Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.council.special.20120206
THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING Monday, February 6, 2012 5:00 pm CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS f Reading — Ordinance #5, 2012 — Approving landmark designation and benefits for 517 E. Hyman Avenue aka Little Annie's and 521 E. Hyman Avenue aka the Benton Building and a mixed use addition on the vacant lot to the east through the AspenModern program. Subdivision, Growth Management, and Design Reviews are also being considered. Public Hearing — February 13, 2012 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Aspen City Council FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: 517 and 521 East Hyman Avenue ( "Benton" and "Annie's ") and the Parking lot at the corner of Hunter and Hyman Avenue (Block 95, Lots G, H, and I) — First Reading of Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 - AspenModern negotiation for Landmark Designation and benefits, Subdivision, Growth Management, Conceptual Commercial Design Review, Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual. Second Reading is scheduled for February 13, 2012. MEETING DATE: February 6, 2012 PURPOSE: The purpose of this meeting is to update Council on the negotiation topics, get direction on the project, and to potentially conduct a First Reading of the proposed ordinance. The proposed project includes preservation of Little Annie's without any changes; and preservation and restoration of the Benton Building with a mixed use addition located over the existing parking lot. The applicant proposes to merge the three lots into one 15,000 sq. ft. lot through subdivision. Following is a result of the negotiations since the January 9, 2012 Council meeting: Code Requirement Original AspenModern Current proposal proposal • 9 FTEs generated considering a credit 22.7 FTEs or 9 FTEs for preservation of landmarks and with a Code change existing GMQS benefits for landmarks. Affordable to allow a net Waiver of mitigation • Provide off - site unit (one bedroom - Housing leasable credit for requirement 1.75 FTEs) deed restricted per APCHA preservation of guidelines landmarks • Pay cash in lieu ($1,014,202.50) for 7.25 FTEs Max 0.5:1 FAR for • Two units @ 8,950 sq. ft. total: residential or 7,500 - Unit 1: 6,950 sq. ft. floor area and sq. ft. with ability to Unit 2: 2,000 sq. ft. floor area Free Market One 7,500 sq. ft. floor area • Added basement commercial space Residential have 0.75:1 or unit which results from losing net leasable 11,250 sq. ft. through onsite AH to the second residential unit above mitigation. grade and replacing the net leasable in the basement. Parking 15.8 spaces 3 spaces on site and waiver of 3 spaces onsite and payment of cash in lieu for cash in lieu for remainder remaining 12.8 spaces = $384,000 517 and 521 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation — First Reading Feb. 6, 2012 Page 1 of 9 Code Requirement Original AspenModern Current proposal proposal Meet requirement with on and offsite public Public 10% or amenity: Amenity 1,500 sq. ft. Waiver of cash in lieu • On -site: in front of Benton (405 sq.ft.) • Off -site: pedestrian enhancement plan for Hyman and Hunter Sts. Impact Fees n/a Waiver of fees n/a because landmarks are exempt SUMMARY: The applicant submitted a land use application through the City's voluntary AspenModern program. The project comprises three separate lots, 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue and the parking lot on the corner of Hunter and Hyman Avenue. Two buildings are located on the subject properties: the building that houses Little Annie's Eatery aka "Annie's" at 517 E. Hyman and the building located at 521 E. Hyman Avenue which is Tom Benton's original design studio aka "Benton ". Neither of these buildings are designated historic landmarks but they are both located within the boundaries of the Commercial Core Historic District. The three properties are proposed to be merged through Subdivision review. The newly created lot is proposed to be 15,000 square feet in size: 3,000 (517 E. Hyman) + 3,000 (521 E. Hyman) + 9,000 (parking lot). During the regular City Council meeting on January 9` Council voted 4 -1 to negotiate for landmark designation through the AspenModern program. Adam Frisch and Torre volunteered to represent Council in the initial negotiations prior to bringing the project before Council for the adoption of an ordinance through the public hearing process. Since January 9 there have been three meetings with the applicant, Staff and Council representatives. During these meetings the applicant significantly adjusted the benefit requests from the original based on comments from Councilmen Frisch and Torre. In addition Staff received more detailed information about the project which enabled a more accurate analysis of the project and standard benefits. In exchange for landmark designation and a $2 million restoration of the Benton Building and designation of Annie's the applicant requests the following for the new construction: 1. Affordable Housing: The original request was to waive the affordable housing mitigation for 29.3 FTEs. More in depth analysis of the project and more accurate numbers have reduced the number of FTEs generated and raised questions about employee generation calculations for AspenModern projects. The existing project comprises three lots - Benton, Annie's and the parking lot. Currently both the Benton and Annie's parcels are each eligible for a growth management bonus if they are designated landmarks. Essentially the number of growth management bonuses depends on the timing of when the lots are merged. Aspen has very few parcels with mixed use, commercial or lodging uses that contain two historic landmarks on one lot. In this proposal there are two potential landmarks, Benton and Annie's, on one parcel; therefore the project receives 517 and 521 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation — First Reading Feb. 6, 2012 Page 2 of 9 two growth management bonuses for the two landmarks which reduce the requirement from 29.3 to 22.7. A historic preservation policy question arose out of whether an AspenModern project should receive a credit for not demolishing a historic landmark. The Land Use Code allows existing commercial net leasable to be replaced after demolition without mitigation. The reason is that the existing commercial net leasable is already mitigated so it does not require mitigation again: only the new net commercial requires mitigation. A comparison of the original AspenCore proposal that demolished Benton and Annie's to the AspenModern proposal that preserves the buildings showed that the affordable housing mitigation was less for the original proposal than it was for the AspenModern proposal because the property received a reconstruction credit for the net leasable commercial by demolishing Benton and Annie's. An analysis of the affordable housing numbers between the original and current proposals disincentivizes preservation of the buildings. The idea that AspenModern landmarks should receive a credit for preservation and a complete restoration as an incentive for AspenModern properties is the proposed methodology for this project and possibly for a future code amendment based on Council feedback. Using this methodology, a total of 9 FTEs are required to be mitigated. Not allowing a credit for the preservation of Benton and Annie's equals an employee generation calculation of about 22.7 FTEs. The detailed calculation is included in the draft Ordinance Section 8. The applicant proposes to mitigate for the 9 FTEs by providing a deed restricted off -site one bedroom unit (1.75 FTEs) of Category 4 or less that meets the requirements of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and providing the remainder of the 7.25 FTEs through a cash in lieu payment ($1,014,202.50). Staff Response: Staff finds that the methodology used to calculate the affordable housing mitigation is appropriate considering that there are two historic landmarks on the site. The ability to receive a net leasable credit for not demolishing the two buildings and restoring the Benton Building is a policy discussion for City Council. Staff suggests that at some point in the future Council evaluate whether a code amendment to allow a growth management credit is appropriate for the preservation and restoration of AspenModern properties as a new historic preservation incentive for Aspen's voluntary program. 2. Free Market Residential unit: There are two calculations in the land use code for free market residential units: maximum floor area and maximum net livable square footage. The Commercial Core (CC) zone district mandates a maximum of 2,000 sq. ft. net livable unit size cap and a 0.5:1 floor area ratio for free market residential with the ability to increase to 0.75:1 through 100% affordable housing onsite. A unit may increase to 2,500 square feet of net livable by landing a TDR. For a 15,000 square feet lot, the maximum allowable floor area at 0.5:1 is 7,500 square feet but is still under the 0.75:1 FAR allowed for free market residential when onsite AH is provided at 100 %. 517 and 521 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation — First Reading Feb. 6, 2012 Page 3 of 9 The applicant previously proposed a single 7,500 sq. ft. floor area unit. In response to concerns about vitality downtown the applicant revised the proposal to include two free market residential units: Unit 1 is 6,950 sq. ft. of floor area or 6,063 sq. ft. of net livable, and Unit 2 is 2,000 sq. ft. of floor area or 1,542 sq. ft. of net livable. Unit 2 meets the requirements of the CC zone district while Unit 1 exceeds the net livable cap. The total FAR proposed for the free market residential portion of the project is 0.59:1 which is an increase over the by -right FAR of 0.5:1. Staff Response: Staff is supportive of the two free market residential units. The project is slightly over the allowable FAR for free market residential in the Commercial Core zone district and one of the two proposed units, Unit 2, is under the residential cap of 2,000 sq. ft. of net livable area by 458 sq. ft. The larger unit (Unit 1) exceeds the residential net livable cap by 4,063 sq. ft. Staff finds that the proposal is an appropriate trade -off considering the restoration and preservation of Benton and the preservation of Annie's without any proposed changes. Councilman Frisch and Torre indicated in the negotiations that an additional on site unit might increase building activity more so than one large single unit. 3. Parking: 15.8 spaces are required to be mitigated either onsite or through cash in lieu. 3 parking spaces are provided off of the alley. The applicant has revised the previous request for a waiver and commits to paying the parking cash in lieu fee of $384,000 for the 12.8 spaces that are not provided onsite. Staff Response: The applicant meets Code requirements for parking. 4. Public Amenity: A partial waiver of the public amenity requirement where 1,500 square feet of open space is required and 405 square feet is proposed onsite. Previously a waiver of cash in lieu was requested. The applicant has revised this request and agrees to implement a Pedestrian Improvement Plan to provide extensive improvements to Hunter and Hyman Streets rights -of -way beyond the standard requirements. Examples could be planting larger caliper street trees, improved tree grates, and specially designed and engineered sub -grade infrastructure for drainage, tree growth and irrigation. Staff Response: The applicant meets the provision of public amenity by providing on and off site public amenity. Both Parks and Engineering Departments' approvals are required for the offsite public amenity. Considering the buildable site and the preservation of Benton and Annie's, Staff finds that this approach is appropriate. 5. Impact Fees: Upon closer analysis of more detailed plans the project is exempt from impact fees — both Parks Development and Air Quality /TDM impact fees. The new mixed use portion of the project is an addition to the Benton Building and as such is exempt from these fees as an addition to a historic landmark. Staff Response: Impact fees do not apply. The project is still subject to School Lands Dedication fee, which the City collects on behalf of the school district. 517 and 521 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation — First Reading Feb. 6, 2012 Page 4 of 9 BACKGROUND: This project was first heard by HPC in September. The original proposal was to demolish the Benton Building and the building that houses Little Annie's Eatery and to construct a mixed use building on the 15,000 sq. ft. site. On September 21 the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) passed Resolution #9, Series of 2011 and Resolution #10, Series of 2011, which granted approval to demolish the structure that houses Little Annie's Eatery, and denied the request to demolish the Benton Building. On September 26, 2011, City Council voted 4 -1 to "call -up" HPC's determination to allow demolition of the Little Annie's building. The Applicant filed an appeal of HPC Resolutions #9 and #10, Series of 2011 pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.316.030, Appeals Procedures. The appeal was filed on the basis that HPC had no jurisdiction to pass both resolutions and that HPC acted improperly in denying the demolition application for 521 E. Hyman Avenue. The Appellant requested that Council nullify and invalidate both HPC resolutions. On November 2, 2011, Council held a special meeting to hear the appeal and to review the Council "call up." The hearing was continued to November 28, 2011. However, on November 14, 2011, the Applicant submitted a letter requesting voluntary designation of the Benton Building and the building that houses little Annie's in exchange for benefits through the AspenModern negotiation process. At this time, the appeal and Council's call up that were scheduled for November 28, 2011 have been tabled while the applicant proceeds with the AspenModern negotiation. As part of the AspenModern review Council is asked to grant Subdivision Review, Growth Management Review, Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Conceptual Major Development Review. HPC RECOMMENDATION: HPC reviewed this project on December 7 and December 14` 2011. The Board recommended approval of landmark designation of both buildings by a 5 — 0 vote on December 14, 2011. HPC found that the Benton Building was a "better" example of Organic /Wrightian style with the potential to be a "best" example after the proposed restoration and that the Little Annie's building was a "best" example of Rustic style. Attached as Exhibit A is a detailed explanation regarding the importance of these buildings. The Commission continued the hearing on December 7` to allow the architect to revise the conceptual plans to better reflect the historic character of Benton and the historic district. The architect returned on December 14 with revisions to the mass and scale of the new addition and HPC voted 4 -1 recommending Council approve Conceptual Commercial Design Standard Review and Conceptual Major Development Review. Minutes are attached as Exhibit F. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from City Council. As noted, many of the reviews below typically fall to either the P &Z or HPC for final review or a recommendation. AspenModern allows the consolidation of reviews at City Council which provides Council with the entire proposal for review. 517 and 521 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation — First Reading Feb. 6, 2012 Page 5 of 9 • AspenModern Ninety -Day Negotiation (Section 26.415.025(C)(1)) for preservation benefits in exchange for historic landmark designation. City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission. The ninety days expires on February 29, 2012. • Designation of Historic Properties (Section 26.415.030(C) for landmark designation for the Benton Building and Little Annie's Eatery Building. City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission. • Subdivision Review (Section 26.480) to merge the existing lots into one 15,000 square feet lot and for the development of a mixed use project. City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. AspenModern allows the consolidation of reviews at City Council; as such the P &Z has not reviewed the application for a recommendation of Subdivision. • Growth Management Review for the enlargement of an historic landmark for commercial, lodge or mixed -use development (Section 26.470.070(1) for an addition to the Benton Building. This is typically a minor growth management review at the Planning and Zoning Commission. AspenModern allows City Council to have review authority over other Board's purview. City Council is the final review authority. • Commercial Design Review — Conceptual (Section 26.412) for an addition to the Benton Building in the Commercial Core. This is typically reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission. In this instance, HPC has provided a recommendation to City Council regarding Conceptual Commercial Design Review. AspenModern allows City Council to have review authority over other Board's purview. City Council is the final review authority for Conceptual review. HPC shall have final review authority for Final Commercial Design Review. • Certificate of Appropriateness for Major development - Conceptual (Section 26.415.070.D) for an addition to the Benton Building within the Commercial Core Historic District. This is typically reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission and is similar to Commercial Design Review. HPC has provided a recommendation to City Council for this review. City Council is the final review authority for Conceptual review. HPC shall have final review authority for Certificate of Appropriateness for major development — Final. STAFF REVIEW: The proposed project includes preservation of Little Annie's without any changes; and preservation and restoration of the Benton Building with a mixed use addition located over the existing parking lot. The applicant proposes to merge the three lots into one 15,000 sq. ft. lot through subdivision. The application meets the requirements of the Commercial Core zone district with the exception of free market residential floor area and the free market residential net livable cap for one of the two units as outlined below. The program is: Basement level: storage and commercial space First level: commercial space Second level: office and residential spaces Third level: residential space 517 and 521 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation — First Reading Feb. 6, 2012 Page 6 of 9 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS: CC zone district Proposed dimensional requirements requirements Minimum Lot Area: No requirement 15,000 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width: No requirement 150 ft. Minimum Front Yard Setback: No requirement 0 ft. — Hyman Avenue Minimum Side Yard Setback: No requirement 0 ft. — Hunter Street Minimum Rear Yard Setback: No requirement 0 ft. — Alley Alley frontage of 20 linear Alley frontage of 23 linear Minimum Trash/Recycle Area: ft. with 10 ft. vertical feet with 10 feet vertical clearance and 10 ft. deep clearance and 10 feet deep 38 ft. for three story 41 ft. for three story elements Maximum Building Height: elements which may be through commercial design increased to 42 ft. through commercial design review review 2.7% accommodated onsite Minimum Pedestrian Amenity: 10% or 1,500 sq. ft. and 7.3% offsite with the completion of a Pedestrian Improvement Plan. Maximum Allowable Floor 2.75:1 or 41,250 sq. ft. 2.2:1 or 33,005 sq. ft. Area: Maximum Commercial Floor 2:1 or 30,000 sq. ft. 24,055 sq. ft. Area: 22,153 sq. ft.: 3,654 sq. ft. @ Benton Maximum Net Leasable n/a 2,460 sq. ft. @Annie Annie's Commercial Area: 15,859 sq. ft. @ mixed use addition 0.59:1 or 8,950 sq. ft. total free market residential Maximum Residential Floor .5:1 or 7,500 sq. ft. allocated as follows: Area: 6,950 sq. ft. - Unit 1 and 2,000 sq. ft. — Unit 2 Maximum Residential Net 2,000 sq. ft. net livable, up 7,605 sq. ft. total: Livable Area: to 2,500 sq. ft. with TDR 6,063 sq. ft. Unit 1 and 1,542 sq. ft. — Unit 2 Free Market Residential Units: n/a 2 1 space /1,000 sq. ft. Minimum Off - Street Parking commercial net leasable; 3 onsite, 13.4 cash in lieu Spaces: no requirement for payment residential 517 and 521 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation — First Reading Feb. 6, 2012 Page 7 of 9 AspenModern Negotiation and Landmark Designation: The designation criteria are stated in Exhibit A. Staff finds that designation criteria A — E for the Benton Building are met. The proposal to completely restore the front facade to its original appearance greatly increases the integrity of the building and enhances the ability to understand Benton's architecture. Benton significantly contributed to Aspen's built environment and sense of place as an architect, an artist, and an activist. His architecture and his artwork are reminders of the 1960s and 1970s when Aspen was developing into a ski resort with conflicting local opinions and lively debates in local politics. Benton's studio was the birthplace of many influential works of art and local gatherings that contributed to local history. Staff strongly feels that the preservation of this building is important to Aspen's post war legacy. Regarding Little Annie's, Staff finds that designation criterion A is met and the property is related to an event, pattern, or trend that has made a contribution to Aspen history that is deemed important. The second component of designation is scoring the physical integrity of the building. Staff's score sheet is attached. The design of the front facade which appears to be unaltered since 1972 allows the property to earn 16 out of 20 points, placing it in the category of "best" examples of Rustic style architecture. The property has sufficient physical integrity to meet designation criterion E. Subdivision: The Subdivision criteria are stated in Exhibit C. Staff is supportive of the subdivision to merge the three lots into one 15,000 square feet lot. While this is not a traditional sized lot in the Commercial Core, the preservation of two buildings on the site and the configuration of the new mixed use portion of the project read as separate buildings with traditional 30 ft. modules. Growth Management for the enlargement of historic landmark: The review criteria are stated in Exhibit D. The growth management portion of the application is subject to the AspenModern negotiation as described above. Commercial Design Review — Conceptual and Certificate of Appropriateness for major development — Conceptual: The review criteria are addressed as Exhibit E. Overall, Staff is supportive of conceptual approval of the project. The proposed three story building defines the street corner and the applicant has broken up the facade on both the Hyman and Hunter Avenues into traditional modules through either setbacks on the third floor and/or material changes on the second floor. The proposed architecture is pulled back adjacent to the Benton Building to provide relief to the existing setback of Benton. The applicant requests a 41 ft. height allowance for the new addition through Commercial Design Review. HPC recommends approval of Commercial Design Review Conceptual and Certificate of Appropriateness Conceptual by a 4 -1 vote with the condition that the applicant continue to study the setback of the third floor closest to the Benton Building. Staff recommends that Council approve both conceptual design reviews. HPC has review authority over Final Commercial Design and Final Certificate of Appropriateness which 517 and 521 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation — First Reading Feb. 6, 2012 Page 8 of 9 addresses fenestration, materials, architectural details, etc should Council approve proposed Ordinance 5, Series of 2012. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: The City Engineer, Fire Marshal, Water/Utilities Department, Aspen Sanitation District, Parking Department, Transportation Department, Building Department, Housing Department, Environmental Health Department and the Parks Department have all reviewed the proposed application and applicable requirements have been included as conditions of approval when appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the proposed AspenModern negotiation and associated land use reviews provide an appropriate balance between voluntary designation of Benton and Little Annie's and restoration of the Benton Building and the requested incentives. Ensuring that the important 1970s buildings are preserved in our Commercial Core historic district for residents and visitors to experience is tantamount to Aspen's story. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No.5, Series of 2012 on first reading." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT A — Landmark Designation criteria EXHIBIT B — Biography of Tom Benton from thomas w. benton: artistl activist. by Daniel Joseph Watkins, published by People's Press, 2011. EXHIBIT C — Subdivision Review Criteria EXHIBIT D — Growth Management Review for the enlargement of a historic landmark Exhibit E — Commercial Design Review — Conceptual and Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development - Conceptual Exhibit F — HPC minutes from December 7, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Exhibit G - Application 517 and 521 East Hyman Avenue AspenModem Negotiation — First Reading Feb. 6, 2012 Page 9 of 9 ORDINANCE #5 (Series of 2012) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION, SUBDIVISION, GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW, CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, BENEFITS THROUGH THE ASPENMODERN PROGRAM, AND A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 517 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, 521 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, AND THE PARKING LOT ON THE CORNER OF HUNTER AND HYMAN STREETS, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS E - I, BLOCK 95, INCLUDING UNITS 1, 2 AND THE COMMON AREA OF THE BENTON BUILDING CONDOMIUMUMS, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID NUMBERS: 2737 - 182 -54 -001 2737 - 182 -54 -002 2737 - 182 -54 -800 2737 - 182 -24 -002 2737 - 182 -24 -004 WHEREAS, the applicant, Aspen Core Ventures, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, Inc., submitted an application, pursuant to Section 26.415.025(C), AspenModern Properties, of the Aspen Municipal Code, to voluntarily participate in the AspenModern ninety -day negotiation period for the properties located at 517 East Hyman Avenue (Lot E, Block 95) (the "Little Annie's Building "), 521 East Hyman Avenue (Units 1 and 2 of the Benton Building Condominium, aka Lot F, Block 95) (the "Benton Building ") and the parking lot located at the southwest corner of Hunter and Hyman Streets (Lots G, 1-1 and I Block 95); and WHEREAS, the subject properties are located within the designated boundaries of the Commercial Core Historic District as described in City Council Ordinance number 49, series of 1974; and WHEREAS, the applicant submitted a letter dated November 29, 2011 requesting that the City and the applicant negotiate the possible voluntary designation of the Little Annie's and Benton Buildings to add them as individual landmarks to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures in exchange for specific benefits through the AspenModern program; and WHEREAS, pursuant to §26.415.025.C(1), the ninety -day AspenModern negotiation commenced on November 29, 2011; and WHEREAS, §26.415.025.C(1)(b) states that, during the negotiation period, "the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the property. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting;" and 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 1 of 14 WHEREAS, the property owners' representative met with the Historic Preservation Commission (the HPC) on December 7, 2011, and December 14, 2011; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on December 14, 2011, the HPC considered the application; found that 517 E. Hyman Avenue was a "best" example of Rustic style; and that 521 E. Hyman was a "better" example of Organic /Wrightian style; evaluated the designation and proposed development; and, found that the policy objectives for the historic preservation program stated at §26.415.010, Purpose and Intent are met, and recommended City Council ( "Council ") approval of Historic Landmark Designation, Conceptual Commercial Design Review and requested benefits and fee waivers as stated in HPC Resolution numbered 16, 17 and 18, Series of 2011; and WHEREAS, §26.415.025.C(1)(d), states that, during the negotiation period, "Council may negotiate directly with the property owner or may choose to direct the Community Development Director, or other City staff as necessary, to negotiate with the property owner to reach a mutually acceptable agreement for the designation of the property "; and WHEREAS, the property owner's representative met with City Council during their regular meeting on January 9, 2012 at which time City Council voted four to one to negotiate for landmark designation and appointed two City Council representatives to meet directly with the property owner regarding the negotiations; and WHEREAS, the two City Council representatives appointed by City Council met with the property owner and Community Development Staff regarding negotiations; and WHEREAS, the property owner, the Community Development Director, City staff, and the two City Council representatives designated by City Council to negotiate with the property owner have directed City staff to prepare an ordinance containing the terms of a proposed mutually acceptable agreement for the designation of the properties for approval or disapproval pursuant to §26.415.030D(4); and WHEREAS, §26.415.025.C(1)d establishes that "as part of the mutually acceptable agreement, the City Council may, at its sole discretion, approve any land use entitlement or fee waiver permitted by the Municipal Code and may award any approval that is assigned to another Board or Commission, including variations; "and WHEREAS, the property owner requests voluntary Landmark Designation - §26.415.030(C), AspenModern; Subdivision review - §26.480.040(C) Subdivisions; Growth Management review - §26.470.070(1); Enlargement of an historic landmark for commercial, lodge or mixed use development; Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual - §26.415.070(D)(3); Conceptual Development Plan Review; and, Conceptual Commercial Design Review - §26.412.040(A)(2), Conceptual Design Review; all to be consolidated with the AspenModern ninety -day negotiation process and reviewed by City Council; and 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 2 of 14 WHEREAS, in addition to Historic Landmark Designation, Subdivision, Growth Management, Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual, and Conceptual Commercial Design Review the applicant had identified preservation incentives that are requested as part of the AspenModern negotiation process in a letter dated November 30, 2011. Those incentives requested include: the ability to construct a 7,500 square feet floor area free market residential unit; acknowledgement that the housing mitigation required for the new mixed use building will be satisfied by the preservation and remodeling of the Benton Building and the preservation of the Little Annie's Building; acknowledgement that the commercial parking requirement would be satisfied by the preservation and remodeling activities described above; a waiver of Park Development Fees and Air Quality /Transportation Demand Management fees; and, a reduction of required Public Amenity space from 1,500 sq. ft. to 405 sq. ft. and a waiver of public amenity cash in lieu fee; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department performed an analysis of the application including Landmark Designation, Subdivision Review, Growth Management Review, Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual Review, and Commercial Design Standard Conceptual Review and found that the review standards are met. The staff report analyzed the proposed preservation incentives and monetary value of the benefits where possible; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves Historic Designation, Subdivision, Growth Management Review, Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual, Commercial Design Review Conceptual and a site specific development plan subject to the conditions described herein. Section 2: Historic Landmark Designation Historic landmark designation is granted for 517 East Hyman Avenue (Lot E, Block 95) aka "Little Annie's ", 521 East Hyman Avenue (Units 1 and 2 of the Benton Building Condominium, Lot F, Block 95) aka "the Benton Building." The historic landmark designation encompasses the entire newly created 15,000 square feet parcel legally described as Lots E, F, G, H and I, Block 95, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Moreover, the property owner has committed to a restoration of the facade and other important exterior elements of the Benton Building, as shown on the plans dated January 30, 2012. 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 3of14 Upon the effective date of this ordinance, the City Clerk shall record with the real estate records of the Clerk and Recorder of the County, a certified copy of this ordinance. The location of the historic landmark property designated by this ordinance shall be indicated on the official maps of the City that are maintained by the Community Development Department. Section 3: Subdivision Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council hereby approves Subdivision of the properties located at 517 East Hyman Avenue (Lot E, Block 95), 521 East Hyman Avenue (Units 1 and 2 of the Benton Building Condominium, aka Lot F, Block 95) and the parking lot located at the southwest corner of Hunter and Hyman Streets (Lots G, H and I, Block 95) to merge the lots into one lot as follows: AspenCore, Lot 1 — Lots E, F, G, H, and I of Block 95, City and Townsite of Aspen containing two buildings including: 1) a mixed use building that includes an addition to 521 East Hyman Avenue aka "the Benton Building" and 2) a one story commercial building at 517 East Hyman Avenue aka "Little Annie's." A final Subdivision Plat and Subdivision Agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code § 26.480, Subdivision, shall be recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office within 180 days of the receipt of a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development by the Historic Preservation Commission. A building permit may be submitted prior to the recordation of the Subdivision Plat and Agreement, but may not be issued until said Plat and Agreement are recorded. The Subdivision Agreement shall include at a minimum the following information: 1. An illustrative site plan of the project depicting the proposed improvement and the approved dimensional requirements. 2. A grading and drainage plan for the property. 3. Approved landscape plan. 4. Pedestrian enhancement plan. 5. Commitment to complete the restoration of the Benton Building prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy or a conditional certificate of occupancy for any portion of the new mixed use building. 6. Commitment to provide $2 million toward restoration of the Benton Building and a process to account for the funds. 7. Commitment to complete all Public Improvements. Section 4: Financial Assurances Before the Applicant is issued any type of Building Permit, including permits for demolition or site improvements, the Applicant shall provide to the Community Development Department the following: a. Cost Estimates. Applicant's General Contractor shall cause to be prepared, and certified as correct, cost estimates for all improvements or development for which a Building Permit is required. The cost estimates for the Public Improvements 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 4 of 14 4 described herein at Section 18 shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. The cost estimates for the implementation and maintenance of the landscape plan described herein at Section 13 shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks Department. The cost estimates for all other improvements and development in the Subdivision shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Department. Cost estimates for the landscape plan and the Public Improvements shall be shown separately from the cost estimates for all other improvements and development of the Project. Owner shall be responsible for the implementation and maintenance of the landscape plan and construction and installation of all Public Improvements required by this Ordinance. b. Public Improvements and Landscaping Guarantees. Pursuant to and in conformance with the requirements of § 26.480.070(C) & (D) and § 26.445.070 (C)(3) & (4) of the Aspen Municipal Code; and, in order to secure the performance of the obligations of the Applicant to implement and maintain the Landscape Plan and to ensure the installation of the Public Improvements, Applicant shall provide a guarantee of no less than one hundred and twenty five percent (125 %) of the estimated cost of such Landscape Plan and Public Improvements, as determined and approved in subsection (a), above. The guarantee to implement and maintain the Landscape Plan and to complete Public Improvements shall be made by depositing with the City an irrevocable letter of credit with provisions as hereinafter set forth. The irrevocable letter of credit shall be retained by the City until satisfaction of Applicant's obligations under this Section or earlier released by the City. The letter of credit shall be issued by a financial institution doing business in Aspen, Colorado, or such other bank as shall be approved by the City; shall have an expiration date no earlier than two years after its date of issue; and shall provide that it may be drawn upon from time to time by the City in such amount or amounts as the City may designate as justified, such amounts not to exceed, in the aggregate, the amount of the letter of credit. Draws under any such letter of credit shall be by a certificate signed by the City Manager of the City of Aspen, or his designee, stating that the City is entitled to draw the specified amount under the terms of this Section. c. Other Improvements and Development. With respect to all other improvements or development within the Project, the Applicant shall provide evidence satisfactory to the Community Development Department and the City Attorney's Office that the Applicant has in place sufficient financing to accomplish and complete all the development for which a Building Permit is sought. Such financing may include, without limitation, a construction loan from an institutional lender or lenders and equity capital investments from the Applicant or third party investors. The City Attorney shall have sole discretion in determining if the proposed financing as advanced by the Applicant is sufficient to complete the development activity for which a Building Permit is sought. d. Financial Assurances for Completion of the Project. The Applicant further commits and agrees that before any Building Permit (including demolition, 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 5 of 14 access /infrastructure, and/or site preparation permits) is issued for the Project approved by this Ordinance, the Applicant shall provide to the City Building Department and the City Attorney for review and approval a copy of a Performance Bond issued or committed to be issued to the Applicant's General Contractor by an institutional surety company pursuant to which the surety agrees to provide the funds necessary to complete the construction of the improvements covered by the Building Permit, and all public improvements required under the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. The Performance Bond shall name the Applicant and the City of Aspen as additional beneficiaries or insureds thereunder to grant to either or both of them a direct right of action under the Performance Bond in order to construct or finish public improvements, and to complete the construction of the improvements covered by the Building Permit. Section 5: Site Protection Fund The Applicant hereby commits and agrees that before any Building Permit (including demolition, access /infrastructure, and/or site preparation permits) is issued for the Project approved by this Ordinance, the Applicant shall deposit with Pitkin County Title, Inc. ( "Escrow Agent ") the sum of $250,000 in the form of cash or wired funds (the "Escrow Funds ") and will execute an Escrow Agreement and Instructions with the Escrow Agent which recites and agrees as follows: "In the event construction work on the Project shall cease for sixty (60) days or longer (`work stoppage') prior to a final inspection by the City of the work authorized by the Foundation/Structural Frame Permit on the Project, then the City in its discretion may draw upon the Escrow Funds from time to time as needed for purposes of protecting and securing the Project site and improvements from damage by the elements and/or from trespass by unauthorized persons, and for purposes of improving the Project site to a safe condition such that it does not become an attractive nuisance or otherwise pose a threat to neighbors or other persons." The Escrow Funds or any remaining balance thereof shall be returned to Applicant upon completion by the City of a final inspection of the work authorized by the Foundation/Structural Frame Permit on the Project. Section 6: Approved Dimensional Requirements The buildings as presented in the plans dated January 30, 2012 and attached as Exhibit A to this Ordinance comply with the effective dimensional allowances and limitations of the Commercial Core (CC) zone district as modified below. Compliance with these requirements shall be verified by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer at the time of building permit submittal. The following dimensions are approved: Minimum Lot Size: 15,000 square feet Minimum Lot Width: 150 feet Minimum Front Yard Setback: 0 feet — Hyman Avenue 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 6 of 14 Minimum Side Yard Setback: 0 feet — Hunter Street Minimum Rear Yard Setback: 0 feet — Alley Minimum Trash/Recycle Area: Alley frontage of 23 linear feet with 10 feet vertical clearance and 10 feet deep Maximum Building Height: 41 feet for three story elements Minimum Pedestrian Amenity: Accommodated partially onsite and with the completion of a Pedestrian Improvement Plan as described in § 7 herein. Maximum Allowable Floor Area: 33,005 square feet Maximum Commercial Floor Area: 24,055 square feet Maximum Net Leasable Commercial Area: 22,153 square feet Maximum Residential Floor Area: 8,950 square feet total free market residential allocated as follows: 6,950 square feet for Unit 1 and 2,000 square feet for Unit 2 Maximum Residential Net Livable Area: 7,605 square feet total: 6,063 square feet for Unit 1 and 1,542 square feet for Unit 2 Residential Units: 2 units Minimum Off - Street Parking Spaces: 3 spaces Minor adjustments to the dimensions represented above may occur upon review of a building permit as long as the resulting dimensions do not exceed those approved through this ordinance. Section 7: Impact and Development Fees: Public Amenity Space The open space in front of the Benton Building qualifies as Public Amenity space and meets a portion of the requirement. Pursuant to Land Use Code Subsection 26.575.030.c.2, Public Amenity, the Applicant commits to provide the remaining 7.3% of the public amenity requirement off -site through the completion of a pedestrian improvement plan. The pedestrian improvement plan shall provide extensive improvements to the Hyman and Hunter Streets right -of -ways and is subject to approval by the Parks, Community Development and Engineering Departments. The 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 7 of 14 improvements shall be installed at the cost of the Applicant and shall be in addition to the basic street, curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping improvements required under the Municipal Code. The property owner has agreed to undertake an architectural study to see if it is possible to provide accessibility in accordance with Building Code requirements to the Little Annie's building without disrupting existing restaurant operations. Parks Development and Air Quality/TDM Impact Fees Pursuant to Land Use Code § 26.610.030, Exemptions, development involving a property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures is exempt from the Parks Development and Air Quality /TDM Impact Fees. School Lands Dedication Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit, the Applicant shall pay a fee -in -lieu of land dedication pursuant to Chapter 26.620, School Lands Dedication. The amount of the fee shall be calculated by the Community Development Department using the calculation method and fee schedule in effect at the time the applicant submits a Building Permit. Parking Pursuant to Land Use Code § 26.515, Parking, new net leasable area is required to mitigate parking impacts either through onsite spaces or cash in lieu. The Applicant agrees to pay the following cash in lieu fee prior to the building permit issuance: 15,859 sq. ft. net leasable/ 1,000 sq. ft. = 15.8 parking spaces required 15.8 spaces required — 3 onsite spaces provided = 12.8 parking spaces 12.8 x $30,000 /space = $384,000 An increase to the 15,859 square feet of net leasable described above shall require additional cash in lieu payment according to the above methodology. Section 8: Employee Generation and Mitigation The existing net leasable calculation for both the Benton Building (521 E. Hyman Avenue) and Little Annie's (517 E. Hyman Avenue) is 7,505 square feet. City Council hereby grants a credit of commercial net leasable for the preservation of these buildings. Pursuant to Chapter 26.470, Growth Management, of the Aspen Land Use Code historic landmarks are eligible for growth management benefits. As such the two free market residential units are permitted without affordable housing mitigation for the historic preservation of two buildings. Following is a calculation of the affordable housing requirement and the manner in which it is proposed to be provided. Existing Commercial Net Leasable Calculation: Benton Building Main Level 2,375 x 4.1 FTEs /1,000 s.f. = 9.7375 FTEs 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 8 of 14 Benton Building Upper Floors: 2,670 x 3.075 FTEs /1,000 s.f. = 8.21025 FTEs Total Benton Building existing net leasable = 17.94775 FTEs Little Annie's Main Level 2,460 x 4.1 FTEs /1,000 s.f. = 10.086 FTEs Preservation credit for existing net leasable 17.94775 +10.086 = 28.03375 FTEs New Commercial Net Leasable Calculation: Main Level (6,096 x 4.1 FTEs) /1,000 sq. ft. = 24.9936 FTEs Upper Floors and Basement Level (9,763 x 3.075)/1,000 s.f. = 30.021225 FTEs Total new commercial net leasable = 55.014825 FTEs Calculation for the enlargement of a historic landmark for mixed use development: 55.014825 — 28.03375 = 26.981075 Total FTEs The first 4 employees require 0 mitigation; 2 landmarks means the first 8 employees require 0 mitigation: 0 FTEs generated for first 8 employees. The second 4 employees require mitigation at 30 %; 2 landmarks means the second 8 employees require 30% mitigation 8 x 30% = 2.4 FTEs generated for the second 8 employees. The remaining employees are mitigated at 60 %. 26.981075 — (2 x 8) = 10.981075 10.981075 x 60% = 6.588645 FTEs 0 + 2.4 + 6.588645 = 8.988645 employees to be housed by this project. The project is required to provide housing mitigation to house 9 employees, and has represented a commitment to pay cash in lieu for approximately 80% of the mitigation, 7.25 FTEs, which equals 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 9 of 14 (7.25 x $139,890) = $1,014,202.50 and approximately 20 %, 1.75 FTEs, shall be provided in the form of an offsite unit or affordable housing credits. The offsite unit shall meet the requirements of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines and shall be deed restricted in accordance with Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority requirements at Category 4 or lower. The a Certificate of Occupancy shall be granted and a deed restriction shall be recorded for the offsite housing unit prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or a Conditional Certificate of Occupancy for any portion of the project. Section 9: Growth Management Quota System Allotments The following Growth Management allotments are hereby granted to the Project: a. Residential Free Market — 2 units b. Commercial Net Leasable — 15,859 square feet Section 10: Design Review Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual including mass, scale and height of the project is hereby granted as presented in the plans dated January 30, 2012 attached as Exhibit A to the Ordinance. Final Commercial Design Review as described in Land Use Code § 26.412, Commercial Design Review, and a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development Final as described in Land Use Code § 26.415.070 Development involving designated historic properties, are required to be granted by the Historic Preservation Commission prior to the issuance of a Development Order. • Section 11: Building Permit The applicant may not submit a Building Permit Application until the requirements in Land Use Code § 26.304.075, Building Permit, are fulfilled. The building permit application shall include the following: 1. A copy of the Development Order issued by the Community Development Department (see § 26.304.075(A)(2), City of Aspen Municipal Code.) 2. A copy of the final City Council Ordinance and HPC Resolutions. 3. The conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover page of the Building Permit set. 4. A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Department. 5. An excavation - stabilization plan, construction management plan (CMP), drainage and soils report pursuant to Engineering and Building Department requirements. 6. A grading report pursuant to Engineering Department requirements. 7. Accessiblity and ANSI requirements shall meet adopted Building Code requirements. 8. Evidence that the landscape plan received approval from the Parks Department. 9. Evidence that the cost estimates for the landscaping plan and Public Improvements received approval from the Community Development Department. 10. Evidence that the Financial Assurances and Site Protection Fund commitments, set forth at Section 4 & 5 above, have been met. 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page l0 of 14 Section 12: Engineering The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21, Title 28, and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. A construction management plan must be submitted in conjunction with the building permit application. A completed drainage report/plan as outlined in the Urban Runoff Management Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to recordation of Final Plat and building permit issuance. A complete grading report shall be submitted and approved prior to recordation of Final Plat and building permit issuance. Failure to meet the standards in Title 21 and Title 28 may result in a physical change to the project and possible review by City Council and/or HPC to amend the design. Any transformers, telephone pedestals and any other above ground utility boxes will need to be located on the property instead of the ROW. Section 13: Parks 1. The Parks Department shall review and approve a landscape plan prior to building permit submittal. 2. Landscaping in the public Right -of -way (ROW) shall be subject to landscaping in the Right -of -way requirements, Aspen Municipal Code Chapter 21.20. All plantings within the City Right -of -way must be approved by the City Parks Department prior to installation. 3. Right -of -way requirements necessitate adequate irrigation pressure and coverage, if a system is not in place one will need to be added. 4. An approved tree removal permit shall be required before any demolition or access infrastructure work occurs. Section 14: Fire Mitigation Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit, the Applicant shall obtain the approval of the Fire Marshal of a Fire Protection Plan which shall include the following elements: 1. Compliance with all codes and requirements of the Aspen Fire Protection District 2. Sprinkler, fire alarms and carbon monoxide alarms are required. (IFC as amended Section 903 and 907). 3. Documentation that the proposed development has sufficient volume and pressure of water for the sprinklers or other fire suppression system adequate to satisfy the District's standards for the type of structures proposed by the approved development. This requirement shall be satisfied by an analysis acceptable to the Water Department which demonstrates system delivery capacity of existing water distribution system at the Water Departments' main water to the approved development of no less than 3,000 gallons per minute. 4. An overall access plan for the site. Section 15: Sanitation District Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 11 of 14 Section 16: Water Department The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code in place at the time of building permit submittal, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Each of the units within the mixed use building shall have individual water meters. Section 17: Exterior Lighting All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code § 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Section 18: Public Improvements The Applicant has agreed to perform certain Public Improvements and completion of said Public Improvements is hereby made a specific condition of the approval of this Ordinance. Applicant shall faithfully complete the Public Improvements listed below before the Applicant is issued a Certificate of Occupancy or a Conditional Certificate of Occupancy by the Building Department for any subdivided parcel. The determination of satisfactory completion of the Public Improvements shall be within the sole discretion of the City Engineering or Building Departments. Applicant shall confirm its agreement to complete all Public Improvements in the Subdivision Agreement. The following are Public Improvements the Applicant has agreed to complete: a. the affordable housing described in §8 herein, b. compliance with the parks improvements referenced in §13 herein, c. the sanitation district requirements set forth at § 15 herein, d. the school land dedication requirement set forth at § 7 herein, and e. the public amenity requirement set forth at § 7 herein Section 19: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site - specific development plan and a vested property right pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.308.011 attaching to and running with the Subject Property and shall confer upon the Applicant the right to undertake and complete the site specific development plan and use of said property under the terms and conditions of the site specific development plan including any approved amendments thereto. The vesting period of these vested property rights shall be for three (3) years which shall not begin to run until the date of the publications required to be made as set forth below. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of § 26.104.050, Void Permits. Zoning that is not part of the approved site - specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. For purposes of this provision, the submission and acceptance of a building permit application for the restoration of the Benton Building as part of the enlargement 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 12 of 14 of a historic landmark that is deemed complete by the Chief Building Inspector pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.304.075 shall prevent the expiration of the vested rights of the applicant and any related development orders under Land Use Code Section 26.304.070.D. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to Chapter 26.308, Vested Property Rights. Pursuant to § 26.304.070(A), Development Orders, such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 517 East Hyman Avenue (Lot E, Block 95), 521 East Hyman Avenue (Units 1 and 2 of the Benton Building Condominium, aka Lot F, Block 95) and the parking lot located at the southwest corner of Hunter and Hyman Streets (Lots G, H and I Block 95), by Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Aspen. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the Development Order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this Ordinance of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this Ordinance. The vested rights granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review. The period of time permitted by law to exercise the right of referendum to refer to the electorate this Section of this Ordinance granting vested rights; or, to seek judicial review of the grant of vested rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as set forth above. The rights of referendum described herein shall be no greater than those set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 20: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Historic Preservation Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 21: This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 13 of 14 Section 22: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 23: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 13 day of February, 2012, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a 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 6 day of February, 2012. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2012. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcester, City Attorney Exhibit A: Plans representing dimensional requirements. 517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #5, Series of 2012 Page 14 of 14 Exhibit A HISTORIC DESIGNATION §26.415. 030. C AspenModern I. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of AspenModern, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet at least two of the criteria a -d, and criterion e described below: a. The property is related to an event, pattern, or trend that has made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific event, pattern or trend is identified and documented in an adopted context paper; b. The property is related to people who have made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific people are identified and documented in an adopted context paper; c. The property represents a physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman, or design philosophy that is deemed important and the specific physical design, designer, or philosophy is documented in an adopted context paper; d. The property possesses such singular significance to the City, as documented by the opinions of persons educated or experienced in the fields of history, architecture, landscape architecture, archaeology or a related field, that the property's potential demolition or major alteration would substantially diminish the character and sense of place in the city as perceived by members of the community, and e. The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. STAFF FINDINGS: BENTON BUILDING (521 E. HYMAN): Tom Benton was indicative of a true Aspen local: a non - conformist, local activist and a self - defined free spirit. While he was a trained architect from University of Southern California, Exhibit A Landmark Designation Criteria Jan. 9, 2012 Benton chose to work for himself and develop his art through silkscreens, monotypes a n d oil paintings. A F s c N P u M A P retrospective book of his life and work titled "thomas w. benton: artistlactivist" was written by Daniel Joseph Watkins and published by the People's Press in 2011. Attached as Exhibit B is a short - - biography of Benton that was included in J "� the book. In addition, Benton's work is included in Aspen's Modern Architecture Context Paper. Photograph 1: Original first floor of the Benton Building 521 E. Hyman was the first building Benton built in Aspen. The building was built one story at a time. He built the gallery and studio space on the first floor and a residence on the second floor. The third floor was added in 1973. It served as a gallery, residence, and studio for his art work. In addition, according the Watkins' book, "Benton became involved in politics and his gallery soon became the central meeting place for local intellectuals, artists and activists." He sold the building in 1975. Benton was best known for his activist posters and artwork. He collaborated with Hunter Thompson and others to create "images that helped to define Aspen's tempestuous political and social upheavals" in the late 1960s. His work also included national anti -war and political posters. Benton's artistic style had an Asian influence with the use of circles and the balance of his compositions. He included geometric shapes such as triangles and rectangles which convey depth, dimension and volume. These characteristics are clearly evident in the architecture of the Benton Building. The cinder block walls on either side of the property protrude beyond the facade of the building to create a rectangular volume inside of which he constructed his studio. The building plays with solids and voids through the use of geometric shapes. Benton used natural materials, and according to Watkins he used local materials "such as cinder blocks from nearby Dotsero and the aluminum printing plates discarded weekly at The Aspen Times." His architectural style was in line with other local architects such as Charles Paterson and Robin Molny. More interested in graphic art than in architecture, he still designed the occasional building, including a residence for actress Jill St. John. His funky, organic, California esthetic was in sync with Aspen's Wrightian tradition. His designs, such as the'Patio Building aka Crandall Building (1969), a flat - roofed commercial building at 630 E. Hyman, exhibit a similar interest in natural materials, simple geometric shapes, deep overhangs, horizontal emphasis, and orienting the building to frame views toward the mountains. Exhibit A Landmark Designation Criteria Jan. 9, 2012 Starting around 1979, the first floor was converted to a restaurant/bar use. Gradually the exterior of the building was changed to the present condition. Stucco, copper details, and new windows erased Benton's aesthetic and use of natural materials and textures on the lower front facade. The original form of the east, west and north facades of the building are intact. The applicant proposes to use photographs, to be presented during the public hearing, to restore the front facade to its original condition with the exception of bumping out the first floor windows to create a better } ,. £.., street presence- Staff is not supportive of this _. alteration and recommends that the first floor be ', - ti restored in accordance with the historic photographs. . �, ,; The applicant proposes to remove the rear portion of ^ � � . the building to provide a 2 car parking garage for the ` y , y y ' site Originally, a subgrade garage was proposed under M` ;; the entire 15,000 square feet site, but with the 1" preservation of both buildings the garage is no longer feasible. Staff is supportive of the removal of the rear v _ portion of the building considering the proposed full r ..# restoration of the front facade. f The property scored a 13, which is defined as "better ", L ' on the integrity score sheet based on its current condition. The proposed restoration would increase the integrity score to at least 16 points, which is defined as a best example of the Wrightian/Organic style in Aspen. MI CONCLUSION: Staff finds that designation criteria A - E are met. Benton significantly contributed to Aspen's built environment and sense of place as an architect, ._ a -', an artist, and an activist. His architecture and - - his artwork are reminders of the 1960s and '' m il ir 7-- k" 1970s when Aspen was developing into a ski \.. i SE resort with conflicting local opinions and lively ■ 4'� a debates in local politics. Benton's studio was Photograph 2 & 3: Benton's original design above and the the birthplace of many influential works of art current condition below. and local gatherings that contributed to local history. Staff strongly feels that the preservation of this building is important to Aspen's post war legacy. Exhibit A Landmark Designation Criteria Jan. 9, 2012 517 E. HYMAN: AKA LITTLE ANNIE'S EATERY: (written by Amy Guthrie) The building at 517 E. Hyman Avenue was built in 1960. Originally occupied f • by a retail shop, the front facade was ' i i 4. brick with a Chalet inspired roof overhang attached to the front. Little Annie's restaurant opened in 1972 with a new facade, seen above, to represent the pioneering history of the community. Little Annie mine, on the backside of - Aspen Mountain, was one of the first Photograph 4: Current condition of 517 E. Hyman — Little Annie's successful silver producers in the Aspen area. Part owner "Three Fingered Jack" Atkinson is said to have built the Sardy house from one week's earnings from the mine. In the 1960s, the Little Annie's basin was proposed for ski area expansion, which never came to be. A collection of remaining mining era cabins and other a rustic buildings on mining claims dotted the area, — occupied by residents willing to live a somewhat eccentric and primitive lifestyle so representative of ,. 4. Aspen at the time that it inspired restaurateurs to namesake what would become a beloved local watering Photograph 5: A cabin in the Little Annie's hole. area In 2002, the City Community Development Department authored a research paper on the popularity of Rustic style architecture in Aspen, particularly from the 1930s to early 1970s. Rustic style buildings of this period, typically hand -built cabins, exemplified the spirit of adventure, romance, and ruggedness of the Rocky Mountain west at a time when leisure travel grew exponentially. Little Annie's restaurant represents this motif, though beyond the front facade the building is dissimilar from other local examples. For this reason, staff has not previously given the property recognition as a potential historic resource. However, it is clear that the community recognizes this connection. CONCLUSION: Staff finds that designation criterion A is met and the property is related to an event, pattern, or trend that has made a contribution to Aspen history that is deemed important. The second component of designation is scoring the physical integrity of the building. Staff's Exhibit A Landmark Designation Criteria Jan. 9, 2012 score sheet is attached. The design of the front facade which appears to be unaltered since 1972 allows the property to earn 16 out of 20 points, placing it in the category of "best" examples of Rustic style architecture. The property has sufficient physical integrity to meet designation criterion E. Exhibit A Landmark Designation Criteria Jan. 9, 2012 %X�t if T). printmaking, •creating his first anti -war peace poster in 1965, and then drifted from architecture to focus on his art. Benton was especially drawn to the impact of symbols and text working in tandem to convey Hs political message. During the late 1960s Benton met gonzo journalist Hunter S. CL . Thompson. His friendship and collaboration with Thompson ` spanned more than four decades and created or inspired some of Benton's most recognized works, including the 1970 "Hunter S. Thompson for Sheriff" poster and a series c z of political posters that combined art and writing — the Aspen Wallposters. He went on to create campaign posters for more than fifty candidates including George McGovern, Gary Hart and Willie Brown. Benton also created numerous cause posters for local benefits, non - profits and charitable - causes that suited his beliefs. Benton's art continued to evolve throughout his lifetime from political posters to abstract silkscreen prints, monotypes and oil paintings. Those iconic works, composed of complex c o layered images of bold colors, text and symbols, mesmerized his viewers. His artwork always remained original and grew in size as he matured. Eventually he was creating prints measuring more than three feet by three feet and oil paintings that were five feet by five feet and larger. THOMAS WHELAN BENTON WAS BORN ON November 16, 1930 in Oakland, California. He attended But, as he said more than once, he was in need of a regular Na vy y Glendale Junior - during the e College Korean orrean War. before Paycheck. check. In 1989 Sheriff Braudis hired him as a jail deputy, enlisting in the United States Na Glendale High School and here he worked full time, off and on, until his retirement After his discharge in 1953, Benton attended the University in 2003. of Southern California and studied architecture under the No one else but Bob Braudis would have hired me,' G.I. Bill. He practiced architecture in Los Angeles where he Benton said in a 1995 Aspen Times interview. But it was so • designed a number of residential and commercial buildings. easy. They tell you when to show up, when to work. During a trip to Colorado in 1962, Benton bought an empty Who to abuse. "' lot in downtown Aspen, at 521 East Hyman Avenue. The During his time as a jailor he would often silkscreen k_ next year he and his wife Betty and children Brian and Christmas T- shirts for the inmates, with quotes such as "The g degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering `t � `# - Michelle moved to As p en where he designed and built his ` a,_ - home, studio, and gallery on that lot. He was adept with f�' ` its prisons;' by Dostoyevsky. -� his hands and quick to use local materials, such as cinder Throughout his career, Benton had ongoing financial and ` *,- blocks from nearby Dotsero and the aluminum printing drug addiction problems that impacted his artistic output. �''€ plates discarded weekly at T he Aspen Times. B enton was the He abandoned art alibgether in the 19805 and '90s before " �. „ kind of guy who would create everything he needed — not taking up painting later in life ' w • just a home but worktables, storage cupboards, hanging g am ; planters, benches, chairs, everything. It was all original, Benton was diagnosed with advanced lymphoma in early elegantly simple and beautiful — works of art that he 2007, and died April 27, 2007. He was seventy -six years old. ,: thought of as mere necessities, whipped up at a moments He is survived by his children, Brian Benton and Michelle n�. ; ; n and disposed of without ceremony when he was Benton Bremer, and two grandchildren, Natalie and Emily ,; --- done with them. •, Bremer. . - -'4' - , Benton became involved in local politics and his gallery soon • ..'. became the central meeting place for local intellectuals, }' „. artists and activists. He taught himself the art of silkscreen biog b EXHIBIT C SUBDIVISION Chapter 26.480, SUBDIVISION Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. General Requirements 1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. 3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. 4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposal supports the general policies and goals in the Aspen Area Community Plan, specifically the Historic Preservation chapter. The project is consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the area and will not adversely affect the future development of the area. The proposed subdivision to merge the lots is in compliance with applicable requirements of the Land Use Code. B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. Staff Finding: The proposed project builds atop an existing flat parking lot. As such, Staff finds that the land is suitable for development and that this criterion is met. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding: The proposed subdivision is located downtown where utilities and public facilities already exist. Staff finds that this criterion is met. C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met: Exhibit C — Subdivision Review Criteria Page 1 of 2 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or the goals of the community. 2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. Staff Finding: The applicant represents that this standard is met and does not request any variations. D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding: Affordable housing is reviewed concurrent with Subdivision pursuant to the AspenModern negotiation process. The applicant proposes offsite and cash in lieu payment to mitigate for employee generation. E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.630. Staff Finding: The applicant agrees to comply with the School Land Dedication Standards in Chapter 26.630. Staff finds this criterion is met. F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable Housing Planned Unit Development (AH -PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44 -2001, § 2) Staff Finding: Affordable housing is reviewed concurrent with Subdivision pursuant to the AspenModern negotiation process. The applicant proposes offsite and cash in lieu payment to mitigate for employee generation. Exhibit C — Subdivision Review Criteria Page 2 of 2 Exhibit D — GMQS Sec. 26.470.070. Minor Planning and Zoning Commission applications. The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section 26.470.110, Procedures for review, and the criteria for each type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications shall comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.050. Except as noted, the following types of growth management approvals shall be deducted from the respective development ceiling levels but shall not be deducted from the annual development allotments. Approvals apply cumulatively. B. General requirements: All development applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for growth management review based on the following generally applicable criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of development: 1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.D. Applications for multi -year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.1 shall not be required to meet this standard. 2. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval, as applicable. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60 %) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate. (Ord. No. 6 — 2010, §2) Exhibit D- GMQS Page 1 of 4 6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30 %) of the additional free - market residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ( "voluntary units ") may be deed- restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section 26.470.100 Employee /Square Footage Conversion. (Ord. No. 6 — 2010, §2) 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. (Ord. No. 14, 2007, §1) Staff Response: Staff finds that the general policies in the AACP are met. The project is subject to review under the AspenModern program which authorizes Council to provide incentives in exchange for landmark designation. The dimensional requirements of the Commercial Core zone district are met with the exception of the floor area for free market residential uses and the net livable cap for one of the two free market residential units as described in the Staff memo. 1. Enlargement of an historic landmark for commercial, lodge or mixed -use development. The enlargement of an historic landmark building for commercial, lodge or mixed -use development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: a. Up to four (4) employees generated by the additional commercial/lodge development shall not require the provision of affordable housing. Thirty percent (30 %) of the employee generation above four (4) and up to eight (8) employees shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash in lieu thereof. Sixty percent (60 %) of the employee generation above eight (8) employees shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash in lieu thereof. Exhibit D- GMQS Page 2 of 4 For example: A project generating 15 employees shall require employee mitigation for a total of 5.4 employees, as follows: First 4 employees = 0 employee mitigation Second 4 employees mitigated at = 1.2 employees 30% Remaining 7 employees mitigated = 4.2 employees at 60% Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Subsection 4, Affordable housing, of this Section and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. b. Up to one (1) free - market residence may be created pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.060.4, Minor enlargement of an historic landmark for commercial, lodge or mixed -use development. This shall be cumulative and shall include administrative GMQS approvals granted prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2007. Additional free - market units (beyond one [1]) shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.080.2, New free - market residential units within a multi - family or mixed -use project. Staff Response: 9 FTEs are generated by applying a new methodology that provides a net leasable credit for not demolishing the Benton Building and Little Annie's. The applicant proposes to meet growth management requirements with an offsite housing unit and cash in lieu payment. The calculation of employee generation is proposed as follows: Existing Commercial Net Leasable Calculation: Benton Building Main Level 2,375 x 4.1 FTEs /1,000 s.f. = 9.7375 FTEs Benton Building Upper Floors: 2,670 x 3.075 FTEs /1,000 s.f. = 8.21025 FTEs Total Benton Building existing net leasable = 17.94775 FTEs Little Annie's Main Level 2,460 x 4.1 FTEs /1,000 s.f. = 10.086 FTEs Preservation credit for existing net leasable 17.94775 +10.086 = 28.03375 FTEs Exhibit D- GMQS Page 3 of 4 New Commercial Net Leasable Calculation: Main Level (6,096 x 4.1 FTEs) /1,000 sq. ft. = 24.9936 FTEs Upper Floors and Basement Level (9,763 x 3.075)/1,000 s.f. = 30.021225 FTEs Total new commercial net leasable = 55.014825 FTEs Calculation for the enlargement of a historic landmark for mixed use development.. 55.014825 — 28.03375 = 26.981075 Total FTEs The first 4 employees require 0 mitigation; 2 landmarks means the first 8 employees require 0 mitigation: 0 FTEs generated for first 8 employees. The second 4 employees require mitigation at 30 %; 2 landmarks means the second 8 employees require 30% mitigation 8 x 30% = 2.4 FTEs generated for the second 8 employees. The remaining employees are mitigated at 60 %. 26.981075 — (2 x 8) = 10.981075 10.981075 x 60% = 6.588645 FTEs 0 + 2.4 + 6.588645 = 8.988645 employees to be housed by this project. The project is required to provide housing mitigation to house 9 employees, and has represented a commitment to pay cash in lieu for approximately 80% of the mitigation, 7.25 FTEs, which equals (7.25 x $139,890) = $1,014,202.50 and approximately 20 %, 1.75 FTEs, shall be provided in the form of an offsite unit or affordable housing credits. The offsite unit shall meet the requirements of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines and shall be deed restricted in accordance with Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority requirements at Category 4 or lower. The deed restriction shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or a Conditional Certificate of Occupancy for any portion of the project. Exhibit D- GMQS Page 4 of 4 Exhibit E- Design Reviews Commercial Design Review — Conceptual and Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development - Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Certificate of Appropriateness both use the adopted Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines (referenced below) for review. Maior Development (Conceptual): The procedure for a• Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Major Development is a two -step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and /or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Commercial Design Review: Sec. 26.412.050. Review criteria. An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: A. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, or any deviation from the standards provides a more appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested design elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the standards. B. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, to the greatest extent practical. Changes to the facade of the building may be required to comply with this Section. Exhibit E- Design Review Criteria Page 1 of 6 C. The application shall comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines as determined by the appropriate Commission. The guidelines set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The City shall determine when a proposal is in compliance with the criteria, standards and guidelines. Although these criteria, standards and guidelines are relatively comprehensive, there may be circumstances where alternative ways of meeting the intent of the policy objectives might be identified. In such a case, the City must determine that the intent of the guideline is still met, albeit through alternative means. The Commercial Core Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines policy is the following: "improvements in the Commercial Core Historic District should maintain the integrity of historic resources in the area. At the same time, compatible and creative design solutions should be encouraged." Important defining characteristics of the historic district are the street grid; a hard street edge that is defined by buildings built to lot lines; variations in height between 1, 2 and sometimes 3 stories; and lot widths of 30 feet, 60 feet and sometimes 90 feet with a depth of 100 feet. Prominent storefronts on the ground level with a tall plate height and subordinate upper stories are traditional buildings in Aspen's downtown. STAFF RESPONSE: Overall, Staff is supportive of conceptual approval of the project. The proposed three story building defines the street corner and the applicant has broken up the facade on both the Hyman and Hunter Avenues into traditional modules through either setbacks on the third floor and/or material changes on the second floor. The third floor of the new construction is setback 10' closest to the Benton Building to allow some visual relief and to break up the mass as described in Guideline 6.28 and 6.29 below. Overall, Staff finds that the proposed modules are sensitive to the historic district and are generally consistent with the intent of the Guidelines. 6.28 On sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths, the facade height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. • The faced height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. • Height should be varied every 60 ft. minimum and preferable every 30 ft. of linear frontage in keeping with traditional lot widths and development patterns. • No more than two consecutive 30 ft. facade modules may be three stories tall, within an individual building. • A rear portion of a third module may rise to three stories, if the front is setback a minimum of 40 ft. from the street facade. (e.g. at a minimum, the front 40 feet may be no more than two stories in height.) Exhibit E- Design Review Criteria Page 2 of 6 6.29 On sites comprising two or more traditional lots, a building shall be designed to reflect the individual parcels. These methods shall be used: • Variation in height of building modules across the site. • Variation in massing achieved through upper floor setbacks, the roofscape form and variation in upper floor heights. • Variation in building facade heights or cornice line. The proposed flat roofs and rectangular building modules, and the proposed building orientation meet the Design Objectives and Guidelines for development in the Commercial Core, specifically 6.20, 6.21, 6.22, 6.23, and 6.24: 6.20 Orient a new building to be parallel to its lot lines, similar to that of traditional building orientations. • The front of a primary structure shall be oriented to the street. 6.21 Orient a primary entrance toward the street. • Buildings should have a clearly defined primary entrance. For most commercial buildings, this should be a recessed entry way. • Do not orient a primary entrance to an interior court. • Providing secondary public entrances to commercial spaces is also encouraged on larger buildings. 6.22 Rectangular forms should be dominant on Commercial Core facades. • Rectangular forms should be vertically oriented. • The facade should appear as predominantly flat, with any decorative elements and projecting or setback "articulations" appearing to be subordinate to the dominant form. 6.23 Use flat roof lines as the dominant roof form. • A flat roof, or one that gently slopes to the rear of a site, should be the dominant roof form. • Parapets on side facades should step down towards the rear of the building. • False fronts and parapets with horizontal emphasis also may be considered. 6.24 Along a rear facade, using building forms that step down in scale toward the alley is encouraged. • Consider using additive forms, such as sheds, stairs and decks to reduce the perceived scale. These forms should however, remain subordinate to the primary structure. • Use projecting roofs at the ground floor over entrances, decks and for separate utility structures in order to establish a human scale that invites pedestrian activity. The applicant requests a height increase from the allowable 38' to 41' through Commercial Design Review. The maximum permitted increase through Commercial Design Review is 42'. The Commercial Design Standards and Objectives for a granting a height variation are listed below. Staff is supportive of a 3 story element at the comer of the property to anchor the intersection and preserve the street wall. The apex of the Benton Building is 38'5 "; therefore, allowing the building height to increase to 41' meets the guideline that permits a height increase to provide a two foot height variation with an adjacent building. Increasing the setback of the third floor module closest to the Benton Building, as described above, achieves an appropriate balance with the requested increase in height to 41'. Exhibit E- Design Review Criteria Page 3 of 6 6.27 A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation in building height of the Commercial Core. • A minimum 9 ft. floor to ceiling height is to be maintained on second stories and higher. • Additional height, as permitted in the zone district, may be added for one or more of the following reasons: o In order to achieve at least a two foot variation in height with an adjacent building. o The primary function of the building is civic. (i.e. the building is a Museum, Civic Building, Performance Hall, Fire Station, etc.) o Some portion of the property is affected by a height restriction due to its proximity to a historic resource, or location within a View Plane, therefore relief in another area may be appropriate. o To benefit the livability of Affordable Housing units. o To make a demonstrable (to be verified by the Building Department) contribution to the building's overall energy efficiency, for instance by providing improved day lighting. 6.30 Height variation should be achieved using one or more of the following: • Vary the building height for the full depth of the site in accordance with traditional lot width. • Set back the upper floor to vary the building facade profile(s) and the roof forms across the width and the depth of the building. • Vary the facade (or parapet) heights at the front. • Step down the rear of the building towards the alley, in conjunction with other design standards and guidelines. COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS Sec. 26.412.060. Commercial design standards. The following design standards, in addition to the commercial, lodging and historic district design objectives and guidelines, shall apply to commercial, lodging and mixed -use development: A. Public amenity space. Creative, well - designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights -of -way or private property within commercial areas. On parcels required to provide public amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030, Public amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the method or combination of methods of providing the public amenity shall be at the option of the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, according to the procedures herein and according to the following standards: 1. The dimensions of any proposed on -site public amenity sufficiently allow for a variety of uses and activities to occur, considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses. Exhibit E- Design Review Criteria Page 4 of 6 2. The public amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade trees, solar access, view orientation and simple at -grade relationships with adjacent rights -of -way are encouraged. 3. The public amenity and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights -of -way and uses contribute to an inviting pedestrian environment. 4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls, sidewalks or adjacent properly, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian environment. 5. Any variation to the design and operational standards for public amenity, Subsection 26.575.030.F., promotes the purpose of the public amenity requirements. STAFF RESPONSE: Public amenity is proposed in front of the Benton Building with the remainder of the requirement being mitigation offsite in the form of a pedestrian enhancement plan that will provide extensive improvements to the Hyman and Hunter Streets right -of -ways and is subject to approval by the Parks, Community Development and Engineering Departments. Examples could be planting larger caliper street trees, improved tree grates, and specially designed and engineered sub -grade infrastructure for drainage, tree growth and irrigation. B. Utility, delivery and trash service provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one (1) building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply: 1. A utility, trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated along the alley meeting the minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060, Utility/trash /recycle service areas, unless otherwise established according to said Section. 2. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property and along the alley. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. 3. Delivery service areas shall be incorporated along the alley. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. 4. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the street as practical. 5. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and /or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a public right -of -way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall Exhibit E- Design Review Criteria Page 5 of 6 STAFF RESPONSE: The trash/utility area is accessed off of the alley and meets the dimensional requirements. Exhibit E- Design Review Criteria Page 6 of 6 t • ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7, 2011 Vice - chair, Ann Mullins called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Nora Berko, Willis Pember, Brian McNellis and Jamie McLeod. Jay Maytin was excused. Staff present: Jim True, Special Counsel Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk Sara Adams, Senior Planner MOTION: Brian moved to approve Nov. 7 minutes, second by Nora. All in favor, motion carried. 517 & 521 E. Hyman Ave. and the parking lot at the corner of Hunter and Hyman Ave. (Block 95, Lots G,H,I) Sara said HPC saw a version of this project in September. HPC was asked to review demolition of the Benton building, 521E. Hyman and the building that houses Little Annie's, 517 E. Hyman and the parking lot. The proposal was the construction of a mixed use building that would comprise the three lots that are there now with a full sub -grade garage and offices on the second floor and residential on the third floor and retail on the first floor. On the September meeting HPC took action regarding the requests for demolition and HPC voted against the demolition of the Benton building 4 -2 and voted for demolition of the building that houses Little Annie's 5 -1. When HPC makes a determination of demolition we are required to notify council so that they have an option to call up HPC's decision. Their review is based on the record which means they are looking to see if HPC abused their jurisdiction. The resolution was called up regarding the demolition of Little Annie's. Around the same time the applicant filed an appeal of HPC's decision. We have council calling up HPC's resolution and we have the applicant filing an appeal of whether or not HPC has jurisdiction. The applicant requested to table their appeal and they filed an application to participate in the Aspen Modern program to volunteer to designate the Benton building and the Little Annie's building. Sara said HPC is asked to provide council with a recommendation on the importance of the buildings using specific criteria. Sara thanked the applicant for volunteering to participate in the program. We appreciate the change in the application and being willing to talk about the designation of the buildings. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7, 2011 Sara - Aspen Modern Overview HPC is asked to determine the importance of these buildings. You are using the designation criteria and the integrity score sheets and the context papers that have been adopted. Because the applicant is asking for benefits that are not typically granted to historic landmarks you are asked to determine whether the project is aligned with the purpose and intent of the preservation program. You are also asked to determine whether the buildings are good, better or best and that is ultimately a product of the integrity score sheets. HPC will forward a recommendation to city council and then city council will have final authority over the designation and negotiation. Tom Benton was a trained architect of Southern California and he ultimately chose to work for himself and develop his art through silk screen and oil painting and mono types. He is well known for his activist posters and collaboration with Hunter Thompson. As you know there was a book published by an historian Daniel Watkins on his life and his work. Benton moved to Aspen in 1963 and this is the first building he built. He basically phased it and built the first floor; as he got more money progressed to the second and third floor. The first floor was used for gallery and studio space and the second floor was added as the residence for his family and the third floor was built in 1973. The entire building was built mainly by Benton and he used local materials. His style is very eclectic and it is best categorized as organic and he has an Asian influence and uses circles and designs in a symmetrical way. In this case what is interesting is he creates a rectangular volume with the CMU block on either side of the building that sticks out further than the building facade to create a volume that he sets the building into. He exhibits some of the Wrightian tradition with the blurring of the line from inside to outside. He celebrates the natural environment by framing Aspen mountain with circular windows and always making sure you could see through his buildings to something natural and very special. He used natural materials all indicative of the organic Wrightian tradition. He also played with solids and voids. The building has changed a lot over time. Benton sold it in 1975 and after that different uses evolved and the facade changed. Most of the changes are on the first and second floor. The form and massing are all intact. On the integrity score sheet it scored 13 out of 20 points. This score can be increased with the proposed restoration of the complete front facade. Part of conceptual is to remove the rear portion of the building and add a two car garage and office space above it. The Crandall building which he designed is one block to the east and it is being 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7, 2011 renovated with a pent house on the third floor. Benton was known for activism and posters. The Benton building was a gathering space for locals and activists and for artists. Staff finds that the Benton building is extremely important to Aspen's Post War Inventory and we find that all the designation criteria are met, A — E. Little Annie's Amy said we have been asked to consider this as a potential voluntary landmark. The architectural style that is most relevant of the Little Annie's building is the Rustic style. Most examples in downtown are free standing such as the fishing cabins and the gazebo. The building itself was built in the 60's and it was a masonry building. In 1972 the restaurant opened and the new facade was applied. Little Annie is an area on the back side of Aspen Mountain, one of Aspen's most important mines. At one point there was discussion of expanding the ski area there. The architecture is more of a vernacular and the interpretation was some kind of rustic style and it is in the core and there are a lot of tourist's connections and examples of the American West. It does not appear to have been altered. With the voluntary designation we are happy that it meets the criteria. Sara presented a power point on the purpose and intent of the program 26.415.010. Criteria a through e are met. The buildings are located in the historic district where most of the buildings are 19 century. There are only a few remaining examples that clearly convey the sentiments of the 1960's and 70's which was a time when citizens actively defended their small town character and their individualism which we feel is very important to Aspen's identity. Little Annie's represented the romanticized rustic style of the west. The Benton building represented an important gathering place. All the aspects of the purpose and intent are met. The request of HPC is to determine the importance of the buildings to council and they will decide how far to go with the negotiation. Stan Clauson said they have slides that relate tp the restoration of the Benton building. The Aspen Modern program allows us to set the jurisdictional questions aside. As you know we objected to jurisdiction and felt that the presence of these buildings within the historic district did not of itself constitute sufficient jurisdiction because they were not on the list however, through the Aspen Modern program we have the opportunity to request benefits that make the project work. We are fully supportive of designation and the context of the 90 day negotiation period within the land use code 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7, 2011 because it would enable the project to keep the buildings and still move forward with a reasonable development project. Stan Clauson and John Toya, architect presented a power point on the proposed development. John Toya said one of the challenges in restoring the Benton building to its original facade was the separation of uses. The previous use was by one single owner. The space on the first floor is best utilized as a retail space and upstairs office space or a studio. It is an amazing space and we intend to restore it to its original condition but it doesn't necessarily continue as a retail space upstairs. Our intention is to separate them and we need to provide an elevator to the second floor. We are proposing to utilize a portion of the Aspen Core lot next door which will have an entrance shared by offices on the Aspen core lot as well as the offices that are for the Benton building. Because you have two different floor heights the elevator has two doors to access the Aspen core and the Benton building. A third floor mezzanine will be accessed by a stair. The flat roof will become a sky light for additional light. The intent is to strip the columns back to their original structural members and sand blast the wood and do the same to the CMU walls. If the brick floors are still there we will reuse them and if we can't we will have to chip out the floor and make it ADA compliance. The only modification to the Benton building is the sky light and because the facade is set back it is out intent to maintain a glazed side light adjacent to the doors and project forward with a bay window which will help bring the merchandise in the retail space closer to the street. On the horizontal door we are proposing some windows that are the same height as the wooden planks. The space inside will resonate with history. Stan said the rear element on the first floor was partially demolished in 2002 when it was intended to go from a restaurant to a store front use. John Toya explained that the CMU walls will be exposed. Sara said staff feels that the windows on the store front should not be pulled forward. We feel the building should be completely restored on the front facade and they should have the flat configuration. Vice -chair Ann Mullins opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7, 2011 Junee Kirk thanked the applicant for historically designating the two structures. Nora applauded the applicant for bringing the project forward and restoring it back to its original state. The synergy of the streetscape with the patio building down the street will be great. My question is about the windows on the restoration. My inclination is to restore the building all the way. Ann thanked staff for the additional photographs. This is a slam dunk. The criteria for Aspen Modern works for both buildings. Both buildings work with the intent of preservation. 1 would support designating both buildings. Jamie said she is happy with the restoration. I am a little concerned about the windows coming forward on the Benton building just because of the shadow line if it was all in one plane. I have no concern with the sky light. It is a good use of space to try and bring more light into the second story. Jamie asked about the door /window. John said they would like to introduce one or two windows within the door so that you can see people coming and going in and out of the space vs. the solid door. The same amount of wood on the door would be exposed. We would just be replacing the sign with windows. Jamie requested review of the windows in the door for final. Brian said he is in support of designation. Bringing the windows forward would energize the streetscape a little more and I am in support of that. Willis said he supports designation of both the properties. Less than 50% of the original street fabric is intact. John said the structural frame is there for that double height portion in front. They added a bay but the wall is still there and it is just a matter of removing the stuff that was tacked on. Ann said it sounds like everyone is for designation and we should move forward with conceptual. Sara said staff is supportive of conceptual with a few conditions for final review. We recommend that HPC discuss the plate heights of the upper 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7, 2011 floors. The applicant is requesting a height increase from 38 feet to 41 feet which can be granted through commercial design review. The maximum height that could be granted is 42 feet. We do find that 41 feet is appropriate considering the adjacent Benton building is 38 .5 feet to the apex. We do have a condition that the module that is closest to the Benton building be set back 40 feet instead of 10 feet which is one of the standards and objectives for commercial design review. That would offer more relief for the Benton building. Another condition for final in addition to the store front windows on the Benton building we are recommending the height of the chimney be reduced or the element eliminated. Overall the mass and scale is consistent with the guidelines. Stan Clauson and John Toya did a power point on the proposed conceptual. These are three parcels to be merged into one 15,000 square foot parcel. The Benton bldg. and Little Annie's would be designated historic landmarks under Aspen Modern. The Benton bldg. would have exterior and interior restoration and Little Annie's essentially unchanged. The new mixed use building would occupy the 9,000 square foot comer lot which is presently occupied by a commercial parking facility. There is Tess floor area than permitted by code and we believe the new commercial space would vitalize the block and help Hyman become a more commercial street leading down to the new art museum. Everything is brought forward to the property line and it is substantially a retail space and there is an entrance to the upper floors. John said the intent is to have the entire Aspen Core project look like one project but still respect the desire to illustrate the difference between the 30 foot modules along Hyman and we have done that clearly on the comer by having an all stone building. We have the same windows continuing and we mixed up the massing a little bit so that contextually it has vibrancy. There is a band at 14 feet for the first floor on the corner of the vacant lot. We stepped back the building facade on Hyman one foot to minimized the perceived setback of the Benton building. The third floor is set back ten feet and on the chimney we can reduce it to five feet tall instead of ten feet and we might be able to push it back slightly. Stan showed the street elevation and context in relationship to the guidelines. There is a band at 14 feet on the first story that is consistent with the guideline and the second and third story are equal at 12 feet with a cornice element above that. The highest roof point is at 41 feet. Looking at 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7, 2011 Hunter Street there is a 100 foot long facade. There is a substantial recess at the alley. On the back we are incorporating a utility trash area and one garage space of the new structure and a parking garage at the rear of the Benton building and Little Annie's remains as is. John said on the floor plans we have a potential layout. Only one space is locked in that accesses the third floor and the service areas on the back. Stan said one of the key things is the corridor and elevator which allows access to the upper floors of the Benton building without intruding an elevator shaft into the Benton building structure. The roof plan includes a roof deck for the new structure which is inset considerably and not visible to the street. Around the area is a green roof approach. John said regarding the materials our interest is brick with patterns in the bands. The shadow lines would activate the facade. There would be columns for identity on the ground floor of the structure to create something iconic that is recognizable at the street level instead of just having a glass front as you walk past. The color would be a brick in the hue of the Colorado sandstone but in a darker value. On the portions of the third floor that are set back we are proposing to use a zinc cladding with a paneling system. The windows would be of a similar color. Stan said the ten foot setback aligns with the Benton building. The 40 foot setback I am not entirely clear of the origin of that in terms of our own structures in town. Nori Winter came up with that concept when he was doing the guidelines and why would a third floor module require a 40 foot setback. Nikos Hecht said when we bought the property we had five lots to develop and when we heard the community's out pour that made me enthusiastic to preserve these. I went to Little Annie's as a kid and I knew Tom Benton. This is an opportunity for a great partnership for all of us. This is our second choice from and economic and architectural standpoint. It is a first choice from a passion point. We have given up a lot of parking etc. to make this work. This building gives respect to other buildings and to the town. John said the 40 foot setback creates a situation on the second floor where it limits a lot of interior function and economically to make the project viable we are relying on the square footage or leasable footage on the upper most 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7, 2011 level. Pushing that back would really affect the lease ability. We can play with the side wall to minimize how strong it looks. Stan said we understand that there will be recommendations for further study at final including the setback, chimney and setback of the windows on the Benton building. At this point it would be great to go forward. Nora asked about what percent of the roof is mechanical? John said the square footage is about 495. Sara said the code allows the elements to go ten feet above the height of the building as long as they are set back 15 feet from the facade. They would have two 15 foot setbacks because they are on the corner. Nora asked if it would be possible to lower the floors by one foot to bring the height down a little bit. Is there any chance of a parking garage below grade? John said they explored that but the ramp would take out a good swath of the first floor. They would need 20 x 75 feet of the first floor for the ramp. The costs didn't add up. Is there some way to make the new building and the Benton building respect each other? Possibly move the building back a little more than ten feet but not 40 feet. Also can the fire place be moved so that it isn't right in front? John said the fire place has a dual function for the terrace and one for the interior bedroom. We can lower it so that it is just above the guard rail height but we would need a cap and the height would be about five feet. That would be half of the height shown. John also said the elevations in the power point were not the same as in the packet due to revisions. The trash area has also changed. Ann said in the guidelines it mentions recessed doorways. John said we have pulled them as close to the sidewalk as possible for the retail spaces. Ann said it might be something to look at because it makes for richness and variety as you go along the front of the building. John said he would feel comfortable pushing the center door in but cannot commit to any others. Vice - chair, Ann Mullins opened the public hearing. 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7, 2011 June Kirk asked why we didn't have a comparison with Boogies behind which repeats a pitched roof like the Benton roof. I was on the task force and Nori Winter and many of us were concerned about the allowance of huge three story buildings on the north side of the block which provides tremendous shade and block the views to the mountains and cause ice dams to be built up in the winter. For that reason the proposal was that any third story would have to be set back 40 feet to allow for views, sun and to eliminate hazards on the streets on Hyman Street. It was brought up that the applicant will lose too much square footage but at Matsuhisa they went way under and it is a spectacular area. Vice -chair Ann Mullins closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Commissioner member comments: Jamie said with the top of the Benton building being 38 feet and the new building being 41 feet I actually think stepping it up to the comer shows that we are bowing down to the Benton building as you are moving toward it. I would like to see a context line of the street elevation from both corners. I am a little concerned about the chamfered corner on the lower level with the columns. I'm not sure we are providing enough access. In regards to the 40 foot setback next to the Benton building that entire facade needs to be restudied. The brick wall seems like it is dwarfing the Benton building. The material change might help and I like the idea of stepping back some of the entries to give relief on the main level. Brian said he is excited to see something on this property. The wall next to the Benton is my concern and what can we do to minimize the impact of that to the Benton building. We don't want the Benton building to look like it is disappearing. John said he can take some of the surface treatments on Hyman and wrap them back to the Benton building and have architecture vs. a wall. Having a window or something that plays off the same proportions of our windows facing in toward the Benton building will lighten up that wall. Brian said he doesn't have a problem with the 41 feet. In order to pay homage to the Benton building possibly you could step down the second and third component next to the Benton building as well as step it back. We need some relief for the third story. I also agree with Jamie about the corner 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7.2011 element and if we can shave off two feet that would be better for the pedestrian. Willis said he appreciates all the efforts put in on this project. The ground floor head height seems low and squished at the ground floor. There is concem with Nori Winter's guidelines and how they are implemented. The commercial design guidelines need relooked at closely. There is also no dialogue between the new building and historic building and we need a concept that connects with Benton's and the rustic facade of Little Annie's. Nora said she doesn't think this is best for the community in terms of dialogue with the two buildings as well as how much of a burden falls on the community in saving buildings I am talking about parking, housing and public amenities. A lot of those burdens do fall on the community and that is zoning's fault or a negotiation fault. If we are going to restore the building lets restore it to what it was. I would also like to see a little relief on the comer. The fourth floor creep is also a concern to me. The process isn't perfect but we have to restore a building and respect it in its relationship to what is coming next door to it. Ann agreed by following the guidelines it is hard to come up with contemporary different architecture. The applicant has done a great job. I agree with Nora that the store front of the Benton building should be restored 100 %. The windows should be put back where they originally were. The 41 foot height is fine and restudying the mechanical has already been mentioned. Possibly restudy pulling back that wall more than ten feet so that the Benton building can have a little breathing room. Also restudy the recessed doors. I am not convinced yet that the diagonal corner is necessary. Brian said he feels there are still questions about scale and mass and he would like the meeting continued. Staff's recommendation illustrates areas where further work can take place. We have a finite number of issues for restudy and we are willing to work on all of those areas. Sara said when this project goes to council there needs to be a conceptual approval in place. If HPC is comfortable with the 41 feet with the main concepts of conceptual approval it would be appropriate to have some of 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7, 2011 these conditions approved at final understanding that this is a special project with special circumstances. Ann said the massing is good and what we are talking about are items that need more detail and things that need restudied without changing the entire project. Jamie said she doesn't want to push this through as we all need to be in agreement. Brian agreed that this is a very significant project and we need to understand exactly what we are approving. Willis said there needs to be a narrative about the new construction as it relates to the historic resource. Sara said the guidelines reflect 19 century traditions not Benton's or Little Annie's architecture. Stan said the 41 foot height is needed in order to have a descent building. There is not an objection across the board for that. I have heard a number of things for study and we can do that. If it is a question of drafting we can do that for the next meeting. Sara explained that we need to do first and second reading at Council. Ann said she feels we are almost there. There are things we can do for articulation but it doesn't affect the entire massing of the project. Jamie said we are looking at the top floor setback, the corner and also context. I have no context of the other buildings to know how it steps around. If those areas are small changes then hopefully it is something that can be done for the next meeting. Brian said the step back of the building next to the Benton building is his concern. Nora said those are all spelled out in their conditions. John said he thinks they can pull together something on the west wall for the next meeting in order to keep the process going. 11 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7, 2011 Jamie said she doesn't want to be at final saying it was pushed back two feet instead of ten and then it becomes a big issue. Stan reiterated that they can restudy that wall. John said he sees things that can be done so that we don't lose the interior space. It is safe to say we are not going to be able to push this back ten or 15 feet. Nikos said we either want to preserve these buildings and this building works for you or it doesn't which is your prerogative and we want to know that tonight. Brian said he does want to preserve these buildings but he wants to make sure we aren't creating a situation that is counterproductive to the preservation of the buildings that we are trying to save. Ann said it is sounding like we are continuing and the biggest issue is the wall. Stan said they talked about some of the changes that can be done and on the other hand it is essential for the project to move forward on conceptual. We need this together as a package. John said they could lower the roof in the zone behind the chimney. Ann said she is influenced about the complete turnaround of demolishing the buildings and now preserving one and restoring the other. MOTION: Ann moved to grant conceptual with the conditions that staff put together and amending #3, instead of requiring the 40 foot setback, restudy that west wall, whether materials, articulation or roof. At final, a study of the comer treatment and recessed doors. Motion second by Nora. Sara said on the heights you would be approving 14 feet on the first floor and 12 on the second and third floors. Sara also explained window reviews are for final. Willis said he thinks the first floor should read as the tallest floor. Amended motion: Ann amended the motion to add that the first floor should read as the tallest floor. Motion second by Nora. 12 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 7;2011 Sara said there are essentially three resolutions on the table tonight, two for Aspen Modern and one for conceptual. Jim said they can incorporate all three resolutions in the motion. Willis said he would ask for a conceptual narrative on the architectural character and how it relates to the historic resource that we are designating. What is the connection between the new construction and the historic resource? Sara said on page 15 we have all the conditions and the change of #3; a height variation of 41 feet is granted for the new construction; restudy the west wall for review at final. Added condition; that the comer treatment will be restudied at final. Another added condition was to explore the option of recessed doors for final and the first floor should read as the tallest floor. Jamie said she has more things to add to the motion. We talked about the mechanical on top not looking like a 4 level. If they come back to ten feet of the third floor how does the board feel about that or if they come back with two feet how do you feel about that. Amended motion; Ann amended the motion to review the mechanical equipment so that it doesn't look like a four story building. Motion second by Nora. Roll call vote: Nora, yes; Jamie, no; Brian, no; Willis, no, Ann, yes. Motion failed 2 -3. Jim said he would recommend that we should continue the meeting until next week and talk to the applicant. MOTION: Ann moved to continue 517 and 521 E. Hyman until December 14 second by Brian. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Ann moved to adjourn; second by Brian. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting // adjourned at 8:15 p.m.. /1 a Kathleen J. S ickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 13 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 14, 2011 Vice -chair Ann Mullins called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Nora Berko, Willis Pember, Brian McNellis, Jamie McLeod and Jay Maytin. Staff present: Jim True, Special Counsel Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk Sara Adams, Senior Planner Motion: Jay moved to approve the minutes of Nov. 16 second by Ann. All in favor, motion carried 6 -0. Disclosure: Nora will step down on 205 S. Spring Street Jay will recuse himself on 517 and 521E. Hyman Jay said his wife's business maybe in negotiations with Greg Hill that does not have anything to do with the application tonight 205 S. Spring 320 Lake Ave. — Conceptual Major Development, On -Site Relocation, Demolition, Hallam Lake Bluff Review and Variances — cont'd public bearing from 11 -9 Amy summarized the staff recommendation. The core of the discussion at the last meeting was how not to accommodate the two car garage on the site. There was also some concem about how from its original site is the historic building being moved for the new addition. Today a restudy was received which includes a single stall garage which has cars stacked inside of it but what you would see from the street is a single stall. This has eliminated the south side yard setback variance and it has greatly reduced the combined side yard setback and has eliminated a residential design standard variance. Staff is recommending approval and the 500 square foot bonus. They need about a four foot reduction on the combined yard and a variance on the north side. At final possibly discuss a slight shift southward of the plan because there is still a pinch on the one side of the property. Exhibit I — new drawings Rich Carr, architect Rich said they made a change that eliminates the second car garage bay toward the street. We have a double deep garage. We have narrowed the 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 14, 2011 5'; motion second by Willis. Willis, yes; Jamie, yes; Nora, yes; Brian, no; Jay, no; Ann yes. Motion carried 4 -2. 517 E. Hyman and 521 E. Hyman and the parking lot on the corner of Hunter and Hyman. Aspen Modern Negotiation for Voluntary Landmark designation of 517 and 521 E. Hyman. Conceptual, Conceptual Commercial design standard review, demolition continued public hearing from 12 -7 • Jay stepped down. Sara said tonight we are hearing the Aspen Core project that was continued from Dec. 7` The project is reviewed under the Aspen Modern program. To summarize the applicant asked Council to weigh a trade off as designation, restoration in exchange for certain benefits for development etc. Council as part of that discussion asked for feedback from HPC on what you think the importance of the building is in the context of the project. It isn't an easy question for HPC and this is not a typical conceptual design review that you would see where you are applying design criteria and standards and things like that in a typical way. Aspen Modern asks you to kind of step back and look at the big picture and weigh the importance of these buildings in the context of what is being proposed. At a conceptual level you are looking at the massing, the height and the scale of the proposed building in addition to how important the two resources are using the tools that you have used before in designation. The project has had some architectural changes based on the comments from HPC last week. We are asking that you review the design in the context of the whole project and looking at the importance of designation of these two buildings and the amount of restoration that is proposed for the Benton building. If the Benton building wasn't going to be designated the restoration wouldn't occur to the extent that it is. Staff is asking for a recommendation tonight to forward to council based on the designation of the buildings and conceptual development. The applicant can walk HPC through the changes. Stan Clauson and John Toya, architect. Stan said significant changes have occurred specifically the interface between Benton and the new building. This is a negotiation based on the preservation of two buildings to the community. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 14, 2011 John said the concern was the interface between the Benton building and the Aspen Core project. We tried to play off key elements of the Benton building and align portions of our building with it. We have significantly different floor heights. Benton's second floor is 9 feet and Aspen Core is 14 feet. We raised the ceil of the window to tie into the neighboring building. One other concern was the visual connection of the Benton building to the core building. It was problematic due to the retail use on the first floor. We previously requested bay windows and HPC was not supportive of that idea. We decided to investigate the erosion of the first floor and we pushed back the front so that it is flush with the facade of the Benton building and it is angled back. The use of brick on the second floor became heavy and we came up with another material that was more appropriate and we thought of a terracotta rain screen product which is like board and batten. It is through this material that we are able to tie into the Benton building. The parapet of the balcony ties into the CMU wall of the Benton building and there is a comer window to align. The chimney is back 11 feet. It is our intent to align certain elements to the Benton building. We have also lowered the chimney five feet. The Core doorway now aligns with the Benton building. On the roof we have separated the elements of the exit stair and elevator. Stan said the basic thrust is to be much more accommodating in linking the proposed building to the Benton building. With the roof plan we have eliminated elements and consolidated the area. Sara said at the last meeting the height of the building was proposed at 41 feet. John said the CMU will basically be in alignment with the upper part of the Benton building. Brian asked John why they angled the comer of the building next to the Benton building instead of just pushing it back? John said the depth of the walkway to the elevator is quite long and we shortened that a little. The angled wall makes it more interesting architecturally than pushing it back. Willis asked if there was a change to the vertical arrangement, the height of the store fronts? John said not floor to floor but we did raise the band to the ceil height. Willis also asked about the materials of the store front windows. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 14, 2011 John said the pilasters and bands will either be stone or we are going to go with a glazed terracotta. Vice -chair Ann Mullins opened the public hearing. Junee Kirk said preserving the historic district is important and you are preserving character on the block and I am still concerned about mass and scale. Possibly they could set back some of the buildings and use below grade area. Ann closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Ann said the commissioner comments should relate to the previous meeting and we need to make sure all concerns have been addressed. Brian said he appreciates the gestures made in tying into the Benton building. If we are designating the Benton building I want to make sure we are paying homage to it. You have made steps to tie it in. For myself I wanted to see the third floor pulled back a little further. If the applicant is not willing to pull back that portion of the new construction closest to the Benton building a little more I would ask that the height of that third block be dropped down to the height of the Benton building. Ann commended the applicant for doing a lot of work in a short amount of time. The applicant has demonstrated that there are ways to address the problem. The dramatic change from last week to this week, I am confident we can work with the applicant and come to some resolution. The applicant has done a good job of addressing the concerns from last week. I would support conceptual approval. Nora also thanked the applicant for coming back. Looking forward 20 years if those buildings are not designated and they are gone we will have the height of the core building clear up to the Ute City bank building and that would really be hard to look at. I feel the applicant has listened to what we have said. We are moving toward what we are looking for. The Ute City bank building and the scale of all those things together are important. I am glad of the changes made. Jamie also thanked the applicant. I am pleased with the changes made and the corner aspect of the building reads better squaring it off rather than angled. The top portion of the building next to the Benton building, you are 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 14, 2011 starting to have that context relationship with the Benton building and playing with materials. At final it will be important to see how those materials play against one another. How do we accentuate the concrete thin walls of the Benton building up against the material of the building next door? The two areas to study for final are the top portion to see if we can get set back a few more feet and also look at the angled window to make sure it works in context. With the changes made I can support moving forward. Willis said the application has come a long way. It is quite remarkable. The connection to the Benton building makes the Benton building better than what it ever was. There is a dialogue being developed and I would encourage you to go further. There are gestures that suggest that this is one project not 40 and I would just encourage you to minimally respond to the commercial design standards and not take them abstractly as you can. I see us going in the right direction in a positive way. MOTION: Jamie moved to approve the project as show, resolution #16 with the condition to restudy the upper level to see if we can set that back a little more and also to restudy the angle of the lower level; motion second by Ann. Jamie said the comer seems a little "forced ". Willis said he cannot support that and he likes the angled corner and it is the best part. It is doing precisely what it is supposed to do and it addressed the street level. It makes the Benton building as good as it can be. Ann said it doesn't have to change we just want to make sure it is the right gesture. Brian said he is not offended by the angle and it seems like an interesting gesture. Amended motion: Jamie amended to motion to withdraw restudying the angle of the lower level, second by Ann. Vote: Willis,yes; Nora, yes; Jamie,yes; Brian, no; Ann, yes. Motion carried 4-1. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 14, 2011 MOTION: Ann moved to approve resolution #17 for 517 E. Hyman to recommend to council designation of Little Annie's; second by Brian. All in favor, motion carried 5 -0. MOTION: Ann moved to approve resolution #18 for 521 E. Hyman to recommend to council designation of the Benton building; second by Nora. All in favor, motion carried 5 -0. 217 E. Bleeker — Conceptual, Major Development, On -Site Relocation, Demolition and Variances Ann moved to continue the public hearing and conceptual development on 217 E. Bleeker until January 11 second by Jamie. All in favor, motion carried. 205 S. Spring Street — Final Major Development, Conditional Use Review and Variances, Public Hearing Nora recused herself. Exhibit I — public notice Amy said this is final for the Berg house that has been a residential site since it was constructed in the late 1800's. It is in the commercial CI zone district. The application is to restore the house and build a detached second unit on the property. The applicant is requesting a rear yard setback variance and a residential design variance for the windows on the new building. A conditional use approval for two residences is also needed since this is a duplex. They also need a parking variance. Staff has a few re- design suggestions regarding the character of the first floor windows of the new structure vs. the upper floor windows which have small multi planes. We are suggestion that the windows be consistent. The fencing has been discussed and staff recommends a picket type fence. We are also suggesting that brick not be the primary material and use something that represents the wood siding of the historic house. The brick somewhat detracts from the historic building. Mitch Haas, Haas planning We feel we have done an admirable strong job of responding to everything we heard at conceptual, things like making sure the entrance to the Victorian is quite obviously the front entrance. We also softened the north facade of the new structure. 10 x — N H c9 M O O 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 • n 1I II II ...-/1. - 0 • I !� F O -- mIIII O n uuuumgL\ W 7. Z 1111 a o O r / N 1- ` 1 0 0 0 133NLS 2131Nf1H 0 1 w • o O m • O U O N z° wE All °; N. Q 1 ' A __ -��W /7. / i *, ,,.,, ...../ .1—f I p!TT\ ` / •/ / f .. r / / Mili IR ,mis . . 1eRIa ►emu W - I�H ,r Mir J Z r",111 = Q iii c...i smoin a Q U I- ra 2 w §, m 0 W fY I Ce U a u w g R 1 0 O Q U z O F6 q Ep m 1 \\ J 21'11 11 \ -- i °111'1`��i ...... iiii iii 1 I � U d W f a U N • S g • i io w ' 1111` p o co 1 r A 0 m o U ` o ,._.l A li I et / W / � C LL o_ - • ° W w ce _.J W m >- W J Y Ce Q . CD U a Q • 0 w U e De H W 1 O Fe i J 1 W S. i 1 r N _ O \ @ \ O O • I I • I 1 1 • O - O r 1 I I G I • 1 w p 1 1 - 1 4 1 �I 1 _ —1 1— CO p L s3unun, , r 1S 1 11 1 R:I a ez HUE ® '1I .�w • E, 1m� 1 i ® II V 1 E i1 9 • sI O � u ' � 1w1111a - 9 1 11 _ I�i1i111i1� — O 1 \\ iwi ig: g I w o 1 1 B I w O 9 w O L ui I 1 1111 111 . ? Cl. a '2 1 o El> N Q ¢ _ s .T _; .. - 'p - - -- - - - -- - II 0 _..__,. 0)— w _ 1^ rc I 1 w NN I � I I 1 rc r 1 1 Y 1 1 p �I ° f I IF r_ 1 1 1 1 • I 1 1 1 1 W J O 1 6 O O Y fY CO • U d Q • I- H w E W = Ur U I J Q i Y 1 W Y g s f N Q O M Q 0 Q O 0 I p D I I .-�[__i IIIw= IIIIIIIIIC „ - -- .:- -- — 0 III I =� ' w w w= m$ o p o : w L 2 , J 9 0 p !! U ' llll ll � a '1 11111 ,, z c� II � 0N�� IN IlY4 i _ m d a d I II I " 6 _ _° w © !1 1 11 — ii 1nJi I IIih ! w iii vs I � ' = = = =. - .--- III III 0 U IJI: 1. 1. II CD 1 I I J w O U O O _, Q Ca U a Zv; Q U g w r k L1 U i 1 w p 1 1 8 M `- Q \ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O e 4 I 0 II I / , Illy 1 ig ..'..� ..ate ,. 9 ` - = 0o .2 j I e m■ 0 - 0 ti I _ li I / 4 _ I co O L 11111111111 . n c) IIII1111 ! 1�, m W c K. (1) 0- 1.1-1 Q .1...a. �i1 L p C ,11111 # � ' I p I — —- - -- — — ' , I ; 0 t L 1 I � 1 0 w J 0 0 0 0 O cc Q m U a z vi Q U w k LLI = K J Q I t W Y 1 i N V Q 0, Q Q 0 1 1 o i ! __ o = w I 1 �- I I 0 1 1 � m_, Olg O __ — — - -- -_ — 0 ' i' 1 : liliPPPII1 pw W o 1;1;11,1,1;1,1,1 •lIN 11,1,,1 I w i 1 i 1 ' 1 i 1,1,1 i 111 � 1 ;1 ;1 ; 1 ,1.1;1 , ;1;1; 1 ,! ;m Ce . v o 11 ;1,1 ;1,1,1 ;1',1, 1,1,1,1,1 1,1 ,1,1,1,1 O O m Vm d lii,l 1 III lIll1l 1II N I;1 M IIIp!1; `-' ; 1, 1, 11, 1, 1 111!.Ij I Q 1 1 11 -, =1 11 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q � III �I;I;I;I;I;I;I;I;t;1;1;1;1 Ad ! 1! 1! 1luls,l61!IlaslYILIlLI16111111 ,� - ... 111 1 PI /•1 1 1 1 19.1 : I a , � t 1' I1y11 ! 1 .ip 1 o G`i 1;' I ;�1;i1 ! r © — � H IMF ,.,; l�hr.!!al!!ll.lah�l��l� ll!! 1,1, : ` � Ii4l i li !�� III : IIIIII�� ; 11!11!! I 11 ' in 1;1 IIII j L !1 I 1 i !II 1I1 IW I1 u 1i0 d 1 iil 1 $ '''1' 1 l� 1 � � ' 2 llllil 1,1,1 E ,1,1,1 j�, i 1 1 ','' , ; . j.1•ImPPg1 1 l I'11l1111111�1i1''i1 ;1;1;1 g$ W i ' ii hi ! Mil i'iliilllll l ll l l 1n i v :4 ; iili iiiiiEi 1 11 I ;1,1,1, III i{11;1;1,1,1,1 l ,1,1,11 ;,1,1,1, II,I;I,1,1 1,, 1 ! ! ! I,1 1 1 1,1,1,1,1 1 1,1,1,1,1 1 1 1,1,1,1 / CC ; 1 ;11 11 � !41!1!111 1 61.11 ;lll la.l.l.11LLLbla ` � . , Illd . e.0 � 1 'i!i!: © - — - - — 41i1 l 1i1�1l1;1,1 l 1 W •1 1 1 1 11 1;!' 1 ' i ' 1 1 1 1 lll l l P 19.199• — � ' 1 a '1 � 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1'1 l 1 � 1 1 1 -! 1 ll 1 1 P ul l 1 1 11;1;1;1, I I II pIIIll : ; r' 11 1 1 ll1 1 1 1 1 1 LC �;1;1;III;1 ; ;;;1; , ,; ;1;1 ; 1 ; 1 ; 1 ; 1;1 ;1;1;1;1;1 1 1; 1; 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 q ! llll1; � �1.11' 1111111' 11111111111 ; 111 1 1 ii w W 3 II lllll l l l l l l l l l l l1;1 ;1;1 ;1;1; 1 , ;1 ;1 ;1;1; •r ;11;1 1; 1;1 ;1;1 ;1;11;1nlllllllll;1 ;1 ;1, ,14 3 L 111, 1 1 l ;1 ;1 1 1 ;1 ; 1 ; 1 ; 1' 1;1 1 ;1;1 ; ; 1 ; 1 ; 1 , 1 ; 1 ; 1 ;1 ;1 ll 1 ; 1I ; I ; ,1,1,1 1 ; 1; 1; 1;1;1 ; 1;11 u. w m 1;1 I,I,1,1, ,1,1 11 11,1;1,1,11,11,,1,1,1,1,1 1 1, 1 r 1 Ell 1 111,1 ,1,1,1,1,,1 ,1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ,1,1,1; 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 , ,1, ;,1, ;1;1 r l 1 1 0 ; ;;�1 �� ;;�; ; :. ;;1;; ;1 ; ; :' :': e;;1; ;;1 ;1; ; ;� ;� �;�;'1; P.,I1.11;�;�;ili9iiy. :I, 0 Ce 111114!11111 IIIIiJ 1!1111111111 11 1 111 ;; ;;;Ri;1 ; 11;• :;1;11;! 1111'1 ;, ;,; ;1111 ;111 ;111'11'1111111 , l1 '1 h1`4�u 1 �I�lil Ati ,1 !!61!1!11111111!lIi11L1_LL ngibLLlh4111 LIWd1l;iil 1 I I 1 1 1 W I O O i i t g W co J W LL u_ Q m r- N N LL LL co W c u. 4 J N [ N N o S co < 0 ..� w± O V 0 O V I.. N F N N Z N W W XLL Z LL co N U. N O w rc W () °NLL 4 F O !H O N N N O O j / j j / , N F IC �I j�. :LI o .� v? 1 P�.Ijj / n W¢ LL r l N y V: AfJ. ✓I�✓t C 4 �Ci CO ¢ CC EL O O Y O Y O y O � j � J%' . i C o pQ N C'D W ,� ° m / W W O N co U¢ f � N N LL N J p � z/. I �- m a Lc , 1 rcm Q 20 J CC 2 $ o !n O co uo Z I Z j `- 3 0O a 2 I_ n m Iri — 4 w 2 I w ¢ a O O UZ O O CC CC O J U O » L z J w W w LL LL H V N - cn J m K O U = O 1 1- - rn U wyy LL N F- O Z Na�3S K E °a� qty Z LL N LL LL N ° o zre N o N N o n ¢Q p O O ° o LU J LL O N M \ :—/ze-fd4 • ri �z /��•�•�•�• LL I .. . . i iii LL N 1 t ," wa / z 0 ce co N o o v w' 0�a _ Fi / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / � L 0 LL O N N M N a0 / W .iI FP...C!'�j.���r♦�t�z �2 !0 XI r y 1 � �/. p O J I / 1 V 0 Z z ii 0 Q ¢ z I f 0 U P 2 a I C W C W0Ct • LL N N N = w N 6 (n¢ N co co O O N 7 Um ¢ W LL O O N m 0l °° wwp °S O CC co M N c W C A Is m Q in oz z LL LL W w Wm U w LL y O J J W co M N co A O Z N to O N lo Ce O N W W OLL LL O LL I- 0 O 0 w Q J w p _1 0 a J LL J N 0 r G w l ¢ ¢ co 11.1 11.1 F Z O O U o ¢ O F F ut N Ip U = c. W F O M N N z w a z w 1 y z \ 1 II r I 3 � p � oz p I w E ).LD j I !i�1��m m I^ Z U � t' IL i_ 2 0 �I••• •V 111 O . ' !n n�. m �.� Yo �1f. d Q ii ` • . ` ' ' • ' • ' • ' • ' • ' ' ' •'• '•' �'' w 1 u r �..t N.1. o 1 l lll ll l l r 1.....1�I T..L:. i a II w • y a w i Y yc. a f i g r . v i m a 4 G� / o I § 0 a F I I U 1 w;o ii Y m o H w , ee a w2 t Ii.) V ;' J ¢ a 0 E 4 i ° _ E o w rc I N_ M O ; o pO O 8 ; o IN LL I� LL I S N V LL 1 1 U a W Z O Z W tN� ELT,, .. 1 , ~❑ I i V yl-.Z p fd " W Vjp 0OU 1 1 0 - - - Ii'I, I - , I t r■■' mood ■' ■f■ al I U ■■ ■11 j �Ijj IIIII I 1"""" ri '= 1 • U■■ M ■1■ � 1 � O z i 1 Ii iII u uuuIiu u I I uuI � ■ I �� �� I O e MI 0 I �� 11111.1111 li u h 1 1 I 1 1iII ■II 1 1 1 1■ l �■ I U_ • W I I I I I • �■■ ill a � = 1111011 11 li I II O N a �I��I�Ii ` 1 �� 1 1 ��1 1!11 ��I 0 1 ■■■■■■■■■h■■■■■■■ 1 N - 11 V 7, n I,I .I .I n z � S i .__IIIIU1 tiliI�I'Ilifili ■d M f2 Q Zia �I u Q Q >WU Y Z Z � a=° i mUm Ill - . I��y� 1 i � ... II I ......., ..., .., i 2-z 1, I 1p i� 0 �� U II 5 I !! l,_ p -- - - C -- - O 1 ¢ E V3 1 � =3 ? �wuJ Z NU m U 1 gl hV - § — IJL U NN �Z� c E 1 N 0 Fg °I° g? Ql� 1 aLIE I �Y I w 6 Y Q CO V a Z vS < 1- C U � G w cc ~ W U c 1 ¢ W 1 I r i 1 : o 14 am gI N Q I —0 —0 I, = I —ip C: . 0 I�Irlo mg 1 1_t11I!IL•1111. LIII I ..,.= - :IIi. m -o —= �II•���IIII�i o . 0 3 R o� C a °w a 3 li � aU pZ S- r d _ I - 4 - © _ - _ - _ _ C I�IItII111 • i ll I h fi .. ..___ \ I lt 0 MI gw 7 0 5 I ii \ IF ,, U Z x H' O _ I - k t- - LLJ g v • Ell E tg MOW = -� t i► I I ■ p m 111 z 111 I il . � 0- a p 111 1 ∎ Q ■ ��� ■ IV w 11 I 1111111111 _ III • 1 " ill . 1 Elli M N — I'1 1 o � o � � i 1 IV I IVIL N a ■ I W L. 2 I 010111 r 1 � • iiiiiii U 11/11111 li �� 1 E iiuiii,nr iiiu ■■ ■■■ F 1 1 D.% i ns.. ....M ■ ! N■■■■■■U■■i■■■■■■■ I 1/1111/1 r4 1 1 11 =1 I ii � a - 1 FT � - l■■ ■I■■ �� I " ' • �,::■■■■■■:;:■ ■ ■i■■ i aI O - -- N I I C w k PJ bH J g ��, a , w�t 8 UU 0 §0 of 00 O • LL g o o o �I N W° • 1-1-1 U E 0 2 R i 4 , 3 ow LL 6.Wp �o � • � �LL �§'' ,- N OU N v g � i Sip k a Hrc ,o O LL'�� LLIN �=a LL O 2 f7 � ~ I N � u W2 � qq J r F F �N 6�i LL 1 I I fllma i - ii ..•• g — Ilium I 1 i1 L L VIL 1 k e� 1111111■11■ Mid il II! 11E ■1111 i II1H „.■■111111 P, .,,, . HffluH 111' 11 ■■ 1.1 ii .! . ,. - L .11 • • __ Mi • -- - 111 ■ 11■ !11 w ■ iii, Mk ; MN i 0 7 2 I III z III 111 = M w ci 1111111 Q -I- r I , 7 I $ �� I I I p -- -- — ' — - � -- l i ° 3 1 g 3 1 w 1 J I Y 1 m U I o: Zvi QI- 2 U I W $ F_ I V E 81 J Q 1 i 516 W i t 1 c o • _ 0, m I r 1 1 II. i 1 i C,1 I 1 �- �� - 441.4:n!r!rnHi.hh. r anumil �'., \ 11 1111r nnIIml_ 1111 a. N ,, �` _ � I � _ > 1 �k �, �1m w -i 01,11 w cc f wit ,, ' AU. Illtilikl D Z .‘,, , \ !AL > ■ Q / \\\\\ \ 7mH'Z'AIIIIL ›- N Nis \ \ \111vi 1fi iii1/4,, ' ` \\ \ �. - i \W11 W1 =ill"' t,V - =_ , 1 w I 1 CZ m U o z ° U W C a. a Cn a i %I //!!/d/ 1 I e �. 2�• � 1= / ^ter -.,,41 / I. i- +D 1 � 1 0. 11 1iiII�1IUUII11lhl 11 , .n\ 111 Ilt iss■■■uali ■■■■ iainial4ii uiia 11111111 > .1 - A . -, II ,,.. ..I=7 I 6' -, y fi 1115 (n • u "As 1111Wai n_-1,"---- iHHhi 111111111 a um: i I- s. _ 1 '■■- w �� ���� LU u ■■ ■e 1 u tana INiliul cc ,,,, wa 1 V\ I, .....0 D , _.,___,,.: . Lii J iii A n _AI cy - � �� l _l ll INA..A� Q : l 1 =! _ Q r U w g III W = 9 Ur U i xxxeio _ i J Q 4 i W d 1 g 1 C7 N 0, r- ed ❑ Z Z U W OC7 KW ❑u. ~Z wwo =‘ r„ 35� y NcUnU ❑J y� ��F- • Z U J �i 33 2 �a muu + II I C? .b , I / I . ._ _..\ Ilt. ,.... , rI". M 1 - •' / - -- h 1 + ' + u+ 1 iiiiiiial -_ -- 1111 ,ill Z 1. O - it � ; • / '�) 6 1 ' Iy. ■ di ■ N a O / / `, W I �� I� , m o z a —� I I 1 1'1' w g Z3?i WM - 1 ° ' ! f l. / t ■ � � ' LL� ❑ J ', . I 1 1 I I og tam r iii i O Z m WR II 111 �� q U / � ► �� by 41 ,. 0 a. 111PPI w _,„ ,,____.„, e`' \ ii E. ‘,. 4. ,_ ,, , •,,,,, , ,, ,_., ..i..... r e „ r 1 1 1 1' ' 11 1 1 '. 1 1 I�� ■ ' ' ■ W r t .. I i l -:.III �; �1 o cc o2 _. IMuuira U O a� oaf I U 1�� .. W C a, — �.: ■ / _,, •• Al • _ •• w 0 Z w re W '.. l,?/ may' , W . ' iii! w 1 r w i a 1 I 42vnn,�y a I j i 1 . ,. {' - t / / $ ., ; I� i 'Il��jll���� I i . ,l jt 11 r 1 1 " I ' I 41 4 ' 1 I I ifi 1 �I A f, a v � iii 9, \ \ ,# (II . ' Ltili Lu k.�l { . ►I I,11 II . � , 1 , ! f 1 I I !! I j m . . L e , a Ma - `I rc �yl17 aa F ti , " .< w 50 1 i',' -," I _- 1 CD U * i 1' J Q I' I Y W i i i O N 1— / O ''nn \ M VJ 2 D J ■Ii IiiiiiiiwompumilimamE. . , ,,_ a _ _ • . ..7‘- . . "' � ii •.� tip. ^' Y - ��' i , s3t , V�JiY ^ -�W �- 0 • • i Irit W X w . :i !la" : •,, Ill 11 . CC 0 J 0 0 Ct • 0 0 ,� . _ o o 0 o Q o o v Z w • z m a Pi N ¢ ¢ •I } + :.! r . t r -� 1, - {'j 3 Q J U w Z O U) J f CL __.1 W < Q 0 z U; o 2 w Q f: Lu _ • Y L7 cc U J ¢ u_ Y i m W i R or wo,9uplueIJeosMMM woaauryueldeos®Olw 8000x6/0L63 faz.Sx6/0[61 �/`� anuany uoid adoospuo adoosTaaa4s um opetolo�•uadsy ]ea1; nom xty V1 I. 1 suols(nab arsap arms. Zurue eid•anulaiivtn adeoapuel. :a ;ea uoua�(H '3 L LS ' lZS ado uedsy 3111 S31tlI00SStl NOSf1tll0 Ntl1S'a °° • :193115 31 99d L t 1 7 I1 ! I `m II Q a m i� m v ° �, a 8 „„, 1 11 my �: ., lip v __ e c ���'� 5 p� T e a � o I[I E 2 i e 1 r ■ $► m c w m L � / ' NISI e 1 € a ° E t 2. ■ i �� �`1 to l Y Q E i . u. .1 1 1 :1 ■ ■ ` � - Q \ U a t i . !: li. O BI 0 w a I ! 11 v ° ii � . g LL Y r 1 'Lllllllli ►l�� I' � .. ` 5�.� .' � k i p 4 ! E U @ ' ( _ _ . y_i `. E E m m v m o . - 01 II11 1 ma I o a ` l a. u CD to it t Z LI ` I'1 �, 41, 1�111 !� 1 4 p _ �d e a a IIIa III ( -- -'� II!� "gip G I01 -__ - • :._ I ii 8 1 ilL 4 t11� ' S C gip 1 I o m R ___ '� Ilk. Q –.—. L w a . . mgr. wJr. gliwi "grr imur. (III 6 Hunter Street 9 P. $ s 16 E 0 S woo9uluueldeas'MMM wm9wuueldnspolw anuany siio4aa adgasIaaa4s ex %loft o[dl Cx[x- Sx(yd[69 u9,9 oPnola�'uadsy pans IIrtY ypoN ns Z 7 V1 JO A 1 alsaD I,nfar'fuluueld'• L[ dnsoual :alga UOWAH •3 LIS ' LZS ado uadsy 3 S31VI3 Nosnvi Nv1S =bsaws zi - talva , v Y m 0 m m Nre d LL 6. CO p co n 'a € a 3 he ti "��m 5 v 1 m1 !w 1 1 z '' .- a � U in W B ° t: E 3 o '1 t moo = o d ' b e °- ti m 3 a� n I 0_ c •MJ nn n= il II Q 4 .I I 1 -II-11=11 h , -C i! ({ 1 f 'I lcll II II II 8 - dig " [ II II 11 II- r i , 7 0- l 0 r il E F 1F I Me ta 11 1.1! i 1_0V4tirri ' L I= ►r � i � I- li \ *4 II II 11 II- O � 1 l I =111.=11 N �s— O M SL =nau- 0 0 y d 0 i till I = 44 O • - V 13 TS 0 C CS p c.. s.. 3'. .. n=ir l it C II=11 -I p m v: IIp =1I I_I; i hl U e• 11-11 -Ilc to r =r� =I 1' 1 u 2 m 1 'I c H i —. w p • fdm p ' `., -. t om ' a d ��II - ��>��6♦vwvvvvtwa ?k I - , m 1.Obttv,♦ndt 6H tv` r c ..N v` �� , I � E I > v� evvvv :s." 41:11 O 1) 8141;;;4 N V `. M il l / ?Sr ii �n ri 1 ,.: t ::. „pp../ ,,,, 4' di 104 x bZ h , / o PM' t h t � � ♦ N � s a ♦ I CO• , F t♦ a t♦ t♦ t$ v v it tt r • t♦••p ek. 63w53u6 ta . e S: .I I I I 1 11111111111111111111111111 In■.idE■N■.■.■. to 11.6‘142111111111111% I� -- - O n 0 i �.■mr.■. ■.■.■ rd ���.t \ \.;t ♦t 4 ♦t� ♦t (� 0 �'� IIIII111111111111IIIIIIIIIIIIII ye co hNV '.tsbl Ch }t Ns' N♦♦� ` v �� ' 6 � 2 u h 2 +tt � 'CC t NN ♦''♦tv v��N 1 �' o its �� a` a ,1 �T ��'� P?a 4 '7{' .N ° . 1 �1. `� y V. CD N B , � v ' � • :t�,,:4tS °t` ♦ p 4' - m z IH ti tk..viv a^ v�ti . +. Q���� v 'v t b �v�.K4 ' I ,�� al 1 . x 5 ci i i EI i i I l 1i z ' 1 i i I 2 V I h 1 A. d Q ° \ \1\ l )116- I V^ 1 a...,... ,....., , ..... ,,,,„ 1 k----- •-• --..-... rz. a - ; 1 i „. __ __ ,... . -.t. '''-• _ .. ".°P' 1 . -- - „e4 4- •..A .. -....- - _ f • , t ---. -. __, , 7 I -`- ._._.. •-• * 4 f I ' i t • . ,‘ 4., ...-" -: illsa 1 t . - .'", . , , ' i • .. I , , 1 1 • 1 ,,,,i ; i 4 ." t ' • ' ... ; I i t p ..., - F - I • .., t.1 1 ,, I! I. , I , . • ,,,, *0„ t 4 .! t , t . 4 • f • 1 4 I •• . 4 1 i 1 ,.... 41" 1 • ' 1 •11• , i , • lo ■ 1 . Is - - - . i ' •-, , i t t • . . ,„ • . 1 • i 1 ia . 110 11 A • ; 1 1 ' 1 % i : I . • • , . 1 1 1 t . . , t k i iii41 1 * • i a *I . PO . i • i 0 i ' I ' i I : ;.. ' . • S' 0 , / 1 111/4 1 11 % I 1 I 1 1 ' I , r 4 , , , i ,, j • ,,, • ,44 , ■ , '' 1 I 1 l'• . 1 I - — "0 '''' 4 ...,, ,, . , . , . i .i , r. • --- •• o p , • . , •,,,,,,,,,,. , , ..,, i = i %.11111 4 . • - le i i . 1 i , ... . , ple-i 3k tigcc, .4- c.044.4_ .0-g. (3-keidA..itit4e,tertt ; 6044..."_., 4..tsiotit_estfrict �b ec UPS * Stis de ' 1...: ....44*.. 414.. • ''....'- tuic .,.... I - . j A -,...001.." * ■We 9drieleeptc .= ' - ...., •" ....., . _ . , . ...., _ ...., , ....... r -.....- :.. -.' ' . ' - 1.•-•-• -*.•-•"-- i -• k t ' , .7:7" 1 . 1 . 1 . ' --, • .._._ _... -- -• ... -- . '--....._ t ' •- ---...,„ - . 4 4 OP Pitt% WA t , '•,; . i t . , • I , I No/ 11 L ', I 11 11, --- . $ „.... , • ,,, I e'y - , i . ,, , /fr --•-..__ - lAlt 1 r i , -- , ' . 1 , ; : - 1 .., 4 „, 4 , : 1 I 1 . , r . s .._ I- , 4_ 1 I t 1 -; pl.. 4 ' t ,...'” • • - ,' I i "1. ---- ,7 1 . 1 0 4, `' • , , , - 4...,„ .. '4, 11 It 4.,, 7>C - - 4 f ' Ill 4 f ' ' 1 1 II „.- „, , k t '; Ll 14 il 1 4 ,.. 1 i h . 4 Illtit;. - f , f • .. - -..- - ,.. . - ,...4 ...--- .• , i ' i i * 4 -. ---. , .' I i 0', - •••• -- . . I i 1 •4! ... , • i : 0, ,,,, e r A // 1 i I ' '1 1 I ! 1. i.) ;o0 il ' „ lir . „I„,- •, l ' . 4 ,, i 4 / .4 ,... -. WO . .. 1011 '.. 1 '''. ' , • . *,. . ' .. 4 . . . . • • ,,, _ ., ' ( _ ,.1. (nit, a i 1 r 11 sle . .. . - a• a C. 41/ &r ie A A iii( A4 Ma; fp ■ ' ' leCjilL Sara Adams P.m: Steven Skadron [skadron @comcast.net] Sunday, January 08, 2012 6:54 PM Chris Bendon Subject: Fwd: Lt. Annies Chris - For the public record: Begin forwarded message: From: tbutler029 Subject: Lt. Annies Date: January 7, 2012 3:24:05 PM MST To: skadronna,comcast.net Hi Steve, Needless to say, I am certainly against tearing down or destroying Lt. Annies in any way. Thx for support on that. Terry C le Residence Hotel 305 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Tel: 970- 920 -6532 1 Fax: 970- 925 -1125 Email: tbutler029 1 Website: www.AspenResidence.com Email secured by Check Point L 1 Sara Adams Fr n: Steven Skadron [skadron @comcast.net] Sunday, January 08, 2012 6:54 PM Chris Bendon Subject: Fwd: annie's /benton For the public record: Begin forwarded message: From: Bruce Berger <bberger(a�rof.net> Subject: annie's /benton Date: January 7, 2012 8:02:05 PM MST To: hitorre a,aol.com Cc: skadron ,,comcast.net, adam @hroarkassociates.com Deat Torre, Steve and Adam, Because I am currently out of town and unable to attend meetings, I would like to express by email my hope that saving and restoring the Benton Building and Little Annie's will prevail over development plans, should an accommodation between the respective parties prove unattainable. The Benton Building is valuable both for its unusual architectural expression of an artist better known for his graphics, as well as a venue for events that had )us i mpacts on the town. Little Annie's is a cultural institution especially treasured for providing a `t.. coming relief to the overdesigned coldness of too many newer restaurants that impress -- then repel. I hope you will see to it that these contiguous treasures are retained as part of Aspen's heritage. Bruce Berger • (Box 482/925 -1647) Aspen Email secured by Check Point • 1 Sara Adams Steven Skadron [skadron @comcast.net] - Sunday, January 08, 2012 6:54 PM jE! Chris Bendon Subject: Fwd: Hecht proposal on Little Annies area For the public record: Begin forwarded message: From: Diane Stouffer <diane(awildamerica.com> Subject: Hecht proposal on Little Annies area Date: January 7, 2012 7:50:12 PM MST To: hitorre(a�aol.com, skadrot,comcast.net Cc: adam(p hroakassociates.com Please support Mick on another threatening proposal by Hecht development by not giving permission to build a larger, higher, bigger building for obvious reasons. The historic nature of the core has been compromised enough already. Studio B, for instance, has awful architectual taste and has uglified each building they have built excluding any historic appearance and detail in keeping with the old, historic buildings. Haven't we lost enough charm already. These plans don't show ' and just looks like another ugly building with no character. ‘41 MIrM Take another look at the Limelite and continuing block up hill. Look at the hodge podge of materials used on the outside of those 2 block buildings. You have multiple, non - meshing, materials used. Not a nice historic look at all. What happened to the Fire station and the Thrift Shop? Architecual craziness at its best. Just fast, no brainer thinking and reviewing. Modern, not nice. Check out the old Tippler area location. Same thing. Whats with those large slabs of rock looking siding ?? Other cities have architecual restrictions and strict reviews to keep a look and feel in keeping with their • historical towns. Whats up with ours? Take a firm stand like they do. Please Thanks Dian Email secured by Check Point r 1