HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.The Nugget Lodge.032A-84 r
s
r
•
•
IPP
P
lim
r
6
N u get L th a g
r
L� 3 DMP ISD4
h.
r
w •
LAW OFFICES
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
✓ 80x 10001
315 EAST HYMAN AVENUE
a ASPEN. COLORADO 81611
October 1, 1984 TELEPHONE
r AREA CODE 303
DAVI GIDEON I. 1S KAUFMAN 8258166
DAVID G. EISENST EIN
HAND DELIVERY
Alan Richman
.. Planning Office
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: 1984 L -3 GMP Competition /Nugget Lodge
Dear Alan:
r
Enclosed please find the following:
r 1. Twenty -one copies of Nugget Lodge 1984 GMP
Application.
2. Check payable to the City of Aspen in the
amount of $2,730.00 as application fee.
3. Copy of Transamerica Title Insurance Company
policy no. 7302993, showing proof of ownership.
Pursuant to § 24 -11.3 (di the Nugget has already
.. received HPC conceptual approval for the proposed addition
and will obtain final approval from HPC before a building
permit for the new addition is obtained. We would also
request a concurrent special review to increase the FAR as
is required in the L -3 zone.
We believe this completes the application, however
if you need anything additional please let us know. Thank
you for your attention to these matters.
Very truly yours,
.. LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN,
a Professional Corporation
r
By
Gid n Kaufman
GK /kl
Enclosures
cc: David Gibson
Robert Morris
0
i
NUGGET LODGE APPLICATION FOR
tia GMP L -3 ALLOTMENT
October 1, 1984
SUBMITTED'TO: City of Aspen Planning Department
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
• Phone: 303/925 -2020
APPLICANT: Hotel Aspen, Ltd.
ir 730 E. Durant
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: 303/925 -1250
Fr ATTORNEYS: Gideon Kaufman and David G. Eisenstein
Law Offices of Gideon I. Kaufman, P.C.
" 315 E. Hyman Avenue, Suite 305
P.O. Box 10001
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: 303/925 -8166 1
It `
ARCHITECT: Gibson & Reno Architects
203 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: 303/9255968
to
•
.
1
1
t
f
t
IL
y TABLE OF CONTENTS
E 'er A. LODGE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION.
1/11. 1. Project description
aa. Water system.
L bb. Sewage.
cc. Drainage
dd. Development area.
ee. Traffic.
ff. A djacent land uses.
'— gg. Construction schedule.
I
2. Site Utilization Maps.
its aa. Architectural drawings.
bb. Landscaping /site plan.
_ cc. Circulation /site plan.
dd. Major street or road links /locator map.
I .. ee. Description of surrounding existing uses /zoning
'map.
—
B. REVIEW CRITERIA
Asw 1. Availability of public facilities and services.
r ' aa. Water. .
bb. Sewer.
cc. Storm drainage.
dd. Fire protection.
ee. Roads.
2. Quality of or improvements to design.
,. aa. Architectural design.
bb. Site design.
}• cc. Energy conservation.
dd. Parking and circulation.
ee. Visual impact.
F s 3. Amenities.
IL aa. Availability of or improvements to the existing
IL aa.
common meeting areas.
,. bb. Availability of or improvements to the existing
on -site dining facilities.
ry. cc. Availability of or improvements to the existing
on -site accessory recreational facilities.
l
fir
I ' 4. Conformance to local public policy goals.
I• aa. Provision of employee housing. •
bb. Conversion of existing units.
cc. Rehabilitation and reconstruction of existing
units.
.. 5. Bonus points.
•
t ATTACHMENTS
1. Conceptual program.
MAPS AND DRAWINGS
1. Site plan.
2. Floor plans.
.. 3. Utility plan.
4. Location map
•
•
r
r
r
1
r
0
ft
it
i t A. LODGE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION.
•
1. Project description. This Application for
GMP allotment under § 24 -11.6 of the Municipal Code of the
City of Aspen (hereinafter "City Code ") seeks an allotment
•
for fourteen (14) lodge units to be built in conjunction
with the improvement and rehabilitation of thirty -three (33)
existing lodge units located at the Nugget Lodge, 110 W.
• Main Street, Aspen, Colorado. This property is legally
described as follows:
East one half of Lots E and 0, all of Lots F, G,
H, I, P, Q, R and S, Block 58, City and Townsite
�.. of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado.
• This project is located within the L -3 zone on real property
containing 26,996 ± square feet. There presently exists on
the property a lodge containing thirty -three (33) units of
which thirty -two (32) are lodge rooms and one (1) is an
employee unit. The lodge also currently contains a lounge
breakfast area, an outside swimming pool, a jacuzzi and an
office. The total developed square footage including
renovation under way at this time is 19,915. The fourteen
(14) lodge units for which the Applicant is seeking a GMP
allotment under this Application will constitute an
expansion of the existing lodge and will represent an
additional 5,020± square feet of development.
Pursuant to § 24 -3.4 of the City Code which allows
I an external floor area ratio of 1 -1 with special review
approval in the L -3 zone, the Applicant, under this GMP
Application, has the right to build an additional 7,081
square feet on the property. This Application calls for
�. construction of an additional 5,020 square feet therefore
the Applicant complies with density requirements. This
project meets the other area and bulk requirements set forth
lim in § 24 -3.4 of the City Code. The Applicant, sensitive to
the City policy for preservation and upgrading of existing
lodges, is planning significant renovation and upgrading to
the thirty -three (33) existing units in the lodge along with
the construction of the high quality fourteen (14) new
units. Thus the lodge use in this location will be
r, preserved, upgraded and expanded in conformance with City
111". policies which will be of benefit to the surrounding
neighborhood and the community in general as well as fitting
in perfectly with the intent and nature of the L -3 zone.
111 Once a GMP allotment is secured, Applicant will
.. concurrently apply for special review to establish external
floor area ratio.
®� - 1 -
I
IL
0
I
I L aa. Water System.
As is indicated in a letter from the City
Water Department, the proposed development can be supplied
IL
by the existing facilities. There is sufficient excess
capacity available from the City water supply to supply the
proposed development. Six inch water mains are in Main
P. Street and Garmisch Street adjacent to the property. A two
inch service line off of Main Street currently serves the
existing units on the subject property. Water pressure in
,, these lines is approximately 90 -100 P.S.I. The anticipated
water demand is expected to fall well within the normal
lodge standards. The project is located very close to the
main fire station (less than .5 miles) so facilities already
L exist to provide fire protection to the project. Fire
hydrants are located at the northeast corner of the property
F and sixty -five feet (65') from the main entrance to the
property across Garmisch Street at the Aspen Clinic.
bb. Sewage.
11.- The project will served by the Aspen
Metropolitan Sanitation district which has sufficient excess
.. capacity available to serve the proposed development. As is
evidenced in a letter from the Aspen Metropolitan Sanitation
District. An eight inch trunk line exists in the alley
directly adjoining the property which is already connected
to the property. Estimated system usage will be within the
rr norm for lodge use. The existing treatment plant can easily
accommodate the anticipated demand' according to the Aspen
Sanitation District manager.
cc. Drainage.
Historic site drainage from the site will be
improved. Roof drainage will feed directly from internal
gutters to dry wells for all roofs. All surface runoff will
be maintained on site. •
It dd. Development Area.
Present existing lot coverage of the
"' thirty -three (33) units equals 16,052 square feet. The
,proposed addition will increase lot coverage only to 17,493±
fi r square feet. The internal square footage presently existing,
r is 19,915 square feet. The proposed addition will add15,02015
square feet to this figure, for a total internal square
fr footage of 24,935 square feet. 9,503 square feet of the
property is devoted to open space or landscaping.
lir ee. Traffic.
Based on the City of Aspen's calculation
values of vehicles per lodge room, the added number of
It vehicles anticipated for this project is seven (7), during
- 2 -
It
r
IL 0 0
.
IL periods of full occupancy. The property is serviced by Main
. Street, Garmisch Street and First Street. All the streets
•
IL are main thoroughfares and very wide and can adequately
handle all anticipated traffic. It is expected that seven
(7) motor vehicles will use or be stationed in the proposed
development. The hours of principal daily usage cannot be
r- accurately determined but it can be expected that hours will
be consistent with typical lodge use in the City of Aspen.
There will be fourteen (14) on -site parking places supplied.
IL All of these are off - street parking. Existing bicycle
routes and paths are very close to the project. Bicycle
., racks will be provided on the property. Most bus routes
1 goes past the property on Main Street. This proposed
development discourages automobiles usage in various ways.
The site is within easy walking or bicycling distance of all
L essential commercial and retail services and activities.
The property is located directly on all existing bus routes.
■ ff. Effects of Proposed Development on
IL Adjacent Land Uses.
The proposed development is fully compatible
... with surrounding uses in the neighborhood and will
IL positively enhance and complement, the local character of the
neighborhood. There are several lodges y n the immediate
neighborhood both across the street and down along Main
Street from the property. The Pitkin County library and a
IL medical clinic is across Garmisch Street from the property
as is also a residential fourplex: immediately to the west
of the property is Arthurs Restaurant. Thus the lodge use
IL at the property has been an existing beneficial use in the
neighborhood, for some time and the proposed development
will only enhance this use. Further uses in the
IL neighborhood are mixed and yet of a complementary character.
gg. Construction Schedule.
•' No phased construction is planned and actual
IL construction is expected to be completed within six (6)
months of commencement. Construction is anticipated to
■ begin in April, 1985, with completion by November, 1985.
I L 2. Site Utilization Maps.
The information contained in this Section
IL supplements the maps and plans submitted with this
Application.
Si
aa. Applicant has given thorough
consideration to energy conservation and solar energy
.. utilization features available to this property. The
I L insulation characteristics of the project exceed the
- 3 -
1 F
0 0
IL W '
requirements of Aspen's stringent energy conservation and
thermal insulation code. Strict attention has been paid to
all facets of architectural design and construction detail
to create an energy efficient, esthetically pleasing
project. Required insulation R- values have been exceeded
IL for wall, floor and roof sections.
Solar gain aspects of the project have been
explored and integrated into the design theme in an
IL esthetically pleasing and energy producing manner.
Horizontally mounted freon solar collectors will be fitted
,. to heat the domestic hot water supply. In the existing
portions of the project uninsulated concrete block (totaling
210 lineal feet) is being insulated to meet code. Single
glazed glass is being replaced with double paned glass.
tit This includes a total of fifty -four (54) individual window
units having a combined area of 1,350 square feet of glass.
bb. The project has been designed to
preserve and enhance natural trees and vegetation and to
EL maximize available open space. The trash area is located
out of the way off the alley and is screened from view on
all sides. The parking areas are, screened and landscaped as
I
much as possible. The project plan preserves the eight to
twelve foot (8' -12') honeysuckles which are being maintained
on site along Sleeker and will serve to screen parking. The
IL seventy to eighty foot (70' -80') blue spruce trees on the
property are preserved and will serve to screen the parking.
I�
cc. All required parking is accessed off the
IL alley and located off the street on the site. There will be
one parking place for each new lodge unit. All parking is
located along the perimeter of the property so as to ease
circulation flow and improve access to and from the project.
As is indicated above natural degetation is maintained
on -site and serves to screen the parking. Bus routes run
along the front of the property on Main Street. The new
proposed lodge units are set back from the bus and transit
r stops. As the existing lodge units and the public, common
IL areas of the lodge are in between the bus stops and the new
units privacy is ensured from such areas. Privacy walls
along Garmisch, four feet six inches (4'6 ") in height,
provide screening and seclusion between each unit and
IL between each unit and the street. A bus shelter is located
less than one -half block from the property in front of the
• library. Also the main lobby entrance for the lodge as
newly renovated serves as shelter for persons using the
lodge waiting for the bus.
IL
t
- 4 -
0 I
1
1 dd. Streets, nearby paths and footpaths are
indicated on maps.
I ee. The zoning district is identified on the
zoning map. Surrounding uses are residential, multi family,
restaurant, lodge, public, park, and office /commercial.
Historical district boundary lines, if any, are indicated on
the zoning map.
ilir
B. REVIEW CRITERIA.
1. Ava of Public Facilities and
Services.
aa. Water.
The existing water system of the City of
I Aspen has sufficient capacity to provide for the needs of
the proposed development and will be able to supply water to
the development without system extensions beyond those
Is normally installed by the developer and without treatment
plant or other facility upgrading. Six inch water mains are
located in both Main and Garmisch Streets adjacent to the
property.
I "' bb. Sewer.
This site is served by and already connected
to the eight inch trunk line existing in the alley directly
adjoining the property. The Metropolitan Sanitation
District Sewer System has sufficient capacity to dispose of
ill the wastes of the proposed development and will be able to
serve the development without system extensions beyond those
normally installed by the developer. No treatment plant or
.. other facility upgrading will be necessitated by this
l is development. •
cc. Storm Drainage.
' Historic site drainage from the property will
II. be improved. The project proposes that all roof and paved
area runoff will feed directly to on -site dry wells all
surface runoff will be retained on the development site.
The development will not require any use of the City's
drainage system as the project provides for on -site
.. retention of one hundred percent (100 %) of runoff. Handling
ir all runoff on -site will benefit the City's drainage system
since previous on -site runoff was handled by the City's
drainage system which will now have greater capacity.
ir dd. Fire Protection.
The new lodge units will be constructed with
—' fire protection in excess of the Building Code requirements.
1 - 5 -
0r
•
i In conformance with the Code, smoke
furnished throughout for added protection detectors will be
_s II extinguishers will be supplied. There are two a fire
drants
presently serving the Property. One at the northeast corner
of the property and the other sixty -five feet (65') away
from the main entrance of the lodge across Garmisch Street
I at the Aspen Clinic. The project is very close (less than
.5 miles) to the main Aspen Fire Station and. the response
time is under two (2) minutes, an exceptional response time
y for a small mountain community. The Fire Department is able
to provide fire protection according to its established
response standards without the necessity of establishing a
new station or requiring addition of major equipment to the
existing station.
Available water pressure and capacity are
more than adequate to provide for fire fighting flows. N
ii water storage tank is necessary to serve the project.
ee. Roads.
li The major linkage of the road network can
easily provide for the needs of the proposed development
without substantially altering the existing traffic
patterns, creating safety hazards or overloading the
existing street system. The property is served by First
le
Street, Garmisch Street and Main S i
very wide, Street Main Street is a
, major thoroughfare. Garmisch was
intended to be a major tnrough street originally
li
never really been used as and although it has
which is substantially und er such, it is a wide thoroughfare
well good utilized. First Street, as
is in ood condition and able to adequately serve the
ilw project without the need for any improvements. The minimal
increased usage attributable to the proposed development
will not necessitate any road system improvements. Because
the project is in the middle of the commercial and
II" retail facilities and a bus line stops right at the project, c
oet,
• all automobile use from the project will be minimized P and
bicycling, walking or the use of public transportation will
be maximized.
2 . Qualit of or Im•rovements to Desi.n.
I
aa. Architectural Desi n.
first and foremost with the lodging dition seeks compatibility
I •• a part. Sforemoril y facility of which it is
the five , the addition seeks to harmonize with
(5) different architectural styles which are
immediately adjacent.
•
newl Lodge. s The building addition is
an
y renovated Nugget Lod extension of the
g On Garmisch Street the
parapet line of the main buildin
• g's east elevation is
r - 6 -
0 0
vill
1 1 1
1 OR
_ continued in the new building at the same height and cornice
detailing. . Solarium bay windows of the type used in the
m west courtyard and along Main Street punctuate the second
floor.
.y Material is 1 X 6 smooth vertical "V- gr o ove"
j ®7 cedar to match the newly remodelled lodge. Other mate
which will match the lodge are 2 X 2 railing detailing,
solid cedar fencing, enamel metal roof over window bays,
I canvas covering over walkways, dark bronze anodized window
frames, and burgundy accent strip at elevation 9'0" along
street front facades.
Thus, in forms, materials and colors, the
addition will harmonize with the main lodge.
r.
1 Aspen Ski Lodge. The clean horizontal
parapet line, restrained 1 X 6 smooth siding /fencing, and
metal roof accents of this fine facility are echoed in our
ii II design. It is interesting to note that both this lodge and
ours use horizontal parapets to disguise a gently sloped
roof and to control drainage.
Aspen Clinic. This brick commercial building
has a style which is different than ours, however in major
if
elements in its composition we relate: the corner entrance,
vertical glazing, and a clearly demarcated first and second
floor.
I` "Chalet style" Fourplex across Garmisch
Street. Our corner presentation is similar in bulk and
massing to this fourplex.
r Sleeker Street. The Addition's design
approach to the open areas across 'Sleeker Street is to set
back from Sleeker Street (a full thirty -two feet [32'] from
Is the property line) and behind the seventy and eighty foot
tall blue spruces which dominate this elevation. The
foreground is screened out by the solid hedge of ten to
W twelve foot honeysuckle and crab apple which follow the
R. property line for one hundred feet (100').
Victorian House. On the north elevation, the
distinguished and picturesque residence directly west raises
its ridges to around thirty -five feet (35') and its chimney
g
to around forty feet (40'). We respond to this house with
window bays, porch bays and sloping roof profiles, although
w our highest ridge is some five feet lower.
f_
r - 7 -
0
•
I
•
p ' In summary, we strive to visually harmonize
. both with the existing lodge and with the several
surrounding styles and uses. At the same time, the massing
p . of the building is toward the center of the site, so that
the street front aspect is typically that of a two (2) story
is
building (see perspective drawing) with deep recesses of
,,. open space punctuated by existing vegetation of apple,
aspen, and spruce trees.
bb. Site Design.
IL The "Open Space" will meet or exceed the
required thirty -five percent (35 %) in the district. Our
I landscaping goal is to preserve and enhance the excellent
mature plantings which exist on the site. These include:
Type Diameter Height
1 "
7 mature spruces 12 "- 24" dia. 50 -80 Ft.
- 22 pines, cedars and spruces 2 " - dia. 10 -40 Ft.
1 cottonwood 8" dia. 20 Ft.
16 aspens 2 "- 6" dia. 12 -25 Ft.
., 12 crab apple 8 "- 10" dia. 10 -15 Ft.
100' honeysuckle /crab apple hedge. 10 -12 Ft.
The addition will respect and protect all of these trees.
Some overdue pruning and cleaning of the evergreens will be
done where branches are rubbing against the buildings and to
enable pedestrian access around the mature and stately
spruces which dominate the Bleeker Street facade.
' In among these tall spruces, garden patios
will be defined by solid cedar fencing, giving each room a
secluded outdoor space, as opposed to the door opening onto
a common sidewalk, which was the previous condition.
All walkways will be new concrete, replacing
the uneven and cracked existing walkways. New sod will be
P P placed and maintained within new patios and around new
is walkways. Second level solarium overhangs and awning
canopies will create a covered circulation system for most
■' rooms below.
` A new jacuzzi tub will be added for the use
14 of the new lodging units at the north side of the site. The
kitchen adjacent to the common room will be upgraded to
. serve larger gatherings and full buffet meals and luncheons.
The gas line now makes a surface entrance
mmg along the alley with several elbows and bends. This will be
rerouted underground and will enter the boiler room through
.. - 8 -
i
i I . 0
1 ! ,
the new basement. A flue at the existing jacuzzi equipment
room which now runs up the outside of the building will be
brought up through the inside and boxed in.
The phone lines, now a tangled, ubiquitous
PI trail of lines on the skin of the buildings, will enter at a
single point and distribute to the rooms from there, with no
visual clutter.
(, A screened trash area will be provided
°^ directly off the alley, in lieu of the present exposed
dumpster.
' cc. Energy Conservation.
1. Exterior wall construction. Use of
3/4" thermax and 4" fiberglass insulation will achieve an
P i overall exterior wall insulation value of R -25.
2. Wall Upgrade. Two hundred ten (210)
fli lineal feet of uninsulated walls will be insulated.
3. Roof construction. All roof
sections will include insulation to raise the overall
IL R -value to or above R -30 exceeding the Code value of R -20.
4. Glass. Existing single glazed
" windows will be replaced by double -paned glass (a total of
54 existing windows comprising 1,350 square feet of glass).
IL " 5. Other solar energy considerations.
Hot water will be provided by a horizontally mounted rooftop
array of freon active solar collectors for domestic hot
water heating.
Insulation, solar energy devices and similar techniques have
go been used to maximize conservation of energy and utilize
®_ solar energy sources in the proposed development.
�"'■ dd. Parking and Circulation.
The internal circulation and parking system
Is for the project is of high quality and is efficient as
possible. All parking is located on the perimeter of the
property for maximum ease of ingress and egress. The
, circulation pattern is designed to accommodate service
vehicle access and loading areas. Parking is screened from
"' public views by retaining the ten to twelve foot (10' -12')
its honeysuckles on the property.
lim
r
m
r
ee. Visual Impact.
The placement of the fourteen (14) room
t addition has been carefully considered to create a minimum
impact. The entire addition will take place on the north
half of the property, away from Main Street. From eye level
on Main Street, the addition will have negligible impact.
In fact, it will not even be visible while walking along the
is Main Street sidewalk in front of the Lodge.
t
Similarly, along Garmisch Street, the massing
is away from the street, toward the center of the lot (see
perspective) so the new addition creates a smaller,
t inconspicuous appearance blending in with the two (2) story
structure of the main lodge building as seen from eye level
on Garmisch Street. The top level steps back twenty feet
from the parapet and recesses within a roof structure which
t slopes away from the street.
Along Sleeker Street the fourteen (14) unit
" addition is lower than its Victorian neighbor; visually both
I s are dwarfed by the seventy to eighty foot (70' -80') spruces
and the fifty to sixty foot (50' -60') cottonwoods (see North
t elevation). The Sleeker Street elevation is divided into
two (2) separate buildings, and has pitched roof contours
and window bays to respond to adjacent residential scale and
configuration. The building facade is set back thirty -two
t feet (32') from the property line at its closest point.
Because it is located toward the center of
the site away from Main Street, away from Garmisch Street,
and set back from Bleeker Street, the addition minimizes
visual bulk and presence and maximizes architectural
continuity with surrounding structures.
3. Amenities Provided for Guests.
aa. The existing on -site lounge common
meeting area is being improved and remodeled substantially.
In addition the remodel is designed to allow the lounge to
accommodate mini - conference use.
bb. The existing on -site dining facilities
are being substantially improved. The kitchen is being
remodeled so that in -house parties and banquets can be
provided and breakfast service may be expanded.
E cc. To compliment the existing jacuzzi and
p ool an additional jacuzzi will be added to serve the
property.
t
- 10 -
W 0
It 4. Conformance to Local Public Policy Goals.
r aa. Provision of Employee Housing.
The project is expected to generate one (1)
new employee. This has been determined based on the level
of service reflected by this type of lodge operation.
r Adding a small number of rooms to an existing lodge facility
does not typically generate the need for additional
employees. The existing lodge facility has been served by
t seven to eight (7 -8) employees. The addition of fourteen
(14) new rooms is expected to necessitate the hiring of only
one (1) new employee. The Applicant agrees to provide low
t income housing (or such other housing as is requested by the
City Council's housing designee) which will provide for one
hundred percent (100 %) of the additional employees of the
t project. The Applicant will meet this requirement by
providing a three hundred fifty (350) square foot
(approximately) dorm unit at the Cortina which can house two
t employees and complies with the housing size, type, income
and occupancy guidelines of the City of Aspen. Parking for
this employee unit will be discussed at special review as
requested by the section of the City Code addressing L -3
residential uses and employee parking. If for any reason
this off -site employee housing is unable to be supplied,
Applicant will dedicate one (1) of the fourteen (14)
IL proposed new lodge units to be employee housing. The unit
will be of equivalent size and shall comply with the housing
guidelines the same as the proposed off -site unit.
It
• bb. Conversion of Existing Units.
Applicant will provide one hundred percent
(100 %) of its employee housing by purchasing fully
t constructed units which are not restricted to Aspen's
housing guidelines and placing a deed restriction on them in
compliance with § 24 -11.10 of the City Code.
The Applicant proposes to purchase and deed
restrict a three hundred fifty (350) square foot
(approximately) unit in the Cortina, which is only a block
t and a half from the project.
cc. Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of
C Existing Units.
Applicant is in the process and will complete
within the next six (6) months the rehabilitation and
reconstruction of all thirty -three (33) existing units in
t the project and is therefore entitled to maximum points
under this Section. Attached hereto as is a conceptual
program identifying the proposed improvements to be made to
the lodge units and the non -unit space and the time table
for the restoration or rebuilding. Applicant is spending at
least three hundred fifty thousand dollars ($350,.000.00), on
c - 11-
0
ir .
these improvements. The rebuilt portions of the lodge shall
be suitable for occupancy prior to or at the same time as
t i the new units for which the allotment is being requested.
,. 5. Bonus Points. The project has incorporated
and met the substantive criteria of § 24 -11.6 (b)(1), (2),
(3) and (4), and has also exceeded the provisions of these
subsections and achieves an outstanding overall design
` meriting recognition. The project is tastefully designed to
ir blend in with and enhance the character of the neighborhood
and incorporates the best facets and technology of energy
w conservation. There will be no negative impacts on traffic,
I. roads, public safety, fire protection, police protection,
drainage, water or sewer service. Applicant will be making
improvements which will enhance various services and visual
qualities of the neighborhood. The existing services and
facilities are adequately situated and set up to serve the
project efficiently at no public fiscal increase. Great
care has been taken in the design of the project to conserve
energy and utilize solar energy. The project energy
efficiency rating significantly exceeds all applicable City
requirements. This project significantly upgrades and o
expands amenities available to the tourists utilizing the
lodge and the lodge overall is greatly enhanced and upgraded
w in accordance with the lodge preservation policy of the City
of Aspen. The parking plan for the project is hidden from
t view offering great safety and convenience as well as
preserving the existing honeysuckles and blue spruce trees
on the property. Applicant is providing housing for one
hundred percent (100 %) of the employees generated by the
t project.
In sum this project has been very carefully
t thought out to balance the needs of the developer to create
a viable project with the policies'expressed by the City of
Aspen and the community in general.. We feel this project
t achieves this balance and is the kind of project that should
be encouraged by the City.
t
t
GMP /NUGET2
- 12 -
t
o
E ,
t
CONCEPTUAL PROGRAM OF
NUGGET LODGE REHABILITATION
t 1. Complete remodel of front facade
2. Install solariums
t 3. Remodel and expand lobby
t 4. Remodel upstairs and common areas
5. Add balconies and patios to many units
t 6. Install new roof
7. Renovate most rooms, including totally remodel and
t upgrade of bathrooms.
Total cost of improvements is not less than
$350,000.00.
t •
I
t
t
1
E
.,, c :,. 1.03LIH EIVA ONSIIIS'3INOSS1
1I
33 3LISS 3 'N3 dSV \`
"' - 13
se
- 3 tl15. NIVW 153M 001. C■ - 17E3 Mt • dW0 30001 1309r1N
0 1
i., r .___
11111•1_ 1
Lai ? 1
1
r
- is MMMMMMM inn 1
is. NOSIINtIVO"NI _
N \ \ \ \ \\ 1
WIC - 1w e ri 1
• m �
- ,- J- 1
•3ANIf1S HIS •N I — s
CC
as Q
N 1
.. I 0
F• Q 1
- N J
is �5
.. 20 1
r . - . i
Q
A. u
D
r 2
... lc,
— z .
✓ D
N t0
- 0-
` /
., S:L0 � 1 1H n t `d T r i lB 15 d 73 FV �elN I I 1 1
,u 0 1330 a NIVW 153
.:77/.w ::. 1786L • dune aODO�1 j9S
r
"'a J.331:119 tl 3N3319 �
— �i //�� \�, \/)
se z
., J .
IMO w 2 1
-
3 • w Q
- 0 -I 2 III a � I L a 1. ilii
D >1. Vs Q N
all w Q I- -
= D J
O a w ° t .. F
D
1
.
*** . m
w.
Si I
MI .
fi
.-■ .- ■-..... ....-...■ ■.---■...--.......-.-..-...■ -......■..■ ...-...-• .--...--....... .--All .
Z W u
MO E 1
M R
Q \ N w
ill .
•
II 1
IN w
. 1 -'
• , , (0 .
ONO
i .1
OM
onru
IS
1MYtl1U NIV W
Ills 0
..._.w...mo .... fVa WAN C3S.81' 1
.....,,..mc .o..... .,.... .....o ...v. m. OOVCOl00 .N3dSV
:74 • 133d15 NIVW 1S3M 001. °
n, /;;141 -- tcol 17861, ewe 3900 1 18JJ(lN r
.1 09
, -411
i 1
4 � ! " 1
s +
sati sal Ill
V _ >
��.. __��
• a
• 1 -t 1
, . ,....4
0.
- I S
•
1
k •
•
L 1 1
• 5 i Pram' a�i ,lZ
iroi
—
i
NI / i 1
\\ III
f o f� U°
/ Ay ./ iiiimiltkii
{ 1
. • ,/ t z - 0 - 10
-
1
- / W if , .
1
' i I Ls 0
/ IN . / 4,"
IN
l
.. *S10313 HOU'v Nativaitscs_eis
... 0133C10S00 1S3 NN 1.
- ; e %;t,- - - >, 17861, • d W O a 900 139' onN - 1
la
.. _ 1
411111 Q, 0
...• 019 eggf r t
41 Tim 1_ Q
1
Ill
•
W
... r - 0
rE •
•
or - ,
1Ill M-
; ' kt ; ";
7I
411 -21
r
_
Q
we I
•
_- 4 Q
._ 1
._ 4 J , ' IIwm ld ' Na8V 4NOsstel. OO � .
VtlO1OO N3dSV
S33dSS. NIVW 1SE'N OOL II
ts86L_ • - d 1AI9 6000'7 190OflN
4 '
t ip •c1 . 40 k :S .
_ 1
- r I I
e- •. w. 2 t,„. !: ='��i� O
1
N Q
• I
_ i.
>
_j` ,:r W
i�i. J o
- - at E
1a W
4!9
i. Fvar
ef
1
.n w
14 all W o
y rD F f-
AV M
a te_
1
i
S
NI Q
s '
g
MO 1 ! 4 ~
II
- a
i = II NM
GM j =Ca
■1 11•i .
Ir Enne
it IIMIMIg
r
"-
• y
a
1
i„ s133tl1.5 NI`JW 1S3M 001.
- - sir... , b96L dW0 2000'7 16OSfN
•
.
_ _
,,SIII' S1
Mwum
n 1
I Itl I �111 I I I IIII�II I I u III
IIII ill I I
�i Il .,�tlll II , , I , I 1 rn :I III
� o I„,,,,p VIII I'I���� 1 I 1
��p ��II IIIII II I I
..i... i�IJwl�llllrlu,,,i��I JLd VIJmGIiWI41,iii11JIUw 11tiJIIYJC „41,I,,IUJl�,1 ° ,,II311�J�IIII�1 ,Ju,,ILEm2
SECTION A-A
t
A
"M
r 7 .
W11111111111111111111111111N_
= ears e�f
= 10 11 12 13 ill
MN
1
g fill III II =
. A
E
3RD LEVEL PLAN
0 S 90 120 Fr
c
,
•--rf.;17-7:1:727•71177,---W-77-3-7.r -"----
... ,
I' ..............._... .............._.
— 0 ocrottcri&J 'N, lasts
— saacis rultrIN J.93AA 006 -- 1
1:7861.• • c11A19 3900, -LMMOrIN
A
7
I N a - 2' • '
a .
- - I I / •
- -
: ell 7 1 / 4 /
MO --- m
1 • 711 .• ,/, . .
, ,,,,..,.... p I 4
, wallop& Its sal
! r .
r is
. .
F 2ND LEVEL PLAN
t .
•
i 7
t „ •
..„.: ..,....,.. \ .
9.
is 1
' '
t
t ... 1 h !
t I I H
_J
t
1ST LEVEL PLAN
C
0 6 10 120 FT.
E •
• .
c4,4 ''as,I_. E' rt -4= :tom..
133 tl1S NIVW 153M ❑ct.
11 4- vast.. ewe apoon sasenN
SLEEKER STREET
al
it
SYO • POPS nw A I 1 n,Al.
I JI
I ; - � •
noo
a i I . I w ? k•l / ti v.o. ,... 4 n.w• � � MAINTAIN •.nn�• -10
MEW SPleatt. HARKING ARCA
a _ ! e vs
i o
am m 1 e H
` OOM
_�
1
PROPOSED 1d,1.1 i I• • vAw.aiy„J �' w ROOMS
E �
e
i 'R
e
_ COLLECTORS I � I _— � S MI alliklIFE0101111 — NI _ _ _ 1a = •T W
•Ye'
ALAS', i Y • w. W
,,, „. � ' _ St II r — r --
�y :o. ' EXISTONG
33 ADONIS •I� •
18,913 3.F. y
S I
i -0 ■ - 7 I
Q Q
l
iii 011
aft C i
■g
'i7Yz I I
F
I
Li
ill
viS
tea. -f. 1 A ^ I :;/ 1 , =- ✓ — I
t
til k
MAIN STREET
t SITE PLAN
0 O 10 Rfl NCI FT.
t
.
st ,.. rOPM NO. C -500f- 0 . _..
colorndo Region Fnrn, 142
AL1A Owners Policy —Fpm, 8 —1970
Amended 10-17-70
w r
POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE --
• ISSUED BY I
TRANSAMERICA TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
SUBJECT TO THE SCHEDULE OF EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS CON-
S TAINED IN SCHEDULE 8 AND THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS
HEREOF, TRANSAMERICA TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY. a California corporation, herein called the
Company, insures, as of Date of Policy shown in Schedule A, against loss or damage, not exceeding
the amount of insurance stated in Schedule A, and costs, attorneys' fees and expenses which the !I
Company may become obligated to pay hereunder, sustained or incurred by the insured by reason of:
1. Title to the estate or interest described in Schedule A being vested otherwise than as stated therein;
.» 2. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on such title;
3. Lack of a right of access to and from the land; or
4. Unmarketability of such title. •
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Transamerica Title Insurance Company has caused this policy to be signed
.. and sealed by its duly authorized officers as of Date of Policy shown in Schedule A.
•
s
Transamerica Title Insurance Company
By
President
BY 1)-4424.4.4...;-. 0. .. ._
Se< reitry
1 77•743731t ,7y '^T l 977-7 , ' `< r+ .-79tr 7M7M n Z r -t..r '. s r77nsr rR a#> 'r*^!- frr4s 'n c4•fe'xn , . ...n,.
1
I ��wre'f °x '0(# M �a rn r � '�!r �"' `^ - ort -• h' e• C`,. >v� �Fw �'�s nm 'r y 7'R -. � � y. - � �✓�.F �.
' .
♦ - •'" 76 1171 n. ' ' n' R ay h
I L:3•a3iSA .wLAt� :,. vn�o-uaiVi-. .R� 5�ar n. Y,l. t w
FORM NO. C- 5000.1
• FOR USE WITH COLORADO REGION A RICAN LANG TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLI-FORM a- 1970 (AMENDED 10•17.701
am
SCHEDULE A
az
s
Amount of Insurance $ 1, 203, 400.00 ' - Policy No. 7302993
s
Date of Policy August 7, 1984 Sheet 1 of
9:28 A.N.
1. Name of Insured:
s
THE HOTEL ASPEN, LTD., A Colorado Corporation
s
2. The estate or interest in the land described herein and which is covered by this policy is:
in fee simple
•
rim
r '
3. The estate or interest referred to herein is at Date of Policy vested in:
r THE HOTEL ASPEN, LTD., A Colorado Corporation,
in fee simple
•
s
IN
s
•
•
•^ FORM NO. C. 6000.2
FCR USE WITH COLORADO REGID, AERICAN LANG TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLIC970 (AMENDED 10- 17.70)
FOR USE WITH COLORADO REGION AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLICY -FORM 0 -1970 (AMENDED 10.17.70)
.. e
SCHEDULE A— Continued
The land referred to in this policy is situated in the Stale of Colorado, County of
Pitkin , and is described as follows:
w THE EAST ONE -HALF OF LOTS E AND 0, AND ALL OF LOTS F, G, H, I,
P, Q, R, S,
•° BLOCK 58,
..I
CITY AND TOWNSITE OF'ASPEN
•
—
IOW
•
r
s
•
r
OR
R.
ON
r
FORM NO •6000.3
FOR USE WI :v COLORADO REGIO • F_RtCAN LANO TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLR_r 1970 'AMENDED 10 -17 701
FOR USE WITH COLORADO REGION A MERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLICY -FORM S -1970 (AMENDED tOn7.70)
SCHEDULE Ii
PART I
Y9
This Policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the full ow in g:
IS
1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records.
2. Easements, or claims of casements, not shown by the public records.
3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a cor
AM rect survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records.
4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by
asi
law and not shown by the public records.
5. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessments, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer
service, or for any other special taxing district. Taxes for the year 1984 are not yet
due or payable.
R.
6. Reservations and exceptions as contained in the Deed from the City of Aspen
providing a5 follows: that no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of
gold, silver, copper or cinnabar or to any valid mining claim or possession
held under existing laws and subject to all the conditions, limitations and •
exceptions as contained in Section 2386 of the Revised Statutes of the United
States, as contained in deeds of record.
7. Deed of Trust from - Aspen Reservations, Inc., J.R. Sturgis, Donald
Feeley and Angus Anderson
to the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin
for the use of • - Y,empers Investors Life Insurance Company
r to secure - $500,000.00
dated November 1, 1978
recorded November 1, 1978 in gook 357 at Page 423.
Assumption agreement in connection with the above Deed of Trust
— recorded May 1, 1979 in Book 367 at Page 592. -
GOP
r 8. Deed of Trust from The Hotel Aspen, Ltd., A Colorado Corporation
to the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin
9• for the use of J.R.S. Investments, Inc.
to secure • $591,953.72
dated - August 1, 1984
recorded - August 7, 1984 in Book 471 at Page 69
IOW
e
•
•� yy �?� DIVISION OF INSURANCE
DEPARTMENT OF REGULATORY AGENCIES
ICS STATE OFFICE BUILDING • 201 E. COLFAX AVE
\wT/ DENVER. COLORADO 00203
A• STATE OF COLORADO •
RICHARD C. LAMM
•
IMO 0
Rr J RICHARD San.. C L u May 1 , 1977
Ce..n.ww..
RMRRRT L •ROwi
D..u.. ee. +n.w.a.
•
MS
Dear Real Estate Purchaser:
•
ar
Following this letter you will find a brief explanation of your title
Pm insurance commitment and policy. _
r Title Insurance companies are regulated by this Division, as are
other types of insurance companies. This Division makes certain that com-
panies Issuing title Insurance commitments and title insurance policies are
am
financially sound, and that they operate in accordance with statutes and
es
regulations.
We also have a great interest in making certain that you, as the
consumer, understand the purpose of title insurance and that you understand
your rights under your insurance policy.
me
In the event you are dissatisfied with responses given to your ques-
tions or problems by your title insurance company, you are encouraged to
send your questions concerning title insurance or any complaints that you
r may have against your title insurer to this office. We are on hand to make
• certain that all your rights and remedies, both under your policy and under
law, are available to you at all times. •
so Sincerely,
. CHARD BARNES, C.L.U.
Commissioner of Insurance
JRB:bI
Rw
MS
As a purchaser of a home or other real estate you may receive a "Commitment for Title Insurance" and a "Policy of Title Insurance:' Both of
es these documents. like many others in connection with your purchase, are contracts creating legal rights which you should read carefully and
which you may wish to have examined and explained by a lawyer or other adviser. While the following description of these documents cannot
r change the precise terms of these documents, it is hoped that this will help you to understand their purpose and effect and answer some of
your questions about them.
QUESTION: "WHAT IS TITLE INSURANCE?"
ee ANSWER: Basically, it is a contract with the title insurance company in which the company agrees to defend and indemnify you against
losses which you may suffer because of unreported defects in the title to your property as of the date of the contract. It is not casualty
,m insurance and, therefore. does not protect you against acts of theft or damage to your home by fire, storm and the like. Essentially, the
insurance insures that you have title to the property subject only to certain exceptions and exclusions listed in the Policy of Title Insurance.
r Title insurance recognizes the possibility of loss, but transfers the risk of loss from you as property owner to the company issuing the policy.
For this reason title insurance companies are required to maintain reserves to cover losses.
If you are financing your purchase, your lender will ordinarily require that you obtain a separate Lender's Policy to insure that your property
will in fact serve as security for its loan.
QUESTION: "WHAT DOES THE PREMIUM PAY FOR ?"
AM ANSWER: The one time. non - recurring premium pays for several things. It helps to pay for the cost of collecting, maintaining, searching
and examining real estate records and certain other public records which relate to your property so that the title insurance company can
MI determine the insurability of your title. For example, the title insurance company will determine whether the public records show that your
seller really owns the property, what mortgages or liens (a recorded legal claim) may exist, whether there are restrictive covenants on your
CONTINUED ON REVERSE
um
"". orocierty or easements which allow pers. • cross your property or to place uulitles across y sroperty. The premrnm also serves to linrince ' '
certain legal costs which may arise if you ,le is challenged. Additionally, payment of the pi .um requires the title insurance company to
e s indemnify you for any losses you suffer as a result of the title company;- failure to fulfill its contractual obligations under your title policy.
• QUESTION:' WHAT IS A COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ?"
ANSWER: A Commitment for Title Insurance is a standardized prelimin , y document authorized by the Commissioner of Insurance,
vs
indicating that a title insurance company will issue a title insurance policy to you Ater certain steps have been taken, such as the. payment
of an outstanding mortgage or lien and the issuance of a deed to you. These steps are set out in the commitment as `requirements" in
▪ Schedule B— Section 1. In Schedule B— Section 2 "Exceptions:' the commitment also summarizes certain existing limitations on the use of
your property, the defects in your title and liens against your property. Your policy will not protect you against these matters. You will note that
i some of these limitations and defects may still exist even after all of the requirements of the commitment have been met. These other matters
are usually such things as restrictive covenants or easements for utilities and the like. You should carefully read both the "requirements" and
es the exceptions to title staled in the commitment so That you :nay raise objections if there are matters affecting the title to which you did not
agree when you signed the contract to purchase your prop y. •
r Some of the "exceptions" are standard and will not normally be covered by your title policy. The first standard exception is any claim by
parties in possession of the property which is not shown by the public records. This means, for example, that someone may have been living
on the property for a long period of time and may claim that they own the property, even though they do not have a recorded deed, or may
claim that they are somehow otherwise entitled to be on the property. The title insurance company could not learn of such a claim by examining
▪ the public real estate records. You should inspect the property to make sure that anyone living there will respect your ownership.
Exception 2 of Schedule B similarly may mean that someone has used a portion of the property long enough to claim an easement, even
w
though inere is no instrument of record giving that person the authority to do 50.
Excelition 3 of the standard commitment, in essence says that the title insurance policy will not insure against problems concerning
the exact boundary lines of the property you are purchasing „which means that you should make certain that there are no fences or other
encroachments on your property, particularly if you do not have a survey. Again, a title insurance company cannot determine whether such
problems exist on your property because employees of the title insurance company will not inspect the property unless they are specially
"' requested and paid to do so.
Exception 4 excludes liens which may be filed against your property by someone who may have done work on the property and who
es
has not been paid. The title insurance company does not have any way of determining whether such claims may exist in the absence of some
recorded document. You may wish to verify that no such unsatisfied claims exist.
The fifth standard exception is for matters which may arise following the issuance of the commitment and before you complete your
purchase. Many companies also exclude taxes and special assessments which may be imposed against your property which are not recorded
— in the public records, or the amount of which has not yet been determined.
If you are purchasing a single family residence. you may wish to check to see if you are entitled to obtain endorsement Form No. 130
which removes several of the standard exceptions and will give you insurance for some of those matters.
You will see that the commitment shows the amount of title insurance to be issued, together with the amount of the premium charge.
.w Your seller should check with his broker and with the title insurance company issuing the commitment to make certain that he has paid the
lowest premium to which he is entitled. For instance, if there has been a title insurance policy issued to your seller within the last two years,
a he may be entitled to receive some credit for the prior premium against the amount of premium which he will now pay.
"' QUESTION: "WHAT IS THE POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE ?"
ANSWER: The Policy of Title Insurance is a document which will be issued to you after your purchase transaction is concluded. It, too, is
a standardized document, the printed portions of which have been approved by the Commissioner of Insurance.
Schedule A of your policy will set forth, among other matters, the amount of insurance coverage, your name as the insured, your interest
• in the property, such as actual ownership or a leasehold interest. and the legal description of the property.
,IM Your title insurance policy, as any other insurance policy, has exceptions from coverage. These will be set forth in Schedule B of your
policy and in the Schedule o Exclusions from Coverage. Matters which may limit coverage will be set forth.in the "Conditions and Stipulations"
a section of the policy.
In Schedule B of the policy, you will find those items against which the title insurance company does not. or cannot, insure. Many of these
will be the same as the exceptions set out in Schedule B of the Title Commitment.
The Schedule of Exclusions from Coverage excludes matters such as zoning ordinances which regulate how the property may be used,
, ights which may be possessed by a governmental body and which might be exercised against the property, and any detects or which you may
be aware but have not informed the title insurance company. You may desire to investigate the status of these matters before you complete
in your purchase. Also excluded are defects or encumbrances which may be placed upon the property subsequent to the date of the policy.
You should remember that a title policy is not a promise of indemnity against some defect or claim against your title which may be created
ei in the future. It does protect you against loss or damage existing from defects in the title to real property existing prior to and as of the date
of the policy even though they may not be discovered until some future date.
The language concerning Conditions and Stipulations under which the title insurance company issues its policy contains an explanation
a of the terms of the policy, and also deals with how you should notify the title insurance company in the event you may believe that you may
have a claim under the policy. If someone should assert that they have a right to use your property or that they own part of it. and you cannot
4111 find that right set forth in your policy as an exception or an exclusion, you must notify the title insurance company in writing of the situation.
The address for this notification will normally appear in your policy. Prompt notification will enable you and the company to deal with the
, matter or problem that you raise, if it is covered by the policy, so that the dispute may be resolved in as timely a manner as possible.
You should know that if the problem is covered by your title insurance policy, a title insurance company must usually bear the costs of
litigation, either to defend your title in the event of an adverse claim against it, or sometimes to bring affirmative legal action to clear up the
problem. In so doing. the title insurance company retains the right of settling the claim or pursuing the matter through the courts, if it believes
that the rights asserted by a third party against your property are not legally justified. If the title insurance company takes the position that the
matter which you raise is not covered by the terms of the title insurance policy, it must so notify you as soon as reasonably possible after
r you present your claim.
QUESTION: "WHAT IF 1 STILL HAVE FURTHER OUESTIONS ABOUT THE COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE OR POLICY OF
TITLE INSURANCE ?"
ANSWER: You should certainly ask them of your attorney, the seller, the lender or the title insurance company. If you do not receive a
satisfac.ory answer to your questions, you may contact the office of the Colorado Commissioner of Insurance, J. Richard Barnes, Commissioner.
Department of Regulatory Agencies, 1065' 'ate Office Building, Denver, Colorado 80203.
Form No. C- 142.13
mis
,..-.-----e4 CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
/
City of Aspen L "l,fr - 8
• CASE NO. � ' 1 a ..' -'4: kt 1 11. .
STAFF: le-*e. _.
/ 2 n p vin,
PROJECT NAME: /' y.�> 4/ . , - L-3 6IYI /- I' =� y u ' , z,,, .,
APPLICANT: Phone: / 6's I4o
REPRESENTATIVE: ) Q1C"-- ,( 4.. 47 Phone: 907_5
oz - -t /t 4
TYPE OF APPLICATION: �'(V7// (FEE)
I. GMP /SUBDIVISION /PUD (4 step)
X 1. Conceptual Submission ($2,730.00) 1
2. Preliminary Plat ($1,640.00)
3. Final Plat ($ 820.00)
II. SUBDIVISION /PUD (4 step)
1. conceptual Submission ($1,900.00)
__ 2. Preliminary Plat ($1,220.00)
3. Final Plat ($ 820.00)
III. EXCEPTION /EXEMPTION /REZONING (2 step) ($1,490.00)
X IV. SPECIAL REVIEW (1 step) ($ 680.00)
1. Special Review
2. Use Determination
3. Conditional Use
4. Other: AIL ' '(ALAst< ..-.. l:3'i0..,4.,
1
P &Z MEETING DATE: ;1 4.1 b CC MEETING DATE: DATE REFERRED:/V ij yr
REFERRALS:
vJC Attorney Aspen Consol. S.D. _ School District
\/ City Engineer Mountain Bell _ Rocky Mtn. Natural Gas
-;7 Housing Director _ Parks Dept. State Hwy Dept. (Glenwood)
Aspen Water Dept. _ Holy Cross Electric _ State Hwy Dept. (Grd. Jctn)
_ City Electric Fire Marshall Building Dept. - "M ° CC
__ Environmental Hlth. Fire Chief Other:
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED:
N CCity Attorney - ✓ City Engineer ( Building Dept.
✓ O I
ther: 7 &_' , /Other:• -iV� ` ( JC'/y`�/,
.." \
,_1 FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: (l6 Z.C,(' /6-�f.O \ ,_
o
•
DISPOSITION: ..
CITY P &Z REVIEW: 1116j' 'I
`'�
�q I ; _74 1 V Q c'� G � Q \.); �(
; QA,a la IAC-4v
• Z.
• • � � .. • s a_ _ • s „l iu „J.._ I d'i'd
n•. • a'R ' n. ... _ I• • •_. L • g1_, •'? L 1a
I. • u. \! . �' �_ LPL_ •9A— • / I 1.� (i I
Gwt l 6
CITY COUNCIL J,/z/' / \ '100 cx A In I OA Q
... • a ■a - l• ♦ f l 0 .Lj ,
•
.
Sane-
O.i ae-NO. 1 f (fag'
/y'
CITY P &Z REVIEW:
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW:
Ordinance No.
CITY P &Z REVIEW:
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW:
Ordinance No. 1
•
•
•
•• RECORD OF PROCEED1nL:8 100 Leaves
RESOLUTION NO. 4I
"(Series of 1984)
. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A GMP ALLOCATION TO THE NUGGET LODGE
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 24- 11.6(a) of the Municipal
Code, as amended, October 1 of each year is established as a deadline
for submission of applications for lodge development allotments within
the L-3 zone district in the City of Aspen; and
WHEREAS, in response to this provision, one project, the Nugget
Lodge, competed for lodge units in the L -3 zone district for a total
�:. j of thirteen (13) units; and
WHEREAS, the quota available in the L -3 zone district in the 1984
1 competition is ten (10) units and three (3) additional units are
available which were carried over from the 1983 L -3 competition; and
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held on November 6,
- y
1984, by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission to consider the L -3
Growth Management Application and evaluate and score it in conformance
with criteria established in Ordinance 35 (Series of 1983) and Ordinance
9 (Series of 1984) which amended Section 24 -11.6 of the Municipal
Code; and
WHEREAS, the project met the required threshold in the Planning
and Zoning Commission scoring; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to Council
the allocation of thirteen (13) lodge units to the Nugget Lodge.
•
�~ - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN,
COLORADO:
,i
Section 1
■
That thirteen (13) lodge units are hereby allocated to the Nugget
Lodge.
'i 2 Section
That this allocation is granted with the following nine (9)
conditions:
{ 2 1) All surface runoff will be retained on -site in drywells.
2) The construction will exceed Building Code fire requirements
and fire extinguishers and smoke detectors will be installed.
t 1
j? 3) sting mature vegetation is bei' preserved and open space
will be at least 35%. i
4) Walkways are being upgraded and fencing is being incorporated
so that roans have small private patios.
• 5) Wall insulation .value will be R -25, overall roof R -value
. will be R -30, sinale glazing (54 windows) will be replaced
• with double -paned glass, and solar collectors will be used
for domestic hot water heating.
6) Thirteen new parking spaces are being provided.
1 . 7) An additional jacuzzi is being added. •
8) The entire existing lodge (33 units) is being reconstructed.
At least $350,000 in improvements has been committed, which
includes total facade remodel, remodelling of lobby, common
areas, new roof, room renovations, addition of balconies,
solariums, or patios.
9) The employee unit in the existing lodge and one of the new
lodge units shall be restricted in terms of use and occupancy
to the rental and occupancy guidelines established and
indexed at the time of or prior to issuance of the building
permit.
DATED: , 1984
p .
William L. Stirling, Mayor
I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk of the
City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true
and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of
Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the _ day of ,
1984.
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
•
•
1 i .
i7 •
. l
o. 1
•
PROJECT PROFILE
1984 L-3 LODGE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SUBMISSION
1. Applicant: Hotel Aspen. Ltd.
2. Project Name: Nugget Lodge
3. Location: 110 W. Main
E _ of Lots E and O, all of Lots F. G, H. I, P, O, R & S, Block 58
4. Parcel Size: 26.996 sq. ft.
5. Current Zoning: L -3
6. Maximum Allowable Build -out: 26.996 sq. ft.
7. Existing Structures: A lodge consisting of 32 lodge units and
one employee unit.
8. Development Program: The current huildout of the lodge is
19.915 sq. ft.. an FAR of .74:1. The fourteen new units being
competed for will add an additional 5.020 sq. ft. for a total
buildout of 24.935 sq. ft. and an FAR of .92:1. The existing
lodge is presently undergoing significant renovation and the
... . -' 1• - I . -. • II - • -.• -.. -. .11
covered.
9. Additional Review Requirements: Special Review for increase in
Floor Area. Change in use (MP Exemption and Parking Exemption
(Employee Housing).
10. Miscellaneous: The earlier error in the zoning of this parcel
has been corrected and the entire parcel is now zoned L -3. A
Special Review approval was granted on October 2. 1984. to allow
for an increase in floor area from .68:1 to .74:1.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Stirling and Aspen C:i_' Council
THP,U: Hal Schilling, City Manage$ ,
FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office AR
SUBJECT: AllocatIcn of L -3 Lodge Growth Management Quota for the
Nugget Lodge
DATE: November 26, 1984
SUMMARY:
The Planning and Zoning Commission and Planning Office recommend
allocation of the available 13 lodge units of quota in the L -3 zone.
Fourteen units will be built with one unit being deed - restricted to
employee housing guidelines.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION:
Council has not taken any previous action on this request. The Nugget
was given Lodge Condominiumization approval on August 27, 1984. A
correction in the zoning of the parcel to include a portion which was
omitted during the class action L -3 rezoning was completed on second
reading on September 24, 1984. The east -west alley on the property
was vacated by Council at your meeting of October 22, 1984, and
replaced by a north -south parcel of the same size for interior block
access.
BACKGROUND:
This application was the only submission in the 1984 L -3 Lodge Growth
Management competition. The Planning and Zoning Commission scored the
project at their meeting of November 6, 1984, and it exceeded all
required minimum thresholds. A public hearing was held as part of
that meeting. Total points were 69 and the minimum total points
required to meet threshold was 63.
Should this project receive a development allotment, subsequent
reviews are not required. The Planning and Zoning Commission granted
Special Review approval on November 6th for an increase in floor area
ratio to accommodate these new units. That floor area ratio increase
was from .74:1 to .92:1. The maximum FAR allowed in the L -3 zone
district is 1:1. Also approved was a parking exemption for one space
for the employee unit.
PROBLEM DISCUSSION:
The quota available in the L -3 zone district for this competition is
13 lodge units. Ten (10) units are available as the 1984 quota and 3
units were carried over as unused quota from the 1983 competition.
The positive aspects of the design approach are that the bulk is
located toward the center of the site and away from Main Street. Along
Garmisch the "top level steps back twenty feet from the parapet and
recesses within a roof structure which slopes away from the street."
The Bleeker Street facade is 32 feet from the property line at its
closest point.
Initially, the applicant was competing for 14 units and submitting an
off -site employee housing solution. At the scoring meeting, however,
they agreed to deed - restrict one of the 14 units to employee housing
guidelines.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives are to allocate the 13 units available and for which
the applicant competed, or to allocate the 10 units available for the
1984 competition. The three units carried over from the 1983 competition
are a discretionary allotment. Section 24- 11.6(f) states that "unallo-
cated allotments may be carried over to the following year for possible
distribution at that (or a later) time."
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
ADVISORY COMMITTEE VOTE:
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends allocation of the 13
lodge units available and deed - restriction of the 14th unit to employee
housing guidelines.
RECOMMENDATION:
The recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the
Planning Office is to allocate 13 lodge units to the Nugget in the L -3
zone.
PROPOSED MOTION:
"I move for adoption of Resolution No. 41 _ (Series of 1984), allocating
13 lodge units in the L -3 zone district to the Nugget Lodge for the
1984 Lodge Growth Management competition."
2
1984 L-3 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SUBMISSION
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION POINTS ALLOCATION
TALLY SHEET
PROJECT: The Nugget Lodge
PC VOTING MEMBERS PERRY LEE PAT JASMINE ROGER NARY DAVID MULTIPLIER AVERAGE
1. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
a. Water Service 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (1)
b. Sewer Service 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (1)
c. Storm Drainage 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 (1)
d. Fire Protection 1 1 .5 1 1 1 1 (1)
e. Roads 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (1)
SUBTOTAL: 6 6 5.5 6 6 6 6 5.93
2. QUALITY OF OR IMPROVEMENTS TO DESIGN
a. Architectural Design 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 (3)
b. Site Design 6 6 3 6 6 6 4.5 (3)
c. Energy Conservation 2 2 2 2 2.5 2 1 (1)
d. Parking and Circulation 6 3 3 3 3 0 0 (3)
e. Visual Impact 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 (3)
SUBTOTAL: 26 23 20 23 23.5 20 17.5 21.86
3. AMENITIES PROVIDED FOR GUESTS
a. Meeting Areas, Lobbies, Con-
ference Facilities 6 4.5 3 6 6 3 3 (3)
b. Dining Facilities 4 3 2 4 3 L 1 (2)
c. Recreational Facilities 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 (2)
SUBTOTAL: 14 11.5 9 14 13 9 8 11.21
4. CONFORMANCE OF PUBLIC POLICY GOALS
a. Employee Housing 15 15 15 15 15 j_ (1)
b. Conversion of Existing Units -- -- -- -- -- -- -- (1)
c. Rehabilitation and Reconstruction
of Existing Units 15 15 15 15 15 j_ (1)
SUBTOTAL: 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
TOTAL POINTS 1-4: 76 70.5 64.5 73 72.5 65 61.5 69
5. BONUS POINTS (1)
TOTAL POINTS 76 70.5 64.5 73 72.5 65 61.5 69
I
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
RESOLUTION NO. 4 11 _
"(Series bf 1984)
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A GMP ALLOCATION TO THE NUGGET LODGE
4 WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 24- 11.6(a) of the Municipal
4 Code, as amended, October 1 of each year is established as a deadline
for submission of applications for lodge development allotments within
the L -3 zone district in the City of Aspen; and
WHEREAS, in response to this provision, one project, the Nugget
Lodge, competed for lodge units in the L -3 zone district for a total
of thirteen (13) units; and
WHEREAS, the quota available in the L -3 zone district in the 1984
competition is ten (10) units and three (3) additional units are
available which were carried over from the 1983 L -3 competition; and
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held on November 6,
1984, by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission to consider the L -3
Growth Management Application and evaluate and score it in conformance
with criteria established in Ordinance 35 (Series of 1983) and Ordinance
9 (Series of 1984) which amended Section 24 -11.6 of the Municipal
Code; and
WHEREAS, the project met the required threshold in the Planning
and Zoning Commission scoring; and
1 WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to Council
the allocation of thirteen (13) lodge units to the Nugget Lodge.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN,
COLORADO:
Section 1_
That thirteen (13) lodge units are hereby allocated to the Nugget
Lodge.
Section 2
That this allocation is granted with the following nine (9)
conditions:
1) All surface runoff will be retained on -site in drywells.
2) The construction will exceed Building Code fire requirements
1 and fire extinguishers and smoke detectors will be installed.
1
3) eisting mature vegetation is be 4 preserved and open space
will be at least 35%.
4) Walkways are being upgraded and fencing is being incorporated
so that roans have small private patios.
5) Wall insulation value will be R -25, overall roof R -value
will be P -30, single glazing (54 windows) will be replaced
with double -paned glass, and solar collectors will be used
for domestic hot water heating.
6) Thirteen new parking spaces are being provided.
7) An additional jacuzzi is being added.
•
8) The entire existing lodge (33 units) is being reconstructed.
At least $350,000 in improvements has been committed, which
includes total facade remodel, remodelling of lobby, common
areas, new roof, room renovations, addition of balconies,
solariums, or patios.
9) The enployee unit in the existing lodge and one of the new
lodge units shall be restricted in terms of use and occupancy
to the rental and occupancy guidelines established and
indexed at the time of or prior to issuance of the building
permit.
•
DATED: , 1984
•
William L. Stirling, Mayor
•
I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk of the
City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true
and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of
Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the _ day of
1984.
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
. j
{
{
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
THRU: Hal Schilling, City Manager
FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office
SUBJECT: The Nugget Lodge L -3 GMP Submission
DATE: November 13, 1984
Attached for your review is the submission requesting an allotment for
thirteen (13) lodge units and one (1) employee unit to be built in
conjunction with the improvements and rehabilitation of thirty -three
(33) existing lodge units located at the Nugget Lodge, 110 W. Main
Street, Aspen, Colorado. The expansion requested will consist of
approximately 5,020 square feet.
The Planning and Zoing Commission scored the application above threshold
at their regular meeting of November 6, 1984.
The results of the scoring will be coming to you at your November 26,
1984 meeting. An allocation will be requested at that meeting.
1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION
CITY OF ASPEN
Name of Project: Nugget Lodge Date: 11/06/84
1. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES AND SERVICES
(maximum 10 points). The Commission shall consider each applica-
tion with respect to the impact of the proposed building or the
addition thereto upon public facilities and services and shall
rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 -- Project requires the provision of new services at increased
public expense.
1 -- Project can be handled by the existing level of service in
the area or any service improvement by the applicant benefits
the project only and not the area in general.
2 -- Project in and of itself improves the quality of service in
a given area
The following facilities and services shall be rated accordingly:
(a) WATER - Considering the ability of the water system to serve
the development, and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) _1—
COMMENT: The Water Department reports that water is availahle i
sufficient capacity to serve the new development. Six inch mains
are a 1 abl a in Main Street Garmisch and Sleeker. A two inch
(2 ") line off Main Street serves the existing units and new
service is recommended to he supplied from Winker or Garmisch.
(b) SEWER - Considering the ability of the sewer system to serve
the development and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING: 1
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT: The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District reports that
the 1 4 additional units can he served and that the present hook-
ups for the existing lodge w i l l he ahle to handle the 14 new units.
(c) STORM DRAINAGE - Considering the degree to which the applicant
proposes to retain surface runoff on the development site.
If the development requires use of the City's drainage
system, considering the commitment of the applicant to
install the necessary drainage control facilities and to
maintain the system over the long term.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) _2—
COMMENT: The applicant has committed to retain all surface
drainage is being directed to on -site drywells. Previous site
drainage was directed into the city's drainage system. so this
w111 improve capacity.
(d) FIRE PROTECTION - Considering the ability of the Fire
Department to provide fire protection according to the
established response standards of the appropriate district
without the necessity of establishing a new station, or
requiring the addition of major equipment to an existing
station, the adequacy of available water pressure and
capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment
of the applicant to provide fire protection facilities which
may be necessary to serve the project, including, but not
limited to, fire hydrants and water storage tanks.
RATING: _J--
(Multiplier - 1) _1-
COMMENT: The lodge is approximately 1/2 mile from the main fire
. � - •.•
11- • .- • 11 1 - - and capacity are adequate for fire fighting flows. A hydrant
exists at the NE corner of the property and another 65 feet away
across Carmish • Smoke detectors will be installed. fire extin-
gnishers provided and the new construction will exceed Building
Code reguireements.
(e) ROAD SYSTEM - Considering the capacity of major linkages of
the road network to provide for the needs of the proposed
development without substantially altering the existing
traffic patterns, creating safety hazards or overloading the
existing street system; and the applicant's commitment to
finance necessary road system improvements to serve the
increased usage attributable to the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) _J-_
COMMENT: The new lodge units should not substantially al ter
11 • • -II " 1 - • 1 • • • : - 11 1 • • 1 • • - "• " •
pages. city buses and downvalley lines use Main Street and the
lodge i +4 within easy walking distance of downtown.
2. QUALITY OF OR IMPROVEMENTS TO DESIGN (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall consider each application with respect to the
quality of its exterior and site design and any improvements
proposed thereto, and shall rate each development by assigning
points according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a totally deficient design.
1 -- Indicates a major design flaw.
2 -- Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design.
3 -- indicates an excellent design.
The following features shall be rate accordingly:
(a) ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - Considering the compatibility of the
proposed building or any addition thereto (in terms of size,
height, location and building materials) with existing
neighborhood developments.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT: The desthn of the new building is an extension of the
2
renovated Nugget Lodge. Materials and clean horizontal lines
make it very compatible with the Aspen Ski Lodge. Bui 1 ding
heist and massi ng_i s in 1 ine with surrounding bull dont and the
massing is concentrated in the interior of the site with a two-
• • 1 ' 1 . 1 - c '- • . . - I' 1 - ••• • • 1 . _ . - - 1
granted.
(b) SITE DESIGN - Considering the quality and character of the
proposed or the improvements to the existing landscaping and open
space areas, the extent of undergrou: ding of utilities, and the
provision of pedestrian amenities (path, benches, etc.) to
enhance the design of the development and to provide for the
safety and privacy of the users of the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3) _6
COMMENT: '1• u- - . '•1 •-••• • - - -• -1 •
• - • - - 1 1. . 1. 1 .• .. -. _. J 1 •
rooms have small private patios. Walkways are being upgraded.
(c) ENERGY CONSERVATION - Considering the use of insulation,
solar energy devices, passive solar orientation and similar
techniques to maximize conservation of energy and use of
solar energy sources in the lodge or any addition thereto.
RATING :
(Multiplier - 1) _2
COMMENT: Walt insulation value is R -25, exceeding the re quired
R -19. Roof R- value overall will he R -30 exceeding the required
R -20. Singl e 91 az ed windows will he replaced by doubl e-paned glass
(54 windows). Solar collectors are being used for domestic hot
water heating.
(d) PARKING AND CIRCULATION - Considering the quality and
efficiency of the internal circulation and parking system
for the project, or any addition thereto, including the
proposed automobile and service service vehicle access and
loading areas and design features to screen parking from
public views.
RATING: �—
(Multiplier -3) _3
COMMENT: The 14 new parking spaces required for the new units
turni ng radi us exi sts in the al ley for trucks. However. Engi neeri nq
also states that "the trash site indicated appears to be undersized
and unnsnahle." Screening is the existing 10 ft. high hedge.
(iv) VISUAL IMPACT - Considering the scale and location of the
proposed buildings or any addition thereto, to maximize
public views of surrounding scenic areas.
RATING: _2
(Multiplier - 3) �—
COMMENT: Since the existing builfiing i being rehabilitated and
a dded on to with this structure. the approach takenwj's somewhat
constrained and handled quite effectively. The hulk is away from
Main Street and Garmisch. set hack from B1eeker and centered in
the si te. pubs i c views shout d not he adversely affected.
Vegetation is heing retained.
3
3. AMENITIESS PROVIDED FOR GUESTS (maximum 9 points) - The Commission
shall consider each application with respect to the quality and
spaciousness of its proposed services for guests as compared to
the size of the proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
The Commission shall rate each development by assigning points
according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a total lack of guest amenities.
1 -- Indicates services which are judged to be deficient in terms
of quality of spaciousness.
2 -- indicates services which are judged to be adequate in terms
of quality and spaciousness.
3 -- Indicates services which are judged to be exceptional in
terms of quality and spaciousness.
The following shall be rated accordingly:
(a) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
common meeting areas, such as lobbies and conference areas,
in relation to the size of the proposed lodging project or
any addition thereto:
RATING: �—
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT: The application is very deficient in the provision of
information to evaluate this criteria. The addition of 14 rooms
to the 33 existing rooms toes not appear to he adding any common
space of significant size.
(b) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
dining facilities, including any restaurants, bars and
banquet facilities, in relation to the size of the proposed
lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 2)
COMMENT: Again. detailed information is absent. Tt appears that
the same space hei na caged sg the conference area woul d also he
the dining facility. No new space is proposed.
(c) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
accessory recreational facilities, such as health clubs,
pools and other active areas, in relation to the size of the
proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 2) _1-
COMMENT: The existing pool and jacuzzi area is a high quality
amenity. An additional jacuzzi is being added.
4. CONFORMANCE TO LOCAL PUBLIC POLICY GOALS (maximum 30 points).
The Commission shall consider each application and its degree of
conformity with local planning policies, as follows:
(a) PROVISION OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall assign points to each applicant who agrees
to provide low -, moderate- or middle- income housing which
complies with the housing size, type, income and occupancy
guidelines of the City of Aspen and with the provisions of
Section 24- 11.10.
4
Points shall be assigned according to the following schedule:
0% to 40% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing - 1 point for each 4%
housed.
41% to 100% of the additional employees generated by
the project are provided with housing - 1 point for
each 12% housed.
The Commission shall employ the advice of the City Council's
housing designee in the determination of the number of
employees the project is expected to generate. The housing
designee shall make available standards for employee generation
representing the various levels of service which reflect the
types of lodge operations in existence or proposed for the
City of Aspen. The applicant shall be given the opportunity
to present to the housing designee information demonstrating
that an alternative standard should be employed. The
alternative standard may be employed by the Planning Commis-
sion, upon the recommendation of the designee.
If the Planning Commission determines that the proposed
project generates no new employees it shall award to the
applicant the full fifteen (15) points available within this
subsection.
In order to determine the percentage of employees generated
by the project who are provided with housing, the Commission
shall use the following criteria:
Studio: 1.25 residents
One - Bedroom 1.75 residents
Two- Bedroom 2.25 residents
Three- Bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents
Dormitory: 1.00 resident per 150
s.f. of unit space
RATING: 1—
(Multiplier - 1) _5
COMMENT: The use of a unit at the Cortina is subject to a Change
' • - v . ' - . ❑ • 1 • • 1 - / • • - •• • • • - • • 1 • ,. / •
• • . se 11 - • - 11 - • • • ' 1 • • - ' 1 - . - ' • 1 W l - - •• ' • 1
states that "if for any reason this off -site employee housing is
unable to he supplied, agpl icant will dedicate one of the 14
• • c - • • • • - 1 - • • - 911. • -- 1• ' •• y• - 1 .:II • • K-
aenerated will, therefore. be housed.
(b) CONVERSION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum 5 points). The
Commission shall assign points to those applications who
guarantee to provide a portion of their low -, moderate- or
middle- income units by purchasing fully constructed units
which are not restricted to Aspen's housing guidelines and
placing a deed - restriction upon them in compliance with
Section 24- 11.10. Points shall be assigned according to the
following schedule:
1% -33% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 1 point
34% -66% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 3 points
67% -100% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
5
restricted: 5 points
In order to determine the percentage of such housing to be
purchased and restricted by the applicant, there shall be
used the same formula (above) used for determining what
percent of the project is devoted to middle -, moderate- and
low- income housing, with no credit to be received for any
unit not meeting the most recent guidelines of the City's
housing designee, as adopted by the Aspen City Council.
(Multiplier - 1) _j___
COMMENT: The solution of ::sing a emit in the Cortina is not
�•.� . •- •_._ . - 44- - '- I• • .. • •.s :; • 1• e• .
the lodge been condami ni nmized. nor has the Change in Use been
>;aguested.
(c) REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum
15 points). The Commission shall award points as follows:
0 to 50% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 10%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
50 to 100% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 5%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
RATING: __i_
(Multiplier - 1) 1_
COMMENT: The entire existing lodge (33 units) is being recan-
- • - • 111 • 11. • -11-• - - 1 -: .--1 ken - •
The work includes total facade remodel. remodelling of lobby.
common areas. new roof: room renovations: addition of balconies.
solariums. or patios.
For the purposes of this section, rehabilitation shall
include the upgrading of the structure and appearance of a
lodge unit or of non -unit space by its in -place restoration
to a substantially higher quality status relative to the
segment(s) of the tourist population to which the lodge
is marketed, which may alter its size.
For the purpose of this section, reconstruction shall
include the partial or complete demolition and rebuilding of
a lodge unit or non -unit space which may be accomplished in
a similar or different size to the original configuration,
provided that the rebuilt portion of the lodge is located on
the same site.
For the purpose of this section, non -unit space shall include
those areas of the lodge not included within individual
lodge units but intended to serve the guests of the facility,
including but not limited to the lobby, halls, recreational
areas and dining facilities.
5. BONUS POINTS (maximum 6 points). The Commission members
may, when any one determines that a project has not only
incorporated and met the substantive criteria of Section 24-
11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4), but has also exceeded the
provisions of these subsections and achieved an outstanding
overall design meriting recognition, award additional bonus
points not exceeding ten (10) percent of the total points
awarded under Section 24- 11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4) prior
6
to the application of the corresponding multiplier. Any
Commission member awarding bonus points shall provide a
written justification of that award for the public hearing
record.
RATING: JYB—
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT: N/A
6. TOTAL POINTS:
Points in Category 1: 6 (minimum of 3 points
required)
Points in Category 2: 23 (minimum of 11.7
points required)
Points in Category 3: 9 (minimum of 6.3 points
required)
Points in Category 4 : 30 ( m i n i m u m of 1 0 . 5
points required)
SUBTOTAL Categories 1 -4: 68 (minimum of 63 points
required)
Bonus Points:
TOTAL POINTS: 68
Name of Planning and Zoning Member: Aspen /Pitkin Planning Office
7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office
RE: Nugget Lodge - L -3 Lodge GMP Submission /Special Review
DATE: November 6, 1984
LOCATION: 110 W. Main Street
East one -half of Lots E and 0, all of Lots F, G, H, I,
P, Q, R and S, Block 58, City and Townsite of Aspen
ZONING: L -3
APPLICANT'S REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting an allotment of 14 lodge units and Special
Review approval to increase the floor area ratio from .74:1 to .92:1.
The employee housing solution proposed will require a Change in Use
GMP exemption and parking exemption.
BACKGROUND:
Attached for your review is the project profile and the Planning
Office's recommended points allocation for the one project submitted
on October 1, 1984, for the L -3 Lodge GMP Competition. The application
is for fourteen (14) lodge units at the Nugget Lodge (110 W. Main
Street).
The quota available in the L -3 zone is 13 units (10 units for the 1984
competition and 3 units carried over from the 1983 competition).
PROCESS:
The Planning Office will summarize the project at your meeting of
November 6, 1984, will review procedures with you and provide a
suggested assignment of points for the scoring of the application.
The applicant will give a brief presentation of the proposal. A
public hearing will be held to allow interested citizens to comment.
At the close of the hearing each Commission member will be asked to
score the applicant's proposal.
The total number of points awarded by all members, divided by the
number of members voting, will constitute the total points awarded to
the project. A project must score a minimum of 60% of the total
points available under categories 1, 2, 3 and 4, amounting to 63
points, and a minimum of 30% of the points available in each category
1, 2, 3 and 4 to meet the basic competitive requirements. The minimum
points are as follows: Category 1 = 3 points; Category 2 = 11.7
points; Category 3 = 6.3 points; and Category 4 = 10.5 points. Should
the application score below these thresholds, it will no longer be
considered for a development allotment and will be considered denied.
Bonus points cannot be used to bring the application over this minimum
threshold.
SUBSEQUENT REVIEWS:
The additional reviews that this project, as presented, will require
are a Special Review to increase the floor area ratio from .74:1 to
.92:1, and a Change in Use GMP Exemption and Parking Exemption for the
employee housing solution.
The applicant did not request the Change in Use GMP Exemption or the
Parking Exemption. The Planning Office feels that the employee
housing solution of converting a unit at the Cortina Lodge to an
employee dormitory unit is not well presented in this application nor
possible under current circumstances. First, Change in Use from lodge
to residential is required, but is not part of the application. Secondly,
no proof of ownership is exhibited for the Cortina, therefore, we do
not accept use of a unit in the property as a viable solution.
Thirdly, the Cortina is not a condominiumized lodge, so the sale of
an individual unit for this purpose is not even possible. Finally,
the Housing Director and the Building Department have not yet determined
through an inspection of the proposed unit if it meets UBC requirements
and the Housing Authority's Dormitory Housing Standards.
For the purposes of scoring, we recommended maximum points because the
applicant committed to deed - restrict one of the new lodge units to
employee housing. The Planning Office feels this is the preferred
solution for several reasons:
a. The employee housing would be on -site and when this can be
accommodated, it is normally the preferred solution;
b. There are thirteen units available and fourteen are being
requested. If the project meets the scoring threshold and
one unit is converted to deed - restricted employee housing,
all thirteen could be awarded with no borrowing or the need
to compete in another year.
c. This sort of off -site employee housing solution for lodge
employees was attempted at the Alpina House for the Woodstone.
When the Woodstone was sold, some confusion resulted in the
transfer of the deed - restricted housing. Finally, through
the Cantrup bankruptcy, it was determined that the deed -
restrictions could not be carried over, and the units were
lost from the inventory. Therefore, we question whether
employee units which cannot be formally deeded to the owner
of the lodge should be considered to meet the housing needs
of the project.
The Special Review to increase the floor area ratio from .74:1 to
.92:1 is being processed as a simultaneous review (to track along with
the GMP process). The maximum FAR allowed in the L -3 zone is 1:1. On
October 2, 1984, you approved a Special Review request to increase the
floor area ratio of the Nugget from .68:1 to .74:1. This increase was
to accommodate additions of space to the existing lodge as part of its
complete remodeling. Specifically, those improvements included an
increased lobby area, enclosing the existing decks with solariums and
adding additional covered access walkways. No adverse impacts were
found associated with that request and a much improved exterior
appearance was considered to be the result.
Similarly, we anticipate no adverse impacts to result from increasing
the FAR from .74:1 to .92:1. If there were significant impacts, they
would be reflected in the GMP scoring. The only comments from the
Planning Office which do affect the recommended scores negatively are
that the additional 14 units (and concurrently, the additional FAR) is
all lodge space with no attendant proportional increase in amenity and
common space.
The positive aspects of the design approach are that the bulk is
located toward the center of the site and away from Main Street.
Along Garmisch the "top level steps back twenty feet from the parapet
and recesses within a roof structure which slopes away from the
street." The Sleeker Street facade is 32 feet from the property line
at its closest point.
The alley that ran east -west on the property was vacated by Council at
their October 22 meeting. It was replaced by a parcel for interior
block access which runs north - south. Each parcel is comprised of
approximately 2250 sq. ft., so the land exchange does not affect floor
area calculations. The application placed no improvements in the area
of either of these "alley" parcels.
- 2 -
PLANNING OFFICE RATINGS:
The Planning Office has assigned points to the application as recommenda-
tions for you to consider. The staff met to assess the ratings of the
reviewing planner and objectively scored the proposals. The following
is a summary of the ratings. A more complete explanation of the
points assignment for each criterion is shown on the attached score
sheets, including rationales for the ratings.
Availability Quality of Conformance
of Public or Improve - Amenities to Local
Facilities/ ments to for Public Bonus Total
Services Design Guests Policy Goals Points Points
The Nugget 6 23 9 30 -- 68
The project exceeds all minimum thresholds required. Quota available
in the L -3 zone is 13 units. Quota being requested is 14 units.
PLANNING OFFICE RECOMMENDATION:
We would recommend that you concur with our point assignments, which
score the project above threshold. We further recommend approval of
the Special Review to increase the floor area ratio to .92:1. Our
final recommendation is to deny the concept of converting a unit at the
Cortina Lodge into an employee dorm unit, and to require the deed -
restriction of one of the 14 units proposed for the employee housing
requirement. Your recommendation for allocation of 13 units is our
recommended action to forward to City Council.
- 3 -
Il i +f
- --------------------------------
It
ry yy .�• . :. 9 ; M --- -- G - - - - -- . ..rte. ....
1 11) . % 1 , Eallit im
N O
II
! \ \\
+a il � ` O
` I
• __I . . I l i u
i , ill ti
, , J.,11...,%.\\.\\\ 1 \ i
4______ ...L. I
alln
1 ilk
.. ...1 I }
�+ GARMISCH STREET
1'
I iiii 1 ''i -•I ;M I 1
} Isil s i , .I 1 1 :
+ f
�s
i � i
i9i Rill
tlii 4f a ps
r ! i
i l i i+
/ ;
, � y.
G6C C(1
OCT 1 9 1984
M E N O R A N D U M IL/
At-
TO: Colette Penne, Planning Offi
FROM: J. Lucas Adamski, Director of Iiousir.'
DATE: October 19, 1904
SUBJECT: The Nugget Lodge - L -3 GNP Conceptual -
Submission /Special Review
I. PROJECT:
A. Description: The Nugget Lodge GNP application is
requesting a GRIP allotment of fourteen (14) lodge units
to be built in conjunction with the improvement and
rehabilitation of thirty -three (33) existing lodge
units located within the L -3 zone district. In addition,
the applicant is requesting special review approval to
increase the F.A.R. from approximately .74:1 to .92:1. and
provide one hundred percent (100%) of its employee
housing by purchasing fully constructed units which are
not restricted to Aspen's housing guidelines and will
place a deed restriction on them in compliance with
Sec. 24 -1.10 of the City Code.
II. HOUSING AUTIIORITY REVIEW:
A. Employee Generation
Section 24 -11.2, Subsection 3 (bb) states "provided
that upon the demonstration to the City Council's
housing designee..., the commission may employ an
alternative standard recommended by the designee." The
standard with which the Housing Authority reviews lodge
applications is as follows:
-.22 to .54 employee per room based on review of the
Housing Authority.
F. Employee Housing
The applicant has stated that he "will provide one
hundred percent (100 %) of its employee housing ". This
is not totally accurate as he is providing housing for
35% of the 100% employees generated. The points he is
allowed should be based of the 35% housing provided.
Using the 0 -35% Employee Housing provision of the City
Code (24.11.5 (3) (aa) and the fact that the Nugget
1
Lodge will provide minimal levels of service to its
customers, results in an employee generation of 1.O8
(14 x .22 x 35% = 1.078).
In addition, the applicant has previously dedicated 520
square feet (one (1) unit of the existing 33 units) to
accommodate the required two pillows of employee housing.
B. Proposed Employee Housing = Dormitory (350 sq. ft.) and
one (1) existing 520 square foot unit (2 pillows).
The standard for dormitory housing is "1.00 residents
per 150 sq. ft. of unit space ". The Housing Authority
also encourages the following standards be applied when
reviewing dormitory housing:
1. One bathroom shared by no more than six persons,
containing at least one water closet, one lavatory,
one bathtub with a shower, and a total area of at
least 60 square feet.
2. Access to a kitchen facility shared by no more
than twelve persons, containing a sink, stove and
refrigerator.
3. 20 square feet per person of enclosed storage
area, located within or adjacent to the unit.
4. One exit per 10 persons.
5. An average of 150 square feet per person for
sleeping, bathroom cooking and common areas.
Gideon Kauffman, attorney for the applicant, assures that
all of the standards for dormitory housing will be met or
exceeded except for the item 2. kitchen facility. Cooking
facilities will be provided at the Nugget Lodge. This is
due to the zoning of the Cortina.
C. Recommendation: It is the recommendation of the
Housing Authority that the approval of the Nugget Lodge
application be conditioned upon the following:
1. The owner covenants with the City that the 350 square
foot unit located at the Cortina and the 520 square
foot existing unit as described in the application
be restricted in terms of use and occupancy to the
rental and occupancy guidelines established and
indexed at the time of or prior to issuance of the
building permit by the City Council's designee for
low income /dormitory housing. Verification of
employment and income of those persons living in
the low income employee units shall be completed
2
and filed with the City Council or its designee by
the owner commencing on the date of recording
hereof, in the Pitkin County real property records
and annually thereafter. These covenants shall be
deemed to run with the land as a burden thereto
for the benefit of and shall be specifically
enforceable by the City or its designee by any
appropriate legal action including injunction,
abatement or eviction of noncomplying tenancy, during
the the period of life of the last surviving
member of the presently existing City Council of
the City of Aspen, Colorado, plus twenty -one (21)
years, or for a period of fifty years from the
date of recording hereof in the Pitkin County real
property records, whichever period shall be less.
2. The Housing Director and the Building Department
shall inspect the Cortina Lodge Employee Housing
Unit to determine if it meets requirements of the
UBC and the Housing Authority's Dormitory Housing
Standards and their recommendations shall be
reviewed at the time of preliminary subdivision
review.
The Housing Authority further recommends a possible municipal
code amendment (If the current code does not allow kitchens) to
allow a shared kitchen or kitchenette for the price restricted
employee dormitory unit.
3
1984 L -3 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SUBMISSION
PLANNING AND ZONING COMISSION POINTS ALLOCATION
TALLY SHEET
PROJECT: The Nugget Lodge
PSZ VOTING MEMBERS PERRY LEE PAT JASMINE ROGER MARY DAVID MULTIPLIER AVERAGE
1. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
a. Water Service __1 1 1 1 1 __1 1 (1)
b. Sewer Service 1_ 1 1 1 1 __1 _ 1 (1)
c. Storm Drainage 2 2 2 2 2 __2 __ 2 (1)
d. Fire Protection 1— 1 .5 1 1 1 1 (1)
--- -- - -- --
e. Roads 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (1)
SUBTOTAL: 6 6 5.5 6 6 6 6 5.93
2. QUALITY OF OR IMPROVEMENTS TO DESIGN
a. Architectural Design 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 (3)
b. Site Design 6 6 3 6 6 __6 4.5 (3)
c. Energy Conservation 2 _ 2 2 2 2.5 2 1 (1)
d. Parking and Circulation 6 3 3 3 3 0_ 0 (3)
e. Visual Iepact = =6 6 6 6 6 6 6 (3)
SUBTOTAL: 26 23 20 23 23.5 20 17.5 21.86
3. AMENITIES PROVIDED FOR GUESTS
a. Meeting Areas, Lobbies, Con-
ference Facilities 6 4.5 3 6 6 3 3 (3)
b. Dining Facilities 4 3 2 4 3 2 1 (2)
c. Recreational Facilities 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 (2)
SUBTOTAL: 14 11.5 9 14 13 9 8 11.21
4. CONFORMANCE OF PUBLIC POLICY GOALS
a. Employee Housing _15 15 15 _15 __ _15 15 15 (1)
b. Conversion of Existing Units -- -- -- -- -- -__— -- (1)
c. Rehabilitation and Reconstruction
of Existing Units _15__ 15__ 15 15__ 15 15 _ 15 (1)
SUBTOTAL: 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
TOTAL POINTS 1 -4: 76 70.5 64.5 73 72.5 65 61.5 69
5. BONUS POINTS (1)
TOTAL POINTS 76 70.5 64.5 73 72.5 65 61.5 69
1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION
CITY OF ASPEN
1 � � /� / ) a
Name of Project: /!� �< ` - -� r ' Date //r 0 / ' /
1. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES AND SERVICES
(maximum 10 points). The Commission shall consider each applica-
tion with respect to the impact of the proposed building or the
addition thereto upon public facilities and services and shall
rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 -- Project requires the provision of new services at increased
public expense.
1 -- Project can be handled by the existing level of service in
the area or any service improvement by the applicant benefits
the project only and not the area in general.
2 -- Project in and of itself improves the quality of service in
a given area
The following facilities and services shall be rated accordingly:
(a) WATER - Considering the ability of the water system to serve
the development, and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(b) SEWER - Considering the ability of the sewer system to serve
the development and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING: /
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(c) STORM DRAINAGE - Considering the degree to which the applicant
proposes to retain surface runoff on the development site.
If the development requires use of the City's drainage
system, considering the commitment of the applicant to
install the necessary drainage control facilities and to
maintain the system over the long term. �7
RATING: s`
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(d) FIRE PROTECTION - Considering the ability of the Fire
Department to provide fire protection according to the
established response standards of the appropriate district
without the necessity of establishing a new station, or
requiring the addition of major equipment to an existing
station, the adequacy of available water pressure and
capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment
of the applicant to provide fire protection facilities which
may be necessary to serve the project, including, but not
limited to, fire hydrants and water storage tanks.
RATING: /
(Multiplier - 1) /
COMMENT:
(e) ROAD SYSTEM - Considering the capacity of major linkages of
the road network to provide for the needs of the proposed
development without substantially altering the existing
traffic patterns, creating safety hazards or overloading the
existing street system; and the applicant's commitment to
finance necessary road system improvements to serve the
increased usage attributable to the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
2. QUALITY OF OR IMPROVEMENTS TO DESIGN (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall consider each application with respect to the
quality of its exterior and site design and any improvements
proposed thereto, and shall rate each development by assigning
points according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a totally deficient design.
1 -- Indicates a major design flaw.
2 -- Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design.
3 -- Indicates an excellent design.
The following features shall be rate accordingly:
2
(a) ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - Considering the compatibility of the
proposed building or any addition thereto (in terms of size,
height, location and building materials) with existing
neighborhood developments.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
(b) SITE DESIGN - Considering the quality and character of the
proposed or the improvements to the existing landscaping and open
space areas, the extent of undergrounding of utilities, and the
provision of pedestrian amenities (path, benches, etc.) to
enhance the design of the development and to provide for the
safety and privacy of the users of the development.
RATING: 2
(Multiplier - 3) <,
COMMENT:
(c) ENERGY CONSERVATION - Considering the use of insulation,
solar energy devices, passive solar orientation and similar
techniques to maximize conservation of energy and use of
solar energy sources in the lodge or any addition thereto.
RATING: 2
(Multiplier - 1)
a <
COMMENT:
(d) PARKING AND CIRCULATION - Considering the quality and
efficiency of the internal circulation and parking system
for the project, or any addition thereto, including the
proposed automobile and service service vehicle access and
loading areas and design features to screen parking from
public views.
RATING: 2
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
3
(iv) VISUAL IMPACT - Considering the scale and location of the
proposed buildings or any addition thereto, to maximize
public views of surrounding scenic areas.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3) 6
COMMENT:
3. AMENITIES PROVIDED POR GUESTS (maximum 9 points) - The Commission
shall consider each application with respect to the quality and
spaciousness of its proposed services for guests as compared to
the size of the proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
The Commission shall rate each development by assigning points
according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a total lack of guest amenities.
1 -- Indicates services which are judged to be deficient in terms
of quality of spaciousness.
2 -- Indicates services which are judged to be adequate in terms
of quality and spaciousness.
3 -- Indicates services which are judged to be exceptional in
terms of quality and spaciousness.
The following shall be rated accordingly:
(a) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
common meeting areas, such as lobbies and conference areas,
in relation to the size of the proposed lodging project or
any addition thereto: a�
RATING: a
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
(b) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
dining facilities, including any restaurants, bars and
banquet facilities, in relation to the size of the proposed
lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 2)
COMMENT:
4
(c) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
accessory recreational facilities, such as health clubs,
pools and other active areas, in relation to the size of the
proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING: , 2
(Multiplier - 2) `7
COMMENT:
4. CONFORMANCE TO LOCAL PUBLIC POLICY GOALS (maximum 30 points).
The Commission shall consider each application and its degree of
conformity with local planning policies, as follows:
(a) PROVISION OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall assign points to each applicant who agrees
to provide low -, moderate- or middle- income housing which
complies with the housing size, type, income and occupancy
guidelines of the City of Aspen and with the provisions of
Section 24- 11.10.
Points shall be assigned according to the following schedule:
0% to 40% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing - 1 point for each 4%
housed.
41% to 100% of the additional employees generated by
the project are provided with housing - 1 point for
each 12% housed.
The Commission shall employ the advice of the City Council's
housing designee in the determination of the number of
employees the project is expected to generate. The housing
designee shall make available standards for employee generation
representing the various levels of service which reflect the
types of lodge operations in existence or proposed for the
City of Aspen. The applicant shall be given the opportunity
to present to the housing designee information demonstrating
that an alternative standard should be employed. The
alternative standard may be employed by the Planning Commis-
sion, upon the recommendation of the designee.
If the Planning Commission determines that the proposed
project generates no new employees it shall award to the
applicant the full fifteen (15) points available within this
subsection.
in order to determine the percentage of employees generated
by the project who are provided with housing, the Commission
shall use the following criteria:
Studio: 1.25 residents
One- Bedroom 1.75 residents
Two- Bedroom 2.25 residents
5
Three- Bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents
Dormitory: 1.00 resident per 150
s.f. of unit space
RATING: �� ^
(Multiplier - 1) /I5
COMMENT:
(b) CONVERSION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum 5 points). The
Commission shall assign points to those applications who
guarantee to provide a portion of their low -, moderate- or
middle- income units by purchasing fully constructed units
which are not restricted to Aspen's housing guidelines and
placing a deed - restriction upon them in compliance with
Section 24- 11.10. Points shall be assigned according to the
following schedule:
1% -33% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 1 point
34% -66% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 3 points
67% -100% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed-
restricted: 5 points
In order to determine the percentage of such housing to be
purchased and restricted by the applicant, there shall be
used the same formula (above) used for determining what
percent of the project is devoted to middle -, moderate- and
low- income housing, with no credit to be received for any
unit not meeting the most recent guidelines of the City's
housing designee, as adopted by the Aspen City Council.
v
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(c) REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum
15 points). The Commission shall award points as follows:
0 to 50% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 10%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
50 to 100% of the total existing unit inventory or non -
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 5%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
6
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) S�
COMMENT:
For the purposes of this section, rehabilitation shall
include the upgrading of the structure and appearance of a
lodge unit or of non -unit space by its in -place restoration
to a substantially higher quality status relative to the
segment(s) of the tourist population to which the lodge
is marketed, which may alter its size.
For the purpose of this section, reconstruction shall
include the partial or complete demolition and rebuilding of
a lodge unit or non -unit space which may be accomplished in
a similar or different size to the original configuration,
provided that the rebuilt portion of the lodge is located on
the same site.
For the purpose of this section, non -unit space shall include
those areas of the lodge not included within individual
lodge units but intended to serve the guests of the facility,
including but not limited to the lobby, halls, recreational
areas and dining facilities.
5. BONUS POINTS (maximum 6 points). The Commission members
may, when any one determines that a project has not only
incorporated and met the substantive criteria of Section 24-
11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4), but has also exceeded the
provisions of these subsections and achieved an outstanding
overall design meriting recognition, award additional bonus
points not exceeding ten (10) percent of the total points
awarded under Section 24- 11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4) prior
to the application of the corresponding multiplier. Any
Commission member awarding bonus points shall provide a
written justification of that award for the public hearing
record.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
7
6. TOTAL POINTS:
Points in Category 1: 1 6 (minimum of 3 points
required)
Points in Category 2: 2 S (minimum of 11.7
points required)
Points in Category 3: /27( (minimum of 6.3 points
required)
Points in Category 4: 3 0 (minimum of 10.5
points required)
SUBTOTAL Categories 1 -4: (minimum of 63 points
required)
Bonus Points:
TOTAL POINTS: 7C
Name of Planning and Zoning Member: 7 l e-/ / 72 v £ j'
8
1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION
CITY OF ASPEN
Name of Proj ect : Date : 7 U s I S
1. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES AND SERVICES
(maximum 10 points). The Commission shall consider each applica-
tion with respect to the impact of the proposed building or the
addition thereto upon public facilities and services and shall
rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 -- Project requires the provision of new services at increased
public expense.
1 -- Project can be handled by the existing level of service in
the area or any service improvement by the applicant benefits
the project only and not the area in general.
2 -- Project in and of itself improves the quality of service in
a given area
The following facilities and services shall be rated accordingly:
(a) WATER - Considering the ability of the water system to serve
the development, and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(b) SEWER - Considering the ability of the sewer system to serve
the development and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) "-
COMMENT:
(c) STORM DRAINAGE - Considering the degree to which the applicant
proposes to retain surface runoff on the development site.
If the development requires use of the City's drainage
system, considering the commitment of the applicant to
install the necessary drainage control facilities and to
maintain the system over the long term.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) 0-
COMMENT:
(d) FIRE PROTECTION - Considering the ability of the Fire
Department to provide fire protection according to the
established response standards of the appropriate district
without the necessity of establishing a new station, or
requiring the addition of major equipment to an existing
station, the adequacy of available water pressure and
capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment
of the applicant to provide fire protection facilities which
may be necessary to serve the project, including, but not
limited to, fire hydrants and water storage tanks.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(e) ROAD SYSTEM - Considering the capacity of major linkages of
the road network to provide for the needs of the proposed
development without substantially altering the existing
traffic patterns, creating safety hazards or overloading the
existing street system; and the applicant's commitment to
finance necessary road system improvements to serve the
increased usage attributable to the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
2. QUALITY OF OR IMPROVEMENTS TO DESIGN (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall consider each application with respect to the
quality of its exterior and site design and any improvements
proposed thereto, and shall rate each development by assigning
points according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a totally deficient design.
1 -- Indicates a major design flaw.
2 -- Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design.
3 -- Indicates an excellent design.
The following features shall be rate accordingly:
2
(a) ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - Considering the compatibility of the
proposed building or any addition thereto (in terms of size,
height, location and building materials) with existing
neighborhood developments.
RATING: 9
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
(b) SITE DESIGN - Considering the quality and character of the
proposed or the improvements to the existing landscaping and open
space areas, the extent of undergrounding of utilities, and the
provision of pedestrian amenities (path, benches, etc.) to
enhance the design of the development and to provide for the
safety and privacy of the users of the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
(c) ENERGY CONSERVATION - Considering the use of insulation,
solar energy devices, passive solar orientation and similar
techniques to maximize conservation of energy and use of
solar energy sources in the lodge or any addition thereto.
RATING :
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(d) PARKING AND CIRCULATION - Considering the quality and
efficiency of the internal circulation and parking system
for the project, or any addition thereto, including the
proposed automobile and service service vehicle access and
loading areas and design features to screen parking from
public views.
RATING: 0
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT: � - PerKI� C Coc-L ?L c S —
3
c_ g tw t ?Lfl ! tnP! o`7EES 6o 0
PI- s 11-111 11 c cars 1)
(iv) VISUAL IMPACT - Considering the scale and location of the
proposed buildings or any addition thereto, to maximize
public views of surrounding scenic areas.
RAT I AT :
(Multiplier - 3) ( P
COMMENT:
3. AMENITIES PROVIDED FOR GUESTS (maximum 9 points) - The Commission
shall consider each application with respect to the quality and
spaciousness of its proposed services for guests as compared to
the size of the proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
The Commission shall rate each development by assigning points
according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a total lack of guest amenities.
1 -- Indicates services which are judged to be deficient in terms
of quality of spaciousness.
2 -- Indicates services which are judged to be adequate in terms
of quality and spaciousness.
3 -- Indicates services which are judged to be exceptional in
terms of quality and spaciousness.
The following shall be rated accordingly:
(a) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
common meeting areas, such as lobbies and conference areas,
in relation to the size of the proposed lodging project or
any addition thereto:
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3) _
COMMENT:
(b) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
dining facilities, including any restaurants, bars and
banquet facilities, in relation to the size of the proposed
lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 2)
COMMENT:
4
•
(c) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
accessory recreational facilities, such as health clubs,
pools and other active areas, in relation to the size of the
proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING: L�
(Multiplier - 2) 2 /
COMMENT:
4. CONFORMANCE TO LOCAL PUBLIC POLICY GOALS (maximum 30 points).
The Commission shall consider each application and its degree of
conformity with local planning policies, as follows:
(a) PROVISION OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall assign points to each applicant who agrees
to provide low -, moderate- or middle- income housing which
complies with the housing size, type, income and occupancy
guidelines of the City of Aspen and with the provisions of
Section 24- 11.10.
Points shall be assigned according to the following schedule:
0% to 40% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing - 1 point for each 4%
housed.
41% to 100% of the additional employees generated by
the project are provided with housing - 1 point for
each 12% housed.
The Commission shall employ the advice of the City Council's
housing designee in the determination of the number of
employees the project is expected to generate. The housing
designee shall make available standards for employee generation
representing the various levels of service which reflect the
types of lodge operations in existence or proposed for the
City of Aspen. The applicant shall be given the opportunity
to present to the housing designee information demonstrating
that an alternative standard should be employed. The
alternative standard may be employed by the Planning Commis-
sion, upon the recommendation of the designee.
If the Planning Commission determines that the proposed
project generates no new employees it shall award to the
applicant the full fifteen (15) points available within this
subsection.
In order to determine the percentage of employees generated
by the project who are provided with housing, the Commission
shall use the following criteria:
Studio: 1.25 residents
One- Bedroom 1.75 residents
Two- Bedroom 2.25 residents
5
Three- Bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents
Dormitory: 1.00 resident per 150
s. f. of unit space
RATING: /5-
(Multiplier - 1) /
COMMENT:
(b) CONVERSION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum 5 points). The
Commission shall assign points to those applications who
guarantee to provide a portion of their low -, moderate- or
middle- income units by purchasing fully constructed units
which are not restricted to Aspen's housing guidelines and
placing a deed - restriction upon them in compliance with
Section 24- 11.10. Points shall be assigned according to the
following schedule:
1% -33% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 1 point
34% -66% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 3 points
67% -100% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 5 points
In order to determine the percentage of such housing to be
purchased and restricted by the applicant, there shall be
used the same formula (above) used for determining what
percent of the project is devoted to middle -, moderate- and
low- income housing, with no credit to be received for any
unit not meeting the most recent guidelines of the City's
housing designee, as adopted by the Aspen City Council.
RATIt:
(Multiplier - 1) C'
COMMENT:
(c) REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum
15 points). The Commission shall award points as follows:
0 to 50% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 10%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
50 to 100% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 5%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
6
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) /S
COMMENT:
For the purposes of this section, rehabilitation shall
include the upgrading of the structure and appearance of a
lodge unit or of non -unit space by its in -place restoration
to a substantially higher quality status relative to the
segment(s) of the tourist population to which the lodge
is marketed, which may alter its size.
For the purpose of this section, reconstruction shall
include the partial or complete demolition and rebuilding of
a lodge unit or non -unit space which may be accomplished in
a similar or different size to the original configuration,
provided that the rebuilt portion of the lodge is located on
the same site.
For the purpose of this section, non -unit space shall include
those areas of the lodge not included within individual
lodge units but intended to serve the guests of the facility,
including but not limited to the lobby, halls, recreational
areas and dining facilities.
5. BONUS POINTS (maximum 6 points). The Commission members
may, when any one determines that a project has not only
incorporated and met the substantive criteria of Section 24-
11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4), but has also exceeded the
provisions of these subsections and achieved an outstanding
overall design meriting recognition, award additional bonus
points not exceeding ten (10) percent of the total points
awarded under Section 24- 11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4) prior
to the application of the corresponding multiplier. Any
Commission member awarding bonus points shall provide a
written justification of that award for the public hearing
record.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
7
6. TOTAL POINTS:
Points in Category 1: (minimum of 3 points
required)
Points in Category 2: (minimum of 11.7
points required)
Points in Category 3: (minimum of 6.3 points
required)
Points in Category 4 : ( m i n i m u m of 1 0 . 5
points required)
SUBTOTAL Categories 1 -4: (minimum of 63 points
required)
Bonus Points:
TOTAL POINTS:
Name of Planning and Zoning Member:
8
1984 L -3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION
CITY OF ASPEN
Name of Project: � /4.46(/ 4;5. Date: ' 1
1. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES AND :ERVICES
(maximum 10 points). The Commission shall consider each applica-
tion with respect to the impact of the proposed building or the
addition thereto upon public facilities and services and shall
rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 -- Project requires the provision of new services at increased
public expense.
1 -- Project can be handled by the existing level of service in
the area or any service improvement by the applicant benefits
the project only and not the area in general.
2 -- Project in and of itself improves the quality of service in
a given area
The following facilities and services shall be rated accordingly:
(a) WATER - Considering the ability of the water system to serve
the development, and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING: 'J
(Multiplier - 1) Y
COMMENT:
(b) SEWER - Considering the ability of the sewer system to serve
the development and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING: Y
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(c) STORM DRAINAGE - Considering the degree to which the applicant
proposes to retain surface runoff on the development site.
If the development requires use of the City's drainage
system, considering the commitment of the applicant to
install the necessary drainage control facilities and to
maintain the system over the long term.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
. may
COMMENT:
(d) FIRE PROTECTION - Considering the ability of the Fire
Department to provide fire protection according to the
established response standards of the appropriate district
without the necessity of establishing a new station, or
requiring the addition of major equipment to an existing
station, the adequacy of available water pressure and
capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment
of the applicant to provide fire protection facilities which
may be necessary to serve the project, including, but not
limited to, fire hydrants and water storage tanks.
RATING: b
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(e) ROAD SYSTEM - Considering the capacity of major linkages of
the road network to provide for the needs of the proposed
development without substantially altering the existing
traffic patterns, creating safety hazards or overloading the
existing street system; and the applicant's commitment to
finance necessary road system improvements to serve the
increased usage attributable to the development.
RATING: 1
(Multi - 1)
COMMENT: 40S j � ��//� /j6 TO IJAKS (!(lam
I� J11s1 lAU1.
2. QUALITY OF OR IMPROVEMENTS TO DESIGN (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall consider each application with respect to the
quality of its exterior and site design and any improvements
proposed thereto, and shall rate each development by assigning
points according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a totally deficient design.
1 -- Indicates a major design flaw.
2 -- Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design.
3 -- Indicates an excellent design.
The following features shall be rate accordingly:
2
(a) ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - Considering the compatibility of the
- proposed building or any addition thereto (in terms of size,
height, location and building materials) with existing
neighborhood developments.
RATING: 2 /
(Multiplier - 3) 47
COMMENT:
(b) SITE DESIGN - Considering the quality and character of the
proposed or the improvements to the existing landscaping and open
space areas, the extent of undergrounding of utilities, and the
provision of pedestrian amenities (path, benches, etc.) to
enhance the design of the development and to provide for the
safety and privacy of the users of the development.
/ j
RATING:
i �
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
(c) ENERGY CONSERVATION - Considering the use of insulation,
solar energy devices, passive solar orientation and similar
techniques to maximize conservation of energy and use of
solar energy sources in the lodge or any addition thereto. 1
RATING: t
'./ �,/ p ,/ (Multiplier f - 1) t
COMMENT: 115T n Y�'* INKY ' °" ws • n.,
(d) PARKING AND CIRCULATION - Considering the quality and
efficiency of the internal circulation and parking system
for the project, or any addition thereto, including the
proposed automobile and service service vehicle access and
loading areas and design features to screen parking from
public views.
RATING: 0
PR O% I,
(Multiplier - { h o) , / 0
COMMENT: MiZKI Ian Ei SPU fr lu oWS. f�' < (C..
(p Sferat wry!
3
(iv) VISUAL IMPACT - Considering the scale and location of the
proposed buildings or any addition thereto, to maximize
public views of surrounding scenic areas.
RAT I IQ; :
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
3. AMENITIES PROVIDED FOR GUESTS (maximum 9 points) - The Commission
shall consider each application with respect to the quality and
spaciousness of its proposed services for guests as compared to
the size of the proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
The Commission shall rate each development by assigning points
according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a total lack of guest amenities.
1 -- Indicates services which are judged to be deficient in terms
of quality of spaciousness.
2 -- Indicates services which are judged to be adequate in terms
of quality and spaciousness.
3 -- Indicates services which are judged to be exceptional in
terms of quality and spaciousness.
The following shall be rated accordingly:
(a) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
common meeting areas, such as lobbies and conference areas,
in relation to the size of the proposed lodging project or
any addition thereto:
RATING: ( O
(Mult 3) (
COMMENT: �1.� h fl� �S � �(y �N�)1 � �{PyM(nf/--
1GUT6S t2a»&S6KAMCt CSC
) _, ere
6
(b) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
dining facilities, including any restaurants, bars and
banquet facilities, in relation to the size of the proposed
lodging project or any addition thereto. LL
RATING: q '6
/�/f (Mu ltiiplier - 2)
COMMENT: k ' 3 ►, 6< 1 r TE� A �Vc — Ho g
4
(c) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
accessory recreational facilities, such as health clubs,
pools and other active areas, in relation to the size of the
proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING:
101 -�Q (Multiplier - 2)
COMMENT; 1146
4. CONFORMANCE TO LOCAL PUBLIC POLICY GOALS (maximum 30 points).
The Commission shall consider each application and its degree of
conformity with local planning policies, as follows:
(a) PROVISION OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall assign points to each applicant who agrees
to provide low -, moderate- or middle- income housing which
complies with the housing size, type, income and occupancy
guidelines of the City of Aspen and with the provisions of
Section 24- 11.10.
Points shall be assigned according to the following schedule:
0% to 40% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing - 1 point for each 4%
housed.
41% to 100% of the additional employees generated by
the project are provided with housing - 1 point for
each 12% housed.
The Commission shall employ the advice of the City Council's
housing designee in the determination of the number of
employees the project is expected to generate. The housing
designee shall make available standards for employee generation
representing the various levels of service which reflect the
types of lodge operations in existence or proposed for the
City of Aspen. The applicant shall be given the opportunity
to present to the housing designee information demonstrating
that an alternative standard should be employed. The
alternative standard may be employed by the Planning Commis-
sion, upon the recommendation of the designee.
If the Planning Commission determines that the proposed
project generates no new employees it shall award to the
applicant the full fifteen (15) points available within this
subsection.
In order to determine the percentage of employees generated
by the project who are provided with housing, the Commission
shall use the following criteria:
Studio: 1.25 residents
One- Bedroom 1.75 residents
Two- Bedroom 2.25 residents
5
Three- Bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents
Dormitory: 1.00 resident per 150
s.f. of unit space
RATING: 1
'` V�I//�S � 4 (Multiplier - 1) 13
COMMENT: �r IT Y T �/I evt.,lb ieu ke ' """r
N 4Mf C Nv -il l
6'2 3 ?it, •
(b) CONVERSION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum 5 points) . The
Commission shall assign points to those applications who
guarantee to provide a portion of their low -, moderate- or
middle- income units by purchasing fully constructed units
which are not restricted to Aspen's housing guidelines and
placing a deed - restriction upon them in compliance with
Section 24- 11.10. Points shall be assigned according to the
following schedule:
1% -33% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 1 point
34% -66% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 3 points
67% -100% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 5 points
In order to determine the percentage of such housing to be
purchased and restricted by the applicant, there shall be
used the same formula (above) used for determining what
percent of the project is devoted to middle -, moderate- and
low- income housing, with no credit to be received for any
unit not meeting the most recent guidelines of the City's
housing designee, as adopted by the Aspen City Council.
RATIN3: �0
(Multiplier - 1) 0
COMMENT:
(c) RERABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum
15 points). The Commission shall award points as follows:
0 to 50% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 10%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
50 to 100% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 5%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
6
E. f
RATING: I�
(Multiplier - 1) 15
COMMENT:
For the purposes of this section, rehabilitation shall
include the upgrading of the structure and appearance of a
lodge unit or of non -unit space by its in -place restoration
to a substantially higher quality status relative to the
segment(s) of the tourist population to which the lodge
is marketed, which may alter its size.
For the purpose of this section, reconstruction shall
include the partial or complete demolition and rebuilding of
a lodge unit or non -unit space which may be accomplished in
a similar or different size to the original configuration,
provided that the rebuilt portion of the lodge is located on
the same site.
For the purpose of this section, non -unit space shall include
those areas of the lodge not included within individual
lodge units but intended to serve the guests of the facility,
including but not limited to the lobby, halls, recreational
areas and dining facilities.
5. BONUS POINTS (maximum 6 points). The Commission members
may, when any one determines that a project has not only
incorporated and met the substantive criteria of Section 24-
11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4), but has also exceeded the
provisions of these subsections and achieved an outstanding
overall design meriting recognition, award additional bonus
points not exceeding ten (10) percent of the total points
awarded under Section 24- 11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4) prior
to the application of the corresponding multiplier. Any
Commission member awarding bonus points shall provide a
written justification of that award for the public hearing
record.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
7
6. TOTAL POINTS:
Points in Category 1: (minimum of 3 points
J required)
Points in Category 2 : ( m i n i m u m of 11.7
points required)
Points in Category 3: - (minimum of 6.3 points
required)
Points in Category 4: (minimum of 10.5
ints required)
SUBTOTAL Categories 1 -4: -i - (minimum of 63 points
required)
Bonus Points:
TOTAL POINTS: 44--nwr
Name of Planning and Zoning Member:
8
1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION
CITY OF ASPEN
`
Name of Project: Iv i ) Ct U L ( Date: ‘') ► vvv
1. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES AND SERVICES
(maximum 10 points). The Commission shall consider each applica-
tion with respect to the impact of the proposed building or the
addition thereto upon public facilities and services and shall
rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 -- Project requires the provision of new services at increased
public expense.
1 -- Project can be handled by the existing level of service in
the area or any service improvement by the applicant benefits
the project only and not the area in general.
2 -- Project in and of itself improves the quality of service in
a given area
The following facilities and services shall be rated accordingly:
(a) WATER - Considering the ability of the water system to serve
the development, and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(b) SEWER - Considering the ability of the sewer system to serve
the development and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING: ,
(Multiplier - 1) /
COMMENT: I
(c) STORM DRAINAGE - Considering the degree to which the applicant
proposes to retain surface runoff on the development site.
If the development requires use of the City's drainage
system, considering the commitment of the applicant to
install the necessary drainage control facilities and to
maintain the system over the long term.
RATING : ��
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(d) FIRE PROTECTION - Considering the ability of the Fire
Department to provide fire protection according to the
established response standards of the appropriate district
without the necessity of establishing a new station, or
requiring the addition of major equipment to an existing
station, the adequacy of available water pressure and
capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment
of the applicant to provide fire protection facilities which
may be necessary to serve the project, including, but not
limited to, fire hydrants and water storage tanks. I
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(e) ROAD SYSTEM - Considering the capacity of major linkages of
the road network to provide for the needs of the proposed
development without substantially altering the existing
traffic patterns, creating safety hazards or overloading the
existing street system; and the applicant's commitment to
finance necessary road system improvements to serve the
increased usage attributable to the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
2. QUALITY OF OR IMPROVEMENTS TO DESIGN (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall consider each application with respect to the
quality of its exterior and site design and any improvements
proposed thereto, and shall rate each development by assigning
points according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a totally deficient design.
1 -- Indicates a major design flaw.
2 -- Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design.
3 -- Indicates an excellent design.
The following features shall be rate accordingly:
2
(a) ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - Considering the compatibility of the
• proposed building or any addition thereto (in terms of size,
height, location and building materials) with existing
neighborhood developments.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3) 1:6
COMMENT:
(b) SITE DESIGN - Considering the quality and character of the
proposed or the improvements to the existing landscaping and open
space areas, the extent of undergrounding of utilities, and the
provision of pedestrian amenities (path, benches, etc.) to
enhance the design of the development and to provide for the
safety and privacy of the users of the development.
RATING: Z
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
(c) ENERGY CONSERVATION - Considering the use of insulation,
solar energy devices, passive solar orientation and similar
techniques to maximize conservation of energy and use of
solar energy sources in the lodge or any addition thereto.
RATING: 2 S
(Multiplier - 1) Z'
COMMENT:
(d) PARKING AND CIRCULATION - Considering the quality and
efficiency of the internal circulation and parking system
for the project, or any addition thereto, including the
proposed automobile and service service vehicle access and
loading areas and design features to screen parking from
public views.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
3
(iv) VISUAL IMPACT - Considering the scale and location of the
proposed buildings or any addition thereto, to maximize
public views of surrounding scenic areas.
RATIM :
(Multiplier - 3) _
COMMENT:
3. AMENITIES PROVIDED FOR GUESTS (maximum 9 points) - The Commission
shall consider each application with respect to the quality and
spaciousness of its proposed services for guests as compared to
the size of the proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
The Commission shall rate each development by assigning points
according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a total lack of guest amenities.
1 -- Indicates services which are judged to be deficient in terms
of quality of spaciousness.
2 -- Indicates services which are judged to be adequate in terms
of quality and spaciousness.
3 -- Indicates services which are judged to be exceptional in
terms of quality and spaciousness.
The following shall be rated accordingly:
(a) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
common meeting areas, such as lobbies and conference areas,
in relation to the size of the proposed lodging project or
any addition thereto:
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3) 4 (C
COMMENT:
(b) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
dining facilities, including any restaurants, bars and
banquet facilities, in relation to the size of the proposed
lodging project or any addition thereto.
i
RATING: /,`D
(Multiplier - 2)
COMMENT:
4
(c) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
accessory recreational facilities, such as health clubs,
pools and other active areas, in relation to the size of the
proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING: �+
(Multiplier - 2) __y__
COMMENT:
4. CONFORMANCE TO LOCAL PUBLIC POLICY GOALS (maximum 30 points).
The Commission shall consider each application and its degree of
conformity with local planning policies, as follows:
(a) PROVISION OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall assign points to each applicant who agrees
to provide low -, moderate- or middle- income housing which
complies with the housing size, type, income and occupancy
guidelines of the City of Aspen and with the provisions of
Section 24- 11.10.
Points shall be assigned according to the following schedule:
0% to 40% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing - 1 point for each 4%
housed.
41% to 100% of the additional employees generated by
the project are provided with housing - 1 point for
each 12% housed.
The Commission shall employ the advice of the City Council's
housing designee in the determination of the number of
employees the project is expected to generate. The housing
designee shall make available standards for employee generation
representing the various levels of service which reflect the
types of lodge operations in existence or proposed for the
City of Aspen. The applicant shall be given the opportunity
to present to the housing designee information demonstrating
that an alternative standard should be employed. The
alternative standard may be employed by the Planning Commis-
sion, upon the recommendation of the designee.
If the Planning Commission determines that the proposed
project generates no new employees it shall award to the
applicant the full fifteen (15) points available within this
subsection.
In order to determine the percentage of employees generated
by the project who are provided with housing, the Commission
shall use the following criteria:
Studio: 1.25 residents
One - Bedroom 1.75 residents
Two- Bedroom 2.25 residents
5
Three- Bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents
Dormitory: 1.00 resident per 150
s.f. of unit space
RATING: ( /
5
(Multiplier - 1) /
COMMENT:
(b) CONVERSION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum 5 points). The
Commission shall assign points to those applications who
guarantee to provide a portion of their low -, moderate- or
middle- income units by purchasing fully constructed units
which are not restricted to Aspen's housing guidelines and
placing a deed - restriction upon them in compliance with
Section 24- 11.10. Points shall be assigned according to the
following schedule:
1% -33% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 1 point
34% -66% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 3 points
67% -100% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 5 points
In order to determine the percentage of such housing to be
purchased and restricted by the applicant, there shall be
used the same formula (above) used for determining what
percent of the project is devoted to middle -, moderate- and
low- income housing, with no credit to be received for any
unit not meeting the most recent guidelines of the City's
housing designee, as adopted by the Aspen City Council.
RATING: C
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(c) REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum
15 points). The Commission shall award points as follows:
0 to 50% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 10%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
50 to 100% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 5%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
6
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) /I)
COMMENT:
For the purposes of this section, rehabilitation shall
include the upgrading of the structure and appearance of a
lodge unit or of non -unit space by its in -place restoration
to a substantially higher quality status relative to the
segment(s) of the tourist population to which the lodge
is marketed, which may alter its size.
For the purpose of this section, reconstruction shall
include the partial or complete demolition and rebuilding of
a lodge unit or non -unit space which may be accomplished in
a similar or different size to the original configuration,
provided that the rebuilt portion of the lodge is located on
the same site.
For the purpose of this section, non -unit space shall include
those areas of the lodge not included within individual
lodge units but intended to serve the guests of the facility,
including but not limited to the lobby, halls, recreational
areas and dining facilities.
5. BONUS POINTS (maximum 6 points). The Commission members
may, when any one determines that a project has not only
incorporated and met the substantive criteria of Section 24-
11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4), but has also exceeded the
provisions of these subsections and achieved an outstanding
overall design meriting recognition, award additional bonus
points not exceeding ten (10) percent of the total points
awarded under Section 24- 11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4) prior
to the application of the corresponding multiplier. Any
Commission member awarding bonus points shall provide a
written justification of that award for the public hearing
record.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
7
e-
6. TOTAL POINTS:
Points in Category 1: 6 (minimum of 3 points
/ .required)
Points in Category 2: 7",`) (minimum of 11.7
points required)
Points in Category 3: - -I -- (minimum of 6.3 points
required)
Points in Category 4 : 3 0 ( m i n i m u m of 1 0 . 5
points required)
SUBTOTAL Categories 1 -4: (minimum of 63 points
required)
Bonus Points: `✓
TOTAL POINTS: 1 `c)
Name of Planning and Zoning Member:,
8
•
1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION
C TY OF ASPEN
`(
Name of Project: kuTi Pd Date: 11 (n - 84
1. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES AND SERVICES
(maximum 10 points). The Commission shall consider each applica-
tion with respect to the impact of the proposed building or the
addition thereto upon public facilities and services and shall
rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 -- Project requires the provision of new services at increased
public expense.
1 -- Project can be handled by the existing level of service in
the area or any service improvement by the applicant benefits
the project only and not the area in general.
2 -- Project in and of itself improves the quality of service in
a given area
The following facilities and services shall be rated accordingly:
(a) WATER - Considering the ability of the water system to serve
the development, and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(b) SEWER - Considering the ability of the sewer system to serve
the development and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(c) STORM DRAINAGE - Considering the degree to which the applicant
proposes to retain surface runoff on the development site.
If the development requires use of the City's drainage
system, considering the commitment of the applicant to
install the necessary drainage control facilities and to
maintain the system over the long term.
RATING: 2'
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(d) FIRE PROTECTION - Considering the ability of the Fire
Department to provide fire protection according to the
established response standards of the appropriate district
without the necessity of establishing a new station, or
requiring the addition of major equipment to an existing
station, the adequacy of available water pressure and
capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment
of the applicant to provide fire protection facilities which
may be necessary to serve the project, including, but not
limited to, fire hydrants and water storage tanks.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) '
COMMENT:
(e) ROAD SYSTEM - Considering the capacity of major linkages of
the road network to provide for the needs of the proposed
development without substantially altering the existing
traffic patterns, creating safety hazards or overloading the
existing street system; and the applicant's commitment to
finance necessary road system improvements to serve the
increased usage attributable to the development.
RATING :
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
2. QDALITY OF OR IMPROVEMENTS TO DESIGN (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall consider each application with respect to the
quality of its exterior and site design and any improvements
proposed thereto, and shall rate each development by assigning
points according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a totally deficient design.
1 -- Indicates a major design flaw.
2 -- Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design.
3 -- Indicates an excellent design.
The following features shall be rate accordingly:
2
(a) ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - Considering the compatibility of the
proposed building or any addition thereto (in terms of size,
height, location and building materials) with existing
neighborhood developments.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3) (;
COMMENT:
(b) SITE DESIGN - Considering the quality and character of the
proposed or the improvements to the existing landscaping and open
space areas, the extent of undergrounding of utilities, and the
provision of pedestrian amenities (path, benches, etc.) to
enhance the design of the development and to provide for the
safety and privacy of the users of the development. JJ
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3) C3
COMMENT:
(c) ENERGY CONSERVATION - Considering the use of insulation,
solar energy devices, passive solar orientation and similar
techniques to maximize conservation of energy and use of
solar energy sources in the lodge or any addition thereto.
RATING: 2_
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(d) PARKING AND CIRCULATION - Considering the quality and
efficiency of the internal circulation and parking system
for the project, or any addition thereto, including the
proposed automobile and service service vehicle access and
loading areas and design features to screen parking from
public views.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
3
(iv) VISUAL IMPACT - Considering the scale and location of the
proposed buildings or any addition thereto, to maximize
public views of surrounding scenic areas.
RATIM3: L
(Multiplier - 3)z_
COMMENT:
3. AMENITIES PROVIDED FOR GUESTS (maximum 9 points) - The Commission
shall consider each application with respect to the quality and
spaciousness of its proposed services for guests as compared to
the size of the proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
The Commission shall rate each development by assigning points
according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a total lack of guest amenities.
1 -- Indicates services which are judged to be deficient in terms
of quality of spaciousness.
2 -- Indicates services which are judged to be adequate in terms
of quality and spaciousness.
3 -- Indicates services which are judged to be exceptional in
terms of quality and spaciousness.
The following shall be rated accordingly:
(a) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
common meeting areas, such as lobbies and conference areas,
in relation to the size of the proposed lodging project or
any addition thereto:
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
(b) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
dining facilities, including any restaurants, bars and
banquet facilities, in relation to the size of the proposed
lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 2)
COMMENT: 'C�� Ater ., -1 'L'
4
(c) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
accessory recreational facilities, such as health clubs,
pools and other active areas, in relation to the size of the
proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 2) 4
COMMENT:
4. CONFORMANCE TO LOCAL PUBLIC POLICY GOALS (maximum 30 points).
The Commission shall consider each application and its degree of
conformity with local planning policies, as follows:
(a) PROVISION OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall assign points to each applicant who agrees
to provide low -, moderate- or middle- income housing which
complies with the housing size, type, income and occupancy
guidelines of the City of Aspen and with the provisions of
Section 24- 11.10.
Points shall be assigned according to the following schedule:
0% to 40% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing - 1 point for each 4%
housed.
41% to 100% of the additional employees generated by
the project are provided with housing - 1 point for
each 12% housed.
The Commission shall employ the advice of the City Council's
housing designee in the determination of the number of
employees the project is expected to generate. The housing
designee shall make available standards for employee generation
representing the various levels of service which reflect the
types of lodge operations in existence or proposed for the
City of Aspen. The applicant shall be given the opportunity
to present to the housing designee information demonstrating
that an alternative standard should be employed. The
alternative standard may be employed by the Planning Commis-
sion, upon the recommendation of the designee.
If the Planning Commission determines that the proposed
project generates no new employees it shall award to the
applicant the full fifteen (15) points available within this
subsection.
In order to determine the percentage of employees generated
by the project who are provided with housing, the Commission
shall use the following criteria:
Studio: 1.25 residents
One - Bedroom 1.75 residents
Two- Bedroom 2.25 residents
5
Three- Bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents
Dormitory: 1.00 resident per 150
s.f. of unit space
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(b) CONVERSION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum 5 points). The
Commission shall assign points to those applications who
guarantee to provide a portion of their low -, moderate- or
middle- income units by purchasing fully constructed units
which are not restricted to Aspen's housing guidelines and
placing a deed - restriction upon them in compliance with
Section 24- 11.10. Points shall be assigned according to the
following schedule:
1% -33% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 1 point
34% -66% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 3 points
67% -100% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 5 points
In order to determine the percentage of such housing to be
purchased and restricted by the applicant, there shall be
used the same formula (above) used for determining what
percent of the project is devoted to middle -, moderate- and
low- income housing, with no credit to be received for any
unit not meeting the most recent guidelines of the City's
housing designee, as adopted by the Aspen City Council.
RATI 33:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(c) REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum
15 points). The Commission shall award points as follows:
0 to 50% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 10%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
50 to 100% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 5%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
6
RATING: /
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
For the purposes of this section, rehabilitation shall
include the upgrading of the structure and appearance of a
lodge unit or of non -unit space by its in -place restoration
to a substantially higher quality status relative to the
segment(s) of the tourist population to which the lodge
is marketed, which may alter its size.
For the purpose of this section, reconstruction shall
include the partial or complete demolition and rebuilding of
a lodge unit or non -unit space which may be accomplished in
a similar or different size to the original configuration,
provided that the rebuilt portion of the lodge is located on
the same site.
For the purpose of this section, non -unit space shall include
those areas of the lodge not included within individual
lodge units but intended to serve the guests of the facility,
including but not limited to the lobby, halls, recreational
areas and dining facilities.
5. BONUS POINTS (maximum 6 points). The Commission members
may, when any one determines that a project has not only
incorporated and met the substantive criteria of Section 24-
11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4), but has also exceeded the
provisions of these subsections and achieved an outstanding
overall design meriting recognition, award additional bonus
points not exceeding ten (10) percent of the total points
awarded under Section 24- 11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4) prior
to the application of the corresponding multiplier. Any
Commission member awarding bonus points shall provide a
written justification of that award for the public hearing
record.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
7
6. TOTAL POINTS:
Points in Category 1: (minimum of 3 points
required)
Points in Category 2: r (minimum of 11.7
points required)
Points in Category 3: — -- (minimum of 6.3 points
required)
Points in Category 4: (minimum of 10.5
points required)
SUBTOTAL Categories 1 -4: 4& (minimum of 63 points
required)
Bonus Points:
TOTAL POINTS: Co
ZS
Name of Planning and Zoning Member: - 4r
AA
te #49
-�U
8
4 •
1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION
CITY OF ASPEN
Name of Project : N U Date: AVV
1. AVAILABILITY OF PDBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES AND SERVICES
(maximum 10 points). The Commission shall consider each applica-
tion with respect to the impact of the proposed building or the
addition thereto upon public facilities and services and shall
rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 -- Project requires the provision of new services at increased
public expense.
1 -- Project can be handled by the existing level of service in
the area or any service improvement by the applicant benefits
the project only and not the area in general.
2 -- Project in and of itself improves the quality of service in
a given area
The following facilities and services shall be rated accordingly:
(a) WATER - Considering the ability of the water system to serve
the development, and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) —L
COMMENT:
(b) SEWER - Considering the ability of the sewer system to serve
the development and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(c) STORM DRAINAGE - Considering the degree to which the applicant
proposes to retain surface runoff on the development site.
If the development requires use of the City's drainage
system, considering the commitment of the applicant to
install the necessary drainage control facilities and to
maintain the system over the long term.
RATING: Z
(Multiplier - 1) y
•
lwr
COMMENT:
(d) FIRE PROTECTION - Considering the ability of the Fire
Department to provide fire protection according to the
established response standards of the appropriate district
without the necessity of establishing a new station, or
requiring the addition of major equipment to an existing
station, the adequacy of available water pressure and
capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment
of the applicant to provide fire protection facilities which
may be necessary to serve the project, including, but not
limited to, fire hydrants and water storage tanks.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(e) ROAD SYSTEM - Considering the capacity of major linkages of
the road network to provide for the needs of the proposed
development without substantially altering the existing
traffic patterns, creating safety hazards or overloading the
existing street system; and the applicant's commitment to
finance necessary road system improvements to serve the
increased usage attributable to the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
2. QUALITY OF OR IMPROVEMENTS TO DESIGN (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall consider each application with respect to the
quality of its exterior and site design and any improvements
proposed thereto, and shall rate each development by assigning
points according to the following formula:
0 -- indicates a totally deficient design.
1 -- Indicates a major design flaw.
2 -- Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design.
3 -- Indicates an excellent design.
The following features shall be rate accordingly:
2
(a) ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - Considering the compatibility of the
proposed building or any addition thereto (in terms of size,
height, location and building materials) with existing
neighborhood developments.
RATING: 2
(Multiplier - 3) rig
COMMENT:
(b) SITE DESIGN - Considering the quality and character of the
proposed or the improvements to the existing landscaping and open
space areas, the extent of undergrounding of utilities, and the
provision of pedestrian amenities (path, benches, etc.) to
enhance the design of the development and to provide for the
safety and privacy of the users of the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
(c) ENERGY CONSERVATION - Considering the use of insulation,
solar energy devices, passive solar orientation and similar
techniques to maximize conservation of energy and use of
solar energy sources in the lodge or any addition thereto.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) 2
COMMENT:
(d) PARKING AND CIRCULATION - Considering the quality and
efficiency of the internal circulation and parking system
for the project, or any addition thereto, including the
proposed automobile and service service vehicle access and
loading areas and design features to screen parking from
public views.
RATING: 1
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
3
(iv) VISUAL IMPACT - Considering the scale and location of the
proposed buildings or any addition thereto, to maximize
public views of surrounding scenic areas. ��77
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
3. AMENITIES PROVIDED FOR GUESTS (maximum 9 points) - The Commission
shall consider each application with respect to the quality and
spaciousness of its proposed services for guests as compared to
the size of the proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
The Commission shall rate each development by assigning points
according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a total lack of guest amenities.
1 -- Indicates services which are judged to be deficient in terms
of quality of spaciousness.
2 -- Indicates services which are judged to be adequate in terms
of quality and spaciousness.
3 -- Indicates services which are judged to be exceptional in
terms of quality and spaciousness.
The following shall be rated accordingly:
(a) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
common meeting areas, such as lobbies and conference areas,
in relation to the size of the proposed lodging project or
any addition thereto:
RATING: 2-
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
(b) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
dining facilities, including any restaurants, bars and
banquet facilities, in relation to the size of the proposed
lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 2) A
COMMENT:
4
(c) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
accessory recreational facilities, such as health clubs,
pools and other active areas, in relation to the size of the
proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 2)
COMMENT:
4. CONFORMANCE TO LOCAL PUBLIC POLICY GOALS (maximum 30 points).
The Commission shall consider each application and its degree of
conformity with local planning policies, as follows:
(a) PROVISION OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall assign points to each applicant who agrees
to provide low -, moderate- or middle- income housing which
complies with the housing size, type, income and occupancy
guidelines of the City of Aspen and with the provisions of
Section 24- 11.10.
Points shall be assigned according to the following schedule:
0% to 40% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing - 1 point for each 4%
housed.
41% to 100% of the additional employees generated by
the project are provided with housing - 1 point for
each 12% housed.
The Commission shall employ the advice of the City Council's
housing designee in the determination of the number of
employees the project is expected to generate. The housing
designee shall make available standards for employee generation
representing the various levels of service which reflect the
types of lodge operations in existence or proposed for the
City of Aspen. The applicant shall be given the opportunity
to present to the housing designee information demonstrating
that an alternative standard should be employed. The
alternative standard may be employed by the Planning Commis-
sion, upon the recommendation of the designee.
If the Planning Commission determines that the proposed
project generates no new employees it shall award to the
applicant the full fifteen (15) points available within this
subsection.
In order to determine the percentage of employees generated
by the project who are provided with housing, the Commission
shall use the following criteria:
Studio: 1.25 residents
One- Bedroom 1.75 residents
Two- Bedroom 2.25 residents
5
Three- Bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents
Dormitory: 1.00 resident per 150
s. f. of unit space
RATING: /5
(Multiplier - 1) /5
COMMENT:
(b) CONVERSION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum 5 points). The
Commission shall assign points to those applications who
guarantee to provide a portion of their low -, moderate- or
middle- income units by purchasing fully constructed units
which are not restricted to Aspen's housing guidelines and
placing a deed - restriction upon them in compliance with
Section 24- 11.10. Points shall be assigned according to the
following schedule:
1% -33% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 1 point
34% -66% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 3 points
67% -100% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 5 points
In order to determine the percentage of such housing to be
purchased and restricted by the applicant, there shall be
used the same formula (above) used for determining what
percent of the project is devoted to middle -, moderate- and
low- income housing, with no credit to be received for any
unit not meeting the most recent guidelines of the City's
housing designee, as adopted by the Aspen City Council.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(c) REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum
15 points). The Commission shall award points as follows:
0 to 50% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 10%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
50 to 100% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 5%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
6
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) is
COMMENT:
For the purposes of this section, rehabilitation shall
include the upgrading of the structure and appearance of a
lodge unit or of non -unit space by its in -place restoration
to a substantially higher quality status relative to the
segment(s) of the tourist population to which the lodge
is marketed, which may alter its size.
For the purpose of this section, reconstruction shall
include the partial or complete demolition and rebuilding of
a lodge unit or non -unit space which may be accomplished in
a similar or different size to the original configuration,
provided that the rebuilt portion of the lodge is located on
the same site.
For the purpose of this section, non -unit space shall include
those areas of the lodge not included within individual
lodge units but intended to serve the guests of the facility,
including but not limited to the lobby, halls, recreational
areas and dining facilities.
5. BONUS POINTS (maximum 6 points). The Commission members
may, when any one determines that a project has not only
incorporated and met the substantive criteria of Section 24-
11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4), but has also exceeded the
provisions of these subsections and achieved an outstanding
overall design meriting recognition, award additional bonus
points not exceeding ten (10) percent of the total points
awarded under Section 24- 11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4) prior
to the application of the corresponding multiplier. Any
Commission member awarding bonus points shall provide a
written justification of that award for the public hearing
record.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
7
6. TOTAL POINTS:
Points in Category 1: (minimum of 3 points
required)
Points in Category 2: C C , 3 (minimum of 11.7
points required)
C o
Points in Category 3: / (minimum of 6.3 points
required)
Points in Category 4 : 50 ( m i n i m u m of 1 0 . 5
points required)
SUBTOTAL Categories 1 -4: - - (minimum of 63 points
required)
Bonus Points:
TOTAL POINTS: 1 5
Name of Planning and Zoning Member: \ A st
8
1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION
CITY OF ASPEN
Name of Project: /27 Date: /
1. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES AND SERVICES
(maximum 10 points). The Commission shall consider each applica-
tion with respect to the impact of the proposed building or the
addition thereto upon public facilities and services and shall
rate each development by assigning points according to the
following formula:
0 -- Project requires the provision of new services at increased
public expense.
1 -- Project can be handled by the existing level of service in
the area or any service improvement by the applicant benefits
the project only and not the area in general.
2 -- Project in and of itself improves the quality of service in
a given area
The following facilities and services shall be rated accordingly:
(a) WATER - Considering the ability of the water system to serve
the development, and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(b) SEWER - Considering the ability of the sewer system to serve
the development and the applicant's commitment to finance
any system extensions or treatment plant upgrading required
to serve the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
(c) STORM DRAINAGE - Considering the degree to which the applicant
proposes to retain surface runoff on the development site.
If the development requires use of the City's drainage
system, considering the commitment of the applicant to
install the necessary drainage control facilities and to
maintain the system over the long term.
RATING: 2
(Multiplier - 1) 2
COMMENT:
(d) FIRE PROTECTION - Considering the ability of the Fire
Department to provide fire protection according to the
established response standards of the appropriate district
without the necessity of establishing a new station, or
requiring the addition of major equipment to an existing
station, the adequacy of available water pressure and
capacity for providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment
of the applicant to provide fire protection facilities which
may be necessary to serve the project, including, but not
limited to, fire hydrants and water storage tanks.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT: -
(e) ROAD SYSTEM - Considering the capacity of major linkages of
the road network to provide for the needs of the proposed
development without substantially altering the existing
traffic patterns, creating safety hazards or overloading the
existing street system; and the applicant's commitment to
finance necessary road system improvements to serve the
increased usage attributable to the development.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
2. QUALITY OF OR IMPROVEMENTS TO DESIGN (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall consider each application with respect to the
quality of its exterior and site design and any improvements
proposed thereto, and shall rate each development by assigning
points according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a totally deficient design.
1 -- Indicates a major design flaw.
2 -- Indicates an acceptable (but standard) design.
3 -- Indicates an excellent design.
The following features shall be rate accordingly:
2
(a) ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN - Considering the compatibility of the
proposed building or any addition thereto (in terms of size,
height, location and building materials) with existing
neighborhood developments.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3) 6
COMMENT:
(b) SITE DESIGN - Considering the quality and character of the
proposed or the improvements to the existing landscaping and open
space areas, the extent of undergrounding of utilities, and the
provision of pedestrian amenities (path, benches, etc.) to
enhance the design of the development and to provide for the
safety and privacy of the users of the development.
RATING: 2 //
(Multiplier - 3) (c■
COMMENT:
(c) ENERGY CONSERVATION - Considering the use of insulation,
solar energy devices, passive solar orientation and similar
techniques to maximize conservation of energy and use of
solar energy sources in the lodge or any addition thereto.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1) 2
COMMENT:
(d) PARKING AND CIRCULATION - Considering the quality and
efficiency of the internal circulation and parking system
for the project, or any addition thereto, including the
proposed automobile and service service vehicle access and
loading areas and design features to screen parking from
public views.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3) `
COMMENT:
3
(iv) VISUAL IMPACT - Considering the scale and location of the
proposed buildings or any addition thereto, to maximize
public views of surrounding scenic areas.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 3)
COMMENT:
3. AMENITIES PROVIDED FOR GUESTS (maximum 9 points) - The Commission
shall consider each application with respect to the quality and
spaciousness of its proposed services for guests as compared to
the size of the proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
The Commission shall rate each development by assigning points
according to the following formula:
0 -- Indicates a total lack of guest amenities.
1 -- indicates services which are judged to be deficient in terms
of quality of spaciousness.
2 -- Indicates services which are judged to be adequate in terms
of quality and spaciousness.
3 -- Indicates services which are judged to be exceptional in
terms of quality and spaciousness.
The following shall be rated accordingly:
(a) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
common meeting areas, such as lobbies and conference areas,
in relation to the size of the proposed lodging project or
any addition thereto:
RATING: I - >
/ C L / (Multiplier - 3) 4c
COMMENT: (^'2 (v ✓ L 2
(b) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
dining facilities, including any restaurants, bars and
banquet facilities, in relation to the size of the proposed
lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING: 1 '
(Multiplier - 2) ice' 3
COMMENT:
4
)
1'
(c) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site
accessory recreational facilities, such as health clubs,
pools and other active areas, in relation to the size of the
proposed lodging project or any addition thereto.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 2) 1'
COMMENT:
4. CONFORMANCE TO LOCAL PUBLIC POLICY GOALS (maximum 30 points).
The Commission shall consider each application and its degree of
conformity with local planning policies, as follows:
(a) PROVISION OF EMPLOYEE HOOSING (maximum 15 points). The
Commission shall assign points to each applicant who agrees
to provide low -, moderate- or middle- income housing which
complies with the housing size, type, income and occupancy
guidelines of the City of Aspen and with the provisions of
Section 24- 11.10.
Points shall be assigned according to the following schedule:
0% to 40% of the additional employees generated by the
project are provided with housing - 1 point for each 4%
housed.
41% to 100% of the additional employees generated by
the project are provided with housing - 1 point for
each 12% housed.
The Commission shall employ the advice of the City Council's
housing designee in the determination of the number of
employees the project is expected to generate. The housing
designee shall make available standards for employee generation
representing the various levels of service which reflect the
types of lodge operations in existence or proposed for the
City of Aspen. The applicant shall be given the opportunity
to present to the housing designee information demonstrating
that an alternative standard should be employed. The
alternative standard may be employed by the Planning Commis-
sion, upon the recommendation of the designee.
If the Planning Commission determines that the proposed
project generates no new employees it shall award to the
applicant the full fifteen (15) points available within this
subsection.
In order to determine the percentage of employees generated
by the project who are provided with housing, the Commission
shall use the following criteria:
Studio: 1.25 residents
One- Bedroom 1.75 residents
Two- Bedroom 2.25 residents
5
Three - Bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents
Dormitory: 1.00 resident per 150
s.f. of unit space
RATING: 1)
(Multiplier - 1) is
COMMENT:
(b) CONVERSION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum 5 points). The
Commission shall assign points to those applications who
guarantee to provide a portion of their low -, moderate- or
middle- income units by purchasing fully constructed units
which are not restricted to Aspen's housing guidelines and
placing a deed - restriction upon them in compliance with
Section 24- 11.10. Points shall be assigned according to the
following schedule:
1% -33% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 1 point
34% -66% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 3 points
67% -100% of all low -, moderate- and middle income units
proposed by applicant are to be purchased and deed -
restricted: 5 points
In order to determine the percentage of such housing to be
purchased and restricted by the applicant, there shall be
used the same formula (above) used for determining what
percent of the project is devoted to middle -, moderate- and
low- income housing, with no credit to be received for any
unit not meeting the most recent guidelines of the City's
housing designee, as adopted by the Aspen City Council.
RATING: C7
(Multiplier - 1) 0
COMMENT:
(c) REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF EXISTING UNITS (maximum
15 points). The Commission shall award points as follows:
0 to 50% of the total existing unit inventory or non-
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 10%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
50 to 100% of the total existing unit inventory or non -
unit space in the lodge which the applicant agrees to
rehabilitate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 5%
rehabilitated or reconstructed.
6
RATING: r S
(Multiplier - 1) /y'
COMMENT:
For the purposes of this section, rehabilitation shall
include the upgrading of the structure and appearance of a
lodge unit or of non -unit space by its in -place restoration
to a substantially higher quality status relative to the
segment(s) of the tourist population to which the lodge
is marketed, which may alter its size.
For the purpose of this section, reconstruction shall
include the partial or complete demolition and rebuilding of
a lodge unit or non -unit space which may be accomplished in
a similar or different size to the original configuration,
provided that the rebuilt portion of the lodge is located on
the same site.
For the purpose of this section, non -unit space shall include
those areas of the lodge not included within individual
lodge units but intended to serve the guests of the facility,
including but not limited to the lobby, halls, recreational
areas and dining facilities.
5. BONUS POINTS (maximum 6 points). The Commission members
may, when any one determines that a project has not only
incorporated and met the substantive criteria of Section 24-
11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4), but has also exceeded the
provisions of these subsections and achieved an outstanding
overall design meriting recognition, award additional bonus
points not exceeding ten (10) percent of the total points
awarded under Section 24- 11.6(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4) prior
to the application of the corresponding multiplier. Any
Commission member awarding bonus points shall provide a
written justification of that award for the public hearing
record.
RATING:
(Multiplier - 1)
COMMENT:
7
6. TOTAL POINTS:
Points in Category 1: 6 (minimum of 3 points
required)
Points in Category 2: 2 3 (minimum of 11.7
points required)
Points in Category 3: ( 3 (minimum of 6.3 points
required)
Points in Category 4: (minimum of 10.5
points required)
SUBTOTAL Categories 1 - 4: (minimum of 63 points
required)
Bonus Points: r
TOTAL POINTS: /�
Name of Planning and Zoning Member: '
8
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Attorney
City Engineer
Housing Director
Aspen Water Department
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District"
Fire Chief
Building Department, Zoning Officer
FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office
RE: The Nugget Lodge - L-3 GMP Conceptual Submission /Special Review
DATE: October 2, 1984
Attached is a copy of The Nugget Lodge GMP application requesting a
GMP allotment of fourteen (14) lodge units to be built in conjunction
with the improvement and rehabilitation of thirty -three (33) existing
lodge units located within the L -3 zone district. In addition, the
applicant is requesting special review approval to increase the
F.A.R. from approximately .74:1 to .92:1. Please review return your
referral comments to the Planning Office no later than October 23,
1984, in order for this office to have adequate time to prepare for
its presentation of this application at a public hearing before the
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on November 6th.
Thank you.
T0'4 es-E. I� hen. ITCo — AL. (J -1r.s CAS- 73 SS2�eA /3 �/ 'Mr/
T e nes.. -r //O alt 31.-,--r• A-s t e s- c 0 t•,i 4- I •s. hTe O $ A
ti T i ATea
�_I,_ ['He EY /!`r,. c L. O ns- q./t- r3
A (b t 3-o /•I Ai- ro ar / y
/1O - AAnsni "- ✓ r,
�-� 4 $ r "It'- • e
MEMORANDUM
TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office
FROM: Chuck Roth, City Engineering Department C
DATE: October 24, 1984
RE: Nugget Lodge GMP Conceptual Submissions
Having reviewed the above application and having made a site
inspection, the Engineering Department has the following
comments:
1. This department's scoring sheet is attached.
2. The following statements in the application appear to
be incorrect:
a. Page 2, item ee: The City requires one parking space
per bedroom for a total of 14 new parking spaces, not
7.
b. Page 4, item cc: There is not a bus shelter in front
of the library. There is a bus stop and bench there.
3. The trash site indicated appears to be undersized and
unusable.
4. All other municipal engineering concerns appear to be
satisfactorily addressed.
CR /co
Enclosure
/ .. LLodge)
GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW CHECKLIST
CITY OF ASPEN ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
DECEMBER 1983
•
Project Name ItiE NUG&r-C L7c-.F
Address 110 \ W ,
Owner ? #o L- ftSPFr,.j � LTC)
Agent/Representative G EDEa.1 KAUFMhrJ
Address 3)5 E , +} 7fiW � SUITE 3os Phone 5 —8 l 6 6
Reviewed By C{}UCe, RoTH Date 1 o/23/g¢
(1) Public Facilities and Services
0 - New facilities required at public expense.
1 - 'Facilities adequate, improvements benefit project
only.
2 - Project improves neighborhood service.
(aa) 1 Water (2 pts:)
(bb) 1 Sewage Disposal (2 pts.)
(cc) 2 Storm Drainage (2 pts.) extr c lu �� ✓-zt<!n."
•
f(� GuUt /Ari l k 1- Ufa�Ctd J / %.4.trle
■ C'd
/C0 qy . �G d n W/ (� a Ae,,,in- t 9 C-f
(ee) 1 Roads (2 pts.)
Capacity of Existing roads to handle increased
traffic. Applicant's commitment to finance
road improvements to serve increased usage
attributable to the development.
•
-2-
GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW CHECKLIST - Lodge
(2) Quality of or Improvements to Design
0 - Totally deficient design.
1 - Major design flaw.
2 - Acceptable (but standard) design
3 - Excellent design •
(bb) '_ Site Design (3 pts.)
Quality and character - of landsca -ping nd open
space, extent of utility under.round pedestrian
amenitie , •rovisi.n o safety and privacy for
development users.
" ��/ 7/ / - -- /c ) ✓l U" QvGI.I /mod - ce .ft 49
(dd) a Parking and Circulation (3 pts.)
Internal circulation, parking, service vehicle
access, loading areas, and extent of screening of
parking areas. fu y ) � Jc fly fr. /Til /"
AN p PLti.1
'/ l ) P !D
. 2 — �-, 7G� EPT To 2EV tev.� � ,P2ye ',vets cos_ cs r&MO 512.11%1G
2) P 2 s - - 7 kle..ai PARKt.1G PLACES ? J 24 -4.5 : I/b CSTATBMF
oa P. t S' �rucoRREGr \) w al', VS . it U,.i�Ts P. 4- - cc. t ( JEw
SPAC.F a tJ
Fog. ElsEW ow* pgip
C.44EcK w [cEc . t 3 F• S - C
•
5lt Iraspecf.
S�
TR S tit
z - 6 ) T ,, ; cc : 1,10 'sus s ++EcTF� @ U61�nlzf
— 7 , W 1Y- '1'}tEy 1 ,3 6et> NEvJ 7 h2COL uo ATP- —r r
__-8) A'Su.'. s /vJ M(4. — co,..)m.ut-r
TOTAL_ g � rJ t S ,r 1 c44
S
MEMORANDUM
TO: Colette Penne, Planning ��/'lh/
FROM: Bill Drueding, Zoning Enforcement Officer V"'
DATE: October 23, 1984
RE: Nugget Lodge
L -3 GMP Conceptual Submission
I have the following questions:
1) Will the current 22 parking spaces remain along Garmisch Street?
2) How does the applicant calculate the 9,503 sq.ft. of open space.
Has he already included the pool area which at this time may be changed
through a code amendment?
In general, it would be helpful if the applicant showed how he got his calculations
for open space and what he is including.
BD /ar
r�a _� .
ocr ► 804 d
ASPEN WATER DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: COLETTE PENNE, PLANNING OFFICE
FROM: JIM MARKALUNAS
SUBJECT: THE NUGGET LODGE
DATE: OCTOBER 17, 1984
J/ �--- IV/ 1 tarp Lvni AS
This is to advise you that Water is available in sufficient capacity to provide
for the existing Nugget Lodge and the proposed new development. 6" Water Mains
are available for servicing Main Steet, Garmish Street and Bleeker Street. We
recommend that the new development be supplied from either Bleeker or Garmish St.,
and that the existing facility be upgraded if necessary.
The Applicant may obtain water service for the new development upon procuring the
necessary Water Permit.
JM:ab
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: The Nugget Lodge - L -3 GMP Conceptual Submission /Special Review
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
November 6, 1984, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 P.M., before the Aspen
Planning and Zoning Commission, in City Council Chambers, 130 S. Galena,
Aspen, Colorado, to consider The Nugget Lodge GMP application requesting
a growth management allotment of fourteen (14) lodge units to be built
in conjunction with the improvement and rehabilitation of thirty -three
(33) existing lodge units at The Nugget Lodge, 100 West Main, Aspen,
which is located within the L -3 zone district. In addition, the
applicant is requesting special review approval to increase the
F.A.R. from approximately .74:1 to .92:1.
For further information, contact the Planning Office, 130 S. Galena,
Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925 -2020, ext. 223.
s /Per c jarvey
Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on October 11, 1984.
City of Aspen Account.