and use up the allotment not used in
prior years. Reents explained that the resolution from P & Z in previous years was that
the allotment not be carried over. The bonus provision does allow Council to take the
extra square footage and spread it out over a series of years. Reents told Council there
are several modifications the staff would propose to the growth management commercial
section; however, it is inappropriate at the time people are working on applications for
1980. P & Z expressed interest in making recommendations for amendments prior to spring.
Reents told Council there was one more application for expansion of the Mountain Plaza
building. The Code requires the planning office to reject an application not in compli-
ante with the zoning regulations; this building is over the current FAR and was rejected
by staff.
Councilman Collins asked how many employees these six application might generate. Reents
told Council from the employer survey, the numbers would break down per square foot
running from slightly over 4 employees per 1,000 square feet for professional -land office
to 9,000 per 1,00.0 square feet for retail to 32 employees per 1,000 square feet for bars
and restaurants. Councilman Collins asked how many employee units were being provided.
Reents pointed out First National Bank already provides on and off -site housing; Bell
Mountain 1 unit; Smith Building 2 units, and Epicure 3 units for a total of 6 units.
Councilman Isaac moved to approve the growth management commercial allocations for 1980
with the use of the bonus and special review approval for Epicure, Bell Mountain Sports,
and Smith Building;, seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
CITY MANAGER
1. Wayne Chapman told Council that two offices in City Hall are going to experiment with
10 hour 4 day work week. Chapman emphasized this is only a trial.
2. Chapman told Council that senior citizen parking has been a problem and has been
Parking
brought to the attention of the traffic control officers. The tco'.s have suggested the
city give 5 hour parking permits to senior citizens. Chapman said this could be adminis-
tered with a sticker for the windshield. Council decided the age should be 65 and said
they felt it was a good idea. Councilman Parry said there should be stickers for both
handicapped and senior citizens and not just in certain places.
3. Chapman told Council that Ted Armstrong and Duane Fen el have discussed the P g g possibility
of a van for the recreation department rather than using the big buses when they only
Recreation
need room for 10 or 15 kids. When a van is used, the city does not have to have regular
van
bus drivers; this would reduce the cost in terms of actual labor costs: Chapman said if
the cost figures look good, he would like to go ahead with the van.. Councilman Isaac
said there are so many vans around, couldn't recreation use one of those. Armstrong told
Council they use the van too often, and he could reduce the cost in the recreation depart-
ment by using a van. Councilman Parry said he was trying to get a van in the transporta-
tion system for years and would like to see this tried. Chapman told Council he would
make sure it cost less before he went ahead with it. l
4. Jim Reents requested a study sesson on the housing overlay and the update on Smuggler
Trailer Park. Council set this study session for noon, Wednesday, November 14th.
5. Jim Reents said Council had to outline the timing for the special election for the
Special election
gerreral obligation bond election for the water plant project. Reents brought up the issuel
g.o. bonds
of going with modular design versus the design the city currently has. Reents said he didl
housing
not have a good figure to compare these two; the modular is a square foot cost only and
does not include what prices the current design has. Reents said he could go into a lot j
of work to get these figures, if that is the direction Council wants to pursue. Currentlyll
i Council is into the design for over $50,000. Reents said he could get these figures by
the next meeting to re -design to accommodate a modular project. This would cost about
$2100. Chapman told Council that Aventura is not interested in doing much more than
managing the project if the g.o. bond passes. Chapman said the staff has to come up with
a plan if the g.o. bond passes, and one thing to look at is modular housing to get the rent
down as low as possible. Councilman Van Ness suggested putting this issue on the next
regular agenda with the information.
ORDINANCE #70, SERIES OF 1979 - Creating Mobile Home Park Zone
Ord. 70, 1979
Councilman Van Ness opened the public hearing. Jolene Vrchota, planning office, told
l iiiip zone
Council when Smuggler area was annexed there was no appropriate zone for the trailer park.I
P & Z discussed whether they would prefer trailers as conditional uses or have a new zone
to have them permitted uses. P & Z created a new zone, MHP, mobile home park zone. Ms.
tt
Vrchota pointed out the ordinance calls for a single manager of the park, section 4 outline,
f
the area and builk requirements. This will accommodate the situation in Smuggler as it
j
exists. Councilman Van Ness closed the public hearing.
` Councilman Isaac moved to read Ordinance #70, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman Parry.
i
All ix� favor, motion carried::
i
f
1 ''
aspen city uouncii
November 12, 1979
VA01 ORDINANCE #70 *Awe
(Series of 1979)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 24-2.1(a) AND 24-3.2 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL
CODE BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW MHP (MOBILE HOME PARK) ZONE DISTRICT AND
AMENDING SECTION 24-3.4 WITH THE ADOPTION OF AREA AND BULK REQUIREMENTS TO
BE APPLIED IN THE MHP ZONE DISTRICT was read by the city clerk
Councilman Isaac moved to adopt Ordinance #70, Series of 1979, on second reading; seconder
by Councilman Parry. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Collins, aye; Isaac, aye;
Michael, aye; Van Ness, aye. Motion carried.
Councilman Van Ness read into the record a letter from Mrs. Ardith Ware objecting to the
City of Aspen's $10,000,000 budget when the City of Denver's budget.is only $2,000,000.
Council asked City Manager Chapman to investigate this and answer Mrs. Ware.
ORDINANCE #72, SERIES OF 1979 - L-1 Code Amendments
Councilman Van Ness opened the public hearing. Karen Smith, planning director, told
Council this is a code amendment which would add single family, duplex and multi -family
uses as permitted uses in the L-1 zone district. This district is at the periphery of
the base of Aspen mountain; L-2 district is closer to the mountain. The intent in the
code is to encourage construction and renovation of lodges and prevent the conversion to
long,term rentals. The Council has previously amended the L-2 district to add single ',e
family and duplexes. Ms. Smith introduced into the record a September 14 memorandum from
the planning office to P & Z; letter from Rick Sabbatini and his preparation of summary
of development in the L01 district; map; resolution from P & Z.
Ms. Smith told Council one of the advantages of this amendment would let residential uses
become conforming and allow those uses to upgrade. Ms. Smith said she felt it was unlike
to see a rush of single family and duplex applications; there is very little development
potential in the L-1 zone. It is also unlikely the existing development in the zone woul'
convert. Ms. Smith pointed out it has been argued there is little difference between
lodge short-term and condominium short-term. One of the impacts Council is concerned
about is the change in type of management. One the disadvantage side, if the city
encourages conversions of lodges into other uses, they are damaging one of the most
attractive features of the city; being able to stay in a lodge. Also if you encourage
the upgradinging of residential uses, this may be encouraging the displacement of long
term rentals. Ms. Smith pointed out that the conversion of lodges into multi -family uses
may be mitigated by the fact that the city attorney has given the opinion that the conver
sion of lodges into long term residences would require GMP application because of the
addition of kitchens. Ms. Smith noted the GMP speaks to the over abundance of short-term
accommodations in the Aspen area, which resulted in transportation problems between Aspen
and Snowmass. A solution might be to limit the amendment to single family and duplex
units.
Ms. Smith told Council an alternative might be the lodge preservation clause, which would
allow Sabbatini to do what he intended if it were extended to residential uses. However,
there are no parking requirements for residential uses in the lodge zone; this was elimin
ated because it was not applicable. P & Z recommended denial of this amendment and felt
very strongly. There reasons were (1) it is unwise to change for one pice of property,
(2) you can handle non -conforming uses through the preservation clause, (3) they felt thi
proposal might open the way for condominiumization of lodges, and (4) they felt the
proposal would result in the reduction of lodge inventory and it would reduce the area
where they should be concentrated. Ms. Smith told Council that the planning office has
weighed the factors and believe that the disadvantages are outweighed by the advantages
and that the impact will not be great in terms of potential for conversion.
Councilman van Ness closed the public hearing.
Councilwoman Michael said it is ironic to look at an ordinance opening up a lodge distric
and then move into an ordinance on.�condominiumization of lodges. Council wants the
moratorium because they are worried about a change in lodge units. Councilman Van Ness
pointed out looking at the skier capacity, lodge capacity and residential capacity in to
the city has too many lodging units for lift capacity and not enough residential. Counc)1i1i
man Parry agreed there is an imbalance in town, perhaps this would cut down on some of
the traffic.
Councilman Isaac moved to read Ordinance #72, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman
All in favor, motion carried.
Ord. 72, 1979
1.-1 Code Amendments
denied
ORDINANCE #72
(Series of 1979)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 24-3.2, 24-3.4 and 24-4.6 OF THE ASPEN
MUNICIPAL CODE PROVIDING FOR PERMITTED USES, MINIMUM LOT AREA PER DWELLING
UNIT AND RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE L-1 ZONE DISTRICT was read by the city clerk.
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #72, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilw man
Michael. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Collins, nay; Isaac, nay; Michael, nay; Paorry,
aye, Van Ness, aye. Motion NOT carried.
ORDINANCE #74, SERIES OF 1979 - Moratorium on Lodge Condomiumizations
Councilman Van Ness opened the public hearing. Ms. Smith told Council this ordinance was
at their request. .A moratorium may give Council time to review the impacts of this Ord. 74, 1979
lodge condominiumization, which have just begun discussion. There is not a clear con- Moratorium on
sensus of how to deal with lodge conversions. This ordinance will enable Council to Lodge
researeh the merits of the arguments withoit being pressured by applications coming in, Oondcmin unizations
and for this reason the planning office is recommending it to Council.
h i
ncy ulai riec�i„y nayc.a �,��Y
Ord. 73, 1979
Mobile Home P
regs
Ord. 75, 1979
^. Mt. Bell tax
Ord. 76, 1979
Annexation
Koch Lumber
property
Peso. 20, 1979
Housing Price
guidelines
Gideon Kaufman told Council the Lodging Association has been meeting with staff, P & Z
and Council on this and are rapidly coming up with recommendations and proposed legislatio:
for Council. The Lodging Association does not feel there is a need for a long moratorium.
Within the next 30 days the Association should have statistics and legislation prepared.
Councilman Collins said he felt the time limit in the ordinance was too short. council-
woman Michael said Council's duty is to do this as quickly as possible. The power of a
moratorium does not give Council the power to go on and on.
Councilman Van Ness closed the public hearing.
Councilman Collins moved to read Ordinance #74, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman
Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #74
(Series of 1979)
AN ORDINANCE IMPOSING A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON THE SUBDIVISION OF LODGE
AND HOTEL UNITS AND THE APPROVAL OF SUBIDIVISON EXEMPTIONS FOR THE PURPOSE
OF CONDOMINIUMIZATION, TIME-SHARING OR SPLITTING THE FEE OF SUCH UNITS
was read by the city clerk.
Councilman Collins moved to adopt Ordinance #74, Series of 1979,.on second reading;
seconded by Councilman Isaac. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Michael, aye; Parry, nay,
Isaac, aye; Collins, aye; Van Ness, aye. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #73, SERIES OF 1979 - Mobile Home Park Regulations
Councilman Van Ness opened the public hearing and stated Council had wanted a study sessi
on this ordinance before second reading. Council set up a study session for November 21
at noon.
Councilman Van Ness continued the public hearing to November 26, 1979.
Councilwoman Michael requested an executive session with the attorneys on*: the Aspen
Institute and the Plum Tree Inn status.
ORDINANCE #75, SERIES OF 1979 - Mountain Bell Telephone Tax
Councilman Van Ness opened the public hearing. Finance Director Lois Butterbaugh told
Council it costs Mt. Bell less to serve urban areas than country areas. Originally 2 per
cent of the revenues were paid to even that out. That was found to be unconstitutional
because it was a gross revenue tax. The PUC will allow an overall cost item on the
telephone bill.
Councilman Van Ness closed the public hearing. Councilman Isaac moved to read Ordinance
#75, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #75
(Series of 1979)
AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING REVENUE AND IMPOSING A BUSINESS AND OCCUPATION TAX
ON TELEPHONE UTILITY COMPANIES OPERATING WITHIN THE CITY OF ASPEN; PROVIDING
FOR THE COLLECTION OF SAID TAXES AND FOR PENALTIES WITH RESPECT THERETO
was read by the city clerk
Councilman Isaac moved to adopt Ordinance #75, Series of 1979, on second reading; seconded
by Councilman Collins. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Isaac, aye; Collins,
aye; Michael, aye; Van Ness, aye. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #76, SERIES OF 1979 - Annexation of Koch Lumber Prperty
Jim Reents told Council this annexation request is for property location at Garmisch and
Cooper; it does have 1/6 contiguity. The purpose of this annexation is to facilitate a
housing project for the M.A.A. The property belongs to Hans Cantrup, who proposes to
build a facility for M.A.A. of 150 rooms to provide housing during their season as well as
a cafeteria. This would be available for lease during the winter season. Ashley Anderson
representing Cantrup, showed Council the concept and general view of the proposal.
Councilman Isaac asked what was planned for the old buildings. Anderson said they are
looking for a place to move them.
Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinances:#76, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman
Isaac. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #76
(Series of 1979)
AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING CERTAIN UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO was read by the city clerk
Councilman Isaac moved to adopt ordinance #76, Series of 1979, on first reading; seconded
by Councilman Parry. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Michael, aye; Isaac, aye; Collins,
aye; Parry, aye; Van Ness, aye. Motion carried.
RESOLUTION #20, SERIES OF 1979 - Housing Price Guidelines
Jim Reents, housing director, reminded Council they adopted rental price guidelines in
October 1978 to apply to the next building season, and also adopted a method to update
these on an annual basis to allow for an inflationary factor. Resolution #20 proposes
two guidelines; those for new construction in the 1980 building season, and rental incr
for anything approved to be built in the guidelines in 1979.
Reents explained that the firs. guidelines, $.57, $.80 and $1.00, are proposed to represen
at least a break even cost for an individual applicant. $1.00 may seem excessive; however
it has been pointed out that the guidelines reflected a break even point for the residenti
zones. The commercial core has different code requirements for construction. Reents
pointed out these guidelines are meant to be an incentive for the private sector to develo
employee housing. Reents said there is a point at which this type of guidelines and the
method of appreciation becomes inappropriate. However, under the current economy these
figures reflect the building costs. Reents said these apply to any deed restricted employ
housing as well as evaluation in the condominiumization issue.
Councilwoman Michael asked why Section 7 says that separate guidelines apply for applica-
tions under the growth management. Reents said if there is a project with free market
units subsidizing the employee units, the price might be a lot less. Dunaway pointed out
the main reason there are guidelines is so that people can allocate points under GMP and
give bonus density housing. Councilman Parry stated these guidelines are too high.
Councilwoman Michael said she did not want to adopt this resolution with the discrepancy
in Section 7 for separate guidelines. Andrew Dracopoli told Council if they make the
price numbers too low, no one will build employee housing. Reents pointed out that Sectio''
1 and Section 2 have two different guidelines; Section 2 is for projects already approved.]
Councilman Parry moved to read Resolution #20, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman I
All in favor, motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO. 20
(Series of 1979)
WHEREAS, the City Council is required to establish housing
price guidelines on or before October 15 of each year for consid-
eration in granting points within the terms of the Growth Manage-
ment Plan,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1
That within the terms of Section 24-10.4(b)(3) the following
housing price guidelines are adopted for housing which is approved
under Section 24-10.4(b)(3) after the effective date of this reso-
lution until October 15, 1980:
Low Moderate Middle
Income Income Income
Rental Price $.57/sq. ft. $.80/sq. ft. $1.00/sq. ft.
Sale Price $59/sq. ft. $82/sq. ft. $102/sq. ft.
Section 2
That within the terms of Section 24-10.4(b)(3) the following
housing price guidelines are adopted for housing which has been
approved under Section 24-10.4(b)(3) from October 9, 1978, until
the date of adoption of this resolution.
Low
Moderate
Middle
Income
Income
Income
Rental Price
$.42/sq. ft.
$.55/sq. 'ft.
$.68/sq. ft.
Sale Price
$52/sq. ft.
$62/sq. ft.
$71/sq. ft.
Section 3
That the
above -adopted rental price terms
do not include
Utility costs.
A landlord may
assess utility
costs in addition to
the rental price
adopted.
Housing Price
Guidelines
Housing Price
guidelines
2'769
Aspen City Council November 12, 1979
Sebt
t the above -adopted rental price terms include the. base
tax assessment. Increases in property taxes above those
in the base year may be assessed, pro rata, in addition
to the rental price adopted. For the purpoic sdcttiion the
property taxes assessed in the base year will be defined as the
property taxes due and payable on the third year following GMP
approval on the project or the property taxes due and payable on
the second year following the issuance of the final certificate of
occupancy for the project, whichever is greater.
Section 5
That the housing price guidelines adopted in Section 1 shall
be modified from year-to-year in an amount equal to the increase
or decrease in the Denver Regional Consumer Price Index. Such
modification shall be made by the Council, or its designated
administrative officer, on or before October 15 of each calendar
year. The provisions of this section notwithstanding, the rental
price of any unit may not fall below the rate established in the
year in which the project application received Growth Management
approval.
Section 6
That the housing price guidelines adopted in Section 2 shall
be modified from year-to-year in an amount equal to the increase
or decrease in the National Housing Index averaged with the
increase or decrease in the Denver Regional Housing Index. Such
modification shall be made by the Council, or its designated
administrative officer, on or before October 15 of each calendar
year. The provisions of this section notwithstanding, the rental
price of any unit may not fall below the rate established in the
year in which the project application received Growth Management
approval.
Section 7
As the price guidelines are modified from year-to-year within
the terms of Sections 5 and 6 above, they shall, as modified,
apply to low, moderate and middle income housing previously
approved, but separate guidelines shall be adopted for applica-
tions seeking approval under the Growth Management Plan.
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Resolution #20, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman
Isaac. Councilmembers Parry and Isaac in favor; Councilmembers Van Ness, Michael and
Collins opposed. Motion NOT carried.
Councilwoman Michael stated she is looking for a redraft and is not against price guide-
lines. Councilwoman Michael said she wanted to know exactly where they go, and the
different guidelines.
Councilwoman Michael Moved to reconsider Resolution #20, Series of 1979; seconded by
Councilman Collins. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilwoman Michael moved to table Resolution #20, Series of 1979 to the next meeting;
seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Collins moved to adjourn at 9:02 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in
favor, motion carried.
Kathryn SJ Koch, City Clerk
EXHIBIT
y
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO
Resolution No. =1 %
(Series of 1979
WHEREAS, in accordance with Ordinance No. 48, Series of 1977, September 1,
1979, was established as a deadline for submission of 1979 applications for
commercial and office development within the City of Aspen, and
WHEREAS, in response to this ordinance six commercial projects were submitted
for a total of 28,669 square feet of commercial space within the 24,000 square
feet of commercial space available in 1979, and
WHEREAS, duly noticed public hearings were conducted before the Aspen
Historic Preservation Commission on October 4, 1979, and before the Planning
and Zoning Commission on October 23, 1979, to consider the Growth Management
applications and evaluate and score these applications in conformance with
criteria established in Ordinance No. 48, Series of 1977, and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission did evaluate, rank, and score
the projects submitted in the following order:
P and Z HPC
Average Average Total
1. Epicure Plaza Building
(10,041 sq. ft.) 18.6 14.0 32.6
2. La Cocina Addn.
(1,300 sq. ft.) 15.4 12.4 27.8
3. Bell Mountain Sports Addn.
(2,000 sq. ft.) 16.4 11.3 27.7
4. Smith Building
(5,100 sq. ft.) 14.3 13.0 27.3
5. Ajax Mountain Assoc. Bldg.
(6,025 sq. ft.) 15.7 9.0 24.7
6. First National Bank Addn.
(4,203 sq. ft.) 16.2 7.9 24.1
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended, in accordance
with Section 24-10.3(a), that City Council authorize additional commercial
I
construction in the amount of 4,669 square feet so as to approve all six projects.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Aspen,
Colorado, hereby allocates commercial development allotment to the Epicure
Plaza Building in the amount of 10,041 square feet, to La Cocina in the amount
of 1,300 square feet, to Bell Mountain Sports in the amount of 2,000 square
En
CM
feet, to the Smith Building in the amount of 5,100 square feet, to the Ajax
Mountain Assoc. Building in the amount of-6,025 square feet, and to the First
National Bank in the amount of 4,203 square feet and that these projects are
authorized to proceed further with any additional approvals needed by the
City of Aspen to secure building permits.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT special review approval be secured for
the employee housing proposals contained in the Epicure, Bell Mountain Sports
and Smith projects.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at its regular
meeting held on November 26, 1979.
ATTEST:
xka-4� Z
Kathryn S och, ity lerk
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO
By k;;� &.
Herman Edel, Mayor
EXHIBIT
Jacobs/Ball & Associates, P.C., Architects
415 East Hyman Suite 205 Aspen Colorado 81611 303/925-1606, 925-8447
City of Aspen
Planning Department
130 S. Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Sir:
June 29, 1982
RE: SMITH BUILDING
Regarding the Smith Building, to be located.at 304 E.
Hopkins, we are requesting the following:
1) GMP exemption for employee housing as per 24-11.2 (h)
Unit Size (2 @ 450. s.f.)
Unit Type (Studio)
Proposed guideline (middle income)
2) Parking reduction for.employee.housing as per 24-4..1 (c)
3) FAR bonus to increase maximum allowable from 1.5 to 2.0
with 1.7 commercial and 0.3 employee housing.
4) Condominiumization
Enclosed are two (2) checks to cover the above; $475.00
for items #1, 2, and 4 and $225.00 for item #3.. Also enclosed
is a copy of the Title Insurance and the survey.
CI)OL4<,134-
Donald Donald Ball, AZA
DB/vl
Enclosures
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen.,/�
1. DATE CERTIFIED COMPLETE: STAFF: t: P
2. APPLICANT: (J�' Jf11^/L �i S24udd:.2
1 REPRESENTATIVE: - ��� /4/
4..PROJECT NAME:y!h1l411
5. LOCATION: I O f' L of 0(* eo OXci A-, e. P-L
U E_
6s TYPE OF APPLICATION:
4 Step: GMP (,
PUD ( }
Subdivision
2 Step: _LSubdivision Exception. (WtiCim CDYIhmitlitTm1Z[e{iG'�}�_
_LGMP.Exception ( )
Rezoning ( )
SPA
1 Step: Use Determination
Conditional Use
Special Review (�� - %JtY4A.� }
HPC
No. of Steps: Other:
i. EFERRALS
Attorney V Sanitation District School District
]TEngineering Dept. Mountain Bell Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas
Housing Parks State Highway Dept.
V Mlater Holy Cross Electric _ Fire Chief .
City Electric Fire Marthal/Building Dept. Other
8. DISPOSITION
Ph Z_ Approved ✓ Denied Date
12861PO(i. Of FAR- im r 0. "v't l.5; 1 7e
<4
i G � IJO a tA_ •
'� i <a Cr0.4ocor {r. 5
<< 9 3 �ti i1llrfJO�G l'ArYIfU631f7aj/�
�c - _Z. �i�3PrvC�11 C.�O+'L �.wri r2.C.grria't1tr•����i La arYtsnslW1
Qlai.'Cc> j;✓ o�Lzl cl tlC_:.�r�C}io.\: o✓1`fW0. I61J'IhCovw�- <�{fiT�':^wiFl�r'1%.L
jQ']i0 h^Y � _ 1"►"¢CL.�i O. .0 a« ��a t0.'�:.L.yli- 11
p..rnc. a.pia• CoJ2v�h.:fsr� {ti�C �a;,c�l.o"a d° l
j f'
9. PRELIMINARY PLAT REFERRALS:
Attorney Sanitation District School District
Engineering Dept. Mountain Bell Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas
Housing Parks State Highway Dept.
Water Holy Cross Electric Other
City Electric Fire Marshal/Building Dept.
10. PRELIMINARY PLAT - PUBLIC HEARING
P &.Z Approved Denied Date
t.
'To:
FROM:
RE:
MEMORANDUM -
Aspen City Council
Colette Penne, Planning Office ' r
Smith building - GMP Exemption, FAR Bonus, Parking Review,
Condominiumization
DATE: Jui 20, 1982 T
Y , APPROVED AS TO FORM: wy'fCi'
iocttion:
Zoning:
Lot Size:
Applicant's
RReequest:
304 E. Hopkins
cc
3,000 ± square feet
The requests are for.(1) a GMP exemption for employee housing;
(2) the FAR bonus needed to allow that additional square footage;
3 a parking reduction for the employeq housing; and (4) sub-
division exception for the purposes of condominiumization.
EXHIBIT
LA
Planning
Office
Review:
This project received a 1979 DIP Commercial Allotment, and turned
in -building plans in the fall of 1981. The building. permit has
been extended and a construction start is imminent. The four
reviews before you were aspects of the original application
which•have never been completed.
The lot size is 3.000 square feet with the proposed FAR at
2:1. The buildout proposed is 5.100 square feet of commercial/
office space and 900 square feet of employee housing. The FAR
Bonus requested is appropriate, since the 0.5 bonus will be
0.3 employee housing and the ratio. of employee housing to
commercial space is as defined in the Code. In the original
GMP submittal, the 900 square .feet of employee housing was shown
-as one unit. The change to two studio units of 450 square feet
each is preferrabTe in terms of the housing need. The units are
at the low end of the size scale for studio units (400-600
Square feet). The applicant has requested the middle income
category but due to the limited size of the units, the low
income category is recommended. Since the lot is presently
vacant, there is no reduction in low or moderate income housing.
I
A parking reduction is requested. Considering that the units are
employee studios and the site is in the CC zone, an exemption
-from the provision of parking for the residential units is
acceptable.
Subdivision exception for the purposes of condominium units will
be.formed consisting of the following:
1 Lower Level Office Space
2 Main Level Commercial Space i
3 Upper Level Office Space
• 4 Upper Level .Employee Studio
.5 Upper Level Employee Studio
"�. -The 6-month minimum lease restrictions of Section 20-22 must be
Complied with And a stiatci,:nt of Subdivision Exception and
Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and -Conditions must be
.
filed through the City Attorney's Office, as well as a Deed
Restriction. A final condominium plat must•be filed following
constr•riction completion which complies with the final Plat
provisions of Section 20-15 of the t4unicipai Codc.
Planning & `•
Zap
Comfiistngsion
Action and
Planning Office
Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this request
at their July M, 1982 meeting and took the fallowing
action:
• 1. Granted an FAR bonus to increase the maximum -allowed
from I-5:1 to 2:1 with 1.7 commercial and 0.3 employee
housing.
They further recommended that Council:
1. Grant a GMP exemption for the two employee studios
of 450 square feet each at the low income. category.
2. Grant an exemption from the provision of parking
spaces for the employee studios.
3. Grant subdivision exception for.the purpose of
eondominiumization of the five units subject to:
a) Compliance with the 6-month minimum Teases as
per Section 20-22.
b) Production and recordation of a Final Condo-
minium Plat.
c) Filing of a deed restriction for two low-income
450 square 'foot studios with the City Attorney
prior to receipt of a Certificate of occupancy.
d) Filing of a.Statement of Subdivision Exception
and Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and
Conditions.
Council
Action: If Council concurs with the action of•the Planning and
Zoning Commission and the recommendation of the Planning
Office, the appropriate motion is as follows:.
"I move to approve:
1.. A GMP exemption for the two employee studios of
450 square feet each at the low income category.
2. An exemption from the provision of parking spaces
for the employee studios.
3. Subdivision exception for the purpose of condo-
miniumization of the -five units subject to:
a) Compliance with the 6-month.minimum'leases as
per Section 20-22.
b) Production and recordation of a final Condo-
minium Plat.
c) Filing of a deed restriction for two 'low-income
450 square foot studios with the City Attorney
prior to receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy.
d) Filing of a Statement of Subdivision. Exception .
and Declaration of covenants, M.-Arictiuns and
Conditions.
••1 t'l l' ••
•o
• lXCA
'
i
F
Vik
..
ara
•
^ i
C/Y[NQfil
t•r
•
f(j
KCI{
{{ R F
WAAW
af .
'
• i
.1"Va
^�
;
r
ILI
UPPER (EVES
.
1
EXHIBIT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City .Council_
FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office
RE: Smith Building - GMP Exemption, FAR Bonus, Parking Review,
Condominiumization
DATE: July 20, 1982 APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Location: 304 E. Hopkins
Zoning: CC
'Lot Size: 3,000 - square feet
Ap licant's
Re q est: The requests are for (1) a GMP exemption for employee housing;
(2) the FAR bonus needed to allow that additional square footage;
(3) a parking reduction for the employee housing; and (4) sub-
division exception for the purposes of condominiumization.
Planning
Office
Review: This project received a 1979 GMP Commercial Allotment, and turned
in building plans in the fall of 1981. The building permit has
been extended and a construction start is imminent. The four
reviews before you were.aspects of the original application
which have never been completed.
The lot size is 3,000 square feet with the proposed FAR at
2:1. The buildout proposed is 5,100 square feet of commercial/
office space and 900 square feet of employee housing. The FAR
Bonus requested is appropriate, since the 0.5 bonus will be
0.3 employee housing and the ratio of.employee housing to
commercial space is as defined in the Code. In the original
GMP submittal, the 900 square feet of'employee housing was shown
as one unit. The change to two studio units of 450 square feet
each is preferrable in terms of the housing need. The units are
at the low end of the size scale for studio units (400-600
square feet). The applicant has requested the middle income
category but due to the limited size of the units, the low
income category is recommended. Since the lot is presently
vacant, there is no reduction in low or moderate income housing.
A parking reduction is requested. Considering that the units are
employee studios and the site is in the CC zone, an exemption
from the provision of parking for the residential units is
acceptable.
Subdivision exception for the purposes of condominium units will
be formed consisting of the following:
1) Lower Level Office Space
2) Main Level Commercial Space
3) Upper Level Office Space
4) Upper Level Employee Studio
5) Upper Level Employee Studio
The 6-month minimum lease restrictions of Section 20-22 must be
complied with and a statement of Subdivision Exception and
Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions must be
filed through the City Attorney's Office, as well as a Deed
Restriction. A final condominium plat must be filed following
construction completion which complies with the Final Plat
provisions of Section 20-15.of the Municipal Code.
IS
Memo: Smith Building
Page Two
July 20, 1982
Planning &
Zoning
Commission.
Action and
Planning Office
Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this request
at their July 20, 1982 meeting and took the following
action:
1. Granted an FAR bonus to increase the maximum allowed
from 1.5:1.to 2:1 with 1.7 commercial and 0.3 employee
housing.
They further recommended that Council:
1. Grant a GMP exemption for the two employee studios
of 450 square feet each at the low income category.
2. Grant an exemption from the provision of parking
spaces for the employee studios.
3. Grant subdivision exception for the purpose of
condominiumization of the five units subject to:
a) Compliance with the 6-month minimum leases as
per Section 20-22.
b) Production and recordation of a Final Condo-
minium Plat.
c) Filing of a deed restriction for two low-income
450 square foot studios with the City Attorney
prior to receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy.
d) Filing of a Statement of Subdivision Exception
and Declaration of Covenants,.Restrictions and
Conditions.
Council
Action: If Council concurs with the action of the Planning and
Zoning Commission and the recommendation of the Planning
Office, the appropriate motion is as follows:
"I move to approve:
1. A GMP exemption for the two employee studios of
0 )eons ' 400 -450 square feet each at the low income category.
2. An exemption from the provision of parking spaces
for the employee studios.
3. Subdivision exception for the purpose of condo-
miniumization of the five units subject to:
a) Compliance with the 6-month minimum leases as
per Section 20-22.
b) Production and recordation of a Final Condo-
minium Plat.
c) Filing of a deed restriction for two low-income
cci �w�sf 1004 0—square foot studios with the City Attorney
prior to receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy.
d) Filing of a Statement of Subdivision Exception
and Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and
Conditions.
MEMORANDUM
T0: Building Department. Stan Stevens
Water Department - Jim Markalunas
Aspen Metro Sanitation District Heiko Kuhn
City Electric Department - Stogie Madalone
FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office
RE:Smith Building
DATE: Judy 2, 1982
R
Attached is an application concerning the Smith Building, a new commercial
building to be built at 304.E. Hopkins. Your office reviewed this
application when it.competed successfulily in 1979 for a GMP allotment.
We. are referring this application to. you at this time not to receive any
further comments from you, but rather to simply inform.you that a new
building is soon to be.placed under construction. If you do have,any
comments.for us on this project, we would appreciate them.no later than.
July 12. Thank you.
Smith Building
'.
Two
20, 1982
Planning b
"'
Zoping
Commission
Action and
.
Planning Office
Recommendation:
The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this request
at their July 20', 1982 meeting and took the following
action:
•
1. Granted an FAR bonus •to increase the maximum allowed
-_
from.1.5:1 to 2:1 with 1.7 commercial and 0.3 employee
housing.
They further recommended that Council:
1. Grant a GMP exemption for the two employee studios
of 450 square feet each at the low income. category.
2. Grant an exemption from the provision of parking
spaces for the employee studios.
3. Grant subdivision exception for.the purpose of
condominiumization of the five units subject to:
a) Compliance with the 6-month minimum leases as
per Section 20-22.
b) Production and recordation of a Final Condo-
minium Plat.
c) Filing of a deed restriction for two low-income
460 square .'foot studios with the City Attorney
�•
prior to receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy.
d) Filing of a,Statement of Subdivision Exception
and Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and
Conditions.
Council
Action:
If Council concurs with the action of -the Planning and
Zoning Commission and the recommendation of the Planning
Office, the appropriate motion is as follows:.
'
"I move to approve: .
1.• A GMP exemption for the two employee studios of
450 square feet *each at the low income category.
2. An exemption from the provision of parking spaces
for the employee studios.
3. Subdi-vision exception for the purpose of condo-
miniumizati,on of the fl ve units subject to:
a) Compliance with the 6-month, minimum' 'leases as
per Section 20-22.
b) Production and recordation of a Final Condo-
miniva flat.
c) Filing of a deed restriction' for two low-income
450 square foot studios with the City Attorney
prior to receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy.
d) Filing of a Statemerit of Subdivision. Exception
and Declaration of Covenants, Re-;trictiuns and
Conditions.
+
... .v :;., .� •row' -.
ro
'
TPASH
acx
v„a
WMA#4 LW
GYCNQFl
•
"a•s t
.
CCCx
amna
&,me
c
�uocrt
wwNw
_ -y
'
JOINT MEETING WITH COUNTY COMA09'10NERS
Mayor Edel called the meeting to order at 4:10 p.m. with Commissioners Madsen, Kinsley,
Klanderud, Blake and Child and Councilmembers Knecht, Parry and Collins present.
1. Post Office Pedestrian.Path Proposal. Elizabeth Holekamp presented a drawing of a
proposed path to connect the elementary school to the post office and Clark's market to
the post office. There is a path up the hill to the school for which the county allocat
money but it was not built. The PCPA proposes a boardwalk to come in between the trees
and over the drainage ditch so pedestrians can would between the market and the post
office. They would also like the trail to go to the ACES entrance. There are two
different phases; phase two would connect to the Rio Grande trail. Phase one would cost
$40,000. County manager Curt Stewart said there is a commitment to Mrs. Paepcke to
finishe the landscaping in this area; the county has $3500 budgeted to cover that.
Councilman Parry said he was in favor of getting the trail in down there. Hal Clark said
the PCPA has pledged $10,000 towards the completion of this project. They have also
asked the developer for contribution and the market and the post office. Clark said the
PCPA have three major things they would like to be accomplished this summer; fix the
Maroon creek bike trail; this post office path; the Hunter Creek trail. Clark said the
PCPA has been talking about a jogging trail east of Aspen with the Boards. They would
like to table this for additional planning. Mayor Edel suggested that the city take the
$15,000 they were going to donate to the jogging trail and put it towards this trail.
Councilman Knecht said he would like to get these projects done this summer.
Mayor Edel asked when the county would have the work done on where the city and county
funds are going to and coming from. "Stewart said this would be done in 4 to 5 weeks.
Bill Martin said Clark's market is very much in favor of this path and he would talk to
other business owners to see if he could get contributions. The Boards agreed the
contributions should get firmed up, the city will contribute, the county Will decide how
much they will contribute, and PCPA will give $10,000.
City Manager Chapman told Council that the Maroon Creek trail was constructed with state
funds and part of the contract was the city's agreement to maintain that stretch of the
trail. Chapman said one of the aspects of that project was the contractor was to replace
the trail. Stewart recommended it is the county's obligation to repair the trail; they
tore up the intersection and should replace the trail. The Boards gave approval for
what was outlined above.
2. Smuggler Mobile Home Park Qualifying by Housing Office Agreement. Assistant City
Manager Ron Mitchell reminded the Boards they have prevsously approved a joint agreement
for the 17 new mobile home units. Since then, the city and county have had requests
from owners of existing units to help qualifying purchasers. This agreement covers the
existing units and having the housing office qualify people to purchase them. The
purchaser will pay 1/2 per cent of the sales cost to cover the work. Commissioner Klande.
said she did not object other than the fact the housing department keeps expanding rather
then the boards taking on the major issue of a housing office. Mayor Edel said the city
and county are having a meeting on this, hopefully to come to a conclusion.
Commissioner Blake moved to approve the joint agreement for the county to qualify
purchasers for Smuggler Mobile Home Park; seconded by Commissioner Child. All in favor,
motion carried.
3. Water Issues - Fr ing Pan/Arkansas U date. Mark Fuller told the Boards he had
information on the Frying Pan Arkansas project on their 1980-81 activities, indicating
they are taking more water than has been decreed to them and bypassing less than is
required of them. in so doing, they are operating outside the framework of a number of
authorizing document, including the environmental impact statement, the Congressional
reauthorization of the Frying Pan/Arkansas project, the court decrees, the settlement
between the county and the BOR, and the operating principles. Fuller told the Boards
he got the operating history for 1981 which showed some small discrepancies. A district
engineer got concerned about some of the figures and went and checked some of the
structures and found they were diverting a great deal more than what they said they were
diverting.
Fuller said there are a number of alternatives, the least attractive is filing in
opposition to their diligence applications before the water board right now. Fuller
recommended expressing concern in a forceful way by either sending city and county
officials to them or having them appear before the joint boards. John Musick reminded
the Boards he had been authorized to withdraw the statement of opposition to their
diligence application because they had submitted enough information to prove they have
been diligent. Musick said if he accepts the redrafted version of the diligence applica-
tion, Pitkin County and Aspen waive the ability in the future to challenge in any sub-
stantive way their potential abandonment of the system for Lime and Last Chance creek
diversions, which have not been completed. This is significant because they are divert-
ing in excess of their decree capacities at the built facilities and are bypassing less.
In order to keep them in priority, they would have to take the Lime and Last chance
creek diversions and move them around, parcel them out on the as -built facility.
Musick recommended the Boards approve him accepting the due -diligence application.
Musick told the Boards he felt the other alternative is not a productive way to tackle
the challenge, the specific things that are causing the problems. A more appropriate
way is Fuller's suggestion of having elected official discuss this with the congressional
delegation, the BOR, the water conservation board and the southeastern district to
express concerns on violations of various agreements. Musick said if they do not correct
what they are doing, a better lawsuit is on the operating principles themselves.
Musick reminded the Boards they had authorized him to get involved in this case to insure
that the Hunter Creek settlement was enforced. Musick said he was about ready to get
out of the case when the division engineer discovered they were diverting in excess.
Musick said if there is a finding of diligence, and they desire to move the Lime and Last
Chance decrees onto the as -built facilities, acts of abandonment which occur prior to
1981 as evidence of abandonment.
Council and t mmissioners accepted Musick's recommendl@Won of meeting with the BOR
and the Congressional delegation. Commissioner Child and Councilwoman Michael agreed to
be the committee. The Boards okayed monies for transportation.
COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
Councilman Knecht moved to approve the minutes of May 10, 24 and June 3; seconded by
Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
1. Robert Carroll, M.A.A. faculty member, asked Council to make a disposition to the M.A.
in regards to the golf course fees. Carroll said they would like a policy like the locals
pass, not just for this year. City Manager Chapman said the reason the city gives locals
a pass is that through their property and sales taxes are supporting the golf course.
Chapman said if Council does this for the M.A.A., there are a number of cultural organiza-
tions with people in just for the summer. The policy will have to be defined very
tightly. Mayor Edel suggested the city should acknowledge the M.A.A. and Ballet West but
cannot go all the way because this will take away a privilege given to the locals.
Councilman Collins said the staff should look at the magnitude of this and get an idea of
how many people this would be. Council directed the staff to come up with some figures
and report back to Council.
2. Rob McClung asked Council to consider placing on the agenda an amendment to an
ordinance regarding personnel rules and political activity.
Councilman Parry moved to add this to the agenda; seconded by Councilman Collins. All
in favor, motion carried.
3. Bill Martin asked the city to consider some kind of reveiw in the west end of the
traffic problem. Martin said he did not think it is fair to have a private walking path
on Lake avenue without checking to see whether or not this is serving the purpose for
which it was approved. Chapman said the staff is counting on if there are problems, the
city would get complaints. Having heard a complaint, the staff will check it out.
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
1. Councilman Knecht moved to add to the agenda a discussion on a long range planning
citizens committee; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
2. Mayor Edel brought up the settlement with Andre Ulrych regarding the employee housing.
City Attorney Taddune said he felt the law suit accomplished the goals of the city. The
units will be rented at the city's regulated rates; people will know they can complain
to the city attorney's office. Also if the city takens action, the defendants will have
to pay the attorneys fees.
3. Mayor Edel asked about the bench on Mill street. Chapman said he has discussed this
with the transportation department. They do have the money and staff time and will get
it done. 0
4. Mayor Edel said he would like a report from staff on the response to the contribution
of 50 per cent of the cost of flowers in the commercial core.
City Manager Chapman requested adding to the agenda a resolution scheduling a special
election September 28 for the Wheeler Opera House and scheduling a progress report on
the siting for the two water tanks.
Councilman Knecht moved to add both items to the agenda; seconded by Councilman Parry.
All in favor, motion carried.
VENDING ISSUES
City Manager Chapman reminded Council at the last meeting a number of business owners in
the downtown presented Council with a petition regarding vending in the downtown area.
Council had directed Chapman to meet with the business owners and with the sole vendor,
Peppermint Patti. It was agreed there were some things Peppermint Patti was doing that
were not contemplated under the agreement. The agreement was to try to get Peppermint
Patti back to her traditional method of operation. The business people want Council to
eliminate all vending in the downtown area. Peppermint Patti felt that would put her
out of business. Chapman had indicated there were some things Patti was doing that were
not in the city's license, and Patti would have to stop putting the hot dog pushcart in
Rubey park for the five day, six hour period. This was a lease rather than a license and
was not authorized to do. Peppermint Patti requested to be allowed to present a lease
for that space and an operation plan in writing. The business community requested no
vending in the downtown community.
Mayor Edel said the petition from the business community had 120 signature backing Perez'
position of no vending in the commercial core. Peppermint Patti present a copy of her
proposal and a petition with 503 signatures. Mayor Edel said he was surprised when he
saw Peppermint Patti's pushcart and did not think that was what he had voted for. Mayor
Edel said he thought the operation and van would be like in past years. Mayor Edel said
the pushcart went beyond in type of structure and goods sold to what he had thought.
Peppermint Patti said she had taken it for granted Council knew what it was. Rich Perez
said it is not his intent to put Peppermint Patti out of business. Perez said he felt
there should be some regulation on Council's part as far as allowing vendors in town.
11
Perez read again the statemeiti.�om the July 12th Council meeting settiut the objecti ns
of the business community to dors. Perez said the cost of operating usiness in
this town is very, very expensive. Because of the high overhead, the business community
does not feel it should be competing against people who can compete on a temporary basis
City Attorney Taddune pointed out the Council reviews vending requests on a case by case
basis. One of the requirements is there a, -.public need for the service. Council has
concluded the service provided by Peppermint promotes a public need.
Bambi Patterson reminded Council she asked for Cookie Muncher vending permit for special
event and at athletic events. They would like the right to sell their product at special
events only. Terry Badger of Nature's Storehouse said the business community is concernec
with future vendors. The merchants would like a guarantee this would not be built out of
proportion; where the Council will draw the line. Randy Terry of Fudgeworks said if
Council gives permission to Cookie Munchers, he should be able to get permission for
Fudgeworks to do the same thing.
Peppermint Patti said the contract is specific on what she can sell. What they are trying
to get ironed out is the method of operation and where. The petition she submitted shows
people like Peppermint Patti; she provides quick service at the right price. Perez told
Council the comments at this meeting show what the problem could be in the future.
Mayor Edel asked Peppermint if she was willing to go back to essentially the same type of
operation as in prior years. Peppermint said she could keep the push cart mobile but
there are some safety problems. Gary Plumley said the Commercial Core and Lodging
Commission have discussed the problems of vending. The CCLC unanimously voted to continue
the position against any vending in the downtown Aspen.
Councilman Parry said he would like the various groups to get together, go over a map of
the central core, and come up with a consensus of the areas Peppermint could be in.
Councilman Parry said he does not like the pushcart being in Rubey Park on city land.
Councilman Knecht said the city is trying to build a quality image of Aspen. If the
Council loosens up on that, there will be trouble from here on out. Councilman Knecht
said he abhored the idea of any kind of vending in the downtown area. Councilman Knecht
said he would agreed to Peppermint vending at construction sites, parks. There is no
need for vending in the downtown area.
Mayor Edel said the change in Peppermint's vending has caused concern. Mayor Edel said
if she went back to prior years operation, it was amenable to him. Councilman Collins
agreed. Councilman Collins said he would like to look at a map and set up arrangements
with the downtown people and with Peppermint. Council agreed to have staff work with
Peppermint and the business community and to continue the decision to Thursday, July 29
at noon.
RESOLUTION 020, SERIES OF 1982 - Calling Special Election on Wheeler Opera House
City Manager Chapman presented a resolution establishing a special election to be held
Tuesday, September 28 for the purpose of seeking voter approval for the financing for the
renovation of the Wheeler and/or the sale of the Wheeler. This is on the agenda in respo.
to last week's Council meeting to review the status of the Wheeler. The staff reported
to Council at the end of September, the city will run out of money for the renovation work
Chapman said the options are either a general obligation bond or acceptance of one of the
,two offers the city received for a sale/lease back of the Wheeler. Council has indicated
the alternative of doing nothing was not acceptable and wanted one of these two issues
to go to the voters.
Councilman Collins moved to approve Resolution #20, Series of 1982; seconded by Councilman
Knecht. All in favor, motion carried. Council requested a study session next week to
discuss this issue. Council scheduled this for Monday, August 2 at noon.
ORDINANCE #33, SERIES OF 1982 - Sale of Castle Ridge
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #33, Series of 1982; seconded by Councilman
Knecht.
City Attorney Taddune submitted a memorandum to Council which tracks all the items that
have been discussed and to highlight the terms of the agreement. Taddune suggested this
be tabled so the collateral documents can be finalized. (Councilwoman Michael came into
Chambers). The city will receive $200,000 for improvements at closing; $50,000 during
the closing process; $155,000 for consultation services; $70,000 for the non -compete
agreement. Gene Zaftt, representing the purchaser, said the non -competition agreement is
that until Londoff gets into the program, the city will not build a new project right
next door and move everybody into it.
Taddune pointed out that the promissory note is independent from the city's bonds; however
the payments to the city cover the bond obligati.ans. Zaftt said the note and the lease
will mature concurrently; at that time, they have an option to buy the land. Failure to
buy the land will mean they lose everything. Mayor Edel asked that the option clause
be clarified. Zaftt told Council there is a separate provision for the assignment of the
rents in the event of default. The city will have the right to go directly to the tenant;
for the rents. Taddune said the risk is defining what a default is. Zaftt said the.
city required the assignment of the rents to cover this. The purchaser, if defaulted,
would lose everything they have given the city up front.
Mayor Edel said he thought all the improvements were to be done immediately rather than
over a two year period. Chapman said the landscaping and sprinkler system have already
been installed. There is a bid on the roadway, which will hopefully be done this
summer. After that, the purchaser will sit down with the tenants and discuss priorities
for improvements. Mayor Edel asked if Council had discussed this remaining employee
housing for only fifty years. Chapman explained that is the longest term the city has
for any employee housing.
Mayor Edel brot up the 6.4 per cent rent increase or t`. _��s/ Est of living, whichever is
higher. Zaftt`�2d the city required enough payment to ameRtize their debt so that the
purchaser has an unusual debt service, which increases at an accelerated rate. There are
increasing operating expenses and there is rent control. Based upon an increase of 10
per cent per year in the operating expenses and built in the increasing rate of payment
on the mortgage note, the rents must go up 6.4 per cent a year to develop income to cover
the project. The city negotiated in a clause if the operating expenses do not go up as
anticipated; however, if the operating expenses increase at a greater right, the applicant
has the right to consider more than 6.4 per cent increases. The increases are geared to
the actual operation of Castle Ridge. The city has to approve any increases after review-
ing the figures of operation.
After told Council if the operating increases are not 10 per cent, the 6.4 per cent rent
increase will be decreased dollar for dollar. Zaftt told Council if the owner wants to
add amenities for the tenants, these cannot be recouped through rent increases. Chapman
said the staff was concerned that with an absolute increases, there would be disincentives
for continued investment.
Mayor Edel opened the public hearing.
Harry Truscott said he would like to improve the assurance that this project will be
retained as low and moderate income housing. The buyer is getting a sizable tax shelter
and acquiring property at a low interest rate. The city will get its construction costs
paid off and will get $70,000 a year in taxes and lease. Both parties.should be pleased
with the contract. However, as far as protection of the property remaining low and
moderate rental projects, there should be some changes made. The rental increase section
is very complex. Truscott suggested the parties agree not to raise rents for five years.
After that five year, they would come to a long term agreement. Truscott said the second
approach is to separate out the operation of the project as a rental project as a non-
profit structure; take the taxes and lease out of the operating cost. This would leave
only the necessary operating costs.
Chapman told Council one of the things built into the operating expenses is a figure for
deferred maintenance, which is $12,000 per year which will go up by 10 per cent a year.
This is allocated for major expenses down the road. The city would expect to do this if
they continued to own it. Zaftt said for the first few years there will be a negative
cash flow. They cannot agree not to raise rents for five years as they will be putting
more money in. Chapman told Council the $30,000 to the city is for the land lease. If
Council wanted, they could cancel this and it may lower rents.
Council brought up the possibility of condominiumization. Chapman said the city has
chosen to say it is not wise to say five years from now that rentals is the way to go;
employee ownership may be the way to go in five year. The staff is trying not to make
a decision to predict the conditions of ownership versus rentals in the next twenty
years. Councilman Knecht said he like the idea of leaving that decision open. Council-
man Knecht said if the city negated the lease payments of $30,000 a year, that would be.
saving the tenants $21 a month; he is in favor of moving toward that.
Jeffrey Sachs said he is in favor of selling the project. However, there is a clause in
the contract that the city will not start construction of a similar project within a 2
miles radius within 24 months. Sachs pointed out the city has agreed in the Marolt
project to lease back 70 housing units. The non -compete clause should be amended. Sachs
said the real problem is H.B. 1604 past last year which says that municipalities and
counties cannot enact any form of rent control legislation pertaining to ownership of
private property. Sachs said when the note on Castle Riedge pays out, they will own the
land. The law, which has not been interpreted, says the city can be involved in those
rent controls where the city has an interest in a public -type project. Sachs told Council
the answer about rent controls won't be known for several years. Sachs said the city
ought to provide in the contract a reversionary clause if the law changes. Sachs said
the city ought to have a clause allowing the city to plane and legislate for new public
employee housing if the city has to have one if the city is put out of business of
regulating private property. Chapman told Council that the purchaser is entering into
this agreement free and clear of any particular ramifications of that house bill. The
purchaser agrees this will be deed restricted employee housing for fifty years irrespec-
tive of any implications.
Council requested staff address these concerns and report at the next meeting. Mayor
Edel continued the public hearing until August 9, 1982.
ORDINANCE #26, SERIES OF 1982 - Revisions to GMP quota
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #27, Series of 1982; seconded by Councilman
Collins.
Mayor Edel opened the public hearing.
Alan Richman, planning office, reminded Council they agreed to no change in the residenti
quota; agreed to an increase of lodge quota to 35 units. The Council had directed staff
to make a change in the commercial quota; staff recommened 35,000 square feet. Council
requested a research of rationale for 24,000 square feet and to develop the quota.
Richman explained the rationale for 24,000 square feet emerges out of the growth manage-
ment plan itself which says 24,000 square feet should serve the commercial needs of the
metro area. However, this did not cover other commercial zones like S/C/I, NC, etc.
Richman said the growth management plan indicates Council is consistent with the adopted
plan.
The staff has followed Council's direction and revised the quota downward; CC and C-1
has been revised down to 10,000-square feet. There is substantial building going on in
the CC and C-1 right now. The NC and S/C/I has been reduced from 9,000 to 7,000 square
feet. This.is a low impact zone in terms of employee generators. The Office zone .is
reduced to 4,000 square feet and the CL and other to 3,000 square feet. Richman told
II Council part of the rationaleN,,,�,,.that for a project to be developed of:�aconomica
feasibility, there has to be a"}iumber to justify a project. In some zones, Council may
see requests for multi -year commitments.
I Welton Anderson brought up the changes from the P & Z resolution. The vote at P & Z was
unanimous for 35,000 square feet. The P & Z felt that to throw all areas into a quota,
it was not fair to use'the number that had been used for the CC for the last five years.
;{ The P & Z felt there had to be an increase in the number of square footage. Anderson
q pointed out in the office zone with a 4,000 square foot quota and a 6,000 foot lot, a
6,000 square foot building cannot be built without using more than one year's quota.
Anderson requested Council go back to the square footage recommended by P & Z. Perry
Harvey, P & Zr concurred with Anderson and told Council the P & Z looked at this very
" carefully. The P & Z wanted to come up with square footage figures that would all for
it competition for projects. What P & 2 recommended was a 25 per cent reduction in what was
occurring. Harvey said if this figure was too liberal or not being used up, it could be
reduced. Harvey said it is easier to lower the quotas in future years than to go through a
j real crimp and have to open the quotas up.
Gideon Kaufman told Council P & Z spent a lot of time and the figures they came up with
are realistic. Kaufman said if these are adopted, for the first time in some of the new
zones, people cannot compete for a viable project. The Council has taken away the viabil
project would have in these new zones the first time through. Kaufman said Council has
over -reacted to concerns about the growth in CC and C-1 districts; the response is too mu
of a cutting back. This is opening up a new problem with greater restrictions. Jeffrey
Sachs said he felt that 4,000 square feet quota is the office zone is too restrictive.
Most of the offices in town are occupied by professionals who give service to the communi
If office space becomes scarce, or costs more to occupy, that cost is passed on by the
professionals to the community. Harvey pointed out that the lodge quota in the last few
years was so restrictive that there were no new facilities, no upgrading, an increase in
cost of the existing facilities._ The city may face the same problem in the commercial
areas if they make the quotas so restrictive.
Mayor Edel closed the public hearing. Richman said of the three projects last year, none
are being taken through the process. What is being built right now are 1979-80 applicatio:
Sunny Vann, planning director, told Council that 35,000 square foot quota reflects a
reduction in what the city has experienced since the adoption of the GMP by about 10,000
a year. Council told staff they felt 35,000 square feet was too large and requested that
the quota be 24,000 square feet for total commercial building. This can be justified on
the original assumptions of the GMP. Richman said the 20 per cent bonus for each category
is still in the ordinance.
Councilwoman Michael said her concern is with the square footages, especially in the S/C/I
and office zones, people will not build. Richman said this will take multiple year
commitments.
Roll call vote; Councilmembers Knecht, aye; Collins, aye; Michael, nay; Parry, nay, Mayor
Edel, aye. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #27, SERIES OF 1982 - Lodge GMP Scoring Procedures
Alan Richman, planning director, told Council one issue in this ordinance has raised
considerable public opinion, this is the issue of rehabilitation or reconstruction of
existing units. The planning office specifically developed this on concern of Council and
businesses and the community about the quality of existing units and what could be done to
provide an incentive for quality. Richman said the planning office thought if they pro-
vided some points in GMP process in lodge scoring for rehabilitation and reconstruction,
this may provide an incentive. P & Z concurred with this, and language is presented in
the ordinance.
Richman said the planning office has had questioned about the fairness of that provision.
The case is if an applicant in L-1 or L-2 is the owner of a vacant piece of property, they
are prohibited from competing under this provision. This provision is worth 10 points out
of the 100 available; these 10 points would be entirely unavailable to an applicant with
a vacant piece of land. Richman said there is question to the equitability of this
provision. The planning office has offered three alternatives.'
One alternative is to leave the 10 points for rehabilitation in. Council originally liked
this provision because existing lodge units could be brought up to first class without
adding to the inventory; no growth - high quality. Richman said if this alternative is
chosen, language could be added that an applicant would have to have the rehabilitated
units open before the new ones are built. Upgrading existing units is a concern to the
entire community.
Another alternative would be to take the rehabilitation and reconstruction and mold it
into a category where everybody can compete. This could be in the category of quality of
units, whether reconstructed or new. Richman said he did not strongly favor this. The
third alternative is to retain the rehabilitation and reconstruction but adds in any year
where there are multiple applicants and one cannot compete under this provision, the
provision would not be included in the scoring.
Mayor Edel opened the public hearing.
Jeffrey Sachs told Council he favored the last alternative. Applicants with vacant land
are at such an immediate handicap they cannot effectively compete because they are 10
points behind with no way to make the points up. Competitions in the past have been won
or lost be one point. Sachs pointed out this is the second highest category of points
except for employee housing. Sachs said he favored the last alternative; in some competi-
tions, there may not be an applicant with a vacant lot, then the 10 points for rehabilita-
tion can come into effect. Mayor Edel said if the city used that approach, they would be
taking the incentive for rehabilitation away. Spencer Schiffer said the third alternative
would bring new units on line first and have the rehabilitation incentive pushed down.
Al Blomquist toouncil the executive board of the lodgissociation supports the
ordinance as pro osed with the ten points for rehabilitatio and reconstruction. Dunaway
suggested changing the points for this category. Richman told Council when he presented
this concept to P & Z, he supported it very strongly and felt it is in the community's
best interest. Councilman Knecht said he felt lodges should be governed by a supply and
demand theory and the quota for lodges should be dropped. Councilwoman Michael said there
should be an increase in the number of lodge units and there should be incentives for the
rehabilitation of existing units. Councilman Parry said he would like to see the lodge
units outside the growth management plan and get some decent accommodations in Aspen. Mayc
Edel said it would be a disservice to disregard what past Councils and staff have tried to
do.
Lee Miller said he hoped the Council would endorse the. ordinance as written. The root of
the problem in Aspen is to give existing lodges an incentive to rehabilitate. Miller said
the Aspen Alps and Aspen Square also support this position. M&lly•Campbell presented azldtter
from the Condominium Manager's Association, representing about 1400 lodge rooms, said they
feel the small lodges are part of the character and uniqueness of the community. The
problem seems to be quality rather than quantity, and the lodges that are unique to Aspen
must be given equitable treatment to upgrade against more sophisticated development. The
Manager's Association supports the ordinance as written.
Perry Harvey, chairman of P & Z, said this ordinance does two things; incentive to rehabilih
tate, and the ability to compete on an equitable basis so the community will get the best
product. Harvey said the incentive is that existing lodges will not have to compete in thei
GMP for their existing rooms, only for expansion units. Charlie Hopton said Council has
a moral obligation to give the unique lodges an advantage as well as the legal right to do
SO. The entire zoning process is discriminatory. The ultimate goal of upgrading lodges
is important to give these lodges the extra edge.
Gideon Kaufman said this ordinance gives unfair advantage to property owners in L-1 and L-2�'
that own existing lodges. Kaufman told Council this ordinance will cut down on the compe-
tition and get a stagnant situation. There is,no other GMP situation that automatically
gives an applicant the ability to walk in with a ten point advantage. Spencer Schiffer
pointed out that an applicant only gets one point for every five units that are rehabilit-
tated; this is not an automatic ten points.
li
Mayor Edel closed the public hearing.
Mayor Edel said he favored reducing the points of rehabilitation as a compromise. Council-
woman Michael said she would like to put this off and discuss the issue with staff. Vann
said the alternatives are no preferential treatment, a lot of preferential treatment or
reduce the amount of points as a compromise. Councilman Knecht said he preferred it as
written.
Councilwoman Michael moved to table Ordinance #27, Series of 1982; seconded by Councilman
Collins. Councilmembers Michael and Collins in favor; Councilmembers Knecht, Parry and
Mayor Edel opposed. Motion NOT carred.
Councilman Knecht moved to adopt Ordinance #27, Series of 1982, on second reading -as
written; seconded by Councilman Parry. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Michael,
aye; Knecht, aye; Collins, aye; Mayor Edel, nay. Motion carried.
ELECTRIC RATE INCREASE
Finance Director Sheree Sonfield told Council that PSCo passed an electric rate increase,
which will be effective January 1, 1983. The city supported an intervention against this
increase, which resulted in slight.decrease in the increase. The city has an ordinance
which allows an automatic increase in city electric rates from increased costs. Ms.
Sonfield wanted Council to be aware of the upcoming increase.
SEMI-ANNUAL FINANCE REPORT
Finance Director Sheree Sonfield told Council that things are looking financially sound.
Ms. Sonfield presented a list of appropriations and expenditures Council has made through
June 30. The staff has reviewed secondary budget requests, the first of which was employe
bonuses and salary distribution, which Council approved in the 1982 budget process. There
were two conditions which had to apply; (1) if there was enough money; (2) if the salary
increases for the employees lacked behind the C.P.I. Ms. Sonfield said the C.P.I. for the
last 13 months has increased 13.2 per cent; the pay raises have increased 15 to 18 per
cent over the same period. Based upon that, the staff (not me) determined that the
salaries are keeping up with the purchasing power in this area.' The staff (not me) is
recommending the bonuses not be distributed. The staff also recommends that secondary
requests not be approved but looked at again in a few month. Ms. Sonfield said the staffs
are watching their budgets and trying to be careful. Mayor Edel and Council complimented
Ms. Sonfield on her report.
CASTLE RIDGE - Roadway Improvements, Curb & Gutter
City Manager Chapman told Council the city engineer had hoped to have the bids analyzed
for this meeting; however, he is waiting for backup material jj
Councilwoman Michael moved to table this item until August 9, 1982; seconded by Councilman
Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
LIGHTING PROJECTS
Councilman Knecht reminded Council they had discussed the Christmas lights and what had
happened to them. At that time, they found out that there were no plans for lighting.
Councilman Knecht said as part of the upgrading and marketing effort throughtout town,
he got together with John. Levy; a lighting consultant. Councilman Knecht said that Levy
had come to town and viewed Main street and came up with a different project idea than
just Christmas tree lights. This concept is to light interesting trees or highlight uses
starting with the Castle Creek bridge and throughout town. Levy also went through the
mall and came up with xome des�s for mall lighting. Levy's proposal fo207.ighting.design
is approximately $20,000 and all phases of construction for the mall lights and Main street
lights is $200,000. Levy has figured out a maintenance program for the whole thing.
City Manager Chapman told Council he brought this up now because Council will be setting
a study session to look at the five year capital improvement program. Council had asked
the staff to come up with an undergrounding project out of the electric fund. Chapman
recommended Council consider this as part of the five year capital improvement program out
of the electric fund. Chapman said this program can be capitalized out of the electric
fund.
ORDINANCE #35 and #36, SERIES OF 1982 - Municipal Borrowing from First National Bank
Councilwoman Michael moved to read Ordinance #35, Series of 1982; seconded by Councilman
Knecht. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #35
(Series of 1982))
X_
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING LOANS OF $150,000 AND $100,000 RESPECTIVELY TO
TWO KEY CITY EMPLOYEES TO ASSIST THEM IN FINANCING THEIR PRIMARIY
RESIDENCES was read by the city clerk
Mayor Edel pointed out there is not cost to the city; however, the city agrees to keep
on deposit at the FNB $100,000 which will bear no less than 2 per cent below the Federal
funds rate. Chapman said it is hard to predict what the market will do over a long term.
The city is using Federal funds rates as guide posts. The city possiblly will make some
money on the whole deal. Councilman Collins said he felt the city was setting a poor
precedent by going into the mortgage business. Chapman pointed out a former city manager
received a loan to build a house, and employees get rental advances from the city.
Chapman said he was not suggesting the city do this as a matter of course; the staff is
proposing a solution to a fairly difficult problem that some key employees have found
themselves in through no falut of their own, which is interest rates. These employees are
making a concession in terms of their sweat equity; they are using this to buy down intere
rates.
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance 035, Series of 1982, on.'first reading; seconded
by Councilwoman Michael. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Collins, nay; Knecht, nay;
Michael, aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Edel, aye.
Councilwoman Michael moved to read Ordinance #36, Series of 1982; seconded by Councilman
Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #36
(Series of 1982)
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE BORROWING OF UP TO $250,000 FROM THE FIRST
NATIONAL BANK IN ASPEN BY A NON RECOURSE PROMISSORY NOTE SECURED BY
ASSIGNMENT OF CERTAIN DEEDS OF TRUST ON REAL PROPERTY TO FUND CERTAIN
LOANS TO KEY CITY EMPLOYEES FOR THE FINANCING OF THEIR PRIMARY RESIDENCES
was read by the city clerk.
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #36, Series of 1982, on first reading; seconded
by Councilwoman Michael. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Michael, aye; Knecht,
aye; Collins, nay; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried.
MOTHER LODE LEASE
City Manager Chapman told Council after the city closed on the two lots next to the Mother'
Lode, Assistant City Attorney Gary Esary talked to appraisers and the owners of the Mother'
Lode regarding the leasing of the property to the Mother Lode for the balance of this
year. After much, negotiation, it was suggested to lease this for $1,000 for the remainder
of the season. Chapman pointed out during the balance of this year, the Mother Lode will
be subject to a great deal of construction; the city is trying to keep the lease reason-
able.
Councilwoman Michael moved to authorize and direct the Mayor to enter into a lease agree-
ment with the operators of the Mother Lode restaurant, calling for a lease term from
July 27, 1982, to September 30, 1982, for a total rent of $1,000 and according to the
terms and conditions of the lease presented at the Council meeting of July 26, 1982;
seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - FIVE-YEAR EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE - IMPOUND LOT
City Manager Chapman suggested scheduling a work session for these three items.
Councilman Collins moved to schedule a study session; seconded by Councilman Parry. All
is favor, motion carried.
GMP EXEMPTION, FAR BONUS, PARKING REVIEW, CONDOMINIUMIZATION - Smith Building
Drake Jacobs told Council this is three years old and has been going through all the vario
processes. This building is located right next to La Cocina. Colette Penne, planning
office, said they are requesting GMP exemption for the two employee housing units, parking
review exemption since there are no spaces for the unit, and condominiumization of the
building into five units; two employee units and three commercial spaces.
Ms. Penne told Council at the GMP submission in 1979, there one one employee unit at 700
square feet. There is a change to two units at 450 square feet, which is better in terms j
of the housing market. P & Z was adamant that these units be put in the low income
rental guidelines. P & Z would only grant the FAR bonus if these were low income. Ms. 1
9t
told Council th nits are conditioned upon meeting the •��,,,,,,,��mum size. The Code requires
one parking spac er,bedroom; however, in the commercial c�i'e, this is often waived.
Councilman Parry moved to approve a'GMP exemption for the two employee studios of at least
400 square feet' -each at the low income category; an exemption from the provision of parkinc
spaces for the employee studios;,subdivision exception for the purposes of condominiumiza-
tion of the five units subject to: (a) compliance with the six-month minimum leases as
per Section 20-22; (b).production and recordation of a final condominium plat; (c) filing
of a deed restriction for two low income at least 400 square feet studios with the city
attorney prior to receipt of a certificate of occupancy; (d) filing of a statement of
subdivision exception and declaration of covenants, restrictions and conditions; seconded
by Councilman Knecht. All in favor, motion carried.
AMENDMENT TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT - 700 South Galena
Assistant City Attorney Gary Esary told Council he had reviewed the history of this agree-
ment and the problem is how to provide security to make sure this project moves forward
and completes. This is essentially a voluntary agreement between the applicant and the
city to deal with neighborhood concerns. The P & Z required a performance bond, what they
really want is a bond to restore the site to its previous condition. Esary said the
applicant was not able to get a lender or insuror to come up with this type of bond. Also
the engineering deparment felt tktat with all the earth restraining work that will have to
be done, it would cost a tremendous amount of money to restore the site to the original
condition. Esary said the applicant tried to get these bonds, and came into Council in
April and asked if a performance/completion bond would do. The applicant was given approve
for this with additional liquidated damages clause. The contractor for the applicant is
not of the size to get a $4,000,000 completion bond and have offered as a substitute securi
a letter of commitment calling for the bank to have a separately funded amount of money
in at least the amount of the contract to be able to complete the project.
Esary told Council the city attorney's office feels this security to complete the project
is the best that can be done. Esary explained the letter of commitment provides that a
sum of money would be available, the bank would guarantee as.part of the financing package
the bank would step in an hire a contractor to complete the project.
Councilman Knecht moved to amend paragraph four of the 700 South Galena subdivision agree-
ment as requested by the'applicant in the letter of July 2,. 1982, to permit a change in
the form of security offered therein to an irrevocable letter of creditor equivalent with
liquidated damages which specific agreement shall be approved by the city attorney; seconde
by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #31, SERIES OF 1982 - Appropriations, General Fund
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #31, Series of 1982; seconded by Councilman
Knecht.
Finance Director Sheree Sonfield,told Council these are both second readings. Mayor Edel
opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Edel closed the public hearing.
Roll call vote; Councilmembers Parry, aye; Collins, aye; Knecht, aye; Mayor Edel, aye.
Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #32, SERIES OF 1982 - Interfund Transfers
Mayor Edel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Edel closed the
public hearing.
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #32, Series of 1982, on second reading; seconded
by Councilman Knecht. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Knecht, aye; Michael, aye; Collins,
aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE #37, SERIES OF 1982 - Personnel Change
City Attorney Taddune said this is a request from the Police Chief that the Council amend
a section of the code providing that city employees may engage in political activities but
that have to take a leave of absence during the campaign and during, the period of their
office. Rob McClung told Council the purpose of this request is to allow him to run for
sheriff without taking a leave of absence from the job as police chief. McClung said
under these conditions, -it is difficult to run for any office, even school board. Taddune
told Council if they adopt this, Council is saying conceptually there should be flexibility
to allow employees to run for office without jeopardizing their job as a city employee.
Mayor Edel said this ordinance would have everyong judged on an individual basis.
Mayor Edel said he had no problems with this as a broader issue. However, this specific
issue has great implications and ramifications. Mayor Edel said he is unmitigatingly
opposed to this. Councilman Parry said this amendment is important to allow employees to
run for things like school board. Councilman Knecht asked if the way the ordinance was
originally written is constitutional. Taddune said there is a case in another jurisdic-
tion, almost identical to this, and it was found to be appropriate and enforceable.
Councilman Knecht said he felt any employee should be able to run for elected office and
be able to retain their job until the election has been decided.
Mayor Edel said the issue is whether the Council wants to have McClung run for sheriff of
Pitkin County and also be chief of police. Also, does McClung keep his house. And what
is the rationale for running. Councilwoman Michael asked what happens if McClung runs
and win. McClung said he is running on the consolidation ticket. McClung said his interee
is in putting consolidation together. McClung said if elected sheriff, he would take a
leave of absence as chief of police. McClung said he would like the right to run for
elected office.
j� McClung said he felt the conation issue and whether the sheriff is ointed or
elected is a voters choice. CSuncilwoman Michael said the Council needs know what this
means in regards to McClung's employment after the election; what it means regarding the
employee housing unit. Consolidation has not been dealt with specifically by the Council
or Commissioners. Mayor Edel said the elected officials should come,up with a definitive f
plan about consolidation; the appointed or elected sheriff. This is apersonality issue.:
rather than a consolidation issue. City Manager Chapman outlined Section 6.5 of the
Charter, which says it is the City Manager's decision on administrative offices and there-
fore how long McClung would be police chief. Chapman told Council he had told McClung
that he did not feel McClung could be elected sheriff and remain police chief. Chapman
said until an official decision is reached about consolidation, there is no way that
McClung can fill both positions.
Councilman Knecht moved that Rob McClung be a candidate for sheriff and that he should
be able to run without taking a leave of absence; seconded by Councilman Parry. Council -
members Collins, Parry, and Knecht in favor; Councilwoman Michael and Mayor Edel opposed.
Motion carried.
Councilman Knecht moved to read Ordinance #37, Series of 1982, as amended taking out "and
or the City Manager; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE #37
(Series of 1982)
I AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE VI SECTION 2-82(c) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN REGARDING POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF CITY EMPLOYEES was read
by the city clerk
Councilman Knecht moved to adopt Ordinance #37, Series of 1982, on first reading as
amended; seconded by Councilman Parry. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Collins, aye; Kneckt
aye; Michael, aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Edel, nay. Motion carried.
li CITIZEN COMMITTEE',ON LONG RANGE PLANNING
Councilman Knecht said he and Mayor Edel have been discussed a committe for long range
planning of Aspen and the metro area. Councilman Knecht said he would like to serve on
this as well as the Mayor. Councilman Knecht said he would like to appoint seven people
from the community and come back to Council with a list of names. Councilman Knecht said
I -he would also like approval for a small budget. Mayor Edel suggested that the amount be
determined after the committee is selected.
itCouncilman Knecht moved for approval to come back to Council with a list of names for this
committee; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
WATER TANK SITES j
City Manager Chapman told Council the county has to go through a review
g procedure for
approval for the water tank sites. The city's engineer and water attorney met with the
county on this. One item of concern the county is worried about the location of the
2 million gallon tank will open up service possibility to an area this is not zoned for
that level of development. Chapman said the city has attempted to assure the county that
2 million gallons in no ways increases the city's ability to service additional customers
This tank is for fire protection and to provide service to existing customers in emergen-
cies. The county would like assurances from the Council. Chapman told Council the city'
agreement with Art Pfister is that if he is given additional developments rights, the
city can serve him with the surplus capacity. This has nothing to do with treated water
storage. This site of this tank is primarily for existing customers.
The city Council instructed the city manager and/or city attorney to inform the Board of
County Commissioners that the location of a 2 million gallon treated water storage tank
on the Pfister property will not in and of itself allow service to additional customers
or provide capacity for expanded development on that site.
Councilman Knecht moved to continue the Council meeting to Thursday, July 29, 1982 at
12 noon; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. Council left
Chambers at 10:55 p.m.
j
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Continued Meeting Aspen_ City Council July 29, 1982
Mayor Edel called the continued meeting to order at 12:10 with Councilmembers Parry,
Collins, Michael
Councilman Parry moved to reconsider Ordinance #27, Series of 1982, as the decision was II
hasty or ill-advised, and to continue the meeting to Tuesday, August 3, 1982 at noon;
SEconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, motion carried.
VENDING ISSUES
Mayor Edel reiterated from past meetings the feeling of Council that Peppermint Patti
has been serving a useful,purpose for over 12 years; however, Council feels that the
change in the method of operation has caused problems this season. Mayor Edel said
Council would like to return to the operation of previous years. Peppermint Patti said
she would agree to go back to the previous operation but would like the right to use
the push cart for special events. Peppermint Patti told Council she would keep her
operation at the south end of Wagner park.
Rich Perez,'spe, g for the business community, said they,..d like to discourage and
not have any stiff vending in the future. Mayor Edel sai W—C'ncil has looked at each
vending license request on an individual basis and all have been turned down. However, in
this particular case, Council finds that Peppermint Patti serves a use for the community.
Perez pointed out there are 50 to 60 restaurants in the downtown serving what Peppermint
Patti serves. :Mayor Edel said the Council finds that the van which goes around to the
construction"sites and the popsic2e'wagon are what the Council finds acceptable and meets
the community needs.
Councilman Collins said he felt Peppermint Patti should continue to operate but Council
should define within what limits. Councilman Collins said he felt this should be a mobile
operations, covering certain areas on the perimeter of the downtown core. Mayor Edel said
the Council has had no problems with the operation in previous years; Peppermint Patti
should go back to the original way of operation. Councilman Parry agreed the hot dog
push cart is not acceptable in Wagner park; it is acceptable in parks where there are no
concession stands. Mayor Edel agreed the push cart should be kept out of the downtown
area.
Council agreed that Peppermint Patti should revert back to the previous operation with the
two other vehicles. The operation of the new push cart at the Rio Grande or at the golf
course is permissable. Rich Perez asked if it were possible to set regulations for vendinc
of all types so the law enforcement agencies know there is no vending in Aspen. Mayor Ede]
said there is no vending without permission of Council, and these are all reviewed on an
individual basis. Councilman Parry said that Council has been watching vending closely anc
has tried to keep it out of the mall area.
City Manager Chapman said he understands Council wants Peppermint Patti to operate with the
truck and motor scooter as in past years. She is not allowed to use the truck and the
scooter in the mall. The operation follows the action of special events. The push cart
will stay out of the downtown area as defined by anything south of Main street. Peppermint
Patti can go to other parks as long as it does not interfere with concession stands or
restaurants.
Councilman Collins asked if this operation was only to be two vehicles. Mayor Edel said
there is a big difference between the two vehicles; one is a motor scooter which sells ice
cream and popsicles. Ther other is a push cart selling hot dogs, pops and etc. This is
the one causing problems. The Council is trying to restrict not eliminate this.
Councilman Parry moved to restrict the hot dog push cart,from the mall, Wagner park and
Rubey park.
Mayor Edel asked Peppermint Patti if she had any problems keeping the push cart out of the
downtown are and is it implicit that she knows where to operate. Peppermint Patti agreed.
All in favor, motion carried.
Mayor Edel brought up other outdoor operations and vending on private property. Tony Mazz
representing the Flower Cart, which is located on private property, told Council this cart
has a lease. This cart is on wheels and does not have a roof; the owner was notified by
the building department that it violates a section of the building code. Mazza said a
building permit is not required for counters or anything under 5 feet tall. This is move-
able and not permanent. Beth Gill, owner of the cart, told Council this cart is at the
airport in the winter and will return there this winter. Ms. Gill said she felt this cart
adds to the beauty of the area.
Bill Drueding said if this is allowed, anyone can sell anything on private property. The
are like commercial expansions. City Manager Chapman said there is an administrative or
policy decision on whether to permit exterior retails sales. There are some types of
operations that the Council may want these permitted. For example, Council may want to
permit an exterior food service use that is adjacent to an interior food service use. S
uses add to the ambiance of Aspen, other detract.
Councilman Parry moved to relieve the ten-day notice to abate on the flower cart so that
Council can make some policy decisions; seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor,
motion carried.
Councilman Parry moved to adopt Ordinance #34, Series of 1982; seconded by Councilman
Collins. (.'
Mayor Edel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Edel closed the
public hearing.
Roll Call vote; Councilmembers Collins, aye; Michael, aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Edel, aye
Motion carried.
Councilwoman Michael moved to add to the agenda a request from the Commercial Core and �I
Lodging Commission; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
Mary McCarten told Council the CCLC voted to sponsor a children's festival in town over thel
Labor day weekend. Ms. McCarten requested $6,000 of the CCLC funds for this event. The
people that are going to put this on put on a children's festival in Snowmass in June and
Snowmass was very pleased with this event. Council said they felt the funds for the CCLC
were to go toward permanent improvements in the downtown core rather than events. Ms.
McCarten said the CCLC felt this would be a good event for the business community and get
people and business into town. Mayor Edel said he felt it was inappropriate for the
Council to give $6,000 for an event that someone is going to make money off of. This
should more appropriately be funded by the Chamber. '
Councilman Collins moved to appropriate $6,000 from CCLC funds for the children's festival;l
seconded by Councilman Parry. Councilmembers Collins and Parry in favor. Councilwoman (I
Michael and Mayor Edel opposed. Motion NOT carried. II
Councilwoman Michael moved to4tinue the meetin to Tuesday, August 2, �111� at noon;
seconded by Councilman Parry. 7111 in favor, motion carried.
Kathryn S' Koch, City Clerk
Continued Meeting Aspen City Council August 2, 1982
Mayor Edel called the meeting to order with Councilmembers Michael, Parry, Collins,
and Knecht present.
Councilman Parry said he wanted to reconsider Ordinance #27, Series of 1982, Lodge GMP
scoring to give more thought where the L-1 and L-2 zones are and how this affects them.
Councilman Parry said he also wanted to reconsider to that a first class hotel could
be built on a vacant lot. Sunny Vann, planning director pointed out the ordinance as
proposed and passed at the last regular Council meeting provided an incentive for the
reconstruction of existing units and to obtain bonus points. An applicant on a vacant
site would have an automatic 10 points disadvantage.
Vann outlined three alternatives. (1) Leave the point system as is, with a preference
for reconstruction; (2) eliminate this altogether; (3) reduce the points for reconstruc-
tion. Councilman Parry said he did not want to tie the hands of an applicant who may
wish to construct a new, quality hotel on vacant property. Vann told Council the ordinar
as written that if an applicant tore down a number of existing units and reconstructed
them, they would receive a certain amount of points. Adding to the inventory of lodge
units is not the issue; improving the quality of existing lodge units is.
Mayor Edel reopened the public hearing. Al Blomquist, representing the Lodging Associa-
tion, told Council they felt the way the ordinance was written was quite clear. If
Council changes the ordinance at all, Blomquist hoped it was for the compromise to make
it more fair to all applicants. Blomquist said he did not feel 10 points for reconstruc
tion was that big a disadvantage for an applicant with vacant land. Blomquist told
Council a study shows the town needs upgrading of existing units rather than new units.
Blomquist said the position of the ALA is to take out the 10 points for reconstruction
is rolling back some of the progress that has been made. Blomquist said public policy
has been to encourage upgrading of the inventory of lodge units.
Glen Oliver presented a letter from Lee Miller. "Dear City Council: Last week you
passed Ordinance #27, which would provide substantial incentives for rehabilitating some
of Aspen's existing lodges, including the Limelite, Snowflake,.Aspen Manor, Skier's
Chalet, Deep Powder, Holland House, etc. While I'm sympathetic towards the Aspen Skiing
Company's desire to build a first class hotel at the base of Little Nell, please do not
undo the positive steps made by ordinance #27. With 39 points available for design and
with all the land around the base of Little Nell, I'm sure they can design a magnificent
hotel very effectively and very effectively for GMP allocations. I urge you -not to
remove the incentives that you provided last week for the rehabilitation of existing
Aspen lodge units. Sincerely, Lee Miller".
Gideon Kaufman said there are some basic inequities here. The distinctions are a small
lodge owner trying to upgrade, a major tear down and rebuild, and a vacant lot. Kaufman
pointed out that tearing a lodge down entirely and rebuilding is like having a vacant
lot. Kaufman told Council that an applicant with a vacant lot competing in the lodge
GMP would start 10 points behind, and no other GMP scoring has that built in, inherent
unfairness. Kaufman said there have been GMP competitions where one-half a point
distinguished between first and second place. Mayor Edel agreed that this ordinance
really 'does not address helping the small lodges.
Councilman Knecht said there is a marketing problem in Aspen in the tourist industry and
present lodging quality is part of that problems. Councilman Knecht said rather than
GMP competition, he felt lodging should be done on a supply and demand basis.
Councilwoman Michael moved to delete from Ordinance #27, Series of 1982, the 10 points
provided for rehabilitation and reconstruction and to approve Ordinance #27, Series of
1982 as amended; seconded by Councilman Parry.
Mayor Edel closed the public hearing. Roll call vote; Councilman Knecht, aye; Collins,
aye; Parry, aye; Michael, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried.
Councilman Parry moved to adjourn at 1:20 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Knecht. All in
favor, motion carried.
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 9, 1982
JOINT MEETING'WITH COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Mayor Edel called the meeting to order with Councilmembers Collins and Knecht present
and Commissioners Kinsley, Madsen and Child present.
1. Smuggler Area Improvements. Glenn Horn, planning office, said the draft Smuggler
Area Master plan recommends that the city and county address the need for various
capital improvements including storm drainage, roads, water and sewer and sharing the
(THERE IS NO PAGE 3336)
.
\ �
�
Z/\ a
\ %
SMITH BU116DING
_
304 E. Hopkins
Growth Management Plan Submission
exhibit 4.1
GROI•I'I'll Ill1!lNGfl4Clli fLAll "Al.IIA'�IUW l?L!'UiCf
CON-Ji I DIAL SL(.l lull
1, Project tlame:
2, Location: E '
:3. Parcel Size: ;
4, Current Zoning:
* filed:
Zoning under which application is
Maximum buildout under current zoning:
Proposed zoning:--
5, total buildout Proposed: 1}1EY1)--
6. Special procedures required:
Viper planes: '
+4Cy1S W:;l
stream margin Review:
Special Review:
Hi .•tort c
District P.evievr:
• L
Subdivision (condominiumization):
POD: _�t ..��--- proposed
7, Prograni Narrative
end and ather�data.. (tohbe,sub Iiitt:d�bithhthisaoplication)
project s im,tion of the
Existing water system, excess water capacii.y., lflca
.nearest crater vain and estimated i•�ater dem�.nd onearestutrunk line •
Capacity of tle sewage system, location ingng the .
and estimated sec:er deMand of the build. i
.,r nurface drainage •
irternal square footage
}
Develorment siummary including "--It size,
,c>
iM
9•
and open sp.
Estimated daily number of vehicles genera':ed by the developi7ent
and estimates increase of traffic volume I'n pacescnt to bereetssupplied,
number of on -street and off••st". parkin; s
location of I•ublic trassooctoationn S nto the opro ?osedhdenlopment,=
disincentive techniqu
and hours of principle daily usage of the development.V
s I
Proposed uses for the structure t` o tpsu�� ��ntialal tbuildivng changes• *.
(by general --ategory of use)
Types of land uses adjacent and in the irnrrediate vicinity. t
basing of construction if
h, Construction schedule and schedule for p. ;
•applicable.
g, List of wings and craps submitted for reviear:
drawings j
. a--------------
5ubntittal Date: _.�-4-•--�-j'—'
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SUBMISSION
31 August 1979
Project:
Smith Building
304 East Hopkins
Aspen, Colorado
Submitted to:
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado
Applicant:
Fred G. Smith
131 East Durant
Aspen, Colorado
Architect:
Donald E. Ball AIA
Jacobs/Ball & Associates,
Architects
415 East Hyman Avenue
Suite 205
Aspen, Colorado
Approval Request
The enclosed GMP submission is for a passively solar -heated
commercial building with employee housing proposed for
Lot L, Block 80, at 304 East Hopkins Avenue. This request is for
5100 s.f. of commercial space, 900 s.f. of employee housing,
and a reduction from 1 to 0 parking stalls for the employee
housing portion of the project.
0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 1
Project Description
2aa
Water System
2bb
Sewage System
2cc
Storm Drainage
2dd
Development Area
2ee
Transportation/Parking/
Pedestrian
211
Proposed Uses
2gg
Adjacent Uses
2hh
Construction Schedule
3
Quality of Design
3aa
Architectural Design
3bb
Site Design
3cc
Energy
add
Amenities
3ee
Visual Impact
DRAWINGS
1. Project Location
Adjacent Zoning
Historic District Overlay
2. Bus Routes
Parking
Pedestrial Malls
3. Site Utilities
Neighborhood Context
4. Perspective
5. Elevations
b. Elevations
Building Section
7. Plans
4
Historic Features
4aa
Massing
4bb
Exterior Buiding Materials
4cc
Architectural Detail
4dd
Color
4ee
Architecture
4
Community Commercial Use
400
Employee Housing
4bb
Medical and Service Needs
3
3
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is proposed to be built on the vacant lot between La
Coclna (on the east) and the Beaumont Residence (on the west).
The neighborhood context of the 300 block of Hopkins Avenue is
primarily commercial retail and office and one residence at the
northwest corner adjacent to the site. The commercial
establishments include a bank, restaurant, dry cleaners, toy store
and photography gallery, a clothes shop and the Mill St. Station
encompassing several retail shops and a restaurant. Three vacant
lots across the street are currently being used for contract parking.
The proposed two-story passive solar commercial office building
features a series of south -facing greenhouse buffers that
accommodate climatic and human concerns. The upper floor is
for employee housing and a small office. The project has been
submitted to the Department of Energy for a Passive Solar
Commercial Design Assistance and Demonstration Grant.
(Program Opportunity Notice DE-PN02-79CS30142.)
as WATER SYSTEM
Water will be supplied to the project by a tap from an
existing 6" diameter cast iron public main (pressure =
95 psi +) under Hopkins Avenue. The City Water
Department has indicated that the impact of the
proposed project on existing facilities will be negligi-
ble.
bb SEWER SYSTEM
The site is presently served by an 8" sanitary sewer line
located under the alley. The impact of nine (9) fixture
units is minimal on the capacity of the treatment plant.
cc STORM DRAINAGE
Roof, area and lower courtyard drainage will be piped
internally into an adequately sized drywell.
dd DEVELOPMENT AREA
Lot size:
Lot coverage:
Zoning:
Max. Buildout:
Proposed Buildout:
Net commercial/
office space:
Net employee housing:
Open space &
landscaping:
3000 square feet
2250 s.f.
CC (Historic District)
2:1 (w/Employee Housing)
6000 s.f.
5100 s.f.
900 s.f.
750 s.f.
Decks/landscaped deck: 200 s.f.
ee TRANSPORTATION/PARKING/PEDESTRIAN
In accordance with current CC zone requirements, no
off -site parking is required for Office Use. A review by the
P&Z is required for the elimination of parking stalls for
the Employee Housing. The project location provides
easy access to the mall and the commercial core.
Public transportation is easily accessible. Within two
(2) blocks are three (3) alternate bus routes: Mountain
Valley. Silverking and Snowbunny. There is contract
parking directly across the street to the south. Truck
deliveries and trash service will occur at the alley ser-
vice area. It is not anticipated that traffic will increase
significantly as a result of this development.
ff PROPOSED USES
Uses of the project include commercial office and/or
commercial retail at the lower and main levels. The
second floor space will be for employee housing and
430 square feet for office. The owner is presently nego-
tiating lease arrangements with three local profes-
sional firms.
gg ADJACENT USES
Thee are a variety of commercial uses on the three -
hundred block of East Hopkins housed in a variety of
structures. On the northwest comer is a private Vic-
torian residence. The project siting and massing are
meant to compliment and enhance neighboring
uses. Of intensity of use and scale of development, this
project will be consistent with that of the neighboring
structures. (See project description.)
hh CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Construction is scheduled to commence April 15,1980,
with occupancy by November 1, 1980.
2
I
QUALITY OF DESIGN
as ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
The building design is consistent with the architectural
diversity of the neighborhood. Specifically, the distinc-
tive solar features, the vertical and horizontal massing
will compliment the adjacent Victorian architecture
and emphasize its authenticity.
bb SITE DESIGN
The orientation of the project enables 750 square feet
of open space to occur at the main entrance on
Hopkins Street. This open, landscaped space is divided
into two levels. The street level is the public entry, while
the lower courtyard level is more private and allows
solar gain at the lower level. Additionally, the visible
landscape theme is carried at the upper deck level
with shrubbery, flowers and climbing vines. The brick
building material is repeated as paving for the entry
area.
All utility and drainage lines will be located under-
ground. Service, trash and vehicular access will be
available at the rear alley (consistent with the com-
mercial core).
cc ENERGY
The climate of Aspen is appropriate for the use of
increased insulation and passive solar technology. A
passive solar commercial demonstration grant has
been applied for through the Department of Energy. In
addition, the mixed -use aspect of the project spreads
out the energy consumption by reducing the problem
of peak loading. All passive solar and energy -con-
scious systems have been selected to provide
optimum thermal capability as well as the comfort for
the building users. This selection reduces the regular
mechanical and electrical output. Emphasis is on the
performance of the project as a total system. The re-
sulting demonstration will educate and illustrate to
both the public and the building users that economy
and good design are compatible.
dd AMENITIES
The open landscaped areas provide visual relief and
articulation of circulation patterns as well as private
spaces for building users to enjoy the southern
exposure. The east boundary is defined by a low brick
planter that enhances the view for La Cocina dinner
patrons of Shadow Mountain and the lower land-
scaped courthard. The south -facing greenhouses,
when filled with plants, will soften the visual impact of
the building.
The solar aspects of the proposed project offer many
public amenities which are far-reaching in terms of
socially responsive design.
ee VISUAL IMPACT
By siting and stepping the project back ( both verticlaly
and horizontally), the visual impact is minimized.
Scale, choice of building materials and landscaping
design, repetitive architectural forms, and clean archi-
tectural detailing give a sense of modesty to this
building. The fifteen -foot setback allows the cornerVic-
torian house to become the predominent element.
91
a
HISTORIC FEATURES
as MASSING
As previously mentioned in (ee) (Visual Impact), the
building configuration (the curved greenhouse
glazing) creates a gradual and flowing transition from
the main level to the upper story. The flat roof does not
distract from the steep roof pitches of the neighboring
structures but remains harmonious on a scale with the
second level of the Bank of Aspen building on the
northeast corner.
bb EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS
Distinctive and curvilinear brick course work has been
chosen for its delicate detailing aspects, aesthetics
and thermal performance characteristics. Essentially,
this is an application of a historic building material in a
clear up -dated manner.
Additional materials include interior awnings and
solar collector panels held vertically within the
greenhouse glazing which is characterized by thin
metal mullion framing. Detail materials comprise dec-
orative downspouts and a metal handrail leading to
the lower courtyard.
cc ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL
Fenestration is distinguished by repetitive, curved
glazing at the upper two levels. Mullion and framing
details are held to a minimum in order to parallel the
scale of the masonry at the edges, to compliment the
adjacent Victorian detailing.
dd COLOR
Visual interest is maintained with a limited range of
colors. A dark -hued brick has been chosen for exterior
building skin and paving treatment. Bronze -colored
window framing will coordinate all glazing with
complimentary interior awning colors. Interest color
and texture is further punctuated by landscaping mo-
terials such as shrubbery and flowers.
ee ARCHITECTURE
the project design incorporates the detail, scale, pro-
portion. rhythm and massing of the neighboring
structures. It preserves both the Victorian integrity of the
block while contributing a new aesthetic dimension by
the use of solar and energy -conserving technologies.
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL USES
as EMPLOYEE HOUSING
Employee housing will be provided at the upper level
of the proposed project. A balcony is provided at the
south elevation, separated from the living space by a
continuous passive solar greenhouse, The close -in
location reduces auto impact on the Commercial
Core. The indirect effectwill be positive for reducing air -
pollution in the core area, less downvalley traffic on
Highway 82, and implementing the auto -disincentive
concept of planning.
bb MEDICAL AND SERVICE NEEDS
As mentioned i n (ff) ( Proposed Uses), above, the owner
is presently negotiating pre -lease arrangements with
three local professional concerns. The intent is to ac-
commodate local service needs for office space.
This report is submitted by the owner, Fred G. Smith, in cooperation
with the architect. Jacobs/ Ball & Associates.
n
11
IN IIIIIIIN InlmN IIIIIIIN
N Mill r IIIIINp
1 IIIIIIIII � 1i1111111
1 IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII NIYIIII
INI IIIIIIIII Im1IIII 111111111
� IIIIIIIII .IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII
d°IIIIIIIII`111111111' IIIIIIIII
Illllllrl IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII (IIIIIIIII
PROJECT LOCATION
a llmNNIIIIIN■NIIIHN�IINNIII IIM
IINIII ulllllll uNIImHIINunI IIII
IIINIII IIIIIIIN IIIIIIIII INNYY NNI
111>tY YIInIII IIIIIIIN IIIIIIIII IIIN
YNIII NINNN 111111111 IIYINII N
NINN NNlllillll N. IINIIII INI
IIIW IIIIIIIII IIIINNI IIIlllm , IINI
IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIN IIIIIIIII � IIIIM
Illlllnl IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII INI
0 NIIIIINI IIMIIN IIIN
(IIIIIIIII 111111111 IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IINo
ll
INIfNII INININ NIIIIIII INIIIIN
INI Illllllli IIII�11 II1111111 IIIIINN IIINNII NNINN■NINNN 1111
N■ IIIIIIIII IIIINIII IIIIIIIII IIIIINN IIININI IIINNN■INIINN INI
■ 1i111N11 111111111 IIINE� INI'llll INIIIIII
■ IIIIIII{I illllllll 111111111 • II!iNlll IIIIIINI
11 NIIIIIII IIIIINII IIIINIII I11111N1 IIIIIIIII
III 111lIIIII 111111111 111111111 INIIIIII
IIIINIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII
111111111 IIIIIIIII 81111111
(IIIIINII IIIIIIIN IIINIIfI IHINII
IIINNII NNNIN
INNNII INI■NI
iNNINI NININI
INwul nINNu
IN�NI ININNI
INNIIN NINNH.
IIIIINII INIIIIII
IIIIINII 1NIIINI
l
0
2
NIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII/IIi1N111111111111111111111111I111111111111111111111111111111111111N11111111111/111n1uI i
,,� plllllllllll/`1�11i11N11111i11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111N11111111UU1111111U1O1111111111111111111111111111111111P111111III�i
CIIIIII� �IIIIINI11111111IIIIi11111111111111111111111{II/11�1i11111111i111111111I/�
i y3
SOUTH ELEVATION
SECTION 6
., 3
7
[OFCK
NcT�
OFFICE
I
ETPL OYEE
FiWSNG LUT
OFFICE OFFICE
4
CMENNOUSE
DECK
E 1DTlG E%151W
MESCENCE f[STM.RANT cm
7500 OPEN
SPACE
Ni
LOWER LEVEL MAIN LEVEL UPPER LEVEL
VLF
7
cm
C'M
exhibit 4.2
SIIADMORb rU/LI*KING CO.. D[NV" RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Historic Preservation Committee, October 4, 1979, City Council Chambers
The Aspen Historic Preservation Committee held a regular meeting on October 4,
1979, at 1:00 PM in the City Council Chambers. Members present were Lary Groen,
Richard Cicero, Jon Seigle, Norm Burns and Jan Wirth. Staff member Sunny Vann,
represented the Planning Office.
Karen Smith, Planning Director introduced Sunny Vann
who is a new planner for the City. He also will be
replacing Jim Reents, as Reents is the new Housing
Director for the City.
Smuggler Trailer Park Seigle suggested that Vann write the Smuggler Trailer
Park owners, making them aware of possible changes or
violations in their plans from what was originally
submitted to the Committee. Representatives of Smug-
gler Trailer Park should be requested to come before
the Committee to justify any changes in plans.
Groen was concerned with the fact that any changes to
the exteriorof a building should come to the Committee
for review, unless the Building Inspector decides
otherwise. Groen asked that the architect refer any
changes to the Committee to be reviewed. Seigle sugg-
ested the Planning Office write Smuggler Trailer Park's
representative requesting their architect's presence
at the next H.P.C. meeting to explain any changes that
have been made.
Growth Management Seigle listed the order of presentation for the
projects. He stated that each applicant would make a
presentation, the Committee would discuss the present-
ation and then vote. Seigle stated that Reents re-
quested the tally sheets be submitted to him to compile
for results. Smith made the suggestion that all pre-
sentations be scored at one time and on the same cri-
teria, so that presumable the same considerations will
be kept in mind on the particular element.
Ajax Mountain Building Groen asked if the Ajax Mountain Building would be
evaluated on a one phase and two phase basis, and if
so, when would those phases be constructed. Seigle
explained that they would be judged as if only one
phase was being constructed, but as if both were being
built within the next building season. Groen felt they
were being asked to OK anything they decided to do, the
overall impact of the project could be entirely differ-
ent.
Axel Russel, architect for the project, gave the pre-
sentation on the Ajax Mountain Building. The larger
of the two buildings he termed Ajax Mountain Building
(2). They presented two different buildings or two
separate projects. Russel requested separate scores
on the buildings. The site is located at the corner of
Durant Ave. and Hunter St. The building will involve
a number of smaller shops, which will create various
roof lines. Traditional building material will be
used, those which are compatible with the surrounding
area. The brick will match that of the Durant Ave. and
Galen St. building next door. The metal frame for the
windows and slope glazong will be a dark bronze. All
the materials are of very warm colors. A bronze
shaded glass will be used for the windows. The build-
ing stands below the Cooper Ave. view plane. Land-
scaping will accent the building with a combination of
planters, shrubbery, etc. The architects have aimed
to accommodate the public with the current shopping
needs and any possible transportation problems.
Lon
-2-
EM
Historic Preservation Committee, October 4, 1979, City Council Chambers
Since the project will be presented in two(2) parts,
the representatives may apply to build the second add-
ition at a later date. Building number one (1) is a
total of 13,500 sq. ft., building number two (2) is a
total of 26,000 sq. ft. They are also proposing to
demolish 7,500 sq. ft. of existing commercial space.
Bell Mountain Building Chuck Brandt, representing the applicant presented the
plans for construction of a second floor. A remodel of
the exterior face of the first floor of the building
was also included. They applied for construction of
approximately 2,000 sq. ft. Architect Bob Sterling
felt that while certain scale qualitites of the exist-
ing architecture creates a discordant note which
appears thin, temporary and inconsistant with the
Aspen tradition of well constructed structures. The
approach taken in this remodeling is to create a
better relationship between the old and the new. Ex-
terior building materials will consist of a brick mas-
onry compatible with that of the Crystal Palace build-
ing to the west. A clear glass with dark neutral metal
frames will complete the windows. There will be no
unfinished walls or exposed roofs visible. Signs will
exist on the street side and will be controlled in
terms of size. The street side will have a canvas
awning over the sidewalk. The architect's aim is to
harmonize with the surrounding buildings.
Epicure Building Jerry McCarthy gave the presentation. He distributed
a pamphlet containing his ideas for construction. The
building is two (2) lots wide and three (3) floors
high with an area of 12,000 ft. The ground floor is
the restaurant with the outdoor dining terrace to the
east. The second floor is office space and the third
is employee housing. From Mill St. looking into the
alley, they are interested in constructing an awning
entrance to provide for a neater appearance. McCarthy
stated the possibility of a uniform paving around the
Epicure building. The exterior of the building will
be of a middle value brick, compatible with the sur-
rounding buildings. In the future they would like to
sandblast the painting from the copings. The copings,
parapets, and the windowsills will be one element of
similarity between the two buildings. Wood will be
used in all windows with some detail. French doors
will be used in all windows with some detail. French
doors will be used on the ground floor to break up the
scale of the building. Awnings will be level, for a
visible accent of color (to be reviewed at a later
date). The building's color will be soft and muted.
McCarthy stated they would like to introduce a hedge
to bury the fence. There will be a tree in the court
which will also soften the appearance in the winter
time. Groen questioned the newspaper racks in front of
the Epicure. McCarthy suggested that with the approval
of the Committee, the newspaper rack be removed.
lst National Bank The presentation was given by Jim Gustinson. The Bank
applied for additional space or an extension. The
original building will remain the same. The new addi-
tion will be extended out within the same plane of the
main building. Planters and cottonwoods will line the
sidewalk in front of the building. The same materials
will be used as were in the original building. The
BRADFORD rURUSH! G CO., O[RY[R RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Historic Preservation Committee, October 4, 1979, City Council Chambers
new building will involve 4,000 sq. ft. or two (2)
lots.
La Cocina Restaurant Nick Lebby gave the presentation of the plans. La
Cocina applied for an extension. It will not be seen
from the street, but from the alley. The extension
will involve approximately 1,275 sq. ft., which will
leave 33% of open sapce. The exterior materials will
match those of the existing La Cocina. The purpose
for construction is to make the existing front dining
room a waiting area, the tables there could be moved
to the new addition. Lebby presented photographs of
the present appearance. The landscaping will be
maintained year-round. The porch will be extended dowr
but will be set back the same distance as existing.
Fred Smith Project Two (2) greenhouses will be of a sloping structure and
will allow the eye to graduate to the upper level.
he roof of the upper level is flat but does not seem
to distract from the Victorian roof lines of the struc-
ture to the left. Exterior materials will consist of
a dark maroon brick along with a dark aluminum framing.
Gargoyles disguise the overflow scuppers which are
required by the Uniform Building Code. The architect-
ural detail is basically very clean and of a delicate
nature. As soon as the solar characteristics are
determined, the glass and particular color shades will
be presented. It will most likely be a type of a
plexiglass. They have considered providing one inch
blinds for the inside of the greenhouse to give it a
uniform appearance from the street side. Awnings will
be provided and the color will be determined at a
later date. Emphasis will be placed on the historic
characteristics and compatibility with the surrounding
area.
The Committee then began to score the projects. The
scores were tallied and are as follows:
Epicure 14 Average Score
Smith Building 13 it
La Cocina 12.4 it "
Bell Mt. Sports 11.26 if"
A}ax Mountain #2 9.1
Ajax Mountain #1 9 "
1st National 7.9
See attached "H.P.C. Growth Management Evaluation: for
a breakdown of individual scores.
The meeting adjourned at 3:30 PM.
Tamira Matherly
Deputy City Clerk
Table 1
1!f C GROWN EVAL.UATlON
OcLnl:ar ��, 197",
1.
Epicure
J.S.
J.W.-N.B.
I.. CA.
F:.C.
Total fAVerage
_
Points Score
Massing
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
External Building Materials
3
3
3
3
2
Architectural Detail
3
3
3
3
2
Color.
2
3
3
3
2
Architecture
Tj
14'
15
15
12
70/14
2.
Smith Building_
Massing
2
3
1.
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
External Building Materials
3
3
Architectural Detail
2.5
1
3
3
2
Color
3
2.5
2
3
3
3
3
3
Architecture
13
9
14
15
14
65/13
3.
La Cocina
Massi ng
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
2
2
2
External Building Vaterials
1
2
Architectural Detail
3
3
3
2
2
Color
3
3
3
3
3
3
l
2
Architecture
T5
15
15
7
10
62/12.4
4.
Bell Mt. Sports
Massing
3
2
2.8
2
2
External Building Pi�:terials
2.5
2
2.5
3
2
2
3
Architectural Deta'1
2
1
2
3
2
Color
2.5
2-
2
2
3
2
2
2
Architecture
12
9
12.3
12 _
it
56.3/11.26
5.
Ajax IMOUntainl #?
Massing
2
3
2.5
0
_0
External Building Materials
2
2
2
1
1
Architectural Detail
2.5
3
2
1
1
Color
3
2
3
2
2
Architecture
2
11.5
3
13
2.5
12
0
1
5
45.5/9.1
4
6.
Ajax Mountain #1
Massing
:2.5
1
2
D
2
External Building 'Materials
2
2
2
1
1
Architectural Detail
2.5
3
2
1
1
Color
3
2
3
2
2
Architecture
2.5
1
2.5
0
—
2
_
13.5
9
11.5
4
1
45/9
7.
1st National
Messing
2
2
1
0.
0
External Building Materials
2.5
3
2.5
2
2
Architectural Detail
1
2
2.5,
0
0
.Color
3
3
3
2
2
Architecture
1
2
. 1
0
—
0
915
12 ''
10 ,
4
4
39.5/7.9