Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.special.20140317 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING <LONG_MEETING_DATE> CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:00 PM I. Ordinance #51, Series of 2013 - Hotel Aspen PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 1 of 15 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Skadron and City Council FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director RE: Hotel Aspen, 110 W. Main Street – Consolidated PUD Review, Subdivision Review and Rezoning- Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2013. Public Hearing, continued from 1/13/14; 2/10/14; 2/24/14; and 3/10/14 MEETING DATE: March 17, 2014 APPLICANT /OWNER: Garmisch Lodging LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Stan Clauson Associates, Inc. LOCATION: 110 W. Main Street, corner of Main, Garmisch and Bleeker Streets CURRENT ZONING: Mixed Use along Main Street, R-6 (Medium Density Residential) along Bleeker Street, and Lodge Preservation Overlay over the entire 27,000 sf. parcel. SUMMARY: The Applicant requests approval to remodel the existing lodge, increase lodge units from 45 to 54 with an average unit size of 300 sf. The proposal includes 3 free market residential units in the form of 3 single family homes, and 3 onsite affordable housing units. The requested reviews include consolidated PUD, Subdivision, and Rezoning. Photo: Current image of Hotel Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The P & Z recommended denial of the proposed project by a vote of 3 -1, with 1 abstention. Staff Recommendation: Staff finds that the proposed revision to reduce the height of the westerly unit is successful, but is not enough of a change to meet the PUD review criteria. Staff included 2 options below that Staff finds meet the PUD review criteria regarding neighborhood context. P1 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 2 of 15 REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals to redevelop the existing lodge: • Consolidated PUD Review (Chapter 26.445, Planned Unit Development) to establish dimensional requirements. City Council is the final review authority. • Subdivision Review (Chapter 26.480, Subdivision) for a mixed use project to divide legal interests. City Council is the final review authority. • Rezoning Review (Chapter 26.310, Amendment to the Official Zone District Map) to adopt the PUD and to clean up the zoning of the back portion of the lot. City Council is the final review authority. • Fee Waiver (Chapter 26.610.100 Waiver of Fees) to waive the Transportation Demand Management/Air Quality fee and the Parks Development Fee. City Council is the final review authority. The applicant presented changes to the project during the public hearing on March 10th. These changes addressed Council’s concerns about the size and compatibility of the free market residential component of the project. The free market residential unit, the “westerly unit”, located adjacent to the relocated alley and a designated historic Victorian is proposed to be reduced in height and floor area by removing the third floor and enlarging the subgrade livable area. As a result, the onsite parking spaces are reduced from 15 spaces to 13 spaces. The proposed height of 25’ meets the underlying R-6 zone district height requirement. Slight changes were made to the lodge portion of the project by moving some of the third floor massing toward Main Street. The proposed numbers are below. Requested Variance Allowable in MU/LP zone districts Difference Maximum Cumulative Floor Area 36,500 sf (1.35:1) 36,350 sf • 27,000 sf floor area(1:1) • Ability to increase to 33,750 sf floor area (1.25:1) through Special Review • 9,350 sf floor area over the allowable. • 2,600 over the Special Review maximum Maximum Lodge Floor Area 24,200 sf 24,650 sf • 20,250 (0.75:1) • Ability to increase to 27,000 (1:1) through Special Review • 4,400 sf floor area over allowable • within the Special Review maximum Maximum Free Market Multi-family Housing Floor Area 10,500 sf total: about 3,500 sf per unit 9,700 sf 10,419 sf floor area 10,708 sf or 60% of total net livable area for lodge units and affordable housing units (a total of 17,365 17,847 sf nla for lodge units and ah units) Under allowable floor area as per the lodging Side yard Setback (Garmisch St.) 0’ 5’ 5’, granted by HPC during conceptual design approvals. P2 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 3 of 15 Maximum net livable unit size cap for Free Market Multi-family Housing 3 units @ 4,400 sf net livable sf per unit. 2,000 sf maximum net livable area (nla) per unit, ability to increase to 2,500 sf nla by landing a TDR 2,400 sf over the allowable without a TDR STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the applicant has addressed some of Council’s concerns related to the Bleeker Street façade by removing the third floor of one of the free market residential units and increasing the basement space. Staff appreciates that the applicant has been willing to work with Council to address their concerns while balancing the viability of the project. The main concern that Staff has voiced at all of the meetings is the overall floor area proposed for the site (now 36,350 reduced from 36,500), and specifically the impact of the massing on the Bleeker Street neighborhood. The applicant has successfully reduced one of the residences to meet the underlying R-6 zone district height requirements and to better relate to the context of the neighborhood. Option 1) Staff feels comfortable that the review criteria for PUD are met if the middle unit was also reduced in height. Staff can support maintaining the 26’9” – 31’ height of the corner residential unit due to the height of the multifamily residential building across Garmisch Street. Option 2) Another option for the middle residential unit is to lower the gable to 25’ at Bleeker Street for the front half the length of the building with the ability to step up to 31’ for the rear half of the building (31’ is the max height for the flat roof of the corner residential unit at the rear). Staff finds that a third floor at the rear of the middle unit allows the building to be perceived as a two story building along the street and at the same time permits the applicant to maintain a portion of a third floor. The mass would be setback 27’ (1/2 of the proposed 54’ building length) and pushed toward the hotel. Option 2 proposes a way to balance the trade-offs for the overall project without negatively impacting the neighborhood. Should Council decide to approve Option 2, Staff recommends that HPC address the roof forms during Final Design Review. Staff finds that this is a good project that will benefit the community by updating a lodge and providing 9 new lodge units. It is challenging to balance the trade-offs of the proposed redevelopment and the impacts on neighborhood context. It would be very unfortunate if the application fails because of a height difference of a few feet (R-6 requires 25’ and the proposal is for 26’9” along Bleeker Street and 31’ at the rear of the residences). On the other hand, it would be equally unfortunate if the 3 story residential units negatively impact the neighborhood. The applicant requests fee waivers as described below on page 13 of the Staff memo. Staff is supportive of either Option 1 or Option 2 and finds that the PUD review criteria are met in both options. P3 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 4 of 15 Following is the Staff memo from the previous public hearings: CHANGES FROM SECOND READING ON 1/13/14 The applicant has responded to Council’s concerns about the overall size of the project and the neighborhood context along Bleeker Street by reducing the number of free market residential units from 4 to 3 and breaking up the proposed 2 duplex buildings into 3 separate single family homes. The architecture of the 3 single family homes is more aligned with the residential character on Bleeker Street in form and site placement. Gable roofs are proposed and the height was reduced from 32’ to 26’9” to the 1/3 point and 31’ for the flat roof portion at the rear of the building (Mixed Use Zoning allows 28’ – 32’ max, and R6 zoning allows 25’ max). Staff recommends that the applicant work with HPC during Final design review to potentially lower the height of the free market residential to 28’ which is the permitted height in the Mixed Use Zone District and is closer to the maximum height in R6 Zone District. Staff recommends that HPC address floor to ceiling heights of the free market residential buildings which may result in a lower height. Staff is supportive of these changes and finds that the project is headed in a positive direction. Based on Council feedback, the lodge and affordable housing portions of the project are unchanged from second reading on January 13th. The floor area numbers proposed in January have not changed. Reducing the number of free market residential units from 4 to 3 increased the net livable area for each residential unit from 3,275 sf/ 3,675 sf to about 5,000 sf. The maximum unit size cap for the Mixed Use Zone District is 2,000 sf. STAFF COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the current proposal is responsive to Council’s concerns about the neighborhood context along Bleeker Street. The residential building form, spacing and gable roof are more aligned with the existing neighborhood and residential character. Staff remains concerned that the overall floor area is too big for the property and the neighborhood, and that the sizes of the free market residential units are too large for the Mixed Use Zone District without the landing of a TDR. Requiring TDRs is an important component of the TDR program. The net livable unit sizes are 3,000 sf over the allowable unit size cap in the Mixed Use Zone District. Even though the Bleeker Street side of the property is zoned R6 with the Lodge Preservation Overlay, Staff continues to refer to the Mixed Use Zone District net livable size cap because the R6 Zone District does not require a net livable calculation. For comparison the maximum allowable floor area for the R6 zoned portion of the lot, allows just less than 4,000 sf of total floor area that may be split between two dwelling units. The proposed three residences are 3,500 sf of floor area each for a total of 10,500 sf of floor area. As mentioned above, Staff is supportive of the change in density and general design of the free market residential component of the project. Staff finds that the proposed floor area and net livable unit sizes do not meet the review criteria attached as Exhibits A and B. Staff recommends continuation of the project to reduce the overall floor area. P4 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 5 of 15 Should Council decide to approve the proposed project, Staff recommends that Council include a recommendation to HPC for consideration of the following design items during Final Commercial Design and Final Major Development review (this is included in the attached draft ordinance): 1) Floor to ceiling heights shall be equal or taller on the first floor compared to the upper floors. 2) Front doors for all residences shall face Bleeker Street. 3) A front porch that meets the Residential Design Standards shall be provided on Bleeker Street for all residences. 4) Reduce the amount of glazing. 5) Restudy the third level “dormer” that breaks the roof plane and creates a large window spanning between the second and third floor. The applicant requests fee waivers as described below on page 13 of the Staff memo. THE FOLLOWING MEMO IS FROM THE 1/13/14 SECOND READING PACKET: CHANGES FROM FIRST READING: The applicant requested approval of “round” numbers for floor area and net livable/net leasable to provide a little float square footage in case there were discrepancies during the building permit review. The applicant has changed the numbers to remove the padding and to propose an increase to the lodge floor area to account for a covered third floor corridor. According to the applicant, the overall cumulative floor area remains the same due to reductions in the non-unit space calculations. Updated floor plans and elevations are not provided – the applicant states that the changes are interior only and do not affect the building mass. COUNCIL QUESTIONS DURING FIRST READING: 1. What type of neighborhood outreach was conducted? The applicant held a neighborhood meeting in accordance with the requirements of the Land Use Code prior to the first HPC public hearing. 2. What public comments have been received to date? During the HPC meeting on February 13th, Julie Ann Steele, a neighbor who lives at 121 Bleeker Street, commented that “…we are being swallowed up by this three story building. I realize they have to sell the townhouses to make this project viable but it will devalue our property.” At the HPC meeting on April 24th Ed Wolkenmuth, who lives in a historic 1888 home on Bleeker Street, stated “I fully support what I see on Main Street. Looking down Bleeker there are a lot of Victorians. The massing in the R-6 zoning is unbearable and overwhelming. If you are on Garmisch things look normal but if you turn the corner and look down Bleeker this massing is tremendous.” Julie Anna Steele also spoke at the April HPC meeting “her concern is that the gables have increased the height P5 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 6 of 15 to 37 feet…we came here because of the massing issue…This is a huge issue and this is the R-6 zone.” During the P&Z hearing on October 15th Steve Garcia (meeting minutes included as Exhibit H), who lives at the Victorians of Bleeker, spoke in favor of the project. He said that he “likes the lodge and would like to see it redeveloped.” He states their concerns are the impact to the neighborhood during construction and possible on-street parking issues. Garcia mentioned concerns about the design of the project: “the area is mostly Victorian with the exception of this project…they are excited that the free market units will drive up the value of their free market units.” The last concern was regarding the old pine tree that will need to be removed for the townhomes. Garcia also attended the November P&Z hearing. 3. Provide justification for the requested variances. To date, the applicant has not provided Staff with an explanation regarding the requested floor area and net livable area variances. 4. What is the allowable floor area for the property if it was entirely free market multifamily development? The Mixed Use zone district portion of the property (about 13, 500 sf) along Main Street is permitted 6,750 sf of floor area (0.5:1) for free market residential development with the ability to increase to 10,125 sf of floor area (0.75:1) if affordable housing equal to 100% of the free market residential floor area developed on the parcel. The R-6 zone district portion of the property (about 13,500 sf) along Bleeker Street is permitted 3,930 sf of floor area. The Lodge Preservation overlay zone district permits multifamily residential based on the single family residential floor area of the underlying zoning. 5. Explain how the free market residential and the lodge floor area/net livable numbers interrelate. The allowable free market multi-family housing is calculated based on the allowances in the Lodge Zone District which provides more free market residential floor area for smaller average lodge room sizes. The average lodge room size proposed is 300 sf net livable which provides for a free market residential floor area equivalent to 60% of the total lodge unit and affordable housing net livable area. The applicant proposes 17,365 sf of net livable area for lodge and affordable housing; therefore 10,419 sf of floor area is allowed for free market multi-family residential. The philosophy is based on incentivizing smaller lodge rooms by allowing more free market residential to offset costs. The floor area for free market residential is calculated based on the net livable of both the lodge units and the affordable housing units. Using net livable area takes into account the actual heated area of the lodge units and affordable housing units rather than basing the allowable free market residential calculation on non- unit lodging space such as hallways, spas, lounges, etc. The percentage of free market P6 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 7 of 15 residential is translated to floor area rather than net livable area because residential floor area can qualify for certain exemptions such as basement space, garages, etc. BACKGROUND: 110 W. Main Street is a 27,000 square foot lot developed as a small lodge, Hotel Aspen. According to the application, the lodge is about 21,344 square feet (sf) of floor area. The property spans from Main Street to Bleeker Street and encompasses a vacated alley. The south half of the property is located in the Main Street Historic District and is zoned MU Mixed Use. The north half of the property is located in the West End neighborhood and is zoned R-6 Residential. It was remodeled, expanded, condominiumized and converted from the Nugget Lodge to the Hotel Aspen in the 1980s. In 1997, the entire property was rezoned with the Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP). The Lodge Preservation Overlay allows some additional development options and flexibility for Aspen’s traditional small lodges, many of which have historically been located in residential neighborhoods. The overlay allows all dimensional requirements, including floor area and height, to be approved on a case by case basis through the planned unit development (PUD) process. TIMELINE OF PROJECT: Application for HPC: October, 2012 HPC hearing: January, 2013 HPC hearing: February, 2013 HPC hearing: March, 2013 HPC hearing and decision: approved April, 2013 Application for PUD/Sub./ Rezoning: June, 2013 P&Z hearing: scheduled for August, 2013 but postponed by applicant until September and then again until October. P&Z hearing and decision: denied November, 2013 City Council first reading: December 9, 2013 NEXT STEPS: The proposed project requires a major Growth Management Review, which has submittal dates on either February 15th or August 15th for each calendar year. The final review occurs after Growth Management Review when the project is considered by HPC for Final design approvals. Figure 1: Zone District Map. P7 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 8 of 15 PREVIOUS APPROVALS: Historic Preservation Commission: Because the project is partially located within the Main Street Historic District, HPC conducted Conceptual design reviews prior to the PUD/Subdivision/Rezoning application. Recognizing that the PUD/Subdivision/Rezoning Reviews overlap with conceptual design reviews, HPC was asked to focus their review on overall issues of architecture and compatibility with the surrounding area. After PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning and GMQS approvals, HPC will hold a Final design review hearing. HPC held four public hearings on the project, continuing each time for a restudy of the height and the footprint of the free market residential units along Bleeker Street. In general, there was little concern expressed with the design of the lodge portion of the development. A major point of debate was roof forms of the free market residential units regarding both height and compatibility with the neighborhood. The hotel and the residences were all initially proposed to have flat roofs. At the March 13th meeting, Staff and HPC members suggested that incorporating gable roof forms on the residences facing Bleeker Street would be more typical of the streetscape and would go a long way in helping that aspect of the project relate to context. The applicant returned to the board on April 24th with this amendment. However, throughout the review, the members in attendance at each hearing varied and the members who attended on April 24th had not given the direction to study gable roofs. Instead, they voted in favor of the flat roofed design that was proposed on March 13th, finding that it reduced the project impact by reducing the height. The overall height with the pitched roofs was actually taller than the flat roofs. HPC granted Conceptual Commercial Design and Conceptual Major Development resolution by a vote of 4-0. As part of their vote, HPC approved the free market residential units to reach a maximum height of 32’ where 28’ is allowed through Commercial Design review. HPC does not evaluate the dimensions of the project; rather the Board focuses on the exterior appearance. Staff did not include the actual floor area numbers of the project to HPC because floor area was not within HPC’s purview through Commercial Design Review. Minutes from all four meetings are attached. Planning & Zoning Commission: The P & Z heard the project twice: the first hearing was extensive background and explanation of the project by the applicant, and the second hearing included staff recommendations. The applicant requested a decision at the second hearing: P & Z voted 3-1-1 in denial of the project. Detailed minutes are attached. The majority of P&Z voiced concern over the size and configuration of the free market residential component of the project and were supportive of the lodge component of the project. Concerns were raised about parking in the right of way regarding head-in, angled, or parallel spaces, and providing a possible designated loading zone for the hotel. The proposal to rezone the R-6 portion of the property to Mixed Use was met with concern about the impacts of the rezoning on the residential neighborhood along Bleeker Street. P8 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 9 of 15 The project is subject to the Land Use Code in place on October 19, 2012 when the application was submitted/deemed complete for HPC review. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: The proposal before Council is complete demolition of all the existing structures except for a portion of the current entry lobby, and replacement with new lodge units, affordable housing and two free market multifamily buildings (in the form of 2 duplexes). The current lodge includes 45 lodge units (average size of 370 sf), a breakfast area, lobby, and 1 affordable housing unit with a grand total of 21, 344 sf of floor area. The proposal is for the following: 54 lodge units with an average of 300 sf net livable area, a café/bar area, lobby, 4 free market residential units, and 3 affordable housing units. The following is proposed for the site: • 1 lodge/affordable housing building along Main Street. o 54 lodge units, 300 sf net livable average size, no lock-offs o Café/bar for lodge guests o 3 affordable housing units: 1 studio and 2 1-bedroom units • 2 free market residential duplex buildings along Bleeker Street: total of 4 multi-family residential units • Subgrade parking garage accessed from the alley (west elevation) o 15 parking spaces • Public amenity area along Main Street. PUD REVIEW (EXHIBIT A): The purpose of Planned Unit Development (PUD) designation is to encourage flexibility and innovation in the development of land which: A. Promotes the purposes, goals and objectives of the Aspen Area Community Plan. B. Achieves a more desirable development pattern, a higher quality design and site planning, a greater variety in the type and character of development and a greater compatibility with existing and future surrounding land uses than would be possible through the strict application of the underlying zone district provisions. C. Preserves natural and man-made site features of historic, cultural or scenic value. D. Promotes more efficient use of land, public facilities and governmental services. E. Incorporates an appropriate level of public input to the planning process to ensure sensitivity to neighborhood and community goals and objectives. Through the PUD process the applicant requests approval to vary the maximum cumulative floor area for the entire site, maximum allowable floor area for the lodge use, maximum allowable floor area for the free market multi-family residential use, the free market multi-family unit size maximum, and setback requirements as described below. Floor Area analysis: The maximum cumulative floor area is calculated based on the underlying zoning – Mixed Use. The allowable lodge and affordable housing floor area is also calculated based on the underlying zoning. The allowable free market multi-family housing is calculated P9 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 10 of 15 based on the allowances in the Lodge Zone District which provides more free market residential floor area for smaller average lodge room sizes. The average lodge room size proposed is 300 sf net livable which provides for a free market residential floor area equivalent to 60% of the total lodge unit and affordable housing net livable area. The applicant proposes 17,365 sf of net livable area for lodge and affordable housing; therefore 10,419 sf of floor area is allowed for free market multi-family residential. Table 2: Floor Area analysis Floor Area Proposed Floor Area Allowable by right in MU/LP zone districts Difference Maximum Cumulative 36,500 sf (1.35:1) 27,000 sf floor area (1:1) ability to increase to 33,750 sf floor area (1.25:1) through Special Review 9,500 sf floor area over the allowable. 2,750 over the Special Review maximum Lodge 24,200 sf 20,250 (0.75:1) ability to increase to 27,000 (1:1) through Special Review 3,950 sf floor area over allowable, within the Special Review maximum Free Market Multi-family Housing 10,500 sf 10,419 sf floor area or 60% of total net livable area for lodge units and affordable housing units (a total of 17,365 sf nla for lodge units and ah units) 81 sf floor area over allowable Affordable Housing 2,000 sf Unlimited, but cannot exceed cumulative maximum FAR The Planning and Zoning Commission requested a comparison of the FAR of the free market residential component to a similar size lot in R-6 zone to better understand the relationship between the proposal and the Bleeker Street neighborhood. There are two scenarios for comparison: 1) Proposed Free Market Residential lot area: Staff drew an imaginary line from the property line along Garmisch Street to the rear of the free market residential rear yards to determine a “lot area” for the purpose of calculating floor area for a similar size lot in the R-6 zone district. Using this methodology, the lot area is 8,400 sf which permits only a single family residential home. The lot must be at least 9,000 sf to permit duplex development. The allowable floor area for a single family home is 3,576 sf. If a duplex was allowed on this lot size, the floor area would be 3,984 sf. 2) Traditional Residential lot area: Staff drew an imaginary line from the original alley (since relocated) to Bleeker Street to create a traditional west end lot configuration resulting in a 12,000 sf lot. Two single family residences are allowed with a total combined FAR of 4,260 sf. P10 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 11 of 15 In either scenario, the allowable floor area by right for a similar sized lot in R-6 (the underlying zoning) is around 4,000 – 4,200 sf. The applicant proposes 11,000 sf of floor area for free market residential use, which is slightly over the allowable floor area under the Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone District. Net Livable Analysis: The project proposes to utilize the Code incentive that allows smaller lodge rooms to develop more free market residential floor area to help drive the lodge redevelopment. The current Code allows a percentage of the lodge/affordable housing net livable area to be developed as free market multi-family housing based on average unit size. The existing lodge has an average unit size of 370 sf of net livable area. The applicant represents an average unit size of 300 sf of net livable area for the new lodge rooms. The affordable housing units meet minimum net livable area sizes for the type of unit at Category 1 or 2 level. The studio unit is 401 sf of net livable area, the two 1-bedroom units are 603 sf and 642 sf of net livable area. The free market multi-family residential units within the MU zone district have a maximum unit size cap of 2,000 sf of net livable area with the ability to increase to 2,500 sf of net livable area with a TDR. The 4 free market multi-family residential units all exceed the maximum unit size cap and require a variation through the PUD. Two units are proposed to be 3,625 sf of net livable area and two units are proposed to be 3,275 sf of net livable area. TDRs are not proposed to be landed. Setbacks: The applicant requests a reduced sideyard setback along Garmisch Street for the free market multi-family residential units. The required side yard is 5’ and 0’ is proposed. A front yard setback variance for the free market multi-family buildings is requested: 9’9” is proposed and 10’ is required. HPC was supportive of the setback variances. Height: HPC granted a height increase through Commercial Design Review from 28’ to 32’ for the free market multi-family buildings. The lodge/affordable housing building is proposed at 28’. Staff comments: Staff is supportive of the lodge redevelopment and understands that the free market residential portion of the project is needed to fund the lodge. The requested floor area increases, net livable increase, and setback reductions may be appropriate; however only with the condition that the overall architecture and massing of the free market multi-family housing is compatible with the neighborhood and adjacent landmarks. There is an appropriate balance that needs to be met between incentivizing lodge redevelopment and preserving the residential mass and scale of the Bleeker Street neighborhood. The PUD review criteria require a finding that the mass, bulk, height and architecture is compatible with the neighborhood and with surrounding historic landmarks. HPC held 4 public hearings to discuss the mass of the free market residential buildings (they did not have purview over the proposed floor area numbers for the project) and ultimately decided to support the project on a conceptual design level. In respect to HPC’s design approval, the Staff discussion is focused on the proposed variations from the zoning rather than the bulk and mass of the P11 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 12 of 15 project which was approved by HPC. Staff does still believe this issue needs more discussion, as the requested variances for the overall cumulative FAR and the free market residential unit sizes are significant. A comparison of the free market residential floor area proposed (11,000 sf) to the free market residential floor area that would be allowed in the R-6 zone district on a same size lot (3,576 sf) raises questions about compatibility with the surrounding R-6 neighborhood to the north of the subject property. City Council is asked to make a finding that the architecture, mass and scale are compatible with the neighborhood in accordance with the PUD review criteria. The proposed floor area for the entire site is significantly over the cumulative allowable floor area which creates challenges regarding compatibility with the neighborhood. In addition, the free market residential unit sizes (two units at 3,3625 sf and two units at 3,275 sf), which are not required or proposed to be short-term rentals, are significantly over the maximum cap of 2,000 square feet of net livable area allowed in the zone district. To date, the applicant has not expressed interest in purchasing Transferrable Development Rights (TDRs) to offset the net livable variance. The proposed changes from first reading are not significant enough to address Staff’s concerns. It is challenging to examine the trade-offs of a project that requests these types of variances without an explanation as to why the variances are needed. Staff cannot support these variations (maximum cumulative floor area and net livable residential unit size) and, based on the recommended findings of fact in Exhibit A, recommends continuation for further restudy. SUBDIVISION (EXHIBIT B): The applicant requests subdivision, which is required for mixed-use project with multiple residential units. Exhibit B addresses the review criteria. Staff comments: In Staff’s opinion the review criteria are met with the exception of criterion 26.480.050.A.1 that requires compatibility with “mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of density, height, bulk, architecture…” REZONING (EXHIBIT C): The purpose statement of the Lodge Preservation (LP) zone district is as follows: “…to provide for and to protect small lodge uses on properties historically used for lodge accommodations, to permit redevelopment of these properties to accommodate lodge and affordable housing uses, to provide uses accessory and normally associated with lodge and affordable housing development…to encourage development which is compatible with the neighborhood and respective of the manner in which the property has historically operated and to provide an incentive for upgrading existing lodges on site or onto adjacent properties.” The LP zone district offers incentives to redevelop and to preserve the existing small lodges, which includes flexibility of dimensional requirements through the adoption of a PUD. Floor area for each use typically refers to the underlying zoning, however for a lodging project the LP district allows the amount of free market residential floor area to be established pursuant to the P12 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 13 of 15 Lodge zone district as an incentive for redevelopment. The Lodge zone district relates the amount of free market residential floor area to the size of the lodge units – the smaller the lodge units, the more free market residential floor area permitted. LP overlay zoning is scattered throughout town and is typically found on small lodge properties such as the Boomerang Lodge, Christiana Lodge, St. Moritz Lodge, Hearthstone House, Hotel Lenado and Molly Gibson to name a few. Currently the property is zoned Mixed Use (MU) along Main Street and Medium Density Residential (R-6) zone district along Bleeker Street. The Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) zone district encompasses the entire property. While the MU zone district allows lodge and multi- family free market residential as permitted uses, neither are allowed in the R-6 zone district. The LP overlay permits lodge and multi-family free market residential uses, defines floor area allowances for a lodge project, and allows the adoption of a PUD to define dimensional requirements. Rezoning the rear parcel to MU, so that the entire property has one underlying zone district, simplifies the underlying zoning. With the current development and the proposed development, the R-6 zone district does not play a very active role as an underlying zone district since the proposal is for a mixed use development that is not permitted in R-6. Rezoning to MU does not permit more development on the parcel since the property is pursuing a PUD that will define dimensional standards. Staff has calculated the allowances in the MU district as the underlying zone for comparison since R-6 does not have dimensional requirements for the proposed uses. Furthermore, the free market residential component of the project is tied to the lodging component because the development is considered one project and the amount of free market residential is determined by the size of the lodge units. The project requires rezoning to adopt the PUD designation. Staff suggests that the entire property be rezoned to Mixed Use Zone District with the Lodge Preservation overlay to simplify the underlying zoning by removing the R-6 designation. Exhibit C addresses the review criteria. Staff comment: Rezoning the entire parcel to Mixed Use/ Lodge Preservation Overlay, does not significantly impact the allowed uses on the parcel. Staff finds that the review criteria are met to rezone the parcel to Mixed Use/Lodge Preservation Overlay. FEE WAIVERS: The applicant requests waiver of the Parks Development fee and the Transportation Demand Management/Air Quality fee. The Land Use Code authorizes Council to waive or to reduce impact fees as an economic incentive for lodging developments. Parks Development Fee ($5.45/new sf of floor area): Proposed floor area 36,500 – existing floor area 21,344 = 15,156 sf new floor area Total Parks Development Fee requested waiver: (15,156 * $5.45) = $82,600.20 Transportation Demand Management/ Air Quality Fee ($0.61/ new sf of floor area) P13 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 14 of 15 Proposed floor area 36,500 – existing floor area 21,344 = 15,156 sf new floor area Total TDM/Air Quality Fee requested waiver: (15,156 * $0.61) = $9,245.16 Grand total of waivers requested: $91,845.36 Staff comment: The Parks Department does not support the requested waiver for Park Development Fees because “the development includes improvements to the City’s right of way and an increase in lodging and free market space. Both of which will add impacts to public park space requiring additional financial maintenance responsibilities.” The Transportation Department does not support the requested waiver for TDM/ Air Quality Impact Fees because “this type of development typically increases transit usage, thus requiring additional fleet/facility maintenance and replacement responsibilities.” RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that City Council continue the hearing with direction for the applicant to reduce the net livable size of the free market residential units and reduce the overall cumulative floor area proposed for the site. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to continue Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2013 for a restudy of the free market residential units and overall cumulative floor area to better relate to the neighborhood.” CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:_____________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance #51, Series of 2013 Attachments: Exhibit A – Staff Findings, PUD Review Criteria [provided at first reading] Exhibit B – Staff Findings, Subdivision Review Criteria [provided at first reading] Exhibit C – Staff Findings, Rezoning Review Criteria [provided at first reading] Exhibit D – Development Review Committee Comments [provided at first reading] Exhibit E – Meeting Minutes from HPC January – April, 2013 [provided at first reading] Exhibit F – Draft Meeting Minutes from P&Z on November 19, 2013 [provided at first reading] Exhibit G – Application [provided at first reading] Exhibit H – Meeting Minutes from P&Z on October 15, 2013 [provided at second reading] Exhibit I – Letter from Stan Clauson proposing changes for Second Reading [provided at second reading] P14 I. 110 W. Main Street – Hotel Aspen Staff Memo 3/17/14 Page 15 of 15 Exhibit J – Staff Findings, UPDATED PUD Review Criteria Exhibit K – Staff Findings, UPDATED Subdivision Review Criteria Exhibit L – Staff Findings, UPDATED Rezoning Review Criteria Exhibit M - updated drawings dated 2/24/14 [provided on 2/24/14] Exhibit N – public letters submitted before 2/24/14 meeting [provided on 23/24/14] Exhibit O – public letters submitted after 2/24/14 meeting P15 I. Ordinance 51, Series 2013 Hotel Aspen Page 1 of 8 ORDINANCE N0.51, (SERIES OF 2013) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, SUBDIVISION AND REZONING APPROVAL FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE HOTEL ASPEN INCLUDING LODGING, MULTI-FAMILY FREE-MARKET RESIDENTIAL UNITS, AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 110 EAST MAIN STREET, HOTEL ASPEN CONDOMINIUMS, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2735-124-61-800 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Garmisch Lodging LLC represented by Stan Clauson Associates, Inc. requesting approval of a redevelopment of the existing lodge; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director determined pursuant to Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.445.030.B.2 that a Consolidated Conceptual and Final Planned Unit Development Review is permitted, WHEREAS, the property is zoned Mixed Use (MU), Medium Density Residential (R-6), Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) and Main Street Historic District Overlay; and, WHEREAS, the property is partially located within the Main Street Historic District and is not considered a contributing building to the integrity of the Historic District; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 24, 2013 the Historic Preservation Commission granted Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Conceptual Major Development Review approval via Resolution No. 14, Series of 2013; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 19, 2013 continued from October 15, 2013, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied Resolution No.21, Series of 2013, recommending the Aspen City Council not approve a PUD, Subdivision, and Rezoning; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended continuation of the application; and, WHEREAS, on December 9, 2013 the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 51, Series 2013, on First Reading by a four to zero (4 - 0) vote, approving with conditions a PUD, Subdivision and Rezoning of the Property; and, P16 I. Ordinance 51, Series 2013 Hotel Aspen Page 2 of 8 WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council 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 Historic Preservation Commission, the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL 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 City Council approves a PUD plan, Subdivision, and Rezoning of the underlying zone district to Mixed Use. The project is subject to all conditions included in Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) Resolution #14, Series of 2013 and requires Growth Management approvals, Final Commercial Design, and Final Major Development approval prior to the issuance of a development order. Council recommends that HPC consider the following during Final design reviews: 1) Front doors for all residences shall face Bleeker Street. 2) A front porch that meets the Residential Design Standards shall be provided on Bleeker Street for all residences. 3) Reduce the amount of glazing. 4) Restudy the third level “dormer” that breaks the roof plane and creates a large window spanning between the second and third floor. Section 2: PUD/ Subdivision Plat and Agreement The Applicant shall submit a Subdivision/PUD agreement (hereinafter “Agreement”) that meets the requirements of the Land Use Code within 180 days of approval. The 180 days shall commence upon the granting of Final Commercial Design and Final Major Development approvals by the Historic Preservation Commission. The recordation documents shall be submitted in accordance with the requirements of Section 26.490 Approval Documents of the Land Use Code. a. In accordance in Section 26.490.040, Approval Documents Content and Form, the following plans are required in the Approved Plan Set: 1. Final Commercial or Historic Design Review/ Architectural Character Plan. 2. Planned Development Project and Detail Review Plans. 3. Public Infrastructure Plan. P17 I. Ordinance 51, Series 2013 Hotel Aspen Page 3 of 8 b. In accordance with Section 26.490.050, Development Agreements, a Development Agreement shall be entered into with the City. c. In accordance with Section 26.490.060, Financial and Site Protection Requirements, the applicant shall provide a site protection guarantee and a site enhancement guarantee for $250,000 each. d. In accordance with Section 26.490.070, Performance Guarantees, the following guarantees are required in an amount equal to 150% of the current estimated cost of the improvement: 1. Landscape Guarantee. 2. Public Facilities and Public Infrastructure Guarantee for the relocation of the main Sewer line. 3. Storm Water and Drainage Improvements Guarantee. Section 3: Rezoning The entire subject property is hereby rezoned to the Mixed Use Zone District as the underlying zone district with the Lodge Preservation Overlay. The Main Street Historic District Overlay applies to the southern half of the property (measured 100 feet back from Main Street toward Bleeker Street). Section 4: Dimensional Requirements The approved dimensional requirements are as follows in Table 1: Table1: Dimensional Requirements Hotel Aspen PUD Dimensional Requirements Minimum lot size 27,000 Minimum lot area per dwelling unit n/a Maximum allowable density n/a Minimum lot width 110’ Minimum front yard (Main Street) - lodge 5’ Minimum front yard (Bleeker Street) – multi-family residential 10’ Minimum side yard (Garmisch) - lodge 5’ Minimum side yard (Garmisch) – multifamily residential 0’ Minimum side yard (alley) – free market residential 5’ Minimum rear yard n/a The property spans between two streets and does not have a rear yard. There are two front yards – one for lodge, and one for multi- family residential. Maximum site coverage 87% Maximum height - lodge 28’ Maximum height – multi-family residential Maximum height of 26’9” for the gable roof and 31’ for the flat roof (easterly two units) Maximum height of 25’ for the gable roof and 25’ for the flat roof (westerly unit) Minimum above grade distance between 10’ between affordable housing/lodge and P18 I. Ordinance 51, Series 2013 Hotel Aspen Page 4 of 8 buildings – lodge and multifamily residential multi-family residential Minimum above grade distance between buildings – multifamily residential 10’, as otherwise adjusted by HPC during final review, 7’10” between middle and westerly building Minimum percent open space 15% or 4,030 sf - reduction of public amenity approved by HPC via Resolution #14, Series of 2013 Trash access area 10’ d x 15’3” w (open to the sky) Cumulative Allowable Floor Area 36,350 sf Maximum free market multi-family residential floor area 9,700 sf Maximum net livable area for free market multi-family residential dwelling unit size 3 units @ 4,400 sf net livable per unit Maximum lodge floor area 24,650 sf Maximum affordable housing floor area 2,000 sf Minimum off-street parking spaces 13 subgrade parking spaces The maximum affordable housing floor area may be increased through growth management reviews with the condition that both the maximum cumulative floor area is not increased and the lodge floor area is not changed. Pursuant to Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.710.090.D.11(a)(5), as shown below, the allowable free market multi-family housing floor area is calculated based on the allowances in the Lodge Zone District which provides more free market residential floor area for smaller average lodge room sizes. The average lodge room size proposed is 300 sf net livable area which provides for a free market residential floor area equivalent to 60% of the total lodge unit and affordable housing net livable area. The applicant proposes approximately 17,847 sf of net livable area for lodge and affordable housing; therefore 10,708 sf of floor area is allowed for free market multi-family residential. The average individual lodge unit size is not permitted to be increased above 300 sf of net livable area without reducing the free market residential floor area allowed on the property in accordance with the chart below. Table 26.710.109.1 Allowable Free-Market Residential FAR Table 26.710.190.1 Average net livable area of individual lodge units on the parcel Free-market residential FAR as a percentage of total lodge unit and affordable housing net livable area Greater than 600 square feet 5% 600 square feet 15% 500 square feet 40% 400 square feet 50% P19 I. Ordinance 51, Series 2013 Hotel Aspen Page 5 of 8 300 square feet or less 60% When the average lodge unit size falls between the square footage categories, the allowable free-market multi-family or large lodge/timeshare unit floor area shall be determined by interpreting the above schedule proportionately. For example, a lodge project with an average unit size of 450 square feet shall be allowed to develop a free- market residential floor area up to 45% of the total lodge unit net livable area. This percentage of free-market residential FAR may not be otherwise established for a project through a planned unit development review. All non-unit space attributable to free-market residential or large lodge/timeshare units shall count towards the individual FAR allowance for free-market residential or large lodge/timeshare units. Section 6: 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. Drainage: The project shall meet 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 impervious areas will need to discharge at historic rates. Sidewalk/Curb/Gutter: All sidewalk curb and gutter shall meet the Engineering Standards of City of Aspen Municipal Code Title 21. The sidewalk shall be detached parallel to Garmisch Street. Excavation Stabilization: Due to the proximity of the neighboring property and the excavation of the building, an excavation stabilization plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department prior to building permit submittal. CMP: The Construction Management Plan shall describe mitigation for: parking, staging/encroachments, and truck traffic. The outbound bus land shall not be impacted by the proposed CMP. The adjacent bus stop shall not be impacted by the proposed CMP. On-street parking: All on street parking shall be parallel parking spaces in accordance with the Engineering Standards unless otherwise approved by the Engineering and Parking Departments. A minimum of two signed “loading zone” parking space for hotel guests is permitted with approval from the Parking Department. P20 I. Ordinance 51, Series 2013 Hotel Aspen Page 6 of 8 Section 7: Affordable Housing The project is required to mitigate for affordable housing and shall submit an application for growth management review pursuant to the Aspen Land Use Code after receiving PUD approval by City Council. The representations made in the PUD application do not constitute approval of affordable housing. Section 8: Environmental Health The trash enclosure area is approved with the condition that one of the following options is met: Option 1): The transformer is either not required or is located somewhere else on the property, not inside the trash enclosure; or Option 2): The transformer remains inside the trash enclosure and the Hotel Aspen agrees to not use a trash compactor (a permanent structure) and instead uses a 2 yard trash bin (moveable), leaving more room for recycle bins. The lodge shall have at a minimum 4 recycle bins. Section 9: Fire Mitigation This project shall meet all of the codes and requirements of the Aspen Fire Protection District. This includes, but is not limited to, Fire Department Access (International Fire Code 2009 Edition Section 503), and the installation of approved fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems (IFC 2009 Sections 903 and 907 as amended). Section 10: Utilities This project shall meet all applicable standards in the City of Aspen Municipal Code, specifically Title 25. Individual buildings shall have individual taps. The transformer shall be located on the subject property. Section 11: 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 shall 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 Sand separators are required for parking garages and vehicle maintenance establishments. Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells. Elevator shafts drains must flow thru o/s interceptor The applicant shall relocate the existing Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District owned main sanitary sewer line that currently runs through the middle of Block 58 at the applicant’s expense and in a manner that is acceptable to the District. 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. P21 I. Ordinance 51, Series 2013 Hotel Aspen Page 7 of 8 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. 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 shall 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. Where additional development would produce flows that would overwhelm the planned capacity of the existing collection system and or treatment facility, the development will be assessed fees to cover the costs of replacing the entire portion of the system that would be overwhelmed. The District would fund the costs of constructing reserve capacity in the area of concern (only for the material cost difference for larger line). A “Line Extension Request” and a “Collection System Agreement” are required for this application. The glycol heating and snow melt system must be designed to prohibit and discharge of glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have approved containment facilities. Section 12: 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. Irrigation of the street trees shall be required with a specific planting medium appropriate for tree growth. Tree removal permits shall be required before any tree is removed and prior to the issuance of a building permit for the project. The Parks Development Fee is hereby waived by City Council. Section 13: Transportation The applicant commits to a courtesy shuttle for lodge guests and to providing a bike rack and bicycles for lodge guests. The Transportation Demand Management Fee and the Air Quality Fee is hereby waived by City Council. Section 14: Parking The project shall reserve 3 parking spaces for the affordable housing units and a maximum of 3 parking spaces for the free market residential units in the subgrade parking garage. Section 15: Outdoor Lighting and Signage All outdoor lighting and all signage shall meet the requirements of the Aspen Municipal Code. P22 I. Ordinance 51, Series 2013 Hotel Aspen Page 8 of 8 Section 16: 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 17: This Ordinance 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 18: 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. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 9th day of December, 2013. _______________________________ Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this ___th day of _____________, 2014. _______________________________ Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________ _______________________________ Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk James R. True, City Attorney Exhibit A: approved plans and elevations P23 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 INDEX 1.INDEX 2.SITE PLAN 3.REVISED WEST END UNIT PLAN 4.REVISED WEST END UNIT PLAN 5.EAST END UNIT & MIDDLE UNIT PLANS 6.EAST END UNIT & MIDDLE UNIT PLANS 7.NORTHEAST PERSPECTIVE 8.GARMISCH PERSPECTIVE 9.NORTHWEST PERSPECTIVE 10.SOUTHEAST PERSPECTIVE 11.SOUTHWEST PERSPECTIVE 12.NORTH ELEVATION 13.EAST ELEVATION 14.SOUTH ELEVATION 15.STREET VIEWS 16.EAST HOTEL STREET VIEWS 17.HOTEL PERSPECTIVES 18.HOTEL PERSPECTIVES 19.HOTEL LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 20.HOTEL LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN 21.HOTEL LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN 22.HOTEL LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN INDEX 1 HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study MARCH 13, 2014 P2 4 I. P2 5 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 3 MAIN LEVEL PLAN Scale: 1/4"= 1'-0" UPPER LEVEL PLAN Scale: 1/4"= 1'-0" HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study REVISED WEST END UNIT PLAN MARCH 13, 2014 P2 6 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 REVISED WEST END UNIT PLAN 4 ROOF PLAN Scale: 1/4"= 1'-0" HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study MARCH 13, 2014 NOTE: REFER TO SHEET 19 FOR LOWER LEVEL WEST END UNIT BASEMENT PLAN P2 7 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 5 LOWER LEVEL PLAN Scale: 1/4"= 1'-0" FIRST LEVEL PLAN Scale: 1/4"= 1'-0" EAST END UNIT & MIDDLE UNIT PLANS HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study EAST END UNIT & MIDDLE UNIT PLANS ROUGH GROSS S.F. TAKEOFFS LOWER LEVEL:1,400 S.F. FIRST LEVEL:1,200 S.F. SECOND LEVEL:1,400 S.F. THIRD LEVEL:830 S.F. TOTAL GROSS:4,830 S.F. DECK AREA:150 S.F. TARGET F.A.R. 3,500 S.F. MARCH 13, 2014 P2 8 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 6 SECOND LEVEL PLAN Scale: 1/4"= 1'-0" THIRD LEVEL PLAN Scale: 1/4"= 1'-0" EAST END UNIT & MIDDLE UNIT PLANS HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study EAST END UNIT & MIDDLE UNIT PLANS ROUGH GROSS S.F. TAKEOFFS LOWER LEVEL:1,400 S.F. FIRST LEVEL:1,200 S.F. SECOND LEVEL:1,400 S.F. THIRD LEVEL:830 S.F. TOTAL GROSS:4,830 S.F. DECK AREA:150 S.F. TARGET F.A.R. 3,500 S.F. MARCH 13, 2014 P2 9 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 NORTHEAST PERSPECTIVE 7 HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study MARCH 13, 2014 P3 0 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 8GARMISCH STREET PERSPECTIVE HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study MARCH 13, 2014 P3 1 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 9NORTHWEST CORNER PERSPECTIVE HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study MARCH 13, 2014 P3 2 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 10SOUTHEAST CORNER PERSPECTIVE HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study MARCH 13, 2014 P3 3 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 11SOUTHWEST CORNER PERSPECTIVE HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study MARCH 13, 2014 P3 4 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 12NORTH BUILDING ELEVATION HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study 2 6 ' - 9 " 2 6 ' - 9 " 25 ' - 0 " 22 ' - 0 " 33 ' - 0 " 35 ' - 0 " 35 ' - 0 " MARCH 13, 2014 FIRST LEVEL PLAN 100'-0" SECOND LEVEL PLAN 110'-6" THIRD LEVEL PLAN (EAST & MIDDLE UNIT) 120'-6" LOWER (PARKING) LEVEL 90'-0" 11 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " SECOND LEVEL PLAN (WEST UNIT) 111'-0" FIRST LEVEL PLAN 100'-0" 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 6 " P3 5 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 13EAST BUILDING ELEVATION HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study 35 ' - 0 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 2 6 ' - 0 " 2' - 0 " MARCH 13, 2014 FIRST LEVEL PLAN 100'-0" SECOND LEVEL PLAN 110'-6" THIRD LEVEL PLAN 120'-6" LOWER (PARKING) LEVEL 90'-0" 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 6 " 10 ' - 0 " P3 6 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 14SOUTH BUILDING ELEVATION HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study 25 ' - 0 " 3 5 ' - 0 " 26 ' - 0 " 3 3 ' - 0 " 31 ' - 0 " 35 ' - 0 " MARCH 13, 2014 FIRST LEVEL PLAN 100'-0" SECOND LEVEL PLAN 110'-6" THIRD LEVEL PLAN (EAST & MIDDLE UNIT) 120'-6" LOWER (PARKING) LEVEL 90'-0" 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 6 " 10 ' - 0 " SECOND LEVEL PLAN (WEST UNIT) 111'-0" FIRST LEVEL PLAN 100'-0" 1 1 ' - 0 " P3 7 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 15STREET VIEWS HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study MARCH 13, 2014 36 ' - 4 " 35 ' - 0 " 3 3 ' - 0 " 31 ' - 2 " P3 8 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 16EAST HOTEL STREET VIEWS HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study PREVIOUS HOTEL MASSING PROPOSED HOTEL MASSING 18 ' - 6 " 10 ' - 0 " 23 ' - 0 " 2 9 ' - 9 " 29 ' - 0 " 35 ' - 0 " 2 0 ' - 0 " MARCH 13, 2014 3 5 ' - 0 " 2 0 ' - 0 " PREVIOUS HOTEL MASSING FIRST LEVEL PLAN 100'-0" SECOND LEVEL PLAN 109'-0" THIRD LEVEL PLAN 118'-0" ROOF LEVEL PLAN 127'-0" 9' - 0 " 9' - 0 " 9 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " LOWER PARKING PLAN LEVEL 90'-0" HOTEL HIGH POINT 129'-9" TOP OF PARAPET 128'-0" 1 8 ' - 6 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 23 ' - 0 " 29 ' - 9 " 2 9 ' - 0 " FIRST LEVEL PLAN 100'-0" SECOND LEVEL PLAN 109'-0" THIRD LEVEL PLAN 118'-0" ROOF LEVEL PLAN 127'-0" 9 ' - 0 " 9' - 0 " 9' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " LOWER PARKING PLAN LEVEL 90'-0" P3 9 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 17HOTEL PERSPECTIVE VIEWS HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study PREVIOUS HOTEL MASSING PROPOSED HOTEL MASSING MARCH 13, 2014 P4 0 I. C BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.2O11 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (T) 970 / 325 4755 ( F ) 970 / 920 2950 18HOTEL PERSPECTIVE VIEWS HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study PREVIOUS HOTEL MASSING PROPOSED HOTEL MASSING MARCH 13, 2014 P4 1 I. UP UP UP ELEVATOR GARAGE 15 PARKING SPACES LIGHT WELL (TYP.) RAMP UP EL E C T R I C A L MECHANICAL STORAGE / ELEVATOR MECHANICAL STORAGE AREA OF RESCUE ASSISTANCE AREA OF RESCUE ASSISTANCE EXISTING / REMAINING BUILDING FOOTPRINT PROPERTY LINE HOUSEKEEPING/ LAUNDRY EMPLOYEE LOUNGE & LOCKERS PROPERTY LINE 28 ' - 6" 10' - 0" 27' - 0" 10' - 0" 27' - 0" 4' - 0" 5' - 8" MECHANICALBED ROOM #5 LAUNDRY MUD ROOM BUNK ROOM BATHROOMFAMILY/GAME ROOM CLO. BATH RM. BUNK BUNK REFER PLAN SHEET 5 REFER PLAN SHEET 5 BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.cccc 2014201420142014( T ) 9 7 0 / 9 2 5 4 7 5 5 ( F ) 9 7 0 / 9 2 0 2 9 5 0 6 0 5 E A S T M A I N S T R E E T A S P E N, C O L O R A D O 8 1 6 1 1 03.13.2014 3/13/2014 1:15:27 PM HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study REVISED HOTEL SUBMISSION : LOWER LEVEL 19 SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN - LL1 P4 2 I. UP UP DN DN 4' - 6"4' - 2"16' - 0" 40' - 6" 4' - 0" 16' - 0" 14' - 4" 14' - 3" 14' - 3 " 14' - 4" 5' - 7" 8' - 8" 5' - 7" 20' - 8" 5' - 2" 20' - 8" 28' - 0"5' - 0"7' - 0"14' - 9"5' - 4" GUEST ROOM 108 GUEST ROOM 106 GUEST ROOM 104 GUEST ROOM 102 GUEST ROOM 105 GUEST ROOM 107 MEETING KITCHEN RESTAURANT / BAR LOBBY / FRONT DESK HSKP / STORAGE / MECH ELEVATOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT ADA GUEST ROOM 115 GUEST ROOM 116 GUEST ROOM 117 GUEST ROOM 118 RAMP DN YARD YARD YARD YARD AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT TRASH / RECYCLING/ UTILITY COLD STORAGE GM OFFICE CLOSET RESTROOMRESTROOMOFFICE ADMIN OFFICE LUGGAGE STORAGE FILES / COPY/ KITCHENETTE ICE / VENDING 75' - 6 1/2"5' - 3"7' - 4"9' - 2"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6" 5' - 1" 9' - 8"6' - 1"11' - 8"0' - 9" DRY STORAGE 3' - 2" 112' - 2" 24' - 3" 9' - 8 " 5' - 4" 4' - 5" 16' - 3" 7' - 9 3/4" PROPERTY LINE STUDIO 401 NET SF LIGHT WELL (TYP.) CANOPY ABOVE CANOPY COLUMNS (TYP.) METAL SCREENS (TYP.)AHU PATIO 1 BEDROOM 603 NET SF 1 0' - 0" 6' - 5 1/4" 28' - 6 " 9' - 9" 26' - 0 " 14' - 0" 21' - 3" GUESTGUESTGUESTGUEST ROOMROOMROOMROOM 103 6' - 2"15' - 3" A4017 --- - 6' - 1" 14' - 7" REFER PLAN SHEET 5 REFER PLAN SHEET 5 REFER PLAN SHEET 3 DECK ABOVE NORTH BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.cccc 2014201420142014( T ) 9 7 0 / 9 2 5 4 7 5 5 ( F ) 9 7 0 / 9 2 0 2 9 5 0 6 0 5 E A S T M A I N S T R E E T A S P E N, C O L O R A D O 8 1 6 1 1 03.13.2014 3/13/2014 12:14:09 PM HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study REVISED HOTEL SUBMISSION : LEVEL 1 20 SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN - L1 P4 3 I. DN DNUP UP 4' - 11" 18' - 1" 9' - 7" 5' - 4 " 9' - 7 " 17' - 5" 21' - 1 " 13' - 6" 13' - 6" 21' - 3"21' - 5"5' - 1"28' - 0"7' - 11" 16' - 0"4' - 2"4' - 6"0' - 9"13' - 9"13' - 9"5' - 0"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"9' - 2"4' - 4"83' - 9 1/2" GUEST ROOM 211 ADA GUEST ROOM 213 ADA GUEST ROOM 212 ADA GUEST ROOM 210 GUEST ROOM 208 GUEST ROOM 209 GUEST ROOM 207 GUEST ROOM 206 GUEST ROOM 204 GUEST ROOM 205 GUEST ROOM 203 GUEST ROOM 202 GUEST ROOM 215 GUEST ROOM 216 GUEST ROOM 217 GUEST ROOM 218 GUEST ROOM 219 GUEST ROOM 220 ELEVATOR 12' - 6" 5' - 6" 9' - 8" 5' - 4 " 27' - 0" 1' - 9 1/4" 19 ' - 11" 4' - 11" 13' - 6" GUEST ROOM 201 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT AREA OF RESCUE ASSISTANCE AREA OF RESCUE ASSISTANCE HSKP 13' - 0" GUEST ROOM 214C GUEST ROOM 214B GUEST ROOM 214A 14' - 4" 14' - 3" 14' - 3" 14' - 4 " 5' - 7" 8' - 8" 5' - 7" 20' - 8" 5' - 2" 20' - 8" 5' - 8 3 /4" PROPERTY LINE 1 BR 643 NET SF 16' - 5 1/4" 28' - 6" 15' - 0 " 20' - 8" 18' - 7 " 7' - 3" CANOPY ABOVE CANOPY COLUMNS (TYP.) 13' - 7"5' - 11" REFER PLAN SHEET 6 REFER PLAN SHEET 6 REFER PLAN SHEET 3 DECK NORTH BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.cccc 2014201420142014( T ) 9 7 0 / 9 2 5 4 7 5 5 ( F ) 9 7 0 / 9 2 0 2 9 5 0 6 0 5 E A S T M A I N S T R E E T A S P E N, C O L O R A D O 8 1 6 1 1 03.13.2014 3/13/2014 12:14:10 PM HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study REVISED HOTEL SUBMISSION : LEVEL 2 21 SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN - L2 P4 4 I. DN DN 33' - 1"5' - 1"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"13' - 6"9' - 2"4' - 4"83' - 9 1/2" 14' - 4" 14' - 3 " 14' - 3" 14' - 4 " 5' - 7" 8' - 8" 5' - 7" 20' - 8" 5' - 2" 20' - 8" 5' - 8 3/4" 13' - 9"21' - 11"5' - 2"21' - 5"9' - 1"4' - 11" 1' - 9 1/4" 19' - 1 1" 18' - 5" 19' - 10" 20' - 8" 5' - 2" 20' - 8 " GUEST ROOM 303 GUEST ROOM 302 GUEST ROOM 304 GUEST ROOM 305 GUEST ROOM 307 GUEST ROOM 306 GUEST ROOM 308 GUEST ROOM 309 GUEST ROOM 310 GUEST ROOM 311 GUEST ROOM 312 GUEST ROOM 313 GUEST ROOM 314 GUEST ROOM 315 GUEST ROOM 316 GUEST ROOM 317 GUEST ROOM 318 GUEST ROOM 319 GUEST ROOM 320 ELEVATOR GUEST ROOM 301 12' - 6" 12 ' - 3 5 /8 " 12' - 4 13 /16" 12' - 4 13/16 " 12' - 4 13/16" HS K P / S T O R A G E IC E / V E N D I N G AREA OF RESCUE ASSISTANCE AREA OF RESCUE ASSISTANCE PROPERTY LINE 19' - 4" 14' - 5 1/4" 17' - 6" 8' - 1" GUEST ROOM 321 9' - 1" REFER PLAN SHEET 6 REFER PLAN SHEET 6 REFER TO ROOF PLAN SHEET 4 NORTH BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.cccc 2014201420142014( T ) 9 7 0 / 9 2 5 4 7 5 5 ( F ) 9 7 0 / 9 2 0 2 9 5 0 6 0 5 E A S T M A I N S T R E E T A S P E N, C O L O R A D O 8 1 6 1 1 03.13.2014 3/13/2014 12:01:44 PM HOTEL ASPEN: Revised Residential Design Study REVISED HOTEL SUBMISSION : LEVEL 3 22 SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN - L3 P4 5 I. P46 I. P47 I. P48 I. P49 I. P50 I. P51 I. P52 I. P53 I. P54 I. P55 I. P56 I. P57 I. P58 I. P59 I. P60 I. P61 I. P62 I. P63 I. P64 I. P65 I. P66 I. P67 I. P68 I. P69 I. P70 I. P71 I. P72 I. P73 I. P74 I. P75 I. P76 I. P77 I. P78 I. P79 I. P80 I. P81 I. P82 I. P83 I.