Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
coa.lu.gm.The Nugget Lodge.032A-84
NUGGET LODGE (Hotel Aspen) 1984 L-3 competition � Nugget Lodge � L•3 GM IJF.�4 1 LAW OFFICES GIDEON I. KAUFMAN ' Box 10001 315 EAST HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN. COLORADO 61611 'October 1, 1984 TELEPHONE GIDEON I. KAUFMAN AREA CODE 303 DAVID G. EISENSTEIN 925.6166 ' 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: Enclosed please find the following: ' 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 S 24-11.3 (dj 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 ' By Gid n Kaufman ' GK/kl Enclosures ' cc: David Gibson Robert Morris NUGGET LODGE APPLICATION FOR 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. 730 E. Durant Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone: 303/925-1250 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 ARCHITECT: Gibson & Reno Architects 203 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone: 303/925,5968 ' 1 0 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS ' A. LODGE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION. ' 1. Project description aa. Water system. bb. Sewage. ' cc. Drainage dd. Development area. ee. Traffic. ff. Adjacent land uses. ' gg. Construction schedule. ' 2. Site Utilization Maps. aa. Architectural drawings. bb. Landscaping/site plan. CC. Circulation/site plan. ' dd. Major street or road links/locator map. ee. Description of surrounding existing uses/zoning ' -map. B. REVIEW CRITERIA F bl' facilities and services. 1. Availability o.L pu is 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. 3. Amenities. ' aa. Availability of or improvements to the existing bb. on -site common meeting areas. Availability of or improvements to the existing on -site dining facilities. Availability of or improvements to the existing CC. recreational facilities. on -site accessory t 1 4. Conformance to local public policy goals. aa. Provision of employee housing. bb. Conversion of existing units. cc. Rehabilitation and reconstruction of existing units. 5. Bonus points. ATTACHMENTS 1. Conceptual program. MAPS AND DRAWINGS 1. Site plan. 2. Floor plans. 3. Utility plan. 4. Location map rc�e+..+r.-.-•"w'_Y! .. .. ^4r�"',�,".�a«�.r-.-�- n . ,,. -�. _. ._.,.. .. tro .•... s-r�-•.�r.�!4'jg1evwr -• 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 O, 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 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 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 preserved, upgraded and expanded in conformance with City 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. Once a GMP allotment is secured, Applicant will ' concurrently apply for special review to establish external floor area ratio. aa. Water System. As is indicated in a letter from the City Water Department, the proposed development can be supplied 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. 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 exist to provide fire protection to the project. Fire ' hydrants are located at the northeast corner of the property and sixty-five feet (651) from the main entrance to the property across Garmisch Street at the Aspen Clinic. ' bb. Sewage. 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 eig^t inch trunk lire exists in the allev ' directly adjoining the property which is already connected to the property. Estimated system usage will be within the 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. 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± square feet. The internal square footage presently existing ' is 19,915 square feet. The proposed addition will add 5,020 square feet to this figure, for a total internal square footage of 24,935 square feet. 9,503 square feet of the ' property is devoted to open space or landscaping. ee. Traffic. Based on the City of Aspen's calculation tvalues of vehicles per lodge room, the added number of vehicles anticipated for this project is seven (7), during '. 2 - - periods of full occupancy. The property is serviced by Main Street, Garmisch Street and First Street. All the streets 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 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. 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 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 essential commercial and retail services and activities. The property is located directly on all existing bus routes. ff. Effects of Proposed Development on Adjacent Land Uses. The proposed development is fully compatible with surrounding uses in the neighborhood and will positively enhance and complement, the local character of the neighborhood. There are several lcdges in the i,=ediate neighborhood both across the street and down along Main Street from the property. The Pitkin County library and a 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 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 neighborhood are mixed and yet of a complementary character. gg. Construction Schedule. No phased construction is planned and actual 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. 2. Site Utilization Maps. The information contained in this Section supplements the maps and plans submitted with this Application. aa. Applicant has given thorough consideration to energy conservation and solar energy utilization features available to this property. The insulation characteristics of the project exceed the - 3 - ...-.v.w.,u��..���e•..ta....�+r.. .. t.-w.il,.r.�.p�..at�r.T'C'Rm7'a.�OR�'°r"""'-�-...,.....,._.,_ ._., _ .___-- -----' -..._.^++�w.*+7�-.w;y,.,,�,,•Vri,.- ' 0 � 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 for wall, floor and roof sections. Solar gain aspects of the project have been ' explored and integrated into the design theme in an 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. 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 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 much as possible. The project plan preserves the eight to ' twelve foot (8'-121) honeysuckles which are being maintained on site along Bleeker and will serve to screen parking. The seventy to eighty foot (70'-80') blue spruce trees on the tproperty are preserved and will serve to screen the parking. CC. All required parking is accessed off the 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 vegetation 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 stops. As the existing lodge units and the public, common 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 (41611) in height, provide screening and seclusion between each unit and 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. E 1 - 4 - I I I I i I i I Ll Ll Ll Ll 11 Ll Ll Ll dd. Streets, nearby paths and footpaths are indicated on maps. 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. B. REVIEW CRITERIA. 1. Availability of Public Facilities and Services. aa. Water. The existing water system of the City of 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 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. , 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 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 development. CC. Storm Drainage. Historic site drainage be improved. The project proposes t _area runoff will feed directly to surface runoff will be retained on The development will not require drainage system as the project retention of one hundred percent (100 all runoff on -site will benefit the since previous on -site runoff was from the property will hat all roof and paved on -site dry wells all the development site. ny use of the City's provides for on -site %) of runoff. Handling City's drainage system handled by the City's drainage system which will now have greater capacity. dd. Fire Protection. The new lodge units will be constructed with fire protection in excess of the Building Code requirements. Ll - 5 - 1 !I AI 11 11 In conformance with the Code furnished throughout for smoke detectors will be extinguishers will be added protection. In addition fire presently serving the Property. There are two (2) hydrants Of the Property P y• One at the northeast corner from the main entrance hof othe rlodge yacross Get at the P (65') away Aspen Clinic. The armisle Street .5 miles) to the main AspenFireStation and is very close the lres response time is under two (2) minutes, an exceptional response time for a small mountain community. P e to y. The Fire Department is able provide fire protection accordin response standards without the necessitto its established new station or requiring addition of major equipment existing he existing station. Available water more than adequate to pressure and capacity water storage tank is necessary rovidefor serve fighting flows. are No Project. ee. Roads. Basil The major linkage of the road network can y provide for the needs of the without substantially altering Proposed development patterns, creating safety g the existing traffic existing street system, he hazards or overloading the Street, Garmisch Street Property is served b and Main Street. Mrai e First very wide, major thoroughfare. n Strout is a intended to be a major tnrough street, nland although sch was origin-ally ah s never really been used as such, it is a wide thoroughfare which is substantiallyas well, is in under utiiized. First Street, as good condition and able to adequately serve the project without the need for any improvements. increased usage attributable to the The minimal will not necessitate an Proposed development the project is in the y road system improvements. Because midthe Cityes retail facilities and a b s linefstops rigwill bht ate the commercial and all automobile use from the project minimized Band use public transportation be maximized. bicycling, walking or the uof aon will 2• Quality of or Im rovements to Desi n. aa. Architectural Desi n, The building addition seeks compatibility first and foremost with the lodging facility of which it is a Part. Secondaril the five y, the addition seeks to harmonize with (5) different architectural styles which are immediately adjacent. newly The building addition is an extension of the } renovated Nugget Lodge. On Garmisch Street parapet line of the main buildin 's the 9 east elevation is - 6 - r continued in the new building at the same height and cornice detailing. Solarium bay windows of the type used in the west courtyard and along Main Street floor. punctuate the second Material is 1 X 6 smooth vertical "V-groove" cedar to match the newly remodelled lodge. Other materials which will match the lodge are 2 X 2 railing detailing, solid cedar fencing, enamel metal roof over window bays, canvas covering over walkways, dark bronze anodized window frames, and burgundy accent strip at elevation 910" along street front facades. Thus, in forms, materials and addition will harmonize with the colors, the main lodge. 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 design. It is interesting to note that both this lodge ours use horizontal and 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 elements in its composition we relate: the corner entrance, vertical glazing, and a clearly derparcated first and floor. second "Chalet style" Fourplex across Garmisch Street. Our corner presentation is similar ' in bulk and massing to this fourplex. Bleeker Street. The Addition's design approach to the open areas across Bleeker Street is to set back from Bleeker Street (a full ' thirty-two feet [32'] from 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 twelve foot honeysuckle v and crab apple which follow the 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 ' to around forty feet (401). We respond to this house with window bays, porch bays and sloping roof profiles, although our highest ridge is some five feet lower. 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 of the building is toward the center of the site, so that ' the street front aspect is typically that of a two (2) story building (see perspective drawing) with deep recesses of open space punctuated by existing vegetation of apple, ' aspen, and spruce trees. bb. Site Design. The "Open Space" will meet or exceed the ' required thirty-five percent (35%) in the district. Our landscaping goal is to preserve and enhance the excellent mature plantings which exist on the site. These include: ' Typo Diameter Height 7 mature spruces 12"- 24" dia. 50-80 Ft. ' 22 pines, cedars and spruces 2"- 10" dia. 10-40 Ft. 1 cottonwood 8" dia. 20 Ft. 16 aspens 2"- 6" dia. 12-25 Ft. ' 12 crab apple 811- 10" dia. 10-15 Ft. 100' honeysuckle/crab apple hedge. 10-12 Ft. The addition will respect and protect all of these trees. 1 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 placed and maintained within new patios and around new ' 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 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 ' along the alley with several elbows and bends. This will be rerouted underground and will enter the boiler room through - 8 - 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 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 overall exterior wall insulation value of R-25.. 2. Wall Upgrade. Two hundred ten (210) lineal feet of uninsulated walls will be insulated. ' 3. Roof construction. All roof i sections will include insulation to raise the overall 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). 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 t 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 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'-121) honeysuckles on the property. 4 4 ee. Visual Impact. The placement of the fourteen (14) room 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 Main Street sidewalk in front of the Lodge. 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, 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 slopes away from the street. Along Bleeker Street the fourteen (14) unit addition is lower than its Victorian neighbor; visually both are dwarfed by the seventy to eighty foot (70'-80') spruces and the fifty to sixty foot (50'760') cottonwoods (see North elevation). The Bleeker Street elevation is divided into two (2) separate buildings, and has pitched roof cont'--ours and window bays to respond to adjacent residential scale and configuration. The building facade is set back thirty-two feet (32') from the property line dt 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. CC. To compliment the existing jacuzzi and pool an additional jacuzzi will be added to serve the property. �8= ri4. Conformance to Local Public Policy Goals. 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. ' 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 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 ' 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 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 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) proposed new lodge units to be employee housing. The unit will be of equivalent size and shal"1 comply with the housing guidelines the same as the proposed off -site unit. bb. Conversion of Existing Units. Applicant will provide one hundred percent (100%) of its employee housing by purchasing fully 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 and a half from the project. CC. Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of 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 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 these improvements. The rebuilt portions of the lodge shall be suitable for occupancy prior to or at the same time as 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 blend in with and enhance the character of the neighborhood and incorporates the best facets and technology of energy conservation. There will'be no negative impacts on traffic, 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 expands amenities available to the tourists utilizing the lodge and the lodge overall is greatly enhanced and upgraded in accordance with the lodge preservation policy of the City of Aspen. The parking plan for the project is hidden from 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 project. In sum this project has been very carefully 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 achieves this balance and is the kind of project that should be encouraged by the City. GMP/NUGET2 12 - 11 a F , 11 CONCEPTUAL PROGRAM OF NUGGET LODGE REHABILITATION 11 1. Complete remodel of front facade 2. Install solariums 11 3. Remodel and expand lobby ' 4. Remodel upstairs and common.areas S. Add balconies and patios to many units 6. Install new roof 7. Renovate most rooms, including totally remodel and ' upgrade of bathrooms. ' Total cost of improvements is not less than F' $350,000.00. tj K, ZONING MAP 0 N LL C RES BLEEKER ST. s ■�smmmmmmmmmm�■�v�■■rse�ms�smm®®©®ea�aa■�m®arsm>.ammm�o O SO 100 ftT MLIT] HST R 1 OVERLAY DISTRICT ` ® MAIN ST. �".��`■■""'��"' ■ 0 1 r1 ■ ■�mmmm'ommm�ov�ammmo®moomoovmm®va� 1 II I d r� u FO W Wo wll ❑ NO ❑ Zc J C W� L'1 >Z pn m 0< i ..r: nw - •..�. :r: ,:+�.': fir:°•e: .:i&:vi` �=ii�.� s.�.ai• :; -mu. �r.�l �.m.:• - m m m 0 2" GAS LINE ---! OVERHEAD POWER LINE 4 j 1 1/4GAS LINE e ' eo 01. W 0 of a of m 1 0i Z - ; 0i Y 0 00 ]]H m a[�Hk i 01. O0 SEWER s"- ; ; .UTILITY PLAN 6" WATER LINE 8 O O O ,O fL0 ..o PIT. ........n����>I��nrn����n��ut��uuutu�����ttt�tu���n>t�>t����nt�niu> OARMISCH STREET IL 2 WW� UrwMIJ cQ o Zu �Q Lu U W oa N z oQ r.: :MOB•+- �s�da' u�..`'7,1, _��• w.+l✓' :Sa.i6 ��tW�i 2'a'�iii�` if':`s.'r'- 21�rz 3iJb�": ^�'1 �+`�: .w%.V�'� �'�f,•;,;;: 2JS?6X: .�11• L�3�'x r d' m r CL ►-0 W w0 w Ur as 1 0 ❑ ZC i. J Q Wrn� U N Q �J W oa li LA 0Q c E.I.M.9 ) m m m m m ma M& ma OIL FAR = m = m L33LI.LS KillaVi LS3;�� O�L ciuuEi asoo-i -LEioonr\j •'Cam 10 14 IN! SECTION A -A J 3RO LEVEL PLAN F� 0 5 10 120 FT Was "OWN mcam W20' mM sorry =PmW mRPE OI, OWN WWO PT-3 N D m m 1 OARM ISCH I: ■ STREET 0 r m m x m D wA D m m A CD �f m r � IL 11 U 1- 0 W WO C WQ 0 as • 0 N ° - �! 0 z J Q li h� W 3zTi W Or Q �! j r9 PORM NO. C-500C ' r;olnredn Region 1nrm1,12 AL?A Owner! Pnhrry - Fnrm 8 - 1970 Amended 10.17.70 POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE -- — ' ISSUED BY TRANSAMERICA TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY SUBJECT TO THE SCHEDULE OF EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS CON- TAINED IN SCHEDULE B 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 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. ' Transamerica Title Insurance Company 1 By Nt �J lam.. V,U President By� Secretary .s}fR�E�j••>:y'{,77 t...pr+v Jr1a"'r r �.q.�r ••r,•c!�t.y Yi[a (i�•'�!M1:4 �;(ror '.��r� • q. +nor ."�l; ¢ ' •a.?y���R�{ae.¢y<Ts w- t►'r�- .`;Y`+. .. ..r-A err. t•x. li}�..`!t�, r•rr.ddY� '�.�+. .. ; F r ,. .- -. t,_fsi �� .1; � vt"�f+//'^. ro:Y `'i � .7'��`t 'Tit Tt: " .. r.t Ary rt,'-;±•k�e.,`t yb. �_ r � �.t..r; _ ci < '� -� � Yii�Y'�..•►�'c3,.,c°lL A • ! 13 a. a�{L.a[,_t L..--e,y�-_,++r--",'.�+i.. r.n !#'ias�LiS 'P '�,Y•as�r .��.i L�:•. 4:7ii:.�.a++• i.aarti:'�IiDir�aa-iL.i..3� FORM NO. C-5000-1 • FOR USE WITH COLORADO IN EG ION A0141CAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLIMbf- FORM 9- 1970 (AMENDED 10.17.70) ' SCHEDULE A ' Amount of Insurance $ 1, 203, 400. 00 ' Policy No. 7302993 Date of Policy August 7, 1984 Sheet 1 of d ' 9:28 A.M. 1. Name of Insured: THE HOTEL ASPEN, LTD., A Colorado Corporation 2. The estate or interest in the land described herein and which is covered by this policy is: in fee simple 3. The estate or interest referred to herein is at Date of Policy vested in: THE HOTEL ASPEN, LTD., A Colorado Corporation, in fee simple FORM NO. C-6000.2 • FCR USE WIrH COLORADO REGIONDAERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLI 970 (AMI'NOED 10.1 7.70) FOR USE WITH COLORADO REGION AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLICY -FORM 0--1970 (AMENDED 1017.70) r S C II E D U I, E A —Continued The land referred to in this policy it; , iloaled in the Slate of Colorado, County of Pltkln , and is de scrihrd as follows: THE EAST ONE-HALF OF LOTS E AND 0, AND ALL OF LOTS F, G, Ii, I, P, Q, R, S r BLOCK 58, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN FORM NO _-.6000.3 FOR USE W1.4 COLORADO REGIO MERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLC. 1970 IAMENOEO 10-17 701 FOR USE WITH COLORADO REGION A.MERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLICY -FORM a-1970 (AMENDED 10.17.70) SCHEDULE 11 PART I This Policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the f111101%,ing: I. Rights or claims of Parties in 1)wscssion not -ho%%'n by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the IluLlic records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroaclunents, and any facts which a cor- rect survey and inspection of the premises would disclose an(] which are not shown b), the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for ser♦ ices, labor, or materia. heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by 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 rl,ecial taxing district. Taxes for the year 1984 are not yet due or payable. 6. Reservations and exceptions as contained in the Deed from the City of Aspen providing a8 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. Feeley and Angus Anderson Sturgis, Donald to the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin for the use of Kempers Investors Life Ins to secure urance Company . $500,000.00 dated November 1, 1978 recorded November 1, 1978 in Book 357 at Page 423. Assumption agreement in connection with the above Deed of Trust recorded May 1, 1979 in Book 367 at Page 592. - 8. Deed of Trust from The Hotel Aspen, Ltd., A Colorado Corporation to the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin 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 r—, STATE OF COLORADO RICNARO O LAMM OOV�RNOR J RICNAR0 BARNES C L U eer ROB6RT L BROWN O ..." COr.,OraR Dear Real Estate Purchaser: DIVISION OF INSURANCE DEPARTMENT OF REGULATORY AGENCIES 106 STATE OFFICE BUILDING • 201 E COLFAX AVE DENVER. COLORADO 80203 May 1, 1977 Following this letter you will find a brief explanation of your title insurance commitment and policy. 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 financially sound, and that they operate in accordance with statutes and 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. 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 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.• Sincerely, CHARD BARNES, C.L.U. Commissioner of Insurance JRB:bI 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 these documents, like many others in connection vwith your purchase, are contracts creating legal rights which you should read carefully and v.hich you may wish to have examined and explained by a lawyer or other adviser. While the following description of these documents cannot change the precise terms of these documents, it 1s 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?" ANSWER: Basically, it is a contract with the title insurance company in which the company agrees to defend and indemnify you against losses tahich you may suffer because of unreported defects in the title to your property as of the date of the contract. It is not casualty 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. 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 requ;red 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 PREMIUb1 PAY FOR?" 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 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 DruRerty or easemt nts which allow perS. cross your property or to ,;Iace ul,litr,s across y .roperty. The prermum al :n serves to hniln, F. ' ':ertain itigal costs which may arise if you led is cnallonged. Additionally, payment of the of um requires the tale insurance comoany to moemntfy you for any losses you suffer as a result of the title company s failure to fulfill its contractual obligations under your title policy 1. QUESTION: "WHAT IS A COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE?" ANSWER: A Commitment for Title Insurance is a standardized prelimin +•y rlocumnnt aulhotized by the Cumnusstoner of Insurance orwicating that a title insurance company will issue a title insurance policy lu you after certain steps have been taken, such as lhti payment of an outstanding mortgage or hen and the issuance of a deed to you. These steps aie set out oil the commitment as -requirements- to 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 some of these limitations and defects may still exist even after all of the requirements of the commitment have been inert. These other matters sae usually such things as restrictive covenants or easements for utilities and the like. You should carefully read both the' requirements' and the exceptions to title stated 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 propt::;y. 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 mako 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 though tnere is no instrument of record giving that person the authority to do so. Exception 3 of the standard commitment in essence says that the title insurance policy will not insure against problems concerning the exact boundary tines 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 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. 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, lie 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 to the property, such as actual ownership or a leasehold interest, and the legal description of the property. 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 of Exclusions from Coverage. Matters which may limit coverage will be set forth.in the "Conditions and Stipulations" 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. t fights which may be possessed by a governmental body and which might be exercised against the property, and any defects of 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 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 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 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 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 you present your claim. e , QUESTION: "WHAT IF 1 STILL HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS 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, 106 c tate Office Building, Denver, Colorado 80203. Form No. C-1/2.13 CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen CASE NO. 03XA, 411. t STAFF • LO ve_�e- 4 PROJECT NAME:--V •-LL APPLICANT:(�J)�j-jryJ��Gf �I� Phone: REPRESENTATIVE: Phone: 61 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (FEE) I. GMP/SUBDIVISION/PUD (4 step) x 1. Conceptual Submission ($2,730.00) 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) (.$1,490.00) IV. SPECIAL REVIEW (1 step) ($ 680.00) 1. Special Review 2. Use Determination 3. Conditional Use 4. Other: �N%—tAJL1`5A P&Z MEETING DATE: -CC MEETING DATE: DATE REFERRED: 3 vp/ V REFERRALS: v City Attorney Aspen Consol. S.D. School District �/ City Engineer Mountain Bell Rocky Mtn. Natural Gas Housing Director Parks Dept. State Hwy Dept. (Glenwood) ZAspen Water Dept. Holy Cross Electric State Hwy Dept. (Grd. Jctn) City Electric Fire Marshall Building Dept. O qG Environmental Hlth. -/ / Fire Chief Other: FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: City Attorney ✓ City Engineer Building Dept. ,/ Other: S1 Other:.�Y1V, FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: a' DISPOSITION: CITY P&Z REVIEW:1 14 H4 A 1 P �t --�a I v,, I Mwwjee- No CITY P&Z REVIEW: CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: Ordinance No. CITY P&Z REVIEW: CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: M 1 Ordinance No. RECORD OF PROCEEDI.. s 100 Leaves RESOLUTION NO. "(Series bf 1984) A RESOLUTION GRANTING A GMP ALLOCATION TO THE NUGGET LODGE WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 24-11.6 (a) of the Municipal i 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 ,i 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 ! ?l WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held on November 6, i 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 ,J and Zoning Commission scoring; and ,f 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• r That thirteen (13) lodge units are hereby allocated to the Nugget i Lodge. '.� S,Cction 2 li That this allocation is granted with the following nine (9) conditions: P 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. f f 3) ting mature vegetation is bei reserved and open space w*w� 1 be at least 35%. 4) Walkways are being upgraded and fencing is being incorporated so that rooms 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. 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 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 i PROTECT PROFILE 1984 L-3 LODGE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SUBMISSION 1. Applicant: Hotel Aspen, Ltd. 2. Project Name: Nugget Lodge 3. Location: 110 W. Main • • .1• • • • • • S 4. Parcel Size: 26,996 sq. ft. 5. Current Zoning: 6. Maximum Allowable Build -out: 26,996 sq . ft. 7. Existing Structures: A lodge consisting of 32 lodge units and 03 or-=7aul • • 1 8. Development Program: The current buildout of the lodge is competed • . ! ! an additional 5,1 1 so, ft, fortotal buildout of 24,935 sa. ft, and an FAR of .92:1. The existing qml 1 ant renovation and the • N - • 9. Additional Review Requirements: Special Review for increase in •• IT-4IT-4 1 • V4W 41 40 U-5 is Ole welWEI 1 • = QM.V51 • 311 1014 W031 10. Miscellaneous: The earlier error in the zoning of this parcel • -1 1 1 •• • •:X JUMV, • 9 TO: Mayor Stirling THRU: Hal Schilling, FROM: Colette Penne, MEMORANDUM and Aspen Ci Council City Manage Planning Office SUBJECT: Allocat- on 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 f4ain Street. Along Garmi sch 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. ALTERNAT IV ES : 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. PROPOS ED MOT ION : "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 0 • 1984 L-3 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SUBMISSION PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION POINTS ALLOCATION TALLY SHEET PROJECT: The NuggetLd _oqe------------------ ---- — -- ------------------------------ ------------------------------- -- P6Z VOTING MEMBERS PERRY LEE___ PAT___ JASMINE ROGER_ MARY__ DAVID_ MULTIPLIER AVERAGE 1. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES a. Water Service 1 ------ 1 ------ 1 ------ 1 ------ i ------ 1 ----- 1 ------ b. Sewer Service 1 ----- 1 ------ 1 ------ 1 ------ 1 ------ 1 -- --- --- 1 --- c. Storm Drainage --2-- --2--- --2--- __2--- --2__. --2--- -.2--- d. Fire Protection 1 ----- 1 ------ .5 ---- — 1 ------ 1 ------ 1 ------ 1 ------ e. Roads 1 ----- 1 ------ 1 ------ 1 ------ 1 ------ 1 -- --- 1 ------ SUBTOTAL: b ----- 6 ------ 5.5 ------ 6 ------ b ------ 6 -- --- 6 ------ 2. QUALITY OF OR IMPROVEMENTS TO DESIGN a. Architectural Design b. Site Design c. Energy Conservation d. Parking and Circulation e. Visual Impact SUBTOTAL: 3. AMENITIES PROVIDED FOR GUESTS a. Meeting Areas, Lobbies, Con- ference Facilities b. Dining Facilities c. Recreational Facilities SUBTOTAL: 4. CONFORMANCE OF PUBLIC POLICY GOALS a. Employee Housing b. Conversion of Existing Units c. Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of Existing Units SUBTOTAL: TOTAL POINTS 1-4: 5. BONUS POINTS TOTAL POINTS --6-- A— --6--- A--- --6--- --6--- - .6--- --6-- --6--- --3--- --6--- --6--- --6--- -.4.5_ 2 ----- 2 ------ 2 ------ 2 ------ 2.5 ------ 2 ----- 1 ------ --6-- 3 --3--- --3- --3--- --0-- --0- b 6 6 6 b b b -26-- __23_- -20-__ -23-_- _23.5- _20-_ _17.5_ 5.93 21_86 --6--- --4.5- - -6--- --6--- --3-- --3--- (3 ) 4 ------ 3 ------ ---3--- 2--- ----- -- 4 3 ------ 2 -- --- 1 (2) ------ 4 ------ 4 ------ 4 ------ 4 ------ 4 ------ 4 -- --- 4 (2) ------ _11_5 9 _14 _13 9 __8___ __11.21 15 ----- 15 ----- 15 ------ 15 ----- 15 ----- 15 ----- 15 ---- (1) ----- ------ ------- ------ ------ -- --- ------ _15__ _15__ __15 _15__ _15_— _15_— 15 --- (1) -- 30-- --30-- 30-- 30-- -30-- -30 --30- -- _76_— 70_5 —64.5 73_— 72_5 65_ — _61_5_ 69.._ (1) _76_— 70_5 _64.5 73-- 72_5 65_— _61_5_ __69 ., ._ RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves RESOLUTION NO. I '(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 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; dnd 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: Section i_ That thirteen (13) lodge units are hereby allocated to the Nugget Lodge. faction 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 and fire extinguishers and smoke detectors will be installed. f 3) Sisting mature vegetation is be* preserved and open space will be at least 35%. 4) Walkways are being upgraded and fencing is being incorporated so that rooms have small private patios. 5) Wall insulation value will be R-25, overall roof R-value will be F-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 remoc+.el, 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 William L. Stirling, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk o'. 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 • 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: I (Multiplier - 1) 1 (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: I — (Multiplier - 1) _1 (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:The applicant has •ntt -. to retain all surface runoff on -site, City facilities will not be utilized since all • �. •- — —� • •� — t — •F. •IWM. • -W,7313Wdi — • I • — �- •- -tl • (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: 1. (Multiplier- 1) 1— •MMENT: The lodge is approximatelymile from the main fir station / • • / - --ti-me--under two minutes, • and .. - adequate for• I 1• flows. A hydrant exists at the NE corner of 1 - property a/ • another • across�-feet away n 1 n•.- detectors will be installed, fire extin- guishers• d-d and the new construction will exceed Building Code - ! - / (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) 1— / • �• / • • •. • 1 1 • ' 11 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: 2— (Multiplier - 3) _6 • 1 ! •1 • 1 1' • ! 1• �1 1. •1 • 2 -I•19WI III•- y. .1• IMI 1• 01 it , - - • p •. ! , 1 1 - ' ! " 1 . • � : • • 11 �. 1 • h• 1 1 � 1 .1 1 • • 1 1 • • I - (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— • I• p. - -•- •I •- I• ! - -• .IV -Mel •-I �. 1 I • •- I• I • !�• -• • 1 .1 (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) _2 I • • • 50 • Be. ISMIRWASUCOM4,6311 .. 1 • 1 I• (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) 3- 1 1• � 1 f • . • 1• 1 1• • 1- 1 1 - lip 1• -� ._••-I'S_ • •- I•• -� ( 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) 6— • 1 - I 1 • • . I • . I • • / • - . 1 • • • • - • • I • 1 .1 1 • ! • • I - 1 • 11 - 1 - Main Street and Garmisch. set back from Bleeker and centered i •• I-. . I.I. -. . - I- . , , •1 i_•- •I beiwiscL-x-iat—aCwted. 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 (Multiplier - 3) 3— (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) 2 1 - 11 - •. or -Poo • - • 1 •1� 1 - 1 - • • •- the dinina 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: 2— (Multiplier - 2) 4 COMMENT:The existing pool and high 'ty. An additional Jacuzzi ig 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: One -Bedroom Two -Bedroom Three -Bedroom or larger: Dormitory: 1.25 residents 1.75 residents 2.25 residents 3.00 residents 1.00 resident per 150 s. f. of unit space RATING: 3_ (Multiplier - 1) _15 Pill q W.'t A P. RZ) 11110119 'Lei low. I fro-W4 0147M.4 MR Co- -10-- - .01 +. • . .- .. - • W-1611511 11111TWO I .-. I 4111111011wel+- • + - (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. RATING: _0 (Multiplier - 1) _0 COMMENT: The solution of using a unit in the Cortina is not shown to be Dossi_b1e_.____ There is no proof -of ownershi-D, nor -has (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: 1_ (Multiplier - 1) _ 5 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 C. • • 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. COMMENT: N/A 6. TOTAL POINTS: Points in Category 1: Points in Category 2: Points in Category 3: Points in Category 4: SUBTOTAL Categories 1-4: Bonus Points: RATING: (Multiplier - 1) (minimum of 3 points required) 23 ( minimum of 11 .7 points required) 9 (minimum of 6.3 points required) 30 ( minimum of 10 .5 points required) 68 (minimum of 63 points required) TOTAL POINTS: 68 Name of Planning and Zoning Member: Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 7 E 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 0 • 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 Bleeker 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 Poi ntsPoints 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 RECOMMENDAT ION : 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 - t t 1 I I 1 1 t 1 , I I — '/0X-- 1 � I [DMCKi[ , CD -EIE 1 •lj t14 LDwG i•-1 ' i + 1 1 I 1 to-LD--G M/ID�MG w 1 L+�_p .. . . I f I I COKR 1t k .� 1 •wD -Doo , t.Dol RNMYOR'S CERMICArf IL EodIE n 19 1984 i P�I E I 1 O R A P: D U P I V TO: Colette Penne, Planning Offi FROM: J. Lucas Adamski, Director of Housi DATE: October 19, 1984 SUBJECT: The nugget Lodge - L-3 GMP Conceptual- Submission/Special Review I. PROJECT: A. Description: The nugget Lodge GIIP application is requesting a GI•iP 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 (10000-) 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. B. Employee Housing The applicant has stated that he "will provide one hundred percent (1000) of its employee housing". This is not totally accurate as he is providing housing for 350 of the 100% employees generated. The points he is allowed should be based of the 35% housing provided. Using the 0-356 Employee Mousing 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 1.08 (14 x .22 x 35 0 = 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. f t. 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 net or exceeded except for the item 2. kitchen facility. Cooking facilities will be provided at the Plugget 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 builaing 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 UB C anu 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 COMMISSION POINTS ALLOCATION TALLY SHEET PROJECT: The Nugget Lodge------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- PbZ VOTING MEMBERS PERRY LEE --- PAT___ JASMINE ROGER_ MARY__ DAVID_ MULTIPLIER AVERAGE 1. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES a. Water Service b. Sewer Service c. Store Drainage , ?_-- -2--_ _-2_-- -2--- --2-__ _-2 -- __2 --- (1) d. Fire Protection 1 1 .5 1 1 1 1 (1) e. Roads __1___ __1___ SUBTOTAL: b 6 5.5_ _ b __6___ __b __ __b___ ---5.93 2. QUALITY OF OR IMPROVEMENTS TO DESIGN a. Architectural Design __6 _ __6___ _ b _ b___ __6___ __6 __6___ (3) b. Site Design 6 ----- _ b___ 3 ------ _ b___ __b___ _ 6 _ - __4.5_ (3) c. Energy Conservation 2-- --2-__ __2_-- _ 2_-- 2.5_ _-2 -- 1_-- (1) d. Parking and Circulation _ b _ 3 _ 3 3 3 0 __0___ (3) e. Visual Impact __6__ __6___ __6 __6___ -_6___ __6 __b___ (3) SUBTOTAL: _26__ __23__ _20___ _23___ _23.5_ _20 __ _17.5_ 21.86 3. AMENITIES PROVIDED FOR GUESTS a. Meeting Areas, Lobbies, Con - Terence Facilities b 4.5 3 _ 6 _ b __3 --3 --- (3) b. Dining Facilities __4__ __3___ _ 2 _4___ __3___ __2 __1___ (2) c. Recreational Facilities _ 4 __4___ __4___ __4___ 4 __4 __ _ 4___ (�) 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 ` TOTAL POINTS 76- _ 74_.5 —64.5 73__ 72.5 _65_ _ _61.5_ _69 1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION CITY OF ASPEN Name of Project: ��/�%�< , `_ /!?''�' 'c1Date: ��• �• �`� 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) 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: (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 (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. RAT I M : (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) 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. COMMENT: 4 RATING (Multiplier - 2) 1 • U (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) . Th e 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: One -Bedroom Two -Bedroom 5 1.25 residents 1.75 residents 2.25 residents • 0 Three -Bedroom or larger: Dormitory: COMMENT: 3.00 residents 1.00 resident per 150 s. f. of unit space RATING: (Multiplier - 1) /47 (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-, proposed by applicant restricted: 3 points 67%-100% of all low-, proposed by applicant restricted: 5 points moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed- moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed - 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) 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. 2 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. COMMENT: 7 RATING: (Multiplier - 1) • 6. TOTAL POINTS: Points in Category 1: Points in Category 2: Points in Category 3: Points in Category 4: SUBTOTAL Categories 1-4: Bonus Points: (minimum of 3 points required) (minimum of 11.7 points required) / I `7 ----- (minimum of 6.3 points required) 3 0 (minimum of 10.5 points required) ------- (minimum of 63 points required) TOTAL POINTS: 7 6- Name of Planning and Zoning Member: %spy' 0 0 1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION CITY OF ASPEN Name of Project: 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: (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: �4 (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) ,l 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 0 • (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: (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) PARRING 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 : U (-) �� 1C l G Toy,- L - 1 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. RATIWS: (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) 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. COMMENT: 4 RATING: „ (Multiplier - 2) (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: One -Bedroom Two -Bedroom 5 1.25 residents 1.75 residents 2.25 residents r: LJ Three -Bedroom or larger: Dormitory: COMMENT: 3.00 residents 1.00 resident per 150 s. f. of unit space RATING: (Multiplier - 1) / (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-, proposed by applicant restricted: 3 points 67%-100% of all low-, proposed by applicant restricted: 5 points moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed- moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed - 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. C 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. A 0 COMMENT: RATING: (Multiplier - 1) 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. COMMENT: 7 RATING: (Multiplier - 1) • 6. TOTAL POINTS: Points in Category 1: Points in Category 2: Points in Category 3: Points in Category 4: SUBTOTAL Categories 1-4: Bonus Points: TOTAL POINTS: Name of Planning and Zoning Member: 0 (minimum of 3 points required) (minimum of 11.7 points required) ------- (minimum of 6.3 points required) (minimum of 10.5 points required) ------- (minimum of 63 points required) u L� 1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION CITY OF ASPEN Name of Project: 42t� Date : A 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 (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) 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. 1 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 • 7-b 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 0 • (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: (Multiplier - 3) COMMENT: (c) ENERGY CONSERVATION - Considering the use of solar energy devices, passive solar orientation techniques to maximize conservation of energy solar energy sources in the lodge or any addition COMMENT: RATING: ✓/ (Multiplier - a# W) A K^ -,?Vot insulation, and similar and use of thereto. 1) 1# (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 - ) COMMENT: P 1 O rM- P 66Mprl�d. 40 3 0 • ( 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: COMMENT: s Ar QOhll..5f�.1(L(� RATING: (Multiplier - 3) —Wry T)07- IT- f4 (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. COMMENT: 4 RATING: ,S (Multiplier - 2) l C� (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: Z_ (Multiplier - 2) 4 COMMENT •4"k I k—w 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: One -Bedroom Two -Bedroom R 1.25 residents 1.75 residents 2.25 residents C� • Three -Bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents Dormitory: 1.00 resident per 150 s. f. of unit space RATING: (Multiplier - 1) '� COMMENT: I- W6 T11,1Wt(/tQ ( - (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-, proposed by applicant restricted: 3 points 67%-100% of all low-, proposed by applicant restricted: 5 points moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed- moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed - 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: v (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. N. • • COMMENT: RATING: (Multiplier - 1) 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. BONDS 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) 4�5 ` Points in Category 2: (minimum of 1 1. 7 points required) C. 'j�r Points in Category 3: ------- (minimum of 6.3 points required) 30 Points in Category 4: (minimum of 1 0. 5 ints required) SUBTOTAL Categories 1-4: —t�—(minimum of 63 points / required) Bonus Points: TOTAL POINTS: Name of Planning and Zoning Member: 0 1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION CITY OF ASPEN 1 G Q Name of Project :�/ (/ Lit L' � 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: G (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. I 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 • � J (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: C� (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) YJ 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. 2.5 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: I (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. RAT I M : (Multiplier - 3) c� 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. COMMENT: 4 i RATING: � (Multiplier - 2) (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: One -Bedroom Two -Bedroom A 1.25 residents 1.75 residents 2.25 residents • u Three -Bedroom or larger: Dormitory: COMMENT: 3.00 residents 1.00 resident per 150 s. f. of unit space / RATING: r (Multiplier - 1) 1`Z (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-, proposed by applicant restricted: 3 points 67%-100% of all low-, proposed by applicant restricted: 5 points moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed- moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed - 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) __71Z 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. C-1 • u COMMENT: RATING: (Multiplier - 1) 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. BONDS 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. COMMENT: VA RATING: (Multiplier - 1) 6. TOTAL ' POINTS: Points in Category 1: (minimum of 3 points required) Points in Category 2: c7 ' (minimum of 11.7 points required) � Points in Category 3: — -- — (minimum of 6.3 points required) �-) Points in Category 4:y ( minimum of 10 . 5 points required) SUBTOTAL Categories 1-4: ------- (minimum of 63 points required) Bonus Points: �✓ TOTAL POINTS: Name of Planning and Zoning Member: A u u 1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION C TY OF ASPEN Name of Pro! ect : k�_c �i �.G� Date: 11 - �. - i` 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: l' (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) S- 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: G- (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) PARRING 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 K ( 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 M : (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) 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. COMMENT:\-'-Y\_ -Ac!7?— \ \L'. 4 RATING: (Multiplier - 2) • (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. h 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: One -Bedroom Two -Bedroom 5 1.25 residents 1.75 residents 2.25 residents • Three -Bedroom or larger: Dormitory: COMMENT: 3.00 residents 1.00 resident per 150 s. f. of unit space RATING: (Multiplier - 1) 1� (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 30-66% of all low-, proposed by applicant restricted: 3 points 67%-100% of all low-, proposed by applicant restricted: 5 points moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed- moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed - 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. 3 • u COMMENT: RATING: (Multiplier - 1) T 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: Points in Category 2: Points in Category 3: Points in Category 4: SUBTOTAL Categories 1-4: Bonus Points: / !� TOTAL POINTS: Name of Planning and Zoning Member: (minimum of 3 points required) (minimum of 11.7 / points required) — -- (minimum of 6.3 points required) = j (minimum of 10.5 points required) (minimum of 63 points required) 10 1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION CITY OF ASPEN Name of Proj ect : N UCICI CT 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: I (Multiplier - 1) 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: I (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: I (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: 1 % (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) —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. RAT I M : 2 (Multiplier - 3) _�O_ 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. COMMENT: 4 RATING: (Multiplier - 2) • u (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) . Th e 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: One -Bedroom Two -Bedroom 5 1.25 residents 1.75 residents 2.25 residents • • Three -Bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents Dormitory: 1.00 resident per 150 s. f. of unit space RATING: S (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 30-66% of all low-, proposed by applicant restricted: 3 points 67%-100% of all low-, proposed by applicant restricted: 5 points moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and d:eed- moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed - 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. 0 • 0 COMMENT: RATING: (Multiplier - 1) 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. BONDS 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 (:)) (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. COMMENT 7 RATING: (Multiplier - 1) U 6. TOTAL POINTS: Points in Category 1: Points in Category 2: Points in Category 3: Points in Category 4: SUBTOTAL Categories 1-4: Bonus Points: TOTAL POINTS: Name of Planning and Zoning Member: 0 (minimum of 3 points required) ( minimum of 11 .7 points required) ------- (minimum of 6.3 points required) �0 (minimum of 1.0.5 points required) -''r�--- (minimum of 63 points required) 4 , 0 • 1984 L-3 LODGE GMP COMPETITION CITY OF ASPEN Name of Project: Date : /1 - G 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: I (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 f 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: _ (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) _ 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: t 3 (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) G 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 germs of quality of spaciousness. 2 -- Indicates services which are judged to be adequate in germs 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 prof ec-_ or any addition thereto: RATING: / (Multiplier - 3) 43— COMMENT (b) Availability of or improvements to the existing on -rite dining facilities, including any restaurants, bars and banquet facilities, in relation to the size of the proposed lodging project or any addition thereto. COMMENT: 4 RATING: (Multiplier - 2) c3 4M (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) f 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: One -Bedroom Two -Bedroom 1.25 residents 1.75 residents 2.25 residents Three -Bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents Dormitory: 1.00 resident per 150 s. f. of unit space RATING: (Multiplier - 1) �sr 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-, proposed by applicant restricted: 3 points 67%-100% of all low-, proposed by applicant restricted: 5 points moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed- moderate- and middle income units are to be purchased and deed - 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) O 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 rehabil itate 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 rehabil itate or reconstruct - 1 point for each 5% rehabilitated or reconstructed. 0 COMMENT: RATING: % 5^ (Multiplier - 1) 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: Points in Category 2: Points in Category 3: Points in Category 4: SUBTOTAL Categories 1-4: (minimum of 3 points required) (minimum of 11.7 points required) ------- (minimum of 6.3 points required) of 10.5 _(minimum points required) ------- (minimum of 63 points required) Bonus Points: TOTAL POINTS: 7� Name of Planning and Zoning Member: 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. -TI.4 F l;F Abe#re—, :✓,—ors _�a- /sE �s���:� IsY 1N'` A.SIt.. COI�.tu�t�sATer� SAw►�TAria /�/s7-m-ir-r. P J6 Y I K T i L 0 ►� �� Iv rj� C /,% t'!�'_ J= r a /� A �- ►� �- �= / f /iaoLa' A hn'r�/o•-ham- `'-'r5 . ,Y_ 11 • MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office FROM: Chuck Roth, City Engineering Department (!-P_ 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 ' Lod e GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW CHECKLIST CITY OF ASPEN ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DECEMBER 1983 Project Name lijr, Address I t0 W, r/l��N Owner ? 4oTE L- A,_PF+_) Arent/Representative G(C)F Address �>IS F , 4yY ^A,� _-SUCTJF Phone —8 16 6 Reviewed By C+UGK Date l0 —3 gc__ (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) I Water (2 pts:) S (bb) f Sewage Disposal (2 pts.) (cc) Storm Drainage (2 pts.) (ee) M 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) nuality 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-l-andsc-a-ping and open space, extent of utility underground�ng pedestrian amenities; -provision of safety and privacy for d /evelo_nment users. �10 (�i? ��C C �.�L.-Gi � � �://�� 0 ufii. I i..c-s•.�� � d �.c,`-i t_ ,�,��!' (dd) rL Parking and Circulation {3 pts.) Internal circulation, parking, service vehicle access, loading areas, and extent of screening of parking areas. �Ufjl�►v1�� /� ��� ..w...��� �ir� �r!/cC�a. LArty-PgAiN1tiGt PLA.J V>Ry W Ei-L cAL-CS /�c►.J v 51 z I nl G i 1'• PA 9440G s PAC V-0 is E,4CH OE U W i Pi.'0&'CES -X 1 4nz."'1# Un1iT5 ; P, C3FZ 5 - <oSOS 5t� i � s Phi TRksH SITE p, Cc , No aus Sitf:e-s� @ Th1w d • MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning FROM: Bill Drueding, Zoning Enforcement Officer 1. 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 . L5 @ a I 09 i b � ASPEN WATER DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: COLETTE PENNE, PLAN14ING OFFICE FROM: JIM MARKALUNAS SUBJECT: THE NUGGET LODGE DATE: OCTOBER 17, 1984 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 Perry Harvey Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on October 11, 1984. City of Aspen Account.