Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.420 E Main -GalenaPlaza. A51-93q Q gym. GMQS , Spec. J RtS . v 737-073-•14-001 4. XJ411� ////Z ASPENTITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street —7 3_' y—O a Aspen, Colorado 81611 Z �] _o I (303) 920-5090 Ai51 _ /a LAND USE APPLICATION FEES CITY: � p -63250-134 GMP/Conceptual ! 5- go -63270-136 GMP/Final -63280-137 SUB/Conceptual -63300-139 SUB/Final -63310-140 All-2 Step Applications -63320-141 All 1 Step Applications -63330-150 Staff Approval -63432-157 Zoning Plan Check -63432-157 Sign Permit -00100-00000-31070 Use Tax for Sign Permits HISTORIC PRESERVATION: -63335-151 Exemption -63336-152 Minor -63337-153 Major Devel. -63338-154 Signif. Devel. -63339-155 Demolition COUNTY: -63160-126 GMP/General -63170-127 GMP/Detailed -63180-128 GMP/Final -63190-129 SUB/General -63200-130 SUB/Detailed -63210-131 SUB/Final -63220-132 All 2 Step Applications -63230-133 All 1 Step Applications -63240-149 Staff Approval -63450-146 Board of Adjustment -63235-148 Zoning Plan Check REFERRAL FEES: -63360-143 Engineering - County 00115-63340-163 Engineering - City 00123-63340-190 Housing j�' - 00125-63340-205 Environmental Health PLANNING OFFICE SALES: -63080-122 County Code -69000-145 Other (Copy Fees) TOTAL Name: �` ' r -t '' Phone: Address: Project: ezz �L��=l /!C Check #: ALI) �__ _Date: No of Copies: ty, wlyy the seized property should not be for- feited The statement shall include specific fac- tual aind legal grounds, if any there may be, supporting it and any affirmative defense as set out in C.R.S. 16-13-501, et seq.; III. A list of witnesses whom the respondent Intends to call at the hearing on the merits, incluc'.Ing the addresses and telephone num- bers; and IV. A verified statement, supported by docu- mentation, of the ownership interest of the claimant. Failure to file said Response to Petition and Citation to Show Cause on or before said hear- ing date shall result in judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, the People of the State of Colorado. Failure to appear, either in person or by coun- sel, shall also result in judgment In favor of the plaintiffs, the People of the State of Colorado. Dated this 2 day of December. 1993. Jane Ramsey Clerk Deputy Clerk Published in The Aspen Times December 10, and 17,1993. 1N DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 93CV222-3 CITATION THE PEOPLE. OF THE STATE OF COLORADO Plaintiff vs. SIX HUNDRED AND NINETY-TWO DOLLARS & SEVENTY-SEVEN CENTS IN U.S. CURRENCY AND JOSE GARCIA-SANCHEZ Respondents. TO: JOSE GARCIA-SANCHEZ and all interest- ed Persons: Pursuant to Court Order issued by the Dis- trict Court, Ninth Judicial District, Pitkin Coun- ty, Colorado, you are directed to appear and show cause why the following property should not be forfeited and title thereto perfected in nu i tLt yr runuL i ntu i cc anr.c ivu. u- TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: You are hereby notified that the holder of the indebtedness secured by the Deed of Trust herein described, has filed a Notice of Election and Demand for Sale in accordance with the provisions of the Deed of Trust and pursuant to the laws of the State of Colorado. The Deed of Trust being foreclosed is described as follows: Deed of Trust From Grantor: Jean Pierre Odler To the Public Trustee of: Pitkin County Current Owner of Evidence of Debt Secured by the Deed of Trust: Alpine Bank, Aspen Original Principal Balance: $500.000.00 Present Principal Balance:$487,303.11 Dated: October 5, 1992 Recorded: October 6, 1992 In Book: 690 At Page: 587 As Reception No.: 349344 The Deed of Trust encumbers the following described real property situate In the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, to wit: LOT 8 AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF LOT 7, BLOCK 100, HALLAMS ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, also known as 701 North Third Street, Aspen, Colorado, being all of the property encum- bered by the Deed of Trust. THE LIEN OF THE DEED OF TRUST TO BE FORECLOSED MAY NOT BE A FIRST LIEN. THEREFORE, notice is hereby given that I will, at 10:00 o'clock in the a.m. of the 26th day of January, 1994; at the south front door of the Pitkin County Courthouse, 506 East Main Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611, sell at public auction to the highest and best bidder for cash, the real property of Grantor, and the heirs and assigns of Grantor, for the purpose of paying the indebtedness secured by the Deed of Trust, attorneys' fees, and expenses of sale, and will deliver to purchaser a Certificate of Purchase, as provided by the laws of the State of Col- orado. WHEREAS, on December 6. 1993. the City Council granted approval of Resolution No.93- 85 for a 4.400 square foot commercial/office growth management allocation for an expan- sion of the Galena Plaza project; and WHEREAS, a request for Vested Rights for the development was submitted to the Planning Office within the growth management applica- tion; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24-6-207 of the Aspen Municipal Code the City Council may grant Vesting of Development Rights for a site specific development plan for a period of three years from the dale of final development plan approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN. COL- ORADO: Section L Pursuant to Section 24-&207 of the Municipal Code, City Council does hereby grant the applicant vested rights for the Galena Plaza site specific development plan as follows: 1. The rights granted by the site specific development plan approved by this Ordinance shall remain vested until November 16. 1996. However, any failure to abide by the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in forfeiture of said vested property rights. Failure to timely and properly record all plats and agreements as specified herein and or in the Municipal Code shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested rights. 2. The approval granted hereby shall be sub- ject to all rights of referendum and judicial review. 3. Nothing in the approvals provided in this Ordinance shall exempt the site specific devel- opment plan from subsequent reviews and or approvals required by this Ordinance or the general rules, regulations or ordinances of the City provided that such reviews or approvals are not inconsistent with the approvals grant- ed and vested herein. 4. The establishment herein of a vested l irop- erty right shall not preclude the applicati,,)n of ordinances or regulations whlch are geneial in nature and are applicable to all property sub- ject to land use regulation by the City of Aspen including, but not limited to, building. lire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes. In this regard, as a condition of this site dev•lop- ment approval, the developer shall abide by any and all such building, fire, plumbing, elec- trical and mechanical codes, unless an exemp- tion therefrom is granted in writing. Section 2: The City Clerk shall cause notice of this Ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulations within the City of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days following final adoption hereof. Such notice shall be given in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to Title 24. Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: The property shall be described in the notice and appended to said notice shall be the ordi- nance granting such approval. Section 3: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 10 day of January, 1994 at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City [fall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (I5) days prior to which a hearing of public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of gen- eral circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUB- LISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 6th day of Decem- ber, 1993. John Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Published In The Aspen Times Dec. 17. 1993. 16 0 CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen DATE RECEIVED: 09 15 93 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO. DATE COMPLETE: ` 2737-073-14-001 A51-93 STAFF MEMBER: KJ PROJECT NAME: Galena Plaza Commercial GMOS, Special Review & Vested Rights Project Address: 420 E. Main Legal Address: APPLICANT: Ron Garfield & Andy Hecht Applicant Address: 601 E. Hyman, Aspen, CO 81611 925-1936 REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann Representative Address/Phone: 230 E. Hopkins Ashen. CO 81611 925-6958 FEES: PLANNING $3925.00 # APPS RECEIVED 21 ENGINEER $ 93.00 # PLATS RECEIVED HOUSING $ 140.00 ENV. HEALTH $ TOTAL $4158.00 TYPE OF APPLICATION: STAFF APPROVAL: 1 STEP: 2 STEP: X P&Z Meeting Date NDV,i6 PUBLIC HEARING: NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO CC Meeting Date 15rPUBLIC HEARING: YES NO �Gr1 Ib Z�9VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO DRC Meeting Date REFERRALS: City Attorney Parks Dept. School District City Engineer Bldg Inspector Rocky Mtn NatGas X� Housing Dir. X Fire Marshal CDOT _ Aspen Water Holy Cross Clean Air Board r City Electric Envir.Hlth. Mtn. ACSD Bell Open Space aril Other C lye Zoning Energy Center /1 Other DATE REFERRED: GT �� `l /13 INITIALS: D/D DUE: /O /a 5 FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: INITIAL:,4.,�,) City Atty City Engineer ZZoning Env. Health Housing Open Space Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: g i M •• 00 INAUr • L : • jul TO: Kim Johnson, Planning Office FROM: Tom Baker, Housing Office DATE: December 10, 1993 RE: Amendment to October 29th Referral Comment: Galena Plaza REFERRAL COMMENT: Based upon the Housing Office referral comment of October 29, 1993, the applicant made an amended proposal to mitigate for employee generation. At the Housing Board's regular meeting of December 1, 1993, the Board made several findings and approved the following amended proposal for affordable housing mitigation: Generally, the applicant proposes to deed restrict the entire Kandahar structure and all nine (9) units rather than demolish and reconstruct the existing units to meet the Affordable Housing Guidelines' minimum net livable square footage requirements. The Housing Board finds: 1. The total square footage required to mitigate for 11.55 employees (4,100) is exceeded by this proposal (4,810); however, all units are below the Guidelines' net livable square footage recommendations. 2. This is an existing structure and the Board feels some flexibility is warranted. 3. The Guideline's square footage minimums are a guide and may be reduced with good reason (see note 2 on p. 13 of Guidelines). The Housing Board recommends the following: 1. The applicant shall receive credit for housing 11.55 employees and no additional credit shall be carried into the future and the Kandahar Apartments cannot be utilized to meet any future affordable housing mitigation. This agreement is made due to the substandard size of the existing units. 2. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit the applicant shall agree in writing to non -Uniform Building Code improvements. The basis of this letter is an inspection of these units by 1 NN 00 0 • 2/3 2 Cat 2/2 bdrm 2 bdrm 4 1 Cat 1/1 bdrm 2 bdrm 5 1 Cat 1/studio 1 bdrm 6/7 2 Cat 2/2 bdrm 2 bdrm 8 1 Cat 1/1 bdrm 2 bdrm 9 1 Cat 1/studio 1 bdrm 10/11 2 Cat 2/2 bdrm 2 bdrm 12 1 Cat 1/1 bdrm 2 bdrm 5) Prior to issuance of any building permits for the Galena Plaza project, the applicants shall execute a deed restriction in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. Proof of recordation of the restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder shall be forwarded to the Housing Authority and the Planning Office. Dated: 1994. John Bennett, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado at a meeting held 3 , 1994. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk flexibility is warranted. 3. The Housing Guidelines' square footage minimums are a guide and may be reduced with good reason (note 2, pg.13 of the Guidelines). ; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined the Galena Plaza housing mitigation proposal to be fair and equitable and consistent with the mitigation requirements contained in Section 8-109 of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: In accordance with Section 24-8-109(J) of the Aspen Municipal Code, City Council does hereby accept the employee housing mitigation plan for 11.55 employees as required by the Galena Plaza project to be nine deed restricted units known as the Kandahar Apartments existing on the Galena Plaza property with the following conditions: 1) The applicants shall receive credit for housing 11.55 employees and no additional credit shall be carried into the future and the Kandahar Apartments cannot be utilized to meet any future affordable housing mitigation. This limitation is made due to the substandard size of the existing units. 2) Prior to the issuance of any building permits for the Galena Plaza project, the applicant shall agree in writing to non - Building Code improvements. The basis of this agreement letter is an inspection of these units by the Housing Office Chief of Property Management and Assistant Director. 3) The applicant shall upgrade the entire building to the requirements in the Uniform Building Code health and safety regulations. 4) The applicant shall deed restrict the Kandahar units to the following categories and rental rates. The rental rates are based upon the sizes of the units rather than the bedroom count due to the substandard size of the units. UNIT CATEGORY RENTAL RATE UNIT TYPE 1 1 Cat 1/studio studio 2 RESOLUTION NO. (Series of 1994) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE HOUSING MITIGATION PROPOSAL FOR THE 1993 COMMERCIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOTMENT FOR THE GALENA PLAZA BUILDING LOCATED AT 420 E. MAIN STREET (GALENA PLAZA CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1 ON THE E. HALF OF LOT 1 AND ALL OF LOTS M,N,O,P,Q,R, AND S, BLOCK 86, TOWNSITE OF ASPEN) WHEREAS, on December 6, 1993, the City Council of the City of Aspen awarded commercial/office development allotments in the CC (Commercial Core) zone district for 1993 pursuant to Resolution No.85 (Series 1993) under the growth management quota system as set forth in Article 8 of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the development project known as Galena Plaza was awarded 4,400 square feet of net leasable area within the 1993 commercial/office development allotments; and WHEREAS, the development of the Galena Plaza project must mitigate for 11.55 employees; and WHEREAS, the Galena Plaza project has requested that the City Council approve an affordable housing mitigation package in which it shall deed restrict all nine (9) of the existing dwelling units in the Kandahar apartment building located on the Galena Plaza property; and WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board reviewed the proposed mitigation package on December 1, 1993 and recommends its approval by City Council by making the following findings: 1. The total area required to mitigate for 11.55 employees (4,100 s.f.) is exceeded by this proposal (4,810 s.f.); however, all units are below the Housing Guidelines' net livable square footage recommendations. 2. This is an existing structure and the Board believes some 1 the Housing Office Chief of Property Management and Assistant Director. 3. The applicant shall upgrade the entire building up to the requirements in the Uniform Building Code health and safety regulations. 4. The applicant shall deed restrict the Kandahar units to the following categories and rental rates. Please note that the rental rate is based upon the size of the unit rather than the bedroom count, due to the substandard size of the units. UNIT CATEGORY RENTAL RATE UNIT TYPE 1 1 Cat 1/studio studio 2/3 2 Cat 2/2 bdrm 2 bdrm 4 1 Cat 1/1 bdrm 2 bdrm 5 1 Cat 1/studio 1 bdrm 6/7 2 Cat 2/2 bdrm 2 bdrm 8 1 Cat 1/1 bdrm 2 bdrm 9 1 Cat 1/studio 1 bdrm 10/11 2 Cat 2/2 bdrm 2 bdrm 12 1 Cat 1/1 bdrm 2 bdrm b:refglpz2 6 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE APPROVAL OF SPECIAL REVIEWS FOR REDUCTIONS OF REQUIRED PARKING AND OPEN SPACE, AND SPECIAL REVIEW FOR FLOOR AREA BONUS FOR THE GALENA PLAZA BUILDING EXPANSION (A GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPLICATION) LOCATED AT 420 E. MAIN STREET (GALENA PLAZA CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1 ON THE E. HALF OF LOT L AND ALL OF LOTS M,N,O,P,Q,R,and S, BLOCK 86, TOWNSITE OF ASPEN). Resolution No. 93-26 WHEREAS, Ronald Garfield and Andrew Hecht, represented by Sunny Vann, submitted an application for Growth Management allocation including Special Reviews in order to expand the existing structure at 420 E Main Street by 4,400 square feet; and WHEREAS, the subject property is located in the CC Commercial Core zone district; and WHEREAS, Section 24-5-209 E.3. of the Aspen Municipal Code allows the Planning Commission to grant reduction of required off- street parking in the CC zone with a cash -in -lieu payment of $15,000.00 for each space reduced, pursuant to Section 24-7-404 B.; and WHEREAS, Section 24-5-209 D.9. of the Aspen Land Use Code allows the Commission to grant reduction of required open space pursuant to Section 24-7-404 A.3.; and WHEREAS, Section 24-5-209 D.10. establishes a floor area ratio maximum of 1.5:1 which may be increased by the Commission to 2:1 pursuant to Section 24- 7-404 A.1. and 2.; and WHEREAS, the parking reduction requested by the applicant is for 11 spaces (two spaces lost due to conversion of those spaces to a trash storage area and 9 for the new generation of parking at the rate of 2 spaces per 1,000 square feet net leasable); and WHEREAS, the applicant requests an open space reduction of approximately 500 square feet and a floor area bonus of approximately 790 square feet (1.6:1 FAR); and WHEREAS, at the time of this condominium application the site exceeded minimum open space requirements but the bulk of the open space on the parcel was non -conforming pursuant to the definition of open space contained in Section 24-301 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, upon review of the referral comments submitted by the Engineering Department, Housing Office, Water Department, Parking and Transportation Director, Historic Preservation Officer, Electric Department, Fire Marshal, and the Sanitation District, the Planning Office recommended to the Commission approval of the 1 Special Reviews with conditions; and WHEREAS, the Commission heard presentations by the project representative and the Planning staff at a public hearing at their regular meeting on November 16, 1993; and WHEREAS, by a vote of 6-0 the Commission approved with conditions the Special Reviews for reduction of on -site parking spaces, reduction of open space, and a floor area bonus; and WHEREAS, the applicant agreed to, and the Commission accepted. the Planning Office recommended GMP score of 27.5 points and found that the minimum category thresholds had been met, allowing City Council to allocate the requested 4,400 square feet of net leasable area to the project; and WHEREAS, the Commission also unanimously passed a motion which recommends to City Council that: "the City Council only accept a housing mitigation package which addresses the Housing Office's concerns, specifically that the employee generation of the project be calculated at 4.375 persons per 1,000 s.f. net leasable, and that the deed restricted units meet the Housing Guidelines." NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: that it does hereby grant approval for Special Reviews for reduction of eleven (11) on -site parking spaces, approximately 500 square feet of open space, and a floor area bonus of approximately 790 square feet (1.6:1) for the Galena Plaza Building Expansion of 4,440 square feet of net leasable area as represented in the September 15, 1993 GMQS Application with the following conditions: 1) The applicant must immediately relocate the dumpster from the sidewalk east of the apartment building. 2) Sidewalk repairs as required by the City Engineer and handicap access ramps at the two corners of Galena must be installed by the applicant prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 3) Tenants cannot use the Galena Street right-of-way for delivery truck access. Prior to issuance of any building permits: 4) The applicant shall make payment -in -Lieu for 11 parking spaces in the amount provided for in Section 24-7-404 B.I. of the Aspen Municipal Code to the Building Department for transfer to the City Finance Department. 5) The applicant shall pay a cash -in -lieu payment in the amount provided for in Section 24-7-404 A.3. of the Aspen Municipal Code for the reduction of approximately 500 s.f. of 2 % ft open space to the Building Department for transfer to the City Finance Department. 6) A drainage plan shall be approved by the City Engineer. The applicant must verify drainage of the existing patio and roof drains to the Sanitation District. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on November 16, 1993. /,(,/, /� �'4L - W. Bruce Kerr, Chairman Jan Carney, Deputy City Clerk 3 367200 A P-489 02/22/94 03:21P P6 1 OF 5 � DOC SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CLERK k RECORDER STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION FROM FULL SUBDIVISION PROCESS AND SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDOMINIUMIZATION WHEREAS, GALENA PLAZA, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, and CBI PROPERTIES, INC., a Colorado corporation (collec- tively, "the Applicant"), are the owners of a parcel of land located in Pitkin County, Colorado (the "Property"), more particu- larly described as: The east half of Lot L and all of Lots M, N, O, P, Q, R, and S, Block 86, City and Townsite of Aspen, _ County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, with a street address of 420 East Main Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611; and WHEREAS, Applicant wishes to create separate fee simple interests by parcelling the Property into two units, to wit: Units 1 and 2, GALENA PLAZA CONDOMINIUMS According to the plat,_, hereof recorded in Plat Book at Page of the records of Pitkin County, Colorado, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, and WHEREAS, Applicant has requested an exemption from the definition of subdivision for the condominiumization of the Property at the above -described location, pursuant to Section 24-7- 1007 of the Aspen Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Office has determined that such exemption is appropriate; and WHEREAS, the City Council has found the proposed division of land to be outside the intents and purposes of the subdivision regulations for the City of Aspen and, on September 27, 1993, approved the Applicant's request for exemption from the definition of subdivision, pursuant to Ordinance No. 46 (Series of 1993); and WHEREAS, a Subdivision Exemption Agreement is required between the Applicant and the City of Aspen binding the Applicant and property to all conditions placed upon the approvals for the subdivision as set forth in §24-7-1005 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen; and 1 367200 5-742 P-49•2/22/94 03:21P P6 2 OF 5 WHEREAS, the City is willing to approve and execute this Agreement and the corresponding condominium plat for the subject property in exchange for Applicant's promises and performance adhering to the terms and conditions contained herein and those other applicable ordinances and regulations as contained in the Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Aspen does hereby determine that the proposed division of the interest in the above -described Property is outside the intents and purposes of the City of Aspen's subdivision regulations, and does, for such reason, grant an exemption from the definition of subdivision for such action. In consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and the approval, execution and acceptance of the plat for recordation by the City of Aspen, it is agreed as follows: 1. The Applicant shall file a Condominium Plat to be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department. 2. The Applicant shall agree to join any future improve- ment districts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in the public rights -of -way benefitting the subject property. 3. Applicant shall record with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder contemporaneously herewith, that certain "Condominium Declaration" for Galena Plaza Condominiums, dated November , 1993, attached hereto. 4. Applicant shall comply with the restrictions as contained in the Condominium Declaration. 5. Applicant shall comply with all provisions contained herein. 6. The provisions of this Agreement shall run with and constitute a burden on the property and shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of Applicant and Applicant's successors and assigns and to the City, its successors and assigns. 7. This Agreement may be altered or amended only by written instrument executed by all parties hereto with the same formality as this Agreement is executed. 8. If any provision of this Agreement is determined to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisi- ons hereof. 9. This Agreement shall become effective upon the date of the last signature set forth below. 2 • 367200 6-142 P-491 024& 03:21P PC, 3 OF ° , APPROVED: The onorable Mayo of the City of Aspen Ao -r4gF►y City Attorney CERTIFICATION I, KATHRYN S. KOCH, do certify that the foregoing Statement of Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision was considered and approved by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting held November , 1993, at which time the Mayor, JOHN S. BENNETT, was authorized to execute the same on behalf of the City of Aspen. Applicant: CBI PROPERTIES, INC., a, -Colorado corporation By 1 W. , Pres. Koch, City Cle-rk Applicant: GALENA PLAZA, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company ByA",L( Lowell Meyer, Manager By Ronal Garfield, Manager 3 E 367200 B-742 P-4 */22/94 03:21P PG 4 OF • STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing was ackno e a ed i ned be a this P9 day of �S-cc , 199*, by , Mayo oCity of Aspe, Kathryn S . Koch, Aspen City Clerk, and $dw krd 6 Aspen City Attorney. T'• WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: My Commission expires 12/=1997 �ml Awl i - 60A-t1-') Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ) CITY & DENVER ) ss. COUNTY OF =WAWAR& ) ,/� The foregoing was acknowledged and signed before me this )4 day of February, 1994, t@9-0.E, by Daniel W. Yohannes, as President of CBI PROPERTIES, INC. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: .," r` Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Th foregoing was acknowledged and signed before me this 'S�day of , 1993, by Lowell Meyer, Manager of GALENA PLAZA, LLC . ....,.. WITNESS my hand and official My commission expires: seal. TAi, i 4 0 • 36200 0 P-493 02/22/94 03:21P P6 5 Of 5 • STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing was acknowledged and signed before me this day of , 1993, by Ronald Garfield, Manager of GALENA PLAZA, LLC. WITNESS my hand and official seal. 'Efi I,C4. My commission expires: .•MO N. '`'ro3 a ry Public O�• L' •%C�tO R/►O�..•o 5 0 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager THRU: Diane Moore, City Planning Director; 1 FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner DATE: January 10, 1993 RE: Galena Plaza Expansion Vested Rights - Request to Table Second Reading of Ordinance 64, Series 1993 Ordinance 64, 1993 vests the site specific development plan for the Galena Plaza Growth Management project which was allocated commercial development rights by the adoption of Resolution 85, 1993 on December 6, 1993. Council must still approve a housing mitigation package for the new commercial impacts. The Applicant is still in the process of finalizing their purchase contract on the property which may affect the wording of their housing resolution. The Planning Office has determined that the housing package constitutes a portion of the site specific development plan and therefore requests that the vesting of said plan by Ordinance 64 be postponed until the housing package comes forward to Council for approval. Ordinance 64 and the housing resolution will return to Council's agenda on February 14, 1994. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager THRU: Diane Moore, City Planning Director FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner DATE: February 14, 1994 RE: Galena Plaza Expansion Vested Rights - Second Reading of Ordinance 64, Series 1993 SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval of the request for vested rights for this development. The Galena Plaza project was granted special reviews for parking reduction, open space reduction, and floor area bonus by the Planning Commission on November 16, 1993. Growth management allocation for the 4,400 square feet of new net leasable area is being presented for Council's approval by resolution on December 6, 1993. The project also seeks vested rights to protect the project from changes to the land use regulations for a period of three years from original approval. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: First reading of Ordinance 64 was approved by a 4-0 vote on December 6, 1993. This property was the subject of a condominium approval by Council on September 27, 1993. CURRENT ISSUES: Section 24-6-207 dictates the process and ordinance language requirements for establishing vested rights for three years. Ordinance 64 contains the required text. Three years is the vested rights period also established by state statute. The vested rights period shall run from November 16, 1993 (the date of P&Z approval of the site development plan including the special reviews) through November 16, 1996. Planning and Zoning Resolution 93-26 is attached for your reference. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval of vested rights for the Galena Plaza project. ALTERNATIVES: Vested rights approval for three years is not a discretionary action by City Council. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve on second reading Ordinance 64, Series 1993 for the approval of vested rights for three years for the development plan for the Galena Plaza project." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Ordinance 64, Series 1993 Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 93-26 ORDINANCE N0.64 (SERIES OF 1993) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, VESTING FOR A PERIOD OF THREE YEARS THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR THE GALENA PLAZA SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL LOCATED AT 420 E. MAIN STREET (E. HALF OF LOT L AND ALL OF LOTS M-S, BLOCK 86, TOWNSITE OF ASPEN). WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Galena Plaza expansion on November 16, 1993, and approved, in conjunction with growth management scoring, special reviews for a reduction of eleven parking spaces, reduction of approximately 500 square feet of open space, and a floor area bonus of approximately 790 square feet; and WHEREAS, Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No.93-26 documents the growth management scoring and special review approvals; and WHEREAS, on December 6, 1993, the City Council granted approval of Resolution No.93-85 for a 4,400 square foot commercial/office growth management allocation for an expansion of the Galena Plaza project; and WHEREAS, a request for Vested Rights for the development was submitted to the Planning Office within the growth management application; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24-6-207 of the Aspen Municipal Code the City Council may grant Vesting of Development Rights for a site specific development plan for a period of three years from the date of final development plan approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: 1 Section 1: Pursuant to Section 24-6-207 of the Municipal Code, City Council does hereby grant the applicant vested rights for the Galena Plaza site specific development plan as follows: 1. The rights granted by the site specific development plan approved by this Ordinance shall remain vested until November 16, 1996. However, any failure to abide by the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in forfeiture of said vested property rights. Failure to timely and properly record all plats and agreements as specified herein and or in the Municipal Code shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested rights. 2. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review. 3. Nothing in the approvals provided in this Ordinance shall exempt the site specific development plan from subsequent reviews and or approvals required by this Ordinance or the general rules, regulations or ordinances of the City provided that such reviews or approvals are not inconsistent with the approvals granted and vested herein. 4. The establishment herein of a vested property right shall not preclude the application of ordinances or regulations which are general in nature and are applicable to all property subject to land use regulation by the City of Aspen including, but not limited to, building, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes. In this regard, as a condition of this site development approval, the developer shall abide by any and all such building, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes, unless an exemption therefrom is granted in writing. Section 2: The City Clerk shall cause notice of this Ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulations within the City of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days following final adoption hereof. Such notice shall be given in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: E 11 0 The property shall be described in the notice and appended to said notice shall be the ordinance granting such approval. Section 3• A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the day of , 1993 at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which a hearing of public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 1993. John Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of 1993. John Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager THRU: Diane Moore, City Planning Director;)i�\ FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner DATE: February 14, 1993 RE: Galena Plaza Affordable Housing Proposal for 1993 Commercial Growth Management Allocation: Resolution No., 1994 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board and the Planning Office recommends approval of this housing proposal and adoption of Resolution No.11 1994. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: On December 6, 1993, City Council approved first reading of Ordinance 64 (1993) approving growth management allocation for a 4,400 s.f. commercial expansion at the Galena Plaza project. Council tabled second reading of Ordinance 64 at the January 10, 1994 meeting in order for the applicant to finalize the purchase contract on the property and make appropriate changes, if any, on the housing resolution. BACKGROUND: The development proposal has received a commercial GMQS allotment for an additional 4,400 square feet of net leasable square feet onto the existing commercial building by an extension eastward as well as the addition of a second floor. Based on the increase in the project's net leasable area, the project must mitigate for 11.55 employees. The applicants have proposed to mitigate their employee mitigation by deed restricting the Kandahar apartment building located on the Galena Plaza property. Nine dwelling units exist in the building. PROPOSAL AND KEY ISSUES: The Kandahar apartments are smaller than the Housing Guidelines permit. Therefore, the applicant is deed restricting more units than necessary as recommended by the Housing Authority and the smaller units are being deed restricted by their size rather than the actual bedroom count. Please see attached Resolution No. and the Housing Director's memo for a thorough explanation. City Council approves the housing mitigation proposed by the applicant. Both the Planning Office and the Housing Authority recommend approval of the applicants proposal to deed restrict the entire apartment building in the categories outlined in the Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval of the Galena Plaza housing mitigation proposal with conditions, and adoption of Resolution No. , 1991. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. , 1994 for the Galena Plaza employee housing mitigation proposal." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Resolution No. , 1994 EXHIBITS A. December 10, 1993 - Tom Baker 2 • • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager THRU: Leslie Lamont, Senior Planne FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner DATE: December 6, 1993 RE: Adoption of Resolution #_ ___, Allotting Commercial/Office Square Footage in the CC (Commercial Core) and C-1 (Commercial) zone districts from the 1993 Growth Management Quota System ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: Growth Management allotments are granted through resolution adoption by City Council. Attached is Resolution # for your consideration and adoption. There was only one growth management application for 1993 commercial allotment from the CC and C-1 zone districts. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Galena Plaza application for 4,400 square feet of rtew commercial area and gave it a score which meets minimum thresholds established by the Municipal Code. STAFF DISCUSSION: The housing mitigation package for the Galena Plaza project is still under review by the Housing Office and the Housing Board. When the Housing Board has made its recommendation, a separate resolution will be prepared for Council's consideration and approval. The project cannot receive any building permits until a housing mitigation package has been implemented. RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff recommends adoption of this allotment resolution. PROPOSED MOTION: I move to adopt Resolution # (Series 1993). CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RESOLUTION NO. (Series of 199 ) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, GRANTING COMMERCIAL/OFFICE DEVELOPMENT ALLOTMENTS IN THE CC (COMMERCIAL CORE) AND C-1 (COMMERCIAL) ZONE DISTRICTS FOR 1993 UNDER THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM. WHEREAS, Article 8 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code sets forth a growth management quota system governing new development within the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8-103 A.3.a. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code, eight thousand (8,000) square feet of net leasable space is available for development allotment within the Commercial Core (CC) and Commercial (C-1) zone districts of the City on an annual basis; and WHEREAS, of the 8,000 square feet established as a minimum allotment, 551 square feet have been used from the 1993 quota through exemptions as allowed by Article 8, leaving 7,449 square feet for growth management competition; and WHEREAS, the Galena Plaza development request for 4,400 square feet of new net leasable area was the only application received and reviewed by the Planning Director for 1993 development allotment in the commercial zone districts and forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission did evaluate and score the development allotment application at a duly noticed public hearing on November 16, 1993, as required by Section 8-106 D. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission determined that 01 the Galena Plaza expansion project successfully met the minimum thresholds for individual and combined score categories and scored the project at 27.5 points; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended that the Galena Plaza project be allocated a development allotment of 4,400 square feet of net leasable area; and WHEREAS, no challenges to the Planning and Zoning Commission's scoring have been submitted to the City Council as allowed under Section 8-106 I. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: In accordance with Section 8-106 J. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen does hereby grant to the Galena Plaza project a development allotment of 4,400 square feet of net leasable space from the 1993 commercial growth management quota. Section 2: In accordance with Section 8-108 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the development allotment as awarded herein shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the date of approval of a site specific development plan for the project as identified herein, unless a building permit is obtained and the project is developed, or unless an exemption from or extension to the approval is obtained. Dated: , 1993. John Bennett, Mayor 2 _, I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado at a meeting held E , 1993. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 3 0 • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager THRU: Leslie Lamont, Senior Planne �A� FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner DATE: December 6, 1993 RE: Galena Plaza Expansion Vested Rights - First Reading of Ordinance , Series 1993 SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval of the request for vested rights for this development. The Galena Plaza project was granted special reviews for parking reduction, open space reduction, and floor area bonus by the Planning Commission on November 16, 1993. Growth management allocation for the 4,400 square feet of new net leasable area is being presented for Council's approval by resolution on December 6, 1993. The project also seeks vested rights to protect the project from changes to the land use regulations for a period of three years from original approval. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: This property was the subject of a condominium approval by Council on September 27, 1993. CURRENT ISSUES: Section 24-6-207 dictates the process and ordinance language requirements for establishing vested rights for three years. Ordinance contains the required text. Three years is the vested rights period also established by state statute. The vested rights period shall run from November 16, 1993 (the date of P&Z approval of the site development plan including the special reviews) through November 16, 1996. Planning and Zoning Resolution 93-26 is attached for your reference. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval of vested rights for the Galena Plaza project. ALTERNATIVES: Vested rights approval for three years is not a discretionary action by City Council. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to have first reading of Ordinance Series 1993 for the approval of vested rights for three years for the development plan for the Galena Plaza project." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Ordinance , Series 1993 Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 93-26 ORDINANCE NO. (SERIES OF 1993) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, VESTING FOR A PERIOD OF THREE YEARS THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR THE GALENA PLAZA SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL LOCATED AT 420 E. MAIN STREET (E. HALF OF LOT L AND ALL OF LOTS M-S, BLOCK 86, TOWNSITE OF ASPEN). WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Galena Plaza expansion on November 16, 1993, and approved, in conjunction with growth management scoring, special reviews for a reduction of eleven parking spaces, reduction of approximately 500 square feet of open space, and a floor area bonus of approximately 790 square feet; and WHEREAS, Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No.93-26 documents the growth management scoring and special review approvals; and WHEREAS, on December 6, 1993, 'the City Council granted approval of Resolution No.93- for a 4,400 square foot commercial/office growth management allocation for an expansion of the Galena Plaza project; and WHEREAS, a request for Vested Rights for the development was submitted to the Planning Office within the growth management application; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24-6-207 of the Aspen Municipal Code the City Council may grant Vesting of Development Rights for a site specific development plan for a period of three years from the date of final development plan approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CIT? COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: 1 Section 1: Pursuant to Section 24-6-207 of the Municipal Code, City Council does hereby grant the applicant vested rights for the Galena Plaza site specific development plan as follows: 1. The rights granted by the site specific development plan approved by this Ordinance shall remain vested until November 16, 1996. However, any failure to abide by the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in forfeiture of said vested property rights. Failure to timely and properly record all plats and agreements as specified herein and or in the Municipal Code shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested rights. 2. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review. 3. Nothing in the approvals provided in this Ordinance shall exempt the site specific development plan from subsequent reviews and or approvals required by this Ordinance or the general rules, regulations or ordinances of the City provided that such reviews or approvals are not inconsistent with the approvals granted and vested herein. 4. The establishment herein of a vested property right shall not preclude the application of ordinances or regulations which are general in nature and are applicable to all property subject to land use regulation by the City of Aspen including, but not limited to, building, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes. In this regard, as a condition of this site development approval, the developer shall abide by any and all such building, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes, unless an exemption therefrom is granted in writing. Section 2: The City Clerk shall cause notice of this Ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulations within the City of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days following final adoption hereof. Such notice shall be given in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: The property shall be described in the notice and appended to said notice shall be the ordinance granting such approval. Section 3• A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the day of , 1993 at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which a hearing of public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of . 1993. John Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 1993. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 3 John Bennett, Mayor day of MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Johnson, Planning Office FROM: Tom Baker, Housing Office DATE: December 10, 1993 RE: Amendment to October 29th Referral Comment: Galena Plaza REFERRAL COMMENT: Based upon the Housing Office referral comment of October 29, 1993, the applicant made an amended proposal to mitigate for employee generation. At the Housing Board's regular meeting of December 1, 1993, the Board made several findings and approved the following amended proposal for affordable housing mitigation: Generally, the applicant proposes to deed restrict the entire Kandahar structure and all nine (9) units rather than demolish and reconstruct the existing units to meet the Affordable Housing Guidelines' minimum net livable square footage requirements. The Housing Board finds: 1. The total square footage required to mitigate for 11.55 employees (4,100) is exceeded by this proposal (4,810); however, all units are below the Guidelines' net livable square footage recommendations. 2. This is an existing structure and the Board feels some flexibility is warranted. 3. The Guideline's square footage minimums are a guide and may be reduced with good reason (see note 2 on p. 13 of Guidelines). The Housing Board recommends the following: 1. The applicant shall receive credit for housing 11.55 employees and no additional credit shall be carried into the future and the Kandahar Apartments cannot be utilized to meet any future affordable housing mitigation. This agreement is made due to the substandard size of the existing units. 2. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit the applicant shall agree in writing to non -Uniform Building Code improvements. The basis of this letter is an inspection of these units by 1 the Housing Office Chief of Property Management and Assistant Director. 3. The applicant shall upgrade the entire building up to the requirements in the Uniform Building Code health and safety regulations. 4. The applicant shall deed restrict the Kandahar units to the following categories and rental rates. Please note that the rental rate is based upon the size of the unit rather than the bedroom count, due to the substandard size of the units. UNIT CATEGORY RENTAL RATE UNIT TYPE 1 1 Cat 1/studio studio 2/3 2 Cat 2/2 bdrm 2 bdrm 4 1 Cat 1/1 bdrm 2 bdrm 5 1 Cat 1/studio 1 bdrm 6/7 2 Cat 2/2 bdrm 2 bdrm 8 1 Cat 1/1 bdrm 2 bdrm 9 1 Cat 1/studio 1 bdrm 10/11 2 Cat 2/2 bdrm 2 bdrm 12 1 Cat 1/1 bdrm 2 bdrm b:refglpz2 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Housing Board FROM: Tom Baker, Housing Office,,jgl DATE: December 1, 1993 RE: Referral Comment: Galena Plaza Housing Mitigation SUMMARY: Sunny Vann is representing the owners of Galena Plaza (the Central Bank building) and processing an application for Commercial GMQS allocation for a 4,400 square foot addition to the east portion of the structure. DISCUSSION: The property is in the CC Zone. The Aspen Land Use Code identifies employee generation in the CC Zone as 3.5-5.25 employees per 1,000 sf, depending on the intensity of the proposed use. The applicant proposed to mitigate at the 3.5 employees per 1,000 sf; however, no specific use was proposed. In staff s original referral comments (attachment 1), we indicated that the applicant should mitigate at 4.375 employees per 1,000 square feet (mid -point of the range) because the applicant will be entitled to all the uses in the CC Zone. The applicant also proposed to deed restrict five units to Category rl in the Kandahar Apartments. The Kandahar Apartments are located on -site adjacent to the alley and Galena Street. In staff's original referral comments, we noted that the Kandahar Apartments were substandard and. recommended that the building be remodelled to meet the Guidelines' minimum net livable requirements. Attachment 2 is a table from the application detailing information on the Kandahar Apartments. Attachment 3 is page 13 from the Guidelines which details suggested square footage for affordable housing units. Based upon staff s referral comments of October 29th, the applicant is offering an amended affordable housing mitigation proposal (attachment 4). In summary, the applicant proposes to: 1. Mitigate at the mid -point of the range - 4.375 employees per 1,000 square feet (4.4)(4,375)(0.6)=11.55 employees to be mitigated; 2. Deed restrict units 1,4,5,8,9 and 12 to category ,#1; 3. Deed restrict units 2/3, 6/7 and 10/11 to category #2; 1 The applicant is proposing to deed restrict the entire building (9 units) and to set rents based upon the unit type which the square footage most closely resembles. The applicant is proposing to compensate for the substandard size of the individual units by meeting the overall square footage requirements to mitigate for 11.55 employees (the Kandahar Apartments have 4,810 sf of net livable area - 4,100 sf are required to house 11.55 employees pursuant to the Guidelines). ISSUE: Will the Housing Board accept units which are substandard if the applicant reduces the rent to a level which is consistent with the size of the units? i.e., Unit #4 is a 2-bdrm, 530 sf unit; and the applicant proposes to deed restrict Unit #4 at a 1-bdrm rental rate even though it has two bedrooms (see table at back of attachment #4). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of the applicant's proposal including the commitment to bring the entire building up to code for the following reasons: 1. The total square footage required to mitigate for 11.55 employees (4,100) is exceeded by this proposal (4,810); however, all units are below the Guidelines' net livable square footage recommendations. 2. This is an existing structure and staff feels some flexibility is warranted. 3. The Guideline's square footage minimums are a guide and may be reduced with good reason (see note 2 on p. 13 of Guidelines). In summary, staff recommends the following category and rental rate for the 12 units in the Kandahar Apartments: UNIT CATEGORY RENTAL RATE UNIT TYPE EMP CREDIT 1 1 Cat 1/studio studio 1.25 2/3 2 Cat 2/2 bdrm 2 bdrm 2.25 4 1 7--Cat 1/1 bdrm 2 bdrm 1.75 5 1 Cat 1/studio — 1 bdrm 1.25 6/7 2 Cat 2/2 bdrm 2 bdrm 2.25 8 1 Cat 1/1 bdrm 2 bdrm 1.75 9 1 Cat 1/studio — 1 bdrm 1.25 10/11 2 Cat 2/2 bdrm 2 bdrm 2.25 12 1 .—Cat 1/1 bdrm 2 bdrm 1-:-75= 15.75 MOTION• accepting mitigation b:refgalpzl "I move to direct staff to write a referr T Comm the applicant's pro osal for Affor�b ousl for Galena Plaza." ` 0 w°'''�'�'""` 2 ] `M l (s15) �E gyp. 5F 1 ) ®I ATTACHMENT 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Johnson, Planning Office }}�� FROM: Tom Baker, Housing Office��6 DATE: October 29, 1993 RE: Referral Comment: Galena Plaza GMQS Allotment REFERRAL COMMENTS: The Housing Office finds the following: 1. The applicant expects to generate 3.5 employees/1,000 sf of net leasable space. The code identifies a range of 3.5 - 5.25 employees/1, 000 sf based on the permitted uses in the CC Zone. Since the applicant does not limit the type of uses in the new structure, the Housing Office recommends that the applicant provide housing for 4.375 employees/1,000 sf (the mid -point of the range). Therefore, the mitigation requirement for this proposal is 11.55 employees (4.4 x 4.375 x .6 = 11.55). 2. The existing Kandahar Apartments are substandard in terms of size. The Affordable Housing Guidelines allow for a reduction in the minimum net livable square footage. The office finds that the combined 2-bedroom are marginally acceptable; however, units 1,4,5,8,9,12 will not qualify as currently configured (see attachment for Housing Office minimums). We suggest that the applicant remodel the Kandahar building to meet the minimum needs for net livable square footage of affordable units. 3. The applicant is offering the income and price limits of category1 due to the substandard size of the dwelling units. It is staffs experience that commercial space of this nature is likely to employee category n1 and n2 employees. Therefore, category 171 does not offer the community any substantial benefit over the category which we normally require. The apartment bu— ATTACHMENT 2 • summarized in Tablu information, is Table 2 KANDAHAR APARTMENTS Unit Type 1. Lower Level Net Employees Livable` Housed 3 Unit #1 Studio 250 Unit #2/#3 4 -2 Bedroom-' 750 Unit #4' 2 Bedroom 530 2. Main Level Unit #5 1 Bedroom 360 Unit #6/#7 4 2 Bedroom-,4---- 750 Unit #8' 2 Bedroom 530 3. Upper Level Unit #9 1 Bedroom 360 Unit #10/#111 2 Bedroom 750 Unit #12' 2 Bedroom 530 All numbers have been rounded to the nearest ten (10) square feet. 24 lagalS UTaW :ISVH �E/OZ7 .*7g sbRo qviodaRxoo vzvqa vxa-rvf) 1.25 2.2-5 2.25 C051 1.75 2.23 2.25 (1,75) T -7 1.75 225 2.25 ® — ATTACHMENT 3 PART III. INFORMATION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING Part III of the Guidelines contains information to be used by developers of affordable housing units in the City of Aspen and Pitkin County whether required in connection with an application for free-market development or otherwise. SECTION 1. NET MINIMUM UVEABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR NEWLY DEED RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS Table II sets forth the allowable Minimum Net Liveable Square Feet (see Definitions) for each unit type and category. Developers may choose to construct larger units; however, allowable rent and sale prices for such larger units may not exceed the maximum set forth in Tables III and IV: TABLE 11 MINIMUM NET LNEABLE SQUARE FEET FOR EACH UNIT TYPE AND INCOME CATEGORY Categories 1 and 2 Categories 3 and 4 Unit T voe S. S.F. Studio 400 500 1 Bedroom 600 700 2 Bedroom 850 950 3 Bedroom 1,000 1,200 Single Family Detached 1,100 1,400 NOTES: 1. Net Liveable Square Footage (see Definitions) calculations shall be required for the affordable housing component of a project and must be verified by the Building Department prior to issuance of any building permits for either the free market or affordable housing component of the project. The Building Department shall retain a set of approved building permit drawings for the project and the Building and Zoning Departments or APCHA may check the actual construction of the affordable housing units for compliance with the approved building permit plans. 2. The minimum net liveable square feet requirements may be reduced upon demonstration to and approval by the APCHA that the development satisfies, or is required to adjust to, other physical factors or considerations including, but not limited to, design for livability, common storage, other amenities, location or site designs. 3. The City of Aspen Accessory Dwelling Unit Program requires a minimum of 300 square feet and a maximum of 700 square feet of net liveable square feet for accessory dwelling units. 13 ATTACIDIENT 4 VANN ASSOCIATES Planning Consultants November 23, 1993 HAND DELIVERED Mr. Tom Baker Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 530 East Main, Lower Level Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Galena Plaza Affordable Housing Mitigation Dear Tom: On November 16, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Commission scored the Galena Plaza commercial GMQS application, and granted special review approval for the project's floor area, parking and open space. The P&Z also voted to recommend to the City Council that the project's affordable housing mitigation proposal be revised to reflect your recommendations. More specifically, you recommended that the employee generation rate be increased, and that the Kandahar Apart- ment units be reconfigured to meet APCHA's minimum net livable area require- ments. As we discussed last wednesday, the Applicants wish to revise their affordable housing mitigation proposal to address the various issues which you identified in your October 29, 1993, memorandum to the Planning Office. The revised mitigation proposal may be summarized as follows. 1. The Applicants will agree to an employee generation rate of 4.375 employ- ees per 1,000 square feet of net leasable area. The minimum mitigation requirement, therefore, would be 11.55 employees. 2. Housing credits and rental rates will be determined based on actual unit square footage as opposed to existing bedroom counts. For example, a 530 square foot two bedroom unit will be considered as a one bedroom unit for purposes of calculating the number of employees housed and the rental rate. 3. All of the units will be deed restricted in exchange for APCHA's approval of a reduction in the applicable minimum net livable area requirements as provided for in the Affordable Housing Guidelines. 0 230 East Hopkins Avenue • Aspen, Colorado 81611 • 303/925-6953 • Fax 303,920-9310 Mr. Tom Baker November 23, 1993 Page 3 tions. Eighty percent of the employees theoretically generated by the project will be housed compared to 60 percent as originally proposed. I look forward to discussing the Applicants' revised mitigation plan with the APCHA board, and would appreciate your support of the proposal. Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Yours truly, VANNrCIATES roll1 nny Vain AICP SV:cwv Enclosure cc: Ronald Garfield, Esq. c:\bus\city. ItrUtr22593.tb i free market apartments which are located on the property to deed restricted status, as provided for in Section 8-109.I.2. More specifically, Units #1, #2/#3, #4, #5 and #9 will be deed restricted to APCHA's Category 1, low income guidelines in effect at the time of the issuance of a building permit This income category is appropri- ate, we believe, given the somewhat substandard size of the units. The units will house approximately nine and one -quarter (9-1/4) employees, or sixty (60) percent of the additional employees theoretically generated by the proposed development. The apartment building's existing unit mix, and other relevant information, is summarized in Table 2, below. Table 2 KANDAHAR APARTMENTS Net Employees Unit Type Livable= Housed' 1. Lower Level Unit # 1 Studio 250 '�_ 1.25 Unit #2/#34 2 Bedroom 750 Unit #4' _ 530 6,:�=1.75 2 Main Level /1-:5 Unit #5 360 `J 2.?5 Unit # 6/ r 2 Bedroom i..s 0 � Unit # 3' _,-Bed-rea$r-_ 530 3. Upper Level Unit #9 2.� // Unit #10/-# 11S 2 Bedroom 750 530 Unit # 12' /S 77 1 All numbers have been rounded to the nearest ten (10) square feet 24 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner RE: Galena Plaza 1993 Commercial Growth Management Scoring in the CC Commercial Core Zone District, Special Reviews for Reduction of Parking, Open Space and Floor Area Bonus DATE: November 16, 1993 SUMMARY: This application seeks a Commercial GMP allocation for the addition of 4,400 s.f. of net leasable to the existing structure on the eastern portion of the Central Bank property. It is the only application submitted which competes for the 7, 000 plus square feet available in the CC and C-1 zones. In an initial scoring by Planning staff, the project meets minimum scoring thresholds. The applicant also requests, and Staff recommends approval of Special Reviews for parking (cash -in -lieu payment), open space, and floor area bonus. Housing and Planning staff do not agree with the housing mitigation program proposed by the application. It is suggested a e Commission forward to Council a recommendation that an alternative housing package be reviewed and approved by Council. Staff suggests that the Commission first consider the project's requests for Special Reviews, then begin the scoring process. APPLICANT: Ronald Garfield and Andrew Hecht, represented ley Sunny Vann LOCATION: 42• E. Main Street, at the N.W. corner •f E. Main at Galena (E. half •f Lot L and all •f Lots M,N,O,P,O,R,and S, Block 86, Townsite of Aspen). The subject parcel (Central yank Condominium Unit 1) is 7,900 s.f. ZONING: CC - Commercial Core APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant seeks Growth Management allotment for the addition of 4,400 s.f. of net leasable square feet to the existing commercial building by an extension eastward as well as the addition of a second floor. The structure will be available for all commercial uses permitted in the CC Commercial Core zone district. Additionally, Special Review approvals are sought for payment -in -lieu for 11 parking spaces and open space and FAR bonus above 1.5:1. The applicant will seek from City Council vested development rights for a period of three years. Please refer to the complete application package. 1 0 • PROCESS: It is suggested that the Planning Commission first review the project's requested Special Reviews as these are critical to the continuance of the development. If Special Reviews are approved, the Commission shall score the project using the criteria/point system established in the land use regulations for commercial projects. Staff has scored the proposal and submits this score to the Commission (Exhibit "A"). The Commission may elect to accept staff's score as their own. If the Commission finds that project meets minimum point thresholds, it will be forwarded to the City Council for GMP allocation of net leasable area and approval of a housing mitigation package and vested property rights. REFERRAL COMMENTS: All referral agency comments are included as Attachment "B". Engineering: Chuck Roth comments that sidewalk repairs and handicap access ramps at the two corners of Galena are required prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Also, the applicant must immediately relocate the dumpster on the sidewalk east of the apartment building. The proposed trash storage area may need to be expanded based on the capacity requirements set forth in the CC zone dimensional requirements. Parking/ Transportation: The proposed development's location makes it readily accessible to the Rio Grande Parking Garage and the Galena Street Shuttle. Therefore it is a likely candidate for cash -in -lieu for the required on -site parking spaces. However, this office is concerned that the removal of the two alley facing spaces for this project will create a problem for delivery activities for this project. Fire Marshall: Wayne Vandemark comments that existing structure must be brought up to current fire code, requiring a sprinkler and alarm system. HPC: This proposal has received conceptual approval with no conditions. Sanitation District: Bruce Matherly states that adequate line and treatment capacity is available to service this expansion. Minor line repairs are necessary in the area of the project. The applicant agrees to pay $6,000 towards these repairs. Prior to connection of new service, the applicant must verify whether any "clear water" site drainage enters the Districts system, and correct that situation if it exists. Housing Authority: Tom Baker forwarded comments. The applicant proposes to mitigate for new employees based on a generation factor of 3.5 employees per 1,000 s.f. of net leasable area. Given the 2 general commercial nature of the structure and location, Housing calculates the employee generation at the midpoint of the Commercial Core generation of 4.375 employees per 1,000 s.f. The applicant commits to mitigating the minimum threshold at 60% of generation. At the midpoint Commercial Core generation, this is 11.55 employees rather than the 9.25 employees offered in the application. The existing apartment units on the property which are proposed to satisfy employee mitigation are too small and need to be remodeled (combining units into larger spaces) to accommodate employees per the Housing Guidelines. This requirement tentatively excepts units 2/3, 6/7, and 10/11 which are still substandard but marginally acceptable to the Housing Office. The Housing Office comments that the proposal to Category 1 restriction suits most of the prospective employees, therefore does not offer an increased community benefit warranting special acceptance of substandard units. Electric: Bill Early states that service is available in the a11^_y and the only upgrade which may be necessary after review of load data may be a larger transformer. Water: No comments at this time other than all codes must be followed pertinent to water supply. PROPOSAL: This application seeks to expand the existing one story building north and eastward and add a second floor. Interior remodeling of the first and basement floors is also included in the project. The grass and trees on the east of the current building will be eliminated and the courtyard area between the commercial and residential buildings will be reduced in size. A trash/ service area is being added to the west of the apartment building. Two parking spaces will be eliminated because of the new trash area and must be compensated for by cash. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff recommends that prior to scoring this project, the Commission review the entire proposal including the Special Reviews for parking reduction and reduction of open space. A staff score summary follows the Special Review discussion. Special Reviews: Parking Reduction / Cash -in -lieu Section 7-404 B. allows the Commission to grant a reduction of required off-street parking. In the CC zone, a cash -in -lieu payment of $15,000 per parking space, at the option of the Commission, must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Commission shall take into consideration the practical ability to place parking on -site, whether parking needs of the development have been adequately met on -site, and whether the City has [plans for] a parking facility which meet the needs of the community. 3 Response: Two on -site parking spaces (directly west of the apartment building off of the alley) are currently dedicated for use by this prospective condominium unit owner. The improved trash storage area will eliminate these two spaces. The new 4,400 s.f. of net leasable area requires 9 new parking spaces at the generation of 2 spaces per 1,00o s.f. The applicant is requesting the Commission approve a payment in -lieu for the two lost spaces as well as the 9 required spaces. This represents a payment of $165,000.00 for 11 spaces. The Parking/Transportation Office believes that the cash -in -lieu payment would be acceptable at this location based on the applicant's anticipated vehicle trip generation rate of 8 trips per day per 1,000 s.f. The Rio Grande Parking Garage can currently accommodate this project, but when the parking control program goes into effect next spring the garage will likely be full on a more regular basis. This Office expresses concern about delivery activities in the alley with out adequate on -site parking. The applicant shall be put on notice that tenants cannot use the Galena Street right-of-way for delivery access. Special Review: Reduction of Open Space: In order to qualify for reduction in the required 25% open space in the CC zone district, the applicant must demonstrate that the provision of less than the required open space on -site will be more consistent with the character of the surrounding land uses than would be the provision of open space according to the standard. The code states that "as general guidelines, the applicant shall take into account the following. It may be appropriate to have open space on the site when the building is located on a street corner, or the open space can be linked to neighboring pedestrian amenities, or the open space provides relief intended to maintain the prominence of an adjacent historic landmark, or the open space is intended for a particular functional purpose, such as dining or the protection of an existing tree. It may be inappropriate to have open space on the site when other buildings along the street front are built to the property line, especially along public malls, or when the open space is configured in such a manner as to serve no public purpose." When the Commission determines open space is inappropriate on the site, it may reduce or waive the requirement if the applicant shall make a payment -in -lieu based on an appraisal of the land. The Zoning Official verifies the amount owed. Response: 25% of the 7,900 s.f. site is 1,975 s.f. The subject site contains 3,740 s.f. of open area which is non -conforming open space per the code definition in that it doesn't meet minimum width and depth or it exceeds 2 feet below street grade. The proposed development reduces the site's open space to approximately 1,480 a] is 0 • 0 s.f., or 500 s.f. below the 1,975 s.f. minimum. The applicant proposes a cash payment for this 500 s.f. to be calculated and paid prior to issuance of a building permit. Staff agrees with the applicant that providing conforming open space on the site would be inappropriate along Main Street because of the existing structure. Although the applicant does provide an angled corner entry which is more pedestrian friendly, staff is disappointed in total loss of the landscaped area along Galena Street which is a major pedestrian link from Main Street to the Library Plaza. Arguably, the apartment building does establish a bottleneck for pedestrians at the northeast corner of the site which does not promote the stepping -back of the proposed structure from Galena. Given the particular situations on the property, staff supports the reduction of open space via cash -in -lieu approval. Special Review for FAR Bonus: The allowable floor area ra,'--io in the CC zone is 1.5:1, which may be increased up to 2:�, upon approval of Special Review by the Commission, with the sti:p lation that 60% of the additional FAR be applied to affordable housing. The 7,900 s.f. development site allows 11,850 s.f. of floor area. The proposed development raises the existing 7,280 s.f. of floor area up to 12,640 s.f., or 1.6:1. This represents an additional 790 s.f. of floor area. Two review criteria apply to bonus FAR: 1. The mass, height, density, configuration, amount of pen space, landscaping and setbacks of the proposed development are designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of surrounding land uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying Zone District. 2. The applicant demonstrates that the proposed development will not have adverse impacts on surrounding uses or will mitigate those impacts, including but not limited to the effects of shading, excess traffic, availability of parking in the neighborhood or blocking of a designated viewplane. Response: The site contains an apartment building of approximately 5,500 s.f., which is the bulk of existing FAR. The apartments are not deed restricted for affordable housing. The applicant is proposing to deed restrict the entire 790 s.f. of "bonus" FAR within this apartment building. Other portions of this building will be deed restricted to mitigate the remaining employees generated by the new net leasable area. Per the Housing office's comments, a revised housing package should be considered by City Council prior to final approval. The requested 790 s.f. of floor area is a relatively small amount given the maximum 2:1 which could have been requested. As 5 0 • mentioned previou!ly, staff is somewhat concerned that the design of the Galena Street frontage totally eliminates a green space buffer to the sidewalk and street. However, the alternatives for placing floor area on the site are limited to either encroaching further into the courtyard area or going up an additional floor, both creating other disadvantages. Because of the limited amount requested, staff supports the proposed 1.6:1 FAR. Growth Management Staff Score: Four City Planners jointly reviewed the project pursuant to the scoring criteria contained in Section 8-106 F. of the land use regulations. The Planning Office forwards the following recommended score for the Galena Plaza Commerc4 al GMP project: scoring Minimum Threshold Points Categories 1) Quality, of Design 7.2 (40%) 11 2) Public Facilities 6.5 and Services 4 (40%) 3) Affordable Housing 10 (60%) _10---- 27.5 Pursuant to Section 8-106 F.(5) a development application shall be required to meet the thresholds of each category and combined categories to be eligible for an allocation. Combined minimum threshold for categories 1-2 above is 16.8 points. This project was scored at 17.5. Individual category thresholds have been met as shown in the table above. The Commission may accept staff's score or do its own scoring procedure. Blank score sheets will be available at the meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval with conditions of the Special Reviews for reduction of open space and parking and Floor Area Ratio bonus with the conditions recommended below: 1) The applicant must immediately relocate the dumpster from the sidewalk east of the apartment building. 2) Sidewalk repairs as required by the City Engineer and handicap access ramps at the two corners of Galena must be installed by the applicant prior to issuance of a Certificate of occupancy. 3) Tenants cannot use the Galena Street right-of-way for delivery truck access. • 0 Prior to issuance of any building permits: 4) The applicant shall make payment -in -Lieu for 11 parking spaces ($165,000.00) to the Building Department for transfer to the City Finance Department. 5) The applicant shall pay a cash -in -lieu payment for the reduction of approximately 500 s.f. of open space to the Building Department for transfer to the City Finance Department. 6) A drainage plan shall be approved by the City Engineer. The applicant must verify drainage of the existing patio and roof drains to the satisfaction of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation Dis r' housing mitigation program for 11.55 employees must be roved by the City Council and appropriate deed restrictions iQ or payments must be completed. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the Galena Plaza Special Roo Reviews for reduction of 11 parking spaces and approximately 50C s.f. of open space, and FAR bonus for 1.6:1 with the conditions recommended in the Planning Office memo date ovember 16, 1993. c "I move to score the Galena Plaza Growth Manage e`nOtroject at Z�.5-� points, finding that required thresholds have been met for growth P.O. management allocation." additionally: "I move that City Council only accept a housing mitigation package which addresses the Housing office's concerns, specifically that the employee generation of the project be calculated at 4.375 persons per 1,000 s.f. net leasable, and that the deed restricted units meet the Housing Guidelines". i si �� 6 --o Application Booklet (distributed to Commissioners earlier) Exhibits: "A" - Planning Staff Scoring "B" - Complete Referral Memos "C" - Public Hearing Proof of galena.gmp.memo Sheet / Recommended Score Publication 7 0 • pLANNINCA ZONING COMMISSION EXHIBIT r APPROVED 19 BY RESOLUTION CITY OF ASPEN COMMERCIAL/OFFICE GROWTH MANAGEMENT SCORE SHEET PROJECT: Galena Plaza (Staff) DATE: 11/9/93 1. QUALITY OF DESIGN (maximum 18 points). Each development application shall be rated based on the quality of the exterior of its buildings and site design and assigned points according to the following standards and considerations: 0 -- A totally deficient design; 1 -- A major design flaw; 2 -- An acceptable (but standard) design; or 3 -- An excellent design. The following features shall be rated accordingly: (a) ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN (maximum 3 points). Considering the compatibility of the proposed development (in terms of scale, siting, massing, height, and building materials) with existing neighboring developments. RATING• 2.5 COMMENTS: Corner building that is only 2 stories - could go higher. Pedestrian street -level is interesting. HPC comments regarding relationship to Courthouse. Nice scale doesn't overpower the Courthouse nice transition. Concerned about mechanicals that could be seen on roof. (b) SITE DESIGN (maximum 3 points). Considering the quality and character of the proposed landscaping and open space areas, the amount of site coverage by buildings, the extent of underground utilities, and the arrangement of improvements for efficiency of circulation, including access for service, increased safety and privacy, and provision of snow storage areas. RATING: 1 COMMENTS: No improvements to circulation safety, privacy, sno:.: storage Loss of landscaping on east due to increased (max) site coverage Limited aesthetics/use of courtyard. Neglected Galena frontage as main entry to Library/Plaza and Galena St. pedestrian improvements to parking garage - narrow sidewalk no landscaping. Could have improved open area between subject building and bank building. (c) ENERGY CONSERVATION (maximum 3 points). Considering the use of passive and/or active energy conservation techniques in the r-nnctritrt i nn of the nr000sed development, including but nc - limited to insulation, glazing, passive solar orientation, efficient heating and cooling systems and solar energy devices; the extent to which the proposed development avoids wasting energy by excluding excessive lighting and inefficient woodburning devices; and the proposed development's location, relative to whether solar gain can be expected to reasonably result in energy conservation. RATING• 2 COMMENTS: No outstanding elements; meets standard requirements. (d) AMENITIES (maximum 3 points). Considering the provision of usable open space, pedestrian and bicycle ways, benches, bicycle racks, bus shelters, and other common areas for users of the proposed development. RATING: 1.5 COMMENTS: Open space not very inviting - narrow and dark. Access to courtyard is unclear and seems very awkward and forbidding - not publicly oriented Bike rack in courtyard is difficult to access up and down stairs. (e) VISUAL IMPACT (maximum 3 points). Considering the scale and location of the buildings in the proposed development to prevent infringement on designated scenic viewplanes. RATING: 2 COMMENTS: Does not apply (no viewplane involved) Did not max out the height. (f) TRASH AND UTILITY ACCESS AREAS (maximum 3 points). Considering the extent to which required trash and utility access areas are screened from public view; are sized to meet the needs of the proposed development and to provide for public utility placement; can be easily accessed; allow trash bins to be moved by service personnel, and provide enclosed trash bins, trash compaction or other unique measures. RATING: 2 COMMENTS: Trash area is not very accessible to commercial users - applicant must confirm Dimension of trash area per CC rear yard requirements. What are trash facilities for the rest of the ban,. complex? Nice to provide recycling bins. 2. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES (maximum 10 points). Each development application shall be rated on the basis of its impact upon public facilities and services by the assigning of points according to the following standards and 2 0 is considerations: 0 -- Proposed development requires the provision of new public facilities and services at increased public expense; 1 -- Proposed development may be handled by existing public facilities and services, or any public facility or service improvements made by the applicant benefits the proposed development only, and not the area in general; or 2 -- Proposed development improves the availability of public facilities and services in the area. In those cases where points are given for the simultaneous evaluation of two (2) 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 (maximum 2 points). Considering the ability of the water supply system to serve the proposed development and the applicant's commitment to install any water system extensions or treatment plant or other facility upgrading required to serve the proposed development. Fire protection facilities and services shall also be reviewed, considering the ability of the appropriate fire protection district to provide services according to established response times without the necessity of upgrading available facilities; the adequacy of available water pressure and capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment of the applicant to provide any fire protection facilities which may be necessary to serve the proposed development RATING: 2 COMMENTS: Provides additional neighborhood protection with the replacement of the hydrant. (b) SANITARY SEWER (maximum 2 points). Considering the ability of the sanitary sewer system to serve the proposed development and the applicant's commitment to install any sanitary system extensions or treatment plant or other facility upgrading required to serve the proposed development. RATING: 1.5 COMMENTS: Modest improvement ($6000) to system repairs. (c) PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION/ROADS (maximum 2 points). Considering the ability of the proposed development to be served by existing public transit routes. The review shall also consider 3 the capacity of major streets to serve the proposed development without substantially altering existing traffic patterns, creating safety hazards or maintenance problems, overloading the existing street system or causing a need to extend the existing road network and consider the applicant's commitment to install the necessary road system improvements to serve the increased usage attributable to the proposed development. RATING: 1 COMMENTS: Negligible impact (positive or negative). (d) STORM DRAINAGE (maximum 2 points). Considering the degree to which the applicant proposes to maintain historic drainage patterns on the development site. If the development requires use of the city's drainage system, the review shall consider the commitment by the applicant to install the necessary drainage control facilities and to maintain the system over the long-term. RATING: COMMENTS: Unclear whether detrimental effects of the existing storm drainage exist. (e) PARKING (maximum 2 points). Considering the provisions of parking spaces to meet the commercial and/or residential needs of the proposed development as required by Article 5, Division 2, and considering the design of the parking spaces with respect to their visual impact, amount of paved surface, and convenience and safety. RATING: 1 COMMENTS: Per approval of special review (cash -in -lieu). 3. PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING (maximum 15 points). Each development application shall be assigned poi,its for the provision of housing which complies with the housing size, type, income and occupancy guidelines of the city, and with the provisions of Section 8-109. Points shall be assigned as follows: Zero (0) to sixty (60) percent of the additional employees generated by the proposed development: One (1) point for each six (6) percent housed; Sixty-one (61) to one hundred (100) percent of the additional employees generated by the proposed development: One (1) point for each eight (8) percent • • • 0 housed. The following standard shall be used in calculating the number of full-time equivalent employees generated by the proposed development: Commercial Core (CC) and Commercial (C-1): Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Service/Commer. Industrial (S/C/I): Office (0) : Commercial Lodge (CL) and other: 3.50 to 5.25 employees/1,000 sq. ft. (net leasable), based on review of the city council's housing designee; 2.30 employees/1,000 sq. ft. (net leasable); 3.00 employees/ 1, 000 square feet (net leasable); 3.50 employees/1,000 sq. ft. net leasable). If it is determined that the proposed development generates no new employees, it shall be awarded the full fifteen (15) points available within this section. In order to determine the percentage of employees generated by the proposed development who are provided with housing, the commission shall use the following criteria: Studio: One -bedroom: Two -bedroom: Three -bedroom or larger: Dormitory: 1.25 residents; 1.75 residents; 2.25 residents; 3.00 residents; 1.00 resident per 150 per square feet of unit space. RATING: 10 COMMENTS: Per Housings memo - actual mitigation Package to be accepted by the City Council. Do not recommend this housing package based on substandard unit sizes (revise to 11 plus employees and greater unit sizes.\ 4. BONUS POINTS (maximum 4 points). Bonus points may be assigned when it is determined that a proposed development has not only met the substantive standards of Section 8-106(F)(1) through (3), but has also exceeded the provisions of these sections and achieved an outstanding overall design meriting recognition. An award of additional bonus points shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the total points awarded under section 8-106(F)(1) through (3). Any commission member 5 • 0 0 Ll awarding bonus points shall provide a written justification of that award for the public hearing record. RATING: COMMENTS: 5. TOTAL POINTS - SCORING CATEGORIES: 1. QUALITY OF DESIGN 2. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES & SERVICES 3. PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING 4. !',)NUS POINTS ,")TAL POINTS: Na*.-,...- c f P&Z Commission Member: 6 SUBTOTAL: POINTS: 6.5 10 27.5 0 0 PLANNIN0 ZONING COMMISSION EXHIBIT_, APPROVED ► 19 BY RESOLUTION MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Johnson, Planning office FROM: Tom Baker, Housing Office �f6 DATE: October 29, 1993 RE: Referral Comment: Galena Plaza GMQS Allotment REFERRAL COMMENTS: The Housing Office finds the following: 1. The applicant expects to generate 3.5 employees/1,000 sf of net leasable space. The code identifies a range of 3.5 - 5.25 employees/1, 000 sf based on the permitted uses in the CC Zone. Since the applicant does not limit the type of uses in the new structure, the Housing Office recommends that the applicant provide housing for 4.375 employees/1,000 sf (the mid -point of the range). Therefore, the mitigation requirement for this proposal is 11.55 employees (4.4 x 4.375 x .6 = 11.55). 2. The existing Kandahar Apartments are substandard in terms of size. The Affordable Housing Guidelines allow for a reduction in the minimum net livable square footage. The office finds that the combined 2-bedroom are marginally acceptable; however, units 1,4,5,8,9,12 will not qualify as currently configured (see attachment for Housing Office minimums). We suggest that the applicant remodel the Kandahar building to meet the minimum needs for net livable square footage of affordable units. 3. The applicant is offering the income and price limits of category #1 due to the substandard size of the dwelling units. It is staff's experience that commercial space of this nature is likely to employee category #1 and #2 employees. Therefore, category #1 does not offer the community any substantial benefit over the category which we normally require. 1 0 0 PART 111. %71 INFORMATION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING Part III of the Guidelines contains information to be used by developers of affordable housing units in the City of Aspen and Pitkin County whether required in connection with an application for free-market development or otherwise. SECTION 1. NET MINIMUM LIVEABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR NEWLY DEED RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS Table II sets forth the allowable Minimum Net Liveable Square Feet (see Definitions) for each unit type and category. Developers may choose to construct larger units; however, allowable rent and sale prices for such larger units may not exceed the maximum set forth in Tables III and IV: TABLE 11 MINIMUM NET LIVEABLE SQUARE FEET FOR EACH UNIT TYPE AND INCOME CATEGORY Unit Tvoe Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom Single Family Detached Categories 1 and 2 S.F. 400 600 850 _ 1,000 1,100 Cateaories 3 and 4 S.F. 500 700 950 1,200 1.400 NOTES: 1. Net Liveable Square Footage (see Definitions) calculations shall be required for the affordable housing component of a project and must be verified by the Building Depart' l tent prior to issuance of any building permits for either the free market or affordable housing component of the project. The Building Department shall retain a set of approved building permit drawings for the project and the Building and Zoning Departments or APCHA may check the actual construction of the affordable housing units for compliance with the approved building permit plans. 2. The minimum net liveable square feet requirements may be reduced upon demonstration to and approval by the APCHA that the development satisfies, or is required to adjust to, other physical factors or considerations including, but not limited to, design for livability, common storage, other amenities, location or site designs. 3. The City of Aspen Accessory Dwelling Unit Program requires a minimum of 300 square feet and a maximum of 700 square feet of net liveable square feet for accessory dwelling units. 13 0 • MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Johnson, Planning Office FROM: Randy Rea raps ortation/Parking Director DATE: November 8, 1993 RE: Galena Plaza Commercial GMQS Allotment, Special Review and Vested Rights The Aspen Department of Transportation and Parking has reviewed the above -referenced application, and has the following comments: 1. The proposed project's location, immediately adjacent to the 340-space Rio Grande Parking Plaza makes it a viable candidate for the payment -in -lieu of parking program. Furthermore, the project is located in an area that would be well -served by both the Galena Street Shuttle and RFTA local bus service. 2. Our opinion that payment -in -lieu may be appropriate in this instance is based entirely on the applicant's assumption of a trip generation factor of eight (8) vehicles per day per one thousand (1,000) square feet of net leasable area. If the proposed land uses generate more than the approximately thirty-five (35) adaitional vehicles per day, then serious reconsideration of our payment -in -lieu position would be in order. While the parking garage is currently operating at an average of about 80% capacity during peak seasons, occupancy is expected to rise to an average of 90-95 % during peak seasons when the City's Commercial Core parking control program is initiated next Spring. 3. We are concerned about the accommodation of loading/unloading and delivery activities for the proposed development. Such activities could be problematic in this location, especially with the removal of the two (2) parking spaces currently provided on the project site. 4. In summary, this department finds that there are practical limitations to the provision of on -site parking for this development, and that (given the above assumptions, and assuming satisfactory resolution of the loading/unloading and delivery problems) the parking requirement for this proposed development may be met by the Rio Grande Parking Plaza. MEMORANDUM To: Kim Johnson, Planning Office Thru: Bob Gish, Public Works Director From: Chuck Roth, City Engineer elL Date: October 29, 1993 Re: Galena Plaza Commercial GMQS Allotment, Special Review &Vested Rights Having reviewed the above referenced application, and having made a site inspection, the Engineerinu Department has the following comments: 1. Storm Runoff Storm rLin-off has been adequately addressed in the application. 2. Trash Storage Facilities There is currently a dumpster for the apartments located on the public sidewalk or: Galena Street. The dumpster must be relocated immediately onto private property. There appears to be adequate space next to the two existing parking spaces behind the building. The final development plan must show the location of the trash storage area. Please refer to the off-street parking portion of this memo for additional, related discussion. 3. Sidewalks, Curb and Gutter The existing curb and gutter sections appear to be in satisfactory condition. There are a nuinher of sidewalk sections which must be repaired..or replaced -to iY yet the Municipal Code requirements for hazardous sidewalks at Section 19-1.03 arl.i -104, especially for vertical displacements in excess of three-quarters (3/4) inch." Also, a handicap ramp and sidewalk extension must be added at the southeast corner and a handicap ramp at the northeast corner of the site, which are the corners of Galen-. Street. These items must be accomplished prior to issuance of a certificate of occupant, for the project. is 0 4. Tree Removal Since the Parks Department was not referred the application, I will point out that there are three trees which will require removal permits. 5. Special Review for Off -Street Parking This same comment section is being written for all three of the 1993 Commercial GMQS applications. I am doing this because there are three different planners for the applications and because the issue should be looked at as a whole for all three applications. Each of the three applicants is seeking a reduction in Code requirements for on - site parking. It would appear that the Parking and Transportation Director should be consulted for a policy statement on approving GMQS projects which do not offer to provide on -site parking for the needs of the proposed projects. Perhaps it may be inappropriate to grant increased development rights when parking is not provided on site. Each of .the applicants states that it is not possible to provide on -site parking. The statement must he evaluated more as a statement of apparent economic feasihility than as an engineering or construction comment. That is, it might be possible to provide on - site parking, but the costs might he greater than paying cash -in -lieu. Please note that the City's cash -in -lieu amount is probably too low, which may contribute to the three applicants' choosing to offer cash -in -lieu instead of constructing parking spaces on site. This was discussed at the Design Review Committee meeting for the Kraut Property project. They reported higher costs for providing on -site, sub -grade parking spaces than the City's cash -in -lieu amount. Permitting cash -in -lieu for daytime office or commercial parking, may have less of I :. verse inlpact, but it would appear that on -site spaces should be provided for r-ential units in all cases. Note that providing parl<ing spaces and trash and utility areas often is a "conflict" for .!c\,elopers versus nlaxinlizin(y on -site net leasable space. The Galena Plaza project c'.t .d potentially construct all Inset trash and utility area into the apartments Which Would s,•, - he existing two on -site; parking spaces. The City has discussed in oth:•r instances col, t acting in -set ti-asll told utility spaces in existing buildings in the conlmcr_-ial care se that the prohlenl of removinyt dunlpstcrs from the alleys can be alleviated. , ludin, this heco les an issue of loss ol, net leasable space. In the commercial core, it is sometimes al t issue: of whether or not such a recessed enclosure into an historic huildinL, r .1l:'eu.nts a col11pronliSe of the historic building. 0 6. Street Li€,hts It is recommended that installation of a standard City antique street light be required at the corner of the alley. This would be consistent with the commercial core street light locations. 7. Work in the Public Right-of-way Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights -of -way, we advise the applicant as follows: N1 ! .2SI The applicant shall consult city engineering (920-5080) for design considerations of development within public rights -of -way, parks department (920-5120) for vegetation species, and shall obtain permits for any work or development, including landscaping, within public rights -of -way from city streets department (920-5130). • • • MEMORANDUM To: Kim Johnson, Planning Office Thru: Bob Gish, Public Works Director From: Chuck Roth, City Engineer 0-'p- Date: November 10, 1993 Re: Galena Plaza GMQS Application Following our conversation this morning, I have the following comments Nvith which to amend my review memo of October 29, 1993: 1. I have checked with the Sanitation District. Their requirements prevent them from accepting roof and courtyard storm runoff, as well as -foundation perimeter drainage, into their systems. The applicant must submit a statement of how th o current "clear water" drainage is being handled. The Sanitation District will not permit additional sewer hookups until the on -site drainage system is verified. If "clear water" is currently being conveyed to the District system, no additional hook-ups will be uermitted until current "clear water" connections are disconnected and the drainage wa : r conveyed to an on - site drywell or other mitigation feature. 2. Section 19-98 states that sidewalk, curb and gutter is requii A_ t, )r all new construction, therefore it is appropriate to require as a condition of approv -Il .:!at handicap ramps be constructed at each corner in conjunction with the proposed Oeveiopment. M9?'62 SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier •fuzu -111-1u—aa , i•iwrm Aspen consolidated Sanitation District 565 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 FAX N(303) 925-2537 W& (303) 925.8601 Albert Bishop Sy Kelly - Chairman Frank Loushin John J. Snyder - Treaa Bruce Matherly, Mgr. Louis Popish - Secy- TELEFAX MEMORANDUM DATE: November 10, 1993 TO: Chuck Roth FROM: Bruce Matherly Re: Galena GMQS clear water connections ifit**klfl►irft�*�t�*1f***itMM**iE*�1t***1f*�A*t**!f*It1liF;F*k1f*M�itifitikifMil�*�1f!!*A� if the Galena Street GMQS project has roof and patio drains currently connected to our system then this would be a violation al law. we can either of our rules and regulations and feder verify connection by conducting a dye test or request that the current ownertodry atethe cstorm roof Bawer asystemnd io drains are connected Y well Since we are only permitted to treat domestic wastewater, 1 would like to requ®st that the planning commission require this verification as part of their review of the project. we would not allow connection of the proposed development with knowledge of possible clear water connections. Please call if you have any questions, and thanks for bringing this to our attention. EPA AWARDS OF EXCELLENCE 1976 - 1986 - 1990 • REGIONAL AND NATIONAL Aspen (Ponsolidated Sanitation District 565 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Tele. (303) 925-3601 Sy Kelly - Chairman John J. Snyder - Treas. Louis Popish - Secy. October 18, 1993 Kim Johnson Planning Office 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 FAX N(303) 925-2537 ++'' f ' OCT 2 5 a i Re: -Galena Plaza Commercial GMQS Dear" Kim: Albert Bishop Frank Loushin Bruce Matherly, Mgr. The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation Distric currently has sufficient line and treatment capacity to provi., service for the proposed expanded use of this site. There are minor repairs that are needed in our collection system adjacent t-1 the site and the applicant has committed, in this applicati;Dn, to fund these repairs up to a level of $6000. This commitment provides a general system improvement to our facilities in this area. The associated total connection charges for the additional development at this site can be determined by our office once detailed plans are available and a tap permit is completed. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Bruce Matherly District Manager EPA AWARDS OF EXCELLENCE .1976 - 1986 - 1990 REGIONAL AND NATIONAL nri I s TO: KIM JOHNSON - - - --- . FROM: BILL EARLEY DATE: OCT 18, 1993 RE: GALENA PLAZA COMMERCIAL GMQS ALLOTMENT, SPECIAL REVIEW AND VESTED RIGHTS Three phase power is available in the alley and so this development will probably not be a problem. No load information was presented r however only upgrade that I foresee is perhaps a transformer. MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Kim Johnson CC Bob Gish CC Kristin Sund From: Larry Ballenger Postmark: Oct 18,93 4:49 PM Subject: Galena Plaza Commercial GMQS --------------------------------- -------------------------------- Message: The Water dept has reviewed the Galena Plaza GMQS Special Review Application. We have no further comments concerning the Application. All City Codes must be followed pertinant to water sup 1 y. 40 0 6 41 MESSAGE DISPLAY TO KIM JOHNSON From: Wayne Vandemark Postmark: Sep 30,93 7:10 AM Status: Certified Urgent Subject: GALENA PLAZA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Message: THE PROPOSED BUILDING LENDS LITTLE MORE TO BE DESIRED BY THE FIRE DISTRICT. IT WILL HAVE A SPRINKLER SYSTEM WHICH IS ALWAYS A PLUS IN OUR BUSINESS. THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT IS TO BE REMODELED IS ANOTHER STORY. WHEN IT IS REMODELED WE WISH IT TO BE BROUGHT UP TO FIRE CODE. THIS WILL REQUIRE A SPRINKLER SYSTEM AND AN ALARM SYSTEM PER UNIFORM FIRE CODE AS AMENDED. • 46 MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Johnson, City Planner FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Galena Plaza Commercial GMQS allotment, Special Review and Vested Rights DATE: October 25, 1993 The Historic Preservation Committee reviewed the "Conceptual Development" proposal for this project on August 25, 1993. The proposal was approved as submitted, with no conditions. HPC found that the materials, scale and details of this project are appropriate to the Commercial Core Historic District. In addition, the project has the potential to be an important anchor along the Galena Street pedestrian corridor and to draw activity to this area, which features some of the most significant historic resources in Aspen. PLANNING•ZONING COMMISSION EXHIBIT 6% , APPROVED ► 19 BY RESOLUTION PUBW NOTICE RE: GALENA PLAZA COh0 fEP AL GROWTH SPECIAL MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM All OTINfX1 REVIEW & VESTED RIGHTS NOTICE IS HEREBY GFM that a public hear- Ing will be held on Tuesday. November 16, 1993' at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before the Aspen Planning and Zoning CommLtslon in the second floor Conference Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen. Colorado, to con- sider an application submitted by Ron Garfield & Andy Hecht, 601 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen. requesting approval of Commercial GMQS Allotment for 4.400 square teen of net leasable area for an addition to the Central Bank proper- ty. The applicants also request Special RSview approvals for reduction of Open Space, Increase in Floor Area Ratio and reduction of e y IParkis and located aVested20 East hWnhStreet, more specifically the east 19 feet of tot Q. hots R & S, Block 66, City and Towasite of Aspen. For fur_ ther information, contact Kim Johnson at the Aspen Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galata St„ Aspen, CO.9205100. sBruce Kerr, Chairman Published Inpthe Aspen and Zoning Commission 19" pen Times October 29, • 0 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: GALENA PLAZA COMMERCIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM ALLOTMENT, SPECIAL REVIEW & VESTED RIGHTS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, November 16, 1993, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission in the second floor Conference Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, to consider an application submitted by Ron Garfield & Andy Hecht, 601 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen, requesting approval of Commercial GMQS Allotment for 4,400 square feet of net leasable area for an addition to the Central Bank property. The applicants also request Special Review approvals for reduction of Open Space, increase in Floor Area Ratio and reduction of Parking and Vested Property Rights. The property is located at 420 East Main Street, more specifically the east 19 feet of Lot Q, Lots R & S, Block 86, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact Kim Johnson at the Aspen Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO. 920-5100. s/Bruce Kerr, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on October 29, 1993. City of Aspen Account. /93 Sunny Vann 230 E. Hopkins Aspen, CO. 81611 PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT September 9, 1993 RE: Central Bank Growth Management Submission Dear Sunny, The Planning Office has determined that it will accept the Central Bank Property commercial GMP application on the September 15, 1993 deadline even though second reading of the condominium application by Messrs. Garfield and Hecht will not take place until September 27. Since the condo plat cannot be recorded and ownership transfer take place until after second reading the Bank, as owners of the entire parcel, will have to consent to and authorize the GMP application. Staff will review.the application for completeness per the usual submission process, but will not begin referring the application to other departments until second reading is approved. If you have any other questions, please contact me at 920-5100. Sincerely, Kim Johnson Planner 130 SOUTH GALENA STREET • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 • PHONE 303.920.5090 • FAx 303.920.5197 I'nntd un n�1d.; Pair: l j • • VANN ASSOCIATES Planning Consultants November 4, 1993 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Kim Johnson Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Galena Plaza Floor Area Special Review Dear Kim: At the Development Review Committee meeting for the Galena Plaza GMQS applica- tion, the Planning Office raised the issue of the project's compliance with the internal floor area ratio provisions of the CC, Commercial Core, zone district. Pursuant to Section 5-210.D.11. of the Land Use Regulations, the CC zone district's external floor area ratio may be increased from 1.5:1 to 2:1 by Special Review, provided that "sixty (60) percent of the additional floor area" is approved for affordable housing purposes. As I understand it, the Planning Office is inclined to interpret the phrase "sixty (60) percent of the additional floor area" as referring exclusively to new floor area which is constructed on -site for affordable housing purposes. While I can understand how the staff might reach this conclusion, I believe that such an interpretation is unduly restric- tive, and clearly not in the City's best interest. My understanding of the relevant language is that sixty (60) percent of the "project's" floor area above 1.5:1 must be used for affordable housing to be eligible for a FAR bonus. To interpret this provision as applying only to new construction effectively precludes the conversion of on -site free market residential units to deed restricted status in exchange for additional floor area. With respect to the Galena Plaza project, such an interpre- tation would require the construction of new affordable housing units as opposed to the conversion the property's existing free market units to deed restricted status. As the Housing Action Plan element of the new Aspen Area Community Plan encourages such conversions, little, if any, benefit would appear to be derived from the staffs proposed interpretation. Apparently, the Planning Office's concern relates to the quality of the existing units which might be converted to affordable housing in exchange for a floor area bonus. As any such units which are proposed to be converted must be approved by the City Council in their sole discretion (see Sections 8-104.C.c. and 8-109.J.) sufficient safeguards presently exist within the Regulations to ensure that converted units meet applicable 230 East Hopkins Avenue • Aspen, Colorado 81611 • 303/925-6958 • Fax 303/920-9310 Ms. Kim Johnson November 4, 1993 Page 2 APCHA requirements. To preclude such conversions outright unduly limits both the land owner's and the City's flexibility in addressing the Regulations' affordable housing requirements. As outlined in Table 1, page 19, of our GMQS application, the proposed external floor area for the Galena Plaza project is twelve thousand six hundred and forty (12,640) square feet, which equates to a floor area ratio of 1.6:1. As the property's allowable external floor area is eleven thousand eight hundred and fifty (11,850) square feet (computed at 1.5:1), a floor area bonus of seven hundred and ninety (790) square feet is required. In exchange for this bonus, the Regulations require that sixty (60) percent, or approx- imately four hundred and seventy (470) square feet, be used for affordable housing purposes. As Table 2, page 24, of our application indicates, the Applicant has proposed to convert two thousand two hundred and fifty (2,250) square feet of existing free market housing to deed restricted status in exchange for the additional floor area. This figure represents more than two and one-half (2-1/2) times the minimum affordable housing required for the requested floor area bonus. In summary, I believe that the proposed Galena Plaza project meets both the intent and letter of the regulatory provision in question. Adequate safeguards presently exist within the Regulations to address the adequacy of the units being proposed for conversion. The proposed conversion of the units is also consistent with the recommendations of Aspen Area Community Plan. Finally, no significant benefit would be appear to be derived from the staffs proposed interpretation. To the contrary, considerable flexibility would be lost with regard to the provision of affordable housing. Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Yours VANN A19SOCIATES ny Van/AICP SV: cc: Ronald Garfield, Esq. c: fts\city.1tr\1tr22593.kj2 SEWER RIM 7890.8 INV1 758$.(, IN1V2 7892.2 INV 3 7589.6 WVI / \INV 5 FT FROM HERE TO "THEM MANHOLE RIM 7896.9 -'LOWEST INV 7B87.8 92 1 ' I I I I I ------------- ---------------------- + 79CD.6 I/O PRIMARY ELECTRICAL, TV 4 PI -IONS ------------------ E tOCA7-C) FtdDM CITY ELECTRICAL MAPS 211 NATURAL GAh LINI'LOCATED ONIINORTHERLY G - 510E OF ALLEY ACCORDING TO HOLY CRO515 G _ 8" :AI+N {TARP to EWER — MANHOU'S LOCATED PER TFllh ,SURVEY `� I I I I I I I I I I I I K �r I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I • i I I I I I I I I i I I I w 1F11", FOPTION OF AD,JPCENT BUILDI� FOR ORIENTATION ONLY AMC) LS Ndt I IMPROVEMENT 'Xi ENC�PCHEh ON STKEET O.31 EL.7904.1 MI`14ALT -cTEL. FEVEMAL EQS£ of ALC£Y O TELEPFLONE - + 7901.7 --------- -- - -------------------- - --- -t + 79OI.20 ALLEY- 1\ II II IFVlY 7yo1.5 -*+ 7901.45 s 1BLOCK (ALLEY WIDTH 2O.31') Cv INCH CAP. WATER MAIN (,707 FT. PEEP W LOCATED AC CITY WATER MAP W + 7905.4 - TRAN51`09MER N -2 KUq 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------------------ E 6 (ED ra 7901.77 14 � �,o +r�� To,� 790 RJLJ= * TMA FK NAIL 3 W 1/0 PRIMARY E E EL. 7903.41 N 4 MiDtz -- E--- C7 G -- 6 — 5 -�- 7902.1a 8 5— 4W3a0MCM i1 0.04 Emozo mENLLEY T. ON A - A U FOLFI0 YELLOW PLASTK CAP {{ L.5. N" I UBS16LF. CF�I°ChIMENT l00.3 ns b, N79'21'27'E 0.20 FROM TRUE CoKNEK W((, TTb1.31 87 / 7y3.0.30 ENCfd-1AQiMENT ON STREF �2,-fXttA;l' 35 I NCRDk" LENT CN CFM77 W 3CWEK RIM N w" 7905, INV r 7m.3 NV-2 793.4 INV 3 7894.4 IW.f / + t 79o3.54 Ii� :so 4 1 aelA . ' 00(� I ,� O 5 to 20 30 40 50 1 7905.9 �T°In- E-T SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: I HffEP>Y CERTIFY THAT ON JULY 21, Ml?), A V15UAL INSPECTION WA5 PERFORMED UNDER MY 5UPERVI510N CF LOT5 Q, R, F 5, BLOCK �C, GIT,r F ASPEN, COLORADO NO CHANGES WERE FOUND EXCEPT A5 SHOWN AND NOTED HEREON. ALPINE SURVEYS, ING JUL'( 23, 1-193 13y'— L.5 VALE* I"- IO' 5An15 OF MFARING> FOUND MONUMENT2 A5 5t'IOWN DATUM PLANE° U.S.C. G.9 5ENCt1 MARK, 5WCo?.000KT HOUSE'' 7102,.80 + 790Co.Ca I-' I SURVEYOR 5 CERTIFICATE I, JAME5 F. REAR, HEKEBY CEKTIFY THAT 7t115 MAP IZEPKE-,ENT AN ACTUAL FIELD SURVEY MADE UNDER MY SUPERVI510N IN APRIL AND MAY OF 19l° -GE- THE EAST HALF Of LOT L AND ALL OF IDTh M, N, 0, P, Q, R ANDS, 5LCCK54, CITY ANDT0WN3LTE0FASF'EN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLOKADO. THETVC ffOKY DRICK BUILDING WITH DA5EMENTANOTHE `1) ONE 570KY BRICK BKICK BUIL01�\G WITH DA5EMENT WERE 170UND TO BL LOCATED ENTIRELY WITHIN 7HE t57UNOAtRY OF THE AeU/E DEtCRIDED FRDPEKTY, AND THE TWO &XKWA5 MUND TO CNCROACH ON TI-1 - ALLEY AND THC 51REET, ALL A5 CFOWN AND NOTED t1EK150N. 711E LOCAMON AND DIMEN5ION5 OF ALL 5UILDIW---{D, IMPROVEMENTS t A5EMENT'S, RIGr1T5 OF WAY IN EVIDENCE OM KNOWN lD ME AND CW-90A t--IMENT'O 15YOr, ON 171E-5E PREMISE-, ARE PW-Gt)RATLY St10Wl I. -I- (L l9ag.59 + 790&.7 s\ , OF C" ALPINE SURVEYS POST OFFICE BOX 1730 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 303 925 2688 SURVEYED AFKIL, MAY 1111 DM. P5, R.K. DRAFTED 7 MAY 1111 JH5 REVIgf-D 22 JULr 1993 UPDATE LOTS Q,R, S TITLE ; IMPROVEMENT SURVEY OF THE EAST 12 LOT L, ALL Of- LOTS M, N, O, P Q, R AND 15, PSLOCK 86, A5PEEN JUf5 1 - 93 -51 CLIENT- GAKFtELD HEGHT 7 L 7 L I GALENA PLAZA � COMMERCIAL GMQS APPLICATION 1 SEPTEMBER 15, 1993 I A COMMERCIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM APPLICATION FOR THE CENTRAL BANK PROPERTY Submitted by Ronald Garfield, Esq. Andrew V. Hecht, Esq. 601 East Hyman Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 925-1936 Prepared by VANN ASSOCIATES Planning Consultants 230 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 925-6958 11 PROJECT CONSULTANTS PLANNER Sunny Vann, AICP Vann Associates 230 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 925-6958 ARCHITECT Kim Weil William Poss and Associates 605 East Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 925-4755 ATTORNEY Ronald Garfield, Esq. Garfield & Hecht, PC 601 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 925-1936 CIVIL ENGINEER Jay W. Hammond, P.E. Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. 1001 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (303) 945-1004 SURVEYOR James Reeser Alpine Surveys, Inc. 215 South Monarch Street Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 925-2688 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. PROJECT SITE 2 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 8 A. Water System 17 B. Sewage System 18 C. Drainage System 18 D. Fire Protection 19 E. Development Data 19 F. Traffic and Parking 22 G. Affordable Housing 23 H. Stoves and Fireplaces 26 I. Location 26 J. Impact on Adjacent Uses 26 K. Construction Schedule 27 IV. GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW CRITERIA 27 A. Duality of Design 27 1. Architectural Design 28 2. Site Design 29 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 3. Energy Conservation 30 4. Amenities 30 5. Visual Impact 31 6. Trash and Utility Access Areas 31 B. Availability of Public Facilities 32 and Services 1. Water Supply/Fire Protection 32 2. Sanitary Sewer 33 3. Public Transportation/Roads 34 4. Storm Drainage 34 5. Parking 35 C. Provision of Affordable Housing 36 D. Bonus Points 36 V. ADDITIONAL REVIEW REQUIREMENTS 37 A. Special Review 37 1. Floor Area Ratio 37 2. Off -Street Parking 39 3. Open Space 40 B. Vested Property Rights 42 Im i 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Section APPENDIX A. 70 TABLE OF CONTENTS Exhibit 1, Pre -Application Conference Exhibit 2, Title Commitment Exhibit 3, Permission to Apply Exhibit 4, Permission to Represent Exhibit 5, Adjacent Property Owners Exhibit 6, Application Fee Agreement Exhibit 1, Letter from Kim Johnson Exhibit 2, Letter from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. w Page LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Title Page Improvement Survey 3 Kandahar Apartments Lower Level Floor Plan 5 Kandahar Apartments Main Level Floor Plan 6 Kandahar Apartments Upper Level Floor Plan 7 Galena Plaza Site Plan 9 Galena Plaza Lower Level Plan 10 Galena Plaza Street Level Plan 11 Galena Plaza Upper Level Plan 12 Galena Plaza South Elevation 13 Galena Plaza East Elevation 14 Galena Plaza North Elevation 15 Galena Plaza West Elevation 16 li 11 1 I. INTRODUCTION The following application requests a commercial growth management quota system (GMQS) allocation for four thousand four hundred (4,400) square feet of net leasable area for an addition to the Central Bank building (a/k/a, the Colorado National Bank), which is located at 420 East Main Street in the City of Aspen, Colorado. In addition, the application requests special review approval to increase the project's allowable floor area, and to make a payment -in -lieu of parking and open space. Vested property rights status is requested for all approvals granted pursuant to this application (see Pre -Application Conference Summary, Exhibit 1, Appendix A). The application is submitted pursuant to Sections 8-106.F., 7-404.A. and B., and 6-207 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations by Ronald Garfield and Andrew V. Hecht, the prospective purchasers of a portion of the Central Bank property (see Title Commitment, Exhibit 2, Appendix A). The owner of the property is First Aspen Corporation, a Colorado corporation. Permission for the Applicants to submit the application on behalf of the property owner is attached as Exhibit 3, Appendix A. Permission for Vann Associates, Planning Consultants, to represent the Applicants is attached as Exhibit 4, Appendix A. An executed application fee agreement, and a list of property owners located within three hundred (300) feet of the project site, is attached as Exhibits 5 and 6, Appendix A, respectively. The application is divided into four (4) parts. The first part, or Section II. of the application, provides a brief description of the project site, while Section III. describes the Applicants' proposed development. The third part, or Section IV., addresses the proposed development's compliance with the growth management 1 11 fl 11 1 ["I 11 review criteria of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. Section V. discusses the special review approvals which are also required to develop the project. For the reviewer's convenience, all pertinent supporting documents relating to the project are provided in the various appendices to the application. While the Applicants have attempted to address all relevant provisions of the Regulations, and to provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evaluation of the application, questions may arise which require further information and/or clarification. The Applicants would be pleased to provide such additional informa- tion as may be required in the course of the application's review. II. PROJECT SITE The Central Bank property is located at the northwest corner of Main Street and Galena Street near the edge of the City's downtown commercial area. As the Improvement Survey on the following page illustrates, the property consists of the east one-half (1/2) of Lot L, all of Lots M, N, O, P, Q, R and S, Block 86, City and Townsite of Aspen. The lots are presently in single ownership, and are considered to have merged pursuant to Section 7-1004.A.5. of the Regulations. The project site occupies the eastern portion of the property, and consists of the east nineteen (19) feet of Lot Q and all of Lots R and S. The project site contains seven thousand nine hundred (7,900) square feet of land area and is zoned CC, Commercial Core. An application for subdivision exemption approval to condominiumize the Central Bank property was submitted to the Planning Office by the Applicants on August 2, 1993. The application requests permission to divide the property into two (2) condominium units pursuant to the provisions of the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act, as amended. A general common element will be located between the F) 11 two proposed condominium units. Condominium Unit # 1 will consist of the east one-half (1/2) of Lot L, all of Lots M, N, O and P, and the west eleven (11) feet of Lot Q, excluding the area to be designated as the general common element. Unit #2, which is the subject of this GMQS application, will consist of the remainder of the property. The Applicants' subdivision exemption application was approved at first reading by the City Council on August 23, 1993. Second reading and a public hearing is scheduled for September 27, 1993. As the Regulations contain no review criteria or mitigation requirements for the condominiumization of commercial property, approval of the subdivision exemption application is non -discretionary, and should be obtained at the September 27 City Council hearing. Permission for the Applicants' to apply for a GMQS allocation prior to the receipt of subdivision exemption approval to condominiumize the property has been granted by the Planning Office (see letter from Kim Johnson, Exhibit 1, Appendix B). Man-made improvements to the project site include the one (1) story, east wing of the existing bank building, a two (2) story apartment building, and a landscaped courtyard. The bank's east wing contains approximately one thousand seven hundred and eighty (1,780) square feet of floor area, excluding the portion of the building's lower level which is located below grade. The building's existing net leasable area totals approximately two thousand four hundred and ninety (2,490) square feet. The apartment building, which was formerly known as the Kandahar Apartments, contains nine (9) dwelling units and approximately five thousand five hundred (5,500) square feet of floor area. As the floor plans on the following pages illustrate, the building originally contained twelve (12) separate units. Three (3) of the dwelling units, however, have been combined with adjacent units to increase the 4 :wet w.v TTlN I I I 1 I - KAL T• 1 .•Oc '-__...--.—�—+ } TD1L., __..__�__—___—__ E+ r1m�.T[D 1VL�---91.4-'.•itE:_._ _ • IRi'___. •--.q'=•-�— flo. Oxtu1�1 +'1�1 �' >.a 6 o AULr .LraeP.i To .itv em» G 6 .� e• eLwac 5 + TaAo 11AL 1 -wa.sWoos 1�1� /(�,��� ®�* S Irnu .VY`:�:[1l ®'(D Coln J nw.R. Kay V/01H ms1') I3 I �y 1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I � I 1 I I I i I W 1 I i s 3 I I u ov. r,x nwe.J T 1 i WA I twrf .NL A.o 1 1 K 4 ' M I N I ro larva. o. wr I �• �Kl/cir.r �:' I I ' ' paAB celowq ' oT5 eo u I I r , I 1 �rvlti� w � j I . 115 54w •M rnr , , ------------------�----- r . w +•n nn I _ I I � .,�u .rir .u,.•n , �•^•'' j t.N T n"Ln MM-M W --. ALPINE SURVEYS POST OFFICE BOX 1730 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 303 925 2688 0 --- --_- 5'T71LYl.ro-- 1 - :.r. ! S — -- - •Pau -S --+—••' �;*tYiYTt i. ro• nK tne•.pc 5y r,v smnw i � /�/ ; LL✓ . 4.+•ea •4 QStAM 0.5LP. � CO.KfIi[ N.YNLr• T.rCw •' .� 'S a1 � l52 5, '/ram/��� /,�/�;'� k _. :� � S�� • wv. ,Y tee,. I- �. /!LA MKIQI.W M.iG // y ' �._ �• M inyy.,l 1 t®Owtl]1 CAC 1�ee.r G � - � --� i I• i .i Is+lcrl y • . Q8 y r // //-/, al •R..4i___ � i �, eararsn iLY. TEA.15 :. 3 f'P+e.ap ONE eAbtx % / i�A� / / �/' i /%% T3'01'll'W—* 229.67 (M�150r DVJtl1.�' �.'wsw.l �.mlle + .5.•. ,: .[ .. .r cv wstc u,ow R. 5.ry t+x rwr vl •, e�A s) ,.("�� .. / ! C O H C R F r [ s• .__—..—__ .__. ____. __—._. n'mno•i rfaf.cw.ac+`'l+o5n 7b5a: W MAEN STR= SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: I HEREPX G7=RTIFY THAT ON JULY 21, M13, A Vl-"L IT-15FTGi1pN WAS PERft7RHE'D LItiIDER NY 51JPERVI5KJN CF LOT5 Q, R, 1 5, 15LDCX rf, CaTY CF /6PEN, COLORALL'D. NO CHANGE5 WERE FOUND E)C :F7 A5 c*40WN AND NDTED HEREON. ALPINE 9j9vEY5, LNG. W. JULY 23, M13 L.S. JLIRVEYED APRIL, AAAY 1171 DAL, F.6., R.K. DKVW 7"WITII JH5 RUMOM 22 JULY M13 UPDATE La5 Q,R, 5 W W o O D 20 31 !O 50 FT yam• I•_I0' 6� OF MARPG• MUND MUd1MENT5 A-31V 5M N MTLW PLANE' UC 46, 5EN31 MIX, aW OM 03-XT 12t1.•P • 79a. to + tO` �URVE`rOR'� CERTIFICATE 1, AVC; r KMM, I-ER'.DE CDETIrY THAT THID MAr IKEFFT5EN P, AN ACrLNL FlELo uURVCY MADE VNOM MY MffrRVpl1J IN ArRIL ANDMAY OF 11 M CF THE EAM HALF OF IDr L AND ALL Cr=0 M. N. O, r, Q. R AND-,, DILCX84, GTYANDTDWN917COEA'.rEN, rITKINciouwy, COLORADO, 7HC TN,o ODRY MCC el)I aw, Wrm WcemcNrA THE ONE wMmf DRCJC DRCK CIT VAPI WH M'!EMENT WEIQ 10-tV W BE LOCATED EMIRELY WITHIN THE eCUNGIRY Or IfM AftWE DC'YSID© rR ,aW, AND THE WC ODRYO?[]CIC IICC/rEUUV wV f0t. D 70 e NDQ7Q1 ON THE A11LY AND TFIE VWMT, ALL A•O *-CWN AND Pt711D 1-IUFLIN. 14 ILTOMM AND DIMENtl3w, Or ALL DUILONG-lt, IMrIpyD.CNn, EADO r3, Rr4H15 Or WW W rADENQ Or, rj4 WN 1D MC AND [N3 W JlWNM DY OR ON THEY MEML2-� ARE ACM A713Y crow. n.0 Iw. �rtluv • ..,vr\vu vl n Is_ FJ,bT V2 LOT L, ALL OF qL�OT5 M, N, O, P Q, R AND 5, E5LOGK 66, A5PEN C_LIENI• Ca KlfttLV HFLHT 1N KANDAHAR 5GALEt 1/5'=1'-O" VASLE S.F. 250.0 S.F. n2 $ #5 = 750.7 S.F. 4 = 526.5 S.F. = 15272 S.F. ? AREA 1600.0 S.F. LOY`lER LEVEL EXI5TINCG FLOOR PLAN 5EFTEMBER 5, 1,1g3 A KANDAHAR SCALE: 1/0'■ 1'-0' _IVABLE S.F. #5 = 362.5 S.F. #6 # 7 = 1501 5.F. #8 = 526.5 5.F. rl. = 163Q.7 S.F. )R AREA 1800.0 S.F. MAIN LEVEL EXISTING FLOOR PLAN SEPTEl-t 6, A115 KANDAHAR 5cALE: 1/8•=V-0• _IVABLE 5.F. #q = 562.5 S.F. #10011= 750.7 S.F. 412 = 526.5 S.F. L = 165q.7 S.F. )R AREA 1 &00.0 S.F. UPPER LEVEL EXI5TINCG FLOOR PLAN 5EPTEMSER 8, ig93 units' size. None of the units are currently deed restricted to affordable housing guidelines. The courtyard is located approximately twelve (12) feet below street level, and ' is accessible from the bank's lower level and the east wing. Existing vegetation ' consists of various deciduous and conifer trees, and miscellaneous ornamental shrubs, the majority of which are located within or adjacent to the courtyard area. Two (2) ' large cottonwood trees are located within the public right-of-way near the southeast corner of the site. Two (2) off-street parking spaces are presently provided adjacent to the alley. As the Improvement Survey illustrates, the existing apartment building encroaches slightly into both the Galena Street right-of-way and the alley. As discussed in the attached letter from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc., ' Consulting Engineers (see Exhibit 2, Appendix B), the project site is presently served by all utilities. A six (6) inch municipal water main is located in the Galena Street right-of-way. A ten (10) inch and a fifteen (15) inch Aspen Consolidated Sanitation ' District (ACSD) sanitary sewer is located in the adjacent public alley. The area's existing electric, telephone and cable TV service has been relocated underground, ' and is also available in the alley. Fire hydrant #664 is located immediately in front ' of the site at the northwest corner of Main Street and Galena Street. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1 As the architectural plans and elevations on the following pages illustrate, the ' Applicants propose to remodel and expand the bank's existing east wing. The building will be extended to the east and north, and a second floor will be added. The existing street level connection between the east wing and the main bank ' building will be removed. The expanded building, which will be known as the Galena 8 f PkiIIG_ r t . IYNDAr� P'Pr4�iirISN'Tt"4 -O■ i GQ;r1>iTGIFL SP�GE pNbDlr'16 it II I� I �77. - - - - I I ---- --— ------ Y c r r r r r r r i a l5R1� —e- M°yM �6T / Q�1I1 d Vt 11 - P L2 RD ����, 5TREET LPL 4 51TE PLAN Auqj5t 15, iaas GALENA PLAZA CONCEPTUAL DESIGN LOWER LEVEL SCALE: 1/6"= P-O" AUGUST 13, 1993 ' t { 1 _-44 w - l - _GorSM�gL ILL �P�G� �attt�b 1 � 1 DN � �t/t�DiNb i f GALENA FLAZA CONCEPTUAL 5TREET LEVEL SCALE: 1/8"= I'-O" AUGU5T 15, 1555 ° n4'intnadNa.vfr_ D�51GN GALENA PLAZA UPPER LEVEL SCALE: 1/8"= I'-0" - AUGUST 15, Ig93 Me TI'{• I 1 .i dd i .t 1~ nil!. TALENA PLAZA CONCEPTUAL DE516N OUTH ELEVATION 5GALIE:. 4/8"=1'-011 AUGUST 15, 19a3 - MT;,. C.tAO GALENA FLAZA Ila Imm in � l�■I Iil 5. LI11i (I CONCEPTUAL DES16N EA5T ELEVATION SCALE: 1/5"= I'-O" AUGUST 15, laa5 M :....w --- Wilk I � i -I il�.lf��1 1 Won — WIN 'N.. , ■ 1 r r� IA ■ ■ ■ I-� CGALENA PLAZA CONCEPTUAL. DE51 CGN NORTH ELEVATION 50ALE: I/BSI = 11_O" AUGUST 13, IQQ3 GALENA PLAZA V`EE5T ELEVATION 50ALE: 1/8"=1'-0" GONCEMAI. DE516N AUGUST 15, AcI3 I 11 1 L, I 1 P 1 Plaza building, will contain both commercial and office uses. As currently envisioned, the building's lower level will be used for office and tenant storage purposes, while the street and upper levels will be devoted to commercial use. Conceptual approval for the proposed development was received from the Historic Preservation Committee on August 25, 1993. Final approval will be obtained following the receipt of a GMQS allocation. The existing apartment building will be remodeled to improve its appearance and to address potential Uniform Building Code (UBC) deficiencies. Five (5) of the building's units will be deed restricted to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority's (APCHA) Category 1, low income guidelines to meet the mitigation requirements of the growth management quota system. The remainder of the units will be rented within the free market. The existing courtyard will also be preserved, albeit reduced in size, and modified to improve access to the apartment building. A more detailed description of the Applicants' proposed development is provided below. A. Water System Water service to the proposed development will be provided via the existing six (6) inch main located in Galena Street. The Aspen Water Department has indicated that the municipal water system has sufficient capacity to serve the development (see letter from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc., Exhibit 2, Appendix B). No improvements to the existing water main or treatment plant will be required as a result of the Applicant's proposed development. The adequacy of the building's existing service line, however, will be reviewed with the Water Department. The service line will be replaced in the event required. 17 B. Sewage System The proposed development will be served by the existing ten (10) inch sanitary sewer located in the alley behind the project site. According to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, anticipated flows can be accommodated with no improvements to existing sewer lines or to the treatment plant (see letter from Inc., Exhibit 2, Appendix B). The Applicants, however, Schmueser Gordon Meyer, 1 will commit to fund, not to exceed six thousand dollars ($6,000.00), various repairs to the existing ten (10) inch sewer as suggested in Schmueser Gordon Meyer's letter. 1 The Sanitation District has indicated that the repairs will improve sanitary sewer service in the immediate site area. The adequacy of the building's existing service District, line be in the event line will be reviewed with the and the will replaced required. C. Drainage No significant increase in the project site's impervious surfaces will occur as a result of the proposed development, as the bulk of the expansion will occur within the paved courtyard and above the existing building. Existing drainage patterns will be unaffected by the project, and no adverse impact is anticipated with respect to the City's existing drainage facilities (see letter from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc., Exhibit 2, Appendix B). Historic flow rates with respect to surface water runoff and groundwater recharge will be maintained. In the event required, on -site drywells will be used to retain and dispose of additional surface runoff. A detailed drainage plan for the project will be submitted to the City's Engineering Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit for the project. 18 1 1 1 1 fl I 1 I D. Fire Protection Fire protection will be provided by the Aspen Volunteer Fire Department. The project site is located approximately one and one-half (1-1/2) blocks from the fire station, resulting in a response time of approximately three (3) to five (5) minutes. The Applicants, however, will replace the existing hydrant located at the southeast corner of the property with an updated model, which will enhance fire protection in the immediate site area (see letter from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc., Exhibit 2, Appendix B). The pr ; ased addition will also be sprinklered, which will further enhance fire protection. E. Development Data As Table 1 indicates, the proposed expansion will increase the floor area of the existing building by approximately five thousand three hundred and sixty (5,360) square feet. The corresponding increase in the building's net leasable square footage will be approximately four thousand four hundred (4,400) square feet. The size of the expanded structure, and the existing apartment building, however, will be significantly below the maximum allowable external floor area limitation of the underlying CC, Commercial Core, zone district. The height of the remodeled building will be approximately twenty-eight (28) feet, which is also significantly less than the maximum allowed. Table 1 DEVELOPMENT DATA 1. Existing Zoning CC, Commercial Core 2. Total Site Area (Sq. Ft.) 7,900 3. Existing Floor Area (Sq. Ft.)' 7,280 19 Commercial 1,780 Lower Level' 290 Street Level 1,490 Residential 5,500 Lower Level2 900 Main Level 2,300 Upper Level 2,300 4. Existing Net Leasable Area (Sq. Ft.)3 2,490 Lower Level 1,190 Street Level 1,300 5. Maximum Allowable External Floor Area 11,850 @ 1.5:1 (Sq. Ft.)' 6. Maximum Allowable External Floor Area 15,800 @ 2:1 (Sq. Ft.) 7. Internal Floor Area Allocation (Sq. Ft.) Maximum Allowable Commercial 13,430 Floor Area Minimum Required Residential 2,370 Floor Area 8. Proposed External Floor Area 12,640 @ 1.6:1 (Sq. Ft.) Commercial 7,140 Lower Level 610 Street Level 3,200 Upper Level 3,330 Residential 5,500 Lower Level 900 Main Level 2,300 Upper Level 2,300 9. Proposed Net Leasable Area (Sq. Ft.) 6,890 Lower Level 1,670 Street Level 2,460 20 Upper Level 2,760 10. Minimum Required Open Space 1,980 @ 25% (Sq. Ft.)' 11. Existing Open Space (Sq. Ft.) 3,740 12. Proposed Open Space (Sq. Ft.) 1,480 13. Maximum Allowable Height (Ft.) 40 14. Proposed Maximum Building Height (Ft.) 28 15. Minimum Required Parking Spaces Commercial @ 2 Spaces/1,000 Sq. Ft. 9 Net Leasable Residential @ 1 Space/Bedroom' None 16. Proposed Parking None ' All numbers have been rounded to the nearest ten (10) square feet. 2 Portions of the lower levels which are located one hundred (100) percent below natural grade have been excluded from the calculation of floor area. 3 Excludes bathrooms, stairways, circulation corridors, mechanical areas, and tenant storage areas. 4 May be increased to 2:1 by Special Review, provided that sixty (60) percent of the additional floor area is approved for deed restricted affordable housing. 5 May be reduced or waived by Special Review subject to a payment -in -lieu. 6 No additional parking is required, as no increase in the number of residential units is proposed. As noted previously, the proposed development will require special review approval to increase its allowable external floor area ratio above 1.5:1. The project will contain a total of twelve thousand six hundred and forty (12,640) square 21 feet of floor area, which equates to a floor area ratio of 1.6:1. However, as all of the additional floor area above 1.5:1 will be used for affordable housing purposes, the ' proposed development complies with the internal floor area requirements of the ' underlying CC zone district. Special review approval will also be required to reduce the project's parking and open space requirements. As Table 1 indicates, no on -site parking is proposed. Similarly, the project's proposed open space is approximately five hundred (500) square feet less than the minimum required. A detailed discussion of the proposed development's floor area, parking and open space requirements is provided in Sections IV.A.1., 2. and 3., respectively, of this application. F. Traffic and Parking The proposed development should have no adverse impact upon the 1 existing street system. Assuming a trip generation factor of eight (8) vehicles per day per one thousand (1,000) square feet of net leasable area, the proposed addition would theoretically generate approximately thirty-five (35) additional vehicles per day. As discussed in the attached letter from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. (see Exhibit 2, Appendix B), these additional vehicles represent a minimal percentage ' increase in the traffic volumes of adjacent streets, all of which are currently functioning below allowable capacity. It should also be noted that the project site is conveniently located adjacent to the City's municipal parking garage, and within walking distance of the commercial core. The Galena Street shuttle van provides frequent service between the cul-de-sac located adjacent to the project site and the Rubey Park transit center. In addition, the Roaring Fork Transit Agency's (RFTA) local bus routes all pass 22 either in front of the project site or through the Mill Street and Main Street intersection. As a result, it is reasonable to assume that much of the increase in business traffic will most likely be pedestrian or transit oriented. ' With respect to parking, the current requirement for commercial uses in the CC zone district is two (2) spaces per one thousand (1,000) square feet of net 1 leasable area. As only two (2) parking spaces are presently provided on the project site, the bank's east wing and the apartments are non -conforming with respect to the parking requirement of the underlying zone district. As no parking can realistically be provided on -site, the Applicants will satisfy the proposed development's parking requirement via a payment -in -lieu as provided for in Section 7-404.B. of the Regula- tions. As noted previously, a detailed discussion of the project's off-street parking requirement is provided in Section IV.A.2. of this application. G. Affordable Housing As Table 1 illustrates, the proposed addition will increase the existing rbuilding's net leasable square footage by four thousand four hundred (4,400) square feet. Based on an employee generation factor of three and one-half (3-1/2) employees per one thousand (1,000) square feet of additional net leasable square footage, the proposed development will theoretically generate approximately fifteen (15) new full time equivalent employees calculated as follows. 4,400 Sq. Ft. Net Leasable/1,000 Sq. Ft. = 4.4 4.4 x 3.5 Employees/1,000 Sq. Ft. = 15.4 Employees 1 The Applicants propose to satisfy the affordable housing requirement of Section 8-106.F.(3) of the Regulations via the conversion of five (5) of the existing 23 free market apartments which are located on the property to deed restricted status, as provided for in Section 8-109.I.2. More specifically, Units #1, #2/#3, #4, #5 and #9 will be deed restricted to APCHA's Category 1, low income guidelines in effect at the time of the issuance of a building permit. This income category is appropri- ate, we believe, given the somewhat substandard size of the units. The units will house approximately nine and one -quarter (9-1/4) employees, or sixty (60) percent of the additional employees theoretically generated by the proposed development. The apartment building's existing unit mix, and other relevant information, is summarized in Table 2, below. 1. Lower Level Unit # 1 Unit #2/#34 Unit #4' 2. Main Level Table 2 KANDAHAR APARTMENTS Net Employees Unit Type Livable' Housed' Studio 250 1.25 2 Bedroom 750 2.25 2 Bedroom 530 2.25 Unit #5 1 Bedroom 360 1.75 Unit #6/#74 2 Bedroom 750 2.25 Unit #85 2 Bedroom 530 2.25 3. Upper Level Unit #9 1 Bedroom 360 1.75 Unit # 10/# 11' 2 Bedroom 750 2.25 Unit # 12' 2 Bedroom 530 2.25 1 All numbers have been rounded to the nearest ten (10) square feet. 24 1 I I 2 Based on interior living area. Excludes mechanical areas, exterior storage, stairwells, patios, decks and porches. 3 Based on 1993 APCHA guidelines. ° These units were previously combined by the building's prior owner. s These units each contain a wood burning stove. The Housing Authority's minimum net livable area requirements for studio, one (1) and two (2) bedroom units is four hundred (400), six hundred (600) and eight hundred and fifty (850) square feet, respectively. These requirements, however, may be reduced by APCHA upon demonstration that "the development satisfies, or is required to adjust to, other physical factors or considerations including. but not limited to, design for livability, common storage, other amenities, location or site design". As the conversion of a portion of the Kandahar Apartments to deed restricted status represents a unique opportunity to obtain a significant number of affordable housing units within the downtown area, a reduction in the minimum net livable square footage requirements would appear appropriate. As noted previously, the Applicants propose to deed restrict the units to APCHA's Category 1, low income guidelines, and to upgrade the units as may be required. Pursuant to Section 8-109.J. of the Regulations, the City Council must approve the method by which the Applicants propose to satisfy the proposed development's affordable housing requirement. In the event the Applicants are eligible for a growth management allocation, and the proposed conversion is determined to be unacceptable, the Applicants will provide affordable housing in an amount consistent with the representations of this application (i.e., sixty percent of the full time equivalent employees generated by the proposed development) via an alternative method acceptable to the City Council. A, 11 u C H. Stoves and Fireplaces As Table 2 indicates, wood burning stoves are presently located in three (3) of the existing apartments. The Applicants', however, will commit to the removal of the stoves to enhance the community's air quality. No wood burning devices or gas fireplaces are included in the proposed development. I. Location The project site is located near the northern edge of the City's downtown commercial area, and adjacent to the municipal parking garage. The Aspen Mountain Ski Area is located approximately five (5) blocks southeast of the property, while Paepcke Park is located approximately two (2) blocks to the west. The Rio Grande recreation area is located immediately north of the property. Rubey Park, the hub of the City's mass transportation system, is located approxi- mately four (4) blocks to the south. Main Street and Highway 82 provide convenient access to the community's schools, Aspen Valley Hospital and the Pitkin County Airport. As commercial development is generally considered to occur in response to growth in the residential population, no significant impact upon the above facilities is anticipated as a result of the proposed development. J. Impact on Adjacent Uses The project site is zoned CC, Commercial Core, as are the adjacent areas located to the south and west. The areas located immediately north and east of the property are zoned Public. Existing land uses in the immediate site area include retail commercial, business and professional offices, the municipal parking garage, and the Pitkin County Library and Courthouse. The proposed development 26 ' is consistent with the intent and purpose of the CC zone district and is compatible with surrounding land uses. As a result, the functional character of this mixed ' commercial/office/public area of the City will be unaffected by the Applicants' ' proposal. K. Construction Schedule Construction will commence prior to expiration of the project's GMQS allocation and vested rights status. The exact starting date of construction, however, has not been determined. IV. GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW CRITERIA ' The followingsection addresses the proposed development's compliance with P P P P the City's commercial GMQS evaluation criteria. We believe that the proposed development meets or exceeds the minimum applicable standard in each review category. Based on our understanding of the various criteria, and the project's compliance therewith, we have requested what we believe to be an appropriate score in each review category. Please reference as necessary the appropriate headings in ' Section III. of this application for detailed information supporting the Applicants' representations and commitments. 1 A. Quality of Design "Each Development Application shall be rated based on the quality of the exterior of its buildings and site design and assigned points according to the following standards and considerations. 0 -- A totally deficient design 1 — A major design flaw 27 F 11 2 — An acceptable (but standard) design 3 — An excellent design The following features shall be rated accordingly." 1. Architectural Design "Considering the compatibility of the proposed development (in terms of scale, siting, massing, height and building materials) with existing neighboring developments." The immediate site area contains a variety of building types and uses. As a result, the architectural intent of the proposed development is to provide a commercial building which will be compatible with the neighborhood. The primary building materials will be brick and stone, which are consistent with the materials used in the construction of the historically designated Pitkin County Courthouse and the St. Mary's Catholic Church rectory, both of which are located on opposite corners of the Main Street and Galena Street intersection. In addition, the new building's window proportions were designed to be compatible with these two structures. The project's height has also been kept to a level commensurate with the adjacent Colorado National Bank building, so as not to compete with the taller courthouse. The project's siting and scale is typical of similar developments located at the edge of the commercial core. The large storefronts which abut the property line are consistent with the Historic Preservation Commission's guidelines, and in keeping with the Main Street streetscape in this area of the City. It should be noted that the Applicants' conceptual HPC application was well received by the Commis- sion, as evidenced by the absence of conditions which were attached to the application's approval. Based on the above, we believe that the proposed develop- ment's architecture represents an excellent design which merits the maximum score available in this category. ' 2. Site Design r] Requested Score: 3 Points "Considering the quality and character of the proposed landscaping and open space areas, the amount of site coverage by buildings, the extent of underground utilities, and the arrangement of improvements for efficiency of circulation, including access for service, increased safety and privacy and provision of snow storage areas." The intent of the project's site design is to create an urban park setting. As the proposed Site Plan illustrates, the buildings are located around the perimeter of the property, and encircling the project's interior courtyard. This approach to site design is dictated by the location of the existing buildings, which are to be retained and remodeled, and is typical of commercial development within the commercial core where most buildings abut their front property line. As Table 1 indicates, approximately fourteen hundred and eighty (1,480) square feet of open space will be provided. The courtyard will be extensively landscaped, and benches, tables and bike racks will be provided on -site. The interior courtyard will provide a highly desirable amenity for both the apartment residents and the project's commercial and office tenants. All utilities will be located underground, and all areas of the project are readily accessible from the surrounding street network and the alley. Given the quality of the project's site design, we believe that a maximum score is also merited in this category. Requested Score: 3 Points rI 1 3. Energy Conservation "Considering the use of passive and/or active energy conservation techniques in the construction of the proposed development, including but not limited to Insulation, glazing, passive solar orientation, efficient heating and cool- ing systems and solar energy devices; the extent to which the proposed development avoids wasting energy by excluding excessive lighting and Inefficient woodburning devices; and the proposed development's location, ' relative to whether solar gain can be expected to reasonably result In energy conservation." 1 L The proposed development will comply with the minimum require- ments of the Model Energy Code in effect at the time of the issuance of a building permit. As such compliance cannot be determined until detailed design of the building is undertaken, an energy analysis demonstrating compliance with applicable Code requirements will be prepared and submitted in connection with the project's building permit application. As the Applicants' energy commitment is acceptable and meets the requirements of the Regulations, a standard score in this category is warranted. Requested Score: 2 Points 1 4. Amenities "Considering the provision of usable open space, pedestrian and bicycle ways, benches, bicycle racks, bus shelters and other common areas for users of the proposed development." As discussed previously, benches, tables and bike racks will be installed on the property to enhance the pedestrian nature of the project, and to accommo- date the needs of the project's visitors, tenants and residents. Similarly, the proposed ' courtyard area will provide a relatively secluded area for the use and benefit of both the public and the project, which is effectively screened from the considerable traffic 30 ri 11 r� 11 and noise which occurs on Main Street. All of these features constitute significant amenities which merit the maximum available score in this category. Requested Score: 5. Visual Impact 3 Points "Considering the scale and location of the buildings in the proposed development to prevent infringement on designated scenic viewplanes." There are no designated scenic viewplanes which are impacted by the proposed development. The Applicants' limitation of the project's height to two (2) stories, however, will ensure that the views of Aspen Mountain from the plaza located above the parking garage will be maintained. As discussed previously, the scale of the project is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. In addition, the proposed development will visually complete and enhance the appearance of both the Main Street and Galena Street streetscape. Given the proposed development's lack of adverse visual impact, and its positive contribution to the immediate site area, a maximum score is merited in this category. Requested Score: 3 Points 6. Trash and Utility Access Areas "Considering the extent to which required trash and utility access areas are screened from public view; are sized to meet the needs of the proposed development and to provide for public utility placement; can be easily accessed; allow trash bins to be moved by service personnel and provide enclosed trash bins, trash compaction or other unique measures." The proposed development's trash and utility area has been sized in compliance with the dimensional requirements of the CC zone district. As no new 31 1 transformers or utility pedestals are required to be located in the trash and utility area, the entire area is available for trash collection and recycling purposes. The area will easily accommodate a two (2) cubic yard dumpster, which should be more than adequate to handle the trash generated by the proposed development. The trash area will be screened from public view. As both the trash area and the alley are paved, convenient all weather access to collection vehicles and personnel is available. The project's trash and utility area represents an excellent design which merits the maximum available score in this category. Requested Score: 3 Points B. Availability of Public Facilities and Services "Each Development Application shall be rated on the basis of its impact upon public facilities and services by the assigning of points according to the following standards and considerations. 0— Proposed development requires the provision of new public facilities and services at increased public expense. i1 -- Proposed development may be handled by existing public facilities and services, or any public facility or service improvements made ' by the applicant benefits the proposed development only and not the area in general. ' 2 -- Proposed development improves the availability of public facilities and services in the area." ' 1. Water Supply/Fire Protection "Considering the ability of the water supply system to serve the proposed development and the applicant's commitment to install any water system extensions or treatment plant or other facility upgrading required to serve the proposed development. Fire protection facilities and services shall also be reviewed, considering the ability of the appropriate fire protection district to provide services according to established response times without the necessity ' of upgrading available facilities; the adequacy of available water pressure and 32 1 11 capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment of the applicant to provide any fire protection facilities which may be necessary to serve the proposed development." The Aspen Water Department has indicated that the existing six (6) inch main located in Galena Street is adequate to serve the proposed development, and that system upgrades will not be required. The existing fire hydrant located at the southeast corner of the project site, however, will be replaced by the Applicants with a new model which meets current standards. According to the Water Department, the replacement of the hydrant will improve both the municipal water system and enhance fire protection in the immediate site area. The proposed development, therefore, improves the availability of services and facilities in the area. Requested Score: 2 Points 2. Sanitary Sewer "Considering the ability of the sanitary sewer system to serve the proposed development and the applicant's commitment to install any sanitary system extensions or treatment plant or other facility upgrading required to serve the proposed development." The proposed development improves the availability of public facilities and services in the area. The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District has indicated that the existing ten (10) inch line which is located in the adjacent alley is adequate to serve the project, and that system upgrades will not be required. The Applicants' commitment to pay for repairs to the existing sanitary sewer, however, constitutes an improvement to the ACSD collection system which will benefit the immediate site area. Requested Score: 2 Points 33 ' 3. Public Transportation/Roads "Considering the ability of the proposed development to be served by existing public transit routes. The review shall also consider the capacity of major streets to serve the proposed development without substantially altering ' existing traffic patterns, creating safety hazards or maintenance problems, overloading the existing street system or causing a need to extend the existing road network and considering the applicant's commitment to install the �I necessary road system improvements to serve the increased usage attributable to the proposed development" The proposed development may be handled by the existing level of service in the area. As discussed in Section III.F. of this application, the surrounding street network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed development. No improvements to the existing street network are either required or proposed. Rubey Park, the hub of the City's mass transportation system is located approximate- ly four (4) blocks south of the property. With the exception of the Hunter Creek bus route, all of the City's existing public transit routes presently pass in front of the project site. The Hunter Creek route passes through the Mill Street and Main Street intersection, which is located less than one (1) block west of the site. Requested Score: 1 Point 4. Storm Drainage "Considering the degree to which the applicant proposes to maintain historic drainage patterns on the development site. If the development requires use of the City's drainage system, the review shall consider the commit- ment by the applicant to install the necessary drainage control facilities and to maintain the system over the long-term." The proposed development may be handled by the existing level of service in the area. The project site's historic flow rates with respect to surface water runoff and groundwater recharge will be maintained, thereby complying with the 34 Fi storm drainage design requirements of the subdivision regulations and the City's Engineering Department. No improvements to the City's stormwater drainage system are either required or proposed. 5. Parking Requested Score: 1 Point ' "Considering the provision of parking spaces to most the commercial and/or residential needs of the proposed development as required by Article 5, Division 2, and considering the design of the parking spaces with ' respect to their visual impact, amount of paved surface and convenience and safety." I i The proposed development may be handled by the existing level of service in the area. No off-street parking was required when the existing building was constructed, and no practical ability presently exists to provide parking on -site in connection with the proposed development. The Applicants, however, propose to make a payment -in -lieu of parking as provided for in Section 7-404.B. of the Regulations. As all monies obtained via this provision are to be used for the construction of parking structures and facilities located within or adjacent to the commercial core, and a new such facility was recently completed adjacent to the project site, the . Applicants' payment -in -lieu effectively mitigates the proposed development's off-street parking requirement. It should also be noted that a second municipal parking garage is presently being planned for the area located adjacent to Cooper Avenue between Spring and Original Streets. The Applicants' payment -in - lieu could be used for this project, or to help retire the debt associated with the Rio Grande parking garage. Requested Score: 1 Point M1 C. Provision of Affordable Housing ' "Each development Application shall be assigned points for the provision of housing which complies with the housing size, type, income and occupancy guidelines of the City and with the provisions of Sec. 8-109. ' Points shall be assigned as follows: i) Zero (0%) to Sixty (60%) percent of the additional employees ' generated by the proposed development: One (1) point for each six (6%) percent housed; ' ii) Sixty-one (61%) to one hundred (100%) percent of the additional employees generated by the proposed development: One (1) point for each eight (8%) percent housed." As discussed in Section III.G. of this application, the Applicants propose to deed restrict five (5) of the existing free market apartments which are ' located on the property to APCHA's Category 1, low income guidelines, as provided for in Section 8-109.I.2. of the Regulations. These units will house nine and one - quarter (9-1/4) employees, or sixty (60) percent of the approximately fifteen (15) additional employees theoretically generated by the project. Based on the Applicants' commitment, and the provisions of Section 8-106.F.(5)(c) of the Regu- lations, the proposed development is entitled to ten (10) points, calculated as follows. 60 Percent of Employees Generated Housed - 6 Percent = 10 Points Requested Score: 10 Points D. Bonus Points "Bonus points may be assigned when it is determined that a proposed development has not only met the substantive standards of Sections 8-106 (F) (1) through (3), but has also exceeded the provisions of these sections and achieved an outstanding overall design meriting recognition. An award of additional bonus points shall not exceed ten (10%) percent of the total points awarded under Sec. 8-106 (f) (1) through (3). Any Commission member 36 awarding bonus points shall provide a written justification of that award for the public hearing record." ' We believe that the proposed development has exceeded the minimum ' review criteria of the City's commercial growth management regulations in several 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 architectural design, site design, amenities, and visual impact. ' Detailed discussions of the project's merits in each of these areas are provided under ' the appropriate headings in Section IV. of this application. V. ADDITIONAL REVIEW REQUIREMENTS In addition to a commercial growth management quota system allocation, special review approval is required for the proposed development's floor area ratio, off-street parking, and open space. Vested property rights status is also requested for the approvals which may be granted pursuant to this application. A. Special Review The Applicants request special review approval to exceed the CC zone district's external floor area ratio of 1.5:1, and to satisfy the proposed development's ' off-street parking and open space requirements via a payment -in -lieu. Each of these ' requests is discussed in detail below. 1. Floor Area Ratio The external floor area ratio in the CC, Commercial Core, zone district ' is 1.5:1. Pursuant to Section 5-210.D.11. of the Regulations, this ratio may be increased to 2:1 by the Planning and Zoning Commission, provided that a minimum 37 of sixty (60) percent of the additional floor area is approved for affordable housing purposes. As Table 1 indicates, the proposed development's external floor area totals approximately twelve thousand six hundred and forty (12,640) square feet, including the on -site apartment building. The project's resulting floor area ratio, therefore, is 1.6:1. As this ratio exceeds the 1.5:1 floor area ratio limitation, special review approval is required. The proposed development exceeds the 1.5:1 ratio by approximately seven hundred and ninety (790) square feet. All of this square footage, however, is located within the proposed affordable housing units. As Table 1 indicates, the project's commercial square footage totals approximately seven thousand one hundred and forty (7,140) square feet. The project's remaining five thousand five hundred (5,500) square feet of floor area is located within the apartment building. Of this amount, approximately two thousand two hundred and fifty (2,250) square feet will be deed restricted. As a result, the project's affordable housing substantially exceeds the minimum requirement necessary to obtain an increase in allowable floor area. Pursuant to Section 7-404.A. of the Regulations, the P&Z must determine that the requested floor area increase is compatible with, or enhances the character of, surrounding land uses. As the proposed development's seven thousand one hundred forty (7,140) square feet of commercial floor area is substantially less than the project site's maximum allowable commercial floor area, the potential impact on adjacent land uses will be significantly reduced. As discussed previously, all of the requested seven hundred and ninety (790) square foot floor area increase will be used for affordable housing purposes. No additional commercial floor area is requested. In summary, the project is compatible with neighboring development, 38 1 r 1 I 1 and no adverse impact will occur as a result of the project's increased floor area ratio. 2. ON -Street Parking Pursuant to Section 7-404.B. of the Regulations, the Planning and Zoning Commission may approve a payment -in -lieu of parking in the CC, Commercial Core, zone district. The relevant review criteria which the P&Z must take into account include whether there exist practical limitations to the provision of on -site parking, and whether the Applicants' parking requirement may be met by an off -site parking facility. As discussed previously, the proposed development consists of an expansion and second floor addition to an existing building. As no off-street parking was required when the building was constructed, no provision was made to accommodate such parking on the project site. As a result, it is physically impossible for the Applicants to meet the project's parking requirement on -site. Given the proximity of the City's municipal parking garage, and the inability to provide on -site parking, the Applicants' commitment to satisfy the project's off-street parking requirement via a payment -in -lieu is appropriate in this case. The proposed development's off-street parking requirement is nine (9) spaces calculated as follows. 4,400 Sq. Ft. Net Leasable/1,000 Sq. Ft. = 4.4 4.4 x 2.0 Spaces/1,000 Sq. Ft. Net Leasable = 8.8 Spaces Please note that the applicable parking requirement has been calculated based on the additional net leasable area to be added to the existing bank building. No parking is required for the building's existing net leasable area, or for 39 n LI 1 1 11 1 1 the existing apartment building, as demolition is not proposed. A payment -in -lieu, however, will be required for the two (2) existing parking spaces which will be lost as a result of the proposed development. Pursuant to Section 7-404.B.1., the Applicants will make a one-time only payment -in -lieu of parking to the City of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00) per space, or a total payment of one hundred and sixty-five thousand dollars ($165,000.00). The payment is for eleven (11) parking spaces, nine (9) of which are attributable to the proposed expansion. The remaining two (2) spaces are existing spaces which will be lost as a result of the proposed development. The payment will be made upon the receipt of a growth management allocation, and prior to issuance of a building permit for the project. 3. Open Space Pursuant to Section 7-404.A.3. of the Regulations, the P&Z may also approve a reduction in the CC zone district's open space requirement. The Commission, however, must determine that the provision of less than the required amount of open space will be consistent with the character of surrounding land uses. As Table 1 indicates, the proposed development's minimum open space requirement is approximately one thousand nine hundred and eighty (1,980) square feet. The project site presently contains approximately three thousand seven hundred and forty (3,740) square feet of open space. Of this amount, approximately two thousand two 1 ` ` hundred and ten (2,210) square feet, or approximately fifty-nine (59) percent, is non- conforming with respect to various design criteria (e.g., maximum depth below grade, etc.) imposed in connection with the City's present open space definition, which is 1� contained in Section 3-101 of the Regulations. ��� 40 I 1 1 A 1 1 1 Ll C1 The building's existing open space, however, is not non -conforming with respect to the minimum open space requirement of Section 5-210.D.9. (i.e., the dimensional requirements of the CC zone district), as the amount of existing open space substantially exceeds the district's minimum twenty-five (25) percent requirement. While portions of the building's existing open space are non- conforming with respect to various provisions of the open space definition, the amount of existing open space exceeds the minimum dimensional requirement. As discussed previously, the proposed development will contain approximately fourteen hundred and eighty (1,480) square feet of open space, all of which is technically non -conforming with respect to the City's open space definition. As the amount of proposed open space is less than the minimum required, a reduction of approximately five hundred (500) feet will be required. The Applicants will make a payment -in -lieu of open space as provided for in Section 7-404.A.3. of the Regulations, the amount of which will be calculated at the time of the issuance of a building permit for the project. A reduction of the project's required open space is appropriate, as no practical ability exists to comply with the City's present open space definition. As the Improvement Survey illustrates, the existing bank building and its east wing abut the site's front property line. The provision of open space adjacent to Main Street would require the demolition of the existing building, and would arguably be inconsistent with the existing streetscape. The preservation of the existing courtyard is also desirable, as it provides an attractive open space amenity for both the apartment units and the project's office area. As no demonstrable benefit would result from requiring that the project's open space to conform to either the dimensional requirement of the CC zone district, or to the design requirements of 41 1 1 1 1 the open space definition, the requested reduction complies with the applicable review criteria. B. Vested Property Rights In order to preserve the land use approvals which may be obtained as a result of this application, the Applicants hereby request vested property rights status pursuant to the provisions of Section 6-207 of the Regulations. It is understood by the Applicants that final approval of the proposed development must be granted by ordinance of the City Council to establish such status. It is also the Applicants' understanding that no specific submission requirements, or review criteria other than a public hearing, are required to confer such status. Ela 1 n I a 1 Fi 1 1 11 APPENDIX A I I i 1 I 3 CITY OF ASPEN 1119q PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY EXHIBIT 1 PROJECT •4ww.-/�� i2��QL�• APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: .y%y1�1'w► VaIt REPRESENTATIVE I S PHONE: OWNER'S NAME: 1. Type of Application: 2. Describe action/type of A A • L / �. - y z, 4 / J . Areas is which Applicant has been requested: to respond, types of reports requested: 8JOt • • i, development being requested: �G1 2 5AU�d , Policy Area/ Referral Accent Comments Ci - Y-P� 441 LT E - 0 _ l�GS D - 4. Review is: (P&Z Only) (CC Only) �&Zhen �toCC) 5. Public Hearing: YES) � (NO) 6. Number of copies of the application to be submitted:_ 7. what fee was applicant requested to submit: 3�25� /40♦ 43 MsU E>r � 8. Anticipated date of submission: y 9. COMMENTS/UNIS�UE CONCERNS: Ea 2,S�ts L _ n V. _ � . � / r,4 A 7 _ , — O / S,. ...-W, frm.pre_app -, �3 g,o� I Commonwealt. EXHIBIT 2 ' Land Title Insurance Company. COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: 05/18/93 at 08:30 A.M. Case No. PCT-7710 12. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a) ALTA Owner's Policy -Form B-1970 Amount$ 1,360,000.00 (Rev, 10-17-70 & 10-17-84 or 10-21-57) Premium$ 2,783.00 Proposed Insured: RONALD GARFIELD and ANDREW V. HECHT (b) ALTA Loan Policy, Amount$ Premium$ (Rev. 10-21-87) Proposed Insured: Tax Cert. $ 20.00 3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or ref erred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested -n: FIRST ASPEN CORPORATION, A COLORADO CORPORATION r a. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: L THE EAST 19 FEET OF LOT Q, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 86, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. COUNTY OF PITRIN, STATE OF COLORADO. ' Countersigned at: PITRIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPKINS ASPEN, CO. 81611 303-925-1766 Fax 303-925-6327 IAuthorized office-- Ior agent Schedule A-PG.1 This Commitment is invalid unless the Insuring Provisions and Schedules A and B are attached. ®Commonwealth< Land Title Insurance Company SCHEDULE B — SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: ITEM (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. ITEM (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record to -wit: 1. Certificate of Incorporation or Certificate of Good oStanding other gof First Aspen Corporation issued by the Secretary of Staterning body for Corporations of the State of Colorado, must be delivered to and approved by the Company. 2. Deed, executed by the -President or Vice President or other designee authorized by the Board of Directors of First Aspen Corporation a Colorado Corporation To : Ronald Garfield and Andrew V. Hecht NOTE: Corporate Seal or Facsimilie:.should be affixed. 3. Evidence satisfactory to the Company that the Real Estate Transfer Tax as established 19y90ordinance enNo. 20paid o(Series of 1979) and ordinance No. 13 (Series of ) has a.. Evidence satisfactory to the Company that the Declaration of Sale, Notice to County Assessor as required by H.B. 1288 has been complied with. 5. Completion of Form DR 1079 regarding the witholding of Colorado Tax on the sale by certain persons, corporations and firms selling Real Property in the State of Colorado. 11 r; 1 ®Commonwealth® Land Title Insurance Company SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 1 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, enchroachments, any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. S. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this commitment. 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. I7. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deed from the City of Aspen.recorded in Book 59 at Page 267 & 394 providing as follows: "That no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws". ' This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B-Section 2 the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT-7710 A and B are attached. I [ - I 1 r I 11 1 I I fJ 1 ®Commonwealth'® Land Title Insurance Company SCHEDULE B-SECTION 1 CONTINUED Exceptions numbered NONE are hereby omitted. The Owner's Policy to be issued, if any shall contain the following items in addition to the ones set forth above: (1) The Deed of Trust, if any, required under Schedule B-Section 1. (2) Water rights, claims or title to water. Pursuant to Insurance Regulation 89-2; NOTE: Each title entity shall notify in writing every prospective insured in an owner's title insurance policy for a single family residence (including a condominim or townhouse unit) (i) of that title entity's general requirements for the deletion of an exception or exclusion to coverage relating to unfiled mechanics or materialmens liens, except when said coverage or insurance is extended to the insured under the terms of the policy. A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanics' and/or Materialmen's Liens executed by the persons indicated in the attached copy of said affidavit must be furnished to the Company. Upon receipt of these items and any others requirements to be specified by the Company upon request, Pre-printed Item Number 4 may be deleted from the Please contact the Company for Owner's policy when issued. further information. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained in this Paragraph shall be deemed to impose any requirement upon any title insurer to provide mechanics or materialmens lien coverage. NOTE: If the Company conducts the owners' closing under circumstances where it is responsible for the recording or filing of legal documents from said transaction, the Company will be deemed to have provided "Gap Coverage". Pursuant to Senate Bill 91-14 (CRS 10-11-122); (a) The Subject Real Property may be located in a Special Taxing District; (b) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction may be obtained form the County treasurer of the County Treasurer's Authorized Agent; (c) Information regarding Special Districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County era '-he County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Commission , - Assessor. NOTE: A tax Certificate will be ordered from Treasurer by the proposed contrary are the Title Po the Company and the costs thereof insured unless received by th icy anticipat This commitment is invalid unless the Insuring Provisions and Schedules A and B are attached. written instructio the County charged to n to the e company prior to the d by this commitment. ssuance of Schedule B-Section 2 Commitment No. PCT-7710 EXHIBIT 3 di RCNALD CARFMLO' AT omw Y. HBCH r** ROBERT H. UNMtO Mx.."EL 1. !:'WCN*" ?A-4=K D. MCALLSTSA'..` Nav Yea 1r mkut>, W .QIAK at G4u.eo sY tlria Ar hmU71•LAM 6W let Yw Ia+.r Bar Via Facsimile No. 8204192 Alarilase McCaz+.szey Cer.- al B=10 1515 Arapahoe . Denver, Colorado 80=4 Deg* Marlane: GARFIELD & HECHT, P.C. ATTOPUNEYS AT LAw vIC:ORIAN SQUAI-. BUILDLNG 601 EAST HYMAN AYENCZ ASPEN, COLCRADC 91611 August 6, 1993 Re: Central Bank Corner Lots TPLEPHOPIB (303) 925.1936 TEL:,COPIER (303) 925-300S The purpose of this letter is to sc; n th= apprOW1 of CB1 Prcperties, Inc. fcr the filing of a second land use a;plication to cbtaLz ccmlrwcial deveiogu e.Zt rights under Lhe City Of Aspen Q=wth Management Cm, yedt:ont 'I'Z:e MUM for the N;.quest now is that these is a filing dracaine of September 1S, 199- Md or to t`'.z furs daadiiac, we must cctain an approval ucn the istcrc Frese.+vation Corrrtissien far the builcL, g design. The available date for the Mstor;c Preservation Comrnissiari is August 25, 1.993. The f�Ln; of this applicaton will +".et affect the remainder ntr_) of the CeBank PrCPe:-1 in hay way and we will !save closed on the pwc.`�ase of the Corner Lots be:ore t.�1e C_ owth 1Viarageme.�t Camxtit+on is complei:. Should we not clove for any remcn, it wi i be e^,Af Fcr You to abar.dcn dh's agplic.:+..orl. As ag zzd in the Con-66act, it would be our undertaking to r ;r all casts 7i the land use aapli=tion and any resemble cast3 you sa Sht in,:,;r in City of Aspen is 1a the proc:9s of adopting new reguladons for the Crawth L -e::.=t Competition and this will be the last y:ar that we can =moets under the curent, mmore fa*.to:able, regulations. The Crewth Management, Competition is am annual ccmlxtitior. znd if we do not ;m et the maz---it f ling deadline, we will have to wait another :lilt year and probably compete- I.:.zder_,fta more restrictive :egula :ens. AGR= TO: CBI PS`OPERT�S, INC. (.e:ard tide hCld=_ is First Aspen Corxration) Ronald By�-� EXHIBIT 4 August 13, 1993 Ms. Amy Amidon Ms. Kim Johnson City of Aspen Planning Office 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 RE: GALENA PLAZA Dear Ms. Amidon and Ms. Johnson: Being the holder of a contract for the property where the above reference project is proposed to take place, the following firms are hereby authorized to act in our behalf: Bill Poss and Associates Vann Associates 605 E. Main Street 230 E. Hopkins Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81611 925-4755 925-6958 This authorization is meant to include only matters pertaining to the historic preservation and growth management quota system approval process. 601 E. Hyman Aspen, CO 81611 925-1936 93100813.LTR EXHIBIT 5 1 u Vincent J. Higens President PITRIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPKINS, 3RD FLOOR ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 303-925-1766 : 303-925-6527 FAX 300' OWNER'S LIST Christina Davis Vice President 93-851 Pitkin County Title, Inc., a duly licensed Title Insurance Agent in the State of Colorado, hereby certifies the following list is a current list of property owner's within three hundred feet of Lots Q, R & S, Block 86 as obtained from the most current Pitkin County Assessors Tax Rolls. ' NAMES AND ADDRESSES TAX SCHEDULE NUMBER -------------------------------------------------------------------------- PLEASE REFER TO LIST ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF Il L Liao-Q ACL VL AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE ALH HOLDING COMPANY, INC. LOTS E-I, BLOCK 87 37 HARLSTON GREEN SNOWMASS VILLAGE CO 81615 CHITWOOD PLAZA CO. LOTS A, B, C, D, BLK 87 C/O THE FLEISHER CO. 200 EST MAIN STREET ASPEN CO 81611 CITY OF ASPEN LOTS K & 0, 1/2 LOT P, BLOCK 93/CITY HALL 130 SOUTH GALENA ASPEN CO 81611 CITY OF ASPEN LOTS 0-R, BLOCK 87 (FIRE DEPARTMENT) 130 SOUTH GALENA ASPEN CO 81611 CITY OF ASPEN M & B/ RIO GRANDE 130 SOUTH GALENA ASPEN CO 81611 COUNTY OF PITKIN LOTS 1-6, BLOCK 19, LOTS K-P, BLOCK 92 (COURTHOUSE, 506 EAST MAIN JAIL, COURTHOUSE PLAZA) ASPEN CO 81611 COUNTY OF PITKIN LOTS A -I, BLOCK 86 (PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY) 506 EAST MAIN ASPEN CO 81611 FIRST BANK SYSTEM, FBS PROP. MGT. LOTS M-S, BLOCK 86 C/O BRUCE MACGREGOR P.O. BOX 522 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55480 HOTEL JEROME LOTS A -I & O-S & EAST 20' LOT N, BLOCK 79 & M-B 330 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN CO 81611 LEWIS I. SCHAINUCK 3650 SOUTH STREET SUITE 301 LAKEWOOD CA 90712 M & W ASSOCIATES A COLORADO CORPORATION 205 SOUTH MILL STREET ASPEN CO 81611 MARJORIE P. JENKINSON 403 WEST HALLAM ASPEN CO 81611 RYANCO PARTNERS, INC. ATTN: PAT SMITH 715 WEST MAIN STREET ASPEN CO 81611 ST. MARY'S CATHOLIC CHURCH MAIN AND HUNTER ASPEN CO 81611 UNITS 1, 2, 101, 102, 103, 201, 201-A, 202 & 203, MILL & MAIN COMMERCIAL LOT K, BLOCK 87 LOTS L, M, N, BLOCK 87 LOT S, BLOCK 87 LOTS A -I, BLOCK 93 t ' EXHIBIT 6 ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE Agreement for Payment of City of Aspgn Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and zi;�S� (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: ' 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for ' (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 77 (Series of 1992) establishes a fee structure for Planning Office applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties to allow APPLICANT to make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project approval, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, PPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $1%8 which is for �� hours of Planning Office time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing. ' CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT By: By: Diane Moore A City Planning Director �i'� e-S/�l Date: 9�6�Vv 2 Fl rl I APPENDIX B 1 Ci Fj EXHIBIT 1 ' ASPEN • PITKIN PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Sunny Vann ' 230 E. Hopkins Aspen, CO. 81611 September 9, 1993 RE: Central Bank Growth Management Submission Dear Sunny, The Planning Office has determined that it will accept the Central Bank Property commercial GMP application on the September ' 15, 1993 deadline even though second reading of the condominium application by Messrs. Garfield and Hecht will not take place until September 27. Since the condo plat cannot be recorded and ownership transfer take place until after second reading the Bank, as owners of the entire parcel, will have to consent to and authorize the GMP application. Staff will review.the application for completeness per the usual submission process, but will not begin referring the application to other departments until second reading is approved. If you have any other questions, please contact me at 920-5100. Sincerely, Kim Johnson Planner ' 130 SOUTH GALENA STREET • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 • PHONE 303.920.5090 • FAx 303.920.5197 P.Wd m i Md P.P. [1 I JI C I1 1001 Grand Avenue, Suite 2-E • Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 2155 SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER IN(. F.O. BOX Aspen, Colorado 81612 QW) 925-6727 Fax (303) 925 4157 EXHIBIT 2 September 3, 1993 Mr. Sunny Vann VANN ASSOCIATES INC. 230 East Hopkins Ave. Aspen, CO. 81611 CONSULTING ENGINEERS R SURVEYORS RE: Central Bank Property Commercial Growth Management Application Engineering Report Dear Sunny: This letter comprises an engineering report for relevant aspects of the Central Bank Building Commercial Growth Management Application to the City of Aspen. My remarks are based on our discussions of the project, conversations with representatives of the primary utilities and inspection of the site. I have also structured my comments in response to the engineering related criteria of City of Aspen Municipal Code Section 8-106 F., Commercial and office development standards. Introduction The Central Bank property is located at 420 East Main Street on the easterly portion of Block 86 of the Original Aspen Townsite. The site currently includes an approximately 3,000 square foot commercial structure and a 9-unit multi -family residential structure. The application is for growth management approval of approximately 4,200 additional square feet of net leasable commercial space in the Commercial Core (CC) zone district. The residential structure is to be renovated and some units are to be deed -restricted as affordable housing as a result of this application. The residential unit count will either be maintained at 9 or decreased slightly by the renovation. I have therefore tended to focus my comments on the infrastructure requirements of the commercial expansion. With regard to the requirements of Aspen Code Section 8-109 F. (2), Availability of public facilities and services, I offer the following comments: (a) Water supply and fire protection Based on my meeting with City of Aspen Water Superintendent Larry Ballenger, the site is currently served by a 6 inch diameter cast iron main in the North Galena Street right-of-way. The City water system has sufficient capacity to serve the expansion of the commercial structure and provision of water service would not pose any special problems from a technical standpoint. As a site within the City, service would be subject only to payment of appropriate tap and connection fees for the additional capacity required by the expansion (whether or not a new service tap is required). Larry did note the existence of an out -dated fire hydrant located in the Main Street right- of-way just off the southeast corner of the site. He indicated that replacement of the hydrant, with a new hydrant to be supplied by the City Water Department, would be an upgrade to the public system in the immediate neighborhood. Replacement of the hydrant would also represent and upgrade to the overall reliability of fire protection in the area by continuing the City's effort to eliminate the old, less reliable, Pacific States fire I� • (303) 945-1004 I I _,J September 3, 1993 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 2 hydrants. The cost of the fire hydrant installation is estimated at $1,000.00. (b) Sanitary sewer Based on my discussion of the project with Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) System Superintendent Tom Bracewell, there are two existing sanitary sewer mains in the alley to the north of the site. The smaller of the two lines, a 10 inch diameter vitrified clay line, serves as the point of connection for all services in the block. The larger line, a relatively new 15 inch diameter PVC line, is a collection trunk from the Galena Street interceptor and is not for service connection use. The ACSD has sufficient capacity to serve the proposed expansion of the Central Bank building and would provide service, once again, subject to payment of appropriate tap and connection charges associated with the capacity requirements of the expansion. Tom also noted the need for some minor spot repairs to the 10 inch collection line in the alley of Block 86. These repairs are not required of the applicant to receive service from the ACSD. Tom estimates these repairs at $5,000 to $6,000 and that a commitment by the applicant to fund the work would provide a general benefit to the ACSD collection system in the area. (c) Public transportation/roads The Central Bank site is located between Main Street and the Rio Grande parking structure, adjacent to Galena Street. The Galena Street shuttle van provides frequent service between the cul-de-sac adjacent to the site and the Rubey Park transit center. The site also fronts on the bus routes that serve Main Street. The Central Bank site is very well served by available transit. Streets adjacent to the Central Bank site are in generally good condition including the alley of Block 86. Some public parking remains available, particularly on Main Street, and will not be reduced as a result of the Central Bank commercial/office expansion. Given the location of the property within the Commercial Core, much of the anticipated increase in business traffic will likely be pedestrian oriented. To anticipate some basis for traffic generation from the additional commercial space, I would reference Section II, "Road Design Standards" of the Pitkin County Road Standards and Specifications, as adopted on December 4, 1990, which recommends a vehicle trip generation figure for commercial and office space of 8 per day per 1,000 square feet of net leasable space assuming a strong transit system. This would result in a traffic generation figure of about 34 vehicles per day impacting adjacent streets as a result of this project. While recent traffic counts on the immediate street segments are not available, the adjacent streets and alley already experience significant traffic loads although none of the immediately adjacent streets are currently over capacity. Main Street likely exceeds 20,000 vehicles per day through the Mill and Main intersection and the alley of Block 86 serves as access for existing businesses in the area and the Pitkin County courthouse. On one level, an additional, and conservative, 34 vpd represents a minimal percent increase in adjacent traffic volumes. In addition, the very strong transit serving the site and its location within easy walking distance of the other businesses of the commercial SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. n u k September 3, 1993 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 3 core will further minimize the additional vehicular activity it will actually generate. No changes to the area street system are required by the Central Bank proposal. (d) Storm Drainage No substantive changes to the current impervious surfaces of the site will occur as a result of the Central Bank expansion. The bulk of the additional building will be directly above existing structure and the net impact of site changes is minimal. Historic drainage patterns will be unaffected as a result of this project and the City of Aspen's drainage facilities will not be impacted additionally. Minor additional impacts, if indicated by the final site design, will be contained by existing or upgraded on -site drainage facilities. (e) Parking Parking is required within this Commercial Core site, as indicated in Article 5, Division 2 of the City of Aspen Land Use Regulations, at two spaces per 1,000 square feet of additional net leasable commercial space. This would require 8 additional parking spaces at the Central Bank site as a result of the proposed commercial expansion. The site is currently non -conforming with regard to on -site parking and space is not available for additional parking within the property. It is my understanding that the Applicant will be seeking Special Review approval to pay cash in lieu of providing additional on -site parking. The Rio Grande parking facility does offer some 400 spaces of paid public parking adjacent to the Central Bank building and will continue to serve drivers accessing the site. As indicated in the above section on roads, available public parking is neither created nor removed from adjacent streets as a result of this proposal. The Central Bank's location adjacent to one of the few large, permanent, public parking structures render it an easily accessed location for those who drive into the area. I hope these comments will be sufficient for the Commercial Growth Management application for the Central Bank building. Please feel free to contact me if I may provide further information or detail. Very truly yours, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. Uv Jay W. Hammond, P.E. Principal, Aspen Office JH4h 93150ER SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC.