Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20130416 AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, April 16, 2013 4:30 p.m. Sister Cities room 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen I. ROLL CALL II. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public III. MINUTES IV. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST V. PUBLIC HEARINGS — A. 534 E. Cooper (Boogies's), Growth management review B. 204 S. Galena (former Gap), Growth management review VI. OTHER BUSINESS VII. BOARD REPORTS VIII. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: 10 MEMORANDUM �aA P1 TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director RE: 534 E Cooper Ave (Boogies)—GMQS and Subdivision Resolution No. of 2013 MEETING DATE: April 16,.2013 APPLICANT/OWNER: Boogie's Building of Aspen, LLC c/o Leonard Weinglass REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann, Vann Associates, LLC LOCATION: 534 E Cooper Ave(Boogies Buildings) CURRENT ZONING: CC (Commercial Core) SUMMARY:The Applicant requests growth management and subdivision reviews for the remodel and expansion of the Boogies Building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request. Photo: Boogies location and picture of Building viewed from Cooper Ave. Page 1 of 5 534 E Cooper Ave(Boogies)—GMQS and Subdivision P&Z Memo t P2 REQUEST OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals to remodel and expand the existing building: • A Growth Management Review (Chapter 26.470.080.1, Minor expansion of a commercial, lodge or mixed-use development) for the development of new net leasable commercial space. The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority.) • A Growth Management Review (Chapter 26.470.080.2,New free-market residential units within a multi family or mixed-use project) for the development of one (1) free-market residential unit. The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority.) • A Growth Management Review (Chapter 26.470.070.4, Affordable Housing) for the development of affordable housing. (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority.) • Subdivision approval (Chapter 26.480, Subdivision) for the creation of multiple residential units and timeshare units in a mixed-use building. (City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission) BACKGROUND AND PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to remodel and expand an existing two story building.and add a recessed third floor at 534 E Cooper Ave. The lot is 6,269 square feet and is located approximately at the north-west corner of Cooper Ave and Hunter St. The original application for this redevelopment was made in March of 2012, and is subject to the Land Use Code in place at that time, which permitted new free-market residential units and an overall allowed height of 38 feet to 42 feet. Existing Conditions and History: The Boogies building is located in the Commercial Core(CC) zone district at 534 E Cooper Ave. It was built in 1987 using reconstruction credits from the demolition of the "Shaft Restaurant." At the time, the building was reconstructed so it did not contain any additional commercial square footage than had previously been on the site. A new two-bedroom affordable housing unit was voluntarily added as part of the reconstruction. The unit was not required to satisfy any mitigation requirements. The building included approximately 10,865 square feet of commercial space in the basement, first and second floors, and one (1) voluntary affordable housing unit on the second floor. In 1995, the owner requested approval to expand the second floor restaurant by 249 square feet through the conversion of one of the affordable housing unit's bedrooms into commercial space. This change in use request was granted, and a cash-in-lieu payment was made to mitigate the expanded restaurant. The affordable housing unit was still considered a voluntary unit, and an updated deed restriction for the reconfigured one-bedroom unit was recorded. At some point following the 1995 approval, the restaurant began enclosing a portion of the second floor outdoor deck with a tent. In 2003, the City informed the owner that the enclosure required a temporary use approval, which was granted. The enclosure has essentially remained up since the approval, even though the approval was only for one season. This application Page 2 of 5 534 E Cooper Ave(Boogies)—GMQS and Subdivision P&Z Memo P3 proposes to bring the area into compliance by expanding the restaurant and removing the "temporary"enclosed space. Proposed Development: The applicant proposes expanding the existing commercial space by 292 square feet of net leasable area, adding a new free-market residential unit of 2,307 square feet of net livable area to a new third floor, and expanding the affordable housing unit to 705 square feet of net livable area in order to use it as the required affordable housing mitigation for the project expansion. The applicant proposes using a TDR to expand the free-market unit beyond 2,000 sq ft. net livable allowed by zoning. The expanded net leasable space generates 0.292 parking spaces, which the applicant will mitigate for through a cash-in-lieu payment. This is allowed by right in the land use code. No parking is required for the residential units. The project received Conceptual HPC and Conceptual Commercial Design Approval from the Historic Preservation Commission on July 11, 2012, which limited the building to thirty-eight (38) feet in height. The Conceptual Reviews were called up by City Council, which affirmed HPC's decision. The proposed dimensions are included in Table 1, below. Table 1: Existing and Proposed Dimensions Existing Proposed Height 27' to top of parapet; 38, g 37' to top of atrium Floor Area (sq ft) 8,101 sq. ft. 12,661 sq. ft. Net Leasable (sq ft) 10,379 sq. ft. 10,671 sq. ft. Affordable Housing Net Livable 654 sq. ft. 705 sq. ft. (sq ft) Free-Market Residential Net N/A 2,307 sq. ft. Livable (sq ft) STAFF COMMENTS: GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW The project proposes to develop a new free market residential unit, additional commercial net leasable space and the applicant proposes to mitigate by expanding the existing deed restricted unit and updating its deed restriction. The unit was not originally provided as mitigation, so the applicant requests using as mitigation for this project. The Planning and Zoning Commission may approve this request, after reviewing a recommendation from APCHA and staff. The new free-market residential unit will require approximately 692 square feet of affordable housing net livable area, or 1.73 FTEs, as mitigation.' The expanded commercial space will require 0.54 FTEs as mitigation.2 The applicant requests mitigating through an on-site unit, 1 2,307 sq ft FM unit*30%net livable mitigation requirement=692.1 sq ft.affordable housing net livable 692.1 sq ft/400 sq ft(conversion rate to FTEs)= 1.73 FTEs 2 292 sq ft net leasable on 2nd floor/1,000 sq ft=.292 0.159 *3.075 FTEs=.8979 FTEs generated Page 3 of 5 534 E Cooper Ave(Boogies)—GMQS and Subdivision P&Z Memo P4 which, if accepted, means only the larger of the commercial and free-market residential mitigation requirements is required to be met. If the P&Z does not accept the affordable housing as the mitigation for the project, the applicant proposes using Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits (Credits). If credits are used, the sum of the employees generated for both the residential unit and the increase in net leasable area are required to be mitigated. In this case, credits for 2.27 FTEs would be required. In reviewing the Growth Management portion of the application, staff believes the proposal meets all applicable review requirements. Staff and APCHA recommend the existing, upgraded affordable housing unit be used as the mitigation for the proposal. The existing unit was never required as mitigation housing, and has an out of date deed restriction. Using it as mitigation guarantees the unit will remain in the affordable housing inventory in perpetuity. SUBDIVISION REVIEw A subdivision review is required for this mixed-use building because multiple dwelling units are proposed. The applicant proposes to develop a new free market residential unit, additional commercial net leasable space and proposes to mitigate by expanding an existing deed restricted unit and updating its deed restriction. The subdivision is similar to the other subdivisions seen throughout the downtown area. In reviewing the Subdivision portion of the application, staff believes the proposal meets all applicable review requirements. The project is currently served by utilities, and the expansion can be accommodated through an upgrade to the existing utility box. In addition, the applicant will meet all applicable engineering requirements, including all drainage requirements. The existing trash/recycling area can accommodate the expansion. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: The City Engineer, Fire Marshal, Water Department, Aspen Sanitation District, Building Department, Parks Department, and APCHA have all reviewed the proposed application and their requirements have been included as conditions of approval when appropriate. A copy of the Referral Agency comments is attached as Exhibit C. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the project,with the following conditions: 1. The chimney shown in the approved plans is not approved. 2. The project is subject to all conditions included in HPC Resolution 16, Series of 2012. 3. The Final HPC and Commercial Design Reviews shall address where any rooftop mechanical equipment is located. 4. All areas labeled"roof' and"exterior roof garden"may not be used as deck space. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # , Series 2013, approving Growth Management Reviews and recommending City Council approve a Subdivision Review for the project located at 534 E Cooper Ave." 0.4889 FTEs*60%mitigation rate=0.54 FTEs Page 4 of 5 534 E Cooper Ave(Boogies)—GMQS and Subdivision P&Z Memo P5 Attachments Exhibit A-Growth Management Review Criteria, Staff Findings Exhibit B- Subdivision Review Criteria, Staff Findings Exhibit C - DRC Comments Exhibit D - Public Comment Exhibit E - Application Exhibit F - Updated FAR and Net Livable/Leasable drawings, dated April 8, 2012 Page 5 of 5 534 E Cooper Ave (Boogies)-GMQS and Subdivision P&Z Memo P6 RESOLUTION N0. (SERIES OF 2013) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING FREE-MARKET RESIDENTIAL, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND COMMERCIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEWS, AND RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A SUBDIVISION, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ONE (1) FREE-MARKET RESIDENTIAL UNIT, ONE (1) AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS, AND 292 SQ FT OF NEW COMMERCIAL SPACE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 534 E COOPER AVE BOOGIES BUILDING) CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2 73 7-182-24-008 WHEREAS,the Community Development Department received an application from Boogie's Building of Aspen, LLC, represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC requesting approval of Free-Market Residential, Affordable Housing, and Commercial Growth Management Allotments, and Subdivision, to remodel and expand the existing building to include one (1) free-market residential unit, one (1) affordable housing units, and 292 sq ft of new commercial space; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requests approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission Free-Market Residential, Affordable Housing, and Commercial Growth Management Allotments; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requests a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission to the City Council for Subdivision approval; and, WHEREAS, the property is zoned Commercial Core (CC); and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of the application; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 16, 2014, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. _, Series of 2013, by a to L— vote, approving one (1) Free-Market Residential Growth Management Allotments, one (1) Affordable Housing Growth Management Allotment, and 292 sq ft Commercial Growth Management Allotments, and recommending the Aspen City Council approve aSubdivision; 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 Resolution No , Series 2013 Page ] of 5 P7 Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Growth Management allotments and approvals for one (1) free-market residential unit, one (1) affordable housing unit, and 292 sq ft of commercial net leasable space. The Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends City Council approval of Subdivision. Section 2: Dimensions All dimensions shall meet the requirements of the Land Use Code in effect on March 30, 2012 (date of initial application). The free-market residential unit is approved at 2,307 square feet of net livable area, through the landing of a Historic Transferable Development Right(TDR). The approved floor plans are attached as Exhibit A. Minor changes from these are permitted at building permit. Areas labeled as "roof' or "rooftop garden" are not permitted for use as a deck. The chimney shown in the approved plans is not approved. The project is subject to all conditions included in HPC Resolution 16, Series of 2012. The Final HPC and Commercial Design Reviews shall address where any rooftop mechanical equipment is located. Section 3: 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 shall be subject to the Urban Runoff Management Plan Requirements. 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 Resolution No_, Series 2013 Page 2 of 5 P8 areas will need to discharge at historic rates. Any detention requirements covered under the FIL option must discharge directly to the City's stormwater infrastructure. As of March 13, 2013, the sidewalk was in acceptable condition and did not require replacement. The curb and gutter was damaged and should be replaced. 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. 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. The Construction Management Plan shall describe mitigation for: parking, staging/encroachments, and truck traffic. Section 4: Affordable Housing The 1 on-site, one-bedroom affordable housing unit shall be deed restricted to Category 3. The Certificate of Occupancy (CO) for the unit shall be issued prior to or at the same time as the proposed free-market unit. The units shall be owned and managed by Boogies Building of Aspen, LLC. More detailed information regarding the management and maintenance of the units shall be provided to APCHA with the proposed deed restriction prior to CO. The owner shall have the right to rent the unit to tenants qualified under the APPCHA Guidelines. If the owner cannot provide a qualified tenant, the unit shall be rented through APCHA's normal advertising process. At no time shall the tenancy of the unit during a lease period be tied to continued employment by the owner. Tenant leases, however, may be terminated for cause or at the end of the lease period upon termination of employment. The tenant in the rental unit shall be required to be requalified by APCHA on a yearly basis. Owner and APCHA stipulate and agree that-, in accordance with C.R.S. 38-12-301(l)(a) and (b), this Deed Restriction constitutes a voluntary agreement and deed restriction to limit rent on the property subject hereto and to otherwise provide affordable housing stock. Owner waives any right it may have to claim that this Deed Restriction violates C.R.S. 38-12-301. The deed restriction shall allow the unit to become ownership units at such time as the owner elects to condominiumize and sell the units, or at such time as APCHA determines the unit is found to be out of compliance for one year. If the unit is found to be out of compliance for one year, or the owner elects to sell the unit, the units shall be listed for sale with APCHA at the category specified in the deed restriction. The sales price shall be as stated in the APCHA Guidelines in effect at the time of recordation of the deed restriction plus appreciation calculated at three percent (3%) per annum or the Consumer Price Index (simple appreciation not compounded), whichever is less, as of the listing date of the units. Resolution No , Series 2013 Page 3 of 5 P9 If the unit is being sold due to noncompliance, it shall be sold through the lottery system. If the owner elects to sell the unit, the owner may choose the initial buyer provided they qualify under APCHA's top priority for the unit. If the owner elects to sell the units, or they are required to be sold due to noncompliance, owner shall condominiumize the units and form a condominium association for the management and maintenance thereof. The affordable housing association shall be separate from the free-market residential unit's and commercial unit's association(s). In the event the rental units are required to become ownership units due to noncompliance, APCHA or the City may elect to purchase them for rental to qualified tenants in accordance with APCHA Guidelines. Section 5: Fire Mitigation All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met. 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). Section 6: Utilities Due to a low roof (non-conforming with standards) above the existing transformer and non-conformance to Electrical codes, the existing transformer cannot be upsized in place. Most likely the transformers at Aspen Core/ Little Armies will not be able to be used by this developer as capacity is being reserved for those developments. Due to these constraints, a new transformer location may be the best option. The applicant shall work with the Utilities Department prior to submittal of building permit to determine a location for a new transformer that acceptable to the Utilities Department. Section 7: Sanitation District Requirements 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. Because a restaurant currently exists and is anticipated to remain, Oil and Grease interceptors (NOT traps) are required for all food processing establishment. Locations of food processing shall be identified prior to building permit. Section 8: 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. 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 the demo and/or building permits. Parks will approve a final landscape plan during the review of the tree removal permit based on the landscape estimates. Resolution No , Series 2013 Page 4 of 5 P10 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 before any construction activities are to commence. Section 9: Parking The applicant shall pay a cash-in-lieu fee for the 0.292 parking spaces generated by the development. Section 10: 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 or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 11: 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 12: 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 day of , 2013. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Debbie Quinn,Asst. City Attorney LJ Erspamer, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Resolution No Series 2013 Page 5 of 5 r f posy ARCHITECTURE+PLANNING •`� ` ---- ------- ----------- -- i I / / n EMO / , APR G 2013 ,,' , MECH9NCAL / - � / ,/ � i /' CITY OF ASPEN /' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NO 534 EAST COOPER � . / / i� ;� / r� r . u i rii as // /a -r ra r ar rii /. irr ✓ai ,/v rii -7iir /i /i/ rii i� e .M. PROPOSED BASEMENT I E.VEL � ,oiu iwww,wmawmttaauxrm nmxwan„su.wauunrwvow,wmm�mnnn.unnw.,a,na:.iwwnuan-lua In,,,,r ur.-,1 PROPOSED BASEXIFNT LEVEL A-101 ( 9 pass ARCHITECTURE PLANNING v 534 EAST COOPER PROM EnOROUNDLEVEL POSED GROUND LEVEL A-1 02 i c — i M T C posy ARCHITECTURE+PLANNING OUTDOOR r \ / AREA '. / / o A..... ell RESIDENTIAL'. �CO ERCI UNIT r/ r / / r / b ,W n ' 534 EAST COOPER �' r .oa air. •.'a � u / i� / //i it r /// ar /aii ✓iir /iir; .✓r ra r /r /a </ri rr,.a/ /r s g a PR(,R(,SF.D MF.]L,NINE 1 EVEL Im-, PROPOSED MEZZANINE LEVEL A-103 pass ARCHITECTURE+PLANNING ? r •V \ i V' . ........ .: :•:•::•:':..:':': . }� ': .:•:'.•: ..'.':'.':':'.'.'.-.'.': ....,:':.:.:.:.:...:.:.:...:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.....:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. O u— '.':'.':'.':'.':' P M flN ET % ..RFSIDENTIP'. L '. UNIT a„on '� 534 EAST COOPER ' R :. / s mm�nr PRnK15Ef1 THIRII LEVF.1. �om,aumum uiaerwm,wxm noa m,ul.mi.urluum uenmw nunuu m»i.uumm�uun»i.uwnnnu.un� IRwu,m.-,1 T Kn- PROPOSED THIRD LEVGL A-104 gn L T CL posy ARCHITECTURE*PLANNING 1lLI i {u I • , O i \ % 534 EAST COOPER Y PROMS-D ROOF LEVEL PROPOSED ROOF LEVEL 0--.0 A-105 pass ARCHITECTURE PLAWRIG MECHAMU 534 EAST COOPER a POSED BASEMENT LEVEL i Y a-ias pass ARCHITECTURE PLANNING 534 EAST COOPER POSED GROUND LEVEL & pass ARCHITECTURE+PLANNING 0 OUT. DECX AREA / AH4: fiESIDENTIAL'...'''. ME n .. . / e %I$ E / 534 EAST COOPER g 1 -PROPSED MEZZANINE LEVEL I—ftOlIbSEDSA^E k—bWlE LEVEL S r� .41JR '•"� z CL gr A-108 a-g O'ai�filer rn r CL posy ARCHITECTURE+PLANNING ....... ------ ...... .......-... ....... ........... ........ .......... ... .......... ................. ..... ........ ....... ................. ........ ... ........ ... . ........ ........ ................................... .............. ........ .................... ........... ... Lluj .L`• 0 O 0 00 O a .......... ....................................... ........,..... ....... .,............... :............... ........ ..................................... ..... ...... O : : :...... O FREE.::.:.:.:.:.:: AI % k . ..................... RESIDENT 1 AL' UNIT w wtn° 534 EAST COOPER i r ....... a 5 w,t�w,l I'RnP(7tiE1)THIRD LEVEL. PRO POSED THIRD LEVEL I�.a liv.+Lle6 na LvnLlal R s9 A-109 P20 Exhibit A—Staff Findings, Growth Management 26.470.050. General requirements. 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 Findings: Adequate growth management allotments exist for the request. Staff finds this criterion is 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 Findings: There are no applicable adopted Master Plans for this property. This is a mixed-use building that includes residential and commercial uses, which conforms with and is compatible with the uses in the immediate block and the zone district in general. Staff finds this criterion is met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff Findings: The development meets all of the dimensional and use requirements of the Commercial Core (CC)zone district. Stafffinds this criterion is 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. Staff Findings: The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation approvals, including Conceptual Design Review. Staff finds this criterion is 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. Exhibit A—Staff Findings,Growth Management Page 1 of 5 P21 Staff Findings: This application proposes new commercial space and a new free-market residential unit. Because housing is proposed on-site, only the larger of the two mitigation requirements must be met; in this case the free-market residential unit. The expanded commercial space will require 0.29 FTEs as mitigation, calculated as follows: 292 sq ft net leasable on 2nd floor/1,000 sq ft = .292 0.292 *3.075 FTEs = .8979 FTEs generated 0.8979 FTEs * 60% mitigation rate = 0.54 FTEs The new free-market residential unit will require approximately 692 square feet of affordable housing net livable area, or 1.73 FTEs, as mitigation, calculated as follows: 2,307 sq ft FM unit *30% = 692.1 sq ft. 692.1 sq ft/400 sq ft (conversion rate to FTEs) = 1.73 FTEs The applicant proposes to mitigate with an on-site affordable housing unit of 705 sq ft, which meets the larger of the two requirements. Stafffinds this criterion is 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 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 Findings: As mentioned in Criterion 5, above, the applicant is proposing to mitigate with an on-site affordable housing, so only the larger of two housing mitigation requirements is needed. The new free-market residential unit is the largest requirement, which is met with the 705 sq ft on-site affordable housing unit. The applicant is proposing to deed restrict the unit at Category 3. Staff finds this criterion is 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. Exhibit A—Staff Findings,Growth Management Page 2 of 5 P22 Staff Findings: The addition of commercial space and a free-market residential unit will represent minimal additional demand on public infrastructure. The applicant has a trash/recycling area that can accommodate the addition, and the applicant has agreed to make any necessary upgrades related to water, sewer, and stormwater service. The applicant will need to upgrade the utility box that exists on site, which is a condition of approval. Staff finds this criterion is met. 26.470.070. Minor Planning and Zoning Commission applications. 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 Findings: The proposed unit complies with all applicable requirements outlined in the AHPCA Housing Guidelines. The Board of Directors reviewed the case and recommended approval of the proposal. Staff finds this criterion is 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 methods. Staff Findings: The applicant proposes utilizing an existing affordable housing unit as mitigation for the proposal. The existing unit was never required for affordable housing mitigation, and has an outdated deed-restriction that allows the unit to be removed at any time. The applicant will update the deed restriction to ensure it is permanently affordable. In addition, the applicant is expanding the unit to comply with the size requirements in the APCHA guidelines. Staff finds this criterion is 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. Exhibit A—Staff Findings,Growth Management Page 3 of 5 P23 Staff Findings: The proposed unit is entirely above grade. Staff finds this criterion is met. 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 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 Findings: The applicant proposes deed restricting the unit as a rental Category 3 unit. The APCHA Board of Directors reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. Staff finds this criterion is met. 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 Findings: The proposed development does not propose non-mitigation affordable housing. Staff finds this criterion is not applicable. 26.470.080. Major Planning and Zoning Commission applications. 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. Staff Findings: The proposed development meets the requirements of 26,470.050, as outlined above. Staff finds this criterion is met. 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. Exhibit A—Staff Findings,Growth Management Page 4 of 5 P24 Staff Findings: The proposed development meets the requirements of 26470.050, as outlined above. Staff finds this criterion is met. Exhibit A—Staff Findings,Growth Management Page 5 of 5 P25 Exhibit B—Staff Findings, Subdivision 26.480.050. Review standards. A development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and requirements: A. General requirements. 1. The proposed subdivision shall be compatible with the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space, as well as with any applicable adopted regulatory master plan. Staff Findings: There are no applicable adopted Master Plans for this property. This is a mixed-use building that includes residential and commercial uses, which conforms with and is compatible with the uses in the immediate block and the zone district in general. In addition, the approved Conceptual Commercial Design is consistent with the heights, bulk, open space, and architecture in the area. The applicant is providing on-site open space (public amenity space) and is required to pay an additional cash-in-lieu fee for space that is being removed to accommodate accessibility improvements, which was approved as part of their Conceptual Commercial Design Review. Stafffinds this criterion is met. 2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. Staff Findings: The development meets all of the dimensional and use requirements of the Commercial Core (CC) zone district and the area. Stafffinds this criterion is met. 3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff Findings: The development does not adversely affect future development in the area. It complies with zoning and is consistent with the other subdivisions in the area. Stafffinds this criterion is met. 4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. Staff Findings: The proposed subdivision complies with all applicable requirements of the Land Use Code. Stafffinds this criterion is met. B. Suitability of land for subdivision. 1. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. Exhibit B—Staff Findings, Subdivision Page 1 of 3 P26 2. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Findings: The proposed subdivision is located on a parcel suitable for the subdivision. There are no known hazards and no steep topography. In addition, the proposed subdivision is in a single mixed-use building so the spatial pattern is efficient. Existing services will be used, and any costs associated with upgrades to service, including to utility service will be borne by the applicant. Stafffinds this criterion is met. C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met: 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with an applicable adopted regulatory plan, Title 28, the municipal code, the existing, neighboring development areas and/or the goals of the community. 2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. Staff Findings: The proposed development meets the requirements of 26580. The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposal and conditions have been added to the Resolution to ensure all Engineering requirements are met. Staff finds this criterion is met. D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Section 26.470.070.5, Demolition or redevelopment of multi-family housing. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Findings: The proposed development meets the requirements of 26.470. Staff finds this criterion is met. E. School land dedication. Compliance with the School land dedication standards set forth at Chapter 26.620. Staff Findings: The applicant will comply with all required school land dedication requirements. A cash-in-lieu payment will be made as part of the building permit. Staff finds this criterion is met. F. Growth management approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-PUD) without first obtaining growth management Exhibit B—Staff Findings, Subdivision Page 2 of 3 P27 approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney. Staff Findings: The proposed development meets the requirements of the Growth Management Quota System, Chapter 26470. If the growth management requests are granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, this criterion will be met. . Exhibit B—Staff Findings, Subdivision Page 3 of 3 P28 Exhibit C - Boogies DRC Comments Building • This addition may cause the building to be reclassified from VB to V A. This will require the addition of fire rated structure and assemblies. • The addition at the commercial level will trigger the toilet rooms to meet ICC/ANSI for accessibility. • The plans do not show but the elevation does show a door to the street from the ADU and Free market unit. This door is required to the street fagade and will not be permitted to swing.into the ROW. Utilities • The applicant should do load calculations now and meet with the department to review in order to better prepare for the building permit • Due to a low roof (non-conforming with standards) above the existing transformer and Non-conformance to Electrical codes the existing transformer cannot be upsized in place. Most likely the transformers at Aspen Core/ Little Annies will not be able to be used by this developer as capacity is being reserved for those developments. Due to these constraints, a new transformer location may be the best option. Fire • All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met. 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). . Environmental Health • No Comments. Trash/Recycling area meets requirements. Parking • No Comments Zoning • The calculation for existing floor area is not accurate. sheet E-102 the stair at South East corner should not be included. • Storage in Basement: sheet A-101 Proposed floor area calculations, and sheet A-106 Net leasable: indicate for whom the storage is proposed, for example commercial or residential. • Proposed"exterior roof garden" not calculated as deck exemption. No access to the area is permitted. • Roof mechanical sheet A-105; no information provided. • Page 17 gives details on proposed square footage but not proposed floor area. Is the deck exemption for the free market unit really 470 pursuant sheet A-103? The deck exemption is based on allowable floor area per use, not including the bonus of the TDR. • Proposed elevations have the chimney which was not approved by HPC. See exhibit 2, HPC Resolution No. 16 (Series of 2012). Exhibit C—Boogies DRC Comments Page 1 of 4 P29 • Elevations (sheet A-112) and floor plan (sheet A109) indicate a door at the North elevation of the third floor free market unit. The roof at the third level has not been counted toward `deck exemption'. And the brick parapet shields the use. Is it intended for mechanical? Parks • Landscaping and Sidewalk Landscaped area: Landscaping in the public right of way will be subject to landscaping in the ROW requirements, Chapter 21.20. There shall be no plantings within the City ROW which are not approved by the City Parks Department and the Engineering Department. • 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 the demo and/or 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: 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 Engineering • 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 full 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 detention requirements covered under the FIL 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. Exhibit C—Boogies DRC Comments Page 2 of 4 P30 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 was in acceptable condition and did not require replacement. The curb and gutter was damaged and should be replaced. 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. APCHA • The APCHA Board reviewed the application at their regular meeting held April 3, 2013 and finds the proposal consistent with the provisions of the current code regarding the use of the existing one-bedroom unit for mitigation of the proposed commercial and residential expansion. If using the on-site unit for mitigation is approved, the development would be allotted one point to the overall GMQS score. Sanitation • 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. Exhibit C—Boogies DRC Comments Page 3 of 4 P31 o Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells. o 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. • 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. Exhibit C—Boogies DRC Comments Page 4 of 4 P32 Jessica Garrow From: Duffy Hurwin <duffyhurwin @g mail.com> Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 1:35 PM To: jessica.garrow @ci.aspen.co.us Cc: Warren Klug; chunke @vogellaw.com Subject: Boogies Building proposed expansion To: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission From: Ron and Duffy Hurwin We own a condominium #319 at Aspen Square 617 E. Cooper Ave. Our condo is on the 3rd floor of the Aspen Square Building exactly caddy corner to Boogies. The height increase will directly negatively impact our view of Red Mountain and beyond and we believe the height increase will also negatively impact our property value as well as values of other units in our building. For this reason we are very opposed to this project. We do not have a problem with the Boogies building as it is nor are we opposed to them tenting in the roof area during inclement weather. But we are very opposed to adding a story or more and the roof that would raise the height of the building by at least another 10-12 feet. As is, we have seen the view obstruction created by the new art museum and how this has blocked the view for afi he north facing Aspen Square units. We don't know how a project of this height was passed in the downtown area of lower height buildings and do not wish to see any more view obstructions. These taller buildings are not characteristic of historic Aspen architecture and are a dangerous trend and blight. Sincerely, Duffy and Ron Hurwin 1 MEMORANDUM P1 TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director FROM: Justin Barker, Planner RE: 204 S. Galena St. (previously the GAP) Growth Management Review—Public Hearing DATE: April 16, 2013 APPLICANT/OWNER: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 204 S. Galena LLC Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission grant Growth Management approval for "Expansion or REPRESENTATIVE: New Commercial Development". Haas Land Planning, LLC and Charles Cunniffe Architects. LOCATION: 204 S. Galena Street, Lots A, B, And C Block 94 City and Townsite of Aspen ' t, CURRENT ZONING: (CC) Zone District with an Historic District Overlay ¢ Y d d 1411""- p SUMMARY: The Applicant requests the F Planning and Zoning Commission approve Growth Management allotments for 1,700 square feet of new net leasable commercial space for the second level, and 4,500 .� ;, q; t square feet for future basement net �n leasable commercial space. 204 S. Galena Location LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission (P & Z) to redevelop the site: • Growth Management Review for Expansion or New Commercial Development for the construction of new commercial space, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.080.1 Page 1 of 4 P2 Expansion or New Commercial Development. (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal). PREVIOUS APPROVALS: In December 2012, HPC granted Final Major Development and Commercial Design Review approval for demolition of the existing structure and replacement with a new commercial building that occupies the full lot on the ground level and a portion of the second level. The approved proposal did not increase existing net leasable commercial.area. After Final approval, the program floor area was increased on the second floor and in the basement for specific tenants and received Amendment to Final Major Development and Commercial Design Review approval from HPC in February 2013. PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant received approval to demolish the existing one-story commercial building located at the corner of Hopkins Avenue and Galena Street and to redevelop the site with a new two-story commercial building with full basement. The existing property is located in the Commercial Core (CC) Historic District on a 9,030 square foot lot and is not deemed contributing to' the District. The existing building contains a net leasable commercial area of 11,319 square feet. The proposed total net leasable commercial area is 16,722 square feet. The applicant requests the following: ■ 1,700 square feet of additional net leasable space on the second level ■ 4,500 square feet of additional net leasable space in the basement STAFF COMMENTS: GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW: The Applicant is requesting growth management approval to obtain sufficient development allotments to construct the proposed project. The request and the project's compliance with the applicable review standards are discussed below: Growth Management Approval for the Expansion of Commercial Development. Only the new net leasable area (NLA) commercial space requested requires mitigation. The development of new NLA commercial space requires affordable housing mitigation at 60% of the employees generated by the new commercial. Additionally, basement and upper floor commercial space allows for a 25% reduction of the number of employees generated per square foot of new NLA space compared to at grade new net leasable space. Every 1,000 square feet of NLA ground level space is equal to 4.1 employees. Every 1,000 square feet of NLA basement or upper floor commercial space is equal to 3.075 employees (this includes the 25% reduction). The calculation for the amount of employees generated for the proposal is as follows: Second level: 1,700 sq. ft. / 1,000 sq. ft. = 1.07 1.07 * 3.075 employees per 1,000 sq. ft. = 5.23 FTE 204 S. Galena Street GMQS for Commercial Page 2 of 4 P3 Basement: 4,500 sq. ft. / 1,000 sq. ft. =4.5 4.5 * 3_.075 employees per 1,000 sq. ft. = 13.84 FTE Only 60% of employees generated by new commercial space must be mitigated. The calculation for the amount of employees that must be mitigated for is as follows: Second level: 5.23 FTE * 0.60 employee mitigation rate = 3.14 FTE Basement: 13.84 FTE * 0.60 employee mitigation rate= 8.30 FTE 3.14 + 8.30 = 11.44 FTE Total The applicant has proposed to mitigate for the 1,700 square feet of second level net leasable area by purchasing and extinguishing Category 2 Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit. The affordable housing mitigation requirements are based on a Category 4 income level. The conversion to Category 2 credits will be based on the amount of additional NLA included with any submitted building plans and calculated at the time of building permit review. The basement space currently has no committed tenants and is proposed as decommissioned space. The applicant has proposed two potential options of mitigation for when the space becomes usable: 1. Purchase and extinguish Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit 2. Provision of sufficient actual newly built or buy-down units deed-restricted If the applicant chooses to mitigate with Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit, the conversion to Category 2 credits will be based on the amount of additional NLA included with any submitted building plans and calculated at the time of building permit review. If the applicant chooses to mitigate with actual newly built or buy-down units, units must satisfy the required amount of FTE in accordance with the schedule outlined in Land Use Code Section 26,470.100.A.2., Employees housed. Any newly built or buy-down units must be approved by APCHA and deed-restricted in accordance with APCHA Guidelines at a Category 4 rate. The original HPC approval required cash-in-lieu mitigation for the 7 spaces that are not being replaced. The increase in net leasable commercial space generates the need for up to 6.2 additional parking spaces (one space per 1,000 square feet net leasable), requiring total mitigation for up to 13.2 spaces. Cash-in-lieu payment (available by right in the Aspen Infill Area) will be based on the amount of additional NLA included with any submitted building plans and calculated at the time of building permit. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Multiple city departments are concerned with the construction impacts on traffic and parking. Any landscaping work that occurs within the right-of-way, including tree removal and new planting, must be approved by Parks. The applicant has revised the 204 S. Galena Street GMQS for Commercial Page 3 of 4 P4 trash/recycling area program in response to Environmental Health comments. The revised, approved plan is attached as Exhibit C. The APCHA Board reviewed the application at their Regular Meeting held April 3, 2013 and recommends approval of the use of the Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit for any required mitigation, calculated at the time of building permit approval. RECOMMENDATION: In reviewing the proposal, Staff believes that the project is generally consistent with the goals of the AACP, as well as, the applicable review standards in the City Land Use Code. Staff recommends approval. RECOMMENDED MOTION(ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE): "I move to approve Resolution No. , Series of 2013, approving Growth Management review for the expansion of new NLA commercial space for the property located at 204 S. Galena Street." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A- Growth Management Review Criteria for Expansion or New Commercial Development, Staff Findings Exhibit B- DRC Comments Exhibit C-Revised trash/recycling area Exhibit D- APCHA Comments Exhibit E- Application 204 S. Galena Street GMQS for Commercial Page 4 of 4 P5 Resolution No. (SERIES OF 2013) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR NEW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 204 S. GALENA STREET, LOTS A, B, AND C, BLOCK 94, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2 73 7-073-40-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 204 s. Galena, LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning, LLC and Charles Cunniffe Architects requesting approval for Growth Management review for Expansion or New Commercial Development to construct a two-story commercial building; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requests approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission for Growth Management review for Expansion or New Commercial Development; and, WHEREAS, the property is located at 204 S. Galena Street and is zoned Commercial Core (CC) with an Historic District Overlay; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant received Final Major Development and Commercial Design Review approval from the Historic Preservation Commission on December 12, 2012 by Resolution#34, Series of 2012; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant received Amendment to Final Major Development and Commercial Design Review approval from the Historic Preservation Commission on February 13, 2013 by Resolution #3, Series of 2013 for an increase in floor area on the second floor and basement; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 16, 2013,the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. _, Series of 2013, by a _ to _ vote, approving Growth Management review for Expansion or New Commercial Development; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the 204 S. Galena Street Resolution No_, Series 2013 Page 1 of 5 P6 development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,COLORADO THAT: Section 1• Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves Growth Management review for Expansion or New Commercial Development, permitting an increase of net leasable commercial space, for basement and upper floors, not to exceed 6,200 square feet, subject to the following conditions. Section 2: 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. The construction management plan submitted as part of building permit shall address parking, staging, encroachments and construction traffic. The Applicant shall work with the Engineering Department and the Parks Department to ensure that any proposed right- of-way improvements, including sidewalks and landscaping, meet all applicable standards. Section 3: Affordable Housing The additional 6,200 square feet of new net leasable commercial space requires mitigation for 3.14 FTE from the upper floor and 8.3 FTE from the basement at the Category 4 level. The second level is 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. The actual form and amount of mitigation for the basement will be determined at the time of building permit review for converting the space to net leasable. Final net leasable numbers shall be verified at building permit review. Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit or the provision of affordable housing units in the form of actual newly built or buy- down units, acceptable to APCHA, shall be provided prior to issuance of a building permit. Section 4: Fire Mitigation All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met. 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). 204 S. Galena Street Resolution No_, Series 2013 Page 2 of 5 P7 Section 5: 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 6: Sanitation District Requirements 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 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. Elevator shaft drains must flow thru oil and sand interceptor. 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. 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. 204 S.Galena Street Resolution No Series 2013 Page 3 of 5 P8 Any 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 right-of-way above ASCD main sewer lines and within 3 feet vertically below the ACSD main sewer lines, which are located in Galena St. and the alley to the south. Section 7: Environmental Health The trash/recycling area was amended to accommodate the increase in net leasable area per Environmental Health requirements. The trash/recycling area must operate according to the Environmental Health approved space, as shown in Exhibit I. Any change in the operation of this space requires new approval from Environmental Health. Section 8: Exterior Lighting 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 9: Parks The applicant will be required to receive an approved tree removal permit per Municipal Code Chapter 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 the building permits. Mitigation for removals will be paid cash-in-lieu or on site per Municipal Code Chapter 13.20. Parks will approve a final landscape plan during the review of the tree removal permit based on the landscape estimates. Landscaping in the public right-of-way will be subject to the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 21.20. There shall be no plantings within the City right-of-way which are not approved by the City Parks Department and the Engineering Department. The applicant should plant a tree species recommended in the City of Aspen Arbor guide. Parks will work with the applicant on the final approved tree species. Irrigation will be required with a specific planting medium appropriate for tree growth. Planting specifications and details need to be approved by the City of Aspen Parks Department and City Engineering, The City of Aspen is requiring that the improvements to the right-of-way include the use of Silva Cell Technology and pavers placed within the planting zone, the area 5 feet off back of curb. Section 10: Parking Historic Preservation Commission approval required mitigation for 7 parking spaces on- site that are not being replaced. The additional 6,200 square feet requested generates 6.2 additional parking spaces, requiring mitigation for up to a total of 13.2 spaces. A cash-in- lieu payment will be assessed for actual mitigation required at the time of building permit submission and shall be paid at building permit issuance. Section 11: Impact Fees 204 S. Galena Street Resolution No Series 2013 Page 4 of 5 P9 The applicant shall pay all impact fees assessed at the time of building permit application submittal and paid at building permit issuance. Section 12: 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 or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein,unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 13: 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 14: 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 16th day of April, 2013. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Deb Quinn, Assistant City Attorney LJ Erspamer,Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 204 S. Galena Street Resolution No , Series 2013 Page 5 of 5 1310 EXHIBIT A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW CRITERIA 26.470.080.1. 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. 26.470.050.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 a total of 6,200 square feet of new net leasable commercial space. Sufficient allotments exist to accommodate the expansion for new commercial. Stafffinds that this criterion is 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 commercial building reflects the nature and purpose of the Commercial Core Zone District and is similar to the surrounding land uses. Stafffinds that this criterion is met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff Finding: The proposal is consistent with the Commercial Core Zone District that was in effect when the application was initially submitted (March 2012.) Stafffinds that this criterion is 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. Staff Finding: The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual HPC approval and Commercial Design Standard approval granted on August 8, 2012 via Resolution 18, Series of 2012. Stafffinds that this criterion is 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 P11 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 new NLA on the second level requires mitigation of 3.14 FTE's f(1,700/1,000)*3.075*0.60] and the NLA in the basement requires mitigation for 8.30 FTE's[(4,500/1,000)*3.075*0.60]. The total required mitigation is 11.44 FTE's. The applicant proposes to purchase and extinguish Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation for the second level new NLA. The applicant proposes two options as mitigation for the basement poor new NLA:purchase and extinguish Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit or actual newly built or buy-down units. The actual amount for any form of mitigation will be determined at the time of building permit based on the amount of NLA included in submitted plans. Staff finds that this criterion is 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 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: No new free market residential is proposed. Staff finds that this criterion is not applicable. 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: Staff finds that the proposal does not significantly increase the demand on public infrastructure over what currently exists. Stafffinds that this criterion is met. P12 EXHIBIT B DRC COMMENTS Engineering: 1) Drainage: a) 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 full review will be completed when the building permit is reviewed. b) 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 detention requirements covered under the FIL option should discharge directly to the City's stormwater infrastructure. However, this site can discharge to the alley, Impacts to the alley must be minimized. c) Staff was unable to determine whether or not the site is able to meet all the Drainage Principals: i) Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. ii) Use the entire site when planning for stormwater quality treatment. iii) Avoid unnecessary impervious area. iv) Reduce runoff rates and volumes to more closely match natural conditions. v) Integrate stormwater quality management and flood control. vi) Develop stormwater quality facilities that enhance the site, the community, and the environment. vii)Use a treatment train approach. viii) Design sustainable facilities that can be safely maintained. ix) Design and maintain facilities with public safety in mind. 2) Sidewalk and Curb and Gutter: a) General note: All sidewalk, curb and gutter must meet the Engineering Standards as outlined in Title 21. b) It is our understanding that the sidewalk will be demolished and replaced. Portions of the curb and gutter are damaged and require replacement. Should the curb or gutter be further damaged as a result of construction activities, it will be the property owner's responsibility to repair the damage as described in Title 21 3) Construction Management: a) 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). 4) Excavation Stabilization: a) 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. 5) Fee in Lieu: a) 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. P13 Parks: 1) Landscaping and Sidewalk Landscaped area: a) 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. b) The applicant should plant a tree species recommended in the City of Aspen Arbor guide. Parks will work with the applicant on the final approved tree species. c) Irrigation will be required with a specific planting medium appropriate for tree growth. d) Planting specifications and details need to be approved by the City of Aspen Parks Department and City Engineering. The City of Aspen is requiring that the improvements to the ROW include the use of Silva Cell Technology and pavers placed within the planting zone, the area 5 feet off back of curb. 2) Tree Permit: a) 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 the demo and/or 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. 3) Tree Protection: a) 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 ACSD: 1) Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. 2) 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. 3) On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD. 4) 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. 5) Oil and Sand separators are required for parking garages and vehicle maintenance establishments. i) Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells. P14 ii) Elevator shaft drains must flow thru o/s interceptor 6) Old service lines must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line according to specific ACSD requirements. 7) Below grade development may require installation of a pumping system. 8) 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. 9) 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. 10)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. 11)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. 12)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. 13)Soil Nails are not allowed in the public ROW above ASCD main sewer lines and within 3 feet vertically below the ACSD main sewer lines, which are located in Galena St. and the alley to the south. 14)We can comment on this application in greater detail once detailed plans have been submitted to the District. Environmental Health: Environmental Health originally approved the trash/recycle area during the HPC approval process for the Gap building. Environmental Health reviewed the application again during this most recent request for additional space and found the proposed area would not function properly given the new use and expanded space of the building. After working with the applicant to redesign the space, Environmental Health now grants approval based on the attached plan. The new plan allows space for four (4)rolling recycle bins and two (2) dumpsters, one for trash and one for cardboard recycling. The proposed space meets the dimension requirements of the Land Use Code, but the applicant has proposed a different alignment to the alleyway than what is required in the code. The proposed alignment reduces the opening to the trash/recycle area and will require the front bins to be removed by the waste hauler to provide access to the bins stored in back. P15 Zoning: 1) Sheet AOA: Net Leasable a) Proposed net leasable schedule states the common mechanical, electrical, circulation, etc. are exempt. The label should be `non-unit' or `common non-unit'. b) Proposed net leasable the dumbwaiter is two different sizes? And it is not exempt from net leasable. 2) Sheet A0.2 floor area existing and proposed: a) Existing main level, the stairs do not add to floor area. b) Proposed, the basement is not exempt as there is exposed wall at the exterior stair. c) Count the crawlspace in the basement(West,North and South). d) The exterior stair is considered `deck exemption', add it to the total (all three levels). e) The main level the mechanical chase from the basement.... Is a corridor?Not much of a mechanical chase. The `corridor' is only partially counted in floor area; why? f) The planter boxes on the deck count as deck; add the area to total. The dumbwaiter is counted in floor area on the main level; exempt on the top level. 3) AM —A3.2 Proposed elevation: a) Provide the proposed height of the elevator overrun -o PD U)� AMP U LLI �' , 1:2 SLOPE _ EGRESS STAIR C) 210 Q .x, DIN Ll £ ILL 31 DUMB z z m �._" WAITER m Z a$a 70 m � 3 a " v U y U) 5-115 Lu ' m J ' " I FOUR(4)96-GAL Q Imo' RECYCLING =SH GONTAINER5 U i �ERVICE!T AREA 5ERVIGE SINK d DRINKING FOUNTAIN W/TENANT FIN15H OUT _ IT, � r I I w w _ I ELEGTRIG o' O DISGONN TWO(2)4-TV CONTAINERS �Q 5'-6"X 6'-0"(WASTE MOMT) Q Z O Z W� � I UP RAMP W Q O m © DN 10" `fl ®1:12 SLOPE II I Q/� pj W V V Q. o ro `j N Q I I N OP5 METER —.----------- RECESS 3/8" 9'-9 1/S" 10'-0" 03/29/1 3 J .7 \ 61/H" A,6,1 PROPOSED 0 TRASH/SERVICE AREA MAIN LEVEL PLAN SK A2.2-1 114"=1'-0" 1� P17 MEMORANDUM TO: Justin Barker, Community Development Department FROM: Cindy Christensen, APCHA Operations Manager DATE: April 3, 2013 RE: REDEVELOPMENT OF 204 S. GALENA (aka the Gap Building) ISSUE: The applicant is proposing to redevelop the property of the former Gap building. BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing to demolition the existing and replace with a new building that will include a full basement, commercial on the first floor, and a restaurant to be located on the second level of the new structure. The second level is also to include outdoor seating. The applicant intends to add 1,700 square feet of net leasable area (NLA) for the restaurant space as well as building out up to 4,500 square feet of net leasable basement space. Second Floor Restaurant Space: This is additional space is located on the second floor, the 1,700 NLA generates an additional 5.23 FTE's (1,700 - 1,000 X 3.075 = 5.23), of which 60% is required for mitigation purposes (5.23 X 60% =3.14 FTE). 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 the second floor of 204 South Galena is 3.14 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 1.84 FTE credit requirements (3.14 FTE X $141,268 [the Category 4 fee] = $443,582; $443,582 $241,538 [the Category 2 fee] = 1.84 Category 2 FTE. The actual amount, however, will be based on the amount of additional NLA included within any submitted building plans at the time of building permit. Basement Space: The mitigation for the build-out of the future basement space of up to 4,500 square feet of NLA is calculated as follows: 4,500 _ 1,000 X3.075 = 13.84 FTE; 13.84 X 60% = 8.3 FTE at Category 4. 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 4.85 FTE credit requirements (8.3 FTE X $141,268 [the Category 4 fee] = $1,172,524; $1,172,524 _ $241,538 [the Category 2 fee] = 4.85 Category 2 FTE. Again, the actual amount will be based on the amount of additional NLA included within any submitted building plans at the time of building permit. Redevelopment of 204 S.Galena Page 1 P18 The table below shows the generated FTE's with the proposed build-out of the development at the 100% mitigation, 60% mitigation requirement based on the Code at the Category 4 level, and what the breakdown is by providing the available Category 2 Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits: 60% @ Conversion Floor 100% Category 4 to Category 2 2nd Floor 5.23 3.14 1.84 Basement 13.84 8.3 4.85 TOTAL 19.07 11.44 6.69 The applicant is proposing to mitigate at what is currently required in the Code. The difference in providing mitigation at the Category 2 60% level is a difference of 12.38 FTE's. RECOMMENDATION: That APCHA Board reviewed the application at their Regular Meeting held April 3, 2013 and recommends approval of the use of the Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits for any required mitigation calculated at the time of building permit approval. By allowing the use of the Certificates, however, the development is not allotted any points to the overall GMQS score. Once again, however, the community is relied upon to make up the difference of the shortfall of the generated FTE's. By allowing less than 100% mitigation, the community will need to add an additional 12.38 FTE's of affordable housing. Staff commends the applicant for proposing the use of the Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit program to be used for mitigation. Staff would recommend that any mitigation requirement be based on the stated amount in the Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines in effect at the time of building permit approval. Redevelopment of 204 S.Galena Page 2