Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20150527 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING May 27, 2015 5:00 PM City Council Meeting Room 130 S. Galena St. 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. SITE VISITS A. Please visit 333 W. Bleeker on your own II. INTRODUCTION (15 MIN.) A. Roll call B. Approval of minutes April 22, 2015 C. Public Comments D. Commissioner member comments E. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) F. Project Monitoring G. Staff comments H. Certificate of No Negative Effect issued I. Submit public notice for agenda items III. OLD BUSINESS A. 834 W. Hallam Street – Conceptual Historic Major Development, Relocation, Variances, Residential Design Standard Review, Establishment of Affordable Housing Credits, Growth Management, CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO JUNE 24 B. 61 MEADOWS ROAD- Minor, PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM MAY 13TH (5:10) IV. NEW BUSINESS A. 101 W. Main Street aka Molly Gibson and Lot 2 of 125 W. Main St. Historic Landmark Lot Split– Planned Development Detailed Review, Final Major Development, and Commercial Design Final Review, PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM APRIL 8TH (5:40) B. 333 W. BLEEKER STREET- Minor Development, On-Site Relocation and Variances (6:40) V. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: Resolution #17, 2015 TYPICAL PROCEEDING- 1 HOUR, 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA ITEM, NEW BUSINESS Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) Staff presentation ( 5 minutes ) Board questions and clarifications ( 5 minutes ) Applicant presentation ( 20 minutes ) Board questions and clarifications ( 5 minutes ) Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) ( 5 minutes ) Applicant Rebuttal Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed (5 minutes ) HPC discussion ( 15 minutes ) Motion ( 5 minutes ) *Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met. No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of the members of the commission then present and voting. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 2015 1 Chairperson, Willis Pember called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were Patrick Sagal, John Whipple, Nora Berko, Jim DeFrancia, Bob Blaich, Gretchen Greenwood and Eric Sechrist. Sallie Golden was absent. Staff present: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Disclosure: Bob will recuse himself on 530 W. Hallam; John said he will recuse himself on 530 W. Hallam due to conflicts. MOTION: Bob moved to approve the minutes from April 8th; second by Jim. All in favor, motion carried. Wagner Park – Conceptual Major Development, Planned Development Project Review, Growth Management, Conditional Use and Mountain View Plane Debbie said the affidavits are in order, Exhibit I MOTION: Jim moved to continue Wagner Park public hearing until June 24 th ; second by Willis. All in favor, motion carried. 609 W. Smuggler Street – Minor Development, On-Site Relocation and Variances, Public Hearing Debbie said the affidavits of posting are in order and the applicant can proceed, Exhibit I Exhibit II – new elevations Sarah Rosenberg, planner presented Sarah said this is a wood frame residence built in 1888 and there have been some alternations in the past. The applicant is proposing to construct a basement under the existing structure and making some exterior modifications. They are proposing to convert the existing historic shed into a garage and they also seek to raise the elevation of the building to accommodate for the poor drainage on the site. Four dormers are proposed P1 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 2015 2 to be added to the rear of the house; change some of the non-original windows and doors. The garage would be stabilized and brought forward out of the right-of-way. They will restore the brackets under the bay window on the front façade and they are proposing to change the fence in the front yard. The concerns staff has are with the shed conversion; the amount of dormers proposed on the back of the house; some site issues and details on the restoration efforts. The applicant addressed the concerns. The foundation will be a neutral color with shrubs planted in front of the flashing. The foundation will be raised 8 inches for the new basement and new drainage. There is a skirt that goes around the front façade and that will be continued around the entire house so that it is consistent. Staff recommended restudying the fenestration of the south façade as the doors and windows are confusing. The windows on the upper level cut into the trim. The applicant said they will line up the doors and windows. The window on the east elevation is in an awkward location and maybe that can be more centered. Sarah said the applicant proposed gable dormers. Gable dormers are not a feature of a miner’s cottage. The applicant said they would remove them; however, they added a skylight. Our guidelines do not support skylights. Sarah said the two shed dormers on the back of the house are out of scale and the design doesn’t work well. The applicant desires to keep the size of the dormers stating that it accommodated the bedroom better and it created livable space. Staff approves the shed dormers because they are out of view on the east and west facades. On the front bay brackets were removed and we are recommending they be added back on in the style that fits the design of the house. The applicant said they would install three brackets and the details will be submitted to staff. Staff asked that the porch be restored back to what it looked like. The applicant said there is no work being done to the porch itself so they are not restoring the porch. Because there are no bonuses we cannot force the restoration. Regarding the fence we have asked that the transition be improved. The applicant said the fence in front will remain and posts replaced. We will need pictures or images of what the posts look like. There will also be fencing around the perimeter and between the two properties and we will also need images of that fencing. P2 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 2015 3 Sarah said the shed on the back is proposed to be converted to a garage placed on a new foundation and repaired as needed. The north façade would be removed. We are concerned about the shed being turned into a garage as the addition alters the form and there is loss of the historic fabric. If the shed is moved how will it be stabilized? The applicant is proposing the conversion and they will modify the shed to help improve its stability and provide long term maintenance and it will be moved out of the right-of-way. Staff said the ideal situation would be a carport but that wouldn’t resolve the sheds deterioration and the rotting. If HPC approves this we would also recommend a $15,000 bond and other conditions. Sarah said the applicant is willing to work with staff, HPC and the monitor on what could be resolved. Amy said this property has had numerous changes and I wouldn’t say the barn is 100% pristine. There has been a concrete floor poured into it and there are siding issues and a lot of structural changes inside. Eric inquired about the chimney. Sarah said the chimney is not historic and it will be removed. Gavin Brooke and Kelleigh Condon - Land & Shelter Gavin said the spruce tree will be preserved and the lilac is proposed to be moved. The brackets will be replaced with historic wood brackets. We will continue the skirt board all around the house and it offers a transition to the new foundation. The shed has been subject to numerous modifications. There would be an extension off the north wall of the shed to accommodate a car. The fencing will be replaced with a tall picket fence. The four windows are non-historic. There is no foundation under the house and we will give it a full basement. We also intend to add dormers to the second floor at the rear. We are proposing an interior over hall and a one car garage. The owner also owns the property next door. The house itself is uninhabitable. In order to achieve the project we are asking for two side yard variances on the house and a side and rear yard variance on the shed. In all cases the variances do exist. The shed currently sits six inches into the alley and we propose to move it onto the property. On the Sanborn map the shed is clearly proportionately less than half the lot width wide. The shed is now 16 feet wide. Our contention is that there was a shed there at one point P3 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 2015 4 and probably it was deconstructed in part or whole. This shed was built and reskinned with very historic looking materials. Gavin said we are trying to make the first floor handicapped accessible with a bedroom and an attached bathroom. The second floor needs a dormer in order to make it a legitimate room. The house currently has two bedrooms. Gavin said on the south elevation of the shed we are proposing to raise it up. The south elevation would have a garage door and diagonal siding and one window will be relocated. We will preserve the shed roof and salvage the materials and reuse them. Metal tabs inside indicate that the wall framing is new. We feel all of the walls were rebuilt. We will work with staff on the fencing. We would like to change out the T posts. There is no fencing between the two properties and the only change to existing fencing is the piece of fence that directly attaches to the shed which is an existing 6 foot high fence which is non-historic and the existing non-historic fence that goes between the two houses. We would like to replace both of those with 6 foot high historically picket fences that comply with the guidelines. Willis asked Gavin to address the proposed skylight. Gavin said by letting the gabled dormers go we were lessening the mass and the skylight is only visible from the alley. The skylight adds to visibility to the second room upstairs. Gavin said after the basement we still have 550 square feet of extra FAR on the site. The garage is 19 feet deep and sized for a 16 foot car. On the concrete around the house we have talked about a veneer or cut stone but we are open to suggestions. Amy said they have prepared a resolution and lot of issues will be left up to staff and monitor. The skylight is not approved in the resolution. Staff feels that it is better to have the shed as an active use than letting it deteriorate. If the shed were not turned into a garage we would discuss what repairs are necessary. John said the Sanborn map it indicates that the shed is smaller than ½ the lot and now it is exceeding that. In the 1903 map is it showing a reduced size. P4 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 2015 5 Amy said we do rely on the Sanborn map but at the same time there are probably some inaccuracies and it seems that the size is comparable to what we have. Gavin said on a maintenance level the front porch flooring will be replaced. Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Willis said staff is on board with the deletion of the skylight. Jim said the issue is the garage and the skylight. Jim said he supports a meaningful use of the shed. John said from the façade view from the alley seeing historical wood would be more appropriate than the windows. Bob said he is in favor of the new use and the only alternative is to build a new garage and then you lose some aspect of our history and the historic character. Willis said the application is modest and very refreshing. Willis said he can support the resolution as stated. John said getting a foundation under the house is a good solution and he supports the garage. MOTION: Willis moved to approve resolution #13; second by Jim. Patrick said we need to define the size of the original garage as right now we don’t have a rectangle. Gretchen said it is clear in the drawings that it will be a rectangle. Gretchen suggested that the siding come down to the grade with a small flashing which is more evident of what miners’ cabins had. Amy said this house has always had a few steps up. Roll call vote: Nora, yes; Jim, yes; Bob, yes; Willis, yes; John, yes; Gretchen, yes; Patrick, yes. Motion carried 7-0. Eric is the monitor. P5 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 2015 6 530 W. Hallam Street – Final Major Development, Public Hearing Bob recused himself John recused himself Eric will vote Debbie Quinn, assistant city attorney said she reviewed the affidavit of posting which is property provided for this hearing – Exhibit I Amy said the additions will be removed and the building relocated towards the corner with a smaller more appropriate addition. A new house will be built to the east. We are happy to see the two detached homes and recommending approval of the project. Amy said she will focus on a few areas that need conditions of approval. 1. A photo was provided of the front porch which will be the guide for the restoration work. There is a temporary railing that will be removed and staff and monitor will work with the applicant. 2. On the east elevation, the porch roof continues all the way up to the ridge line. Once this is under construction we would like to look at the porch roof framing to make sure there isn’t something that needs to be put back in the right way. 3. The historic chimney needs dismantled during the relocation process and put back up. We need to make sure it is carefully documented and goes back up the proper way. 4. The historic house has the typical one story connector and HPC did allow a deck on top of the connector. We are asking that the glass railing be pulled back and the deck terminate 3 to 5 feet behind the Victorian house so that there is breathing room. 5. On the landscape proposal shrubs are to be placed at the base of the Victorian and we need to know what those are and possibly restudy them. 6. There are pavers shown at the front of the Victorian and we do not think that is an appropriate detail and we would like to see that deleted. P6 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 2015 7 7. The sidewalk to the front door needs redesigned after we look more carefully now you approach the house. 8. Cut sheets for light fixtures. The fixtures need to be appropriate for the Victorian and meet the lighting code. 9. On the back of both houses the garage doors need to be detailed so that they meet the residential design standards. The door should look like it is separated into two doors. 10. We are supporting a variance of the window standard for the front façade of the new house. The glazing goes up to the eave and the RDS’s don’t permit that. Staff feels the glass façade is a good way to distinguish the construction. Amy said condition 11 and 12 are repeats from conceptual and #13 is the vested rights. Kim Raymond, architect Kim said the existing porch continues to the east and that is different from the original porch. We can move the sidewalk if need be and look at it in the field with the monitor to make sure we do what was there historically. We will measure the fireplace chimney and take photographs before we take it apart. The city wants us to remove two trees so the Victorian is visible. On #4 we can shorted the length of the deck so that it is three feet from the roof of the Victorian. On #5 we will look at the shrubs at the base of the Victorian and we can replace them with a flower bed. We will provide cut sheets for the lights. On the garage door we will put one large door and trim them out so that they look like two doors. On the siding we had 18 inch cementitious material and now we have reduced them to 8 inches side. We also simplified the window scheme on the back of the Victorian. On the link the material will be a little wider. The fascia would be a metal trim that sticks out four or five inches to add interest. On the landscaping it will be kept very simple on both houses. The wood will be painted. Lighting - Exhibit II Willis said this is a successful project and it flows according to the guidelines. P7 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 2015 8 Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Jim said Amy gave a good presentation and all the conditions are appropriate. MOTION: Willis moved to approve resolution #14 as drafted granting approval for 530 W. Hallam Street; second by Jim. Motion carried 6-0. Roll call vote: Eric, yes; Nora, yes; Jim, yes; Gretchen, yes; Patrick, yes. Selection of annual HPC awards MOTION: Willis moved to adjourn; second by Jim. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk P8 II.B. 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 61 Meadows Road - Minor Development, Public Hearing continued from May 13th DATE: May 27, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY: 61 Meadows Road is Unit 6 of the eight original Trustee Townhomes designed by Herbert Bayer at the Aspen Institute. Several areas of the campus are landmarked, including the Townhomes, the Reception Center, the Health Club, Marble Garden and Anderson Park. HPC design review is required for any changes to these historic resources. The townhomes were built in 1965 as short term accommodations for special visitors associated with the Institute’s programs. Today the Institute retains ownership of some of the units, while others are individually owned and used as primary residences or second homes. There are three new units, one on the south end of the complex and two on the north, that were authorized in the 1992 Aspen Meadows Master Plan and constructed in 1996. The owner of Townhome #6 is requesting approval to construct a basement under the existing building, to make an addition at the rear, and to complete other exterior changes. The amount of new square floor area involved in the project qualifies this as Minor Development. HPC discussed this project on May 13 th . There were several proposed alterations that both staff and the board were comfortable with, namely: • Underpinning the existing foundation in order to excavate and construct a basement • Removal of a non-historic door leading into the storage area under the carport • Replacing all exterior sconces • Extending the living space right behind the carport approximately 2’ westward, into the rear patio There were two areas where staff requested restudy, which the architect accomplished with amended drawings provided at the last hearing: • The proposal to replace the existing non-historic front door was amended to replacing it with a solid, unglazed, painted door. • The proposal to shift the location of a window on the south elevation, right above the carport storage was withdrawn. The applicant would however like to discuss some additional research that may indicate this window is not original. While a full set of Bayer’s original drawings has not been located, his south elevation is shown on the next page, compared to the existing condition. P9 III.B. 2 South facing windows as shown on Bayer drawing, above. Note that the openings are covered with louvers and do not match the existing windows below. However, other features shown on the Bayer drawing, such as aluminum louvers higher up on the wall were not constructed, so it is possible that some design changes were made in the field. It is not clear whether the existing windows are original or not. The architect suggests that the upper window could be back-painted because it will be covered from the interior. Staff recommends that existing window be preserved as it is. P10 III.B. 3 There were two aspects of the project which generated more debate and were to be restudied for this continued hearing: • Increasing the width of the rear living space approximately 6’ southward, into the rear patio and popping up above the carport roof. This was to be restudied to create a flat roof on the addition. • Adding a dormer over the rear living space (existing at left, proposed at right). The dormer was to be reduced or eliminated. P11 III.B. 4 The architect has submitted amended drawings to restudy the rear addition and the dormer. Staff supports the project with conditions of approval. APPLICANT: NSF 1976 Investments LLC, represented by Poss Architecture and Planning. ADDRESS: 61 Meadows Road, Condominium Unit 6, The Trustee Townhomes At-The-Aspen Meadows Condominiums, Aspen, Colorado. PARCEL ID: 2735-122-39-006 ZONING: RMF/PD MINOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project’s conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. Staff Response: The Trustee Townhomes were built as simple two story forms with low pitched gable roofs. Natural wood shakes covered the front and rear facades. The sidewalls of each unit were sided with painted white wood. Relatively small, mostly vertically oriented windows were used on all elevations. Each unit originally had a staircase leading to a small upper floor deck on the front façade, which allowed the first and second floors to be occupied by two different tenants. The townhomes were linked together with carports. The main entry to each unit was placed at the back of the carport. Over the years, minor changes have been made to the street-facing facades of each unit and more significant alterations have occurred at the rear. Some of the remodels have been reviewed by HPC. Others pre-date the historic designation. The architect for this proposal has provided photos of each of the original townhomes, attempting to indicate where alterations have occurred. This is very helpful information. There P12 III.B. 5 is very little documentation of the original design. To date, staff has been unable to locate Bayer’s original drawings or any early photos of the buildings. Much of the townhomes’ significance lies in their character as a group and their relationship to the rest of the Meadows campus. They are located very close to the health club, restaurant, and gardens, but are somewhat screened from view. In staff’s opinion, the front facades of the units are the area of most concern in terms of historic preservation. The rear of the units have some visibility from a public trial well below the back of the buildings. The rear façade is an appropriate area for expansion and it appears that all of the units have had some alterations here. The alterations, for the most part, expanded the living space into the rear patio area. None of the additions are taller than the original structures or are visible from the front. The original size of each townhome is approximately 1,800 square feet of floor area. The units are limited to 2,500 square feet and three bedrooms. The proposed floor area for this project is 2,160 square feet. About half of the proposed increase is attributed to the construction of a basement level. Briefly, the project to be considered by HPC involves: • Underpinning the existing foundation in order to excavate and construct a basement • Removal of a non-historic door leading into the storage area under the carport • Replacing the non-historic front door • Replacing all exterior sconces • Extending the living space right behind the carport approximately 2’ westward, into the rear patio • Shifting the location of an original window on the south elevation, right above the carport storage • Increasing the width of the rear living space approximately 6’ southward, into the rear patio • Adding a dormer over the rear living space Staff supports the proposed basement excavation as a low impact way to increase the living area in the house. A new lightwell will be constructed at the rear of the site. Staff supports the removal of the non-historic door under the carport, replacing the existing front door with a solid painted door, replacement of the exterior sconces, and extending the living space behind the carport. We recommend the south windows, discussed above, be preserved as is. Regarding the proposed new dormer, staff finds that the architect has significantly reduced the impact of this feature through their restudy. We find that the dormer meets this guideline: 7.7 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. A new dormer should fit within the existing wall plane. It should be lower than the ridgeline and set in from the eave. It should also be in proportion with the building. The mass and scale of a dormer addition must be subordinate to the scale of the historic building. P13 III.B. 6 At the last meeting, it appeared that some board members felt that no dormer would be appropriate to add, because it would negatively impact the original form. HPC must determine whether this proposed new element is appropriate due to its very limited visibility, or not an appropriate change to a building so significant due to association with Herbert Bayer. Regarding the rear addition, dropping the height of the roof so that the addition cannot be seen from the front is appropriate and allows this new construction to read as separate from the original structure. Staff does recommend that the proposal be redesigned so that this space has little to no eave overhang, particularly no eave projection wrapping across the historic west façade. (see pink arrow.) 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Instead, maintain the perceived line and orientation of the roof as seen from the street. Retain and repair roof detailing. P14 III.B. 7 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. Guidelines of concern are: RELOCATION The intent of this Chapter is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. The following standards apply for relocating a historic property as per Section 26.415.090.C of the Municipal Code: C. Standards for the Relocation of Designated Properties Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and P15 III.B. 8 Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Response: The Townhouse will gradually be underpinned with a new foundation and a full basement excavation will be completed. Although the house will not be lifted and moved during excavation, the standard assurances that the structure will be protected are required. A memo from a structural engineer addressing the preservation concerns must be submitted with the building permit, along with the standard financial assurance of $30,000. ______________________________________________________________________________ DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: • approve the application, • approve the application with conditions, • disapprove the application, or • continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC grant Minor Development approval with the following conditions: 1. Replace the existing front door with a solid, painted door. 2. Do not move or alter (other than basic maintenance) the existing south facing window above the carport. 3. A report from a licensed engineer must be submitted with the building permit application clearly indicating the approach to underpin the house in a manner that does negatively impact the historic structure. A bond, letter of credit or cashier’s check in the amount of $30,000 must be posted using the City’s required format until the Certificate of Occupancy is granted. 4. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise P16 III.B. 9 exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property : 61 Meadows Road, Condominium Unit 6, The Trustee Townhomes At-The-Aspen Meadows Condominiums, Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Exhibits: A. Design Guidelines B. Application Exhibit A, Relevant Design Guidelines 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining feature. Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls. P17 III.B. 10 Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. A historic door from a similar building also may be considered. Simple paneled doors were typical. Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Instead, maintain the perceived line and orientation of the roof as seen from the street. Retain and repair roof detailing. 7.7 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. A new dormer should fit within the existing wall plane. It should be lower than the ridgeline and set in from the eave. It should also be in proportion with the building. The mass and scale of a dormer addition must be subordinate to the scale of the historic building. 9.7 A lightwell may be used to permit light into below-grade living space. In general, a lightwell is prohibited on a wall that faces a street (per the Residential Design Standards). The size of a lightwell should be minimized. A lightwell that is used as a walkout space may be used only in limited situations and will be considered on a case-by-case basis. If a walkout space is feasible, it should be surrounded by a simple fence or rail. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. P18 III.B. 11 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. Do not wash an entire building facade in light. Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. P19 III.B. 12 Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights-of-way. P20 III.B. A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING MINOR DEVELOPMENT FOR 61 MEADOWS ROAD, CONDOMINIUM UNIT 6, THE TRUSTEE TOWNHOMES AT-THE-ASPEN MEADOWS CONDOMINIUMS, ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2015 PARCEL ID: 2735-122-39-006 WHEREAS, the applicant, NSF 1976 Investments LLC, represented by Poss Architecture and Planning, submitted an application requesting Minor Development review for the property located at 61 Meadows Road, Condominium Unit 6, The Trustee Townhomes At-The-Aspen Meadows Condominiums, Aspen, Colorado ; and WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with the applicable review standards and recommended approval of Minor Development with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation 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, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing on May 27, 2015; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission finds that the development proposal meets all applicable review criteria and that the approval of the request is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission approves the application with conditions by a vote of __ to __. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC grants Minor Development approval for the property located at 61 Meadows Road with the following conditions: 1. Replace the existing front door with a solid, painted door. 2. Do not move or alter (other than basic maintenance) the existing south facing window above the carport. 3. A report from a licensed engineer must be submitted with the building permit application clearly indicating the approach to underpin the house in a manner that does negatively impact the historic structure. A bond, letter of credit or cashier’s check in the amount of $30,000 must be posted using the City’s required format until the Certificate of Occupancy is granted. P21 III.B. 4. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property : 61 Meadows Road, Condominium Unit 6, The Trustee Townhomes At-The-Aspen Meadows Condominiums, Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 27th day of May, 2015. ______________________ Willis Pember, Chair P22 III.B. Approved as to Form: ___________________________________ Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: ___________________________ Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk P23 III.B. 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 (t) 970/925 -4755 (f) 970/920 -2950 WWW.BILLPOSS.COM May 21, 2015 Amy Simon City of Aspen Historical Preservation Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado, 81611 Re: Aspen Meadows Townhome Remodel - Revisions to original submittal Dear Amy, Please accept this letter as a response and description of the changes to the original submittal for the remodel of Unit #6, Aspen Meadows Townhome remodel. Per the staff memo from May 13, 2015, these were the concerns of the HPC: 1. Front door redesign Concern: The proposed front door design is not consistent with the original front door design Solution: We will replace the proposed front door design with a solid core painted wood front door with no glass which is thought to be the original design. 2. Proposed shift of an original window on the south Elevation Concern: Shifting of an existing historic window. Solution: We have reviewed all the permit applications for the remodel of other units located in the building department files. We were able to locate and existing elevation drawing. In the drawing there is evidence of 2 windows on the south elevation, although they are not drawn as a typical window. They look to be drawn as a louvered type of window. This may have been done for privacy reasons between the units. It might be noted that the majority of the units have windows on the side walls of the units that are not historic in size or location. If the current location of the window is desired to be retained, we can install a window and back paint the glass so that the window looks frosted. This window will not be visible from the inside of the unit. 3. South Extension Concern: The proposed south extension raises above the carport roof, obscuring the original sloped roof line. Solution: The south extension has been redesigned so that all the new massing occurs below the flat roof of the carport. In this new mass, we have proposed a new fenestration pattern (horizontal wood siding) and separated the roof forms by two feet (2’-0”) to delineate this element as new. There is a philosophical question when it comes to the length of the eaves on the flat roof addition. There are two options: a. Keep eaves consistent with the garage flat roof eaves – this makes the forms look similar but does not show the building element as “new” against the existing structure. P24 III.B. 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 (t) 970/925 -4755 (f) 970/920 -2950 WWW.BILLPOSS.COM b. Make eves depth different – this direction make the element read as new against the existing structure but one can argue makes the entire composition a little disjointed as you have a variety of eave lengths on a small building. We are not sure what the correct answer is on this. If the overall form is accepted by HPC, I could go either way on the eave depth. It is currently shown as option b, longer than the carport eaves to allow the element to read as new. We are amendable to either direction on this issue. 4. New dormer on back roof. Concern: The proposed back dormer is not inset from the roof and changes the original roof form. The height of the dormer obscures the original roof line. Solution: We have pulled back the size of the dormer in width, depth, and height to allow the original roof to be seen in its original form. In the original memo the back of the unit was identified as the area for expansion. As quoted: “The rear façade is appropriate area for expansion and it appears that all of the units have had some alterations here” This is where we have proposed the expansion. We acknowledge the concern that we are adding to the existing roof form and there is the concern that we are setting precedent for all units to add dormers in this location. We believe that the addition of the revised dormer will not affect the overall integrity of the original design for these reasons: a. Preservation of original roof form – The new dormer design meets the criteria of 7.7 and is subordinate to the scale of the historic building. b. Solid and void – For the back of these units, it was expressed that the rhythm of the solid and void of the units was desired to be retained. Unfortunately, this rhythm has been interrupted on units two, four, and nine where the back terrace has been filled in by a building form. The dormer allows us to maintain this rhythm by placing the floor area in a location that does not affect the solid-void relationship of the units. c. Sightlines – Sightline to the back of the unit are limited and can be broken down into two categories - Public and private. 1. Public – The public sightlines to this unit are from the trail below the complex. We have walked the trial and provided photos from various vantage points along the trial. The roof of unit #6 is not visible from any point on this trail. We encourage the HPC board to walk this trail previous to our next meeting. 2. Private – The private sightlines occur from the area of lawn around and along the lawn area at the back of the complex. To get to this stage in this process we have had to procure the Aspen Meadows HOA approval. All of the neighbors including the HOA president (next door in Unit #7) approved the original dormer scheme. d. Materiality – We have designed the dormer with windows on three sides to differentiate the new dormer from the existing structure. P25 III.B. 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 (t) 970/925 -4755 (f) 970/920 -2950 WWW.BILLPOSS.COM 5. West Extension Concern: This section of the proposal was not identified as objectionable in the HPC memo. Solution: This part of proposal will remain as proposed. We hope that this letter mitigates the concern of the HPC staff and we will have your support with the revised proposal. If you need additional material(s) or need to meet to review details of the revised proposal, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, Keith Howie, Authorized Representative for NSF 1976 Investments, LLC. P26 III.B. BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,2015 C ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C. ( 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 5/ 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 2 : 4 9 : 1 2 P M 05/20/15 AS P E N M E A D O W S T R U S T E E T O W N H O M E R E M O D E L 61 M E A D O W S R D . A S P E N , C O 8 1 6 1 1 HPC REVIEW P27 III.B. P28 I I I . B . P29 I I I . B . P30 I I I . B . P31 I I I . B . BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.c 2015 ( 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 5/ 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 2 : 4 9 : 1 4 P M AS P E N M E A D O W S T R U S T E E T O W N H O M E R E M O D E L 61 MEADOWS RD. ASPEN, CO 81611 HPC REVIEW : 3D IMAGES 05/20/15 HPC 21 VA L L E Y A X O N - E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E N O R T H VA L L E Y A X O N - O R I G I N A L L Y P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E N O R T H VA L L E Y A X O N - R E V I S E D P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E N O R T H SI G N I F I C A N T L Y R E D U C E D D O R M E R , FL A T R O O F O V E R E X P A N S I O N P32 III.B. BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.c 2015 ( 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 5/ 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 2 : 4 9 : 1 5 P M AS P E N M E A D O W S T R U S T E E T O W N H O M E R E M O D E L 61 MEADOWS RD. ASPEN, CO 81611 HPC REVIEW : 3D IMAGES 05/20/15 HPC 22 VA L L E Y A X O N - E X I S T I N G C O ND I T I O N S F R O M T H E S O U T H VA L L E Y A X O N - O R I G I N A L L Y P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E S O U T H VA L L E Y A X O N - R E V I S E D P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E S O U T H FLATTENED ROOF OVER EXPANSION, SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED DORMER P33 III.B. BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.c 2015 ( 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 5/ 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 2 : 4 9 : 1 7 P M AS P E N M E A D O W S T R U S T E E T O W N H O M E R E M O D E L 61 MEADOWS RD. ASPEN, CO 81611 HPC REVIEW : 3D IMAGES 05/20/15 HPC 23 PE R S P E C T I V E - E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E N O R T H PE R S P E C T I V E - O R I G I N A L L Y P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E N O R T H PE R S P E C T I V E - R E V I S E D P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E N O R T H FLATTENED ROOF OVER EXPANSION,SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED DORMER P34 III.B. BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.c 2015 ( 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 5/ 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 2 : 4 9 : 2 0 P M AS P E N M E A D O W S T R U S T E E T O W N H O M E R E M O D E L 61 MEADOWS RD. ASPEN, CO 81611 HPC REVIEW : 3D IMAGES 05/20/15 HPC 24 PE R S P E C T I V E - E X I S T I N G C O ND I T I O N S F R O M T H E S O U T H PE R S P E C T I V E - O R I G I N A L L Y P R O P O S ED C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E S O U T H PE R S P E C T I V E - R E V I S E D P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E S O U T H FL A T T E N E D R O O F O V E R EX P A N S I O N , S I G N I F I C A N T L Y R E D U C E D D O R M E R P35 III.B. BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.c 2015 ( 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 5/ 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 2 : 4 9 : 2 1 P M AS P E N M E A D O W S T R U S T E E T O W N H O M E R E M O D E L 61 MEADOWS RD. ASPEN, CO 81611 HPC REVIEW : 3D IMAGES 05/20/15 HPC 25 PE R S P E C T I V E - E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E N O R T H PE R S P E C T I V E - O R I G I N A L L Y P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E N O R T H PE R S P E C T I V E - R E V I S E D P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E N O R T H SIGNIFICANTLY RE DUCED DORMER, P36 III.B. BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.c 2015 ( 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 5/ 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 2 : 4 9 : 2 3 P M AS P E N M E A D O W S T R U S T E E T O W N H O M E R E M O D E L 61 MEADOWS RD. ASPEN, CO 81611 HPC REVIEW : 3D IMAGES 05/20/15 HPC 26 PE R S P E C T I V E - E X I S T I N G C O ND I T I O N S F R O M T H E S O U T H PE R S P E C T I V E - O R I G O N A L L Y P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E S O U T H PE R S P E C T I V E - R E V I S E D P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E S O U T H P37 III.B. NO R T H BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.c 2015 ( 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 0 4 8 1 6 3 2 04 8 1 6 3 2 0 25 5 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 0 02 4 8 1 6 0 80 1 6 0 3 2 0 6 4 0 0 10 20 40 8 0 0 5 10 20 4 0 0 NO S C A L E 5/ 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 2 : 4 9 : 2 5 P M AS P E N M E A D O W S T R U S T E E T O W N H O M E R E M O D E L 61 MEADOWS RD. ASPEN, CO 81611 HPC REVIEW : 3D IMAGES 05/20/15 HPC 27 FR O N T A X O N - E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E N O R T H FR O N T A X O N - O R I G I N A L L Y P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E N O R T H FR O N T A X O N - R E V I S E D P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E N O R T H SI G N I F I C A N T L Y R E D U C E D D O R M E R P38 III.B. BILL POSS AND ASSOCIATES,ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C.c 2015 ( 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 5/ 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 2 : 4 9 : 2 7 P M AS P E N M E A D O W S T R U S T E E T O W N H O M E R E M O D E L 61 MEADOWS RD. ASPEN, CO 81611 HPC REVIEW : 3D IMAGES 05/20/15 HPC 28 FR O N T A X O N - E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E S O U T H FR O N T A X O N - O R I G I N A L L Y P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E S O U T H FR O N T A X O N - R E V I S E D P R O P O S E D C O N D I T I O N S F R O M T H E S O U T H FL A T R O O F O V E R E X P A N S I O N , S I G N I F I C A N T L Y R E D U C E D D O R M E R P39 III.B. 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson 5/27/15 Page 1 of 9 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner RE: Molly Gibson Lodge, 101 W. Main Street and Lot 2 of the 125 West Main Street Historic Landmark Lot Split – Major Development Final Review, Commercial Design Review- Final, Planned Development – Detailed Review, public hearing MEETING DATE: May 27, 2015 APPLICANT : Aspen Galena LLC REPRESENTATIVE : Stan Clauson Associates, Inc. and CCY Architects LOCATION : 101 W. Main Street, Lots 1 and 2 of the Molly Gibson PUD, located at the corner of Main and Garmisch, and on Hopkins Avenue; and a vacant lot located on Main Street directly adjacent to the Molly Gibson CURRENT ZONING : Mixed Use along Main Street, R-6 (Medium Density Residential) along Bleeker Street, and Lodge Preservation Overlay over both Lots 1 and 2 of Molly Gibson Lodge. SUMMARY : The applicant requests approval to redevelop the Molly Gibson Lodge and to merge the Main Street lot with an adjacent vacant lot to create an 18,000 sf parcel along Main Street. The lodge is proposed to include 68 lodge units and 1 affordable housing unit. Two single family homes are proposed for the 9,000 sf parcel along Hopkins Avenue. STAFF RECOMMENDATION : Staff recommends approval with conditions. Photo: Current images of Molly Gibson Lodge. REQUEST OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION : The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals to redevelop the existing lodge: P40 IV.A. 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson 5/27/15 Page 2 of 9 • Final Major Development Review (Chapter 26.415) for new construction in a Historic District. This review only applies to the properties along Main Street. (Historic Preservation Commission is the final review authority .) • Final Commercial Design Review (Chapter 26.412, and the Commercial Design Guidelines) for construction of a mixed-use lodge building. (The Historic Preservation Commission is the final review authority . • A Planned Development Detailed Review (Chapter 26.445) to refine a project’s design and operational characteristics. (The Historic Preservation Commission is the final review authority for Detailed Review. City Council granted Project Review approval which established dimensional requirements for the project.) PREVIOUS APPROVALS : City Council Review : The Molly Gibson was decided by City Council after one public hearing. Similar to the Hotel Aspen, Council was satisfied with the mass and scale of the lodge building along Main Street and focused the discussion on the free market residential component. Council decided to look at the two properties as a whole because the entire site was designated with the Lodge Preservation Overlay. Under the LP overlay, the Code allowed 12,709 sf of free market FAR and the project asked for 8,000 sf (about 4,700 sf under the maximum for free market residential). The allowed Lodge FAR was 27,000 sf and the project asked for 26,959 sf. When all of the buildings are added up, the maximum cumulative FAR for the project as a whole ended up being 34,959 sf where 33,750 sf is allowed (a difference of about 1,209 sf) in the mixed use district. The applicant represented to City Council that the entire project was to be constructed in one phase. A future proposal to phase the project requires City Council approve an amendment. Council felt that the project was primarily focused on lodging use, added lodge units to the inventory, updated an existing lodge, fit into both neighborhoods - Main Street and Hopkins - and restored a residential use along Hopkins Avenue. The approved ordinance is attached as an Exhibit. HPC Review : HPC held two public hearings on the Molly Gibson. The main focus of those meetings (minutes are attached) was the dimensional variations and Residential Design Standard variances requested for the 2 single family homes and the proposed architecture of the lodge closest to the landmark at 125 West Main Street. The applicant was very responsive to HPC’s concerns and was granted approval by a 5-1 vote at the second hearing. The applicant restudied the single family homes which resulted in increased sideyard setbacks (originally 5’ increased to 7’), decreased overall floor area (from 9,000 sf to 8,000sf) and decreased site coverage (from 56% to 51%). Two of the requested Residential Design Standard variances were met in the restudy. On the Main Street parcel, the applicant restudied the module closest to 125 West Main Street and proposed two different roof forms: a flat roof and a gable roof. A discussion of the roof P41 IV.A. 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson 5/27/15 Page 3 of 9 forms and images are provided on page 10 below. HPC ultimately decided that the flat roof version was appropriate. After receiving HPC approvals (5 – 1 vote), the applicant decided to remove the proposed free market residential unit in the lodge building along Main Street and replace it with 4 additional lodge rooms. BACKGROUND : 101 W. Main Street, the Molly Gibson Lodge, comprises 2 separate lots – a 15,000 sf lot along Main Street and a 9,000 sf lot along Hopkins Avenue. The lodge contains 53 lodge units and 54 bedrooms in two separate structures. The Main Street parcel, Parcel 1, is zoned Mixed Use with the Lodge Preservation Overlay. The Hopkins Avenue parcel, Parcel 2, is zoned R-6 Medium Density Residential with the Lodge Preservation Overlay. 125 West Main Street was approved for a historic landmark lot split in 2014, which subdivided the parcel into two lots – one lot contains a 19 th century landmark and the other lot is vacant. The vacant lot is zoned Mixed Use and is 3,000 sf in size. Figure 1: Zone District map showing underlying zone districts. Arrows indicate the 3 parcels included in the application. The Lodge Preservation Overlay applies to both Molly Gibson parcels and it 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 to be approved on a case by case basis through the Planned P42 IV.A. 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson 5/27/15 Page 4 of 9 Development (PD) process. The primary focus of a PD is for a project to fit into the context of the neighborhood. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT : The applicant proposes a complete demolition of the existing Molly Gibson lodge on both parcels; combining the Main Street parcel with the adjacent vacant lot; the construction of a new 3-story building with lodge units and an affordable housing unit along Main Street; and the construction of 2 new single family residences along Hopkins Avenue. The approved project dimensions are as follows: LODGE PARCEL: Approved Dimensions minimum lot size 18,000’ SINGLE FAMILY HOME PARCEL: Approved Dimensions minimum lot width 180’ minimum lot size 9,002 sf front yard (Main St.) see site plan - up to 2.5' variance minimum lot width 90’ side yard (Garmisch) see site plan- up to 0' variance front yard (Hopkins Ave.) 10’ side yard ( west) 3.5’ side yard (east) 7’ rear (alley) see site plan- up to 0' variance side yard ( west) 7’ maximum height 32' rear (alley) 10’ public amenity 1,869 or 10% distance between buildings 10’ trash access area 20w x 9' 8.5" d x open to sky maximum height 25’ minimum off-street parking spaces 12 (Current deficit maintained) maximum % site coverage 51.3% cumulative floor area (1.5:1) 26,959 sf allowable floor area total 8,000 sf or 4,000 sf per single family residence lodge floor area (1.46:1) 26,314.8 sf minimum off-street parking spaces 4 affordable housing floor area 644 sf average lodge unit size 303 sf number of lodge units 68 total number of pillows/bedrooms 136/68 lodge net livable area 20,575 sf affordable housing net livable area 607 sf P43 IV.A. 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson 5/27/15 Page 5 of 9 STAFF FINDINGS : PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) – DETAILED REVIEW (E XHIBIT A): While Project Review focuses on the general concept for the development and outlines underlying dimensional requirements, Detailed Review focuses on the comprehensive evaluation of the specific aspects of the development, including utility placement, and architectural materials. NOTE: The applicant provided updated drawings and grading on May 21 st to address Staff’s concerns listed below. Staff will inform HPC as to whether the updated information meets City requirements and has Staff support at the public hearing. The revised information is included in the application packet. Lodge/Affordable Housing Building: The applicant proposes wood and metal materials with large windows. Staff finds that the materials meet the Commercial Design Standards and Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (see discussion below). Minor changes to the architecture are proposed – mainly to the Garmisch elevation near the lodge entrance. Comparison renderings are provided in the application. Staff is supportive of the architectural changes which are described below in the Commercial Design Standard discussion. The application includes detailed grading and drainage, snow shedding/storage plan, landscape, draft Construction Management Plan, and other required drawings. After comparing the grading and drainage plan to the renderings and landscape plan, it was discovered that ramping and steps were proposed at the entrances along Main and Garmisch Streets and the entrance adjacent to the historic landmark. Building sections showing the grading changes are provided on Sheets AL100.1 and AL100.2. The PD review criteria specifically require at-grade entrances for new buildings. The relationship of the new building to grade in the Historic District is crucial to its integration with the adjacent landmarks. Staff understands the complex grading on the site which slopes up to the west along Main Street and down to the south along Garmisch; however these are ways to make it work – using interpolated grade for building height calculations, reducing interior floor to ceiling heights, exploring interior changes to accommodate grade changes, etc. Similar challenges were addressed during the Sky Hotel design review that resulted in interior floor level changes to accommodate on grade entrances. The Staff recommends that the applicant restudy the building interior to have the building entrances at grade in order to meet the PD review criteria. The applicant proposes a detached sidewalk along Main Street with street trees and an attached sidewalk along Garmisch Street. The City Engineer has control over the location of the sidewalk along Garmisch Street. Staff recommends a detached sidewalk along Garmisch Street which aligns with Hotel Aspen across the street and provides a buffer between the sidewalk and the busy street. An accessible loading zone space is required to access the Garmisch lodge entrance. Staff has discussed the accessible space requirement with Building, Engineering and the applicant and there are solutions that incorporate a detached sidewalk and the accessible P44 IV.A. 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson 5/27/15 Page 6 of 9 requirements. Staff recommends that HPC provide a recommendation to the City Engineering that a detached sidewalk is provided. Staff recommends that the number of exterior light fixtures be reduced to meet the Historic Preservation Design Guideline 14.7 “Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting.” The Main Street Historic District already has street lamps, so site lighting should be focused on entrances with minimal pathway lighting for the lodge building. Staff’s concern is focused on the street facing facades and not on the alley elevation. Some of the light fixtures (See Exhibit A) do not meet lighting code. These fixtures need to be replaced with compliant fixtures. The stairway along the alley that accesses the pool needs to be redesigned to be open in order for the feature to not be counted in floor area. Currently the stairway is not counted in floor area but it needs to be open to qualify for the exemption. Staff recommends the applicant work with the Zoning Officer to resolve this discrepancy. There is no available floor area to allow the stairway to be enclosed. Free Market Residential Building: The applicant proposes wood, board formed concrete, and metal for the residences along Hopkins Street which is consistent with the residential character of the neighborhood and the Residential Design Standards. Simple residential landscaping is proposed in addition to a detached sidewalk. Staff has some of the same concerns about light fixtures as mentioned for the lodge building and recommends that the fixtures meet lighting Code. Staff is supportive of the lodge project and is excited about the new additions to the Main Street Historic District and to Hopkins Avenue. Staff recommends a continuation to address a few outstanding items that do not meet the review criteria. COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARD FINAL REVIEW/ MAJOR DEVELOPMENT FINAL REVIEW (E XHIBIT B): Some minor changes to the architecture are proposed as shown below. Staff is supportive of the changes which further break up the mass along Garmisch Street. Some setback variances were reduced along Garmisch as shown in the application on Sheet A- 101. P45 IV.A. 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson 5/27/15 Page 7 of 9 Image 1: Image at left is proposed, image at right is the conceptual approval Staff is supportive of the building design which balances new architecture with historic window proportions and punched window openings (Guidelines 7.16 and 7.17). The building has small modules and façade undulations along Main Street that break up the building mass. As noted above Staff has concerns about the grading of the site – according to Guideline 7.18 the entrance should be located at sidewalk level or as close to a level entry as possible. An internal airlock is proposed at the main lodge entrance off of Garmisch Street to meet Guideline 7.19. 7.16 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the Victorian era residences seen traditionally on Main Street. T h e s e i n c l u d e w i n d o w s , d o o r s a n d porches. Overall, details should be modest in character. 7.17 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen’s history are especially discouraged. 7.18 The retail entrance should be at the sidewalk level. All entrances shall be ADA compliant. On sloping sites the retail frontage should be as close to a level entrance as possible. 7.19 Incorporate an airlock entry into the plan for all new structures. An airlock entry that projects forward of the primary façade at the sidewalk edge is inappropriate. Adding temporary entries during the winter season detracts from the character of the historic district. Using a temporary vinyl or fabric "airlock" to provide protection from winter weather is not permitted. P46 IV.A. 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson 5/27/15 Page 8 of 9 The proposed vertical wood siding relates to historic wood structures along Main Street and the proposal metal panels have. Metal is not typically found on historic landmarks in the district, however the proposed long rectangular proportions relate to traditional wood siding in a way that balances the contemporary material. Staff is supportive of the type of materials and the application/proportion of the materials which reflect the historic landmarks in the District (7.20). 7.20 Use building materials that are similar to those used historically. When selecting materials, reflect the simple and modest character of historic materials and their placement. As noted above, Staff has concerns about some aspects of the landscape including a detached sidewalk along Garmisch Street to create a buffer between the street and the sidewalk as noted in Guideline 7.23 rather than privatize the right of way with a buffer between the sidewalk and the building. 7.22 Landscaping and paving should have the following characteristics: Enhance the street scene Integrate the development with its setting Reflect the quality of the architectural materials 7.23 Landscaping should create a buffer between the street and sidewalk. Staff is supportive of the final design with a few changes to the grading and the landscape to meet the Guidelines. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC continue the Planned Development Detailed Review, Final Commercial Design and Final Historic Preservation Major Development Review. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to continue the public hearing to August 12, 2015 to restudy the following: 1. Provide at-grade entrances. 2. Detached sidewalk with accessible passenger loading zone on Garmisch. 3. Update lighting plan with compliant light fixtures and reduce the amount of lighting along Main and Garmisch Streets. 4. Open the stairway along the alley to qualify as exterior stair and exempt floor area. Attachments: Exhibit A – Staff Findings, PD Review Criteria Exhibit B – Staff Findings, Commercial Design Standard Review Criteria Exhibit C – City Council Ordinance 3, Series of 2015 P47 IV.A. 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson 5/27/15 Page 9 of 9 Exhibit G – Development Review Committee Comments updated for Detailed Review Exhibit H – Application P48 IV.A. Exhibit A – Planned Development Detailed Review Criteria 26.445.030.C Scope and Limitations of Detailed Review. Detailed Review shall be used to perfect and finalize detail aspects of the project within the parameters established during Project Review. Issues resolved during Project Review shall not be revisited or reconsidered as part of Detailed Review. (Also see amendment procedures – Section 26.445.110.) The approval of a Project Review and Detailed Review together constitute a Final Planned Development Approval. A Development Order shall be issued after Detailed Review approval and the period of statutory vested rights shall begin, subject to requirements of the Development Order regarding the submission and recording of certain documents, plats, plans, or agreements. 26.445.070. Detailed Review Standards. Detailed Review shall focus on the comprehensive evaluation of the specific aspects of the development, including utility placement, and architectural materials. In the review of a development application for Detailed Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission as applicable, shall consider the following: A. Compliance with Project Review Approval. The proposed development, including all dimensions and uses, is consistent with the Project Review approval and adequately addresses conditions on the approval and direction received during the Project Review. Staff Response: The proposed development meets the approved dimensional requirements of Ordinance 3, Series of 2015. The conditions of approval have been met as follows: An Outdoor Lighting Plan, pursuant to section 26.575.150. Submitted (page 87 and 88 of application) An existing and proposed Landscaping Plan, identifying trees with diameters and values. Submitted and reviewed by Parks Department A draft Construction Management Plan. Submitted and reviewed by Engineering Department A snow storage and snow shedding plan. Snow is not permitted to shed off roofs onto neighboring properties. Demonstrate that any snow which sheds off roofs will remain on-site. Submitted and reviewed by Engineering and Building. Preservation of the historic fence. Included in the application. Proposed to be relocated along the western property line. A completed Transportation Impact Analysis. Submitted and reviewed by Engineering and Transportation. Confirmation from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District that the 0’ rear yard setback is constructible without damage to the sanitation sewer lines in the alley. Confirmation received from ACSD that the 0’ setback is permissible. P49 IV.A. B. Growth Management. The proposed development has received all required GMQS allotments, or is concurrently seeking allotments. Staff Response: The proposed project has received Growth Management allotments pursuant to HPC Resolution 35, Series of 2014. C. Site Planning and Landscape Architecture. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well-designed treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. Vegetation removal, protection, and restoration plans shall be acceptable to the Director of Parks and Open Space. Staff Response: The Parks Department provided the following comments that have been incorporated into the Final Resolution: • No planting of trees will be allowed in Bio-Retention ponds, nor can the location of these ponds affect the long term health of any trees that are proposed. The proposed tree removal plan appears okay. • On the Hopkins side of this development, the tree removal plan appears okay, however we wish to preserve the maple tree in the northeast corner of the property. • Parks Department will permit removal of most of the trees on the Molly Gibson properties, however, on the Hopkins Avenue property, only certain trees will be allowed to be removed. • A Tree Removal/Dripline Excavation permit will be required prior to the Parks Department signing off on the building or demolition permit. • Tree Protection Fencing shall be in place prior to any construction activity on either property and the City Forester or his designee will need to inspect this fence before construction activity may commence. The Bio-Retention area shall be relocated out of the Right of Way and onto the property, to be reviewed and approved by Engineering. Street trees and planting shall be located outside of the bio-retention area and are subject to Parks Department approval. The applicant proposes a detached sidewalk along Main Street and an attached sidewalk along Garmisch Street. Staff does not support the attached sidewalk along Garmisch, which privatizes the right of way, and recommends HPC recommend to the City Engineer a detached sidewalk with a hardscape path/connection to accommodate an ADA passenger loading zone. Staff also recommends that the ADA passenger loading zone be relocated in front of the lodge door. There are grading issues on the site; however Staff recommends that internal changes be made so that the building is accessed from grade without ramps and steps and that a resolution be found for an accessible loading zone in front of the lodge entrance. The recent Sky Hotel application, which deals with a very significant grade change onsite, proposed internal changes to accommodate at-grade building entrances on all street fronts. P50 IV.A. The residential component along Hopkins Avenue meets the review criterion subject to Parks Department approval at building permit review. Staff finds this criterion is not met and recommends a restudy to provide a detached sidewalk along Garmisch Street. 2. Buildings and site grading provide simple, at-grade entrances and minimize extensive grade changes along building exteriors. The project meets or exceeds the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and applicable requirements for emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. Adequate snow storage is accommodated. Staff Response: The applicant proposes ramps into both lodge entrances along Main and Garmisch Streets due to slopes on the site. Steps are proposed closest to the landmark at the west of the property. Sinking the building into the site along Main Street does not meet the review criteria and the proposed relationship to grade has a detrimental impact on the Main Street Historic District and the adjacent landmark. Staff recommends that internal changes be made to accommodate at-grade entrances. Staff is finds that the new building shall be constructed at grade to meet this criterion. The project is required to have an accessible loading zone along Garmisch Street in accordance with Building Code. Adequate snow storage has been accommodated at a conceptual level. The residential component along Hopkins Avenue has steps to address grading changes and is not required to meet ADA. Staff is less concerned about the grading changes on the Hopkins Avenue property as opposed to the Main Street property which is located in a Historic District. Staff finds this criterion is not met and recommends a restudy to remove the ramps and have the lodge building on grade. 3. Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into the landscape in a manner that enhances the site. Staff Response: n/a there are no energy production features proposed. 4. All site lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City’s outdoor lighting standards. Staff Response: The proposed lighting plan proposes a variety of lighting fixtures in many locations around the property. The Main Street Historic District typically has lighting at the entrances to a building with minimal landscape lighting. The Selux Exelia Column light fixture does not meet lighting standards (the light source is visible) and the BK lighting flush mount mini drivestar does not meet lighting standards (up-lighting is prohibited). Staff recommends that the applicant restudy the lodge lighting plan to remove a large percentage of the proposed architectural and landscape lighting. The lighting plan for the residences is appropriate with the elimination of the BK lighting flush mount mini drivestar feature that does not meet lighting standards. Staff finds that this criterion is not met. P51 IV.A. 5. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff Response: Site drainage is in compliance with Title 29 with the condition that all private storm pipes and Best Management Practices (BMPs) are located within the property boundary, excluding storm pipes to tie in to the city system, and BMPs that serve a greater public benefit. The stormwater system is subject to review and approval by Engineering during building permit review. Staff finds this criterion is met with conditions. D. Design Standards and Architecture. The proposed architectural details emphasize quality construction and design characteristics. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The project architecture provides for visual interest and incorporates present-day details and use of materials respectful of the community’s past without attempting to mimic history. Staff Response: The proposed architecture, materials and details is appropriate for the Main Street historic district and fits in with the pattern of development in the neighborhood. The architecture is a product of its own time with references to traditional developments through façade articulation, punched window openings and window dimensions. The residential architecture along Hopkins Street contributes to the residential neighborhood and is appropriate for the pattern of development. The details (front porch, one story element, primary entrance) and use of materials are appropriate for single family residences. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. Exterior materials are of a high quality, durability, and comply with applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards , Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Standards , and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation . Staff Response: The applicant proposes metal, glass and wood materials for the lodge building which is consistent with materials historically used in the Main Street Historic District. The residences have a similar palette of materials – wood, metal, board formed concrete, glass, stone- all of which are consistent with residential development and the Residential Design Standards with the condition that the metal is non-reflective. Staff finds this criterion to be met with conditions. 3. Building entrances are sited or designed to minimize icing and snow shedding effects. Staff Response: Building entrances have roof elements protecting the entrance from snow shedding. The proposed lodge building is flat which minimizes snow shedding effects. The gable roofs on the residential homes along Hopkins are proposed to have snow fences to control snow shedding. Staff finds this criterion is met. 4. Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into structures in a manner that enhances the architecture. P52 IV.A. Staff Response: n/a - Energy efficiency features, such as solar panels, are not proposed as part of this project. 5. All structure lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City’s outdoor lighting standards. Staff Response: Staff has concerns with the amount of lighting that is proposed along Main and Garmisch Streets. The Historic District typically has minimal lighting with light fixtures located adjacent to entrances and some minimal pathway lighting. Street lamps are located along Main Street that provide additional lighting. A few of the lighting fixtures for both properties (Main and Hopkins) have been identified by the Zoning Officer as not meeting the lighting code related to uplighting and exposed lighting filament (selux exelia column, Bk Lighting flush mount mini drivestar). Staff recommends that the lighting plan be simplified and the light fixtures meet Outdoor Lighting Standards. E. Common Parks, Open Space, Recreation Areas, or Facilities. If the proposed development includes common parks, open space, recreation areas, or common facilities, a proportionate, undivided interest is deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the Planned Development. An adequate assurance through a Development Agreement for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a prohibition against future development is required. Staff Response: n/a – not proposed as part of the development. F. Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and improvements. Any new vehicular access points minimize impacts on existing pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of the Project Review and as otherwise required in the Land Use Code. These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements and to determine any required cost estimating for surety requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Staff Response: The project proposes a bike rack for 4 bikes as part of the TIA. Purchase of a Wecycle station is also part of the proposal – it will remain in its current location on Paepcke Park. Staff finds this criterion is met. G. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the proposed subdivision to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – P53 IV.A. Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Staff Response: The applicant has been working with the Engineering Department to conceptually comply with Municipal Code Title 29 and the URMP requirements. Engineering is comfortable moving forward with the conceptual proposal with the understanding that construction level documents are required at building permit. Staff finds this criterion is met. H. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Staff Response: The applicant commits to upgrading public infrastructure as described in Ordinance 3, Series of 2015. Staff finds this criterion is met. I. Phasing of development plan. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. Phasing shall insulate, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. All necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the Planned Development, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures shall be completed concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Response: The applicant represents that the project will not be phased. These representations were made to City Council during the project review hearings. The plan is to develop both lots simultaneously. A proposal to phase the project requires City Council approval. P54 IV.A. Exhibit B- Commercial Design Standards and Major HP Review 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson Page 1 of 7 Exhibit B - Commercial Design Standards (Main Street) 26.412.010. Purpose. The purpose of commercial design review is to preserve and foster proper commercial district scale and character and to ensure that the City's commercial areas and streetscapes are public places conducive to walking. The review standards do not prescribe architectural style, but do require that certain building elements contribute to the streetscape. The character of the City's commercial district is largely established by the variety of uses and the relationship between front facades of buildings and the streets they face. By requiring certain building elements to be incorporated in the design of new and remodeled buildings, storefronts are more appealing and can contribute to a well-designed, exciting commercial district. Accommodation of the automobile within commercial districts is important to the consistency and quality of pedestrian streetscapes. The standards prescribe certain methods of accommodating on-site parking to achieve environments conducive to walking. Acknowledgement of the context that has been established by the existing built environment is important to protecting the uniqueness of the City. To achieve compatibility, certain standards require building elements to be influenced by adjoining development, views, pedestrian malls or sun angles. Finally, along with creating architecturally interesting and lively primary streets, the pedestrian nature of downtown can be further enhanced by making alleys an attractive place to walk. Store entrances and display windows along alleyways are encouraged to augment, while not detracting from, the pedestrian interest of primary streets. 26.412.050. Review Criteria. An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: A. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, or any deviation from the standards provides a more appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested design elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the standards. Staff Findings: Some minor changes to the architecture are proposed as shown below. Staff is supportive of the changes which further break up the mass along Garmisch Street. Some setback variances were reduced along Garmisch as shown in the application on Sheet A- 101. P55 IV.A. Exhibit B- Commercial Design Standards and Major HP Review 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson Page 2 of 7 Image 1: Image at left is proposed, image at right is the conceptual approval Staff is supportive of the building design which balances new architecture with historic window proportions and punched window openings (Guidelines 7.16 and 7.17). The building has small modules and façade undulations along Main Street that break up the building mass. As noted above Staff has concerns about the grading of the site – according to Guideline 7.18 the entrance should be located at sidewalk level or as close to a level entry as possible. An internal airlock is proposed at the main lodge entrance off of Garmisch Street to meet Guideline 7.19. 7.16 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the Victorian era residences seen traditionally on Main Street. T h e s e i n c l u d e w i n d o w s , d o o r s a n d porches. Overall, details should be modest in character. 7.17 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen’s history are especially discouraged. 7.18 The retail entrance should be at the sidewalk level. All entrances shall be ADA compliant. On sloping sites the retail frontage should be as close to a level entrance as possible. 7.19 Incorporate an airlock entry into the plan for all new structures. P56 IV.A. Exhibit B- Commercial Design Standards and Major HP Review 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson Page 3 of 7 An airlock entry that projects forward of the primary façade at the sidewalk edge is inappropriate. Adding temporary entries during the winter season detracts from the character of the historic district. Using a temporary vinyl or fabric "airlock" to provide protection from winter weather is not permitted. The proposed vertical wood siding relates to historic wood structures along Main Street and the metal has long rectangular proportions similar to wood siding. Staff is supportive of the materials and the application/proportion of the materials which reflect the historic landmarks in the District (7.20). 7.20 Use building materials that are similar to those used historically. When selecting materials, reflect the simple and modest character of historic materials and their placement. As noted above, Staff has concerns about some aspects of the landscape including a detached sidewalk along Garmisch Street to create a buffer between the street and the sidewalk as noted in Guideline 7.23 rather than privatize the right of way with a buffer between the sidewalk and the building. 7.22 Landscaping and paving should have the following characteristics: Enhance the street scene Integrate the development with its setting Reflect the quality of the architectural materials 7.23 Landscaping should create a buffer between the street and sidewalk. Staff is supportive of the final design with a few changes to the grading and the landscape to meet the Guidelines. B. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, to the greatest extent practical. Changes to the façade of the building may be required to comply with this Section. Staff Finding: n/a. C. The application shall comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines as determined by the appropriate Commission. The guidelines set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The City shall determine when a proposal is in compliance with the criteria, standards and guidelines. Although these criteria, standards P57 IV.A. Exhibit B- Commercial Design Standards and Major HP Review 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson Page 4 of 7 and guidelines are relatively comprehensive, there may be circumstances where alternative ways of meeting the intent of the policy objectives might be identified. In such a case, the City must determine that the intent of the guideline is still met, albeit through alternative means. Staff Finding: See discussion above. 26.412.060. Commercial Design Standards. The following design standards, in addition to the commercial, lodging and historic district design objectives and guidelines, shall apply to commercial, lodging and mixed-use development: A. Public Amenity Space. Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of-way or private property within commercial areas. On parcels required to provide public amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030, Public amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the method or combination of methods of providing the public amenity shall be at the option of the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, according to the procedures herein and according to the following standards: 1. The dimensions of any proposed on-site public amenity sufficiently allow for a variety of uses and activities to occur, considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses. Staff Finding: The proposed public amenity is small pockets of space along Main Street and at the corner of Main and Garmisch Streets where there are undulations in the building plane. These areas will be used by lodge guests and will activate Main and Garmisch Streets. The project provides a total of 1,869 sf of public amenity space, which is 10% of the 18,000 sf lodge parcel. There is currently no public amenity onsite, so 10% or 1,800 sf of public amenity is required. Staff finds this criterion is met. 2. The public amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade trees, solar access, view orientation and simple at-grade relationships with adjacent rights-of-way are encouraged. Staff Finding: Street trees and seating are proposed for the public amenity areas to activate the street and add vitality. Staff finds this criterion is met. 3. The public amenity and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights-of-way and uses contribute to an inviting pedestrian environment. Staff Finding: The location of the public amenity space along Main and Garmisch Streets contributes to the pedestrian environment by creating spaces small seating areas. Staff finds this criterion is met. P58 IV.A. Exhibit B- Commercial Design Standards and Major HP Review 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson Page 5 of 7 4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls, sidewalks or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian environment. Staff Finding: The proposed amenity space does not duplicate existing spaces. Rather it provides a positive and creative addition to Main Street and Garmisch Street where there are currently no public amenity spaces. Staff finds this criterion is met. 5. Any variation to the design and operational standards for public amenity, Subsection 26.575.030.F., promotes the purpose of the public amenity requirements. Staff Finding: The project does not require a variation from the public amenity standards. Staff finds this criterion is met. B. Utility, delivery and trash service provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one (1) building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply: 1. A trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum size and location standards established by Title 12, Solid Waste , of the Municipal Code, unless otherwise established according to said Chapter. Staff Finding: The trash recycle area is located on the property adjacent to the restaurant/eating area and is accessed off of the alley. The applicant is working with the Environmental Health Department to receive approval for a reduced trash size. Environmental Health is supportive of the proposed dimensions 20’w x 9’ 8.5”d x open to the sky (included in the application dated Nov. 5, 2014). The required size for this type of development is 20’w x 20’d x 20’h. 2. A utility area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum standards established by Title 25, Utilities , of the Municipal Code, the City’s Electric Distribution Standards, and the National Electric Code, unless otherwise established according to said Codes. Staff Finding: The application indicates that the utility area will meet minimum requirements it is located on the property behind the landmark at 125 West Main Street. The Utility Department provided the following comments: “Give consideration for electrical Transformer on site w/ associated easement (minimum 10’x10’).” Staff finds this criterion is met with conditions. 3. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be co-located and combined to the greatest extent practical. Staff Finding: The utility and trash areas are not co-located or combined. The trash area is too small to accommodate the utility area within the enclosure. The required onsite parking and the location of the trash area adjacent to the restaurant necessitated the location of the transformer separate on the parcel. Staff finds this criterion is met to the extent practical. P59 IV.A. Exhibit B- Commercial Design Standards and Major HP Review 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson Page 6 of 7 4. If the property adjoins an alleyway, the utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be along and accessed from the alleyway, unless otherwise approved through Title 12, Solid Waste , of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review . Staff Finding: These areas are located off of the alley. Staff finds this criterion is met. 5. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be fenced so as not to be visible from the street, unless they are entirely located on an alleyway or otherwise approved though Title 12, Solid Waste , of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review . All fences shall be six (6) feet high from grade, shall be of sound construction, and shall be no less than ninety percent (90%) opaque, unless otherwise varied through Chapter 26.430, Special Review . Staff Finding: The trash area is proposed to have a vertical wood fence as shown in the alley elevation. Staff recommends that HPC adopt a condition of approval for staff and monitor to review a design for the fence surrounding the transformer that is located behind the landmark. Staff finds this criterion is met with conditions. 6. Whenever utility, trash, and recycle service areas are required to be provided abutting an alley, other portions of a building may extend to the rear property line if otherwise allowed by this Title, provided that the utility, trash and recycle area is located at grade and accessible to the alley. Staff Finding: A rear yard variance was granted for a portion of the lodge building adjacent to the trash/recycle area. Staff finds this criterion is met. 7. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. Staff Finding: The utility areas are proposed to be located on private property. An easement is required for service provider access and is included as a condition of approval. Staff finds this criterion is met. 8. All commercial and lodging buildings shall provide a delivery area. The delivery area shall be located along the alley if an alley adjoins the property. The delivery area shall be accessible to all tenant spaces of the building in a manner that meets the requirements of the International Building Code Chapters 10 and 11 as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen. All non-ground floor commercial spaces shall have access to an elevator or dumbwaiter for delivery access. Alleyways (vehicular rights-of-way) may not be utilized as pathways (pedestrian rights-of-way) to meet the requirements of the International Building Code. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. P60 IV.A. Exhibit B- Commercial Design Standards and Major HP Review 101 W. Main Street – Molly Gibson Page 7 of 7 Staff Finding: The applicant represents that deliveries will take place on the property with access through the back door of the lodge. Elevator access is provided. Staff finds this criteirno is met. 9. All commercial tenant spaces located on the ground floor in excess of 1,500 square feet shall contain a vestibule (double set of doors) developed internal to the structure to meet the requirements of the International Energy Conservation Code as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen, or an air curtain. Staff Finding: A vestibule is proposed accessed off of Garmisch Street. Staff finds this criterion is met. 10. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the street as practical. Staff Finding: The applicant represents that all mechanical shall be vented through the roof. A roof plan showing mechanical and screening is included in the application. Staff finds this criterion is met. 11. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. Staff Finding: The rooftop mechanical shall be consolidated into one area and screened from view. The applicant proposes significant setbacks for the mechanical equipment, which is clustered around the elevator overrun in the center of the building. Staff finds this criterion is met. 12. The trash and recycling service area requirements may be varied pursuant to Title 12, Solid Waste , of the Municipal Code. All other requirements of this subsection may be varied by special review (see Chapter 26.430.040.E, Utility and delivery service area provisions ). Staff Finding: A reduction to the trash and recycle area has been reviewed by the Environmental Health Department pursuant to the requirements in Title 12 of the Municipal Code. Environmental Health has indicated support for the reduced size. Staff finds this criterion is met. P61 IV.A. Exhibit C – DRC Comments for Detailed Review Engineering : Note - The applicant has provided additional information to address Engineering’s concerns at this level of review. Engineering is comfortable with the project moving forward to HPC. The following needs to be addressed before the application can proceed: Conceptual Drainage Plan The submitted plan does not adequately demonstrate that stormwater mitigation measures can be accomplished with the proposed layout. The conceptual plan does not meet Engineering Standards for the following reasons: 1. The project proposes bioretention ponds within the City ROW. Use of the ROW is not permitted unless the BMP captures the WQCV for the portion of the ROW that is tributary to the project site. The bioretention ponds need to capture street runoff if they are to be located in the City ROW. 2. There is a significant amount of piping proposed within the alley ROW. All pipes must remain within the property boundaries. The pipe which runs from Parcel 2 to the drywell on Parcel 1 will not be permitted. The alley cannot accommodate private stormwater pipes. All stormwater runoff from Parcel 2 must be treated within Parcel 2. 3. The piping system is a large amount of hard infrastructure and does not follow the COA stormwater guiding principles for Low Impact Development. Transportation Impact Analysis (this has been updated to address the concerns listed below) 1. Within the Trip Generation the number of lodging units should be net new units as opposed to the net total, i.e. there should be 15 net new units, an increase from 53 to 68. 2. MMLOS a. The proposed sidewalk is not detached in all locations. Along Garmisch St the sidewalk is attached to accommodate a passenger loading/unloading area. The COA Engineering Department will permit the loading/unloading area to be attached however the project cannot receive credit for this category. b. The proposed landscape buffer is 5’, it does not exceed the standard minimum width. In addition there is no buffer along Garmisch St. Credit will not be given for this measure. c. The pedestrian directness factor is called out as 1.3. It cannot receive credit for having a directness factor less than 1.2. This measure should be removed from the TIA tool spreadsheet. d. The project briefly mentions a bus stop but does not elaborate. The bus stop does not show up on the plan sheet. Nothing has been worked out with the Transportation Department. No credit is taken on the MMLOS spreadsheet. The Engineering Department would not support the location of a bus stop on the SE corner of the property. This could be a temporary location as an improvement to dropping off passengers behind parked cars, but this location should not be a permanent bus stop. P62 IV.A. The Molly Gibson could work with the Transportation department to create a permanent bus stop located further down Garmisch. Removing the above mentioned measures from the TIA spreadsheet for MMLOS would result in a total of 20 mitigated trips, which would still meet the required mitigation. 3. TDM a. Regarding a WE-cycle station, the applicant should work with Transportation and Engineering to find the safest location that provides the best incentive for a mode shift between bus and bike. It is assumed collaboration with WE-Cycle has already begun. The following shall be addressed at Building Permit: 1. The drywell lid should not be placed in the ADA aisle, but rather in a non-ADA parking stall. 2. A greater amount of runoff could be directed to the pervious pavers at a 2:1 ratio to utilize the paver sub base for WQCV as opposed to directing the majority of the runoff to the drywell. As stated in the Drainage Report, pavers could be lined and underdrains directed to the drywell. 3. The green roofs capability to treat stormwater should be completely developed. 4. The entrance to the alley needs to be improved in order to meet ADA and City standards. 5. Identify utility pedestals serving the property. Relocate all utility pedestals to within the property boundary. 6. Locate any new electric transformer within the property boundary. 7. All sidewalk, curb and gutter must meet the Engineering Standards as outlined in Title 21 and the Engineering Design Standards adopted by Title 29. If the standard minimum slope cannot be met along Main St a formal variance request must be submitted. 8. Snow Storage - A minimum functional area equaling 30% of the paved area shall be provided contiguous to the paved and designed to accommodate snow storage. For heated areas, the functional area can be reduced to 10%. This area should be shown on a plan set. CMP: The general approach to the project is sound, and in compliance with existing Construction Mitigation regulations. Though some limited areas of city Right-Of-Way may be available for construction use (staging, layback, etc…) the sidewalk must be maintained clear and accessible to pedestrians throughout the project, with the exception of reasonable closures for replacement of sidewalk and associated ROW work. Due to limited work space available, some advantage might be gained through the use of a tower crane on site. P63 IV.A. Construction noise regulations are currently being re-written, and may have some impact on the project. The site may be required to be modeled by a sound engineer/consultant for planned noise mitigation. With these considerations in mind, I believe that the preliminary CMP provided by RA Nelson for re-development of the Molly Gibson Lodge is appropriate and acceptable. Zoning: Note- The applicant has worked with Zoning to resolve many of the calculation concerns below. Lodge Plans: • Need To have a Survey to show that the natural grade is totally flat, which is what the elevations show. The elevations show that they are right at maximum height, and therefore if the grade drops by even a foot they are too tall. • Sheet A-112, the floor plan does not match the section 2 on sheet A300 . The section shows all kinds of stairs and levels where the floor plan shows "open". • Sheet A-114, On the building permit, the applicant will need to show that the screen around the mechanicals is 15' back from any street facing façade. • A900.1 - FA, based on the drawings in A900.2, the FA total should be very close to the net livable total, however the FA is about 3,000 more. It may be that the un-enclosed areas are being included in the FA total. Lodge uses in the MU zone district are exempt from floor area calcs for decks and patios. Therefore, no matter how much un-enclosed space there is, none of it will count as FA. • Should there be separate credits for AHU FA and Lodge FA? • Sheet A900.3. No sub grade walls, so I can't verify sub grade percentage. • Do the approvals call out a maximum lodge sq. footage? If so, the will need to do non- unit allocation by use percentage, which they have not done. • Level 2 of the lodge shows interior space next to the open space over restaurant. It does not appear that this space was accounted for in the FA totals. • Sheet A900.3 - Residences, the rear exterior stairs to access the roof top decks counts towards deck 15%. • They will need to show the total square footage of the garage, to see if they qualify for the credit of 375 sq. per garage. • Sheet A900.4, the AHU unit is missing most of its net livable - both in the diagrams and in the chart. • Residences: • Would need to see a survey to verify the topography, however, it appears from AR-100.1 that the lot drops a total of 2' from the front towards rear (alley side) NE corner. • Sheet AR-211. On drawing 2 it is hard to tell if the rear height measurement is correct, because they don't show where they measure height from, and what the total height is. It appears from the drawing that the proposed grade is substantially lower than 0'. P64 IV.A. • On drawing 1, they also may run into trouble with the 15' back measure of height. From D to B is probably about 15', and therefore the height at the outside edge of the building is the height line they need to use for the 1/3 point. • That same 15' challenge applies to the rear of the eastern house as well. • If the hot tub on the eastern house is any taller than 3' it could be taller than the height limit. No exceptions for residential hot tubs. Trash/Environmental Health: My only concern is that the residential space for waste containers does not appear anywhere on the drawings and that was part of our Special Review requirement. Building: We had questions on the following items. 1) Show a plan to demonstrate the exit scheme. Exit access, exit, exit discharge. 2) Will need to determine correct number of type B and fully accessible units for the dwelling units and sleeping units and accessibility to parking, passenger loading and food service areas. 3) We plan to adopt 2015 codes by time of permit is submittal. 4) Single family home to meet IRC for review unless they are to be short term rentals. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: Service is contingent upon compliance with the District’s rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. All clear water connections are prohibited (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) including trench drains for the entrances to underground parking garages. On-site drainage and landscaping plans require approval by the district, must accommodate ACSD service requirements and comply with rules, regulations and specifications. On-site sanitary sewer utility plans require approval by ACSD. Oil and Grease interceptors are required for all new and remodeled food processing establishments. Plans for interceptors, separators and containment facilities require submittal by the applicant and approval prior to a building permit application. Plumbing plans for the pool and spa areas require approval of the drain size by the district. Glycol snowmelt and heating systems must have containment provisions and must preclude discharge to the public sanitary sewer system. P65 IV.A. When new service lines are required for existing development the old service lines (3) must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line according to specific ACSD requirements and prior to all soil stabilization activities. Below grade development will require installation of a pumping system. Generally 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 areas covered by sewer easements or right of ways to the lot line of each development. All ACSD total connection fees must be paid prior to the issuance of any permits. 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. Due to the depth of the main sewer line in the alley and the need to replace this sewer line in the future, the District would not support the applicants request for an exemption to vacate the five foot setback requirement from the alley lot lines. The district will be able to respond with more specific comments and requirements once detailed building and utility plans are available. Utilities: The proposed 10’x10’ transformer area that the basic requirements to serve the property electrically are met. This assumes the transformer is allowed within the dashed red-line “setback area.” Most transformer sizes can be accommodated within a 10’ by 10’ area and this transformer can and will be sized based upon load calculations to be provided when requesting a building permit. I don’t have a problem with the single phase transformer at this location but this would mean that most likely all of the single phase services that feed from that transformer will have to be replaced all the way to the residences as we do not allow splicing in the customers secondary cables. The design is not currently at a detailed enough level to contemplate water service, or I did not notice a consideration for abandoning existing or proposing new water service. All Water dept. standards should be adhered to when submitting Water plans. Water mains appear to be available form Hopkins if the developer wishes to serve the property from City infrastructure on Hopkins. Any and all alignments should be reviewed and approved by the City of Aspen Water Dept. P66 IV.A. Parks: No planting of trees will be allowed in Bio-Retention ponds, nor can the location of these ponds affect the long term health of any trees that are proposed. The proposed tree removal plan appears okay. On the Hopkins side of this development, the tree removal plan appears okay, however we wish to preserve the maple tree in the northeast corner of the property. Parks Department will permit removal of most of the trees on the Molly Gibson properties, however, on the Hopkins Avenue property, only certain trees will be allowed to be removed. A Tree Removal/Dripline Excavation permit will be required prior to the Parks Department signing off on the building or demolition permit. Tree Protection Fencing shall be in place prior to any construction activity on either property and the City Forester or his designee will need to inspect this fence before construction activity may commence. P67 IV.A. RECEPTION#: 617290, 02/10/2015 at 10:52:33 AM, 1 OF 25, R $131.00 Doc Code ORDINANCE Janice K.Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO ORDINANCE NO. 3 SERIES OF 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPROVAL, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT—PROJECT REVIEW APPROVAL AND SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ON PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 101 W MAIN STREET,LOTS 1 AND 2 OF THE MOLLY GIBSON PUD, AND FOR LOT 2 OF THE 125 WEST MAIN STREET HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2735-124-55-800 2735-124-55-005, 2735-124-55-066 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application for the Molly Gibson PD (the Application) from Aspen Galena, LLC (Applicant), represented by Stan Clauson Associates and CCY Architects for the following land use review approvals: Planned Development—Project Review, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.445. Subdivision Review - pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.480. Growth Management Review — Replacement of Existing Commercial and Lodge Development, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470. Growth Management Review—Lodge Development, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470. Growth Management Review — New Free Market Residential Units, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470. Growth Management Review— Affordable Housing, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470. Growth Management Review — Demolition or redevelopment of multi-family housing, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470. Commercial Design Review - Conceptual, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.412. Major Development - Conceptual for properties within the Historic District, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.415. Demolition of properties located within the Historic District, pursuant to Section 26.415; and, WHEREAS, all code citation references are to the City of Aspen Land Use Code in effect on the day of initial application—August 11, 2014, as applicable to this Project; and, WHEREAS, the.-Application for the Molly Gibson PD proposes: 68 hotel units with 68 bedrooms in 20,575 square feet of net livable area located on Parcel 1 Molly Gibson Lodge 101 W. Main Street Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015 Page 1 of 12 P68 IV.A. 1 affordable housing unit in 607 square feet of net livable area located on Parcel 1. 2 free market residential single family homes located on Parcel 2 in 8,000 square feet of floor area. 12 parking spaces at-grade spaces on Parcel 1. 4 garage parking spaces, 2 spaces per single family home, on Parcel 2; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, Building Department, Fire Protection District, Environmental Health Department, Parks Department, Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, Public Works Department, and the Transportation Department as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.7, Affordable Housing, of the Land Use Code, a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority is required and a recommendation for approval by the board was provided at their November 5, 2014, regular meeting; and, WHEREAS, said referral agencies and the Aspen Community Development Department reviewed the proposed Application and recommended continuation; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.445 of the Land Use Code, Planned Development - Project Review approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Historic Preservation Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.480 of the Land Use Code, Subdivision approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Historic Preservation Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on December 3, 2014, the Historic Preservation Commission approved Resolution 35, Series of 2014, by a 5 -1 vote granting Conceptual Major Development approval, Conceptual Commercial Design approval, Demolition approval, Residential Design Standard variances, and Growth Management approval, and recommending City Council approve the Molly Gibson Application and all necessary land use reviews, as identified herein, with the recommended conditions of approval; and, WHEREAS, all required public noticing was provided as evidenced by an affidavit of public notice submitted to the record, a public open house was provided by the applicant to meet the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.304.035, and the public was provided a thorough and full review of the proposed development; and, WHEREAS, on January 12, 2015 the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015, on First Reading by a five to zero (5-0) vote; and, WHEREAS, during a public hearing on January 26, 2015, the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015, by a five to zero (5-0) vote, approving with conditions the Molly Gibson Lodge Subdivision/PD and all necessary land use reviews; and, Molly Gibson Lodge 101 W. Main Street Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015 Page 2 of 12 P69 IV.A. 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 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 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 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 AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Approvals Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby grants the Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development — Project Review approval, Subdivision approval, and Growth Management approvals, for a Site Specific Development Plan for the Molly Gibson Lodge Subdivision/PD, subject to the conditions of approval as listed herein. The approved dimensions are attached as Exhibit A. Section 2: Subsequent Reviews Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Applicant is required to obtain Final Commercial Design Review, Major Development Review— Final for properties located within the Historic District, and Planned Development — Detail Review following approval of the reviews outlined herein. The applicant shall combine these applications, and they shall be made no later than one (1) year following City Council approval of the reviews outlined herein. Section 3: Historic Preservation Reviews Major Development- Conceptual approval for properties located within a Historic District, Conceptual Commercial Design Standard approval, and Demolition for properties located within a Historic District are granted for Parcel 1 of the Molly Gibson PUD and Parcel 2 of the 125 West Main Street Historic Landmark Lot Split pursuant to HPC Resolution No. 35, Series of 2014. Section 4: Growth Management Allotments The following Growth Management allotments and credits amend those approved via HPC Resolution No. 35, Series of 2014. 4.1 Reconstruction Credits. Based on the existing Molly Gibson Lodge development, the Applicant represents the following reconstruction credits, pursuant to Land Use Chapter 26.470 Molly Gibson Lodge 101 W. Main Street Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015 Page 3 of 12 P70 IV.A. a. A total of 53 lodging bedrooms, equating to 106 lodge pillows, is credited toward the Project's lodge GMQS allotment request. b. 1 unit of affordable housing. 4.2 Growth Management Allotments. The following growth management allotments are granted to the Molly Gibson Lodge: a. 15 lodging bedrooms = 30 lodging pillows. Added to the reconstruction credits, the entire project represents 68 lodging.bedrooms or 136 pillows. b. 2 free market residential allotments. Section 5: Affordable Housing 5.1 Mitigation Requirements. The mitigation for the project is as follows: Affordable Housing replacement: Replace existing one-bedroom affordable housing unit which houses 1.75 FTEs with an onsite one-bedroom affordable housing unit which houses 1.75 FTEs. Lodge: Mitigate for the additional 15 lodge bedrooms 15 lodge bedrooms * 0.3 FTEs = 4.5 FTEs generated 4.5 FTEs @ 10% mitigation = 0.45 FTEs required mitigation for lodge Free-Market Residential: Provide 10% of free-market residential square feet as affordable housing 11,121 sq ft * 10% = 1,112 square feet net livable area required as affordable housing To convert to FTEs- 1,112/400 sf net livable per FTE =2.78 FTEs Affordable Housing Credits equal to 3.23 FTEs at a Category 4 or lower to mitigate the Lodge and Free Market Residential requirements are approved. A one bedroom unit that is Category 2 and is provided onsite to mitigate the demolition of the existing onsite one bedroom unit is approved. 5.2 Affordable Housing Conditions. The affordable housing rental unit shall be deed restricted at Category 2, and shall meet the following conditions: a. The unit shall be deed restricted at Category 2. b. All tenants shall be approved by APCHA prior to occupancy. c. The hotel has the right-of-first refusal to place a qualified tenant in the unit upon approval from APCHA. Molly Gibson Lodge 101 W. Main Street Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015 Page 4 of 12 P71 IV.A. d. Employees of the hotel will be exempt from maximum assets and maximum income for the on-site unit; however, the tenants cannot own any other property within the ownership exclusion zone and must work full time as defined in the APCHA Guidelines. e. Minimum occupancy shall be obtained for each unit (one qualified employee per bedroom). f. The unit cannot be vacant for longer than 45 days, unless APCHA is notified as to why the unit has been left vacant. If an employee of the lodge is not interested in renting the unit, a qualified tenant based on the APCHA Guidelines shall be allowed to rent the unit. g. The deed restriction shall be recorded for the affordable housing unit prior to Certificate of Occupancy (CO) of the free-market component. The CO for the affordable housing unit shall be issued at the same time or prior to the CO for the lodge, free-market residential units, and commercial space. h. The Condominium Declaration shall include language, to be reviewed and approved by APCHA, that should the affordable housing unit become an ownership unit: a. The unit will be sold through the lottery system. b. The dues will be based on the assessed value of the deed-restricted unit vs. the free- market unit as well as the square footage of the units; c. No common expenses will be charged to the deed-restricted owners, unless approved by APCHA, especially the common expenses associated with the lodge. Section 6: Planned Development— Detail Review In addition to the general documents required as part of a Planned Development— Detail Review, the following items shall be required as part of the Application's Planned Development — Detail Review: a. An Outdoor Lighting Plan, pursuant to section 26.575.150. b. An existing and proposed Landscaping Plan, identifying trees with diameters and values. c. A draft Construction Management Plan. d. A snow storage and snow shedding plan. Snow is not permitted to shed off roofs onto neighboring properties. Demonstrate that any snow which sheds off roofs will remain on-site. e. Preservation of the historic fence. f. A completed Transportation Impact Analysis. g. Confirmation from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District that the 0' rear yard setback is constructible without damage to the sanitation sewer lines in the alley. Section 7: Subdivision/PD Plat and Agreement Lot 1 of the Molly Gibson PUD and Lot 2 of 125 West Main Street Historic Landmark Lot Split are hereby merged into one lot: Lot 1 of the Molly Gibson Planned Development. Upon filing of the Subdivision Plat Lot 2 of 125 West Main Street Historic Landmark Lot Split is hereby removed from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Molly Gibson Lodge 101 W. Main Street Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015 Page 5 of 12 P72 IV.A. The Applicant shall submit a Subdivision/PD agreement (hereinafter "Agreement") that meets the requirements of the Land Use Code within 180 days of final approval. The 180 days shall commence upon the granting of Final Commercial Design, Final Major Development and Planned Development — Detail Review 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 and Historic. Design Review/ Architectural Character Plan. 2. Planned Development Project and Detail_Review Plans. 3. Public Infrastructure Plan. 4. Final Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). 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. 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. 3. Storm Water and Drainage Improvements Guarantee. Section 8: Engineering Department 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. 8.1 Drainage: The project shall meet the Urban'Runoff Management Plan Requirements and Engineering Design Standards. 8.2 Sidewalk/Curb/Gutter: All sidewalk curb and gutter shall meet the Engineering Standards of City of Aspen Municipal Code Title 21. a.The minimum sidewalk width on Main and Garmisch Streets is 8 ft, detached. The minimum width of the planting strip is 5 ft. It is understood that potential conflicts may limit the sidewalk width and or planting strip width. While the applicant should attempt to achieve the code width, the sidewalk width can be reduced to 6 ft where conflicts exist, subject to approval by the Parks and Engineering Departments. a) The Hopkins sidewalk is in a residential area and therefore, the minimum sidewalk width is 5 ft, detached. The minimum width of the planting strip is 5 ft. Molly Gibson Lodge 101 W. Main Street Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015 Page 6 of 12 P73 IV.A. b) Curb and gutter likely needs to be replaced except for the new curb and gutter on Hopkins Ave. The turning radius may need to be address at the intersection of Main and Garmisch Streets. 8.3 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. 8.4 CMP: The Construction Management Plan shall describe mitigation for: parking, staging/encroachments, and truck traffic. 8.5 Snow Storage: A minimum functional area equaling 30% of the paved area shall be provided contiguous to the paved and designed to accommodate snow storage. For heated areas, the functional area can be reduced to 10%. 8.6 Parking: parking must be located within the property boundary. Parallel parking is required for Garmisch Street. At least one signed loading zone parking space is permitted for Garmisch Street. Additional spaces are subject to approval by the Engineering and Parking Department, Section 9: Fire Mitigation All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met, subject to review and approval by the Fire Marshall. Section 10: Parks Department Tree removal permits are required prior to issuance of a building permit for any demolition or significant site work. Mitigation for removals must be met by paying cash in lieu, planting on site, or a combination of both, pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of the City Municipal Code. Significant mitigation is required due to the large amount of trees that are on both of the properties that appears will need to be removed. We would like to see a detailed landscape plan that shows all trees with the DBH (diameter at breast height) that they want to remove as well as a proposed planting plan. A tree protection plan indicating the drip lines of each individual tree or groupings of trees remaining on site shall be included in the building permit application for any demolition or significant site work. The plan shall indicate the location of protective zones for approval by the City Forester and prohibit excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, storage of equipment, and access over or through the zone by foot or vehicle. The municipal code requirements regarding tree protection fencing being required & the excavation, storage of material, construction backfill, equipment, foot or vehicle traffic being prohibited is applicable. Section 11• Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Requirements Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. Molly Gibson Lodge 101 W. Main Street Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015 Page 7 of 12 P74 IV.A. All clear water connections are prohibited (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) including trench drains for the entrances to underground parking garages. On-site drainage and landscaping plans require approval by the district, must accommodate ACSD service requirements and comply with rules, regulations and specifications. On-site sanitary sewer utility plans require approval by ACSD. Oil and Grease interceptors are required for all new and remodeled food processing establishments. Plans for interceptors, separators and containment facilities require submittal by the applicant and approval prior to a building permit application. Plumbing plans for the pool and spa areas require approval of the drain size by the district. Glycol snowmelt and heating systems must have containment provisions and must preclude discharge to the public sanitary sewer system. When new service lines are required for existing development the old service lines (3) must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line according to specific ACSD requirements and prior to all soil stabilization activities. Below grade development will require installation of a pumping system. Generally 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 areas covered by sewer easements or right of ways to the lot line of each development. All ACSD total connection fees must be paid prior to the issuance of any permits. 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. Due to the depth of the main sewer line in the alley and the need to replace this sewer line in the future, the District would not support the applicants request for an exemption to vacate the five foot setback requirement from the alley lot lines. The district will be able to respond with more specific comments and requirements once detailed building and utility plans are available. Section 12: Environmental Health Department The State of Colorado mandates specific mitigation requirements with regard to asbestos. Additionally, code requirements to be aware of when filing a building permit include: a prohibition on engine idling, regulation of fireplaces, fugitive dust requirements, noise abatement and pool designs. The trash enclosures for Parcel 1 have received approval by the Environmental Health Department for an enclosure that is 9' 8.5' x 20' for the trash and recycling receptacles. This area is within the property line and is not encroaching on the alley The trash and recycling for Parcel 2 (the single family residences) shall be located on Parcel 2. Molly Gibson Lodge 101 W. Main Street Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015 Page 8 of 12 P75 IV.A. Section 13: Transportation Department The applicant shall update the Transportation Impact Analysis report for approval by the Transportation Department prior to Detailed Review. Consideration for the BRT bus stop shall be considered in the Construction Management Plan. Section 14: Water/Utilities Department 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. All Water System Distribution standards in place at the time of building permit shall apply, and all tap fees will be assess per applicable codes and standards. Utility placement and design shall meet adopted City of Aspen standards. Section 15: Outdoor Lighting and Sisnage All outdoor lighting and all signage shall meet the requirements of the Aspen Municipal Code. Section 16: Public Amenity Spaces The Applicant has committed to providing ground floor public amenity spaces as shown on Exhibit B. These spaces shall be permanently accessible by the public. Section 17: 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 Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Aspen 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 other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 18: 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 19: 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 12`" day of January, 2015. Molly Gibson Lodge 101 W. Main Street Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015 Page 9 of 12 P76 IV.A. teven a ion, M car i tSA nda Manning, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 26`" day of January, 2015. APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPRO AS TO CONTENT: ZJ'aines R. True, City Attorney Ste e -Skadran, Mayor TEST: i b°j Linda Manning, City Cie k Attachments: Exhibit A: Approved Dimensional Requirements Exhibit B: Approved Elevations, Site Plan and Public Amenity Space Molly Gibson Lodge 101 W. Main Street Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015 Page 10 of 12 P77 IV.A. Exhibit A—Approved Dimensional Requirements Parcel 1 of Molly Gibson PUD (Main Street) and 125 West Main Street Lot 2: Approved Dimensions minimum lot size 18,000' minimum lot width 180' front yard (Main St.) see site plan - up to 2.5'variance side yard (Garmisch) see site plan- up to 0'variance side yard (west) 3.5' rear(alley) see site plan- up to 0' variance maximum height 32' public amenity 1,869 or 10% trash access area 20w x 9' 8.5" d x open to sky minimum off-street 12 (Current deficit maintained) parking spaces cumulative floor area 1.5:1) 26,959 sf lodge floor area 1.46:1)26,314.8 sf affordable housing floor 644 sf area average lodge unit size 303 sf number of lodge units 68 total number of 136/68 pillows/bedrooms lodge net livable area 20,575 sf affordable housing net 607 sf livable area l Molly Gibson Lodge 101 W. Main Street Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015 Page 11 of 12 P78 IV.A. Parcel 2 of Molly Gibson PUD (Hopkins Ave.): Approved Dimensions minimum lot size 9,002 sf minimum lot width 90' front yard (Hopkins 10' Ave.) side yard (east) 7' side yard (west) 7' rear (alley) 10' distance between 10' buildings maximum height 25' maximum % site 51.3% coverage allowable floor area total 8,000 sf or 4,000 sf per single family residence minimum off-street 4 parking spaces Molly Gibson Lodge 101 W. Main Street Ordinance No. 3, Series 2015 Page 12 of 12 P79 IV.A. i I t I I I I I I I F v L, i Ri( 1. I u f - gra.. rFPpVG• i.. ! I I - I '': r -- r -----' r------ t r-- ---- t , 4 } 111 ' il IOr 9 f3 (;: b \ 5 CICt ) ( i1 I-- G I ' c' v SITE PLAN 11"= 10. 4" NORTH A l , H FEC IL . 0 MGL DECEMBER 19, 2014 V ', P80 IV.A. I I I I I I I I r ...___ i ._... All L— i - et E,--- Lr € i s r' , I i--' 1 I I u e j I I 1 f II I l [ I I ' I C E I i; I I, I• Ea EE 1 I it A y I I i I--------- ---, - - --- -----, I i i I i i l i i i VARIANCE SITE PLAN MGL I DECEMBER 19, 2014 C Y R ( I— I I ECT ;> 9AI- 2. 1 J P81 IV.A. LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN P82 IV.A. I I j I I I I 1 I 1j I: I I ds z (. .. r ; __'___- m;---` ------ ------- ------- -- --- - -------- ----- t ( 1 polls r7a.. i,[ ] P- 15',, iei v- MIX . 4 1 TWA_1 C( C i r i 1 GD 4/ OUR—. AEZIEA IX,. ......--- .._..-.•_.._.-..._-._ m.__.-_..-.-.-._.. l-. e_..__. i._..-_. 1--,!.,._-__ 1w' l. i. l Lw u.. I i I1 1i i MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 1i8 MGL I DECEMBER 19, 2014 NORTH C C Y A R C I F I_ C I SI AL31 i P83 IV.A. C{ .. .-- Y l I I I i I 1 1 1 1 I ------ ------ ------------------------ i----- --- ------- ----- ------ K< I N I' I LYH} ilf 4JEEY U'. UEkk WEEN : 1GJ: fE WEEN Fm 1 X.< ai 1 1 Ik E 1 1 I i EI ; I I 11 1 i k: N:: Pi1Ntf. tS! fET! AX: I: Ic( N FV , 19lE OUEFN WITIt Ott r! M. 4E1EG I I I f 1 I 1 II I I i I I----- - L-------=------ i I I I I i SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 1/ 8"= V- 0" MGL DECEMBER 19, 2014 NORTH R ' ( 1 ' AL3' 3 P84 IV.A. i j I I xl- I I I 1 — I i t t ' 1' I I v;•...< 1 r--------- -----? ------- -------- —=-- ------ 7 j li I l - Nil& fp£: 1! tO RI£ OUEr t% z: FIEGUF[ II j I t 477 u; i I - 1 I eif quffrc i li I I I I II I K, I I I 1. I I 3 THIRD LEVEL FLOOR PLAN MGL DECEMBER 19, 2014 NORTH-- C 1 A R C 1- 1 - E C T S AL3. • I I_ P85 IV.A. i i i i tr; I i I I I I I rar• T I r 1 S i- I I I I I I I •• 1`.._-.: I I 4; i 14, I i 1 i 71 I - r - , ----- 7 ---- --- 4- ' — I ROOF PLAN( vs°— r- o" MGL DECEMBER 19, 2014 P A R C Fi i T E C AL 3. 5 P86 IV.A. 7t77 Jj r r ME I t I FR i-• 4r-=: I t BL t Y ALLEY- ALLE ESI. Iwn i IR.YE: i REunc METER LCCATk]•! r MULTI STORY; j FRAME i BUILDING if o 7 I I I ,•, ! j4 1 }' EER-0 ECREss EIGRAYa_ UGMI' ML BEECiv; PCRGWE, IOYI CWF! . 5 SER i, oaE. ROCFB Y J s J I`\•!- ? au.: R Roo: 6El0'. v— 1 J . ii fes- 1 XI I ... .._ tt I e oj, y` I HOPKINS- HOPKINS HOPKINS STREET I RCR STE RAR- Exrsnnn MCN CTE P: M!- aROPosEB _ i• lo c- I- Iro• I °_ 10'- 0° RES. SITE PLAN C Y A P CH I T E C., T S AR2. 0 MGL NOVEMBER 24, 2014 NOH I P87 IV.A. i– ----------------— F I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1! I I I I I I I I ( I I I I I I I I I I, I I i e i i II S J U 3 1L• wLV lelSi ,_,--_ 1 lCN LEVEL I I RES. FLOOR PLANS tis"= V- 0" -- z_ 1-- MGL I NOVEMBER 24, 2014 NORTH C C Y A R C H I T I C I S : AR3. 0 P88 IV.A. T 1.. I i 0 I O I i 1 I I i l f RES. FLOOR PLANS va = r o :—' MGL NOVEMBER 24, 2014 NORTH O hl C, 1- 1 - ( j S iQ '. P89 IV.A. i E7•`-, s „ w» 4.e- If C\ ILL 1 r i E, I r J T. FES' FSE Ta PESJ- NOPTN ELEVaTiW v 3 I rEPlr:,. cL, S i q PEs- soma ELEviT ou ...__.. ESf SVEST ELf. V. 1TIGf r I + v „ T f .'' (, .,. .'. W' CLPEASE I15 E VAPOa S EIB\ d( V All i RFVKIW. S T' ANC All Pl] CTIF W[ SHOtVN W iLOM •,.- SOLIN_ TP- El Elm- MS RES. ELEVATIONS MGL NOVEMBER 24, 2014 C A R C 1- 1 1 T F i- . I.. ca AR4. 0 P90 IV.A. I L—...... yDE yx' y f4 i... ....... vw5& i. : - .. UPPCR trVEQ v S.. RIIY 5'`• I lDY/ fA.. cvFl IVMRLLkE4. . REe3? atiT Elf T f1E : IDRTR EIEVATIO. v i•a'. e y, F[ a - . mini 1' x`,.`_.. s- _ i - r t nocr eccK 1 croceEc . n:F a JI Hr Y` a I I RE I. 1': ESI f.: EVATIU; I aC' 1- FAUnI EUVATIDfI d v E omowu 137HIR510. Ek1' ELE bN . t__l'__- ....._..... --. RES. ELEVATIONS MGL NOVEMBER 24, 2014 A ' I...{ I E. ' ) S AR-. 1 I P91 IV.A. MAIN STREET x PROPOSED STREET TREES INTREELAWN EXISTING CROSSWALK PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK GRANITE PAVERS AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACCESS— PK" I 3LIC AMENITY SPA E GRANITE BENCH TYP. PERENNIAL GARDEN PROPOSED TREES D ROP OFF/ PICK UP p — MAIN ENTRANCESTAIR& LOBBY ACCESS HOTEL ROOM ACCESS 99 z5 x'x PRIVACY FENCE r, m xis ' n s r q 3' COVERED OUTDOOR DINING I 1 ATt1x OFFSITE ENHANCED C` UESrT?, A 7G3,+"' x' y r T J v' I Yr.. r y. T PUBLIC AMENITY 3 r @ wy`*'` Sr 3x 6s,• g' Sw cx 3 S. s s i Y . a 8 ' . r + k 7 5 k s - , r``', z 1gTs TK H, h Y tth[ t r,. th rsa'.,{ . i yu 1LfLE7ta?. ., rirat G LODGE LL 101 WEST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 STAN CItaUSONASSOCIATES irlc Conceptual Landscape Plan 29 July 2014 rr: rxm Av sv..; W. n tx> oeoaa t•', t 5] eIWS UrI r vnn. o-, mo i+ foprmpa r. r;. c« r. w*'. iuW^^^ lF^'° STgNCUVSON ASS..^. 0 fTCL•." INC 30;+ P92 IV.A. IVIIJIII NQII VJ LV IJ vv.v..v 10851222 l / Ad Ticket#5 q' / 0 C l 0 Acct: 1013028 Name: Aspen (LEGALS) City of Phone: (970)920-50.64 Address: 130 S Galena St E-Mail: ANGELA.SCOREYQa CITY Client: Caller: Angela Scorey City: Aspen_ Receip t State:' CO Zip: 81611 Ad Name: 10851222A Original Id: 0 Editions: 8ATl/8ATW/Class: 0990 Start: 01/08/15 Stop: 01/08/15 Color: Issue 1 Copyline: atw Molly Gibson 101 W. MAIN ST. Rep: AT Legals PUBLIC NOTICE RE:101 W.MAIN ST.AKA MOLLY GIBSON AND LOT 2 OF.125 W. MAIN ST. HISTORIC LAND- MARK LOT SPLIT-PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REVIEW,GROWTH MANAGEMENT Lines: 41 AMENDMENT,SUBDIVISION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing Depth: 3.43 will be held on Monday.January 26.2015•at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m.before the Aspen City Council.in Council Chambers.City Hall. 130 S. Galena St..Aspen. City Council is asked toColumns: 1 consider an application submitted by Aspen Gale- na LLC. 605 West Main Street.Suite 2,Aspen, Discount:0.00 Colorado.represented by Stan Clauson and Asso- ciates.and affecting the property located at 101 West Main Street,Lots 1 and 2 of the nnMolly Gitr Commission: 0.00 son Lodge Planned Development.City and Town- site of Aspen.Colorado.and Lot 2 of the 125 West Main Street Historic Landmark Lot Split. The appli- cant requests approval to demolish the existing Net-0.00 lodge along Main Street and Hopkins Street.to merge Lot 1 of the Molly Gibson Lodge PUD with 000 Lot 2 of the 125 West Main Street Historic Land- Tax: mark Lot Split.and to construct a new 68 unit lodge along Main Street with one affordable housing unit. and to construct 2 detached single family homes Total 20.75 along Hopkins Street. The following reviews are requested of City Council:Planned Development- Project Review and Subdivision.and an amend- ment to Growth Management approvals.For fur- ther information.contact Sara Adam s at the City ofPaymentAspenCommunityDevelopmentDepartment, 130 S. Galena St.. Aspen. CO. (970) 429-2778. sara.adamsne cityofaspen.com. s/Steven Skadron Aspen Mayor Published in the Aspen Times on January 8.2015 10851222) Ad shown is not actual print size P93 IV.A. Land Use Application Molly Gibson Lodge A lodge preservation project, featuring small room lodging and associated free- market residential units. 18 March 2015 - Revised 31 March 2015 Location: 101 West Main Street, Aspen, CO (PID# 273512455800) An application for final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review. Represented By: P94 IV.A. P 9 5 I V . A . Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 1 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 PROJECT OVERVIEW Aspen Galena, LLC (the “Applicant”) submits this application for final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and Planned Development (PD) – Detailed Review for the Molly Gibson Lodge as a small lodge preservation project with associated residential development. The subject site is a 27,000 SF parcel spanning from Main Street (Parcel 1) to Hopkins Avenue (Parcel 2), and bordering Garmisch Street on the east (the “Property”). The Property lies partially within the Mixed-Use (MU) Main Street Historic District and Medium-Density Residential (R-6) zone districts, and has a Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) impacting the entire parcel. The LP Overlay District has been used to determine the permitted uses and the allowable floor area for the proposed free-market multi-family residential component. The Planned Development (PD) overlay will determine other parameters, which generally considered the MU and R-6 zone districts. Previous Approvals The Historic Preservation Commission (“HPC”) granted Demolition and Major Development Approvals for properties located within the Main Street Historic District, Commercial Design Standard – Conceptual Approval, Growth Management allotments, and Residential Design Standard Variances by Resolution 35, Series of 2014. City Council granted Growth Management, Planned Development – Project Review, and Subdivision for a Site Specific Development Plan approval by Ordinance 3, Series 2015. This application responds to the third step of three for the required process and is prepared in conformance with the Pre-application Conference Summary dated 4 February 2015. Proposed Development The proposed development will replace the existing lodge with an entirely new lodge that will feature units averaging 302 SF in size. The proposed design is compatible with the Main Street Historic District and neighboring properties. The addition of small lodge units to the inventory of lodging units for the City of Aspen is a stated goal of the Aspen Area Community Plan as well as a priority of the City Council, and this development will address an important gap in the lodging inventory for the City. Through the previous reviews the proposed project has been refined to now include an increase in the number of lodge units provided, from 53 existing units to 68 units. Previously, HPC approved 64 lodge units. The increase in lodge units is the result of the conversion of the previously proposed free-market residential unit on the third floor of the hotel to four (4) additional lodge units. Two (2) single-family residential units are still proposed on Hopkins however the size of these residential units was reduced by a combined 1,000 SF to accommodate increased side yard setbacks (7’ side yard setbacks) and reduce site coverage (from 56% to 51%), as recommended by HPC at Conceptual. The Residential Design Standards variance requests have been reduced to two (2) variance requests, down from the four (4) requested at Conceptual. Other modifications that were made pursuant to HPC recommendations and which are still a part of the proposed development include the flat roofed western module and additional public gathering spaces adjacent to entry door and lobby. Twelve (12) at-grade parking spaces are proposed for lodge use on Parcel 1. Four (4) garage spaces, two (2) spaces per single-family residence, are proposed on Parcel 2. Replacement of the existing affordable housing studio unit and mitigation for the additional lodge and residential development is proposed through the combined provision of on-site affordable housing and the purchase of Affordable Housing Credits or the buy-down of an existing unit or units. The proposed affordable housing unit provided on-site will be fully P96 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 2 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 compliant with Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines and is intended to house employees of the lodge. Additional site improvements include the provision of a new detached sidewalk along Main Street, replacing the narrow attached sidewalk, as well as sidewalk amenities and the installation of appropriate deciduous street trees along Main Street. These will replace existing spruce trees, which are not preferred to be located along streets. Also proposed is the enhancement of the area between the edge of pavement along Garmisch and the entrance to the lodge. The Applicant looks forward to working with the Parks Department in specifying the appropriate street trees and landscape improvements. The approved dimensional requirements for the development are as follows: Parcel 1  3.5’ Western side yard setback;  2.5’ Front yard setback (Main Street);  0’ Eastern (Garmisch) side yard setback;  Maximum height of 32’;  Public amenity space of 10% or 1,869 SF;  Twelve (12) parking spaces (current deficit maintained);  Cumulative floor area ratio of 1.5:1 (26,959 SF);  Lodge floor area ratio of 1.46:1 (26,315 SF);  Lodge net livable area of 20,575 SF Parcel 2  Minimum lot size of 9,002 SF;  Front yard setback (Hopkins) of 10’;  Side yard setbacks (East and West) of 7’;  Rear yard setback (alley) of 10’;  Maximum height of 25’;  Allowable floor area of 8,000 SF or 4,000 SF per residence The architectural plans that are submitted with this application conform to the above dimensional limitations. Final Design and Materials The design and materials utilized in the lodge will be compatible and represent positive change to the Main Street Historic District. The western module of the lodge, which has been designed to specifically provide an appropriate transition between the new architecture and the neighboring historic resource, features a modern take on a traditional front porch. This modern front porch approximates the front porch on the Victorian resource to the west in size and location. The lodge building modulates and steps on a 25’ and 30’ module thereby creating an undulating and interesting façade along Main Street. This modulation relates to the traditional lot width found in Aspen. The windows of the lodge found along Main Street are designed with a tall and narrow proportion that is based on Victorian window proportions. The materials utilized in the lodge will primarily be wood and metal siding. The natural color of the rough sawn wood siding will be evocative of historic out buildings found in the Main Street Historic District. The metal, panelized siding will be non-reflective and contemporary in its feel. Minor modifications are proposed to the Garmisch Street elevation. These modifications have been reviewed with Community Development staff, and staff has determined the modifications P97 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 3 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 to be acceptable. The modifications reduce the foot print of the building as well as reduce the massing of the lodge. Finally, the modifications will serve to emphasize the main entrance of the lodge. The design and materials utilized in the residential units on Hopkins will blend with the variety of architectural styles and materials found in the West End. The homes are designed with overhangs and relief in the massing, especially on the street and alley facades. The siding materials are stone, board form concrete, wood composite and metal. The siding materials have texture and relief and the colors are natural and approachable. The gable roof material is zinc and the flat roofs will be covered with stone ballast. The overall palette is primarily warm greys and brown tones with charcoal and taupe mixed in for contrast and relief. The landscape design for the lodge features accent paving materials which will be utilized in the courtyards and public amenity spaces around the lodge. A concrete ribbon will define the landscape areas and transition into a flowing vertical element which will be utilized as seating. Dense ornamental plantings will soften and complement the architecture and provide the pedestrian with areas of shade and interest. The Applicant is considering adding public art on the corner of Main and Garmisch with the potential to showcase local artists. Landscape lighting will be simple and sleek, providing safety and ambiance without being over powering. The landscape design for the residential units off of Hopkins is designed to maintain the character of the pedestrian environment by enhancing the existing sidewalk. The sidewalk has been detached in accordance with City of Aspen design guidelines. A tree lawn has been provided that ties into the existing tree lawn to the east. The landscaping will relate to and complement the front porches of the residences. Landscape lighting is limited to pathway lighting and a sconce at the front door of both residences. Landscape plantings will be incorporated in the increased setbacks between the residences. The Applicant has worked to design a project that meets the City’s goals with respect to small lodge development with smaller rooms and a more economical cost basis. We look forward to reviewing the final details of this exciting project with the HPC. P98 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 4 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 MAIN STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT FINAL REVIEW DESIGN GUIDELINES Building Design & Articulation 7.16 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the Victorian era residences seen traditionally on Main Street. The proposed development will be compatible and represent positive change to the District. The character of the redeveloped lodge will include a module designed specifically to provide an appropriate transition between the new architecture and the neighboring historic resource. The careful design of the proposed development will help preserve the existing contextual flavor of the neighborhood. The building modulates and steps on a 25’ and 30’ module that creates an undulating façade along Main Street. This modulation relates to the traditional lot width found in Aspen. The windows along Main Street are designed with a tall and narrow proportion that is based on Victorian window proportions. The western two story module of the lodge defers to the existing Victorian residence to the west by providing a front porch condition that is similar to the front porch on the Victorian resource. 7.17 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. The proposed development has not been designed to imitate the historic architectural style within the district. Rather, the proposed development has been designed to respectfully complement adjacent historic styles by utilizing some historically inspired detailing, particularly in the fenestration of the building, as well as providing for a transitional module that allows the redeveloped lodge to complement the neighboring historic resource to the west. The proposed development will feature structures of their own time. While the Victorian proportions are acknowledged through the stepping of the façade, and window shapes, the proposed lodge is intended to be current architecture that relates to and respects the City of Aspen of today. The forms are derived from modernist forms that relate to some of the more progressive lodges in this district. Windows and Doors 7.18 The retail entrance should be at the sidewalk level. The primary entrances of the redeveloped lodge are accessible from sidewalk level. The lodge will be able to be entered both from Main Street and Garmisch Street. 7.19 Incorporate an airlock entry into the plan for all new structures. The proposed lodge incorporates one air lock entry at the principal entry located off of Garmisch. Other entries do not incorporate an air lock pursuant to discussions with the City of Aspen Community Development Department. Architectural Materials 7.20 Use building materials that are similar to those used historically. The majority of the building exterior for the redeveloped lodge will consist of wood and metal siding. The wood siding is intended to be of a rough sawn wood that relates to the siding and structures of historic out buildings found along alleys in Aspen, particularly in P99 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 5 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 the West End. The metal siding is a panelized, non-reflective sheet metal siding that is intended to be more contemporary in its pattern. This material selection is in keeping with the historic character of the Main Street Historic District. Samples of all building materials will be provided at the public hearing, both images and actual samples. Specifically 7.21 Use roofing materials that are similar in appearance to those seen historically. The lodge will feature flat membrane roofs which will be light in color and non-reflective. The residential units on Hopkins will utilize a non-reflective, prefinished sheet metal, standing seam roofing material on the sloped roofs. The standing seam roofing material is similar in appearance to historic materials. The flat portions of roof on the residences will utilize ballasted membrane roofing. Paving and Landscaping 7.22 Landscaping and paving should have the following characteristics: • Enhance the street scene • Integrate the development with its setting • Reflect the quality of the architectural materials The landscape is designed to activate and enhance the pedestrian environment along Main Street and Garmisch Street. Public amenity space is expanded in front of the redeveloped lodge and activated through the provision of seating and other attractive landscape design elements. The landscape improvements will enhance the connection with Paepcke Park, which is directly located across Garmisch Street, as well as serve to integrate the neighboring properties to the west by replacing a constricted portion of sidewalk on Main Street. Accent paving materials will be utilized in the courtyards and public amenity spaces. A concrete ribbon will define the landscape areas and transition into vertical elements which will be utilized as seating. Dense ornamental plantings will soften and complement the architecture and provide the pedestrian with areas of shade and interest. Public art will be included on the corner of Main and Garmisch with the potential to showcase local artists. Landscape lighting will be simple and sleek, providing safety and ambiance without being over powering. All lighting will be dark sky compliant and meet applicable City of Aspen lighting code. The Free Market Residential Units, with frontage on W. Hopkins Street, are designed to maintain the character of the pedestrian environment by enhancing the existing sidewalk. The sidewalk has been detached in accordance with City of Aspen design guidelines. A tree lawn has been provided that ties into the existing tree lawn to the east. The landscaping will relate to and complement the front porches of the residences. Landscape lighting is limited to pathway lighting and a sconce at the front door of both residences. Landscape plantings will be incorporated in the increased setbacks between the residences. 7.23 Landscaping should create a buffer between the street and sidewalk. The Main Street frontage of the redeveloped lodge will include a detached sidewalk with a buffer of lawn and street trees which will replace a rather constricted portion of P100 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 6 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 the existing sidewalk. The new sidewalk condition will make pedestrian travel on the south side of Main Street more safe and comfortable. At the property frontage on Garmisch Street, the parking will be converted from the existing head-in condition to parallel parking. In this new configuration, the redesigned street frontage includes a detached sidewalk along the length of the parking turnout. The Free Market Residential Units, with frontage on W. Hopkins Street, are designed to maintain the character of the pedestrian environment by enhancing the existing sidewalk. In its current condition, the detached sidewalk includes a 3-feet wide buffer from the curb using brick pavers. The new landscape design will replace the brick pavers and convert this space to lawn with street trees. P101 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 7 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 L A N D U S E C O D E R E S P O N S E S Sec. 26.412.040A.4.Final Design Application The application contains the materials for final design including final drawings, accurate representations of all major building materials to be used in the development depicted through samples and photos, and responses showing how the final design conforms to representations made or stipulations placed as a condition of conceptual design approval. Sec. 26.412.060. Commercial design standards The following design standards, in addition to the commercial, lodging and historic district design objectives and guidelines, shall apply to commercial, lodging and mixed-use development: A. Public amenity space. Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of- way or private property within commercial areas. Currently, the Property contains no public amenity space. The proposed redevelopment will provided 1,869 SF of public amenity space, representing 10% of the parcel. The project provides public amenity space through the development of a pedestrian amenity plaza at the corner of Main and Garmisch, and two new plazas along Main Street. Additionally, the sidewalk along Main Street, which is currently attached, will be replaced as a detached sidewalk, with planting of appropriate street trees in the newly created tree lawn. Immediately offsite along Garmisch and adjacent to the entrance of the lodge, the Applicant proposes improving the area between the street and the Property with lawn, benches, and appropriate planting areas. B. Utility, delivery and trash service provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one (1) building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply: 1. A trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum size and location standards established by Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, unless otherwise established according to said Chapter. Utility, trash, and recycle service areas will be provided off of the alley. The utility, trash, and recycle service areas are shown on the drawings and consist of a 20’x9’8’ enclosure which is open to the sky. The enclosure is consistent with the standards set forth in previous approvals. 2. A utility area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum standards established by Title 25, Utilities, of the Municipal Code, the City’s Electric Distribution Standards, and the National Electric Code, unless otherwise established according to said Codes. The proposed utility area will meet the minimum standards as established by Title 25, Utilities, of the Municipal Code, the City’s Electric Distribution Standards, and the National Electric Code, unless otherwise established according to said Codes. P102 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 8 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 The transformer located at the southwest corner of the lodge site will be directly accessible off the alley. The space allotted the transformer is 15’6” x 15’-0” which allows for a pad mounted transformer with ample clearance on all sides. 3. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be co-located and combined to the greatest extent practical. All utility, trash and recycle service areas will be co-located and combined to the greatest extent practical. The trash and recycle plan allows for multiple 90 gallon, wheel mounted containers as well as a compacting 6 yard dumpster. This is located at the south edge of the site near the delivery area. The utility, trash, and recycle service area has been reviewed and approved by the Environmental Health Department. 4. If the property adjoins an alleyway, the utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be along and accessed from the alleyway, unless otherwise approved through Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. Utility, trash, and recycle service areas will be located off of the alley. The utility, trash, and recycle service areas will meet the minimum standards established. 5. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be fenced so as not to be visible from the street, unless they are entirely located on an alleyway or otherwise approved though Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. All fences shall be six (6) feet high from grade, shall be of sound construction, and shall be no less than ninety percent (90%) opaque, unless otherwise varied through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. All utility, trash and recycle service areas will be fenced. The fence will be a maximum six (6) feet high from grade, of sound construction, and will be no less than 90% opaque. 6. Whenever utility, trash, and recycle service areas are required to be provided abutting an alley, other portions of a building may extend to the rear property line if otherwise allowed by this Title, provided that the utility, trash and recycle area is located at grade and accessible to the alley. The utility, trash, and recycling is located off the alley and at grade. Portions of the building immediately adjacent to the utility, trash, and recycle service areas will extend to the rear property line. 7. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. All utility service pedestals are located within the property boundary and along the alley. There are no proposed encroachments into the alley. Although no encroachments are contemplated, any required encroachments will be properly licensed. 8. All commercial and lodging buildings shall provide a delivery area. The delivery area shall be located along the alley if an alley adjoins the property. The delivery area shall be accessible to all P103 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 9 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 tenant spaces of the building in a manner that meets the requirements of the International Building Code Chapters 10 and 11 as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen. All non-ground floor commercial spaces shall have access to an elevator or dumbwaiter for delivery access. Alleyways (vehicular rights-of-way) may not be utilized as pathways (pedestrian rights-of-way) to meet the requirements of the International Building Code. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. A delivery area will be provided for the lodge, located along the alley. Access from the delivery area to the lodge meets all applicable code requirements. The lodge is the sole tenant requiring access to the delivery area. The alleyway will not be utilized as a pathway, and an internal sidewalk will be provided leading from the parking area to the lodge. 9. All commercial tenant spaces located on the ground floor in excess of 1,500 square feet shall contain a vestibule (double set of doors) developed internal to the structure to meet the requirements of the International Energy Conservation Code as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen, or an air curtain. No commercial tenant spaces are proposed to be located on the ground floor. 10. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the street as practical. Mechanical exhaust will be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment will be located as far away from the street as practical. 11. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting will be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device. These features will not be visible from the public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. The newly constructed buildings will reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. 12. The trash and recycling service area requirements may be varied pursuant to Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code. All other requirements of this subsection may be varied by special review (see Chapter 26.430.040.E, Utility and delivery service area provisions). No variations of the trash and recycling service area are requested at this time. Sec. 26.412.070. Suggested design elements. The following guidelines are building practices suggested by the City, but are not mandatory. In many circumstances, compliance with these practices may not produce the most desired development, and project designers should use their best judgment. A. Signage. Signage should be integrated with the building to the extent possible. Integrated signage areas already meeting the City's requirements for size, etc., may minimize new tenant signage compliance issues. Common tenant listing areas also serves a public way-finding function, especially for office uses. Signs should P104 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 10 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 not block design details of the building on which they are placed. Compliance with the City's sign code is mandatory. Signage will be integrated with the building to the maximum extent possible. Signs will not block design details of the building on which they are placed. The proposed signage will be in compliance with the City sign code. The principal signage is located on the east elevation along Garmisch Street, oriented vertically. The sign features cut out letters that are 1’-0” tall. The overall length of the sign is 10’ long. A secondary sign will be provided on the façade facing Main Street of the same dimensions and style, only horizontally oriented. Cut-out signs are provided a 50% reduction when calculating area. Therefore, the two signs will represent 10 SF of signage, below the 12 SF maximum afforded lodge uses. B. Display windows. Display windows provide pedestrian interest and can contribute to the success of the retail space. Providing windows that reveal inside activity of the store can provide this pedestrian interest. No retail is proposed for the proposed development. Large windows will be provided which will reveal the inside activity of the lobby area from both Main and Garmisch Streets. C. Lighting. Well-lit (meaning quality, not quantity) display windows along the first floor create pedestrian interest after business hours. Dynamic lighting methods designed to catch attention can cheapen the quality of the downtown retail environment. Illuminating certain important building elements can provide an interesting effect. Significant light trespass should be avoided. Illuminating the entire building should be avoided. Compliance with the City's Outdoor lighting code, Section 26.575.150 of this Title, is mandatory. The proposed development will not employ any dynamic lighting methods. Certain important building elements may be illuminated to provide an interesting effect. Significant light trespass will be avoided, as well as illuminating the entire building. The proposed development will be fully compliant with the City's outdoor lighting code. The modern and clean lighting will utilize fully shielded fixtures pointed downward. Ground mounted fixtures are shielded such that no portion of the light is visible. All post mounted fixtures have translucent, sandblasted glass which will not allow the lamp to be visible. 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property. No building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. While the Property is located within the Main Street Historic District, the proposed development does not involve a designated historic property. 26.415.080. Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. While the Property is located within the Main Street Historic District, the proposed development does not involve a designated historic property. A demolition permit has P105 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 11 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 been granted to demolish the existing Molly Gibson Lodge. The replacement of the existing structure is long overdue as the building is tired and does not function optimally as a lodge. The replacement structure will respect existing character and complement the neighborhood and the City as a whole by providing needed lodge rooms at a reasonable price point. 26.445.050. Planned Development. Project Review Standards. The Project Review shall focus on the general concept for the development and shall outline any dimensional requirements that vary from those allowed in the underlying zone district. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this Title. The underlying zone district designation shall be used as a guide, but not an absolute limitation, to the dimensions which may be considered during the development review process. Any dimensional variations allowed shall be specified in the ordinance granting Project Approval. In the review of a development application for a Project Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, and City Council shall consider the following: A. Compliance with Adopted Regulatory Plans. The proposed development complies with applicable adopted regulatory plans. The proposed development is consistent with the adopted Aspen Area Community Plan, particular by providing for “entry-level” lodging which will encourage diverse lodging opportunities in the City. Residential development incentives were added to the land use code specifically to encourage the preservation and redevelopment of lodging properties, and this incentive increases where smaller room sizes are provided as part of a lodging development. B. Development Suitability. The proposed Planned Development prohibits development on land unsuitable for development because of natural or man-made hazards affecting the property, including flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snowslide areas, slopes in excess of 30%, and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Affected areas may be accepted as suitable for development if adequate mitigation techniques acceptable to the City Engineer are proposed in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards. Conceptual plans for mitigation techniques may be accepted for this standard. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. The requested maximum allowable density can be accommodated within the PD. The land is suitable for the proposed development. Ground instability or the possibilities of mudflow, rock fall, or avalanche dangers have not been specifically identified for this property. C. Site Planning. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The site plan responds to the site’s natural characteristics and physical constraints such as steep slopes, vegetation, waterways, and any natural or man-made hazards and allows development to blend in with or enhance said features. The site plan responds to the site’s natural characteristics and physical constraints. No physical constraints, such as steep slopes, waterways, or any natural or man-made hazards exist on the site. P106 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 12 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 2. The project preserves important geologic features, mature vegetation, and structures or features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual, or ecological importance or contribute to the identity of the town. The project will preserve important mature vegetation, to the greatest extent possible. No geologic features, structures or features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual, or ecological importance, or features which contribute to the identity of the town exist on the Property. 3. Buildings are oriented to public streets and are sited to reflect the neighborhood context. Buildings and access ways are arranged to allow effective emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. Buildings will be oriented toward public streets and will be sited to reflect the neighborhood context. Buildings and access ways will be arranged to allow effective emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. D. Dimensions. All dimensions, including density, mass, and height shall be established during the Project Review. A development application may request variations to any dimensional requirement of this Title. In meeting this standard, consideration shall be given to the following criteria: 1. There exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such variations. Granting certain variations requested will assist in providing for moderate-cost lodging, which will support a diverse lodging inventory in the City. 2. The proposed dimensions represent a character suitable for and indicative of the primary uses of the project. The proposed dimensions represent a character suitable for and indicative of the lodge use and will support this use by providing an exceptional guest experience. 3. The project is compatible with or enhances the cohesiveness or distinctive identity of the neighborhood and surrounding development patterns, including the scale and massing of nearby historical or cultural resources. The proposed development will be consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area. Currently, the property located along Main Street is utilized as a lodge, and this use will continue. Neighboring properties are also used for lodges, namely the Hotel Aspen and the Annabelle Inn. The free-market residential, located to the rear of the lodge off of Hopkins, will complement and enhance the residential neighborhood found along Hopkins Avenue. The size of the residential units has been reduced to accommodate 7-foot side yard setbacks, thereby ensuring the new development will be contextually sensitive. 4. The number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the probable number of cars to be operated by those using the proposed development and the nature of the proposed uses. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development, and the potential for joint use of common parking may be considered when establishing a parking requirement. A parking deficit currently exists on the Property, and this deficit is permitted to remain. However, additional parking will be provided for both the increased lodge use and the P107 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 13 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 residential component. Public transit is located in the immediate vicinity in addition to We-cycle bike sharing facilities. The location of the lodge makes the central core of the City easily walkable, and pedestrian networks will be enhanced as a part of the project to encourage pedestrian activity. The Applicant will request their guests to utilize public transportation whenever possible. Generally, it is anticipated that many guests of this small lodge project will not come with vehicles. 5. The Project Review approval, at City Council’s discretion, may include specific allowances for dimensional flexibility between Project Review and Detailed Review. Changes shall be subject to the amendment procedures of Section 26.445.110 – Amendments. Modifications from the previously approved variances are requested. A revision to the eastern and southern elevations is proposed which reduce the foot print of the building on the eastern edge ground level by 10”. The massing has been further decreased to reduce the upper level overhang at the pool deck. This revision helps delineate and emphasize the entry location of the hotel. The dimensional requirements provided in previous approvals are met. The proposed revisions decrease the size and scale of the building and were considered minor when reviewed with Community Development staff. E. Design Standards. The design of the proposed development is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The design complies with applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. The design of both the lodge and the residential units comply with applicable design standards to the maximum extent possible. Two variances have been approved from the Residential Design Standards for the free-market units. The first variance involves the provision of a subordinate linking element that is intended to break down the scale of the residences. A secondary mass is proposed, delineated using a material linking element, which connects the one-story and two-story masses of the proposed residences. This is an interpretation of the secondary mass design standard. The second variance involves the stepping down of the proposed residence when there is a one-story building adjacent to the proposed structure (inflection). The western proposed residence steps down with a one-story element and has been pulled forward of the primary two-story mass to the front yard setback. This one-story mass does not extend as far back along the common lot line as the adjacent one-story neighboring building. The HPC has previously reviewed these requests for variance from the Standards, and determined that the proposed condition appropriate for the neighboring structures. 2. The proposed materials are compatible with those called for in any applicable design standards, as well as those typically seen in the immediate vicinity. Exterior materials are finalized during Detailed Review, but review boards may set forth certain expectations or conditions related to architectural character and exterior materials during Project Review. The proposed materials will be compatible with the commercial and residential design standards, to the maximum extent possible. The material palette of the lodge, made up of primarily wood and metal, are similar to materials seen in the immediate neighborhood. The lodge will feature vertical wood siding that is rough sawn and of a natural wood color. The wood siding relates to the historic back buildings seen P108 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 14 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 throughout the historic district. The sheet metal siding is a prefinished, non-reflective material. It is panelized to relate to the scale of the base of the building. The design and materials utilized in the residential units on Hopkins will blend with the variety of architectural styles and materials found in the West end. The homes are designed with overhangs and relief in the massing, especially on the street and alley façade. The siding materials are stone, board form concrete, wood composite and metal. The siding materials have texture and relief and the colors are natural and approachable. The gable roof material is zinc and the flat roofs will be covered with stone ballast. The overall palette is primarily warm greys and brown tones with charcoal and taupe mixed in for contrast and relief. F. Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and improvements. Any vehicular access points, or curb cuts, minimize impacts on existing or proposed pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. The City may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Improvements will be made to the existing pedestrian network by replacing the existing attached, narrow sidewalk on Main Street, and providing a new walkway along Garmisch Street. Additional enhancements will be provided through the planting of appropriate vegetation adjacent to the right-of-way. No new vehicular access points will be created and all onsite parking will be provided for off the existing alley. City requirements, including curb and sidewalk replacement, and the planting of recommended street trees, will be documented in the Planned Development Agreement. G. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the project to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Accurate studies have been made to identify the necessary engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for the proposed development to meet applicable standards. H. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. The Applicant understands that public infrastructure improvements, including curb and sidewalk replacement, will be provided and paid for by the Applicant. Specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation of timelines as required by the City Engineer will be reviewed and documented in the Planned Development Agreement. I. Access and Circulation. The proposed development shall have perpetual unobstructed legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed Planned Development shall not eliminate or obstruct legal access from a public way to an adjacent property. All streets in a Planned Development retained under private ownership P109 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 15 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 shall be dedicated to public use to ensure adequate public and emergency access. Security/privacy gates across access points and driveways are prohibited. Perpetual unobstructed legal vehicular access to all public ways will be provided. Legal access will not be eliminated or obstructed from any public way to an adjacent property. No streets are planned within the Planned Development, and no security/privacy gates across access points and driveways are proposed. 26.445.060. Use Variation Standards. A development application may request variations in the allowed uses permitted in the zone district. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the request and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this Title. The permitted and conditional uses allowed on the property according to its zoning shall be used as a guide, but not an absolute limitation, to the land uses which may be considered during the review. Any use variation allowed shall be specified in the ordinance granting Project Review approval. In the review of a development application for a Project Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, and City Council shall consider the following standards related to Use Variations: The proposed small lodge and associated free-market development represent uses permitted in the underlying Mixed-Use (MU) and R-6 zone districts, and use variations are not required. 26.445.070. Detailed Review Standards. Detailed Review shall focus on the comprehensive evaluation of the specific aspects of the development, including utility placement, and architectural materials. In the review of a development application for Detailed Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission as applicable, shall consider the following: A. Compliance with Project Review Approval. The proposed development, including all dimensions and uses, is consistent with the Project Review approval and adequately addresses conditions on the approval and direction received during the Project Review. The proposed redevelopment of the Molly Gibson Lodge is consistent with the Project Review approval granted by Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2015. The redeveloped lodge will feature sixty-eight (68) new lodge rooms in 20,502 SF of net livable area, a reduction of 73 SF from Ordinance No. 3. One (1) 594 SF affordable 1-bedroom housing unit located off of Main Street will replace the existing 1-bedroom unit on site. The size of the 1-bedroom has slightly been reduced by 13 SF from the size approved by Ordinance No. 3. Two (2) free- market residences located off of Hopkins Avenue are still proposed which together contain 8,000 SF of floor area. Additionally, in conformance with Ordinance No. 3, twelve (12) parking spaces are provided at grade for the lodge use and four (4) parking spaces, two (2) per single family residence, are provided for the residences off of Hopkins. The architectural plans for both the lodge and the single family residences conform to all approved dimensional requirements for height, setbacks, and floor area ratio. B. Growth Management. The proposed development has received all required GMQS allotments, or is concurrently seeking allotments. P110 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 16 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 The proposed development has received all required GMQS allotments pursuant to Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2015. The GMQS allotments approved consist of reconstruction credits of fifty-three (53) lodge rooms, equating to one hundred and six (106) lodge pillows and one (1) affordable housing unit. Additional allotments for fifteen (15) lodging rooms, equating to 30 pillows, are added to the reconstruction credits and two (2) free-market residential allotments. C. Site Planning and Landscape Architecture. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well-designed treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. Vegetation removal, protection, and restoration plans shall be acceptable to the Director of Parks and Open Space. The landscape design for the lodge exhibits a well-designed treatment of exterior spaces featuring accent paving materials which will be utilized in the courtyards and public amenity spaces around the lodge. A concrete ribbon will define the landscape areas and transition into a flowing vertical element which will be utilized as seating. Dense and varied ornamental plantings, which are suitable for Aspen’s climate, will soften and complement the architecture and provide the pedestrian with areas of shade and interest. The Applicant is considering adding public art on the corner of Main and Garmisch with the potential to showcase local artists. The landscape design for the residential units off of Hopkins also exhibits the same high level of design as the exterior spaces around the lodge and have been designed to maintain the character of the pedestrian environment by enhancing the existing sidewalk. The sidewalk has been detached in accordance with City of Aspen design guidelines. A tree lawn has been provided that ties into the existing tree lawn to the east. The landscaping will relate to and complement the front porches of the residences. Landscape plantings will be incorporated in the increased setbacks between the residences. Existing vegetation will be retained to the greatest extent possible. Inappropriate coniferous street tress will be removed and replaced with appropriate deciduous street trees. Species selection for the new street trees will be done in conjunction with the Director of Parks and Open space. 2. Buildings and site grading provide simple, at-grade entrances and minimize extensive grade changes along building exteriors. The project meets or exceeds the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and applicable requirements for emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. Adequate snow storage is accommodated. Buildings and site grading provide simple, at-grade entrances and extensive grade changes along the building exteriors have been avoided. Courtyards and public amenity spaces are located immediately off replaced and enhanced sidewalks and will allow easy access by pedestrians to the lodge and residences. The building is compliant with ADA requirements. All requirements for emergency egress have been met. Trash and utility access is provided off the alley for the lodge building and all service vehicle access is also provided off the alley. P111 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 17 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 3. Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into the landscape in a manner that enhances the site. The building will be constructed with the highest quality materials with regard to energy efficiency. Exterior courtyards are provided on the eastern and southern façades to take advantage of solar orientation. Passive solar opportunities are created by the dominant east and south facing windows. No energy production features are proposed to be included in the landscape. 4. All site lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City’s outdoor lighting standards. Landscape lighting for the lodge will be simple and sleek, providing safety and ambiance without being over powering. The lighting will not emit direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All lighting will be dark sky compliant and meet applicable City of Aspen lighting code. Similarly, for the free-market residences, landscape lighting is limited to pathway lighting and a sconce at the front door of both residences. The lighting will not emit direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. 5. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Site drainage will be accommodated for the lodge and the free-market residential in compliance with Engineering Design Standards. A conceptual grading and drainage plan has been reviewed with the City of Aspen Engineering Department and has been found to be in compliance with applicable standards. D. Design Standards and Architecture. The proposed architectural details emphasize quality construction and design characteristics. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The project architecture provides for visual interest and incorporates present-day details and use of materials respectful of the community’s past without attempting to mimic history. The design and materials utilized in the lodge will be compatible and represent positive change to the Main Street Historic District. The western module of the lodge, which has been designed to specifically provide an appropriate transition between the new architecture and the neighboring historic resource, features a modern take on a traditional front porch. This modern front porch approximates the front porch on the Victorian resource to the west in size and location. The lodge building modulates and steps on a 25’ and 30’ module thereby creating an undulating and interesting façade along Main Street. This modulation relates to the traditional lot width found in Aspen. The windows of the lodge found along Main Street are designed with a tall and narrow proportion that is based on Victorian window proportions. The materials utilized in the lodge will primarily be wood and metal siding. The natural color of the rough sawn wood siding will be evocative of historic out buildings found in the Main Street Historic District. The metal, panelized siding will be non-reflective and contemporary in its feel. P112 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 18 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 The design and materials utilized in the residential units on Hopkins will blend with the variety of architectural styles and materials found in the West End. The homes are designed with overhangs and relief in the massing, especially on the street and alley facades. The siding materials are stone, board form concrete, wood composite and metal. The siding materials have texture and relief and the colors are natural and approachable. The gable roof material is zinc and the flat roofs will be covered with stone ballast. The overall palette is primarily warm greys and brown tones with charcoal and taupe mixed in for contrast and relief. 2. Exterior materials are of a high quality, durability, and comply with applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. The proposed materials utilized in the lodge, which consist primarily of wood and metal siding, will be of a high quality, durable, and compatible with the Main Street Historic District and the Residential Design Standards. 3. Building entrances are sited or designed to minimize icing and snow shedding effects. Snow will not shed onto or near any building entrances, both for the lodge and the single-family residences. The lodge features flat roofs designed to carry potential snow loads. The eastern single-family residence is designed with flat roofs that will be engineered structurally to hold snow to prevent any shedding. Exterior terraces, decks & walkways will be engineered structurally to hold the snow load, however, they will be snowmelted or shoveled (snow stored on site). Guest parking off the alley will be plowed and the snow will be temporary stored and/or removed from the site by the plow company. The west residence has a combination of flat and gable roofs. The flat roofs will be engineered to hold the snow to prevent any shedding. The gable roof will utilize snow fences to retain the snow. An edge melt system will melt the retained snow and the water will be directed down through heat taped gutters and downspouts into below grade drywells to be designed by a civil engineer. Exterior terraces, decks & walkways will be engineered structurally to hold the snow load, however, they will be snowmelted or shoveled (snow stored on site). Guest parking off the alley will be plowed and the snow will be temporarily stored and/or removed from the site by the plow company. 4. Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into structures in a manner that enhances the architecture. The buildings will be constructed with the highest quality materials with regard to energy efficiency. Passive solar opportunities are created by the dominant east and south facing windows which will become a defining feature of the architecture of the lodge. 5. All structure lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City’s outdoor lighting standards. Lighting for the lodge will be simple and sleek, providing safety and ambiance without being over powering. The lighting will not emit direct glare or hazardous interference of P113 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 19 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All lighting will be dark sky compliant and meet applicable City of Aspen lighting code. Similarly, for the free-market residences, structure lighting is limited to a sconce at the front door of both residences. The lighting will not emit direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. E. Common Parks, Open Space, Recreation Areas, or Facilities. If the proposed development includes common parks, open space, recreation areas, or common facilities, a proportionate, undivided interest is deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the Planned Development. An adequate assurance through a Development Agreement for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a prohibition against future development is required. Common parks, open space, and recreation Area or facilities are not proposed for the development. F. Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and improvements. Any new vehicular access points minimize impacts on existing pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of the Project Review and as otherwise required in the Land Use Code. These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements and to determine any required cost estimating for surety requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities will be improved with the redevelopment of the lodge. Site improvements include the provision of a new detached sidewalk along Main Street, replacing the narrow attached sidewalk, as well as sidewalk amenities and the installation of appropriate deciduous street trees along Main Street. These will replace existing spruce trees, which are not preferred to be located along streets. Also proposed is the enhancement of the area between the edge of pavement along Garmisch and the entrance to the lodge. The lodge has committed to providing a new We-cycle kiosk and will continue to provide a fleet of lodge bikes for use by guests. Shower facilities are also provided for both guests and employees of the lodge in order to encourage biking. No new vehicular access points are proposed. Due to the unification of uses on either side of the alley, existing vehicular/pedestrian conflicts will be removed. A complete TIA tool has been provided with the application which outlines the various trip generation mitigation techniques. G. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the proposed subdivision to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. P114 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 20 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 The grading and drainage plan has been reviewed with the City of Aspen Engineering Department for compliance with applicable standards. To applicant’s knowledge, no hazards currently exist which will require mitigation techniques. H. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. The applicant will provide all necessary upgrades to public infrastructure and facilities as determined necessary by appropriate City departments. Improvements to the sidewalks along Main Street and Garmisch have been incorporated into the landscape plan. The sidewalk improvements along Main will feature a new detached sidewalk which will replace a narrow and uncomfortable attached sidewalk. New deciduous street trees will be provided in conjunction with the detached sidewalk along Main Street. The improvements to the Garmisch sidewalks will include enhancement to the area between the edge of the pavement and the entrance to the lodge. Onsite parking has also been formalized in the alley and provides twelve (12) parking spaces for the lodge use, meeting the developments parking requirement. Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. The project civil engineering will prepare and review specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines with the City of Aspen Engineering Department. All designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines will be prepared to comply with the applicable requirements of the Municipal Code and URMP. I. Phasing of development plan. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. Phasing shall insulate, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. All necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the Planned Development, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures shall be completed concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. A phasing plan has not been developed at this point. All necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the Planned Development, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures will be completed in conjunction with the redevelopment of the site and/or with each specific phase. B. Detailed Review Application Contents. The contents of the development application for a Detailed Review shall include the following: 1. The general application information required in Common Procedures, Chapter 26.304. The general application materials have been made a part of the land use application. 2. A site improvement survey meeting the requirements of Title 29, Engineering Design Standards. P115 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 21 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 A site improvement survey has been prepared and has been made a part of the land use application. 3. Description, and depiction as necessary, of how the project complies with the approved Project Review, including requested plans, reports, or other documentation. All requested plans, reports, and other documentation which shows compliance with the approved Project Review, including landscape plan, tree removal plan, architectural plans, snow storage and shedding plan, information relating to the preservation of the historic fence, completed Transportation Impact Analysis, and assurance from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District confirming that the 0’ setback is constructible without damage to the sanitation sewer lines in the alley, have been made a part of the land use application. 4. Proposed Planned Development plans and Development Agreement containing the applicable information required by Chapter 26.490, Approval Documents. A proposed Planned Development plan and draft Development Agreement containing the applicable information required has been made a part of the land use application. 5. A grading and drainage plan showing all grading and how drainage and stormwater is accommodated, and that meets the Conceptual Drainage Plan and Report requirements in the Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). A conceptual grading and drainage plan which shows all grading and how drainage and stormwater is proposed to be accommodated has been made a part of the land use application. This conceptual plan has been reviewed with the Engineering Department. 6. A description, and depiction as necessary, for specific pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facility designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review. These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. A description and depiction of pedestrian, bicycle, mitigation techniques has been made a part of the land use application. Specifically the improvements to the sidewalks along Main Street and Garmisch Street are shown on the landscape plan. The sidewalk improvements along Main will feature a new detached sidewalk which will replace a narrow and uncomfortable attached sidewalk. New deciduous street trees will be provided in conjunction with the detached sidewalk along Main Street. The improvements to the Garmisch sidewalks will include enhancement to the area between the edge of the pavement and the entrance to the lodge. A complete Transportation Impact Analysis, which reviews appropriate transit mitigation techniques, has been updated and included with the land use application. 7. A description and depiction as necessary, for specific engineering designs, hazard mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review. These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP), but do not need to be detailed construction documents. No hazards have been identified onsite at this point. The project civil engineer will provide specific engineering designs, hazard mitigation, and implementation timelines as P116 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 22 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 necessary and these plans will be reviewed with the City of Aspen Engineering Department for conformance with applicable code. 8. A description and depiction as necessary, for specific Public Infrastructure and Facility designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review. These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP), but do not need to be detailed construction documents. The landscape plan provides a depiction and of the specific public infrastructure and facility designs, mitigation techniques. These include sidewalk improvements to Main Street and Garmisch Street and the provision of adequate parking in the alley for the lodge use. 9. A statement specifying the method of maintaining any proposed common areas on the site, including but not limited to common parking areas, walkways, landscaped areas and recreational facilities and what specific assurances will be made to ensure the continual maintenance of said areas. It is anticipated that the common areas of the site, which include the parking area along the alley, all walkways, landscaped areas, and public amenity space, will be continually maintained by the owner/operator of the lodge. The parking area, landscaped area, and walkways of the free-market residential units will also initially be maintained by the owner/operator of the lodge. 10. A description of any proposed project phasing detailing the specific improvements within each phase. A phasing plan has not been determined at this time. All necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the Planned Development, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures will be completed in conjunction with the redevelopment of the site and/or each specific phase. 11. A written response to each of the review criteria contained in Section 26.445.070. Written responses to Section 26.445.070 have been made a part of the land use application. 12. The application contents, materials, and written responses as applicable for all associated reviews being combined with Detailed Review. Application contents, materials, and written responses for final Major Development and final Commercial Design Review, including material samples and images, have been made a part of the application or will be provided at the HPC hearing. 26.575.020. Calculations and Measurements A. Purpose. This section sets forth methods for measuring floor area, height, setbacks, and other dimensional aspects of development and describes certain allowances, requirements and other prescriptions for a range of structural components, such as porches, balconies, garages, chimneys, mechanical equipment, projections into setbacks, etc. The proposed development will utilize the previously approved dimensional requirements established in the Planned Development approval. P117 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 23 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 26.710.040. Medium-Density Residential (R-6) A. Purpose. The purpose of the Medium-Density Residential (R-6) Zone District is to provide areas for long-term residential purposes with customary accessory uses. Recreational and institutional uses customarily found in proximity to residential uses are included as conditional uses. Lands in the Medium-Density Residential (R-6) Zone District are generally limited to the original Aspen Townsite, contain relatively dense settlements of predominantly detached and duplex residences and are within walking distance of the center of the City. The Property includes the Mixed-Use (MU) and Medium-Density Residential (R-6) zone districts with a Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) impacting the entire parcel. The LP Overlay Zoning District dictates the permitted uses of the Property and provides for a Planned Development. The LP Overlay will dictate the maximum floor area for the free- market residential. The residential units along Hopkins Avenue are proposed to have 4,000 SF each of floor area, a reduction from the previous proposal. This conforms to the allowable floor area for free market development associated with a lodging project, based on the proposed room size. 26.710.180. Mixed-Use (MU). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Mixed-Use (MU) Zone District is to provide for a variety of lodging, multi- family, single-family and mixed-use buildings with commercial uses serving the daily or frequent needs of the surrounding neighborhood, to provide a transition between the commercial core and surrounding residential neighborhoods and to provide a variety of building sizes compatible with the character of the Main Street Historic District. The Property straddles the Mixed Use (MU) and Medium-Density Residential (R-6) zone districts with a Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) impacting the entire parcel. The LP Overlay Zoning District dictates the permitted uses of the Property and provides for a Planned Development (PD) to be applied to the property. The proposed small lodge and residential development is consistent with the purpose of the LP overlay zone district. It is also consistent with the MU zone district, which is to provide for a variety of lodging, multi-family, single-family, and mixed use buildings with commercial uses serving the daily or frequent needs of the surrounding neighborhood, to provide a transition between the commercial core and surrounding residential neighborhoods, and to provide a variety of building sizes compatible with the character of the Main Street Historic District. Both lodge and free-market multi-family housing are identified as permitted uses in the LP zone district. The proposed PD follows the dimensional requirements of the Mixed-Use (MU) zone district as amended by approvals already received. The final development plan will clearly define all dimensional requirements within the PD. As part of the PD process a variance has been received for floor area for the overall development. Cumulative floor area has been approved as 26,959 SF. Maximum height of the proposed building is 32 feet, which conforms to the maximum height in the MU zone district. 26.710.320. Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) Zone District P118 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge (PID# 273512455800) Page 24 Final Major Development in a Historic District, final Commercial Design Review, and PD- detailed review 18 March 2015 – revised 31 March 2015 A. Purpose. The purpose of the Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District is to provide for and 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 Property straddles the Mixed-Use (MU) and Medium-Density Residential (R-6) zone districts with a Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) impacting the entire parcel. The LP Overlay Zoning District dictates the permitted uses of the Property. The Applicant has received PD approval, incorporating certain PUD special review and variation requests. The proposed small lodge and multi-family residential development are identified as permitted uses in the LP zone district. P119 IV.A. P 1 2 0 I V . A . P 1 2 1 I V . A . P 1 2 2 I V . A . P 1 2 3 I V . A . P 1 2 4 I V . A . P 1 2 5 I V . A . P 1 2 6 I V . A . P 1 2 7 I V . A . P 1 2 8 I V . A . P 1 2 9 I V . A . P130 I V . A . P131 I V . A . P132 I V . A . P133 I V . A . P134 I V . A . P135 I V . A . P 1 3 6 I V . A . P 1 3 7 I V . A . P 1 3 8 I V . A . P 1 3 9 I V . A . P 1 4 0 I V . A . P 1 4 1 I V . A . P 1 4 2 I V . A . P 1 4 3 I V . A . P 1 4 4 I V . A . P 1 4 5 I V . A . P 1 4 6 I V . A . P 1 4 7 I V . A . P148 I V . A . P149 I V . A . P150 I V . A . P151 I V . A . P152 I V . A . P153 I V . A . P 1 5 4 I V . A . P 1 5 5 I V . A . P 1 5 6 I V . A . P 1 5 7 I V . A . P 1 5 8 I V . A . P 1 5 9 I V . A . P 1 6 0 I V . A . P 1 6 1 I V . A . P 1 6 2 I V . A . P 1 6 3 I V . A . P 1 6 4 I V . A . P 1 6 5 I V . A . P166 IV.A. P167 IV.A. P168 IV.A. P169 IV.A. P170 IV.A. P171 IV.A. P172 IV.A. P173 IV.A. P174 IV.A. P175 IV.A. P 1 7 6 I V . A . P 1 7 7 I V . A . P 1 7 8 I V . A . P 1 7 9 I V . A . P 1 8 0 I V . A . P 1 8 1 I V . A . P 1 8 2 I V . A . P 1 8 3 I V . A . P 1 8 4 I V . A . P 1 8 5 I V . A . P 1 8 6 I V . A . P 1 8 7 I V . A . P 1 8 8 I V . A . P 1 8 9 I V . A . P 1 9 0 I V . A . P 1 9 1 I V . A . P 1 9 2 I V . A . P 1 9 3 I V . A . P 1 9 4 I V . A . P 1 9 5 I V . A . P 1 9 6 I V . A . P 1 9 7 I V . A . P 1 9 8 I V . A . P 1 9 9 I V . A . P 2 0 0 I V . A . P 2 0 1 I V . A . P 2 0 2 I V . A . P 2 0 3 I V . A . P 2 0 4 I V . A . P 2 0 5 I V . A . P 2 0 6 I V . A . P 2 0 7 I V . A . P 2 0 8 I V . A . P 2 0 9 I V . A . P 2 1 0 I V . A . P 2 1 1 I V . A . P 2 1 2 I V . A . P 2 1 3 I V . A . P 2 1 4 I V . A . P 2 1 5 I V . A . P 2 1 6 I V . A . P 2 1 7 I V . A . P218 I V . A . P219 I V . A . P220 I V . A . P221 I V . A . P222 I V . A . P223 I V . A . P224 I V . A . P 2 2 5 I V . A . P 2 2 6 I V . A . P 2 2 7 I V . A . P 2 2 8 I V . A . P 2 2 9 I V . A . P 2 3 0 I V . A . P 2 3 1 I V . A . P 2 3 2 I V . A . P 2 3 3 I V . A . P 2 3 4 I V . A . P 2 3 5 I V . A . P 2 3 6 I V . A . P 2 3 7 I V . A . P 2 3 8 I V . A . P 2 3 9 I V . A . P 2 4 0 I V . A . P 2 4 1 I V . A . P 2 4 2 I V . A . P 2 4 3 I V . A . P 2 4 4 I V . A . P 2 4 5 I V . A . P 2 4 6 I V . A . P 2 4 7 I V . A . P 2 4 8 I V . A . P 2 4 9 I V . A . P 2 5 0 I V . A . P 2 5 1 I V . A . P 2 5 2 I V . A . P 2 5 3 I V . A . P 2 5 4 I V . A . P 2 5 5 I V . A . P 2 5 6 I V . A . P 2 5 7 I V . A . P 2 5 8 I V . A . P 2 5 9 I V . A . P 2 6 0 I V . A . P 2 6 1 I V . A . P 2 6 2 I V . A . P 2 6 3 I V . A . P 2 6 4 I V . A . P 2 6 5 I V . A . P 2 6 6 I V . A . P 2 6 7 I V . A . P 2 6 8 I V . A . P 2 6 9 I V . A . P 2 7 0 I V . A . P 2 7 1 I V . A . P 2 7 2 I V . A . P 2 7 3 I V . A . P 2 7 4 I V . A . P 2 7 5 I V . A . P 2 7 6 I V . A . P 2 7 7 I V . A . P 2 7 8 I V . A . P 2 7 9 I V . A . P 2 8 0 I V . A . P 2 8 1 I V . A . P 2 8 2 I V . A . P 2 8 3 I V . A . P 2 8 4 I V . A . P 2 8 5 I V . A . P 2 8 6 I V . A . P 2 8 7 I V . A . P 2 8 8 I V . A . P 2 8 9 I V . A . P 2 9 0 I V . A . P 2 9 1 I V . A . P 2 9 2 I V . A . P 2 9 3 I V . A . P 2 9 4 I V . A . P 2 9 5 I V . A . P 2 9 6 I V . A . P 2 9 7 I V . A . P 2 9 8 I V . A . P 2 9 9 I V . A . P 3 0 0 I V . A . P 3 0 1 I V . A . P 3 0 2 I V . A . P 3 0 3 I V . A . P 3 0 4 I V . A . P 3 0 5 I V . A . P 3 0 6 I V . A . P 3 0 7 I V . A . P 3 0 8 I V . A . P309 I V . A . P310 I V . A . 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.CCY14017 COVER SHEET AL-100.0MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015 MO L L Y G I B S O N L O D G E MG L MGL CCYARCHITECTURAL SHEET INDEX AL - 1 0 0 . 0 C O V E R S H E E T AL - 1 0 0 . 1 S I T E P L A N AL - 1 0 0 . 2 S I T E S E C T I O N S AL - 1 0 1 V A R I A N C E S I T E P L A N AL - 1 1 0 L O W E R L E V E L F L O O R P L A N AL - 1 1 1 M A I N L E V E L F L O O R P L A N AL - 1 1 2 S E C O N D L E V E L F L O O R P L A N AL - 1 1 3 T H I R D L E V E L F L O O R P L A N AL - 1 1 4 R O O F P L A N AL - 1 2 0 . 1 E N L A R G E D L O W E R L E V E L P L A N E A S T AL - 1 2 0 . 2 E N L A R G E D L O W E R L E V E L P L A N W E S T AL - 1 2 1 . 1 E N L A R G E D M A I N L E V E L P L A N E A S T AL - 1 2 1 . 2 E N L A R G E D M A I N L E V E L P L A N W E S T AL - 1 2 2 . 1 E N L A R G E D S E C O N D L E V E L P L A N E A S T AL - 1 2 2 . 2 E N L A R G E D S E C O N D L E V E L P L A N W E S T AL - 1 2 3 . 1 E N L A R G E D T H I R D L E V E L P L A N E A S T AL - 1 2 3 . 2 E N L A R G E D T H I R D L E V E L P L A N W E S T AL - 2 0 0 O V E R A L L E L E V A T I O N S AL - 2 0 1 O V E R A L L E L E V A T I O N S AL - 2 0 2 O V E R A L L E L E V A T I O N S AL - 2 0 3 M A T E R I A L S AL - 2 1 0 E N L A R G E D E X T E R I O R E L E V A T I O N S AL - 2 1 1 E N L A R G E D E X T E R I O R E L E V A T I O N S AL - 2 1 2 E N L A R G E D E X T E R I O R E L E V A T I O N S AL - 3 0 0 O V E R A L L B U I L D I N G S E C T I O N S AL - 3 0 1 O V E R A L L B U I L D I N G S E C T I O N S AL - 3 1 0 E N L A R G E D B U I L D I N G S E C T I O N S AL - 3 1 1 E N L A R G E D B U I L D I N G S E C T I O N S AL - 3 1 2 E N L A R G E D B U I L D I N G S E C T I O N S AR - 1 0 0 . 0 C O V E R S H E E T AR - 1 0 0 . 1 R E S I D E N T I A L S I T E P L A N AR - 1 1 0 R E S I D E N T I A L F L O O R P L A N S AR - 1 1 1 R E S I D E N T I A L F L O O R P L A N S AR - 1 1 2 R E S I D E N T I A L F L O O R P L A N S AR - 1 1 3 R E S I D E N T I A L R O O F P L A N S AR - 2 0 0 R E S I D E N T I A L S T R E E T E L E V A T I O N S AR - 2 1 0 R E S I D E N T I A L E L E V A T I O N S AR - 2 1 1 R E S I D E N T I A L E L E V A T I O N S AR - 2 1 2 R E S I D E N T I A L E L E V A T I O N S AR - 2 1 3 R E S I D E N T I A L E L E V A T I O N S AR - 3 1 0 R E S I D E N T I A L S E C T I O N S AR - 3 1 1 R E S I D E N T I A L S E C T I O N S AR - 4 0 0 R E S I D E N T I A L M A T E R I A L S AZ - 9 0 1 E X I S T I N G F L O O R A R E A AZ - 9 0 2 E X I S T I N G N E T L I V A B L E AZ - 9 0 3 F L O O R A R E A C A L C S - P R O P O S E D F L O O R A R E A S AZ - 9 0 4 F L O O R A R E A C A L C S - P R O P O S E D N E T L I V A B L E ISSUE DATE ISSUED 2 2015 - 05 - 18 3 2015 - 05 - 21 RE V I S I O N 2 : SIT E S E C T I O N S AD D E D T O S E T 2 RE V I S I O N 3 : SIT E S E C T I O N S , P L A N S & E L E V A T I O N S RE V I S E D W / N E W TO P O G R A P H Y & FL O O R E L E V A T I O N S 3 P311 IV.A. 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 17893 7 8 9 1 7 8 9 0 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 7 8 9 0 7 8 9 07892 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 17893 7 8 9 1 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 7 8 9 0 7 8 9 07892 TR A N S F O R M E R AL L E Y MG L G U E S T P A R K I N G TR A S H E N C L O S U R E PR O P E R T Y L I N E T Y P . O P E R T Y L I N E T Y P . PR O P E R T Y L I N E T Y P . MA I N S T . GARMISCH STREET 20 ' CO N C R E T E R I B B O N O N G R A D E 20' SI D E W A L K O N G R A D E W I T H PA R K I N G N O R A M P N E C E S S A R Y ACCESSIBLE PASSENGER LOADING ZONE TR A N S F O R M E R 8' - 6 " TY P . 1 23 45 6 7 89 10 12 VA N A C C E S S I B L E 11 8' 8 ' 1 0 ' 5 ' 1 7 ' - 5 " 1 ' - 5 " 6 " R E F . D W 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 A TR A S H E N C L O S U R E TE R R A C E PA R K I N G S P A C E S SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN &TO BE REMOVED GA S ME T E R PU B L I C A M E N I T Y SP A C E PU B L I C A M E N I T Y SP A C E PU B L I C A M E N I T Y SP A C E EN T R Y DI N I N G TE R R A C E H I J K 5' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E 5' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E ROOF OVER HANG AT ENTRY AND DINING TERRACE EX I S T I N G BU I L D I N G 10 ' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K 3 AL - 1 0 0 . 2 TR A N S F O R M E R AR E A , R E : C I V I L & LA N D S C A P E F O R RE V I S I O N S DE L I V E R Y A R E A 1 5 ' - 6 " 3'- 2 " 3'- 0 " LA N D S C A P E B U F F E R 3 ' - 0 " 1 AL - 1 0 0 . 2 2 AL - 1 0 0 . 2 4 AL - 1 0 0 . 2 3 3 3 3 2 UPDATED LANDSCAPE BACKGROUND INSERTED FOR REFERENCE IN REVISION 3, RE:LANDSCAPE TO CONFIRM ALL INFORMATION REPRESENTED3 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.10'20'5' 1" = 10'-0"Author14017 SITE PLAN AL-100.1MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker NORTHISSUEDATEISSUED2 2015 - 05 - 18 3 2015 - 05 - 21 P312 IV.A. 789078917892789378947895 7889 4.3 % PE R M E A B L E P A V E R T Y P . GR A D E B R E A K ED G E O F S I D E W A L K 2% BU I L D I N G F A C A D E FF E 7 8 9 1 . 5 8 2% GARMISCH ST. 3.5 % NE W C U R B A N D G U T T E R VALLEY PAN TIE INTO EXISTING AS P H A L T T Y P . CO N C R E T E T Y P . 8'- 4 1 _2" 8' S I D E W A L K 8 ' - 6 " P A R K I N G L A N E P R O P E R T Y L I N E SE T B A C K F R O M P R O P E R T Y L I N E 15 ' - 1 1 5 _8" 9 9 _ _ 1 6 " VALLEY PAN TIE INTO EXISTING 789078917892789378947895 BU I L D I N G F F E 7 8 9 2 . 5 8 CO N C R E T E T Y P . CO N C R E T E R I B B O N GARMISCH ST. 2% 3.1 % 7% NE W C U R B A N D G U T T E R 2% AS P H A L T T Y P . PE R M E A B L E P A V E R T Y P . LA N D S C A P E I S L A N D 2% 8'- 6 " P A R K I N G L A N E 8' S I D E W A L K 13 ' - 6 1 _4" P R O P E R T Y L I N E SE T B A C K F R O M P R O P E R T Y L I N E R T Y L I N E 78907891789278937894 1% BU I L D I N G F F E 7 8 9 2 . 5 8 LP - T R E N C H D R A I N O R SIM I L A R T O B E P R O V I D E D PE R M E A B L E P A V E R T Y P . CO N C R E T E T Y P . MAIN ST.1.5%CURB AND GUTTER TIE INTO EXISTING 1.5 % ASPHALT TYP. PL A N T E R 2% 2% 10 ' - 0 1 _2" 8' S I D E W A L K 5 ' T R E E L A W N P R O P E R T Y L I N E SE T B A C K F R O M P R O P E R T Y L I N E 7 1 _ 2 " 1% 2% 2% 1.5 % 1.5 % (3 ) 5 - 5 / 8 " S T E P S ED G E O F S I D E W A L K CU R B A N D G U T T E R TIE I N T O E X I S T I N G BU I L D I N G F A C A D E FF E 7 8 9 1 . 5 8 LP - T R E N C H D R A I N O R S I M I L A R T O B E P R O V I D E D PE R M E A B L E P A V E R T Y P . CO N C R E T E T Y P . MA I N S T . 2% 2% AS P H A L T T Y P . P R O P E R T Y L I N E 13 ' - 5 9 __16 " 5' 17 ' - 5 " 5' T R E E L A W N 8' S I D E W A L K SE T B A C K F R O M P R O P E R T Y L I N E 22 ' - 5 " Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0" 1 2 3 Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0" 1 2 3 Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0" A Ma i n L e v e l 10 0 ' - 0 " Se c o n d L e v e l 11 0 ' - 0 " A H I 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 1/4" = 1'-0"Author14017 SITE SECTIONS AL-100.2MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker ISSUE DATE ISSUED 2 2015 - 05 - 18 3 2015 - 05 - 21 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " E/ W S i t e S e c t i o n a t E n t r y 1 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " E/ W S i t e S e c t i o n a t N E C o r n e r 2 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " N/ S S i t e S e c t i o n a t N E C o r n e r 3 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " N/ S S i t e S e c t i o n a t N W C o r n e r 4 REVISION 2:SITE SECTIONS ADDED TO SET2REVISION 3:SITE SECTIONS REVISED3 3 3 3 3 P313 IV.A. 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 94 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 17893 7 8 9 1 7 8 9 0 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 7 8 90 7 8 9 07892 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 94 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 17893 7 8 9 1 7 8 9 0 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 7 8 90 7 8 9 078924%0.6%0.5%2 %2 %7890.5 78 9 3 . 2 5 78 9 2 6 % 2 % 2%8 .3 %5 % 78 9 4 78 9 3 . 8 5 0 .3 5 % 2 % 0 .3 5 % 2 % 0 .3 5 % 2 % 78 9 3 . 1 78 9 3 . 1 7890.77891.77892.5 4.3%5.5%7891.15 7890.85 7890.6 0.7%0.7% 0 . 7 % 0 . 7 % 7890.752%2 %2 % 78 9 3 . 1 5 0 .3 5 % 8 .3 % 1 .8 % 7892.6 78 9 2 . 9 78 9 2 . 8 2% CO N C R E T E R I B B O N O N G R A D E 1 .8 % 78 9 2 . 2 78 9 1 . 8 5 0 . 7 % 2 % 2 % 1 % 8 .3 % 7 8 9 2 7 891 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1:12 R E F . D W 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 A H I J K TE R R A C E PA R K I N G SP A C E S GA S ME T E R PU B L I C A M E N I T Y SP A C E PU B L I C A M E N I T Y SP A C E PU B L I C A M E N I T Y SP A C E EN T R Y DI N I N G TE R R A C E PR O P E R T Y L I N E PR O P E R T Y L I N E VARIANCE FOR ROOF OVERHANG -EXTEND TO PROPERTY LINE-DECREASED 38 s.f.OUTLINE OF EXISTING BUILIDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED SHOWN DASHED EX I S T I N G BU I L D I N G VA R I A N C E F O R B U I L D I N G A R E A I N T O SE T B A C K A T U P P E R L E V E L S - G R O U N D LE V E L C O N F O R M S 1 ' - 0 " VA R I A N C E F O R B U I L D I N G A R E A I N T O SE T B A C K A T U P P E R L E V E L S - G R O U N D LE V E L C O N F O R M S 5' S E T B A C K 5' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E PR O P E R T Y L I N E 3 AL - 1 0 0 . 2 EL E C T . X F O R M E R - 2 0 ' - - 2 0 ' - 0 " - - 6 0 ' - 0 " - 26 ' - 6 " 26 ' - 6 " 9 ' - 3 1 / 4 " 1 7 ' - 5 " 29 ' - 6 " 10'-1 101/128" 2 ' - 5 " 5 ' - 0 " 2 ' - 5 " 1' - 5 " VA R I A N C E F O R B U I L D I N G A R E A I N T O SE T B A C K A T S E C O N D L E V E L - G R O U N D LE V E L C O N F O R M S DE L I V E R Y A R E A 3'- 6 1 / 4 " GROUND LEVEL AREA MOVED OUT OF SETBACK SETBACK = 43 S.F.(12 S.F. INCREASE OVERALL) 0" 1 AL - 1 0 0 . 2 2 AL-100.2 4 AL - 1 0 0 . 2 UPDATED LANDSCAPE BACKGROUND INSERTED FOR REFERENCE IN REVISION 2, RE:LANDSCAPE TO CONFIRM ALL INFORMATION REPRESENTED2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.10'20'5' 1" = 10'-0"Author14017 VARIANCE SITE PLAN AL-101MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker ISSUE DATE ISSUED 2 2015 - 05 - 18 P314 IV.A. UP UP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N SM A L L Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N ME D I U M Q U E E N SM A L L Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N 13 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3" 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 6 ' - 3 " 4 ' - 0 " B. O . H . B. O . H . KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N D O U B L E Q U E E N H I J K ST A F F B R E A K R O O M MA I N T E N A N C E SH O P BU I L D I N G S E R V I C E ME C H A N I C A L S P A C E S LO D G E LA U N D R Y LI N E N ST O R A G E RE S T R O O M DE P A R T U R E RO O M LU G G A G E ST O R A G E ST O . ST O . SH A R E D A D M I N OF F I C E MA N A G E R S OF F I C E ST O R A G E FO O D ST O R A G E FO O D P R E P CL E A N / TR A S H EX E R C I S E ME E T I N G RO O M 5' S E T B A C K 5' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E PR O P E R T Y L I N E 1 AL - 3 0 1 3 AL - 3 0 0 2 AL - 3 0 0 1 AL-300 2 AL - 3 0 1 2 AL-3101 AL-310 2 AL - 3 1 2 8' - 8 " 6 ' - 8 3 / 4 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.8'16'4' 1/8" = 1'-0"Author14017 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN AL-110MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker NORTHISSUEDATEISSUED P315 IV.A. 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 7 8 9 0 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 7 8 9 0 AL L E Y MG L G U E S T P A R K I N G TR A S H E N C L O S U R E PR O P E R T Y L I N E T Y P . MA I N S T . 4%0.6%0.5%2 %2 %7890.5 78 9 3 . 2 5 78926% 2 % 2%8 .3 %5 % 78 9 4 78 9 3 . 8 5 0 .3 5 % 2 % 0 .3 5 % 2 % 0 .3 5 % 2 % 78 9 3 . 1 78 9 3 . 1 7890.77891.77892.5 4.3%5.5%7891.15 7890.85 7890.6 0.7%0.7% 0 . 7 % 0 . 7 % 7890.752%2 %2 % 78 9 3 . 1 5 0 .3 5 % 8 .3 % 1 .8 % 7892.6 7892.9 7892.82%1 .8 % 78 9 2 . 2 78 9 1 . 8 5 0 . 7 % 2 % 2 % 1 % 8 .3 % 20 ' CO N C R E T E R I B B O N O N G R A D E 20' SI D E W A L K O N G R A D E W I T H PA R K I N G N O R A M P N E C E S S A R Y ACC LOA TR A N S F O R M E R 8' - 6 " TY P . 1 23 45 6 7 89 10 12 VA N A C C E S S I B L E 11 8' 8 ' 1 0 ' 1 3 ' - 5 9 _ _ 1 6 " 5 ' 1 7 ' - 5 " 1 ' - 5 " 6 " UP R E F . D W UP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 A DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N ME D I U M Q U E E N KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N D O U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N KI N G K I N G 13 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 13 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 6 ' - 3 " DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N KI N G 4'-0" LO B B Y S P A C E K I T C H E N LI V I N G EN T R Y BE D R O O M BA T H BA R DIN I N G 77 0 S . F . 60 S E A T S VE S T . ST O RE C ' T ST O R A G E DIN I N G OF F I C E H I J K 5' S E T B A C K 5' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E PR O P E R T Y L I N E ME D I U M Q U E E N SM A L L Q U E E N R E S T R O O M SM A L L Q U E E N DE L I V E R Y A R E A 1 AL - 3 0 1 3 AL - 3 0 0 2 AL - 3 0 0 1 AL-300 2 AL - 3 0 1 8'- 8 " 6 ' - 8 3 / 4 " U EG R E S S W D W . CL . EX I T D I S C H A R G E T O M A I N S T R E E T (I N C L U D E S S T E P S ) AC C E S S I B L E E X I T DI S C H A R G E T O A L L E Y & 1S T S T R E E T EX I T D I S C H A R G E T O S . 1 S T S T . AL L E Y (F U L L Y A C C E S S I B L E ) RO L L - I N 2 2 2 DN LA N D S C A P E T O C O O R D I N A T E 30 " X 4 8 " A R E A F O R A S S I S T E D RE S C U E A T B O T T O M O F ST A I R S O U T O F E G R E S S P A T H 2 UPDATED LANDSCAPE BACKGROUND INSERTED FOR REFERENCE IN REVISION 3, RE:LANDSCAPE TO CONFIRM ALL INFORMATION REPRESENTED3 R E S T R O O M 10 1 ' - 0 " 10 0 ' - 0 " 10 0 ' - 6 " 3 3 3 10 0 ' - 6 " 3 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.8'16'4' 1/8" = 1'-0"CCY14017 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN AL-111MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL CCY NORTHISSUEDATEISSUED2 2015 - 05 - 18 3 2015 - 05 - 21 RE V I S I O N 1 : EX I T D I S C H A R G E P A T H S A D D E D T O T H I S P L A N IN D I C A T E D W I T H T H I S L I N E T Y P E P316 IV.A. UP UP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ME D I U M Q U E E N KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N D O U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N D O U B L E Q U E E N SM A L L Q U E E N KI N G KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N 13 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 '- 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 6 ' - 3 " 4 ' - 0 " SM A L L Q U E E N OP E N H I J K 5' S E T B A C K 5' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E PR O P E R T Y L I N E KI N G A B C D E F G H ME D I U M Q U E E N 1 AL - 3 0 1 3 AL - 3 0 0 2 AL - 3 0 0 1 AL-300 8' - 8 " 6 ' - 8 3 / 4 " HO U S E K E E P I N G 2 AL - 3 0 1 2 AL - 3 1 2 (F U L L Y AC C E S S I B L E ) DO U B L E Q U E E N HO U S E K E E P I N G DO U B L E Q U E E N SM A L L Q U E E N 2 2 AL-100.2 4 AL - 1 0 0 . 2 2 EX T E R I O R S T A I R F R O M S P A (3 R D L E V E L ) D O W N T O A L L E Y FO R E G R E S S , T H I S S T A I R D O E S NO T C O U N T I N F L O O R A R E A CA L C U L A T I O N S 2 3 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.8'16'4' 1/8" = 1'-0"Author14017 SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN AL-112MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker NORTHISSUEDATEISSUED2 2015 - 05 - 18 3 2015 - 05 - 21 P317 IV.A. UP DN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 A KI N G KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N D O U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N 13 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 3 " 1 6 ' - 3 " 4 ' - 0 " SP A A N D R O O F A C C E S S KI N G H I J K 5' S E T B A C K 5' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E PR O P E R T Y L I N E KI N G KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N 1 AL - 3 0 1 3 AL - 3 0 0 2 AL - 3 0 0 1 AL-300 2 AL - 3 0 1 6 ' - 8 3 / 4 " 8' - 8 " (F U L L Y A C C E S S I B L E ) (F U L L Y AC C E S S I B L E ) 2 2 AR C H I T E C T T O W O R K W I T H B U I L D I N G DE P T T O C O N F I R M E G R E S S RE Q U I R E M E N T S F R O M S P A T E R R A C E PR I O R T O P E R M I T S U B M I T T A L 2 3 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.8'16'4' 1/8" = 1'-0"Author14017 THIRD LEVEL FLOOR PLAN AL-113MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker NORTHISSUEDATEISSUED2 2015 - 05 - 18 3 2015 - 05 - 21 RE V I S I O N 1 : EX I T D I S C H A R G E P A T H S A D D E D T O T H I S P L A N IN D I C A T E D W I T H T H I S L I N E T Y P E P318 IV.A. 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 7890 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 78904%0.6%0.5%2 %2 %7890.5 78 9 3 . 2 5 6 %2%8 .3 %5 % 78 9 4 78 9 3 . 8 5 0 .3 5 % 2 % 0 .3 5 % 2 % 0 .3 5 % 2 % 78 9 3 . 1 78 9 3 . 1 7890.77891.77892.5 4.3%5.5%7891.15 7890.85 7890.6 0.7%0.7% 0 . 7 % 0 . 7 % 7890.752%2 %2 % 78 9 3 . 1 5 0 .3 5 % 8 .3 % 1 .8 % 7892.6 7892.9 7892.82% CO N C R E T E R I B B O N O N G R A D E 1 .8 % 78 9 2 . 2 78 9 1 . 8 5 0 . 7 % 2 % 2 % 1 % 8 .3 % 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 1 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1:12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 A 13 1 ' - 6 " 13 6 ' - 0 " 12 0 ' - 0 " NO T E : F I N I S H F L O O R E L E V A T I O N 1 0 0 E Q U A L S 7 8 9 1 . 2 5 ' H I J K 5' S E T B A C K 5' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E PR O P E R T Y L I N E ME C H A N I C A L A R E A M E C H A N I C A L A R E A 2 9 ' - 6 " 40 ' - 2 " 2 2 UPDATED LANDSCAPE BACKGROUND INSERTED FOR REFERENCE IN REVISION 2, RE:LANDSCAPE TO CONFIRM ALL INFORMATION REPRESENTED2 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.8'16'4' 1/8" = 1'-0"Author14017 ROOF PLAN AL-114MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker NORTHISSUEDATEISSUED2 2015 - 05 - 18 P319 IV.A. UP UP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 H I J K 3 AL - 3 0 0 2 AL - 3 0 0 1 AL - 3 0 0 DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N SM A L L Q U E E N SM A L L Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N B. O . H . KI N G RE S T R O O M DE P A R T U R E RO O M LU G G A G E ST O R A G E ST O . ST O . SH A R E D A D M I N OF F I C E MA N A G E R S OF F I C E ST O R A G E FO O D ST O R A G E FO O D P R E P CL E A N / TR A S H EX E R C I S E ME E T I N G RO O M 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED LOWER LEVEL PLAN EAST AL-120.1MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " lo d g e L o w e r L e v e l - E a s t 1 ISSUE DATE ISSUED P320 IV.A. UP UP 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 H I J 1 AL - 3 0 0 DO U B L E Q U E E N KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N ME D I U M Q U E E N SM A L L Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N B. O . H . DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N ST A F F B R E A K R O O M MA I N T E N A N C E SH O P BU I L D I N G S E R V I C E ME C H A N I C A L S P A C E S LO D G E LA U N D R Y LI N E N ST O R A G E 5' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E S T A F F L O C K E R S B E N C H B E N C H B E N C H ST A F F R E S T R O O M ST A F F R E S T R O O M 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED LOWER LEVEL PLAN WEST AL-120.2MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " lo d g e L o w e r L e v e l - W e s t 1 ISSUE DATE ISSUED P321 IV.A. 78926% 2 % 0 . 7 % 0 . 7 % 7890.7 8 .3 %7892.8% 78 9 2 . 2 78 9 1 . 8 5 0 . 7 % 7 8 9 1 11 UP UP UP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A H I J K 3 AL - 3 0 0 2 AL - 3 0 0 1 AL - 3 0 0 DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N KI N G KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N LO B B Y S P A C E BA R DI N I N G 77 0 S . F . 60 S E A T S VE S T . ST O RE C ' T ST O R A G E OF F I C E RE S T R O O M RE S T R O O M DE L I V E R Y A R E A 2 AL - 3 0 1 6 y a r d CO M P A C T I N G DU M P S T E R RE C Y C L I N G 90 g a l 9 0 g a l 9 0 g a l TR A S H E N C L O S U R E (O P E N T O S K Y ) TR A S H A R E A 20 ' - 0 " 2 AC C E S S I B L E RE C E P T I O N D E S K AR E A W I L L B E PR O V I D E D 2 AC C E S S I B L E BA R A R E A W I L L BE P R O V I D E D 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED MAIN LEVEL PLAN EAST AL-121.1MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " Lo d g e M a i n L e v e l - E a s t 1 ISSUE DATE ISSUED 2 2015 - 05 - 18 P322 IV.A. 7 8 9 47894 CO N C 8 .3 % R E F . D W UP UP 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 A H I J 1 AL - 3 0 1 1 AL - 3 0 0 DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N ME D I U M Q U E E N KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N KI N G KI T C H E N LI V I N G EN T R Y BE D R O O M BA T H DI N I N G 5' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E ME D I U M Q U E E N SM A L L Q U E E N SM A L L Q U E E N UT I L I T Y CL . EG R E S S W D W . 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED MAIN LEVEL PLAN WEST AL-121.2MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " Lo d g e M a i n L e v e l - W e s t 1 ISSUE DATE ISSUED 2 2015 - 05 - 18 P323 IV.A. UP UP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 H I J K 3 AL - 3 0 0 2 AL - 3 0 0 1 AL - 3 0 0 DO U B L E Q U E E N HO U S E K E E P I N G DO U B L E Q U E E N SM A L L Q U E E N KI N G KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N OP E N 2 AL - 3 0 1 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED SECOND LEVEL PLAN EAST AL-122.1MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " Lo d g e S e c o n d L e v e l - E a s t 1 ISSUE DATE ISSUED P324 IV.A. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 H I J 1 AL - 3 0 1 1 AL - 3 0 0 ME D I U M Q U E E N KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N D O U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N SM A L L Q U E E N 5' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E KI N G ME D I U M Q U E E N 4 AL - 1 0 0 . 2 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED SECOND LEVEL PLAN WEST AL-122.2MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " Lo d g e S e c o n d L e v e l - W e s t 1 ISSUE DATE ISSUED 2 2015 - 05 - 18 P325 IV.A. UP UP DN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A H I J K 3 AL - 3 0 0 2 AL - 3 0 0 1 AL - 3 0 0 DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N D O U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N SP A A N D R O O F A C C E S S KI N G KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N 1 3 ' - 1 4 3 / 1 2 8 " 1 2 ' - 6 " 1 2 ' - 6 " 8'- 8 " 2 AL - 3 0 1 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED THIRD LEVEL PLAN EAST AL-123.1MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " Lo d g e T h i r d L e v e l - E a s t 1 ISSUE DATE ISSUED 2 2015 - 05 - 18 P326 IV.A. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 A H I J 1 AL - 3 0 1 1 AL - 3 0 0 KI N G KI N G DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N DO U B L E Q U E E N 5' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E KI N G 2 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED THIRD LEVEL PLAN WEST AL-123.2MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " Lo d g e T h i r d L e v e l - W e s t 1 ISSUE DATE ISSUED 2 2015 - 05 - 18 P327 IV.A. Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0" A Third Level 120'-0"Roof Level 130'-0" H I J K VERTICAL WOOD SIDING PA N E L I Z E D M E T A L S I D I N G GL A S S G U A R D R A I L P R O P E R T Y L I N E P R O P E R T Y L I N E 5'- 0 " H E I G H T L I M I T 3 2 ' - 0 " Ma i n L e v e l 10 0 ' - 0 " Se c o n d L e v e l 11 0 ' - 0 " 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Th i r d L e v e l 12 0 ' - 0 " Lo w e r L e v e l 87 ' - 6 " Ro o f L e v e l 13 0 ' - 0 " GL A S S G U A R D R A I L VE R T I C A L W O O D S I D I N G PA N E L I Z E D M E T A L S I D I N G P R O P E R T Y L I N E P R O P E R T Y L I N E 78 9 1 ' - 7 " 78 9 3 ' - 8 " 78 9 2 ' - 1 " H E I G H T L I M I T 3 2 ' - 0 " SID E W A L K P R O F I L E ( D A S H E D ) VERTICAL 8" CHANNEL LAP WOOD SIDING PANELIZED 16" X 96" METAL SIDING STOREFRONT WINDOW SYSTEM 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.8'16'4' 1/8" = 1'-0"NM14017 OVERALL ELEVATIONS AL-200MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL JS 1/8" = 1'-0"LODGE - EAST ELEVATION 1 MA I N S T R E E T W E S T 2 1/8" = 1'-0" LO D G E - N O R T H E L E V A T I O N 3 ISSUE DATE ISSUED 3 2015 - 05 - 21 33 P328 IV.A. Ma i n L e v e l 10 0 ' - 0 " Se c o n d L e v e l 11 0 ' - 0 " 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Th i r d L e v e l 12 0 ' - 0 " Lo w e r L e v e l 87 ' - 6 " Ro o f L e v e l 13 0 ' - 0 " GL A S S G U A R D R A I L VE R T I C A L W O O D S I D I N G PA N E L I Z E D M E T A L S I D I N G P R O P E R T Y L I N E P R O P E R T Y L I N E 78 9 1 ' - 7 " 78 9 3 ' - 8 " 78 9 2 ' - 1 " H E I G H T L I M I T 3 2 ' - 0 " SI D E W A L K P R O F I L E ( D A S H E D ) Ma i n L e v e l 10 0 ' - 0 " Se c o n d L e v e l 11 0 ' - 0 " 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Th i r d L e v e l 12 0 ' - 0 " Lo w e r L e v e l 87 ' - 6 " Ro o f L e v e l 13 0 ' - 0 " GL A S S G U A R D R A I L VE R T I C A L W O O D S I D I N G PA N E L I Z E D M E T A L S I D I N G P R O P E R T Y L I N E P R O P E R T Y L I N E 78 9 1 ' - 7 " 78 9 3 ' - 8 " 78 9 2 ' - 1 " H E I G H T L I M I T 3 2 ' - 0 " SI D E W A L K P R O F I L E ( D A S H E D ) VERTICAL 8" CHANNEL LAP WOOD SIDING PANELIZED 16" X 96" METAL SIDING STOREFRONT WINDOW SYSTEM 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.8'16'4' 1/8" = 1'-0"Author14017 OVERALL ELEVATIONS AL-201MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " LO D G E - N O R T H E L E V A T I O N - WI T H T R E E S 2 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " LO D G E - N O R T H E L E V A T I O N - WI T H O U T T R E E S 1ISSUEDATEISSUED3 2015 - 05 - 213 3 P329 IV.A. Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0"1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Third Level 120'-0"Lower Level 87'-6"Roof Level 130'-0" SH E E T M E T A L S I D I N G - M A T C H WIN D O W S ? PA N E L I Z E D M E T A L S I D I N G GL A S S G U A R D R A I L PROPERTY LINE P R O P E R T Y L I N E 5' - 0 " 5'-0" H E I G H T L I M I T 3 2 ' - 0 " Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0" A Third Level 120'-0" Lo w e r L e v e l 87 ' - 6 " Roof Level 130'-0" H I J K PA N E L I Z E D M E T A L S I D I N G VE R T I C A L W O O D S I D I N G PROPERTY LINE P R O P E R T Y L I N E SETBACK5'-0" H E I G H T L I M I T 3 2 ' - 0 " VERTICAL 8" CHANNEL LAP WOOD SIDING PANELIZED 16" X 96" METAL SIDING STOREFRONT WINDOW SYSTEM0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.8'16'4' 1/8" = 1'-0"Author14017 OVERALL ELEVATIONS AL-202MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 1/8" = 1'-0"LODGE - SOUTH ELEVATION 3 1/8" = 1'-0"LODGE - WEST ELEVATION 1 CO U R T Y A R D V I E W 2 ISSUE DATE ISSUED 3 2015 - 05 - 213 P330 IV.A. VE R T I C A L W O O D S I D I N G 8 " E X P O S U RE V E R T I C A L C H A N N E L L A P S I D I N G HO R I Z O N T A L P A N E L I Z E D M E T A L S I D I N G 1 6 " X 9 6 " P A N E L S ME C H A N I C A L G R I L L A T W I N D O W S Y S T E M ( C O L O R T O B E S E L E C T E D ) GL A S S G U A R D R A I L S Y S T E M FO L D I N G D O O R S Y S T E M AL U M I N U M S T O R E F R O N T W I N D O W S Y S T E M ( F I N A L C O L O R T O B E S E L E C T E D ) VE R T I C A L F E N C I N G A T M E C H A N I C A L A R E A S ( O N R O O F ) 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 1/2" = 1'-0"Author14017 MATERIALS AL-203MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker ISSUE DATE ISSUED P331 IV.A. Ma i n L e v e l 10 0 ' - 0 " Se c o n d L e v e l 11 0 ' - 0 " 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Th i r d L e v e l 12 0 ' - 0 " Lo w e r L e v e l 87 ' - 6 " Ro o f L e v e l 13 0 ' - 0 " VE R T I C A L W O O D S I D I N G P R O P E R T Y L I N E Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0" 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Third Level 120'-0"Roof Level 130'-0" GL A S S G U A R D R A I L PA N E L I Z E D M E T A L S I D I N G PROPERTY LINE 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AL-210MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " LO D G E - P A R T I A L N O R T H EL E V A T I O N ( E ) 2 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " LO D G E - P A R T I A L N O R T H EL E V A T I O N ( W ) 1 ISSUE DATE ISSUED 3 2015 - 05 - 21 33 P332 IV.A. Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0"1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Third Level 120'-0"Lower Level 87'-6"Roof Level 130'-0" SH E E T M E T A L S I D I N G - M A T C H WI N D O W S PA N E L I Z E D M E T A L S I D I N G PROPERTY LINE5'-0" Ma i n L e v e l 10 0 ' - 0 " Se c o n d L e v e l 11 0 ' - 0 " 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Th i r d L e v e l 12 0 ' - 0 " Ro o f L e v e l 13 0 ' - 0 " GL A S S G U A R D R A I L P R O P E R T Y L I N E 5'- 0 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AL-211MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " LO D G E - P A R T I A L S O U T H EL E V A T I O N ( E ) 2 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " LO D G E - P A R T I A L S O U T H EL E V A T I O N ( W ) 1 ISSUE DATE ISSUED 3 2015 - 05 - 21 3 P333 IV.A. Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0"A Third Level 120'-0"Roof Level 130'-0" H I J K GL A S S G U A R D R A I L P R O P E R T Y L I N E PROPERTY LINE 5'- 0 " Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0" A Third Level 120'-0"Lower Level 87'-6"Roof Level 130'-0" H I J K PA N E L I Z E D M E T A L S I D I N G VE R T I C A L W O O D S I D I N G PROPERTY LINE P R O P E R T Y L I N E SE T B A C K 5'- 0 " H E I G H T L I M I T 3 2 ' - 0 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AL-212MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3/16" = 1'-0" LO D G E - E N L A R G E D E A S T ELEVATION 2 3/16" = 1'-0" LO D G E - E N L A R G E D W E S T ELEVATION 1ISSUEDATEISSUED3 2015 - 05 - 213 P334 IV.A. Ma i n L e v e l 10 0 ' - 0 " Se c o n d L e v e l 11 0 ' - 0 " A Th i r d L e v e l 12 0 ' - 0 " Lo w e r L e v e l 87 ' - 6 " Ro o f L e v e l 13 0 ' - 0 " H I J Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0"A Third Level 120'-0"Lower Level 87'-6"Roof Level 130'-0" H I J K 8'-11 3/4"10'-0"Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Third Level 120'-0"Lower Level 87'-6"Roof Level 130'-0"AL-3102 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.8'16'4' 1/8" = 1'-0"Author14017 OVERALL BUILDING SECTIONS AL-300MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " OV E R A L L S E C T I O N @ G R I D 7 3 1/8" = 1'-0" OV E R A L L S E C T I O N @ G R I D 3 2 1/8" = 1'-0" OV E R A L L L O N G S E C T I O N @ CORRIDOR 1ISSUEDATEISSUED P335 IV.A. Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0"A Third Level 120'-0"Lower Level 87'-6"Roof Level 130'-0" H I J Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0"A Third Level 120'-0"Lower Level 87'-6"Roof Level 130'-0" H I J K 1 AL - 3 0 0 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.8'16'4' 1/8" = 1'-0"Author14017 OVERALL BUILDING SECTIONS AL-301MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 1/8" = 1'-0" OV E R A L L S E C T I O N @ W E S T STAIR 1 1/8" = 1'-0" OV E R A L L S E C T I O N @ E L E V A T O R 2 ISSUE DATE ISSUED P336 IV.A. Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0"1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Third Level 120'-0"Lower Level 87'-6"Roof Level 130'-0" Ma i n L e v e l 10 0 ' - 0 " Se c o n d L e v e l 11 0 ' - 0 " 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Th i r d L e v e l 12 0 ' - 0 " Lo w e r L e v e l 87 ' - 6 " Ro o f L e v e l 13 0 ' - 0 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED BUILDING SECTIONS AL-310MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " PA R T I A L S E C T I O N @ C O R R I D O R (E ) 2 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " PA R T I A L S E C T I O N @ C O R R I D O R (W ) 1 ISSUE DATE ISSUED P337 IV.A. Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0"A Third Level 120'-0"Lower Level 87'-6"Roof Level 130'-0" H I J K Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0"A Third Level 120'-0"Lower Level 87'-6"Roof Level 130'-0" H I J 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED BUILDING SECTIONS AL-311MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3/16" = 1'-0" EN L A R G E D S E C T I O N @ G R I D 3 1 3/16" = 1'-0" EN L A R G E D S E C T I O N @ G R I D 7 2 ISSUE DATE ISSUED P338 IV.A. Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0"A Third Level 120'-0"Lower Level 87'-6"Roof Level 130'-0" H I J K 1 AL - 3 0 0 Main Level 100'-0"Second Level 110'-0" A Third Level 120'-0"Lower Level 87'-6"Roof Level 130'-0" H I J 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"Author14017 ENLARGED BUILDING SECTIONS AL-312MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3/16" = 1'-0" EN L A R G E D S E C T I O N @ ELEVATOR 1 3/16" = 1'-0" EN L A R G E D S E C T I O N @ W E S T STAIR 2 ISSUE DATE ISSUED P339 IV.A. 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.CCY14017 COVER SHEET AR-100.0MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015 MO L L Y G I B S O N R E S I D E N C E S MG L MGL ESG RE S I D E N T I A L S H E E T I N D E X AR - 1 0 0 . 0 C O V E R S H E E T AR - 1 0 0 . 1 R E S I D E N T I A L S I T E P L A N AR - 1 1 0 R E S I D E N T I A L F L O O R P L A N S AR - 1 1 1 R E S I D E N T I A L F L O O R P L A N S AR - 1 1 2 R E S I D E N T I A L F L O O R P L A N S AR - 1 1 3 R E S I D E N T I A L R O O F P L A N S AR - 2 0 0 R E S I D E N T I A L S T R E E T E L E V A T I O N S AR - 2 1 0 R E S I D E N T I A L E L E V A T I O N S AR - 2 1 1 R E S I D E N T I A L E L E V A T I O N S AR - 2 1 2 R E S I D E N T I A L E L E V A T I O N S AR - 2 1 3 R E S I D E N T I A L E L E V A T I O N S AR - 3 1 0 R E S I D E N T I A L S E C T I O N S AR - 3 1 1 R E S I D E N T I A L S E C T I O N S AR - 4 0 0 R E S I D E N T I A L M A T E R I A L S ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P340 IV.A. 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 67896 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 7 7 8 9 57894 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 6 789678937892 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 7 7 8 9 57894 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 2 C H I M N E Y 1 '∅C O N C R E T E S U P P O R T 1 '∅C O N C R E T E S U P P O R T HO P K I NS S T R E E T M U L T I -S T O R Y F R A M E B U I L D I N G E D G E O F P A V E M E N T C O N C R E T E C U R B & G U T T E R B R I C K P A V E R S C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K W O O D P R I V A C Y F E N C E A D J A C E N T B U I L D I N G S E C O N D S T O R Y W A L K W A Y W O O D E N D E C K R O O F O V E R H A N G S E C O N D S T O R Y W A L K W A Y S T A I R S U P T O S E C O N D S T O R Y W A L K W A Y S H E D C O N C R E T E P A T I O S H E D P L A N T E R S P A F L A G S T O N E P A T I O L A W N L A W N A D J A C E N T B U I L D I N G L A N D S C A P I N G S T O N E R E T A I N I N G S T O N E R E T A I N I N G L A R G E B O U L D E R (T Y P I C A L ) S T O N E R E T A I N I N G S E C O N D S T O R Y W O O D D E C K R O O F O V E R H A N G S T A I R S T O B A S E M E N T S T O N E R E T A I N I N G C O V E R E D C O N C R E T E W A L K W A Y C H A I N -L I N K F E N C E O N T O P O F C O N C R E T E R E T A I N I N G W A L L B U I L D I N G F O U N D A L U M I N U M C A P I L L E G I B L E (N 5 3 °2 6 'E 0 .3 1 ') S E T N O . 5 R E B A R & Y E L L O W P L A S T I C C A P M A R K E D P R O P C O R N E R H C E L S 1 9 5 9 8 (T Y P I C A L ) T R A S H C O M P A C T O R E L E C T R I C T R A N S F O R M E R S O N C O N C R E T E P A D S C O N C R E T E R O O F O V E R H A N G R O O F O V E R H A N G C O N C R E T E F F E :7 8 9 3 .7 8 B A S E M E N T :7 8 8 8 .2 1 1 s t L E V E L :7 8 9 7 .1 5 2 n d L E V E L :7 9 0 6 .2 4 7 9 0 5 .9 7 8 9 6 .6 R I D G E :7 9 2 1 .9 R I D G E : 7 9 2 2 . 1 4 .9 ' 9 . 7 ' 4 .6 ' 1 7 . 7 ' 4 . 8 ' N 1 5 ° 4 4 ' 1 7 " E 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' S 7 4 °1 5 '4 3 "E 9 0 .0 2 ' S 1 5 ° 4 4 ' 1 7 " W 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' N 7 4 °1 5 '4 3 "W 9 0 .0 2 ' 5 0 .8 ' 5 .1 ' 2 8 .3 ' 1 4 . 1 ' 4 .0 ' 1 4 .1 ' 7 2 . 3 ' 8 . 0 ' 1 .2 ' 1 7 .8 ' 4 8 .4 ' 2 4 . 4 ' 1 3 . 2 ' 1 3 . 2 ' 6 . 8 ' 4 0 . 7 ' 5 .1 ' 3 .9 ' 3.6'1 5 . 1 ' 1 8 . 4 ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 112 1 3 1 415161718 W B U C A N T I L E V E R A .C . U N I T C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K 8 4 .5 ' B O L L A R D S W I N D O W W E L L S S T E P S F O U N D N O . 5 R E B A R 1 H A L L W 1 2 . 0 . 6 ' 1 2 .5 ' N7 4 ° 1 5 ' 4 3 " W 19 1 . 4 3 ' I V B I V B G E E G E I V B 45 ' - 0 " 45 ' - 0 " 90 ' - 0 " 100' - 0" 5' - 0 " 5' - 0 " 7' - 0" 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " AL L E Y HO P K I N S RES 2 - UTILITY METER LOCATION RE S 1 - U T I L I T Y ME T E R L O C A T I O N 1' - 0 " 1 ' - 6 " 1' - 6 " 1' - 0 " 1 ' - 6 " EG R E S S L I G H T W E L L BE L O W ( P E R C O D E ) EGRESS LIGHTWELL BELOW (PER CODE)PORCH ROOF BELOW PO R C H R O O F B E L O W 7' - 0 " 1' - 6" EG R E S S L I G H T W E L L BE L O W ( P E R C O D E ) EGRESS LIGHTWELL BELOW (PER CODE)EXISTING GRADE (DASHED)PROPOSED GRADE,RE: LANDSCAPE & CIVIL 7 8 9 5 ' - 0 " 78 9 5 ' - 0 " 78 9 4 ' - 0 " 78 9 4 ' - 0 " 78 9 4 ' - 0 " 7893'-0" 7 8 9 3 ' - 0 " 7 8 9 4 ' - 0 " 7 892'-0 " 7 8 9 5 ' - 0 " RE: LANDSCAPE FOR EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN1 AL L E Y 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.10'20'5' 1" = 10'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL SITE PLAN AR-100.1MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 1 " = 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 AR C H S I T E P L A N - P R O P O S E D NORTH 1 " = 1 0 ' - 0 " 2 AR C H S I T E P L A N - E X I S T I N G ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 RE V I S I O N 1 : M I N O R R E V I S I O N S T O C O O R D I N A T E W I T H F U R T H E R DE V E L O P M E N T O F T H E G R A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N I S S U E D B Y T H E CI V I L E N G I N E E R RE V I S I O N 2 : M I N O R R E V I S I O N S T O I N C O R P O R A T E B U I L D I N G , P L A N N I N G , ZO N I N G & E N G I N E E R I N G D E P T C O M M E N T S / C L A R I F I C A T I O N S P341 IV.A. 15234 A B C D RE C . R M PD R A/ V BA R TH E A T E R ME C H LA U N D R Y EL E V 15 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 7' - 2 1 / 2 " 9' - 6 " 9 ' - 0 1 / 4 " 1 3 ' - 9 " 5 0 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 6 ' - 0 " 2 AR - 3 1 0 7' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 7' - 0 " E L E C BU N K R O O M BE D R O O M BA T H BA T H CL O C L O UP 1 AR - 3 1 0 1 AR - 3 1 1 RE C . R M PD R A/ V BA R TH E A T E R ME C H LA U N D R Y EL E V E L E C BU N K R O O M BE D R O O M BA T H BA T H CL O C L O UP CO D E R E Q ' D LI G H T W E L L SE R V I N G EA C H BE D R O O M CO D E R E Q ' D LI G H T W E L L SE R V I N G EA C H BE D R O O M E F G H 14 ' - 8 3 / 4 " 6' - 7 1 / 4 " 10 ' - 7 " -1 3 ' - 0 " -1 3 ' - 0 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS AR-110MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG NO R T H 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 LO W E R L E V E L ISSUE DATE ISSUED MA I N L E V E L ( A R C H E L E V ) 0 ' - 0 " = C I V I L E L E V A T I O N 7 8 9 4 ' - 6 " P342 IV.A. DN 2 AR - 2 1 0 AR - 2 1 0 AR - 2 1 1 1 2 1 15234 A B C D 15 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 7' - 2 1 / 2 " 9' - 6 " 5' - 0 " 5' - 0 " AR - 2 0 0 1 2 AR-213 2 21 ' - 6 " 2 4 ' - 0 " AR - 2 1 2 1 AR - 2 1 3 1 AR - 2 0 0 2 R E A R S E T B A C K 1 0 ' - 0 " F R O N T S E T B A C K 1 0 ' - 0 " EN T R Y P O R C H FR O N T Y A R D FR O N T Y A R D GU E S T P A R K I N G (P A R A L L E L ) GU E S T P A R K I N G (P A R A L L E L ) RE S 2 - ( 2 ) C A R GA R A G E 2 AR - 3 1 0 SE T B A C K 7' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " SE T B A C K 7' - 0 " EN T R Y P O R C H 1 0 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " RE S 1 - ( 2 ) C A R GA R A G E GU E S T M A S T E R BE D R O O M BA T H CL O M A S T E R C L O S E T EN T R Y UP C O A T S OF F I C E PD R MA S T E R BA T H MA S T E R BE D R O O M MU D RO O M DN 1 AR - 3 1 0 1 AR - 3 1 1 EL E V GU E S T M A S T E R BE D R O O M BA T H CL O M A S T E R C L O S E T EN T R Y UP C O A T S OF F I C E MA S T E R BA T H MA S T E R BE D R O O M MU D RO O M DN EL E V PD R FI R E P L A C E FI R E P L A C E E F G H 9 ' - 0 1 / 4 " 1 3 ' - 9 " 5 0 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 6 ' - 0 " A R - 2 1 0 A R - 2 1 1 0' - 0 " 0' - 0 " 0' - 0 " 0' - 0 " -1 ' - 6 " -1 ' - 6 " -1 ' - 6 " 0' - 0 " 0' - 0 " -0 ' - 6 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS AR-111MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG NO R T H 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 MA I N L E V E L ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 MA I N L E V E L ( A R C H E L E V ) 0 ' - 0 " = C I V I L E L E V A T I O N 7 8 9 4 ' - 6 " REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P343 IV.A. 2 AR - 2 1 0 AR - 2 1 0 AR - 2 1 1 1 2 1 15234 A B C D 15 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 7' - 2 1 / 2 " 9' - 6 " AR - 2 0 0 1 2 AR-213 2 AR - 2 1 2 1 AR - 2 1 3 1 AR - 2 0 0 2 RE S 1 - U P P E R LE V E L E X T E R I O R DE C K RE S 2 - U P P E R LE V E L E X T E R I O R DE C K RE S 1 - BA C K D E C K RO O F A C C E S S , S P I R A L ST A I R O R A L T . T R E A D DE V I C E T B D RO O F A C C E S S , SP I R A L S T A I R O R AL T . T R E A D DE V I C E T B D 2 AR - 3 1 0 T V 7' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 7' - 0 " KI T C H E N LI V I N G DI N I N G B'F A S T C L O GU E S T BE D R O O M S T U D Y B A T H DN 1 AR - 3 1 0 1 AR - 3 1 1 EL E V RE S 2 - BA C K D E C K T V C L O GU E S T BE D R O O M B A T H KI T C H E N B'F A S T S T U D Y EL E V LI V I N G DI N I N G DN FI R E P L A C E FI R E P L A C E E F G H 9 ' - 0 1 / 4 " 1 3 ' - 9 " 5 0 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 6 ' - 0 " A R - 2 1 0 A R - 2 1 1 10 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS AR-112MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 UP P E R L E V E L ISSUE DATE ISSUED MA I N L E V E L ( A R C H E L E V ) 0 ' - 0 " = C I V I L E L E V A T I O N 7 8 9 4 ' - 6 " NO R T H P344 IV.A. 2 AR - 2 1 0 AR - 2 1 0 AR - 2 1 1 1 2 1 15234 A B C D 15 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 7' - 2 1 / 2 " 9' - 6 " 9 ' - 0 1 / 4 " 1 3 ' - 9 " 5 0 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 6 ' - 0 " AR - 2 0 0 1 2 AR-213 2 AR - 2 1 2 1 AR - 2 1 3 1 AR - 2 0 0 2 RE S 1 - R O O F L E V E L TE R R A C E & H O T T U B RE S 2 - R O O F L E V E L TE R R A C E & H O T T U B 12 " / 1 2 " 12 " / 1 2 " A R - 2 1 0 A R - 2 1 1 RE S 2 - U N O C C U P I A B L E PO R C H R O O F B E L O W RE S 2 - O C C U P I A B L E TE R R A C E B E L O W RE S 1 - U N O C C U P I A B L E PO R C H R O O F B E L O W RE S 1 - O C C U P I A B L E TE R R A C E B E L O W PR I M A R Y F L A T (B A L L A S T ) R O O F SE C O N D A R Y F L A T (B A L L A S T ) R O O F SE C O N D A R Y F L A T (B A L L A S T ) R O O F 2 AR - 3 1 0 PR I M A R Y S L O P E D (G A B L E ) R O O F 7' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 7' - 0 " 1 AR - 3 1 0 1 AR - 3 1 1 E F G H 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 2 RO O F R E V I S E D T O S T E P D O W N F O R HE I G H T L I M I T C O M P L I A N C E A T 1 5 ' PE R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T , S E E NO R T H A N D E A S T E L E V A T I O N S 1 ' - 6 " 1 ' - 6 " 1' - 0 " 1' - 6 " 1' - 0 " 1' - 6 " 1' - 6 " 1 2 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL ROOF PLANS AR-113MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 RO O F P L A N ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 MA I N L E V E L ( A R C H E L E V ) 0 ' - 0 " = C I V I L E L E V A T I O N 7 8 9 4 ' - 6 " NO R T H REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P345 IV.A. 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.8'16'4' 3/32" = 1'-0"Author14017 RESIDENTIAL STREET ELEVATIONS AR-200MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 3 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 SO U T H S T R E E T E L E V A T I O N ( H O P K I N S ) 3 / 3 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 NO R T H S T R E E T E L E V A T I O N ( A L L E Y ) ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P346 IV.A. MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " A B C D RID G E P E R C O D E > 2 ' - 0 " RO O F D E C K - W E S T 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 4 ' - 0 " 8 ' - 0 " EX I S T I N G G R A D E ( D A S H E D ) 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T R E S T R I C T I V E GR A D E ( C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , PR O P O S E D G R A D E & 1 5 ' P E R I M E T E R ME A S U R E M E N T ) PR O P O S E D G R A D E 1/ 3 E A V E T O R I D G E P T . @ 23 ' - 5 2 9 / 3 2 " EA V E P T . @ 19 ' - 9 3 / 3 2 " 2 5 ' - 0 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 1 1 2 2 2 MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0" UP P E R L E V E L 10' - 0" LO W E R L E V E L -13' - 0" 1 5 2 3 4 RO O F D E C K - W E S T 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " EX I S T I N G G R A D E ( D A S H E D ) PR O P O S E D G R A D E 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M MO S T R E S T R I C T I V E G R A D E (C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , PR O P O S E D G R A D E & 1 5 ' PE R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T ) EA V E P T . @ 19 ' - 9 3 / 3 2 " 1/ 3 E A V E T O R I D G E P T . @ 23 ' - 5 2 9 / 3 2 " 2 5 ' - 0 " 2 1 1 2 PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL ELEVATIONS AR-210MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 RE S 1 - S O U T H E L E V A T I O N 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 RE S 1 - W E S T E L E V A T I O N ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P347 IV.A. MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " A B C D RO O F D E C K - W E S T 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " EX I S T I N G G R A D E ( D A S H E D ) 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T R E S T R I C T I V E GR A D E ( C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , PR O P O S E D G R A D E & 1 5 ' P E R I M E T E R ME A S U R E M E N T ) PR O P O S E D G R A D E 1/ 3 E A V E T O R I D G E P T . @ 23 ' - 5 2 9 / 3 2 " EA V E P T . @ 19 ' - 9 3 / 3 2 " 2 5 ' - 0 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 2 1 2 RI D G E MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " 1 5 2 3 4 RO O F D E C K - W E S T 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 1/ 3 E A V E T O R I D G E P T . @ 23 ' - 5 2 9 / 3 2 " EA V E P T . @ 19 ' - 9 3 / 3 2 " 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T R E S T R I C T I V E G R A D E (C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , P R O P O S E D G R A D E & 15 ' P E R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T ) PR O P O S E D G R A D E PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 15 ' P E R I M E T E R H E I G H T L I M I T 15 ' - 0 " 2 2 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL ELEVATIONS AR-211MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 RE S 1 - N O R T H E L E V A T I O N 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 RE S 1 - E A S T E L E V A T I O N ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P348 IV.A. MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " P E R C O D E > 2 ' - 0 " 4 ' - 0 " 8 ' - 0 " E F G H EX I S T I N G G R A D E ( D A S H E D ) PR O P O S E D G R A D E 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T R E S T R I C T I V E GR A D E ( C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , PR O P O S E D G R A D E & 1 5 ' P E R I M E T E R ME A S U R E M E N T ) 2 5 ' - 0 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 2 2 1 1 1 RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 2 MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0" UP P E R L E V E L 10' - 0" LO W E R L E V E L -13' - 0" 1 5 2 3 4 2 5 ' - 0 " 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T RE S T R I C T I V E G R A D E (C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , PR O P O S E D G R A D E & 1 5 ' PE R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T ) EX I S T I N G G R A D E ( D A S H E D ) PR O P O S E D G R A D E PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 1 PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 2 RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL ELEVATIONS AR-212MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 RE S 2 - S O U T H E L E V A T I O N 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 RE S 2 - W E S T E L E V A T I O N ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P349 IV.A. MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " E F G H 2 5 ' - 0 " 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T RE S T R I C T I V E G R A D E ( C O M B I N A T I O N O F EX I S T I N G , P R O P O S E D G R A D E & 1 5 ' PE R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T ) 1 ' - 6 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " *S E E E A S T E L E V A T I O N & R O O F P L A N FO R H E I G H T L I M I T C O M P L I A N C E A T RO O F B E Y O N D PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 2 RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 2 2 1 MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " 1 5 2 3 4 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T R E S T R I C T I V E GR A D E ( C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , P R O P O S E D GR A D E & 1 5 ' P E R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T ) 1 ' - 6 " 2 1 PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 *S E E N O R T H E L E V A T I O N F O R H E I G H T L I M I T CO M P L I A N C E A T R O O F B E Y O N D 2 PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 *S E E R O O F P L A N F O R S T E P D O W N I N RO O F F O R H E I G H T L I M I T C O M P L I A N C E AT 1 5 ' P E R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T 2 RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL ELEVATIONS AR-213MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 RE S 2 - N O R T H E L E V A T I O N 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 RE S 2 - E A S T E L E V A T I O N ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P350 IV.A. MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " A B C D RO O F D E C K - W E S T 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 1 AR - 3 1 1 T . O . P L A T E 9 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 3 ' - 0 " T . O . P L A T E 9 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 3 ' - 0 " C E I L I N G 8 ' - 1 0 5 / 8 " P R O P L I N E P R O P L I N E P R O P L I N E TH E A T E R TH E A T E R MA S T E R BE D R O O M MA S T E R BE D R O O M EN T R Y EN T R Y EX T E R I O R DE C K EX T E R I O R DE C K ST A I R ST A I R E F G H C E I L I N G 8 ' - 1 1 1 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 1 ' - 6 3 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 1 ' - 6 3 / 8 " RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 1 1 1 2 MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " A B C D RO O F D E C K - W E S T 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 1 AR - 3 1 1 C E I L I N G 1 2 ' - 3 1 / 2 " T . O . P L A T E 9 ' - 9 " HO T T U B HO T T U B LI G H T WE L L LI G H T WE L L P R O P L I N E P R O P L I N E P R O P L I N E LA U N D R Y BE D R O O M HA L L LA U N D R Y BE D R O O M HA L L GU E S T M A S T E R BE D R O O M CL O PD R HA L L GU E S T M A S T E R BE D R O O M CL O PD R HA L L KI T C H E N B'F A S T KI T C H E N B'F A S T M A X . C E I L I N G 1 9 ' - 5 3 / 8 " E F G H C E I L I N G 9 ' - 0 " C E I L I N G 8 ' - 1 1 1 / 8 " C E I L I N G 8 ' - 1 1 1 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 1 ' - 6 3 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 1 ' - 6 3 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 0 ' - 0 3 / 8 " RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 1 2 C E I L I N G 8 ' - 3 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL SECTIONS AR-310MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 SE C T I O N 1 - T R A N S V E R S E 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 SE C T I O N 2 - T R A N S V E R S E ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P351 IV.A. MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " 1 5 2 3 4 2 AR - 3 1 0 1 AR - 3 1 0 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 3 ' - 0 " RE C . R M BA R TH E A T E R BU N K RO O M BE D R O O M CL O RE S 2 - ( 2 ) C A R GA R A G E GU E S T M A S T E R BE D R O O M BA T H MA S T E R BA T H MA S T E R BE D R O O M KIT C H E N LI V I N G GU E S T BE D R O O M EX T E R I O R DE C K 6' - 0 " 50 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 13 ' - 9 " 9' - 0 1 / 4 " C E I L I N G 1 1 ' - 6 3 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 0 ' - 0 3 / 8 " C E I L I N G 8 ' - 1 1 1 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 2 ' - 3 1 / 2 " C E I L I N G 1 0 ' - 5 1 / 8 " 8 ' - 0 " RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL SECTIONS AR-311MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG (S E C T I O N T A K E N T H R O U G H R E S I D E N C E 2 . R E S I D E N C E 1 I S I D E N T I C A L E X E C P T F O R U P P E R R O O F . ) 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 SE C T I O N 3 - L O N G I T U D I N A L ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P352 IV.A. 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL MATERIALS AR-400MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG BO A R D F O R M E D C O N C R E T E B A S E CO M P O S I T E W O O D S I D I N G ( R A I N S C R E E N ) DA R K G R E Y M E T A L S I D I N G ( R A I N S C R E E N ) ME D I U M G R E Y Z I N C R O O F I N G , F A S C I A & S E C O N D A R Y ( B A C K G R O U N D ) S I D I N G NA T U R A L S T O N E V E N E E R B A S E RE S I D E N T I A L H O U S E 1 - MA T E R I A L P A L E T T E RESIDENTIAL HOUSE 2 -MATERIAL PALETTE WA R M G R E Y / B R O W N C O M P O S I T E F A S C I A & S E C O N D A R Y ( B A C K G R O U N D ) S I D I N G VI E W S I M U L A T I O N L O O K I N G A C R O S S HO P K I N S T O P R O P O S E D R E S I D E N C E S ISSUE DATE ISSUED N.T.S. P353 IV.A. P354 IV.A. P355 IV.A. P356 IV.A. P357 IV.A. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 A H I J K TE R R A C E PA R K I N G SP A C E S GA S ME T E R PU B L I C A M E N I T Y SP A C E PU B L I C A M E N I T Y SP A C E PU B L I C A M E N I T Y SP A C E EN T R Y DI N I N G TE R R A C E PR O P E R T Y L I N E PR O P E R T Y L I N E VARIANCE FOR ROOF OVERHANG - EXTEND TO PROPERTY LINE- DECREASED 38 s.f.OUTLINE OF EXISTING BUILIDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED SHOWN DASHED EX I S T I N G BU I L D I N G VA R I A N C E F O R B U I L D I N G A R E A I N T O SE T B A C K A T U P P E R L E V E L S - G R O U N D LE V E L C O N F O R M S 1 ' - 0 " VA R I A N C E F O R B U I L D I N G A R E A I N T O SE T B A C K A T U P P E R L E V E L S - G R O U N D LE V E L C O N F O R M S 5' S E T B A C K 5' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K 10 ' S E T B A C K PR O P E R T Y L I N E PR O P E R T Y L I N E EL E C T . X F O R M E R - 2 0 ' - - 2 0 ' - 0 " - - 6 0 ' - 0 " - 26 ' - 6 " 26 ' - 6 " 9 ' - 3 1 / 4 " 1 7 ' - 5 " 29 ' - 6 " 10'-1 101/128" 2 ' - 5 " 5 ' - 0 " 2 ' - 5 " 1'- 5 " VA R I A N C E F O R B U I L D I N G A R E A I N T O SE T B A C K A T S E C O N D L E V E L - G R O U N D LE V E L C O N F O R M S DE L I V E R Y A R E A 3' - 6 1 / 4 " GROUND LEVEL AREA MOVED OUT OF SETBACK SETBACK = 43 S.F. (12 S.F.INCREASE OVERALL) 10 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 1" = 10'-0"Author14017 VARIANCE SITE PLAN A-101MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PROGRESSMARCH 16, 2015MGL Checker ISSUE DATE ISSUED P358 IV.A. P359 IV.A. P360 IV.A. P361 IV.A. P362 IV.A. P363 IV.A. P364 IV.A. P365 IV.A. 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.CCY14017 COVER SHEET AR-100.0MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015 MO L L Y G I B S O N R E S I D E N C E S MG L MGL ESG RE S I D E N T I A L S H E E T I N D E X AR - 1 0 0 . 0 C O V E R S H E E T AR - 1 0 0 . 1 R E S I D E N T I A L S I T E P L A N AR - 1 1 0 R E S I D E N T I A L F L O O R P L A N S AR - 1 1 1 R E S I D E N T I A L F L O O R P L A N S AR - 1 1 2 R E S I D E N T I A L F L O O R P L A N S AR - 1 1 3 R E S I D E N T I A L R O O F P L A N S AR - 2 0 0 R E S I D E N T I A L S T R E E T E L E V A T I O N S AR - 2 1 0 R E S I D E N T I A L E L E V A T I O N S AR - 2 1 1 R E S I D E N T I A L E L E V A T I O N S AR - 2 1 2 R E S I D E N T I A L E L E V A T I O N S AR - 2 1 3 R E S I D E N T I A L E L E V A T I O N S AR - 3 1 0 R E S I D E N T I A L S E C T I O N S AR - 3 1 1 R E S I D E N T I A L S E C T I O N S AR - 4 0 0 R E S I D E N T I A L M A T E R I A L S ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P366 IV.A. 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 67896 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 7 7 8 9 57894 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 6 789678937892 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 7 7 8 9 57894 7 8 9 5 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 2 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 3 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 4 7 8 9 2 C H I M N E Y 1 '∅C O N C R E T E S U P P O R T 1 '∅C O N C R E T E S U P P O R T HO P K I NS S T R E E T M U L T I -S T O R Y F R A M E B U I L D I N G E D G E O F P A V E M E N T C O N C R E T E C U R B & G U T T E R B R I C K P A V E R S C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K W O O D P R I V A C Y F E N C E A D J A C E N T B U I L D I N G S E C O N D S T O R Y W A L K W A Y W O O D E N D E C K R O O F O V E R H A N G S E C O N D S T O R Y W A L K W A Y S T A I R S U P T O S E C O N D S T O R Y W A L K W A Y S H E D C O N C R E T E P A T I O S H E D P L A N T E R S P A F L A G S T O N E P A T I O L A W N L A W N A D J A C E N T B U I L D I N G L A N D S C A P I N G S T O N E R E T A I N I N G S T O N E R E T A I N I N G L A R G E B O U L D E R (T Y P I C A L ) S T O N E R E T A I N I N G S E C O N D S T O R Y W O O D D E C K R O O F O V E R H A N G S T A I R S T O B A S E M E N T S T O N E R E T A I N I N G C O V E R E D C O N C R E T E W A L K W A Y C H A I N -L I N K F E N C E O N T O P O F C O N C R E T E R E T A I N I N G W A L L B U I L D I N G F O U N D A L U M I N U M C A P I L L E G I B L E (N 5 3 °2 6 'E 0 .3 1 ') S E T N O . 5 R E B A R & Y E L L O W P L A S T I C C A P M A R K E D P R O P C O R N E R H C E L S 1 9 5 9 8 (T Y P I C A L ) T R A S H C O M P A C T O R E L E C T R I C T R A N S F O R M E R S O N C O N C R E T E P A D S C O N C R E T E R O O F O V E R H A N G R O O F O V E R H A N G C O N C R E T E F F E :7 8 9 3 .7 8 B A S E M E N T :7 8 8 8 .2 1 1 s t L E V E L :7 8 9 7 .1 5 2 n d L E V E L :7 9 0 6 .2 4 7 9 0 5 .9 7 8 9 6 .6 R I D G E :7 9 2 1 .9 R I D G E : 7 9 2 2 . 1 4 .9 ' 9 . 7 ' 4 .6 ' 1 7 . 7 ' 4 . 8 ' N 1 5 ° 4 4 ' 1 7 " E 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' S 7 4 °1 5 '4 3 "E 9 0 .0 2 ' S 1 5 ° 4 4 ' 1 7 " W 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' N 7 4 °1 5 '4 3 "W 9 0 .0 2 ' 5 0 .8 ' 5 .1 ' 2 8 .3 ' 1 4 . 1 ' 4 .0 ' 1 4 .1 ' 7 2 . 3 ' 8 . 0 ' 1 .2 ' 1 7 .8 ' 4 8 .4 ' 2 4 . 4 ' 1 3 . 2 ' 1 3 . 2 ' 6 . 8 ' 4 0 . 7 ' 5 .1 ' 3 .9 ' 3.6'1 5 . 1 ' 1 8 . 4 ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 112 1 3 1 415161718 W B U C A N T I L E V E R A .C . U N I T C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K 8 4 .5 ' B O L L A R D S W I N D O W W E L L S S T E P S F O U N D N O . 5 R E B A R 1 H A L L W 1 2 . 0 . 6 ' 1 2 .5 ' N7 4 ° 1 5 ' 4 3 " W 19 1 . 4 3 ' I V B I V B G E E G E I V B 45 ' - 0 " 45 ' - 0 " 90 ' - 0 " 100' - 0" 5' - 0 " 5' - 0 " 7' - 0" 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " AL L E Y HO P K I N S RES 2 - UTILITY METER LOCATION RE S 1 - U T I L I T Y ME T E R L O C A T I O N 1' - 0 " 1 ' - 6 " 1' - 6 " 1' - 0 " 1 ' - 6 " EG R E S S L I G H T W E L L BE L O W ( P E R C O D E ) EGRESS LIGHTWELL BELOW (PER CODE)PORCH ROOF BELOW PO R C H R O O F B E L O W 7' - 0 " 1' - 6" EG R E S S L I G H T W E L L BE L O W ( P E R C O D E ) EGRESS LIGHTWELL BELOW (PER CODE)EXISTING GRADE (DASHED)PROPOSED GRADE,RE: LANDSCAPE & CIVIL 7 8 9 5 ' - 0 " 78 9 5 ' - 0 " 78 9 4 ' - 0 " 78 9 4 ' - 0 " 78 9 4 ' - 0 " 7893'-0" 7 8 9 3 ' - 0 " 7 8 9 4 ' - 0 " 7 892'-0 " 7 8 9 5 ' - 0 " RE: LANDSCAPE FOR EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN1 AL L E Y 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.10'20'5' 1" = 10'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL SITE PLAN AR-100.1MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 1 " = 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 AR C H S I T E P L A N - P R O P O S E D NORTH 1 " = 1 0 ' - 0 " 2 AR C H S I T E P L A N - E X I S T I N G ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 RE V I S I O N 1 : M I N O R R E V I S I O N S T O C O O R D I N A T E W I T H F U R T H E R DE V E L O P M E N T O F T H E G R A D I N G A N D D R A I N A G E P L A N I S S U E D B Y T H E CI V I L E N G I N E E R RE V I S I O N 2 : M I N O R R E V I S I O N S T O I N C O R P O R A T E B U I L D I N G , P L A N N I N G , ZO N I N G & E N G I N E E R I N G D E P T C O M M E N T S / C L A R I F I C A T I O N S P367 IV.A. 15234 A B C D RE C . R M PD R A/ V BA R TH E A T E R ME C H LA U N D R Y EL E V 15 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 7' - 2 1 / 2 " 9' - 6 " 9 ' - 0 1 / 4 " 1 3 ' - 9 " 5 0 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 6 ' - 0 " 2 AR - 3 1 0 7' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 7' - 0 " E L E C BU N K R O O M BE D R O O M BA T H BA T H CL O C L O UP 1 AR - 3 1 0 1 AR - 3 1 1 RE C . R M PD R A/ V BA R TH E A T E R ME C H LA U N D R Y EL E V E L E C BU N K R O O M BE D R O O M BA T H BA T H CL O C L O UP CO D E R E Q ' D LI G H T W E L L SE R V I N G EA C H BE D R O O M CO D E R E Q ' D LI G H T W E L L SE R V I N G EA C H BE D R O O M E F G H 14 ' - 8 3 / 4 " 6' - 7 1 / 4 " 10 ' - 7 " -1 3 ' - 0 " -1 3 ' - 0 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS AR-110MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG NO R T H 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 LO W E R L E V E L ISSUE DATE ISSUED MA I N L E V E L ( A R C H E L E V ) 0 ' - 0 " = C I V I L E L E V A T I O N 7 8 9 4 ' - 6 " P368 IV.A. DN 2 AR - 2 1 0 AR - 2 1 0 AR - 2 1 1 1 2 1 15234 A B C D 15 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 7' - 2 1 / 2 " 9' - 6 " 5' - 0 " 5' - 0 " AR - 2 0 0 1 2 AR-213 2 21 ' - 6 " 2 4 ' - 0 " AR - 2 1 2 1 AR - 2 1 3 1 AR - 2 0 0 2 R E A R S E T B A C K 1 0 ' - 0 " F R O N T S E T B A C K 1 0 ' - 0 " EN T R Y P O R C H FR O N T Y A R D FR O N T Y A R D GU E S T P A R K I N G (P A R A L L E L ) GU E S T P A R K I N G (P A R A L L E L ) RE S 2 - ( 2 ) C A R GA R A G E 2 AR - 3 1 0 SE T B A C K 7' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " SE T B A C K 7' - 0 " EN T R Y P O R C H 1 0 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " RE S 1 - ( 2 ) C A R GA R A G E GU E S T M A S T E R BE D R O O M BA T H CL O M A S T E R C L O S E T EN T R Y UP C O A T S OF F I C E PD R MA S T E R BA T H MA S T E R BE D R O O M MU D RO O M DN 1 AR - 3 1 0 1 AR - 3 1 1 EL E V GU E S T M A S T E R BE D R O O M BA T H CL O M A S T E R C L O S E T EN T R Y UP C O A T S OF F I C E MA S T E R BA T H MA S T E R BE D R O O M MU D RO O M DN EL E V PD R FI R E P L A C E FI R E P L A C E E F G H 9 ' - 0 1 / 4 " 1 3 ' - 9 " 5 0 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 6 ' - 0 " A R - 2 1 0 A R - 2 1 1 0' - 0 " 0' - 0 " 0' - 0 " 0' - 0 " -1 ' - 6 " -1 ' - 6 " -1 ' - 6 " 0' - 0 " 0' - 0 " -0 ' - 6 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS AR-111MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG NO R T H 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 MA I N L E V E L ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 MA I N L E V E L ( A R C H E L E V ) 0 ' - 0 " = C I V I L E L E V A T I O N 7 8 9 4 ' - 6 " REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P369 IV.A. 2 AR - 2 1 0 AR - 2 1 0 AR - 2 1 1 1 2 1 15234 A B C D 15 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 7' - 2 1 / 2 " 9' - 6 " AR - 2 0 0 1 2 AR-213 2 AR - 2 1 2 1 AR - 2 1 3 1 AR - 2 0 0 2 RE S 1 - U P P E R LE V E L E X T E R I O R DE C K RE S 2 - U P P E R LE V E L E X T E R I O R DE C K RE S 1 - BA C K D E C K RO O F A C C E S S , S P I R A L ST A I R O R A L T . T R E A D DE V I C E T B D RO O F A C C E S S , SP I R A L S T A I R O R AL T . T R E A D DE V I C E T B D 2 AR - 3 1 0 T V 7' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 7' - 0 " KI T C H E N LI V I N G DI N I N G B'F A S T C L O GU E S T BE D R O O M S T U D Y B A T H DN 1 AR - 3 1 0 1 AR - 3 1 1 EL E V RE S 2 - BA C K D E C K T V C L O GU E S T BE D R O O M B A T H KI T C H E N B'F A S T S T U D Y EL E V LI V I N G DI N I N G DN FI R E P L A C E FI R E P L A C E E F G H 9 ' - 0 1 / 4 " 1 3 ' - 9 " 5 0 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 6 ' - 0 " A R - 2 1 0 A R - 2 1 1 10 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS AR-112MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 UP P E R L E V E L ISSUE DATE ISSUED MA I N L E V E L ( A R C H E L E V ) 0 ' - 0 " = C I V I L E L E V A T I O N 7 8 9 4 ' - 6 " NO R T H P370 IV.A. 2 AR - 2 1 0 AR - 2 1 0 AR - 2 1 1 1 2 1 15234 A B C D 15 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 7' - 2 1 / 2 " 9' - 6 " 9 ' - 0 1 / 4 " 1 3 ' - 9 " 5 0 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 6 ' - 0 " AR - 2 0 0 1 2 AR-213 2 AR - 2 1 2 1 AR - 2 1 3 1 AR - 2 0 0 2 RE S 1 - R O O F L E V E L TE R R A C E & H O T T U B RE S 2 - R O O F L E V E L TE R R A C E & H O T T U B 12 " / 1 2 " 12 " / 1 2 " A R - 2 1 0 A R - 2 1 1 RE S 2 - U N O C C U P I A B L E PO R C H R O O F B E L O W RE S 2 - O C C U P I A B L E TE R R A C E B E L O W RE S 1 - U N O C C U P I A B L E PO R C H R O O F B E L O W RE S 1 - O C C U P I A B L E TE R R A C E B E L O W PR I M A R Y F L A T (B A L L A S T ) R O O F SE C O N D A R Y F L A T (B A L L A S T ) R O O F SE C O N D A R Y F L A T (B A L L A S T ) R O O F 2 AR - 3 1 0 PR I M A R Y S L O P E D (G A B L E ) R O O F 7' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 7' - 0 " 1 AR - 3 1 0 1 AR - 3 1 1 E F G H 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 2 RO O F R E V I S E D T O S T E P D O W N F O R HE I G H T L I M I T C O M P L I A N C E A T 1 5 ' PE R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T , S E E NO R T H A N D E A S T E L E V A T I O N S 1 ' - 6 " 1 ' - 6 " 1' - 0 " 1' - 6 " 1' - 0 " 1' - 6 " 1' - 6 " 1 2 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL ROOF PLANS AR-113MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 RO O F P L A N ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 MA I N L E V E L ( A R C H E L E V ) 0 ' - 0 " = C I V I L E L E V A T I O N 7 8 9 4 ' - 6 " NO R T H REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P371 IV.A. 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.8'16'4' 3/32" = 1'-0"Author14017 RESIDENTIAL STREET ELEVATIONS AR-200MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL Checker 3 / 3 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 SO U T H S T R E E T E L E V A T I O N ( H O P K I N S ) 3 / 3 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 NO R T H S T R E E T E L E V A T I O N ( A L L E Y ) ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P372 IV.A. MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " A B C D RID G E P E R C O D E > 2 ' - 0 " RO O F D E C K - W E S T 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 4 ' - 0 " 8 ' - 0 " EX I S T I N G G R A D E ( D A S H E D ) 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T R E S T R I C T I V E GR A D E ( C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , PR O P O S E D G R A D E & 1 5 ' P E R I M E T E R ME A S U R E M E N T ) PR O P O S E D G R A D E 1/ 3 E A V E T O R I D G E P T . @ 23 ' - 5 2 9 / 3 2 " EA V E P T . @ 19 ' - 9 3 / 3 2 " 2 5 ' - 0 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 1 1 2 2 2 MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0" UP P E R L E V E L 10' - 0" LO W E R L E V E L -13' - 0" 1 5 2 3 4 RO O F D E C K - W E S T 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " EX I S T I N G G R A D E ( D A S H E D ) PR O P O S E D G R A D E 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M MO S T R E S T R I C T I V E G R A D E (C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , PR O P O S E D G R A D E & 1 5 ' PE R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T ) EA V E P T . @ 19 ' - 9 3 / 3 2 " 1/ 3 E A V E T O R I D G E P T . @ 23 ' - 5 2 9 / 3 2 " 2 5 ' - 0 " 2 1 1 2 PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL ELEVATIONS AR-210MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 RE S 1 - S O U T H E L E V A T I O N 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 RE S 1 - W E S T E L E V A T I O N ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P373 IV.A. MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " A B C D RO O F D E C K - W E S T 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " EX I S T I N G G R A D E ( D A S H E D ) 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T R E S T R I C T I V E GR A D E ( C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , PR O P O S E D G R A D E & 1 5 ' P E R I M E T E R ME A S U R E M E N T ) PR O P O S E D G R A D E 1/ 3 E A V E T O R I D G E P T . @ 23 ' - 5 2 9 / 3 2 " EA V E P T . @ 19 ' - 9 3 / 3 2 " 2 5 ' - 0 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 2 1 2 RI D G E MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " 1 5 2 3 4 RO O F D E C K - W E S T 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 1/ 3 E A V E T O R I D G E P T . @ 23 ' - 5 2 9 / 3 2 " EA V E P T . @ 19 ' - 9 3 / 3 2 " 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T R E S T R I C T I V E G R A D E (C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , P R O P O S E D G R A D E & 15 ' P E R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T ) PR O P O S E D G R A D E PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 15 ' P E R I M E T E R H E I G H T L I M I T 15 ' - 0 " 2 2 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL ELEVATIONS AR-211MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 RE S 1 - N O R T H E L E V A T I O N 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 RE S 1 - E A S T E L E V A T I O N ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P374 IV.A. MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " P E R C O D E > 2 ' - 0 " 4 ' - 0 " 8 ' - 0 " E F G H EX I S T I N G G R A D E ( D A S H E D ) PR O P O S E D G R A D E 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T R E S T R I C T I V E GR A D E ( C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , PR O P O S E D G R A D E & 1 5 ' P E R I M E T E R ME A S U R E M E N T ) 2 5 ' - 0 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 2 2 1 1 1 RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 2 MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0" UP P E R L E V E L 10' - 0" LO W E R L E V E L -13' - 0" 1 5 2 3 4 2 5 ' - 0 " 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T RE S T R I C T I V E G R A D E (C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , PR O P O S E D G R A D E & 1 5 ' PE R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T ) EX I S T I N G G R A D E ( D A S H E D ) PR O P O S E D G R A D E PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 1 PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 2 RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL ELEVATIONS AR-212MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 RE S 2 - S O U T H E L E V A T I O N 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 RE S 2 - W E S T E L E V A T I O N ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P375 IV.A. MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " E F G H 2 5 ' - 0 " 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T RE S T R I C T I V E G R A D E ( C O M B I N A T I O N O F EX I S T I N G , P R O P O S E D G R A D E & 1 5 ' PE R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T ) 1 ' - 6 " PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " *S E E E A S T E L E V A T I O N & R O O F P L A N FO R H E I G H T L I M I T C O M P L I A N C E A T RO O F B E Y O N D PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 2 RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 2 2 1 MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " 1 5 2 3 4 25 ' H E I G H T L I M I T F R O M M O S T R E S T R I C T I V E GR A D E ( C O M B I N A T I O N O F E X I S T I N G , P R O P O S E D GR A D E & 1 5 ' P E R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T ) 1 ' - 6 " 2 1 PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 *S E E N O R T H E L E V A T I O N F O R H E I G H T L I M I T CO M P L I A N C E A T R O O F B E Y O N D 2 PE R I M E T E R H E I G H T M E A S U R E M E N T 15 ' - 0 " 2 *S E E R O O F P L A N F O R S T E P D O W N I N RO O F F O R H E I G H T L I M I T C O M P L I A N C E AT 1 5 ' P E R I M E T E R M E A S U R E M E N T 2 RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL ELEVATIONS AR-213MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 RE S 2 - N O R T H E L E V A T I O N 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 RE S 2 - E A S T E L E V A T I O N ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P376 IV.A. MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " A B C D RO O F D E C K - W E S T 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 1 AR - 3 1 1 T . O . P L A T E 9 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 3 ' - 0 " T . O . P L A T E 9 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 3 ' - 0 " C E I L I N G 8 ' - 1 0 5 / 8 " P R O P L I N E P R O P L I N E P R O P L I N E TH E A T E R TH E A T E R MA S T E R BE D R O O M MA S T E R BE D R O O M EN T R Y EN T R Y EX T E R I O R DE C K EX T E R I O R DE C K ST A I R ST A I R E F G H C E I L I N G 8 ' - 1 1 1 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 1 ' - 6 3 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 1 ' - 6 3 / 8 " RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 1 1 1 2 MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " A B C D RO O F D E C K - W E S T 20 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 1 AR - 3 1 1 C E I L I N G 1 2 ' - 3 1 / 2 " T . O . P L A T E 9 ' - 9 " HO T T U B HO T T U B LI G H T WE L L LI G H T WE L L P R O P L I N E P R O P L I N E P R O P L I N E LA U N D R Y BE D R O O M HA L L LA U N D R Y BE D R O O M HA L L GU E S T M A S T E R BE D R O O M CL O PD R HA L L GU E S T M A S T E R BE D R O O M CL O PD R HA L L KI T C H E N B'F A S T KI T C H E N B'F A S T M A X . C E I L I N G 1 9 ' - 5 3 / 8 " E F G H C E I L I N G 9 ' - 0 " C E I L I N G 8 ' - 1 1 1 / 8 " C E I L I N G 8 ' - 1 1 1 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 1 ' - 6 3 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 1 ' - 6 3 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 0 ' - 0 3 / 8 " RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 1 2 C E I L I N G 8 ' - 3 " 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL SECTIONS AR-310MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 SE C T I O N 1 - T R A N S V E R S E 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 SE C T I O N 2 - T R A N S V E R S E ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P377 IV.A. MA I N L E V E L 0' - 0 " UP P E R L E V E L 10 ' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 3 ' - 0 " 1 5 2 3 4 2 AR - 3 1 0 1 AR - 3 1 0 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 3 ' - 0 " RE C . R M BA R TH E A T E R BU N K RO O M BE D R O O M CL O RE S 2 - ( 2 ) C A R GA R A G E GU E S T M A S T E R BE D R O O M BA T H MA S T E R BA T H MA S T E R BE D R O O M KIT C H E N LI V I N G GU E S T BE D R O O M EX T E R I O R DE C K 6' - 0 " 50 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 13 ' - 9 " 9' - 0 1 / 4 " C E I L I N G 1 1 ' - 6 3 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 0 ' - 0 3 / 8 " C E I L I N G 8 ' - 1 1 1 / 8 " C E I L I N G 1 2 ' - 3 1 / 2 " C E I L I N G 1 0 ' - 5 1 / 8 " 8 ' - 0 " RO O F D E C K - E A S T 19 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.4'8'2' 3/16" = 1'-0"CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL SECTIONS AR-311MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG (S E C T I O N T A K E N T H R O U G H R E S I D E N C E 2 . R E S I D E N C E 1 I S I D E N T I C A L E X E C P T F O R U P P E R R O O F . ) 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 SE C T I O N 3 - L O N G I T U D I N A L ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1 2015 - 04 - 27 2 2015 - 05 - 13 REVISION 1: MINOR REVISIONS TO COORDINATE WITH FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ISSUED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER REVISION 2: MINOR REVISIONS TO INCORPORATE BUILDING, PLANNING,ZONING & ENGINEERING DEPT COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS P378 IV.A. 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt,Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.comDATE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:ISSUE:HISTORY:SCALE:© COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD.CCY14017 RESIDENTIAL MATERIALS AR-400MOLLY GIBSON RESIDENCES HPC DETAILED/ FINAL REVIEWMARCH 18, 2015MGL ESG BO A R D F O R M E D C O N C R E T E B A S E CO M P O S I T E W O O D S I D I N G ( R A I N S C R E E N ) DA R K G R E Y M E T A L S I D I N G ( R A I N S C R E E N ) ME D I U M G R E Y Z I N C R O O F I N G , F A S C I A & S E C O N D A R Y ( B A C K G R O U N D ) S I D I N G NA T U R A L S T O N E V E N E E R B A S E RE S I D E N T I A L H O U S E 1 - MA T E R I A L P A L E T T E RESIDENTIAL HOUSE 2 -MATERIAL PALETTE WA R M G R E Y / B R O W N C O M P O S I T E F A S C I A & S E C O N D A R Y ( B A C K G R O U N D ) S I D I N G VI E W S I M U L A T I O N L O O K I N G A C R O S S HO P K I N S T O P R O P O S E D R E S I D E N C E S ISSUE DATE ISSUED N.T.S. P379 IV.A. P380 I V . A . P381 I V . A . 1 Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment DRAFT CMP Plan Aspen, CO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 GENERAL 1.1 PURPOSE 1.2 APPLICABILITY 1.3 DEFINITIONS AND TERMS 1.4 REFERENCES 2.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION 2.1 DISTURBANCE AREA 2.2 LOCATION 2.3 DESCRIPTION 3.0 PROJECT DOCUMENTATION 3.1 PERMITS / OTHER DOCUMENTS 3.2 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION 3.3 PROJECT SIGN 3.4 CONTACT DESIGNATION 4.0 PROJECT IMPLEMENATION 4.1 DATES OF CONSTRUCTION 4.2 HOURS OF CONSTRUCTION 4.3 SEQUENCE (PHASING) OF CONSTRUCTION 4.4 ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS 4.5 PROJECT FENCING 4.6 PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE 4.7 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 5.0 PARKING MANAGEMENT 5.1 PARKING MANGEMENT FORM 5.2 EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS AND ORDINANCE 35 5.3 CONSTRUCTION PARKING DETAILS 5.4 STAGING AREAS 5.5 CONSTRUCTION TRAILER, MATERIALS STORAGE, AND WASTE MANAGEMENT 6.0 TRAFFIC CONTROL 6.1 GENERAL 6.2 HAUL ROUTES 6.3 ONSITE VEHICLE LIMITATIONS 6.4 DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS 6.5 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN P382 IV.A. 2 7.0 PEDESTRIAN PROTECTION 7.1 GENERAL 8.0 SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL 8.1 REQUIREMENTS 8.2 SMUGGLER MOUNTIAN RESTRICTIONS 9.0 FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL 9.1 FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL PLAN 9.2 REQUIREMENTS 10.0 EMISSIONS 10.1 GENERAL 10.2 EMISSIONS FROM DIESEL POWERED ENGINES 11.0 NOISE SUPRESSION 11.1 GENERAL 11.2 NOISE SUPPRESSION PLAN 11.3 REQUIREMENTS 11.4 SPECIFIC RESTRICTIONS RELATED TO MANUFACTURING ON SITE 12.0 ENFORCEMENT 12.1 CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION OFFICER 12.2 CORRECTIVE ACTION 12.3 INSPECTION REPORTS APPENDICES A – Required Project Sign B – Site Management Plan C – Erosion Control Plan D – Noise Suppression Plan, Techniques and Equipment E – Project Schedule F – Stormwater Management Plan G – City of Aspen Ordinance 35 H – Filler Hydrant Permit P383 IV.A. 3 1.0 GENERAL 1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Construction Management Plan Manual is to provide a consistent policy under which certain physical aspects of construction management will be implemented on the Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment Project. The approved Construction Management Plan will be kept onsite. 1.2 APPLICABILITY This construction Management Plan shall govern the construction of One Aspen Phase I. 1.3 DEFINITIONS AND TERMS Construction Management Plan – A Construction Management Plan is a combination of diagrams, documents, drawings, and specifications that clearly define the steps that will be taken to demonstrate how the impacts to the community will be minimized. How the impacts associated with any construction project will be managed. Herein described as “Plan” throughout the remainder of this policy. Construction Mitigation Officer – An appointed employee of the City of Aspen whose charge is to ensure that all aspects of a Construction Management Plan are followed, and to further ensure that the impacts associated with construction activities within the City of Aspen are effectively managed and impacts associated with those projects are the least necessary to accomplish the project. Disturbance Area – A portion of land where topsoil or native soils have been removed for purposes of construction (development). Best Management Practices (BMP’s) – Schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of waters of the state. BMP’s also include treatment requirements, operating procedures, and practices to control site runoff, spillage or leaks, waste disposal, or drainage from material storage. Tree Dripline and Protection Zone - Use the longest branch of the tree as a radius from the center of the tree and make a circle. The circle is then defined as the dripline and thus is the tree protection zone. Final Stabilization – Uniform vegetative cover has been established with a density of at least 70 percent of pre-disturbed levels. 1.4 REFERENCES P384 IV.A. 4 A. City of Aspen Policy 205-A Right-Of-Way Permit Requirements B. City of Aspen Policy 204-A Revocable Encroachment License Application C. City of Aspen Construction and Mitigation Standards for Work in the Public Rights-of-Way D. City of Aspen Municipal Code Titles 13, 21, and 26 E. City of Aspen Ordinance 35 F. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways – 2003 Edition G. Colorado Department of Public Safety General Permit Part IB H. Colorado Department of Transportation M&S construction standards I. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment – Air Pollution Control Division 2.0 PROJECT LOCATION 2.1 DISTURBANCE AREA The total project disturbance area includes the entire Molly Gibson Lodge property plus the public right-of-way fronting the property along Main Street, Garmisch Street, and Hopkins Avenue. The project disturbance area is calculated to be approximately 33,566 SF. RA Nelson will not operate outside of the limits of disturbance without the prior consent of the property owner involved. RA Nelson will be responsible for protecting existing conditions outside the limit of disturbance from damage. Any damage to the existing areas outside the limit of disturbance will, at a minimum, be restored to a state equal to its pre- construction state. Construction staging areas as located on the Site Management Plan Appendix B will be located to minimize soil disturbance. 2.2 LOCATION The Molly Gibson Lodge is located at the corner of Highway 82 and S. Garmisch Street. There is an alley that seperates the second portion of the building located along W. Hopkins Ave. The project map is shown on the Site Management Plan Appendix B. 2.3 DESCRIPTION The Molly Gibson Lodge presently consists of two separate structures, a main lodge building fronting on Main and Garmisch Streets on an 15,000 SF portion of the property, and a secondary lodge building on a 9,000 SF portion of the property fronting on Hopkins Avenue. Additionally, a 3,000 SF parcel created by a historic lot split has been added through subdivision to the overall property. This creates a total involved property of 27,000 SF. Conceptual Planned P385 IV.A. 5 Development, Growth Management, and Subdivision approvals have been provided through Historic Preservation Commission and City Council reviews. The project is currently an applicant in the Final Planned Development approval process. The existing lodge building along Main and Garmisch Streets will be demolished and replaced with a new two-and three-story lodge building consisting of 26,959 SF of floor area. New curb and gutter, sidewalk, and street tree plantings will be provided along Main and Garmisch Streets. The existing lodge building fronting on Hopkins Avenue will be demolished and replaced with two single-family residences, each consisting of 4,000 SF of floor area. New sidewalk and street tree plantings will be provided along Hopkins Avenue. 3.0 PROJECT DOCUMENTATION 3.1 PERMITS / OTHER DOCUMENTS RA Nelson will maintain all applicable local, state and federal licenses and permits that apply to this project. The following permits will be attached: Stormwater Discharge permit (Future), Temporary Sign permit, Filler Hydrant permit. It is anticipated that permits will include a City of Aspen Demolition Permit, Building Permit, and a permit for construction in the right-of-way. Additionally, a Colorado Department of Transportation Right-of-Way Permit will be required for the curb and gutter construction along Main Street. These permits have not yet been applied for. All Planned Development, Growth Management, and Subdivision Approvals are provided. These include: o Ordinance No. 3—Series of 2015 Granting Growth Management Approval, Planned Development—Project Review Approval and Subdivision Approval for a site-specific development plan for the Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development o Resolution No. 35—Series of 2014 Granting Major Development Conceptual Approval, Demolition, Residential Design Standard Approval, Growth Management Approvals, and Conceptual Design Approval, and recommending City Council Grant Planned Development—Project Review Approval for a site-specific development plan for the Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development 3.2 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION P386 IV.A. 6 A project update will be provided to the public on a monthly basis. Specific information may be forwarded to the Molly Gibson website administrator, this update will also be emailed to all HOA’s adjacent to the property. This notification will provide an update to the overall project schedule and describe any major activities that will be happening in the forthcoming month. The first public notification will occur no later than 10 days prior to the start of construction. In addition to being sent out via the project website, this notification will be emailed to all Residents within 300 ft. of the property. The notification will include the following items: 1. Description of the current project phase 2. Overall Project Schedule 3. Traffic and /or pedestrian control measures and how they will be utilized during the construction of the project to protect the adjacent properties and pedestrians. 4. Summarize the Construction Management Plan 5. Describe Hauling / Staging Operations 6. Date and Location of Preconstruction Meeting indicated below A preconstruction meeting will be scheduled on (TBD). The meeting time is (TBD), located at (TBD). The purpose of this meeting will be to discuss the project and summarize the project specific Construction Management Plan. RA Nelson will require all subcontractors to attend. Utility personnel, applicable City departments, the Roaring Fork Transit Authority, local residents and the Aspen School District shall also be notified. In order to proactively address any concerns during the construction phases, RA Nelson will provide a designated representative that local residents can contact if a concern arises. A phone number and email address will be made available to contact this representative. The RA Nelson representative will then contact the concerned individual within 24 hours to address the concern. These concerns will be logged and tracked on a monthly basis. RA Nelson will provide an update of these concerns during the Monthly Meeting. If a construction operation will affect the current residents within 300 ft., RA Nelson will provide prior notification via email of the operation to the current residents. These notifications will be related to construction activity that may affect them outside the normal everyday construction activities (i.e. noise related activities, etc.) These notices will be emailed out 48 hours prior to the start of any of these operations. 3.3 PROJECT SIGN A project sign will be posted that includes items shown in Appendix A - Required Construction Sign. The sign will be posted in a location where it is readable from the street and will meet the City Municipal Code 26.510.030B4. RA Nelson will obtain all permits as required by the City of Aspen for project signage. 3.4 CONTACT DESIGNATION Owner- Aspen Galena LLC, c/o Michael Brown- 970-930-1754 RA Nelson Project Manager– TBD P387 IV.A. 7 RA Nelson Site Superintendent- TBD State Certified Safety Officer- Mike Grimaldi (970) 471-5845 State Certified Traffic Control Officer- TBD State Certified Erosion Control Representative- Aspen Fire Department – (970) 925-2690 ( non emergency ) Aspen Police Department – (970) 920-5400 ( non emergency ) Roaring Fork Transit Authority – (970) 920-1905 Aspen Valley School District – (970) 925-3760 CoA Consolidated Sanitation District – Tom Bracewell (970) 925 - 3601 CoA Water Department – Mike McDill (970) 920 - 5110 Aspen Valley Hospital - (970) 925-1120 Emergency Contact Info – 911 Holy Cross Energy – (970) 945-5491 4.0 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION 4.1 DATES OF CONSTRUCTION Dates of construction shall be specified in the Plan. Any work being performed within City ROW shall be completed as per the City of Aspen Right of Way permit requirements. No specific dates for construction have been determined at this time. See Appendix E – Construction Schedule. TBD (Pending Approvals) 4.2 HOURS OF CONSTRUCTION Hours of construction will be adhered to per the City of Aspen regulations listed in the following and any other applicable City of Aspen websites: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/clerk/municode/coaspent18.pdf http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/engineering/design_construction/ 2013%20Design%20Construction%20CMP/HoursOfConstruction01.08.2013.pdf http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/engineering/design_construction/ 2013%20Design%20Construction%20CMP/Appendix%20D%20noise%20suppre ssion2013.pdf All construction activity is limited to the following days and times: Monday thru Friday Saturday 7:30 am to 5:30 pm 9:00 am to 5:00 pm P388 IV.A. 8 No construction work is allowed on Sundays. Specific indoor activities during restricted periods may be permitted with approval from the City of Aspen Engineering Department; specific conditions will be applied to each project separately. During the off-season 24 hour a day interior work may be permitted within the CRA, the applicant must present a work plan to the City of Aspen Engineering Department and the plan must be approved prior to working outside of the normal construction hours. Constructions activities producing noise greater than 80 decibels are limited to the following days and times: Monday thru Friday 9:00 am to 5:00 pm Work that is over 80 decibels which by law requires a noise suppression plan will not be allowed for Saturday work, that includes but not limited to the use of compressors, generators, jackhammers, power equipment, nail guns, drilling machinery, earth moving equipment and similar loud construction activities. This does not restrict quiet work inside and outside that does not require a power source, including a battery, on Saturday. Construction activity is not allowed during all federal holidays. Due to the congestion in Aspen when town is completely full, noise suppression plans will not be approved for the following dates: Christmas Week (December 25 through Jan. 1), Food and Wine Week in June (Friday thru Sunday), 4th of July day and/or weekend if it falls on a Friday or Monday, and Labor Day weekend. 4.3 SEQUENCE (PHASING) OF CONSTRUCTION A construction schedule including all project phasing, with item details, and specific item completion dates or duration of phasing will be provided. No construction schedule has been determined at this time. It is possible that the residential construction may be phased in advance of hotel development, but this has not been determined at this time. R.A. Nelson also acknowledges the Holiday Schedules for the City of Aspen and the Annual Bike Race that occurs. R.A. Nelson will adhere to the job-site closures enforced by the City of Aspen. 4.4 ADJOINING PROPERTIES No person shall excavate on land close enough to a property line to endanger any adjacent public street, sidewalk, and alley, other public or private property, or easement, without supporting and protecting the property from any damage that might result from construction operations. 4.5 PROJECT FENCING P389 IV.A. 9 Please refer to the attached Site Management Plan for site fencing locations. Open mesh galvanized fencing 6’ in height constructed out of chain-link fence with mesh windscreens (visual barriers) with locked access gates will be installed. 4.6 PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE RA Nelson requires all subcontractors to conform with the site specific Safety Health and Management Plan. 4.7 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Environmental procedures will be implemented on this project to ensure compliance with federal, state and local requirements for construction site stormwater run-off. Site clearing and excavation will be conducted in a manner to reduce the impact on local ecosystems. Trees that are scheduled for retention shall be provided tree protection fencing along the tree drip lines wherever possible. Areas for tree protection are identified on the Landscape Plan provided as Appendix B&C. This project involved extensive replacement to the street trees in the public right-of-way. The project has worked closely with the Parks Department to determine the appropriate tree locations, species, etc. A Tree Removal Permit will be applied for prior to Building Permit application. 5.0 PARKING MANAGEMENT 5.1 PARKING MANAGEMENT FORM RA Nelson encourages use of car-pooling and careful staging of subcontractors as a means to eliminate impacts upon the site and due to the limited parking opportunities at the jobsite. The parking areas are identified in Appendix B&C – Site Management Plan. 5.2 EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS AND ORDINANCE 35 RA Nelson will maintain continuous emergency vehicle access, on and around the site, including but not limited to police, fire, and ambulance services. Emergency access will be followed per City of Aspen Ordinance 35, See Appendix G. 5.4 STAGING AREAS Please refer to the attached construction management plan for staging. The staging areas will be located within the project fencing boundaries and are identified on the Site Management plan. See Appendix B&C. Staging of trucks will not be allowed on public ROW, and will not block access to neighboring properties. 5.5 CONSTRUCTION TRAILER, MATERIALS STORAGE, AND WASTE MANAGEMENT P390 IV.A. 10 All Construction trailers, job material storage areas, portable restrooms, waste management and recycling containers are identified on the Site Management Plan and will be located with the project fenced boundaries. It is a requirement of this Project that not less than 25% of all construction waste and demolition debris by weight be salvaged or diverted to recycling facilities, but not less than 2.5 pounds per square foot. It is the goal of this project to increase this amount to 75%. RA Nelson will salvage or recycle 100% of the following uncontaminated packaging materials: paper, cardboard, boxes, plastic sheet and film, wood crates and plastic pails. RA Nelson will also be salvaging nonhazardous site clearing and construction waste, recycling nonhazardous site clearing and construction waste and disposing of nonhazardous site clearing and construction waste. RA Nelson will be coordinating waste management including separate roll-off containers as required to meet or exceed the City of Aspen recycling requirements according to the City of Aspen Municipal Code. RA Nelson will salvage and recycle the following waste materials produced during the course of this Contract: Construction Waste, Site-clearing waste, Asphaltic pavement, Concrete construction, Concrete masonry, Concrete flatwork, Lumber, Wood sheet materials, Wood trim, Roofing, Insulation, Carpet and pad, Gypsum board, Metal scrap including aluminum from window frames, metal stud framing, mechanical equipment and ductwork, electrical equipment and fixtures, Plumbing piping, Electrical conduits and wiring, Clean, corrugated cardboard such as used for packaging, etc., Discarded temporary office refuse paper such as unwanted files, correspondence, etc., Plastic bucket containers for various liquid and semi-solid or viscous construction materials and compounds, Aluminum, glass and plastic beverage containers, and other mixed construction and demolition waste including solid waste resulting solely from construction, remodeling, repair or site clearing operations exclusive of waste materials. Conventional recycling of co-mingled materials (plastics #1 - #7, tin, aluminum, and glass), and cardboard will have an assigned space and area and will separated on-site during the project. These materials will not be disposed of in the trash. Per municipal code, any dumpster or other trash receptacle that is used for food refuse will be constructed in such a manner as to render it bear proof. All containers will be adequately covered at all times until transferred to the landfill. An onsite hazardous material spill cleanup kit will be provided, as specified by the City Engineer, that contains, at a minimum, a 25 pound bag of Floor-Dri (or equal), absorbent pads, and other spill kit materials. 6.0 TRAFFIC CONTROL 6.1 GENERAL RA Nelson will have certified traffic control workers during the project. The Main Entry Gate will be accessed from the alley between the two buildings and will be P391 IV.A. 11 locked during non-working hours. Certified traffic control personnel shall be used by RA Nelson if necessary. All traffic control personnel shall be equipped with a radio and appropriate flagging/signage equipment. 6.2 HAUL ROUTES Construction related traffic to the One Aspen Jobsite will flow from Highway 82 to South Aspen Street. Juan Street will be utilized during the utilities installation along South Aspen Street. We will also install a temporary road through the project during the South Aspen Street Construction allowing access to the Townhomes above the project and Ski Co access to Lift 1A. 6.3 ONSITE VEHICLE LIMITATIONS Maximum vehicle weights and sizes will follow the City of Aspen management plan requirements. 6.4 DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS Traffic control required for deliveries must be fully coordinated with the City of Aspen Engineering Department. All deliveries must be scheduled through RA Nelson Superintendent with a (48) hour notice. Any unscheduled deliveries may be turned away. Deliveries will only be allowed through the Main Access Gate between 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. In addition, delivery trucks will not be allowed to park along the City of Aspen streets. If trucks arrive early, they will be required to park and wait down valley at a future designated location until their designated delivery time. Delivery vehicles and all other onsite vehicles are not allowed to idle for more than five (5) minutes, with the exception of generators or PTO type operations and will be required to comply with City of Aspen Municipal Code (13.08.110). 6.5 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The contractor and its subcontractors shall follow the guidelines set forth in the Colorado Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD), specifically Chapter 6C (Temporary Traffic Control Elements). The site access gate does not interfere with a school bus stop or school walk route. 7.0 PEDESTRIAN PROTECTION 7.1 GENERAL There should be no pedestrian traffic through the construction site during times of construction. The access gates will be locked during non-construction hours. The site will have construction fencing placed adjacent to active roads, sidewalks, trails, or existing buildings to provide a separation barrier between construction activities and the pedestrian traffic. The fence will be relocated as required to P392 IV.A. 12 protect the public from the construction area. Temporary signage, traffic cones and orange fencing will be used to direct both pedestrian and vehicle traffic. Pedestrian Safety devices shall follow the requirements of city code 21.04.060, MUTCD chapter 6D, the Americans with Disability Act, and IBC Chapter 33. RA Nelson will install warning signs informing the public of construction activity at the Main Gates and at interval locations around the perimeter of the jobsite fence.The site will be secured and locked during non-working hours and trespassers will be subject to prosecution for trespassing. All visitors to the jobsite must check in at the construction office trailer located at the main entrance prior to entering the site. This site will not be open to the public. As sidewalk reconstruction will occur as part of this project, pedestrian protection is recognized as an important part of the CMP. Pedestrian protection will be designed in accordance with the above-referenced documents, and reviewed for approval by the City Engineer. 8.0 SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL 8.1 REQUIREMENTS The State of Colorado Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) for The Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment will be attached as Appendix F of this document when approved by the state. The plan will be prepared in accordance with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment to comply with the terms and conditions of the CDHPE general permit and local agency requirements. A Project Specific Erosion Control Plan will be included in Appendix C of this document. The main objective of this SWMP is to identify Best Management Practices to minimize erosion and sediment transport. Onsite sediment and erosion control operations will be managed by a state certified erosion control supervisor. All site clearing, excavation, and erosion control will be conducted in accordance with the SWMP. All hazardous materials will be disposed of or treated as required per the manufacturer’s recommendations. All fueling of vehicles will be conducted in a designated area to prevent accidental leakage or spills. Non Stormwater discharges are identified on the SWMP and will be closely monitored to ensure discharges remain pollutant free. Concrete wash areas will be provided for concrete trucks and pumps, and masonry operations inside of the construction fencing area. Vehicle Tracking Control Pads (VTC) will be utilized at the main construction entrance as described in the SWMP in Appendix F of this document. Dewatering activities, if required, will require a permit from the State of Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS). This permit will be applied for 30 days prior to anticipated discharge. P393 IV.A. 13 9.0 FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL 9.1 FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL PLAN All projects that result in fugitive dust emissions must submit a fugitive dust control plan and file an application for a construction permit with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. The approval of a Dust Prevention and Control Plan does not relieve the owner or contractors of the responsibility to implement whatever additional measures may be required by the City Engineer to properly prevent and control dust. It is recognized that a fugitive dust control plan may be required, along with a construction permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment. R.A. Nelson will consult with the Engineering Department to determine plan and permit requirements based on the proposed project. 9.2 REQUIREMENTS The following processes will be implemented to help minimize the impact of dust and debris during the construction process: A watering truck will be available on site to control dust. Wetting shall occur daily under dry conditions or as directed and approved by the Construction Mitigation Officer. A Filler Hydrant permit will be obtained from the City of Aspen Water Department and water will be obtained from one of the approved filler hydrant locations as shown in Appendix H of this document. Trucks entering and exiting the site will be required to cover loads onsite to help mitigate dust and debris migration Site fencing will include screening which will help minimize dust pollution into adjacent properties. Ground cover measures shall be installed in staging and entrances to prevent dust and soil tracking. This will include temporary gravel material that will be removed at the end of the construction phase as needed or when a temporary staging area is no longer required. Material stockpiles heights will be kept to a minimum practicable heights and gentle slopes. Material stockpiles will use water misting/sprays as appropriate Stockpiling of materials will be located away from the project boundary when feasible and downwind of sensitive areas to help minimize dust pollution. A wheel washing station and/or anti-tracking material (gravel) will be laid at the entrance/exit from the construction site as necessary and as noted in the SWMP. The tracking pad will consist of compacted subgrade underneath a layer of geotextile fabric and will be compliant with CDOT Specifications. The wheel washing system will consist of cattle guards with a concrete pit located underneath for collection of dirt and debris that is washed off of the trucks. Laborers and pressure washers will be utilized to clean truck and equipment tires P394 IV.A. 14 when leaving the site. When the pit underneath the cattle guards is full, it will be pumped out and disposed of properly. This system will be utilized as it is most effective during colder temperatures and freezing of pit can be managed by using ground heaters. The water for this operation will be obtained from onsite water trucks as necessary. A vacuum operated street sweeper will be utilized to keep the existing roads, up to and outside of the construction fence, clean from construction debris, mud or other undesirable materials, resulting from the Molly Gibson Lodge construction activities. Cleaning of existing roads inside the site boundary will be carried out daily; however frequency will increase if necessary. It is important to recognize that this needs to be monitored consistently throughout the day, in light of site operations and weather conditions. Suction road sweeping will be required on a daily basis, however during wet conditions this may need to be increased. All trucks will exit through the provided wheel washing station and/or anti-tracking material (gravel), which is located at the exit of the site. The street sweeping operation will include all of the pavement areas around the project as necessary. The soil stockpiles will be given special consideration. The stockpiles will be held in areas wherever possible out of the wind and kept to minimum practicable height and covered. The stockpiles will be inspected daily for dust and when necessary dampened down and again if necessary screened with dust screens. The handling of these stockpiles will be by conventional construction equipment, either a 360-degree excavator or front loader. The material being loaded will be from an area that is thoroughly soaked. The water for this operation will be supplied from onsite water trucks as necessary. 10.0 EMISSIONS 10.1 GENERAL All subcontractors will be required to verify that all vehicles meet the City of Aspen Emissions requirements. Any vehicle that does not meet the requirements will be asked to leave until verification that they have improved the vehicles emissions to standards. 10.2 EMISSIONS FROM DIESEL POWERED ENGINES RA Nelson will enforce that emissions from diesel engines operated within the City of Aspen shall be of a shade or density no darker than 40% opacity, except for starting motion no longer than 10 seconds or for stationary operation not exceeding 10 seconds. 11.0 NOISE SUPRESSION 11.1 GENERAL P395 IV.A. 15 Every reasonable effort will be made to minimize the noise impact of construction activities. Noise limits for construction activities is 80 decibels measured at the property line of the construction site. All construction equipment shall be adequately muffled and maintained to minimize project noise. 11.2 NOISE SUPPRESSION PLAN See Appendix D for the Noise Suppression Plan. The plan includes information on noise blocking methods, techniques, and common equipment and activities that require noise suppression. 11.3 REQUIREMENTS FOR ACTIVITIES EXCEEDING 80 DECIBELS 1. Any work producing noise levels over 80 decibels is not permitted to commence until after 9:00 am and is not permitted on Saturdays. That includes but not limited to the use of compressors, generators, jackhammers, power equipment, nail guns, drilling machinery, earth moving equipment and similar loud construction activities. This does not restrict quiet work inside and outside that does not require a power source, including a battery, on Saturday. 2. RA Nelson will notify neighbors within two hundred fifty (250) feet of the project informing them of the kinds of equipment, expected noise levels and durations of loud work. Including the variation of noise levels during a typical construction days may be helpful. Such notification must be in writing and be done seven (7) days prior to the starting time of the project. Communication with neighbors can prevent complaints from arising, and resolve concerns before there is a problem. RA Nelson will provide a phone number where the foreman can be reached prior to the start of the job. 3. Equipment will be operated in accordance with manufacturer's specifications and with all standard manufacturers’ mufflers and noise-reducing equipment in use and in properly operating condition. 4. Notices will be posted to inform workers, including sub-contractors, about the basic noise requirements, as well as specific noise restrictions, to the project. 5. Noise barriers will be installed around all equipment/activities specified in Table 1 of Appendix D. Noise barriers not only significantly reduce construction noise, but they also provide an extra benefit of “hiding” the noise producing sources, thus increasing a neighbor’s tolerance. Additional equipment requiring Noise Suppression that will be used on site , to be added to the City of Aspen Table 1, include a rock crusher and soil screener. 6. Portable loud equipment including generators, compressors, and cement mixers will be moved to different sides of the property to reduce impacts on individual neighbors. 7. The use of radios on the site are not allowed. 11.4 SPECIFIC RESTRICTIONS RELATED TO MANUFACTURING ON SITE We do not anticipate any manufacturing on-site at this time. P396 IV.A. 16 12.0 ENFORCEMENT 12.1 CITY CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION OFFICER The City Construction Mitigation Officer shall be assigned to the Molly Gibson Lodge construction project. The City Construction Mitigation Officer will complete random site visits to determine if the project is following approved Plan and City requirements. The officer is not intended to take the place of a City of Aspen building inspector. 12.2 CORRECTIVE ACTION The City of Aspen will enforce construction mitigation corrections as follows: 1. The first corrective action is a verbal warning and explanation of the violation with a timeframe for completion. 2. The second corrective action is a written warning or correction notice with timeframe for compliance. 3. Third and final notice is a “Stop Work Order” (red tag). If a stop work order is issued, no more work can be completed until the violation is corrected. Failure to correct violations and/or any threat to public safety could subject the owner, contractor or both to a fine of $1000 a day as determined by the municipal court. 12.3 INSPECTION REPORTS The Construction Mitigation Officer will complete construction inspection reports. All reports are public and will be kept in the City Engineering Asset Management Department. P397 IV.A. E MAI N S T W MAI N S T E DUR A N T A V E E HOP K I N S A V E GI B S O N A V E E COO P E R A V E W HAL L A M S T W BLE E K E R S T N T H I R D S T S A S P E N S T W FRA N C I S S T N F I F T H S T W HO P K I N S A V E N M I L L S T NORTH S T N S I X T H S T W SM U G G L E R S T N F O U R T H S T S M O N A R C H S T P A R K A V E S M I L L S T R E D M T N R D N F I R S T S T S O R I G I N A L S T LA K E A V E N S E C O N D S T S G A R M I S C H S T LO N E P I N E R D O A K L N S H U N T E R S T S W E S T E N D S T E BLE E K E R S T N S P R I N G S T NEA L E A V E VINE ST S F I R S T S T S H A D Y L N M I D L A N D A V E E HYM A N A V E S G A L E N A S T GILLESPIE AVE W HY M A N A V E DEAN S T KIN G S T RI O G R A N D E P L N E I G H T H S T S S P R U C E S T M A P L E L N PAR K C I R N G A R M I S C H S T RA C E S T E HAL L A M S T WATE R S A V E N A S P E N S T S T H I R D S T N SPRUCE ST T E A L C T A J A X A V E N I C H O L A S L N W CO O P E R A V E JUAN S T WI L L I A M S W Y ASPEN MTN R D P U P P Y S M I T H S T QUEEN ST CL E V E L A N D S T L A C E T L N FOUN D E R S P L A C E C O T T O N W O O D L N S R I V E R S I D E A V E N S E V E N T H S T PEARL CT SOUTH AVE SUMM I T S T GILB E R T S T S F I F T H S T S S I X T H S T W NO R T H S T S F O U R T H S T S S P R I N G S T N R I V E R S I D E A V E S S P R I N G S T DEAN S T S G A L E N A S T N S E V E N T H S T P A R K C I R DEAN S T S M I L L S T AS P E N M T N R D Map prepared by Engineering and GIS Department City of Aspen, CO 81611 May 4,2007 0 600300 Feet Legend Designated Heavy Haul Route Roads Parcels City Boundary OFFICIAL HEAVY HAUL ROUTE MAP P 3 9 8 I V . A . Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment Aspen, CO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN Appendix A Project Sign P399 IV.A. Mo l l y  Gi b s o n  Lo d g e   Re d e v e l o p m e n t      Bu i l d i n g  Pe r m i t  #     Ge n e r a l  Co n t r a c t o r :    R.  A.  Ne l s o n  LL C   Ge n e r a l  Co n t r a c t o r  Co n t a c t :  TB D   Co n t a c t  Ph o n e  #:  TB D      Em e r g e n c y  Ph o n e  #:  TB D   24  Ho u r  Em e r g e n c y  Co n t a c t  #:  TB D   P400 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment Aspen, CO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN Appendix B Site Management Plan P401 IV.A. P402 IV.A. C H I M N E Y 1 '∅C O N C R E T E S U P P O R T 1 '∅C O N C R E T E S U P P O R T HO P K I NS S T R E E T M U L T I -S T O R Y F R A M E B U I L D I N G E D G E O F P A V E M E N T C O N C R E T E C U R B & G U T T E R B R I C K P A V E R S C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K W O O D P R I V A C Y F E N C E A D J A C E N T B U I L D I N G S E C O N D S T O R Y W A L K W A Y W O O D E N D E C K R O O F O V E R H A N G S E C O N D S T O R Y W A L K W A Y S T A I R S U P T O S E C O N D S T O R Y W A L K W A Y S H E D C O N C R E T E P A T I O S H E D P L A N T E R S P A F L A G S T O N E P A T I O L A W N L A W N A D J A C E N T B U I L D I N G L A N D S C A P I N G S T O N E R E T A I N I N G S T O N E R E T A I N I N G L A R G E B O U L D E R (T Y P I C A L ) S T O N E R E T A I N I N G S E C O N D S T O R Y W O O D D E C K R O O F O V E R H A N G S T A I R S T O B A S E M E N T S T O N E R E T A I N I N G C O V E R E D C O N C R E T E W A L K W A Y C H A I N -L I N K F E N C E O N T O P O F C O N C R E T E R E T A I N I N G W A L L B U I L D I N G F O U N D A L U M I N U M C A P I L L E G I B L E (N 5 3 °2 6 'E 0 .3 1 ') S E T N O . 5 R E B A R & Y E L L O W P L A S T I C C A P M A R K E D P R O P C O R N E R H C E L S 1 9 5 9 8 (T Y P I C A L ) T R A S H C O M P A C T O R E L E C T R I C T R A N S F O R M E R S O N C O N C R E T E P A D S C O N C R E T E R O O F O V E R H A N G R O O F O V E R H A N G C O N C R E T E F F E :7 8 9 3 .7 8 B A S E M E N T :7 8 8 8 .2 1 1 s t L E V E L :7 8 9 7 .1 5 2 n d L E V E L :7 9 0 6 .2 4 7 9 0 5 .9 7 8 9 6 .6 R I D G E :7 9 2 1 .9 R I D G E : 7 9 2 2 . 1 4 .9 ' 9 . 7 ' 4 .6 ' 1 7 . 7 ' 4 . 8 ' N 1 5 ° 4 4 ' 1 7 " E 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' S 7 4 °1 5 '4 3 "E 9 0 .0 2 ' S 1 5 ° 4 4 ' 1 7 " W 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' N 7 4 °1 5 '4 3 "W 9 0 .0 2 ' 5 0 .8 ' 5 .1 ' 2 8 .3 ' 1 4 . 1 ' 4 .0 ' 1 4 .1 ' 7 2 . 3 ' 8 . 0 ' 1 .2 ' 1 7 .8 ' 4 8 .4 ' 2 4 . 4 ' 1 3 . 2 ' 1 3 . 2 ' 6 . 8 ' 4 0 . 7 ' 5 .1 ' 3 .9 ' 3 .6 '1 5 . 1 ' 1 8 . 4 ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 112 1 3 1 415161718 8 7 8 8 8 9 C O N C R E T E C O N C R E T E STEPS S T A I R W E L L P O O L S H E D C O N C R E T E C O R R I D O R W O O D W A L K W A Y C O N C R E T E P A T I O B U I L D I N G M U F R B U C A N T I L E V E R A .C . U N I T C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K 8 4 .5 ' 4 .4 ' B O L L A R D S 3 6 .2 ' 1 s t L E V E L :7 8 9 2 .1 0 2 n d L E V E L :7 9 0 1 .0 1 W I N D O W W E L L S S T E P S F O U N D N O . 5 R E B A R 2 0 . 2 ' 1 1 . 6 ' 1 5 . 3 ' 0 .7 ' 1 4 . 9 ' 0 . 8 ' 0 .6 ' 0 . 8 ' 0 .6 ' H A L L W A Y 1 2 . 0 ' 8 . 8 ' 4 . 3 ' 1 1 .9 ' F 0 . 6 ' 1 2 .5 ' N7 4 ° 1 5 ' 4 3 " W 19 1 . 4 3 ' I V B I V B G E E G E I V B 45 ' - 0 " 45' - 0" 90 ' - 0 " 100' - 0" 5' - 0 " 5' - 0 " 7' - 0" 1 0 ' - 0 " 10' - 0" 10 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " AL L E Y HO P K I N S RES 2 - UTILITY METER LOCATION RE S 1 - U T I L I T Y ME T E R L O C A T I O N 1' - 0 " 1 ' - 6 " 1' - 6 " 1' - 0 " 1 ' - 6 " EG R E S S L I G H T W E L L BE L O W ( P E R C O D E ) EGRESS LIGHTWELL BELOW (PER CODE)PORCH ROOF BELOW PO R C H R O O F B E L O W 7' - 0 " 1' - 6" AL L E Y HO P K I N S 0 10 ' 20 ' 5' 1 " = 1 0 ' - 0 " RE S . S I T E P L A N MG L JA N U A R Y 5 , 2 0 1 5 AR2.0 1 " = 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 AR C H S I T E P L A N - P R O P O S E D NO R T H 1 " = 1 0 ' - 0 " 2 AR C H S I T E P L A N - E X I S T I N G P403 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment Aspen, CO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN Erosion Control Plan 1. Silt fencing will be placed around the entire job-site including the job-site storage and trailer areas. 2. Site clearing and excavation will be conducted in a manner to reduce the impact on the local ecosystem. 3. All storm sewer inlets will be protected from sediment migration. 4. All bio retention areas will be constructed as soon as possible to establish permanent drainage flows. 5. Dust impact mitigation and street cleaning procedures will be followed to minimize their impacts. 6. Landscaping will be placed throughout the project as soon as schedule allows. P404 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment Aspen, CO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN Appendix D Noise Suppression Plan P405 IV.A. City of Aspen Construction Noise Suppression Plan As the General Contractor for this construction project, I ___________________ hereby agree to the following restrictions and will provide the necessary noise suppression (outlined below), such that it will lesson the impact to the properties within 300 feet of the project located at ________________________________. I understand that if any construction activities exceed 80 decibels and are not covered by this document I will contact the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department to design a specific noise suppression plan for those activities. _______________________________ _____________________________ Signature Print name On-site Contact Phone # ___________________ Many activities on construction sites are noisy. Although some noise may be unavoidable, it can often be controlled using improved work practices. Builders should make all reasonable efforts to minimize noise. Noise Suppression plans are required for all construction projects where activities will generate noise that exceeds 80 decibels. Section 18.04.050(A)(2)(d) Hours of operation All construction activity is limited to the following days and times: Monday thru Friday Saturday Sunday 7:30 am to 5:30 pm 9:00 am to 5:00 pm No construction work is allowed Constructions activities producing noise greater than 80 decibels are limited to the following days and times: M o n d a y t h r u F r i d a y 9:00 am to 5:00 pm Work that is over 80 decibels which by law requires a noise suppression plan will not be allowed for Saturday work that includes but not limited to the use of compressors, generators, jackhammers, power equipment, nail guns, drilling machinery, earth moving equipment and similar loud construction activities. This does not restrict quiet work inside and outside that does not require a power source, including a battery, on Saturday. Construction activity is not allowed during all federal holidays. Due to the congestion in Aspen when town is completely full, noise suppression plans will not be approved for the following dates: Christmas Week (December 25 through Jan. 1), Food and Wine Week in June (Friday thru Sunday), 4th of July day and/or weekend if it falls on a Friday or Monday, and Labor Day weekend. Revised 01/09/2013 P406 IV.A. Specific noise suppression requirements for all activities exceeding 80 decibels at a construction site include: 1. Notify neighbors within two hundred fifty (300) feet of the project informing them of the kinds of equipment, expected noise levels and durations of loud work. Including the variation of noise levels during a typical construction days may be helpful. Such notification must be in writing and be done seven (7) days prior to the starting time of the project. Communication with neighbors can prevent complaints from arising, and resolve concerns before there is a problem. Provide a phone number where the foreman can be reached prior to the start of the job. 2. Operate equipment in accordance with manufacturer's specifications and with all standard manufacturers’ mufflers and noise-reducing equipment in use and in properly operating condition. 3. Post notices to inform workers, including sub-contractors, about the basic noise requirements, as well as specific noise restrictions, to the project. 4. Install noise barriers around all equipment/activities specified in Table 1: TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT REQUIRING NOISE SUPPRESSION. Noise barriers not only significantly reduce construction noise, but they also provide an extra benefit of “hiding” the noise producing sources, thus increasing a neighbor’s tolerance. (See also the attached list of noise blocking methods for details on approved noise barriers.) 5. Move portable loud equipment including generators, compressors, and cement mixers to different sides of the property to reduce impacts on individual neighbors. What can you do about construction noise? • The use of radios on the site before 8:00 am are not allowed: remind laborers and sub- contractors. • Noise suppression plans will not allow noisy machines such as brick cutters or jackhammers to be operated before 9.00 am. • Noisy equipment such as cement mixers should be placed on the site to maximize the distance from neighboring houses and/or rotate location so as to not impact just one neighbor. Noise levels drop quickly with distance from the source. • All equipment should be properly maintained, with special attention to mufflers and other noise control devices. • Between work periods, builders are required by city ordinance to shut down machines such as backhoes, bobcats, loaders and generators. • When dropping materials from a height—for example, into or out of a truck, or when loading or unloading scaffolding, noise suppression plans require a chute or side baffles. • All vehicular movements to and from the site must only be made during the scheduled normal working hours. This includes off-site noise that is associated with a specific project such as staging of concrete trucks. Revised 01/09/2013 P407 IV.A. TABLE 1: NOISE CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT REQUIRING NOISE SUPPRESSION PLANS Equipment Category Auger Drill Rig Backhoe Chain Saw Clam Shovel Compressor (air) Concrete Mixer Concrete Pump Concrete Saw Crane (mobile or stationary) Dozer Drill Rig Excavator Front End Loader Generator (more than 25 KVA) Gradall Grader Horizontal Hydraulic Boring Jack Impact Pile Driver (diesel or drop) Impact Wrench Jackhammer* Mounted Impact Hammer (hoe ram) Paver Pneumatic Tools Rock Drill Scraper Scarifier Slurry Machine Vibratory Pile Driver Revised 01/09/2013 P408 IV.A. Noise Blocking Methods Contractors shall require all subcontractors and vendors to use: • Quieter vs. Louder equipment • “Residential” grade combustion engine exhaust silencers • Electrical vs. pneumatic hand power tools: All pneumatic tools operated in the City of Aspen must be fitted with an effective silencer on their air exhaust port. • Hydraulic vs. air powered rock drills • “Silenced” pile drivers vs. Diesel pile drivers In general, noise reduction equipment and materials may include, but not be limited to: 1. Shields, shrouds, or intake and exhaust mufflers. 2. Noise-deadening material to line hoppers, conveyor transfer points, storage bins, or chutes. 3. Noise barriers using materials consistent with the Temporary Noise Barrier Materials Section. 4. Noise curtains 5. Plywood with concrete blankets at the height of the equipment and that it surrounds the activity such that it directs noise up more than out from the property. 6. Portable three sided enclosures made out of plywood to move with the activity such as jack hammering. 7. Internal combustion engines are to be fitted with a suitable muffler in good repair. Specific Equipment: Generators: The local power grid shall be used wherever feasible to limit generator noise. No generators larger than 25 KVA shall be used and, where a generator is necessary, it shall have maximum noise muffling capability. Backup Alarms: All equipment with backup alarms operated by the Contractor, vendors, suppliers, and subcontractors on the construction site shall be equipped with either audible self-adjusting ambient-sensitive backup alarms or manually- adjustable alarms. The ambient-sensitive alarms shall automatically adjust to a maximum of 5 dBA over the surrounding background noise levels. The manually-adjustable alarms shall be set at the lowest setting required to be audible above the surrounding noise. Installation and use of the alarms shall be consistent with the performance requirements of the current revisions of Society of Automotive Engineering (SAE) J994, J1446, and OSHA regulations. Compressors: The unit with the lowest noise rating which meets the requirements of the job should be used where work is conducted in the City of Aspen, installed with mufflers and/or enclosed in a noise barrier. Revised 01/09/2013 P409 IV.A. Jackhammer: All jackhammers and pavement breakers used on the construction site shall have exhaust systems and mufflers that have been recommended by the manufacturer as having the lowest associated noise and shall be enclosed with shields or acoustical barrier enclosures. Concrete crushers or pavement saws: Pre-augur pile holes to reduce the duration of impact or vibratory pile driving and tie to local power grid to reduce the use of generators and shall be enclosed with shields or acoustical barrier enclosures. Pneumatic hand power tools: All pneumatic tools operated in the City of Aspen must be fitted with an effective silencer on their air exhaust port. Temporary Noise Barrier Materials: Temporary barriers shall be constructed of 3/4-inch Medium Density Overlay (MDO) plywood sheeting, or other material of equivalent utility and appearance having a surface weight of 2 pounds per square foot or greater. The temporary barriers shall be lined on one side with glass fiber, mineral wool, or other similar noise curtain type noise-absorbing material at least 2-inches. The materials used for temporary barriers shall be sufficient to last through the duration of the construction project, and shall be maintained in good repair. Prefabricated acoustic barriers are available from various vendors. An equivalent barrier design can be submitted in lieu of the plywood barrier described above. Impact Equipment: Impact noise is noise produced from impact or devices with discernible separation in sound pressure maxima. Examples for impact equipment include, but are not limited to; blasting, chisel drops, mounted impact hammers (hoe ram), and impact pile drivers. Impact equipment is the loudest and most intrusive to the neighboring property. The City of Aspen requires that this type activity have the strictest mitigation requirements and requires a customized noise suppression plan specific to the site. General contractors must contact the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department for an application at 970-920-5039. Noise Control • Replace worn, loose, or unbalanced machine parts that cause vibration. • Keep machine parts well lubricated to reduce friction. • Acoustical enclosures and barriers around generators • Sound absorbing material and vibration isolation systems on hand tools • Quiet work practices - use rubber mallets to erect and dismantle formwork. Revised 01/09/2013 P410 IV.A. Revised 01/09/2013 Noise Controls for Construction Equipment (Schneider et al., 1995) Equipment Noise Controls Pile Driver Enclosure, muffler Stone saw cutting Noise control pad with water Handheld impact drills Reduction of reflected sound Circular saw blades 15º tooth angle, new tooth configuration, slotted saw blades, viscoelastic damping Pneumatic tools Muffler Pavement breaker/ Rock drill Muffler, enclosure of cylinder case and front head, moil damping Portable air compressor Muffler, acoustic enclosures Bulldozer Bulldozer Cab-liner material, enclosure, sound absorption in canopy, sealing of all openings Wheeled loader Absorption of sound cooling air route Vibratory roller Flexible mounting for pump compartment Joint Cutter Anti-vibration mounting fixtures P411 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment Aspen, CO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN Appendix E Project Schedule (TBD) P412 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment Aspen, CO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN Appendix F Stormwater Management Plan P413 IV.A. P414 IV.A. C H I M N E Y 1 '∅C O N C R E T E S U P P O R T 1 '∅C O N C R E T E S U P P O R T HO P K I NS S T R E E T M U L T I -S T O R Y F R A M E B U I L D I N G E D G E O F P A V E M E N T C O N C R E T E C U R B & G U T T E R B R I C K P A V E R S C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K W O O D P R I V A C Y F E N C E A D J A C E N T B U I L D I N G S E C O N D S T O R Y W A L K W A Y W O O D E N D E C K R O O F O V E R H A N G S E C O N D S T O R Y W A L K W A Y S T A I R S U P T O S E C O N D S T O R Y W A L K W A Y S H E D C O N C R E T E P A T I O S H E D P L A N T E R S P A F L A G S T O N E P A T I O L A W N L A W N A D J A C E N T B U I L D I N G L A N D S C A P I N G S T O N E R E T A I N I N G S T O N E R E T A I N I N G L A R G E B O U L D E R (T Y P I C A L ) S T O N E R E T A I N I N G S E C O N D S T O R Y W O O D D E C K R O O F O V E R H A N G S T A I R S T O B A S E M E N T S T O N E R E T A I N I N G C O V E R E D C O N C R E T E W A L K W A Y C H A I N -L I N K F E N C E O N T O P O F C O N C R E T E R E T A I N I N G W A L L B U I L D I N G F O U N D A L U M I N U M C A P I L L E G I B L E (N 5 3 °2 6 'E 0 .3 1 ') S E T N O . 5 R E B A R & Y E L L O W P L A S T I C C A P M A R K E D P R O P C O R N E R H C E L S 1 9 5 9 8 (T Y P I C A L ) T R A S H C O M P A C T O R E L E C T R I C T R A N S F O R M E R S O N C O N C R E T E P A D S C O N C R E T E R O O F O V E R H A N G R O O F O V E R H A N G C O N C R E T E F F E :7 8 9 3 .7 8 B A S E M E N T :7 8 8 8 .2 1 1 s t L E V E L :7 8 9 7 .1 5 2 n d L E V E L :7 9 0 6 .2 4 7 9 0 5 .9 7 8 9 6 .6 R I D G E :7 9 2 1 .9 R I D G E : 7 9 2 2 . 1 4 .9 ' 9 . 7 ' 4 .6 ' 1 7 . 7 ' 4 . 8 ' N 1 5 ° 4 4 ' 1 7 " E 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' S 7 4 °1 5 '4 3 "E 9 0 .0 2 ' S 1 5 ° 4 4 ' 1 7 " W 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' N 7 4 °1 5 '4 3 "W 9 0 .0 2 ' 5 0 .8 ' 5 .1 ' 2 8 .3 ' 1 4 . 1 ' 4 .0 ' 1 4 .1 ' 7 2 . 3 ' 8 . 0 ' 1 .2 ' 1 7 .8 ' 4 8 .4 ' 2 4 . 4 ' 1 3 . 2 ' 1 3 . 2 ' 6 . 8 ' 4 0 . 7 ' 5 .1 ' 3 .9 ' 3 .6 '1 5 . 1 ' 1 8 . 4 ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 112 1 3 1 415161718 8 7 8 8 8 9 C O N C R E T E C O N C R E T E STEPS S T A I R W E L L P O O L S H E D C O N C R E T E C O R R I D O R W O O D W A L K W A Y C O N C R E T E P A T I O B U I L D I N G M U F R B U C A N T I L E V E R A .C . U N I T C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K 8 4 .5 ' 4 .4 ' B O L L A R D S 3 6 .2 ' 1 s t L E V E L :7 8 9 2 .1 0 2 n d L E V E L :7 9 0 1 .0 1 W I N D O W W E L L S S T E P S F O U N D N O . 5 R E B A R 2 0 . 2 ' 1 1 . 6 ' 1 5 . 3 ' 0 .7 ' 1 4 . 9 ' 0 . 8 ' 0 .6 ' 0 . 8 ' 0 .6 ' H A L L W A Y 1 2 . 0 ' 8 . 8 ' 4 . 3 ' 1 1 .9 ' F 0 . 6 ' 1 2 .5 ' N7 4 ° 1 5 ' 4 3 " W 19 1 . 4 3 ' I V B I V B G E E G E I V B 45 ' - 0 " 45' - 0" 90 ' - 0 " 100' - 0" 5' - 0 " 5' - 0 " 7' - 0" 1 0 ' - 0 " 10' - 0" 10 ' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " AL L E Y HO P K I N S RES 2 - UTILITY METER LOCATION RE S 1 - U T I L I T Y ME T E R L O C A T I O N 1' - 0 " 1 ' - 6 " 1' - 6 " 1' - 0 " 1 ' - 6 " EG R E S S L I G H T W E L L BE L O W ( P E R C O D E ) EGRESS LIGHTWELL BELOW (PER CODE)PORCH ROOF BELOW PO R C H R O O F B E L O W 7' - 0 " 1' - 6" AL L E Y HO P K I N S 0 10 ' 20 ' 5' 1 " = 1 0 ' - 0 " RE S . S I T E P L A N MG L JA N U A R Y 5 , 2 0 1 5 AR2.0 1 " = 1 0 ' - 0 " 1 AR C H S I T E P L A N - P R O P O S E D NO R T H 1 " = 1 0 ' - 0 " 2 AR C H S I T E P L A N - E X I S T I N G P415 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment Aspen, CO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN Appendix G City of Aspen Ordinance 35 P416 IV.A. P417 IV.A. P418 IV.A. P419 IV.A. P420 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment Aspen, CO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN Filler Hydrant Permit To be permitted by excavation subcontractor P421 IV.A. P422 I V . A . P423 I V . A . P424 I V . A . P425 I V . A . = input = calculation DATE: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: APPLICANT CONTACT  INFORMATION: NAME, COMPANY,  ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL Minor Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total Commercial (sf)0.0 sf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Free‐Market Housing (Units)2 Units 0.39 0.95 1.34 0.92 0.72 1.64 Affordable Housing (Units)1 Units 0.36 0.39 0.75 0.49 0.40 0.89 Lodging (Units)15 Units 2.14 1.61 3.75 2.42 2.23 4.65 Essential Public Facility (sf)0.0 sf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.89 2.95 5.61 3.83 3.35 6.17 Land Use Trip Rate %Entering %Exiting Trip Rate %Entering %Exiting Commercial 2.27 0.69 0.31 4.14 0.4 0.6 Free‐Market Housing 0.67 0.29 0.71 0.82 0.56 0.44 Affordable Housing 0.75 0.48 0.52 0.89 0.55 0.45 Lodging 0.25 0.57 0.43 0.31 0.52 0.48 Essential Public Facility 0.86 0.62 0.38 1.66 0.4 0.6 AM Peak Average PM Peak Average Trips Generated AM Peak‐Hour PM Peak‐Hour TOTAL NEW TRIPS ASSUMPTIONS ASPEN TRIP GENERATION Is this a major or minor project? 101 West. Main Street, Aspen, CO Molly Gibson Lodge Net New  Units/Square Feet of  the Proposed ProjectProposed Land Use *For mixed‐use (at least two of the established land uses) sites, a 4% reduction for AM Peak‐Hour and a 14% reduction for PM Peak‐Hour is applied  to the trip generation.  Stan Clauson, AICP, ASLA, Stan Clauson Associates, Inc.  970‐925‐2323 Trip Generation 5/13/2015 Instructions:  IMPORTANT: Turn on Macros: In Microsoft Excel 2013 go to the Developer Tab in the upper left corner of the  window. Under the "Code" subsection select "Macro Security." Beneath "Macro Settings" select "Enable all Macros."  If you are running an older version of Excel click "File" and then click "Excel Options." In the "Trust Center" category,  click "Trust Center Settings", and then click the "Macro Settings" category. Beneath "Macro Settings" select "Enable  all Macros."  Sheet 1. Trip Generation: Enter the project's square footage and/or unit counts under Proposed Land Use. The  numbers should reflect the net change in land use between existing and proposed conditions.  Sheet 2. MMLOS: Answer Yes, No, or Not Applicable under each of the Pedestrian, Bike and Transit sections. Points  are only awarded for proposed and confirmed aspects of the project.  Sheet 3. TDM: Choose the mitigation measures that are appropriate for your project. Sheet 4. Summary and Narrative: Review the summary of the project's mitigated trips and provide a narrative which  explains the measures selected for the project. Click on "Generate Narrative" and individually explain each measure  that was chosen and how it enhances the site or mitigates vehicle traffic. Ensure each selected measure make sense  Minor Development - Inside the Roundabout Major Development - Outside the Roundabout Helpful Hints:  1. Refer to the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines for information on the use of this tool. 2. Refer to TIA Frequently Asked Questions for a quick overview.  2. Hover over red corner tags for additional information on individual measures.  3. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should be new and/or an improvement of existing conditions. A project will  not receive credit for measures already in place. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should also make sense in the  context of project location and future use. 4. A glossary sheet is provided as an additional tab. Typical terms are defined within this glossary.  Transportation Impact Analysis  TIA Frequently Asked Questions P426 IV.A. = input = calculation 20 Category Sub. Site Plan Question Answer Points Is the proposed sidewalk detached and does the sidewalk and buffer meet standard minimum widths? No 0 Is the proposed effective sidewalk width greater than the standard minimum width?No 0 Is proposed landscape buffer greater than the standard minimum width?No 0 0 Does the project propose a detached sidewalk on an adjacent block? No 0 Is the proposed effective sidewalk width on an adjacent block greater than the standard minimum width?No 0 Is the proposed landscape buffer on an adjacent block greater than the standard minimum width?No 0 0 Are slopes between back of curb and sidewalk equal to or less than 5%?Yes 0 Are curbs equal to (or less than) 6 inches? Yes 0 Is new landscaping proposed that improves the pedestrian experience?Yes 5 Does the project propose an improved crosswalk? No 0 5 Are existing driveways removed from the street? No 0 Is pedestrian and/or vehicle visibility unchanged by new structure or column?Yes 0 Is the grade (where pedestrians cross) on cross-slope of driveway 2% or less?Yes 0 Does the project propose enhanced pedestrian access points? Yes 5 Does the project propose enhanced pedestrian or bicyclist interaction with vehicles at driveway areas?Yes 5 10 Is the project's pedestrian directness factor less than 1.5? Yes 0 Is the project's pedestrian directness factor between 1 and 1.2? No 0 Is the project proposing an off site improvement that results in a pedestrian directness factor below 1.2?* No 0 Are traffic calming features proposed that are part of an approved plan (speed humps, rapid flash)?*No 0 0 Are additional minor improvements proposed which benefit the pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff? NA 0 Are additional major improvements proposed which benefit the pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff? NA 0 15 Pe d e s t r i a n s Subtotal Ad d i t i o n a l Pr o p o s e d Im p r o v e m e n t s TOTAL NUMBER OF TRIPS MITIGATED: Pe d e s t r i a n R o u t e s Tr a f f i c C a l m i n g a n d Pe d e s t r i a n N e t w o r k Dr i v e w a y s , P a r k i n g , a n d Ac c e s s C o n s i d e r a t i o n s MMLOS Input Page Subtotal Subtotal Si d e w a l k Co n d i t i o n o n Ad j a c e n t B l o c k s Si d e w a l k Co n d i t i o n o n Pr o j e c t F r o n t a g e Subtotal Instructions: Answer Yes, No, or Not Applicable to each measure under the Pedestrian, Bike and Transit sections. Subtotal Subtotal Pedestrian Total* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 P427 IV.A. Category Sub. Question Answer Points Is a new bicycle path being implemented with City approved design?No 0 Do new bike paths allow access without crossing a street or driveway?No 0 Is there proposed landscaping, striping, or signage improvements to an existing bicycle path?No 0 Does the project propose additional minor bicycle improvements which have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff?NA 0 Does the project propose additional major bicycle improvements which have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff?NA 0 0 Bi c y c l e Pa r k i n g Is the project providing bicycle parking? Yes 5 5 5 Category Sub. Question Answer Points Is seating/bench proposed? No 0 Is a trash receptacle proposed? No 0 Is transit system information (signage) proposed? No 0 Is shelter/shade proposed? No 0 Is enhanced pedestrian-scale lighting proposed? No 0 Is real-time transit information proposed? No 0 Is bicycle parking/storage proposed specifically for bus stop use? No 0 Are ADA improvements proposed? No 0 0 Is a bus pull-out proposed at an existing stop? No 0 Is relocation of a bus stop to improve transit accessibility or roadway operations proposed?No 0 Is a new bus stop proposed (with minimum of two basic amenities)?No 0 0 0 Tr a n s i t Ba s i c A m e n i t i e s Subtotal Subtotal En h a n c e d Am e n i t i e s Subtotal Subtotal Bicycles Total* Transit Total* Bi c y c l e s Mo d i f i c a t i o n s t o Ex i s t i n g B i c y c l e Pa t h s 1 2 3 4 5 6 P428 IV.A. Category Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT  Reductions Will an onsite ammenities strategy be implemented? No Which onsite ammenities will be implemented? Will a shared shuttle service strategy be implemented? Yes What is the degree of implementation? Low What is the company size? Small What percentage of customers are eligible? 100% Nonmotorized Zones Will a nonmotorized zones strategy be implemented? No 0.00% 1.38% Category Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT  Reductions Will a network expansion stragtegy be implemented? No What is the percentage increase of transit network coverage? 0% What is the existing transit mode share as a % of total daily trips? 50% Will a service frequency/speed strategy be implemented? No What is the percentage reduction in headways (increase in frequency)? 0% What is the existing transit mode share as a % of total daily trips? 50% What is the level of implementation? <50% of lines (within project) improved Will a transit access improvement strategy be implemented? Yes What is the extent of access improvements? Within Project Only Intercept Lot Will an intercept lot strategy be implemented? No 0.00% 1.00% Category Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT  Reductions Will there be participation in TOP? Yes What percentage of employees are eligible? 100% Is a transit fare subsidy strategy implemented? No What percentage of employees are eligible? What is the amount of transit subsidy per passenger (daily equivalent)? Is an employee parking cash‐out strategy being implemented? No What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a workplace parking pricing strategy implemented? No What is the daily parking charge? What percentage of employees are subject to priced parking? Is a compressed work weeks strategy implemented? No What percentage of employees are participating? What is the workweek schedule? Is an employer sponsered shuttle program implemented? No What is the employer size? What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a carpool matching strategy implemented? Yes What percentage of employees are eligble? 100% Is carshare participation being implemented? No How many employee memberships have been purchased? <100 What percentage of employees are eligble? 100% Is a bikeshare program participation being implemented? Yes How many memberships have been purchased? <100 What percentage of employees/guests are eligble? 100% Is an end of trip facilities strategy being implemented? Yes What is the degree of implementation? High What is the employer size? Small Is a self‐funded emergency ride home strategy being implemented? No What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a carpool/vanpool priority parking strategy being implemented? No What is the employer size? What number of parking spots are available for the program? Is a private employer shuttle strategy being implemented? No What is the employer size? What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a trip reduction marketing/incentive program implemented? Yes What percentage of employees/guests are eligible? 100% 4.14% 2.37% 6.40% 1. 22% work trips represents a mixed-used site (SF Bay Area Travel Survey). See Assumptions Tab for more detail. Participation in TOP Transit Fare Subsidy Employee Parking Cash‐Out Workplace Parking Pricing Compressed Work Weeks Employer Sponsored Vanpool Carpool Matching Carshare Program Self‐funded Emergency Ride Home Carpool/Vanpool Priority Parking Private Employer Shuttle Trip Reduction Marketing/Incentive  Program End of Trip Facilities Cross Category Maximum Reduction, Neighborhood and Transit  Global Maximum VMT Reductions TDM Input Page 1.50% 3.50% 0.00% Co m m u t e  Tr i p  Re d u c t i o n  Pr o g r a m s  St r a t e g i e s Onsite Servicing Shared Shuttle Service Ne i g h b o r h o o d / S i t e   En h a n c e m e n t s  St r a t e g i e s 0.00% 1.38% Network Expansion Service Frequency/Speed Transit Access Improvement Maximum Reduction Allowed in Category 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 7.50% 0.00% Bikeshare Program 0.00% 4.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.00% 4.00% Maximum Reduction Allowed in Category Maximum Reduction Allowed in CategoryTr a n s i t  Sy s t e m  Im p r o v e m e n t s   St r a t e g i e s Instructions TDM: Choose the mitigation measures that are appropriate for your project. Proposed TDM or  MMLOS measures should be new and/or an improvement of existing conditions. A project will not receive credit  for measures already in place. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should also make sense in the context of  project location and future use. P429 IV.A. DATE: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: APPLICANT CONTACT  INFORMATION: NAME, COMPANY,  ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL Peak Hour Max Trips Generated MMLOS TDM Total Trips Mitigated PM 6.2 20 0.40 20.40 0.00 In the space provided describe what  new landscaping is proposed and how the proposed landscaping plan enhances the pedestrian experience. This measure is only  applicable to large scale projects and requires more extensive landscaping then a few plantings or lawn area. The project shall establish extensive landscaping which  significantly benefits the site and improves the pedestrian comfort and experience. The landscape design for the lodge features accent paving materials which will be used in the courtyards and public amenity spaces around the lodge.  A concrete ribbon will  define the landscape areas and transition into a flowing vertical element which will be serve as seating.  Dense ornamental plantings will soften and compliment the architecture  and provide the pedestrian with areas of shade and interest.  Public art will be included on the corner of Main and Garmisch that will show case local artists.  Landscape lighting  will be simple and sleek, providing safety and ambiance without being over‐powering.  The landscape design for the residential units off of Hopkins is designed to maintain the  character of the pedestrian environment by enhancing the existing sidewalk. The sidewalk has been detached in accordance with City of Aspen design guidelines.  A tree lawn has  been provided that ties into the existing tree lawn to the east.  The landscaping will relate to and compliment the front porches of the residences.  Landscape lighting is limited to  pathway lighting and a sconce at the front door of both residences.  Landscape plantings will be incorporated in the increased setbacks between the residences.   Explain the proposed improved crosswalk and how this improvement benefits the pedestrian experience and the site as a whole. An improved crosswalk includes measures  such as incorporating a corner bulb out or defining a crosswalk path with colored concrete. Simply re‐striping a crosswalk will not receive credit. This measure must be pre‐ approved by City staff.  In the space below provide a description of the proposed project. The proposed development will replace the existing lodge with an entirely new lodging structure that will feature units averaging 302 SF in size.  The proposed design is  compatible with the Main Street Historic District and neighboring properties.  It will replace a tired building with a new lodge development that complements the soon to be  remodeled Hotel Aspen.  The addition of small lodge units to the inventory of lodging units for the City of Aspen is a stated goal of the Aspen Area Community Plan as well as a  priority of the City Council, and this development will address an important gap in the lodging inventory for the City.  Through the previous reviews the proposed project has been  refined to now include an increase in the number of lodge units provided, from 53 existing units to 68 units.  Previously, HPC approved 64 lodge units.  The increase in lodge units  is the result of the conversion of the initially proposed free‐market residential unit on the third floor of the hotel to four (4) additional lodge units.  Two (2) single‐family  residential units are proposed on the former lodging site along Hopkins Avenue.    Significant public amenity spaces are provided, as public gathering spaces adjacent to entry door  and lobby, and along Main Street.  Twelve (12) at‐grade parking spaces are proposed for lodge use on the lodge parcel, also known as Parcel 1.  Four (4) garage spaces, two (2)  spaces per single‐family residence, are proposed on the residential parcel, also known as Parcel 2.   The proposed affordable housing unit provided on‐site will be fully compliant  with Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines and is intended to house employees of the lodge, which will serve to reduce employee trips.  Additional site improvements  include the provision of a new detached sidewalk along Main Street, replacing the narrow attached sidewalk, as well as sidewalk amenities and the installation of appropriate  deciduous street trees along Main Street.  These will replace existing spruce trees, which are not preferred by the Parks Department as street trees.  The current head‐in parking  along Garmisch Street will be relaced by parallel parking at the request of City Engineering, who believes that this will be a safety enhancement.   MMLOS In the space provided call out the effective sidewalk width and the percentage of the site which meets or exceeds the minimum standard width. Explain the site constraints for  areas which do not meet the minimum width.  The width of the sidewalks on both Main Street and Garmisch Street are 8 feet.  100% of the site meets the minimum standard width. Project Description Click on the "Generate Narrative" Button to the right. Respond to each of the following prompts in the space provided. Note: Regenerating a narrative after narrative inputs have already been entered will cause everything written previously to  be permanently deleted.  If regenerating a narrative save your responses elsewhere.  Each response should cover the following:   1. Explain the selected measure.  2. Call out where the measure is located. 3. Demonstrate how the selected measure is appropriate to enhance the project site and reduce traffic impacts. 4. Explain the Enforcement and Financing Plan for the selected measure.    5. Explain the scheduling and implementation responsibility of the mitigation measure.  6. Attach any additional information and a site map to the narrative report.  Stan Clauson, AICP, ASLA, Stan Clauson Associates, Inc.  970‐925‐2323 Summary and Narrative:  Narrative: 5/13/2015 Molly Gibson Lodge 101 West. Main Street, Aspen, CO Trip Generation SUMMARY Trip Mitigation NET TRIPS TO BE  MITIGATED P430 IV.A. Explain the proposed end of trip facilities strategy below. The provision of convenient facilities for pedestrians and cyclists encourages these types of alternative modes, thus  reducing SOV trips. Non‐residential projects may provide facilities such as showers, secure bicycle lockers, personal lockers, changing spaces, etc.  As existing on‐street and on‐site parking is limited and primarily intended to be provided for guests of the hotel, the employees of the hotel will be encouraged to carpool, if not  using public transportation.  The hotel will encourage employees to utilize the Aspen Commuter Connect service to form carpools. Provide details in the space provided for the proposed car share participation. Car share programs have been linked to increased use of alternative transportation modes and  reduced SOV trips. The successful project will provide access to Aspen’s CAR TO GO car share program. Trip reduction potential will depend on the level to which the  development participates.  Car share memberships can be provided to all employees or residents of new developments.  Car share participation will not be made available by the hotel.  The TDM input has been corrected. Provide details for the proposed bike share program participation. Bike sharing provides access to a fleet of bicycles for short trips, thus reducing SOV travel. The successful  project will provide memberships to the existing WE‐cycle program. Include details on how many WE‐cycle memberships will be purchased and whether these will be made  available to guests, employees, or both.  The hotel has long provided bikes to guest as an alternative means of transportation around Aspen and this program will continue.   In addition to the hotel's fleet of bicycles,  memberships in the WE‐cycle program will be provided and made available to both guests and employees.   The Molly Gibson Lodge has been a long‐time supporter of WE‐Cycle  and has recently committed to the purchase of the We‐Cycle station adjacent to the hotel in order to offset the cost of We‐Cycle providing an additional station location.   A transit access improvement strategy will be implemented. Provision of safe and comfortable access to transit service is important for generating and maintaining transit  ridership, thus reducing SOV trips. The successful project will improve pedestrian access to a transit stop via formalization of trails, addition and/or improvement of sidewalk,  installation of lighting and/or way finding or other measures. Explain the proposed transit access improvement strategy below.  The physical location of the hotel is adjacent to the designated Paepcke Park bus stop as well as an informal bus stop on Garmisch Street.  The improved sidewalk conditions will  help ensure that pedestrians in the neighborhood feel comfortable walking to and from these bus stops.  The hotel will also provide guests with information indicating the arrival  by private vehicle is not essential to the enjoyment of the Aspen area amenities.   Explain below how the project plans to participate in the Transportation Options Program (TOP). The successful project will work with City of Aspen staff to determine  whether TOP membership is appropriate and, if so, to join the program.  Notes: This program is not typically appropriate for employers of less than 20 employees.  Grant  funding from the TOP program may not be used to offset mitigation measures until the reporting period has been successfully completed The hotel looks forward to working with the City of Aspen in determining whether the TOP program is appropriate.  The hotel would be interested in providing information on  transit options and providing transit schedules to guests and employees.  Provide details for the proposed carpool matching strategy below. Facilitating the formation of employee carpool groups is a method of reducing SOV trips. The successful  project will include use the city of Aspen Commuter Connect service to allow for the formation of carpools as well as the sharing of other important transportation information  via a custom employer web page.  Include any additional information that pertains to the MMLOS plan in the space provided below.  Enter Text Here TDM Explain the proposed shared shuttle service strategy in the space below. The use of hotel or other customer service vehicles to shuttle employees can maximize the use of on‐ site resources while reducing SOV trips. The successful project will creatively consider the use of necessary business vehicles for shuttle purposes. For example, a health club  with a guest shuttle could provide employee transfers to a transit center or park and ride. Note, the provision of a hotel shuttle alone does not qualify for this measure. The hotel shuttle, in addition to being used to transport hotel guests, will also be made available to transport hotel employees to transit centers and/or park and rides.  The use of  the shuttle to transport employees will be carefully scheduled to coincide with the end of shifts so that the shuttle usage can be maximized to the greatest extent possible. The current narrow  attached sidewalks along Main Street will replaced with detached sidewalks and a tree lawn between curb and sidewalk.  Wider than required parkway  separation between curb and sidewalk has also been provided.  The parallel parking proposed along Garmish Street will provide for safer pedestrian and bicycle movements.  The  overall improvements to sidewalks and pedestrian infrastructure will enhance linkages along Main Street to the bus stops located adjacent ot Paepcke Park.   Additional entrances  to the hotel have been provided.  Two entrances off of Main Street compliment the primary entrance off of Garmisch Street.  These enhanced entrances are provided in  conjunction with public amenity space featuring attractive landscaping and seating amenities. Explain the enhanced pedestrian interaction at driveway areas or alley crossings. There must be an existing deficiency on the proposed site to select this measure. If the  project will increase interaction between pedestrians and vehicles at a driveway this should be mitigated by implementing improvements to that area. New signage, striping,  mirrors, and other approved devices are examples to address pedestrian‐vehicle conflicts at driveways.  The existing hotel is located on two parcels that are divided by an alley.  Currently, guests and staff of the hotel are forced to frequently cross the alley to access the combined  facilities.  The new hotel will be provided entirely on the parcel located off of Main Street and the other parcel will be developed for two single family residences.  By unifying the  hotel use on one parcel guests and staff will no longer be forced to cross the alleyway.  This will decrease the likelihood of pedestrian vehicular conflict.  The current bus stop on  Garmisch Street is without any formal designation or facilities.  This has the tendency to create conflicts at the alley for pedestrian and vehicle movements.  A formailzed bus stop  will help to reduce these conflicts.  Also, the replacement of head‐in parking with parallel parking will minimize conflicts between buses turning into Garmisch Street from Main  Street and private vehicles that may be exiting from parking spaces. Explain any planned traffic calming features below. All traffic calming features must be pre‐approved by the City. Features include islands, medians, raised crosswalks, speed  humps, and rapid flash. No traffic calming is provided.  The MMLOS input has been corrected. Improvements to the crosswalk are not proposed.  The MMLOS input has been corrected. Describe the enhanced pedestrian access point(s). This measure is to improve pedestrian access to the site from the ROW. It includes adding additional access points which  prevent pedestrians and bicyclists from crossing a street,  improvements to the project's ADA ramps in the ROW, and improvements to existing access points.  P431 IV.A. Provide a monitoring and reporting plan. Refer to page 17 in the Transportation Analysis Guidelines for a list of monitoring plan requirements. Components of a Monitoring  and Reporting Plan should include (1) Assessment of compliance with guidelines, (2) Results and effectiveness of implemented measures, (3) Identification of additional  strategies, and (4) Surveys and other supporting data. Monitoring and Reporting will be conducted by the hotel manager each year for three years.  A good faith effort will be made to survey the guests and employees of the hotel to  ascertain whether participation in the mitigation measures are successful.  If it is found that one or multiple mitigation measures are not effective in mitigating trips, the hotel  manager will consult with the Transportation and Engineering Departments for alternative mitigation measures for the next year.  The following year's report will review how  successful the alternative mitigation measures were.  The Monitoring and Reporting plan will include the four steps of 1.) assessment of compliance with guidelines 2.) results and  effectiveness of implemented measures, 3.) identification of additional strategies, and 4.) surveys and supporting data.   Assessment of compliance with guidelines will primarily  be accomplished through conducting the annual survey of guests and employees.  The hotel manager will periodically review the TDM tools to refine existing strategies or  implement new strategies.   The Enforcement and Financing plan for the proposed transportation mitigation measures will be made a part of standard hotel operations.  The hotel has provided a fleet of  bikes for sometime and this program  will continue in the future and appropriate funds will be directed for the upkeep of the bike fleet.  Education of employees to the  transportation mitigation measures will be incorporated in staff training and orientation.  Staff will be expected to follow the mitigation measures to the greatest extent possible  and directed to encourage guests to use alternative means of transportation.  Marketing materials will highlight the hotel's convenient location and close proximity to transit to  ensure prospective guests know they don't have to bring a vehicle with them.    Scheduling and Implementation Responsibility of Mitigation Measures Provide an overview of the scheduling and implementation responsibility for the proposed transportation mitigation measures. Scheduling and implementation of the proposed transportation mitigation measures will be the responsibility of the hotel manager.  This will include, but not be limited to,  ensuring the hotel's bike fleet is in safe working condition, memberships in the WE‐cycle program are current, scheduling the use of the hotel shuttle for employee transportation,  and ensuring marketing materials and materials available to guests promoting alternative means of transportation are up‐to‐date and useful. Monitoring and Reporting Pedestrian Directness Factor (See callout number 9 on the MMLOS sheet for an example) Traffic Calming Features Bicycle Parking Enforcement and Financing Provide an overview of the Enforcement and Financing plan for the proposed transportation mitigation measures. Landscape Plan Crosswalk Improvement(s) 2% Slope at Pedestrian Driveway Crossings Enhanced Pedestrian Access Point Enhanced Pedestrian Interaction at Driveway Areas  Enter Text Here MMLOS Site Plan Requirements Include the following on a site plan. Clearly call out and label each measure. Attach the site plan to the TIA submittal. Sidewalk Width and Buffer Width Slopes Between Back of Curb and Sidewalk The hotel will provide staff lockers and bathrooms with shower facilities to allow employees to use alternative means of transportation to get to work.  Additionally, the hotel will  provide a departure room for hotel guests that contains shower facilities.  In the event that a guest has arrived at the hotel prior to their room being ready or has already checked  out of their room and the guests has engaged in some physical activity, such as biking, the departure room can be utilized to shower.  Storage is provided in conjunction with the  departure room.    Explain the proposed trip reduction marketing/incentive program in the space provided. A trip reduction marketing programs should include a number of the following  strategies: orientation to trip reduction programs and benefits; orientation to specific alternative transportation modes such as bus service information, bike/walk route maps,  etc.; publishing of web or traditional informational materials; events and contests such as commuter fairs, new employee orientations, bike to work days, etc.; educational  opportunities such bicycle commute/repair classes; web or traditional materials aimed at guests/customers such as bike/walk maps, free transit day passes, etc.; incentive  programs such as prizes, rewards or discounts for alternative commuting.  The hotel will make prospective guests aware that they do not need to arrive by private vehicle to enjoy the Aspen area amenities while staying at the hotel.  The convenient  location of the hotel, within walking distance to the downtown core and adjacent to transit stops in all directions, will be a point made when marketing the hotel.  Transit  schedules, walking and biking maps, and other information aimed at increasing alternative means of transportation will be available to guests and employees.  In addition to  carpooling, employees will be encouraged to use transit and alternative means of transportation to get to work. Include any additional information that pertains to the TDM plan in the space provided below.  P432 IV.A. P433 IV.A. P434 IV.A. Page 1 of 11 017696\0001\12151974.4 SUBDIVISION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ON PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 101 W MAIN STREET, LOTS 1 AND 2 OF THE MOLLY GIBSON PUD, AND FOR LOT 2 OF THE 125 W MAIN STREET HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT THIS SUBDIVISION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, (“PDA”) is entered into as of this _____ day of _________, 2015 by and between the City of Aspen, Colorado, a home rule Colorado municipality, (“City”) and Aspen Galena, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company (“Owner”). RECITALS A. The City adopted Ordinance No. 3 (Series of 2015) on January 26, 2015 (“Ordinance 3”), which was recorded in the real property records of Pitkin County, Colorado on February 2, 2015 at reception number 617290. Ordinance 3 is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and is incorporated herein. B. Pursuant to Section 1 of Ordinance 3, City Council granted the Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development - Project Review approval, Subdivision approval, and Growth Management approvals, for a Site Specific Development Plan for the Molly Gibson Lodge Subdivision/PD, subject to the conditions of approval provided therein. C. Sections 2 and 3 of Ordinance 3 set forth the additional reviews required for final approval. D. Section 4 of Ordinance 3 sets forth the Growth Management allotments and credits. E. Section 5 of Ordinance 3 sets forth the Affordable Housing requirements and conditions. F. Section 6 of Ordinance 3 sets forth additional items required as part of the Application’s Planned Development – Detail Review. G. Section 7 of Ordinance 3 sets forth approval of the lot merger described therein and the removal of Lot 2 of 125 West Main Street Historic Landmark Lot Split from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures upon the filing of the Subdivision Plat (“Plat”). H. Sections 8 through 19 of Ordinance 3 set forth further requirements and obligations associated with the approvals contained therein and are incorporated herein by reference. I. Owner has made and submitted to the City for approval a Plat under the name and style of the “MOLLY GIBSON LODGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT” (“PD”) for the purpose of subdividing Lots 1 and 2 of the Molly Gibson PUD and incorporating Lot 2 of the 125 Main Street Historic Landmark Lot Split into Lot 1 of the Molly Gibson PUD. J. Owner is the owner of the Molly Gibson PUD, consisting of Lots E, F, G, H, and I, along with Lots O, P, and Q of Block 95, City and Townsite of Aspen, containing two buildings including: 1) a main lodge building at 101 West Main Street; 2) a secondary lodge P435 IV.A. Page 2 of 11 017696\0001\12151974.4 building at the same address but fronting on Hopkins Avenue; and 3) a portion of Lots C and D of Block 95, known as Lot 2 of the 125 West Main Street Historic Landmark Lot Split. K. As fully set forth in Ordinance 3, City Council approved a lodging and residential development consisting of 68 hotel units with 68 bedrooms in 20,575 square feet of net livable area located on Parcel 1, One (1) affordable housing unit in 607 square feet of net livable area located on Parcel 1, two (2) free market residential single family homes located on Parcel 2 in 8,000 square feet of floor area, twelve (12) at-grade parking spaces on Parcel 1, and four (4) garage parking spaces (two (2) per single family home) on Parcel 2 (collectively, the “Project”). L. The Plat has been approved by the City as required by Ordinance 3 and has been recorded at Plat Book ___ Page ___, as Reception Number ___________. M. The City has imposed certain conditions and requirements in connection with its approval of the Project and its execution and recordation of the Plat, such matters being necessary to promote, protect, and enhance the welfare of the public. N. Owner is willing to acknowledge, accept, abide by, and faithfully perform the conditions and requirements imposed by the City in approving the Project and the Plat. O. Under the authority of Section 26.480.070 (C and D) of the Aspen Municipal Code, City is entitled to certain financial guarantees to ensure that the required public facilities are installed, and that required landscaping is implemented and maintained, and Owner is prepared to provide such guarantees as hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, and the approval, execution, and acceptance of the PDA for recordation by the City, the parties agree as follows: ARTICLE I. PURPOSE AND EFFECT OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 1.1 Purpose. The purpose of this PDA, along with the Plat, is to set forth the complete and comprehensive understanding and agreement of the parties with the respect to the development of the Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development and to enumerate all terms and conditions under which such development may occur. 1.2 Effect. It is the intent of the parties that this PDA, Ordinance 3, and the Plat shall effectively supersede and replace in their entirety all previously recorded and unrecorded subdivision, condominium, and other land use approvals and related plats, maps, declarations, and other documents and agreements encumbering the Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event of any inconsistencies between the provisions of Ordinance 3 and this PDA, the provisions of Ordinance 3 shall control. P436 IV.A. Page 3 of 11 017696\0001\12151974.4 ARTICLE II. ZONING AND REGULATORY APPROVALS 2.1 Pursuant to Ordinance 3, City Council granted approval of the subdivision of the Property for the construction of a three-story lodge building consisting of 68 lodging units and one affordable housing unit for a total of 26,959 square feet of floor area on Parcel 1 and 8,000 square feet of residential floor area configured as two (2) single-family residences on Parcel 2, as fully set forth in Ordinance 3 and subject to conditions and requirements set forth in Ordinance 3 in connection with its approval, which matters the City determined are necessary to protect, promote, and enhance the public health, safety and welfare. ARTICLE III. DEVELOPMENT AND USE REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS 3.1 Recording. Owner shall record this PDA in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within 180 days from the effective date of the later of the granting of Final Commercial Design, Final Major Development and Planned Development – Detail Review approvals by the Historic Preservation Commission (the “Final Approval”). The Final Approval was issued with an effective date of ________ 2015. Whereas the development is configured in such a way that a Condominium Map is also required, recordation of said Condominium Map shall occur after building permit issuance, but prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 3.2 Plat Drawings. To accompany this PDA, Owner has submitted, and the City has approved, a set of Plat Drawings consisting of ___ sheets and a title sheet, entitled “Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development--Plans.” These plans include architectural drawings, the pedestrian enhancement plan, and landscape plans for the public right-of-way. Such plans are recorded as Reception No._____. 3.3 Dimensional Requirements. The project for the Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development, as approved, complies with the effective dimensional allowances and limitations of the Mixed Use and R-6 zone districts, as modified in Ordinance 3. Compliance with these requirements will be verified by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer at the time of building permit submittal. The approved dimensions for the Molly Gibson Planned Development, Parcel 1 (Main Street) and Molly Gibson Planned Development, Parcel 2 (Hopkins Avenue) are attached hereto as Exhibit A to Ordinance 3. Ordinance 3 is attached as Exhibit 1 to the PDA. Slight adjustments to the dimensions represented herein may occur upon review of a building permit as long as the resulting dimensions do not exceed those approved through Ordinance 3. During the period of statutory vested rights all dimensions shall be calculated as described herein. Where not specifically addressed herein, dimensions shall be calculated as provided in the Land Use Code in effect at the time of adoption of this ordinance. Decks are P437 IV.A. Page 4 of 11 017696\0001\12151974.4 approved for the project and are as shown in the landscape plans attached to this PDA as Exhibit 2. 3.4 Employee Generation and Mitigation. The mitigation for the project is provided in Section 5.1 of Ordinance 3, and the approval is summarized as follows: Affordable Housing Credits equal to 3.23 FTEs at Category 4 or lower to mitigate the Lodge and Free Market Residential requirements are approved. A one-bedroom unit that is Category 2 and is provided onsite to mitigate the demolition of the existing onsite one-bedroom unit is approved. 3.5 Affordable Housing Deed Restriction. The affordable housing rental unit requirements and conditions are set forth in Section 5.2 of Ordinance 3 and are incorporated herein by reference. 3.6 Design and Development requirements. Sections 8 through 15 of Ordinance 3 set forth design and development requirements for the Projects, which are specifically incorporated herein by reference. Owner agrees to comply with all obligations, requirements and limitations set forth in Ordinance 3, as further clarified and limited below: 3.6.1 Sidewalks, Curb and Gutter. The Owner’s obligation to construct sidewalks is limited to the boundary of its property line. Pursuant to Ordinance 3, Owner is not obligated to replace any curb or gutter, and, to the extent the City’s departments or permits requires replacement of curb or gutter to construct the Project, Owner’s obligation is hereby limited to construction of curb and gutter to the boundary of its property line. 3.6.2 Excavation Stabilization. The Engineering Department shall approve the Owner’s excavation stabilization plan required to be submitted pursuant to Section 8.3 of Ordinance 3 if the excavation stabilization plan is in accordance with the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21, Title 28, and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. 3.6.3 Construction Management Plan. The Construction Management Plan requirements described in Section 8.4 of Ordinance 3 shall be deemed satisfied if the described mitigation for parking, staging/encroachments, and truck traffic comply with the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Ordinance 3, Final Approval, and this PDA. 3.6.4 Snow Storage. The minimum functional area for snow storage provided in Section 8.5 of Ordinance 3 may be satisfied by Owner by the creation of one or more areas to accommodate snow storage throughout the Project and the combined total area of each snow storage area shall be used to determine compliance with Section 8.5 of Ordinance 3. 3.7 Public Improvements. Owner has agreed to provide certain landscape as described in the Final Approval, including the public amenity, and sidewalks (collectively, the “Public Improvements”) and completion of said Public Improvements was made a specific condition of the approval of Ordinance 3. Owner will faithfully complete the Public Improvements contained in Ordinance 3 and the Final Approval before the Owner is issued a Certificate of Occupancy or a Conditional Certificate of Occupancy by the Building Department. The determination of satisfactory completion of the Public Improvements shall be within the sole P438 IV.A. Page 5 of 11 017696\0001\12151974.4 discretion of the City Engineering Department. Should a dispute arise as to satisfactory completion of the Public Improvements, where (i) the City Engineering Department agrees that at least 85% of the Public Improvements are satisfactorily complete, and (ii) the permit application for a Certificate of Occupancy is otherwise eligible for approval, Owner shall be entitled to Conditional Certificate of Occupancy until the disputed Public Improvements are completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineering Department. However, if all other Public Improvements are completed except for the landscaping and it is during the winter months, and the permit application for a Certificate of Occupancy is otherwise eligible for approval, Owner shall be entitled to a Conditional Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Department, which shall be conditioned on the completion of the outstanding landscape obligations no later than the end of the upcoming summer months. 3.8 Public Improvements Costs Estimates. Attached hereto as “Appendix A” are cost estimates for public improvements proposed by Owner together with a description of those improvements for the Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development. [TO BE PROVIDED AT A LATER DATE] 3.9 Off-Street Parking. There shall be a minimum of twelve (12) parking spaces on Parcel 1 and four (4) garage parking spaces on Parcel 2. All parking spaces may be accessible from the alleyway, to be determined in Owner’s sole discretion. 3.10 Vested Rights. The Ordinance, the Plat, and any Condominium Maps, when recorded, all as amended, and this PDA between the parties, collectively granting and defining the final approvals for the Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development (“Approvals”) constitute an approved “site-specific development plan” pursuant to §24-68-101, et seq., C.R.S. (the “Vested Rights Statute”), and shall establish and extend vested property rights to develop The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development in the manner contemplated by the Approvals pursuant to the Vested Rights Statute until three (3) years from the issuance of the Development Order for the Project (the “Vesting Period Expiration Date”). A Development Order was issued on __________ 2015, indicating that the Vesting Period Expiration Date is __________2018. Approvals for the Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development shall be vested against any changes in the City Code which may be contrary or in conflict with those rights described herein above, through the Vesting Period Expiration Date. This PDA shall be considered a “development agreement” as that term is used in §24-68-104, C.R.S., and shall include the right to develop and use the Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development in the manner permitted under the Approvals. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Sec. 26.104.050, Void Permits. ARTICLE IV. PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE AND FEES P439 IV.A. Page 6 of 11 017696\0001\12151974.4 4.1 Public Amenity Space. The Applicant has committed to providing ground floor public amenity spaces as shown on the landscape plans attached hereto as Exhibit 2. These spaces shall be permanently accessible by the public. The parties agree that it is not their intent that any part of the Property be considered a public forum for purposes of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution solely by virtue of the fact that Developer has committed to construct improvements constituting public amenity space under the Code, or by virtue of the permitted use of any portion of the Property. 4.2 Park Development Impact Fee and TDM/Air Quality Fee. Owner shall pay a Park Development Impact Fee and TDM/Air Quality Fee prior to the issuance of a building permit, calculated by the City of Aspen Community Development Department using calculation methodology and fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit submittal. 4.3 School Lands Dedication Fee. Owner shall pay a fee-in-lieu of land dedication prior to issuance of a building permit, calculated by the City of Aspen Community Development Department using the calculation methodology and fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit submittal. 4.4 Parking. Pursuant to Land Use Code Sec. 26.515, Parking, the off-street parking as described in Section 3.14 herein shall satisfy all parking requirements, and no additional cash- in-lieu mitigation shall be required. ARTICLE V. COST AND FINANCIAL ASSURANCES 5.1 Cash Escrow for Site Enhancement Fund. Before the issuance of a building permit for The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development, and as a condition of such issuance, the owner of The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development will deposit with an appropriate legal entity the sum of TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO/100THS ($250,000.00) (the “Site Enhancement Escrow Funds”) in the form of cash or wired funds pursuant to an Escrow Agreement made and entered into between Owner of The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development and the City which shall provide as follows: In the event construction work on the development of The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development shall cease for ninety (90) days or longer prior to a final inspection by the City of the work authorized by a foundation/structural frame permit (“F/SFP”) on such lot, then the City in its discretion may draw upon the Site Enhancement Escrow Funds from time to time as needed for the purposes of improving the appearance of any construction work already completed, and for the installing of any public improvements on or adjacent to The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development as specified Appendix A “Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development—Public Improvements Costs Estimates” as attached to the PDA. [TO BE PROVIDED AT A LATER DATE] P440 IV.A. Page 7 of 11 017696\0001\12151974.4 The City shall have sole discretion with respect to the manner of improving the appearance of construction work in progress as well as a determining the public improvements to be installed. The Site Enhancement Escrow Funds or any remaining balance thereof shall be returned to Owner of The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development upon completion by the City of a final inspection and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development, or when otherwise agreed to by Owner of The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development and the City. The City shall be named as a third party beneficiary of the Escrow Agreement with the express right and authority to enforce the same from time to time in accordance with the tenor in terms thereof. 5.2 Cash Escrow for Site Protection. Before the issuance of a building permit for The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development, and as a condition of such issuance, the owner of The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development will deposit with an appropriate legal entity the sum of TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO/100THS ($250,000.00) (“Escrow Funds”) in the form of cash or wired funds pursuant to an Escrow Agreement made and entered into between Owner of The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development and the City which shall provide as follows: In the event construction work on the development of The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development shall cease for sixty (60) days or longer (“Work Stoppage”) prior to a final inspection by the City of the work authorized by a F/SFP on such lot, then the City in its discretion may draw upon the Escrow Funds from time to time as needed for the purposes of protecting and securing the Lot/construction site and improvements thereon from damage by the elements and/or from trespass by unauthorized persons, and for purposes of improving the site to a safe condition such that it does not become an attractive nuisance or otherwise pose a threat to neighbors or other persons. The Escrow Funds or any remaining balance thereof shall be returned to Owner of The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development upon completion by the City of a final inspection of the work authorized by the Foundation/Structural Frame Permit on the project. The City shall be named as a third party beneficiary of the Escrow Agreement with the express right and authority to enforce the same from time to time in accordance with the tenor in terms thereof. ARTICLE VI. GENERAL PROVISIONS 6.1 Binding Effect. The provision of this PDA shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of Owner and City and their respective successors and assigns. P441 IV.A. Page 8 of 11 017696\0001\12151974.4 6.2 Situs. This PDA shall be subject to and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. 6.3 Invalidity. If any provision of this PDA or any paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, word, or section or the application thereof in any circumstance is invalidated, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this PDA, and the application of any such provision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, word, or section in any other circumstance shall not be affected thereby. 6.4 Entire Agreement. This PDA, Exhibits and Appendices attached hereto, contain the entire understanding between the parties hereto with respect to the transactions contemplated hereunder. Owner, its successors or assigns, may on its own initiative, petition the City Council for an amendment to this or for an extension of one or more of the time periods required for performance hereunder. The City shall not unreasonably deny such petition for amendment or extension after considering all appropriate circumstances. Any such amendments or extensions of time shall only become effective upon the execution by all parties hereto that are affected by the proposed amendment. 6.5 Section Numbers & Headings. Numerical and title headings contained in this PDA are for convenience only, and shall not be deemed determinative of the substance contained herein. As used herein, where the context requires, the use of the singular shall include the plural and the use of any gender shall include all genders. 6.6 Notice. Notices to be given to the parties to this PDA shall be considered to be given if hand delivered or if deposited in the United States Mail to the parties by registered or certified mail at the addresses indicated below, or such other addresses as may be substituted upon written notice by the parties or their successors or assigns: CITY: City of Aspen City Manager 130 Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 OWNER: Aspen Galena, LLC Attn.: Michael Brown P.O. Box 5109 Aspen, CO 81612 6.7 Counterparts. This PDA may be executed in counterparts, in which case all such counterparts together shall constitute one and the same instrument which is binding on all of the parties thereto, notwithstanding that all of the parties are not signatory to the original or the same counterpart. Facsimile signatures shall be treated as original signatures hereon. 6.8 Covenant Running with the Land. The terms, conditions, provisions and obligations herein contained shall be deemed covenants that run with and burden The Molly Gibson Lodge Planned Development and any and all owners thereof or interests therein, their respective successors, grantees or assigns, and further shall inure to the benefit of and be specifically enforceable by or against the parties hereto, successors and assigns. P442 IV.A. Page 9 of 11 017696\0001\12151974.4 6.9 Assignment. This PDA may be assigned in whole or in part in a signed writing by Owner. Any rights or obligations not specifically assigned shall be retained by Owner. P443 IV.A. Page 10 of 11 017696\0001\12151974.4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the day and year above first written. CITY: City of Aspen, Colorado, a Colorado municipal corporation By: Steven Skadron, Mayor Attest: Linda Manning, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: , City Attorney OWNER: Aspen Galena, LLC By; Michael Brown, Manager P444 IV.A. Page 11 of 11 017696\0001\12151974.4 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) s s . COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of ____________, 2015, by Steven Skadron as Mayor and Linda Manning as City Clerk of the City of Aspen, Colorado, a municipal corporation. Witness my hand and official seal: My commission expires: Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ) ) s s . COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of ____________, 2015, by Michael Brown, Manager of Aspen Galena, LLC. Witness my hand and official seal: My commission expires: Notary Public P445 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment-Conceptual Drainage Report April 27, 2015 Conceptual Drainage Report for Molly Gibson Lodge Aspen, Colorado Submitted To: City of Aspen Engineering Department 517 E. Hopkins St. Aspen, CO 81611 Prepared by: Sopris Engineering, LLC 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 SE Project Number: 15086 April 27, 2015 P446 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment-Conceptual Drainage Report April 27, 2015 Table of Contents A. Purpose of Report .............................................................................................................................................2 B. General ..............................................................................................................................................................2 C. Project Summary ...............................................................................................................................................3 D. Existing and Post Development Drainage Basin Descriptions ........................................................................3 E. Post Development Drainage Basin Descriptions .............................................................................................4 F. Stormwater Mitigation Requirements & Hydrologic Criteria ............................................................................6 G. Hydraulic Criteria ...............................................................................................................................................7 H. Low Impact Design ............................................................................................................................................9 I. Water Quality Treatment ...................................................................................................................................9 J. Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................................... 11 K. Attachments .................................................................................................................................................... 11 P447 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment-Conceptual Drainage Report April 27, 2015 S OPR IS E NGINEER ING • LLC civil consultants 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale Colorado 81623 (970)704-0311 Fax:(970)704-0313 2 | P a g e A. Purpose of Report The purpose of this Conceptual Drainage Report is to outline the recommended stormwater mitigation concepts for the proposed redevelopment of the Molly Gibson Lodge in support of a Planned Development Detailed Review Application. The recommendations within this report are in compliance with the City’s Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The design of stormwater mitigation infrastructure to include locations, sizes, and types of best management methods will be further developed as final design of the project progresses towards building permit application. B. General The Molly Gibson Lodge, originally constructed in 1967, is located at 101 W. Main Street within the City of Aspen. The lodge currently consists of four separate buildings, a pool and 53 lodge units. The lodge currently falls within the Molly Gibson Lodge PUD and within the City’s Lodge Zone District. The Molly Gibson Lodge PUD consists of two parcels as described below. Parcel 1 is approximately 0.432 acres and includes City Lots D-I of City Block 59. The parcel is bordered by Main Street to the north, Garmisch Street to the east, Alley 59 to the south and a single family dwelling unit to the west. Currently there are 3 separate multi-story buildings located within this parcel. The surrounding ground cover consists of buildings, concrete walkways, a pool and landscaping areas. Site topography generally falls from the west to the east with approximately 4-ft of fall along the southern edge and Alley 59. Grades along the north side are tied to the flatter grades (0.35%- 0.5%) of Main Street. Garmisch Street is located along the east side and includes a lowpoint between the alley and Main Street creating varying slopes between 1% - 3.5%. Head in parking is located along the east side of the parcel and has grades as steep as 10%. Parcel 2 is approximately 0.207 acres and includes City Lots O-Q of City Block 59. This parcel is bordered by Alley 59 to the north, residential dwelling units to the west and east and W. Hopkins Avenue to the south. The parcel currently consists of a single multi-story building and landscaping. Walkways are provided and connect to W. Hopkins Avenue sidewalk system as well as Alley 59. There is about 2.5 feet of fall across the site between W. Hopkins Avenue and Alley 59. The grades within the alley vary between 1.5% - 2.5% and direct runoff from the west towards the east. The grades along W. Hopkins Avenue are approximately 1% from west to east. Both parcels fall within System 3 as described within the Surface Drainage Master Plan for the City of Aspen. The main storm sewer for this system runs along Garmisch Street until E. Francis Avenue at which point it heads east along the bike path. The final termination point is the Roaring Fork River. The storm sewer between Garmisch Street and W. Hopkins is a 36-inch corrugated metal pipe with an approximate depth to invert of 7-ft. Further discussions of existing drainage conditions is provided within the following section. No previous drainage studies were known at the time of preparing this report. No drainage, irrigation or waterway easements were identified on the existing conditions survey prepared by High Country Engineering. The property is located in Zone X on FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map panel number 08097C0203C with effective date of June 4, 1987. FEMA designates Zone X as being an area outside the 0.2% (500 year storm) annual chance floodplain. The property falls outside the debris flow zone as depicted on Figure 7.1a of the City’s URMP. Furthermore, the property does not include wetlands or other environmentally sensitive areas. P448 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment-Conceptual Drainage Report April 27, 2015 S OPR IS E NGINEER ING • LLC civil consultants 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale Colorado 81623 (970)704-0311 Fax:(970)704-0313 3 | P a g e A geotechnical study was conducted. The results are summarized within a report titled Geotechnical Investigation Molly Gibson Lodge and Residences prepared by CTL Thompson and dated April 14, 2015. In summary the underlying soils consist of up to 5-feet of silty/clay sand fill underlain by clean to slightly gravel with scattered cobbles and boulders. Based on this information it is Sopris Engineering’s recommendation that the construction of improvements include the removal of the silty/clay materials in areas where infiltration of stormwater is proposed. In areas where removal of this material is not practical or where infiltration treatment of stormwater is proposed within 10-ft of any structure an underdrain system with impermeable liner shall be incorporated. C. Project Summary The proposed improvements within Parcel 1 include the demolition of all existing buildings and the construction of a new lodge accommodating 68 lodge units. The existing head in parking along Garmisch Street will be replaced with parallel parking. As mentioned above the existing head in parking currently consists of grades as steep as 10%. The proposed grading plan provides acceptable cross slopes within the parallel parking stalls within the City ROW. Correcting this existing condition will result in lowering of the finished floor of the proposed building as compared to existing conditions which created some grading challenges as it pertained to gaining access to the main level of the lodge. ADA compliant access ramps and steps were incorporated into the grading design to provide access at all entrances to the lodge. Landscaping enhancements are also proposed within Garmisch Streets ROW. These landscaping improvements may include two bio-retention stormwater treatment gardens. These treatment facilities could provide an opportunity to treat stormwater runoff from a portion of the lodge’s roof and surrounding hardscape to include a small portion of sidewalk located within the City’s ROW. Additional stormwater mitigation measures for improvements falling within Parcel 1 include permeable pavers, onsite bioretention cells, green roofs and a dry well proposed under the parking within the alley. The improvements proposed on Parcel 2 include 2 single family residential units. Garages will be provided off the alley with the main entrance facing W. Hopkins Avenue. The 2.5 foot grade differential across the site as mentioned above will create some grading challenges to accommodate the garages along the alley and the entrances from W. Hopkins Avenue. A solution includes stepping the building internally as well as providing steps at the main entrances. Right-of-way improvements include providing a detached sidewalk and 5-ft landscaping buffer along W. Hopkins Avenue. Stormwater mitigation improvements will include permeable pavers at the garage entrances and bioretention cells. D. Existing and Post Development Drainage Basin Descriptions An analysis of historic drainage conditions is not relevant since post development improvements do not require providing stormwater detention to historic peak runoff rates. Instead, the existing drainage conditions were studied to the extent possible as discussed herein. The existing onsite drainage infrastructure consists of roof gutters/downspouts, area inlets and surface conveyance. Several area inlets are located within low lying areas. Despite several site visits, confirmation of stormwater routing from these inlets was not successful. Furthermore, several downspouts were observed during site visits. Some of these downspouts clearly discharge runoff to the surface and towards the City’s ROW while others disappear under decks with no visible determination of where they are actually routed P449 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment-Conceptual Drainage Report April 27, 2015 S OPR IS E NGINEER ING • LLC civil consultants 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale Colorado 81623 (970)704-0311 Fax:(970)704-0313 4 | P a g e towards. Since the project includes complete tear down of existing structures it did not seem relevant to obtain a thorough understanding of the current drainage conditions or confirmation of where existing onsite stormwater is being routing. Instead, time was spent on the design of the conceptual drainage improvements to ensure mitigation of post development stormwater runoff is achievable per the requirements outlined within the City’s URMP. Despite our lack of complete understanding of the existing onsite drainage system the subject properties were broken into 3 existing drainage basins based on overall topography. These assumed existing drainage basins and associated design points (DP) are described below. Existing Basin 1 (EX-1) includes the portion of site that is believed to convey runoff to an existing Type R inlet located at the southeast corner of Main Street and Garmisch Street. This existing inlet was designated as Design Point 1 (DP #1) and is connected to the 36-inch CMP storm sewer that runs along Garmisch Street. Existing Basin 2 (EX-2) includes areas within Parcel 1 and 2 that appear to convey runoff towards an existing shallow inlet located within a low lying area along Garmisch Street; identified as Design Point 2 (DP #2). It was difficult to determine during site visits whether this inlet was a dry well full of sediment or just a very shallow structure. A small (8”-12”) drain pipe exits this structure and heads to the east towards a similar structure on the east side of Garmisch Street. This inlet is also shallow with a small drain pipe exiting to the east towards Paepcke Park. The terminus location of this drain system was not determined. It is believed to continue to the east to a dry well within Paepcke Park or connected to the existing 36-inch CMP running along Garmisch Street. Existing Basin 3 (EX-3) includes the southern portion of Parcel 2. Runoff generated from this basin appears to sheet flow towards W. Hopkins street gutter system. Once intercepted by the gutter system runoff is routed to an existing curb inlet that is connected to the 36-inch CMP storm drain running along Garmisch Street. This existing curb inlet was identified as Design Point 3 (DP #3). Minor offsite basins were identified along the south side of Parcel 2 where landscaping areas within the City’s ROW convey runoff onto the subject property. These incidental areas have little to no impact to the overall existing drainage conditions and will be accounted for under post development drainage improvements. Estimated peak runoff rates for each of the existing drainage basins outlined above are provided within Table 1 of Section F. Existing drainage basins are also delineated on Exhibit C5. E. Post Development Drainage Basin Descriptions This conceptual drainage mitigation design outlined within this report contemplates the incorporation of several stormwater mitigation facilities for treatment of stormwater runoff. Each of these proposed facilities were used to delineate corresponding post development drainage basins for the Lodge and Residential Units. Each of these post development drainage basins are discussed below and are illustrated on Exhibits C2 & C4. In addition, conceptual grading plans of the Lodge (C1) and Residential Units (C3) are also provided for illustrative support. All stormwater generated from Parcel 1 (Lodge) will be treated and routed to the City’s existing stormwater system via the Type R inlet (DP #1) located at the southwest corner of Main Street and Garmisch Street intersection. The invert of this existing structure is approximately 5.4-ft deep. In order to provide positive P450 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment-Conceptual Drainage Report April 27, 2015 S OPR IS E NGINEER ING • LLC civil consultants 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale Colorado 81623 (970)704-0311 Fax:(970)704-0313 5 | P a g e drainage from several of the proposed design treatment locations storm pipes may need to be routed to the proposed dry well (DW #1) within the alley parking area. This structure will provide water quality treatment for a portion of the Lodge roof but will also provide an opportunity to break up the routing and distances of storm pipes thereby allowing the final discharge pipe to daylight within the exiting Type R inlet. Each of the proposed water quality treatment basins associated with the Lodge are discussed below: Basin L-1 includes the west side of Parcel 1 as well as the head in parking along the north side of Alley 59. This area primarily consists of a permeable pavers. Runoff from this area will be infiltrated and collected in an underdrain system and/or collected within drains. Underdrain pipes and inlet pipes will be routed to a dry well (DW #1) proposed under the alley parking area. Water quality treatment will be provided via the permeable pavers. Basin L-2 consists of a two tiered roof area. The lower roof is currently proposed to be a green roof. The contributing impervious roof area has been limited to a 1:1 ratio. More detailed design may allow for additional impervious roof areas based on final design of the green roof system. Green roof overflow drains will be routed to DW #1 and an overflow pipe will be provided to route flows to DP #1. Basin L-3 consists of roof area. Water quality treatment for this roof area is currently proposed within DW#1. This is the only area that is currently contributing runoff to the proposed dry well for water quality purposes. This dry well will include an overflow pipe routed to the existing Type R inlet and therefore will only require sizing to accommodate the required water quality capture volume associated with the contributing roof area. If upon final design of the structure it is determined that it is not feasible to route all of the roof area to DW #1 then a supplemental underground treatment vault may also be required. This structure could be located along the north side of the Lodge and underneath a proposed seating area. This area falls outside the limits of structure. Basin L-4 consists of the Lodge’s northeast roof area as well as portions of the entrance area. Water quality treatment will be provided via a proposed bio-retention cell (BRC #1) proposed within Garmisch Street ROW. A seating wall and landscaping enhancements will be integrated into this treatment facility. Overflow inlets will be provided and routed the existing Type R inlet (DP #1). Basin L-5 consists of a small area along the east entrance. Water quality treatment for the impervious areas proposed within this area will be provided by a bioretention cell (BRC #2) located south of the entrance. This facility will also include a seating wall and landscaping improvements. A slot drain maybe required at the entrance walk to the Lodge to route runoff towards BRC #2 prior to entering Garmisch Street’s gutter pan. Overflow inlets will be provided within BRC #2 and will route flows exceeding the water quality storm event to exiting Type R inlet (DP #1). Basin L-6 includes the roof pool area. An intensive green roof area is proposed around the perimeter of this roof area and will provide the required water quality treatment for the impervious roof areas. Overflow inlets will be routed to the existing Type R inlet (DP #1). Basin L-7 includes the area south of the proposed Lodge. The surface treatment will be permeable pavers or landscaping. Area inlets within landscaping zones will be routed to DW #1 and ultimately to DP #1. If further design and value engineering eliminates portions of the currently proposed permeable pavers then the P451 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment-Conceptual Drainage Report April 27, 2015 S OPR IS E NGINEER ING • LLC civil consultants 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale Colorado 81623 (970)704-0311 Fax:(970)704-0313 6 | P a g e surrounding landscaping areas may be converted to bioretention cells to provide additional water quality treatment. Basin L-8 includes the area along the north side of the building that consists of permeable pavers and landscaping areas. Runoff from this basin will be directed towards Main Street’s gutter system and ultimately towards DP #1. Basins R-1 - R-3 are all associated with the residential units proposed on Parcel 2 and include offsite basins associated with W. Hopkins Avenue ROW. The primary method for providing water quality treatment for these improvements will be the implementation of 3 separate bioretention cells. Basin R-4 includes the permeable paver driveway entrances and landscaping along the north side of the residences. Runoff from this basin will sheet flow towards the alley and ultimately intercepted at DP #2. The water quality concepts discussed above are conceptual and may be revised as the design progresses to building permit application. The post development basins described above are delineated on Exhibits C2 & C4. Conceptual grading plans (C1 & C3) have also been provided for illustrative support of the overall conceptual drainage mitigation plan. F. Stormwater Mitigation Requirements & Hydrologic Criteria The drainage criteria used for this study was based on the COA’s URMP dated December 2014. The location and improvements associated with this project classify it as a “Major Design” which requires an analysis for the 10 and 100-year storm events. Water quality treatment of all impervious areas will be required however stormwater detention is not required since the site falls within the limits of the City storm sewer system. The Rational Hydrologic Method (Eq. 1) was used to estimate the peak runoff rates associated with the 10- and 100-year storm events. Eq. 1: Q = C* I * A Q = Runoff Flow Rate (cfs) C = Runoff Coefficient I = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr) A= Area of Basin (acres) The runoff coefficient (C) is a variable that represents the ratio of runoff to rainfall volumes during a storm event. The determination of C mainly depends on the soil type, watershed impervious and storm event frequency. Each drainage basin was studied to determine the percent of impervious area. The effective impervious percentages associated with permeable pavement areas were determined per the requirements outlined within Section 8.5.1.4 of the City’s URMP with the assumption that underdrains will be utilized. UD- Rational Spreadsheets were utilized to estimate the corresponding 10- and 100-year runoff coefficients based the resultant impervious areas of each basin. These spreadsheets have been provided as an attachment to this report. P452 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment-Conceptual Drainage Report April 27, 2015 S OPR IS E NGINEER ING • LLC civil consultants 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale Colorado 81623 (970)704-0311 Fax:(970)704-0313 7 | P a g e The design rainfall duration used in the Rational Method is referred to as the time of concentration. The time of concentration is the cumulative travel time, including overland flow and channelized flow, for runoff to get from the furthest point upstream of a basin to a designated design point. Per COA URMP, 5 minutes was used as the absolute minimum time of concentration. This minimum value was adopted for all existing and post development basins because of the short travel distances. The resultant estimated peak runoff rates for each of the existing and post drainage basins are summarized in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Table 1: Conceptual 10 & 100-Yr Existing Drainage Basin Peak Runoff Summary Table 2: Conceptual 10 & 100-Yr Post Development Drainage Basin Peak Runoff Summary G. Hydraulic Criteria This section provides an outline of the conceptual hydraulic calculations performed under this study. These initial computations and design criteria provide a framework of design for the primary backbone of the proposed storm system to include conceptual sizing of drainage swales, overflow inlets, storm pipes and the replaced drain pan proposed along the west side of Garmisch. Final design of all of these improvement will be verified prior to building permit application. Vegetative Swales are proposed along the sides of the single family units. Manning’s Equation (Eq. 2) was used to estimate the size of the drainage swales being proposed within these areas. The 100-year peak runoff rate associated with Basin R-2 was used along with the minimum proposed longitudinal slope associated with these proposed swales. P453 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment-Conceptual Drainage Report April 27, 2015 S OPR IS E NGINEER ING • LLC civil consultants 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale Colorado 81623 (970)704-0311 Fax:(970)704-0313 8 | P a g e Equation 2: Q = 1.49/n * (A/Pw) 2/3 * A * S 0.5 Q = Channel Capacity (cfs) n = manning’s runoff coefficient (native: n = 0.027) A = Area of flow (sf) Pw = Wetted perimeter of channel (ft) S = Channel longitudinal slope (ft/ft) As mentioned above, the design considered 100-year peak runoff rates for Basin R-2. A roughness coefficient of 0.027 was used along with a minimum slope of 1%. Swale dimensions were assumed to include 4:1 side slopes were practical. In addition, rectangle swales with vertical curb walls were also studied since several window wells are proposed that might constrain the ability to provide 4:1 side slopes. The results of this analysis indicate that grading shall accommodate “V” shaped swales with a minimum depth of 4-inches and 4:1 side slopes. In areas where this cannot be accommodate because of adjacent window wells or other site constraints rectangle swales with vertical curb walls shall have a bottom width of 12-inches and depth of 4- inches. Supporting calculations are provided as attachments to this report. Sump Overflow Inlets will be required within each of the proposed bioretention cells. The Orifice Equation (Eq. 3) was used to estimate the grate area required within each of these treatment areas. It is recommended that a minimum of 3-inches of freeboard be provided above the inlet grates to increase the overall efficiency. In addition, inlets should be designed to accommodate the 100-year peak runoff rates. In addition, a 50% clogging factor will be required. Table 3 summarizes the results of this conceptual analysis. The design of all inlets will be confirmed prior to building permit application. Eq. 3: Q = C*A min * (2gh) 0.5 2Q =Design Flow Rate (cfs) (100-yr Peak Flow w/ 50% clogging factor) C = Coefficient of Discharge (0.6) Amin = Minimum allowable area (sf) h = Available head (ft) (0.25 ft); g = Acceleration from Gravity (32.2 ft/sec 2) Table 3: Conceptual Overflow Sump Inlet Sizing The minimum grate areas outlined above will be confirmed prior to final design. Also, the areas can be provided through the use of multiple inlets to help reduce the sizes and conceal them within the landscaping areas. P454 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment-Conceptual Drainage Report April 27, 2015 S OPR IS E NGINEER ING • LLC civil consultants 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale Colorado 81623 (970)704-0311 Fax:(970)704-0313 9 | P a g e Storm Sewers pipes are proposed throughout the project. Conceptual design of storm sewer pipes was based on Eq. 2. The overflow pipe from the dry well to the DP #1 was studied to gain an understanding of limitations since this pipe will likely be routed with a longitudinal slope of 0.5% given the constraints of connecting into the existing curb inlet located at DP #1. The basins ultimately contributing to a segment of this storm sewer include L-2 - L7 as well as R-1 - R-3. The 100-year peak cumulative peak runoff rates was estimated to be 2.47 cfs. This peak runoff rate neglects the available volumes provided within the landscaping areas, dry well and bioretention cells; however based on this conservative approach a 12-inch plastic storm pipe running at 1% can carry this peak runoff rate while only running at 0.68-ft deep. Supporting documentation is provided as attachments to this report. Final pipe sizing and routing will be confirmed and described within a final drainage study in support of any future building permit application. A Drain Pan is proposed along the west side of Garmisch between the head in parking and travel lane. The carrying capacity of this drain pan was included as part of this conceptual drainage analysis. This drain pan has a longitudinal slope of 0.8% and 5%. Since the 0.8% longitudinal slope is the confining design parameter it was used to determine the carrying capacity of this 3-foot drain pan. Hydraflow Express was used to estimate this value and was based on Eq. 2. The results indicate that a 3-ft pan at 0.8% has the capacity of carrying 0.33 cfs; this does not include allowable gutter spread into the travel lanes. Further analysis of this proposed gutter pan and resultant street spread widths will be provided in a final drainage study which will be required prior to pursuing any future building permit applications. H. Low Impact Design Low impact design is a stormwater management strategy that aims to control stormwater at the source by promoting infiltration, evaporation, filtering and detain runoff close to its source. The Low Impact Design techniques that have been incorporated into the conceptual drainage design of this project include green roofs, bioretention cells, dry well, permeable pavers and grass lined swales. Each of these techniques will contributing to decreased peak runoff rates and volumes of stormwater exiting the site and entering the City’s storm sewer system. Furthermore, these strategies will provide water quality treatment of stormwater which will enhance the quality of rain water exiting the site and entering the City’s storm system. I. Water Quality Treatment Several water quality treatment best management practices (BMPs) are proposed throughout this project. These BMPs include bioretention cells, green roofs, permeable pavers and dry well(s). Each of these BMPs are discussed below: Bio-retention Cells are depressed landscaping areas designed to capture and filter or infiltrate the water quality capture volume from a contributing drainage basin. The conceptual water quality drainage basins for the proposed improvements have been conceptually laid out to determine if proposed receiving landscaping areas/bio-retention cells are adequate in providing the required treatment volume. Since the majority of these treatment areas lie in close proximity to structures they will likely require an impermeable liner and underdrain system. In addition, overflow inlets shall also be provided. Both the underdrain systems and overflow inlets will be connected to the City’s storm sewer system at DP #1 via DW #1. Each of the conceptual bio-retention cells are discussed below and include a brief description of their corresponding drainage basins. P455 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment-Conceptual Drainage Report April 27, 2015 S OPR IS E NGINEER ING • LLC civil consultants 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale Colorado 81623 (970)704-0311 Fax:(970)704-0313 10 | P a g e • BRC #1 is proposed along the east side of the Lodge. This treatment area will provide water quality capture volume for the surrounding impervious walkways as well as a portion of the roof area. This facility is proposed within the City’s ROW and therefore may require an encroachment license. • BRC #2: is also proposed along the east side of the Lodge. This treatment area will provide water quality treatment of the surrounding impervious area around the west entrance. This facility is also proposed within the City’s ROW and therefore may require an encroachment license. • BRC #3 - #5 are all associated with the development of the residential units. Runoff from the site as well as contributing areas within the right-of-way will be routed to one of these treatment basins via grass lined swales. Green Roofs are structural roof components that filter, absorb and retain/detain stormwater runoff. The water quality benefits of green roofs include: biological uptake of stormwater runoff, evapotranspiration, moderates stormwater runoff temperatures, and reduces peak runoff rates and volumes by decreasing the amount of impervious area typically associated with traditional roof systems. Currently this project is proposing approximately 1,850+/- square feet of green roof area. Green roof locations will be further analyzed prior to issuance of a Building Permit Application. A Dry Well will likely be required to provide water quality treatment of a portion of the Lodge’s roof area. A dry well is a BMP that incorporates manhole structures with perforated barrels at the deeper depths. Washed screened rock is installed around the exterior of the perforated sections. When Sub- soils are capable of moderate to high infiltration rates dry wells are considered to be a viable BMP. They dramatically reduce the increased runoff and volume of stormwater generated from surrounding impervious areas and promote infiltration; thereby improving the water quality of stormwater runoff. The required water quality capture volume for a dry well shall be 150% of the design water quality capture volume as outlined within Chapter 8 of the City’s URMP. Permeable Pavers are proposed throughout this project. This type of BMP is comprised of a layer of concrete pavers separated by joints filled with small stones. Water enters the joints between solid concrete pavers and flows through an open graded base; i.e. crushed stone layers with no small or fine particles. The void spaces among the crushed stones store water and infiltrate it back into the soil subgrade. The conceptual design of the permeable pavers was based on the design criteria as outlined within Section 8.5.1.4 of the City’s URMP. Effective impervious areas were based on the assumption that underdrains will be required given the close proximity to proposed structures. Underdrains can be routed to DW #1. Final locations and design of the permeable pavers will be provided prior to building permit application. The installation of all permeable pavers shall comply with the specifications provided by Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute (ICPI). Tables 4 and 5 outline the conceptual water quality capture volumes for the proposed bioretention cells and dry well, respectively. In addition, the conceptual sizing of the dry well includes a 150% of the design water quality capture volume per the requirements outlined within the City’s URMP. P456 IV.A. Molly Gibson Lodge Redevelopment-Conceptual Drainage Report April 27, 2015 S OPR IS E NGINEER ING • LLC civil consultants 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale Colorado 81623 (970)704-0311 Fax:(970)704-0313 11 | P a g e Table 4: Conceptual Bioretention Sizing Summary A level 0 MDCIA for determining effective impervious areas was used for the conceptual design of the bioretention cells. This was considered to be a conservative approach. Final design of bio-retention gardens will be provided in a drainage study prepared in support of any future building permit applications. Table 5: Conceptual Dry Well Design Summary The information summarized within Table 5 indicates that a 4-diameter dry well with an effective depth (volume below lowest incoming invert) of approximately 10-ft will be required to provide water quality treatment of the anticipated roof area. Final design of any proposed dry well(s) will be included within the final drainage study required for any future building permit application. J. Conclusion Aspects of this design were prepared in accordance with the COA URMP. The existing drainage basins were delineated based on survey topography and associated peak runoff rates were estimated. More importantly, post development drainage basins were also studied to determine feasible water quality treatment solutions as well as estimate peak runoff rates. Conceptual sizing has been outlined for all stormwater infrastructure and in accordance with the requirements outlined within the City’s URMP. Numerous low impact design techniques have also been incorporated into the conceptual design which will result in a much improved stormwater system than what exists today. Lastly, the locations, sizes and types of all water quality treatment facilities will be finalized as the design progresses. Final design will be outlined within a final drainage report in support of any future building permit applications. K. Attachments A. UD-Rational Spreadsheets B. Hydraflow Output C. Grading and Drainage Exhibits (C1, C2, C3, C4 & C5) Prepared by: Jesse K. Swann, PE P457 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = EX-1 Area = 0.118 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 71.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.54 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.50 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.50 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.24 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE EX-1 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales EX-1 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:56 PM P458 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = EX-1 Area = 0.118 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 71.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.63 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.50 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.50 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.47 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE EX-1 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales EX-1-100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:56 PM P459 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = EX-2 Area = 0.390 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 75.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.58 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.54 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.54 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.84 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE EX-2 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales EX-2 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:56 PM P460 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = EX-2 Area = 0.390 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 75.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.66 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.54 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.54 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 1.62 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE EX-2 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales EX-2-100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:56 PM P461 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = EX-3 Area = 0.112 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 74.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.57 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.53 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.53 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.24 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE EX-3 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales EX-3 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:56 PM P462 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = EX-3 Area = 0.112 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 74.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.65 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.53 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.53 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.46 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE EX-3 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales EX-3-100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:55 PM P463 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-1 Area = 0.086 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 40.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.36 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.30 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.30 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.11 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE L-1 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-1 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/27/2015, 7:53 AM P464 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-1 Area = 0.086 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 40.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.50 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.30 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.30 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.27 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE L-1 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-1 100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:55 PM P465 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-2 Area = 0.034 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 50.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.40 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.35 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.35 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.05 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE L-2 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-2 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:55 PM P466 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-2 Area = 0.034 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 50.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.52 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.35 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.35 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.11 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE L-2 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-2 100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:55 PM P467 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-3 Area = 0.114 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 100.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.92 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.90 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.90 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.39 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE L-3 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-3 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:55 PM P468 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-3 Area = 0.114 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 100.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.96 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.90 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.90 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.69 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE L-3 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-3 100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:54 PM P469 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-4 Area = 0.101 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 95.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.83 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.81 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.81 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.31 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE L-4 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-4 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:54 PM P470 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-4 Area = 0.101 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 95.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.88 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.81 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.81 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.56 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE L-4 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-4 100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/27/2015, 7:52 AM P471 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-5 Area = 0.027 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 61.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.47 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.42 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.42 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.05 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE L-5 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-5 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:56 PM P472 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-5 Area = 0.027 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 61.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.57 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.42 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.42 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.10 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE L-5 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-5 100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:59 PM P473 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-6 Area = 0.033 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 89.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.74 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.71 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.71 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.09 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE L-6 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-6 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:59 PM P474 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-6 Area = 0.033 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 89.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.80 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.71 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.71 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.16 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE L-6 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-6 100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:59 PM P475 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-7 Area = 0.032 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 21.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.28 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.20 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.20 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.03 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE L-7 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-7 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:58 PM P476 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-7 Area = 0.032 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 21.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.44 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.20 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.20 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.09 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE L-7 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-7 100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:58 PM P477 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-8 Area = 0.013 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 14.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.24 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.16 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.16 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.01 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE L-8 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-8 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:58 PM P478 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = L-8 Area = 0.013 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 14.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.42 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.16 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.16 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.04 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE L-8 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales L-8 100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:58 PM P479 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = R-1 Area = 0.028 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 62.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.47 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.43 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.43 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.05 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE R-1 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales R-1 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:58 PM P480 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = R-1 Area = 0.028 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 62.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.57 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.43 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.43 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.10 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE R-1 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales R-1 100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:58 PM P481 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = R-2 Area = 0.116 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 64.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.49 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.44 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.44 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.21 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE R-2 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales R-2 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:57 PM P482 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = R-2 Area = 0.116 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 64.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.58 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.44 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.44 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.43 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE R-2 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales R-2 100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:57 PM P483 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = R-3 Area = 0.057 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 72.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.55 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.51 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.51 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.12 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE R-3 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales R-3 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:57 PM P484 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = R-3 Area = 0.057 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 72.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.63 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.51 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.51 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.23 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE R-3 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales R-3 100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:57 PM P485 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = R-4 Area = 0.019 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 9.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 10 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 64.50 (input the value of C1) C2= 9.0 (input the value of C2) C3= 0.983 (input the value of C3) P1= 0.77 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.21 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.13 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.13 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 3.72 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.02 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LODGE R-4 10YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales R-4 10-YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:57 PM P486 IV.A. Project Title: Catchment ID: I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = R-4 Area = 0.019 Acres Percent Imperviousness = 9.0 % NRCS Soil Type = B A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 100 years (input return period for design storm) C1 = 100.10 (input the value of C1) C2= 10.70 (input the value of C2) C3= 1.080 (input the value of C3) P1= 1.23 inches (input one-hr precipitation--see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.40 Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.13 Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration NRCS Land Heavy Tillage/ Short Nearly Grassed Type Meadow Field Pasture/ Bare Swales/ Lawns Ground Waterways Conveyance 2.5 5 7 10 15 Calculations: Reach Slope Length 5-yr NRCS Flow Flow ID S L Runoff Convey- Velocity Time Coeff ance V Tf ft/ft ft C-5 fps minutes input input output input output output Overland 0.13 N/A 0.00 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 0 Computed T c = 0.00 Regional Tc = 10.00 User-Entered Tc = 5.00 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at Regional T c, I = inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = cfs Rainfall Intensity at User-Defined T c, I = 6.32 inch/hr Peak Flowrate, Qp = 0.05 cfs Sum CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD MOLLY GIBSON LDOGE R-4 100YR Paved Areas & (Sheet Flow) 20 Shallow Paved Swales R-4 100YR.xls, Tc and PeakQ 4/25/2015, 3:59 PM P487 IV.A. Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Saturday, Apr 25 2015 3-foot Drain Pan Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 12.00, 12.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.13 Invert Elev (ft) = 100.00 Slope (%) = 0.80 N-Value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by: Known Depth Known Depth (ft) = 0.13 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.13 Q (cfs) = 0.334 Area (sqft) = 0.20 Velocity (ft/s) = 1.65 Wetted Perim (ft) = 3.13 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.13 Top Width (ft) = 3.12 EGL (ft) = 0.17 0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 99.75 -0.25 100.00 0.00 100.25 0.25 100.50 0.50 100.75 0.75 101.00 1.00 Reach (ft) P488 IV.A. Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Saturday, Apr 25 2015 12-inch Storm Sewer Circular Diameter (ft) = 1.00 Invert Elev (ft) = 100.00 Slope (%) = 1.00 N-Value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 2.47 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.62 Q (cfs) = 2.470 Area (sqft) = 0.51 Velocity (ft/s) = 4.82 Wetted Perim (ft) = 1.81 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.68 Top Width (ft) = 0.97 EGL (ft) = 0.98 0 1 2 3 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 99.50 -0.50 100.00 0.00 100.50 0.50 101.00 1.00 101.50 1.50 102.00 2.00 Reach (ft) P489 IV.A. Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Saturday, Apr 25 2015 Rectangular Swale Rectangular Bottom Width (ft) = 1.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.33 Invert Elev (ft) = 100.00 Slope (%) = 1.00 N-Value = 0.027 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 0.42 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.26 Q (cfs) = 0.420 Area (sqft) = 0.26 Velocity (ft/s) = 1.62 Wetted Perim (ft) = 1.52 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.18 Top Width (ft) = 1.00 EGL (ft) = 0.30 0 .25 .5 .75 1 1.25 1.5 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 99.75 -0.25 100.00 0.00 100.25 0.25 100.50 0.50 100.75 0.75 101.00 1.00 Reach (ft) P490 IV.A. Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Saturday, Apr 25 2015 V Swale Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 4.00, 4.00 Total Depth (ft) = 0.33 Invert Elev (ft) = 100.00 Slope (%) = 1.00 N-Value = 0.027 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 0.42 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.28 Q (cfs) = 0.420 Area (sqft) = 0.31 Velocity (ft/s) = 1.34 Wetted Perim (ft) = 2.31 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.24 Top Width (ft) = 2.24 EGL (ft) = 0.31 0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Elev (ft) Depth (ft) Section 99.75 -0.25 100.00 0.00 100.25 0.25 100.50 0.50 100.75 0.75 101.00 1.00 Reach (ft) P491 IV.A. P492 I V . A . P493 I V . A . P494 I V . A . P495 I V . A . P496 I V . A . 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sarah Rosenberg, Special Projects Planner THRU: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 333 W. Bleeker - Minor Development, On-site Relocation and Variances, Public Hearing DATE: May 27, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY: 333 W. Bleeker is a wood frame residence on a 6,000 square foot property. Built in the early 1890s, this Victorian home is relatively unaltered except for a porch addition to the back of the house built in approximately 1898. A historic carriage house sits at the back of the property along Third Street and the alley. This carriage house does not appear on the 1904 Sanborn Map, but appears to be early 20 th century construction and is considered to be historically significant. The home is listed on the National Register of Historic Places for its high style interpretation of the Queen Anne style. The house was built by D.E. Frantz, owner of an early sawmill in Aspen, after the pattern book design from The Cottage Souvenir, No. 2. The applicant is requesting approval to construct a basement under the existing house, to make minor exterior modifications to the house, and to construct an addition to the east side of the carriage house which has served as a garage. The applicant is also requesting a 315 square foot bonus for restoration efforts to the house and carriage house. Setback and design variances will be reviewed. APPLICANT: Mark Friedland, 333 Bleeker, LLC., represented by Kim Raymond Architect, Inc. PARCEL ID: #2735-124-41-001 ADDRESS: 333 W. Bleeker Street, Lot 1, Bleeker Street Partners Historic Landmark Lot Split, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado ZONING: R-6 MINOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project’s conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the P497 IV.B. 2 hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. Staff Response: This project has been deemed a minor development project instead of a major development project due to the fact the floor area of the original house is not being significantly increased. Basement: The applicant proposes to lift the house directly up from its location to construct a basement underneath. To accommodate the basement, three new lightwells are being proposed on the east side of the house. However, the proposed new basement is larger than the footprint of the Victorian. A lightwell at the north-east corner of the house “floats” in the yard and is proposed to abut a new raised planter. Staff recommends that this area be restudied and that all of the lightwells be flush with grade and protected by grates. When the house is placed back on its original location, it will be restored to its historic elevation on a new concrete foundation. The existing stone foundation will be reused as a veneer on the concrete foundation. If any of the stone needs to be replaced, the replacement will match the cut and design of the stone and joints. The stone foundation does not extend under the 1898 porch addition. This area should be detailed differently than the original house. Alterations : The applicant plans on restoring and maintaining the existing historic windows and proposes to add some new windows on the north, west, and south sides of the house. The applicant believes that there could be a historic window that has been removed on the upper level of the north elevation, as shown on the image to the right. The applicant plans to investigate for the framing during construction and if the historic framing does exist, they will replace the window. There is no evidence that supports this idea and since there hasn’t been major modifications to the front façade, staff believes that there is no earlier window on the upper floor. However, if during construction, the applicant finds that window framing does exist, staff supports the decision to restore it. Possible historic window framing Historic double hung window The applicant seeks to replace the non-historic double doors on the upper level of the south façade with two double hung windows. It is unclear when the double doors on the upper level were added, but they were most likely later additions. The applicant proposes that the two double hung windows that are to replace the door fit within the current opening. Staff approves of replacing the double doors with windows, however, staff suggests that during construction, the applicant investigate any historic framing in this P498 IV.B. 3 area to determine the original window size. The 1893 Bird’s Eye View of Aspen, as shown on the image to the right, suggests that there was only a double hung window in the gable end. Staff suggests that the applicant investigate the fixed single window that exists now high in the south gable end to determine whether or not it is historic. If it is not, staff suggests that the window be removed and the shingles restored. Possible non-historic window to be removed On the east façade, the applicant seeks to replace an existing sliding glass door with a single door that fits the original character of the house. Staff supports replacing the sliding glass door with the proposed single door, which is a more appropriate design for the house. The applicant seeks to add two fireplace vents on the house, one on the east façade and one on the south facade. Historically, chimney flues would go through the roof, not through the wall of the house. HPC’s policy usually requires venting through the roof, however, staff finds that a tall flue on the front of the house could detract from the design since the front façade has been minimally altered. Staff supports the applicant’s proposal to locate a direct east wall vent on the east wall of the house in this instance. On the south side of the house, the applicant proposes two options, a direct vent located on the wall or a flue going through the roof. These two options are shown on the image to the right. The applicant favors option one while staff supports option two. Staff finds that locating the flue through the roof fits what would have been done historically and because the vent is on the back of the house, it will not have negative visual impact and minimizes impacts to the historic siding. The applicant must clarify with the Building Department to obtain the exact height and size that the fireplace vent needs to be and provide that information at the hearing. Option 2: Vent through roof Option 1: Vent through wall Staff is concerned with any other vents and mechanical equipment that will be placed on the house to accommodate the interior changes. We request that the applicant provide documentation and drawings of any vents or mechanical equipment that will be visible on the exterior so that they can be determined whether or not they have an impact on the house’s character. The applicant has proposed four double hung windows to be added to the enclosed porch on the south side of the house, two on the porch’s south façade and two on the porch’s west façade. There are four double hung windows that already exist on the south façade. There is not enough evidence to determine what the open porch would have looked like historically, so it is difficult to determine how it should be designed. To maintain the current simple character on this part of P499 IV.B. 4 the house, staff recommends approval of the two windows on the south side, but not the two windows proposed on the west street facing façade. Roof: The applicant proposes to replace the existing asphalt roof with a wood roof. Staff supports replacing the asphalt roof to a more appropriate wood shingle roof. The applicant also seeks to change the roofline of the enclosed porch on the south side from a shallow hipped roof to a steeper shed roof. There is no evidence to support the idea that the roof has been altered in the past. Staff suggests that the applicant further investigate the roof framing to determine whether or not there was a steeper shed roof. If there is no evidence that the roof pitch has been changed, staff does not recommend approval of the proposed changes. The images below illustrate the existing and proposed roof slope. Existing roof slope on enclosed porch Proposed roof slope on enclosed porch Private Yard: The applicant proposes to remove the curb cut on the west side of the site that currently serves as an additional parking spot. The paving will be reduced and changed from gravel to concrete to create a walkway to the back yard. Staff supports removal of the curb cut, changing the driveway into a walkway, and the material change. The applicant proposes some landscaping changes which include a raised flower bed at the northeast side of the house, perennials and shrubs along the perimeter of the house, and decorative grasses by the front pathway and side pathway. Large shrubs, tall grasses, and raised flower beds are potentially of character for the site of a Victorian home. Generally, the house should be surrounded by sod or plants at natural grade with some accent planting, such as lilacs. Staff does not recommend approval of the raised flower bed on the northeast side of the house and requests that the applicant provide documentation on the species and types of shrubs and long grasses that are being proposed elsewhere. Staff is concerned that the height and material of the shrubs, grasses, and plantings being proposed could be out of character and eventually will alter the view of the house and site. Along the west side of the property, in the public right of way, there are three historic cottonwood trees and five spruce trees that a previous owner added without the approval of the Parks Department. Staff is concerned with the impact these growing spruce trees have on the cottonwood trees and the view of the house. The City has the right to remove the spruces, but would like the property owner’s cooperation, which is being offered. Staff and the Parks Department will coordinate the removal process, however, we recommend a condition of approval that the work be paid by the property owner. The applicant proposes some lighting changes around the site. The existing pendant light on the front porch is to remain. The proposed new lighting includes sconces that are similar to design P500 IV.B. 5 of the existing pendant light. These sconces will be placed by the door on the east side of the house, the back door of the house, above the garage door on the carriage house, and next to the north door on the carriage house. The proposed sconces do not meet lighting code as it states that outdoor lighting has to have frosted glass. Staff recommends that the applicant choose lights with frosted glass that meet code and replace the proposed light with an utilitarian fixture that would be more appropriate for the garage. Secondary Structure (Carriage House) : The applicant seeks to maintain the carriage house as a garage and add a mudroom addition to the east side of the structure. Currently, there is a trash shed on the east side of the structure and an open shed on the north side. The applicant proposes to remove both of these structures to make way for the mudroom addition. The applicant also proposes to remove the skylights on the north and south elevation. Staff recommends approval of the removal of the trash shed, open shed, and skylights. The north and south wall of the proposed mudroom addition jogs in four inches so that the walls are not flush with the existing carriage house. Staff finds that the mudroom addition could be better distinguished from the existing structure. This could include changing the height or pitch of the roofline and making the north and south walls jog more pronounced. Staff does not recommend approval of the mudroom addition and recommends the applicant redesign it. ON-SITE RELOCATION 26.415.090.C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and P501 IV.B. 6 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Response: The house is to remain in its original location and will be lifted directly up to accommodate a basement underneath the structure. Once the basement is constructed, the house will be placed back onto a new concrete foundation. The existing stone foundation will be salvaged and reused as a veneer. The relationship to grade will remain the same. Staff finds that excavating a basement under the house is acceptable and meets the design standards. For the temporary relocation of the house during basement excavation, the owner must provide a $30,000 letter of credit, cashier’s check, or other form acceptable to the City Attorney to insure the safe relocation of the house. A relocation plan detailing how and where the building will be stored and protected during construction must be submitted with the building permit application, and the applicant shall include documentation of the existing elevation of the home and the relationship of the foundation to grade in the building permit application. SETBACK VARIANCES The carriage house sits in the required side and rear setbacks. Variances are requested. 26.416.110.C. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Response: The house location meets setback requirements, but the carriage house does not, as the eave encroaches slightly into the alley. These conditions will be maintained. The applicant proposes that the mudroom have a very minimal rear setback and continue the eave encroachment, which is not allowed. Staff can support some rear setback reduction for the mudroom, but we recommend that this addition be restudied to differentiate from the historic building. We also recommend that an Encroachment License be obtained from the Engineering department upon applying for building permit. FLOOR AREA BONUS 26.416.110F. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building’s form, material or openings; P502 IV.B. 7 e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; f. The project retains a historic buildings; and/or g. Notable historic sites and landscape features are retained. Staff Response: The applicant requests a 315 square foot bonus due to the restoration efforts to allow for a basement to be built under the house. Restoration efforts include preserving the original form and character of the house and carriage house, restoring the roof of the house and carriage house, maintaining the existing windows, and agreeing to the removing the five spruce trees in the right of way, but asked the City to do the work. Staff supports the restoration efforts of the house and carriage house. Staff recommends HPC approve the bonus to offset a floor area penalty that affects the carriage house. Because this building is accessed from the street and not the alley, it cannot receive a garage exemption that other homes can get. HPC would be unlikely to approve turning this historic building to face the alley, so the applicant must count the garage fully in the floor area. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS Staff Response: The applicant is seeking an exception to the Build-to line standards. The location of the house does not meet the design standards as the setbacks on the front and side yards are larger than required. However, keeping the original location of the house preserves the pattern and character of it, so staff recommends approval of the variance request. The applicant seeks another variance for the carriage house since the driveway to the garage comes off of Third Street and not the alley, which the design guidelines require. Altering or relocating the carriage house to be entered from the alley severely impacts the character of the site and the structure. Staff recommends approval of the variance to maintain the location and garage door entrance of the carriage house off Third Street. Other existing conditions that don’t meet the design standards, such as the undersized front porch, do not require adjustment. _________________________________________________________________________ DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: • approve the application, • approve the application with conditions, • disapprove the application, or • continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that project be continued for restudy of the following issues: By next meeting: 1. Restudy lightwell on the north-east corner of the house. 2. Detail the foundation underneath 1898 porch differently from the original house foundation. P503 IV.B. 8 3. Provide further detail on option two of flue placement on the rear of the house. 4. Provide documentation on any other vents and mechanical equipment that is proposed. 5. The two windows on the west side of the enclosed porch are not approved. 6. The raised flower bed on the northeast side of the site is not approved. 7. Clarify landscaping and plantings used around site. 8. The applicant is required to pay for the removal of the five spruce trees in the right of way. A tree removal permit will be required to assure proper technique, but no mitigation fee will be charged. 9. Propose outdoor lighting that meets code and has frosted glass and provide a proposal for review and approval by staff and monitor. 10. Design the mudroom addition on the carriage house to differentiate from the original and so that it is not in the right of way. 11. Provide documentation on the lifting and relocation of the house and a $30,000 security. 12. Restudy the carriage house setbacks. Conditions of Approval during construction: 1. During construction, investigate whether or not there is a window frame on the upper level of the north façade. 2. During construction, investigate any historic framing to determine the original window size that will replace the double doors and provide a proposal for review and approval by staff and monitor. 3. During construction, investigate the south gable end fixed window to determine whether or not it is historic and provide a proposal for review and approval by staff and monitor. 4. During construction, investigate the roofline of the enclosed porch on the house and provide a proposal for review and approval by staff and monitor. 5. Obtain an Encroachment License from the Engineering Department for the carriage house upon applying for the building permit. Exhibits: A. Relevant Design Guidelines B. Application & Drawings EXHIBIT A. RELEVANT DESIGN GUIDELINES: 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. P504 IV.B. 9 The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod, and not covered with paving, for example. 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. If a tree must be removed as part of the addition or alteration, replace it with species of a large enough scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project. 1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs. Retaining historic planting beds, landscape features and walkways is encouraged. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials. 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are inappropriate. Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes. 1.16 Preserve historically significant landscape designs and features. This includes the arrangement of trees, shrubs, plant beds, irrigation ditches and sidewalks in the public right-of-way. 1.17 Maintain historic irrigation ditches as an integral component of the streetscape. The character of an irrigation ditch should be maintained. It is inappropriate to use an irrigation ditch as a planting bed, or to fill it with another material. Ditches cannot by culverted except where crossed by a walkway or driveway, and a culvert must be approved by the Parks Department. 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade. Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character-defining facade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. P505 IV.B. 10 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double-hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes. Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades. 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. A historic door from a similar building also may be considered. Simple paneled doors were typical. Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled buildings. If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non-reflective finish. 8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved. When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. These include its primary and roof materials, roof form, windows, doors and architectural details. If a secondary structure is not historically significant, then its preservation is optional. 9.5 A new foundation should appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a modest miner's cottage is discouraged because it would be out of character. Where a stone foundation was used historically, and is to be replaced, the replacement should be similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints. 9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic elevation above grade. Raising the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable. However, lifting it substantially above the ground level is inappropriate. Changing the historic elevation is discouraged, unless it can be demonstrated that it enhances the resource. 9.7 A lightwell may be used to permit light into below-grade living space. In general, a lightwell is prohibited on a wall that faces a street (per the Residential Design Standards). The size of a lightwell should be minimized. P506 IV.B. 11 A lightwell that is used as a walkout space may be used only in limited situations and will be considered on a case-by-case basis. If a walkout space is feasible, it should be surrounded by a simple fence or rail. P507 IV.B. P508 IV.B. 802 E. Cooper Avenue, Suite 4 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252       February  23,  2015         Amy  Simon   City  of  Aspen  Community  Development  Department   130  S  Galena  Street,  3rd  Floor   Aspen,  CO    81611     RE:    333  W  Bleeker  Ave    Summary  Letter   Aspen,  Colorado   Parcel  ID:  273512401401     Dear  Amy,     Thank  you  for  your  time  and  knowledge  regarding  this  property  and  the  process   required  to  renovate  this  historic  structure  and  construct  a  basement  under  it.    This  beautifully  preserved  property  is  located  in  the  R-­‐6,  Medium  density   residential  zone  district.   P509 IV.B. 802 E. Cooper Avenue, Suite 4 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252  This  home  is  on  the  National  Register  of  Historic  Places  and  is  significant  for  it’s   high  style  interpretation  of  the  Queen  Anne  style  and  it’s  unusual  design  elements.    The   information  on  file  about  this  home  shows  us  that  it  was  built  ca.  1886  and  was  owned   by  D.  E.  Frantz;  and  the  plans  came  from  one  of  the  design  books  of  that  era.    Mr.  Frantz   owned  a  number  of  homes  at  that  time  and  it  is  believed  that  the  wood  for  this  home   came  from  his  own  saw  mill;  which  was  first  listed  in  the  Colorado  business  directory  in   1886.    The  carriage  house  does  contribute  to  the  historic  significance  of  this  property.     Reviewing  the  history  of  this  building  and  using  the  Sanborn  &  Sons  Mapping  of   1904,  this  two  story  Victorian  was  situated  on  the  center  of  two  city  lots  which  currently   make  up  this  parcel;  Lots  A  and  B.      According  to  the  Sanborn  map  in  1904,  this  property   had  an  addition  to  the  back  of  the  home  that  could  have  been  the  current  back  porch,   with  another  addition  that  connected  the  house  to  the  carriage  house;  or  just  a  larger   addition  to  the  original  structure  that  connected  the  home  to  the  carriage  house.    There   was  also  a  small  structure  in  the  south  east  corner  of  the  property  that  is  no  longer   there.    At  some  point,  the  back  of  the  home  was  modified  again  to  remove  a  portion  of   the  addition  to  the  rear  of  the  structure;  so  the  house  and  carriage  house  are  no  longer   connected.    It  is  not  known  if  what  appears  to  be  a  back  porch  was,  indeed  a  historic   element  or  not  in  it’s  current  configuration;  but  it  is  enclosed  and  being  used  as  interior   space  at  this  time.  There  is  currently  a  small  shed  connected  to  the  carriage  house  with   no  record  of  when  it  was  added.         The  other  anomaly  is  that  there  is  a  door  on  the  upper  level  that  opens  to     the  roof  over  what  may  have  been  the  back  porch  at  some  time.    There  is  no  deck  or   railing  outside  this  door,  just  a  sloping  roof.    We  would  like  to  remedy  this  situation   and  possibly  restore  the  roof  to  what  the  gable  roof  shown  in  the  plan  book  for  the     original  house.    (see  below)     Looking  at  the  plans  of  this  house  (or  the  one  that  it  was  modeled  after)  in  the   pattern  book  that  is  on  file  with  the  National  Register;  the  current  back  of  the  house  was   probably  not  historic;  at  least  not  part  of  the  original  structure.    The  floor  plan  doesn’t   include  a  back  porch  the  width  of  the  home;  rather  more  living  space,  under  a  roof  that   is  a  simple  gable,  parallel  to  the  main  roof.    It  was  lower  as  a  single  story,  which  covered   the  kitchen  and  the  back  bedroom.    We  would  like  to  replace  this  roof.       Further,  this  home  will  remain  in  it’s  original  location,  and  will  be  lifted  straight   up;  supported  and  a  new  full  basement  will  be  put  under  it.    The  main  level  floor  will  be   returned  to  the  same  elevation  as  it  was  originally  built  and  we  will  restore  the  look  of   the  original  foundation  as  a  veneer  to  the  new  concrete  foundation.  We  are  proposing   to  finish  the  last  few  details  of  full  restoration  to  this  already  well-­‐preserved  Victorian.           The  only  variance  we  are  seeking  is  to  be  allowed  to  make  use  of  the  sq.  ft.   garage  exemption  for  having  a  garage  that  is  accessed  from  the  alley  and  a  side  yard   setback  for  this  carriage  house.    The  existing  carriage  house  has  been  used  as  a  garage,   P510 IV.B. 802 E. Cooper Avenue, Suite 4 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 and  we  would  like  to  continue  to  do  so.    The  hardship  we  face  is  that  the  access  is  from   Third  Street,  instead  of  the  alley;  even  though  the  garage  is  located  right  on  the  alley.         The  local  HPC  and  the  National  Register  of  Historic  Places  count  this  carriage  house  as   significant,  so  we  do  not  feel  that  it  is  appropriate  to  alter  it  to  make  it  accessible  from   the  alley;  nor  do  we  feel  it  is  appropriate  to  use  the  carriage  house  for  a  different  use,   and  then  build  a  garage  in  the  back  yard.    This  would  crowd  both  the  Victorian  home   and  the  carriage  house;  being  a  foreign  element  on  the  property.    Rather,  we  would  like   the  garage  exemption  so  we  have  the  FAR  to  put  the  basement  under  the  house  and   restore  the  carriage  house  to  it’s  historic  appearance  and  use  in  it’s  original  location.         We  are  seeking  the  additional  FAR  bonus  to  create  one  TDR  that  would   permanently  remove  250  sq  ft  from  the  property  for  future  development.    This  helps   preserve  this  very  pristine  example  of  Aspen’s  history.         RELEVANT  LAND  USE  CODE  SECTIONS      SECTION  26.304  –  Application   1.    Please  see  attached  letter  of  authorization  from  333  Bleeker,  LLC,  a  Colorado  limited   liability  corporation,  granting  Kim  Raymond  Architects,  Inc  authority  to  act  on  their   behalf  throughout  this  process.       2.      Please  see  the  attached  Vicinity  Map  with  a  legal  description  and     directions  to  the  property.   3.      Attached,  please  find  the  Disclosure  of  Ownership  in  the  form  of  the  Title  Insurance   conveying  the  property  to  333  Bleeker,  LLC.   4.      See  number  2  above.   5.      Please  see  attached  Site  Plan  depicting  the  proposed  changes  to  the     existing  landscape  and  building  footprint.   6.    Please  see  the  site  improvement  survey  of  the  property  located  at  333  W  Bleeker.   7.    Please  see  below,  the  description  and  summary  of  all  requested  information   pertaining  to  the  Land  Use  Code  sections  in  regard  to  the  proposed  development  as   requested  by  Amy  Simon  in  the  pre-­‐application  summary  letter  dated  January  26,  2015.     Additionally,  please  find  a  copy  of  the  Pre-­‐application  Conference  Summary  sheet,   attached  at  the  end  of  this  packet  of  information.    This  application  package  includes  all   requested  documents  as  outlined  in  the  pre-­‐application  conference  summary.       Section  26.314  –  Variances  (for  Historic  outbuilding  floor  area  bonus)   Section  26.314.020  -­‐  Authority   The  Historic  Preservation  Commission  has  the  authority  to  grant  variances  in  accordance   with  this  section  of  the  Land  Use  Code.     Section  26.314.040  -­‐  Standards  Applicable  to  variances.   A.  The  required  three  circumstances  exist;  for  the  HPC  to  have  the  ability  to  grant     P511 IV.B. 802 E. Cooper Avenue, Suite 4 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 dimensional  variances:    1.    The  granting  of  a  variance  to  this  project  is  consistent  with  the  purposes,   goals  and  objectives  of  the  LUC  and  the  Municipal  Code;  the  preservation  and   restoration  of  an  Historic  Resource  is  consistent  with  both  codes.    2.  The  variance  requested  is  the  minimal  variance  to  make  this  carriage  house   reasonable  to  keep  as  a  garage  for  the  parcel,  so  as  not  to  alter  the  carriage  house  or     crowd  the  parcel  and  the  Historic  resource  with  the  addition  of  another  structure.    3.  The  literal  interpretation  of  this  section  of  the  code  regarding  the  exemption   of  floor  area  in  the  garage  from  FAR  calculations,  but  only  if  accessed  off  the  alley;   deprives  this  applicant  from  this  benefit  as  enjoyed  by  others  in  the  same  zone  district.   a)  The  special  condition  of  this  parcel  is  that  the  carriage  house  is  historically  significant,   and  it  cannot  be  modified  to  be  accessed  from  the  alley  and  continue  to  be  used  as  a   garage;  we  are  requesting  a  variance  from  the  requirement  of  alley  access.    The  carriage   house  is  adjacent  to  the  alley,  at  the  very  back  of  the  yard;  but  it  is  accessed  from  Third   street.    We  feel  it  is  inappropriate  to  ask  to  relocate  this  historically  significant  structure   just  so  it  would  meet  this  code  requirement  for  the  exemption  benefit.   b)  The  granting  of  this  variance  shall  not  be  conferring  any  benefits  that  are  usually   denied  to  other  parcels  in  the  same  zone  district;  rather  it  allows  this  parcel  the  same   benefits  that  others  enjoy  that  are  not  working  to  preserve  an  historic  resource.     B.    All  of  the  required  circumstances  are  met  to  enable  the  HPC  to  have  the  authority  to   grant  the  requested  variances:    1.    The  public  notice  and  mailing  was  done  in  accordance  with  Section   26.304.060.E.3.a-­‐c.    Please  see  attached  affidavit.    2.  A  variance  is  the  most  reasonable  method  to  afford  the  applicant  relief  from   the  guidelines  that  were  adopted  decades  after  this  parcel  was  developed.    A  variance   of  this  sort  is  also  an  incentive  offered  by  the  HPC  to  aid  in  the  restoration  and   preservation  of  Historic  properties.        3.  There  is  no  number  3    4-­‐6.  These  standards  do  not  apply  as  there  will  be  no  off-­‐site  storage  and  the   variances  shall  not  expire.     Section  26.410  –  Residential  Design  Standards       Section  26.410.10  –  Applicability       26.410.010  General    A.  The  purpose  of  these  standards  is  to  preserve  established  neighborhood  scale   and  character,  while  not  determining  architectural  style.      The  intention  of  the   development  of  this  historic  property  is  to  renovate  the  existing  home  to  it’s  original   appearance  and  to  add  a  full  basement  under  it  and  preserve  the  carriage  house.    The   home  and  carriage  house  will  remain  in  their  historic  locations,  which  adds  to  the   streetscape  of  the  block.    The  relationship  and  transition  of  the  private  spaces  of  the   home  and  the  public  spaces  of  the  pedestrian  will  be  maintained.    The  applicant  has  also   offered  to  work  with  the  City  and  Amy  Simon  in  removing  the  non-­‐historic  evergreen   P512 IV.B. 802 E. Cooper Avenue, Suite 4 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 trees  from  the  West  side  of  the  property  as  part  of  the  full  restoration  work;  making  this   beautiful  Victorian  more  visible  along  the  streetscape.    Additionally,  the  applicant  would  like  to  preserve  the  large  yard  in  the  rear  of  the   property;  which,  very  likely,  was  the  original  way  the  home  was  developed  and  typical  of   these  Victorians.    The  floor  plans  attributed  to  this  home  did  not  include  a  long   extension,  connecting  the  home  to  the  carriage  house  as  was  shown  in  1904  on  the   Sanborn  maps.     B.2  The  proposed  development  will  remain  a  single  family  residence  that  is   within  the  Aspen  infill  area;  thus  all  the  residential  design  standards  shall  apply.      C.    We  are  seeking  a  development  order  from  the  HPC  showing  that  the   Residential  Design  Standards  have  been  met  for  the  restoration  of  the  historic  home   and  carriage  house  at  the  rear  of  the  property,  during  the  re-­‐development  process.       26.410.020  Procedures  for  Review    A.    A  pre-­‐application  conference  was  held  between  Amy  Simon  and  Kim   Raymond  regarding  this  project.    This  letter  addresses  the  issues  outlined  in  the  letter   sent  by  Amy  dated  January  26,  2015.    D.  Please  see  Section  26.410.40  for  the  details  of  the  specific  design  standard   variances  that  will  be  requested  of  the  HPC  for  the  completion  of  this  project.    There  are   a  couple  dimensional  variances  being  sought  regarding  the  exemption  of  garage  floor   area  from  the  FAR  calculations;  5’-­‐0  side  yard  setback  variance  for  the  existing  carriage   house;  and  the  guideline  to  have  sixty  percent  of  the  property  within  5’  of  the  front  and   side  yard  setbacks.    The  buildings  are  retaining  their  historic  locations.     26.410.040  Residential  Design  Standards    A.  Site  design  1.  The  existing  house  is  located  on  a  corner  parcel  of  a  city  block   comprised  of  two  original  City  blocks.  The  historic  home  will  remain  in  the  same  location   and  have  the  same  orientation  to  the  street;  with  the  front  door  facing  Bleeker  Street,   parallel  to  the  street.    2.  The  building  will  remain  where  it  is  located;  so  the  front  façade  and  the  Third   Street  façade  will  not  be  within  the  required  five  feet  of  the  setback  lines.    This  is  the   historic  location,  and  will  not  be  changed.    The  front  façade  is  20’-­‐6”  from  the  property   line  and  19’-­‐9”  from  Third  street.    3.  There  is  a  short  fence  currently,  and  the  applicant  is  planning  on  keeping  it,   as  it  is  in  character  of  the  Victorian  and  meets  the  code  requirements  for  fences.        B.1.  Building  Form  1.  Secondary  Mass;  This  Victorian  does  not  have  a  connected   secondary  mass.    There  is  an  existing  carriage  house  that  is  a  secondary  mass.    It  will   remain  a  free-­‐standing  structure.    2.  Subordinate  linking  element:  There  will  be  no  linking  of  the  structures.     P513 IV.B. 802 E. Cooper Avenue, Suite 4 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252  C.  Parking,  garages  and  carports  1.  This  property  does  have  an  alley  and  the   existing  carriage  house,  that  serves  as  the  garage  is  adjacent  to  the  alley.    The  issue   arises  from  the  overhead  door  facing  Third  Street,  instead  of  the  alley.    Since  this  carriage  house  is  historic  and  a  significant  example  of  the  way  these     carriage  houses  were  constructed  and  used;  the  applicant  does  not  want  to  change     anything  about  it.    Thus  we  are  requesting  the  variance  to  exempt  250  sq.  ft.  of  the   garage  from  the  FAR  calculations.              D.  Building  Elements  1.  Street  Oriented  entrance  and  principal  window.    The   property  sits  on  a  corner  lot  with  the  historic  house  facing  Bleeker  Street  as  it  was  built   in  1886.    This  historic  building  has  a  front  door  at  the  entry  porch,  which  is  less  than  10’   back  from  the  front  façade  and  does  have  a  principle  window  facing  Bleeker.      D1.a  The  entry  door  is  on  the  front  porch,  which  is  set  back  6’-­‐0  from  the  front   façade  of  the  home.    The  door  is  under  8’-­‐0”  tall  and  faces  Bleeker.   D1.b  Front  porches:  The  home  has  a  front  porch  that  is  open  on  two  sides;  6’   wide  towards  Bleeker  Street  and  6’-­‐1  deep,  towards  Third  Street.    The  porch  is  only  36   sq.  ft.    The  front  door  is  less  than  10’-­‐0”  from  the  front  façade.      D1.c  The  home  has  a  principal  window  in  a  “box”  shaped  element  on  the  second   story,  above  another  principle  window  at  the  main  level  on  the  front  façade;  meeting   this  design  criteria.        D2.  One  Story  Element:  On  this  historic  building,  the  porch  is  nearly  30%  of  the   front  façade.    The  only  issue  is  that  the  roof  is  an  extension  of  the  upper  level  roof.    This   is  a  prominent  detail  of  the  Queen  Anne  style  architecture;  and  will  not  be  changed.       So  the  single  story  element  is  not  really  single  story,  but  it  is  historic.     D3.a  Street  facing  windows  shall  not  span  between  9-­‐12’  above  the  main  floor   or  where  a  floor  may  typically  be  located.    There  are  no  windows  in  this  “no  window   zone”.    It  is  very  clear  where  a  second  floor  is  located  in  the  building.    D3.b  There  are  no  non-­‐orthogonal  appearing  windows  on  the  building.    D4.  All  the  light  wells,  for  the  home  are  located  behind  the  front  façade  of  the       historic  building.      E.  Context  1.  Materials.  E1.a  All  of  the  existing  materials  on  the  historic  house   will  be  cleaned  up  and  repaired  as  necessary  to  maintain  the  historic  character  of  the   existing  building;  the  materials  on  the  renovated  back  area  will  match  the  historic,  as  we     believe  this  will  be  a  renovation,  not  an  addition.     E1.b  The  palette  of  materials  will  be  the  historic  building  materials.   E1.c  Highly  reflective  materials  will  not  be  used  anywhere  on  this  project.   E2.  Inflection.    The  house  will  not  be  changed  in  scale  or  mass;  so  inflection  is  not   a  consideration  of  this  project.     Section  26.415  –  Historic  Preservation   P514 IV.B. 802 E. Cooper Avenue, Suite 4 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 Section  26.415.070  –  Development  involving  designated  historic  property  or  property   within  a  historic  district.   Section  26.415.070C  Certificate  of  appropriateness  for  minor  development    C1.    This  development  meets  all  the  criteria  for  being  a  minor  development:   a. The  new  construction  is  less  than  250  sq.  ft.  of  floor  area,  as  it  is  in  the   basement.    The  gross  area  is  1314  sq  ft;  but  new  FAR  is  110  sq  ft.     b. It  is  altering  less  than  3  elements  of  the  existing  building  in  the  restoration   work  of  the  Victorian.    The  application  proposes  changing  the  roof  on  the   single  story  element  at  the  rear  of  the  home  and  removing  the  doors  on  the   upper  level,  north  elevation;  as  part  of  the  restoration  of  the  home.       c. The  proposal  does  not  include  the  addition  of  awnings,  canopies,  or   accessory  features.    The  only  addition  is  the  flue  for  a  new  gas  fireplace.   d. There  are  no  “non-­‐historic”  portions  of  this  building.   e. The  proposal  does  not  include  any  street  furniture,  art  or  other  fixtures.     C2.  Please  see  section  26.304  above  for  the  general  application  information.   The  attached  drawings  shall  include  all  listed  drawings  and  requirements,   including  conceptual  materials,  and  3D  renderings  of  the  project.    See  Section   26.410  above  to  see  how  the  project  complies  with  the  residential  design   standards;  see  Section  26.415.110  for  a  detailed  summary  of  the  variances  being   requested.    We  will  comply  with  the  posting  and  mailing  of  public  notices  prior   to  any/all  meetings  to  complete  this  process.     Section  26.415.110  Benefits   Pursuant  to  this  section  of  the  Land  Use  Code,  the  applicant  is  seeking  certain   benefits  being  offered  by  the  City  of  Aspen  to  encourage  good  preservation  practices;   taking  advantage  of  the  preservation  tools  that  were  developed  to  help  owners,  in   response  to  the  tight  historic  preservation  controls  legislated  by  the  City.     This  section  also  states  that  no  affordable  housing  mitigation  shall  be  required  as   a  result  of  the  addition  to  the  historic  resource  on  the  original  lot.        A.    Lot  Split  no  lot  split  is  being  requested    B.  Increased  Density  This  project  is  not  increasing  density  on  this  lot;  it   will  remain  a  single-­‐family  home.     C1.      Variances  The  applicant  seeks  minor  dimensional  variances  for  setbacks  for   the  historic  buildings.    Being  on  a  corner  lot,  this  home  has  setback  requirements  from   both  streets;  Bleeker  and  Third.    We  are  requesting  a  variance  from  the  front  and  side   yard  setbacks  (the  home  is  set  back  too  far  to  meet  today’s  requirements)  The  house   will  not  be  moving,  so  we  are  seeking  a  variance  from  this  standard.    The  carriage  house  is  not  set  back  at  all  from  the  side  street;  thus  a  5’-­‐0  sideyard   setback  variance  is  being  sought  for  this  historic  structure.   The  only  other  variance  that  we  are  requesting  is  the  exemption  of  250  sq  ft  of   garage  floor  area,  because  the  historic  carriage  house  is  adjacent  to  the  alley,  but  not   P515 IV.B. 802 E. Cooper Avenue, Suite 4 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 accessed  from  the  alley.      Our  serious  intention  to  keep  the  historic  feel  of  the  entire   project,  not  just  the  home,  is  reflected  in  the  fact  that  we  are  keeping  the  carriage   house  as  the  garage  for  the  residence.    Because  the  carriage  house  has  historic   significance,  and  we  are  not  moving  it;  we  would  like  to  be  rewarded  for  that,  not   penalized.    We  do  not  want  to  crowd  the  property  by  building  a  new  garage,  adding   another  element  or  structure  to  the  property.       Please  see  Attachment  3  of  the  Historic  Preservation  Land  Use  Application.     C2a.    We  feel  that  the  small  variances  from  the  residential  design  standards   is  in  keeping  with  the  pattern  and  characteristics  of  the  historic  district  by  leaving  the     Victorian  in  it’s  original  location,  centered  on  the  lot  and  preserving  the  historic  layout   of  the  property.    These  setback  variances  are  being  requested  for  the  benefit  of  the   restoration  of  the  original  home.            D.  Parking  We  are  not  seeking  a  parking  variance,  we  are  providing  the  two   required  off  street  spaces;  one  in  the  carriage  house,  the  other  next  to  it.          E.  Conditional  Uses  We  are  not  seeking  a  conditional  use.     F.  Floor  Area  Bonus:  We  are  asking  that  the  HPC  grant  the  500  sq.  ft.  bonus     to  this  project.       1.  Please  consider  the  following:   a) The  existing  Victorian  is  a  very  good  example  of  the  Queen  Ann  style  of   architecture  and  we  will  finish  restoring  this  building  to  it’s  original   appearance;  determined  by  the  house  plans  on  file  with  the  National   register.    The  only  reason  there  are  variances  requested  is  because  the   Victorian  does  not  meet  the  setbacks  of  today’s  code.   b)    The  Victorian  is  the  key  element  of  the  property,  remaining  centered  on                    the  lot.    There  will  be  no  addition  to  the  house  except  the  basement;                    leaving  the  home  at  the  existing  elevation  above  grade.    There  will  only                  be  a  few  window  wells,  that  will  be  not  detract  from  the  character  of  the                  home  or  site.    c)      Using  photos  and  the  house  plans  on  file  with  the  National  Registry,  we  are                  restoring  the  back  of  the  home  to  what  we  can  determine  as  original;  and  we                are  keeping  the  carriage  house  as  a  garage  in  the  same  location.    d)    All  new  construction  will  be  below  grade.        e)    The  construction  materials  for  the  renovation  and  the  new  construction  will                  be  of  the  highest  quality  available.    f)      There  are  no  transitional  links.    g)    The  project  is  retaining  the  historic  carriage  house;  same  location  and  use.    h)      There  are  no  notable  historic  landscape  or  site  features  that  are  being    altered  or  saved.   P516 IV.B. 802 E. Cooper Avenue, Suite 4 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 F2.  As  outlined  above,  we  feel  that  we  are  meeting  all  of  the  criteria  to  be  considered   for  the  square  foot  bonus.    The  historic  home,  carriage  house  and  site  are  being   carefully  preserved  and  the  applicant  is  not  proposing  the  addition  of  new  structures  to   the  site  or  additions  to  the  home;  thus  a  true  renovation  of  the  entire  property.    The     request  for  the  additional  square  feet  to  create  a  TDR  is  to  further  limit  any  future   development  to  the  property.     G.  Exemption  from  GMQS  requirements.    This  project  is  exempt  from  GMQS  as  it  is     remaining  a  single  family  home  and  is  adding  subgrade  space  to  the  existing  home.     H.  Waiver  of  Impact  Fees.    As  offered  by  the  HPC  as  an  incentive/reward  for  good   preservation  practices,  we  would  like  the  fees  outlined  in  Section  26.610.100,  the     Parks  Development  Fee  and  the  TDM/Air  Quality  Fee  to  be  waived  for  the  renovated   Victorian;  pursuant  to  Section  26.600.030  Exemptions  for  homes  on  the  Aspen   Inventory  of  Historic  Landmarked  Sites  and  Structures.  We  are  not  seeking  any  further   fee  waivers.     L.  We  are  seeking  to  create  one  TDR  from  the  500  sq.  ft.  bonus;  thus  further  restricting   the  opportunity  for  further  development  on  this  property;  it  is  part  of  the  restoration   plan  for  the  property.     O.  Building  codes.  The  International  Building  Code  (IBC)  provides  for  flexibility  in  its   application  to  historic  structures.  In  addition  to  the  IBC,  the  City  has  adopted  the   International  Existing  Building  Code  (IEBC)  to  assist  owners  in  making  repairs  in  a   manner  that  minimizes  intrusion  into  the  historic  structure.    We  are  asking  for  this  code   to  be  available  to  us  as  we  get  into  the  renovation  and  addition  to  the  Victorian.     Section  26.535  Transferable  Development  Rights     Section  26.535.70  Transferable  Development  Rights   A  TDR  may  be  established  by  the  Mayor  if  the  City  Council  finds  that  all  the  standards     below  are  met  and  adopt  such  an  ordinance.      We  believe  all  the  standards  are  met:   9.    The  sending  site  is  a  historic  landmark  site  with  a  permitted  use  of  a  single  family   residence.    This  property  will  retain  a  single  family  residence.    This  property  is  also   registered  on  the  National  Register  of  Historic  places.   10.    The  sending  site  has  an  allowable  FAR  of  3240  sq.  ft.;  the  proposed  development  is   using  less  than  2740  sq.  ft.  This  leaves  500  sq.  ft.  with  which  we  would  like  to  create  two   TDRs;  to  remove  500  sq.  ft.  of  development  from  the  site.    Please  see  attached  FAR   calculation  sheets;  both  existing  and  proposed.   11.  There  are  no  non-­‐conformities  now,  nor  will  any  be  created  by  the  establishment  of     these  two  TDRs.   12.  The  request  for  the  establishment  of  TDRs  does  not  depend  on  the  granting  of  the   500  sq.  ft.  bonus.    The  zoning  for  this  lot,  R-­‐6  allows  for  3240  by  right.   13.    This  project  is  only  counting  legally  available  square  feet,  per  zoning  right.   P517 IV.B. 802 E. Cooper Avenue, Suite 4 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 14.    The  establishment  of  two  TDRs  will  reduce  the  allowable  FAR  for  this  lot,  as  a  deed   restriction,  to  2740  sq.  ft.  No  further  development  will  be  allowed  legally.         (3240  -­‐250-­‐250=  2740)   15.    A  real  estate  closing  will  be  scheduled  where  the  City  will  transfer  two  TDRs  to  the     property  owner  and  the  owner  will  deliver  a  recorded  deed  restriction  to  the  property     showing  the  reduced  allowable  square  foot  allowance.   16.    The  Property  owner  has  developed  building  plans  and  zoning  analysis  of  the   property  that  demonstrates  the  ability  of  this  property  to  be  a  sending  site.  Please     see  attached  documents.   17.    When  the  TDRs  are  sold  or  conveyed,  the  information  of  the  transfer,  including  the     certificate  number,  the  grantor  and  grantee  and  the  value  paid  to  the  City  within  5  days   and  will  be  recorded  with  the  Pitkin  County  Clerk  and  Recorder.     Section  26.575.020  –  Calculations  and  Measurements.    Please  see  attached  Floor  Area  Ratio  Calculations.    These  calculations  were  made   in  accordance  with  the  regulations  and  rules  of  this  section  and  Section  26.710.040  R-­‐6   medium  Density  Zone  District.       The  Floor  Area  for  this  parcel  is  3240  sq.  ft.  for  a  single  family  home  on  a  6000  sq.  ft.  lot.   The  current  measurements  and  calculations  per  this  section  have  been  used  in   the  calculation  of  floor  area  for  the  building,  including  the  subgrade  space;  and  the  Site   plan  addresses  the  front,  rear  and  side  yard  setbacks;  leaving  the  historic  structures  in   their  historic  locations.    The  elevations  show  compliance  with  the  height  limitations  as   described  herein  as  it  is  the  historic  home.    Please  see  attached  drawings  for  the  FAR   Calculations,  Site  plan  and  Exterior  Building  Elevations.    The  small  changes  to  the  existing  building  and  all  new  construction  (basement)   complies  with  the  definitions,  requirements  and  limitations  as  outlined  in  this  section.     Section  26.600  –  Impact  Fees  and  Dedications     Section  26.600.030  Exemptions.    The  Victorian,  being  listed  on  the  Inventory  of  Historic   Sites  and  structures  is  exempt  from  the  Parks  and  TDM  fees.         Section  26.710  –  R-­‐6  Zone  District;  Medium  Density    Please  see  the  Application  form,  dimensional  requirements  for  a  summary  of     the  dimensional  requirements  or  allowances  and  the  proposed  measurements.      Please  see  the  attached  Site  Plan,  for  showing  the  locations  of  the  historic   buildings  and  the  need  for  the  two  setback  variances  for  these  historic  structures.      Please  see  Attached  Floor  Area  Calculations  that  demonstrate  that  this  project  is   in  compliance  with  the  FAR  regulations  for  the  R-­‐6  zone  district.      In  Summary,  the  proposed  development  of  this  property;  renovating  the  rear  of   this  already  well  preserved  home  and  saving  the  carriage  house  comply  with  all   requirements,  allowances,  limitations  and  restrictions  as  outlined  in  Title  26  of  the  Land   Use  Code  as  described  above.    This  includes  the  request  for  small  design  standard   P518 IV.B. 802 E. Cooper Avenue, Suite 4 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 variances  for  the  existing  home  and  benefits  as  offered  by  the  City  and  the  Historic   Preservation  Commission  to  projects  that  are  demonstrating  excellence  in  preservation   efforts  to  save  our  historic  resources  and  the  heritage  of  Aspen.      We  feel  that  this  project  meets  all  of  the  criteria  and  design  standard  intentions   to  be  an  outstanding  Historic  Preservation  project;  especially  since  the  only  new  square   feet  on  the  property  will  be  subgrade  and  will  have  no  real  impact  on  the  look  of  this   Queen  Ann  style  home.    The  decision  to  not  add  a  new  structure  to  the  lot  or  home  was   intentional  for  the  full  restoration  of  this  exquisite  example  of  Aspen’s  history.         Thank  you  for  your  time  and  consideration  of  this  project.    We  look  forward  to  working   with  the  HPC  on  another  preservation  project.     Sincerely,         Kim  Raymond,  Principal   Kim  Raymond  Architects,  Inc   P519 IV.B. Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 1.0 5/19/15Plotted On:T I T T L E S H E E T / G E N E R A L I N F O ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C 0103 02 04 N 1 A7.1 LOCATION 1 A4.1 1 A5.1 PARCEL ID NUMBER: ZONING: SITE AREA: BLDG USE: OCC. GROUP: CONST. TYPE: CLIMATE ZONE: FIRE SPRINKLERS: LEGAL DESC'N: 273512401401 R6-Medium Density Residential 6000 sf. Residential #### #### #### #### 333 Bleeker Street ABBREVIATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEXPROJECT TEAMAPPLICABLE CODES PROJECT DATA ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS A 1.0 TITLE SHEET / GENERAL INFO A 1.1 SITE PLAN A 1.2 SURVEY A 1.3 FAR EXISTING A 1.4 FAR PROPOSED A 1.5 FAR PROPOSED ELEVATIONS A 1.6 NEIGHBORHOOD PICTURES A 2.1 EXISTING: LOWER+MAIN FLOOR PLANS A 2.2 EXISTING: UPPER+ROOF PLANS A 2.3 EXISTING: ELEVATIONS A 2.4 EXISTING: ELEVATIONS A 2.5 EXISTING: GARAGE A 2.6 EXISTING: SECTIONS A 3.1 LOWER+MAIN FLOOR PLANS A 3.2 UPPER+ROOF PLANS A 4.1 NORTH+EAST PROPOSED ELEVATION A 4.2 SOUTH+WEST PROPOSED ELEVATIONS A 4.3 PROPOSED GARAGE A 5.1 SECTIONS-PROPOSED A 5.2 SECTIONS-PROPOSED A 9.1 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: KITCHEN A 9.2 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: POWDER ROOM A 9.3 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: MASTER BATHROOM A 9.4 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: MASTER CLOSET A 9.5 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: BATH 1 + BATH 2 A 9.6 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: LAUNDRY ROOM A 10.1 EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVES - PROPOSED #### OWNER: ARCHITECT: GENERAL CONTRACTOR: STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: LIGHTING DESIGNER: ALL CODES REFERENCED ARE TO BE USED AS AMENDED BY THE STATE OF COLORADO AND LOCAL JURISDICTION. #### FAR (FLOOR AREA RATIO) 1. THESE DRAWINGS AND ANY ACCOMPANYING SPECIFICATIONS, AS INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF THE ARCHITECT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE PROJECT FOR WHICH THEY WERE PRODUCED IS CONSTRUCTED OR NOT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE NOT TO BE REUSED OR REPRODUCED IN ANY FORM OUTSIDE OF THE PROJECT CONTRACT WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE ARCHITECT. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO INSURE THAT CONSTRUCTION CONFORMS TO ALL FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL AND RELATED CODES AND PRACTICES. SKILLED AND QUALIFIED WORKMEN IN THEIR ASSOCIATED TRADES SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK AT THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF CRAFTSMANSHIP. 3. THE ARCHITECT WILL PROVIDE DETAILS AND/OR DIRECTION FOR DESIGN INTENT WHERE IT IS NEGLECTED IN THE DOCUMENTS OR ALTERED BY EXISTING CONDITIONS. 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS DEPICTED IN THESE DOCUMENTS AND SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, AND/OR CONFLICTS PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK. ALL DIMENSIONS ON STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS SHALL BE CHECKED AGAINST ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT AND ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK. 5. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. THE DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DRAWINGS. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING ALL TRADES UNDER THEIR AUTHORITY WITH DRAWINGS AND/OR SPECIFICATIONS. 7.  THE OWNER AND/OR ARCHITECT SHALL APPROVE ANY “EQUAL” MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, FIXTURES, ETC. PRESENTED BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUPPLY THE ARCHITECT AND/OR OWNER WITH SAMPLES OF ALL FINISH MATERIALS AND SHALL NOT PROCEED WITH INSTALLATION UNTIL THE ARCHITECT AND/OR OWNER ISSUES AN APPROVAL. ALL WORK MUST CONFORM TO THE APPROVED SAMPLE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FORWARD ALL REQUIRED SUBMITTALS AND VERIFICATIONS TO THE ARCHITECT WITH ADEQUATE TIME FOR REVIEW AS NOT TO DELAY THE WORK IN PROGRESS. 8. IF REQUIRED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT WITH A CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN PRIOR TO OBTAINING A BUILDING PERMIT. 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS TO THE ARCHITECT FOR WINDOWS, DOORS, CASEWORK, METAL DETAILING, STAIRS, FIREPLACE, AND ANY OTHER WORK NOTED IN THE DOCUMENTS. FABRICATION SHALL NOT PROCEED ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS UNTIL THE CONTRACTOR RECEIVES APPROVED SHOP DRAWINGS FROM THE ARCHITECT. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE APPROVED SHOP DRAWINGS. 10. THE DESIGN, ADEQUACY, AND SAFETY OF ERECTION BRACING, TEMPORARY SUPPORTS, SHORING, ETC. SHALL BE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STABILITY OF THE STRUCTURE THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL CONFORM TO ALL FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL O.S.H.A. REGULATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFETY AND CARE OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES UNTIL THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED. 11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REQUESTING BUILDING INSPECTIONS AS APPLICABLE TO THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING / RESIDENTIAL CODE AND LOCAL ORDINANCES. 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL OPENINGS THROUGH WALLS, FLOORS, AND CEILINGS WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL, AND LIGHTING DRAWINGS. REFER TO THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FOR ALLOWABLE OPENING SIZES / REQUIREMENTS IN STRUCTURAL MEMBERS. 13.  THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE STONE MASON’S TAKE-OFFS AND WILL ASSUME THE RESPONSIBILITY OF COORDINATING ANY ITEMS THAT REQUIRE CLARIFICATION DURING THE BIDDING PROCESS. 14. THE ARCHITECT WILL VERIFY IN FIELD ALL LIGHTING FIXTURES, SWITCHES, MECHANICAL GRILLES, REGISTERS, AND THERMOSTAT LOCATIONS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ROUGH-IN LIGHTING FIXTURES AND ILLUSTRATE SWITCH, REGISTER, AND GRILLE LOCATIONS PRIOR TO THE ARCHITECT WALK-THROUGH. 15. ALL EXTERIOR PENETRATIONS SUCH AS GRILLES, BOILER FLAPS, ETC. TO BE COPPER OR ENCLOSED BY COPPER FITTINGS. - 2009 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE - 2006 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE - 2009 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE - PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE CODE - PITKIN COUNTY BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION CODE - PITKIN COUNTY PROPERTY RESOLUTIONS OFFICE PHONE: CONTACT: KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. 0133 Prospector Rd. Unit 4102X ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2252 KIM RAYMOND / kim@krai.us 333 W. BLEEKER, LLC #### JST.JOIST VINYL COMPOSITION TILEVCT YARD WROUGHT IRON WOOD WITHOUT WITH WEIGHT WEATHER PROOF WAINSCOT WINDOW WATER CLOSET VERTICAL VOLT AMPERE VERIFY IN FIELD VAPOR BARRIER URINAL UNFINISHED TYPICAL TRANSFORMER TOILET THROUGH THICK THREADED THRESHOLD TELEPHONE TELEVISION OUTLET TUBE STEEL TOP OF WALL TOP OF SLAB TOP OF MASONRY TOP OF JOIST TOP OF FOOTING TOP OF CURB TOP OF BEAM TOP OF TELEPHONE MOUNTING BOARD THROUGH BOLT TONGUE AND GROOVE SYSTEM SYMMETRICAL SWITCH SUSPENDED STEEL STANDARD SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASS SQUARE INCHES SQUARE FEET SPEAKER SPECIFICATIONS SPACE SIMILAR SHEATHING SHEET SERVICE ENTRANCE SECTION SECTION SCHEDULE SELF CLOSING STAINLESS STEEL SKYLIGHT SHUT OFF VALVE SMOKE DETECTOR SOLID CORE REMOVE ROOM REVISION RETURN REQUIRED REINFORCED REFERENCE REFRIGERATOR RIGHT OF WAY ROUGH OPENING ROOF DRAIN OVERFLOW ROOF DRAIN LEADER RADIUS QUANTITY QUARRY TILE POWER POLYVINYLCLORIDE PARTITION POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT PREFABRICATED PERFORATED PORCELAIN PLYWOOD PLUMBING PLASTIC PLATE PLASTER PHASE PERPENDICULAR POINT OF CONNECTION PLASTIC LAMINATE PROPERTY LINE PRECAST CONCRETE OPPOSITE OPENING OVER HEAD OUTSIDE AIR INTAKE OUTSIDE RADIUS ORNAMENTAL IRON OVER HANG OUTSIDE DIAMETER ON CENTER NOMINAL NUMBER NAILER NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NON-CORROSIVE METAL NOT TO SCALE NOT IN CONTRACT MULLION METAL MODULAR MISCELLANEOUS MINIMUM MANUFACTURER MANUFACTURING MEDIUM MECHANICAL MAXIMUM MATERIAL MASONRY MARBLE MASONRY OPENING MALLEABLE IRON MANHOLE MACHINE BOLT LAMINATED VENEER LUMBER LIGHTING LIGHT LINOLEUM LINEAR LEAD LAVATORY LATERAL LAMINATE LINEAR FEET LIGHT EMITTING DIODE KNOCK OUT KILN DRIED KNOCK DOWN JOINT JUNCTION JUNCTION BOX INTERIOR INSULATION INCLUDE, INCLUSIVE IMPREGNATED INTERMEDIATE METALLIC CONDUIT ISOLATED GROUND IDENTIFICATION INSIDE FACE INSIDE DIAMETER INTERCOM OUTLET HYDRAULIC HOT WATER HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING HEATER HORIZONTAL HEIGHT HARDWARE HARDBOARD HANDICAPPED HOLLOW METAL HOLLOW CORE HOSE BIBB GYPSUM BOARD GYPSUM GALVANIZED RIGID TUBING GATE VALVE GRADE MARK GLUE LAMINATED BEAM GLASS GROUND FAULT INTERRUPTER GROUND FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER GARAGE GALVANIZED GAUGE GALVANIZED IRON FURNISH FOOTING FIRE PROOF FLUORESCENT FLOORING FLOOR FINISH FIRE HOSE CABINET FOUNDATION FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION FIRE ALARM CONTROL PANEL FABRICATE FIBERGLASS FLOOR SINK FACE OF FIELD NAILING FIRE EXTINGUISHER FLOOR DRAIN FLOOR CLEAN OUT FAN COIL FIRE ALARM EXTERIOR EXISTING EXHAUST EXCAVATE ELECTRIC DRINKING COOLER EVAPORATIVE COOLER ESTIMATE EQUIPMENT EQUAL ELECTRICAL NON-METALLIC TUBING ELECTRICAL METALLIC TUBING ELECTRICAL METALLIC CONDUIT ELEVATOR "ELECTRIC, ELECTRICAL" ELEVATION EACH EACH WAY END NAILING EXPANSION JOINT EXHAUST FAN EXPANSION ANCHOR DOOR DOWN DEAD LOAD DIMENSION DIAGONAL DIAMETER DEMOLITION DOUBLE DISHWASHER DOWN SPOUT DECOMPOSED GRANITE DRINKING FOUNTAIN PENNY COPPER CONTRACTOR CONTINUOUS CONSTRUCTION CONCRETE COMBINATION COLUMN CENTERED CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CLEAR CLOSET CAULKING CEILING CENTERLINE CIRCUIT BREAKER CHANNEL CUBIC FEET PER MINUTE CERAMIC CEMENT CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION CAMBER CABINET CERAMIC TILE CLEAN OUT CONTROL JOINT CAST IN PLACE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS CONCRETE ASBESTOS PIPE BRONZE BEARING BRASS BEAM BLOCKING BLOCK BUILDING BOARD BACK OF CURB BUILT UP BOTTOM OF FOOTING BOTTOM OF BOUNDARY NAILING BENCH MARK ANGLE AMERICAN WIRE GAUGE AVERAGE ASPHALT ANNEALED ALTERNATE ALUMINUM AIR HANDLER UNIT ABOVE GRADE ADDITION or ADDENDUM ACOUSTICAL CEILING TILE ACOUSTIC ASBESTOS-CEMENT BOARD ABOVE ACRYLONITRILE-BUTADIENE-STYRENE AGGREGATE BASE COURSE AIR CONDITIONING ABOVE FINISHED GRADE ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR ANCHOR BOLT AMPERES YD. W.I. WD. W/O W/ WT. WP WCT WDW WC VERT. VA V.I.F. V.B. UR UNF. TYP. TRANS. TLT. THRU THK. THD. TH. TEL. T.V. T.S. T.O.W. T.O.S. T.O.M. T.O.J. T.O.F. T.O.C. T.O.B. T.O. T.M.B. T.B. T & G SYS. SYM SW SUSP. STL. STD. STC SQ. IN. SQ. FT. SPKR. SPECS SPA. SIM. SHT'G. SH SES SECT. SCHED. SC S/S S/L S.O.V. S.D. S.C. RMV. RM REV. RET. REQ'D. REINF. REF. REF R.O.W. or R/W R.O. R.D.O. R.D.L. R QTY. Q.T. PWR. PVC PTN. PSI PSF PREFAB. PERF. PORC. PLYWD. PLUMB. PLAS. PLT. PL. PH or Ø PERP. or P.O.C. P.LAM. P.L. P.C. OPPO. OPNG. OH OAI O.R. O.I. O.H. O.D. O.C. NOM. NO. NLR. NFC NCM N.T.S. N.I.C. MUL MTL. MOD MISC. MIN. MFR. MFG. MED. MECH. MAX. MAT'L MAS. MAR. M.O. M.I. M.H. M.B. LVL LTG. LT. LINO. LIN. LD. LAV LAT. LAM L.FT. L.E.D. KO KD K-D JT. JCT J-BOX INT. INSUL. INCL. IMPG IMC IG ID I.F. I.D. I.C. HYD. HW HVAC HTR HOR. HGT. HDW HDBD. H/C H.M. H.C. H.B. GYP. BD. GYP. GRC GM GM GLB GL GFI GFCI GAR. GALV. GA. G.I. FURN. FTG. FP FLUOR. FLG. FL FIN. FHC FDN. FDC FACP FAB. F/G F.S. F.O. F.N. F.E. F.D. F.C.O. F.C. F.A. EXT. EXIST. or E EXH. EXC EWC EVAP. EST. EQUIP. EQ. ENT EMT EMC ELEV. ELECT. EL EA. E.W. E.N. E.J. E.F. E.A. DR DN. DL DIM. DIAG. DIA. or Ø DEMO DBL. D/W D.S. D.G. D.F. d CU CONTR. CONT. CONST. CONC. COMB. COL. CNTRD. CMU CLR. CLO. CLKG. CLG. CL or C.L. CKT. BKR. CH CFM CER CEM. CCTV CAM. CAB C.T. C.O. C.J. C.I.P. C.D. C.A.P. BRZ BRG. BR BM. BLKG. BLK. BLDG BD. B/C B.U. B.O.F. B.O. B.N. B.M. AWG AVG ASPH. ANL ALT. AL. or ALUM. AHU AG ADD. ACT ACOU. ACB ABV. ABS ABC A/C A.F.G. A.F.F. A.B. A SLOPE TO DRAINS.T.D. GENERAL NOTES FINISH WOOD WOOD STUD BLOCKING STEEL STEEL STUD FRAMED WALL BATT INSULATION OR PLYWOOD PLYWOOD OR GLU-LAM CONCRETE STONE CMU SAND GRAVEL GWB COMPACTED SOIL SPRAY-FOAM INSULATION RIGID INSULATION GRID LINE BREAK LINE MATCH LINE REVISION A9.1 ELEVATION MARKER SECTION MARKER DETAIL CUT DETAIL 1 A6.1 ELEVATION 100 A ROOM NAME 101 INTERIOR ELEVATION MARKER ELEVATION NUMBER SHEET NUMBER SECTION NUMBER SHEET NUMBER DETAIL NUMBER SHEET NUMBER SPOT ELEVATION DOOR MARK WINDOW MARK ROOM NAME AND NUMBER ELEVATION NUMBER SHEET NUMBER SYMBOL LEGEND DESIGN DEVELOPMENT REVISION #1 STRUCTURAL S 1.1 #### ELECTRICAL E 1.1 #### LIGHTING LP 1.1 SITE LIGHTING LANDSCAPING LA 1.1 LANDSCAPE PLAN P 5 2 0 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 1.1 5/19/15Plotted On:S I T E P L A N ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 A A B B C C D D 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 N F F 5 ' - 1 0 3 / 4 " 1 4 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 6 ' - 1 1 / 4 " 23'-1 1/4"20'-3 1/2"6' 6'-1 3/4"16'-11 1/2"13'-3"6"6'-6 3/4" 6'-4 1/2"16'-11 1/2" 6'-1 3/4"16'-11 1/2"13'-10 3/4"12'-4 3/4" 49'-4 3/4" 2 6 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 2 5 ' 6 ' 13'-2 1/2" 6 " 6 ' - 8 " 3 1 / 2 " 1 4 ' - 1 1 1 / 4 " 6 " 9 ' - 3 3 / 4 " 6 6 S O U T H E A S T N O R T H 2 3 4 1 M U D R O O M A D D I T I O N W A L L S E T B A C K 4 " P R O P E R T Y L I N E PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE P R O P E R T Y L I N E BRICK WALK TO MATCH EXISTING E X I S T I N G " C A R R I G E H O U S E " G A R A G E R E S T A U R A T I O N E F F O R T R E P L A C E N O N H I S T O R I C S L I D I N G D O O R W / O N E S W I N G D O O R N E W W I N D O W S : - T W O O N W E S T S I D E - T W O O N S O U T H S I D E EXISTING DITCH & DRAIN R E M O V E S H E D A D D M U D R O O M B L E E K E R S T R E E T THIRD STREET F A M I L Y R O O M L I V I N G R O O M P O W D E R C L O S E T K I T C H E N A L L E Y * REMOVE GRAVEL DRIVEWAY (ELIMINATE PARKING AND CURVE ) TO CREATE CONCRETE WALKWAY TO BACK CLOSET M U D R O O M F P CLOSET 1 1 3 3 4 4 5 5 2 2 D I N I N G R O O M P 5 2 1 I V . B . P 5 2 2 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 1.3 5/19/15Plotted On:F A R E X I S T I N G ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C W D R 1,110 sq ft1,110 sq ft 912 sq ft 24 sq ft 112 sq ft 330 sq ft existing SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 MAIN FLOOR SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 UPPER FLOOR SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 LOWER FLOOR SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 MAIN FLOOR-GARAGE EXISTING FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS LIVABLE MAIN LEVEL 1110 sq ft UPPER LEVEL 912 sq ft LOWER LEVEL MECHANICAL (EXEMPT)112 sq ft SUBTOTAL 2022 sq ft DECK MAIN LEVEL (EXCEMPT)35 sq ft SUBTOTAL 35 sq ft GARAGE MAIN LEVEL (330 sq ft- 250 sq ft= 80 sq ft 80 sqft/2= 40 sqft) 40 sq ft STAIRS (EXEMPT) 40 sq ft 2062 sq ftEXISTING FAR TOTAL ALLOWABLE FAR FOR SINGLE FAMILY FOR THIS LOT PER ORDINANCE 43 OF 2002 LOT SPLIT IS 2280 24 sq ft P 5 2 3 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 1.4 5/19/15Plotted On:F A R P R O P O S E D ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 886 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1,110 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1,314 sq ft SLIDING GLASS DOOR 330 sq ft 123 sq ft existing proposed SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 UPPER FLOOR SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 MAIN FLOOR SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 LOWER FLOOR NEW SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 MAIN FLOOR - GARAGE PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS LIVABLE MAIN LEVEL (main floor+mud room)1110 sq ft UPPER LEVEL 886 sq ft SUBTOTAL 2245 sq ft DECK MAIN LEVEL 35 sq ft SUBTOTAL 35 sq ft exempt GARAGE 330 sq ft STAIRS (EXEMPT 47 sq ft) 2575 sq ftFAR TOTAL LOWER LEVEL 126 sq ft (9.6 % FROM TOTAL 1314 sq ft, see page A 1.5 for calculation) ALLOWABLE FAR FOR SINGLE FAMILY FOR THIS LOT PER ORDINANCE 43 OF 2002 LOT SPLIT IS 2280 REQUEST FOR 315 sq ft BONUS; IF GRANTED THE ALLOWABLE FAR 2595 330 sq ft 2595 - 2575 = 20 sq ft EXISTING NEW 123 sq ft ALLOWED FAR P 5 2 4 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 1.5 5/19/15Plotted On:F A R P R O P O S E D E L E V A T I O N S ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C 397 sq ft59 sq ft 59 sq ft 47 sq ft 308 sq ft +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +27'-10" 303 sq ft 547 sq ft +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +24'-9" SITE -1'-9" SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 EAST ELEVATION FAR SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 SOUTH ELEVATION FAR SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION FAR SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 WEST ELEVATION FAR PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS LOWER LEVEL PERIMETER WALL WINDOW WELL TOTAL 1720 sq ft= 165 sq ft= 100 % 9.6 % P 5 2 5 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 1.6 5/19/15Plotted On:N E I G H B O R H O O D P I C T U R E S ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C P 5 2 6 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 2.1 5/19/15Plotted On:E X I S T I N G : L O W E R + M A I N F L O O R ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C A A B B C C D D 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 4 9 '-4 3 /4 " 6 '-1 3 /4 " 1 6 '-1 1 1 /2 " 1 3 '-1 0 3 /4 " 1 2 '- 4 3 /4 " 26'-3 1/2" 5'-10 3/4"14'-3 1/2"6'-1 1/4" 8 " 1 6 '-2 1 /2 " 8 " 8"8'-6 3/4"6"12'-6 1/4"8" MECH.CRAWL SPACE 66 SOUTH EAST NORTH 1 1 1 33 4 4 5 5 2 2 F R G A A B B C C D D 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 5'-10 3/4"14'-3 1/2"6'-1 1/4" 2 3 '-1 1 / 4 " 2 0 '-3 1 /2 " 6 ' 6 '-1 3 /4 " 1 6 '-1 1 1 /2 " 1 3 '-3 " 6 " 6 '-6 3 / 4 " 6 '-4 1 /2 " 1 6 '- 1 1 1 /2 " 6 '-1 3 /4 " 1 6 '-1 1 1 /2 " 1 3 '-1 0 3 /4 " 1 2 '-4 3 /4 " 4 9 '-4 3 /4 " 26'-3 1/2" 7'-2"3 1/2"15'-5 1/4" 66 SOUTH NORTH 1 PROPERTY LINE P R O P E R T Y L I N E P R O P E R T Y L I N E TO BE REMOVED EXISTING "CARRIGE HOUSE" GARAGE E X I S T I N G C A B I N E T EXISTING BATHROOM L A U N D R Y EXISTING BEDROOM KITCHEN STAIRS FORMAL LIVING ROOM DINING ROOM FAMILY ROOM ENTRY BATH 1 BEDROOM 1 EXISTING SHED W I N D O W W E L L W I N D O W W E L L W I N D O W W E L L 1 1 33 4 4 5 5 2 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 LOWER LEVEL PLAN-EXISTING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 MAIN FLOOR PLAN-EXISTING ** FOR EXISTING GARAGE PLANPLEASE REFER TO PAGE A2.5 FOR DETAILS** P 5 2 7 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 2.2 5/19/15Plotted On:E X I S T I N G : U P P E R + R O O F F L O O R ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C A A B B C C D D 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 665 '-1 /4 " 1 2 '-1 1 1 /4 " 4 9 '-4 3 /4 " 6 '-1 3 /4 " 1 6 '-1 1 1 / 2 " 1 3 '-1 0 3 /4 " 1 2 '-4 3 /4 " 26'-3 1/2" 1 1 33 4 4 BEDROOM 2 BATH 2 CLOS 2 BEDROOM 3 HALL BEDROOM 4 EXISTING PITCH 12:2 5 5 2 2 A A B B C C D D 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 66 SOUTH EAST NORTH 1 1 1 33 4 4 5 5 2 2 EXISTING PITCH 12:2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 UPPER FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 ROOF PLAN - EXISTING P 5 2 8 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 2.3 5/19/15Plotted On:E X I S T I N G : N O R T H + E A S T E L E V A T I O N S ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C D C B A EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN ORIEL WINDOW W/ SUN-BURST DESIGN AND FISHSCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN PORCH TRIM & FISH SCALE SHINGLE TO REMAIN EXISTING DOOR & PORCH PENDANT LIGHT TO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR MAIN FLOOR 0'-0" +24'-9" SITE -1'-9" BELTCOURSE TO REMAIN EXISTING ASPHALT SHINGLE TO BE REPLACED 5 EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN ORIEL WINDOW TO REMAIN FISH SCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN EXISTING ROOF PITCH 12:2 TO BE REPLACED +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +24'-9" +27'-10" -1'-9" SITE BELTCOURSE TO REMAIN EXISTING ASPHALT SHINGLE TO BE REPLACED EXISTING SLIDING DOOR TO BE REPLACED SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION-EXISTING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 EAST ELEVATION-EXISTING P 5 2 9 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 2.4 5/19/15Plotted On:E X I S T I N G : S O U T H + W E S T E L E V A T I O N ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C C EXISTING ROOF PITCH 12:2 TO BE REPLACED EXISTING "DOOR" TO BE RESTORED AS A WINDOW EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN FISH SCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN 4 EXISTING SOUTH WINDOWS TO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR MAIN FLOOR 0'-0" +27'-10" A B D EXISTING ASPHALT SHINGLE TO BE REPLACED 1 2 3 4 5 EXISTING ROOF PITCH 12:2 TO BE REPLACED ORIEL WINDOW TO REMAIN FISH SCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN FISH SCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN PORCH TRIM TO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR MAIN FLOOR 0'-0" +24'-9" +27'-10" SITE -1'-9" BELTCOURSE TO REMAIN EXISTING ASPHALT SHINGLE TO BE REPLACED SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 SOUTH ELEVATION-EXISTING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 WEST ELEVATION-EXISTING P 5 3 0 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 2.5 5/19/15Plotted On:E X I S T I N G G A R A G E ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C SHED TO BE REMOVED SHED TO BE REMOVED SKYLIGHT TO BE REMOVED EXISTING TRIM AND SIDING TO BE RESTORED AND MAINTAINED WINDOWS TO BE RESTORED AND MAINTAINED EXISTING WINDOWS TO BE RESTORED AND MAINTAINED 1 5 '-8 " SKYLIGHT TO BE REMOVED EXISTING TRIM AND SIDING TO BE RESTORED AND MAINTAINED SHED TO BE REMOVED SHED TO BE REMOVED SKYLIGHT TO BE REMOVED EXISTING TRIM AND SIDING TO BE RESTORED AND MAINTAINED SHED TO BE REMOVED SKYLIGHT TO BE REMOVED EXISTING WINDOWS TO BE RESTORED AND MAINTAINED EXISTING TRIM AND SIDING TO BE RESTORED AND MAINTAINED A B 25'6' 1 3 '-2 1 /2 " 4 ' 7'-2"3 1/2" 9'-3 3/4" SOUTH 2 3 1P R O P E R T Y L I N E TO BE REMOVED TO BE REMOVED EXISTING "CARRIGE HOUSE" GARAGE SKYLIGHTS ABOVE TO BE REMOVED EXISTING GARAGE DOOR TO BE RESTORED T H I R D S T R E E T GARAGE * R E D U C E G R A V E L D R I V E W A Y W I D T H (E L I M I N A T E P A R K I N G A N D C U R V E C U T ) T O C R E A T E W A L K W A Y T O B A C K EXISTING SHED EXISTING SHED 1N SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION EXISTING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 WEST ELEVATION EXISTING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 EAST ELEVATION EXISTING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 SOUTH ELEVATION EXISTING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" GARAGE FLOOR PLAN-EXISTING T H I R D S T R E E T ALLEY EXISTING GARAGE WINDOWS P 5 3 1 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 2.6 5/19/15Plotted On:E X I S T I N G : S E C T I O N S ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C 6'-1 3/4"16'-11 1/2"13'-10 3/4"12'-4 3/4" EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR EXISTING LOWER FLOOR -7'-2" EXISTING LOWER FLOOR 5 4 3 2 1 BEDROOM 1 MASTER BEDROOM FAMILY ROOM LIVING ROOM BEDROOM 3 BEDROOM 4 MECH. 5'-10 3/4"14'-3 1/2"6'-1 1/4" EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR EXISTING LOWER FLOOR -7'-2" EXISTING LOWER FLOOR A B C LIVING ROOM BEDROOM 4 6'-1 1/4"14'-3 1/2"5'-10 3/4" EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR EXISTING LOWER FLOOR EXISTING LOWER FLOOR BEDROOM 1 MASTER BEDROOM KITCHEN MECH. D C B A -7'-2" EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR EXISTING LOWER FLOOR -7'-2" KITCHEN CLOSET MECH. A B C D EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN 1 +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR EXISTING LOWER FLOOR -7'-2" +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR -7'-2" EXISTING LOWER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR 2 3 4 5 LIVING ROOM BEDROOM 4 DINING ROOM BEDROOM 1 MASTER BEDROOM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 SECTION 2-EXISTING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 SECTION 3-EXISTING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 SECTION 4-EXISTING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 SECTION 6-EXISTING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 SECTION 5-EXISTING ** PLEASE SEE PAGE A2.1 AND A2.2 THAT SHOW THE LOCATION OF SECTION 2 CUT LINE** ** PLEASE SEE PAGE A2.1 AND A2.2 THAT SHOW THE LOCATION OF SECTION 5 CUT LINE** P 5 3 2 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 3.1 5/19/15Plotted On:L O W E R + M A I N F L O O R - P R O P O S E D ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C W 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 C D A A B B C C D D 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 4 9 '-4 3 /4 " 6 '-1 3 /4 " 1 6 '-1 1 1 / 2 " 1 3 '-1 0 3 /4 " 1 2 '-4 3 /4 " 4 '-1 1 " 4 '-3 1 /2 " 9 1/2"8'-8"3 1/2"4'-6 1/2"3 1/2"11'-2 1/2"9 1/2" 9 1/2"2'-11 1/2" 3 1/2" 8'-5 1/2" 3 1/2" 13'9 1/2"9 1 /2 " 4 '-8 1 /2 " 3 1 /2 " 5 '-1 /4 " 3 1 / 2 " 5 ' 3 1 /2 " 9 '-1 1 /2 " 3 1 /2 " 7 '-5 1 /4 " 3 1 / 2 " 1 5 '-2 3 /4 " 7 1 /2 " 9 1 /2 " 1 1 '-1 0 1 /4 " 3 1 / 2 " 3 '-5 1 /2 " 1 6 '-1 0 1 /4 " 3 1 / 2 " 1 5 '-2 3 /4 " 7 1 /2 " 3 '-2 " 1 2 '-3 / 4 " 3' 6 '-8 1 / 2 " 1 2 3 4 IE-05 BATH 1 1 2 3 4 IE-06 BATH 2 1 2 3 4 IE-07 LAUNDRY SLIDING GLASS DOOR LAUNDRY MECHANICAL FAMILY ROOM BEDROOM 1 BATH 1 CL. 1 L I N E N SHOWER BENCH BEDROOM 2 CL. 2 SHOWER BENCH BATH 2 WC WC 66 SOUTH NORTH 1 1 1 33 4 4 5 5 2 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 A A B B C C D D 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 F F 5'-10 3/4"14'-3 1/2"6'-1 1/4" 2 3 '-1 1 /4 " 2 0 '-3 1 /2 " 6 ' 6 '-1 3 /4 " 1 6 '-1 1 1 / 2 " 1 3 '-3 " 6 " 6 '-6 3 /4 " 6 '-4 1 /2 " 1 6 '-1 1 1 / 2 " 6 '-1 3 /4 " 1 6 '-1 1 1 / 2 " 1 3 '-1 0 3 /4 " 1 2 '-4 3 /4 " 4 9 '-4 3 /4 " 26'-3 1/2" 6"6'-8"3 1/2"14'-11 1/4"6" 66 SOUTH EAST NORTH 1 P R O P E R T Y L I N E EXISTING "CARRIGE HOUSE" GARAGE RESTAURATION EFFORT REPLACE NON HISTORIC SLIDING DOOR W/ ONE SWING DOOR NEW WINDOWS: -TWO ON WEST SIDE -TWO ON SOUTH SIDE FAMILY ROOM LIVING ROOM POWDER CLOSET KITCHEN C L O S E T FP 1 1 33 4 4 5 5 2 2 DINING ROOM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 LOWER LEVEL-PROPOSED SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 MAIN FLOOR-PROPOSED ** FOR PROPOSED GARAGE PLAN PLEASE REFER TO PAGE A4.3 FOR DETAILS** P 5 3 3 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 3.2 5/19/15Plotted On:U P P E R + R O O F P L A N P R O P O S E D ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 A A B B C C D D 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 W 66 SOUTH NORTH 1 4 '-8 3 /4 " 1 2 '-1 1 1 /4 " 4 9 '-4 3 /4 " 6 '-1 3 /4 " 1 6 '-1 1 1 / 2 " 1 3 '-1 0 3 /4 " 1 2 '-4 3 /4 " 26'-3 1/2" 1 1 33 4 4 1 2 3 4 IE-03 MASTER BATH 1 2 3 4 IE-04 MASTER CLOSET GLASS WALL TV FIREPLACE MASTER BEDROOM MASTER BATHROOM CLOSET B E N C H TUB S T O R A G E DRESSER NEW PITCH 2:1 5 5 2 2 A A B B C C D D 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 66 SOUTH EAST NORTH 1 1 1 33 4 4 5 5 2 2 NEW PITCH 2:1 RESTORE ROOF WOOD SHINGLE (CLASS A) - 2:1 PITCH SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 UPPER FLOOR-PROPOSED SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 ROOF - PROPOSED P 5 3 4 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 4.1 5/19/15Plotted On:N O R T H + E A S T P R O P O S E D E L E V A T I O N S ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C 5 FAMILY ROOM FIREPLACE VENTILATION RESTAURATION EFFORT REPLACE NON HISTORIC SLIDING DOOR W/ ONE SWING DOOR EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN MAINTAIN ORIGINAL ROOF TRIMS AND DETAILS WOOD CLAPBOARD SIDING TO REMAIN TRIMS TO REMAIN ORIEL WINDOW TO REMAIN FISH SCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN * OPTION 1: FIREPLACE VENTILATION THROUGH ROOF AS REQUESTED BY HPC +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +24'-9" +27'-10" -1'-9" SITE RESTORE ROOF WOOD SHINGLE (CLASS A) - 2:1 PITCH RESTORE ROOF WOOD SHINGLE (CLASS A) EXISTING STONE TO BE REUSED AS VENEER ON NEW CONCRETE FOUNDATION BELTCOURSE TO REMAIN D C B A FIREPLACE VENTILATION LEVEL TO BE RESTORED TO HISTORIC ELEVATION EXISTING STONE TO BE REUSED AS VENEER ON NEW CONCRETE FOUNDATION RESTORE WOOD SHINGLE (CLASS A) DURING CONSTRUCTION LOOK AT HISTORIC FRAMING TO SEE IF THERE IS A WINDOW TO REPLACE EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN ORIEL WINDOW W/ SUN-BURST DESIGN AND FISHSCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN PORCH TRIM & FISH SCALE SHINGLE TO REMAIN EXISTING DOOR & PORCH PENDANT LIGHT TO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR MAIN FLOOR 0'-0" +24'-9" SITE -1'-9" BELTCOURSE TO REMAIN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 EAST ELEVATION PROPOSED SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION PROPOSED NOTE: EXISTING WINDOWS TO BE FIELD VERIFIED TO EVALUATE IF THEY ARE ORIGINAL OR NOT. ORIGINAL WINDOWS WILL BE KEPT. P 5 3 5 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 4.2 5/19/15Plotted On:S O U T H + W E S T P R O P O S E D E L E V A T I O N ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N CC ADD TWO NEW DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS NEW DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS W/TRIM TO MATCH EXISTING . FIELD VERIFY ORIGINAL OPENING DURING CONSTRUCTION EXISTING STONE TO BE REUSED AS VENEER ON NEW CONCRETE FOUNDATION RESTORE WOOD SHINGLE (CLASS A) * OPTION 2: PROPOSED FIREPLACE VENTILATION EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN MAINTAIN ORIGINAL ROOF TRIMS AND DETAILS WOOD CLAPBOARD SIDING TO REMAIN TRIMS TO REMAIN FISH SCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN * OPTION 1: FIREPLACE VENTILATION THROUGH ROOF AS REQUESTED BY HPC +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR MAIN FLOOR 0'-0" +27'-10" RESTORE ROOF WOOD SHINGLE 2:1 PITCH (CLASS A) A B D 1 2 3 4 5 EXISTING STONE TO BE REUSED AS VENEER ON NEW CONCRETE FOUNDATION RESTORE WOOD SHINGLE (CLASS A) TWO NEW DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN MAINTAIN ORIGINAL ROOF TRIMS AND DETAILS WOOD CLAPBOARD SIDING TO REMAIN TRIMS TO REMAINORIEL WINDOW TO REMAIN FISH SCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN FISH SCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN PORCH TRIM TO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR MAIN FLOOR 0'-0" +24'-9" +27'-10" SITE -1'-9" RESTORE ROOF WOOD SHINGLE (CLASS A) - 2:1 PITCH BELTCOURSE TO REMAIN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 WEST ELEVATION PROPOSED NOTE: EXISTING WINDOWS TO BE FIELD VERIFIED TO EVALUATE IF THEY ARE ORIGINAL OR NOT. ORIGINAL WINDOWS WILL BE KEPT. P 5 3 6 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 4.3 5/19/15Plotted On:P R O P O S E D G A R A G E ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C NEW MUDROOM VERTICAL SIDING ON GARAGE ADDITION NEW TRIM TO MATCH EXISTING EXISTING WINDOWS TO BE RESTORED AND MAINTAINED WOOD CLAPBOARD SIDING TO REMAIN TRIM TO BE MAINTAINED -1'-9" SITE 1 5 '-8 " MAINTAIN TRIM WOOD CLAPBOARD SIDING TO BE MAINTAINED GARAGE DOOR TO REMAIN EXISTING WINDOW TO REMAIN ALLEY -1'-9" SITE NEW MUDROOM NEW TRIM TO MATCH EXISTING VERTICAL SIDING ON GARAGE ADDITION EXISTING WINDOWS TO BE RESTORED AND MAINTAINED -1'-9" SITE NEW WINDOW TO MATCH EXISTING ON OPPOSITE END VERTICAL SIDING ON GARAGE ADDITION NEW TRIM TO MATCH EXISTING ADDITION SECTION NARROWER THAN EXISTING WALL ALLEY -1'-9" SITE A B C 25'6' 1 3 '-2 1 /2 " 9'-3 3/4" SOUTH 2 3 4 1 MUD ROOM ADDITION WALL SET BACK 4" P R O P E R T Y L I N E EXISTING "CARRIGE HOUSE" GARAGE REMOVE SHED ADD MUD ROOM T H I R D S T R E E T ALLEY * R E D U C E G R A V E L D R I V E W A Y W I D T H (E L I M I N A T E P A R K I N G A N D C U R V E C U T ) T O C R E A T E W A L K W A Y T O B A C K MUD ROOM C L O S E T 1 5 2 N SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" GARAGE FLOOR PLAN-PROPOSED T H I R D S T R E E T P 5 3 7 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 5.1 5/19/15Plotted On:S E C T I O N S - P R O P O S E D ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR LOWER FLOOR -11'-10" 5 4 3 2 1 LIVING ROOM KITCHEN FAMILY ROOM FAMILY ROOMBATH 2 MASTER BEDROOM MASTER BATH MASTER CLOSET BATH 1CLOSET 2 EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN LOWER FLOOR -11'-10" 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR +17'-11" ROOF 5 MASTER BEDROOM MASTER BATHROOM (BEYOND) BEDROOM 2 BEDROOM 1 4 3 2 1 -1'-9" SITE 6 3 /4 " EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN 1 2 3 4 5 +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR MASTER CLOSET MASTER BATH MASTER BEDROOM -1'-9" SITE -11'-10" LOWER FLOOR SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 SECTION 1 - PROPOSED SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 SECTION 2 - PROPOSED SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 SECTION 5 - PROPOSED ** PLEASE SEE PAGES A3.1 AND A3.2 THAT SHOW LOCATION OF SECTION 1 CUT LINE ON ALL FLOOR PLANS** P 5 3 8 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 5.2 5/19/15Plotted On:S E C T I O N S - P R O P O S E D ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C 5'-10 3/4"14'-3 1/2"6'-1 1/4" EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR -11'-10" LOWER FLOOR -11'-0" LOWER FLOOR A B C D LIVING ROOM MASTER CLOSET BEDROOM 1CLOSET 1BATH1 PORCH -1'-9" SITE 6'-1 1/4"14'-3 1/2"5'-10 3/4" EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR -11'-10" LOWER FLOOR D C B A HALLWAY BEDROOM 2 (TO BATH 2) CLOSET 2 MASTER BEDROOM -1'-9" SITE EXISTING MAIN FLOOR LEVELTO REMAIN +17'-11" ROOF +9'-11" UPPER FLOOR 0'-0" MAIN FLOOR LOWER FLOOR -11'-10" A B C D KITCHEN FAMILY ROOM LAUNDRY MASTER BATHROOM WC -1'9"SITE SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 SECTION 3-PROPOSED SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 SECTION 4-PROPOSED SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 SECTION 6-PROPOSED ** PLEASE SEE PAGES A3.1 AND A3.2 THAT SHOW LOCATION OF SECTIONS CUT LINE ON ALL FLOOR PLANS** P 5 3 9 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 A 10.1 5/19/15Plotted On:E X T E R I O R P E R S P E C T I V E S - P R O P O S E D ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C ROOF TO BE RESTORED GARAGE TO BE EXPANDED FOR MUDROOM REMOVE EXISTING SKYLIGHTS NEW WINDOWS TO REPLACE EXISTING DOOR FRONT VIEW WEST SIDE VIEW THIRD STREET A L L E Y P 5 4 0 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 LP 1.1 5/19/15Plotted On:S I T E L I G H T I N G ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 A A B B C C D D 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 N F F 1 1 1 1 S O U T H E A S T N O R T H W E S T 2 3 4 1 1 2 3 4 I E - 0 1 K I T C H E N 1 2 3 4 I E - 0 2 P O W D E R 1 2 3 4 I E - 0 8 F A M I L Y R O O M L I G H T A B O V E G A R A G E D O O R B L E E K E R S T R E E T THIRD STREET F A M I L Y R O O M L I V I N G R O O M P O W D E R C L O S E T K I T C H E N A L L E Y * REDUCE GRAVEL DRIVEWAY WIDTH (ELIMINATE PARKING AND CURVE CUT) TO CREATE WALKWAY TO BACK CLOSET M U D R O O M F P CLOSET D I N I N G R O O M 1 BELLAGION 16 1/2" BRONZE DOWN ARM LED OUTDOOR LIGHT ST. 4K7722 EXISTING LIGHT TO REMAIN SITE ELECTRICAL KEY P 5 4 1 I V . B . Scale: ISSUE 3 3 3 B L E E K E R 3 3 3 B l e e k e r S t r e e t A s p e n , C o l o r a d o 8 1 6 1 1 LA 1.1 5/19/15Plotted On:L A N D S C A P E P L A N ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N D I C AT E D B Y T H E SE D R A W I N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE w w w . K i m R a y m o n d A r c h i t e c t s . c o m t e l 9 7 0 - 9 2 5 - 2 2 5 2 e m a i l k i m @ k r a i . u s K I M R A Y M O N D A R C H I T E C T S I N C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 A A B B C C D D 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 N F F M U D R O O M A D D I T I O N W A L L S E T B A C K 4 " P R O P E R T Y L I N E PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE P R O P E R T Y L I N E BRICK WALK TO MATCH EXISTING E X I S T I N G " C A R R I G E H O U S E " G A R A G E RAISED FLOWER BED R E S T A U R A T I O N E F F O R T R E P L A C E N O N H I S T O R I C S L I D I N G D O O R W / O N E S W I N G D O O R N E W W I N D O W S : - T W O O N W E S T S I D E - T W O O N S O U T H S I D E EXISTING DITCH & DRAIN R E M O V E S H E D A D D M U D R O O M SPRUCE TREES ON 3RD STREET TO POSSIBLY BE REMOVED B L E E K E R S T R E E T THIRD STREET F A M I L Y R O O M L I V I N G R O O M P O W D E R C L O S E T K I T C H E N A L L E Y * REDUCE GRAVEL DRIVEWAY WIDTH (ELIMINATE PARKING AND CURVE CUT) TO CREATE WALKWAY TO BACK CLOSET M U D R O O M F P CLOSET D I N I N G R O O M PERENNIALS PROPOSED LANDSCAPE KEY SHRUBS MULCH OR BEACH COBBLE UNDERNEATH TREES CONCRETE WALKWAY GRAVEL EXISTING SPRUCE TREE SOD DECORATIVE GRASSES EXISTING ASPEN TREE EXISTING COTTON WOOD TREE EXISTING DITCH EXISTING LANDSCAPE KEY P 5 4 2 I V . B . EXHIBIT,-,- MAIN STRE J PROPOSED STREET TREES IN TREE LAWN —EXISTING CROSSWALK PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK POTENTIAL PUBLIC ART EXHIBIT AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACC E PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE r-r -- BIKE RACK w — LANDSCAPE ISLANDS >_ i krt SPECIALTY PAVING lie MAIN ENTRANCE O Fjj ,STAIR&LOBBY > al HOTEL ROOM ACCESS `^ x PRIVACY FENCE r - • 21 JCOVERED OUTDOOR DINING FIRE FEATURE Y ADA LOADING ZONE 3-PHASE TRANSFORMER�II - 3 4� 5 6 7 e s io ii 1z K 77 y OFFSITE ENHANCED GUEST PA KING PUBLIC AMENITY f VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING ROOFTOP POOL DECK TRASH,&RECYCLING ENLOSURE (SEE DETAIL) GRAVEL ALLEY �r MAIN LEVEL PLAN i OO m IA im I i � m ROOF DECK DETAIL As STAN CLAUSON,ASSOCIATESINC Illustrative Landscape Plan Rdmagining the ...,. 21 May 2015 {t NaN iftl$bM AV-Cd—do B.6u "'°"'s"� '�° '� Nfoll 'GibsonLodge STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATES INC 2015 AIN STREET — ---- - 1 PROPOSED STREET TREES IN TREE LAWN PROPERTY I F —EXISTING CROSSWALK • •� PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK POTENTIAL PUBLIC ART EXHIBIT AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACCESS i PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE { � `fix t BIKE RACK LANDSCAPE ISLANDS z� > e SPECIALTY PAVING cleELu L O MAIN ENTRANCE �I e ( STAIR&LOBBY ` EL ACCESS 7O i 3 HOTEL ROOM ACCESS PRIVACY FENCE ---v • • I p COVERED OUTDOOR DINING FIRE FEATURE F I — I ADA LOADING ZONE 3-PHASE TRANSFORMERI1 1 z 3 a 5 6 7 s s 10 11 12 ! OFFSITE ENHANCED GUEST PARKING I PUBLIC AMENITY VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING ROOFTOP POOL DECK TRASH,&RECYCLING ENLOSURE (SEE DETAIL) GRAVEL ALLEY p MAIN LEVEL PLAN MAO.� w �m •an pu �it�acae ,[o .wavy mmn.o..m y •�.,,�, rc.9^aolw..�n, tEo w. ,W.m.u. � 4 I I� •r.r.. ..wqMr.wu.rw ww.. �ca.n.y.M � r I ROOF DECK DETAIL STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATESme Landscape Lighting Plan Reimagining the cc Y im ...1.—., 21 May 2015 ~� 3 f � 1611 YN/9�5.33i L MollyGibsonLodge 9)y/9m-6i5 y.a@ycypl.nnM<am "w"'x+ 'M�'^ ®STAN CIAUSON ASSOCIATES.INC 2015 GRAVEL ALLEY PERTY LIN PERMEABLE PAVERS TYP. PROPERTY LINE oti SINGLE PHASE TRANSFORMER F T RIVEWAY GRASS PAVERS TYP. ————— ' PROPOSED TREE TYP. — — - ALTERNATING STAIRCASE I I I ROOF LEVEL TERRACE I I HOT TUB SECOND STORY OVERHANG I I , PLANTER I I I I I I CHIMNEY I I CHIMNEY I I I r SOD ole PERENNIAL GARDEN TYP. PR P EXISTING MAPLE TO REMAIN PROPERTY LINE FRONT ENTRY PAVERS ROOF TERRACE sr MAIN LEVEL ' STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATESiNC Illustrative Landscape Plan Reima inin the -d—P.—hi........... x ..... g g 0 21 May 2015 ARCHITECTS „,9N/Vz S— E 0/MI obaAoe.cn MollyGibsonLodge t )a/9x5.x3x1 )-9)0/9Yi�o.6x8 ,nlo�uapl�mmycum xep{vnr..�<xxn ©STAN CIAUSON ASSOCIATES INC 2015 GRAVEL ALLEY PROPERTY LINE ��PERMEABLE PAVERS TYP. PROPERTY_LINE _ , , I SINGLE PHASE TRANSFORMER �— T DRIVEWAY GRASS PAVERS TYP. PROPOSED TREE TYP. I 1 I I • ALTERNATING STAIRCASE ROOF LEVEL TERRACE I I SECOND STORY OVERHHOT TUB ANG i PLANTER i li d-i i I i CHIMNEY I CHIMNEY I � L—JI I I I I_' — _ I SOD I PERENNIAL GARDEN TYP. G'r. Pk PRT LW E�,— EXISTING MAPLE TO REMAIN PROPERTY LINE "—s FRONT ENTRY PAVERS g ROOF TERRACE -- - N MAIN LEVEL a1 ' STAN�CLAUSON ASSOCIATES mc Landscape Lighting Plan Reimagining the ..N�uusa.•Awncow,aoe,sn..g 21 May 2015 `� - �� MollyGibsonLodye ©STAN CUUSON ASSOCIATE6 INC 2015 a Y LEGEND)GRADING&EROSION CONTROL — — _ s ® N awssvwr m k J _ �•ame 4 S J OP —— BASIS OF ELEVATION _ y O Tq, aP EIEV�rIOH*HE rPN cmoP IiBPErI Z a ewuEa cwraa crux,wwlcH P;ensEo ipNOi mo.ealrMw=MP10N ixf 0 Z 3 Nv5 Surnx 4f xT. W � U Z SPOT ELEVATION LEGEND p 1 w.=emnx aEwu y �xe=`�eomP m w GMPHI[SGLE F5 x��l ulFm11U U U a IiH H[rl rox=.aawru =o=.mem rima.mrt mxlr.EoxxnonaE -� • �x.wr:ro.amwrearsmm.��x.,x.a Icm..nnhNow. u.E: slo-ls Call�rW 4& J491b. 1soP8 sir J EXHIBIT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE COD ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ��3 3 l�•J L¢Qk.R r Aspen, CO S DU ED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: VI IP 6%aplg, 20['5- STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: _Az"Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15)days prior to the public hearing on the day of , 20 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hgaring on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall•be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAS or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended,whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this day of�(Gt.vl , 20A,by PUBLIC E NOTICE WITNESS MY HAND DST� p ON RE:933 W.SLEEKER STREET- MINOR DEVELOPMENT,ON SfTE ATE OF COLORADO RELOCATION AND VARIAWCES NOTARY ID COLO 3001 T NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing My commission expire MY COMM will be held on Wednesday,May 27,2015,ata /26/2U17 meeting to begin at loo p.m.before the Aspen A/► ,�/�/I Historic Preservation 0 S.Galena ., Council Chambers,City Hall,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen to consider an application submitted by 333 Bleeker LLC,0133 Prospector Road,Suite 41028,Aspen, CO 61611,affecting the property at 333 W.Bleak- er NotaryPublic Street,Lot 1,Bleeker Street Partners Historic Landmark Lot Split,City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado,Parcel IDN2733-124-01-401. The appli- cant is requesting approval to construct a base- ment under the existing house and to make exteri. or modifications to the house and the outbuilding Setback,floor area and design variances will be reviewed. For further information,contact Amy Si. mon at the City of n Community Development 444 Dart27 emt,130 S. alone St.,Aspen,co,(s7°)CTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: amy.si mon•cilyofaspen.com. 11�A. W.I.P—r-muon Commission BLICATION Published in the Aspen Times on May 7,2015OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) 11164936) of Asps"Account ?VERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY AIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE. ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: . Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 20RECEV" ICj STATE OF COLORADO ) MAY-11 2015 ss. CITY OF ASPEN County of Pitkin ) Lids 1 _ � � l/yl1 (name,please print) being or representing anl-Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. 4 Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made-of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was poste at least fifteen(15)days prior to the public hearing on the � j day of 20_j5, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A pho ograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. 4Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community -- Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred(300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty,(30)days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAs or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. igna ure The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this day of 20_6 ,by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL KRISTIN PRIDE My commission expires: �o /0 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID#20064029379 My Commission Expires July 30,2018 *tm ic ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. X24-65.5-103.3 212 N SECOND ST LLC 320 WEST MAIN LLC 323 W HALLAM LLC 509 GUISANDO DE AVILA#201 2020 CALAMOS CT 101 S MILL ST#200 TAMPA, FL 33613 NAPERVILLE, IL 60563 ASPEN,CO 81611 330 WEST BLEEKER STREET LLC 331 W BLEEKER LLC ASPEN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 1000 POTOMAC ST NW STE 102 2727 ALLEN PKY STE 1400 A COLO NON PROFIT CORPORATION WASHINGTON, DC 20007 HOUSTON,TX 77019 311 W MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN RETINA SURGEONS LLC BLANK JEFFREY C,TRST 2 FBO BLANK JEFFREY C TRST 3 FBO 5014 WOODHURST LN 101 S MILL ST#200 2521 BROADWAY STE A MINNETONKA, MN 55345 ASPEN,CO 81611 BOULDER,CO 803044239 BLEVINS J RONALD&PHYLLIS M BLOCKER LAURA G BOOKBINDER FISHDANCE&DELANEY 310 W BLEEKER ST PO BOX 9213 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 164 LITTLE PARK RD GRAND JUNCTION,CO 81503 BRIEN ALICE BROWDE DAVID A CARINTHIA CORP 110 NEALE AVE 604 QUAKER RD 45 E LUPINE DR ASPEN, CO 81611 CHAPPAQUA, NY 10514 ASPEN,CO 81611 CHAMBERS PETE CHOOKASZIAN DENNIS CITY OF ASPEN PO BOX 220 1100 MICHIGAN AVE 130 S GALENA ST CABIN JOHN, MD 20818 WILMETTE, IL 60091 ASPEN,CO 81611 CLICK JANE CRETE ASSOCIATES LP CRETE ASSOCIATES LP 333 W MAIN ST#2A 1630 LOCUST ST#200 PO BOX 1524 ASPEN,CO 81611 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 BRYN MAWR, PA 19010 DAHL W ROBERT&LESLIE A DEWOLF MARGARET LEE TRUST 81% DH ASE LLC 83 PECKSLAND RD 223 W SLEEKER ST 2711 CENTERVILLE RD#400 GREENWICH, CT 06831 ASPEN, CO 81611 WILMINGTON, DE 19808 i DOUBLE D CONDO ASSOC DRATCH KATE TYCHER 2012 TRUST ELKINS LESLIE KEITH TRUST 300 W BLEEKER ST ROSELAND PROPERTY CO t BARBARA 1001 FANNIN#700 ASPEN, CO 81611 MASCERA HOUSTON,TX 77002 233 CANOE BROOK RD SHORT HILLS, NJ 07078 FISCHER SISTIE GUNGOLL CARL E EXPLORATION LLC GUNNING JANINE L 442 W BLEEKER 6 NE 63RD ST#300 PO BOX 11705 ASPEN,CO 81611 OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73105 ASPEN,CO 81612 GUNNING RALPH HOUSTON TRUST CO HUDGENS ROBYN PO BOX 11912 1001 FANNIN#700 PO BOX 570 ASPEN, CO 81612 HOUSTON,TX 77002 RANCHO SANTA.FE,CA 920670570 JACOBY FAMILY LP JANSS MARY TRUST JEWISH RESOURCE CENTER CHABAD OF 700 20TH ST 403 W HALLAM ASPEN VERO BEACH, FL 32960 ASPEN,CO 81611 435 W MAIN ST ASPEN,CO 81612 JOSEPH RUSSELL C&ELISE E KAPLAN DAVID P&MARCIA PRESS KARBANK 430 LLC 3257 INWOOD DR 9100 BURNING TREE RD 604 W MAIN ST HOUSTON,TX 77019 BETHESDA,MD 20817 ASPEN,CO 81611 KARP MICHAEL LEVY ROBERT I LORENTZEN AMY L 1630 LOCUST ST#200 2099 NW PINE TREE WY 125 22ND ST PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 STUART, FL 34994 HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 MARION BRANDON &ANGELA MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC NATHAN REVOCABLE TRUST PO BOX 8837 PO BOX 5109 718 N LINDEN DR ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81612 BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90210 PENSCO TRUST COMPANY FBO POTVIN FAMILY TRUST PRICE DOUGLAS PO BOX 173859 320 W BLEEKER ST PO BOX 220 DENVER, CO 80217 ASPEN,CO 81611 CABIN JOHN,MD 20818 RICKEL DAVID RISCOR INC ROSENTHAL DIANNE 275 GOLDENROD DR 3838 OAK LAWN AVE#1000 PO BOX 10043 LANDSDALE, PA 19446 DALLAS,TX 75219 ASPEN,CO 81612-7311 SEAL MARK SEVEN SEAS INVESTMENT LLC SHEEHAN WILLIAM J&NANCY E PO BOX 9213 1120 MICHIGAN AVE 10 GOLF VIEW LN ASPEN, CO 81612 WILMETTE, IL 60091 FRANKFORT, IL 60423 SILVERSTEIN PHILIP SNYDER GARY STILWELL REED&CLAIRE SILVERSTEIN ROSALYN 8324 BROODSIDE RD 191 UNIVERSITY BLVD#304 25 KNOLLS CRESCENT ELKINS PARK, PA 19027 DENVER,CO 80206 BRONX, NY 10463 TAD PROPERTIES LLC TEMPKINS HARRY&VIVIAN TOLER MELANIE S TRUST PO BOX 9978 605 LINCOLN RD#301 6400 S CLIPPINGER DR ASPEN,CO 81612 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139 CINCINNATI, OH 45243 TWIN COASTS LTD TYCHER DANA 2012 TRUST TYCHER JACK 2012 TRUST 433 PLAZA REAL#275 150 JOHN F KENNEDY PKWY ROSELAND PROPERTY CO/BARBARA BOCA RATON, FL 33432 SHORT HILLS, NJ 07078 MASCERA 233 CANOE BROOK RD SHORT HILLS, NJ 07078 WARBLE ERIC 0124 SPRING PL EDWARDS, CO 81632 � •f � - r ie r ,yt �4 �1 ,ow 2 %7F i PUBLIC NOTICE Date: weed . Lby_27 2015 nm e; 3 oo p,m Ptace,13os Gaiww st., AS Purpose )'PC mA cons+dqf an atpF ron �3l 333 Bleeker LLC,.0133 Proms, see a� ?Q'j. ,,Ccs 8-- . . 'rf°a'^9 this P-Dp ij► appy`_ Mquesh Nvw" to construct a ba$finent wndetr Vie_house_$.to " o Rood 9fKm to Howe d -SftQ X fimwwe b QesVnwsr cg"s ate requested. w Cj;kjtact Aske^ PUa'w''' . 970-429-2758, ' I 1111-1`in i •�ill� iFKtii'�liiii iu I _.I IIh.ir�l'�', :� - � �- cn It wo �. CD 00EL M _w ` 4 03 CD a • _ . _ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIilllllllllll �,�,'°", �,", - IIIIIIIIilll�llllllll IIIIIIIiilllllllll� �!IIIII _/ 5.c-Ji III111111u1111�, �I � _ I YI. - PO • lww IA LA t( -LISIHX3 i \1)•J 1 T ORIEL WINDOW (g W/SUNBURST E516N AND FISHSGALE RESTORE WOOD Z 5HIN6LES TO REMAIN 5HIN6LE(GLASS A) FPORCH TRIM t FISH . I v) 5CALE SHINGLE - TO REMAIN I, �7U ___—_____________ __ __ -_ __ _ __ _ -________-___-_____ LL 1. 1 k E OL, ; I (Y(� U D G u E_ ✓Y ------------- ROOF ROOFS, O ` E 10CN DURING CON5TRUCTION -- 0 in LOOK AT HISTORIC - EN --- FRAMING TO SEE IF THERE T IS A WINDOW TO REPLACE N .9'- ---------- -- - -` o.............. -------------------—--- ---- UPPER FLOOR - UPPER FLOOR 20 _ o �_ 30) FIRE LACE }' LACE VENTILATION EXISTING DOOR t PORCH • -OPTION 1(SEE PAGE A4.2) I PENDANT LIGHT TO REMAIN Mom II II �LEVEL TO BE RESTORED a41-No TO HISTORIC ELEVATIONEXISTING MAIN FLOOR FEI LE VELTO REMAIN �• Iiinnn0 n ,nnnnr)rinn I fill O•-O• I I P I I ! — OO - - - NE ------ MAIN FLO fift MAIN FLOOR SITE EXISTING STONE TO BE I I REUSED AS VENEER ON NE)N BELTCOURSE I I I CONCRETE FOUNDATION TO REMAIN I I � N ORTH ELEV o TION PROP05ED / G 1 FISH SCALE Y MAINTAIN ORIGINAL REM TOO REMAIN N ROOF TRIMS —_— AND DETAILS -OPTION 1: FIREPLACE VENTILATION THROUGH ROOF AS _ __ _ _____________________ •24 1 REOU:$TED BY HPG n n _ (SEE PAGE A4.2) —= I n nW _ RESTORE ROOF n ---- W00D5HIN6LE (GLASS A) O ,1,-11 J Y O —1, _ ___ -------------------------- — -- — — ——————————————————--- ROOF ROOF m O IL. III I � c ORIEL WINDOW M C 1 P � TO REMAIN co M 42) RESTORE ROOF L L ,I - - WM M n '^ WOOD SHINGLE LJ OOD CLAPBOARD Q `// (GLASS A)-2:1 PITCH SIDING TO REMAIN Z UPPER FLOOR UPPER FLOOR \� Q/ ■ ❑ FAMILY ROOM FIREPLACE J BELTGOURSE p VENTILATION-OPTION, W TO REMAIN . . J q (SEE PAGE A4.2) DATE ISSUE Q EXISTING MAIN FLOORHUTH L TRIMS TO REMAIN w LEVELTO REMAIN ` MAIN FLOOR I MAIN FLOOR LL SITE REST ATION EFFORT REPLA1..1- I I CE I I I I 1 I r -Not TORIC GLIDING I (-------- I I r------- 1 I i I I DOdMµ'V/ONE 1 I I I 1 1 1 I NEW FOUNDATION FOR PORCH I5WINCr DOOR Scale: AS NOTED TO BE CONCRETE I I I I I I I I 1 I I I NOTE: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -�-®- EXISTING WINDOW5 TO BE FIELD I I j I I I I j I I I T THE ASO E oiMENeo"Doff EXISTING STONE TO BE REUSED I I I I I _______I I I I NOT MEASURE ONE iNOe 1 i'! _______ I I BEEN Ewunoio on REDICED VERIFIED TO EVALUATE IF THEY AS VENEER nN NGW rE REUSED —————— E—T1NGNIW¢EG.A Es + ARE ORIGINAL OR NOT. A"ECT _ ORIGINAL WINDOkX5 WILL BE KEPT. ��AST ELEVATION PROPOSED �— u A 4.1 0 rnaua oa snnrs 7 ^ ^ TO SHINGLES /�. D •OPTION 1: TO REMAIN FIREPLACE VENTILATION U a I—I — THROUGH ROOF AS 7 REQUESTED BY HPG PVltn L __ ___ T-1-11n 1�— min. RN I I Rml nasning I MAINTAIN OR161NAL ROOF TRIMS AND DETAILS U o W � Fppaep F E to RESTORE WOOD O L F4 SHINGLE(GLASS A) supportplatertez I UY in SMov� U E Fireatap Q wY ROOF I ,, O L C ❑ ❑ NEW DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS W/TRIM TOEI Z Q Q) MATCH EXISTING ---------------------VERIFY ORIbINAL "- ---""-""" ---------- OPENIN6 DURIN&CONSTRUCTION 17 Elb 90° ow 0 C N uo Ln O I WOOD CLAPBOARD E N N SIDINTO REMAIN TRIMS TO REMAIN Flpan 10L Rear vent Roofnmw d trading(1 9(r band). N Q�N U RFLooR *;E;FLOOR OPTION 1 Y0 •OPTION 3: l . FLUE THROUGH ROOF G 3 m ❑ ■ . ❑ ❑ ❑ PROPOSED FIREPLACE VENTILATION aL 3 ADDTWO p RESTORE ROOF Section 33: Installing a Wall Mounted Direct DOUBLE t t t t t WOOD Vent Termination SHINGLE WINDOWS 2:1 PITCH(GLASS A) eieanc•Tlo.e NnE TIE eRo:ERTr NNo This section appliestoinstallations wherethedirectventterination EXI5TIN6 MAIN FLOORMo wwi NeTIeN EE UEEooNu°rawE"'Nos" r REMAIN be wall mounted. LEVELTO REMA "0A'EEr"MV OMmA10"'o"""r an JI' onerelw:e Installation of Termination with built in frame NE°"`N nE.N:o�Ma."MDo�w°1N1w.'cR`TER,��. ^"�+s wa�T ro TION a THE ATermnduring framing with Frame installed duhaming of astmdtae. MAIN FLOOR �"TEa wIUR TocorTeNEiME�rrr rtEwoR. 1.Frame the termination opening lo11'x 11'F 4b . 2.Lhsell"A" sheathing b the structure framing. 3. Fasten the lennnation to the sheathing using a mnmum d 4 screws. I NEW FOUNDATION FOR PORCH TO BE CONCRETE Framing, I Extwior /Fastening Ffsl x re. 5OUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED sneamig maemun4-screws J xALe:1/4' PTO4F(5-/e') II- Timitetbn �\ Fiptus tl.ktehM1gaF'!D-F tsmrination. (� T—N F15HSGALE / OPTION2`' �Tj FLUE THROUGH WALL SGALE SHINGLES SHINGLES TO REMAIN TOREMAIN —_-- ----__------_ .3'1'-10" .34-9" RESTORE WOOD SHINGLE(GLASS A) N MAINTAIN ORIGINAL W ROOF TRIMS AND DETAILS Y W ` CO VVVAX ILI O 0.1 .1 ROOr-F — ------------------ m °'o WOOD CLAPBOARD ROOF M m U SIDINb TO REMAIN ORIEL WINDOW TRIMSTOREMAINM N TO REMAIN D M (`') to EjT j RESTORE ROOF O L WOOD 5HIN6LE L •9'-11" (GLASS A)-3:1 PITCH .9-11" r UPPER FLOG ——————————————— FLOOR EXISTING STONE TO Ill PORCH TRIM o REUSED AS VENEER ON NEW J TO REMAIN CONCRETE FOUNDATION w ❑ ❑ e e e NEW FOUNDATION FO"C-H DATE ISSUE TO BE CONCRETE ELTGOURSE 0 TO REMAIN ��11 MAIN FLOOR \� Ilk 1-q. LOOR �ON SITE L L I I I a EXI5TIN6 i I MAIN FLOOR Scale AS NOTED ) WE5T ELEVATION PROPOSED --�.� `/J SCALE: 1/4" - 1'-O" o ooEE w 4 NOT RE ONE INC.Ih•I AEE«.rnr.T.e wtwm it. EN ENE�ROEO OR RE.Es.CE. NOTE: rECnNONIwFLm9LKEs + 2 EXISTING WINDOWS TO BE FIELD � VERIFIED TO EVALUATE IF THEY �.L A O ARE ORIGINAL OR NOT. ORIGINAL WINDOW5 WILL BE KEPT. RwMao SrzT 5 0 urrr■rr■�r■rrr■rrrrrrr■�r■rrr■rrrrrrr.rrr.rrr■�rr� �■■rrrr�■rrr.r�■rrr.rrr■■r+.rrr■rrr�rrr■rrr■r�■rrr rrr■rrr■+rrrrrr■rrr■rrr■+rr■rrr■rrr■r�rrrrr■rrr■rrr■i +rilrrirrriliirirrilr■rr■■rr■r•rrr■rr■►.r♦mom rrr■r■.■rrr■rr■r■rr �■rr.■■r•.r■.rrr.■r■��r■rrr■rr■■rr■rrr■rrr■r.r■r■r■rrr■rrr■r■r■■.r■rrn ■ter■rrr■rr■rr■�.ri�r■■rr■■rr■r�rrrrr■rrr■rr■rrrrrrr■■,�■■r■■rrr■rrrnr ■r■rrr■rrrr.,■r■rr■rrr ■ren■rr■�■r�r.�.■�r■�■rr■n�■■�r■�■■rri —_ _ ■rrr■ rrirrr■rrrrrr.rrru ■r■ ■rrrrrrr■■.rr■rr■rw r■ r■rrr■rr■rrrn.rr� — ,No ■rrrrr�■rrr.r�■rrr - irr■r.r�rrr+.rr■■r.rrrrrrrr■rrr.wr■rrrrrr■rrrrrr■�rrrrrr�r■r■r■ir■rri rrrrrrr■�■■�.r■rrr■ie.rrrrr.nrrr■r.r■irr■r.■.rrrrrrr■r.rr■rr■rrrrr.nrrr \ p■rrr r r•■r r■r r•■rr■rrr■r rr,.r■rrrr i;r■rrr..■r■rrrrr�rrrrr■.■r■rrr.r•rri �■rrrrrrrrn.■.rrrr TIM . I ,r - •s.:::' 1111 � I ,r - iiiii � � _, � • � ' rr■rrr■rrr■rrr■�r.rrr■rra.rrr■rr.rrr MOMr.rMO r., nrrr■rrr.rr+■rrr.rrr■rr■r�+■rrr.rrr■r■r■rrr■r■r■rry rrr■rrr■rrr�rrr■rrr■rrr■rrrarrrrrrr■rrr■rrr■rrr■rrr■i---•----- r■rr■■■rr■r.rrr■rr.■■rr■►wrr 0 moo ■rr■�rrr•■rr.rrrrr■rr■■`iri�rii i ■rrrrrrrr+r■rrrr+rrrrrr+r�rrrrrrrrwrrmr■r•r■rrr,r■rr■n�r■�rn■■rr ■■■rrr■rr■rr,■rrr■■rrr■rrrr+�■rrrr■rrr■rr■rrr■rrrr■rirrr■rr■rr.rrr.r■rrr� ■rrrrrr.■rrr:�rrrrr■rr♦■■.tray■rrr■rrr.rrr`rrrrirr■rrr■rr■r�■rr■r■r .r■rrr■r•r■rr\.r•r■rrr.r•r■.r��.rrrrrrr■r•rrrrrrrrr■mrrr.rrr■rr■r■�■■■r1 ■rrr.r�.■■rr■r■■r♦■rrrrrrr■■,`■rrr■r ..■rr■r■rrrrr■rrr■ir■rr■r�r■r rr.rrrrr.rrrrr■rrr■rrr■�rrrrrr�r■rr■rrrrrr■�r.i rrrrrrr■r.rrrr■rrri i■■rr■rrr■rrr■rrr.rrrrrrr■rrrrrrv■rrrrrrr.rrr■r�.rrri-W-1 rr.ir■�rr■ rrr.rrr■rrr■rrr.r•r■rrr■rrrrrrr■r•rrrrr■rrr.rrr■�r.nrrr■rr•■rrr■rr•■rrr n■rrrrrr■rrr.rrvrrrrrrr■rrrrrr,■rrrrrr.■rrrrrrr■r.u.■■ON nommomommomi r■r■�■n.r■�■u rrr■rrr■rrr■wr..�r■wr■rrr■wr.■�r■rrr■rrr■rrr.�r■i■rrrrr�■■rr.r�■rrr �1 '1 I Moll 4 ; 111111 © 0 � o y Low II�� _ •REMOVE GRAVEL DRIVEWAY (ELIMINATE PARKING AND CURB)TO SPRUCE TREES ON 3RD STREET EXI5TING DITCH CREATE CONCRETE WALKWAY TO THIRD STREET TO POSSIBLY BE REMOVED 4 DRAIN u BACK Z - - ------ ----- ----------------- --- ----------------------------------------- -- W - � E IOL u� � � E �Y p � D z� v 0 0ul PROPERTY N LINE Q >N N Ern II EUONYMOI/B �Y YI O h I r 3 m I 3— I Y v 3� II I �i u' I .I. c j mp pp R� 9 I JUNIPER rn II 11 _ 1 I �• r W D �6� cRRC N O II II AG T JJNIPER LA-1 BARBERRY rn 717 n f 0 � ILL-�JJI I rn I 01 17 m I.Oz _ L BRICK WALK TO MATCH EXISTIN G ti m _ rn Ln� rn r PROPOSED DA v; GL�sET cuBBIEs { Z,� m 0; LANDSCAPE KEY W o ��I 0 0 0 Y o'� ❑ o— v m - IPA �'3�< ' DECORATIVE W O O A to GRASSES W 'D 0 m PERENNIALS J O @ O X O UB - S S r -� �__i m co M r�i MULCH OR BEACH GOBBLE Q -EST-T-T- t9 UNDERNEATH TREES �1 11 I 1 I I I I I I I I �-1-1 t-i t HI-i }}1�1 U CONCRETE WALKWAY -.. _ - �\ .-': - GRAVEL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 III I �ttt�Hl-JJ EUONYHOUS � '- - JUNIPER I L 5 LAG , I DATE ISSUE I . ... : ]iV�R 1= Ei R :w a z rn � vl - 9' - w Z b - EXISTING w LANDSCAPE KEY D5 E J I A NOTED Sca e S PROPERTY LINE EXISTING SPRUCE TREE u 1 LL EXISTING ASPEN TREE Q EXISTING COTTON /1 --— WOOD TREE LA 1 .1 Q EXISTING DITCH J U Z 51TE ELECTRICAL KEY •REMOVE GRAVEL DRIVE^AY (ELIMINATE PARKING AND CURB)TO Ul7 GREATS CONCRETE YJALKNI BACK THIRD STREET ❑ EXISTING LIGHT E'; TO REMAIN ° KICHLER # 9040BK Q r BLACK SALISBURY Z COLLECTION LIGHTE N UO mO 19" OUTDOOR > >N m FROSTED GLASS �� WALL LIGHT �Y 3 2 ER DISTRESSED II I II 4,IRN. II I II Ir�iow.*fu��EaEap���p I COP ER I CIFICAT—A RE TIE PROP.RTI AND ENE GY STAR 9 1/2" ED , HIG WALL LIGHT TO1. II I STYL E#53726 I I I I I, I I TIC, II II II II W IIII �- ---- I--- --- ----------------- 1 - --- 1 D rn p �I � II i i ❑� � I I rn I I ❑ � III I rn u c Ar u I tlp tl 0< cLoeer w cD A 00 w I ; mI LLJ _ � rn co II M I ® > rn ,I GL SET GUD6iE I j ° A> U L.E M a r I Q r I rn - -- — — — $3 ------------ -------------- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 �t6664_IJJdd� DATE ISSUE --_-_-_-_-_-_ II II I I V Scale: AS NOTED Z L N A W N r 1NN ABOVE Dl0WNN.lON DOE. T ENfiURf ONE INCH jt'� .L EK I ENLARGED TNR OR WILL CED OR REDUCED /f1 AFFECT—N.LWRfD 9CNE6 V LP 1 .1 w� RgWU(M 5'21115 )