Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20130402 AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, April 2, 2013 4:30 p.m. Sister Cities room 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen I. ROLL CALL 11. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public 111. MINUTES IV. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST V. PUBLIC HEARINGS — A. 616 E. Hyman Avenue, Final Commercial Design Review and associated land use reviews VI. OTHER BUSINESS A. Code Amendment check-in VII. BOARD REPORTS VIII. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: Community Development Update March 2013 Project: Aspen Valley Hospital Contact: Jennifer Phelan Status: Pending Review by City Council Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The Hospital has applied for approval of Phases 3 and 4. These include the addition of new medical office space, new hospital space, and a new entry. Update: P&Z recommended approval of the project on January 8t". Council approved first reading on February 25t", with second readings to be held in March and April Next Steps: City Council second readings March 11, 18, April 8, and 22. Project: 110 W Main - Hotel Aspen Contact: Amy Guthrie Status: Pending Review by HPC Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The applicant proposes to increase the number of lodge rooms on the property from 45 to 53, add 4 new free-market residential units, add on-site affordable housing, and create an underground parking garage. The lodge rooms average less than 300 square feet. Update: Staff is still reviewing the initial application. The project's conceptual commercial design review will be conducted by HPC. HPC reviewed the project on January 9, February 13 and March 13 and continued their review to April 24. Next Steps: Review by HPC on April 24. If approved, the project will be subject to City Council call-up. Project: 434 E Cooper Ave (Bidwell) Contact: Sara Adams Status: Pending Review by HPC Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The applicant is proposing to demolish and replace the building at 434 E Cooper, commonly known as the Bidwell building, with a new commercial building. No residential space is proposed as part of the redevelopment. Update: HPC approved the conceptual design on December 12, 2012. City Council did not call the project up. Next Steps: The applicant will apply for final commercial design review. Page 1 of 8 Project: 610 E Hyman Historic Designation Contact: Amy Guthrie Status: Pending review by HPC Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The applicant proposes to designate and expand an existing free-market residential unit and add two-story commercial addition to the property. The building houses the Charles Cunniffe offices. Update: Review by Staff. HPC is reviewed the project on May 23, 2012 and recommended a continuance. The was approved, with conditions retyarding work required to in order to qualify for designation, by HPC on October 10t . City Council approved the designation on January 14th, and gave the applicant 30 days to accept the decision. The applicant accepted the designation decision. Next Steps: The applicant will apply for final HPC review. Project: 601 E Hyman Ave (Victorian Square) Contact: Sara Nadolny Status: Completed review by P&Z Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The'applicant proposes demolishing and replacing the existing building with a mix of commercial space and one free-market residential unit. The applicant proposes to use an affordable housing credit for their affordable housing mitigation. The building is commonly known as the Garfield and Hecht office building. Update: Review by Staff. P&Z reviewed the project at their June 19th and July 3rd meetings, and approved the project by 4:2. City Council reviewed the application under Call-Up procedures and voted to remand the project back to P&Z for further review of the public amenity space. P&Z reviewed and approved a slightly revised design. P&Z approved a Growth Management Review for commercial space and free-market residential space on December 4 th Next Steps: Applicant is determining if they will apply for subdivision approval. Project: 514 E Hyman Historic Designation Contact: Amy Guthrie Status: Pending review by HPC Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The applicant received designation approval for their modern building (commonly known as the Mason Morse building) from City Council earlier in 2012. They have applied for their final design review with HPC. Update: HPC approved the final design application on February 27. However, the applicant is interested in amending their designation approval to remove an approved Page 2 of 8 free-market residential unit. This will require an amendment with City Council, which has not been scheduled yet as the application has not yet been submitted. Next Steps: Submission of designation amendment to remove an approved free- market residential unit and convert the entire building to commercial space. Project: 602 E Hyman Ave Contact: Amy Guthrie Status: Pending review by HPC Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The applicant had proposed to remodel the existing building and add a new third story. The development would have included updated commercial space, a new affordable housing unit, and an updated free-market residential unit. The applicant has since withdrawn their application and submitted a request to designate the property under AspenModern. The new application includes an updated free-market residential unit and updated commercial space. A small addition in the rear is proposed. Update: HPC reviewed the requested designation on February 27 and recommended City Council approve it. Next Steps: On March 18th, City Council approved an extension of the negotiation period through May because the applicant had travel delays that made it impossible for him to attend the scheduled designation hearing The designation hearing was continued to May 13th Project: 419 E Hyman (Paragon Building) Contact: Amy Guthrie Status: Pending review by Council Closing Date: Undetermined Description: The applicant is requesting a height variance for roof features and amenities. The variance is required because of the recent changes in the height allowances in the CC zone. Update: City Council will review the request at their meeting on April 8th Next Steps: City Council review on April 8th. Project: 420 E Hyman (CB Paws/Zocalito) Contact: Sara Adams Status: Pending review by P&Z and Council Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The applicant proposes to redevelop the property at 420 E Hyman with a new three-story mixed-use building. Update: HPC approved the project on July 25, 2012 by a 3:2 vote. City Council reviewed the application under Call-Up procedures and voted to remand the project Page 3 of 8 back to HPC for further review of the mass and scale. HPC approved the massing on November 14th. The Applicant applied for subdivision and growth management reviews on February 15th. That application is being reviewed by staff and has not yet been scheduled for P&Z review. Next Steps: P&Z review for growth management and subdivision reviews. Project: 204 S Galena (Gap) Contact: HPC - Amy Guthrie GMQS - Justin Barker Status: Pending Review by P&Z Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The applicant proposes to redevelop the property with a new one to two story building comprised of commercial space and a roof-top deck. The building is commonly referred to as the Gap building. Update: HPC voted to approve the conceptual design of the project on August 8, 2012. Final HPC Review was granted on December 12, and notice of call up was provided to City Council. The applicant received an amendment to their approval on February 13th to change the second story massing. The applicant has made a growth management application for the changed second floor space and to utilize the basement for commercial space. Next Steps: P&Z review for growth management and subdivision reviews. This is scheduled for April 16. Project: 534 E Cooper Ave (Boogies) Contact: Jessica Garrow Status: Pending Review by P&Z and Council Closing Date: Undetermined.. Description: The applicant proposes to add a third story free-market residential unit, and convert a second floor deck to commercial space. The building is commonly referred to as the Boogies Building. Update: HPC approved conceptual design of the project on July 11, 2012 by a 4:0 vote. City Council reviewed the application under Call-Up procedures and accepted HPC's decision. The applicant has applied for growth management and subdivision reviews. Next Steps: P&Z review for growth management and subdivision reviews. This is scheduled for April 16. Project: 616 E Hyman Ave Contact: Jennifer Phelan Status: Pending Review by P&Z Closing Date: Undetermined. Page 4 of 8 Description: The applicant is proposing to demolish and replace the building at 616 E Hyman, with a new commercial building. Residential space is proposed as part of the redevelopment. Update: P&Z approved the conceptual design of the project in November 2012, and City Council has exercised their call-up authority to review the decision. Council accepted the decision. The applicant has applied for growth management and subdivision reviews. Next Steps: P&Z review for growth management and subdivision reviews. This is scheduled for April 2. Project: 420 E Cooper Contact: Amy Guthrie Status: Pending Review by P&Z Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The applicant proposed to demolish an existing one-story commercial building, commonly known as the Red Onion Annex (currently houses the poster shop). The applicant proposes to replace it with a new two —three story mixed use building including commercial space and one free-market unit. Update: HPC reviewed the project on September 12, 2012 and approved it on October 24. City Council has exercised their call-up authority, and remanded the project back to HPC for view plane review. Next Steps: HPC reviewed the remanded project, and approved it with no changes. The applicant will apply for growth management and final design reviews. No application has been made to date. Project: Jewish Community Center Contact: Jennifer Phelan Status: Pending Review by HPC Closing Date: Undetermined. Description: The Jewish Community Center has applied for an Essential Public Facility growth management review for their project. They propose to amend the site plan to replace the social hall with a parsonage for the Rabbi. Update: P&Z recommended approval of the Essential Public Facility growth management review on December 18th. City Council approved the amended application on February 11th Next Steps: The applicant will apply for final design review with HPC. Project: 233 E Hallam Lot Split Contact: Jennifer Phelan Status: Pending Review by City Council Closing Date: Undetermined. Page 5 of 8 Description: The applicant propose&a lot split for the property at 233 E Hallam. They are requesting removal of a non-historic addition to the historic home. Update: HPC approved the request for removal of a non-historic addition on the property on November 14. City Council Lot Split Review is required and was approved in March Next Steps: The applicant is working on finalizing their lot split plat. Project: Lodging Study Contact: Jessica Garrow Status: Ongoing Closing Date: Spring/Summer 2013 Description: One of City Council's Top Ten Goals is to "examine the desirability and sustainability of preserving existing lodging and producing more lodging in Aspen." As part of this effort, staff is conducting a lodging study to examine our existing inventory and to understand the current state of the lodging market. Staff is utilizing a two-phase approach to Council's Lodging Goal. The first stage includes an overview of the City's role in the lodging sector, interviews with key players in the lodging industry, and an inventory of lodging in Aspen. Phase two would begin with a series of facilitated roundtable discussions between lodging owners, planners, developers, general businesses, ACRA, the Aspen Skiing Company, Stay Aspen Snowmass, and outside lodging experts. The discussion would focus on three topics: 1) Is there a problem in the lodging sector as it relates to product diversity? 2) Should the City have a role is addressing any problems? 3) If so, what can the City do? Update: The Phase 1 Report is available online at: http //www aspenpitkin com/Departments/Community-Development/PIanning-and- Zoning/Long-Ranee-Planning/ Phase 2 consisted of a charrette with Aspen's lodging stakeholders to discuss the issues, challenges and opportunities in the lodging sector. The group also discussed what roles the City could or should have in the lodging sector. The charrette was held on October 23`d and included representatives from Aspen's lodges, ACRA, SS, SkiCo, and the lodging development community. Two lodging consultants from Denver also attended and are writing a report on their conclusions from that meeting. Staff with present the findings and a summary of the meeting at a December work session. Next Steps: Staff is moving forward on the next steps presented to Council at their December 11th work session. Project: ADUs Code Amendment Contact: Chris Bendon Status: Ongoing Closing Date: Jan/Feb 2013 Page 6 of 8 Description: Council, P&Z, and APHCA have all expressed interest in eliminating ADUs as an option when mitigating for housing impacts in single-family and duplex development. This code amendment eliminates the ADU mitigation option, creates a system to remove existing ADUs, and changes the mitigation trigger to any time new floor area is created in a single-family or duplex development. Update: City Council approved policy direction on November 12th, and approved code language at first reading on November 26tH. Second reading on December 10 was continued to January 28tH Next Steps: Staff is taking direction from the January 28th council meeting and working on the proposal. It will come back to City Council at a later date. Project: Employee Generation Code Amendment Contact: Jessica Garrow Status: Complete Closing Date: Feb 2013 Description: As part of the implementation of the AACP, City Council asked staff to update the employee generation study completed 10 years ago. This study has been completed, and there were a few changes in the employee generation numbers within different zone districts. This code amendment will update the figures in the code. In addition, Council has previously given staff Policy Direction to eliminate the provision in the growth management code that allows multiple mitigation requirements to be satisfied by mitigating for the largest requirement when on-site housing is provided (also referred to as the "double dip" provision). These two items will be address in the same code amendment. Update: Staff requests Policy Direction from City Council on January 28tH, with 1St and 2 readings in February. Council approved Policy Direction on January 28th, and the code amendment was approved on February 25tH Next Steps: The code amendment goes into effect 30 days from approval (March 27). Project: Sign Code Amendment Contact: Jim Pomeroy Status: Ongoing Closing Date: Feb/Mar 2013 Description: City Council has asked staff to simplify the sign code. Update: City Council provided Policy Direction at their December 10th meeting. First and second readings will be held this spring, but no dates are currently set. Next Steps: Council review at 1St and 2nd readings. Dates are to be determined. Project: Business Obstacles Code Amendment Contact: Jim Pomeroy Page 7 of 8 Status: Ongoing Closing Date: Mar 2013 Description: One of City Council's Top Ten Goals is related to improving City Codes to eliminate barriers to businesses. As part of this effort, Community Development has identified some obstacles in the Land Use Code that could be eliminated, including size caps on business types. Update: Staff requests Policy Direction from City Council on February 11th, with 1St and 2nd readings in February and March. City Council approved policy direction on February 11th, and first reading on February 25th Next Steps: City Council approved the changes at second reading on March 18th Page 8 of 8 P1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Directo6F RE: 616 E Hyman—Final Commercial Design Review, Growth Management Review Resolution No._, Series of 2013 MEETING DATE: April 2, 2013 APPLICANT/OWNER: . Furngulf LLP REPRESENTATIVE: s. x Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning ;W1 LOCATION: LOCATION: ,x 616 E Hyman Ave. Lots N& O, Block 99, City and p Townsite of Aspen CURRENT ZONING: u C-1, Commercial zone district SUMMARY: The Applicant requests final commercial design review, x and two growth management reviews for a remodel and g addition of the building at .`A 616 E Hyman. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ° Approval with conditions. pp F Photo: 616 E Hyman building and location. 616 E. Hyman Ave—Final Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 1 of 5 P2 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: • Growth Management Review for Expansion/New Commercial Lodge or Mixed-Use Development in the development of a new mixed-use building pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040 C.2.(The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal). • Growth Management Review for Free-Market Residential Units within a Mixed-Use Project in the development of new free-market residential units within a mixed-use project pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040 C.6. (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal). • Growth Management Review for Affordable Housing pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040 C.7. (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal). • Final 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.) BACKGROUND AND PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to remodel and expand an existing two story building and add a recessed third floor at 616 E Hyman. The lot is 6,000 square feet and is located approximately at the center of the north side of the block face of Hyman, between Hunter and Spring Streets. Existing Conditions: The existing structure includes one entrance with commercial space in the basement, ground and second floors. There is a second floor deck on the building, head-in parking along the alley, and a planted public amenity space along the front fagade at the southwest corner. The building currently includes 9,046 sq. ft. of existing net leasable divided among the three levels. The existing Floor Area is 7,396 sq. ft. The maximum allowed Floor Area for the Site is 15,000 sq. ft. The trash/utility area is located along the building, in the alley, but is not clearly dedicated and consists of a trash dumpster. There are currently six (6) marked off-street parking spaces located along the alley that are compromised by existing doorways out of the building and the trash dumpster. Approximately 7% of the parcel (430.68 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 southwest 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. 616 E. Hyman Ave—Final Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 2 of 5 P3 Proposed Development: The applicant proposes to remodel and expand the existing building. The building would include commercial space on the basement, ground, and second levels and a free-market residential unit on the third floor. Specifically, the footprint will stay the same on the ground level, expands towards the property lines on the second level (replacing a street facing deck and cantilevering over the current parking area), and adds a new, recessed, third level with an accessory deck along the front facade. The proposal would bring the building to approximately 11,875 sq. ft. of floor area, with 2,465 sq. ft. of free-market residential net livable space and 9,626 sq. ft. of commercial net leasable space. The applicant is proposing to use a TDR to enable an increase above the 2,000 sq. ft. unit size cap for the free-market unit. Four parking spaces are proposed with the application, and the existing Public Amenity's size and location is unchanged. The proposed third story addition will result in an overall height of 38 feet to the parapet, on select portions of the third story, as approved via Conceptual Commercial Design Review. STAFF COMMENTS: FINAL 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 Final Review Guidelines of the Commercial section of the Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines. The project must comply with standards in three main areas: Building Design&Articulation, Architectural Materials, Paving and Landscaping. Building Design and Articulation: As noted in the guidelines, form and scale of a building is further articulated by the expression of traditional lot widths, facade articulation and street level character. Since the building's footprint already exists, the expressed two modules do not reflect the traditional 30 feet lot width but does break the building due to the varying front yard setback. With regard to street level character the design guidelines emphasize that the building should "respect the height of traditional building design" with distinguishable differences in levels of the buildings. As proposed, the building provides a typical street front 1" story, with the facade being predominately transparent glass and minimum amounts of opaque materials. It also incorporates retail entrances. The second story is more opaque in nature as suggested in the guidelines, with windows being smaller, transparent openings in the solid facade. Third stories are recommended to be minimized with a minimum set back of 15 feet from the street facade and the roofscape should be designed as a secondary elevation that is visible (from above). Architectural Materials: The guidelines recommend that durable, quality materials be used in the development of new buildings and that "all facades of a building should reflect, complement and enhance the evolving form and character of the center city." The building's first floor's transparent, glass facade uses a typical material seen within the downtown, while the second and third floors provide opaque wood upon the second and third story, with masonry accents. Although not 616 E. Hyman Ave—Final Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 3 of 5 P4 traditional materials to the Victorian era, these materials are a throwback to old Aspen after skiing started in town. Paving and Landscaping: The guidelines encourage paving and landscaping that enhances the immediate setting of the project. In this case, the public amenity is adjacent to the street right of way within a courtyard. Existing street trees are proposed to be maintained with no changes to the sidewalk as both meet city standards. Staff supports the materials represented but recommends that the roof plan more clearly outline where roof top mechanical will be located to encourage grouping of the mechanical and location towards the rear of the roof area. SPECIAL REVIEW(FOR UTILITY/TRASH/RECYCLE AREA) : The project proposes a variation from the Trash/Utility/ Recycle area requirements of the code. The current configuration is a dumpster located along the alley faeade of the building within a striped parking space that does 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. As noted in Exhibit F of this application, the modified design of an approximate area that is 14'- 6"wide by 20' deep is adequate for trash service. The Environmental Health department supports the reductions in size as long as the design is constructed and functions as represented by the Applicant's representative. Staff sgpports the size reduction. GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW The project proposes to develop a new free market residential unit and additional commercial net leasable space and the applicant proposes to mitigate the affordable housing by using Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits (Credits). By using credits, the sum of the employees generated for both the residential unit and the increase in net leasable area required to be mitigated. The Applicant is proposing to purchase Credits to mitigate for the .85 FTE generated by commercial development and 1.86 FTEs generated by the residential development. A total of 2.71 FTEs (Category 4) are required to be mitigated. The Applicant may mitigate at a lower category level by converting the category designation of a Credit. Staff supports the use of Credits to provide mitigation for the proposed development. PARKING As presented, the existing building provides four code compliant parking spaces. The applicant is permitted to maintain an existing deficit of parking for the existing net leasable. With the redevelopment's increase in net leasable area and development of a residential unit, the parking requirement is .58 of a space for the net leasable and no requirement for the residential unit. The Applicant intends to pay cash-in-lieu for the fraction of a space, which is permitted by code. RECOMMENDATION: Overall, Staff supports the changes in materials that have been presented since Conceptual Design Review. The materials and treatment of them provides 616 E. Hyman Ave—Final Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 4of5 P5 features that are more akin to the,design guidelines and are a throwback to old Aspen after skiing started in town. Staff recommends approval of the project, with the following conditions: • Require that the roof plan more clearly outline where roof top mechanical will be located to encourage grouping of the mechanical and location towards the rear of the roof area. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution #_, Series 2013, approving Final Commercial Design Review, Special Review and Growth Management Reviews for the project located at 616 E Hyman Ave." Attachments: Exhibit A— Staff Findings, Final Commercial Design Review Criteria Exhibit B— Staff Findings, Final Commercial Design Guidelines Exhibit C— Special Review Exhibit D—Growth Management Review Commercial and Residential Development Exhibit E—Growth Management Review, Affordable Housing Exhibit F—Environmental Health email on trash/utility/recycling area Exhibit G—DRC comments Exhibit H—Application Exhibit I—Application, drawings 616 E. Hyman Ave—Final Commercial Design P&Z Memo Page 5 of 5 P6 RESOLUTION NO._ (SERIES OF 2013) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING FINAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, SPECIAL REVIEW AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEWS FOR A REMODEL AND ADDITION CONSISTING OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 616 E HYMAN AVE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS N & O, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 273718212005 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Furngulf LLP, represented by Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning LLC requesting of the Planning and Zoning Commission approval of Conceptual Commercial Design Review to remodel the existing building and add a third floor addition for a project that will include a mix of commercial space 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 with regard to height and for the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve the application with conditions; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 16, 2012 and continued to October 30th, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 20, Series of 2012, by a six to one (6 —1) vote, approving Conceptual Commercial Design Review; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Furngulf LLP, represented by Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning LLC requesting of the Planning and Zoning Commission approval of Final Commercial Design Review, Special Review and Growth Management Reviews for the previously described project; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended to approve the application with conditions; 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, Resolution No. ---,Series 2013 Page 1 of 7 P7 WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal,with conditions; 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 the following-land use reviews with conditions: A. Final Commercial Design Review. Any building permit application for the redevelopment of the site shall be for a building that substantially duplicates the representations made before the Planning and Zoning Commission and included as Exhibit 1 of this resolution. All underlying dimensional requirements, except for height and trash/utility/recycling areas, shall be met and verified at building permit submission per Exhibit 2. B. Special Review. A reduction in size of the trash/utility/recycling is permitted to be reduced to the dimensions and layout shown in Exhibit 3 of this resolution. The area shall solely be used for trash and recycling purposes. C. Growth Management Reviews. The growth management reviews for Expansion or New Commercial Development, New Free-Market Residential Units within a Multi-family or Mixed-use Project, and Affordable Housing are approved. This permits an increase of net leasable commercial and office space on site, not to exceed 580 sq. ft., and the development of one free-market residential unit of up to 2,500 sq. ft. of net livable area. The proposed net livable size of the residential dwelling of over 2,000 sq. ft. requires the extinguishment of a historic TDR prior to the issuance of a building permit These approvals permit the remodel and redevelopment of a three story mixed-use building containing net leasable commercial and office space and one free-market residential unit with a maximum building height of-38- feet and a 430 sq. ft public amenity space. Section 2: Building Permit Application The Applicant, the Applicant's General Contractor, the Architect that produced the construction drawings, and representatives from the Building Department, Community Development Department and any other person deemed necessary by the City shall attend a meeting prior to the submission of any type of Building Permit for the Subject Property. The purpose of the meeting shall be to ensure clarity relative to the submission Resolution No.---,Series 2013 Page 2 of 7 P8 requirements, the requirements of this Ordinance, timeframes for processing Building Permits, and any other issues raised by any party. The building permit application shall include the following as applicable: A. A copy of the Planning and Zoning Commission resolutions approving the project. B. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. C. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. D. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer, which meets adopted City standards. E. An excavation stabilization plan, construction management plan (CMP), and drainage and soils reports pursuant to the Building Department's requirements. F. A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the Environmental Health Department. G. A detailed excavation plan for review and approval by the City Engineer. H. Accessibility and ADA requirements shall be addressed to satisfactorily meet adopted building codes. Section 3: Affordable Housing. As represented, the proposal expands the net leasable commercial and office space by 580 sq. ft. and creates a new free-market residential unit(represented at 2,479 sq. ft of net livable area). Based upon these numbers, the affordable housing mitigation required for this project is 2.71 FTEs at a Category 4 level, which are approved to be mitigated with Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits. The applicant may mitigate at a lower Category level by converting the category designation of the credit pursuant to the Land Use Code. Final net leasable and net livable numbers, as well as the mitigation required, shall be verified at building permit review. Certificates of Affordable Housing shall be extinguished prior to the issuance of a.building permit for the subject project. Section 4: Engineering The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21 and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. The Applicant design shall also be compliant with the Urban Runoff Management Plan. Section 5: Fire Mitigation All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met per building permit. This includes but is not limited to access (International Fire Code (IFC), 2003 Edition, Section 503), approved fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems (IFC, as amended, Section 903 and 907). Resolution No.---,Series 2013 Page 3 of 7 P9 Section 6: Utilities The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Utility placement and design shall meet adopted City of Aspen standards. Section 7: Sanitation District Requirements Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, at the time of construction, which are on file at the District office. ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections (roof, foundation,perimeter,patio drains) are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD. Elevator shafts drains must flow thru an oil and sand interceptor. Plans for interceptors, separators and containment facilities require submittal by the applicant and approval prior to building permit. Below grade development may require installation of a pumping system. One tap is allowed for each building. Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways. Landscaping plans will require approval by ACSD where soft and hard landscaping may impact public ROW or easements to be dedicated to the district. All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit Where additional development would produce flows that would overwhelm the planned capacity of the existing collection system and or treatment facility, the development will be assessed fees to cover the costs of replacing the entire portion of the system that would be overwhelmed. The District would fund the costs of constructing reserve capacity in the area of concern (only for the material cost difference for larger line). Any glycol heating and snow melt system must be designed to prohibit and discharge of glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have approved containment facilities. Soil Nails are not allowed in the public ROW above ASCD main sewer lines and within 3 feet vertically below an ACSD main sewer line. Section 8: Environmental Health The state of Colorado mandates specific mitigation requirements with regards to asbestos. Additionally, code requirements to be aware of when filing a building permit include: a Resolution No. ---, Series 2013 Page 4 of 7 P10 prohibition on engine idling, regulation of fireplaces, fugitive dust requirements and noise abatement. Wildlife protection/enclosures for the trash and recycle area is required. Section 9: Exterior LiAtin All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor lighting. Section 10: Parks 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 indicated that the existing street tree planting is to remain in place. Careful consideration to the location and installation of utilities will determine the success of this desire. Tree Permit: If a tree(s) is requested for removal, the applicant will be required to receive an approved tree removal permit per City Code 13.20, this includes impacts 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 of 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 of 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 Section 11• Impact Fees and School Lands Dedication Fee-in-Lieu The Applicant shall pay all impact fees and the school lands dedication fee-in-lieu assessed at the time of building permit application submittal and paid at building permit issuance. Section 12: Vested Rights The development approvals granted pursuant to this resolution shall be vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of the development order. No later than fourteen (14) days following the final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this ordinance,the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a Resolution No.---, Series 2013 Page 5 of 7 P11 site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a vested property right, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: Lots N and O, City and Townsite of Aspen and commonly known as 616 E. Hyman. Section 13: Exhibits. The exhibits listed below are appended hereto and are, by references made to them, incorporated into this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein: • Exhibit 1 - Schematic elevations, square footages and floor plans • Exhibit 2—C-1 Zone district standards • Exhibit 3 —Approved trash and utility area Section 14: 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 15: 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 16: 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 2nd day of April,2013. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Deb Quinn,Assistant City Attorney LJ Erspamer, Chair Resolution No.---, Series 2013 Page 6 of 7 P12 ATTEST: Jackie Lothian,Deputy City Clerk Resolution No. ---, Series 2013 Page 7 of 7 P13 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 Finding: The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060 of the Land Use Code. The applicant's proposal for public amenity space, as it is an existing space, is slightly under what the code requires for demolition and redevelopment but is considered legally existing. The amenity space is located so that it can contribute to the pedestrian environment. The applicant is requesting a minor variation in the location and size of the trash/utility standards. 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 fagade of the building may be required to comply with this Section. Staff Finding: Staff finds this criterion to be non-applicable. The building currently contains commercial space and will contain commercial space 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, §1) Staff Finding: The proposed development is submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission for Final Commercial Design Review. Staff finds most applicable guidelines are met or can be met with a conditioned approval. Staff finds the criterion is met. Sec. 26.412.060. Commercial design standards. The following design standards, in addition to the commercial, lodging and historic district design objectives and guidelines, shall apply to commercial, lodging and mixed-use development: Exhibit A—Commercial Design Review—Land Use Code Review Criteria Page 1 of 4 P14 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 Finding: The existing size of the public amenity space is 430 sq. ft. and is located on the southwest corner of the property. 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% exists, the same amount must be replaced not to be lower than 10%. The site currently contains 7% public amenity space and the applicant is not proposing demolition of the site so the existing area is permitted to be maintained. Stafffinds 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 Finding: The existing courtyard remains on site as public amenity space. The at-grade space contains a tree and landscaped plantings contributing to a varied streetscape. Staff finds this criterion is met. 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 existing courtyard remains on site as public amenity space. The at-grade space contains a tree and landscaped plantings contributing to a varied streetscape. Staff finds this criterion is met. 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 Finding: The proposed amenity does not duplicate space, but enhances the pedestrian environment. Staff finds the criterion is met. Exhibit A—Commercial Design Review—Land Use Code Review Criteria Page 2 of 4 P15 5. Any variation to the design and operational- standards for public amenity, Subsection 26.575.030.17., promotes the purpose of the public amenity requirements. Staff Finding: 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 applicant is requesting to modify the orientation and dimensions of the trash and utility area. It does not meet the dimensional standards outlined in 26.575.060, which is 20 linear feet with a 10 foot depth but the applicant is requesting a size that is close to the required dimensions. The change in orientation is reasonable to accommodate on-site parking for the property and the Environmental Health department supports the request. Staff finds the criterion is met. 2. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property and along the alley. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. Staff Finding: The existing service pedestals located on the alley will remain. If any upgrades in service are required (such as a new transformer) then adequate space and easements shall be provided. 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 Finding: Delivery service is accessible off of the alley. An accessible ramp 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 Finding: The applicant proposes all mechanical exhaust to be vented through the roof and screened from the street. The proposed project does not include plans for a garage. Staff finds the criterion to be met. Exhibit A—Commercial Design Review—Land Use Code Review Criteria Page 3 of 4 P16 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, §1) Staff Finding: 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. Staff recommends that the applicant clearly indicate where mechanical will be located as part of this approval. 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. 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 hours. 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 Finding: Any signage and outdoor lighting will be regulated via building permit review and issuance. The current building includes large windows on the ground level which can contribute to a potential retail environment. Staff finds this criterion is met. Exhibit A—Commercial Design Review—Land Use Code Review Criteria Page 4 of 4 P17 Exhibit B Commercial Design Guidelines—Final 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 Finding: 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 with the addition of a new third story, which relates to the historic district without replicating it. Stafffinds this criterion is met. 2. Maintain a retail orientation. Staff Finding: The proposed development increases the existing commercial square footage and maintains commercial uses along the ground floor street edge. 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 Finding: The proposed remodel and addition maintains the basic form of the current building with a third story addition that is recessed to minimize its presence. The primary entrance is along Hyman Ave, with additional entries being proposed along Hyman. Traditional forms such as storefront windows are interpreted in a contemporary fashion. 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 fagade definition should be achieved while at the same time recognizing the value of public dining and landscaped space. Staff Finding: As proposed the development will have a well-defined street wall oriented towards Hyman that is accented with an existing Public Amenity space. 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. Exhibit B—Commercial Design Review—Commercial Design Guidelines, Commercial Character Area Page 1 of 5 P18 Staff Finding: The Applicant proposes variation in building heights with a mix of 2 and 3 story elements. The proposed two story fagade's height is differentiated from adjacent structures. 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 Finding: The existing public amenity space is an accent to the established street wall that exists and is maintained. 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 Finding: The applicant proposes variety in the project's street level experience with landscaped public amenity, storefront style windows and additional entries along the facade. Staff finds this criterion is met. Exhibit B—Commercial Design Review—Commercial Design Guidelines,Commercial Character Area Page 2 of 5 P19 Commercial Character Area Final Review Design Guidelines Building Design and Articulation Staff Finding: As noted in the guidelines,form and scale of a building is further articulated by the expression of traditional lot widths,facade articulation and street level character. Since the building's footprint exists the expression of traditional lot widths does not reflect the traditional 30 feet lot width but does break the building up into two modules due to the varying front yard setback. With regard to street level character the design guidelines emphasize that the building should "respect the height of traditional building design" with distinguishable differences in levels of the buildings. As proposed, the building provides a typical street front I"story, with the facade being predominately transparent glass and minimum amounts. of opaque materials. It should also incorporate retail entrances. The second story is more opaque in nature as suggested in the guidelines, with windows being smaller, transparent openings in the solid facade. Third stories are recommended to be minimized with a minimum set back of I5 feet from the street facade and the roofscape should be designed as a secondary elevation that is visible (from above). Staff recommends that the any rooftop mechanical be identified where it will be located, otherwise staff finds this criterion met. Stafffinds the following Guidelines are met: 1.30 The detailed design of the building facade should reflect the traditional scale and rhythm of the block. This should be achieved using: • The fenestration grouping • The modeling of the faced • The design framework for the first floor storefront • Variation in architectural detail/or the palette of faced materials 1.31 A building should reflect the architectural hierarchy and articulation inherent in the composition of the facade. • The design and definition of the traditionally tall first floor • The vertical proportions of the upper level fenestration pattern and ratio of solid wall to window area. 1.32 A building should reflect the three-dimensional characteristics of the street facade in the strength and depth of modeling, fenestration and architectural detail. 1.33 Any new building shall be designed to maintain a minimum of 9 feet from floor to ceiling on all floors. 1.34 Maintain the distinction between the street level and upper floors. 1.36 Minimize the appearance of a tall third floor. Exhibit B—Commercial Design Review—Commercial Design Guidelines, Commercial Character Area Page 3 of 5 P20 1.37 The first floor facade should be designed to concentrate interest on the first level, using the highest quality of design, detailing and materials. 1.38 The retail entrance should be at sidewalk level. 1.40 Window area along the first floor shall be a minimum of 60%of exterior street facade area when facing a principal street(s). 1.41 Where appropriate a building shall be designed to maintain the character and transparency of the traditional street level retail. 1.42 Design of the first floor storefront should include particular attention to the following: • The basic element and proportions of storefront design. 1.44 A large building should reflect the traditional lot width in form and variation of its roof. This should be achieved through the following: • A set back of the top floor from the front facade Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable: 1.29 A new building shall reflect the traditional lot width (30ft.) as expressed by two or more of the following: • Variation in height at internal lot lines • Variation in the plane of the front facade • Street facade composition • Variation in architectural detailing and materials to emphasize the building module 1.35 A new building should be designed to maintain the stature of traditional street level frontage. 1.43 Retail frontage facing onto side courts or rear alleys should follow similar design principles to the street frontage adjusted for the scale of space Staff finds the following Guideline is not met: 1.39 Incorporate an airlock entry into the plan for all new structures 1.45 The roofscape should be designed with the same design attention as the secondary elevations of the building Architectural Materials Staff Finding: The guidelines recommend that durable, quality materials be used in the development of new buildings and that "all facades of a building should reflect, complement and enhance the evolving form and character of the center city. " The first transparent, glass facade uses a typical material seen within the downtown, provides opaque wood upon the second and Exhibit B—Commercial Design Review—Commercial Design Guidelines, Commercial Character Area Page 4 of 5 P21 third story, with masonry accents. Although not traditional materials to the Victorian era, these materials are a throwback to old Aspen after skiing started in town. Stafffinds the following Guidelines are met: 1.46 High quality, durable materials should be employed. 1.47 Building materials should have these features: • Convey the quality and range of materials seen traditionally. • Reduce the perceived scale of the building and enhance visual interest if the fagade. • Covey a human scale. • Have proven durability and weathering characteristics within Aspen's climate. 1.48 A building or addition should reflect the quality and variation in material seen traditionally. 1.49 Where contemporary materials are use they shall be: • High quality durability and finish • Detailed to convey a human scale • . Compatible with a traditional masonry palette Paving and Landscaping Staff Finding: The guidelines encourage paving and landscaping that enhances the immediate setting of the project. In this case, the public amenity is adjacent to the street right of way within a courtyard. Existing street trees are proposed to be maintained with no changes to the sidewalk as both meet city standards. Stafffinds the following Guideline is met: 1.51 Paving and landscaping should be designed to complement and enhance the immediate setting of the building area. Exhibit B—Commercial Design Review—Commercial Design Guidelines, Commercial Character Area Page 5 of 5 P22 Exhibit C Special Review for a Reduction to the Utility/Trash/Recycle Area, per section 26.575.060 B. 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. 2. Access to the utility/trash/recycle service area is adequate. 3. Measures are provided for enclosing trash bins and making them easily movable by trash personnel. 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. 5. The area for public utility placement and maintenance is adequate and safe for the placement of utilities. 6. Adequate provisions are incorporated to ensure the construction of the access area. Staff Finding: Since the February 15, 2013 submission of this land use application, the applicant has been modifying the design of utility/trashlrecycle area with input from the Environmental Health department. As noted in Exhibit E of this application, the modified design of an approximate area that is 14'-6" wide by 20' deep is adequate for trash service. The Environmental Health department supports the reductions in size as long as the design is constructed and functions as represented by the Applicant's representative. Staff finds the criteria met to support the size reduction. Exhibit C—Special Review Page 1 of 1 P23 Exhibit D Growth Management Review Criteria for Expansion or new Commercial Development and New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project, per Section 26.470.080(1)and(2). 1. Expansion or new commercial development. The expansion of an existing commercial building or commercial portion of a mixed-use building or the development of a new commercial building or commercial portion of a mixed-use building shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.050. 2. New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project. The development of new free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.050 above. B. General requirements: All development applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for growth management review based on the following generally applicable criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of development: 1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.D. Applications for multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.1 shall not be required to meet this standard. Staff Finding. The Applicant requested I free-market residential development allotment from the 2013 calendar year and 580 sq.ft of new net leasable commercial space. The allotments are available. Staff finds this criterion met. 2. The proposed development is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, as well as with any applicable adopted regulatory master plan. Staff Finding. The proposed development of a mixed-use building reflects the mix of development within the area which includes a number of buildings that contain a mix of residential and commercial uses within them. Staff finds this criterion met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff Finding: The proposed design appears to meet the requirements of the Commercial zone district. Final design detail may require slight. changes to the building but conformity of the design with the underlying zone district requirements shall be verified at building permit review. Staff finds this criterion met. 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval, as applicable. Exhibit D—Growth Management Review for Commercial and Residential development Page 1 of 3 P24 Staff Finding: The design is consistent with the conceptual approval granted with regard to height, massing and footprint of the building. Staff finds this criterion met. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate. Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing to develop an additional 580 sq. ft. of commercial net leasable space. A credit is provided for the existing net leasable of 9,046 sq. ft. Within the Commercial zone district, 4.1 full time Equivalents (FTEs) are generated per 1,000 square feet of net leasable area. For commercial uses, the basement and upper floor employee generation rate is reduced by twenty-five (25)percent or 3.075 FTEs per 1,000 square feet of net leasable area. The existin building contains 3,261 sq. ft. of first floor net leasable and 5,785 square feet of upper and lower floor net leasable. The net leasable area generates 8.02 FTEs [(3,261 sq. ft.11,000 sq. ft.) x 4.1 x.61 on the first floor, and 10.67 FTEs [(5,785 sq. ft.11,000 sq.ft.) x 3.075 x .6] on the second floor. In sum, the existing building generates 18.69 FTEs. The proposed building will contain an expected total of 9,626 sq.ft. of net leasable area, with 2,910 sq. ft. of first floor net leasable and 6,716 square feet of upper floor or basement net leasable. The new net leasable area generates 17.15 FTEs [(2,910 sq. ft.11,000 sq.ft.)x 4.1 x.6] on the first floor, and 12.39 FTEs [(6,716 sq.ft./1,000 sq.ft.)x 3.075 x .6] on the second floor. In sum, the existing building generates 18.69 FTEs while the proposed building generates 19.54 FTEs. The difference between the two numbers equals .85 of a FTE. The Applicant is proposing to purchase Affordable Housing Credits to mitigate for the .85 FTE generated by commercial development. Staff finds this criterion met. 6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide Exhibit D—Growth Management Review for Commercial and Residential development Page 2 of 3 P25 mitigation units at a lower category designation. Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section 26.470.100 Employee/Square Footage Conversion. Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing to develop one free-market unit containing 2,4 79 sq.ft. of net livable square feet. The underlying zone district caps the unit size to 2,000 sq. ft. and 2,500 sq. ft if a Historic Transferable Development Right (TDR) is extinguished. The applicant is below the 2,500 net livable cap and will be required to land a TDR to develop the unit as proposed. With a unit size of 2,479 sq.ft. of net livable area, mitigation is required at 30% of the new net livable developed or 743 sq. ft. (2,479*.30=743). To determine the number of Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) to be mitigated the conversion of sq. ft. to FTEs is as follows: 1 FTE=400 sq.ft of net livable area. 743 sq.ft.1400 sq.ft. =1.86 FTEs The Applicant is proposing to purchase Affordable Housing Credits to mitigate for the 1.86 FTEs generated by the residential development. Staff finds this criterion met. 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, . energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal,parking and road and transit services. Staff Finding: The property is being developed in an area f town that is adequately served by public infrastructure. Stafffins this criterion to be met. Exhibit D—Growth Management Review for Commercial and Residential development Page 3 of 3 P26 Exhibit E 4. Affordable housing. The development of affordable housing deed-restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the Board of Directors. Staff Finding: The Applicant is proposing to meet their affordable housing mitigation via the purchase of Affordable Housing Credits. APCHA has noted the mitigation that would be required for the project as proposed. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b. Affordable housing required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of actual newly built units or buy-down units. Off-site units shall be provided within the City limits. Units outside the City limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.2. If the mitigation requirement is less than one (1) full unit, a cash-in-lieu payment may be accepted by the Planning and Zoning Commission upon a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. If the mitigation requirement is one (1) or more units, a cash-in-lieu payment shall require City Council approval, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.3. A Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit may be used to satisfy mitigation requirements by approval of the Community Development Department Director, pursuant to Section 26.540.080 Extinguishment of the Certificate. Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of these in Staff Finding: The Applicant is proposing to meet their affordable housing mitigation via the purchase of Affordable Housing Credits. APCHA has noted the mitigation that would be required for the project as proposed. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. c. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent (50%) or more of the unit's net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. This dimensional requirement may be varied through Special Review, Pursuant to Chapter 26.430. Staff Finding: The criterion is not applicable. As the applicant is propping the purchase of Affordable Housing Credits. d. The proposed units shall be deed-restricted as "for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The owner may be entitled to select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned qualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The deed restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as defined in the Affordable Housing Guidelines established by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended. The proposed units may be rental units, including but not limited to rental units owned by an employer or nonprofit organization, if a legal instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney ensures permanent affordability of the units. The City encourages Exhibit E—Growth Management Review—Affordable Housing Page 1 of 2 P27 Exhibit E affordable housing units required for lodge development to be rental units associated with the lodge operation and contributing to the long-term viability of the lodge. Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen, Pitkin County or other similar governmental or quasi-municipal agency shall not be subject to this mandatory "for sale" provision. Staff Finding: The criterion is not applicable. As the applicant is propping the purchase of Affordable Housing Credits. e. Non-Mitigation Affordable Housing. Affordable housing units that are not required for mitigation, but-meet the-requirements of Section 26.470.070.4(a-d). The owner of such non-mitigation affordable housing is eligible to receive a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit pursuant to Chapter 26.540. Staff Finding: The criterion is not applicable as mitigation is required for this project and on-site housing is not being proposed. Exhibit E—Growth Management Review—Affordable Housing Page 2 of 2 P28 Jennifer Phelan From: Ashley Perl Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 10:44 AM To: Jennifer Phelan Cc: Mitch Haas Subject: FW: 616 Service Yard Revised 3.19.13 Attachments: 616 Hyman Revised Service Yard Plan Enlarged N.T.S. 3.19.13.pdf; 616 Hyman Revised Service Yard Plan 3.19.13.pdf Based on the updated Trash/Recycle area attached and described below,the Environmental Health Department believes the proposed development includes adequate space for trash and recycling. Ashley (970)429-1798 From: Mitch Haas [mailto:mitch @hlpaspen.com] - Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 5:42 PM To: Ashley Perl; Jennifer Phelan Cc: Chris Dwyer; Les Rosenstein Subject: Fwd: 616 Service Yard Revised 3.19.13 Hi Ashley. Please have a look at the attached plans, which include several revisions from the previously submitted version. As Chris notes in the email below,the revisions include removal of the wing walls at the alley, the addition of full-width gates at the alley, and moving the separation wall between the dumpster area and the service area back toward the building effectively increasing the size of the dumpster area so as to accommodate the placement of some recycling bins therein. Any additional recycling area needs will be met on the 610 E Hyman property under the terms of the shared use agreement between this applicant and Charles Cunniffe. In addition, the open doorway from the walkway area into/out from the service yard area has been widened to more easily allow bins and other items to be moved through. We were unable to reverse the swing of the egress door from the building due to building code issues that would then have resulted in our having to decrease the overall width and, thus, size of the service paces. The result of all this is that we now have a trash/recycle/service area size that is 14'-6" wide by approximately 20' deep, where the depth is broken into a 13'-11" deep trash dumpster and recycle bins area and a 6' deep service and overflow recycling area, all supplemented by the ability to bring recyclables over to Charles Cunniffe's space next door. Given grades on the property, the trash area is lower in elevation than the service area behind it; thus the need for the wall separating the two so as to eliminate the need for an actual step. It is our hope that these revisions adequately satisfy all anticipated needs and will meet with your approval. Please let me know if you have any questions and, also, what your general thoughts are on this plan. Also, please let me know if printed plans are needed and, if so, how many and at what size. Best regards, Mitch Mitch Haas Haas Land Planning,LLC 201 N. Mill Street,Suite 108 Aspen,CO 81611 Phone:(970)925-7819 Fax: (970)925-7395 1 rn N d RAMP SLOPE: 1:12 I Lo I DN UP 6' - 0" 13 - 11 " r a SERVICE AREA NOTE: PER OWNER AGREEMENT o w/ 610 E. HYMAN, ADDITIONAL ALLEY ' PROPOSED RECYCLING STORAGE IS LOCATED i Fr COMMON AT 610 E. HYMAN RESTROOM I PROPOSED I x ; a FULL WIDTH GATES MECH. SHAFT PARKING I 00 t I I 00 I I I DRAWING NOT TO SCALE PROPOSED:NEW WAILS (SHOWN IN GRATI PROPOSED:NEW ELEVATOR UP , , I , '= ELEV.EQUIP PROPOSED ROOM PARKING I a IHCI I EXISTING '. STING' 1 PLANTER ATRIUM 1 (PUBLIC AMENITY IoPEN TO ABOVE SPACE) "AND aE<Gwl,. PROPOSED R liCOMMERCIAL � � ' _......_. .:.......:... ��.. O L ._........... .. _................ _ I a0 I RAMP SLOPE: r ] SECOND PROPOSED MEANS CORRIDOR/ I Tn '�. :�� ........._...__ � SECOND MEANS OF EGRESS I , ON w 4. 13'-11" ' c SERVICE AREA NO PER OWNER AGREEMENT w/610 E.HYMAN.ADDITIONAL I ALLEY $ PROPOSED PROPOSED RECYCLING STORAGE 6 LOCATED COMMON COMMON AL 610 E.HYMAN RESiROOM RFSIROOM _� I C PROPOSED FULL WIDTH GATES m t / MECH.SHAFT PARKING I _ PROPOSED 1 COMMERCIAL I y ..` PROPOSED - PARKING I I I , I I 1 ..............._......... PROPOSED I :e PARKING y, PROPOSED:NEW WINDOW .............................. II 616 E. HYMAN REDEVELOPMENT 616 E.HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN.COLORADO 81611 O �OJJ SCHEMATIC DESIGN: REVISED SERVICE YARD PLAN A ,rJ O 1+wn 03119/13 /Y d P31 Exhibit G APCHA ISSUE: The applicant is proposing a remodel of the Gulfco Building, located at 616 East Hyman, Avenue. BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing to extend the second level closer to the rear property line on the alley side of the building and enclose the existing second floor south-facing deck to create additional commercial space. A third floor addition containing one free-market residential unit is also proposed. The commercial component currently generates 31.159 FTE's. The remodel and addition generates a total of 32.83 FTE's; therefore, the commercial component will generate an additional 1.424 (32.83 — 31.159)FTE's,of which 60% is required for mitigation purposes(1.424 X 60%=.854 FTE) Currently, there does not exist a free-market component; therefore, the entire 2,479 proposed is additional. The Code requires mitigation to be provided in an amount equal to 30% of the additional free- market residential Net Livable area; therefore, 743.7 square feet of above-grade net livable affordable housing space is required(2,479 X 30%). At 400 square feet per FTE as stated in the Code, this equates to 1.859 FTE to be mitigated. The proposal does not include any on-site affordable housing. The applicant is requesting to mitigate by purchasing Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits. The required mitigation for the redevelopment of 616 East Hyman Avenue is 2.713 Category 4 FTE's, per the Land Use Code. The Certificates available are designated as Category 2; therefore, based on Section 26.540.110, Converting category designation of an affordable housing certificate, the conversion from Category 2 credits to Category 4 mitigation requirement equates to 1.59 FTE credit requirements (2.713 FTE X $141.268 [the Category 4 fee] = $383,260; $383,260 / $241,538 [the Category 2 fee] = 1.59 Category 2 FTE. The applicant is in the process of purchasing 1.63 FTE's of the Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits to extinguish the mitigation for this project. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the Land Use Code, the 1.63 FTE Category 2 Certificates would mitigate for the required 1.859 FTE's generated by the proposed development. ACSD Requirements-616 East Hyman Ave.Redevelopment Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter,patio drains)are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD. Oil and Grease interceptors (NOT traps) are required for all food processing establishment. Locations of food processing shall be identified prior to building permit. Even though the commercial space is tenet finish, interceptors will be required at this time if food processing establishments are anticipated for this project. ACSD will not approve service to food processing establishments retrofitted for this use by small under counter TRAPS at a later date. Oil and Sand separators are required for parking garages and vehicle maintenance establishments. Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells. Elevator shaft drains must flow thru o/s interceptor Old service lines must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line according to specific ACSD requirements. Exhibit G—DRC Comments Page I of 4 P32 Below grade development may require installation of a pumping system. One tap is allowed for each building. Shared service line agreements may be required where more than one unit is served by a single service line. Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways. Landscaping plans will require approval by ACSD where soft and hard landscaping may impact public ROW or easements to be dedicated to the district. All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Peg in our office can develop an estimate for this project once detailed plans have been made available to the district. Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the planned reserve capacity of the existing system (collection system and or treatment system) an additional proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection system or treatment capacity constraint. Additional proportionate fees would be collected over time from all development in the area of concern in order to fund the improvements needed. Glycol heating and snow melt systems must be designed to prohibit and discharge of glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have approved containment facilities. Soil Nails are not allowed in the public ROW above ASCD main sewer lines and within 3 feet vertically below an ACSD main sewer line. We can comment on this application in greater detail once detailed plans have been submitted to the District Parks Department 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 indicated that the existing street tree planting is to remain in place. Careful consideration to the location and installation of utilities will determine the success of this desire. Tree Permit: If a tree(s) is requested for removal,the applicant will be required to receive an approved tree removal permit per City Code 13.20,this includes impacts 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 of 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 of 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 Exhibit G—DRC Comments Page 2 of 4 PH zoning observations and concerns with regard to zoning compliance: 1. height of chimney: not provided.The exception to height is for,"the minimum necessary for the chimney"which does not seem to be the case as the chimney appears wider than the elevator overrun. See Sheet A10,Al2. 2. The location and width of the chimney changes from sheet A-9 to A-10. 3. height of mechanical: not provided 4. height of mechanical screen: not provided. See sheet A-9 and A-16 5. mechanical shaft is clad as a chimney: exception to height not intended for faux chimney which is really a mechanical shaft. See, A6-A9 and A15-17 6. height of elevator overrun: not provided see A-10. 7. Stair towers: height not provided 8. Height of building provided from finishes floor level; should be from most restrictive grade. See sheet All 9. deck ... the deck provides enforcement or use issues. The intent is to comply the actual use may differ. Planter box is illustrated and have not been included in deck exemption total. Planter boxes are included in the size of the deck. See A-9 and A-24. 10. Screen canopy third level, is illustrated from the chimney on the East fagade all the way to the West fagade see sheet A10. Which is different on sheet A15. 11. Commercial store front: the South fagade is pulled back from the property line for the commercial space. Is the fagade of the South elevation commercial space going to be pulled back or not? Sheet A7 12. Please note there is no exception for veneer beyond the property. Sheet A8 and A15. 13. Existing floor area: not correct as the calculation includes stairs on every level. See sheet A22 14. Sheet A7 indicates posts and roof over service area and parking spaces: carports are exempt but does the covered service area count as non-unit or deck exemption?The service area has walls but the space does not appear to be conditioned. How tall are the walls? 15. Length of parking spaces: what is the length of the parking spaces? Sheet A7 16. The allocation of non-unit space: totals add up. Allocated by level;the basement the non-unit was not added to totals. Engineering Department These comments are not intended to be exclusive, but an initial response to the project packet submitted for purpose of the DRC meeting. Drainage: General note: The design for the site must meet the Urban Runoff Management Plan Requirements. Staff was not-able to determine whether or not the site will meet these requirements. A-fuH review will be - - - completed when there is enough information to review. A compliant drainage plan must be submitted with a building permit application. This includes detaining and providing water quality for the entire site. If the site chooses fee-in-lieu of detention(FIL), it can only be applied to existing impervious areas all new areas will need to discharge at historic rates. Any Exhibit G—DRC Comments Page 3 of 4 P34 detention requirements covered under the FI , option must discharge directly to the City's stormwater infrastructure. Staff was unable to determine whether or not the site is able to meet all the Drainage Principals: 1. Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. 2. Use the entire site when planning for stormwater quality treatment. 3. Avoid unnecessary impervious area. 4. Reduce runoff rates and volumes to more closely match natural conditions. 5. Integrate stormwater quality management and flood control. 6. Develop stormwater quality facilities that enhance the site,the community, and the environment. 7. Use a treatment train approach. 8. Design sustainable facilities that can be safely maintained. 9. Design and maintain facilities with public safety in mind. Sidewalk and Curb and Gutter: General note: All sidewalk, curb and gutter must meet the Engineering Standards as outlined in Title 21. As of March 13, 2013, the sidewalk curb and gutter were in acceptable condition and did not require replacement. Should the sidewalk, curb or gutter be damaged as a result of construction activities, it will be the property owner's responsibility to repair the damage as described in Title 21. Construction Management—Engineering is concerned about the Construction Impacts of this site. The plan shall describe mitigation for: parking, staging/encroachments, and truck traffic. Note that the current code does not allow for any encroachments during the on-seasons (November 1 — April 15 and June 1 —Labor Day). Excavation Stabilization — Due to the proximity of the neighboring property, the City will require an excavation stabilization plan prior for any excavation. The plan should be submitted with the building permit submittal. Fee in Lieu—This project is considered a Major project and can opt to pay the Fee in Lieu for a portion of the detention requirements.Please refer to Section 2.12.140 of the Municipal Code. Building The comments are intended to provide the applicant with corrections or concerns that may require further development or be re drawn to show compliance. We are available to schedule a meeting to discuss these items at your earliest convenience. Please either email me at Denis.Murraygcityofaspen.com or call at 970-429-2761. 1) Identify the building type of construction will allow a residential use on the third level. 2) Verify the exits have the required separation of at least one third the diagonal of the area served. ( Sprinklered Building) 3) We will need to discuss the floor openings at the entry which connect three levels not permitted by code. There may be an exception to permit this situation. 4) The rear exit enclosure is required to open directly to the public way or provide a protected path to the public way by way of an exit passageway. 5) An accessible route to the trash and recycle area is required by chapter 11 from within the site. 6) The trellis at the upper level may be required to have a fire resistive construction for projections. Exhibit G—DRC Comments Page 4 of 4