The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.602 E Hyman Ave.0031.2012.ASLUC 0031.2012.ASLU 602 E HYMAN AVE I 2737 18 2 12 00 3 Conceptual Com Design Review 3~Â«Â« 0 1 / 00. Clel .0 R 7 External Media Located Here 024Â»91:1 M-008000 Â»L t., 13 ~ M-008001 f.:4 THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0031.2012.ASLU PARCEL ID NUMBERS 2737 182 12 003 PROJECTS ADDRESS 602 E HYMAN AVE PLANNER JESS GARROW CASE DESCRIPTION CONCEPTUAL COM DESIGN REVIEW REPRESENTATIVE SUNNY VAAN DATE OF FINAL ACTION 8.15.12 CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 12.27.12 RESOLUTION NO. 12, (SERIES OF 2012) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL REVIEW FOR THE TRASH / UTILITY / RECYCLE AREA, FOR A REMODEL AND ADDITION CONSISTING OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL SPACE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 602 E HYMAN AVE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS K & L, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-12-003 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Daniel L Hunt, represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC requesting of the Planning and Zoning Commission approval of Conceptual Commercial Design Review, and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Area. to remodel the existing building and add third floor addition for a project that will include a mix of commercial space, affordable housing, and free-market residential; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended the Applicant amend the proposal to better comply with the Commercial Design Standards and the Special Review Standards for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Areas and, WHEREAS, the Applicant amended the application on June 13. 2012 fur the June 19,2012 Planning and Zoning hearing, which staff recommended in favor of; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 19,2012, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 12, Series of 2012, by a five to zero (5 - 0) vote, approving Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Area; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the RECEPTION#: 592017, 09/07/2012 at 10:49:30 AM, Resolution No 12, Series 2012 1 OF 6, R $36.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Page I of 3 Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO development Pr~Posal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion o f public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Conceptual Commercial Design Review, and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycling Area, with the following conditions: A. The applicant shall work with the Engineering, Building, Parks, and Planning Departments to address the ability to create an accessible sidewalk along this properly between Conceptual and Final Design Review. A final solution shall be presented with the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review. B. The Final Commercial Design Application shall address the specific improvements proposed in the Public Amenity spaces located on the site. These will be reviewed and must be approved by the City Parks Department, C. Remove the wall between the recycling bjns and alley to ensure adequate access to the bins. D. The Final Commercial Design Application shall address the height of the third story addition, and explore ways to minimize the perception that the third story appears out of proportion with the existing building. Drawings illustrating the Conceptual Commercial Design Review are attached as Exhibit A to the Resolution. Section 2: Engineering The applicant shall address compliance with the City's Urban Runoff Management Plan as part of the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review. Section 3: Parks There shall be no plantings within the City ROW which are not approved by the City Parks Department and the Engineering Department. Parks is concerned with any improvements to the sidewalk area. The applicant has expressed interest, :. and is supported by Parks, in saving the larger spruce trees planted within the Hunter Street courtyards. Changes in elevation on Hunter and Hyman will have impacts to the success of these trees. These shall be addressed in the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review The applicant must work closely with the City Forester in order to reduce conflicts between the development of the third floor and the existing trees. Resolution No 12, Series 2012 Page 2 of 3 The Applicant shall include information on the Parks Department requirements related to tree replacement as part of the Final Commercial Design Application,. The applicant should also consider lifecycle planning for the large on-site trees. Section 4: General i The applicant shall comply with all applicable City of Aspen Codes. Nothing in this conceptual approval negates the Applicant's requirements to meet other sections and requirements of the Municipal Code. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 6: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a.' court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereo f. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 19th day of June, 2012. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNI~Kf~ AND ZONING coM#116903: Deb Quinn, Assistant City Attorney LJ Erspamer, Chair ATTEST: 0.. L.Â·.Dfil- /JOckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk V Resolution No 12, Series 2012 Page 3 0 f 3 ZONE 0---3-1 - MI.. . /r.Â£00.-1 11/ h - / - 125'ARM'Fl 12.'2=6 1 . ARÂ°"'ul.~CTS '' 'Ii' 0. 9 -L ..O .OX 2.0. AepeN CO .1.12 M C.1Â¥i #' + .5 P.Wil / *T,0 F.n'IRfll'IL i EL+1.-51~Â· * ** , 4 * * + + 1 ***** 1 T,Â©t U, SECON' LE*Â¥1 LLâ€¢,0-4 9 -7 1111111 - 1 1 7-- -1-- -7'-- ?3[ 2-ZE, + / _'__1 i-_i w -- 11,1,11 '- 96: EL (p~ PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION Cy 3/1/= 1Â·-0Â· --n ~__ _ Ill -L.__~Â·icÂ·.== 1 1 1 I ,T~ ROOF/PARAPErs 'EL.â€¢id r 11 . ... 1 Z :i ~ NEW RESIENTLI UMT - 1 0 0 0- 1 1 I 11 1,111011 AM[ImED . 2 h.- 1-1 A. i 11*j r E -JIJ 1 r- .TO F.F.sECON[H.Ea- , 1 \....._....CX 6 - 'EL .109Â·Â·minÂ· -.1.11.-L_ - 1 111 11' 1 11 . -- 1 111 1 , I 1111 0 /3/ - 11,~ 1 =V lili 1 lili .1(11 1 11, 1 1 lili .1,11,1,1 1, r--r' _ - - - -- ~ '2'â€¢F,657'871 - . -----2-- 4--2--1- CONCEPTUAL DESIGN 1 01 MAY, 2012 1 OMMEBGZL Â· 'll L_ 3 1- r-j PROPOSED) ~ Â· 2~ - - .TO F F BASEMEN-LEVER, u - .U_â€¢01'-7/2' ELEVAnONS 3 El - (6?~ PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION i - 3/16- = 1'-{r A304 1 130OW33 NVWAH ISÂ¥3 Z09 06Â¥,010) 166$Y 'in}11AY NÂ¥,aH Lm [09 = - uill =â€¢Am =.- msâ€¢ i.=,10 - 01â€¢ #0~3 *rl =10 . mm, m, Dn :*=â€¢ i= m .=i= I â€¢0=01, nllrul -i l; ,01- 016,0 I 0. Imi nk,Wi. =Imillm ID,la, i ],01 10 .NO'u o. I,]1,4]01 .i ,0 11.f,I]03 1,1. lag' - ....f.VU,Ill.............1,1 0,1./. 1Â», ni - I ..,0,1 I I. - u .u,rm i ZONE M. ar,=EfC,a RIFER%Â¥~ST n~AT~ FOR IDGI' COâ€¢â€¢~CÂ»~WK:E ROC* / PAUPIT~ 1â‚¬~t L.,0 ~~!~LGUA.RDIWL * .~JP'.ED 'ell /-to**EW 89 1.0. ATOR +131'Â·83!4 Lj El .OX .so. A.CHILLI.ECTS ASPEN CO a 1I,. T O PA E â€¢120'M T.0 F.F â€¢11 .4 1- 1 Si=.Â·po=~. - - - Ii-- I --I--1 TO.FFS N -/1.M .,-01 , 0 T. .FF IR ~ ~ ~~- ~ EL â€¢100 -5-0.-DE r- b 2--- ./13*Er....CA'- 1 1 L________3 E-_-__-6 ~ -7 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION Â¢irwiG-EE W..*1*/~Evg,a -000/t-â€¢a - M==T 1.-f __ ___ _.253727- - ----4 ./t.i/,su~pu,~ â€¢Cocoseâ€¢o + OLA. ./.0... ~ 13 '~9~PEX I i ELâ€¢/9.Syâ€¢Â· .- *Â¢. C~.0.7, | 01 Z 04.!3.2011 A~IN APP. MATâ„¢~L LO. F.F SECON[ L - -- -i- --I- .I.~ . 1 * T F. FÂ¥'STLEVEL 41 T.0 Ff ALLI' CON[En]Al DESIGN \ 1 Fe~CE A No Lâ€¢N=CÂ»,Ic 1 -G- - Ol MAY, 2011 PAIMT,DOMU ' 1 ..04. PROPOSED 1 ELEVATIONS -- (60 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION \~j 3/16-= 1-0' A305 1300W3N NVWAH 1SV3 Z09 oov,010) 'Hidw 'inlmY HYWAH 1$Â¥3 [Dg rali~1 ZON EF- A lic" I.Jecrs P. O .0. *sce A8PEN CO .,/12 wwir. I ZOÂ·aâ€¢,â€¢.DaH.rccrs. co. 1 U-1 21=1 *E 0 *1 1 33 LU --+ i--T=7 K--Z--71 - 1 1 I/ \ 21 - - 1 ZE 7 16.2. ' -31__ 1 -6 1 = EXISTING <coSt*Lu ~~ ,- 9 BUILDING UJ -1 , g=/ r.r - ,--- , F. - 2 J 7,1 1 L J LEGEND 52!MIXS 6 (CO)~ T Ct,Ja Y.90 34** ~ LU_LI PUBUC AMENrTY AREA 12S~/I'l~ 26 1 /- 519. -T- ,~r.Â», 5.>-4 * r-EME*f 1--- Mmip- 01 0~u~I] AMENDED An. r 'LEUC AMEN=.. .REA- 14361 S.F -8 49 43 43 4% CONCEPTUAL DE!1611 01 MAY, loW NORâ„¢ .-1% PROPOSED PUBUC -\ PROPOSED PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE m AMERm SPACE 06 2- MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner ~Y|~ THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~~~~~ RE: Notice of P&Z approval of Conceptual Commercial Design Review : 602 E Hyman Ave., P&Z Resolution #12, Series of 2012 MEETING DATE: August 13, 2012 COUNCIL REQUEST: On July 23rd City Council voted to call up the P&Z approval of Conceptual Commercial Design Review for a third floor addition and second floor remodel at 602 E Hyman Ave. Council is asked to proceed with the call up procedures and take action on one of the options listed below. REVIEW PROCESS: During a public meeting, City Council shall consider the application de novo and may consider the record established by the P&Z. The City Council shall conduct its review of the application under the same criteria applicable to the P&Z. City Council may take the following action: 1. Accept the decision. 2. Remand the application to P&Z with direction from City Council for rehearing and reconsideration. 3. Continue the meeting to request additional evidence, analysis or testimony as necessary to conclude the call up review. If Council selects Option #2 and remands the application back to the Board, the rehearing and reconsideration of the application by P&Z is final and concludes the call up review. Substantial changes to the application outside of the specific topics listed in the remand to P&Z may require a new call up notice to City Council; however the call up review would be limited only to the new changes to the application. This application is subject to future Subdivision, Growth Management, and Final Commercial Design Reviews. BACKGROUND: (UNCHANGED FROM JULY 23]~D MEMO) On June 19, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) approved Conceptual Commercial Design Review for a project at 602 E Hyman Ave. Conceptual Commercial Design Review addresses the mass, scale and placement of a proposed building, and provides the applicant with direction for moving forward with their proposal. The applicant is proposing to remodel the existing two-story building and add a third floor that is set back from the street. The project meets all underlying dimensional requirements. The project increases public amenity space from 17% of the site to 24% of the site. It re-uses the existing building, and is proposed to be 35 feet in height, which is lower than the 36 - 40 foot height allowed under the code in effect at the time of initial application. The building is proposed to be a mix of Commercial, Affordable Housing and Free-Market Residential space. Planning staff recommended in favor of the design review, and the P&Z approved the design by a vote of 5:0. A copy of the P&Z Resolution and Minutes are attached as Exhibits B and C, respectively. A copy of the approved massing is attached as Exhibit A. DISCUSSION: No specific questions or issues were raised by Council when they called the project up on July 234. Staff is prepared to answer any questions that may arise at the call-up hearing. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the P&Z applied the review criteria in accordance with the Land Use Code and recommends that City Council accept the decision. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to accept P&Z decision to approve Conceptual Commercial Design Review for 602 E Hyman Ave." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Approved Plans Exhibit B: P&Z Resolution 12, Series 2012 Exhibit C: P&Z approved minutes ZONE Exhibl A PC ARCHITECTS LLC. P.O. BOX 2608 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW .ZONE,AFICH[TECTS. COM Lu 0 Tivi-*4r --/ ~ -_- 7.I.-b-Ili sir: 80-4/-Eizz=li=8 -h HYMAN AVENUE (SOUTH) ELEVATION li $ 11 C m Mi'&L - ~ - - 1-- = .~ *3 -I- -3 - 4Â·4 ; * 15 il 11 06.112012 AMENDED APP. = -\ HUNTER STREET (WEST) ELEVATION 5 ME gE i! CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ./ 01 MAY, 2012 D-1 1/ ELEVATION STREETSCAPE 5.1.1.. A307 li NVWAH 1SV3 T09 00Â¥1010) 'N]diÂ¥ '3nN3AV NVIAH 15,3 [09 011:M Ulm m Â·01313*U 1119[1610} DI,lonÂ·0111 31181, OM,3$31 :31U0 11Â¥ 011, ~01A1Â¥11 /An N0I1110) m 111Â¥hl, TMIS ]TI &1]31]1[m , 1110Z NI iDit]11],f , 3NOZ 10 HOMII,ld Nlill,/A 10Ild lili 180Illl/A 036,0] 10 03!Il l, An, lIOUÂ¥I,IOJNI ilill JO N ZZIV111'~~1'TLTTL= :2 NA ZONE PE ARCHITECTS P.O. BOX 2608 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW .ZON.ARCHITECTS. COM 0/ UC. 4 . :.- 4 1 Â· 1 i .... / /. . . lar ' be/Bed ./ - - -.-Zirt. - VIEW TOWARDS NORHTWEST l91) l PRIMARY MATERIALS i DI 06.0.20ll AMENDED APP. -YM I g. 0. METAL PANEL PAINTED CEMENTITIOUS PAINTED WOOD - CONCRETE COMPOSITE WOOD SIDING CONCEPTUAL DESIGN D.I BLOCK Ol MAY, 20ll PERSPECTIVE NOTE: STREETSCAPE THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE 51.# USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. A308 1300W3X NVWAH 1Â§Vl I09 00Â¥y010) 'NMÂ¥ '3nN3AV NVWAH 15Â¥3 T09 0]AligÂ¥ Ulm m Â·0Â£113Ill 1!lgl~do] 9IllonÂ·1]Ill 31IM MM I]IUO m Oll,I ~01A1,11 /An NOI,Ilo) TY# IllÂ¥131 Tmli ]TI ;DillIO~ , ]NOZ NI 51]11]I[N, , DIN JO INOM~Imd IllilIUA m, 3,U 180Ill]Al OmWO} 10 01Â§11 n An, NollÂ¥1110JNI glll JO 11,4 Oll ]T, ~DmID,V , ]IloZ 10 11,3,lo,d ]H 9 WItt NO 3NIVJ]lo] 110Ull Ilglgo ONY Hollmoilll ]Ill -]TI '11)1UHDI Â¥ NIOZ ZIDZ W 3 $3*1 1 S]DIIÂ¥Il] UlÂ¥ 10 1 ]MU m 1Â¥ 31'lillod,31 10 311'0110lt il $1/Ul,INÂ¥, 'OZ ZONE PC ARCHITECTS UC. P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81812 WWW . ZON.4ARCHITECTS . COM 1. 1 2 . I I*tdif 1 0 04 i . 1 0 f 0 1.1.1 4 I Z D . ..ir . = -1 VIEW TOWARDS NORTHEAST PRIMARY MATERIALS i 7327. i 01 06.0.lon AMENDED APP. ~ / -r _A =U 11 g. METAL PANEL PAINTED CEMENTITIOUS PAINTED WOOD CONCRETE COMPOSITE WOOD SIDING BLOCK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN Itt 0 I MAY, 10 I 2 Of..1 TII NOTEÂ· PERSPECTIVE THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. STREETSCAPE 1.1.1 I A309 004010) 'NldiÂ¥ '3nN3AÂ¥ NVW111 15Â¥3 [09 ON!5311 1111!n m Â·073Ili 1#9,0} 91110nDNI 311191Â¥ Mm umm oll, Immi mzm MI'ni â„¢Ii ]11 il]31!IllÂ¥Â¥ , ]NO~ ]TI il}illIDII, 4 3NDZ 10 IlolÂ§,Il,nd %211[1/A mid M molluM 01]WO] E 03;Il N mi Noll,Illo,NI illu 10 1,Â¥d OIl 111 ll]UNIDâ€¢ 4 ]Â»01 JO linlold lili g glli ~11,96&6~f,ai #wA~.31ll NI billl[),Â¥ , DIOZ zIOI w 1SV3 I09 8 10 111~110N W $1)11IHIV I ]NOT ZONE ARCHITECTS UC. ri. 13 P. O. BOX 2808 ASPEN CO 81612 VA~A. . ZONE,AACHITECTS . COM , t >22â‚¬93=@ae--~L 1 1 1 179 Â¥ ' 42-42*72**frmem-1 1 I l l 11qll.. - clegag~ 11111/'.I- -" 2999%k@Als<I>43;~ / 1-1.1.1â€žb 7*3>~ 7*2â‚¬4â‚¬itâ‚¬--IMWL - ,Â·<Â·S- t.Â«tÂ«Â·Â«10 7 2.--~Â»* 6 -2-4-44-4- ' ,--Â·.L Â·Â· 1:ZÂ· / 0274 :1- 1 ..2..9 44% 11~ - , 0 . , 11 . - VIEW TOWARDS SOUTHEAST PRIMARY MATERIALS 01 06.13.2012 AMENDED APP. A 1 CL--1 2E METAL PANEL PAINTED CEMENTITIOUS PAINTED WOOD CONCRETE COMPOSITE WOOD SIDING - *1 BLOCK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ~ I. :m 0 I MAY, 20 I 2 @i =8 NOTEÂ· PE~E~TIVE ~i THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. STREETSCAPE ~ E i# A310 li 1300W3X NVWAH 1Â§V 3 Z09 00Â¥90101 'NldSÂ¥ 'inN3AY NVWAH 1Â§Â¥3 t09 03111$31 g}8111 m '017,31ll l]IDINWD) 9Nlom]NI 11119111 Iltl353, Bu m M IEE K #I m Ki Tmlt Â·]T! 11]IDW , 3,IN Â·)11 5011,0, 4 ]IN JO WOMIIal N]10,/A MIdi le 1110HIWA 03Wo) ,0 01Â§1, I AÂ¥Il IlouÂ¥1110'I Â§Illt jo.~~~ , 311=mly:=432 2 Esxh,b)+ 8 RESOLUTION N0.12, (SERIES OF 2012) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL REVIEW FOR THE TRASH / UTILITY / RECYCLE AREA, FOR A REMODEL AND ADDITION CONSISTING OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL SPACE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 602 E HYMAN AVE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS K & L, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-12-003 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Daniel L Hunt, represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC requesting of the Planning and Zoning Commission approval of Conceptual Commercial Design Review, and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Area, to remodel the existing building and add third floor addition for a project that will include a mix of commercial space, affordable housing, and free-market residential; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended the Applicant amend the proposal to better comply with the Commercial Design Standards and the Special Review Standards for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Areas and, WHEREAS, the Applicant amended the application on June 13, 2012 for the June 19,2012 Planning and Zoning hearing, which staff recommended in favor of; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 19,2012, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 12, Series of 2012, by a five to zero (5 - 0) vote, approving Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Area; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the Resolution No 12, Series 2012 Page 1 of 3 development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Conceptual Commercial Design Review, and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycling Area, with the following conditions: A. The applicant shall work with the Engineering, Building, Parks, and Planning Departments to address the ability to create an accessible sidewalk along this property between Conceptual and Final Design Review. A final solution shall be presented with the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review. B. The Final Commercial Design Application shall address the specific improvements proposed in the Public Amenity spaces located on the site. These will be reviewed and must be approved by the City Parks Department. C. Remove the wall between the recycling bins and alley to ensure adequate access to the bins. D. The Final Commercial Design Application shall address the height of the third story addition, and explore ways to minimize the perception that the third story appears out of proportion with the existing building. Drawings illustrating the Conceptual Commercial Design Review are attached as Exhibit A to the Resolution. Section 2: Engineering The applicant shall address compliance with the City's Urban Runoff Management Plan as part o f the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review. Section 3: Parks There shall be no plantings within the City ROW which are not approved by the City Parks Department and the Engineering Department. Parks is concerned with any improvements to the sidewalk area. The applicant has expressed interested, and is supported by Parks, in saving the larger spruce trees planted within the Hunter Street courtyards. Changes in elevation on Hunter and Hyman will have impacts to the success of these trees. These shall be addressed in the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review The applicant must work closely with the City Forester in order to reduce conflicts between the development of the third floor and the existing trees. Resolution No 12, Series 2012 Page 2 of 3 The Applicant shall include information on the Parks Department requirements related to tree replacement as part of the Final Commercial Design Application. The applicant should also consider lifecycle planning for the large on-site trees. Section 4: General The applicant shall comply with all applicable City of Aspen Codes. Nothing in this conceptual approval negates the Applicant' s requirements to meet other sections and requirements of the Municipal Code. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 6: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereo f. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 19th day of June, 2012. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Deb Quinn, Assistant City Attorney LJ Erspamer, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Resolution No 12, Series 2012 Page 3 of 3 b<hibit (L Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes June 19,2012 Comments 2 Minutes 2 Conflicts of Interest 2 602 E Hyman Ave Conceptual Commercial Design 2 601 E Hyman Ave Conceptual Commercial Design 7 1 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes June 19,2012 LJ Erspamer opened the regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission in Sister Cities Meeting Room at 4:30. Commissioners present were Keith Goode, Bert Myrin, Stan Gibbs, Jim DeFrancia, Ryan Walterscheid and LJ Erspamer. Jasmine Tygre and Cliff Weiss were not in attendance. Staff in attendance were: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney; Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Community Development Director; Jessica Garrow, Sara Nadolny, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. Comments Bert Myrin wanted everything submitted electronically and this past time we just had everything but the application books submitted electronically. Jennifer replied that as soon as we get Council going with a smooth format then the P&Z and other Boards would be able to have a smooth transition. Jennifer said the clerks have hired an outside purveyor. LJ said that he also would follow up. LJ talked about the ARC passes. Jennifer said they were looking into it and need something to available to members so it hasn't been forgotten. Jennifer said that the Hospital wanted to invite Planning & Zoning to a tour of the facility and asked for any interest in that and what scheduling was necessary. Jennifer said it would be a 90 minute walking tour. Bert asked ifthey could join the Council tour. Minutes MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to approve the minutes of June 911 seconded by Keith Goode. All in favor APPROVED. Conflicts of Interest Ryan Walterscheid stated that he was conflicted on 602 East Hyman. LJ Erspamer said that he property managed a unit in the building next door but the city attorney thought it was okay but if the applicant asked him to leave he would leave. Sunny Vann stated that he would like to have him stay. Bert and Stan said they did not walk by the site and Keith, Jim and LJ did walk by for an informal site visit to both properties. 1 Public Hearing: 211' 602 E Hyman Ave Conceptual Commercial Design Ar LJ Erspamer opened the public hearing for 602 East Hyman Avenue. LJ asked for legal notice and Debbie Quinn asked the applicant if the sign was up the entire 2 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes June 19, 2012 St time from the 31 day ofMay 2012 until today, the public hearing. Sunny Vann, the applicant representative, replied that it was. Jessica Garrow said this was a public hearing for the redevelopment and addition at 602 East Hyman sometimes referred to the Ellie Burman Building. The new owner David Hunt received permission from the previous owner Taylor Investments for Conceptual Design Review, Special Review for the trash/utility/recycle area and addition to the building. Sunny Vann is the applicant's representative and Dylan Johns and Jeff from Zone 4 Architecture are present. Staff recommends in favor of the requests with conditions. Jessica utilized power point showing the front page photograph from the memo, as well as the photographs from page 4,5,6 and the applicant attachments A300 to PAS2 included in Exhibit G. Jessica said that the existing building was a 2 story building with a full basement and approximately 20 to 21 feet in height. The current floor area of the building is about 5,100 square feet; there is 4,548 square feet of commercial leasable space (located on the basement Isl and 2nd floors) and a legally established free market residential unit just over 1500 square feet as well as a bandit unit. The bandit unit will at some point in the past years was converted from commercial space to a livable dwelling unit and it will be addressed with Growth Management Review. The parcel has some substantially large trees and the applicant is working with the Park Department to preserve the trees on site. There is a substandard trash area located on the alley currently as well as 6 parking spaces offthe alley. Jessica said currently there is 17% ofthe parcel that qualifies as public amenity space and some existing roof overhangs on the Hunter and Hyman sides; on the Hyman side the roof hangs into the right-of way by about 4 feet and on the Hunter side it over hangs by a few inches. There is a view plane that crosses this property from the Courthouse and it crosses most o f this property with the exception of the northeast corner but it crosses at a height limit that is higher than the building about 45 to 50 feet so it doesn't restrict the property in any way. Jessica said the new total floor area would be 8,818 square feet; 2,409 of that would be net livable space. The required amount of public amenity space is 25% however if it is part of a redevelopment to maintain any deficient as long as you don't have any less than 10% and they currently have 17% on site and they are increasing that to 24%; staff is supportive of this. There is the elimination of some second floor decks. Jessica from power point (page 4 of the memo) said you could see the existing and proposed public amenity. There is a significant grade change 3 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes June 19,2012 on this site where the actual parcel sits and the actual right-of-way. The street is down and stairs are along Hyman and Hunter that lead up into this sidewalk and there are some stairs that go up into the actual parcel from the side walk. Jessica said there were some unique constraints with the large trees that the city and applicant want to preserve on the site and there was not much to do with changing the grade ofthe sidewalk which will come before you at final and subdivision review to figure out how to make ADA accessibility to this site without really impacting the way this building sits. There are significant setbacks shown on page 5 ofthe memo. The existing overhang on Hyman will be removed and replaced with what they are calling "shadowboxes" taking advantage o f the elimination of the vestibule and create an interesting design element and because they are using the existing building they have come up with a creative way of the design of the building and glazing. The 3rd floor is setback approximately 30 feet from the property line. Staff was concerned about the plate height ofthe 3rd floor; it meets all of the design guidelines but there final design guidelines that talk about St rd story and staff has asked maintaining the statue o f the 1 floor as opposed to the 3 the applicant when coming back to final to look at those 3rd floor plate heights. The resolution includes the condition o f the new portion o f the building relate to the redevelopment of the building. The second part of the review is the trash/utility/recycle area. Staff would like to see the small wall at the recycle area removed because it will help ensure proper access to the recycling bins and trash and is incorporated into the resolution. There were a few changes to the resolution to add a date to the 3rd WHEREAS and add the applicant amended the application on June 13, 2012 for the June 19th Planning & Zoning Hearing and on Section 1 on B and D to eliminate The Subdivision and. Bert Myrin said that on page 15 #3 there was mention of elevator shaft in the building. Jessica said it was referencing an internal elevator and there was an elevator that goes out to the alley so folks in that area can access that elevator. Bert talked about the trees dying and being replaced with a parking spaces and how they go about preventing that. Jessica replied at final the resolution could address that with the Parks Department. Stan Gibbs asked if in the big rectangle was the dumpster that gets taken out and loaded into the waste trucks. Stan said that TDRs were 250 square feet. Jessica replied TDRs are different where you land tem; on a single family home it is 250 4 Regular City Pl (11 nine & Zoning Meeting - Minuies June 19,2012 square feet and within one of the commercial zone districts is worth 500 square feet of net livable area; doesn't increase the size of the box but what is in the box. LJ asked about the size of a setback on the roof for a railing. Jessica answered the setback is required to be the same as the height of the fence or railing. Jessica said with this applicant there is a significant setback on the Hyman side but there is potential with the roof but that will come back at final with the plan. LJ asked if the trash met the DRC requirement. Jessica replied that they did. LJ asked if they could be a deck on a shadowbox. Jessica said that this would be reviewed at final. Sunny Vann stated that he represented the applicant and they closed today. Sunny said this project was about half ofthe allowable floor area, wants to maintain the existing building and alley, the commercial spaces will be retained. Sunny said that the trash was the only special review because the code conflicts with the new part of the building that goes to the rear o f the property line and calls for a 20 by 10 trash area but he doesn't understand why they have to apply by the building rules for a new building. Sunny said if you are familiar with parking in the alley it is double loaded and there were 6 spaces and they willlose one for the trash; this building was built in the 1960s and the code requirements have changed since then. There needs to be better pedestrian accesses to the rear of the building as well as the trash/recycle area. Sunny said in the CC or C-1 zone district there is no residential requirement for parking and the parking requirement for commercial uses can be met by the owner's discretion so the 2 spaces are lost and asked i f we need to pay cash-in-lieu for those. Dylan Johns, Zone 4 Architects, said that Jessica did a great job with the presentation and presented a slide show showing the initial ground floor of the site plan and basement, with the exception of mechanical, is net leasable space. Dylan showed the 1St floor net leasable space was held by Chaffin/Light and office space for support. The 2nd floor was the residential space with the entrance on the Hunter side of the building and there were stairs on the north side of the building outside. Dylan said they were planning a fairly straight forward roof with skylights and he showed the elevation of the building. Dylan said that they anticipated that the lower level of the building would be net leasable with the exception of the mechanical portion; they have expanded the mechanical rooms and brought in some circulation along with an elevation for accessibility. Dylan showed the revised 2nd and 3rd level plans but hasn't gotten too far into this; the deck configuration may change a bit. They are going to try and keep as much of the existing structure as possible and they are going to need to add some additional structure and mechanical equipment into the building and anticipate the current 5 Reitular City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minuies June 19,2012 roof needing to get thicker to accommodate the 3rd floor and the majority of that ceiling height is at 10 feet and only at the kitchen and living area has an increase higher, so they were not taking a 12 foot ceiling all they across. Dylan said that they did not want to lose those trees. Dylan said most of the Design Guidelines will recommend changing the cladding for an addition onto an existing building; we thought we would take a wood element. Keith Goode asked if there were any slides without the trees looking at that 3rd story. Dylan showed the Hunter Street elevation and the Hyman elevation. Stan asked the setback from the 2nd to the 3rd floor. Dylan said the biggest restriction is the trees hanging over onto the building and the setback is 5 to 6 feet. Stan asked the reason that wall has to be that deep. Dylan replied that the general parameters with 3rd floors was to set them back and there was the consideration of the tree. LJ asked where the cash-in-lieu parking money goes. Jessica replied that it goes into a parking fund and the number of parking spaces is addressed in subdivision. PUBLIC COMMENTS: 1. Harris Kahn, public, stated that he owned the building behind this one; he said with one small exception he liked what they were doing. Harris had one concern for the patio for the cheese shop and would like to discuss this with Sunny and Dylan. Harris would like the new third floor setback a little more from the alley. 2. Jim Scull, public, stated that he worked for the Taylor family since 1968 until today when the building was sold. Jim spoke about the trees. LJ closed the public portion of the hearing. Sunny said Mr. Kahn's comments would be about talking with staff and whether we can move it forward with building materials and color. Jim DeFrancia said he agreed with Sunny that there was not much that could be done with moving the top floor because it was to address another concern and was in an alley way. Jim said they didn't know what would happen across the alley. Jim said that he didn't have a problem with the project as presented. LJ asked if those were stilts holding up that 3rd floor. Dylan replied yes. Sunny said that those were the things that they talked about with staff but they haven't 6 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes June 19,2012 gotten to that much detail. LJ asked how far was the overhang from the main building. Jessica said the 3rd floor setback was really necessary for Hyman Avenue. Bert said on page 3 the last sentence of the 1St paragraph was excellent. Bert supported staff concerns on A306. Bert wanted to see some kind of plan for the li fecycle o f these trees to be replaced with whatever should be clear. Bert said that he would support the application. Stan Gibbs stated that his biggest concern was the Hunter Street elevation and he doesn't have as much concern about the alley although he understands Harris's concern. Stan wondered if there was more balancing to do in this project and some ofthe amenity space could be changed. Sunny said that was a special courtyard and they have an opportunity to enhance it; the building was built in the 1960s so they will take a look at what they have once they start opening up the building. Jim wanted to move this forward and it does comply with all of the dimensional requirements and some of the things that are in the conceptual stage. MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved toapprove Resolution #12, series 2012 as amended approving Conceptual Commercial Design Review for the project located at 602 East Hyman Avenue; seconded by Bert Myrin. Roll call vote: Stan Gibbs, yes; Keith Goode, yes; Jim DeFrancia, yes; Bert Myrin, yes; U Erspamer, yes. APPROVED 5-0. Discussion prior to the vote: Bert proposed on page 10 Dto add minimize the perception that the 3rd story appears out of proportion with the existing building. Bert wanted to add an "E" request the lifecycle of the trees and restrict the tree space not to parking. Bert would like to have a plan to replace the trees. Jennifer said that at final the applicant will come back with the Parks Department requirement on tree replacement. Jessica said it was in Section 3. LJ asked to remove wall by the trash, access sidewalk plan and minimize the floor height. Sunny said the sidewalk was covered in A and the removal of the wall was in C. Public Hearing: 601 E Hyman ~*e Conceptual Commetcial Design \~ . LJ Erspagler opened the hearing for 601 East Hyman. Debbie Quinn asked the applicant concerning the Resting of notice was fur 15 days prior to the public / hearing and it was signed on the.27th day of May An4 has it been poited as noted in the notice. Stan C}auson stated yesit~las been. <,->ti i / 7 Exhibit D: 26.412.040.B. Appeals, Notice to City Council, and Call-Up. 1. Appeals. An applicant aggrieved by a determination made by the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, pursuant to this Chapter, may appeal the decision to the City Council, pursuant to the procedures and standards of Chapter 26.316, Appeals. 2. Notice to City Council. Following the adoption of a resolution approving or approving with conditions a development application for Conceptual Design, the City Council shall be promptly notified of the action to allow the City Council an opportunity to avail itself of the call-up procedure set forth below. Notification shall consist of a description in written and graphic form of the project with a copy of the approving document. The notification shall be placed on the agenda of a regular City Council meeting within 30 days of the approval, or as soon thereafter as is practical under the circumstances. 3. Call-up. Following the adoption of a resolution approving or approving with conditions a development application for Commercial Design Review, the City Council may order call-up of the action within fifteen (15) days of notification, as outlined in 26.412.040(B)(2). Consequently, applications for Final Design shall not be accepted by the City and no associated permits shall be issued during the notice and call-up period. If City Council exercises this call-up provision, no applications for Final Design shall be accepted by the City and no associated permits shall be issued until the City Council takes action as described in subsection 26.412.040.B.4. If the City Council does not call up the action within the call-up period, the resolution shall be the final decision on the matter. 4. City Council action on call-up. The City Council shall, at a public meeting, consider the application de novo. The City Council may, at its discretion. consider evidence included in the record established by the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning and Zoning Commission, as applicable, or supplement the record with additional evidence or testimony as necessary. The City Council shall conduct its review of the application under the same criteria applicable to the reviewing body. The City Council's action shall be limited to: a. Accepting the decision. b. Remanding the application to the applicable Commission with direction from City Council for rehearing and reconsideration. (Ord. No. 13,2007, Â§1) c. Continuing the meeting to request additional evidence, analysis, or testimony as necessary to conclude the call up review. 5. Additional Actions. The rehearing and reconsideration of the application by the applicable Commission shall be duly noticed pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E Public Notice and shall be limited to the topics listed in the direction from Council. The decision made by the applicable Commission is final and concludes the call up review. Substantive changes, as defined in Section 26.412.080 Amendment of Commercial Design Review Approval, made to the application during the call up review and outside the topics listed in the remand from Council shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 26.412.080 and may require a new call up notice to City Council. The call up review shall be limited only to the changes approved in the Amendment application. IX b MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner /7 ~ , Â· Â£ 'l A Uvn RE: Notice of P&Z approval of Conceptual Commercial Design: 602 E Hyman Ave, P&Z Resolution #12, Series of 2012 MEETING DATE: July 23, 2012 UPDATE: th This memo responds to questions raised during the July 9 Council meeting. The free-market residential unit is being developed at the maximum size. No commercial space is being converted to residential space and no additional space is expected to be converted in the future unless zoning regulations become more flexible. Regarding the existing trees, the plans maintain the existing structure and add a third floor. This is highly preferable given the proximity and size of these trees. The applicant has engaged a professional arborist to monitor the health of the trees and to work with Parks and Engineering Departments on final landscape and sidewalk plans for the final review. Finally, it does appear that the P&Z did discuss the massing of the proposal shown on the "view towards northeast" rendering. This massing was preferred over other iterations that had a greater presence along Hyman Avenue. BACKGROUND: (UNCHANGED FROM JULY 9TH MEMO) On June 19, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) approved Conceptual Commercial Design Review for a project at 602 E Hyman Ave. Conceptual Commercial Design Review addresses the mass, scale and placement of a proposed building, and provides the applicant with direction for moving forward with their proposal. The applicant is proposing to remodel the existing two-story building and add a third floor that is set back from the street. The project meets all underlying dimensional requirements. The project increases public amenity space from 17% of the site to 24% of the site. It re-uses the existing building, and is proposed to be 35 feet in height, which is lower than the 36 - 40 foot height allowed under the code in effect at the time of initial application. The building is proposed to be a mix of Commercial. Affordable Housing and Free-Market Residential space. Planning staff recommended in favor of the design review, and the P&Z approved the design by a vote of 5:0. A copy of the P&Z Resolution and Minutes are attached as Exhibits B and C, respectively. A copy of the approved massing is attached as Exhibit A. PROCEDURE: This call up procedure is new and was part of the AACP Gap Code Amendments approved on February 27, 2012. This is not a public hearing and no staff or applicant presentation will be made at the July 9th Council meeting. If you have any questions about the project, please contact the staff planner, Jessica Garrow. Pursuant to Section 26.412.040(B), notification of all Conceptual Commercial Design Approvals must be placed on City Council's agenda within 30 days. City Council has ,ption of exercising the Call Up p ions outlined in Section 26.412.040(B) within 15 days of notification on the regular agenda. For this application, City Council may vote to Call Up the project at their July 9,2012 or July 23, 2012 meetings. If City Council decides to exercise the Call Up provision, it will be placed on the August 13, 2012 City Council regular agenda for discussion. If City Council does not exercise the Call Up provision, the P&Z Resolution shall stand, and the applicant will move forward through the land use review process. This application will be subject to future Subdivision, Growth Management, and Final Commercial Design Reviews. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Approved Plans Exhibit B: P&Z Resolution 12, Series 2012 Exhibit C: P&Z draft minutes ZONE PE ARCHITECTS UC. P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81 8 12 WWW . ZONÂ£4ARCHITECTS . COM --#.7 14 ./i/*ht " ry , _ r' rÂ·EYMV -% ..Mm'.1--,il..-* ~ L.1-1 - WI-- ---7-- 3 I-----~ ----Al/'/5/1 4-Tipm-h'"Br - 9- 21"Milizzj//0/4/Il/*/111*/9.........Bill....eir.9 -- ---- C c Ir e i ~~j~~la AWrib 61~ 1-6.1 01\ HYMAN AVENUE (SOUTH) ELEVATION .. . 1 71 n .6 r ,- Il 06.13.lon AMENDED APP. E - HUNTER STREET (WEST) ELEVATION 81 ~8 g' 11 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN I. 01 MAY, 2012 Â»-1 T. ELEVATION STREETSCAPE ~z =SM 3E A307 03!,1531 UlÂ®11111Â¥ 01]13111 1119Itldo) 9Illonl]NI ti]IDI, ON,3$3, 13Illo m Oll, ~Ollt,11 jl~Â¥I NOÂ»WO] m NI,13, â„¢Ii ]TI &1)11]Il],Â¥ 4 M Â·]TI illilll[),f ) illoZ 10 Nol~lilld Â»311[,Am lolld ]Ill JIIOIUIM 0]WO] lo 03$Il ]1 Alll Noll,Illoilll illu 30 llÂ¥d oIl 111 U]31Ill]W , 1?4 :11116=%6 6 7%6 r";6962;'6~ NVWAH 15VB Z09 00Â¥"010) '13diV '3nN3AV NVWAH 15,3 IM NOUÂ¥mOHIAÂ¥ 1111111/A ,01,4 ZONE PC ARCHITECTS UC. P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81012 ... .ZONEAARCHITECTS. COM - 92 24 â‚¬r. '.1 f 4 , L.L.1 t. fr. 0 l 4 - *. I 4 ' 1.r 0= 9 - .$--14. -?.. r ..1Â£t.,- - VIEW TOWARDS NORHTWEST PRIMARY MATERIALS Ol Oil].20,2 AMENDED APP. -- Â©a METAL PANEL PAINTED CEMENTITIOUS PAINTED WOOD ..... = CONCRETE COMPOSITE WOOD SIDING [0NCEPTUAL DESIGN I. BLOCK Ol MAY, 20ll D-1 11 PERSPECTIVE NOTEÂ· STREETS[APE THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE .1 # USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. A308 1 MM U}0111 m '0131 310 111911W0) 911I0nI)Ill tiNDI,1 0~391 â„¢10 â„¢ OIlÂ¥ MUUÂ¥0 #Arl NOIIWO] m Ill,131 Tmli ~]Tl tj]~11ID,V , DIOZ ll Illit,IM , NIOZ 90 N0IS911,3, N]LUVA IOI,d Slll ltIOIUI/A 03ldo) ,0 03$11 31 mi NOUÂ¥11,01111 $Illl 30 1,Â¥d OIl ']TI il)]1111]n , 31101 10 11,1,0,4 3111 g 11311(1]00 gill No ilir,110] 11,11*Il IEM$30 ON, NOLimOINI M -]TI 11)11Ill],I , 1N0Z iliz W 00Â¥1010) 'NldfY '3nN3AÂ¥ NÂ¥11111 liÂ¥3 [09 1SV3 Z09 NOUmOIUM Illill,Al Ell, 1*0111IAt HOUnll,)111 M DWAM ]Â§341 1 539)Â¥Il] All, mi ]Illl Al~ 1Â¥ Mlill(}di], NO IN,1 loN $ ZONE PC ARCHITECTS LLC. P.O. BOX 2/08 ASPEN CO lilli WWW . ZONIMARCHITECTS. COM . 34 -Â·fl I *1Â· 1 - U l' L.1-1 I D ' .#14 - 6 , H I b. I. .6 4 G 3 ..4 0 ' . . 1 ~ Â· - -- Â·, 60,4,11 . 7 6.Â·/ - VIEW TOWARDS NORTHEAST PRIMARY MATERIALS E Z: 5*5}33, a " 06.:320:2 AMENDEDAPP ~ 5% 0 . 7 - 5- g, - 1% 11~4-0 - METAL PANEL PAINTED CEMENTITIOUS PAINTED WOOD Mi 22 CONCRETE COMPOSITE WOOD SIDING -: /1 BLOCK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN li ./ 0 I MAY, 20 I 2 5% hITI NOTE. PERSPECTIVE THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. STREETSCAPE 5-# A309 m NVWAH 1SV3 Z09 00"1010) 'N31Â§Â¥ '3[N3AV 1Â¥WAH 15Â¥3 [09 01,1 337 WN â„¢ 01113Ili 1119ItUO] DI,lonÂ·I]Ill 3Ulel, omnn ,3,UO 1~ ONÂ¥ limit[,11 MIn ND]Illo} TI NT,li TIVII; -m U]lmfâ€¢ ) ]I,02 ']71 UD 'M , 101 10 10Mlf,3, Illiti,IA 10,1, 3,Il lAO,Ul# 03,10) 90 03%9 31 ill,I HoliVIVoll glu 10 1~Â¥d ~~~U ~~*~1~311~2~iM2~~11IHIV I Hol ZONE PC ARCHITECTS LLC. P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81/12 WWW . ZON.4ARCH.ECTS COM 44 - 1 1 '.4./thÂ»'% - -11.-4 ., TER 1 ...tOi. ' %3*4 1 4 . *Ga>%2029Â®73&42 'a -1 <:-tat~< Â«Â»ew/Fer.~324.49 -2%* t..fl-N,-33.3k. 2 4...922- 1-44'. - - 2394:.-* W-tj. L ~ -i?~92-2 ... . 54&.6 ' - - ~V~~-1 4.~~ I . .6 0..2/,3 S., â‚¬ 921 - I. rk 71 0 .-- r - t 9.4 4,Â«Â£*M-~- ' . j 1 -1% -//6://-/ E- 6 , 1, - VIEW TOWARDS SOUTHEAST PRIMARY MATERIALS po~ B 01 06.13.2012 AMENDED APP. 2~ . "5 gi E - -p *bp E E B/ *ber METAL PANEL PAINTED CEMENTITIOUS PAINTED WOOD CONCRETE COMPOSITE WOOD SIDING - BLOCK (0NCEPTUAL DESIGN h. Ol MAY, 20ll NOTE: PERSPECTIVE THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. STREETSCAPE -" ~ A310 Il 1300W3~I NVWAH lSÂ¥ 3 I09 001Â¥11010) '1115Â¥ 'inll]AÂ¥ 1Â¥WAH 15Â¥31 I09 03Amll illm M +01]Ull,1 1ll9IW0) 9Â»IOnT)NI 11jelll OMIAn willo m Oll, AolntÂ¥11 AVI NOWNO] â„¢ Ill,111 â„¢Ili ]TI $11311101Â¥ , illoi Â·)11 illwH]llf , M 10 Il[}mlil,3, NU,UNM 10Ild ]Ill mOHLIM Oll,0) 10 03;Il 3, AVII NOUMOINI illtl JO~N~ Ill# MP,96"r 2'u'~ M~Imi~:Am E \11 b j + 8 RESOLUTION N0.12, (SERIES OF 2012) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL REVIEW FOR THE TRASH / UTILITY / RECYCLE AREA, FOR A REMODEL AND ADDITION CONSISTING OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL SPACE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 602 E HYMAN AVE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS K & L, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-12-003 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Daniel L Hunt, represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC requesting of the Planning and Zoning Commission approval of Conceptual Commercial Design Review, and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Area, to remodel the existing building and add third floor addition for a project that will include a mix of commercial space, affordable housing, and free-market residential; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended the Applicant amend the proposal to better comply with the Commercial Design Standards and the Special Review Standards for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Area; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant amended the application on June 13, 2012 for the June 19,2012 Planning and Zoning hearing, which staff recommended in favor of; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 19, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 12, Series of 2012, by a five to zero (5 - 0) vote, approving Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Area; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the Resolution No 12, Series 2012 Page 1 of 3 development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Conceptual Commercial Design Review, and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycling Area, with the following conditions: A. The applicant shall work with the Engineering, Building, Parks, and Planning Departments to address the ability to create an accessible sidewalk along this property between Conceptual and Final Design Review. A final solution shall be presented with the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review. B. The Final Commercial Design Application shall address the specific improvements proposed in the Public Amenity spaces located on the site. These will be reviewed and must be approved by the City Parks Department. C. Remove the wall between the recycling bins and alley to ensure adequate access to the bins. D. The Final Commercial Design Application shall address the height of the third story addition, and explore ways to minimize the perception that the third story appears out of proportion with the existing building. Drawings illustrating the Conceptual Commercial Design Review are attached as Exhibit A to the Resolution. Section 2: Engineering The applicant shall address compliance with the City's Urban Runoff Management Plan as part of the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review. Section 3: Parks There shall be no plantings within the City ROW which are not approved by the City Parks Department and the Engineering Department. Parks is concerned with any improvements to the sidewalk area. The applicant has expressed interested, and is supported by Parks, in saving the larger spruee trees planted within the Hunter Street courtyards. Changes in elevation on Hunter and Hyman will have impacts to the success of these trees. These shall be addressed in the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review The applicant must work closely with the City Forester in order to reduce conflicts between the development of the third floor and the existing trees. Resolution No 12, Series 2012 Page 2 0 f 3 The Applicant shall include information on the Parks Department requirements related to tree replacement as part of the Final Commercial Design Application. The applicant should also consider lifecycle planning for the large on-site trees. Section 4: General The applicant shall comply with all applicable City of Aspen Codes. Nothing in this conceptual approval negates the Applicant' s requirements to meet other sections and requirements of the Municipal Code. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 6: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereo f. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 19th day of June, 2012. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Deb Quinn, Assistant City Attorney LJ Erspamer, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Resolution No 12, Series 2012 Page 3 of 3 79. h i lot-f (L Regular City Pia ng & Zoning Meeting - Minu June 19,2012 Comments 2 Minutes 2 Conflicts of Interest 2 602 E Hvman Ave Conceptual Commercial Design 2 601 E Hyman Ave Conceptual Commercial Design 7 1 Regular City Pig ing & Zoning Meeting - Minu June 19, 2012 LJ Erspamer opened the regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission in Sister Cities Meeting Room at 4:30. Commissioners present were Keith Goode, Bert Myrin, Stan Gibbs, Jim DeFrancia, Ryan Walterscheid and LJ Erspamer. Jasmine Tygre and Cliff Weiss were not in attendance. Staff in attendance were: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney; Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Community Development Director; Jessica Garrow, Sara Nadolny, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. Comments Bert Myrin wanted everything submitted electronically and this past time we just had everything but the application books submitted electronically. Jennifer replied that as soon as we get Council going with a smooth format then the P&Z and other Boards would be able to have a smooth transition. Jennifer said the clerks have hired an outside purveyor. LJ said that he also would follow up. LJ talked about the ARC passes. Jennifer said they were looking into it and need something to available to members so it hasn't been forgotten. Jenni fur said that the Hospital wanted to invite Planning & Zoning to a tour of the facility and asked for any interest in that and what scheduling was necessary. Jennifer said it would be a 90 minute walking tour. Bert asked if they could join the Council tour. Minutes MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to approve the minutes of June 5th seconded by Keith Goode. All in favor APPROVED. Conflicts of Interest Ryan Walterscheid stated that he was conflicted on 602 East Hyman. LJ Erspamer said that he property managed a unit in the building next door but the city attorney thought it was okay but if the applicant asked him to leave he would leave. Sunny Vann stated that he would like to have him stay. Bert and Stan said they did not walk by the site and Keith, Jim and LJ did walk by for an informal site visit to both properties. < Public Hearing: + 602 E Hvman Ave Conceptual Commercial Design /4 LJ Erspamer opened the public hearing for 602 East Hyman Avenue. LJ asked for legal notice and Debbie Quinn asked the applicant if the sign was up the entire 2 Regular City Ph ing & Zoning Meeting - Minu June 19, 2012 time from the 31St day of May 2012 until today, the public hearing. Sunny Vann, the applicant representative, replied that it was. Jessica Garrow said this was a public hearing for the redevelopment and addition at 602 East Hyman sometimes referred to the Ellie Burman Building. The new owner David Hunt received permission from the previous owner Taylor Investments for Conceptual Design Review, Special Review for the trash/utility/recycle area and addition to the building. Sunny Vann is the applicant's representative and Dylan Johns and Jeff from Zone 4 Architecture are present. Staff recommends in favor of the requests with conditions. Jessica utilized power point showing the front page photograph from the memo, as well as the photographs from page 4,5,6 and the applicant attachments A300 to PAS2 included in Exhibit G. Jessica said that the existing building was a 2 story building with a full basement and approximately 20 to 21 feet in height. The current floor area of the building is about 5,100 square feet; there is 4,548 square feet o f commercial leasable space (located on the basement lst and 2nd floors) and a legally established free market residential unit just over 1500 square feet as well as a bandit unit. The bandit unit will at some point in the past years was converted from commercial space to a livable dwelling unit and it will be addressed with Growth Management Review. The parcel has some substantially large trees and the applicant is working with the Park Department to preserve the trees on site. There is a substandard trash area located on the alley currently as well as 6 parking spaces off the alley. Jessica said currently there is 17% ofthe parcel that qualifies as public amenity space and some existing roof overhangs on the Hunter and Hyman sides; on the Hyman side the roof hangs into the right-of way by about 4 feet and on the Hunter side it over hangs by a few inches. There is a view plane that crosses this property from the Courthouse and it crosses most of this property with the exception of the northeast corner but it crosses at a height limit that is higher than the building about 45 to 50 feet so it doesn't restrict the property in any way. Jessica said the new total floor area would be 8,818 square feet; 2,409 of that would be net livable space. The required amount of public amenity space is 25Â°/0 however if it is part of a redevelopment to maintain any deficient as long as you don't have any less than 10% and they currently have 17% on site and they are increasing that to 24%; staff is supportive of this. There is the elimination of some second floor decks. Jessica from power point (page 4 of the memo) said you could see the existing and proposed public amenity. There is a significant grade change 3 Regular City Pli ing & Zoning Meeting - Minu June 19, 2012 on this site where the actual parcel sits and the actual right-of-way. The street is down and stairs are along Hyman and Hunter that lead up into this sidewalk and there are some stairs that go up into the actual parcel from the side walk. Jessica said there were some unique constraints with the large trees that the city and applicant want to preserve on the site and there was not much to do with changing the grade of the sidewalk which will come before you at final and subdivision review to figure out how to make ADA accessibility to this site without really impacting the way this building sits. There are significant setbacks shown on page 5 of the memo. The existing overhang on Hyman will be removed and replaced with what they are calling "shadowboxes" taking advantage of the elimination of the vestibule and create an interesting design element and because they are using the existing building they have come up with a creative way of the design of the building and glazing. The 3rd floor is setback approximately 30 feet from the property line. Staff was concerned about the plate height of the 3~d floor; it meets all of the design guidelines but there final design guidelines that talk about maintaining the statue ofthe 1St floor as opposed to the 3rd story and staff has asked the applicant when coming back to final to look at those 3~d floor plate heights. The resolution includes the condition of the new portion of the building relate to the redevelopment of the building. The second part of the review is the trash/utility/recycle area. Staff would like to see the small wall at the recycle area removed because it will help ensure proper access to the recycling bins and trash and is incorporated into the resolution. There were a few changes to the resolution to add a date to the 3rd WHEREAS and add the applicant amended the application on June 13, 2012 for the June 19th Planning & Zoning Hearing and on Section 1 on B and D to eliminate The Subdivision and. Bert Myrin said that on page 15 #3 there was mention of elevator shaft in the building. Jessica said it was referencing an internal elevator and there was an elevator that goes out to the alley so folks in that area can access that elevator. Bert talked about the trees dying and being replaced with a parking spaces and how they go about preventing that. Jessica replied at final the resolution could address that with the Parks Department. Stan Gibbs asked if in the big rectangle was the dumpster that gets taken out and loaded into the waste trucks. Stan said that TDRs were 250 square feet. Jessica replied TDRs are different where you land tem; on a single family home it is 250 4 Regular City Pla 'ng & Zoning Meeting - Minu June 19,2012 square feet and within one of the commercial zone districts is worth 500 square feet of net livable area; doesn't increase the size of the box but what is in the box. LJ asked about the size of a setback on the roof for a railing. Jessica answered the setback is required to be the same as the height of the fence or railing. Jessica said with this applicant there is a significant setback on the Hyman side but there is potential with the roof but that will come back at final with the plan. LJ asked if the trash met the DRC requirement. Jessica replied that they did. LJ asked if they could be a deck on a shadowbox. Jessica said that this would be reviewed at final. Sunny Vann stated that he represented the applicant and they closed today. Sunny said this project was about half ofthe allowable floor area, wants to maintain the existing building and alley, the commercial spaces will be retained. Sunny said that the trash was the only special review because the code conflicts with the new part of the building that goes to the rear of the property line and calls for a 20 by 10 trash area but he doesn't understand why they have to apply by the building rules for a new building. Sunny said if you are familiar with parking in the alley it is double loaded and there were 6 spaces and they willlose one for the trash; this building was built in the 1960s and the code requirements have changed since then. There needs to be better pedestrian accesses to the rear ofthe building as well as the trash/recycle area. Sunny said in the CC or C-1 zone district there is no residential requirement for parking and the parking requirement for commercial uses can be met by the owner's discretion so the 2 spaces are lost and asked if we need to pay cash-in-lieu for those. Dylan Johns, Zone 4 Architects, said that Jessica did a great job with the presentation and presented a slide show showing the initial ground floor of the site plan and basement, with the exception of mechanical, is net leasable space. Dylan showed the 1St floor net leasable space was held by Chaffin/Light and office space for support. The 2nd floor was the residential space with the entrance on the Hunter side of the building and there were stairs on the north side of the building outside. Dylan said they were planning a fairly straight forward roof with skylights and he showed the elevation of the building. Dylan said that they anticipated that the lower level of the building would be net leasable with the exception of the mechanical portion; they have expanded the mechanical rooms and brought in some circulation along with an elevation for accessibility. Dylan showed the revised 2nd and 3rd level plans but hasn't gotten too far into this; the deck configuration may change a bit. They are going to try and keep as much of the existing structure as possible and they are going to need to add some additional structure and mechanical equipment into the building and anticipate the current 5 Regular City Pla ng & Zoning Meeting - Minu June 19, 2012 roof needing to get thicker to accommodate the 3rd floor and the majority of that ceiling height is at 10 feet and only at the kitchen and living area has an increase higher, so they were not taking a 12 foot ceiling all they across. Dylan said that they did not want to lose those trees. Dylan said most of the Design Guidelines will recommend changing the cladding for an addition onto an existing building; we thought we would take a wood element. Keith Goode asked if there were any slides without the trees looking at that 3~d story. Dylan showed the Hunter Street elevation and the Hyman elevation. Stan asked the setback from the 2nd to the 3rd floor. Dylan said the biggest restriction is the trees hanging over onto the building and the setback is 5 to 6 feet. Stan asked the reason that wall has to be that deep. Dylan replied that the general parameters with 3rd floors was to set them back and there was the consideration of the tree. LJ asked where the cash-in-lieu parking money goes. Jessica replied that it goes into a parking fund and the number of parking spaces is addressed in subdivision. PUBLIC COMMENTS: 1. Harris Kahn, public, stated that he owned the building behind this one; he said with one small exception he liked what they were doing. Harris had one concern for the patio for the cheese shop and would like to discuss this with Sunny and Dylan. Harris would like the new third floor setback a little more from the alley. 2. Jim Scull, public, stated that he worked for the Taylor family since 1968 until today when the building was sold. Jim spoke about the trees. LJ closed the public portion of the hearing. Sunny said Mr. Kahn' s comments would be about talking with staff and whether we can move it forward with building materials and color. Jim DeFrancia said he agreed with Sunny that there was not much that could be done with moving the top floor because it was to address another concern and was in an alley way. Jim said they didn't know what would happen across the alley. Jim said that he didn't have a problem with the project as presented. LJ asked if those were stilts holding up that 3rd floor. Dylan replied yes. Sunny said that those were the things that they talked about with staff but they haven't 6 Regular City Pli ing & Zoning Meeting - Minu June 19, 2012 gotten to that much detail. LJ asked how far was the overhang from the main building. Jessica said the 3rd floor setback was really necessary for Hyman Avenue. Bert said on page 3 the last sentence of the 1St paragraph was excellent. Bert supported staff concerns on A306. Bert wanted to see some kind of plan for the lifecycle of these trees to be replaced with whatever should be clear. Bert said that he would support the application. Stan Gibbs stated that his biggest concern was the Hunter Street elevation and he doesn't have as much concern about the alley although he understands Harris' s concern. Stan wondered if there was more balancing to do in this project and some of the amenity space could be changed. Sunny said that was a special courtyard and they have an opportunity to enhance it; the building was built in the 1960s so they will take a look at what they have once they start opening up the building. Jim wanted to move this forward and it does comply with all of the dimensional requirements and some of the things that are in the conceptual stage. MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved to approve Resolution #12, series 2012 as amended approving Conceptual Commercial Design Review for the project located at 602 East Hyman Avenue; seconded by Bert Myrin. Roll call vote: Stan Gibbs, yes; Keith Goode, yes; Jim DeFrancia, yes; Bert Myrin, yes; U Erspamer, yes. APPROVED 5-0. Discussion prior to the vote: Bert proposed on page 10 Dto add minimize the perception that the 3rd story appears out of proportion with the existing building. Bert wanted to add an "E" request the lifecycle of the trees and restrict the tree space not to parking. Bert would like to have a plan to replace the trees. Jennifer said that at final the applicant will come back with the Parks Department requirement on tree replacement. Jessica said it was in Section 3. LJ asked to remove wall by the trash, access sidewalk plan and minimize the floor height. Sunny said the sidewalk was covered in A and the removal of the wall was in C. Public Hearing:, -, 601 E Hyman X*efonceptual Commercial DesiEn . . LJ Erstjairer opened the hearing for 601 East Hyman. Debbie Quinn asked the applicant donceming the Astigg of notice was Â®r 15 days prior tolhe public /--hearing and it was signed on tkiel?th day of May &714~has it been poste~ as noted in the notice. Stan Â¢}auson stated yeb~as been. 7 - Exhibit D: 26.412.040.B. Appeals, Notice to City Council, and Call-Up. 1. Appeals. An applicant aggrieved by a determination made by the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, pursuant to this Chapter, may appeal the decision to the City Council, pursuant to the procedures and standards of Chapter 26.316, Appeals. 2. Notice to City Council. Following the adoption of a resolution approving or approving with conditions a development application for Conceptual Design, the City Council shall be promptly notified of the action to allow the City Council an opportunity to avail itself of the call-up procedure set forth below. Notification shall consist of a description in written and graphic form of the project with a copy of the approving document. The notification shall be placed on the agenda of a regular City Council meeting within 30 days of the approval, or as soon thereafter as is practical under the circumstances. 3. Call-up. Following the adoption of a resolution approving or approving with conditions a development application for Commercial Design Review, the City Council may order call-up of the action within fifteen (15) davs of notification, as outlined in 26.412.040(B)(2). Consequently, applications for Final Design shall not be accepted by the City and no associated permits shall be issued during the notice and call-up period. If City Council exercises this call-up provision, no applications for Final Design shall be accepted by the City and no associated permits shall be issued until the City Council takes action as described in subsection 26.412.040.B.4. If the City Council does not call up the action within the call-up period, the resolution shall be the final decision on the matter. 4. City Council action on call-up. The City Council shall, at a public meeting, consider the application de novo, The City Council may, at its discretion, consider evidence included in the record established by the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning and Zoning Commission, as applicable, or supplement the record with additional evidence or testimony as necessary. The City Council shall conduct its review of the application under the same criteria applicable to the reviewing body. The City Council's action shall be limited to: a. Accepting the decision. b. Remanding the application to the applicable Commission with direction from City Council for rehearing and reconsideration. (Ord. No. 13, 2007, Â§1) e. Continuing the meeting to request additional evidence, analysis, or testimony as necessary to conclude the call up review. 5. Additional Actions. The rehearing and reconsideration of the application by the applicable Commission shall be duly noticed pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E Public Notice and shall be limited to the topics listed in the direction from Council. The decision made by the applicable Commission is final and concludes the call up review. Substantive changes, as defined in Section 26.412.080 Amendment of Commercial Design Review Approval, made to the application during the call up review and outside the topics listed in the remand from Council shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 26.412.080 and may require a new call up notice to City Council. The call up review shall be limited only to the changes approved in the Amendment application. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council 11(a_ FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner ~Â¥1~ RE: Notice of P&Z approval of Conceptual Commercial Design: 602 E Hyman Ave, P&Z Resolution #12, Series of 2012 MEETING DATE: July 9, 2012 BACKGROUND: On June 19, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) approved Conceptual Commercial Design Review for a project at 602 E Hyman Ave. Conceptual Commercial Design Review addresses the mass, scale and placement of a proposed building, and provides the applicant with direction for moving forward with their proposal. The applicant is proposing to remodel the existing two-story building and add a third floor that is set back from the street. The project meets all underlying dimensional requirements. The project increases public amenity space from 17% of the site to 24% of the site. It re-uses the existing building, and is proposed to be 35 feet in height, which is lower than the 36 - 40 foot height allowed under the code in effect at the time of initial application. The building is proposed to be a mix of Commercial, Affordable Housing and Free-Market Residential space. Planning staff recommended in favor of the design review, and the P&Z approved the design by a vote of 5:0. A copy of the P&Z Resolution and Minutes are attached as Exhibits B and C, respectively. A copy of the approved massing is attached as Exhibit A. PROCEDURE: This call up procedure is new and was part of the AACP Gap Code Amendments approved on February 27, 2012. This is not a public hearing and no staff or applicant presentation will be made at the July 9th Council meeting. If you have any questions about the project, please contact the staff planner, Jessica Garrow. Pursuant to Section 26.412.040(B), notification of all Conceptual Commercial Design Approvals must be placed on City Council's agenda within 30 days. City Council has the option of exercising the Call Up provisions outlined in Section 26.412.040(B) within 15 days of notification on the regular agenda. For this application, City Council may vote to Call Up the project at their July 9,2012 or July 23. 2012 meetings. If City Council decides to exercise the Call Up provision, it will be placed on the August 13, 2012 City Council regular agenda for discussion. If City Council does not exercise the Call Up provision, the P&Z Resolution shall stand, and the applicant will move forward through the land use review process. This application will be subject to future Subdivision, Growth Management, and Final Commercial Design Reviews. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Approved Plans Exhibit B: P&Z Resolution 12, Series 2012 Exhibit C: P&Z draft minutes Exhibit D: Land Use Code Section 26.412.040(B) ZONE ~0-191\Ul, , ARCHITECTS LLC. P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81612 WVYW . ZONE'ARCHITECTS . COM - I f i.... . \-la/'-lil. 7/ ,!* Milf .,=36 0* 4 - ~1- 191 : 11 - -i : - -I.-I - â‚¬p HYMAN AVENUE (SOUTH) ELEVATION rN -- -e-:-A.=;P..t.ps!3â€¢Ii:551././...f/Â£ 6 1.,191"File&....Ii.' pftli-m~14O2, 1 4259.- U.4--,-,*-=-â€ž&,&1&,mâ€žm*. -6.96. 37=.-11--~ 0,â€žr.-71- L,-a'.1~. .-.---1 F-[i.. I 1 , f 1 9444 -944+Rhk41+1 - *-rif:--71,16"-rJIMp=ft, 7~ 'IEINXE# ziÂ·'~uÂ·' 'r --*-AN-46 -32-- - - - ,â„¢ . 01 06.13.20ll AMENDED APP. 02 HUNTER STREET (WEST) ELEVATION 1=9*: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN I. 01 MAY, 2012 D,â„¢M: k ELEVATION STREETSCAPE Sheet # a= A307 H 1300W3H NVWAH lSV 3 0071010) 'N345Â¥ '3nNIAV NVIAH 15Â¥3 Z09 0]A,]9, &1115!W TIY '01nlmt ll,DI~WO] DNIOnl)111 'UHDIx 0]A~lny ~11110 3 011Â¥ 1~0m!Â¥jS MVI NOWNO] TIÂ¥ IllÂ¥13!I TIVIIE 'Yrt U]~1!IDÂ¥, # 11101 3Tt Â§1]11Ill]Yll , NIO! JO lIOI~Ill,~d N]llIVA ~0!~d ~Ilt lnOHtljA 0]WO) ~0 03!n 32 1Â¥W N0I1Â¥11Â¥0]111 ill11 ~0 ~1~ ON Â·)T! ill]1~1~~110~ m 1.1Â¥~~~Ni~t! ~3;~~~~ ~H 01 0 "1Â¥01811, N]Ll A 19081]AA WU AllÂ¥ 1Â¥ mlil,Odili ,0 318 G Slill 1,~ 0311Â¤~1Nlf'7'FÂ° ONÂ¥ NoltÂ¥Il~011113Hl ']TI W 1 M It Hm TW Â·01],1 3111 11!91,Ado] 9 N10 nl]111 91191~ 01Aw]33,1 331llo T V 011, 1101myl$ Mn NOW W 0) Tly NiÂ¥1 nl TI,Hi Â·]T :Dil] 10,Y 4 31101 DTI ti]Ell],Â¥ , 3,JO! 30 NOTAIWild N3LltVM lolld ]Ill MOHWA OlldO) 70 0331I 30 1Â¥W NDI!Â¥1~0JN! imt 10 1,Â¥d ON 111 illnllmY , ]NOI 10 LillidON, 31lt 51 1,131111)00 Silll No 03NIÂ¥1110) iN31}1[ 119~30 011, NOMVI,INNI 11!1 Â·]T, 1!lo!11]Ily , DIOZ ZIO[ W Â·MOU,molliftÂ¥ Nill[VA 10[lid 701UIA S NOUÂ¥]IN] 18 40 59 NIMY,0 3 9,1 01 ;391~1'll] Ally Vo~ 31,It Ally lÂ¥ 1181Â§108 1 1 WO ]19 Yll loN 9 11]]1Ill]XY , 31102 w~Z $33 00 O(Inlolo] 'N3diV '3RN]AY NVIAH 15Â¥3 I09 9-16 11-9 x00 ...-- 1300W3H NVWAH 1SVB Z09 . f Flim--g 1-."' 0..' L . ' 1.111 4 , /4 * 6 50132 #4 . ' I , 1 ...4 I. 4. 14 * . 1 tliaa fiaÂ·. - t..145, *4 .1 -ti~ 1Â·! ift:.::ta ~ i 'll MIL ...3 1 r = I'/ , ~ - Fi,Â·' J.,m 1 ji'I . ; 2,1,t , '' ~I~, 1 Â·ti ...321 144'1 14, .-.. A.74/.- : ur., Â· Â·AA*.it-/ : D I. ..... :i : , 4,'. ' 'I 'I'/ ' I 'l ' . Et~ . p'5 9 t ' luyÂ·r--r -r-rm; 1 ' 11 i '5 0* 2 111Â£-4 - \\. -0140 2 4.- 44&.ii'Â· \\'ZO 4 \\UU i $ f 0|*~Â·54- 'â€¢.â€¢ t,1 < 4*4 mr : 1.. f W i. . '' 4 ir. ~ C',9 "Â· ifÂ· N UD R-,4,-Â·r#*MI**1 ZO LU 0. f .MIÂ· Â·Â· Â· I I 11, 1, Ill O 0 0 'N' â€¢ r 1 ,1 iN'is,Â·, )Â·Â·"I. 9,1 .3.. ' 1<MI. Â·.~wt, Iii Â¢ 2 1 / ./ . 10 ~ ~ e~Il'[Â·4{:1'2~ '. ' NA 2 69*47,#M, J 1 Â·....9 l,212Â·ih,-2 Ilifo l v EtÂ»FIG. ,;Ht!+; |~ti#'*p 1*f ' 'J FY.:~ u.9': Â· I j Z I'Â·': 't. *as:~/'4'f *.. 24'11 0- 0 2 1 l -- <U 1. m ;CO 4 4 1/482,4 .2 IIJ < 4 - 5, 05 LU 4 , reaot Â·~ .. Â· Â· 3 2 I .....IM'â€¢ 4Â· , " *42:11. '11., U , 4 .'.0..F.11.! - 1 9 1- '~ gi Â· . < '5" M .â€ž BRA T.: ..1 1 5 4, 4"*4*' 2 _ L ~ Â·, :,'!h-:f...7:1: ,jâ€ž11 . 1 7 :. ,* . 2 .A .Lr'Â·'~~--*..44*,0"u' A CL . . r '~+071U 6 1,~~ 4 - 1! t ?*.i ' Â·Â·, Â· ' 0~:7' W#"46..1 Ulti'.p 'fc N Â· , '' -1Â· i' 1?rÂ· 4/:4 bteÂ· , 'F'~Â·~â€¢ 1 ~' " ~:'I'..4,",Â·' ~ I~â€¢, Â· '"4, ... r , 4 6/#RAQ ~ . 5.6hg/14 ~ 1 i .r sg,19-,Fli~ 1.---1 =U) 2 1 11 4"But h M.F. 4 6 1,31.- .1 .J#%?,3~~11 1 1 m*/d,"./ 4' Â· ' 162 -7 Â·. 44#pl #Â·, . *0:19.- j};itt.0, 1->EMiIA :,1,-1/31/4 1 . .4. I 1,5 01-,2 r:.,7 *+JE#>. Â· ' Â© 6 - HirecTS -,LIV (130N3llÂ¥ Ilar[I'90 Il NDISIO 1,nld3)NO) 3dY)5133W1 Mor"W 10 3All)3dSW 3d SPEN 38 01 6-1VlhELLVIN 1Nmi333IC] SlN363hld31 ONÂ¥ 1VnldEONOO S 31V-1Â¥d hl0100 OlldelÂ¥ ONV Nahlrll.OVdnNVIN NOdn 1NBONIiNOO BHV SHO-100 3H1 'C] 313U0N >10019 13NVd 1Â¥13 W 1S3M-LHEION SC]ZIVM01 M3IA 1 ,â‚¬'21 Â· -6 : :017=1=. -9,////1''f~,1'L i. 1.117+ 1 -2 Â¢. 4 1 1 '.11 f,MÂ·. 1 1 I. M 140.. 9 .7:.* ''fi Vt - 4 i F, 4- 4 111 1 1 '' .'. 1 , i.â€¢I 11. 0, ul.lilli:.1 :1'11,111~':. Ill 1- 1 4 I 1:14>N 11 .t:.Â· ...i.. 1 J Â·Â· i.,Â·Â·,i, 'i~'. 1 Â·1;Â·!v.i,d ' 'Â·Â·'Â·Â·Â· ' K m.1 - .1 .1,1 1 1 . -5 1 +23. , 1. 16 1 r 77 m 1 . I n L . 'ZA ' .t- 2':. 1 2+11.1. 5 r ..AE r Zz i 1 1 -- 14, , O -1 1 S.1, xx] mi m O f 61 f j\W 1 11 4 24 * h I - . po!11 O 0 ---Illum 1 1 . .J~ .wila'E: 11 , 416Â£Â¢U: 7,/:,-' 1 . El . 1,4,=il.Â®It,~ Â·Â·44:1**6:'itil!@i~1~-1 mr -- Ilro-1.m. 4 1 ,/ i-Ii"B. ..2,r CZE 1 f j- Â·Â· "-1 . k - 4~1 ... 1 1-41 ,.11-1*3 24~ , 4 ...r i.2 ~2%,~ -- .. .-1.- h LIR zm 13*Ni 4,01" u . 4 --Â¥*32):- 11; 1=90*111. I .3.,4. I ........ t,tÂ·W'~,it61:. ./.dÂ· 4,:0114* %Er\\\\24 --- :1 11 % . C 11*6 . : 1. .1 : , 8 ..$ , - I -:les,:, a~ rn-- Â· Â·Â·Â· , '4%2.. ..~ â€¢pil@,- O A Jj=1-,IrÂ·~.W Â·k/'' . 1 - ..... 1 1 b u * 104 71#. 2 4. 1 4 :71' :'. it.Â·. , .... . I. B h Xt'FT ., 4 'illt:9:1 .9 4 ". Y/'| 4 '41 - 1-1 1 d. '-ILl Â· 1 - miftoÂ·2 ' -4* -G# - Â· ~ g 11. . Lfi Af ..ir, i.. l.h 1 .1 0 4 301!: ,1 ' rE#,11 . 4, or 4 52 0 :,f '411.i h .:1 11.:.--*76 ."1. 1% I.- 3 'M b hi ir r.,R~'.t!. 11" u,Ii.,IN- 11!~-m~ G ./ 41'.11 1 *fl .C=.~m d twi 1 1 *4 '11 1, 1 - 4: :4.- -63*4:41: 31 . 1 jidE~ i:~ :W-- ~N -10 ir i 602 EAST HYMAN REMODEL i 0: 11 -- ' '1' I - I. , L. 1 4 41 '.1 =.,1. , 1 1 Â· A.\\\ r 18* * aur# MI'l"mIAÂ· -" T. i \ t U.!.le'. -- P _ 602 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, ASPEN, COLORADO 00 M.: 1 1 , =:= mik Jim ~011[ 4 All[HITECTI 15 NOT LIABLE OR RES PONSIBLE AT ANT TIM[ IOR ANT CHANGE! TO f HEI E DUWING; 0, 1,1[,8 InON i W NOUT PRIO R WAIm M AlmlolliATION. Â© 20:1 ZONE 4 ARcHIrE[13 UC THE INEORMA,101[ AND DMIGN 111[ENT (olliAINED OIl TIÂ¢15 DOQIMEIff il THE PADPEATT 01 ION[ 4 ARIHI[Em LLC NO PART OF THM INFOBATION MA, BE WED OR COMED WITHOUT DIE PMOA WAMEN PERMIZ!011 oF lollE 4 AR[IlrnaI LLC LOME 4 AR{llITE[A LLC ~HALL KETAIN ALL [OMMON LAW f[AIWORT AND All OTHER BERVID) RIGHTi INQUDING [OFTRIGICT THEUTO. ALi RIGH 3 REEAYID 1SV3HlhION SC]h!Â¥Mol M3IA ~ 13NVd 1Â¥13nl S1VIN31Â¥I/\I Ak:IVINIk:Id -1 UmÂ¥@ ND 530 1 nldDNO] 3018 3dV)S13 3!1S 'NOI1VOnddV ONV h]ElunloV:InNVIA,I Odn iN)Â©N[1NOO IMV SMOTOO 3H1 38 01 S1VI~31Â¥nt 1N323=I=!Ia SlNEIS3Md M ONV 1Vald EIONOO Sl 31V-IVd h1010 Ila 'AVW 10 'dJÂ¥ 030IllilÂ¥ CIOnt-90 10 14?41:.Ill'll'll'llillill'll//1/lillill'll'llill'/Imill'llill'llilli/-6 1 <:b t.%1*~119% t,/i.*14 7 1-0 i:'.rn'*Â¥4*e\Â·.,1~ ' i'l. ... I' :2Â·Â· Fj~t % . ,.. , r'UNplm#827;flt~i'f ~9.Â·Aff!'4 1,> - 4+ 404 N -A' Wit,IUU *6 7,: 1 Â·Â·4,4*Â·u-'ukrm' Er 3 ..4., Ii-:~AViftÂ·1. 1 =M#f*%543*4Iff?Â·.-*py Â· Â·*u:,myÂ·, flÂ·Â·Â· 1.'!..Â· 1 i '; ' i . Al" i..:~%\ ':iltiN<4 - 1:-09*2,%'t*?~ ~â„¢*:Â· 7 ~ ,.6 0 p 0 1 .*up-Â·7.*Sl r- â€¢ . + 93'*2~IÂ·ki,~,iA>iâ‚¬.,.I;0 .:,.:~~r-1, ... ME?**1*,4 :9 &Â·Â®, . ~ ~,t_ i- -~ 4Iti~~t~-~~~ ~41 ~ - -1-. f~ 0 :td [0 0 -0 , Fl. 1 j I .7.17'E.. L FO~ r C -1/ 4,9,Â¢*1 ., , .' 0 85% 1 1 .14.489,94 1 -3-W - ./1 ~7om ; 1 '-,;MI,J~ ~<~44%***t>~tf; 4':~-'i:, 90 ;1 ' ,.,0 ,.41:r,A'I,*4'4t~:t 7 PI ' "; f.ki*~4:':4~9~Â·idg:i*h#*3 *':.1- 1 ' 4#.7VbÂ·,# Â· 7, 39Â·449 Â·AlÂ·Â· ,Â· i .1 1 le&:. , ' ,;Alle:".*' . - .Â·,l .... i: 6 : ....,.i, : ....i 6 4!~.h . ~ ~ ~ ' UN.1-CE. J 0Mm St' 1 1 i.Â·.2&24 ..4 i), .2: :Te,rf# .i,9Â·,cg'>2Â·' ' . - f ME 1 +Ak : '",9,Â«~.1 #."114+ -0 f 0> 0 0 ms=@3=*k- bi'81#24 0 0tmillilli"/MI,Mul":ijS;4,~ -~ 0* K< EMI#****U**'~Â· ~' 7.--Irimuilpe-â€¢74â€¢,Â·1 .meâ€¢.' . jr t*@i*jidi.4, .,6.~=Ull .~.i..mi#*,9;IÂ· Â·::Â·: Â·Â·Â·:,~ a -Â·0 riÂ·i *gâ€¢,*m:eÂ·,~19. rl --:31~11~~r,iÂ·I;Â·Â· E 2597 :: ..'. ~I Â·~' Z 90.3.-;i.<*3 L , Â· ,Â·â€¢,i'./1 - itAIÂ·~plfpe"RB';' .'' ' '- m O la/~Â·Â· '..,-Â·:Â·,~~ .. Â·, <TA . Â·#:. i 1 2 -1 S 441Â·2*Filiew/*4 -Â· -1 > , .W...3~/.Im#V''t Fle. Z . . 4/1. - fy ly.tg j t) , i: 1 . 49 2-, lilli'. 2 32\\\ .0 I L 4~al. Â·Â· er. , O z 1 f'*E.~ OMit- 4~,1 % 29 : ZE' 11 1&1@Â®19#11'1114, illillf w i ,4 m El k 1 : :11:i .:11,11. 4.1.11,1..:1:2. '1 q '1 ' #Al .' 4 .... ' .1. ./. #/ d) I 4'fb)%,;~ ;!.1 .. , 22 4 9.-4 -~ 1 ---.R.3- 1 Â¥ 1 191 '.4/ 4 7(f31'<JÂ£'ARÂ· ,.::,Â·Â· f o 1.3 1 : d ~-4. 7 1..1 4 ,,1~: '.11 --1~1: .4.P,~..~1~).Ii.i~ ...~ 1. 11 1.1 11, 1 '~~~~~~~~~~'" ~ ~1 Â·41 -MejE&:..9 Â·tÂ·-:Â·/2~#:';A~'~ Â·:~*~Â·- Â·Â·' 4 , 1 waÂ·IF , 1. .2...1-1 .122911.4: 'IJ:. J 1 ...4,1 11,6.1~, 1 91,1 1 -1, .It 4: # )49Â¥-VI, .-,4#42;*- -~~~' .2.1 ,.i...' m ' B.3 i. ,~1 Â¢41/,341%41 , ,~, Â·2.44*#.4~.-da.f. ..1. vi~d,~6.-- I - 1 1 4. L. LL-2- Â· , ', - 2 Â· - i r i % 602 EAST HYMAN REMODEL m 602 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, ASPEN, COLORADO 225 0 111 10 liE 4 A~HITE 1 11 NOT WABLE OR KESPOIBIELE AT ANT 1111E M ANT [HANGEi ID IHME DUWNIG; 011 SPE[Ill[AIN)115 WmioU[ nIOA W Blmll AUnloRILAI]011 O 1011 1 0 NE 4 AR[IliI[[ri, U[ THE HIFORMAn oIl AND DESIGN MENT [ONIAINED ON lim 00[ UME M 13 111[ PROPERIT of ZO lIE 4 AR[Il[1[m UC HO PAII T Of Bili IN[OANAI I 011 MAY BE WED OA COM ED WIIHOUI IHE PRIOR WRInfil PEAMO,loll OF WHE 4 AACHI![al LiC 1011[ 4 AR[liffim LIC SHAU REMIN ALL [01111011 IAW 51Ant,OR! AND All Ollift EZEWD 8161111 Ill(LUDING COMAIGICT DIEMIO. ALL RIWI[f RESERÂ¥[D 1SV3HlnOS SC]hIVMOI M3IA 13NVd 1Â¥13IAI idDS.133W1S OV=In NV liNOO 32IV Ski 1 0 251,2173&3MILLN)93 OIEV NDIS O1VnldDNO] 'ddÂ¥ (13(1NiWV TIOCE! -90 ID 3All)3dSII3d I lot 'AVW 10 Exhib)+ 8 RESOLUTION N0. 12, (SERIES OF 2012) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL REVIEW FOR THE TRASH / UTILITY / RECYCLE AREA, FOR A REMODEL AND ADDITION CONSISTING OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL SPACE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 602 E HYMAN AVE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS K & L, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-12-003 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Daniel L Hunt, represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC requesting of the Planning and Zoning Commission approval of Conceptual Commercial Design Review, and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Area, to remodel the existing building and add third floor addition for a project that will include a mix of commercial space, affordable housing, and free-market residential; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended the Applicant amend the proposal to better comply with the Commercial Design Standards and the Special Review Standards for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Area; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant amended the application on June 13, 2012 for the June 19,2012 Planning and Zoning hearing, which staff recommended in favor of; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 19, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 12, Series of 2012, by a five to zero (5 - 0) vote, approving Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Area; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the Resolution No 12, Series 2012 Page 1 of 3 development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and wel fare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Conceptual Commercial Design Review, and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycling Area, with the following conditions: A. The applicant shall work with the Engineering, Building, Parks, and Planning Departments to address the ability to create an accessible sidewalk along this property between Conceptual and Final Design Review. A final solution shall be presented with the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review. B. The Final Commercial Design Application shall address the specific improvements proposed in the Public Amenity spaces located on the site. These will be reviewed and must be approved by the City Parks Department. C. Remove the wall between the recycling bins and alley to ensure adequate access to the bins. D. The Final Commercial Design Application shall address the height of the third story addition, and explore ways to minimize the perception that the third story appears out of proportion with the existing building. Drawings illustrating the Conceptual Commercial Design Review are attached as Exhibit A to the Resolution. Section 2: Engineering The applicant shall address compliance with the City' s Urban Runoff Management Plan as part of the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review. Section 3: Parks There shall be no plantings within the City ROW which are not approved by the City Parks Department and the Engineering Department. Parks is concerned with any improvements to the sidewalk area. The applicant has expressed interested, and is supported by Parks, in saving the larger spruce trees planted within the Hunter Street courtyards. Changes in elevation on Hunter and Hyman will have impacts to the success of these trees. These shall be addressed in the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review The applicant must work closely with the City Forester in order to reduce conflicts between the development of the third floor and the existing trees. Resolution No 12, Series 2012 Page 2 of 3 The Applicant shall include information on the Parks Department requirements related to tree replacement as part of the Final Commercial Design Application. The applicant should also consider lifecycle planning for the large on-site trees. Section 4: General The applicant shall comply with all applicable City of Aspen Codes. Nothing in this conceptual approval negates the Applicant' s requirements to meet other sections and requirements of the Municipal Code. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 6: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 19th dayof June, 2012. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Deb Quinn, Assistant City Attorney LJ Erspamer, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Resolution No 12, Series 2012 Page 3 of 3 .k ,- Uni p il- 6 Regular City Planninil & Zoning Meeting - Minutes June 19, 2012 Comments 2 Minutes 2 Conflicts of Interest 2 602 E Hvman Ave Conceptual Commercial Design 2 601 E Hyman Ave Conceptual Commercial Design 7 1 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes June 19,2012 LJ Erspamer opened the regular meeting ofthe Planning and Zoning Commission in Sister Cities Meeting Room at 4:30. Commissioners present were Keith Goode, Bert Myrin, Stan Gibbs, Jim DeFrancia, Ryan Walterscheid and LJ Erspamer. Jasmine Tygre and Cliff Weiss were not in attendance. Staff in attendance were: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney; Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Community Development Director; Jessica Garrow, Sara Nadolny, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. Comments Bert Myrin wanted everything submitted electronically and this past time we just had everything but the application books submitted electronically. Jennifer replied that as soon as we get Council going with a smooth format then the P&Z and other Boards would be able to have a smooth transition. Jennifer said the clerks have hired an outside purveyor. LJ said that he also would follow up. LJ talked about the ARC passes. Jennifer said they were looking into it and need something to available to members so it hasn't been forgotten. Jennifer said that the Hospital wanted to invite Planning & Zoning to a tour of the facility and asked for any interest in that and what scheduling was necessary. Jennifer said it would be a 90 minute walking tour. Bert asked if they could join the Council tour. Minutes MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to approve the minutes ofJune 5th seconded by Keith Goode. All in favor APPROVED. Conflicts of Interest Ryan Walterscheid stated that he was conflicted on 602 East Hyman. LJ Erspamer said that he property managed a unit in the building next door but the city attorney thought it was okay but if the applicant asked him to leave he would leave. Sunny Vann stated that he would like to have him stay. Bert and Stan said they did not walk by the site and Keith, Jim and LJ did walk by for an informal site visit to both properties. i Public Hearing: 2:~~ 602 E Hyman Ave Conceptual Commercial Design ,yq LJ Erspamer opened the public hearing for 602 East Hyman Avenue. LJ asked for legal notice and Debbie Quinn asked the applicant if the sign was up the entire 2 Regular City Plannine & Zoning Meeting - Minutes June 19, 2012 time from the 31 St day of May 2012 until today, the public hearing. Sunny Vann, the applicant representative, replied that it was. Jessica Garrow said this was a public hearing for the redevelopment and addition at 602 East Hyman sometimes referred to the Ellie Burman Building. The new owner David Hunt received permission from the previous owner Taylor Investments for Conceptual Design Review, Special Review for the trash/utility/recycle area and addition to the building. Sunny Vann is the applicant's representative and Dylan Johns and Jeff from Zone 4 Architecture are present. Staff recommends in favor ofthe requests with conditions. Jessica utilized power point showing the front page photograph from the memo, as well as the photographs from page 4,5,6 and the applicant attachments A300 to PAS2 included in Exhibit G. Jessica said that the existing building was a 2 story building with a full basement and approximately 20 to 21 feet in height. The current floor area ofthe building is about 5,100 square feet; there is 4,548 square feet of commercial leasable space (located on the basement 1St and 2nd floors) and a legally established free market residential unit just over 1500 square feet as well as a bandit unit. The bandit unit will at some point in the past years was converted from commercial space to a livable dwelling unit and it will be addressed with Growth Management Review. The parcel has some substantially large trees and the applicant is working with the Park Department to preserve the trees on site. There is a substandard trash area located on the alley currently as well as 6 parking spaces offthe alley. Jessica said currently there is 17% ofthe parcel that qualifies as public amenity space and some existing roof overhangs on the Hunter and Hyman sides; on the Hyman side the roo f hangs into the right-o f way by about 4 feet and on the Hunter side it over hangs by a few inches. There is a view plane that crosses this property from the Courthouse and it crosses most of this property with the exception of the northeast corner but it crosses at a height limit that is higher than the building about 45 to 50 feet so it doesn't restrict the property in any way. Jessica said the new total floor area would be 8,818 square feet; 2,409 of that would be net livable space. The required amount of public amenity space is 25% however if it is part of a redevelopment to maintain any deficient as long as you don't have any less than 10% and they currently have 17% on site and they are increasing that to 24%; staff is supportive of this. There is the elimination of some second floor decks. Jessica from power point (page 4 of the memo) said you could see the existing and proposed public amenity. There is a significant grade change 3 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes June 19, 2012 on this site where the actual parcel sits and the actual right-of-way. The street is down and stairs are along Hyman and Hunter that lead up into this sidewalk and there are some stairs that go up into the actual parcel from the side walk. Jessica said there were some unique constraints with the large trees that the city and applicant want to preserve on the site and there was not much to do with changing the grade of the sidewalk which will come before you at final and subdivision review to figure out how to make ADA accessibility to this site without really impacting the way this building sits. There are significant setbacks shown on page 5 ofthe memo. The existing overhang on Hyman will be removed and replaced with what they are calling "shadowboxes" taking advantage of the elimination of the vestibule and create an interesting design element and because , they are using the existing building they have come up with a creative way of the design of the building and glazing. The 3~d floor is setback approximately 30 feet from the property line. Staff was concerned about the plate height of the 3rd floor; it meets all of the design guidelines but there final design guidelines that talk about maintaining the statue of the 1St floor as opposed to the 31.d story and staff has asked the applicant when coming back to final to look at those 3rd floor plate heights. The resolution includes the condition of the new portion of the building relate to the redevelopment of the building. The second part of the review is the trash/utility/recycle area. Staff would like to see the small wall at the recycle area removed because it will help ensure proper access to the recycling bins and trash and is incorporated into the resolution. There were a few changes to the resolution to add a date to the 3rd WHEREAS and add the applicant amended the application on June 13, 2012 for the June 19th Planning & Zoning Hearing and on Section 1 on B and D to eliminate The Subdivision and. Bert Myrin said that on page 15 #3 there was mention of elevator shaft in the building. Jessica said it was referencing an internal elevator and there was an elevator that goes out to the alley so folks in that area can access that elevator. Bert talked about the trees dying and being replaced with a parking spaces and how they go about preventing that. Jessica replied at final the resolution could address that with the Parks Department. Stan Gibbs asked if in the big rectangle was the dumpster that gets taken out and loaded into the waste trucks. Stan said that TDRs were 250 square feet. Jessica replied TDRs are different where you land tem; on a single family home it is 250 4 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes June 19, 2012 square feet and within one of the commercial zone districts is worth 500 square feet of net livable area; doesn't increase the size of the box but what is in the box. LJ asked about the size of a setback on the roof for a railing. Jessica answered the setback is required to be the same as the height of the fence or railing. Jessica said with this applicant there is a significant setback on the Hyman side but there is potential with the roof but that will come back at final with the plan. LJ asked if the trash met the DRC requirement. Jessica replied that they did. LJ asked ifthey could be a deck on a shadowbox. Jessica said that this would be reviewed at final. Sunny Vann stated that he represented the applicant and they closed today. Sunny said this project was about half of the allowable floor area, wants to maintain the existing building and alley, the commercial spaces will be retained. Sunny said that the trash was the only special review because the code conflicts with the new part ofthe building that goes to the rear of the property line and calls for a 20 by 10 trash area but he doesn't understand why they have to apply by the building rules for a new building. Sunny said if you are familiar with parking in the alley it is double loaded and there were 6 spaces and they will lose one for the trash; this building was built in the 1960s and the code requirements have changed since then. There needs to be better pedestrian accesses to the rear of the building as well as the trash/recycle area. Sunny said in the CC or C-1 zone district there is no residential requirement for parking and the parking requirement for commercial uses can be met by the owner's discretion so the 2 spaces are lost and asked i f we need to pay cash-in-lieu for those. Dylan Johns, Zone 4 Architects, said that Jessica did a great job with the presentation and presented a slide show showing the initial ground floor o f the site plan and basement, with the exception of mechanical, is net leasable space. Dylan showed the 1St floor net leasable space was held by Chaffin/Light and office space for support. The 2nd floor was the residential space with the entrance on the Hunter side of the building and there were stairs on the north side of the building outside. Dylan said they were planning a fairly straight forward roof with skylights and he showed the elevation o f the building. Dylan said that they anticipated that the lower level of the building would be net leasable with the exception of the mechanical portion; they have expanded the mechanical rooms and brought in some circulation along with an elevation for accessibility. Dylan showed the revised 2nd and 3rd level plans but hasn't gotten too far into this; the deck configuration may change a bit. They are going to try and keep as much of the existing structure as possible and they are going to need to add some additional structure and mechanical equipment into the building and anticipate the current 5 Regular City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes June 19, 2012 roof needing to get thicker to accommodate the 3rd floor and the majority of that ceiling height is at 10 feet and only at the kitchen and living area has an increase higher, so they were not taking a 12 foot ceiling all they across. Dylan said that they did not want to lose those trees. Dylan said most ofthe Design Guidelines will recommend changing the cladding for an addition onto an existing building; we thought we would take a wood element. Keith Goode asked if there were any slides without the trees looking at that 3 rd story. Dylan showed the Hunter Street elevation and the Hyman elevation. Stan asked the setback from the 2nd to the 3rd floor. Dylan said the biggest restriction is the trees hanging over onto the building and the setback is 5 to 6 feet. Stan asked the reason that wall has to be that deep. Dylan replied that the general parameters with 3rd floors was to set them back and there was the consideration of the tree. LJ asked where the cash-in-lieu parking money goes. Jessica replied that it goes into a parking fund and the number of parking spaces is addressed in subdivision. PUBLIC COMMENTS: 1. Harris Kahn, public, stated that he owned the building behind this one; he said with one small exception he liked what they were doing. Harris had one concern for the patio for the cheese shop and would like to discuss this with Sunny and Dylan. Harris would like the new third floor setback a little more from the alley. 2. Jim Scull, public, stated that he worked for the Taylor family since 1968 until today when the building was sold. Jim spoke about the trees. LJ closed the public portion of the hearing. Sunny said Mr. Kahn's comments would be about talking with staff and whether we can move it forward with building materials and color. Jim DeFrancia said he agreed with Sunny that there was not much that could be done with moving the top floor because it was to address another concern and was in an alley way. Jim said they didn't know what would happen across the alley. Jim said that he didn't have a problem with the project as presented. LJ asked ifthose were stilts holding up that 3rd floor. Dylan replied yes. Sunny said that those were the things that they talked about with staff but they haven't 6 Reeular City Planning & Zoning Meeting - Minutes June 19, 2012 gotten to that much detail. LJ asked how far was the overhang from the main building. Jessica said the 3rd floor setback was really necessary for Hyman Avenue. Bert said on page 3 the last sentence of the 1St paragraph was excellent. Bert supported staff concerns on A306. Bert wanted to see some kind of plan for the lifecycle of these trees to be replaced with whatever should be clear. Bert said that he would support the application. Stan Gibbs stated that his biggest concern was the Hunter Street elevation and he doesn't have as much concern about the alley although he understands Harris's concern. Stan wondered if there was more balancing to do in this project and some o f the amenity space could be changed. Sunny said that was a special courtyard and they have an opportunity to enhance it; the building was built in the 1960s so they will take a look at what they have once they start opening up the building. Jim wanted to move this forward and it does comply with all of the dimensional requirements and some of the things that are in the conceptual stage. MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved to approve Resolution #12, series 2012 as amended approving Conceptual Commercial Design Revie-w for the project located at 602 East Hyman Avenue; seconded by Bert Myrin. Roll call vote: Stan Gibbs, yes; Keith Goode, yes; Jim DeFrancia, yes; Bert Myrin, yes; LJ Erspamer, yes. APPROVED 5-0. Discussion prior to the vote: Bert proposed on page 10 Dto add minimize the perception that the 3rd story appears out of proportion with the existing building. Bert wanted to add an "E" request the lifecycle of the trees and restrict the tree space not to parking. Bert would like to have a plan to replace the trees. Jennifer said that at final the applicant will come back with the Parks Department requirement on tree replacement. Jessica said it was in Section 3. LJ asked to remove wall by the trash, access sidewalk plan and minimize the floor height. Sunny said the sidewalk was covered in A and the removal of the wall was in C. Public Hearing: 607 E Hyman ~*e Conceptual Commefeial Design .. 1 LJ Ers#alper opened The hearing for 601=East Hyman. Debbie Quinn asked the applicant concerning the Asting of notice wasdj)r 15 days prior tojhe public - hearing and itwas signed on t}4622th day of May #4 has it been po ktâ‚¬~ as noted in the notic-e. Stan Â¢}auson stated-yeht<~ys been. ..51 7 I , / 7 Exhibit D: 26.412.040.B. Appeals, Notice to City Council, and Call-Up. 1. Appeals. An applicant aggrieved by a determination made by the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, pursuant to this Chapter, may appeal the decision to the City Council, pursuant to the procedures and standards of Chapter 26.316, Appeals. 2. Notice to City Council. Following the adoption of a resolution approving or approving with conditions a development application for Conceptual Design, the City Council shall be promptly notified of the action to allow the City Council an opportunity to avail itself of the call-up procedure set forth below. Notification shall consist of a description in written and graphic form of the project with a copy of the approving document. The notification shall be placed on the agenda of a regular City Council meeting within 30 days of the approval, or as soon thereafter as is practical under the circumstances. 3. Call-up. Following the adoption of a resolution approving or approving with conditions a development application for Commercial Design Review, the City Council may order call-up of the action within fifteen (15) days of notification, as outlined in 26.412.040(B)(2). Consequently, applications for Final Design shall not be accepted by the City and no associated permits shall be issued during the notice and call-up period. If City Council exercises this call-up provision, no applications for Final Design shall be accepted by the City and no associated permits shall be issued until the City Council takes action as described in subsection 26.412.040.B.4. If the City Council does not call up the action within the call-up period, the resolution shall be the final decision on the matter. 4. City Council action on call-up. The City Council shall, at a public meeting, consider the application de novo. The City Council may, at its discretion, consider evidence included in the record established by the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning and Zoning Commission, as applicable, or supplement the record with additional evidence or testimony as necessary. The City Council shall conduct its review of the application under the same criteria applicable to the reviewing body. The City Council's action shall be limited to: a. Accepting the decision. b. Remanding the application to the applicable Commission with direction from City Council for rehearing and reconsideration. (Ord. No. 13,2007, Â§1) c. Continuing the meeting to request additional evidence, analysis, or testimony as necessary to conclude the call up review. 5. Additional Actions. The rehearing and reconsideration of the application by the applicable Commission shall be duly noticed pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E Public Notice and shall be limited to the topics listed in the direction from Council. The decision made by the applicable Commission is final and concludes the call up review. Substantive changes, as defined in Section 26.412.080 Amendment of Commercial Design Review Approval, made to the application during the call up review and outside the topics listed in the remand from Council shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 26.412.080 and may require a new call up notice to City Council. The call up review shall be limited only to the changes approved in the Amendment application. VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning Consultants June 199 2012 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Jessica Garrow . Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 602 East Hyman Avenue Conceptual Commercial Design Review Applica- tion/Neighborhood Outreach Dear Jessica: Pursuant to Section 26.304.035.C.3. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations, an enhanced public notice was mailed to all property owners within three hundred feet of the subject property. The notice contained a more detailed description of the pro- posed development in addition to noting the time and place of the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing at which the Applicant's commercial design review application is to be considered. Perspective drawings depicting the proposed development and neighboring streetscape were also included in the notice. Copies of the enhanced project description and the drawings are attached hereto. Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Yours truly, VAN* ASSOCIATES, LLC I.- )-*- 2/ ~1 -7 Vann Sjkcwv Attachments d: \oldc\bus\city.ltr\ltr58912.jg4 RO. Box 4.827 Â· Basait, Colorado 81621 Â· 970/925-6958 Â· Fax 970/920-9310 vannassociates@comcast.net Di. ZONE ARCHITECTS LLC May 31, 2012 Good day, Enclosed you will find a public notice for a Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Special Review for Utility/Trash Service area that is scheduled for Tuesday, June 19, 2012 that will be reviewed by the City of Aspen's Planning and Zoning Commission, as well as images of the proposed design. In short, the application is to consider the renovation of the property at the Northeast corner of East Hyman Avenue &Hunter Street and addition of a partial f floor with a roof deck. The building was built in the early sixties and is not currently designated as a historic structure. The interior space of the existing building will be renovated and reconfigured. The exterior of the building will see some modifications, such as additional glazing as requested in the City of Aspen's Commercial Design Guidelines and bringing overhangs into compliance with the Land Use Code. The intention is to maintain the simplicity and proportion of the first two floors as they relate to both Hyman Avenue and Hunter Street. The concrete block wall will be maintained as the exterior finish material on the ground floor and the Zld floor will be re-clad with a new material. The perimeter of the new 3~ floor will have a pronounced setback from Hyman Avenue and Hunter Street, which will be further screened from pedestrian view by the specimen evergreen trees on the lot. The 5d floor addition will be in character with the architecture of the existing building, however the cladding will be differentiated from the existing structure in keeping with the City's aesthetic position regarding additions to older structures. No variances for height, setbacks, or floor area are being requested. The specimen trees that are located along Hunter Street will be preserved, however the utilities and trash facilities will be updated to meet current City requirements and better incorporated within the site. The design seeks to improve the pedestrian experience on the Hunter Street edge of the property by removing the existing fence and adding some landscaping. Onsite parking will be provided and any parking required in excess of the available area on site will be mitigated by cash-in-lieu. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Dylan Johns or Bill Pollock at Zone 4 Architects at (970) 429-8470 %pi-*. -. 4'1........%-/...M U * *R! Â· .*.-125 d .' -# rd: 4 - . "000.1,al/1 viwi--=a-'.a '.'.' 0 - -1-: e. ..U 'Uâ€ž 11.4:. '4440 .. Cl~LI//7.- 29 -.I-im/9 44Â£., :: . h ./ - 2119. I , . k . Jr. .1/ i , 4Â· .W.,- ,-**449 3*,tÂ«**CK'* ~:#**f *,1 ir - . r. 11 0.~ 44*].11.11. . 2 FE -~ ...-- - y.-~: =A. p \1 --- ..N i .--,4 ~.U,â€¢,a,â€¢im=Xetayaritaff-:' ,-* . ~ Â·Â·Â·u: .:Â· ~2,Â·.....~ ..r,ugwp :..., v . | | 55 :3@1!IMM:Mi;illitfi .,li. ,t.19 - - ~ Â· ~ --~- ' - ~ Â· ~-9. 21*J~I~ ~:-~.-9_~i.:1:Liti;:+-::1 1493:'--.--- L~~-. -1 , ."7.7 /& 1 ... . le Â·u . 0â‚¬- fi'+42 7....Â·-,1 Â·Â·>44 Â·Â· 46K036Â»>,1'' 0,414 ..: .j r: ' I ';3. ..Â·Â»49 : Â·Â· '7 1, '4 ...1,/~ Â·Â· ' 6(49244:4 % lu f - -/6 ... 4.-4.01Â»0. ...0 Â·./ .- C.l~~ /1 3 1 13' Â·,36 ' ..f 'InÂ¥: |.I ' ' i. 41 I .4- :- Ii,-- t.k L.'93< A. - -t#4 -r#~:- &*2 Â·Â·ii ,~~: ~ i J ' 6*EFOR Â»,1MAN AVENUEM'3Â·Nut.~:3 , - 4 f 9 / .4 r.Â·,73: 444:.t.~ r.- r f. 3 ' ,+19'~234969/43*~AÂ·~' ''' 43 f , kiÂ·019** - . . .r. 1794 ; 599 Â· Â·....IM/:cz~~2 10 1 . . .. ~ EE ~iâ€¢.~~FEii:i:~~~ f.<:.Â·t.,~~*' liÂ·I Â·.I'.-â€¢,ie~o:~Â·3~cei+t.*.s.J Â·Â·~Â·-w... , Â· 1. . ... -- -- .aÂ«Ay ..7Â». 'f .-4.45 - . .. Â·Â·' 72.'FI, I...0;.fEFemmBR Â· ~11.~71:323Â·0%34Â·1*Â·93~ti.Â·02 109tcrp=.j-*E A t' v 4, ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 602 BAS-7- H YAMA) AUS. , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 40%- 1 1 1 , 20/2 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) 1, 7)94- A-,0 30 Uk)3 (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City ofAspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to thepublic hearing. A copy ofthe publicationis attached hereto. b< Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the gls'day of M Al , 200_Ze to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. 70 Mailing of notice. By die mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet ofthe â€¢ property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. fcontinued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part ofa general revision of this Title, or whenever the text ofthis Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise. the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of. and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area o f the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. l.-3*aure f The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 9/ day of /16 / '2041-,by Dy,-6,rj 409Â£.45 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My comt],Rsion expires: C --413; , 727/ <g- Notary Public 0/7-\I,Â¢73X Ar t t.arATÂ« 'An ATTACHMENTS: imc#Buo,W COPY OF THE PUBLICATION ,%%=30, PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL 4, 1 1 â€¢ e.,4EE 44 4 ..4 PUBLIC NOTICE .,9 11 ' 44 . 1 1. p *63 - f . rem:,1 Time: : Â·Â·J: n Place: 'i trÂ· f (. it eb Mee?ina Rm r Â» L,4,41 130 S (34'!en, St Purpose: .f e Apin i 1 Ii'.1 .'o-ung Corno 'h...kin 1,3 1 Â·-1 i ' 4. th>% pupid'.7 4. ipÂ· abon subm Med by ' 7 . I , , Â·: ' 'Â·11 reg .,, I . I ' 4,1 â‚¬17* :W.A P. .,4.4 re - J 0 . - . 1 0, 1 WA 0Â« 3 .'. L. 11 r * DateÂ· Â·- :Â·4 - 19 21}12 1 i, . - th"*Istin j 'I KiÂ·,1 . 1 23 ./ . /. / / --- ! Ul=N... .1 .-44.. .4 , . 4 202\ / 2 44.94 . . 1 ' I. . ' 4 t 1 , - * 4, 4 9 4 ' 14 0 / , . 3. , 2 i ..,h 9, . 4 qi.a 7 11 , t. f .4 Â· I :. 2Â¢*'41 1. 'P Â¥ (51 2 6, , - 4,4 :' ''I-5 ,Â·1*L.. -I_.M_+ 3 I 4 .d~11 K 'A , 1 .......... . 1 4.0# 4 ,;: 941Â·Â¥:aks m/44441:p~Â·>~~~~~~# *eft'-3635itt~/'*lij. ffÂ·'<t- Stt Â·,Â©t~Vi Fi.'*~ . y 1 4 '047 4$, '4Â£; >i . ' ~ . b 'Â·~Â· 'C t~~1,~ ,,â€¢ i~ #22*#ht Â· ,/ir.iggw!28*1 . I .*:4Â·f - 7. t .. it Cot , '. Â¥ 1, -,3/10/3,=4311"IN!72~ e .. . I . & It. , 9. t....1 *li H.9 & .,3 1/.16&/i , 4. $ I'*Â·WO Y d~ ~*114 2 114 *6 4.$17-, - 2'3** 81/9--M , , I 1 ' -4-2 - /,Pri. 4 4- '.,i.Â·Â·L- .2. . . 1. U:il:. M 44 f- - ' I.- . . v' ' 1, ' rat",i t.. 1 . :- *7 '/54'*4/"Ilit.FLWAZZe'"2* 4- '44 'A:'.44'- Â· \ ' 2 44*- 1.-4; . 4'.c' - c y ..*//1-7. ' 4-/ - -ZE /2 ' 1 A, . . ., bl,fb - 47 . 1- f -:Vf.-EFT-39*9i. 4 Me,4 ' -. B 7, 4,1 - 34417 \ -l 4,42.2 2,Â¥440% r~ 4 - ' V; S -1 0--7 i , I ...4*01Â¥OA L / 6. W., I . ' . .#t. Pe '*AL'Aut 1 + >22?.9 .Â·.9,6 - , . e . - 7:t, , 4 I C..1 . - - 1-Â« I . .0 j.. le.,1 " J t'.1/:~.- IÂ· 7 yi 12** . 2 I e q 45/. I % A'V</. Lir 1 4. : I , itt. 4 .41.. 2 ... t râ€¢ . . .., . F , * . i F. 4, I @ 2 /41-*I r . lit ') . 461 ;-:4:'..6,9- . "3 Â·, p : . : " 2 y r , . t. * IT *, 11 Q J * g(.34? -4P Â· * ' . Ar . 2 \ ..1 4/ 1 le. 2.1.1. 1 Â¥ 4,3 . t. .0 '1* I 7 '.1 I Â·~ 4 4 . Get .4 1 5% p 1 I . * I ,--t -.4 4 f Al': I , . " r . R 4 1% I 1:I .9. " FItÂ·; 4 ~ 0 . k. - , MA 1 -31 ... 1, I tri %14 1 - 1.4.1 - 1,/.9 . 11' . 2 - *Ch.Â·"FVÂ·,0*t'f It, .! r -4/4 -t 4 .: 44 *A 4 .1 I. i .1 i, 0 44/<'b-/~Mta' -- -.AÂ» - 1-- - - .-31 -At .:.&41.terÂ·,Â·2 - ., j.k.> ../IREM,TZ - ,- U 0 6 56-25.4*ir .,p 3- k.4 - 9%*9 - 4 . 12 Shi +4 . 3:"410.4.'M- i-9::-9.4,f.: 14.til#:- -3,/fulf/rl--:~51#i'llip' * ,./..... e V t. " 0% trui li 1 - I - *- Â»1 t . 7- i /' 4 . 14 EtÂ·> ... ' I ' : 14 1 4 36, 2 , .., '44*W+Nke +I .... . i . . I . ik, .0 1 1, A ... L 2 41.4*-,Al 1.~ - -tZ~11 1 1 + I . Â«Ir ) .. 4 6/: .1_Â· ~f w - 4- i. "/1/ 1 #111/dird . l....1-Â· - .,â€ž., -4 . 1 - .8.1.'5.. i.02.1 t. 0 + , -an:,0. 7 Jhf .PE'* ..7. a. ' 33,, , . ~'jÂ¥>kÂ·*%: &:-- .-tall. 4* A K,lit.r'*-7- + 4 - Mkt-,44:(AÂ· 3 6 7 .,ta,K,ZL :4331:1lill-lilli~~Te#jilli r - $.:- *..6 t,< t..ti* .-'flige ~./Ir*Flit,Wist,2644/IM:':21:ri-'441~ 1 z :. 7.9!71? 14 .+ 2Â· >AÂ· . 34 , 7"â„¢1~{FY..1 . 40: 1.-IÂ· -1~07-71//4&,9/rhim. ..14 - f . I . IM- f ,+ v M di . 1.St'-af~ fl#*+ Â·4 w-. *44*: ' .. N C LS=. A. t, . -1 ?3 7 '4,>b :d .4-q ~391 <fâ€ž 4*.0<p#~bwi,Ii,W~L~Â£6~<~44f<4rÂ·< :4# ' 1. JOI, t t~ P~ t ~14 VE *-â€ž*2 *921,+ 44 '~ Â¥-Â· *k.i.:44*9Â£;,1-~ i j' 0 - -Vy .* * 30 3Â¢0â€¢.048Â£*UP 'll :L ' '41.h ..1,1,Â¥M â„¢, f, Â£144*,; 2 .1<~,'br t.411 i ..14#4033. ;*trseawk,Â«4*'6,031 -i./44,4 4,/'ruzE 'ftfi.21~: ,94;4;1 i : ' 41 -41* r i'R. 421. 21,60~~/0;4*. -2129 9.fÂ·4:%=7%,Iditt,~~1~ th Aw*22:M.1 4.6.6- 6.214:c 29 *~. Â£*.1*9* ~19. op 0 .-i.~~.,1,- %#, 6.14 4*4,0 -3~ kip:1 -4. ,10., , 1. 0 4 ..# I n.*0- i." -<''ef.*:fim' t'* fb,34*44~ A : - 4,4 1.~ 1 .1 . . 2 . i - ./2 .17. , pi. , 4, t *41**1,~ I At - 1% "- 42. 0,. ...L.. : :7. *-1~6)t/4%t*4 1*4 -* 13:â‚¬ ~ .AC . :Â· 1, P 'CY . . @ 4,Â¥Â» 11-405 1 3' 3 2,>,Cifi//f 4 ./ I I. . ' 1 . . p -4 3,9. 49 , Â¥ . I I. . 71 74 .-31 242 44,4. ~. 1 4 t,I /<Â¢Â¢13114*ff -1--* 1 t>*i ,$4 31,f * ~ *% 4% 4'. 0 I. i ' Mt '. I '~ .% &â€žf,1 -t~ 0,0 '9 - - 1*/3. . ./ 1.1 0- 4-44 P, 4. t 'e'.f . " 4, M '4Â¢ 4. Â£ 4 ,/<42 :. cr j.r 9/,EL/64*':66' .tu .....ju: '1. .ti ..1 . 3,4 - '. *c , *4. :01 2 044 4*,4. ..R.m,-7-Â».'* .4 6. f' 44* 147* .4.~ 0 74,2 =9.1 .Â¥4 -0/. ty. # 1, 4#% ' . F. k $ + 1i,Ut ij~~~~fc: '20~ti#14*~Ter rj .'it-'*ft/Z :tÂ·Â·*4*,91;fltilig ff t;~1~fÂ«*fil<; 9. Lr#f M#<+4.10'fir'} .ja#*' . I * ' M I ./. I 4 , ' 1â‚¬f & Ajew Â»jÂ·~.3 424, Â·*eÂ©. r el "17*196 il,N noa: ' 1 4 j.. :EdÂ¥ -*9,44 'Â·,i Ki;f.4-~:Li ':34 iE; . 'a-n:: It -JJ , 'I ? b. - . 4.,i,a ' I ; M: 1, *%41,1 9.1 .... tri~ift>*7425 0.,r 1 +1 4 1 , 4,0 2,4 AL: 6 ..! . 4. .:*:A x j,Â·1111,4 5 -1Â· i 114. - . hiltk~&444:lil"W 17- 4 Ijagulu:/d:~,J ,Â¢.4 e.7.0. r Ylk â€ž55 .2: .6 . + ~ . â„¢, li Â« #1** .fitiitÂ¢~307PFRW ** 1,6. *42,~â‚¬}i*: Â·4?viÂ¢i''fl &*. U< 24'tr 4Â· "11 J dula .â€ž ..,9.A 44 aff 73.54:2749'j.2 . 762);4. *-- ~14 Â·t-3.. 9 *'fÂ·. .1 446 /*6:3/ Ilillill . Ilillimi5/il11.1 liMliBlll 1/. I. 1 AL; n h - -- -- f k L Z . I 311;Fiwi./"96AH' . f-' till:4, R f 1 3, -EUM - $ I ..... #t %, I - /- t ".' ' A-1,9, 0.,--: 7 -4 . V 1, 21 ' â‚¬** 4,- + /04' - -I...~/.'ll- ki, *ep M 02"~-I.-7-~: .-77/4 1 -- mi .* 1 4*yormwa ~~10Â»'73:f:.-~~ *. * . ,":34Â»Z.12.20â‚¬h,3 .r 1 - - :'ll. ~~ ~ Â»ft - 7*,r 1 . 1 INT - - 4, * I -,5/. % I, ,. * 9 > 1 4. r.- Â·7 I,+E I I I . , ' . ' : .. . r- I ..L. I J. /1 I .f 1 * . I . ... 4 - ./. ti 24 .'- . J . 1 irt 'trUO'*.- Easy PeelÂ® Labels ' A I Bend along line to i Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® ~ Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ 1 ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i A 308 HUNTER LLC 4 SKIERS LP 517 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE LLC 490 WILLIAMS ST 1108 NORFLEET DR 517 E HOPKINS AVE DENVER, CO 80218 NASHVILLE, TN 372201412 ASPEN, CO 81611 610 EAST HYMAN LLC 520 EAST COOPER PTNRS LLC 530 HOPKINS LLC C/O CHARLES CUNNIFFE 402 MIDLAND PARK 5301/2 E HOPKINS 610 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 630 EAST HYMAN LLC 633 SPRING 11 LLC 635 E HOPKINS LLC 532 E HOPKINS AVE 418 E COOPER AVE #207 532 E HOPKINS ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ALPINE BANK ASPEN ARCADES ASSOCIATES LTD LLC ASPEN ART MUSEUM ATTN ERIN WIENCEK C/O KRUGER & CO 590 N MILL ST PO BOX 10000 400 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO- 81611 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 ASPEN, CO 81611 94 - ASPEN PLAZA LLC ASPEN BLOCK 99 LLC ASPEN CORE VENTURES LLC PO BOX 1709 532 E HOPKINS AVE 418 E COOPER AVE #207 C/O STEVE MARCUS ASPENâ€žCO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 AUSTIN LAWRENCE CONNER LLC AVP PROPERTIES LLC BASS CAHN 601 LLC 532 E HOPKINS AVE 630 E HYMAN AVE #25 PO BOX 4060 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 BATTLEGERALD LIVING TRUST BAUM ROBERT E BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC HIXON BURT LIVING TRUST PO BOX 1518 65 FIRST NECK LN PO BOX 2847 STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 SOUTHAMPTON, NY 11968 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659 BOOGIES BUILDING OF ASPEN LLC BG SPRING LLC BISCHOFF JOHN C C/O LEONARD WEINGLASS 300 S SPRING Br #202 502 S VIA GOLONDRINA 534 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 TUCSON, AZ 85716-5843 ASPEN, CO 81611 BORGIOTTI CLAUDIO BPOE ASPEN LODGE #224 CHATEAU ASPEN CONDO ASSOC 9610 SYMPHONY MEADOW LN 210 S GALENA ST #21 630 E COOPER AVE VIENNA, VA 22192 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CHATEAU ASPEN UNIT 21-A LLC CITY OF ASPEN CICUREL CARY 421.ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CTR , ATTN FINANCE DEPT 2615 N LAKEWOOD STE G 130 S GALENA ST CHICAGO, IL 60614 ASPEN, CO 816113551 ASPEN, CO 81611 ttiquettes faciles & peler 1 A Repliez & la hachure afin de t www.avery.com 1 Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i Sens de chargement r6v6ler le rebord Pop-UpTM 1 1-800-GO-AVERY ' A Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A I Bend along line to i Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® ~ Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ 1 ~j AVERYÂ® 5160Â® I A COOPER STREET DEVELOPMENT LLC COLORADO CABLE DUNN JUDITH A REV LIV TRUST C/O PYRAMID PROPERTY ADVISORS 500 PRESIDENT CLINTON AVE #310 8051 LOCKLIN LN 418 E COOPER AVE #207 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 COMMERCE TOWNSHIP, MI 48382 ASPEN, CO 81611 EDGETTE JAMES J & PATRICIA ERGAS VENESSA BLAIR & CLAUDE EXELCEDAR INC 20% 19900 BEACH RD STE 801 PO BOX 4316 534 E HYMAN AVE JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 FITZGERALD FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LTD FURNGULF LTD FERRY JAMES H 111 C/O PITKIN COUNTY DRY GOODS LLC A COLO JOINT VENTURE BOX 167 520 E COOPER 616 E HYMAN AVE GLENCOE, IL 60022-0167 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 GELD LLC GOFEN ETHEL CARO TRUSTEE GONE WEST LLC C/O LOWELL MEYER 455 CITY FRONT PLAZA 401 W CENTER PO BOX 1247 SEARCY, AR 721451406 CHICAGO, IL 60611 ASPEN, CO 81612-1247 I I GOODING SEAN A 80% & RICHARD L GROSFELD'ASPEN PROPERTIES GREENWAY COMPANY INC 20% PARTNERS LLC 666 TRAVIS ST #100 C/O PARAGON RANCH INC 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD #2222 SHREVEPORT, LA 71101 620 E HYMAN AVE #1 E LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 ASPEN, CO 81611 HIMAN LLC HOPKINS DEV LLC HORSEFINS LLC PO BOX 6159 345 PARK AVE 33RD FLR 601 E HOPKINS AVE SWANBOURNE WA 6010 NEW YORK, NY 10154 ASPEN, CO 81611 AUSTRALIA, HUNTER PLAZA ASSOCIATES LLP JARDEN CORPORATION JENNE LLP 205 S MILL ST #301A 2381 EXECUTIVE CENTER DR 1510 WINDSOR RD ASPEN, CO 81611 BOCA RATON, FL 33431 AUSTIN, TX 77402 JOSHUA & CO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LCT LP JOYCE EDWARD LLC TENNESSEE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 1310 RITCHIE CT 300 S HUNTER ST PO BOX 101444 CHICAGO, IL 60610 ASPEN, CO 81611 NASHVILLE, TN 37224-1444 LUCKYSTAR LLC MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP MARTELL BARBARA PO BOX 7755 317 SIDNEY BAKER S #400 702 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81612 KERRVILLE, TX 78028 ASPEN, CO 81611 MCMURRAY WILLIAM & HELEN MASON & MORSE INC MIAO SANDRA 29 MIDDLE HEAD RD 514 E HYMAN AVE 9610 SYMPHONY MEADOW LN MOSMAN NSW 2088 ASPEN, CO 81611 VIENNA, VA 22182 AUSTRALIA, ttiquettes faciles & peler 1 A Repliez 5 la hachure afin de 1 www.avery.com I Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® 1 chamement ravaler le rebord Pop-UpTM 1 1-800-GO-AVERY ' Sens de A Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A m Bend along line to i Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® :ed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeTM ~ ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® ~ NATTERER HELEN MORRIS ROBERT P MYSKO BOHDAN D 67 BAYPOINT CRES 600 E HOPKINS AVE STE 304 615 E HOPKINS OTTAWA ONTARIO ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CANADA K2G6R1, NIELSON COL STEVE & CAROL D NONNIE LLC OLITSKY TAMAR & STEPHEN 501 S FAIRFAX PO BOX 565 PO BOX 514 ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314 ASPEN, CO 81612 GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 PITKIN CENTER CONDO OWNERS P & L PROPERTIES LLC PITKIN COUNTY BANK 80% ASSOC 101 S 3RD ST #360 534 E HYMAN AVE 517 W NORTH ST GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 REVOLUTION PARTNERS LLC ROTHBLUM PHILIP & MARCIA RUST TRUST PO BOX 1247 40 EAST 80 ST #26A 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD #760 ASPEN, CO 81612 NEW YORK, NY 10075 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 . e RUTLEDGE REYNIE SCHNITZER KENNETH L & LISA L SHUMATE MARK 51 COUNTRY CLUB CIR 2100 MCKINNEY AVE #1760 1695 RIVERSIDERD SEARCM, AR 72143 DALLAS, TX 75201 ROSWELL, GA 30076 SILVER DIP EQUITY VENTURE LLC SJA ASSOCIATES LLC SNOWMASS CORPORATION 2100 MCKINNEY STE 1760 418 E COOPER AVE #207 PO BOX 620 DALLAS, TX 75201 ~ ASPEN, CO 81611 BASALT, CO 81621 STEWART TITLE CO STERLING TRUST COMP SWEARINGEN WILLIAM F CO JENNIFER SCHUMACHER 2091 MANDEVILLE CYN RD 450 CONWAY MANOR DR NW PO BOX 936 LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 ATLANTA, GA 303273518 TAYLORSVILLE, NC 28681 TENNESSEE THREE RENTALS TENNESSEE THREE THOMPSON ROSS & LYNETTE C/O J H COBLE PO BOX 101444. 1502 GREYSTONE DR 5033 OLD HICKORY BLVD NASHVILLE, TN 37224-1444 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 NASHVILLE, TN 37218-4020 TOMKINS FAMILY TRUST TREUER CHRISTIN L TROUSDALE JEAN VICK 520 E COOPER AVE #209 981 E BRIARWOOD CIR N 611 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 LITTLETON, CO 80122 ASPEN, CO 81611 VICTORIAN SQUARE LLC WAVO PROPERTIES LP WEIDEL LAWRENCE W - 418 E COOPER AVE#207 512 1/2 E GRAND AVE #200 PO BOX 1007 ASPEN, CO 81611 DES MOINES, IA 50309-1942 MONROE, GA 30655 ttiquettes faciles & peler 1 A Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® Sens de Repliez a la hachure afin de I www.avery.com 1 1 chargement rav*ler le rebord PoP-UPTM ~ 1-800-GO-AVERY ' A Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A m Bend along line to i Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® aed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ i *J AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i A WISE JOSEPH WOLF LAWRENCE G TRUSTEE WOODS FRANK J 111 1320 HODGES ST 22750 WOODWARD AVE #204 205 S MILL ST #301A RALEIGH, NC 27604-1414 FERNDALE, MI 48220 ASPEN, CO 81611 WRIGHT CHRISTOPHER N YERAMIAN CHARLES REV TRUST 13 BRAMLEY RD PO BOX 12347 LONDON W10 6SP UK, ASPEN, CO 81612 I - 1 5% . ttiquettes faciles & peler | Sens de Repliez & la hachure afin de 1 www.avery.com 1 Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® charaement ravaler le rebord Pop-UPTM 1 1-800-GO-AVERY ' A PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 602 E HYMAN AVE. - CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL REVIEW FOR UTILITY/TRASH SERVICE AREA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 19, 2012, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by the Daniel L Hunt, for the property located at 602 E Hyman Avenue, represented by Vann Associates, LLC. The applicant is proposing to add a third story to an existing mixed-use building. The applicant is requesting the following development approvals: Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Special Review for Utility/Trash Service area. The property is legally described as Lot K&L, Block 99, City and Towntise of Aspen, CO. For further information, contact Jessica Garrow at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2780, jessicag@ci.aspen.co.us. LJ Erspamer. Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on May 31, 2012 City of Aspen Account ZONE ~Â£1 CL ARCHITECTS 1 1 C May 31, 2012 Good day, Enclosed you will find a public notice for a Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Special Review for Utility/Trash Service area that is scheduled for Tuesday, June 19, 2012 that will be reviewed by the City of Aspen's Planning and Zoning Commission, as well as images of the proposed design. In short, the application is to consider the renovation of the property at the Northeast corner of East Hyman Avenue &Hunter Street and addition of a partial 34 floor with a roof deck. The building was built in the early sixties and is not currently designated as a historic structure. The interior space of the existing building will be renovated and reconfigured. The exterior of the building will see some modifications, such as additional glazing as requested in the City of Aspen's Commercial Design Guidelines and bringing overhangs into compliance with the Land Use Code. The intention is to maintain the simplicity and proportion of the first two floors as they relate to both Hyman Avenue and Hunter Street. The concrete block wall will be maintained as the exterior finish material on the ground floor and the 29(1 floor will be re-clad with a new material. The perimeter of the new 34 floor will have a pronounced setback from Hyman Avenue and Hunter Street, which will be further screened from pedestrian view by the specimen evergreen trees on the lot. The 3~ floor addition will be in character with the architecture of the existing building, however the cladding will be differentiated from the existing structure in keeping with the City's aesthetic position regarding additions to older structures. No variances for height, setbacks, or floor area are being requested. The specimen trees that are located along Hunter Street will be preserved, however the utilities and trash facilities will be updated to meet current City requirements and better incorporated within the site. The design seeks to improve the pedestrian experience on the Hunter Street edge of the property by removing the existing fence and adding some landscaping. Onsite parking will be provided and any parking required in excess of the available area on site will be mitigated by cash-in-lieu. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Dylan Johns or Bill Pollock at Zone 4 Architects at (970) 429-8470 1 - . I. .. i.,1, RE 4Â£0 ..Elli. '1 -1- 31:3< 0=07 - |t I ./ - ~|~7""""â€¢-!5-6 44' EE EE -ilitit-/fill 3-*'. 41.=Men"-N-- f ./ lilli* il #*BEE-3- f ~: 7 iffult. $''Ft'Â·/ t * 2/$ ~ , 'Ah. \~,X>41 ... I M 6.~ 7 Ii,2 -â‚¬*4 F~ I / .~ | ~m :#6,4 V-Â»i VIEW LOOKING EAST ON HYMAN AVENUE L - , - ---9 . fi -~1-1-. - 1 11-- Atimwist\.5 E 441 ' I m .JI=: 1:.11.. 1... 1 =*:'e:~:~50 a3:ng:IEE:mdE.EZER:22~2~-~-- .. :- ldp AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: A/3 2 9 -Nj 1Â¥)O.13 -;4~Â»L- , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: lilu cug kv.-9- ne, 4..50<,V" 20326 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) i, A~1â‚¬41 %â‚¬64*~ (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) o f the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: 4 -Publication ofnotice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official Â·~ paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 20 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the pubiic hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) 00 t- E râ€¢ O M O & 4 n - -1 > g 8.9.0 0 4 g027 4 PE Mve PUBLIC NOTICE 5 > A 4.-4 0 2 4 '-< RE: 602 E HYMAM AVE. - CONCEPTUAL COM- MERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL RE- cs d ,=in VIEW FOR UTILITY/TRASH SERVICE AREA .1 8. R NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing to 308 00 (ro 21 p will be held on Tuesday, June 19, 2012, at a O + E*24*26*:6%35 1 24 Â¤ CR 2 A A Me SEY* g pen, to consider an application submitted by the *= 47 = 04 ~ g R a E. 5 t N R &@ 5 .0 6 Daniel L Hunt, for the property located at 602 E 1-lyman Avenue, represented by Vann Associates, ~m- f g -3-~1 9. 4 S t RÂ· 4Â· t 0 kN12:*Al*2~i~%311: Yrimi WA .0 CA is: requesting the following development approvals: C onceptual Commercial Design Review and Spe- cial Review for Utility/Trash Service area. The M 43 2& 90 m @2mn 8 8-E property is legally described as Lot K&L, Block 99, .0 4 00 City and Towntise of Aspen, CO. For further infor- C,K.- CD mation, contact Jessica Garrow at the City of As- 04 & 2 4 ~eani~noam~~nitlkYRMÂ°pg'~n,t Tgrtr~* ~*~ I C gn--) .2 2 /1 2 gr 1, 2 0 1.. /. V jessicag@ci.aspen.co.us. 0 >e 0 4 LJ Erspamer, Chair 3 4 (pn M Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission F 1 2 ~ ~2 0 Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on May 31, o G' 2012. [7949582] 1 09 6 -t 6 & 3 2, eD & Â¤ O 2 5.1 fl E a M *1 t; N 3 1 â‚¬ E rFa 0 2 M _ A . o anIIAO:inI SV 3[JI.LONI SNAMAO G[IVI .LATVOITIddy * aqI.LON S:i[IDAI39 (INIV SMAIA~O GIHI AO ISI * Of HA~ , 208-,by dIO HdVJIDO,LOHd * )Iland G[ILL ~IO AdOI) * The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" dged before me this,2/ day prior to the public heari inspection in the planni iness hours for fifteen (15) days 3302 ver, the propos 11 be avail sufficient legal notice to regulation, se, the re t of an accurate su rvey map or other revision be nt of a new land use of this Title, or whenever the te .t 2Yl~~seto be amended, whether such any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision Rezoning or text amendment: Whenever the official zoning district map is in ommis ion ex Cri A. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director RE: 602 E Hyman - Conceptual Commercial Design Review, Special Review for Trash / Utility / Recycle Area Resolution No. , Series of 2012 MEETING DATE: June 19,2012 APPLICANT /OWNER: - David L Hunt REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann, Vann - Associates. LLC 0-Fity.Â·-. Â· 2 1 3- y..7*: LOCATION: . .1 2 .' . / : ,I ~ 4 . 2 22*6 602 E Hyman Ave, 3*e*.. --6 70Â» 1 CURRENT ZONING: a... */6/1/'llaillialliÂ£;*ksili,Mut'Imil*/tking"igi,%-.h- C-1, Commercial, Zone -- District 6â€ž7/~t-* 11 ~ 4Â· ,â‚¬â€¢*4;961 14* hi SUMMARY: 0, -~*.1 u. N ~C ~~N The Applicant requests 6 -12.2 -~'-19- 0 i conceptual commercial - Â» i k.- -1 design review and special review for the trash / utility / .9. 4 -7,4/'llf-- - recycle area for a remodel and addition of the building at 602 E Hyman. - STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request. with - 1/ .CL- 21 ,'L ,4,4-1---4 1 conditions. .L. '7 1 *.2 ty --tat . 4 Â», -4~. i * 1 : i rk * 2 4 1 lilliA k - i- i . ->111 4.1 ' . 1 Â·gl I el li// ~ ift ~ Â· 7 '4~ 7 I 1 . .// 7.1 Photo: 602 E Hyman building and location. 602 E Hyman Ave - Conceptual Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 1 0 f 8 REQUEST OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission to redevelop the site: â€¢ Conceptual Commercial Design Review for development involving commercial uses, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.412.050, Commercial Review, and pursuant to the Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines. (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority.) â€¢ Special Review for varying the trash / utility / recycle area, pursuant to Land Use Code Sub-Sections 26.575.060.B and 26.430.040.E, Utility/trash/recycle service areas. (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority.) BACKGROUND AND PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to remodel an existing two story building and add a recessed third floor at 602 E Hyman. The lot is 6,002 square feet and is located on the north-east corner of Hunter and Hyman. It is commonly referred to as the Ellie Brickham building because local architect Ellie Brickham designed the building. The geometric shapes, expression of volumes to define space, clean lines and an emphasis on minimalist details of the circa 1960 building are important characteristics of the Modem style of architecture. The successful expression of the Modern style, and the accomplishments and contributions of Ellie Brickham as an architect qualified this building for inclusion on the City's AspenModern map as a building with potential historic significance. The building is not landmark designated, and participation in the AspenModern program is voluntary. The applicant is not proposing to designate the building. Existing Conditions: The existing structure includes two entrances - one on each street - with commercial space in the basement, ground and second floors. A free-market residential unit is located on the second floor, as is commercial space that was converted at some point in the last 30-40 years into a bandit residential unit. There are a number of second floor decks on the building. The building currently includes 5,128.1 sq. ft. of floor area, with 4,548.1 sq. ft. of commercial net leasable space and 1,530.6 sq. ft. of residential net livable space. The existing building is 20 feet in height. The building includes a number of roof overhangs, which proj ect into the right of way by over four feet on both the Hunter and Hyman sides of the building. The parcel is at a higher elevation than the right o f way, and includes a raised sidewalk that is not ADA accessible. The parcel also includes a number of very large trees and some fencing. The trash/utility area is located along the alley, but is substandard in size. There are currently six (6) off-street parking spaces located along the alley. Approximately 17% of the parcel (1,040 sq. ft.) presently meets the Public Amenity requirements. The Court House View Plane No. 1 crosses a small portion of the site at the far north-east corner of the property. However, it crosses at a height well above the allowed 36 - 40 foot height limit of the zone district and therefore does not limit the height of the development. 602 E Hyman Ave - Conceptual Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 2 0 f 8 Proposed Development: The applicant proposes to remodel the existing building and add a third floor. The building would include commercial space on the basement, ground, and second levels, an affordable housing unit on the second floor, and a free-market residential unit on the third floor. Some deck space is proposed on the roof. The proposal would bring the building to 8,818 sq. ft. of floor area, with, 2,344.1 sq. ft. of free-market residential net livable space, and 1,693.4 sq. ft. of affordable housing net livable space. The applicant is proposing to use a TDR to enable an increase above the 2,000 sq ft unit size cap. Four parking spaces are proposed with the application, and approximately 24% of the site (1,438 sq ft) is proposed as Public Amenity space. The proposed third story addition will result in an overall height of 34 feet 534 inches feet. The proposal meets all of the underlying dimensional requirements. The applicant is working with City staff to address the sidewalk elevation and to try to achieve ADA compliance and to ensure the development does not compromise the health of the large trees. The roof overhangs which currently extend into the right of way are proposed to be shortened to as to not exceed the property boundary. These overhangs are proposed tp be converted into "shadow boxes". STAFF COMMENTS: CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW: The project is required to comply with the standards set forth in section 26.412.060, Commercial Design Standards, as well as the Conceptual Review Guidelines of the Commercial section of the Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines. Overall, staff finds that the project's design meets the requirements set forth in the Commercial Design Standards and Guidelines. The project must comply with five main areas: Street & Alley System, Parking, Public Amenity Space, Building Placement, and Building Height, Mass & Scale. Street & Alley System: The development proposal re-uses the existing building. It is oriented to the street and includes a developed alley. The primary entrance is located along Hyman Ave, with secondary entrances along Hunter St. and along the alley. The building currently includes courtyards, which are proposed to be maintained. These add visual interest to the building and provide access to the commercial spaces. The proposal also updates the alley elevation to ensure it provides visual interest. The existing transformer will be screened. Staff finds this portion of the guidelines is met. Parking: The design guidelines focus on parking structures. No structured parking is proposed. Staff finds this portion of the guidelines to not be applicable. Public Amenitv Space: On-site public amenity space can help a project relate to the street and provide a positive pedestrian environment. The existing site configuration includes 1,040 sq. ft. of public amenity space (or 17% of the parcel). The existing configuration includes a number of deck overhangs 602 E Hyman Ave - Conceptual Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 3 of 8 and fences, which are proposed to be eliminated with this proposal. That results in a net increase of public amenity space to 1,438 sq. ft., or 24% ofthe parcel. Figures 1 and 2, below, outline the existing and proposed Public Amenity Space. Figure 1 - Existing Public Amenity Figure 2 - Proposed Public Amenity Space r=-9-T-----------' Ly kiiiA =m =aL 49 Â®El 11 lili J = 6 1 # L-91 1 - Tr tizill V...,, I *. --/7. ' I IM I 'Ir- 4-4.-4 2=y-Â£-11 031161* 4--ltrtÂ·7-t 7-r; ri-- ANA *Â»-1 7 mdr' VIT ' 7. 0 -0 43 0 The applicant does not have a lot of options for new Public Amenity space given they are re- using the existing building. Improvements to the existing site configuration have increased the amount of Public Amenity space. Staff believes the changes represent an improvement to the site, especially along the Hunter Street elevation. The removal of the second floor decks will provide more space for the existing trees. In addition, the removal of a fence along Hunter Street will create new Public Amenity space which will improve the pedestrian experience. The applicant is working with the Parks, Engineering, and Planning departments to address the grade change in the sidewalks. This will be resolved as part of the Final Commercial Design Review. Staff finds this portion of the guidelines is met. Building Placement: The proposal reuses the existing two-story building and adds a third floor. The proposal maintains the main footprint of the existing building, other than a second floor deck located along the Hunter elevation that is proposed to be removed. The existing building is oriented toward the street, and the existing setbacks are maintained. The existing building includes large setbacks along both the Hunter and Hyman facades. For the most part, these are maintained in the proposal. Figures 3 and 4, below outline the first level setbacks along Hyman. 602 E Hyman Ave - Conceptual Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 4 0 f 8 C my Alll Figure 3 - Existing First Level Setbacks ----7' I The existing building includes secon level overhangs that protrude into the City's right of way. The entry vestibule along Hyman is at the properly line. A h /1 -7 majority of the building is setbackfrom 0 \Â¥ 1 E Ir .0 IIi Hyman between 30 and 31 feet. 1 --1 1 ~ 9-=it==-4 14 ----U---JI----- E-=--=23. - 31' 11 11 - 1. 1 30' (11 .#I.A....Al') 1========== -Mp.-m 7 i ' -tt . \ r.â‚¬ r ~~ ===========:-1 1 iii & I 4 9 , 44:: J 1 -1Â£.UL cr 1 0, Figure 4 - Proposed First Level Setbacks - The proposed building eliminates the ' ~ converts them to "shadow boxes" that are overhangs in the right ofway, and 492 IZ FE[-1._*-3 1 /,1 located entirely within the property. The first level has avariety ofsetbacks: 1111111.M!!!21 d Et between 4 feet and 31 feet. The portion of P 1. the building with a 4 foot setback includes a second floor with a new "shadow box" that is located at the property line with a r.< -aL ./1 zero setback. A similar shadow box is %32* 14 created along a portion of Hunter Ave. = 30' '-- TFFTE 31' 1Â·UtkIL ./INI:Â¥ ARLA ff 4, -4-% I 1 r -ZE'Pt=* 94 - -- The overhangs that currently protrude onto the City' s right of way are shortened in the proposal so as to not extend beyond the property line. These are proposed to be converted to second level "shadow boxes." Figures 5 and 6, below, outline the proposed change. 602 E Hyman Ave - Conceptual Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 5 0 f 8 Figure 5, Existing building, Hyman View 0% 1 42Nt#, . The red lines in Figure 5, at left, show the 1 , .tteÂ·*2 v.. 1 . I. I ' I. + approximate setback lines. The roof - - *-44 overhang protrudes into the Right of Way , Lift by approximately 4 Net 6 inches, n L .Â» I j.,W.J.,4,â€¢~. 3 P. 7 1 :42 -2 4 ' . .li *-5*4. - a. Fi ure 6, Pro osed buildin , H man View The new "shadow box " is within the - -3-Yâ‚¬94#7* -i~ -: Â·Â·- 7 pri,perty hountittry 95441 i.,â‚¬ b. i. -4 P -4 remt,Ving an extxting %181,lr i . + S Q..: -4â‚¬4-I h,euted on the propure Net, 2. Â« Â·k: r. .1 -t $ Staff finds that a number of the design guidelines are not applicable because of the re-use of the existing building. However, staff believes the development meets the intent of the design guidelines in terms of building placement and setbacks. Building Height, Mass & Scale: There are a range of heights in the Commercial Character area. This building is proposed to be a mix of two and three stories. The third floor is proposed to be significantly setback from the street, helping to minimize the perceived mass of the building. The entire third story is setback approximately 30 feet from the property line. The building height is 33 feet 7 inches at its highest point along Hyman, and 34 feet at its highest point along Hunter Street. A guardrail along the west elevation is the highest element of the building at 34 feet 5 3/4 inches. All the height measurements are below the allowed height limit in the C-1 zone district. 602 E Hyman Ave - Conceptual Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 6 of 8 Staff requested the applicant to relocate a portion of the third floor mass from the Ilyman Ave elevation to decrease the perceived mass of the addition in relationship with the existing building as well as to improve the pedestrian experience. The applicant relocated the mass to the rear of the property along the alley, creating a cantilever over the parking spaces. Staff is supportive of this change and believes it is an improvement to the design. The design guidelines call for maintaining a minimum of 9 foot ceiling heights on all upper floors, and having a larger first floor. The current building has a total height of approximately 20 feet in height, with ceiling heights of 8 feet 3 14 inches on the first floor and 8 feet 9 91 feet on the second floor. Because the applicant is maintaining the existing building, these are not proposed to change. The proposed third tloor has ceiling heights of 10 to 12 feet. Staff has some concerns that the third fioor heights result in a third story that appears out of proportion with the existing building. These are Final Commercial Design issues, and as such, staff recommends the applicant explore the lowering the height of the third floor for the Final Commercial Design Review to address this issue. The new "shadow boxes" create an interesting element to the building while using the existing building structure, which staff supports. Staff finds this portion of the guidelines is met. SPECIAL REVIEW FOR TRASH / UTILITY / RECYCLE AREA: The project requires a variance from the Trash / Utility / Recycle area requirements of the code. The current configuration is located by the parking in two different areas. They do not currently meet the requirements of the land use code. The Land Use Code requires 20 linear feet with a minimum vertical clearance of 10 feet and a minimum depth of 10 feet. Because of the trees on site and the configuration of the existing building, the applicant is requesting a variance from the standard. The applicant had requested an 8 foot by 8 foot area to accommodate the trash, recycling, and utility area. After comments from the Environmental Health Department that the space would not adequately accommodate trash and recycling, staff asked the applicant to redesign the space. The applicant has enlarged the area to include enough space for to accommodate a 2 yard dumpster (7ft x 3.5 ft) and 4 recycling/composting toters (3.5ft x 2.5 ft). Staff is comfortable with this direction, but recommends the wall located between the recycling bins and the parking spaces be removed to ensure better access to the trash area. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Referral comments were received from parks, engineering, and environmental health. Their comments have been incorporated into the recommendation and resolution, and are attached as Exhibit D. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the project, with the following conditions: 1. Remove the wall between the recycling bins and alley to ensure adequate access to the bins. 602 E Hyman Ave - Conceptual Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 7 of 8 2. The applicant must work with the Engineering, Building, Parks, and Planning Departments to address the ability to create an accessible sidewalk along this property. A final solution shall be presented with the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review. 3. The Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Application shall address the specific improvements proposed in the Public Amenity spaces located on the site. These will be reviewed and must be approved by the City Parks Department. 4. The Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Application shall address the height of the third story addition, and explore ways to minimize its height in relation to the existing building. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # , Series 2012, approving Conceptual Commercial Design Review for the project located at 602 E Hyman Ave." Attachments: Exhibit A - Staff Findings, Conceptual Commercial Design Review Criteria Exhibit B - Staff Findings, Conceptual Commercial Design Guidelines Exhibit C -Staff Findings, Special Review Exhibit D - Development Review Committee Referral Comments Exhibit E - Copy of C-1 Zone District Exhibit F - Application (bound) Exhibit G - Application Addendum, dated June 13,2012 602 E Hyman Ave - Conceptual Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 8 of 8 RESOLUTION NO. -, (SERIES OF 2012) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL REVIEW FOR THE TRASH / UTILITY / RECYCLE AREA, FOR A REMODEL AND ADDITION CONSISTING OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL SPACE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 602 E HYMAN AVE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS K & L, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-12-003 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Daniel L Hunt, represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates. LLC requesting of the Planning and Zoning Commission approval of Conceptual Commercial Design Review, and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Area, to remodel the existing building and add third floor addition for a project that will include a mix of commercial space, affordable housing, and free-market residential; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended the Applicant amend the proposal to better comply with the Commercial Design Standards and the Special Review Standards for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Areas and, WHEREAS, the Applicant amended the application for the June 19, 2012 Planning and Zoning hearing, which staff recommended in favor of; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 19,2012, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. _, Series of 2012, by a to L -3 vote, approving Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycle Area; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions o f the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval o f the Resolution No _, Series 2012 Page 1 of 3 development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Conceptual Commercial Design Review, and Special Review for the Trash/Utility/Recycling Area, with the following conditions: A. The applicant shall work with the Engineering, Building, Parks, and Planning Departments to address the ability to create an accessible sidewalk along this property between Conceptual and Final Design Review. A final solution shall be presented with the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review. B. The Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Application shall address the specific improvements proposed in the Public Amenity spaces located on the site. These will be reviewed and must be approved by the City Parks Department. C, Remove the wall between the recycling bins and alley to ensure adequate access to the bins. D. The Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Application shall address the height of the third story addition, and explore ways to minimize its height in relation to the existing building. Drawings illustrating the Conceptual Commercial Design Review are attached as Exhibit A to the Resolution. Section 2: Engineering The applicant shall address compliance with the City's Urban Runoff Management Plan as part o f the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review. Section 3: Parks There shall be no plantings within the City ROW which are not approved by the City Parks Department and the Engineering Department. Parks is concerned with any improvements to the sidewalk area. The applicant has expressed interested, and is supported by Parks, in saving the larger spruce trees planted within the Hunter Street courtyards. Changes in elevation on Hunter and Hyman will have impacts to the success of these trees. These shall be addressed in the Subdivision and Final Commercial Design Review The applicant must work closely with the City Forester in order to reduce conflicts between the development of the third floor and the existing trees. Resolution No _., Series 2012 Page 2 of 3 Section 4: General The applicant shall comply with all applicable City of Aspen Codes. Nothing in this conceptual approval negates the Applicant's requirements to meet other sections and requirements ofthe Municipal Code. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 6: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction. such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity o f the remaining portions thereo f. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this day of , 2012. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Deb Quinn, Assistant City Attorney LJ Erspamer, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Resolution No _, Series 2012 Page 3 of 3 Exhibit A - Commercial Design Review - Land Use Code Review Criteria Sec. 26.412.050. Review criteria. An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: A. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, or any deviation from the standards provides a more appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested design elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the standards. Staff Findinjz: The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060 of the Land Use Code. The applicant's proposal for public amenity space meets all applicable standards. The public amenity space increases from 17% of the lot to 24% of the lot, and is positioned on the site to encourage pedestrian activity and act as a gathering area. The applicant is requesting a variance from the trash/utility dimensional standards. Staff has some concerns about the size of the area proposed and has asked the applicant to revise the plans. The applicant intends to comply with Section 26.412.070: Suggested Design Element, which will be more fully developed during the final commercial design review phase of the development process. Staff finds the criterion is met. B. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, to the greatest extent practical. Changes to the fa~ade of the building may be required to comply with this Section. Staff Findinp: Staff finds this criterion to be non-applicable. The building will contain the same amount of commercial space before and after the remodel and addition. C. The application shall comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines as determined by the appropriate Commission. The guidelines set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The City shall determine when a proposal is in compliance with the criteria, standards and guidelines. Although these criteria, standards and guidelines are relatively comprehensive, there may be circumstances where alternative ways of meeting the intent of the policy objectives might be identified. In such a case, the City must determine that the intent of the guideline is still met, albeit through alternative means. (Ord. No. 13, 2007, Â§1) Staff Findine: The proposed development is submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission for Conceptual Commercial Design Review. Staff finds all applicable guidelines are met. Staff finds the criterion is met. Exhibit A -Commercial Design Review - Land Use Code Review Criteria Page 1 of 5 See. 26.412.060. Commercial design standards. The following design standards, in addition to the commercial, lodging and historic district design objectives and guidelines, shall apply to commercial, lodging and mixed-use development: A. Public amenity space. Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of-way or private property within commercial areas. On parcels required to provide public amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030, Public amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the method or combination of methods of providing the public amenity shall be at the option of the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, according to the procedures herein and according to the following standards: 1. The dimensions of any proposed on-site public amenity sufficiently allow for a variety of uses and activities to occur, considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses. Staff Findinit: The size of the public amenity space proposed for this project is 1,040 sq. ft. and is to be located on the Hyman Ave and Hunter St facades of the development. The requirement according to the Land Use Code is to allow for 25% of the developable parcel to be used as public amenity space, but in cases of redevelopment where less than 25% is existing, the same amount must be replaced. The site currently contains 17% as public amenity space, which is increasing to 24%. Staff believes the public amenity space will enable a variety of uses and activities to occur on the property. The intent of a successful public amenity space is to accommodate public gatherings and enhance street vitality, which staff believes the proposal does. Staff finds this criterion is met. 2. The public amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade trees, solar access, view orientation and simple at-grade relationships with adjacent rights-of-way are encouraged. Staff Findinw: The existing courtyards remain on site as public amenity space. These areas can accommodate a variety of activities. Specific programming of the areas will be finalized as part of the Final Commercial Design Review. The applicant is working with staff to address the accessibility of the sidewalk. Staff finds this criterion is met. Exhibit A -Commercial Design Review - Land Use Code Review Criteria Page 2 of 5 3. The public amenity and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights-of-way and uses contribute to an inviting pedestrian environment. Staff Finding: The parcel is located at an elevation slightly elevated above the grade of the right of way. This has resulted in a sidewalk that is not ADA accessible. The applicant is working to resolve any potential issues and will include a final design solution as part of the Final Commercial Design Review. The applicant is in on-going conversations with City staff about these issues. Staff finds the criterion is met at a conceptual level. 4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls, sidewalks or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian environment. Staff Findinwz: The proposed amenity does not duplicate space, but enhances the pedestrian environment. Staff finds the criterion is met. 5. Any variation to the design and operational standards for public amenity, Subsection 26.575.030.F., promotes the purpose of the public amenity requirements. Staff Findinju The proposed public amenity space will not deviate from the design and operational standards for public amenity, Subsection 26.575.030.F. Staff finds the criterion is met. B. Utility, delivery and trash service provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one (1) building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply: 1. A utility, trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated along the alley meeting the minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060, Utility/trash/recycle service areas, unless otherwise established according to said Section. Staff Finding: The proposed development does not meet the dimensional standards outlined in 26.575.060, but the applicant has requested a variance. Staff has some concerns about the amount of space provided for the trash/utility/recycle area, and has asked the applicant to revise the proposal to enlarge the space in order to better accommodate the trash/utility/recycle needs of the building. Staff finds the criterion is not met at this time. 2. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property and along the alley. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site Exhibit A -Commercial Design Review - Land Use Code Review Criteria Page 3 of 5 conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. Staff Findinju The existing service pedestal located on the alley will remain. The applicant proposes additional screening of the pedestal. Staff finds the criterion is met. 3. Delivery service areas shall be incorporated along the alley. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. Staff Findinyz: The delivery service is accessible off of the alley. An adjacent elevator provides easy access to the building. Staff finds the criterion is met. 4. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the street as practical. Staff FindinR: The applicant proposes all mechanical exhaust to be vented through the roof and located as far away from the street as practical. The proposed project does not include plans for a garage. Staff finds the criterion to be met. 5. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. (Ord. No. 13,2007, Â§1) Staff Findinp: Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting will be accommodated internally within the building and located on the roof. It will be minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. The proposed development will reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. Staff finds the criterion is met. Sec. 26.412.070. Suggested design elements. The following guidelines are building practices suggested by the City, but are not mandatory. In many circumstances, compliance with these practices may not produce the most desired development, and project designers should use their best judgment. A. Signage. Signage should be integrated with the building to the extent possible. Integrated signage areas already meeting the City's requirements for size, etc., may minimize new tenant signage compliance issues. Common tenant listing areas also serves a public way-finding function, especially for office uses. Signs should not block design details of the building on which they are placed. Compliance with the City's sign code is mandatory. Exhibit A -Commercial Design Review - Land Use Code Review Criteria Page 4 of 5 B. Display windows. Display windows provide pedestrian interest and can contribute to the success of the retail space. Providing windows that reveal inside activity of the store can provide this pedestrian interest. C. Lighting. Well-lit (meaning quality, not quantity) display windows along the first floor create pedestrian interest after business bours. Dynamic lighting methods designed to catch attention can cheapen the quality of the downtown retail environment. Illuminating certain important building elements can provide an interesting effect. Significant light trespass should be avoided. Illuminating the entire building should be avoided. Compliance with the City's Outdoor lighting code, Section 26.575.150 of this Title, is mandatory. Staff Findinlt: The applicant will address the signage and lighting design elements as part o f the Final Commercial Design Review. The current building includes large windows on the first and second levels which will be maintained though this proposal, Staff finds this criterion is met. Exhibit A - Commercial Design Review - Land Use Code Review Criteria Page 5 of 5 Exhibit B: Commercial Design Guidelines - Conceptual Design Review Guidelines for the Commercial Character Area Commercial Character Area Design Objectives: These are key design objectives for the Commercial Area. The City must find that any new work will help to meet them: 1. Strengthen the sense of relatedness with the Commercial Core Historic District. Staff Findinit: The Commercial Character Area is adjacent to the Commercial Core Historic District. The mixed use proposal relates to the uses seen in both character areas. The project is to remodel an existing building and add a new third story, which relate to the historic district without replicating it. The increase in public amenity space further enhances the relatedness. Staff finds this criterion is met. 2. Maintain a retail orientation. Staff Finding: The proposed development maintains the existing commercial square footage in enhanced spaces. The proposal includes nearly double the amount of commercial space as residential space. Staff finds this criterion is met. 3. Promote creative, contemporary design. Designs should seek creative new solutions that convey the community's continuing interest in exploring innovations. At the same time, the fundamental principles of traditional design must be respected. This means that each project should strike a balance in the design variables that are presented in the following pages. Staff Findinju The building's design conveys a sense of human scale and depicts variation in building height and materials, which will add interest and vitality to the area. The proposed remodel and addition maintains the basic form of the current building. The design pulls from the past while adding new elements. The design works with the existing form and creates something new and unique in the proposed second level "shadow boxes." These design elements utilize existing cantilevers along the Hunter and Hyman elevations to create a new design element. These "shadow boxes" likely would not work in another location, but add an interesting design element in this location and utilize the existing structure. The primary entrance is along Hyman Ave, with secondary entrances along Hunter and the alley. Staff finds this criterion is met. 4. Encourage a well-defined street wall. The intent is to more clearly establish a strongly defined street wall, but with some greater variety than in the Commercial Core Historic District since the historic building edge is not as defined. A stronger street fa<ade definition should be achieved while at the same time recognizing the value of public dining and landscaped space. Exhibit B - Commercial Design Review - Commercial Design Guidelines, Commercial Character Area , Page 1 of 6 Staff Finding: As proposed the development will have a well-defined street wall through the use of the proposed "shadow boxes." The basic form of the structure remains, which is oriented toward both streets and has a well-defined edge. The existing modulation is maintained, providing visual relie f and architectural interest from the street. The public amenity spaces are enhanced and enlarged. The project will demonstrate variety with the differing levels of height and architectural elements. Staff finds this criterion is met. 5. Reflect the variety in building heights seen traditionally. It is important that a range and variation in building height and scale in the Commercial Area be recognized in future developments. Larger buildings should be varied in height and reflect original lot widths. Staff Findinju The Applicant proposes variation in building heights with a mix of 2 and 3 story elements. Staff finds this criterion is met. 6. Accommodate outdoor public spaces while establishing a clear definition to the street edge. Providing space in association with individual buildings remains important, but should be balanced with much greater building street presence and corner definition. Staff Findinp: The proposed public amenity spaces enhance the spaces currently on-site, and actually increase their size. The spaces will be paved and programmed to optimize use. In addition, the spaces are an important part of the current building's original design. I hey are modules of void that interact with the building's modules. Staff finds this criterion is met. 7. Promote variety in the street level experience. Display cases, architectural details and landscaping are among the design elements that should be used. Staff Findinit: The applicant proposes variety in the project's street level experience with enhanced public amenity spaces, landscaping and trees. The applicant is working with City staff to address the sidewalk elevation and accessibility, as well as ensuring the large trees located on the site are maintained. Staff finds this criterion is met. Exhibit B - Commercial Design Review - Commercial Design Guidelines, Commercial Character Area Page 2 of 6 Commercial Character Area Conceptual Review Design Guidelines Street & Alley System Staff Findinx:: The development proposal re-uses the existing building. It is oriented to the street and includes a developed alley. The primary entrance is located along Hyman Ave, with secondary entrances along Hunter St. and along the alley. 1 he building currently includes courtyards, which are proposed to be maintained. These add visual interest to the building and provide access to the commercial spaces. The proposal also updates the alley elevation to ensure it provides visual interest. The existing transformer will be screened. Staff finds this portion of the guidelines is met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met 1.1 Orient a primary entrance toward the street. 1.2 Maintain the established town grid in all projects. 1.4 Develop an alley fafade to create visual interest. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable 1.3 Public Walkways and through courts should be designed to create access to additional commercial space Parking Staff Findinjz: The design guidelines focus on parking structures. No structured parking is proposed. Staff finds this portion of the guidelines to not be applicable. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable 1.5 The visual impacts of structured parking should be minimized. 1.6 Structured parking should be placed within a 'wrap' of commercial and/or residential uses. Public Amenity Space Staff Finding: On-site public amenity space can help a project relate to the street and provide a positive pedestrian environment. The existing site configuration includes 1,040 sq. ft. of public amenity space (or 17% of the parcel). The existing configuration includes a number of deck overhangs and fences, which are proposed to be eliminated with this proposal. That results in a net increase of public amenity space to 1,438 sq. ft., or 24% of the parcel. Staff believes the changes represent an improvement to the site, especially along the Hunter Street elevation. The removal of the second floor decks will provide more space for the existing trees. In addition, the removal of a fence along Ilunter Street will create new Public Amenity space which will improve the pedestrian experience. The applicant Exhibit B-Commercial Design Review -Commercial Design Guidelines, Commercial Character Area Page 3 of 6 is working with the Parks, Engineering, and Planning departments to address the grade change in the sidewalks. This will be resolved as part of the Final Commercial Design Review. Staff finds this portion o f the guidelines is met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met 1.7 A street facing amenity space shall meet all of the following requirements: â€¢ Abut the public sidewalk, Be level with the sidewalk, Be open to the sky, Be directly accessible to the public, Be paved or otherwise landscaped 1.8 A street facing public amenity space shall remain subordinate to the line of building fronts in the Commercial Area. 1.9 Street facing amenity space shall contain features to promote and enhance its use. These may include one or more of the following: â€¢ Street furniture, Public art, Historical/interpretive marker Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable 1.10 Mid-block walkways shall remain subordinate in scale to traditional lot widths 1.11 A mid-block walkway should provide public access to the following: â€¢ Additional commercial space and frontage within the walkway, Uses located at the rear of the property that are commercial in nature. 1.12 An alley side amenity space shall be designed to have these characteristics: â€¢ Direct public access to commercial space at ground or second floor levels, Maximize solar access to the alley side amenity space, Enhance the attractiveness and use o f the rear alley, Minimize the adverse impacts of adjacent service and parking areas. 1.13 A second floor amenity space should meet all of the following criteria: â€¢ Ensure consistent public access, Be dedicated for public use, Provide a public overlook and/or an interpretive marker, Be identified by a marker at street level 1.14 Second level space should be oriented to maximize solar access and views to the mountains or other landmarks. 1.15 Second level space should provide public access by way of a visible and attractive public stair or elevator from a public street, alley, or street level amenity space. 1.16 Second level dining may be considered. Building Placement Staff Findinit: The proposal reuses the existing two-story building and adds a third floor. The proposal maintains the main footprint of the existing building, other than a second floor deck Exhibit B -Commercial Design Review - Commercial Design Guidelines, Commercial Character Area Page 4 of 6 located along the Hunter elevation that is proposed to be removed. The existing building is oriented toward the street, and the existing setbacks are maintained. The existing building includes large setbacks along both the Hunter and Hyman facades. For the most part, these are maintained in the proposal. The existing building includes second level overhangs that protrude into the City's Right of Way. The entry vestibule along Hyman is at the property line. A majority of the building is setback from Hyman between 30 and 31 feet. The proposed building eliminates the overhangs in the right of way, and converts them to "shadow boxes" that are located entirely within the property. The first level has a variety of setbacks: between 4 feet and 31 feet. The portion of the building with a 4 foot setback includes a second floor with a new "shadow box" that is located at the property line with a zero setback. A similar shadow box is created along a portion of Hunter Ave. Staff finds that a number of the design guidelines are not applicable because of the re-use of the existing building. However, staff believes the development meets the intent of the design guidelines in terms o f building placement and setbacks. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met 1.18 Maintain the alignment of facades at the sidewalk's edge. 1.20 Building facades shall be parallel to the facing street(s) and primary entrances shall be oriented toward the street. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable 1.19 A building may be set back from its side lot lines in accordance with design guidelines identified in Street & Alleyway System and Public Amenity Space guidelines. 1.21 Orient a new building to be parallel to its lot lines, similar to that of traditional building orientations. Building Height, Mass & Scale Staff Finding: There are a range of heights in the Commercial Character area. This building is proposed to be a mix of two and three stories. The third floor is proposed to be significantly setback from the street, helping to minimize the perceived mass of the building. The entire third story is setback approximately 30 feet from the property line. The building height is 33 feet 7 inches at its highest point along Hyman, and 34 feet at its highest point along Hunter Street. A guardrail along the west elevation is the highest element of the building at 34 feet 5 3/4 inches. All the height measurements are below the allowed height limit in the C-1 zone district. Rooftop mechanical equipment is currently proposed to be 3 to 4 feet above the roof height, which is permitted by code. The placement and sizing of rooftop mechanical equipment will be addressed as part of the Exhibit B - Commercial Design Review - Commercial Design Guidelines, Commercial Character Area Page 5 of 6 final Commercial Design Review. The new "shadow boxes" create an interesting element to the building, which staff supports. The design guidelines call for maintaining a minimum of 9 foot ceiling heights on all upper floors, and having a larger first floor. The current building has a total height of approximately 20 feet in height, with ceiling heights of 8 feet 3 14 inches on the first floor and 8 feet 914 feet on the second floor. Because the applicant is maintaining the existing building, these are not proposed to change. The proposed third floor has ceiling heights of 10 to 12 feet. Staff has some concerns that the third floor heights result in a third story that appears out of proportion with the existing building. These are Final Commercial Design issues, and as such, staff recommends the applicant explore the lowering the height of the third floor for the Final Commercial Design Review to address this issue. Staff finds this portion o f the guidelines is met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met 1.22 Building fa<ade height shall be varied from the fa~ade height of adjacent buildings of the same number of stories by a minimum of 2 feet. 1.23 A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation in building height of the Commercial Area. 1.24 Height variation should be achieved using one or more of the following: â€¢ Vary the building height in accordance with traditional lot width. Set back the upper floor to vary the building fa*ade profile(s) and the roof forms across the width and the depth of the building, Vary the fa~ade (or parapet) heights at the front, Step down the rear of the building towards the alley, in conjunction with other design standards and guidelines. 1.25 On sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths, the favade height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable 1.26 Buildings on sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths shall achieve a minimum of two of the following: Variation in height of building modules across the site, Variation in massing achieved through upper floor setbacks, the roofscape form and variation in upper floor heights, Variation in building favade heights or cornice line 1.27 A new building should step down in scale to respect the height, form and scale of a historic building within its immediate setting. 1.28 New development adjacent to a single story historic building that was originally constructed for residential use shall not exceed 28 ft. in height within 30 ft. of the side property line adjacent to the historic structure within the same block face. Exhibit B-Commercial Design Review -Commercial Design Guidelines, Commercial Character Area Page 6 of 6 Exhibit C - Special Review for Trash/Utility/Recycle Area See. 26.430.040. Review standards for special review. No development subject to special review shall be permitted unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all standards and requirements set forth below. E. Utility/trash service area. Whenever a special review is conducted to determine a change in any utility/trash service area requirements, it shall be considered in accordance with the standards set forth at Section 26.575.060. See. 26.575.060. Utility/trash/recycle service areas. B. Review standards for reduction of dimensions. The Planning and Zoning Commission may reduce the dimensions of a utility/trash/recycle service area by following special review procedures set forth at Chapter 26.430 if: 1. There is a demonstration that, given the nature of the potential uses of the building and its total square footage, the utility/trash/recycle service area proposed to be provided will be adequate. Staff FindinEs: There is an existing utility box at the corner of the site at the alley and Hunter Street. This will remain in the same location, with an added screen. The spacing is adequate to serve the building. The applicant has revised the area to ensure there is adequate space for trash and recycle bins. The applicant has originally proposed an 8 foot by 8 foot area, which did not provide enough space. The applicant revised the plans based on direction from the Environmental Health Department. The revisions includes space for a large dumpster as well as 4 recycling bins. There is a wall running east-west along the rear of the recycling bins. Staff recommends removing this wall to allow great ability for trash and recycle haulers to access the dumpster. Staff believes the area is adequate and the criterion is met. 2. Access to the utility/trash/recycle service area is adequate. Staff Findinws: Staff has some concerns regarding the ability of haulers to access the trash and recycling bins, and therefore recommends the east-west wall along the recycling bins be removed. With this change staff finds the criterion to be met. 3. Measures are provided for enclosing trash bins and making them easily movable by trash personnel. Staff Findinits: Again, with the removal of the wall by the recycling bins staff believes the space will be adequate. Staff finds the criterion is met. Exhibit C - Special Review for Trash/Utility/Recycle Area Page 1 of 2 4. When appropriate, provisions for trash compaction are provided by the proposed development and measures are taken to encourage trash compaction by other development in the block. Staff Findinjts: No trash compaction is proposed as part of this application. Staff finds this criterion is not applicable. 5. The area for public utility placement and maintenance is adequate and safe for the placement of utilities. Staff Findinlts: The utility area is located right off of the alley, enabling easy and safe access. Staff finds this criterion is met. 6. Adequate provisions are incorporated to ensure the construction of the access area. Staff Findinas: These areas are integral to the building and have been incorporated into the design of the building. Staff finds this criterion is met. Exhibit C - Special Review for Trash/Utility/Recycle Area Page 2 of 2 Exhibit D - Development Review Committee Comments Environmental Health: After reviewing the plans and visiting the site, the Environmental Health Department feels the proposed trash area of 8ft x 8ft is not adequate to provide trash and recycling storage for the building at 602 East Hyman Avenue. The space needs to be large enough to accommodate a 2 yard dumpster (7ft x 3.5 ft) and 4 recycling/composting toters (3.5ft x 2.5 ft). There must also be adequate space for users to access all bins and for the trash hauling company to remove all bins. These requirements may be able to be met by extending the trash area in length. The current design only allows space for 3 recycling toters and does not provide adequate space for a user to access the bins. Parks: Landscaping and Sidewalk Landscaped area: Landscaping in the public right of way will be subject to landscaping in the ROW requirements, Chapter 21.20. There shall be no plantings within the City ROW which are not approved by the City Parks Department and the Engineering Department. Parks is concerned with any improvements to the sidewalk area. The applicant has expressed interested, and is supported by Parks, in saving the larger spruce trees planted with in the Hunter street courtyards. Changes in elevation On Hunter and Ilyman will have impacts to the success ofthese trees. Tree Permit: Per City Code 13.20 an approved tree permit will be required before any tree is removed or impacted under the drip line of the tree. Parks is requiring that the tree permit be approved prior to approval of building permits. If a permit is necessary, contact the City Forester at 920-5120. Mitigation for removals will be paid cash in lieu or on site per City Code 13.20. Parks will approve a final landscape plan during the review o f the tree removal permit based on the landscape estimates. Tree Protection: 1) A vegetation protection fence shall be erected at the drip line of each individual tree or groupings o f trees remaining on site and their represented drip lines. A formal plan indicating the location of the tree protection will be required for the bldg permit set. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, storage of equipment, foot or vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree remaining on site. This fence must be inspected by the city forester or his/her designee (920-5120) before any construction activities are to commence. As referenced in Chapter 13.20 Public Court Yards/Street Facing Amenity: 1) On page 6 and 7 the applicant refers to improvements within the existing court yards. Parks would prefer to see a concept of the "improvements" in order to better understand and prevent impacts to the existing trees. At this point parks could not support any improvements that include excavation, plantings of materials greater than small annual plantings within a designated space. Exhibit D - DRC Comments Page 1 of 1 Proposed Third Floor: The applicant is encouraged to work closely with the City Forester in order to reduce conflicts between the development of the third floor and the existing trees. Engineering: Sidewalk needs to be ADA compliant which means the stairs need to be replaced with complaint ramps. Additionally the site must comply with the URMP. Plans don't show how that will be achieved. Exhibit D - DRC Comments Page 2 of 2 Exhibit E: 26.710.150. Commercial (C-1) Zone District A. Purpose. The purpose of the Commercial (C-1) Zone District is to provide for the establishment of mixed-use buildings with commercial uses on the ground tloor and opportunities for affordable and free-market residential density. A transition between the commercial core and surrounding residential neighborhoods has been implemented through a slight reduction in allowable floor area as compared to the commercial core, the ability to occupy the ground floor with offices, and a separate chapter in the commercial design guidelines. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District: 1. Uses allowed on upper floors: Lodging, affordable multi-family housing, free-market multi-family housing and home occupations. 2. Uses allowed on all building levels: Retail and restaurant uses, neighborhood commercial uses, service uses, office uses, arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, recreational uses, academic uses, child care center, bed and breakfast, accessory uses and structures, uses and building elements necessary and incidental to uses on other floors, including parking accessory to a permitted use, storage accessory to a permitted use, farmers' market, provided that a vending agreement is obtained pursuant to Section 15.04.350(b). Parking shall not be allowed as the sole use of the ground floor. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: 1. Lodging, affordable multi-family housing, free-market multi-family housing or home occupations on the ground floor. 2. Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Section 26.515. 3. For historic landmark properties: Detached residential dwelling, two (2) detached residential dwellings and duplex dwelling. D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District: 1. Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): a. Detached residential dwelling, two (2) detached residential dwellings, duplex dwelling and bed and breakfast: 3,000. b. All other uses: No requirement. 2. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet): a. Detached residential dwelling, two (2) detached residential dwellings, duplex dwelling and bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: No requirement. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): a. Detached residential dwelling, two (2) detached residential dwellings, duplex dwelling and bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. Exhibit E - C-1 Zone District Page 1 of 1 b. All other uses: No requirement. 4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): a. Detached residential dwelling, two (2) detached residential dwellings, duplex dwelling and bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: No requirement. 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): a. Detached residential dwelling, two (2) detached residential dwellings, duplex dwelling and bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: No requirement. 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): a. Detached residential dwelling, two (2) detached residential dwellings, duplex dwelling and bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: No requirement. 7. Minimum utility/trash/recycle area: Pursuant to Section 26.575.060. 8. Maximum height: a. Detached residential dwelling, two (2) detached residential dwellings, duplex dwelling and bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: twenty-eight (28) feet for two-story elements of a building. Thirty-six (36) feet for three-story elements of a building, which may be increased to forty (40) feet through commercial design review. See Chapter 26.412. 9. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): a. Detached residential dwelling, two (2) detached residential dwellings, duplex dwelling and bed and breakfast: Same as R-6 Zone District. b. All other uses: No requirement. 10. Public amenity space: Pursuant to Section 26.575.030. 11. Floor area ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively up to a total maximum FAR of 2.5:1. Achieving the maximum floor area ratio is subject to compliance with applicable design standards, view plane requirements, public amenity requirements and other dimensional standards. Accordingly, the maximum FAR is not an entitlement and is not achievable in all situations. a. Commercial uses: 1.5:1. b. Arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, recreational uses, academic uses, child care center and similar uses: 2.5:1. c. Affordable multi-family housing: No limitation. d. Lodging: .5: 1, which may be increased to 1.5:1 if the individual lodge units on the parcel average five hundred (500) net livable square feet or less, which may be comprised of lock-off units. Exhibit E - C-1 Zone District Page 2 of 2 e. Free-market multi-family housing: .5:1, which may be increased to .75:1 if affordable housing equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the free-market residential floor area is developed on the same parcel. f. Detached residential dwellings. duplex dwellings and bed and breakfast (as the sole use of parcel and not cumulative with other uses): Eighty percent (80%) of allowable floor area of a same-sized lot located in the R-6 Zone District. (See R-6 Zone District.) Extinguishment of historic TDRs shall not permit additional FAR for single-family or duplex development. 12. Maximum multi-family residential dwelling unit size (square feet): 2,000 square feet of net livable area. a. The property owner may increase individual multi-family unit size by extinguishing historic transferable development right certificates ("certificate" or "certificates"), subject to the following: 1. The transfer ratio is five hundred (500) square feet of net livable area for each certificate that is purchased. 2. The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units. However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring development rights is two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet of net livable area (i.e., no more than five hundred [500] additional square feet may be applied per unit). 3. This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development rights does not allow an increase in the FAR of the lot. Commentary: Refer to Chapter 26.535 R,r the procedures for extinguishing certificates. 13. Maximum lodge unit size (square feet): 1,500. When units are comprised of lock-off units, this maximum shall apply to the largest possible combination of units. 14. Commercial/residential ratio: The total lodging and free-market residential net livable area shall be no greater than the total above-grade floor area associated with the uses described in Subparagraphs 26.710.150.D.11.a. and b. combined on the same parcel. (Ord. No. 56-2000, Â§Â§7 [pan], 12,15; Ord. No. 25-2001, Â§5 [part]; Ord. No. 1-2002, Â§20; Ord. No. 28b-2004, Â§1; Ord. No. 12-2006, Â§11; Ord. No. 11,2007, Â§2; Ord. No. 27-2010. Â§4) Exhibit E - C-1 Zone District Page 3 of 3 FE- 24\-ID'.1 (1 ZONE CU ARCHITECTS LLC June 13, 2012 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Jessica Garrow Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Amended Application 1 602 East Hyman Avenue Conceptual Commercial Design Review Dear Jessica: This letter and additional material represents an amendment to the original application for conceptual commercial design review approval for the development of a third floor addition to the existing building located at 602 east Hyman Avenue in the City of Aspen, dated April 30, 2012. The documents within this package illustrate the following revisions: â€¢ Per Community Development staff request, the foremost mass towards East Hyman Avenue has been relocated to the north side of the building adjacent to the alley. This reduces the third floor massing near the intersection of East Hyman Avenue and Hunter Street. â€¢ Secondary to the relocated massing is that the rooftop deck area has been decreased and additional deck area has been added to the third level near the corner of East Hyman Avenue and Hunter Street. Glass guardrails will be used to minimize visual screening. â€¢ Per Community Development staff request, we have revised the sloped roof on the third floor to a flat roof. This has been done to address the original architectural massing of the building. â€¢ The originally proposed corrugated metal siding on the third floor addition has been replaced with wood siding. Metal panels are proposed for the stair structure adjacent to 610 East Hyman Avenue on the north side (alley). â€¢ The vertical circulation has been consolidated, which simplifies its functionality at each fioor while addressing code requirements. â€¢ Per the City of Aspen Environmental Health Departments request, the site plan has been revised to include 4 recycling / composting bins and a 2 cubic yard trash dumpster. An additional fence has been added to screen the recycling bins from the alley. Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please feel free to contact us. L-------Dylan Johni, P - cipal Zone~A rchitects VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning Consultants June 13, 2012 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Jessica Garrow Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 602 East Hyman Avenue Conceptual Commercial Design Review Application I)ear Jessica: As we have discussed, the various revisions to the proposed 602 East Hyman Avenue project which the Applicant proposes to make in response to various staff review comments has resulted in minor changes to the project's dimensional data. The revised project, however, continues to comply with all applicable dimensional requirements of tile C- 1, Commercial, zone district. The revised project data is summarized below. 1. Free Market Unit Net Livable Area: 2,409 Sq. Ft. 2. Proposed Floor Area: 8,745 Sq. Ft. Commercial: 3,392 Sq. Ft. Free Market Residential: 3,000 Sq. Ft. Affordable Housing: 1,934 Sq. Ft. Other (roof overhangs, etc.): 419 Sq. Ft. 3. Commercial Net Leasable Area: 4,548 Sq. Ft. 4. Affordable Housing Unit Net Livable Area: 1,623 Sq. Ft. 5. Maximum Height (measured to top of highest roof): 33.6 Feet The revisions to the project's design are summarized in the accompanying letter from Zone 4 Architects and depicted on their revised architectural drawings. RO. Box 4827 Â· Basalt, Colorado 81621 Â· 970/925-6958 Â· Fax 970/920-9310 vannassociates@comcast.net Ms. Jessica Garrow June 13, 2012 Page 2 Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Yours truly, VANN~BSOCIATES, LLC ~Uyi~Vann . 11 Ssfcwv d:\oldc\bus\city.ltr\Itr58912.jg3 ZONE ACCm, 4,Â£. - 141 1.4 JUN 1 9 44Â¢ La U C rrY A. ARCHITECTS NEW FENCE TO SCREEN-1 , V, 712 DEÂ·k~K>-0,4 ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER, \ VIdENT WWW . ZON.4AFICHITECTS . COM UC. P.O. BOX 2808 PARKING. RECYCLING, AND ASPEN CO 81012 TRASH NEW 2 YARD-x DUMPSTER PAVED PARKING RECYCLE BINS , \ 1 ALLEY PROPEr~ A (4- 3.5Â·*2.57 \~ ~ BOUNDARY Â£ 1 -~ - 1 ! 2 3 4 ~ -90 TEXISTING RETAINING ~ WALL NEXT DOOR sio -7 97 . 1 SES-- EXISTING LANDSCAPE ~ UP AREA TO REMAIN En 1 3 OVERHANG ABOVE MEW 1 / -4 1 TO FF t!&1 1 . 1 .,-. j T--3 L-1~ | 1-OUTLINE OF i 1.-0 r ------ Blm.DINGABOVE MEQM J - J 0 O OFFICE Cl un EXISTING . (COOMERCIAL) 1- BUILDING STORAGEn BELOW ~ 0 . 40 <COMMERCIAL) I EXISTINGn MECH OFFICE - L...1 , D-,lud , L 0 - 14 r 21 - COURTYARD TO BE REMODELED k 2----UP--- .T.O. F.F. BASEMENT LEVE - up - ~I EL. +91'.71/2. OVERHANG ABOVE 21. 1 Ir= 1 ~ - EL- +100*-00 , T.OF.F. MAIN LEVEL O 1 OFFICE 9 \ OUTLINE OF rPLANTER - ., 23 U J ~._|~ FEXISTING COURTYARD / TO BE REMODELED (COMMERCIAL) ~ COURTYARD ~ (co826-1 -l NEIGHBORING BUILDING ~ COURTYARD Â®TO. F-F.MAINI-EVEL EL.+10(-O /-OUTLINE OF LANDSCAPE-1 11, 2 ~/ NEIGHBORING BUILDING AREA - LIGHT POST 1 \Â»-1 D ex / 4. --- - AND SIGN DI 06,:3.20:2 AMENDED APP. Â¥ li 10 94300 il IN: EAST HYMAN AVE. hgo: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN 01/ 0 I MAY, 20 I 2 D-1 1* NORTH NORTH PROPOSED SITE / 81 /-.\ PROPOSED BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN rh /-\ PROPOSED SITE PLAN ~ BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN jz E) 1/8Â·= 1,-0Â· 8) 1/8"= 1'-0' -1. A300: BE 1300W3~I NVWAH oonlolo) 'N38V '31111AÂ¥ NVIAH 15Â¥3 I09 Glt,m mel, TH 83Ili llamwO] 91,lIOnl]111 ttlet~ OU~lin 1,10 â„¢ 00 001= Awl 1,011110} â„¢ IllÂ¥13117011 ]TI toiLII[m i 32! NI tolillow i 31101 m il=mlal Nlill,Al ,0111 3H1 li,Olutit 01,0] lo Ont le int Nou,WION,1 illit Jo.IN~ %2 m~2~v~u.~ ~ -W-Â»fll+H] IF ZONE ARCHITECTS LLC. P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW . ZON.4ARCHITECTS. COM /- OUTLINE OF BUILDING ~ TWO STORIES ABOVE rll, l j , PAVED PARKING V 1~ 7.-L 1.1 .111// / - r---------------t I 4/ NEW 2 YARD-, DUMPSTER \~ -OUTLINE OF 1/9 A BUILDING ABOVE RECYCLE BINS 1 (3.5')(2.5') ~ =6 =C . L - P/Â«/- - UTILITY METERS -7 BEHIND DOORS \~ | ~ DN up 1H NEWFENCE ~ ~ ~ 41 \"/1 LOBBY MECHANICAL C I EMP V STOR. -ira - DN *INEOFn 11__ BUILDING ABOVE 6 AFJ2 A ~ OFFICE ~ T O. F.F SECOND LEVEL (COMMERCIAL) f-L EL. +109 21/2Â· DN : 7 Le lCDMMERCIAL.1 5* - 1 LU-U--1/ OPEN / - 7-1 u -- EMPLOYEE HOUSING - i UNIT #1 --- -- Uton -up TO. F.F. MAIN LEVEL ~ ~1 EL +100'-0Â· 1 J Â»Â«-f ~t_f Â® -3~CEn*=1==I~Â»==4 -NEW WINDOW 41 TAL) 2 OUTLINE OF OUTLINE OF Â®TO FF.SECOND LEVEL OFFICE N- NEIGHBORING COURTYARD NEIGHBORING (COMMERCIAL) T COURTYARD BUILDING . BUILDING EL. +109 21/7 . T.O. F.F. MAIN LEVEL 1 - F COURTYARD 3 ' EL,+100'-0â€¢ ,=rNG u NITTO BE REMODEED Z BELOW >G TOMEEITADAREQUIRBIENTS =C up 1 ~ 4% r) f [117 1 1/L GUARDRAIL / ROOF BELOW _1_ _- 1' 4 \ ~ |-~- LPLANTER OUTLINE OF -~ BUILDING ABOVE Ol 06.I 3.lon AMENDED APP. 4> 1.0 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN " IDE NORTH NORTH Ol MAY, 20ll /-1 PROPOSED FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~~ r-3 PROPOSED SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~~ D,7-1 1* ~/ 1/8" =1'=0" 419 1/8" = 1'-0Â· PROPO$ED FIRST / SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN iheel # A301 130OW31I NVWAH 1SV 3 I09 00Â¥11010) 'NI3dfV '3AN3AÂ¥ NVWAH 1Â§93 t09 ambill UIM m ~011,31Lt 11191,UO] 91,lum]Ill ttlm OdÂ¥313, 131UD m 011, IMÂ¥1& MYI 11011110] m NI,13, â„¢Ils OTI U]ill,0,Â¥ , 1110! ]Ti will,DÂ¥Â¥ 4 3Â»01 B 110IBimd Nnll,M Iolid gill 180Hlw 0,WO] 10 03Sll 38 AÂ¥W NOUMOINI Â§lili 10 1,Â¥d ON Â·m 31]lINÂ¥ 4 DZ JO 11,3,0,4 3Ill il Ulll,fDOO SIH,1 NO 0@NIÂ¥1Â»0] I ND,$10 allÂ¥ NOUÂ¥IllIO,Ill ll,1 Jll 11)11:ID,â€ž BNOZ Zler Â® in01Ull MIOUU 1034Â§ 2 5541,*no 3$3111 M S3911nl] ,01 ]1111 111Â¥ 1, TNISMOdS]I YO ]11Â¥Il lON il iD]LIH]Ill , 31101 ZONE PC /21 Xte V AREA OF POTENTIAL ARCHITECTS ROOFTOP MECHANICAL LLC. L-/ EQUIPMENT, p.o. Box 2508 i - - - MAXIMUM 2Â·-6" TO 3Â·-0" ASPEN CO 81S12 ABOVE ROOFTOP WWW . ZONEAARCHITECTS . COM /2/94 - (EL 133'.6Â· TO EL134'-0") ELEV~~ORSHN~n-~ I p-Â·-U -STAIR LANDING BELOW 2 . --fl. 2 -NEW ROOF ~Â·-OUTLINE OF / STRUCTURE BELOW LP T*7[ a MEN =~r ~ 4 ON_ . AREA OF POTENTIAL ROOFTOP 7 1\\ -ROOPTOP~ MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, . DECK - MAXIMUM 3'-0Â· TO 4Â·-0â€¢ ABOVE - - \14.1 PARAPET / GUARDRAIL ROOFTOP (EL 134% TO EL.135'-09 - -PLANTING AREAS 1 OUTLINE OF EXISTING -1 *T.O. F.F. THIRD LEVEL PARAPET BELOW \~ 4 (GREEN ROOF) EXISTING ROOF- EL.+119:5 3/4' _ EXISTING ROOF -1 1 BELOW 4 .171 NEW 1 ~ FREE MARKET OUTLINE OF-~ RESIDENTIAL UNIT STRUCTURE ' ~ NEW ROOF ~ BELOW 1 r- kbtlÂ»S342* -~ r\ all / ~3057 9,3057 L 11 L-------- 1 f ~- OUTLINE OF 1 - ~, ~, ~-EXISTING ROOF ~ STRUCTURE BELOW - \\ LOUTLINE OF OUTLINE OF ROOF ABOVE GUARDRAIL BELOW -~ ~ 1 1 NEW ROOF -OUTLINE OF EXISTING STAIR BELOW 7 PARAPET BELOW 122 : Â»39/ VA304/ t ~I--GUARDRAIL =~-~ ~ OUTUNE OF EXISTING ROOF BELOW -, NEIGHBORING BUILDING I DECK \ \cOUTLINEOF NEIGHBORING BUILDING ~ ~GUARDRAIL F COURTYARD ~ OUTLINE OF PARAPET-x 1 ~ BELOW OUTLINE OF PARAPET -, BELOW " OUTLINE OF STRUCTURE .. BELOW ~ 1___________ 0 DI 06.Illoll AMENDED APP. bl=: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN NORTH NORTH ./ 01 MAY, 2012 /-3 PROPOSED THIRD LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~ 6/ 1/8. = 1'-0 r.7 PROPOSED ROOF PLAN ~~ 21/ 1/8"= 1'-0" PROPOSED THIRD / ROOF DrlÂ»~i T~t LEVEL FLOOR PUN h.. 13OOW31I NVWAH 1SV3 I09 00Â¥1010) 'NldfÂ¥ '3nN3AÂ¥ NYWAH 15Â¥3 f09 .. ~ CARPORT / \ CARPORT / 3 - ZONE \OVERHANG/ \OVERHANG / ___ (2581:. Exr (256tf. EVT) -1 55:OX.:+ L 1 LEGEND 9 NET LEASABLE AREA -122*Unt . Â», + . 1+ + + .#. ~~~~ (COMMERCIAL) +++++ COMMON AREA â€¢r-*41...9- +++++++ NET LIVABLE AREA /LELLL x0>1 +:+:+:+:+:D:+:+*+++ + +--+-++ 1 +A+++++ ARCHITECTS (NEW RESIDENTIAL) EkELL DECK AREA ./,+I++ LLC. P. O. BOX 2500 ...+. ASPEN CO 81612 ~ NET LIVABLE AREA -j Uuk // 1/ ++ MECHANICAL WWW . ZON.4ARCHITECTS . COM (NEW EMPLOYEE UNITS) OVERHANG AREA -JI --34Â«~- J -4 L 111 /2- _ -1 TOTAL PROPOSED AREA: ...+ 11 < 4 inliiylliLl;111221%%#w. TOTAL BUILDING FLOOR AREA: 8745.0 S.F. TOTAL COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA: 3392.2 S.F. (INCLUDES 25% OF CA.) - -71Â»2Â»44/ Â»p//~l~,//ff~Â« -' jqfl/lil//~lllWNljglgNÂ»mil- TOTAL NET LEASABLE AREA: 4548.1 S.F. (COMMERCIAL) TOTAL NEW RES. FLOOR AREA: 2999.9 S.F. (INCLUDES 50% OF C.A.) Â£#f flf~iÂ¢*~4 I F-rifl~/44 -74 (NEW RESIDENTIAL) 111> im lill i, illi<ill TOTAL NET LIVABLE AREA: 2408.5 S.F. - ill//i////0Â« ullillilliTTFC#Rial /8~ // ~11 7* /1////1 (NEW RESIDENTIAL) TOTAL EMP. HSNG FLOOR AREA: 1933.6 S.F. (INCLUDES 25% OF C.A.) _U_ _ _U_ _ 1 111 jill 11 ||11 11 424i-K //// //// //// ~ FLOOR AREA: 3018.4 S.F. TOTAL NET LIVABLE AREA: 1623.0 S.F. (NEW EMPLOYEE UNITS) (INCLUDING OVERHANG) NORâ„¢ Nt!/ll Ill / 1/~ / r COU-RD---~ ~~ t"' ~~ OVERHANG: 130,9 S.F. TOTAL COMMON AREA: 698.5 S.F. .V -- COURTYARD COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA 2440 5 S.F /-h SECOND LEVEL AREA PLAN ~~ 1111/ ~/ 1 7 1 NET LEASABLE AREA. 2175,2 S.F. (COMMERCIAL) 1' 231 Â»AAAAAAAAP COMMON AREA 258 4 S.F FLOOR AREA: 3076.0 S.F. -1--1 /--0 = (INCLUDING OVERHANGS) OVERHANGS: 49.0 S F. IhiNAAAA/iÂ»eV7)...'.9% EMP HOUSING FLOOR AREA 1759 OSF , TEEE EEEE:EE;EE 43:Â»Pf~%12.:%:95 212 NET LIVABLE AREA. 1623.0 S F. (EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNIT 1) NORTH EXTERIOR DECK / STAIR AREA 68 9 S.F. /3\ FIRST LEVEL AREA PLAN ~~ ~ (EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNIT 1) >.2888% 6) 1/8'-1'-0 COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREAÂ· 7771 S.F NET LEASABLE AREA 720 4 S.F. (COMMERCIAL) COMMON AREA: 440.1 S.F. 1/Ii / -1 / 0 MECH - ' ~.-..Â·.Â·Â·>. 26~413>Â·?.jÂ·:4>945<.*27..>4.<Â·2222 -0 -1Â« L . (LINh Ol 06.:3.2011 AMENDED APP. ~ /LLILLL- vffÂ»4/4//4*fril///////P-u --- /1-T-7 r T T 1 444+44=+ 3TFFTFFEFFF31 1 lill'Illill~1~1 2 2 1=1: *@ T '. CONCEPTUAL DESIGN &E NORTH - THIRD LEVEL AREA PLAN ~ 3 - 1. t8) 1/8"=1'-0" I. -= 01 MAY, 2012 @i PROPOSEDNboR PLAN ~i NET LEASABLE AREAÂ· 1652 5 S - (COMMERCIAL) AREA ; 0 - 29 =LOOR AREA 2650.6 S.F ~ NORâ„¢ ----- A3O3 i ALL NEW RESIDENTIAL-) lai NET LIVABLE AREA: 2408.5 S.F. THIRD LEVEL DECK AREA. 285.4 S.FE /--h BASEMENT LEVEL AREA PLAN ~~ ROOF TOP DECK AREA+ 163.6 S.F. TOTAL DECK AREA: 449.0 S.F. ~ 1/8"= 1'-0= 13GOW3E NVWAH 1SVB I09 00Â¥,010] 'NldfV '3nN3AÂ¥ NYWAH 193 [09 (IM,m UHDIWI P '013,3IU 11IDIU,101 9Nlom]NI IllÂ®Ill 039]531 UILLO m OllÂ¥ INOintÂ¥h MVI NOWWO) TY IllYÂ£1, TlVIA ]11 101!lID,V , 3,IDI Jn 11)111IDIIÂ¥ , @NOZ 40 NOmIWY 3d Nitull lold )Hl ltIONRM 039 10 0 jill 3, AYW NollÂ¥I,lodNI Â§,Ill 30 ~W~~4~~t~~~ 1011~~3*J23;WjmhAH9 ZONE [LO.'ATORD[YOND OUAADRAJLBEYOND 11[101]Tulrr i -19/ f f N NEIGHBORINGBUILDING -- ~rl 610 HYMAN PROPOSED Â®T.O. ROOF / PARAPET EL.+133 r *T.O. PAW'ET â€¢, EL.+131'-8 3/40 66'JO OUARDW ~ ARCHITECTS NEIGHBORING BUILDING LLC. 0 09,0 0 0 FRONTFACâ€¢DE ----- ASPEN CO 81812 P.O. SOX 2/0/ WWW . ZONIMICHrECTS COM 4 / ~ ~ I T.O. PARAPET / I EL. +120'-13/4 / *T.OF.F. THIRD LEVEL EL.+119'-5 3/4' CEMENTTTIOUC | r,%1!CTED V.'ODD COMPOSITE / SIDING MATER* 4 1 + 4 1 0 C .00* I -1 11 /1--~ TK - -3- - - - -- - Â®T.O. F.F. SECOND LEVEL EL. +109'-21/2Â· MÂ£ 14 Â«91Â« 4, 0** -30 - --10 =Lulf , T.O. F.F. FIRST LEVEL EL. +100'-0' EXISTING GRADE CONCRETE FOUNDATION BELOW L] r.) PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION ~5/ 3/18Â· = lia" 1100i{T LIMIT ru.,(Tut,Â·rlo.(onroi ncorÂ·) OU,VlfJrL'IL He*rr LIMIT - .APIUBEYO,E) ~ TO GUARDRAIL / Â® EL.+134'-53/4Â· Â® T.O. ROOF / PAIWETS I EL.+1337 11 . 11 --7 \\21Â«41 Â® T.O. PARAPET 1 EL. +131'-8 3/4' T.O. ROOF DECK ~EL.+130'-11 3/4â€¢ -WIC}/81/NG 0 8 NEW RESIDENTIAL UNIT ~ 1--2- ~ r-- - TO. PARAPET CEME,InTIOUS -1 ~ ---------------- u. - -~ /~~?b.+F.FO'TH~4DLEVEL COMPOSITE mIERk S. - I "EL.+119 53/4' 11 = 1% i C. /6- I [fl O O- COMMERCIAL I tz, ,.12 2111 - Â§= ol 06.I].20:2 AMENDED) AFF. f ~ Z Â®T.O. F.F SECOND LEVEL 0 6 EL. â€¢log 21/2Â· (01 111 lili - == 13 1 1 III"ir. ror~OROL.40 -- COMMERCIAL MECHANICAL_ Â»42 1 8 oxisT.c on,Â·,cc ~ - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN *111 1 \\1 1 1 . TO, FF. FIRST LEVEL -Â· IEL.+100'-O C= - -------,-~-----A Da. EXISTING GRADE L-PAINTED CMU = ZE 7==== Ol MAY, 20ll COMMERCIAL r- -: r* --1/RETE.Oul,DATION I BELOW PROPOSED BE Â®T.O. F.F. BASEMENT LEVEL ELEVATIONS ~am EL. +91'-71/2Â· 5611 IS M :g /-1 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION l917 3/16"=1'-0" A304 li 1~11Heal 13OOW3~I NVWAH 1SÂ¥3 t09 00Â¥11010] 'N3dSÂ¥ 'inNAAÂ¥ NVWAH lin T09 0]Anilll ttlell mt Â·01]nit[ 1,mlldo) 9Nlonl]NI 31HDI, CE,3$31 Illl.10 Tn, Ull, lioll,1Â¥U MÂ¥1 NOWHO] Tly IllÂ¥131 1TVHS ]TI 11)11]I[m , DIOZ NI fl}11]Il]Â¥ i 3NOZ W WOIS,Ill,lid N3J11~M ,Olld 3HI NIOIUIM 01W0] 90 01 11 AVW MOUVI,10 JNI Slill jO.~~~~~~~~~~~~'~~ 10( 59,Il,Am ]Â§]H, 1 DNÂ¥H) ANÂ¥ ~3HfDO(] WH1 NO ~lll~;11,0] iN31,I~~~I;~~~; ~ ZONE TOPOFELEVATORBEYOM). REFER TO WEST ELEVATION FOR HEIGHT CONFORMANCE NEIGHBORÂ»iG BUILDING - METAL PANELING -GUARD)RAIL ,~ ROOF 'PARAPET' HEIGHT LIMHT 610 HYMAN FO~ BEYOND PROPOSED>HEIGHT . T.O. GUARDRAIL IEF+134'-5 3/4 T O. ELEVATOR -_3~3~17_9_- ------- T.O. ROOF/PAUPETS EL. +133-7' T.O. PARAPET EL +131 -8 3/4' ARCHITECTS P.O.BOX 2508 ASPEN CO B1612 h WWW . liNE*Al,CHIECTS COM T O. PARAPET EL. +120'-13/4' T.O. F.F. THIRD LEVEL EL.+119'-5 3/T CEMENTI'OUSCOMPOSITE MATERIâ€¢,L T.0 F F SECOND LEVEL EL. +109-21/2Â· rk==T - 4 1--4 L _ T.O. F.F. FIRST LEVEL EL. +100Â·-0' EXISTINGGRM,DE i --3 1 E-- -3 r 1 1 1 ~ CONCRETE FOUNDATION | BELOW L________1 d_-____3 - PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION (2~311Â¥219 r=.TOP OF STAIR TOWER BEYOND. WOODSIDING -LIVING ROOM ROOF 8EYO~ -HEIGHT.M. REFER ro NOIrrH ELEVATION GUARDRAIL --1-------- FOR HEIGHT CONFORMANCE BEYONO -------- --- T.O. ELEVATOR EL. +134'-0' - T.O ROOF # PARAPETS EL +133 r T.O. PARAPET EL.+131'-8 3/40 iL G WOOD SIDING 0 4 GLASS GUARDRAIL T.O. PARAPET EL +120'-1 3/4 T.O. F.F THIRD LEVEL + 5 EL +119'-5 3/4 MATER]AL -1= CEMENTITIOUS E--------T----------------------------------------------1 '. ./ COMPOSITE 1 01 1 06,13.2012 AMENDED APP. 1 IE IL T.O. F.F. SECOND LEVEL 6-- --- - --- EL.+109-2 1/2' I2C PAINTED CMU 0 0 + . TO. F F FIRST LEVEL - .T.O. F.F ALLEY EL. +100'4Â» h~e, 'EL. +99'4 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN &5 CEMENT1TiOUS COMPOSITE I EXISTINGGRADE Dal ~ERIAL QI MAY, 20 Il MATERIAL PAINTED CMU ~ PAINTED CMU | ~ - CONCRETE FouNDATION PROPOSED) ~ 0-1 WI ST~/TO*RB)/ ~ BELOW {METAL SIOING) --3 ELEVATIONS She.t # - PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION Erie--re- A305 2 111"In 1HS,3H 130OW3X NVWAH 1SV 3 Z09 00Â¥yolo) 'N3dSÂ¥ '3nN3AÂ¥ NYWAH 15Â¥3 I09 Moll Ulm TÂ¥ +013131Lt DI91*WO) 91,IOnDII 111,1 0893$31 131110 â„¢ 011, 1,01A1Â¥15 AWI 11011110] T,V IllÂ¥13, Tmlt ]TI $1)31110,Â¥ 1 31101 ]11 11)11111),f , 3110~ 30 110I!$11â€žkI NInll,All lolld )Hl mOHt]M 03W0) 10 03$0 li m NOUÂ¥11101Ill gill 10 ild~ &11~110 ~iNV~19 91Â§~ li; 110*WAOINI 3~lo-W,I~iT, ZONE ~ Ill]11111111!JJ1111110112. U.1-l .['_11]111.11.[[1-Ill ' ARCHITECTS -21_1111 A[UACENTBUILDING' LLC. -L -4.~*TÂ·Â·4- '.2 1 ___ - Tr P.O. BOX 2508 -EliFF@11- -- 810 EASTHYMANIVENUE , ASPEN CO 81812 WWW . ZONE./.HITECTS . COM %\ 4 ,/0.IF. THI R. â€¢11.-62/92 I 0 2 % 6 * 16 2, - I '* 1 M :*~=#-ifg~~::~I~:~2:~En 2.4:?*il.IN:3 - ,TIFF IEGONDIEVE1 1 ==f f EL +10~-2 17- ----JI- -r 2 9 - , TO. F F. Fl.T LEVEL 4-1 1 1 11 - 1111111 : . E- -----/ EL +100-0' ~ _1 602 EAST HYMAN AVENUE 610 EAST HYMAN AVENUE ~ Pr- HYMAN AVENUE ELEVATION 111182.- I PROPOSE'ADD,nON'EYOND. 610 EAST HYMAN AVENUE ' 4 Â«\\1=- - / =-=un---- .015;0;~ & - --===- I.O FF ..... I - EL ...34' 0 t v - H - 00 01 06.13.2012 AMENDED APP. I.OFFSECONDIML _ - 11-.-0---: 'EL +109'Â·21~F ~AN -ta 111111 L- : r -- -- . 1 1 1,1 1 MI i - 91 J Â® i. - TOFF FIRSTLEVEL 11111111111111111 1-- 1 11'llrll 100. - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN Cal 01 MAY, 20ll D-1 1// NOTEÂ· /-3 HUNTER STREET ELEVATION RENDERED ~/ 3/16"=1' - Or USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. ELEVATIONS 2- I THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE A306 memw#40 #colÂ®Oll}Ilitiol'l~E 1:*41,00Â®lion 130OW3X NVWAH 1SV 3 T09 00Â¥~010) 'NidSÂ¥ '31N3AV 1Â¥WAH 15Â¥3 T09 (]]Anin WI9I, m '01313* BDINWO) 9111001]NI $1847 01(Â¥353, UNLO â„¢ OIlÂ¥ AVOUUÂ¥8 AWI 1101,HO) m 11Â¥131 â„¢Ill -]13 $1]luID,Â¥ , 3110Z Â·]TI ;Dilillm , illoZ 10 101Â§111934 1,1Lill/A lolld 3111 lfIOHWA Olldo) ,0 03!n 3, AÂ¥11 11011Â¥Ii,Oilll illu 10 1,Â¥~I ON ]TI 11=Ult:&31:L=31:=:Ill= 1111Â¥=?=162'Sal:; #IM=Â§:VT,Jt]Y=Uzi,IMNZ ZONE EnT-, - *ACE~eUI~NGs ARCHITECTS PROPOSED..LEVELADDITION. - 810 EAST 1/*1WN AVENUE Â· i ~ LLC. Â· P.o. Box 2508 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW .ZON.........COM PROPOSEDADDITION- -Â·-*....:1#.,I...t--a.~.-I......F.... -/i. 61. EAST,r,-NAVENUE )- , T.O. F.F. THIRD LEVEL EL.+119'-5 3/4' 11 I h 1 ' P Â®TO. F.F. SECOND LEVEL . 3 ' â€¢Ft -1 -si,Fre" 93%* t. 'i -4414.5*99)41 - 1~ EL. +109'-21/7 -41 67 f ... ?32 I.IMM' Ill//IZI/// 'Tl \ 1=..11_...1[IC:.11;11 - 61.4 Â£ .- 11, . i '. 1 --d--- 9- 14 %*rttill FE,m . F~-~ 1 ! Â®T.O. F.F. FIRSTLEVEL EL.+100'< --- 2- '-1!11.-#' -Ali 41*t J. - I--I'lj" /'h NORTH (ALLEY) ELEVATION ~17 3/16*=10 - e HEIGHT~IM[T ...... 1.IGHTLNT Â«Â«11 .TO GUARDRAIL PARAPETIEVO~} 'OOD 30-6 -7 \ _ ,Â·11Â£:'m'3Â¥r rN - r .1.0. ROOF PARAPUS 'EL.+133 r O *T.O. PARAPET EL.+131 +8 34- 42 ':,TO ROOF DECK . '01 - *... &+'~.11* 1 -- MEI RESIDENnAL UNIT E 1 . T O. PaBAFE 1 .' 2 vEL +120-1 3,4- T OFF TH#H) LEVEL *~ ~EL +119-534' =- 16% El El -- iii IN 1. 9.-- - 1: 16 MI 1 . COMMERCIAL 9 14 , 01 06.13.2012 AMENDED APP. ~ ~ 1 i TOFF SECOND LEVEL - 2E -Â·STE~INF-J~) 11 COMMERCIAL 9 0 MEellANICAL -/ Ul EXISTiNG GRAD, 00 IIllllllllll IT.O F.F.FIRSTLEVEL b: ~ 'EL +100'4. - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN EmSINGG~#at " :m ~ 01 MAY, 20 Il ./ COMMERCIAL 15 - - 1-ICâ€¢ICIRE TE ~0-10*.ON ~ ~ _ BEL- RENDERED LE---------------14 - -- â€¢,1 +giÂ·-1-,51- ELEVATIONS ~ .TO FE BAS,=MENTIEVEL 541* I. (8Tj EAST (COURTYARD) ELEVATION NOTE: - 3/16" = 1'-0' THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. A306bli 1300W31I NVWAH 1SÂ¥3 am im illm Tv 0Â£113IU UI9I"UO) DNIOnl]Ill Vlelll Omjg Illl,10 11Â¥ 1 19031Â¥15 Atn I,011110} â„¢ NI,131 â„¢15 Â·]TI TDilll[]IV , 31101 ]11 &031110Â¥, 4 3110Z 10 NOISPI,3,l Nittllm Yolld ]Ill JAOIUIM 031,0] IO 03Â§11 l, m, NollÂ¥11,0,NI illl 10 9 NO 3111Â¥1110] 1~'LP'j:&% Nt=:r 0(In010) 'Nid;V '3nN3AÂ¥ NYWAH 15Â¥3 r09 ZONE PC ARCHITECTS UC. P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81612 WV.W .ZONIHICHITECTe. COM - 7 U.Ity, f. - 4. 1 ' 4/1 1 1 j/v 0 ... 7 IE; FL C L LI-~-1- LU -)HYMAN AVENUE (SOUTH) ELEVATION , - - 1. f 41 *- &94/Â·-9/-/-<I . Ck - U. ./8 6-#-7.:-- 372 E .: - 9 '-:. Â·Â·Â·UP .21' . 41 r . -I- ~1 , m= ~0 HUNTER STREET (WEST) ELEVATION = 01 06.13.2012 AMENDED APP. ~~ !5 m5 iE m% 09 - IE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN 3 5 Itt Ol MAY, 20 Il 512 =: D-,I ELEVATION ~i STREETSCAPE 5â€¢011 # . 61 A307 li 014,3Uy ill!9Ill 11Â¥ +0111@Ill JII!)I,WO) SNIOn'UNI 11,!Dn om,3131 ,]Ilio T), ollÂ¥ nollu,15 MÂ¥1 Nolillo] TN Ill,13, â„¢Ili JTI il]31Ill],Â¥ p ]Nor )11 $1)1Ull)ll, 4 BIOZ 10 NOMII,3, Ii]LU,M IOI,d ]Ill lfIOIUI,!* 036I0] 10 03ill 31 Alll NIOUVI,NO,Ill ill!1 10 NVWAH 1SV3 t09 00Â¥,010) 'N3d5Â¥ '3113AV NYWAH 15Â¥3 T09 ZONE PC ARCHITECTS LLC. P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO a 1612 VAVW . ZONEIARCHITECTS. COM * LU At 4 0 1 % L.-1 4 Itt , i , t :EC: .~ft,iegu Â·*/ - I. -*7.-f - VIEW TOWARDS NORHTWEST PRIMARY MATERIALS i 01 Oil].20ll AMENDED APP. ~ i -r-- - im E O= METAL PANEL PAINTED CEMENTITIOUS PAINTED WOOD ./ CONCRETE COMPOSITE WOOD SIDING CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ~s I. -- BLOCK Ol MAY, 20ll -* PERSPECTIVE NOTE: STREETS[APE THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE .111# USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. A308 - AL 00Â¥1010] 'N3d5Â¥ '3nN3AV NYWAH 1Â§13 IM 03!INM Ulelll m '013,]Ill 111911Wo] 9Nlom]NI â„¢Ill OMII]Â§31 131U0 m 011, 1101913 MVI 11011Â»0) 3 IllÂ¥,71 Tmli ']11 il],Ill[J~ 0 3110t 111 U]11]I[m , iNOZ 10 NOIHIW,30 Nil.11:Al IOI,d 3Â»1 1[10H11/A 03W0) ,0 03Â§11 31 1Â¥ld lIOUÂ¥11,03NI Will 10 ma oIl Â·]TI U)11111)n , 3Â»01 10 1113,101/ 9111 NO ME I N91 10 ON NOUVII,OINI 3111 NI '11]111HIV , INOZ ZIN W 1SV 3 I09 1 Â§39lfÂ¥ID lOl Wal AN lÂ¥ mlillodS]* 90 31,ll 10* il Â£1]11Ill),Â¥, ,NOZ ZONE PE ARCHITECTS LLC. P. O. .OX 2800 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW . ZONEINICHIECTS. COM . 0 , 8 .9 -7 f f I. 4 .U . UJ C= I: I -n :NE: 1 - 4- ./ .OB D Z ,< 3 , =9 - ....i .â€ž,e t .- Â·:,8,/Zg~*IÂ·- 23= 4. .- ....,Â£4 '*Â·'*7@@Mbeake''r: 'Â· 30 'Â· ..... . -I .&./.1.. - VIEW TOWARDS NORTHEAST PRIMARY MATERIALS Il 06.13.2012 AMENDED APP. ~ i - - .,1 -j - Eu * S. ---*I,# A. il METAL PANEL PAINTED CEMENTITIOUS PAINTED WOOD O M CONCRETE COMPOSITE WOOD SIDING BLOCK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN h. M. 01 MAY, 20ll NOTEÂ· PERSPECTIVE ~ THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. STREETSCAPE ~011# A309 03"3Â§3ll Ulelll TT, Â·01]13IU 11lglytdo] 9NK]ffDNI 11119111 011,3;31 13Hlo m oll, UointÂ¥11 AWI Nol,MO) TIÂ¥ NI'nn M ]TI LDilll[m, )110! 111 ;Dillil],r , 31I0Z 10 NOMIN,),I NUillm ,(Mld 3HI lf,OIL.lIM 013W0] 10 03ill 11 AVII NOUMOJNI illit JO lmI OIl 171 I @NOZ 10 Uy),INd lili g 9"1 NO 1NNUN0] 11ll.Ull NDI 0 (INV HOUÂ¥ IOINI 3HI NI 'U]lill[]I P 31101 [IO[ O 0(Inolo) '13dn '3nNIAV 11Â¥11113Â¥3 I09 1SV 3 I09 3$]Ill 1 $39NVI] 1 NÂ¥ Â¥Ol U MIÂ¥ 1, 11 lillod;31 IO ]10 nl lON il il]11]ID"' MOZ ZONE PC ARCHITECTS UC. P. O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81/12 1-~ WWW . ZON.4AACHITECTS . COM - ..3*~ 1% :Â·Â·=*Â·.: Â· Â·Â»--/-12â‚¬*LO - Â· - - .SQ.. t....4 0-TÂ».:Â»2 . . 0 , 4-. a .. 6 -- *I 4 --10 7/:4915/jw#$Â£ 4.W Â£2<87,411(6////1//// 5~ ....â€¢,r-'W '>Â·rÂ· ..... .Â·â‚¬Z Â· I ~.ti~/-/f*-:cAi~.. ..icÂ»4-62*41*Tai-~*#*1* -14 - /h VIEW TOWARDS SOUTHEAST PRIMARY MATERIALS 01 06131012 AMENDED APP. ~ /7 , - 'Il.,WA il METAL PANEL PAINTED CEMENTITIOUS PAINTED WOOD CONCRETE COMPOSITE WOOD SIDING ./ BLOCK (0NCEPTUAL DESIGN Ol MAY, 20IZ NOTE: -Z PERSPECTIVE g THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE m USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. STREETSCAPE = -# d A310 1 1300W31 NVWAH 1Â§V 3 Z09 00Â¥Â¥010) '134Â§Â¥ '3nll3AV NVIAH 1$Â¥3 Z09 034.~83~ U11911 TY -013132 1}IDIUWO] 91,K]nDNI 'UlÂ®Ill 0]W);31 931110 3 011, 11031Â¥15 *Â¥1 11011110) TN NIÂ¥ln M ]TI 51}1111[m 4 ~11[)Z ~)11 10]UIDIV , 3110Z 10 11[)Ililll,U 113ill,M ,01,4 3HI m0H1IM 03W0] ,0 03$11 11 AVII N0I1Â¥11,01NI Illl.1 10 1,Â¥4 011 -]TI 4 jÂ»Or 10 lil;,Ild 310 9 9Ill NO 01NIÂ¥1N0] 111]1]Il lIDIi]0 (INÂ¥ NOUÂ¥ ]Olu 01 139NVII J ANI VOi ]Wll ANÂ¥ 11 n INOdiI, NO nrnl ION g U]]U]1]1Â¥ p ]No ZONE PC ARCHITECTS LLC. P. O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO B1612 WWW . ZON.4AACHITECTS COM J- 1 943* j 7 1 22 1- - - K*71 -1 r L | MECHANICAL L-- lia --3 =th i. 4 >4% OFFICE EXISTING (CoUMERCIAL) BUILDING 4 C Â« F 04 07 1---1 -15--w --Oâ€¢=-F~im'-1--F <-1 <._J LEGEND Â£21.RIMMiC | 22 (COM~~CIAL) .. 132 COUR-YAqD 4-4-4-1 PUBLIC AMENITY AREA ty 9 1%, 1 1 L.4,2 LT ~1/---1~ i 1 8/4 1 /11 ,%\vI///4, r ' 1 7 1 tx,4 / - 2#'f f==0 44904 \,Â»U.1 Ol 06.I3.20ll AMENDED AFF. f= i: PUBLIC AMENITY AREA 1438.1 S.F. SE 11 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN h. Ol MAY, 20ll Dn~: Tidâ‚¬ NORTH PROPOSED PUBLIC /--h PROPOSED PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE O El~ 1/8"=1'-0' . N AMENITY SPACE ~ E PAS 2 11 0 1300W3X NVWAH liVB r09 00Â¥1010) '113d5Â¥ '31N1AV NVIIAH 15Â¥3 I09 (]MAill Sllay TrÂ¥ all,3Ill 11191Ud0) 9NI0ffl]NI '11 lell, 0*VM 13%0 Tr, Cll'Â¥ li011.1Â¥h MÂ¥1 NOWI,0] TIÂ¥ NIÂ¥lili Tr,HS ']TI WilliDIV , DIOZ )11 mi llt] , , ]NOZ JO NOISgll,3@ N3UI/A, NOI,4 3HI 1.AOHUM CJWO] m 03Â§8 31 An, MOUÂ¥W,O,NI Â§,Ill Jo.~~;~~~ ?: Pau=17121= :M=~ i, i, 3 [117 Alll RECEIVED MAY 3 0 2012 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2 01 43 425 0 0 44* 0 -2/2 .0 02 L 135 '76\ r - 1 i K 3 0-0-OF A -2- 1 1 ..... f .11 lilli 1.1.11 .. illilillilillilmllilliwl .44""I'll"'ll/#01"F.$ ./.Ilidilili,i:i:i:iliwilisliwillilill'llill....Ill'llilillili~ 1 - W RECEIVED MAY 3 0 2012 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 0 0 oÂ· 8 Jw,04 7 1 FO ~1 3 1 8 8 b 6 0 22 0 e , 1 r-- f I 1 M Il 0 x-- =2 . - 11/ 1 21\ 11'In.]111]11- 1[.1 1 .~.. U. 1-Tr-T r...7==...ikÂ« h ......:t.44%1#&.1~-LI#''444*: * 41.....0.14:,Â·iÂ·.2Â· *-9M!'*~7DSS'~~'0p 9A RECEIVED MAY 3 0 2012 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT e 0* 4 O - 44 3 - 0 1 a -it~ibbA */ TrOO Ir ill *l F . -------..::. 1.-*dem- 643./ 2 4 4.2. -70*~-3~ f /// f ...9 '... Â¢ 2, f ' .~ ~ '11Â·11/2. ...., - L . ......."4 1 4- Â· 9. 0, 1,4 . LU ZE 2 18 C\J to [ij C <a ec LL 0 Â» O ZE cdc > 2 ~LD 0 f 1. - 9 44Â©34\ 44 0 0 67 /9. 19 -2 24" 1Â» / 4 8 - Â° \\ U - & P p te-- 6 p 1lm- , .f Fi Y"./' b. .L, -2, t t 11,1 I -, 4 1 n-16 1 lt. N I. /4 RECE'V D 1 Â·.:40 Â·J 1 Â· f-: L l* i A /11 43$34 -A J . - - 4 1/5410 +Trobbg -ho . 0, -00 0 Y-- ' 9. 0 6 A2% 1 4.2 -*ANÂ·A.;:43 .,' 20 : C-3 i 'Â·44'44<>*4 *Â« CD -1-1 9> W (n O 30 ax m FFi Z MAY 3 0 2012 RECEIVED A* Cabon E xh'ibit F (*9 + e ajact I ) VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning Consultants arreiVED April 30, 2012 MAY 0 1 2012 HAND DELIVERED CITY OF ASPEN Ms. Jessica Garrow Aspen Community Development Department COMMUNITY DEVELOPME~ 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 602 East Hyman Avenue Conceptual Commercial Design Review Application Dear Jessica: Please consider this letter an application for conceptual commercial design review approval for the development of a third floor addition to the existing building located at 602 East Hyman Avenue in the City of Aspen (see Exhibit 1, Pre-Application Conference Summary, attached hereto). The application is submitted pursuant to Sections 26.412.050, 26.430.040. E. and 26.575.060 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations (the "Regulations") by Daniel L. Hunt (hereinafter "Applicant"), the prospective purchaser of the property. Permission for the Applicant to submit the application has been obtained from the property's owner, Taylor Family Investments Company, RRLP (see Exhibits 2 and 39 Permission to Apply and Commitment for Title Insurance, respectively). Permission for Vann Associates, LLC, Planning Consultants, to represent the Applicant is attached as Exhibit 4. A land use application form, application fee agreement, dimensional requirements form, and a list of property owners located within 300 feet of the project site are attached as Exhibits 5,6,7 and 8, respectively. Project Site - The project site is legally described as Lots K and L, Block 99. City and Townsite of Aspen, and is located at the northeast corner of East Hyman Avenue and South Hunter Street (see Exhibit 9. Vicinity Map). As the attached Improvement Survey illustrates, Lots K and L contain 6,002 square feet of "Lot Area" and are zoned C-1, Commercial (see Exhibit 10). Man-made improvements to the property consist of a two-story, mixed-use building with a partial basement; two landscaped outdoor courtyards fronting on Hyman Avenue; and a paved parking area located adjacent to PO. Box 4827 ' Basalt, Colorado 81621 ' 970/925-6958 0 Fax 970/920--9310 vannassociates@comcast.net Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 2 the alley at the rear of the site. A small detached storage shed is located adjacent to the northwest corner of the building. A decorative metal fence encloses the southwest courtyard. A wooden fence extends from the rear of the building to the alley along the project site's western property line. An electric transformer and an easement therefore is located adjacent to the alley at the northwest corner of the property. Two small roofs located above the building's Hyman Avenue and Hunter Street entrances encroach into the adjacent street right-of-ways. Existing vegetation consists primarily of three large evergreen trees, which are located within the southwest courtyard and at the rear o f the building and behind the wooden fence. A small aspen tree and various ornamental trees and shrubs are located in the two courtyard areas. The existing structure, which is commonly referred to as the Eleanor Brickham building, is believed to have been constructed in approximately 1960. According to the City's records, the building's design is characterized by spare simple forms, and displays a clarity of design, simplicity of decoration, and a modern approach to solid/void relationships characteristic of the Modern architectural movement. While the property is not historically designated, it is included on the City's Aspen.Modern Map. Participation in the Aspen-Modern program, however, is strictly voluntary. As the attached site plan, floor plans and elevations illustrate (see Exhibit 11), the existing building's basement and ground floor are presently devoted to office use, and contain approximately 1,653 and 2,175 square feet of net leasable area, respectively. A two-bedroom, free market dwelling unit, containing approximately 1,530 square feet of net livable area, and approximately 720 square feet of additional net leasable commercial area, which is presently used for office purposes, is located on the building's second fioor. The building's existing tloor area totals approximately 5,128 square feet. Approximately 400 square feet of the second floor office area contains a kitchenette which was apparently added without the benefit of required approvals, and which has been used from time to time as a so-called "Bandit" residential unit. The two- bedroom, free market residential unit has existed since the building was constructed, and has been occupied by both non-residents and working residents of the community. As a result, the redevelopment of this unit is subject to the requirements of Section 26.470.070.5 of the Regulations, the City's so-called multi-family replacement program. Existing development in the immediate site area includes the Victorian Square office building, which is located on the south side of Hyman Avenue across from the project Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 3 site; a recently approved mixed-use building, which is to be developed on the vacant parking lot at the southwest corner of Hyman Avenue and Hunter Street; the Vectra Bank building, which is located at the northwest corner of Hyman and Hunter; and n existing mixed-use building, which is located across the alley at the rear of the property. An additional mixed-use building is located adjacent to and immediately east of the project site. The character of the immediate site area can be described as a vibrant mixed-use neighborhood containing a variety of commercial, office and residential land uses. The project site lies within the City's Court House View Plane No. 1, a designated Environmentally Sensitive Area. As the Improvement Survey illustrates, the view plane, however, intersects the site's rear property line at an elevation that does not impact or otherwise limit the height of the proposed third floor addition. Proposed Development The Applicant proposes to deed restrict the building's existing two-bedroom, free market residential unit as provided for in Section 26.470.070.5.1.a) of the Regula- tions, and to utilize the resulting residential reconstruction credit to develop a replacement free market residential unit on the building' s roof. The proposed third floor residential unit will contain approximately 2,344 square feet of net livable area. As the unit exceeds the C-1 zone district's 2,000 square foot net livable area limita- tion, the Applicant will provide one "Transferrable Development Right Certificate" at building permit to accommodate the unit's additional net livable area. The kitchen in the existing "Bandit" residential unit will be removed and the space used solely for commercial purposes. The removal of the "Bandit" unit is exempt from the City's multi-family replacement program pursuant to Section 26.470.070.5.8. No expansion of the building' s existing net leasable commercial area is proposed. As the proposed site plan, floor plans and elevations illustrate (see Exhibit 12), a modest addition to the rear of the existing building will contain an entry vestibule, an elevator and additional stair assemblies that will provide convenient access to all building levels and comply with applicable accessibility requirements. The ground level of the proposed addition will also contain a small exterior storage area and a partially enclosed trash/recycle area which will permit the relocation of the building' s existing dumpster and recycle bins to a more discreet location. The building' s existing exposed utility meter area will be enclosed within a new utility closet, and a new fence will be installed along Hunter Street behind the existing trees to screen the trash/recycle area and the utility closet from the neighboring sidewalk. The fence will also will enclose the existing electric transformer located adjacent to the alley at the rear of the property. Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 4 The second floor addition is devoted primarily to access/circulation elements but will also contain an additional storage area for the proposed two-bedroom affordable housing unit. The existing deck which protrudes over the courtyard at the southwest corner of the property will be removed and the exterior stair which provides access thereto will be reconfigured to enhance the courtyard' s functionality. As presently envisioned, the existing ornamental fence will be removed to facilitate the courtyard' s use as a more desirable public amenity space. The third floor, free market residential unit has been setback from the existing south and west facades and the interior courtyard to preserve the simplicity of the existing building's form, to avoid the upper branches of the adjacent large evergreens, and to reduce the visual impact of the addition when viewed from neighboring streets. The residential unit's fenestration will consist of relatively large glazed areas that are consistent with the existing building's window treatments, and which will serve to lighten the massing of the third floor addition. An outdoor rooftop deck accessible from the new stair assemblies at the rear of the building will be provided in lieu of exterior decks on the building's third floor. The existing building' s ground floor concrete block walls will be retained while the - existing second floor will be sheathed with a composite cementitious board. The second and third floor additions will be sheathed with horizontal corrugated metal siding. The maximum height of the third floor addition will be approximately 35.5 feet measured to the top of the highest roof. The expanded building will contain a total floor area of approximately 8,818 square feet of which approximately 2,995 and 3,148 square feet will be contained within the free market unit and above grade corn- mercial areas, respectively. The affordable housing unit will contain approximately 1,693 square feet of net livable area. The building's net leasable commercial area will total approximately 4,548 square feet. The proposed development will comply will all applicable dimensional requirements of the C-1 zone district. The building' s commercial net leasable area will require the provision of five off- street parking spaces. As the proposed site plan illustrates, four spaces are presently proposed. The reduction in on-site parking is proposed to enhance pedestrian access to the rear of the building, and to permit more convenient access to the relocated trash/recycle area from the alley. The Applicant will make a payment-in-lieu of the one additional required commercial parking space. While no parking spaces are required for the proposed free market and affordable housing units, the Applicant may also elect to make a payment-in-lieu for one or more of the required commercial spaces to provide parking for the proposed residential units. A payment-in-lieu of providing on-site commercial parking spaces is expressly permitted in the C-1 zone district. Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 5 Conceptual Commercial Design Review Pursuant to Section 26.412.020 of the Regulations, all mixed-use development within the City with a commercial component requiring a building permit is subject to commercial design review by the Planning and Zoning Commission ("P&Z"). Pursuant to Section 26.412.050, an application for commercial design review approval must comply with the applicable requirements of the City's Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Objectives and Guidelines (the "Guidelines") and the Commer- cial Design Standards contained in Section 26.412.060. A. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines The Guidelines are organized to correspond to the two stages of P&Z commercial design review (i.e., those applicable only to conceptual review followed by those to be addressed at final review). The conceptual review design guidelines for properties located in the "Commercial Character Area", and the proposed develop- ment's compliance therewith, are summarized below. 1. Street Grid 1.1 Orient a primary entrance toward the street. The existing building's primary entrances are oriented to East Hyman Avenue. Secondary entrances are provided from South Hunter Street and at the rear of the building. 1.2 Maintain the established town grid in all projects. The proposed development maintains the City' s established street and alley grid pattern. No changes to the established town grid are proposed. 2. Internal Walkways 1.3 Public walkways and through courts should be designed to create access to additional commercial space. No changes to the existing building' s ground floor footprint are pro- posed. Two existing courtyards add visual interest to the building and provide opportunities for commercial access thereto. The existing second floor deck which protrudes into the courtyard at the corner of Hyman Avenue and Hunter Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 6 Street will be removed and the existing stairway will be reoriented to enhance the courtyard' s appearance and functionality. 3. Alleys 1.4 Develop an alley facade to create visual interest. The various architectural changes which are proposed to the rear of the building will significantly enhance its appearance when viewed from the alley. The redesigned alley facade will consist of articulated wall planes which will create visual interest. The existing electric transformer will be screened with a more attractive enclosure and the existing trash/recycling receptacles will be relocated to further enhance the appearance of this area of the project site. 4. Parking 1.5 The visual impacts of structured parking should be mini- mized. No structured parking is proposed. The existing building's on-site surface parking area will be reconfigured and retained adjacent to the alley. 1.6 Structured parking should be placed within a "wrap" of commercial and/or residential uses. Structured parking is not proposed. 5. Street Facing Amenity Space 1.8 A street facing amenity space shall i) abut the public side- walk, ii) be level with the sidewalk, iii) be open to the sky, iv) be directly accessible to the public, and v) be paved or otherwise landscaped. The two existing courtyards will comprise the majority of the proposed development's public amenity space, both of which abut the adjacent side- walks. An additional area of public amenity space will be created at the rear of the site and adjacent to the Hunter Street sidewalk as a result of the reloca- tion of the fence which presently blocks the view of this area, and the reloca- tion of the existing trash/recycling bins to a more screened location. The proposed public amenity areas will be open to the sky; accessible to the public; and, with the exception of the existing courtyard at the southeast corner of the Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 7 site, level with the sidewalk. The existing landscaping within the two court- yards will be improved and the additional Hunter Street public amenity area landscaped, a plan for which will be submitted with the Applicant's final commercial design review application. 1.9 Street facing amenity space shall contain features to promote and enhance its use. The two street facing courtyards will contain street furniture and other features to enhance their use. A landscaping plan depicting such features will be submitted with the Applicant's final commercial design review application. 6. Mid-Block Walkway Amenity Space 1.10 Mid-block walkways shall remain subordinate in scale to traditional lot widths. 1.11 A mid-block walkway should provide public access to i) additional commercial space, and ii) to uses located at the rear of the property that are commercial in nature. No mid-block walkways are proposed. The existing building, which is - to be retained, abuts the adjacent building to the east. 7. Alley Side Amenity Space 1.12 An alley side amenity space shall be designed to i) provide direct public access to commercial space at ground or through second floors, ii) maximize solar access to the alley side amenity space, iii) en- hance the attractiveness and use of the rear alley, and iv) minimize the adverse impacts of adjacent service and parking areas. No alley side amenity space is proposed. 8. Second Level Amenity Space 1.13 A second floor amenity space should i) ensure consistent public access, ii) be dedicated for public use, iii) provide a public overlook and/or an interpretive marker, and iv) be identified by a marker at street level. Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 8 1.14 Second level space should be oriented to maximize solar access and views to the mountains or other landmarks. 1.15 Second level space should provide public access by way of a visible and attractive public stair or elevator from a public street, alley or street level amenity space. 1.16 Second level dining may be considered. No second level amenity space is proposed. 9. Front Yard Amenity Space 1.17 Front and side yard amenity space should be provided in the context of a historic one-story residential type building. The building' s existing street facing courtyard's are to be retained. The proposed new side yard public amenity space abutting the Hunter Street sidewalk is consistent with that typically provided with a historic one-story residential type building. The landscaping plan to be submitted with the Applicant's final commercial design review application will also address the additional public amenity area to be provided adjacent to Hunter Street. 10. Setbacks 1.18 Maintain the alignment of facades at the sidewalk's edge. 1.19 A building may be set back from its side lot lines in accor- dance with design guidelines identified in Street and Alley System and Public Amenity Space guidelines. No changes are proposed to the portions of the building' s footprint which face Hyman Avenue and Hunter Street, sections of which presently abut the adjacent sidewalks. An addition to the rear of the building adjacent to the alley, however, is proposed. 11. Building Orientation 1.20 Building facades shall be parallel to the facing street(s) and primary entrances shall be oriented toward the street. Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 9 The existing building' s street facing facades parallel Hyman Avenue and Hunter Street. The proposed third floor addition will also parallel the street. The building' s primary entrances are oriented toward the street. 1.21 Orient a new building to be parallel to its lot lines, similar to that of traditional building orientations. The front of a primary structure shall be oriented to the street. Both the existing building and the proposed third floor addition parallel the property' s lot lines. 12. Height Variation 1.22 Building facade height shall be varied from the facade height of adjacent buildings of the same number of stories by a minimum of two feet. The proposed third floor addition is a minimum of two feet higher than the adjacent mixed-use building to the east. 1.23 A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation in building height of the Commercial Area. The proposed third floor addition reflects the range and variation in the building height of the Commercial Area. 1.24 Height variation should be achieved using one or more of the following: i) vary the building height in accordance with traditional lot width, ii) set back upper floors to vary building facade profile(s) and roof forms across the width and depth of the building, iii) vary the facade (or parapet) heights at the front, iv) step down the rear of the building towards the alley, in conjunction with other design standards and guide- lines. The Hyman Avenue facing facade at the rear of the interior courtyard is setback approximately 30 feet from the property line. The upper level of this building element is setback an additional four feet. The courtyard and respee- tive facade setbacks help to articulate the traditional 30 foot City lot width. With the exception of the rear of the third floor addition, all of the addition's facades are setback from the building' s second floor and the adjacent streets. Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 10 13. Height Variation for Larger Sites 1.25 On sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths, the facade height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. 1.26 Buildings on sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths shall achieve a minimum of two of the following: i) variation in height of building modules across the site, ii) variation in massing achieved through upper floor setbacks, the roofscape form and variation in upper floor heights, iii) variation in building facade heights or cornice line. These two design guidelines do not apply as the project site consists of only two townsite lots. 14. Height Adjacent to Historic Structures 1.27 A new building should step down in scale to respect the height, form and scale of a historic building within its immediate setting. This design guideline does not apply. There are no historic buildings in the immediate area of the project site. 1.28 New development adjacent to a single story historic building that was originally constructed for residential use shall not exceed 28 feet in height within 30 feet of the side property line adjacent to the historic structure within the same block face. This design guideline does not apply. The existing building is not located adjacent to a single story historic building. B. Commercial Design Standards 1. Public Amenity Space Pursuant to Section 26.575.030.B. of the Regulations, mixed-use developments within the C-1 zone district are required to provide public amenity space in an amount equal to 25 percent of the project site. In lieu thereof, off-site public amenity space can be provided or a payment-in-lieu can be made to the City subject to P&Z approval. For redevelopment of parcels on which less than 25 percent public amenity space currently exists, the Regulations provide that the existing percentage is the effective requirement provided no less than 10 percent is required. Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 11 Based on the above, approximately 1,500 square feet of public amenity space would normally be required unless the amount were reduced by the P&Z as provided for in Section 26.575.030.D. 1. As the attached Existing Public Amenity Space calculation illustrates (see Exhibit 13), approximately 1,040 square feet, or 17 percent of the project site, presently complies with the applicable design standards for public amenity space. This amount, therefore, constitutes the effective public amenity space requirement for the project site as it is less than 25 percent and greater than 10 percent. As discussed previously, however, the project site's public amenity space will increase as a result of the removal of the deck which currently abuts the existing second floor residential unit, and the relocation of the existing fence which abuts the sidewalk at the rear of the property. The removal of the deck and relocation of the fence will increase the project site's public amenity space to approximately 1,438 square feet, or 24 percent (see Exhibit 14). No variance from the applicable public amenity space requirement, therefore, will be required. The applicable commercial design standards for the provision of public amenity space, and the proposed development's compliance therewith, are summarized below. a) The dimensions of any proposed on-site public amenity allow for a variety uses and activities to occur considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses. As the existing building is to be retained, little opportunity exist to reconfigure the two street-facing courtyards. Their dimensions, however, will accommodate a variety of uses and activities to occur therein. b) The public amenity contributes to an active street vitality. The two courtyards will contribute to an active street vitality. The street facing courtyards enjoy exception views of Aspen Mountain, will contain public seating, and can accommodate a variety of activities associated with the potential uses of the adjacent commercial spaces. 0 The public amenity, and the design and operating character- istics of adjacent structures, rights-of-way, and uses contributes to an inviting pedestrian environment. Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 12 The existing courtyards will be improved to enhance their attractiveness to pedestrians. A landscape plan depicting the proposed improvements will be submitted with the Applicant's final commercial design review application. d) The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by mails, sidewalks, or adjacent property, or such duplica- tion does not detract from the pedestrian environment. The existing courtyards do not duplicate existing pedestrian space in the immediate site area. e) Any variation to the Design and Operational Standards for Pedestrian Amenity, Section 26.575.030.F., promote the purpose of the pedestrian amenity requirements. No variations from the pedestrian amenity standards of Section 26.575. 030.F. are requested. 2. Utility, Delivery and Trash Service Provision The applicable commercial design standards for the provision of utility, delivery and trash service areas, and the proposed development's compliance there- with, are summarized below. a) A utility, trash and recycle service area shall be accommo- dated along the alley meeting the minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060 Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Areas, unless otherwise established according to said section. As the Existing Site Plan illustrates, the building's utility meters and service area is located on an exterior wall at the northwest corner of the building. The building' s trash/recycle receptacles are located behind the wooden fence and adjacent to the existing parking area. Pursuant to Section 26.412.060.B., a utility/trash/recycle service area meeting the requirements of Section 26.575.060.A. must be provided along and accessible from the alley at the rear of the project site. A minimum of 20 linear feet with a minimum vertical clearance of 10 feet and minimum depth of 10 feet at ground level is required. Given the constraints imposed by the existing building and the fact that it does not abut the alley, a variation from these standards will be required. The proposed utility/trash/recycle service Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page I 3 area, however, represents a substantial improvement over the existing situa- tion, and complies with the functional intent of the above standard. Special review approval to vary the applicable dimensional requirements is requested and is addressed in the following section of this application. While the utility service area will remain in essentially the same location, it will be enclosed within a new utility closet. As the proposed floor plans illustrate, an enclosed trash/recycle area will contain the building's dumptster and recycling bins, and will provide protection from the elements. A new screen wall which will be setback from the Hunter Street sidewalk will connect the building to a new screened enclosure for the existing electrical transformer located adjacent to the alley. This screen wall will shield the utility and trash receptacle areas from the street and permit the provision of additional public amenity space adjacent to Hunter Street. The enclosed trash/recycle receptacle area will measure approximately eight feet in length by eight feet in depth. While configured differently than the typical alley utility/trash/recycle area, the proposed design will be more than adequate to accommodate the building' s needs, and constitute a significant improvement over the current facilities both from a functional and visual perspective. The proposed utility closet and trash/recycle area will be directly accessible from the alley for service purposes. b) All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property and along the alley. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the allleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as a historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be property licensed. All utility service pedestals will be located within the project site. No pedestals are located within the alley right-of-way. c) Delivery service areas shall be incorporated along the alley. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. Delivery access will be available directly from the alley via the proposed entry vestibule at the rear of the building. The adjacent elevator will provide convenient access to all building levels. No truck loading facility is required or proposed. Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 14 d) Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the Street as practical. In the event required, mechanical exhaust equipment will be located on the third floor addition's roof and screened from public view. e) Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a public right- of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. Mechanical ventilation equipment will be located on the third tloor addition's roof and screened from public view. 3. Contextual Elevations Contextual elevations for the north side of East Hyman Avenue from Hunter Street to Springs Street and for the east side of South Hunter Street from Hyman Avenue to Hopkins Avenue are attached as Exhibit 15. Special Review Pursuant to Section 26.575.060.A. of the Regulations, the proposed development is required to provide a utility/trash/recycle service area adjacent to the alley. For properties with thirty feet or less of alley frontage, a fifteen foot wide by ten foot deep utility/trash area is required. This requirement, however, may be reduced by the P&Z subject to special review approval. The applicable review criteria, and the proposed development's compliance therewith, are summarized below. 1. There is a demonstration that given the nature of the poten- tial uses of the building and its total square footage, the utili- ty/trash/recycle service area proposed to be provided will be adequate. The existing building is presently served by an unenclosed two cubic yard dumpster and several small recycle containers located behind the wooden fence and adjacent to the parking area at the rear of the property. The pro- posed enclosed trash/recycle area will accommodate the existing dumpster and Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 15 the recycling bins. The existing utility meter area will be enclosed within an utility closet. Space need not be provided within the service area for an electric transformer as a transformer present exists at the northwest corner of the property. No new commercial area is proposed and the existing proposed trash/recycle facility will be adequate to accommodate the additional free market residential unit. 2. Access to the utility/trash/recycle service area is adequate. Access to the proposed service area is provided directly from the alley. 3. Measures are provided for enclosing trash bins and making them easily movable by trash personnel. The trash/recycle area is enclosed on three sides. The dumpster and recycling bills to be located therein will be readily accessible at grade from the alley. 4. When appropriate, provisions for trash compaction are provided by the proposed development and measures are taken to encour- age trash compaction by other development in the block. Trash compaction is neither feasible nor warranted given the limited nature of the proposed development. 5. The area for public utility placement and maintenance is adequate and safe for the placement of utilities. The building's existing utility meters and services are located at the rear of the building on an unenclosed exterior wall. Relocation of this utility area is neither warranted or required. The existing utility service area, however, will be enclosed within a utility closet to reduce its visual impact and enhance maintenance and safety. 6. Adequate provisions are incorporated to ensure the construe- tion of the access area. The proposed trash/recycle and utility service areas are an integral part of the proposed addition to the rear of the building. Ms. Jessica Garrow April 30, 2012 Page 16 - Should you have any questions, or require additional information or clarification, please do not hesitate to call. Yours truly, VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC 49 , f ann SV: CWV Cristin D. Adam, Esq. d:\oldc\bus\city.app\app58912.cdr HIBIT li / CITY OF ASPEN ./. -1- PRE-APPLICATION SUMMARY PLANNER: Jessica Garrow, 429-2780 DATE: 4.30.12 PROJECT: 602 East Hyman Avenue, REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann, Vann Associates 925-6958 DESCRIPTION: The applicant is interested in adding an addition to the third floor of the existing commercial building at 602 East Hyman. The building currently has commercial space on the basement, first, and second floors, as well a free-market residential unit and some commercial space that has been used as a bandit residential unit on the second floor. The applicant is proposing to reconfigure the 2nd floor space as an affordable housing unit, and to add a third floor that will be a free-market residential unit. The applicant has indicated they may increase the amount of commercial net leasable space on the site. 602 East Hyman is located in the C-1 Commercial Zone District. There are a number of large trees on the site that the applicant plan on maintaining. Staff recommends that the applicant discuss the trees with the Parks Department about the trees. There is currently on-site parking, and on-site public amenity space. The property is about 6,000 square feet in size. A maximum of 2.5:l FAR is permitted in the C-1 zone district with commercial use limited to 1.5:1 and residential free market use limited to 0.5:1 (which may be increased to 0.75:1 if affordable housing equal to 100% of the free market residential floor area is developed on the same parcel). Free market residential individual unit size is limited to 2,000 square feet of net livable area, which may be increased to 2,500 square feet of net livable area by landing 1 transferrable development right (TDR). The total free market residential net livable area shall be no greater than the total above grade floor area associated with the commercial use. The application requires Commercial Design Standard review by the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) and compliance with the Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines- specifically the Commercial Character Area Chapter. The property is required to provide public amenity space and trash/utility enclosure that meet the requirements of Section 26.412.060. The applicant may request a variance from the requirements through special review. **Please note, that the applicant should respond to review criteria related to the trash/utility/recycle area, as outlined in sections 26.575.060 and 26.430.040.E as part of the conceptual commercial design application, as well as respond to review criteria outlined in section 26.575.030 and 26.430.040.C for any variance from the public amenity space. As part of the commercial design review, the applicant should provide contextual elevations. For the initial application submission, staff requests the North elevation of E Hyman Ave from Hunter Street to Spring St and the west elevation of S Hunter St from Hyman Ave to Hopkins Ave. A 3D model is required for this application, and can be submitted after the initial application, but within at least 1 week of the first public hearing. The residential units do not require onsite parking. An increase in commercial net leasable area requires parking spaces at a rate of 1 space/1,000 square feet of net leasable area. Properties in the C-1 zone district are permitted to pay cash in lieu for parking by right ($30,000/space). The demolition and redevelopment of a free-market residential unit, as well and increase in commercial space growth management reviews. These are all Minor P&Z reviews, which can be applied for at any time of year. Conceptual Commercial Design Review must be granted prior to applying for growth management and any other associated reviews. The applicant has indicated that the existing free-market residential unit has been rented by local residents, and is therefore subject to Multi-Family Replacement requirements. The Bandit unit is proposed to be eliminated, and is dÂ·~2 1344, exempt from Multi-Family Replacement Requirements. The applicant is proposing to demolish the exiting free-market unit and replace it at 100% mitigation with a deed-restricted unit. This means that the applicant can replace the existing one free-market unit on the site and not incur additional affordable housing mitigation, even if it is expanded. The applicant is interested in possibly increasing the commercial space through a change in use from residential to commercial space, which will trigger affordable housing mitigation. Please note that net new commercial space that is not a change in use will require a Major P&Z application, which can only be applied for August 15111 or February 15#1 of each year. This pre-app assumes any increase in commercial space will result from a change in use between the development categories. The applicant will mitigate their affordable housing requirements on-site. On-site affordable housing allows the applicant to mitigate for multiple requirements (commercial and residential) with a concurrent calculation. The redevelopment triggers Subdivision review by City Council upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission because there are multiple residential units proposed in a mixed-use building. Recently, City Council adopted a Code Amendment that requires neighborhood outreach prior to the first public hearing. Community Development has determined that neighborhood outreach is required for this application. A summary of the outreach shall be presented at the first P&Z public hearing. http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoninq/Recent-Code- Amendments/ Please note that Ordinance 3, Series of 2012 (a link is above) also changes the requirement that a project comply with the Aspen Area Community Plan. This application is subject to Ordinance 3 which went into effect on March 27, 2012. Impact fees are triggered by the addition of new let livable residential space and new net leasable commercial space. These fees are calculated at the time of building permit issuance. City Council adopted a Code Amendment that changes allowable heights in the C-1 zone district. The Code Amendment is effective on May 2nd A complete application must be received by Community Development by the end of the day on May 1 st to be reviewed under the current Land Use Code. , The review process would be as follows (all steps require public hearings): < Step 1: P&Z for Conceptual Commercial Design Review. Step 2: P&Z for Minor Growth Management and recommendation of subdivision to council Step 3: City Council for Subdivision Review. Step 4: P&Z for Final Commercial Design Review. Please note that final Commercial Design Review can be combined with step 2. Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.412 Commercial Design Review 26.430.040 Special Review (Public Amenity and Utility/trash service area) 26.470 Growth Management 26.470.050 Growth Management: General Requirements 26.470.070.2 Change in Use 26.470.070.4 Development of Affordable Housing 26.470.070.5 Demolition or redevelopment of multi-family housing 26.480 Subdivision 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.575.030 Public Amenity Space 26.575.060 Trash/Utility/recycle service areas 26.515 Off-street parking 26.610 Impact Fees 26.620 School Land Dedication 26.710.150 Commercial (C-1) Zone District A link to the Land Use Code is here: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning- and-Zoning/Title.26-Land-Use-Code/ A link to the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guideline is here: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Current-Planning/ A link to the Land Use Application is here: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Applications-and-Fees/ Review by: Staff for complete application P&Z, and City Council Public Hearing: At P&Z. Neighborhood Outreach:Yes, prior to first public hearing at P&Z. Planning Fees: $4,410 for 14 hours at $315 per hour Referral Fees: Parks: $945 flat fee, Engineering $265 per hour, Environmental Health - $945 flat fee. Total Deposit: $6,565. (note, this fee is only for the Conceptual Commercial Design Review.) Total Number of Application Copies: 12 for P&Z conceptual commercial design review. To apply, submit the following information: 1. Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 3. Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 4. Completed Land Use Application. 5. Signed fee agreement. 6. Pre-application Conference Summary. 7, An 81/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 8. Proof of ownership. 9. Existing and proposed elevation drawings and site plan that include proposed dimensional requirements as well as landscaping plan. 10. A 3-D model of the proposal in context. 11, A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as well as proposed. 11. All other materials required pursuant to the specific submittal requirements. 12. Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status, including all easements and vacated rights of way, of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. 13. Applicants are advised that building plans will be required to meet the International Building Code as adopted by the City of Aspen, the Federal Fair Housing Act, and CRS 9.5.112. Please make sure that your application submittal addresses these building-related and accessibility regulations. You may contact the Building Department at 920- 5090 for additional information. 14. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearing 15. Copies of prior approvals. 16. Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text and line drawings on a CD. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. April 27, 2012 Ms. Jessica Garrow Community Development Department 130 South Gatena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Permission to Apply Dear Ms. Garrow: Please consider this letter authorization for Daniel L. Hunt to apply for Commercial Design Review and such other land use approvals as may be required for the develop- ment of our property, which consists of Lots K and L, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen. Mr. Hunt is under contract to purchase the property. YourÂ·s truly, TAYLOR FAMILY INVESTMENTS COMPANY, RLLP a Colorado registered limited liability partnership LA 11 L L - Ray Tay~or, Autho~ed Representative d loldc\busicity.!uÂ·\1~58912.jgl EXHIBIT COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: April 20, 2012 at 8:00 AM Case No. PCT23415W3 2. Policy or Policies to be issued (a) ALTA Owner's Policy-(6/17/06) Amount$ 6,700,000.00 Premium$ 11,060.00 Proposed Insured: Rate: Standard DANIEL L. HUNT (b) ALTA Loan Policy-(6/17/06) Amount$ 0.00 Premium$ 0.00 Proposed Insured: Rate: (c) ALTA Loan Policy-(6/17/06) Amount$ Premium$ Proposed Insured: Rate: 3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested in: TAYLOR FAMILY INVESTMENTS COMPANY, RLLP, A COLORADO REGISTERED LIMITED LIABILITY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is described as follows: LOTS K AN D L, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. Schedule A-PG.1 601 E. HOPKINS, ASPEN, CO. 81611 This Commitment is invalid 970-925-1766 Phone/970-925-6527 Fax unless the Insuring 877-217-3158 Toll Free Provisions and Schedules A and B are attached. AUTHORIZED AGENT Countersigned: SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. 7. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deed from the City of Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Page 113 and Book 79 at Page 11, providing as follows: "That no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws". 8. Mineral reservations as contained in Deeds recorded in Book 105 at Page 228 and Book 115 at Page 407. 9. Easement granted to the City of Aspen for Electric and Communication Utilities, recorded June 16, 1976 in Book 313 at Page 281 10. Deck, overhang, building encroachments and all matters as shown on Improvement Survey prepared by Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. dated 3/12 as Job No. 21092. EXHIBIT April 27, 2012 Ms. Jessica Garrow Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Permission to Represent Dear Ms. Garrow: Please consider this letter authorization for Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC, Planning Consultants, to represent me in the processing of my application for Commercial Design Review and such other land use approvals as may be required for the development of Lots K and L, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen. Mr. Vann is hereby authorized to act on my behalf with respect to all matters reasonably pertaining to the aforementioned application. Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Yours truly, - 1.r i - 1 Daniel 1,- Hunt d:\oldc\bus\city.]tr\Itr58912.jg2 r--EXHIBIT- 11 6 LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: Name: r-DABI,ea a. He*-tr Location: GA>Ze-HY#WH Lars %46; norA 99,1,44616 (Indicate street address, lot & ~ock number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID#(REQI'IRED) 273-7->422 -/â‚¬;2)3 REPRESENTAT]VE: Name: 60*/0* Vi/W Address: lax ty* 48277 r*=.0Â¢:,r os> 2/â‚¬21 Phone #: 42â‚¬-4Â»798 ' PROJECT: Name: Â«1 6 -ACAA,4 a~Kerrk*- CÂ»1:Â·40â€¢CJÂ« Address: r>696,4 ~646*J Phone #: Â»f TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Conditional Use [3 Conceptual PUD U Conceptual Historic Devt. Special Review U Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) E] Final Historic Development Design Review Appeal U Conceptual SPA U Minor Historic Devt. GMQS Allotment U Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) U Historic Demolition GMQS Exemption U Subdivision 2 Historic Designation ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream U Subdivision Exemption (includes ~1 Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane Lot Split U Temporary Use ~ Other: Lot Line Adjustment Â£ Text/Map Amendment CON/-le&,g:ac rÂ»944 ge/CNâ€¢/ EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description ofexisting buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) Aae Â«riN+Er> ArrtÂ»mt-eâ€¢-1 PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) L-=EE- 17*TAf'-1 20 #FFâ‚¬4Â«72 41 Have'you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ ~ 5~65 6 - t [*EPre-Application Conference Summary [2~ttachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement C ~Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form [2' Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards El El U El ~Cl EXHIBIT r COMMUNrrY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement to Pay Application Fees An agreement between the City of Aspen ("City") and Property Phone No. 2/f- 444 - 50029 Owner CI"): r)*J/al- c . Aic-10* Email: Â£:70/S;&4/%~466*97Â»099:C es=w/ Address of Billing /9+4,*221 Z. *09Â«16/7- PYODetty d23â‚¬- /3. 46//*4Â·i/ Address <304//1-Y #LA,Â·/7L, /6/<2 . (subject of (send bills here)/ 46, aC+-4 â‚¬y 46.0/75Â¥602â€¢ application) /01 CMS, 7X yâ‚¬ 2-0/ I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. , Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and the payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. 1 understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: i agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these fiat fees are non-refundable. 945 Parks 945 Environmental Healti $ flat fee for $. flat fee for . 0 $. flat fee for Select Dept 0 Select Review $ flat fee for For deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. 1 understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review, and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for non-payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render an application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, 1 agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. 54,410 14 deposit for hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $315 per hour. 265 1 $ deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $265 per hour. City of Aspen: Property Owner: 9 71 If Chris Bendon ; Community Development Director Narne: 3 .. A'.1 -1 u. 1-0 Title: City Use: 6565 Fees Due: $ Received: $ November. 2011 . City of Aspen 1 130 S. Galena St. 1 (970) 920-5090 '-1*mE EXHIBIT 1 7 ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project 6202 2.,9>994,4/<5:22Â·+*Pty-04 6 /1694- /95uote.U Applicant: r>Â«w, e C.. '4â‚¬2.-Â¥-T Location: 4.62 8 . HYMBq/Ave . Zone District: c -1 Ce+42-l g fart 14 Lot Size: â‚¬ 60 2 91/55 Lot Area: 9 Â¢3,32 391 ,â‚¬~ (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) A Â«A_o .r*tâ€¢ Commercial net leasable: Existing: 7) J To Proposed. ~4 21Â¥ 0 Number of residential units: Existing: / Proposed: 2 Number of bedrooms: Existing: 2 Proposed: 5 Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: '~tz.g Allowable:/9~0~>6 Proposed: <5,8/S Principal bldg. height: Existing: Allowable: 34 Proposed: .35: 9 Access. bldg. height: Existing: Allowable: Proposed: On-Site parking: Existing: 4 Required: 6 Proposed: 9- % Site coverage: Existing: Required: Proposed: % Open Space: Existing: / 7 Required: 2 S Proposed: Z+ Front Setback: Existing: Required: 0 Proposed: Rear Setback: Existing.* Required: 0 Proposed: Combined F/R: Existing: Required: /4/Al Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: Required: 0 Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: Required: 0 Proposed: Combined Sides: Existing: Required: 44 Proposed: Distance Between Existing Required: /44 Proposed: Buildings Existing non-conformities or encroachments: /'PED-50, /54-vt/'=1&44 Variations requested: Â»s<uq or,crr<j necf<le 4!784 EXHIBIT Easy PeelÂ® Labels ' A I Bend along line to i S El Jse AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® ~ Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ ~ )8 HUNTER LLC 4 SKIERS LP 517 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE LLC 490 WILLIAMS ST 1108 NORFLEET DR 517 E HOPKINS AVE ENVER, CO 80218 NASHVILLE, TN 372201412 ASPEN, CO 81611 610 EAST HYMAN LLC 20 EAST COOPER PTNRS LLC 530 HOPKINS LLC C/O CHARLES CUNNIFFE 402 MIDLAND PARK 5301/2 E HOPKINS 610 E HYMAN AVE SPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 30 EAST HYMAN LLC 633 SPRING 11 LLC 635 E HOPKINS LLC 432 E HOPKINS AVE 418 E COOPER AVE #207 532 E HOPKINS SPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ALANE BANK ASPEN ARCADES ASSOCIATES LTD LLC ASPEN ART MUSEUM . J-TN ERIN WIENCEK C/O KRUGER & CO 590 N MILL ST 'O BOX 10000 400 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN PLAZA LLC \SPEN BLOCK 99 LLC ASPEN CORE VENTURES LLC PO BOX 1709 532 E HOPKINS AVE 418 E COOPER AVE #207 C/O STEVE MARCUS \SPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 4USTIN LAWRENCE CONNER LLC AVP PROPERTIES LLC BASS CAHN 601 LLC 532 E HOPKINS AVE 630 E HYMAN AVE #25 PO BOX 4060 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 BATTLE GERALD LIVING TRUST BAUM ROBERT E BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC HIXON BURT LIVING TRUST PO BOX 1518 65 FIRST NECK LN PO BOX 2847 STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 SOUTHAMPTON, NY 11968 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659 BOOGIES BUILDING OF ASPEN LLC BG SPRING LLC BISCHOFF JOHN C C/O LEONARD WEINGLASS 300 S SPRING ST #202 502 S VIA GOLONDEINA 534 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 TUCSON, AZ 85716-5843 ASPEN, CO 81611 BORGIOTTI CLAUDIO BPOE ASPEN LODGE #224 CHATEAU ASPEN CONDO ASSOC 9610 SYMPHONY MEADOW LN 210 S GALENA ST #21 630 E COOPER AVE VIENNA, VA 22192 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CHATEAU ASPEN UNIT 21-A LLC CITY OF ASPEN CICUREL CARY 421 ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CTR ATTN FINANCE DEPT 2615 N LAKEWOOD STE G 130 S GALENA ST CHICAGO, IL 60614 ASPEN, CO 816113551 ASPEN, CO 81611 Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A Bend along line to i Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ 1 ~1 AVERYÂ® 5160Â® 9 A COOPER STREET DEVELOPMENT LLC :OLORADO CABLE DUNN JUDITH A REV LIV TRUST C/O PYRAMID PROPERTY ADVISORS ':00 PRESIDENT CLINTON AVE #310 8051 LOCKLIN LN 418 E COOPER AVE #207 ITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 COMMERCE TOWNSHIP, MI 48382 ASPEN, CO 81611 EDGETTE JAMES J & PATRICIA ERGAS VENESSA BLAIR & CLAUDE EXELCEDAR INC 20% 19900 BEACH RD STE 801 PO BOX 4316 534 E HYMAN AVE JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 FITZGERALD FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LTD FURNGULF LTD -ERRY JAMES H 111 C/O PITKIN COUNTY DRY GOODS LLC A COLO JOINT VENTURE BOX 167 520 E COOPER 616 E HYMAN AVE . GLENCOE, 1 60022-0167 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 GELD LLC GOFEN ETHEL CARO TRUSTEE GONE WEST LLC C/O LOWELL MEYER 455 CITY FRONT PLAZA 401 W CENTER PO BOX 1247 CHICAGO, IL 60611 SEARCY, AR 721451406 ASPEN, CO 81612-1247 GOODING SEAN A 80% & RICHARD L GROSFELD ASPEN PROPERTIES GREENWAY COMPANY INC 20% PARTNERS LLC 666 TRAVIS ST #100 C/O PARAGON RANCH INC 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD #2222 SHREVEPORT, LA 71101 620 E HYMAN AVE #1E LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 ASPEN, CO 81611 HIMAN LLC HOPKINS DEV LLC HORSEFINS LLC PO BOX 6159 345 PARK AVE 33RD FLR 601 E HOPKINS AVE SWANBOURNE WA 6010 NEW YORK, NY 10154 ASPEN, CO 81611 AUSTRALIA, HUNTER PLAZA ASSOCIATES LLP JARDEN CORPORATION JENNE LLP 205 S MILL ST #301A 2381 EXECUTIVE CENTER DR 1510 WINDSOR RD ASPEN, CO 81611 BOCA RATON, FL 33431 AUSTIN, TX 77402 JOSHUA & CO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LCT LP JOYCE EDWARD LLC TENNESSEE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 1310 RITCHIE CT 300 S HUNTER ST PO BOX 101444 CHICAGO, IL 60610 ASPEN, CO 81611 NASHVILLE, TN 37224-1444 LUCKYSTAR LLC MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP MARTELL BARBARA PO BOX 7755 317 SIDNEY BAKER S #400 702 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81612 KERRVILLE, TX 78028 ASPEN, CO 81611 MCMURRAY WILLIAM & HELEN MASON & MORSE INC MIAO SANDRA 29 MIDDLE HEAD RD 514 E HYMAN AVE 9610 SYMPHONY MEADOW LN MOSMAN NSW 2088 ASPEN, CO 81611 VIENNA, VA 22182 AUSTRALIA, Etiquettes faciles A peler 1 A Repliez A la hachure afin de t www.avery.com ~ Utilisez le qabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® , charoement rdvdler le rebord Pop-Upâ„¢ 1 1-800-GO-AVERY ' Sens de i Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A I Bend along line to i Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® Feed Paper 1 expose Pop-Up EdgeTM 1~j AVERYÂ® 5160Â® I NATTERER HELEN IORRIS ROBERT P MYSKO BOHDAN D 67 BAYPOINT CRES 800 E HOPKINS AVE STE 304 615 E HOPKINS OTTAWA ONTARIO SPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CANADA K2G6R1, MELSON COL STEVE & CAROL D NONNIE LLC OLITSKY TAMAR & STEPHEN 501 S FAIRFAX PO BOX 565 PO BOX 514 4LEXANDRIA, VA 22314 ASPEN, CO 81612 GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 PITKIN CENTER CONDO OWNERS D & L PROPERTIES LLC PITKIN COUNTY BANK 80% ASSOC 101 S 3RD ST #360 534 E HYMAN AVE 517 W NORTH ST 3RAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 REVOLUTION PARTNERS LLC ROTHBLUM PHILIP & MARCIA RUST TRUST PO BOX 1247 40 EAST 80 ST #26A 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD #760 ASPEN, CO 81612 NEW YORK, NY 10075 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 RUTLEDGE REYNIE SCHNITZER KENNETH L & LISA L SHUMATE MARK 51 COUNTRY CLUB CIR 2100 MCKINNEY AVE #1760 1695 RIVERSIDE RD SEARCY, AR 72143 DALLAS, TX 75201 ROSWELL, GA 30076 SILVER DIP EQUITY VENTURE LLC SJA ASSOCIATES LLC SNOWMASS CORPORATION 2100 MCKINNEY STE 1760 418 E COOPER AVE #207 PO BOX 620 DALLAS, TX 75201 ASPEN, CO 81611 BASALT, CO 81621 STEWART TITLE CO STERLING TRUST COMP SWEARINGEN WILLIAM F C/O JENNIFER SCHUMACHER 2091 MANDEVILLE CYN RD 450 CONWAY MANOR DR NW PO BOX 936 LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 ATLANTA, GA 303273518 TAYLORSVILLE, NC 28681 TENNESSEE THREE RENTALS TENNESSEE THREE THOMPSON ROSS & LYNETTE C/O J H COBLE PO BOX 101444 1502 GREYSTONE DR 5033 OLD HICKORY BLVD NASHVILLE, TN 37224-1444 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 NASHVILLE, TN 37218-4020 TOMKINS FAMILY TRUST TREUER CHRISTIN L TROUSDALE JEAN VICK 520 E COOPER AVE #209 981 E BRIARWOOD CIR N 611 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 LITTLETON, CO 80122 ASPEN, CO 81611 VICTORIAN SQUARE LLC WAVO PROPERTIES LP WEIDEL LAWRENCE W 418 E COOPER AVE #207 512 1/2 E GRAND AVE #200 PO BOX 1007 ASPEN, CO 81611 DES MOINES, IA 50309-1942 MONROE, GA 30655 ttiquettes faciles & peler ' A Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® I Sens de Repliez A la hachure afin de 1 www.avery.com I 1 chargement rdvaler le rebord Pop-UPTM 1 1-800-GO-AVERY ' A Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A Bend along line to i Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® Feed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeTM ~j AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i A VISE JOSEPH WOLF LAWRENCE G TRUSTEE WOODS FRANK J 111 '320 HODGES ST 22750 WOODWARD AVE #204 205 S MILL ST #301A .LALEIGH, NC 27604-1414 FERNDALE, MI 48220 ASPEN, CO 81611 VRIGHT CHRISTOPHER N YERAMIAN CHARLES REV TRUST 13 BRAMLEY RD PO BOX 12347 .ONDON W10 6SP UK, ASPEN, CO 81612 ttiquettes faciles & peler A Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® | Repliez & la hachure afin de t www.avery.com I Sens de i charaement rdvaler le rebord Pop-l.4)TM 1 1-800-GO-AVERY ' EXHIBIT VICINITY MAP I N.T.S. 11 L % .I l 3 .. .1 . "* r 2 '12 1. - -Â« '4 vÂ¥ a 6/ 0, Asper 21. - â‚¬ ' E f.1 J.,1 3: ' 1 r'} 182 PROJECT SITE E p M .. .r . > t, c 1. ; -11= 4,- - Project Site: 602 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611 LEGEND AND NOTES EXHIBIT /2> 0 O FOUND OR SET SURVEY MONUMENT AS DESCRIBED O STREET LIGHT UTILITY BOX 1.-10 /7916.5 a SURVEY CONTROL -5,"â€ž,;lia i 0 10 20 TITLE INFORMATION FURNISHED BYÂ· PITK]N COUNTY TITLE, INC. CASE NO. PCT234 I 5W DATEDÂ· MARCH 7, 2012 THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCK 99 (9184) 8 75Â·09Â·11Â·W) /-7'Dle.5 BEARINGS BASED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCK 94 (0184 j IND 791515-h.~ 4Â£y , WATER VALVE 7916,5 0 0 FENCE 7957.95 42y Â· VIEW PLANE ROOF. FENCE AND BUILDING ENCROACH INTO RIGHT-OF-WAYS AS SHOWN NO I MANHOL E 5 '/29 !20 9. R, POSTED ADDRESS -602, 606, 608 PAVED'Â·WI) CK 99 1 4 4* f unli k D\SK 25947 TREE WITH CALIPER (D-DECIDUOUS. F-CONIFER, DLÂ·DR,PLI NEI 3 75.09' THIS PROPERTY IS S ITUATED I N ZONE X' CAREAS DETERM NED TO BE OUTSIDE 500-YEAR 10. UILITY EASEMENT It'E 7959.82 FOR BOOK 313 PAGE 281 , VIEW PLANE FLOOD PLAIN) AS SHOWN ON FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP PREPARED BY F E.M,A. 60.02' P 1 T K I N COUNTY COLORADO, COMMUN I TY. PANEL NUMB ER 08097(0204 C, EFFECTIVE , NO. t DATE: JUNE 4, 1987 7917.9 rRASH 1 9 THIS PROPERTY LIES ENTIRELY INSIDE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUDFLOW HAZARD ARD. AS DEFINED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN. PROJECT NIJMBER 1963, 7 No F[GURE ES-15 1 ZONING: C. I COMMERCIAL Â· COURTHOUSE VIEW PLANE NO. 1 ELEVATION 7912,32 4Â·25 1 4 .-A PAVED/PARKING ~ CARPORT WATER IS IN HYMAN AVENUE ILL OTHER UTILITIES ARE IN THE ALLEY / ELEVATIONS BASED ON ASPEN GPS MONUMENT NO. S E.EV - 7910.748 (1929 NVOD) 1 1 7919,4 790[,52 0 4 ,s/ .\ 44 17 F SÂ· v EW PLANE 17Â·OL l - W. 4 0 V g. 0 :MT I 0 / 4 42.8 7910.8 - ENCROACHES VICINITY MAP GUILDNG f*/ I // / m#49Â·'Â»42 k Â»Â»1 1 1-1 ~U@k ' 0.. f 6 BU~LDING - b n K 1 5,:7.5.kfir,*A - 11 'e-'Â· Â·. rÂ»,01 Â· ...C: r,-L.22;}k â€¢ 1 - 1 -1 k crly 09 AspEN Gps ~ MONUMENT NO . 5 Ce 4 ,-21 ...Cr .71 cr--5~~ - - :: 1 Â¥ 7919.7 1Â¥ 2 5,f>~SG'Sh-.ruor- 4.7-3-6-Gooh: : \ S>. 10 u i L 5.01.-8,4nt.--0.0-1!AttI.Â«r-Er.St' * 1 J t \. Â£*REF,Ii#Izw~,~A: 724$21 1 Â» 14 8 2nd FLOOR DECK 40 7 - 9484, SOUTHEAST 26-F 2 CORNER BLOCK 94 \74 20'DL 5 \\El 14 9%141&fillf\Y *5::.:.r:::di -4,4 Â», ; --- BUILD INC 79\7 2 / 0 7920,1 e S 1 M CERTIFICATION ~,~ THE UNDERSIGNED STATES THAT THE PROPERTY DESCR I BED HEREON WAS CONC. PAT10 ' FIELD SURVEYED DUR I NG 2012 AMID IS ACCURATE C 79 ~9 -- . FRUIT I BASED ON THE FIELD EV IDENCE AS SHOWN AND THAT THERE ARE NO 1 TREE DISCREPANCIES OF RECORD BOUNDARY LINE CONPLICTS ENCROACHMENTS, 7920.17 BUILDING ON PROPERTY LUE EASEMENTS OR RIGHTS o F WAY IN FIELD EV I PENCE OR RNOWN TO ME PAV IS , 7964.91 EXCEPT ~S HEREON SHOWN UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WITH NO ABOVEOROUND VIEW PLANE 5-D APPURTENANCES. AND DOCUMENTS OF RECORD NOT SUPPLIED To THE Fl ST 8+DL SURVEYOR ARE EXCEPTED, THI S SURVEY IS VOID UNLESS WET STAMPED 7917.9- ~ NO. 1 l/2*-F OOR WITH THE SEAL OF THE SURVEYOR BELOW. SURVEY PRECISION 15 LESS A 75.09 C RED 8'DL 1 0,~-TED:- THAN 1::5.000, -=A-1.\Vli. I- 11.W - 7 20,7 + 791. 9 60.02 4 -*%*wr miNT-__.2/ 1 7920'* 1.0 2 joHN M. HOWORTH P.L.S. 25947 7948:0 f<'FRUIT 2-Uâ„¢UP- CONC 44Â£ 2594 7 I TREE mell tj NO.t 7966.96 VIEW PLANE 4 4.4 210.07 LANDSCAPED BUILDING CITY OF ASPEN GPS ENCROACHES 7918,4 -9184. SOUTHEAST MONUMENT NO 2 CORNER BLOCK 99 HORIZONTAL CONTROL- EAST RECORD â‚¬3907 4 VENUE IMPROVEMENT SURVEY OF LOTS K AND L, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN COUNTY OF PITKIN STATE OF COLORADO IREA: 6,002 S.F.Â·/-, O. M ACRES ./. PREPARED BY ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC. 210 SOUTH GALINA STREET ASPEN, COLORADO MA I NOTICE ACCORDING TO COLORADo LAW YOU MUST COÂ·flENCE ANY LEGAL aCTiON BASED UPON .7 DEFECT ON THI: PLAT ..IN THREE YEARS PHONE/FAX (970) 925-3816 BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS PLAT . COPMENCED MORE THAN TEN DATE JOB AFTER YOU FIR" DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION YRAR5 FROH THE DATE OF â„¢E CERT'ACATION SHOWN HEREON. ble 4/12 210923 mWY. 16 VOID f. NOT WET :-AMPED Â¥11â„¢ THE SEAL 0~ THE 75.00 RECORD R.O.N. UNPA Rte *A, . *. iÂ·,1 ~r.C 3,2/%%'e.e.'eS-t. Ayl'Â£um-02 ~ ZONE ~Â£1 ARCHITECTS LLC. FENCED IN P O. BOX 2508 ELECTRICAL ASPEN CO 81612 WWW . 2/NE'ARCHIECTS . COM CONCRETE PAD - \ FOR TRASH x~ CANISTER FENCE ALLEY PROPERTY - BOUNDARY ____1_ UTILITY METERS I. ' RECYCLABLE - 1 RETAINING - BINS WALL e f# 11 UNPAVED-- ',.V.. 1 ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 AREA - SIDEWALK- - zle _ - LANDSCAPE- r AREAS U.1 u -0 -~ rÂ·--7:- i 4 IN Â· , 1 1 --5-3 0.-C== E.==== 1 " 1111 1 1 11 221 ROOM *TO. F.F.__ . T.O, F.F. NORTH ENTRANCE 4 +IthE- EL *99'-4Â· 11| i -1 'EL.liOW OUTLINE OP D I ll"|| tup 4. BUILDING ABOVE 2 11 - 1.-=10 1.===.....di .i 11|Il Ill , D q , 1.,r 11 8 1 ", 1, PWOR 11 0 10 - MECK U SHELVES/ .\ - ~ STORAGE A-----1 1----It~ 11 I , It===- CONCRETE 1 . s.00. : CONFERENCE 1 E. EQQM EXISTING - gE[!CE . C BUILDING i (COMMERCIAL) STORAGE -~-- 11 1 7 BELOW ATORAGE Ililli 1 - 0 1- 131<LOW 80!21 -r- 11 1 1392 _..IL. 111.1/ --- 11 11 k Â· . *Il= I -~~I=-<'i;- 0 - 1 11 11 L- Up-- T.O. f.F, BASEMENT L.EVEI ~~ . 11 11 11 BRICK PAVERS- ~T.O. F.F. MAIN LEVEL O [ri..= - *ET-*54-7-iaÂ· - - FEL.+100'-0- Wb!21 i B--~-8-9 E .0 1292 j 11 11 It OU1 LINE OF 75Â· HIGH D*CDRATIVE FENCE NEIGHBORING BUILDING STORAGE , _ 1 9Â£51(4_ OFFICE PLANTERS (COMMERCIAL) -OUTLINE OF 1 -------- COURIZilm=Q NEIGHBORING ____ +In.CONC. i--SLT--T--- ~ EL -100Â·-0Â· EL.+1004 " BUILDING3 L t , 01 LANDSCAPE 2// 4 ~ ~ r-- *1: 1 AREA 7 4204 1 1.- 1 LIGHT POST --- AND SIGN -1.Â«U 1 & 144- l =11 117 s 123 - -~ 2 2 EAST HYMAN AVE. <0 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN D2., 01 MAY, 20)12 M.. EXISTING SITE / E NORTH NORTH /-h EXISTING BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN <Th /h EXISTING SITE PLAN /Th BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN ~2 ~ 1/8"= 11-0" Ze Uy 5,28 ' ~ 1/8 , -1Â·.01' W A200 , gz E 2 2@ 1300W3~I NVWAH 1SV3 mim 111191, m oiml,1 1,91Â¥UO] 91lkmT]IÂ« tiffÂ£JIH dfA,Ifiy :RHA TIF 0, Alatilifff &1,1 NOWEJ 11, Ning 11#I )77 !0121â€ž8, r lb* 317 !07#Imp ' 'NO? 30 NOIDIN,/ Nlut,All *Cm Dit MOB** 09,01 Â¥0 039 3, 10, Noilm,03%} INIE W IÂ¥â€¢1 08 311 %1]lilla, A 1!101 ,0 8,340,8 mi W Dam)00 9111 NO HIViN ) iN~iNI NNI30 ONÂ¥ NOIMI 00Â¥Holo) 'N3dW 'jANJAÂ¥ 1Â¥WAH 15Â¥3 (09 NotiYmOilin, Millilldil Eld inolitIM Â§110!In[NjUS Â¥0 0llÂ¥,0 RAHL fil# 10 41Â¥ 101 NHI ANV 0 11 U ARCHITECTS LLC. P.O. BOX 2808 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW . ZONEIAACHITECTS. COM UTILITY METERS 04 F- V A204 1 //1 1 '9504 Y STORAGE SHED ' O- v 4 1 -CONCTRETE - - Â£22/ STOOP WM +EL; )2 - __ i - - UP ~ T.O. F.F. NORTH ENTRANCE l.ba DN - 1 11' 111 EL. +100Â·4 : BEDROOM | ZED!1 OUTLINE oF- ROOF BELOW - _ _ - 2 1 7--1 SOFFI OFFICE, T ABOVE . , 1#2-" 1, .----11 1 = gl imie 11 CLOSET 11 1.. _ 1 SKYLIGHT ABOVE - --- 11-W taill . OUTUNEOF CONFERENCE ~~--------- -~ - -.---- - - - ~;+C~--* LAWâ‚¬611 1 .&11211'3~ ~~~--r----4 2 m - ROOF ABOVE 8922 -|~T------------ A 1 - -771=r ' ' ~ STORAGE ~ ~__ _/-37(DIA~i -_ -33'J rdiSIER CONCRETE STOOP I [Â· , | CLOSET DN P.- ~ ~ ~II~1TCHENETTE -4 i 41- -d=:=1. L- ' 2 -'6Â«1 -=31 = . 0~ ~ ~ ~ R/F | Fi (1- . _ 1 T.O. F.F. SECOND LEVEL - --I 4 Uul ~<-Ll 03 1 11 "-11 It A204 7 11 1 11 SOFFITS ABOVE A2134 / MASTER - Ioo EL. +109'-21/7 BEAMS AND 1 11 ..0.:~ 1 8.FORIM &!ICMEN 10 0 2[Eli[El ' |22 - =====4= 1 hon. IE' I 11 11 PARritIONSNOTiltÂ·JSTRATEE) , . 6-, BEAMS AFolie , ti ij li ~-p% BUILT-INS 2'-5Â·HIGH ' 11 11 - *IÂ·02Â£ MAB I.EVE.L Alf < DECORATIVE FENCE . 27 i, i I 2----8- 8-- --8---8 - E E[34105.60;'-- 1 - - 1-0 21 ..tl- _2 -_11- --2.ELEND LU P 1 OUTLINE- OF BEAMS AND ; , 1 11 41 FU- -- -- -- r. - -- -- - - - - FIXED SCREEN SKI STORAGE 1 DECK ABOVE -1 SOFFITS ABOVE , 01 1 % OUTLINE OF ~ , | I OFFICE 7 4204 OUTLINE OF - 4 - SOFFIT ABOVE d GUARDRAIL ~ DECK f-4 (COMMERCIAL) 4 _ NEIGHBORING HALF WALL BEAMS .> NEIGHBORING 4 - OUTLINE OF BRICK ' OUTLINE OF COURT'Â¥ARD EQUMIXARD ~ BUILDING , ROOF ABOvE 7-6= -zi~- -- 402)/E--1 BUILDING ~ 1 , PAVERS 10 4..., - 4 T.0. F.F, MAIN LEVEA T .1&5:=6 IL. +1004Â· - el.+1004 U i DN I _____ BELOW 1-1Â· I r.-n A PLANTER C-=- PLANTER , 01 -0 33 1 SKYLIGHT Â¥ . ri,inhS â€¢,Cd tu, Sut.rt' t 9 AZO! , -IT~r] - 2--J ABOVE ---- 1 j - - - -- - L -1 ==â€ž---------- h r---r-- OUTLINE OF ------------ LIVING ROOM BUILDING BELOW - i ( T.0. P.F. SECOND LEVEL 1 r---- EL. +109 2 1'2 1 Lup- 1 rr_ - -GUARDRAIL ROOF BELOW ' 7% DNÂ· .0- 1 2. a 1 / RE . ' 1 1 L_ L____ A 1 02 1 i 52_1 /954 A204 NORTH NORTH ' ~ EXISTING FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~ /-1 EXISTING SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~~ h r=ue 1/8" = 1'-0Â· ~ 1/8 . = 1,-0. CONCEPTUAL DESIGN 01 MAY, 2012 0,@-1 TRI .Â« : EXISTING FIRST / SECOND =0 LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ite.t I A20I i: Â°GU 1300W3N 00Â¥90103 1INTÂ¥ '3fIN3AV NnIAN lill ZO9 (IMU~/HM-/ WmOJ 9NI,]AljNI 'INSIM 63A,31?~ M3HI0 Tly ON, A,01~11Â¥15 1,1 NOW!Â·10] TiÂ¥ Rl,ll 11,16 -m 11)11,fm $ l01 m fli,!gly I Plal *0 NOC,MIbll Ulifl,4 Wi~U ll lattl# 01UW 10 (]M 32 &Â¥6 katifill!9il SIHi ~0 ild ON )11 5113!jH)8, r 3N0~ 10 ;2341Â°'d ili~I ~11%*'2'~1 IÂ£ ~3~1110) 111111 N9[S~0 ONÂ¥ 11Â¥ 1 1111 BH, Â·m 'w] 110!)4, NOLim,0HlllÂ¥ Nillet X0[04 lj,Olll SNOUY]LID i 0 ~ 19 B91/Â¥H) Ny Â®d )N 1 ANV 1 01 1Â£ Odly I ]18m loN $111]311HJ,y rij CU ARCHITECTS LLC. P.O. BOX 2608 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW . ZONEIARCHITECTS, COM x-XZ y 0 V 0 OUTLINE OF 1 1 Z Roof BELOW 1 ~ LU - OUTLINE OF <C SKYLIGHT OUTLINE OF ~ >- ROOF BELOW f E)tlsâ„¢G ROOF ' (DRAINS TO INTERNAL GUTTERS> = 4 Â£ ' 404> 1 1 4 OUTLINE oF PARAPET c OUTLINE OF DECK BELOW COURTYARD ' BELOW ~ 1 OUTLINEOF NEIGHBORING \,IA f 7 A204 BUILDING X OUTLINE OF N SKYLIGHT OUTLINE OF ROOF i OUTLINE OF ... . ..... ROOF BELOW 1 1 02 1 A2o4 Inue CONCEPTUAL DESIGN NORTH - EXISTING ROOF PLAN ~~ 01 MAY, 2011 EL i.'8â€¢ = 1 LO~ D:le D.'.'/ r~10 EXISTING ROOF PLAN 9.01 I Alnl 00Â¥P010) 113,8Â¥ '38NlAÂ¥ NÂ¥WAH 15Â¥~ Â£09 1SV 3 E09 41 p/] ZONE -kxÂ«ix,VeÂ»XIL W L.-_ :.*& ~ ~4~~Â»O42~iÂ«Â»~71 --1 L' 9946Â«044444>f -- -111/1 lift*41 11/l/ll, -- CU 4----___-t.: 1 li i i i / LI j i 190%1 li 'l il i 'll /1 ' ' -UJ ru 1 1-4_. i ."1///1///NY,11#,//~ /1 ARCHITECTS LLC. 47.X.Xia> 30/4/CY /2.1/1/ /'/9, 7.11 ~ 1, /4444,1 1 il -4 ASPEN CO 81612 P. 0, BOX 2508 620 - ~, jmlim] wirj lili I . 4.Ytful 1%~Â»064+44 Ua WWW , ZONE'ARCHITECTS . COM --- c x 00Â¢V V.VI>214 - /11////I'/ :/ill 'Â«-E l-T+71~01- 4. -EN+ , r // j// /4*pu //l,- 111 1.1,11. -Â«44,Â»Â«Â»Â»*9 -36-.----2962&~i~~~7.4 1:E: , 1 + 1. t.t--1.... - lelah t. 2 I /4 359~ -+*-171-11 1 7 U 1- 1 71-0 i j , 4 I j , i i j l 4.4.11'111'llill 3.585''p''t506%*9/ilii"Sili2i%%: , _ ---''ltilll{Clill -4 I ruill Fkt il/j'f " f ' / 6'' . i lill '1 123333. fj11, U U J N 4 104 1 - g LE_L_LLL_LL-L-LL.mme! - - L-LI_LLLL-l-LLL-CLE.- Â· i ' L-LILLLLLLL-LLLU v LL,_LDECM_LI_LL. LLL L aLLLIELL.LLLLLU . l_L-LELLELLLMLLE,.1 LLLELLL L Lki.L-LL l. - . ~_ COURTYARD LLELLLELLL2LLL - - I_l.-LL.LL I L L.Lt-LLLI . . f,/1//44 1 --1 PO .,81.80 ' - 0/7/91<92 - TOTALPLOORAREA: 2479.0%.9. --- lF X ,/~,y~, ' ~ i~ (f]OFS.OliN'./OF'/PRHAN.5 i TOTAL FLOOR AREAc 2649.1 s,F, , NET LEASABLE AREA: 400.6 SA - 414/ 1 / I~_ 0 / A- (COMMERCIAL) ' ' (OFFICE #1 1 COMNIERS'AU | 1 NET LEASABLE AREA: 2176.2 S.F, :,15 N[T LEASABLE AREA: 319.8 e 1 4 0 4-,Ff *CE #2 / COMMERCWLj L L_.1 COMMON AREA: 187.8 S.F. <C NEI LIVABLE AREA 1530.6 S.F, OVERHANG AREA, 208.1 S.F Z (RESIDE'NTIAL) COMMON AREA 56.9 S.F D.I DECK AREA: 1/3.1 S.F. ~0 NORTH NOR]H 01 SECOND LEVEL AREA PLAN /--1 FIRST LEVEL AREA PLAN =1'-0 TfJ 1/8 . 1 -0" 0 0 LEGEND 1 t F ZI~ NET LEASABLE AREA 14499% 7 -49 MECH 4 , NET LIVABLE AREA -UNNOUNJU 4./. 'ji/l7///l/lift/. 2351 COMMON AREA -Â» -LLULL1 ALL-LL .LaLLLI stifit/////li--41 LILLL LLELLL DECK AREA ' j/ AÂ»~92i~- Mwb<U X i l MWjti ; l ~ f f r/BA/ / f 3- 9\ CJ-I' / r/ /// //>>/a ////// /:LL.10 //FA/74-6-76-; U///7/////i;' ky-P~ OVERHANG AREA (/ /9/ P/A /1 /// /ftyf/ '/f'j/~11'4 45 A ~11//1 Mjjl 1~-1- lili Ill 09'L ~ l1 UNitt j i - IQIAL EXISTING AREA: = -0 O 0 1//flit/1 1 TOTAL FLOOR AREA: 5128.1 S.F. /a & i CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ~ TOTAL NET LEASABLE AREA: 4548.1 SA . 111/1//1///il (COMMERCIAL) 01 MAY, 2012 -- Â»U = 2 TOTAL NET LIVABLE AREA: 1530.6 S.F, 3101Â®,L NET LEASABLE AREAÂ· 1652.5 S.F. EXISTING FLOOR PLAN ZC Dr.,r' Tnle I (RESIDENTIAL) (COMMERCIAL) - AREA r TOTAL COMMON AREA: 224.7 S.F, 5~1 0 DECK AREA: 173.1 S,F. M -m NORTH WW - BASEMENT LEVEL AREA PLAN 0 A203 11 ~ 1/8" = 1.-0' A 13OOWill 1593 Z09 0011010) 'NmÂ¥ '3ON3 AÂ¥ NVWAH 1%Â¥3 ZO}9 011Â¥]110010Â¥ N31.JIN VOCd 180Klll iMOUIE!)343 4 M 31]H 1 99IiÂ¥H) 1 11111 1 31 B 01%31 10 ]19Â¥0 101 5 M]in 919Ix n, 0131,3,1 iH9IyM0) 9NI0D1]NI '1[1191, (13*Njlly IliH10 nY ONY 1,01Rt,]S #An NON,(0] nÂ¥ blÂ¥ll 11,Hi JT] g]U{,0Â·~Â¥ D IOZ 7[1 $131.1DotÂ¥ t ~01 B !04011.IN *Illnd, MU 3Rf IÂ©DHill. 53651 W <1~5&] I Ww 1,01!11,*011[ SIHi ;0 yl ON ]11 11]31:HI, p ]NOZ 10 11Wldo,4 M Il 3 I 1 1 ZONE hl C-Ir i ARCHITECTS LLC. P,O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81612 VA'VW . ZONEIARCHITECTS . COM --- - - - - --- --INTED STUCCO 01 - 1[ .0 . 37'FIJ EI-5 ECU ELE' 1 -- --VIllE--21 --- -- - -- - Â· Â·-------- ----Â·-- Â· PINTED WOOD SIDU. ED STUCCO - TO FÂ¢ fF,7,40)LF.'El . 112.1.F SECONG,kall 1 1 r-! i I - - --L.-7 -1 -*._ _ ' ~ -~ ---- ~- - -Â·- - - ---- -PAINTEDCNIU 11 i 1\XE-3 ---- - -- '-Â·"-Â·- ---Â·PAINTED CMU - 10 i : Â· 1| FÂ©L ; | 1 -- . -_---- --I--Â·-- . STORAGE SHED \>ILL INd O.F.F. FIRILEVEL . T.D f F P/57 1 Ev,il #,+100/1 aL.*100Â·4â€¢ .TOÂ·U,0.UEVENTRANCE) - , .,- -- - -- .7,01 ", ALI " F."TRANft'; A -- - + -- . - â€¢*L Â«.4 'EL m. i - Â·- Â·- -- ---Â· ---- ./.ING'RADE $TORAGE SHED FENCIi '\ND k ANDSÂ©APING 1 PAINT?MMU 5 DECORATIVE,eNCIE EXISTING GRADE + NOT *HOWN FOR/AAITY I , NOT SHOWN FOR 'ARITY -- CONÂ©Re r -- Â· Â·- ---p-Â· CONCART/FOUNDATION : I/,4 Below 1 1 1 3 ve(UN ~ 3/16"=1'-0 wirrT - EXISTING'WJ#lf ELEVATION 01 EXISTING SÂ©Â¥-1 ELEVATION l~ 3/16"= 1'-0" - Â· ----- NEIOHOORING BUILDINGl MITE"mucco ........... - -- --___ _ PAIN Til)STIC 1Â·r- - - -- -- PAINTED WOOD i i ~ OFFICE #2 2Â£!281 N Al/Fl - - )il. 16â€¢-7 i.Â·1' - *06:048/6A -, 1 11 FT~COMMERCIAL ~ 2 iE .< 2 =L .~ - --- * 32 .F'F LE a -- - IT,O, FF FIRST LEVE ZE 4.L.Â·10- ' - a Â·106'4- t-- DECORATIVE FENCE PAINTED Cljo PAJNTED WOOD SIDING )IN-Â£ 1 __ i i NOT SHOWN FOR CLAfarr ..STING GRADE PA]NTED CMU COMMERCIAL 4 n -- - -- -Â· - CONCRETE FOUNCANON ~- - - CONCRETE FOUNDATION BELOW BELOW 18* a T,0, F,F. BASEMENT LEvEL 1 -. -------------- [-1 J ..tÂ·.7 1 7 . CONCEPTUAL DESIGN I. 01 MAY, 2012 - EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION - EXISTING EAST ELEVATION EXISTING Draw,i: T* l~) 3/is" =1'-0Â· l~/ 3/16"= 1-0" ELEVATION S 1.Eel I A204 e 11 IHHE 130OW3X NVWAH 15VB I09 00,11010) 'N3dfÂ¥ '311113AÂ¥ ,Â¥WAH 15Â¥3 ZO9 QU'iM, 11Â¥ 01183Ht JHDINAdo) 91lloill)1,1 1111911 GiAÂ¥311â€ž400 In 9, 1*lfiliES â€¢11 Â©â€¢00) 4 NÂ¥!31 1Â·mn Â·)TI it),i,ow i ne, lr: 501*im i *tw Â£ 11,1@w,IN â€¢Lial voiu 311! lrON*,1 g*,62 K. Eim a A 3,*moal mit fo IsÂ¥ 5%7 6 MA&*599&*15 27'WM .1 ]1, 'St]3]iH)~V 3181;Nodf38 10 Ilgyn loN il it.J]liH},Â¥ P ]NOI ./. 2 ,>44... . . ./ '4.1/. {% I I . I . . 1.... Â· 4,Â· C, 1144'wair 9 .../ 21N6,c - Â· S.N ., 04.,9,1,9 14 ; 2 , ... S*.* r.. I: . I ... 4 *22 , 44 t r'f' :W ' 4.* fg . .Â· 1Â·44/: . ' 1 2 ... I. -m Ii-1 4 -7.45 41â‚¬4 , 9,- -44..: 223 ; 1 1 :... . 24 4 1*4. 9-0.. 1 ./ /2264.... 1.1 9,4 , ..;-f ..1,4 2 , ...1 .4 . lr~.. ,,, ,, 8, .- UAL 1 94 ' f .!4 1:f i 13"El, 4 -.4 Wil:/ i ,.?A al<â€¢ De . j *0 41&. . VIEL.. +.4, '~9 R ~ Â· ~ ' JftÂ«Â· . - ' 14~. % /, 4 4. 1. : :: r- .*-* .1.:""46 $ ' ...4 I .. - lmR*U'Â·Â·Â· Â·Â·F*~4 *A . 1 14., p; 111â‚¬=f.. 4-6 , -'1,4. V.. it '-*d. 44 'Flf /4 /11 .1 90#00rt~44 , 'tri . F 1. Â·Â· I I Â·Â· - - 3.-2-3 46-~F---11-. . - , e. - I ' 94 - - 5,433& I- pt I " 4 2 6.~4 K, 0 1 L . 34& ... I' ..4:,a,f '144W , 4%1 /- /474/*4 - + i: b r, .Â·!r . & A |~'â€¢'~. '; â‚¬ 4 1 - / d i ' 02 4,8 . b ...4 '*. 4 9. â‚¬ E..4114 .4 1 J Â¢Â·' a .4*' ~fs,)14 2**D .9 '0 - % I 1 9 4, 92 , 9. - lip +.b' t.6 y '4 -*1*f *4,31.Â·th VF :i'** .9,â€¢: - 94't,4 Â¢i... 94"944 'h'.1.Â¢21.-a ; 2 1~"1 24. Â»11-ur 994. :'AW *4 ~~ ~~~~ ~ a e ' f./:$ I'k V ..,t 9- -' . 6 04*ty*Â£4 TE*#-64 ~-7 Nf '19*Am en,fyi m, 1 ..0- - 2 1 Il.-- '7 7'WiLL 4 - . killrdlll/MilkS. , l+1'~illiriÂ·le ffÂ¥Â¥ â€¢ e, 9#' 44" A:â€¢*'i~ JL OF*Dit///0/6-#-Â·a~~ , 6 *0. I . 02/1 214* 4.-imt-i - 4 .ll r $ I ' . i..Â£ ./ r - 11 'TA 12% .1..' 4' 4+4- ~' b I. 4.97 01 -, 4% AL ~U . . '1 2.f e 9- 11. . . -LI .= 1 - ...Muumr/0 4 ..2 , , * 0 - - 1 go = 'Se'' 21,1 j g... ' -, ..1 .. try -S 1/ - - - '., t.k :21/1 it. 11,m 44 lit!' I - Vay ..44 'Â»2(f.*::.-.. 3 - '4. , 1 1 1 1 .. , ./g 1*1 ARCHITECTS LLC. P. O. BOX 2608 ASPEN CO 81612 NEW FENCE TO WWW . ZONE*ARCHITEOTS . COM SCREEN ELECTRICAL RECYCLE BINS -PAVED PARKING ALLEY PROPERTY - BOUNDARY NEW LANDSCAPE AREA ~~- 1 2 o EXISTING RETAINING W u WALL. EXPANDED LANDSCAPEÂ·- N ' 7 4-I ~ r.-rph . AREA ~ 6 SIDEWALK 4% 1 1 1, EXISTING LANDSCAPE , 11 AREA TO REMAIN , W- -- - --- -T 4*94 -al---.--. C =g ELEL Na r ir- -1 ; 1. =r Â£81& 2 M .1 11 1 14 1 4 F ~ . EL -100< . T.O. F.F. 0 Ilillillil - ~ *T.D F F. NORTH ENTRANCE E I ; 1 P Mtga 0 || IL__ : 1 0 R'mu--3--1 3 T I 1 OUTLINE OF 1 -Â·--- Â·- ----1 BUILDING ABOVE L- 0 OFFICEE f25Â£!2 EXISTING (COMMERCIAL) (COMMERCIAL) BUILDING C.P.211 = . STORAGE GCLOW 0 - - 51 --2~21 ff - 0 F 4'-' - OUTLINE OF EXISTING- NEIGHBORING BUILDING , COURTYARD TO GE REMODELED 2-37 -- L - - Up - - .T.O. F.F. BASEMENTLEV[fiy- -- ~ EL.+91'-7 1/2 432 * T.O~ F.F. MAIN LEVEL [1 ' EL.+100.7 -B 8 - -El----19 E Sle)' & TO BE REMODELED EXISTING COURTYARD OFFICE ~ (COMMERC}AL) - OllÂ·CLINE OF OFFICE PLANTER EQEZAR.2 -72 (COMMERCIAL) T NEIGHBORING BUILDING 1 COURTYARD 494 -- $ T.0 EC MAIN 1.EVEL ~ EL. +100'4 '1 LANDSCAPE P A, 304 AREA LIGHT POST -' AND SIGN f - _ -=- n _ 4 43 f 2210 2 & r4 *~9 O>7 F ~ \4-1 i %4 < e ;S ,/097 ut. 49 4-9 49 49 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1"W. CONCEPTUAL DESIGN .C 01 MAY, 20ll NORTH NORTH Dow: Al /-1 PROPOSED BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN ~~ ~ 1.8' =1'Â·0" (bE PROPOSED SITE PLAN PROPOSED SITE / BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN - 1/8" = 1'-0 0 1~0{1 . A3OO 2 0 13OOW3~I NVWAH 1SV 3 T09 CM,309 iu?3, m Manill 1119Â¥Ado) 9111081*1 111,91, 01#Â£* TH{0 12, ah, *=mIT aft *we m ll,ki Nmi m illim],Â¥ t 107 111 it)1111OW t 11,07 10 XMN'hil Alijal Fl lii inOill# 0*!0) *0 %1 Â£[ 4%1,l *DIL[teled* *d *1 0' m U)'lid}M t 11,OI t~,Al' ll'%:APS'f 11,1I,1;01 11~~ NOINO ON~ N0I1,~3'16 331'180 Ill 311~ililjf t 3#101 Z 10t 0(IN010) 'NldfÂ¥ 'lnN3AV NYWAH 15Â¥3 Â«09 4 9-1-11 6 moetiw 1,]lini M Nmd LAOHNM i 9 Â£ 401 ild! i 1Â¥ 31 li Od lUÂ¥[1 1DN 10311#IJhÂ¥ i ]11 ZONE PC ARCHITECTS LLC, P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO B1 8 12 WWW + ZONCIAROHITIOTS. COM 2 1;36sf .-/ Â¥ ri~ir RECYCLE BINS L - 1 Pill 1 1 / UTILITY METERS 1 OPEN TO ' -OPEN TO -' ' '01111-: 1 17 ~ 1, ABOVE~~ ~ STORAGE BEHIND DOORS ' BELOW i ~ EMPLOYEE HOUSING I f 9 l 2%4 ---27' -21 **Q Cl =-1- r-Irn 1 UP - -|1 44! ~ili' ~ 7 J L 1 --I~ ; ~ - 1 NEW FENCE 1 u .- ' I ' ON k , I.T.O.F.P. ' 11:'11 Lbo NEW -Â· 1 -9'EÂ«7 ON-- 11!ill':,1 _ ~T.O. F.F. NORTH ENTRANCE L(fi-BY-#2 , ! EL. -1 00'-0" f t-i L= , ouu.0, 1 ~ I 76 11-J 4 BUILDING ABOVE i I 2 C 1 OFFICE TIC). FA SECOND LEVEL (COMMERCIAL) EL. -109'-21/2" 1= 1 Ip-_-_ij ' 1[In _ DN 1 1 6 -1 '11 4 0 ------A305 7 , 1 ~ 1 EMPLOYEE COMMERCIAL | DN -11 1 1 HOUSING .. ~ /'1 =- -- 1 1 . A3057 I ~ UNIT#1 V k. H L.LL-2 OPEN 1 ! + BELOW_~ - 9 0 11-Il -ijp ~ T.O. F.F. MAIN LEVEL L=- D ~6-8 8---8 -- 8 E EL.+108'-0" ~iM.-7 31 1 b . -~-78111877787--r.TE'=>M - NEW WINDOW /1 I ~ 4304 OUTLINE OF -2-1 : 4 OUTLINE OF --t- PEE!2 k NEIGHBORING NEIGHBORING COLATYA{in - 23- (COMMERCIAL] BELOW 26!BTY-&52 BUILDING O. F.F. SECOND LEVEL 1 COURTYARD BUILDING Â¢ k.+109'12 12 -I TO F.F. MAIN LEVEL T 41-4100'4---- 3 -1 491,4 K PLANTER ...../.*....LED VA3O4 . Mt El Ab, m-CLN $ 1.lt,irs. OUTLINE OF my~ ~ tÂ· BUILDING BELOW /1 i ~F_= 0 -4 ~ il ~ GUARDRAIL 7 n _rry= 7- -C 02 ROOF BELOW 1, 0% AL--1 L. 1 OUTLINE OF BUILDING ABOVE .9 '2J -./ Af 2 A 4304 A304 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN NORTH NORTH 01 MAY, 2012 2 Â» PROPOSED FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~~ 8 1/8.1-0 LEVEL FL00R PLAN Em .PROPOSED SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~~ ---- = Dâ€¢2%,lr~ T,de PROPOSED FIRST / SECOND j~ .- 2. ag *E A301 1300WiN NVWAH 1SVB I09 O(191010) 'NldfÂ¥ '30113.AÂ¥ NVWAH 15Â¥3 ZO9 Omein ita M DImill U191,6,0) 9,NAUM 'UIE,1 09$313, ENI!0 11Â¥ 0}NY 1,0121,1$ MIfi 110*1101 m Imil m,3 371 104*GW i 0,02 N$ U]RaOII, t NIZ i,D 126*W Nitta %0Â¢U m ~016,at l~F,~01 *0 ,iia JÂ® 0. 10~MWiÂ©f, 9te M , 4&91jt~ CNInt?'W'MT 17 NOUY - 1~ ililr /,4 ARCHITECTS LLC. P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW . ZONEIARCHITECTS Â· COM 2 ~*58&,,P 2 1605 7 ELEVATOR SHAFT \1 TOP OF NEWi ONÂ«-- Il _1 GUARDRAIL- -2-1 ELE,/ NEW r- ROOFIOP DECK OUTLINE OF PARAPET - i' BELOW NEW | OUTLINE OF I RESIDENTIAL UNIT FREE MARKET STRUCTURE BELOW . -T= NEW ROOF 1 (DRAIN TO INTERNAL ~ i 1 GUTTERS) :/ 11 1 ' A308 ' AV ' 11--C= OUTLINE OF Ii--- ROOF ~ NEW ROOF OUTLINC OF PARAPET STAIR BELOW ' , BELOW OUTLINE oF ~ COURTYARD NEIGHBORING BUILDING i i _ OUTLINE OF i NEIGHBORING BUILDING 1 1 h \ VA304 1 9 A304 OUTLINE OF PARAPET ./ - OUTLINE OF PARAPET ~ - OUTLINE OF STRUCTURE N.-- -- - ..1 BELOW ; - BELOW '2J A A304 , 2 J A3O4 2/ 5* ig E/ 22 G = I. 10 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN / NORTH NORTH Dzl /-1 PROPOSED THIRD LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~~ /-1 PROPOSED ROOF PLAN ~~ ~7 1/8' =1'-0 ~ 1/8- = 1'-0 PROPOSED THIRD / ROOF k 01 MAY, 2012 Di@* LIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 3% ihf2[ # 1300W3X NVWAH 1SV 3 Z09 011,3%]! %11014 1T, '0111 3H1 11191,WOJ 9NI0IIUNi 'WIDIM WAM]m IHIO nÂ¥ OMÂ¥ 1Â¥01{,Wly TAn !40%810) m !,Imi lyld m fl)3110%Â¥ r am m ini~31, t B,N 0 *AR,Itina *U 3,~! 1001!*a OE(aU) c Glia * 1Â¥W 11011,1,*0041 Will m 1Â¥U ON 311 51)]ll HyÂ¥ t 11Â¢01 10 UY] , 1 i 111'J 1, 110 Ill N 1 111~I'2'j ZO '~ N0I117Â°j 0071010) 'NldfÂ¥ 3(1113AV NÂ¥WAH 1918 IM 3/01 11011elly N)111,l 01,4 DIOHNM iN 111 ,] i J H.-----~ I 1 11 ~ 1 1% 1 -34 11 11 E *KdYEWk#*fNG~ 0:4:111 47 Â§*4* Â»5 1+X+11 " c.-1 LEGEND -19;i:-1 tÂ·X+I'l-I+X.MON+14+1441.:+I.:+11 ~~~5 5**~0'-~ -++::++s*j*i:i~:: 1 "-7,"r + ........ :Illf +Ir....+ + + 49-1 ms:4 fi~i:* i: I :E..f:.:E:E:E ~ NET LEASABLE AREA . x.:+I+Ir;iI+I+I+I+I-:- ~, EL~'1 Z '11*4++4++11 ++4+- + 1+ 1 1 .......11 (COMMERCIAL) . .Â«4.WTÂ¢t,t~ [1 i H M. ~f E-- 1449 !11~ 1! ~ ARC"1JECTS 6256Â® NET LIVABLE AREA 00004 (NEW RESIDENTIAL) j P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW , ZONE'ARCHIECTS. COM 2/ta .9 r / (NEW EMPLOYEE UNITS) --L=b~-1.-= 1 9 444Â«4444 lilli////1f-l/illilill,il//lcitil ' NET LIVABLE AREA - 111. \1 / / / f j l / / / / / l i 1 j ' I l l, l i l i l l i il l fy;- l l' i 1 2-94 7 71 gilli///li//l//lillliill,flil uldad li '1 ; 1<N- -(-Ili ' 1 / Lill~ 555511 -rr,/, i 2.,3.,3.,3*", COMMON AREA .a>Â·5 1ix OF - FLE . /.1-111 1 | kLLL LL kEEELE v/// lill p///-//0-441 1Â»-1/j'll///i;14_---- DECK AREA / i /1/i \4/1~ irt, I / li ' 'l lI lili li .imis,#BErriE:Effililimimimemi~~~~~Edigg,Gr~~I.F.B.~'EE.E.CIC./.~~EE;&~2~ -Â·Ill I ~f ~ OVERHANG AREA - TOTAL PROPOSED AREA: QDWRIZAER -- TOTAL BUILDING FLOOR AREA: 8818.0 S.F. NORTH 9944 COURIYARD (INCLUDING OVERHANGS) ~/ 1/80 =1'-0" I -XÂ«311/ jill jill /jil - SECOND LEVEL AREA PLAN ~ 2 2~1 TOTAL COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA: 3148.9 S.F. _1 L L 21 111 l'ili .111 1- L 1 />07 <C TOTAL NET LEASABLE AREA: 4548.1 S.F. (COMMERCIAL) th=2 j TOTAL FLOOR AREA: 2995.6 S.F. FLOOR AREA: 3128,0 S.F. 3 1 1 FLOOR AREA: 3114.1 S F (INCLUDING OVERHANGS, >- (NEW RESIDENTIAL) ]Ef~ , 'INCIU......... OVERHANG AREA 87.4 S. F OVERHANG AREA: 222.2 S.F. ~0 TOTAL NET LIVABLE AREA: 2344.1 S.F. COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA: 2373.6 S F. (NEW RESIDENTIAL) | | NET LIVABLE AREA: 1530.6 S.F, (EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNIT 1) NORTH NET LEASABLE AREA 2175.2 S.F. TO'TAL NET LIVABLE AREA: 1693.4 S.F. EXTERIOR DECK /STAIR AREA: 68,9 S.F. (COMMERCIAL) (NEW EMPLOYEE UNITS) (EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNIT li /-1 FIRST LEVEL AREA PLAN ED f TOTAL COMMON AREA: 651.0 S.F. .1 2%< I 4.--717-1 COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA 775.3 SF 411 '11 1 1, 1 lili ..J -'1 illl 16 1 Z l~) 1/8â€¢ â€¢ 1'-0" NET LEASABLE AREAÂ· 720.4 S.F. > (COMMERCIAL) RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA' 94.2 S.F. NET LIVABLE AREA: 17.0 S.F. (NEW RESIDENTIALi 0 '1 4 ' X ~ COMMON AREA: 373.2 S.F. 92Â¢itif V'' 4 -% 1 4 2, 4 1 - -4/4 MECH 1. K ! 0 1/.1 /7 ..11 i i Â· V. 11 %944LF ' X . A - 111/11/1111/1 1 1 //// 'I k , li IjÂ«Nlij = </ M ./ Â· 1. y / .1 - 1 1, 111,1 1 K '' A, 1 I I. ' 1 #,i'jut.. 1 :* 2 944-4 ix 4/10/7/2 ---Â·- --/- -jia E --6-= 4993/6 0%4 i NORTH , j '1/1!11 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN - /-1 THIRD LEVEL AREA PLAN 0 01 MAY, 2012 5 190/ I l~) 1/8" = 1'-on D.~wrn# /14\ 0 PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN . NET LEASABLE AREA 1652.5 S.F. Â»,1 4 N. / A.VeÂ· - AREA < i FLOOR AREA 2575.9 SA (COMMIRCIAL) (ALL NEW RESIDENTIAL) GM NET LIVABLE AREA 2344.1 S.F. (NEW RESIDENTIAL) NORTH (NOT SHOWN) /-\ BASEMENT LEVEL AREA PLAN ~ NEW ROOF TOP DECK AREA 449SF. A303 { ~ 118"= 1-0 1300W3w 1SVi t09 =Mmn!3~. 1}19!,Ad0) Smaft]NE 'WHM 03MAN VI10 11Â¥ 01,Â¥ MOInl,ES AWI NOWWO) TlÂ¥ NIVAN 11,11% m WHNJ,Â¥ I 31*01 m Gli,Hm , Me iO *95~;,TW 1#1111â„¢ ad 310 1,081# 0300) 90 015ft 10 lhÂ· 11011Â¥1110111! URl 10 111Â¥d 011 111 Il)31111)4Â¥ 4 10 10 11, 3~ d~ 11Wn HH] NO GlmÂ¥1110) MIl NOI~ GhÂ¥ NOUÂ¥H,0~NI I 1 O(WHO10) 'NldSV '3AN3AV NVWAH 15Â¥3 Z09 0 HO]1Â¥RI01!18Â¥ NitjINM VOWN lnOHM SNOILY]lil @0 5911 Â¥,0 al]H!01 139HVH) INÂ¥ 101 ZONE PAINTED CORRUGATED -- NEJGHBORING BULOING METAL 8,0 *r--- / rrarTily- JI[]DI//6MT 2.2140* _ _ 4 ARCHITECTS 0 -610 *- P O. Box 2808 AM 7 0 21 2-#b -1 - L j li NE!01Â®001,0 BUL,e LLC. FICÂ»rT 'ACADE A8PEN CO 81 8 12 El Z CIT,Â¢ 81: ASPEL 1 1 P.m==0 1 M - 4 OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IT O PARAPET 1 COI.'IPOSITE 81011'0 MATERI. 0 0 + 0 0 0 1 . I 0 9 24-22= IT O FF SeCoND l FVEL 1 9EL.+109'-2117 111111111 11 1 = --* 0 + D .T Q FF FIRST LEVEL \\ '' FEL â€¢1004 1 ~DECORATIVE FENCE L PAINTED CAIU ~ | EXISTING GRADE NOT SHOWN FORCLAITY E CONCRETE FOUNOAION BELOW 4 <.7. PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION ~~,0/ 3/16" =1'-0" PAiNTEDÂ¢O4RUGA1ED .01/ LIMIT METAL / _~ _-_-_-_ ,TO, ROOF SAVE -EL +135'-41/7 1 /--EC--*TWJ5314. .TO PARAPET 2----- ----l---------------- 1- 1.T O ROOF DECK - - - - '*l +1111/1/4" 1 I 1 1 - *\ - I NEW RESIDENTIAL UNIT 9 - .T O PARAPET _/-:c~-3-31< =57- ATO. FFTMIRBLEVEL MATER'. .: ~EL +116'-53/4 ..... Ki E m n [I]- ~ *5 * P~ /8 ME 18 EB IT.0 FIF SECONDIEVE *0 vEL .l Og'11/2 -4 :11 1 - /11 1 ' 1 1 1 COMMERCIAL = - - .T O GUARDRAH - 1 11 1 G :11 1 0. /g 1 1 - _ _ .T.O. FF FIRSTIFVFC mi - 'EL. 4100'-0 ' ' CONCEPTUAL DESIGN Dâ€¢11 ~- EXISTING GR,~DE ~PAINTEDCMU + % 01 MAY, 2012 9EJU'Wiza/ . I 0,1"1 1* L-- CONCRETE FOUâ‚¬*TION 1 BELOW PROPOSED 2.1 -1 1 - U --- 'EL.Â·01'-112 ELEVATIONS .T,O F F, BABEMENT LE W,Mt # - PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION ~ 3/16" = 1'-0 AlAA 13OOW3W NVWAH 1593 T09 â€¢â€¢ --- --J -â€¢.1.1-1 11,1.- uln.... U]Ful " U.i .Will' all -1-U, iii ./.11 .. Ill ..... F ./ .8 Wi...dIU ..... Rill- Ulld 'Ill l[IOHUM I.J. UAR I i. I,OU.KM,0 % 00 M ]NIÂ¥11Â¢0) 11I31' NOIS]0 ONÂ¥ ~1~1~111 3111~~ m 'iD]1}H]N, ) I! 1 O/nolo) 'NMV '30N3AV NÂ¥11111 m t09 ONUSD(3 - 1)16 *0 5 AA. 313 1 ;3911,10 111Â¥ 80, 31'U 111Â¥ 1 Odi]H 31.11 loN il folt'll]. ZONE F-- pAINTEDCOP'UGATED .. - GUARDRAIL .-------- PAIN'TED CORRUGATED Ti~1 NETAL / METAL I- - - NEIGHBORING BUILDING . I 610 HYMAN PROPOSED'll.. // . ~-HEIGHTLIM. *T.O. GUARDRAIL EL. +134 5 14 / 1 T.0 ELEVATOR tly!.-1 / *EL.+134'-on _ _ *T.O. PARAPET EL. +131Â·-834Â· ARCHITECTS - i i -- Â·Â·- Â·- -- .-.-...,. LLC. - ASPEN co 81612 PO . . BOX 2508 E- .1-22 - ..222--2J , ' WWW . Z0NE4ARCHITE0TS . COM 1 9 -- .T.Q, PARAPET -Â·------ i --- NEL.*120-1 3,4 1- -- 222 PAINTED WOOD SIDING 1- - -- --- - - J ~T.O. F.F. SECOND LEVEL EL.+109 21,2 L . - L L I _ ~ 3-- 1 +1 4 - ' i' 1 -- --- T+ 11'111Â·1 ' , 1 0. F.F. FIRST LEVEL. I i f i - . , EL. *100'4 r 1 11: - ' -- -1 ~TO. P.F. ALLEY +'x EL. *994 PAINTED CMU EXISTING GRADE Z 1 COIa#...= .(Di 1. !31'10/ 13 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION = 2 --Â· P.NIED CORRUGATED 14001 DEYOND --HEIGHT LIMIT METAL \ ... *T.O. ELEVATOR 2 EL.+134'-0" ~ T.O. PARAPET EL. +131'-8 3/4' -- PAINTED CORRUGATED -- METAL 1 '- - ~T.O. PARAPET EL. +120'-1 34" 1 ~-- 1 0 [ -Â»-1 0 1 0 1 - c....Trrious 2. COMPOSITE - 164 - ..... 3 Â® T.O. F.F. SECOND LEVEL 1 \ 11 .. ~ EL. +log-2 1 2Â· --1 1 -1 -- f 10 1 + -4*4 1 1 m: . -- -- -- 11 25 _ .. Â·Â· Â®TO.F.F. FIRST LEVEL *Y.----li --IF -t ~ J--<~1 ! 1.-L EL. +100'-0- CONCEPTUAL DESIGN EL.+99/ ,/2 . â€¢ Â®T.O. F.F. ALLEY CEMENTITious PAINTED MATERIAL ./ .-g FOR CLARm 01 MAY, 2012 WOOD - - FENCE AND LANDSCAPING - DECORATIVE FENCE ExiSTINGGRADE CON'POSITE SIDING NOT SIÂ¢Oy.N FOR elARITV PAINTED CMU MCED':Al ..ing lide -- - - CONCRETE FOUNDATION SELOW PROPOSED ELEVATIONS imt #1 r--h PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION 41/ 3/16" =11-0 A3O5 i Ulm'll,DI~ 13OOW3ll 15VB t09 00Â¥8010) '1345Â¥ '31IN3AV NÂ¥WAH 15Â¥3 Z09 Mit, gÂ»91' m OBM 1H91'd0) 9-01]Ill '20911 1131131% MIO m ONÂ¥ 1Â¥0]Am; Nan 140,11,0] Ti, MI,13, Tinll 311 $13*101Â¥ i mol m &1Â®1!01, i *W *1 10!i,mi R.d,M ,- i,ilti ~iN!0 am m [3@11 9 m la~ml,Omi SIHi 10 1,Â¥1 OIl )T il]31]Il)9 NOi I IWOÂ¥d I W 38]00 WH HI~1110) â€¢011â€¢10â€¢NI ]HI )11 'Slmillo NOilYIOHI NUL,WA N W MOHM SNOIinllt)3 d$ ~ ENIAInG 1, 13911/&7|~NI~ ANÂ¥ 1V 31~litiodti~ ~0 ylgÂ¥11 toN W ~1)31IH)Â¥V ~ 3N0Z ZONE PC lili. P.[j ARCHITECTS 1 A.JACENT BUILDING S LLC. ---- ) PROPOSE'IRDLEVEL IDDITIO' P.O. BOX 2508 -- - 810 EAST HYMAN AVENUE - --- ASPEN CO 81612 k r j WWW . ZONE'ARCHITECTS . COM -- i .2.,1.1.4.? 3, i>'Â·.'.! 4 * i:24...li * CM";Â·Vi & 12,97 + 4, i.1 - - ,4 " P Il o V P '4/ (i k'VE' -EL-1,W 1 1 . * - i,f :2 1 Â·24 ..4> ..7 '% / 4 r7 -TO. F,FRE'ONM.I. -EL Â·109'4172~ / ' 3 A . I 4 4 E : t=-4 - + T N. & 41 â‚¬ -1 h. S -1 - g M, W .' 0 ...SIL.YEL - - M M Â· : 4 Ela=- , . . 602 EAST HYMAN AVENUE 610 EAST HYMAN AVENUE - EAST HYMAN AVENUE ELEVATION 0136-1-2-6- PROPO BED ADDITION BEYOND Â· 010 CAST HYMAN AVCNUE ~- %J 10 Meee:62,WE+6*Q@@69~CF~~0 L.' 1 r==Illf/====-====E~ 1....In 'FEREEEEE/'ll./.....<14-4. .- -si-/*---1-il .- I: C..~ ~17~~ ---2 2.0. R f. THIRD LEVEL----- --- - - -- --- * f--- UL_IL .. --.. , \ C.--1.--= -1=.I -I./.#Il . im iiTiTTIF ' E\/%11Mt-- CONCEPTUAL DESIGN I. 01 MAY, 2012 .-: T. /82\ HUNTER STREET ELEVATION NOTE: THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE RENDERED U 3/161' =1'--0" USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. ELEVATIONS S.1,1 # A306 r. 5 . * 13OOWBW NVWAH lSÂ¥ 3 t09 0(Inl010) 'N]dl '3AN3AV NyWAH 15Â¥3 I09 0;AÂ¥3/ Mm ~013,;Ht ll,91yAJ0] 9NI0AD}11 'WINE 03AÂ¥313, ~,H10 11Â¥ ON, 1,01IU,1Â§ MÂ¥1 NOWMO] 11~ NI,!31 TIÂ¥11~ 111 il]31I11]Â¥, , 3MDI Â·IT! il)~11,0â€ž , 31101 ,0 1101&~IN~34 N3111111, ~01,d 3Ht 100IUIN, 03140) WO 0150 3~ AÂ¥W MOUÂ¥WyOINI 51111 10 1~Â¥d OH Dll tl]311,1)~V , iM07 ~0 U,340,Id ~Ill Â§1 1!131ill]00 9,U NO 0~NI,1N0) 11131NI MDIS?0 ONV N0I1VH,0,}11 3HI )TI 'U]]JIH)WÂ¥ P 3H0; t!02 110!tim0111,W N]111,M KIU lnOIUIM ~IOUDIE)15 10 WIUMWII(I liDU 01 Â§39NVID UlÂ¥ FO; lk[1 11{V l, 1191;NOdi]W 10 118Â¥rl 10N 9 in)111}1, k ]N 1 EXHIIT 1- ARCHITECTS LLC. P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW . ZON"ARCHITECTS. COM 1 -Ill 1 LU 0 Z 1-61 1 = PT COPY 11 E=R 113 \ 2-4- -mil - 1,9<)'-A========-= a"1/ IZXXOR 1 A CONFERENCE BORM EXISTING ~ OFFICE BUILDING i (COMMERCIAL) i __ 5 - ---------- 1 11 11 AH Il 11 11 -- kEGEND- OFFICE + LCOMMERCIAL) LILLI 1 1 - ------------ Qm,!82632 11 T-1. 1_ ----------- -~ rt-tÂ·-1 ~T-7 1 ' PUBLIC AMENITY AREA 1 ------- - ~le!Â¥BLIC AMENITY AREA: 1040.8 S.F. ~ L . E 1 1 10 A LL I: 1 u '*iÂ· % 1 1 L - J SITE PLAN lilis CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ./ 01 MAY, 2012 NORTH D.â€¢il W EXISTING PUBUC /-1 EXISTING PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE O AMENITY SPACE ~ 1 f B" = 1 '-0 - 2,2.1 # PAS I U {I]Am/ St,191; 11, '(M]13,11 ]HOiÂ·,Ado) 911!001]NI %!H91% 01AUWN 83Illo TW (INY HollilÂ¥15 Mvl Not,laÂ» 11Â¥ Al,ll TI,Hi }11 ill~117,Â¥ t Ml m Iall,Â§O*â€ž 2,9 e KINg'/M *1,11*/ //*/ 2/ iANKÂ¥, likfa} / // / 11*1 '811/10'N! Will / 10 111174*Ar * & An#*MSM -.IlY,Â®mÂ¢ 1/ Ill 31]311~} NVWAH 1SV3 I09 0(Inl010] '1115Â¥ '3flll3AV NYWAH 1$8 209 ~ [E 111111 Oltin, Illitnu,01,4 ]Aoilll,A Â§!1[1 1 kNÂ¥ 1Â¥ iMINO,15]W ~0 319yll lolf f ~ZONE IE)~IT Ih, ARCHITECTS LLC. P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW Â· ZONE'ARCHITECTS. COM UJ F------1 1 L 0 STORAGE COMMON L.U _ ''ilil, PT 5 -ing-1 - 1 <C 1-3-: i--1 1 J X Â» 1 4 = OFFICE 1 1 -% EXISTING Â£COMMERCIAL) ~1: 2 1 BUILDING - 0 44 Lf-GENO OFFICE I Â£2181"RE -7- icoiJKiERCiAL) - ~- - --- - -1-1- U T â‚¬71-2-2 44-1 .i:-#*~ W..1 --t-4=-=1= PUBLIC AMENITY AREA -=1- -1 3 I f 5--1.- 1 + .3 - .4 L 1 - 4.-9 PUBLIC AMENITY AREA: 1438.1 S.F. - 35=I 01= 18., CONCEPTUAL DESIGN 02/ 01 MAY, 2012 NORTH PROPOSED PUBLIC .$.E . r--1 PROPOSED PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE O AMENITY SPACE p ~ 1/8" =1'-0" m . PAS 2 0 01, 1 L i, MM 11Â¥ '01..1 11151,UO) 9m Onl]NI 'a,191, Milll *MIO B ONÂ¥ 1,0011Â¥g NAÂ¥1 *014110} 11Â¥ 1,Irlw mli% 311 it)11bJW k 3,0i 1,7 9}=im i *Â£2 0 vo,BR IMI KNId â„¢ 10#{ta 13&10> 30 85 @e m~ Nomlli,Of" 1@ia M im 011 }11 il]31]NOUÂ¥ f 3102 30 , 340" ]Hi 11 1NJ .'DO i1111 NO n 11]3!Ill] 00VI010] 'N3diÂ¥ '3AN3AV NÂ¥WAH 15Â¥3 lO9 1SV 3 t09 =1Â¥moÂ«iny MmIXI yol,4 Molm . 3di W &911IMVÂ¥0 11]Il[ 01 &*NVH)~1NM0~~iml JN~ 1,~ilgi;Nod IWI 101 ~ZONE EX~IT ARCHITECTS LLC. P.O. BOX 2508 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW . ZONEIARCHITECTS. COM - r. . 5 l. - ' 1 1 ..L *F- T -~r ./ â€ž 4. .:Â· v Ar-- .' + D 1///6.-- 11Â·.2..L32<. * . 'i ! 0,4:.I ,i~ -.J#-21-. --- Ilp -9 - 4 3-1- EL h / -/.. 2- --44-2 ...4-446@iti- - --- -Ill...1 - 4,~-I--W- Â© HYMAN AVENUE (SOUTH) ELEVATION L..._ 4 - u . - â€¢~ r-yr~ .'...illillillillillillillillillillillillillilli~ F . - . I. PG f.r'Â·1 t"/////9,/"Fl'/////////////"""m/ -- -.f rvoilllilA - -1 +1 .2 J./.:ce, T.-$'. r- /. =EL-' ~-4 WET''il -_* 2- I.. Â·Â·m* Â© HUNTER STREET (WEST) ELEVATION CONCEPTUAL DESIGN I. 0 I MAY, 20 IZ D-,g lide ELEVATION STREETSCAPE 91.1, I A307 i 13GOW3X NVWAH 1SV3 I09 06Â¥8010) 'NldSV '3nNiIAV NYWAH 1Â§93 ZO, CHITE[TS, lLC THE INFOAMATION AND DESIGN I~~INED ~HU~EN~ if TNE FROP[AR of loNE UJHITE(TS ll[ NO ~T of THI; IN[ORMAnON MAT 0[ USED 01 COMED WITHOUT THE PAIOA WRITIEN PER!16;1011 OF LOHE 4 AR<HHICTS llc ~ON[ 4 AA[MfTECTS llC ;HALL â€žIA]N AU [OMMON LAW STATUTORÂ¥ AND AU 0TNER AMERVED RIGHTJ. INCWDING COMUGHT THERETO All RIGHIS RES[iyED 0HtÂ¥ lilli U nOlliIA 51(OUDII i 31~11 ANV tV 31BI~H0dS]V IO 318ll loN 9 91 ZONE PC 1 ARCHITECTS :1,4 , 4 LLC. P. O. BOX 2808 ~ --.,~ ~ iftiu: '1 ,1&<,1./.r. ,- ,Â·,Â·1-.~, , .......... 2 ASPEN CO 81612 WWW . ZONEIARCHEriall . COM i 6,Â¢ 2 . 1 .4, 4,1,2 P "1 W. -- EN ' 49% 1 r 42Â¢ Â£ ..'eat */&*. WIL F .1 ...6 .A'.4. . . Â·Â· 4/ME":.fi,Â·; A :4 - , . .298.4 -K- ..1," 1 P.; T 4 1%1 - L _!rump U . c 'er . ,.. 14 . A ,--- I - ' Â· g. ,/:jap *1-3 . . 4,1.14 2 , li f - J : 2.., 4. 1. 1 b.r .' 4 , * 4 - 9 -. . *.t ~~ 4 ,~ ~1 ' . ..8 38 . 2 I . 932 . /~4 + ' /1.,E -r a .... Â£ 1, I $ .. . . 1 1 â€¢â€¢ rÂ» , , , .. .A t._- 4...:>jf#.i#,e. - .t % til >4% &. I - fut-. . . I .a ) :AN,4."lil . 4. I & ' ....4 , ./ w .1,1 - + I. : : 1 .1 , l 4- I. 1. ..12 0 1 Up 2 1 $ /86'k- *0~ 1- .U.Â¥9. ' .<f- -C'-- Â· + "M_J 42%7-3*422~~.4Â§2964p:1 . . -- # 1/ L V.Â· ' 114*k .. , . ..9.Â·)_I '3-11 - 7~~.1 '.4. I . :,04% ir.1 - - . *: . ... 4. - VIEW TOWARDS NORHTWEST PRIMARY MATERIALS 1 -4 .tr 02223%4 CORRUGATED PAINTED CEMENTITIOUS PAINTED '~ METAL CONCRETE COMPOSITE WOOD CONCEPTUAL DESIGN BLOCK 01 MAY, 2012 lit Dr,wm:. PERSPECTIVE NOTE: STREETSCAPE - THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE theet # USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION, A308 1 7 130OW31I NVWAH 1Â§Vl I09 CIA,391 $01911 11, 01313I11 0191Â¥AdÂ® 91,10011 liH911 MB MO TIÂ¥ 0!1, 1,01jlt,5 MÂ¥1 110141,0] 11Â¥ MIVI,1 n,Il; 311 51]li01]W t 31,Oz ]TI 11)111!OW ; DIO ,0 110ttpg U N]1]11* *011, 3,1 lnDI,11* 0*tdo] :0 0,w 3, 1,1, MOILÂ¥11101,1 1,Ill i IN, 0% ]11 w311Ilm , 3110! 10 11,3d0W E 1 11131Â¢11)00 oU NO 011Â¥1,01 1,131*I NDIS,0 ONÂ¥ N011Â¥11,0 iNI ]H k )11 '51131Ill] 0(In010) 'Nldfy '30NBAy NYWAH 1$33 (09 110Um,OHUIÂ¥ N]Lin M VOIU 1110#11,\ 910!lnl,)14; I LENIAÂ¥10 Bilit 01 ,3911Â¥10 1N Â¥ 901 21411 AN, 11 319 I;NOd 53â€ž0 319,[t 10 N W $03 Ull)%Â¥ 4 ]Â«OZ ZONE MC 1,9Â·31,1 ARCHITECTS LLC. 7 , lue P.O. BOX 2808 ASPEN CO 81612 494Â¢1 4. WWW . ZONE4AACHITECTS. COM : WA . }-441 .. . - M ..age , 444, 7 .66 ' 2;-~b ./4 . .. 1 . , ~, 7-. . , - . . ".Jp,- 4443..,:.r...re.# f -' --.1..â‚¬49 1 - i , F + 5-Â£21$.4&:Â·* * r. >41 4 - .9 1 4. , * 4. .kÂ·'4. *- . , .1....:1; A :,42i~.. h~ 1 - /- , :31 . li.Â·.' .,Â· I ~h'*16 . 2 - -- 6*fl 9 .. ..2 I ae ./ l. â€¢ *ll ~|||.. .dr. . . Ii. 11 .Ar . r'* . ~ , t /14 I ./-& 1/, 1' - I.' , I I . I 41- 1 ... U ... -Â·r.:3&Â·# '~~7 Â· Wrr. 1 1. A...... Â·Â·Â·.Ail-/./.4Â·:Il//Ir.Â· ~ - VIEW TOWARDS NORTHEAST PRIMARY MATERIALS .g g: 8= '0-41/ 11 - :N CORRUGATED PAINTED CEMENTITIOUS PAINTED METAL CONCRETE COMPOSITE WOOD /1. BLOCK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN Duc 01 MAY, 2012 D-g & NOTE: PERSPECTIVE THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. STREETICAPE ;z ;6,el # %: A309 i 130OWl~I NVWAH lÂ§Â¥ 3 t09 Ommi illE]r, m Ol,BU 11,91IUO] 9,~001]Ill '~li!91, 03HAr, 13â€ž0 nÂ¥ 011Â¥ 1,01,lim /An NOWIKD Tr, NI,131 â„¢6 )11 il]31}Dit 102 7rl 1011011, 1 INO! 10 N0IS91,Ud Illl.~IM Wold ]Ht WOHJIM 03140) 10 OAA 38 1Â¥1, NollÂ¥,1,0!HI Â§181 W NO ~1~ll10] IHNI NWI ONV NollÂ¥~01NI 00Â¥~010) 'MidiÂ¥ '3(IN)AV NYWAH 1118 Z09 4%1~'VIJM * = 91,10 111Â¥ ,01 31,1 INÂ¥ n 1510413 ZONE Pe ARCHITECTS LLC. ASPEN co 81612 P.O. BOX 2508 WWW . ZONEURCHITECTS . COM --lk ... . ..r L.L.1 9 G I - - . 1 - Z 0 fh 66.1 4 :.1- D '4 ...7,1 .. .f r .1 4/ 4 try . r. 0 ... .C ' #4 ~'/** Z . gif - < .le 1/2 ,, . I - - Â¥ I -- Â» a . Z . r 1- 6..912*1471 $/410 -- /87 VIEW TOWARDS SOUTHEAST PRIMARY MATERIALS 7 . 1 95/f'~ .9/ y /\ -1 - 1.- 1 CORRUGATED PAINTED CEMENTITIOUS PAINTED METAL CONCRETE COMPOSITE WOOD w BLOCK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN I. 01 MAY, 2012 D,wi., rd, NOTE: PEMPECTIVE -r = S THE COLOR PALATE IS CONCEPTUAL AND REPRESENTS DIFFERENT MATERIALS TO BE USED. THE COLORS ARE CONTINGENT UPON MANUFACTURER AND APPLICATION. STREETSCAPE ~le, I. A310 9 1, ./4 01,311 Â§1}19n m 0lmill li191,WO) 91*]nl]Ill 311,911 0]A,39, 91*0 2 011, A,0111,]; MY] NOWWO) Tly N!Â¥131 11,Il; 111 it]WillolÂ¥ , 1101 )11 ~1111]101, , 11,0~ ;0 11011$U,Â¥34 111UIVA 101,4 3,11 1001[NM 01140) 10 (litft n mi 11(11,11101111 $!Ill 40 1,Â¥4 ON ]11 %1]311HJ,Â¥ , 3110Z 30 j.1,3.ad 3111 11 1:31:67Â§2 m&=?Irt'21%0,14; "VII. INI ]Hl }11 00Â¥8010) 'N3dfV '3nN3AV NÂ¥W111 15Â¥3 tO9 1SV 3 t09 1Â«]11Â¥n,OllinÂ¥ Rilll,/A Â¥011, 1AOHil/A !11Ollnlil]M; 9 31 15 01&31 90 11,gl 1011 ] MY I ]11(12 2787 - IF -2 -12 -00 3 003 l. 2012 . Ail_Ld . le<,uarm~,Gi~~J~E-ER.; 14Â·-6.~~iaÂ·-ir 4 -4;Â·Â·2Â· -Â·iâ€žz~- - 41Â»Q ~=-2 . e .-222 - Â» -abx r- -"p':w*. f-~'~'- f--11~11.~ Ble Edit Record Navigate Fgrm Repons Format Tab Help 1@@IX , e .4~0i#.le 3 23Â·0 i N i / 4 0 j & lump 1 ~ 11 1 0161 11 :;41*1 4 2 9 J .~ ..9 %2 4 11 Routing Status |Fees |Fee 5ummarg ~J~~~ &ctions ~ Attachments ,Routing Mistory 191uation |Arch/Eng |Custom Fields |Sub Bermits 1 ) wv- <Â· .='Mf#362-~~ Permit type aslu |Aspen Land Use Permit # 0031.2012.ASLU -ilt--- 2>~ T. -â‚¬ --2:- i- K Address 602 E HYMAN AVE Aptilite I City ASPEN State ~3-~ Zip 81611 3*k al"/8. Permit Information .. *~-r=/.,filili Master permit Routing queue aslu07 Applied 5/1/2012 project Status pending Approved i . Description LAND USE APPLICATION FOR CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW- Issued APPLICANT INTERESTED IN ADDING AN ADDITION TO THIRD FLOOR Closed Final ~ 0 Submitted SUNNY VANN 926 6958 clock ~JIIi-| Days ~| Expires 4/262013 ~ Submitted via ?9:f. #jmtv I Owm ./.112%. ~ Last name HUNT First name DANIEL 1601 ELM ST - UNITY HUNT, INC ,~ 1601 ELM ST STE 4000 Phone ()- Address DALLAS TX 75201 4 [ Applicant. E Owner is applicant? Il Contractoi is applicant? Â·r *; Last name HUNT First name DANIEL 1601 ELM ST - UNITY HUNT, INC 1601 ELM ST STE 4000 IÂ« Phone ()- Cust # 29271 Address DALLAS TX 75201 :81 0/2 P Lender 49 Last name First name :COM fÂ·fÂ· phone ()- Address '*,6- / !Displaps Ihe permit lender'S address AspenGokE (selver] angelas ~ 1 oil ,:i Ck'M- 102 31 4 bbÂ· 3 0/ 5-6 9 00 .:Re.fâ‚¬-rr=& F~ grnt- 9,4 (ills t --- IrÂ·31 5-13> r-* An 6.- . : 7 .. r. . . 1[ xoq'00 sdneig qe l SetoN Molnt) THE CITY oF ASPEN Land Use Application Determination of Completeness Date: May 1,2012 Dear City of Aspen Land Use Review Applicant, We have received your land use application and reviewed it for completeness. The case number and name assigned to this property is 0031.2012.ASLU - 602 E Hyman. The case has been assigned to Jessica Garrow. [3 Your Land Use Application is incomplete: We found that the application needs additional items to be submitted for it to be deemed complete and for us to begin reviewing it. We need the following additional submission contents for your application: Please submit the aforementioned missing submission items so that we may begin reviewing your application. No review hearings will be scheduled until all of the submission contents listed above have been submitted and are to the satisfaction of the City of Aspen Planner reviewing the land use application. E Your Land Use Application is complete: If there are not missing items listed above, then your application has been deemed complete to begin the land use review process. Other submission items may be requested throughout the review process as deemed necessary by the Community Development Department. Please contact me at 429-2780 if you have any questions. Thank You, Juwmt"J U u Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner City of Aspen, Community Development Department For Office Use Only: Qualifying Applications: Mineral Rights Notice Required SPA PUD COWOP Yes No Subdivision (creating more than 1 additional lot) GMQS Allotments Residential Affordable Housing Yes No Commercial E.P.F.