HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.Volk Property Don Fleisher.1985Volk Property
r J I "Don Fleisher
� V OLK PROPERTY
COMMERCIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPLICATION
August 1, 198S
Mr. Steve Burstein, Planner
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: The Volk Property
Dear Mr. Burstein:
Attached for the City's review and consideration
is a commercial growth management application for
jha proposed retail commercial/office building to
I)CU
(I be constructed on the Volk Property. The applica-
tion is submitted pursuant to Section 24-11.S of
the Aspen Municipal Code by The Donald J. Fleisher
1:1csu4pr Company, Inc., on behalf of the property's owner,
a
IUC
� the Russell H. Volk Trust.
ct
V [) (N Should you have any questions, please direct your
� inquiries to either Bruce Sutherland, AIA of Bene-
dict, Sutherland, Fallin, Inc. or Sunny Vann AICP
of Vann Associates. Your assistance in the pre-
paration of this application has been most appre-
ciated.
Very truly yours,
a 7A��
Donald �J.eisher
DJF/je
attachment
Il
I
1 P.O. Box 7946 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Telephone: (303) 925-2122
r
1
1
1
i
1
1
A COMMERCIAL
GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPLICATION
FOR THE
VOLK PROPERTY
Prepared for
Mr. Richard W. Volk, Trustee
The Russel H. Volk Trust
Wichita, Kansas
and
The Donald J. Fleisher Company, Inc.
P.O. Box 7946
Aspen, Colorado 81612
(303) 925-2122
Prepared by
BENEDICT, SUTHERLAND, FALLIN, INC.
1280 Ote Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925-3481
and
VANN ASSOCIATES
Planning Consultants
P.O. Box 8485
Aspen, Colorado 81612
(303) 925-6365
r
1
1
1
1
1
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1. INTRODUCTION
1
A. Project Description
1
1. Water System
3
2. Sewage System
3
3. Drainage System
5
4. Development Data
5
5. Traffic and Parking
6
6. Proposed Uses
6
7. Impact on Adjacent Uses
7
8. Construction Schedule
9
9. Employee Housing Proposal
9
II. GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW CRITERIA
10
A. Quality of Design
11
1. Architectural Design
11
2. Site Design
14
3. Energy Conservation
15
4. Amenities
18
5. Visual Impact
19
6. Trash and Utility Access
20
B. Availability of Public Facilities
21
and Services
1. Water Supply and Fire Protection
21
2. Sewage Disposal
22
3. Public Transportation and Roads
22
4. Storm Drainage
23
5. Parking
23
C. Provision of Employee Housing
25
D. Conversion of Existing Units
25
E. Bonus Points
26
III. SPECIAL REVIEW APPROVAL
26
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Section Page
APPENDIX
A.
Exhibit 1, Letter from Bill Drueding,
28
Zoning Enforcement Officer, Aspen/Pitkin
Building Department.
B.
Exhibit 2, Letter from Ann Ballard,
29
Administrative Assistant, Aspen Water
Department.
C.
Exhibit 3, Letter from Heiko Kuhn,
30
Manager, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
District.
D.
Exhibit 4, Letter from Clark Smyth, Aspen
31
Airport Business Center.
E.
Exhibit 5, Letter from Steve Crockett, Fire
32
Chief, Aspen Volunteer Fire Department.
LIST OF DRAWINGS
Drawing Page
1 Location/Zoning 2
2 Existing Conditions 4
3 Floor Plans 8
4 Site Plan 12
5 Exterior Elevations 13
6 Circulation 24
ii
r
I. I NT RODDCT ION
The following application, submitted pursuant to Section 24-
11.5 of the Aspen Municipal Code, requests a commercial growth
management allocation for the development of a 4,005 square foot
I
parcel of land, hereinafter referred to as the Volk Property. As
shown on Drawing 1, Location /Zoning, Page 2, the Property is
' located at the intersection of Galena Street and Cooper Avenue
and is zoned CC, Commercial Core. Specifically, the Property
consists of the southerly 68 feet of Lots K and L, Block 95, City
of Aspen, Colorado. An existing 1,500 square foot commercial
structure containing the Cookie Munchers Cafe and the Aspen T-
' Shirt Station is presently located on the Property as is the so-
called Popcorn Wagon. The owner of the Property and applicant is
the Russel H. Volk Trust of Wichita, Kansas. The applicant's
agent is the Donald J. Fleisher Company, Inc. of Aspen, Colorado.
' A. Project Description
The applicant proposes to demolish the existing
building and to construct a new 6, 809 square foot (external floor
'
area)
commercial structure
on the Volk
Property. The
ground
floor
of the new building will
contain approximately
2,977
square
'
feet
of floor area and will
be devoted
exclusively to
retail
commercial uses. The second
floor will
contain approximately
'
2,552
square feet of floor area
and will
be utilized for
office
' purposes as will the approximately 1,280 square foot, third floor
penthouse. The penthouse will also house a portion of the
' building's mechanical systems, thereby reducing unsightly roof
1
'
clutter from the view of surrounding, taller buildings. The net
increase in external commercial floor area for the project is
5,309 square feet, the new building's 6, 80 9 square feet of
external floor area less 1,500 square feet of existing commercial
floor area to be reconstructed (see Exhibit 1, Appendix, Page
'
28, for confirmation of the Volk Property's existing commercial
square footage).
1. Water System. Existing utilities in the immediate
site area are shown on Drawing 2, Existing Conditions, Page 4.
Water service to the project will be provided via a new service
line connecting to either the existing six (6) inch water main
' located in Cooper Avenue or to the eight (8) inch main in Galena
Street. The preliminary fixture count for the new commercial
structure is four (4) toilets, two (2) urinals, four (4) lava-
tories, one (1) drinking fountain, and approximately three (3)
hose bibs. The Water Department has indicated that a connection
to either existing main is acceptable and, by implication, that
the impact of the project on existing facilities will be minimal
' (see Exhibit 2, Appendix, Page 29) .
2. Sewage System. The proj ect will be served by
either the existing eight ( 8) inch sewer located in the nearby
alley or the twenty (20) inch sewer located in Galena Street.
' According to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, antici-
pated flows can be accommodated with no improvements to the
' existing lines or treatment plant (see Exhibit 3, Appendix, Page
30) .
3
m = m m = = = = m
s
t
i
LJ
�= ! Tv
AS
■-rr !—TV i -ry
❑T
LEGEND
— WATER
F
W
yO
.. .. —{— SANITARY {EWER
—.o— arolr DRAIM
t� ® C11TCM [•[IN
FIRE NTGR.wT
/TREET LIGHT
— TELtFMON■
t
_
�
t7
on.. III IRTIO —t•Tv— ll[CTRIC /CAlll T.Y.
Get
'jE �TO/yY ICI TREM{FORMER
BUI DI G
�/ swrs/
s
�
• .0
w w •o
COOPER AVENUE
EXISTING CONDITIONS
l
r]
fl
3. Drainage System. Roof runoff will be retained on -
site via a new drywell to be located under the project's open
space area at the front of the Property. Surface runoff from the
project's impervious areas will be collected by the existing
storm drains located in Galena Street and Cooper Avenue. The
existing catch basins in the area are believed to be sufficient;
however, additional basins will be provided should they be
required by the City Engineer. The applicant's proposed storm
drainage solution will upgrade the present system in which all
runoff is currently collected by the existing storm drains. The
regrading of the project's open space area will eliminate
the existing problem of standing water and related ice buildup
currently associated with the site.
4. Development Data. The following table summarizes
site and development data for the Volk Property and the appli-
cant's proposed commercial structure.
TABLE 1
VOLK PROPERTY SITE AND DEVELOPMENT DATA
Lot Area
4,005
sq.
ft.
Building Footprint
2, 977
sq.
ft.
Landscaping/Open Space
1,028
sq.
ft.
External Floor Area
6, 809
sq.
ft.
External Floor Area
Ratio 1
1.7:1
Net Leaseable Floor
Area
5,179
sq.
ft.
Existing Commercial
Credit 2
1,500
sq.
ft.
1985 Commercial GMP
Request
5,309
sq.
ft.
1 Pursuant to Sections 24-3.4 and 24-3.5(a), the applicant is
requesting Special Review approval for an additional 0.2
commercial floor area ratio.
2 See Exhibit 1, Appendix, Page 28.
5
5. Traffic and Parking. The City Engineer has
indicated that the proposed project will have no negative impact
upon the existing street system, as Galena Street and Cooper
Avenue are currently functioning below allowable capacity levels
in the immediate site area. The applicant proposes to terminate
' the current gas station operation and to eliminate the existing
curb cuts on both Galena and Cooper. As a result, vehicular
ingress and egress to the site will be eliminated, thereby
' improving circulation on the adjacent street system. It can also
be argued that the elimination of the gas station use will
' reduce, to a significant degree, the extent to which the property
' currently functions as a magnet to the automobile.
Although no parking is required or will be
provided on site, approximately four (4) additional on -street
parking spaces will be obtained as a result of the elimination of
the existing curb cuts on Galena Street and Cooper Avenue. With
' respect to alternative means of transportation, the Rubey Park
Transit Center is conveniently located approximately one (1)
block south of the Property and is readily accessible via the
' adjacent mall system and area surface streets.
6. Proposed Uses. In view of the proj ect's excep-
tional location in the heart of the City's tourist commercial
' district, and the high level of pedestrian activity in the
immediate site area, the ground floor of the building will be
' devoted exclusively to retail commercial use. As shown on
'
Drawing 3, Floor Plans, Page 8, four (4) leaseable spaces are
anticipated, ranging in size from approximately 350 square feet
to 700 square feet. The total leaseable floor area for the
'
ground floor is approximatley 2,400 square feet. Although the
building's actual tenants have not been finalized, commercial
uses will be primarily tourist -oriented and may include the
'
Property's existing businesses. Full scale restaurant uses,
however, will be specifically excluded, given the relatively
small rental spaces available and the lack of direct service
access to the nearby alley.
Given the architectural design of the new build-
ing, the applicant believes that the highest and best use for the
second and penthouse floors is for professional office space.
2,552
The building's second floor will contain approximately
'
square feet of leaseable floor area which will be partitioned as
individual office needs dictate. The penthouse floor will
' contain a portion of the building's mechanical systems and
approximately 923 square feet of additional leaseable office
space which may be leased separately or in conjunction with the
' office's on the second floor.
7. Impact on Adjacent Uses. The Volk Property is
currently utilized for commercial purposes. The immediate site
' area is zoned CC, Commercial Core, and is fully developed.
Proposed uses are consistent with the intent of the CC zone
' district and compatible with adjacent land uses. As a result,
the functional character of this area of the commercial core will
7
1
�e.c sz.[a ua. oa .•e,...w.. aw oez, Pale�otl,o�m UIIIel
'
puepotgns
joipauaq
z
0
J_
m T:
Y
J
O Z o
UWJ -CW<MIAccW
F77=":
O
U
W
<
UW
¢U
i<
0y
O
<
o
F
a
W <
20
U
/1 I
cmIa
O
O
W
U
U
U.
i
LL
m
O
ode
:2:
O
�— - -
-- --
-
LL —.
m
U
II
C
N
r�
Q
W
= U
Y
QO
C
A
�
a
o
i
LL _
'
be
by the
In fact, it
uneffected
applicant's
proposal. can be
'
argued that the redevelopment
of the Volk Property, through
sensitive
architectural design
and the creation of highly
'
desireable
public open space,
greatly enhances this major
pedestrian
area of the City,
thereby positively impacting the
property's
adjacent land uses.
' B. Construction Schedule. Upon successful receipt of
a growth management allocation and approval of all incidental
reviews which may be required, construction documents for the
' project will be prepared. The target date for commencement of
construction is the Spring of 1986, with completion of the
project anticipated prior to December of 1986.
I
9. Employee Housing Proposal. As shown in Table 1,
Page 5, the external floor area of the project is 6, 809square
feet, of which the net leaseable floor area is 5,179 square
feet. Taking into account the Property's existing leaseable
commercial floor area credit of 1,500 square feet, the net
increase in net leaseable floor area is 3,679 square feet
(the 1,500 square foot credit represents the existing building's
external floor area, all of which is leaseable).
Assuming an employee generation factor of 3.5
employees per 1,000 square feet of additional net leaseable floor
area (an appropriate factor for retail/office services in the CC
zone district), the project will generate approximately thirteen
(13) new employees. The applicant proposes to house off -site
E
5.25 employees or approximately 40 percent of the total new
temployees generated by the project. Specifically, the applicant
proposes to purchase one (1), two bedroom unit and one (1), three
' bedroom unit at the Airport Business Center (see Exhibit 4,
Appendix, Page 31) . These formerly free market, rental units
' have recently been renovated, condominiumized and offered for
'
sale as the Park Place Condominiums. The two (2) units will be
deed -restricted to employee occupancy and price guidelines in
'
accordance with the Housing Authority's recommendations prior to
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new building.
II. GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW CRITERIA
'
The following section addresses the various review criteria
against which the proposed project will be evaluated. The
information contained herein represents the applicant's best
'
effort at compliance with both the letter and intent of the
'
criteria. We believe that, in every category, the proposed
project meets or exceeds the minimum applicable standard. Based
'
on our understanding of the various criteria and the proj ect's
compliance therewith, we have taken the liberty of requesting an
'
appropriate score in each review category. Please reference as
'
necessary the appropriate headings in Section I.A. of this
application for detailed information in support of the appli-
cant's following representations.
10
A. Quality of Design
' The quality of the proposed proj ect's exterior and site
design is discussed below. Please note that the project received
' conceptual approval from the Historical Preservation Commission
'
on July
23, 1985.
Final HPC approval,
however, must be obtained
prior to
issuance
of a building permit.
'
1. Architectural
Design.
g
Architecturally, the
Y►
proposed
building
has been designed to
honor the height and bulk
of the
Property's
surrounding structures,
particularly Andres
'
and the
Cooper Street
Pier. As shown
on Drawing 4, Site Plan,
a
Page 12, the building's basic form is triangular in shape so
as to maximize useable open space and maintain and enhance the
site's existing circulation pattern. Secondary benefits arising
from this design concept include the ability to take advantage of
the exceptional views originating from the site and to maximize
passive solar energy gain.
As shown on Drawing 5, Exterior Elevations, Page 13,
the building steps back on each of its three floors so as to
soften the building's various facades and to introduce roof decks
and landscaping to the second and third floor office levels. The
height of the first and second floors generally corresponds to
the window and brick coursing details on the adjacent Andres
building. Compatibility with the Andres facade was given
priority over the Cooper Street Pier building since Andres, as a
historically designated structure, is expected to significantly
11
J
INDEPENDENCE h N,
ron,,onu,wuIllel •
pueliayins
jaipauaq
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
outlive the adjacent Cooper Street Pier. The proposed building's
design provides for a facade setback adjacent to Andres which
results in a visual separation between the two buildings and a
slight variation in the appearance of the stair entrance to the
upper level office spaces. The relatively small third floor
rpenthouse has been designed to effectively screen the new
Lbuilding's roof top mechanical systems from the higher Indepen-
dence and Mountain Plaza Buildings.
The principal building material will be brick. The
extensive use of
glass on
the ground floor
will visually tie the
building to
the
outdoor public space and the
proj ect's extensive
landscaping.
In
summary,
the building, in
respecting the height
and bulk of
the
adjacent
structures, can
be characterized as a
"background
structure"
as opposed to a
major architectural
statement. Although contemporary in
concept
and design, the
proposed building employs brick, window
and roof line details
which are reminiscent of the Victorian
period in which many of
Aspen's downtown structures were built.
Requested
Score: 3 points
2. Site Design. The basic
design
concept for the
'
project site has been to minimize perceived
building bulk,
maximize useable public open space, and
maintain
and enhance the
site's existing pedestrian circulation
characteristics. As a
result, the proposed building footprint, although larger than
that of the existing structure, approximates that area of
14
A
' the site currently devoted to commercial use. This feature, in
conjunction with the removal of the gas pumps, has allowed the
creation of a substantial open space plaza contiguous to both
Galena Street and Cooper Avenue.
As shown on the site plan, the pedestrian plaza will be
extensively landscaped with specimen size trees, shrubbery and
street furniture. Both sidewalks will be reconstructed and
landscaped in a similar fashion as the pedestrian plaza. Brick
pavers will be used throughout and the entire open space/sidewalk
area provided with snowmelt to prevent unsightly snow buildup and
to increase pedestrian safety. The plaza will be attractively
lighted and all utilities will be placed underground. Although
the nature of the site prohibits direct service access from the
alley, the building has been designed to provide convenient
access to the basement storage and trash compaction areas and to
the building's mechanical and electrical systems via the Galena
tStreet office floor entrance.
IRequested Score: 3 points
1 3. Energy Conservation. The proposed project has
been designed to maximize the conservation of energy and the use
' of solar energy sources. Specific measures to be undertaken by
the applicant include the following:
1
11 15
1
1
r�
r
11
i
1
1
a. Building Siting and Orientation. To take
full advantage of the site's sunny location,
all spaces have been given south, southwest
and west orientation which provides maximum
exposure to the sun even during the shortest
day of the year.
b. Solar Utilization. It is anticipated that
with the proposed glazing orientation the
building will be heated largely by passive
solar gain. This heat will be stored
within the building through the use of
thermal mass consisting of brick floors and
masonry walls throughout the retail and
office areas.
c. Glazing.
To allow for
maximum solar gain,
all windows
have south or
west exposure,
with
no windows
on the north
and east sides.
To
prevent excessive
heat
buildup during
the
summer, a
combination of awnings and
deep
window recesses
will be utilized for
the
retail areas and awnings
and/or sun shading
systems in
the offices.
d. Insulation. The heat loss from this building
will be significantly less than most struc-
tures in that over half of the exterior
16
1
t
1
1
P
1
I
walls are located adjacent to existing
buildings. The remaining exterior walls and
roof construction will exceed existing
minimum energy code requirements.
e. !Mechanical. The building will be heated,
cooled and ventilated using the latest state-
of-the-art minimum energy technology.
Heating and cooling will be provided by an
energy efficient pulse system. Heat reclaim
will be accomplished via exhaust systems
which transfer excess heat to cooler areas
within the building. Cooling and ventilation
will be provided by an indirect -direct
evaporative air -handling system. Such a
system has a co -efficient of performance
(COP) of ten (10 ) as compared to a COP of
3.5 for a refrigeration system. Air from
this system will be circulated through ducts
in the building to provide conditioned air to
all occupied spaces.
The building spaces will be heated primarily
by direct sun, and heat gain from lighting
with supplemental hot water forced air units
for commercial spaces and hot water radiant
baseboard units in the office areas.
17
F
I
it
1
1
1
I
The building's mechanical systems will be
zoned to allow systems serving unoccupied
spaces to be shut off completely or to
operate at reduced temperatures. Night
setback controls will be used throughout the
building.
The domestic hot water system consists of
only lavatories for hand washing which
require very little energy.
Requested Score: 3 points
4. Amenities. The applicant's objective for this
property has been to create a highly marketable, commercial
building of exceptional quality, which incorporates the most
functional and inviting open space and pedestrian experience
possible given existing site limitations. We believe that this
objective has been achieved through careful attention to site
design and the retention of twenty-five (25) percent of the
property as useable public open space.
Given the relatively small size of the Volk Property
and the inordinate cost of developing downtown properties, the
retention of so much useable open space, we believe, is particu-
larly noteworthy, the City's minimum open space requirement
notwithstanding. The design of the proj ect's open space area so
' as to maintain the Property's existing open space pattern
represents a major concession on behalf of the applicant, as it
dictates the shape of the building and significantly increases
development costs. The resulting concentration of over 1,000
square feet of highly useable public open space at the front of
the site constitutes a major amenity for the project, adjacent
land uses, and the City of Aspen.
As discussed in Section II.A.2., the entire open space
plaza, including the Galena Street and Cooper Avenue sidewalks,
will be heavily landscaped. Specimen size trees will be used
extensively to soften the bulk of the new building and to enhance
the outdoor enjoyment of the plaza and the exceptional scenic
' views of the surrounding area. Street furniture will also be
provided to further promote public useage of this valuable
amenity.
Requested Score: 3 points
5. Visual Impact. Considerable effort has been made
to integrate the new building into its surroundings. The
architectural concept of massing the building against the
adjacent Andres and Cooper Street Pier facades at the rear of
' the property, while concentrating the open space into a highly
useable area at the front of the site, results in a project
which, we believe, is extremely compatible with its neighbors.
By retaining the existing open space and pedestrian circulation
characteristics of the Volk Property, public views of surrounding
scenic areas are maximized both from the open space plaza and
19
'
from the interior of the building itself. In no instance is the
view from surrounding properties significantly impacted.
Requested Score: 3 points
6. Trash and Utility Access. Pursuant to Section 24-
3.4 of the Municipal Code, a utility/trash service area is
'
required abutting an alley. The City Att orney's Office has
indicated that, for those properties unable to comply with this
provision, a decision will be made on a case -by -case basis as to
the appropriate procedure to be followed. The inability to
comply with this provision, however, will not render a property
'
ineligible for a growth management allocation provided an
acceptable alternative for the provision of such service can be
demonstrated. In the event a variance is required from this
provision of the Code, the applicant will obtain same as a
condition to the receipt of a growth management allocation.
' With respect to the project's trash and utility access,
the applicant proposes the following solution. Trash will be
compacted and stored in the building's basement. Dumpster space
will be leased in the nearby alley as required. The applicant is
currently researching the existence of a prior agreement which
provided such dumpster access to the Volk Property. Additional
clarification with respect to trash disposal will be provided
prior to formal review of this application.
F1
11
Joe Dickinson of the City's Electric Department
has indicated that the proposed building may utilize the existing
transformer located in the nearby alley and that the building's
electrical panels may be located in the basement. A utility area
abutting the alley, therefore, will not be required. Access to
the basement electrical panels will be via the Galena Street
office entrance. Electric Department personnel will be provided
keys for meter reading and emergency access.
rRequested Score: 2 points
IB. Availability of Public Facilities and Services
The proposed project's impact upon public facilities
and services is described below.
1. Water Supply and Fire Protection. The project may
be handled by the existing level of service in the area. The
' Water Department has indicated that the existing water mains in
the immediate site area are adequate to supply the project and
r that system upgrades will not be required. However, in order to
! minimize consumption, water -saving fixtures will be specified
throughout the project.
With respect to fire protection, the site is located
approximately two blocks from the
Aspen Volunteer
Fire Depart-
in
ment, resulting a response time
of approximately
three minutes
(see Exhibit 5, Appendix, Page
32) . Existing
fire hydrants
are located in close proximity
to the site at
the southeast
'
corner of Galena and Cooper and at
the northwest corner
of Cooper
21
r
t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
and Hunter. No additional fire hydrants will be required to
adequately serve the project.
Requested Score: 1 point
2. Sewage Disposal. The project may be handled by
the existing level of service in the area. The Aspen Consoli-
dated Sanitation District has indicated that the existing sewer
lines in the immediate site area are adequate to serve the
project and that system upgrades will not be required.
Requested Score: 1 point
3. Public Transportation and Roads. The project in
and of itself improves the quality of service in the immediate
site area. The City Engineer has indicated that the project will
have no negative impact upon the existing street system as Galena
Street and Cooper Avenue are currently functioning below allow-
able capacity levels in the vicinity of the site. In fact, the
elimination of the existing curb cuts from both Galena Street and
Cooper Avenue which presently serve the gas station will substan-
tially reduce the vehicular/pedestrian conflicts which have
habitually plagued this intersection. Vehicular turning move-
ments in this area will be essentially eliminated thereby
enhancing circulation and reducing the hazard to both pedestrians
and through traffic.
Although no bus routes currently utilize this segment
of Galena Street or Cooper Avenue, convenient access to Rubey
Park, the hub of the joint City/County public transportation
22
1
L' J
system, is provided via the adjacent mall system and area
surface streets. As shown on Drawing 6, Circulation, Page 24,
Rubey Park is located approximately one (1) block from the
project site.
Requested Score: 2 points
4. Storm Drainage. The proj ect in and of itself
improves the quality of service in the immediate site area. No
expansion of the existing storm drainage system will be requir-
ed. As a result of the installation of an on -site drywell,
historical storm water runoff levels will decrease, thereby
significantly reducing the impact of the project on the City's
existing storm drainage system. In addition, appropriate grading
of the project's open space areas will eliminate the problem of
standing water and associated winter ice buildup that has
historically plagued the site, thereby significantly improving
pedestrian safety in the area.
Requested Score: 2 points
5. Parking. The project in and of itself improves
the quality of service in the immediate site area. Although no
parking is required or will be provided on -site, approximately
four (4) additional on -street parking spaces will be obtained as
a result of the elimination of the existing curb cuts on Galena
23
m m m i m w r== m r= are m = = = m m
Monarch St.
Aspen St.
AL +�
Ski Bus Route
it -- - - - I�mae.wtawra.ntw
Proposed
Dean St. Trail
Willoughby —
Park
Mill St
Galena St.-,
Legend
Pedestrian Malls Pedestrian Circulation City Bus Route
.....77
Parks or Openspace Proposed Trails —�—� Ski Bus Route
�f
—64• Main St.
Hopkins Ave.
Hunter St.
a 41 1 v�
Spring St.
T1LI
rl
Hyman Ave.
ram`
n
Cooper Ave.
--Durant Ave.
I
l
hill
~ Glory Hole
Park
VOLK BUILDING
Circulation
Street and Cooper Avenue, thereby increasing the availability of
on -street parking in the City's commercial core area.
Requested Score: 2 points
C. Provision for Employee Housing
The applicant proposes to house off -site 5.25 full-time
equivalent employees, or approximately 40 percent of the addi-
tional employees generated by the project (see Section I.A.9 for
a discussion of the proj ect's employee generation and housing
proposal). Based on the applicant's proposal and the provisions
of Section 24-11.5 (b) (3) of the Municipal Code, the project is
entitled to ten (10) points, calculated as follows:
40% employees housed x 1 point = 10 points
4% housing factor
Requested Score: 10 points
D. Conversion of Existing Units
As described in Section I.A.9., the applicant proposes
to purchase and deed -restrict, in accordance with the Housing
Authority's recommendations, one (1), two bedroom unit and one
(1), three bedroom unit at the Park Place Condominiums which are
located at the Airport Business Center. These units are fully
constructed and are currently unrestricted to employee occupancy
and price guidelines. One hundred (100) percent of the units
purchased by the applicant will be deed -restricted pursuant to
Section 24-11.10 of the Municipal Code. As a result, the project
25
' Section 24-11.10 of the Municipal Code. As a result, the project
is entitled to the entire five (5) points available in this
category.
Requested Score: 5 points
IE. Bonus Points
' We believe that this project has exceeded the minimum
review criteria of the City's commercial growth management
regulations in numerous categories and, as a result, has achieved
' an outstanding overall design meriting the award of additional
bonus points. Specific areas in which we believe the project
excels include building and site design, energy conservation,
amenities, visual impact, public transportation and roads, storm
drainage, and parking. Detailed discussions of the project's
' merits in each of these areas are provided under the appropriate
headings in Section II of this application.
' III. SPECIAL REVIEW APPROVAL
IThe proposed external floor area of the proj ect is 6, 809
square feet. Based on a lot area of 4,005 square feet, the
external floor area ratio (FAR) of the project is 1.7:1, or 0.2:1
greater than the basic FAR -provided for in the underlying zone
district. Pursuant to the provisions of Sections 24-3.4 and 24-
3.5(a), the applicant requests that 0.2:1 bonus FAR, or 801
' square feet of additional floor area, be approved in conjunction
with the applicant's request for a commercial growth management
' 26
' allocation. The specific criteria of Section 24-3.5(a) of the
Municipal Code are addressed under the appropriate headings in
' Section II.A. and B. of the applicant's growth management
' application.
n
I
E
27
1
APPENDIX
' ASPEN*PITKIN REGIONAL BUILDING. DEPARTMENT
C
Ll
I
Sunny Vann
Vann Associates
P.O. Box 8485
Aspen, CO 81612
Dear Sunny:
July 30, 1985
Exhibit 1
On July 25, 1985,.you and I made a physical inspection of the
Volk Property located on.the northeast corner of Cooper and
Galena Streets.
The building did not contain a mechanical room. The furnace was
hanging from the ceiling and the area under it was being used for
storage and would count in the existing floor area. The
following areas would be excluded from calculations of existing
floor area:
1. A portion of the building
in the form of a strip all
along the east wall 1.3 feet
wide (plus or minus).
'
2. That portion of the building
along the north wall that
encroaches on the adjacent
property.
3. The area on the.west wall
that covers the electrical
'
service disconnect'.
You advised me that your survey engineer
calculated the remaining
'
floor area to be 1,500.2 sq.ft. My
calculations taken from the
improvement survey confirms this.
I hope this is what you need. Please
contact me if I can be of
'
further help.
'
Sincerely,
'
William L. Drueding
Zoning Enforcement Officer
'
cc: Alan Richman, Planning
Jim Wilson, Building Official
Paul Taddune, City Attorney
'
BD/ar
'
28
1
offices: mail address:
1 110 East Hallam Street 506 East Mat, Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611 303/S25-5S73 Aspen, Colorado 81611
July 25, 1985
CITY. OF ASPEN
130 south galena street
aspen, Colorado 81611
303-925 -2020
Exhibit 2
Sonny Vann
Vann & Associates
P.O. Box 8485
Aspen, CO 81612
Re: Volk Property
Dear Sonny,
This letter is to verify that water service is available in both
Galena and Cooper Streets and can be provided to the above referenced
property upon submission of a Utility Connection Application and
payment of corresponding fees.
The Fire hydrant across is the street is adequate for fire protection.
Sincerely,
i�nn;Ba 1 lard
Administrative Assistant
Aspen Water Department
29
- ---- -----------------
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
565 North Mill Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Tele. (303) 925-3601 Tele. (303) 925-2537
Exhibit 3,
Sunny Vann
% Vann Associates
P. 0. Box 8485
Aspen, Colorado 81612
July 23, 1985
RE: Volk Property
Dear Mr. Vann:
This letter is to indicate that upon preliminary examination
the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District can service a proposed
commercial building on the Volk property where the Sinclair Gas
Station is now located.
Sincerely
Heiko Kuhn, Manager
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
30
11
1
1
1
Exhibit 4
July 31, 1985
The Donald J. Fleisher Co., Inc.
Post Office Box 7946
Aspen, Colorado 81612
RE: Volk Property Employee Housing
Dear Don:
Please be advised that we will reserve one (1),
two bedroom unit and one (1), three bedroom unit in
our Park Place Condominium project for your purchase.
It is our understanding that you intend to use these
units to meet the employee housing requirement for
your 1985 commercial growth management application for
the Volk Property. We will hold these units for you
for a period of thirty (30) days from the date of this
letter, which should allow ample time to negotiate the
specific terms of either an option or contract to
purchase.
Several two and three bedroom units are currently
available ranging in size from approximately 700 to
1,000 square feet. We are available at your convenience
to discuss your specific unit needs and the terms of
the sale. Should you have any questions, or if we can
be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to
rn11 _
CS/je
31
I CLARK S MYTH•BOX3665•ASPEN•COLORADO.81612.303.925.4792
r
420 E. HOPKINS STREET
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
Exhibit 5
July 30, 1985
' VANN ASSOCIATES
Planning Consultants
' Post Office Box 8485
Aspen, Colorado 81612
' RE: The Volk Property
Dear Sunny:
Based on our preliminary discussions, the Aspen Volun-
teer Fire Department should have no problem in providing
service to the proposed commercial project to be constructed
' on the Volk Property. Fire hydrants in the area are suffi-
cient to access the property and the fire barn is located
approximately two (2) blocks from the site, resulting in a
' response time of approximately three (3) minutes. No up-
grading of existing facilities will be required.
1
SC/je
Since e y
Steve Crockett
Fire Chief
t32
Reviewed by: , r�_S p 1, z 7) City counclo
74, P! I
jr, tk
.... .. .... 11: . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . A '77�4
3 o
p) Q4f
X . � 7.n
l7js
11 'tiv &t )L./,- c
Pevielloc, BY: Asper, P&-z
I
City councii-,00—/,_-?5
%c ot
TO:
TH RU
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
ME MORANDU M
Aspen City Council
Hal Schilling, City Manag 'r
Steve Burstein and Alan Richman, Planning Office
Volk Property GMP Allocation
October 3, 1985
SUMMARY: The Planning Office and Planning Commission recommend that
Council grant a commercial growth management allotment for the Volk
Property proposal since it exceeds the threshold score required for
consideration of allotment.
REQUEST: This application is for 5,309 s.f. of new commercial and
office space. The applicant also proposes to tear down and recon-
struct the existing 1500 square feet of commercial space for a total
building size of approximately 6,800 s.f.
BACKGROUND: The Commercial Growth Management application for the Volk
Property was submitted August 1, 1985. Pursuant to Section 24-11.3(d)
of the Municipal Code, it was necessary for the proposal to receive
conceptual approval from the Historic Preservation Committee prior to
GMP submittal. Conceptual approval was given by the HPC for the
project on July 23, 1985, with the understanding that a much more
detailed elevational plan must be submitted for final committee review
and approval.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE VOTE: At the September 17, 1985, regular meeting
of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, the Volk Property
proposal was evaluated in the 1985 Commercial Growth Management
competition. As the only project competing for commercial GMP
allotment, the Volk Property proposal was presented and discussed.
Scoring was done individually by each Commissionmember.
The Planning Commission also considered and approved two requests for
Special Review associated with the proposal. The Bonus Floor Area
Ratio (FAR) Special Review was approved for a 0.2:1 FAR increase (or
801 square feet) above the basic FAR in the Commercial Core Zone
District of 1.5:1. A Special Review for reduction in trash and
utilities access requirements was approved, allowing (a) the placement
of electric panels in the basement of the proposed building; and (b)
compacting trash in the basement and hauling it daily to leased
dumpster space in the Ute Banque Arcade's alley trash area.
A resolution was passed by the Commission on October 8, 1985, forward-
ing to Council the final score of the proposal and recommending
investigation of the public purchase of this site (see attached) .
PROBLEM DISCUSSION:
Quota Available: Quota for the Commercial GMP competition is calcu-
lated as follows:
Carry Over Quota Exemption Remaining
-0- 10,000 sq. ft. 1000* sq. ft. 9,000 sq. ft.
*Additions to Aspen Grove Building and Weinerstube Restaurant.
Thresholds And Eligibility:
A project must score a
minimum of 60% of
the total points available
under Categories A, B
and C
of the GMP
competition, amounting to
28.8 points, and a minimum of
30% of the
points available in each
category A, B and C to meet
the basic
competitive requirements.
Should the application
score
below these
thresholds, it will no longer be considered for a
development allot-
ment and will be considered denied. Bonus points
cannot
be used to
bring the application over
the minimum threshold.
The scoring by the Planning and Zoning Commission was as follows:
VOLR PROPERTY Average
A. Quality of Design 11.83
B. Availability of Public Facilities 6.5
and Services
C. Provision of Employee Housing 9.33
D. Conversion of Existing Units 4.66
E . Bonus Points .83
Total 33.2
Carry -Over Of Unused Quota: Over the past several years, the Council
has taken the following actions with respect to the commercial quota:
1981: Eliminated allotments remaining from prior years
(Resolution 58, Series of 1981) and established new
quotas for all commercial zones.
1982: Carried -over the unused quotas to 1983 (Resolution 32,
Series of 1982).
1983: Eliminated allotments remaining from prior years
(Resolution 36, Series of 1983) .
1984: Eliminated allotments remaining from prior year (by
2
1984: Eliminated allotments remaining from prior year (by
motion).
The quotas which Council can either carry-over or eliminate this year
are as follows:
CC/C-1 3,691 s.f.
NC/SCI 7,000 s.f.
Off ice 4,000 s.f.
CL and Other 2,500 s.f.*
*500 s.f. deducted due to addition at Chart House.
The main arguments in favor of the carry-over are as follows:
1. Council has eliminated the quotas from each of the prior two
years and no buildup has occurred.
2. Since the imposition of a quota in the zones outside of the CC/C-
1 districts, no new development has taken place.
3. When the quotas outside of the CC/C-1 zones were established,
Council agreed to consider allowing quotas to accummulate from
time to time.
The argument to the contrary is based on whether or not Council feels
it to be in the Community's best interest to provide the potential for
the development of large commercial projects next year. If a carry-
over were to occur, the following would be the 1986 commercial quotas:
CC/C-1
13,691
s.f.
NC/SCI
14,000
s.f.
Office
8,000
s.f.
CL and Other
5,500
s.f.
With the recent activity in the commercial market, it is difficult to
provide a rationale for making available over 40,000 square
feet of
commercial space next year. We recommend that, at a minimum,
Council
not carry-over the unallocated quotas in the CC/C-1 district
and the
Office district, where excess space clearly exists. Given
the
expectation of considerable lodge development in the coming
years,
carry-over of the CL quota would appear to make sense, to
keep a
lodging/commercial balance. Carry-over in the NC/SCI zone may
also be
necessary to keep up with the recent growth which has occurred
in the
residential sector due to Centennial. We recommend that
Council
direct us to draft a Resolution incorporating these carry-over
actions
with respect to the commercial quotas.
RECOMMENDATION: The project met all required thresholds and the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the requested 5,309
square feet for the Volk Property be alloted out of this year's
available quota.
3
PROPOSED MOTION: "Move to approve the allotment of 5,309 square feet
of commercial space for the Volk Project."
"Move to direct the Planning Office to prepare a Resolution to carry-
over the unused quotas in the NC/SCI and CL and Other zone districts,
and to eliminate the unused quotas in the CC/C-1 and Office zone
districts. "
SB.1 4
4
fZ �� PITKIN PARK PLACE CONDOMINIUMS
PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made in Pitkin County, Colorado,
by and between Clark Smyth Co. ("Seller") and The Russell 11, Volk Trust.
(-as- mod-n-t T-enants�Tenants -in -Common) .
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual
covenants and agreements as hereinafter set forth, the parties
hereto agree, as follows:
1. The Project. Pitkin Park Place Condominiums (the
"Project") is a condominium project which is organized under
the laws of the State of Colorado. The project consists of
four buildings containing separate individual air space units
of various types, each of which, with an appurtenant undivided
interest in the common elements constitutes a condominium
unit. The condominium is constructed on the real property
described as Lot 10, Block 2, Aspen Airport Business Center,
Pitkin County, Colorado, records.
2. - The Condominium Declaration. The Project shall be
subject to a Condominium Declaration (the "Condominium
Declaration"). The Condominium Declaration shall specify the
undivided interest allocated to the condominium unit which is
the subject of this Agreement, as well as Buyer's voting
rights, assessment obligations and other covenants and
restrictions of condominium ownership.
3. Condominium Map. Seller will record in the office of
the Clerk and Recorder, Pitkin County, Colorado a condominium
map reflecting the locations, both horizontally and
vertically, of the boundaries of all the individual air space
units in the Project. Transfer and assignment on the Closing
Date of the condominium unit shall be made by reference to
such condominium map, and shall be conclusively presumed to
relate to such condominium unit as reflected on such
condominium map.
4. Purchase and Sale. Seller agrees to sell and Buyer
agrees to buy the Condominium Unit designated below, subject
to the provisions of the Addendum to this Agreement, described
as follows:
Condominium Unit II3 , Pitkin Park
as shown on the Condominium Map recorded
Book Page of Pitkin County records.
5. Purchase Price.
Place Condominiums
1985,
(a) Condominium Unit. The purchase price for the
Condominium Units is 95,900.00 (the "Condominium Unit
Purchase Price"), which Buyer shall pay Seller as follows:
(i) Initial Down Payment. Concurrently with the
execution and delivery of this Agreement, Buyer has paid
$ 4,500.00 , hereby receipted for by Seller.
(ii) Additional Down Payment. $
payable on or before n a , 1985.
None due and
(iii) Balance of Condominium Purchase Price. An
additional amount of 91,400.00 the balance of the
Condominium Purchase Price) shall be paid by Buyer in cash or
by certified check, payable to Seller on the Closing Date.
• 0
(b) Closing Costs. Real property taxes and assessments
and assessments under the Condominium Declaration shall be
pro -rated to the Closing Date.
6. Closing Date. The term "Closing Date", shall mean
the date of recording of the Deed to the Condominium Unit.
The Closing Date shall be no later than thirty (30) days after
all units in the building in which the subject condominium
unit is located come under contract, or sixty (60) days if finan-
cing has not yet been approved.
7. Items to be Delivered in Connection with Closing.
The following items shall be delivered by the parties in
connection with the Closing:
(a) Items to be Delivered by Buyer. Buyer shall deliver
to Seller at closing: i) two 2 copies of the Closing
Statement signed' by Buyer; and (ii) all remaining payments
required to be made by Buyer hereunder, for delivery to Seller
upon the Closing. Such payments shall be in cash or cashiers
check drawn on a local bank.
(b) Items to be Delivered by Seller. On the Closing
Date, Seller shall execute and deliver: (i) a Deed to the
Condominium Unit. Upon such delivery all payments by Buyer to
Seller provided for hereunder shall become the absolute
property of Seller.
8. Title. Title shall be merchantable in the Seller and
Seller shall at its expense, provide Buyer with a title
commitment no later than See Note (1) , 1985. Seller shall
deliver the final policy to Buyer after closing and pay the
premium thereon. Said policy shall be subject to the
following matters:
(a) U.S. Patent reservations appearing in Book 180 at
Page 529, Book-55 at Page 530 and in Book 167 at Page 561 of
the records of Pitkin County, Colorado;
(b) Avigation Easement and Right -of -Way dated July 22,
1974, and recorded August 20, 1974, in Book 290 at Page 373 of
the records of Pitkin County, Colorado, for the passage of all
aircraft until Sardy Field sha_11 be abandoned and shall cease
to be used for public airport purposes;
(c) Covenants, restrictions, and limitations contained
in that Certain Declaration of Protective Covenants for the
Aspen Airport Business Center dated June 16, 1971, and
recorded June 17, 1971, in Book 255 at Page 916 of said
records;
(d) Restrictions, if any, contained in Subdivision
Exception resolution of the Board of Commissioners of Pitkin
County, Colorado recorded in Book at Page
(e) Provisions, covenants, conditions and restrictions
as contained in the Condominium Declaration for the Pitkin Park
Place Condominiums.
(f) The Condominium Map for the Pitkin Park Place
Condominiums.
(g) Non -delinquent real property taxes and assessments,
including any Special Service district taxes, assignments,
fees or charges; and
Note (1):Ten days prior to closing
- 2 -
0 •
9. Default. Time is of the essence in this Agreement,
and if Buyer fails to make any payment required by this
Agreement within the time such payment is required to be made,
or if the Closing for any reason cannot be held as a result of
any default of Buyer, Seller shall have the right to terminate
this Agreement. Upon such termination, Buyer shall be
obligated to Seller in an amount equal to 5% of the Purchase
Price as liquidated damages, and Buyer hereby authorizes
Seller to retain any funds theretofore paid to Seller by or on
behalf of Buyer up to such amount. Subject to the provisions
of Paragraph 15, below, in the event that the Seller fails to
perform any condition thereof as provided herein, then the
Buyer may, at his election, treat this Agreement as
terminated, and all payments made hereunder shall be returned
to the Buyer, or the Buyer may, at his election, treat this
Agreement as being in full force and effect with the right to
an action for specific performance and damages.
10. Representations and Warranties of Seller. Seller
represents, warrants and agrees as follows:
(a) Building. Buyer acknowledges that he or his agents
have examined the Property and accepts same "as is" in its
current condition. Seller makes no warranties, either express
or implied, regarding the physical condition of the subject
property.
(b) Seller. Seller is a duly organized and validly
existing corporation in good standing under the laws of the
State of Colorado, and has full power and authority to enter
into and perform this Agreement in accordance with its terms.
(c) Broker's Fees. If Seller has incurred any
obligation, contingent or otherwise, for broker's or finder's
fees with respect to the matter provided for in this
Agreement, it shall remain an obligation of Seller, and Buyer
shall have no responsibility therefor.
Seller makes no other representation or warranty, express
or implied.
11. Contingencies. This contract is expressly
contingent upon the following matters:
(a) Financing Contingencies. This contract is
specifically contingent upon Buyers obtaining a loan, secured
by first mortgage in the amount of $ 76,720.00 . Said loan
shall bear interest at a rate not to exceed 10% per annum�gNote (2)
with,a loan origination fee not to exceed 2 points. Buyer
agrees to promptly apply for said loan and supply to -lender
all necessary financial statements, tax returns and other
financial data customarily required by lenders in Pitkin
County, Colorado. In the event Buyer is unable to obtain such
financing he shall so notify Seller on or before October 1 ,
1985, and in the event of such notification all earnest monies
shall be returned to buyer. If no such notice is given on or
before October 1 1985 this contingency shall be deemed
waived by Buyer.
(b) Pre -Sale of Units. This contract is further
contingent upon Seller entering into binding agreements for
the sale of all other units in the building (Building 11 )
which the subject unit is located and the simultaneous closing
of such units with the subject unit. In the event such
closings cannot occur by April 30 1986, then this
contract shall be deemed null and void and all earnest money
or other payments made by Buyer shall be returned to Buyer.
*Note (2) : initial interest rate
- 3 -
9 •
(c) Qualified Employees. This contract is contingent
upon Buyer qualifying as a Pitkin County employee under the
guidelines of the Pitkin County Housing Authority, or Buyer ob-
taining other approval from the Pitkin County (lousing Authority.
12. Approval of Condominium Documents. Buyer shall be
provided with copies of all Condominium documents at least
twenty (20) days prior to closing. Buyer shall have a period
of ten (10) days from receipt of such documents to make
written objection to same. In the event no such objection is
received within said ten (10) day period said condominium
documents shall be deemed accepted as satisfactory by Buyer.
12. Representations, Warranties and Agreements of Buyer.
Buyer hereby represents, warrants and agrees as follows:
(a) Investigation. Buyer has personally inspected the
Project; has made,' or has caused to be made on his behalf, an
independent investigation of the Project, and the expenses to
be incurred in connection therewith.
(b) Broker's Fees. If Buyer has incurred any
obligations, contingent or otherwise, for broker's or finder's
fees with respect to the matters provided for in the
Agreement, it shall remain an obligation of Buyer, and Seller
shall have no responsibility therefor.
13. Notices. Except as otherwise provided herein, any
notice, demand, payment or other communication required or
permitted to be given by any provision of this Agreement shall
be hand -delivered or sent by registered or certified mail,
postage prepaid, and shall be addressed to the parties at the
addresses set forth below or as either may furnish to the
other in writing:
If to Seller: Clark Smyth Company
Box 3665
Aspen, CO 81612
If to Buyer: (at the mailing address set
forth under Buyer's
signature)
Any notice, demand, payment or other communication made in
accordance with this Paragraph 13, shall be deemed to have
been duly given or delivered on the date the same is
hand -delivered to the recipient or 48 hours after the same is
deposited in any post office or postal box regularly
maintained by the United States Post Office.
14. Assignment. This contract shall be non -assignable
by Buyer without the prior written consent of Seller.
15. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be
binding upon and inure to the benefit of the respective heirs,
personal representatives, successors and assigns of Buyer and
Seller.
16. Survival of Terms and Provisions. The terms and
provisions hereof shall survive the Closing and shall remain
in full force and effect thereafter.
17. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and exhibits
embody the entire agreement between the parties hereto
relative to the subject matter hereof, and there are no oral
or parol agreements existing between the parties relative to
the subject matter hereof which are not expressly set forth
herein and covered hereby.
- 4 -
18. Applicable Law. This Agreement and all aspects of
the transactions contemplated hereunder shall be construed and
enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado
and the laws of Pitkin County, Colorado including the Pitkin
County Land Use Code.
19. Commission. Upon closing Seller agrees to pay a
fee of one and one Falf (1,%) percent of the purchase price
to The Donald J. Fleisher Co., Inc.
20. Additional Contingencies. Seller acknowledges that
Buyer is contracting to purc ase t e Condominium Unit in order
to satisfy, in part, Buyer's employee housing obligation aris-
ing out of the proposed development of Buyer's property at the
northeast corner of the intersection of Cooper and Galena in
Aspen, Colorado, to -wit the South 68 feet of Lots K and I.,
Block 95, City and'Townsite of Aspen, Colorado (Independence
Square). Buyer has applied for development approval and al-
location under the City of Aspen's Growth Management Plan (GMP).
This contract is expressly contingent upon the following matters:
(a) GNIP Approval. In the event a GMP allocation
for Independence quare as not been granted to and accepted
by Buyer on or before December 31, 1985, Buyer at its option
may terminate this contract without further obligation and all
earnest money or other payments made by Buyer hereunder shall
be returned to Buyer.
(b) Condemnation. In the event the City of Aspen,
prior to January 1, 1986, ormally authorizes the purchase of
Independence Square by negotiation or condemnation, Buyer at
its option may terminate this contract without further obliga-
tion and all earnest money or other payments made by Buyer
hereunder shall be returned to Buyer.
21. Closing Date Adjustment. Notwithstanding anything to
the contrary in paragraph b oT tF-is contract, the Closing Date
shall not be earlier than January 3, 1986, unless Buyer agrees
otherwise.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed
this Agreement as follows:
EXECUTED BY BUYER this ^)3 day of 1985.
BUYE R , i
,c c[-
Address
This Agreement must be accompanied by a check payable
to Clark Smyth Company in an amount no less than the sum of the
amounts indicated in Paragraph 5 (a) (i).
Accepted by Seller this day ofG-e1985.
20. (c) Closing Date.
CLA
BY:
In the event the
under Paragraph 6 is not before December 1,
Buyer's
Closing Date
1986, then at the
option this Agreement can be declared null and void.
-5-
1
LICENSE AGREEMENT
j THIS AGREEMENT made this day of September, I
j I
:between ARCADE ASSOCIATES, LTD., (hereinafter "Arcade]
Associates"), and the RUSSELL H. VOLK TRUST, (hereinafter "Volk'
Trust")
W I T N E S S E T H
WHEREAS, the Volk Trust is desirous of erecting a
!! commercial building on the following described real property j
i
!'situate in the City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of
Colorado:
I
South 68 feet of Lots K and L, Block 95,
City and Townsite of Aspen
i
(hereinafter referred to as the "Volk Trust real property"), and
WHEREAS, as a condition thereto, the City of Aspen has
�I
required that the Volk Trust have and maintain certain space for
:trash receptacles, and
!' I
!
WHEREAS, the Arcade Associates wish to allow the Volk
i
Trust to utilize the pad presently located on the real property �
I! located next to the Volk Trust real property described above in
�
I•
('order to fulfill the aforementioned requirements. i
li
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises
!-herein contained, the parties agree as follows:
I
j 1. Grant of License. Arcade Associates hereby grants to
I: the Volk Trust a non-exclusive license to use a portion of the
trash receptacle pad located on its property, for the purpose of
LI
9 j
locatin its trash receptacles, subject to all the terms and
conditions of this License Agreement.
2. Term. The license granted hereby shall be for a
i —
I
period of five (5) years commencing on September 1, 1986, and
I ending at midnight on August 31, 1991. Unless it is in default
hereunder, the Volk Trust shall have the option to renew this
I i
license for an additional five (5) year period, which option must
i�
!be exercised by written notice to the Arcade Associates on or
before June 1, 1991.
3. Compensation. As consideration for the granting of
this license, the Volk Trust shall pay to Arcade Associates the
1
sum of One Hundred Twenty Dollars ($120.00) per annum. This
amount shall be paid in advance on June 1 of each year, except I
for the initial payment which shall be paid contemporaneously
;,with the execution hereof.
4. Conditions to Grant of License. The license granted I
herein is granted subject to the following conditions:
a. Licensee shall use the property solely for the purpose
11 of locating its trash receptacles thereon, which shall in no way
I�
;interfere, instruct or impede with the trash receptacles owned by
,Arcade Associates, or with Arcade Associates' use of its real I
property.
b. The Volk Trust shall maintain the licensed real
property in a usable and neat order and keep the area around its i
j trash receptacles in a neat and orderly fashion. Arcade
Associates shall have the right to designate the type of '
receptacles to be used and how they shall be painted. Any costs
2
1` of repair or replacement as to the receptacles themselves, shall
be borne by the owner thereof, but any cost of repair, !
maintenance or replacement, including but not limited to snow
I removal, to the licensed real property shall be shared equally;
i.except that any damage due to the negligence of any person shall
be borne by the person under whose authority the negligent j
i
individual has acted.
i
5. Indemnification and Liability Insurance. The Volk a
I �
Trust shall defend, indemnify and hold Arcade Associates harmless j
from any and all claims, suits, costs and liability arising o6t j
I, f
I:of its use of the Arcade Associates' property, including the acts
i
i
or neglect of the Volk Trust, it's agents, tenants, employees or j
invitees.
i
6. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by the
i
'.Arcade Associates, in the event of any permanent construction i
!.upon the licensed property, upon ninety (90) days' written notice
il
of termination. In the event of breach of any of the material j
provisions of this Agreement, or in the event no commercial
!structure is erected upon the Volk real property by the Volk
i Trust within three (3) years of the date of this Agreement, this j
Agreement may be terminated upon thirty (30) days' written
notice. Upon termination, all property owned or utilized by the
Volk Trust shall, at its expense, be removed from the property of
the Arcade Associates, and the property shall be restored to a
! condition satisfactory to Arcade Associates. I
I
7. Superior Obligations. This Agreement is subordinate
and subject to any and all obligations for any financing which
encumbers the real property owned by the Arcade Associates. The !
i
i
i 3
I
I
I
Volk Trust agrees upon the request of the Arcade Associates to
j
execute any documents required to evidence this subordination
8. No Assignment. The Volk Trust shall not assign this f
license or any rights granted pursuant to this Agreement without
I `
.the prior written consent of the Arcade Associates, which consent
;;may be withheld at the Arcade Associates' sole discretion.
I
9. Notices. All notices required pursuant to this
Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been
given if either delivered personally or mailed by certified,or
registered mail to Arcade Associates or the Volk Trust, as the
case may be, at their respective addresses as follows, or to such
k other addresses as either party may so notify the other of in�
I;
!I writing:
I I
I
Arcade Associates, Ltd. Russell H. Volk Trust i
c/o Jacobson Rentals c/o Donald Fleisher Company
730 E. Durant Avenue P.O. Box 7946 `
I Aspen, Colorado 81611 Aspen, Colorado 81612 I
1;
t
9. Binding Effect. This License Agreement shall bed
j
i binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the Aspen Arcade
iAssociates and the Volk Trust and their respective heirs,I
personal representatives, successors and assigns.
10. Modifications. This Agreement contains the entire)
— — I
;understanding of the parties hereto and may be modified only by
;written agreement executed by each of the parties.
I
i 11. Access by Arcade Associates. The license granted)
hereunder shall be deemed non-exclusive and nothing herein shall
be construed as limiting in any fashion by Arcade Associates use
of its property, or from granting to anyone else a license to use
I
4
•
said property as long as the Volk Trust use thereof is not
!:unreasonably affected thereby.
I.
12. Waste and Nuisance Prohibited. The Volk Trust shall
not commit, or suffer to be committed, any nuisance upon the
licensed property. Any admission of any nuisance shall be
grounds for the termination of this Agreement by the Arcade;
L
Associates.
13. Severability. Each portion of this Agreement shall be I
deemed to be severable and if for any reason any portion or '
portions hereof are invalid or contrary to any existing or future
flaw, such invalidity shall not affect the applicability on
I� validity of any other provisions of this Agreement.
II 14. Governing Law. This Agreement, for all purposes,
li shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of
the State of Colorado.
i
15. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed inl
jseveral counterparts, each of which shall have the force and
` I
effect of the original. I
' I
16. Attorneys' Fees. Should any party hereunder be
I f
jrequired to resort to legal or equitable process for they
I' enforcement of any of the provisions of this Agreement, the
prevailing party shall be entitled to collect from the otherl
i
party all of its reasonable attorneys' fees, expenses and court
I
costs.
I'
I
I
i
5
i
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their i
!hands and seals the day and year first written above.
A ACE-�ASSOCIAT , LT RUSSELL H. VOLK TRUST i
i I
By. / By
General Partner R c and W. Volk, Trustee
r
jSTATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
;COUNTY OF PITKIN )
a
'! The foregoing document was acknowledged and sworn to before
Ime this day of September, 1985, by
ias General Partner of ARCADE ASSOCIATES, LTD.
!
!My commission expires:
Witness my hand and
!official seal.
1 Notary Public
STATE OF Kansas )
ss.
COUNTY OF Sedgwi ck )
r
The foregoing document was acknowledged and sworn to before
�me this 23rd day of September, 1985, by Richard W. Volk as
.I Trustee for the RUSSELL H. VOLK TRUST.
I My commission expires: 2/27/86
!Witness my hand and
' official seal.
I
1
N6tary Public
A
CITY OF •a
1985 (IMMERCIAL C I• MMMITIDON
TALLY
Nane of Project: Volk Property Date: 9/19/85
1 2 3 4 5 6 AVERAGE
Anderson Hint Blocmquist Parkalinas Peyton Tygre
A. Quality of Design
1. Architectural Design _2 _3 3
2. Site Design 1 2 2
3. Energy 2 _2 3
4. Amenities 2 2 3 _
5. Visual Impact 2 2 3
6. Trash & Utility Access 0 2 1
SUET rAL : 9 -13 15
B. Availability of Public Facilities
and Services
1. Water Supply/Fire Protection 1 _1 2 _
2. Sewage Di spo ssal 1 I_ 1
3. Public Transportation/Roads 1 1 2
4. Storm Drainage 2 _2— 2
5. Parking _I_ _1 2
SUBTOTAL: 6 6 9
C. Provision of Employee Housing 10 -IQ _ 10
D. Conversion of Existing Units 5 5 5
E. Bonus Points 0 0 1
SAL POINTS CATEIOREIS A-E: 30 34— 40
SB.20
ME MORANDU M
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE: 1985 Commercial GMP Application and Volk Building Special
Reviews
DATE: September 17, 1985
INTRODU CT ION
Attached for your review is the Planning Office's recommended points
allocation for the one application submitted on August 1 for the
Commercial GMP Competition. The application is for 5,309 s.f. of new
office space for the Volk Building at the northeast corner of Galena
Street and Cooper Avenue. The applicant also proposes to tear down
and reconstruct the existing 1500 square feet of commercial space, for
a total building size of approximately 6,800 square feet.
QUOTA AVAILABLE
Quota for this competition is calculated as follows:
Carry Over Quota Exemption Remaining
0 10,000 s.f. 500 s.f. 9,500 s.f.
PROCESS
The Planning Office will summarize this project at your meeting of
September 17, 1985, and will review procedures with you and provide a
suggested assignment of points for the scoring of the application.
The applicant will give a brief presentation of the proposal. A
public hearing will be held to allow interested citizens to comment.
At the close of the hearing each commission member will be asked to
score the applicant's proposal.
The total number of points awarded by all members, divided by the
number of members voting, will constitute the total points awarded to
the project . A project must score a minimum of 60% of the total
points available under categories 1, 2, and 3, amounting to 28.8
points, and a minimum of 30% of the points available in each category
1, 2 and 3 to meet the basic competitive requirements. The minimum
points are as follows: Category 1 = 5.4 points; Category 2 = 3
points; and Category 3 = 8.75 points. Should the application score
below these thresholds it will no longer be considered for a develop-
ment allotment and will be considered denied. Bonus points cannot be
used to bring the applicatin over this minimum threshold.
This project, should it receive a development allotment, requires
additional reviews to be conducted at this meeting, and discussed
below in this memorandum.
The reviews consist of:
1. Special Review for approval of reduction of Trash and Utilities
requirements; and
2. Special Review for approval of an FAR Bonus.
PLANNING OFFICE RATINGS
The Planning Office has assigned points to the application as a
recommendation for you to consider. The staff met to assess the
ratings of the reviewing planner and objectively scored the proposal.
The following is a summary of the ratings. A more complete explana-
tion of the points assignment for each criterion is shown on the
attached score sheets, including rationales for the ratings.
Availability
Quality
of Public
Employee
Conversion
of
Facilities/
Housing
of Existing Bonus Total
Design
Services
Need
Units Points Points
10
6
10
5 -- 31
The project exceeds all minimum thresholds required. Quota available
in the CC/C-1 category is 9,500 sq. ft. Quota being requested is
5,309 sq. ft.
PLANNING OFFICE RECOMMENDATION
According to the Planning Office's recommended scoring, the Volk
Property proposal meets the threshold number of points in each scoring
category. There are some positive features in the proposal making it
an acceptable project by the standards of competition, including
employee housing and the diagonal cut corner. However, there are also
some significant problems and detracting features, such as access,
trash and utilities, and the use of open space on the site. The
Planning Office recommends that you concur with its point assignment
to approve the project and recommend to Council the allocation of
5,309 square feet of commercial space for the construction of the Volk
Building.
SPECIAL REVIEW
I. Bonus FAR
The applicant proposes to construct a new 6,809 square foot
commercial structure on a lot area of 4,005 square feet. The
external floor area ratio (FAR) of the project is 1.7:1. The
basic FAR in the Commercial Core zone district is 1.5:1.
Pursuant to Section 24-3.4 and 24-3.5 (a) , the applicant requests
that a 0 .2: 1 bonus FAR, or 801 square feet of additional floor,
area be approved. The Planning and Zoning Commission needs
to make findings relative to the following criteria in Section
24-3 .5 (a) in its decision to allow or deny the bonus FAR request:
" (1) The compatibility of the development with surrounding
land uses and zoning, including size, height and bulk,
proposed site design characteristics, including
landscaping and open space and visual impacts such as
vi ewpl ane s.
(2) Whether the applicant has documented the availability
and adequacy of water supply (for domestic and fire
protection needs) , sewage treatment, storm drainage,
roads and parking facilities to serve the proposed
development. "
The recommended scoring of this GMP application suggests that the
proposed development meets the basic criteria and standards for
design and availability of public facilities and services.
However, there exist particular problems with service access to
the site and the provision of trash and utility access areas.
Due to the small lot size and the corner location lacking
adjacent alley access, these problems would seem to be exacer-
bated by allowing the maximum density represented by the 1:7.1
FAR requested. The greater the size of the building, the more
E
demand there is on public rights -of -way from service vehicles,
pedestrian and vehicular traffic, and trash service. In addi-
tion, by building out to the maximum allowable FAR, the site
design possibilities for this very important corner location in
the center of town are constrained. In our opinion, the quality
of the site design has suffered as a result of this, particularly
in the area of open space. While the open space provided does
meet minimum standards of the Code, its usability appears quite
limited. We feel that much of the area left open will simply be
for circulation into and out of the building and between Cooper
and Galena Streets, and that little beneficially used open space
is actually being provided on this prominent downtown corner.
ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives are:
1. Deny this request for Bonus FAR;
2. To approve the request for Bonus FAR;
3. To table this review until the applicant can provide more
information regarding the effects of having this project
built out to the 1.7:1 FAR upon the surrounding public
rights -of -way, trash and utility services and whether the
overall proposed floor area can be accomplished on the site
within an improved design containing more usable open space.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Office recommends that you choose alternative #3,
above, tabling this special review in order to give the appli-
cant a chance to address in greater depth these issues of
on -site and off -site impacts from maximizing the floor area
ratio.
II. REDUCTION IN TRASH AND UTILITIES ACCESS REQUIREMENTS
Section 24-3.5(b) states the criteria by which the Planning
Commission shall consider reducing the trash and utilities access
requirements. These criteria are as follows:
1. Adequacy of trash vehicle access.
2. Amount of trash expected to be generated.
3. Unique measures for enclosing trash bins.
4. Provision for trash compaction.
5. Comments of City Engineering Office and trash service
personnel.
6. Adequacy of area for public utility placement.
The applicant proposes to place the electric panels in the
basement of the building. Jinx Capparella, of the City Electric
Department, stated on September 5, 1985 that this situation can
be a problem if the utility room becomes cluttered with storage
items or if there are other impediments to emergency access and
reading meters. The applicant faces a problem that since there
is no alley abutting the property, he cannot practically place
the utility service on the alley as Code section 24-3.7 (h)
requires. In the opinion of City Electric and the Planning
Office, the solution proposed is probably the best possible, even
though not meeting Code requirements.
The proposed method for handling trash is also in response to the
lack of direct alley access. The applicant proposes to compact
trash in the basement and haul it out daily to a dumpster
located in the Ute Banque Arcade's trash area off a nearby
alley. Space for one and possibly two dumpsters would be leased
3
"
by the applicant. It was pointed out by BFI Trash Service
Personnel on September 11, 1985, that there are several problems
with this pr o po sa 1 :
1. Trash generation from the proposed project would surely be
greater than what one 2 yard dumpster can accommodate.
Depending on the uses, even two dumpsters may not be
adequate.
2. The Arcade's trash area is regularly overloaded during the
winter season; and there does not appear to be adequate
space there for two additional dumpsters.
3. BFI is not aware of any compaction system that might be
located in a basement that would sufficiently reduce the
volume of trash to fit into one dumpster.
The Planning Office views the above concerns expressed by BFI to
be significant problems with the applicant's proposal. In
addition, there are potential problems with (1) hauling the trash
along the sidewalk to the alley; and (2) handling food service
trash that poses special problems with liquids and decomposi-
tion. Finally, given the corner location of this property, we
have concerns about the traffic impacts associated with deliver-
ing goods to the new building, given the possible conflicts with
traffic, pedestrians and other service vehicles for the site and
neighborhood.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends tabling this
review in order to given the applicant a chance to present more
creative solutions to trash storage problems. It should be noted
that because of the size of the proposed building, it is likely
that a great deal more trash will be generated than is the case
with the present uses on the site.
4
PLANNING AND ZONING CO MMI S S ION EVALUATION
1985 COMMERCIAL GMP APPLICATIONS
PROJECT: VOLR PROJECT DATE: Spntember 6 ,1985
1. QUALITY OF DESIGN (exclusive of historic features [maximum 18
points]) . The Commission shall consider each application with
respect to the quality of its exterior and site design and shall
rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 -- Indicates a totally deficient design.
1 -- Indicates a major design flaw.
2 -- Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design.
3 -- Indicates an excellent design.
Rate the following features accordingly:
a. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - Considering the compatibility of the
proposed building (in terms of size, height, location and
building materials) with existing neighboring developments.
RATING: 2
COMMENT: An attemLt has been made to design the building honoring
rel ati onshi t)s of first story height lines and the frontage alignment
with neighboring Andres and the Cooper St. Pier, as well as
creating a diagonal face to the corner. However, the arched
entranceway, uner stories, and facade details depart from the
architectural themes and forms of neighborhing buildings.,
b. SITE DESIGN - Considering the quality and character of the
proposed landscaping and open space areas, the extent of
undergrounding of utilities, and the arrangements of improve-
ments for efficiency of circulation (including access f or
service vehicles) and increased safety and privacy.
RATING: 1
• 1 ! ! I � 1 � 1 ! � • � • I 11 • ' 11 - I 11 • 1
- 1 - • • 1 - • • • - 1 • -4000 0Boston
III• • ! I- • • • ! - • • •g �. -� • ! -
'i I• •�•I �. "None
C. ENERGY - Considering the use of insulation, passive solar
orientation, solar energy devices and efficient fireplaces
and heating and cooling devices to maximize conservation of
energy and use of solar energy sources.
RATING: _ 2
COMMENT: No commitments beyond the use of standard materials and
mechanical systems are made,
d. AMENITIES - Considering the provision of usable open space
and pedestrian and bicycles ways.
RATING: 2
COMMENT:1 minimum requirement of open •• would •-
provide . . - 11 - I of an • 1 - in an
e. VISUAL IMPACT - Considering the scale and location of
buildings to maximize public views of surrounding scenic areas.
RATING: 2
.IR -• • . •- win•• 1 1 • 1 - .• • •- .1
1 a. • • 1 - -of--- ! - • • 1 •
0 �- 1 H• 1 I
f. TRASH AND UTILITY ACCESS AREAS - Considering the quality and
efficiency of proposed trash and utility access areas.
RATING: _1
COMMENT:The applicant is unableto comply with the required
abutment t• an • 1 1 and, 1 • has
FE -�
1 - • -{{ "1 • - •• I • 1 - •• MIS
! h� •- • • {{ • 11" • • 1 e 1 • -1{ - - 1
SUBTOTAL: 10
2. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES (maximum 10
points) . The Commission shall consider each application with
respect to its impact upon public facilities and services and
shall rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 -- Indicates a project which requires the provision of new
services at increased public expense.
1 -- Indicates a project which may be handled by existing 1 ev el
of service in the area, or any service improvement by the
applicant benefits the project only and not the area in
general.
2 -- Indicates a project which in and of itself improves the
quality of service in a given area.
(In those cases where points were given for the simultaneous
evaluation of two services (i. e. , water supply and fire protection)
the determination of points shall be made by averaging the scores
for each feature) .
a. WATER SUPPLY/FIRE PROTECTION - Considering the capacity of
the water supply system to provide for the needs of the
proposed development without system extensions and without
treatment plant or other facility upgrading. Also considering
the ability of the appropriate fire protection district to
provide service according to established response times
without the necessity of upgrading available facilities.
RATING:
• .&TAPOV4W • 1 •• 1 ••.- •W76,
. • • 1
b. SEWAGE DISPOSAL - Considering the capacity of sanitary
sewers to dispose of the wastes of the proposed development
without system extensions and without treatment plant or
other facility upgrading.
- 2 -
RATING:
COMMENT: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District stated that
there are sewer lines nearby with adequate cal&city to serve
the project and there is adequate treatment plant capacity to
handle the project.
C. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION/ROADS - Considering the ability of the
project to be served by existing City or County bus routes.
Also considering the capacity of major streets to provide
for the needs of the proposed development without substantially
altering existing traffic patterns or overloading the
existing street system or causing a need to extend the
existing road network.
RATING:
• I 1 - - I • - • 11 - . • • • 1 . - • ' - • 1
• • estion. In particular, service vehicles• 1
• 1 estion. The proiect is conveniently• -• in proximity t•
bus service aid ! •-a�. •1 1 - •
' • - 11 • • ! • • 11 • • 1 • • 1
• • • - 1 • • • 11 - C' ffl•dffs
1 - - • ' e 1
d. STORM DRAINAGE - Considering the capacity of the drainage
facilities to adequately dispose of surface runoff of the
proposed development without system extension.
RATING: 2
• I The installation of drywell will reducethe historical
• 11 water runoff
e. PARKING - Considering the provision of parking spaces to
meet the commercial and/or residential needs of the proposed
development which are required by Section 24-4.5 of the
Code, and considering the design of said spaces with respect
to visual impact, amount of paved surface, convenience and
safety.
RATING: I
COMMENT:11 1 •• of !e existing curb cuts will allow•
me "11
SUBTOTAL: 6_
3. PROVISION OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING (maximum 15 points) - The Commission
shall assign points to each applicant who agrees to provide low,
moderate and middle income housing which complies with the
housing size, type, income and occupancy guidelines of the City
of Aspen and with the provisions of Section 24-11.10. Points
shall be assigned according to the following schedule:
0 to 40% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing:
1 point for each 4% housed
41 to 100% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing:
1 point for each 12% housed
- 3 -
E
RATING: 1_
2-
bedroom and • n' •-• ••11 unit at Park Place Condominiums.
111 .M OM. �- •Illy •.• 1 is • •- �� •�.
• ON , W. P.• ' • - • 1 1 • t
4. CONVERSION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum 5 points) - The Commission
shall assign points to those applicants who guarantee to provide
a portion of their low, moderate and middle income units by
purchasing fully constructed units which are not restricted to
Aspen's housing guidelines and placing a deed restriction upon
them in compliance with Section 24-11.10. Points shall be
assigned according to the following schedule:
Points
1 to 33% of all low, moderate and middle income
units proposed by applicant are to be purchased
and deed restricted 1
34 to 66% of all low, moderate and middle income
units proposed by applicant are to be purchased
and deed restricted 3
67 to 100% of all low, moderate and middle income
units proposed by applicant are to be purchased
and deed restricted 5
RATING: 5
5. BONUS POINTS (maximum 8 points) (Not to exceed 20% of the points
awarded in Sections 1, 2 and 3) - Commission members may, when
any one determines that a project has not only incorporated and
met the substantive criteria of those sections, but has also
exceeded the provisions of these sections and achieved an out-
standing overall design meriting recognition, award additional
points. Any Commission member awarding bonus points shall
provide a written justification of that award for the public
hearing record.
BONUS POINTS:
COMMENT: No comment,
6. TOTAL POINTS
Points in Category 1: 10 (minimum of 5.4 points
needed to remain eligible)
Points in Category 2: 6 (minimum of 3 points
needed to remain eligible)
Points in Category 3: 10_ (minimum of 8.75 points
needed to remain eligible)
Points in Categoy 4: 5 (No minimum threshold)
SUBTOTAL: Points in
Categories 1, 2,
3 and 4 3_ (minimum of 28.8 points
- 4 -
r�
L
needed to be eligible)
Points in
Category 5 0_
TOTAL POINTS: —3-1_
Name of Planning and Zoning Member: Planning Office
— 5 —
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
THRU: Hal Schilling, City Manager
FROM: Tom Baker, Alan Richman, Planning Office
RE: INDEPENDENCE SQUARE PRESENTATION
DATE: September 4, 1985
S_U_MMARY:_ At the request of City Council, this memorandum
evaluates several public/private options for the use of the
parcel at the corner of Cooper and Galena Streets, known as
Independence Square and the Volk Property.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL AC_T_ION: During a Planning Office presentation
on August 26 concerning the Downtown Plan and Transportation
Element, the Council heard a request from Robin Molny and Stacey
Standley. Robin and Stacey asked the Council to evaluate the
potential for acquisition of the Volk Property. The Council
asked the Planning Office to prepare a report on the property
for the meeting on September 9, 1985.
BACKGROUND: The Planning Office has concentrated its efforts on
formulating site development alternatives for the property,
placing it in the context of the existing malls and the poten-
tial for mall expansion and considering the planning for the
entire downtown. At a meeting of the City Agency Directors on
August 27, it was decided that Ron Mitchell and the Finance
Department would be responsible for contacting the property owner
and reporting to Council on the possible costs of acquisition.
A_LTER_NA_TIVES: The accompanying figures illustrate several
alternatives for the use of the Volk Property and summarize their
advantages and disadvantages as follows:
1. Figure 1 illustrates the existing Volk parcel, consisting of
approximately 4005 square feet of land, zoned CC, depicting
its existing uses.
2. Figure 2 illustrates the owner's proposal to develop the lot
for commercial purposes by constructing a building of 1,500
square feet of reconstructed space and 5,300 square feet of
new commercial space. The Building Footprint includes 2,977
square feet of the lot and 1028 square feet (25%) are shown
as landscaping/circulation and open space. The Aspen
Planning and Zoning Commission is scheduled to evaluate this
MEMO: INDEPENDENCE SQUARE PRESENTATION
Page 2
September 4, 1985
project as the only competitor in the Commercial GMP on
September 17.
3. Figure 3 illustrates a public/private partnerships option,
allowing a more limited commercial development on the
site and utilizing an open space easement to compensate the
owner for the public's use of the property. In our review
of designs for small urban spaces, we have found that a
certain amount of commercial use of a site can add to the
life of the space, while providing an economic return to the
landowner and saving the city some of its site development
and maintenance costs. Please note that we have not
analyzed the technical feasibility fo the building as shown,
and it should be considered illustrative only.
4. Figures 4 and 5 illustrate two potential public development
strategies for the outright purchase of the property. The
figures are intended to illustrate the range of uses to
which the property could be put, from the most heavily
landscaped and water -oriented approach, to more of a
mall -oriented approach with tables, a performance area and
fountain. Once again, these figures are illustrative only
and should not be considered final design sketches.
5. Figure 6 takes some of the elements included in the prior
two figures and illustrates how they might fit into the
larger context of Independence Square. From our review of
the original mall drawings, we have discovered that a public
square comprising the Cooper -Galena right-of-way and this
corner property can be accomplished through the purchase of
the Volk Property and the closure of the two streets. The
square becomes the central people place in the downtown
area, surrounded by mall restaurants (Guido's and Pablo's),
seating, a fountain and a performance area on the Volk
Property. The corner works alone as an impromptu location
for performers and a sunny spot for lunches, and through
temporary closure to traffic on Galena and Cooper Streets,
becomes a natural place for parades, awards ceremonies
(Coors Classic, World Cup) events, and the like. Eventual
mailing of the entire corner creates an ideal pedestrian,
human environment, free of the present conflicts with
traffic and presenting options to shop, to eat, to drink or
simply to stroll or congregate.
EVALU_AT_I_ON: The Planning Office believes that the accompanying
figures illustrate the enormous potential for public amenities to
be created through the use of the Volk Property. Options for
public use range from the limited alternative associated with
acquisition of an open space easement, to development of a corner
downtown park, to the ultimate creation of a town square in the
MEMO: INDEPENDENCE SQUARE PRESENTATION
Page 3
September 4, 1985
heart of the City. Given the limited time available to us, we
have not yet looked at the financial aspects of any of these
development alternatives. What we believe we have done is to set
a context for Council evaluation of the citizen initiative, and
to begin to formulate in our own minds one possible vision of a
future downtown Aspen.
Given the development pattern which is emerging for the downtown,
with the approval of the Aspen Mountain PUD, the rehabilitation
of four of our principal historic structures, the investigation
of transportation solutions for Rubey Park, parking and a
downtown shuttle, and the proposed redevelopment of the Little
Nell Base, we see a renewed emphasis on the pedestrian elements
of the core of the City. We feel that the acquisition of this
11arcel gives us another key building block in this planning and
development program, and will also help significantly in enliven-
ing the presently underutilized Cooper Street Mall. As noted in
the citizen report on the property, this corner has an except-
ional orientation toward Aspen Mountain views and sunshine, and
is the most significant remaining open corner in the commercial
core. Based on all of these reasons, we conclude that the
purchase of this property would have great public benefit, and
even though we are at a very early stage of the downtown planning
process, we conceptually endorse the proposal for its purchase.
R_EC_OMMENDA_TI_ON: Should Council agree with the Planning Office's
finding that public use of the Volk Property has merit and that
it should be acquired by the City, we suggest that the following
actions be taken:
1. Continue to pursue negotiations with the owner as to
outright acquisition of the property or purchase of an open
space easement for a portion of the property.
2. Consider having a "design competition" among local and
national architects and land planners to identify the best
uses of this property and the surrounding mall property. If
a design competition is found to be too complex or inappro-
priate, then an RFP (Request for Proposal) process could be
initiated, requiring Council to choose a design program for
the site which an architect would follow.
3. Consider holding an "event" in September for the purposes of
evaluating how the corner would work as a pedestrian
environment. The Galena and Cooper blocks could be tempo-
rarily closed for a weekend Festival, in a manner similar to
the temporary closure which occurred in the mall area prior
to its formal construction.
AR. klm
, 1' � 'I �* I , :�
"Z F* . !1,
pp
VOLK PROPERTY
EXISTING CONDITIONS
LL2
MALL
RIM 1
ANDRE'S
COOPER ST
SITE INFORMATION
EXISTING STRUCTURE •
POPCORN WAGON
4' KNEE WALL
BRICK PATIO
GAS PUMP
PROPERTY LINE
0
J
MALL
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
COOPER AVENI
INDEPENDENCE k L.
FKAM 2
ADVANTAGES
.NO COST TO CITY
.PROPERTY REMAINS ON
TAX ROLLS
DISADVANTAGES
.PEDESTRIAN FLOW REDUCE!
USABLE OPEN SPACE
! i ���� 4 �� i, ti ; ,� ' jl.j.,r .i .. � r ` ..�,, i.,.!.�•i'*C^'I�r�cTir-c -r-i .,.--�,.--.- r-r.,., �.. .
PUBLIC/PRIVATE OPTION
RGUF E 3
S
T LESS THAN OUTRIGHT
PURCHASE
'AGES
;NIFICANT COST FOR SMALL
INCREASE IN OPEN SPACE
IT
L�
•
1S VN31VO
a
a
O
0
r>
>C
H
H
a
0
z
a
0 w
r3,
U w U)
Ua
a
W FC
�C
HwQ
H U, z
0
ww°
w
a
cn
op"
H
Cw7
z W
z
O
co
cc
Cl
H
�
Q
8
V
H
cc
ON
0
1S VN3ldJ
•
W
U
Z
O
I
1S VN3lVp
W
Q
W
w
cr
w
a
3
Q
w
cc
a
w
U
Z
Q
cr
O
w
n^
tJ
This letter is written in anticipation of your agenda item
forthcoming on August 26th relating to overall transportation
and concerning land uses in the downtown area. It is spec-
ifically in regard to the property located at the intersection
of Galena and Cooper Streets which is commonly known as
"Independence Square" or "The Sinclair Station."
Interested and concerned citizens have attended several meetings
,.to discuss the potential impacts of the eventual use of the
property and this letter and the attached Outline Report
have been prepared based on information brought to light at
those meetings.
It was concluded that the property is unique to the downtown
area and that prior to its being developed for commercial
uses, it deserves the City Council's and the Staff's careful
evaluation of the desirability of its acquisition for open
space use. As has been the case when other strategically
located properties have been proposed for development, we feel
the historic open space slogan, "when it's gone, it's gone"
to be particularly applicable when regarding the future of
Independence Square.
The attached Outline Report attempts to examine the pros and
cons of the acquisition of the property for open space use,
suggests some of the uses to which it might be put if acquired
and includes an examination of several techniques for funding --
we do not suggest that the contents of the report are comprehensive,
but rather that they might serve as a basis from which you,
the Council, might begin deliberations if you choose to do so.
Respectfully submitted,
1
Robin Molny X7
Stacey Standley
August 23, 1985
RM:sm
This letter is written in anticipation of your agenda item
forthcoming on August 26th relating to overall transportation
and concerning land uses in the downtown area. It is spec-
ifically in regard to the property located at the intersection
of Galena and Cooper Streets which is commonly known as
"Independence Square" or "The Sinclair Station."
Interested and concerned citizens have attended several meetings
,.to discuss the potential impacts of the eventual use of the
property and this letter and the attached Outline Report
have been prepared based on information brought to light at
those meetings.
It was concluded that the property is unique to the downtown
area and that prior to its being developed for commercial
uses, it deserves the City Council's and the Staff's careful
evaluation of the desirability of its acquisition for open
space use. As has been the case when other strategically
located properties have been proposed for development, we feel
the historic open space slogan, "when it's gone, it's gone"
to be particularly applicable when regarding the future of
Independence Square.
The attached Outline Report attempts to examine the pros and
cons of the acquisition of the property for open space use,
suggests some of the uses to which it might be put if acquired
and includes an examination of several techniques for funding --
we do not suggest that the contents of the report are comprehensive,
but rather that they might serve as a basis from which you,
the Council, might begin deliberations if you choose to do so.
Respectfully submitted,
1
Robin Molny X7
Stacey Standley
August 23, 1985
RM:sm
OUTLINE REPORT
- • . � i-' CyA ratnx •.. • � ..ri a:':c�r.-_at �ti�w.,t
r3:r'q,�.
CONSIDERATIONS
-- Factors Supporting Acquisition
Most Significant Remaining Open Corner in the Commercial Core
Proximity to and Enlivenment of Cooper Street Mall and Mall
Activities
Exceptional Orientation toward Aspen Mountain Views and
Sunshine
Potential for Uses Not Currently Compatible with or Available
to Existing Malls
Preservation of Activities Similar to Those Currently
Available to the Public on the Site
Elimination of Impact of Delivery and Service Vehicles
Anticipated from Proposed Commercial Development
Counter Indications to Acquisition
Cost of Acquisition
. Cost of Development
. Cost of Maintenance
. Loss of Tax Revenues
Increased Pedestrian/Vehicular Hazard
. Increased Pedestrian Congestion
. Limitation of Uses Due to Size of Property
Impact of Building Masses on Adjacent Properties on Design
of Improvements
' • V 1J11.V1 J VG11 l.G1
Civic Fountain
Landsca ed Park Area- Passive Uses •-
. p
• Activities Center - Music, Gatherings, Speechmaking,
Bulletin Kiosks, etc.
. Passive Uses of Activities Center When Appropriate
*Present or similar uses could be preserved on property prior
% to its eventual development.
M LAND
°-
P
AnLlcipaLea 11b5 xevenues rrom btn Penny
and Other Land Fund Sources in Excess
of 1985 Budget Projections......................$170,000.00
RED ROOF SALE
. Proceeds From Sale in 1985......................$500,000.00
. Rental Loss in 1985.............................$250,000.00
TOTAL ........... $540,000.00
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
As with other open space acquisitions, this proposed purchase
should be undertaken on an installment basis.
In the event that a portion of the proceeds from the Red
Roof Sale are required to refund existing bonds, additional
6th penny funds would become available.
The potential of the availability of state lottery funds
for such a purchase should be investigated.
Partial.interim retirement of the debt -can be expected
from revenues obtained from existing uses.
•ASPEN*PITKIN •
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
FROM: Thomas S. Dunlop, Director
Environmental Health Department
DATE: August 19, 1985
RE: Volk GMP and Special Review
The above -referenced submittal has been reviewed for the following
Environmental Health concerns.
AIR POLLUTION
1. Demolition of the existing building on the site will require
compliance with the State of Colorado Air Pollution Control
Regulations. Specifically, air pollution control techniques to
minimize fugitive dust from the work site will be necessary.
Control techniques such as constant watering of the rubble and
debris during demolition will be required. Fencing, shrouding or
the use of dust suppressants on the site are other options.
Trucks transporting debris to the landfill shall be covered to
eliminate spillage or dust from leaving the trucks during transp-
ort.
Any carry out of mud or debris onto City streets shall be cleaned
up daily with the use of wet process mechanical sweepers.
2. Any proposed restaurant grills or solid fuel burning devices
which may be installed in the building shall comply with City of
Aspen Air Pollution Ordinances in existence at the time building
permits are acquired for the project.
3. The buildings to be destroyed shall be inspected by a qualified
person or company to determine if any asbestos is present in the
structure.
Material test results shall be provided to this office for review
prior to any demolition.
If asbestos materials are discovered they shall be removed by
qualified persons using the most current removal technology
available. Such a removal plan shall be submitted to this office
and the Colorado Health Department prior to any demolition.
130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado B1611 303/925-2020
Page Two
Volk GMP and Special Review
August 19, 1985
NOISE ABATEMENT
Chapter 16 of the Aspen municipal Code titled Noise abatement
will be the governing legislation used to monitor noise generated
on the site. Should complaints be received an investigation will
be initiated to determine compliance with the Code.
WATER SUPPLY
Service to this facility by the Aspen Water Department's municipal
distribution system is in compliance with policies of this office.
SEWAGE DISPOSAL
Service to this facility by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
District collection lines is in conformance with policies of this
office.
SITE DRAINAGE
The proposed method of on -site
the use of a dry well located
with policies of this office.
Should any
in the new
addressing
be limited
bakeries.
retention of roof drainage through
on the property is in conformance
food service establishments be allowed to occupy space
building compliance with all Colorado Regulations
food service must be met. This would include, but not
to restaurants, grocery stores, confectionaries and
UNDERGROUND FUEL STORAGE TANKS
A-bandonment, pumping, removal and disposition of the sub -surface
fuel storage tanks on the site shall be in compliance with
Colorado and Federal law.
TSD/co/VolkGMP
• 4 •
1`-'lEHORANDUM
TO:- Paul Taddune, City Attorney
Jay Hammond, City Engineer
Jim Adamski, Dousing Director
Heiki Kuhn, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
Joe Dickinson, City Electric
Tom Dunlop, Environmental Health
Jim Markalunas, Aspen Water Department
Jim Wilson, Fire Marshall
Steve Crockett, Fire Chief_
Bill Drueding, Zoning Official
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE: Volk GMP & Special Review
DATE: August 9, 1985
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by
by Don Fleisher, requesting GMP approval to construct a new building
on the Volk Property located at the intersection of Galena Street and
Cooper Avenue. The applicant is also requesting FAR bonus in the CC
zone and a special review to vary the trash and utility access.
Please review this material and return your referral comments to the
Planning Office no later than September 2, 1985 in order for this
office to have adequate time to prepare for its presentation before
City P&Z on September 17, 1985.
Thank you.
T/)/ S P o s c j- c^- l3 F_ S 03x —1 of A [5 y 4'/ir_ A-.1Av...
0&- I n A t s A y A ,- , r ,1 T i L3 I>/ S i ,T i c J O" K ,L i —0- .S r k
A oLvi4T 2 C-Ar PA C- v /4 A O /7L01V .-T- %f A S /� tl C a vZtY R �iF r y /-
/I-^,rn#- I-V Tt-c S /',cL.3c C-f
/�` S n "Al /+, r K ,
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Paul Taddune, City Attorney
Jay Hammond, City Engineer
Jim Adamski, Housing Director
Heiki Kuhn, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
Joe Dickinson, City Electric
Tom Dunlop, Environmental Health
Jim Markalunas, Aspen Water Department
Jim Wilson, Fire Marshall
Steve Crockett, Fire Chief t�O I
Bill Drueding, Zoning Official. D
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office WG Q `
RE: Volk GMP & Special Review
DATE: August 9, 1985
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by
by Don Fleisher, requesting GMP approval to construct a new building
on the Volk Property located at the intersection of Galena Street and
Cooper Avenue. The applicant is also requesting FAR bonus in the CC
zorie and a special review to vary the trash and utility access.
Please review this material and return your referral comments to the
Planning Office no later than September 2, 1985 in order for this
office to have adequate time to prepare for its presentation before
City P&Z on September 17, 1985.
Thank you.
: ol
f,oIA6f 6,�•,,,,Hr�+�ht►.� roddbea�oio6leinif u&'-,.notClfar
l 1 re u , stord t lileMs Q, here'fYe 0+' ff VWfts �ti e�er�teey w«rss RM%
+tY rpN ++ G�uTitYt� w l'
,l rt1y I(Q S fDr S�wil+ir sr�vaiiohs
for nc�f'Yr feai " �►►�
ocf't►��nvh�pvta /' •lity,�cr»qs IM (G i. c++AOW ^A'/ r p
0
•
MENORANDUM
TO: Paul Taddune, City Attorney
Jay Hammond, City Engineer
Jim Adamski, Housing Director
Heiki Kuhn, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
Joe Dickinson, City Electric
Tom Dunlop, Environmental Health
Jim Markalunas, Aspen Water Department
Jim Wilson, Fire Marshall
Steve Crockett, Fire Chief
Bill Drueding, Zoning Official
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE: Volk GMP & Special Review
DATE: August 9, 1985
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by
by Don Fleisher, requesting G M P approval to construct a new building
on the Volk Property located at the intersection of Galena Street and
Cooper Avenue. The applicant is also requesting FAR bonus in the CC
zone and a special review to vary the trash and utility access.
Please review this material and return your referral comments to the
Planning Office no later than September 2, 1965 in order for this
office to have adequate time to prepare for its presentation before
City P&Z on September 17, 1985.
Thank you.
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: '/-0J
DATE RECEIVED COMPLETE:
PROJECT NANII : U'll l r 'r
APPLICANT I
Applicant Address Phone
REPRESENTATIVE:
RepresentativeAddress/Phone:
Type
of Application:
Y I. GMP/SUBDIV IS ION/PUD (4 step)
Conceptual Submission
Preliminary Plat
Final Plat
II. SUBDIV IS ION/PUD (4 step)
Conceptual Submission
Preliminary Plat
Final Plat
III. EXCEPTION/EXEMPTION/REZONING (2 step)
+� IV. SPECIAL REVIEW (1 step)
Special Review
Use Determination
Conditional ,Use
Other : c *iO� 1s--- . � c
CAS E N0.
STAFF:
($2,730.00) /tl
uCvLC.
($1,640.00) 3,g1G.
($ 820.00)
($1,900.00)
($1,220.00)
($ 820.00)
($1,490.00)
($ 680.00)
P&Z CC MEETING DATE: �- , 1 �l PUBLIC HEARING • YES , NO
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: INITIAL: j
City Atty City Engineer Building Dept.
��
DATE REFERRED:
INITIALS•
REFERRALS:
-'City Atty
V � � Aspen
Consol . S.D.
School District
�.' City Engineer
Mtn.
Bell
Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas
w %Housing Dir.
Parks
Dept.
State Hwy Dept (Glenwd)
Aspen Plater
Holy
Cross Electric
State Hwy Dept (Gr.Jtn)
�--City Electric
�.- Fire
Marshall-
Bldg: Zoning/Inspectn
./ Envir. Hlth.
Fire
Chief
Other:
Other:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
Other:
=• is/•1�i,a``!. /�'r�._ iI^.-! "
ASPEN* PITKINOREG•IONAL BUILDAG. DEPARTMENT
S 6 - p`K. v cve
July 30, 1
Sunny Vann
Vann Associates
P.O. Box 8485
Aspen, CO 81612
Dear Sunny:
On July 25, 1985, you and I.made a physical inspection of the
Volk Property located on.the northeast corner of Cooper and
Galena Streets.
The building did not contain a mechanical room. The furnace was
hanging from the ceiling and the area under it was being used for
storage and would count in the existing floor area. The
following areas would be excluded from calculations of existing
floor area:
1. A portion of the building in the form of a.strip all
along the east wall 1.3 feet wide (plus or minus).
2. That portion of the building along the north wall that
encroaches on the adjacent property.
3. The area on the.west wall that covers the electrical
service disconnect'.
You advised me that your survey engineer calculated the remaining
floor area to be 1,500.2.sq.ft. My::calculations.taken from the
improvement survey confirms this.
I hope this is what you need. Please contact me if I can be of
further help.
cc: Alan Richman, Planning
Jim Wilson, Building Official
Paul Taddune, City Attorney
BD/ar
offices:
110 East Hallam Street
Aspen, Colorado 131611
Sincerely,
kti�
William L. Druedin
Zoning Enforcement Officer
303/925-5973
mail address:
506 East Math Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
T
IN CONIC
I
w
rn
0
Ln
O
It
PA,
IN CONC.
N 750 09' 1 I W
60.20
A V IE
7
'kENC. 1.3', ( SEE.
•
0
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Georgeann Waggaman, Historic Preservation Committee Chairperson
RE: Volk Building Conceptual Review
DATE: July 30, 1985
The purpose of this memorandum is to explain to you the nature of
HPC's conceptual approval of the Volk Building proposal. On July 23,
1985 the Historic Preservation Committee granted conceptual approval
to the Volk Building proposal presented by Don Fleisher and Dick
Fallin. This approval allowed the applicants to submit a growth
management application under Section 24-11.3 (d) of the Municipal Code.
The first proposal for the Volk Building submitted to the HPC on July
9, 1985 did not meet with an approval due to conceptual problems with:
(a) the split-level design, (b) lack of a diagonal corner on the
building, (c) lack of useable open space on a presently open corner
used as a prime meeting place, (d) the height and bulk of the building
which would not be complimentary to the adjacent Andre's and the
Cooper St. Pier Building, and (e) the lack of Victorian features
which would help the building better fit into the existing Victorian
Street scope.
The HPC felt that the second proposal we reviewed was a vast improvement
over the earlier design. Most of the above concerns were addressed by
the applicants, however the elevational plan was very sketchy and we were
not able to review fenestration, openings, glazing and the other
details that HPC normally looks at during the Preliminary/Conceptual
stage in order to give direction to the project' s design for final
review. HPC gave conceptual approval for the massing of the building
alone, and all the other details will still need to be reviewed prior
to final approval.
It is hoped that P&Z will take into account HPC's conditional, pre-
liminary approval when scoring design features of this project during
the growth management competition. HPC may still ask for significant
changes to the design of this building before final approval is given.
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE: Pre -Application Meeting on the Volk Building Proposal
DATE: July 16, 1984
LOCATION: Southeast corner of S. Galena and E. Cooper Streets.
The applicants' representatives, Don Fleisher and Dick Fallin, would like
to discuss with the Planning and Zoning Commission their proposal to
build a commercial structure on the corner of S. Galena and E. Cooper
Streets. During a pre -application meeting with the Planning Office on
July 3 to discuss making an August 1 application for Commercial GMP
allotment some serious concerns were raised with regards to the design
of this building. It was suggested that the applicants meet with the
Planning and Zoning Commission to get some general direction from this
Board prior to submitting an application due by the August 1 deadline
for commercial GMP competition.
Section 24-11.3 (d) states that HPC conceptual approval of the proposed
project must be secured prior to submitting an application for develop-
ment allotment. On July 9, 1985 the applicants brought their proposal
before the HPC. The committee had numerous problems with the project
and did not give preliminary approval at that meeting. HPC will
continue preliminary review at a July 23, 1985 meeting.
The Planning and Zoning Commission should be cautioned to maintain a
general context to their comments as the GMP competition process has
not yet begun. Specific evaluations of the proposal should be witheld
until the time of GMP review, with consideration of all applications
for commercial space allotments.
PR*PLICATION CONFERENCE SUM*
eOco►nnirfc�<I b�.�A�J R1' c.p�A4r4 4gtr ) G,�—eA
PROJECT. Ni �►�tGfn (L�lJ1� LurN��%
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE:
REPRESENTATIVE'S PHONE:
OWNERS NAME:
SUMMARY
-krlrrd
1. Type of Application:
2. Describe action/type of development being requested:
Cr M ►� c,�.'�M (c v v� rA+r� � ��' a y --11. h 3 Cn r � ,�. i
3. Areas in which Applicant has been requested to respond, types of
reports requested:
Policy Area/
Referral Agent
4. Review is: (P&Z Only)
Comments
7 � a
litta �:.c,k1l.,•���r ..'.it��CCd/�r � dy�+�'� � rt 61�P/�a�'"' �1V�_I)
e
y rI4 ili. L 4 , P -A f
Qo
14
(CC/BOCC Only) (P&Z then to CC/BOCC)
5. Public Hearing: (YES) (NO)
6. Did you tell applicant to submit list of ADJACENT PROPERTY
OWNERS? (YES) (NO) Disclosure of Ownership: (YES) :(NO)
7. What fee was applicant requested to submit:
8. Anticipated date of submission:
9. COMMENTS/UNIQUE CONCERNS:
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: VOLR GMP
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
September 17, 1985 at a meeting to be held at 5:00 P.M., before the
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, City Council Chambers, 130
S. Galena, Aspen, CO to consider a commercial growth management
application to construct a new retail/office building of approximately
6,800 square feet on the Volk property. The Volk property is located
at the intersection of Galena Street and Cooper Avenue, and presently
contains the Popcorn Wagon and Cookie Munchers Cafe.
For further information, contact the Planning Office, 130
S. Galena, Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 925-2020, ext. 223.
�fWelton Anderson_
Chairman, Aspen Planning and
Zoning Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on August 15, 1985
City of Aspen Account.
N OILS S
',1"1 GQ
-2k)4-l-- -+V P„V--
$7J
11
t- -
viCL 4,
414 2'
T
ILI
n i•
,i
LL
�
X
X
•
.a— f
MEMORANDUM
To: Steve Burstein, Planning Department
From: Elyse Elliott, Engineering Department
Date: August 30, 1985
Re: Volk GMP & Special Review
Upon reviewing the above application and making a site inspection,
the Engineering Department has the following comments:
Utilities
Thy building will not significantly effect the City's utilities.
utilities. There is a 6" water main on Cooper and an 8" main on
Galena. We prefer that the connection by made to the 8" Galena
line. The existing sewer lines will also adequately accommodate
the building. Since this building will not house any full scale
restaurant facilities, it is not expected to use large quantities
of water. The installation of a drywell will reduce the historical
storm water runoff levels.
Construction
During the construction phase of the building, the right-of-way
must not be obstructed. Pedestrian sidewalks and barricades will
have to be installed by the contractor to maintain normal traffic
patterns.
ParkinQ
The new sidewalk and open space proposal will eliminate two curb
cuts, thus creating four new parking spaces. This will also
eliminate the pedestrian/vehicle conflicts that occur on that
corner.
Trash
The applicant has indicated that dumpster space will be leased in
the nearby alley. This department needs to see a copy of that
lease to determine if the space is adequate.
Lighting
It will be necessary for the lighting proposal of this project to
be coordinated with the Phase II Lighting Plan for the Commercial
Core, this should be done through the CCLC. We require that
concrete piers be placed at two or three location as required by
the CCLC.
Special Review
Most of the above comments pertaining to GMP also pertain to the
Special Review. We are mostly concerned with the adequacy of the
dumpster space.
herein shall mean any person currently residing in and employed
in the City of Aspen or Pitkin County for a minimum average of 30
hours per week, nine months out of any twelve-month period, who
shall meet moderate income and occupancy eligibility requirements
established and applied by the Housing Authority with respect to
employee housing.
Verification of employment of person(s) living in the employee
rental unit shall be completed and filed with the Housing
Authority Office by the Owner of the unit prior to occupancy
thereof, and must be acceptable to the Housing Autority. If the
Owner does not rent the employee unit to a qualified employee the
unit shall be made available for occupancy in accordance with the
Housing Authority Guidelines, provided the Owner shall have the
right to approve any prospective tenant, which approval shall not
be unreasonably delayed or withheld.
No lease agreement executed for occupancy of the employee rental
unit shall provide for a rental term of less than six consecutive
months.
When a lease is signed with a tenant, a copy shall be s e n t to
the Housing Office so that a current file may be maintained on
each unit.
ACTIO11 HEEDED; Comments and approval b1, the Hoard.
3
C
D
AUG 2 010
TO: Jteve trier
MEMORANDUM
Date
nstein, Planning
FROM: Bill Drueding, Zoning Enforcement Officer
SUBJECT: Volk GMP & Special Review
1) Basement level must be 100% below grade to be excluded from
F.A.R.
2) The third floor penthouse, if used as a dwelling, will
require a Park Dedication Fee.
3) Does the 4,005 square foot parcel account for the land on the
east side deeded to Cooper St. Pier Building.?
cc: Patsy Newbury, Zoning Official
BD/ar
D
M E
U 0 r A ►,, D U
TO: Tn�sina
Authoritly Bo rd
0i 4Q
Aspen
and Pitkin County, Colorado .—
FP.0I1: Ann Doorman,
Property Manager
PE: Volk G11P and
Special Review
DATE: September 3, 1985
ISSUE:
Is the
employee housing
proposed by the applicant
aderuate
to meet
the employee housing
obligation?
BACKGROUND: The applicant's (Russel 11. Volk Trust) located at
tiie intersection of Galena Street and Cooper Avenue is in the CC
Commercial Core zone. The applicant is requesting a commercial
growth management allocation for the development of 4,005 s.f.
An existing 1,5C0 s.f. commercial structure containing the Cookie
r•1unchers Cafe, the Aspen T Shirt Station, and the Popcorn Wagon
are located on the property.
The applicant proposes to
demolish the
exiting building and to
construct a new 6,609 s.f.
(external floor
area).
The ground
f7loor will contain 2,977
s.f. and be
exclusively
retail com-
mercial. The second floor
will contain
2,552 s.f.
and will be
utilized as office space
as will the
1,280 s.f.
third floor
penthouse.
STAFF FEVIEI-1: The external floor area of the project is 6,809
s. f .t The net leasable floor area is 5,179 s.f. The existing
leasable commercial floor area credit is 1,500 s.f. The net
increase is 3,679 s.f.
Section 2 4- .11. 5 of the Nuni cipal Code calculates the number of
full time equivalent employees generated by the project as:
CC/C-1 3.5 to 5.25 employee/1000 s.f. net leasable
(bb) Points shall be assignee: according to tile follo:•,ing:
0-40$ of the addition employees generated by the project are
_provided with housing: 1 point for each 4% housed
(dote: (bb) is only s::own for the purpose of the 40a calcula-
tion)
Therefore, assuming an employee generation factor of 3.5 employee
/1000 s.f. of aduitional net leasable floor area, the project
;,,ill generate approximately thirteen (13) new employees
1
New net leasable 5,17111 s.f.
Credit of exist. 1,500 s.f.
3,679 s.f. increase
3,679 x's 3.5/1000 = 12.50 or 13 employee
13 x's 400 = 5.2 employees to be housed
The applicant proposes to house oaf -site 5.25 employees by
aurehasina one (1) two bedroom and one (1) three bedroom unit at
the Airport Business Center (see E::hibit 4) . Sunny Vann has
represented that the contracts for purchase have been sent to the
out of town applicant for signature. These formerly free market
rental units have been recently renovated, cordorliniumized and
offered for sale as the Park Place Condominiums.
one (1) 2 bedroom = 2.25 employees
one (1) 3 bedroom = 3.00 employees
total = 5.25
STAFF COT,i:IE?'TS• The Housing Office finds the proposal to meet
the criteria established in the 1 unicipal Code of the City of
Aspen Section 24.11.5 and: therefore recommends approval with
the following conditions:
The Applicants shall covenant with the City of Aspen that
the employee housing units be restricted in terms of use and
occupancy to the rental or sale guidelines established and
indexed at the time or prior to issuance of the building permit
by the City Council's designee for i:i9der-a-te_ income employee
rousing units. Verification of employment and income of those
persons living in the moderate income employee units shall be
completed and filed with the City Council or its designee by the
owner commencing on the date of recording hereof, in the Pitkin
County Real Property records and annually thereafter. These
covenant shall be deemed to run with the land as a burden thereto
for the benefit of and shall be specifically enforceable by the
City or its designee by any appropriate legal action including
injunction, abatement or eviction of noncomplying tenancy
during the period of life of the last surviving member of
the presently existing City Council of the City of Aspen,
Colorado, plus twenty-one (21) years, or for a period of fifty
(50) years from the date of recording hereof in the Pitkin County
real property records, rahichever period shall be greater.
The Ov7ner hereby covenants that the employee rental unit shall
remain a rental unit and shall not be condominiu.mized. Use
and occupancy of the employee rental unit shall be limited to
housing for crualified employees in accordance aith the moderated
rental guidelines. The OS.,ner of the unit shall have the right to
lease the units to qualified employees of his own selection.
Such individual may be employed by the Owner, or employed in
7,snen/Pitkin County, provided such persons fulfill the require-
ments of a qualified employee. "Qualified employee" as used
2
5, 6 tuot W
Design A
square planter
shown in
Wat
Charcoal
Design B
round planter
shown in Tan
FF
Design F
planter
shown J . n
Slate Gray
UD
Design R
Ribbed planter
shown in
Mojave Sand
g7
4. 5, 6 foot
� p
15117OWN,
77V 7-1
2, 3, 4, 5, 6 foot
2, 3, 4, 5, 6 100 *�00
2.12/Dur
A Square
al,
C au
Round
C D Roun
F Round R Round
36„
1
r
--
. —j
22"
—�
_ Spun aluminum
X Round lid with anchor
S Round
V Round
Y Square chain and
bstener available
in anodized black,
_
hrc-wn or natural.
r
GalYanized MeW
liner has a lift
I j livdie and holds
20 gallons"
A Square C Square
t B Round D Round F Round R Rou%
22"
X Round
S Round V Round Y Square Sand tray
��. optional
accessory" Pease
srecify when
------ A Square C Square H1 FoundB Round D Round F Round
F I l
Yr
36„
r
_ I
A �4-AIL-
1
r
BPD CGS /icJ L1li�/TEQ \� • �•� ���,'����Tti/y : ;,9�
G2��PLAov74-2- 1a/�
�� v✓.EQS /N SuM'KEK
�,�i �ir�l6 .8Yea1a/s iU
PLE /•V 3ro"�
PLA.t/7.&K
0
T•E'r15N
792�. 3
�ivGE TXF�D /.v 2-0 •.
I
T,�'E�5 , 3" To y' �U✓,�`
NAZI'
41AI—low -11 ---- - .