Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20150610 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING June 10, 2015 5:00 PM City Council Meeting Room 130 S. Galena St. 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. SITE VISITS A. Please visit 411 E. Hyman on your own. II. INTRODUCTION (15 MIN.) A. Roll call B. Approval of minutes C. Public Comments D. Commissioner member comments E. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) F. Project Monitoring G. Staff comments Request for Referral comment regarding Aspen Historical Society Subdivision and TDRs Request for feedback on proposed parameters for future HPC worksessions Request for feedback on Community Development Department work program Request for Referral comment regarding proposed rezoning of 540 E. Main Street property H. Certificate of No Negative Effect issued I. Submit public notice for agenda items III. OLD BUSINESS A. None IV. NEW BUSINESS A. 411 E. Hyman - Major Conceptual Development, Conceptual Commercial Design, Demolition, Growth Management, Mountain View Plane, PUBLIC HEARING (5:50) B. 110 E. BLEEKER STREET- Final Major Development, Continue Public Hearing to July 8th V. ADJOURN (7:00) Next Resolution Number: Resolution #20, 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. C:\Program Files (x86)\Neevia.Com\Document Converter\temp\6906.doc 6/3/2015 HPC PROJECT MONITORS- projects in bold are under construction Nora Berko 332 W. Main 1102 Waters 1006 E. Cooper 100 E. Main 417/421 W. Hallam 602 E. Hyman 61 Meadows Road ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Bob Blaich Lot 2, 202 Monarch Subdivision ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Jim DeFrancia 435 W. Main, AJCC 420 E. Cooper 420 E. Hyman 407 E. Hyman Rubey Park Sallie Golden 206 Lake 114 Neale 514 E . Hyman 212 Lake 400 E. Hyman 517 E. Hyman (Little Annie’s) Hotel Aspen Gretchen Greenwood 28 Smuggler Grove ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Willis Pember 204 S. Galena Aspen Core 514 E. Hyman 120 Red Mountain 233 W. Hallam 101 E. Hallam 407 E. Hyman Patrick Segal 204 S. Galena 623 E. Hopkins 701 N. Third 612 W. Main 206 Lake 212 Lake Holden Marolt derrick 333 W. Bleeker John Whipple Aspen Core 201 E. Hyman 549 Race 208 E. Main 420 E. Cooper 602 E. Hyman Hotel Aspen 610 E. Hyman 301 Lake Needed: 232 E. Bleeker and 609 W. Smuggler P1 II.F. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director RE: 620 W. Bleeker, Wheeler/Stallard House - Aspen Historical Society – Subdivision Referral MEETING DATE: June 10, 2015 APPLICANT /O WNER : Aspen Historical Society REPRESENTATIVE : Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning LOCATION : 620 W. Bleeker Street CURRENT ZONING & USE Located in the Medium Density Residential (R-6) zone district PROPOSED LAND USE : The Applicant is requesting to memorialize the use of the arts, cultural and civic use of the existing museum property via Conditional Use, subdivide the property to create two lots, request a dimensional variance for a setback requirement, and establish Transferable Development Rights on the newly subdivided lot. STAFF RECOMMENDATION : Staff recommends that the Historic Preservation Commission provide referral comments on the subdivision request to City Council. Vicinity/zone district map of the site BACKGROUND: The Aspen Historical Society (AHS) owns the Wheeler/Stallard Museum at 620 W. Bleeker Street. The property, which was donated to AHS in 1969, is comprised of all of Block 23 and the alley with the exception of lots H and I. The property contains 53,400 sq. ft. and is located in the Medium Density Residential (R-6) zone district. It is bordered by Bleeker Street, 5 th Street, Hallam Street and 6 th Street. The property was designated a historic landmark in 1973 and is on the National Register of Historic Places. P2 II.G. PROJECT SUMMARY : The Applicant requests to formally memorialize the nonprofit use of the property as a museum. Although the property has operated as a museum since 1969, a conditional use has never been granted by the city for the arts, cultural, civic use. Conditional Uses are “those land uses which are generally compatible with the other permitted uses in a Zone District, but which require individual review of their location, design, configuration, intensity, and density in order to ensure the appropriateness of the land use in the zone district.” The Applicant also requests approval to subdivide the current property for the purpose of creating one additional lot. The new lot is proposed to be 9,000 sq. ft., located at the northwest corner of the property. The remaining, fathering parcel is proposed to contain 44,400 sq. ft. of land as well as the museum and the archival building. Due to the proximity of the existing museum to the proposed new lot line, a variance from the minimum required side yard setback is necessary. Finally, the Applicant proposes to establish 12 TDRs from the newly created lot as well as develop a duplex on it sometime in the future to house museum employees and guests. AHS has offered to prohibit any fencing between the lots and maintain access to both lots via the existing driveway off of W. Hallam Street as part of the application. HPC would conduct design review for any future structures. Land Use Referral: As a historic resource and a significant estate style property in the West End, Staff is requesting that the Commission provide a referral to City Council with regard to the proposed lot split and creation of the new lot. Specifically, Staff asks that the Commission comment on the appropriateness of the proposed location and size of the new lot considering the existing context. P3 II.G. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner RE: Request for feedback on proposed parameters for future HPC worksessions DATE: June 10, 2015 SUMMARY : On June 22 nd , City Council is scheduled to consider adoption of an Ordinance which amends the Historic Preservation process to eliminate work sessions. HPC was informed of this proposal last winter. Both HPC and City Council have expressed an interest in alternatives. Planning Staff and the City Attorney’s office continue to believe that worksessions create several procedural challenges. We are seeking HPC feedback on options outlined below, or other ideas the board may offer. In lieu of a code amendment, staff is considering an Administrative Policy which would require a full application and public notice before any worksession is scheduled. The City’s Historic Preservation section of the Land Use Code (26.415) outlines the review process for all historic landmarks. Currently, the code states: “No development application that includes a request for a floor area bonus may be submitted until after the applicant has met with the HPC in a work session to discuss how the proposal might meet the bonus considerations.” Projects with no floor area bonus are not required to hold a worksession, but in practice, staff often receives such requests. As HPC is aware, for some time the upcoming agendas have been full at least six months into the future. It is staff’s opinion that, generally, each HPC meeting should be limited to two items when possible to allow adequate meeting preparation and a sufficient amount of discussion of each proposal. One problem with worksessions is that they are difficult to schedule given the demand for agenda space at HPC. Projects that have been submitted for formal review may end up being scheduled even further out. At the least, staff recommends narrowing the types of applications that are eligible to request a worksession to a) only projects requesting a floor area bonus, and no others, or b) only projects deemed to be of significant importance to the community as a whole. Worksessions have typically appeared last on the agenda. By this point in the meeting, commission members may be running out of energy. Often members need to exit before or during the worksession due to other obligations. P4 II.G. A solution to this issue would be to only allow worksessions to be scheduled at special meetings, on off Wednesdays. This could help ensure that workesssions are productive. On the other hand this is an additional evening commitment for the board as well as staff. These special meetings could perhaps be scheduled during the lunch hour. Staff has a concern that attendance at special meetings could be limited. For many years, the board received no information in advance of a worksession. This practice was changed so that an introductory letter and representative drawings were included in the HPC packet leading up to any workession. Nonetheless, having the board comment and provide direction on a project without any of the applicable review criteria or design guidelines in front of them can result in confusing or misleading direction that is retracted when the first formal hearing occurs. A solution to this problem could be to make the worksession a more formal process, with some criteria provided in writing by staff. This suggests that a more detailed application is required, a fee would be charged, etc. The worksession then becomes more like a Conceptual review and staff questions the purpose of this process. As stated, we are considering this approach. Worksessions are non-binding, but are used by an applicant to gauge potential HPC support of the proposed project. As the board is aware, staff’s primary concern with worksessions is public notice. Although a work session meeting is noticed in a manner consistent with the open meeting laws, because the topic of the work session is not published or posted, neighbors and other interested community members are often unaware they occur and are not able to provide their input at the initial design phase. When the formal public hearing comes, often the project has received detailed comments from HPC without the benefit of community input. Staff believes this creates an unfair situation for members of the community, as well as the applicant. HPC’s feedback is welcome and will be provided to Council at the June 22 nd hearing if that discussion proceeds. Staff may have a different recommendation than the commission on this topic, however we respect that there are other points of view on the value or potential drawbacks of the worksession process. P5 II.G. 6.10.2015 HPC Work Program check-in Page 1 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner MEETING DATE: June 10, 2015 RE: Community Development Department work program SUMMARY: Staff meets with City Council periodically to review the Community Development work program. In advance of that, staff is meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission and Historic Preservation Commission to get feedback on their priorities. Staff requests comments from HPC on the historic related work program items listed below, as well as any other ideas the board would like to discuss. It should be noted that in addition to the Historic Preservation related items listed below, staff is engaged in a number of other work program items including updates to the Residential Design Standards, the Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA regulations), and Off-Street Parking. CURRENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WORK PROGRAM ITEMS: Beyond the general planning services the city provides (processing land use applications, providing walk-in services, etc), Community Development staff is working on the following items related to Historic Preservation: 1. Permit Process Change. The Community Development Department is working on a complete overhaul of the building permitting process, from initial pre-planning inquiries through the issuance of a CO. This also involves conversion to a new software system and digital plans review. This is a significant effort and involves all Community Development staff and multiple review agencies of the City. Efforts will be ongoing though the end of the year and possibly into 2015. Staff: All of Community Development. 2. Lift One Stabilization. The City continues to work on addressing repair needs at the historic Lift 1 site. An initial assessment by an Architectural Conservator and a Structural Engineer was completed last fall, and staff is awaiting construction documents for immediate repair work that will be implemented this summer. New interpretive information will be added to the site. Staff: Amy Simon. 3. AspenModern Website. Historic Preservation staff worked on a website dedicated to Aspen’s Post-WWII era properties. The website was completed in April 2014 and includes information on each style of architecture and each architect modern properties (http://www.aspenmod.com/ ) Staff continues to update the website as new properties are designated. Staff: Amy Simon. P6 II.G. 6.10.2015 HPC Work Program check-in Page 2 of 2 4. AspenVictorian Website. Historic Preservation staff worked on a website dedicated to Aspen’s Victorian era properties. The website went live in September 2014, and continues to be updated with information. Staff: Amy Simon. PROPOSED WORK PROGRAM IDEAS: Community Development staff proposes three additional work program items related to the Historic Preservation Program. 1. Update Historic Preservation Guidelines. The city’s Historic Preservation Guidelines have not been updated since 2000. A general update is recommended to address emerging issues such as landscaping and to ensure the guidelines result in development that respects Aspen’s historic buildings and districts. Staff has begun an initial review of the guidelines and would work with HPC on the update. 2. Update Aspen Modern. In 2010 City Council approved the AspenModern program, which allows for voluntary designation of Aspen’s post-war historic resources. The program requires review by the HPC and City Council, with applicants able to request various benefits in exchange for designating their property. The City owns a number of AspenModern eligible properties, but to date has not done extensive planning or investigation to determine if the properties should go through the designation process. The AspenModern Ordinance included language stating that the City would initiate AspenModern designation on the eligible City-owned properties. Staff proposes that the City Asset and Community Development Departments work together to investigate and potentially bring forward these designations. 3. Update Historic TDR Review Criteria. The Review Criteria for the City’s TDR program are based on a mathematical formula – if there is additional available floor area on the lot, that floor area is eligible to be severed as a TDR. The Review Criteria do not address such things as if the creation of TDRs will benefit the historic property or represent an important preservation effort. Staff proposes an update to the Review Criteria to include some additional context-specific criteria. P7 II.G. Page 1 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Hillary Seminick, Planner Technician THRU: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer DATE OF MEMO: June 4, 2015 MEETING DATE: June 10, 2015 RE: 540 E. Main St. (A.K.A Zupancis) Rezoning ________________________ SUMMARY: 540 E. Main St., which is also known as the Zupancis Property, currently lies within three zone districts, Commercial Core (CC), Commercial (C-1) and Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI). Three 19 th century cabins, known as the Zupancis-McMurtchy cabins, are located on the southern portion of the property. The property is designated historic. The City Parking Department, a parking garage, and surface parking are located on the property. The property and existing overlying zone districts are depicted in Figure 1. Figure 1. Current Zupancis Zoning P8 II.G. Page 2 of 2 The City Parking Department is considered a public use. Public use is not an allowed use within the Service/Industrial/Commercial (SCI) Zone District, while the Commercial Core (CC) and Commercial (C-1) Zone Districts do allow for Public use on the ground floor. In accordance with Section 26.710.022.A; which pertains to lands within more than one zone district, where a proposed use is not allowed in all Zone Districts, the use can only be developed on land in which it is a permitted use. The Parking Department falls within both the CC and SCI Zone Districts; therefore, the existing use of the property as the City Parking Department is a non-conformity. To bring the existing use into conformance, the City of Aspen Capital Asset Department is initiating an amendment to zone districts of the Zupancis property from CC, C-1, and SCI to Public (PUB). The subject parcel is approximately 27,000SF in size. At this time, no development is proposed on the subject property; however, the parcel has been considered for future City facilities. The Public Zone District requires a Planned Development; however, one is not proposed at this time. The dimensional characteristics of the parcel will be determined through the Planned Development Review process. PROPOSAL: Alan Richman, of Alan Richman Planning Services LLC, and Charles Cunniffe Architects, on behalf of the Applicant, the City of Aspen Capital Asset Department; have submitted an application to rezone the subject property to the Public Zone District. This application seeks to bring the existing use into compliance and allow for potential redevelopment for City facilities. SUMMARY: The intent of this Memo to the Historic Preservation Commission is to inform the Commission of the Application to Rezone the Zupancis Property to the Public Zone District. Additionally, Staff seeks to receive comment from the Commission regarding the proposal. P9 II.G. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Justin Barker, Planner THRU: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 411 E. Hyman Ave. – Major Conceptual Development, Commercial Design Review, Demolition, Growth Management, Mountain View Plane Public Hearing DATE: June 10, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY: The subject property is located at 411 E. Hyman Avenue, on the south side of the Hyman pedestrian mall. The lot is 1,400 square feet (14’ x 100’) and is zoned Commercial Core. The property is not designated, but is located within the Commercial Core Historic District. The Wheeler Opera House View Plane intersects a portion of the property. The property currently contains a two-story structure, shown in Figure A, that has 767 square feet of net leasable commercial space on the first floor and a 798 square foot one-bedroom free-market residential unit on the second floor. The proposal before HPC is to demolish the existing structure and construct a new one-story commercial building that occupies the entire footprint of the lot. The proposed project is subject to Demolition review for demolition of the existing structure in a historic district, Conceptual Major Development and Commercial Design reviews for the new commercial structure, Growth Management review for demolition of the existing multi-family unit, and View Plane review for development within the Wheeler Opera House view plane. If approved by HPC, the project will require HPC review for Final Major Development and Final Commercial Design reviews. APPLICANT: City of Aspen, represented by BlueGreen. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends continuation for a restudy to include an affordable housing unit on site, increase the storefront height, and to further develop the alley façade. Figure A – Existing Structure 1 P10 IV.A. PARCEL ID: 2737-180-16-005. ADDRESS: 411 E. Hyman Avenue, East fourteen feet (E14’) of Lot C, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. Figure B – Area Map DEMOLITION (EXHIBIT A) The proposed project includes demolition of the existing two-story structure on the property. No demolition of a property within a Historic District may occur unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards found in Exhibit A. Staff Response: Figure B shows the location of the building and nearby historic properties hatched in purple. The existing structure has no historic significance. The building was built in 1960 and does not contribute to the Commercial Core Historic District. Demolition would not adversely affect the integrity of the District or adjacent properties. Staff is supportive of the proposed demolition. 2 P11 IV.A. CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & COMMERCIAL DESIGN (EXHIBIT B) The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, 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. Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. The design guidelines for conceptual review of a new building in the Commercial Core Historic District are all located within the “Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives.” The applicable guidelines are included in “Exhibit B.” The subject property is only 14 feet wide and is located mid-block, sharing walls on both sides with the adjacent buildings. Therefore, only the Hyman façade and alley façade are visible to the public. The proposed structure is only one floor, but will appear as two stories, which reflects the character of the downtown core and the adjacent structures. The mass of the structure will be essentially a rectangular box, which is appropriate for a mid-block structure. The proposed façade along Hyman Avenue (Figure C) is simple in design. It is located on the property line, flush with the adjacent buildings, and includes storefront windows which are encouraged for commercial spaces. Figure C – Proposed Hyman façade 3 P12 IV.A. The storefront entry of the proposed building is only 8’ tall. Many storefronts in Aspen span up to 14’, typically through the use of transom windows, as seen in many examples in Figure D. The design guidelines encourage these taller storefronts, which allow more light into the space and create more presence at the street level. Although storefront height is mainly discussed at final review, staff believes it is beneficial to discuss at conceptual, as it affects overall design and height of this project. If additional building height is not desired, a taller storefront height could be achieved through a false front to retain a perceived two-story height. This is historically common to achieve varied façade heights (Figure E) without having an impact on the view plane. Figure D – Tall storefront examples The final guidelines also encourage buildings to reflect the architectural hierarchy and articulation inherent to the composition of the street façade, and maintain the stature of traditional street level frontage. 413 E. Hyman, directly east of the site (left of 411 E Hyman in Figure E) is an 1885 structure listed on the National Register. It’s storefront is approximately 12’ tall. Figure E – 411 E. Hyman c. 1940, since demolished 411 E. Hyman 4 P13 IV.A. The other portion of the proposed building that will be visible is the alley façade (Figure E). The Guidelines call for developing an alley façade that creates visual interest using building forms that step down in scale toward the alley. The current proposal is a flat, blank CMU wall that is ~21 feet tall. Staff recommends further study on the alley façade to better comply with the Guidelines. The applicant is proposing a shared trash/recycle area with the adjacent property (413 E Hyman). Environmental Health would prefer an on-site solution as the point of the Code is to improve handling of waste materials and a shared space often does not offer an improved situation. The applicant needs to either provide an on-site solution or obtain Special Review approval from Environmental Health to not require the on-site provision. The proposed development requires 1.15 parking spaces and 140 square feet of public amenity space. The applicant is proposing a cash-in-lieu payment for both of these requirements, which is permitted by right. Staff would not support on-site amenity, as the subject property is especially narrow, giving less flexibility to provide on-street amenity space that would not diminish the character of the street edge. GROWTH MANAGEMENT (EXHIBIT C) The proposed development increases the commercial net leasable area by 384 square feet. Minor expansion of a commercial development of less than 500 square feet cumulative net leasable area may be approved by the Community Development Director. Additionally, the existing development contains a free-market residential unit on the second floor. The proposal includes removal of this unit, which is considered demolition of multi-family housing in Growth Management. The demolition of multi-family housing shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning & Zoning Commission (or HPC) based on the criteria found in Exhibit C. Staff Response: The proposed development increases the commercial net leasable by 384 square feet. This would typically require employee mitigation. However, the exemption allowed under Section 26.470.060.5 states that no employee mitigation shall be required if the proposal meets the threshold of the exemption, which in this case it does. This property has never received this exemption before and is therefore eligible for up to 500 square feet net leasable area increase that does not require mitigation. No employee mitigation is required for the increase of commercial space in the proposed development. Figure E – Proposed alley façade 5 P14 IV.A. The existing development contains a 798 square foot (net livable area) one-bedroom free market residential unit. This unit houses 1.75 full time equivalents (FTEs). The proposed new development eliminates this unit, which requires a minimum of 50% mitigation. The applicant is proposing to provide mitigation through 0.875 Category 4 Affordable Housing Credits. This is permitted, as long as HPC determines that on-site replacement is not feasible due to site constraints or would create a nonconformity. Staff finds that on-site replacement is feasible. Affordable housing is a permitted use on the second floor in the zone district and could reasonably be provided within the dimensional requirements of the zone district on a flat, rectangular lot. A new building with an affordable housing unit on the second floor would be slightly taller than the existing building. Additional height on the rear portion of the building would also further encroach into the view plane. However, the applicant has pointed out that the surrounding development already blocks the view plane. A slight increase in height to include a second floor affordable housing unit could be developed with a minimal height increase and have no further impact on the view plane. The subject property is only 14 ft. wide, which means an on-site replacement unit would be limited to about 12 ft. of interior width. This is somewhat narrow, but still livable and should not be considered a site constraint that would prohibit developing a unit on-site. Staff finds that having an affordable housing unit downtown provides an immense benefit to the affordable housing stock and is preferential to Credits that represent a unit that may not even be within the City limits. Staff recommends that an on-site unit be incorporated into the proposal. The APCHA board reviewed this application on June 3rd and has recommended approval of Credits for mitigation only if Category 4 Credits are provided for 100% of the FTEs associated with the loss of the existing unit (1.75). MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE (EXHIBIT D) Approximately the south one-third (1/3) of the subject property is intersected by the Wheeler Opera House view plane (Figure F). No development shall be permitted within a mountain view plane unless the Planning & Zoning Commission (or HPC) makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all of the requirements found in Exhibit B. The HPC may exempt the development from the view plane requirements if certain criteria are met. Staff Response: The existing structure to the west already blocks this portion of the view plane, as do the buildings across the alley to the south. The proposed development would not further infringe on the view plane as the redevelopment of these other structures is not anticipated in the near future. Staff recommends that the proposed development be exempted. Figure F – View plane 6 P15 IV.A. ______________________________________________________________________________ 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 continue the hearing for a restudy to include an affordable housing unit on site, increase the storefront height, and further develop the alley façade. EXHIBITS: A. Review Criteria – Demolition B. Review Criteria – Major Conceptual & Commercial Design C. Review Criteria – Growth Management D. Review Criteria – Mountain View Plane E. APCHA referral F. Application 7 P16 IV.A. EXHIBIT A DEMOLITION 26.415.080.A Procedures for considering requests for demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Staff findings: The property is not an imminent hazard and is structurally sound. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location, as this structure is mostly just a storefront and narrow building with shared walls with the structures to each side. There is no documentation that supports this property has an historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance. Staff finds criteria c) and d) are met. Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and Staff findings: Although the property is located within the Commercial Core Historic District, only one structure in the nearby vicinity is designated (413 E. Hyman Ave. directly to the east). The existing structure was built in 1960, long after 413 E. Hyman, which was built in 1885. It does not add to the historic associations or architectural qualities of the parcel or District. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and Staff findings: The building is considered a non-contributing resource to the District and would not adversely affect the integrity of the district, or the adjacent landmarked 413 E. Hyman Ave. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Exhibit A – Demolition Page 1 of 2 P17 IV.A. c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. Staff findings: Demolition of this structure will not affect the historic preservation needs of the area, as this is a fairly newer structure, and there is only one historic resource in the immediate vicinity. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Exhibit A – Demolition Page 2 of 2 P18 IV.A. EXHIBIT B COMMERCIAL DESIGN 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: Responses to Sections 26.412.060-070 are outlined below. Staff finds this criterion is met. B. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, to the greatest extent practical. Changes to the façade of the building may be required to comply with this Section. Staff Findings: The proposed structure is already commercial, and the proposed development is commercial. Staff finds this criterion is not applicable. C. The application shall comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines as determined by the appropriate Commission. The guidelines set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The City shall determine when a proposal is in compliance with the criteria, standards and guidelines. Although these criteria, standards and guidelines are relatively comprehensive, there may be circumstances where alternative ways of meeting the intent of the policy objectives might be identified. In such a case, the City must determine that the intent of the guideline is still met, albeit through alternative means. Staff Findings: Responses to the Design Guidelines are outlined below. This property is located in the Commercial Core Historic District. Overall, Staff finds this criterion is met. 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. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Page 1 of 10 P19 IV.A. 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. 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. 3. The public amenity and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights-of-way and uses contribute to an inviting pedestrian environment. 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. 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 Findings: The applicant is proposing to provide a cash-in-lieu payment instead of providing on-site amenity space due to the limited site width and area. Staff finds this to be an appropriate action for this site. 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. 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. 3. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be co-located and combined to the greatest extent practical. 5. 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. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Page 2 of 10 P20 IV.A. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. 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. 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. 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. 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 Findings: The applicant is proposing a shared trash/recycle area with the adjacent property (413 E Hyman). The proposed use of the new building typically would require 300 sq. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Page 3 of 10 P21 IV.A. ft. of waste space, and the requirement for 413 E. Hyman is 200 sq. ft. The existing space is 240 sq. ft. which would fall short of the combined requirement. The proposed use for the space will most likely not need 300 sq. ft., however a future use of the space may. Environmental Health would prefer an on-site solution as the point of the Code is to improve handling of waste materials and a shared space often does not offer an improved situation. The applicant needs to either provide an on-site solution or obtain Special Review approval from Environmental Health to not require the on-site provision. The existing property is serviced by a 200 amp service, and Utilities has indicated that there is no availability within the alley to increase the service. The proposed development must maintain a maximum service of 200 amps or present an alternative solution that is acceptable to Utilities. 26.412.070. Suggested design elements. The following guidelines are building practices suggested by the City, but are not mandatory. In many circumstances, compliance with these practices may not produce the most desired development, and project designers should use their best judgment. A. Signage. Signage should be integrated with the building to the extent possible. Integrated signage areas already meeting the City's requirements for size, etc., may minimize new tenant signage compliance issues. Common tenant listing areas also serves a public way- finding function, especially for office uses. Signs should not block design details of the building on which they are placed. Compliance with the City's sign code is mandatory. Staff Findings: The project will comply with all signage requirements. Staff finds this criterion is met. 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. Staff Findings: The proposed development includes display windows facing the Hyman Street pedestrian mall. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Lighting. Well-lit (meaning quality, not quantity) display windows along the first floor create pedestrian interest after business hours. Dynamic lighting methods designed to catch attention can cheapen the quality of the downtown retail environment. Illuminating certain important building elements can provide an interesting effect. Significant light trespass should be avoided. Illuminating the entire building should be avoided. Compliance with the City's Outdoor lighting code, Section 26.575.150 of this Title, is mandatory. Staff Findings: The project will comply with all lighting requirements. Staff finds this criterion is met. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Page 4 of 10 P22 IV.A. Commercial Design Guidelines – Commercial Core Historic District, Conceptual Review Design Guidelines This parcel is designated by the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Objectives and Guidelines as Commercial Core Historic District. The street pattern is a grid with buildings typically occupying the entirety of the lot with zero setbacks. Buildings range in scale from early residential to larger commercial and community buildings. This area includes the varied range of buildings dating from the city’s early history and representing all period of development in the evolution of Aspen. Most buildings have features associated with traditional commercial designs which include large display windows, recessed entries and visual separation between the ground floor and upper stories. Outdoor spaces occur, but infrequently. The intent is to maintain a strong definition of the street wall. The primary design objectives for this character area are: 1. Maintain a retail orientation. 2. Promote creative, contemporary design that respects the historic context. 3. Maintain the traditional scale of building. 4. Reflect the variety in building heights seen historically. 5. Accommodate outdoor public spaces where they respect the historic context. 6. Promote variety in the street level experience. 7. Preserve the integrity of historic resources within the district. Conceptual Review includes the following guidelines: Street & Alley System Staff Findings: The subject property is a 14’ x 100’ lot, internal to the block. It is slightly smaller than half an traditional Townsite lot and already located within the established town grid. The proposed development intends to occupy the entire footprint of the lot, so there will be no internal walkways. The alley façade is a solid CMU wall, that does not contribute to the human scale. The Guidelines suggest developing an alley façade that creates visual interest, through the use of varied setbacks, material changes, secondary entrances, and others to achieve this. Staff recommends the rear façade is modified to add visual interest. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines to be not met. Staff finds the following Guideline to be met: 6.1 Maintain the established town grid in all projects. • The network of streets and alleys should be retained as public circulation space and for maximum public access. • Streets and alleys should not be enclosed or closed to public access, and should remain open to the sky. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Page 5 of 10 P23 IV.A. Staff finds the following Guideline to be not met: 6.3 Develop an alley façade to create visual interest. • Use varied building setbacks and changes in materials to create interest and reduce perceived scale. • Balconies, court yards and decks are also appropriate. • Providing secondary public entrances is strongly encouraged along alleys. These should be clearly intended for public use, but subordinate in detail to the primary street-side entrance. Staff finds the following Guideline to be not applicable: 6.2 Public walkways and through courts, when appropriate, should be designed to create access to additional commercial space and frontage, within the walkway and/or to the rear of the site. • See also: Public Amenity Space design guidelines. Parking Staff Findings: The current development contains one off-street parking space, accessed from the alley. The proposed development occupies the entire lot, and does not propose any off-street parking spaces. The applicant proposes to mitigate the required parking through a cash-in-lieu payment. Since the Guidelines specifically address structured parking, Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines to be not applicable for this proposal. Public Amenity Space Staff Findings: The current development contains no public amenity space as the building is located on the front and side lot lines. The Guidelines mention that outdoor spaces are infrequent and maintaining the street edge is more important. This lot is especially narrow, giving less flexibility to provide on-street amenity space that would not diminish the character of the street edge. The applicant has proposed to provide a cash-in-lieu payment instead of on-site public amenity, and therefore Staff finds the proposed action to be appropriate for this site. Building Placement Staff Findings: The proposed development covers the entire property footprint, which is in line with the town grid. The building front will be in line with the neighboring properties for the entire width of the façade. The primary entrance is facing the street, which is the Hyman Avenue pedestrian mall. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines to be met. Staff finds the following Guidelines to be met: 6.18 Maintain the alignment of façades at the sidewalk’s edge. • Place as much of the façade of the building at the property line as possible. • Locating an entire building front behind the established storefront line is inappropriate. • A minimum of 70% of the front façade shall be at the property line. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Page 6 of 10 P24 IV.A. 6.20 Orient a new building to be parallel to its lot lines, similar to that of traditional building orientations. • The front of a primary structure shall be oriented to the street. 6.21 Orient a primary entrance toward the street. • Buildings should have a clearly defined primary entrance. For most commercial buildings, this should be a recessed entry way. • Do not orient a primary entrance to an interior court. • Providing secondary public entrances to commercial spaces is also encouraged on larger buildings. Staff finds the following Guideline to be not applicable: 6.19 A building may be set back from its side lot lines in accordance with design guidelines identified in Street & Circulation Pattern and Public Amenity Space guidelines. Building Form Staff Findings: The façade is rectangular in overall shape as well as the entrance elements. The façade is mostly flat with few projecting elements which include a canopy and decorative cornice. The proposed roof is flat for the entire structure. The alley façade is the same shape and height as the street façade, but lacks any form of detail or scale. Staff recommends the alley façade is modified to reduce the perceived scale. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines to be not met. Staff finds the following Guidelines to be met: 6.22 Rectangular forms should be dominant on Commercial Core façades. • Rectangular forms should be vertically oriented. • The façade should appear as predominantly flat, with any decorative elements and p r ojecting o r setback “articulations” appearing to be subordinate to the dominant roof form. 6.23 Use flat roof lines as the dominant roof form. • A flat roof, or one that gently slopes to the rear of a site, should be the dominant roof form. • Parapets on side façades should step down towards the rear of the building. • False fronts and parapets with horizontal emphasis also may be considered. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Page 7 of 10 P25 IV.A. Staff finds the following Guideline to be not met: 6.24 Along a rear façade, using building forms that step down in scale toward the alley is encouraged. • Consider using additive forms, such as sheds, stairs and decks to reduce the perceived scale. These forms should however, remain subordinate to the primary structure. • Use projecting roofs at the ground floor over entrances, decks and for separate utility structures in order to establish a human scale that invites pedestrian activity. Building Height, Mass & Scale Staff Findings: The existing development is a two-story building. Although the proposed development is only a one-story structure, the height will remain almost 21’ and provide an awning at the perceived floor level where a second story would be located. The adjacent buildings are both two-story structures and vary marginally in height. The proposed structure will be a height in between the two. The height of the building falls within the limitations of the Commercial Core zone district. The building directly to the east is historic, however reducing the height of the proposed development to respect the height would make it appear as a one-story building, which is in contradiction with other guidelines. Although the adjacent building is historic, and a handful of others on the east end of the block, there are no “iconic” historic structures immediately near the proposed development. The storefront entry of the proposed building is only 8’ tall. Many storefronts in Aspen span up to 14’, typically through the use of transom windows. The design guidelines encourage these taller storefronts, which allow more light into the space and create more presence at the street level. Although storefront height is mainly discussed at final review, staff believes it is beneficial to discuss at conceptual, as it affects overall design and height of this project. Additional storefront height could be achieved through a false front if additional building height is not desired. This is historically common to achieve varied façade heights and would retain a perceived two-story height without having an impact on the view plane. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines to be not met. Staff finds the following Guidelines to be met: 6.25 Maintain the average perceived scale of two-story buildings at the sidewalk. • Establish a two-story height at the sidewalk edge, or provide a horizontal design element at this level. A change in materials, or a molding at this level are examples. 6.31 A new building should step down in scale to respect the height, form and scale of a historic building within its immediate setting. 6.32 When adjacent to a one or two story historic building that was originally constructed for commercial use, a new building within the same block face should not exceed 28 in height within 30 ft. of the front façade. • In general, a proposed multi-story building must demonstrate that it has no negative impact on smaller, hist oric s t ruct u res nearby. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Page 8 of 10 P26 IV.A. • The height and proportions of all façade components must appear to be in scale with nearby historic buildings. 6.34 The setting of iconic historic structures sho uld b e p reserved and enhanced when feasible. • O n sit e s comp rising more t han t w o traditional lot widths, the third floor of the adjacent lot width should be set back a minimum of 15 ft from the front facade. • Step a building down in height adjacent to an iconic structure. • Locate amenity space adjacent to an iconic structure. Staff finds the following Guidelines to be not met: 6.26 Building façade height shall be varied from the façade height of adjacent buildings of the same number of stories. • If an adjacent structure is three stories and 38 ft. tall, new infill may be three stories, but must vary in façade height by a minimum of 2 ft. 6.27 A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation in building height of the Commercial Core. • Refer to the zone district regulations to determine the maximum height limit on the subject propert y. • A minimum 9 ft. floor to ceiling height is to be maintained on second stories and higher. • Additional height, as permitted in the zone district, may be added for one or more of the following reasons: - In order to achieve at least a two-foot variation i n height with an adjacent building. - The primary function of the building is civic. (i.e. the building is a Museum, Civic Building, Performance Hall, Fire Station, etc.) - Some portion of the property is affected by a height restriction due to its proximity to a historic resource, or location within a View Plane, therefore relief in another area may be appropriate. - To benefit the livability of Affordable Housing units. - To make a demonstrable (to be verified by the Building Department) contribution to the building's overall energy efficiency, for instance by providing improved day- lighting. 6.28 Height variation should b e achieved using one or more of the following: • Vary the building height for the full depth of the site in accordance with traditional lot width. • Set back the upper floor to vary the building façade profile(s) and the roof forms across the width and the depth of the building. • Vary the façade (or parapet) heights at the front. • Step down the rear of the building towards the alley, in conjunction with other design standards and guidelines. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Page 9 of 10 P27 IV.A. Staff finds the following Guidelines to be not applicable: 6.29 O n sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths, the façade height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. • The façade height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. • Height should b e varied every 6 0 ft. minimum and preferably every 30 ft. of linear frontage in keeping with traditional lot widths and development patterns. • No more than two consecutive 30 ft. façade modules may be three stories tall, within an individual building. • A rear portion of a third module may rise to three stories, if the front is set back a minimum of 40 feet from the street façade. (e.g. at a minimum, the front 40 feet may be no more than two stories in height.) 6.30 On sites comprising two or more traditional lots, a building shall be designed to reflect the individual parcels. These methods shall be used: • Variation in height of building modules across the site • Variation in massing achieved through upper floor setbacks, the roofscape form and variation in upper floor heights • Variation in building façade heights or cornice line 6.33 New development adjacent to a single story historic building that was originally constructed for residential use shall not exceed 28 ft. in height within 30 ft. of the side property line adjacent to the historic structure, within the same block face. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Page 10 of 10 P28 IV.A. EXHIBIT C GROWTH MANAGEMENT 26.470.050 General Requirements. All development applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for growth management review based on the following generally applicable criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of development: 1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.D. Application for multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.1 shall not be required to meet this standard. Staff Findings: The proposed development increases the commercial net leasable area by 384 square feet, and decreases the Floor Area by 165 square feet. According to Section 26.40.060.5, an expansion of no more than 500 square feet net leasable and 250 square feet of Floor Area may be approved administratively and shall not be deducted from the annual allotments. This is a cumulative exemption. This property is eligible for the exemption, as it has not received this exemption in the past. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, as well as with any applicable adopted regulatory master plan. Staff Findings: The proposed development is a one-story commercial building, which is in line with the majority of the development along this block of Hyman Avenue (1-3 story commercial and mixed-use buildings). Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff Findings: The property is located within the Commercial Core zone district. The existing development contains a free-market housing unit on the second floor that is a legally established nonconforming use. The proposal removes this unit and all other aspects of the development conform to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Conceptual Planned Development approval, as applicable. Staff Findings: Conceptual HPC and Commercial Design Review approvals are requested with the application as part of a consolidated review. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. Exhibit C – Growth Management Page 1 of 7 P29 IV.A. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate. Staff Findings: The proposed development increases the commercial net leasable by 384 square feet. This would typically require employee mitigation. However, the exemption allowed under Section 26.470.060.5 states that no employee mitigation shall be required if the proposal meets the threshold of the exemption, which in this case it does. This property has never received this exemption before and is therefore eligible for up to 500 square feet net leasable area increase that does not require mitigation. No employee mitigation is required for the increase of commercial space in the proposed development. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section 26.470.100 Employee/Square Footage Conversion. Staff Findings: There is no free-market residential component to the proposed project. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. Exhibit C – Growth Management Page 2 of 7 P30 IV.A. Staff Findings: The proposed development removes a residential use and only increases the commercial net leasable area by 384 square feet. There will be minimal to no additional demand on the infrastructure. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 26.470.070.5 Demolition or redevelopment of multi-family housing. The combining, demolition, conversion or redevelopment of multi-family housing shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on compliance with the following requirements (see definition of demolition.): 1. Requirements for combining, demolishing, converting or redeveloping free-market multi- family housing units: Only one (1) of the following two (2) options is required to be met when combining, demolishing, converting or redeveloping a free-market multi-family residential property. To ensure the continued vitality of the community and a critical mass of local working residents, no net loss of density (total number of units) between the existing development and proposed development shall be allowed. a. One-hundred-percent replacement. In the event of the demolition of free-market multi-family housing, the applicant shall have the option to construct replacement housing consisting of no less than one hundred percent (100%) of the number of units, bedrooms and net livable area demolished. The replacement units shall be deed-restricted as resident occupied affordable housing, pursuant to the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Each replacement unit shall be approved pursuant to Subsection 4, Affordable housing, of this Section. When this one-hundred-percent standard is accomplished, the remaining development on the site may be free-market residential development with no additional affordable housing mitigation required as long as there is no increase in the number of free- market residential units on the parcel. Free-market units in excess of the total number originally on the parcel shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.3, Expansion of free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use development. b. Fifty-percent replacement. In the event of the demolition of free-market multi-family housing and replacement of less than one hundred percent (100%) of the number of previous units, bedrooms or net livable area as described above, the applicant shall be required to construct affordable housing consisting of no less than fifty percent (50%) of the number of units, bedrooms and the net livable area demolished. The replacement units shall be deed-restricted as Category 4 housing, pursuant to the guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Each replacement unit shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing. When this fifty-percent standard is accomplished, the remaining development on the site may be free-market residential development as long as additional affordable housing mitigation is provided pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.3, Expansion of free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project, and there is Exhibit C – Growth Management Page 3 of 7 P31 IV.A. no increase in the number of free-market residential units on the parcel. Free-market units in excess of the total number originally on the parcel shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.080.2, New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project. c. One-hundred percent affordable housing replacement. When one-hundred-percent of the free-market multi-family housing units are demolished and are solely replaced with deed-restricted affordable housing units on a site that are not required for mitigation purposes, including any net additional dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.470.070.4, Affordable Housing; all of the units in the redevelopment are eligible for a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit, pursuant to Section 26.540 Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit. Any remaining unused free market residential development rights shall be vacated. Staff Findings: The existing development contains a 798 square foot (net livable area) one-bedroom free market residential unit. This unit houses 1.75 full time equivalents (FTEs). The proposed new development eliminates this unit, and therefore requires replacement through one of the three (3) options listed above. The applicant is proposing to meet option b. through the provision of 0.875 Category 4 Affordable Housing Credits. This is permitted, as long as the Planning and Zoning Commission (or HPC) determines that on-site replacement is not feasible due to site constraints or would create a nonconformity. Staff finds that on-site replacement is feasible (See responses to Section 4 below). Staff does not find this criterion to be met. 2. Requirements for demolishing affordable multi-family housing units: In the event a project proposes to demolish or replace existing deed-restricted affordable housing units, the redevelopment may increase or decrease the number of units, bedrooms or net livable area such that there is no decrease in the total number of employees housed by the existing units. The overall number of replacement units, unit sizes, bedrooms and category of the units shall be reviewed by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and a recommendation forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Staff Findings: There are no existing affordable housing units on site. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 3. Fractional unit requirement. When the affordable housing replacement requirement of this Section involves a fraction of a unit, cash-in-lieu may be provided only upon the review and approval of the City Council, to meet the fractional requirement only, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.3, Provision of required affordable housing via a cash- in-lieu payment. Staff Findings: The applicant is not currently proposing a cash-in-lieu payment for the proposed development. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 4. Location requirement. Multi-family replacement units, both free-market and affordable, shall be developed on the same site on which demolition has occurred, unless the owner shall demonstrate and the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that replacement Exhibit C – Growth Management Page 4 of 7 P32 IV.A. of the units on site would be in conflict with the parcel's zoning or would be an inappropriate solution due to the site's physical constraints. When either of the above circumstances result, the owner shall replace the maximum number of units on site which the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the site can accommodate and may replace the remaining units off site, at a location determined acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be considered for this standard. Staff Findings: The applicant is proposing replacement of the existing unit through the provision of Affordable Housing Credits. Credits represent actual built units that are off- site. All replacement units must be deed-restricted, and affordable multi-family housing is a permitted use in the Commercial Core zone district on the second floor. Staff recognized that requiring a replacement affordable housing unit on site would require a taller building, since it must be located on a second floor to comply with zoning. The proposed development has a height of just less than 21 ft., which is shorter than the existing structure. This height does not allow for floor-to-floor heights that meet the design guidelines (13-15 ft. first floor, 9 ft. second floor). The maximum allowable height in this zone district is 28 ft., so additional height could be added to achieve two floors that meet the design guidelines and comply with the underlying zoning. Additional height on the rear portion of the building would also further encroach into the view plane. However, the applicant has pointed out that the surrounding development already blocks the view plane. A slight increase in height to include a second floor affordable housing unit could be developed with a minimal height increase and have no further impact on the view plane. The subject property is only 14 ft. wide, which means an on-site replacement unit would be limited to about 12 ft. of interior width. This is somewhat narrow, but still livable and should not be considered a site constraint that would prohibit developing a unit on-site. Staff finds that having an affordable housing unit downtown provides an immense benefit to the affordable housing stock and is preferential to Credits that represent a unit that may not even be within the City limits. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority reviewed this application on June 3rd (Exhibit E) and has recommended approval of Credits for mitigation only if Category 4 Credits are provided for 100% of the FTEs associated with the loss of the existing unit (1.75). Staff finds this criterion to be not met. 5. Timing requirement. Any replacement units required to be deed-restricted as affordable housing shall be issued a certificate of occupancy, according to the Building Department, and be available for occupancy at the same time as, or prior to, any redeveloped free- market units, regardless of whether the replacement units are built on site or off site. Staff Findings: The proposal includes the use of Affordable Housing Credits to satisfy the replacement requirement. Affordable Housing Credits represent actual built units that Exhibit C – Growth Management Page 5 of 7 P33 IV.A. have already received a certificate of occupancy. Credits must be extinguished prior to certificate of occupancy for the commercial space. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. Redevelopment agreement. The applicant and the City shall enter into a redevelopment agreement that specifies the manner in which the applicant shall adhere to the approvals granted pursuant to this Section and penalties for noncompliance. The agreement shall be recorded before an application for a demolition permit may be accepted by the City. Staff Findings: Conditions of redevelopment are included in the proposed resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Growth management allotments. The existing number of free-market residential units, prior to demolition, may be replaced exempt from growth management, provided that the units conform to the provisions of this Section. The redevelopment credits shall not be transferable separate from the property unless permitted as described above in Subparagraph d, Location requirement. Staff Findings: Free-market units are not a permitted use in the CC zone district, and therefore the proposed development does not include any free-market units. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 8. Exemptions. The Community Development Director shall exempt from the procedures and requirements of this Section the following types of development involving Multi- Family Housing Units. An exemption from these replacement requirements shall not exempt a development from compliance with any other provisions of this Title: a. The replacement of Multi-Family Housing Units after non-willful demolition such as a flood, fire, or other natural catastrophe, civil commotion, or similar event not purposefully caused by the land owner. The Community Development Director may require documentation be provided by the landowner to confirm the damage to the building was in-fact non-willful. To be exempted, the replacement development shall be an exact replacement of the previous number of units, bedrooms, and square footage and in the same configuration. The Community Development Director may approve exceptions to this exact replacement requirement to accommodate changes necessary to meet current building codes; improve accessibility; to conform to zoning, design standards, or other regulatory requirements of the City; or, to provide other architectural or site planning improvements that have no substantial effect on the use or program of the development. (Also see Chapter 26.312 – Nonconformities.) Substantive changes to the development shall not be exempted from this Section and shall be reviewed as a willful change pursuant to the procedures and requirements of this Section. b. The demolition of Multi-Family Housing Units by order of a public agency including, but not limited to, the City of Aspen for reasons of preserving the life, health, safety, or general welfare of the public. Exhibit C – Growth Management Page 6 of 7 P34 IV.A. c. The demolition, combining, conversion, replacement, or redevelopment of Multi- Family Housing Units which have been used exclusively as tourist accommodations or by non-working residents. The Community Development Director may require occupancy records, leases, affidavits, or other documentation to the satisfaction of the Director to demonstrate that the unit(s) has never housed a working resident. All other requirements of this Title shall still apply including zoning, growth management, and building codes.) d. The demolition, combining, conversion, replacement, or redevelopment of Multi- Family Housing Units which were illegally created (also known as “Bandit Units”). Any improvements associated with Bandit Units shall be required to conform to current requirements of this Title including zoning, growth management, and building codes. Replaced or redeveloped Bandit Units shall be deed restricted as Resident Occupied affordable housing, pursuant to the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority e. Any development action involving demising walls or floors/ceilings necessary for the normal upkeep, maintenance, or remodeling of adjacent Multi-Family Housing Units. f. A change order to an issued and active building permit that proposes to exceed the limitations of remodeling/demolition to rebuild portions of a structure which, in the opinion of the Community Development Director, should be rebuilt for structural, safety, accessibility, or significant energy efficiency reasons first realized during construction, which were not known and could not have been reasonably predicted prior to construction, and which cause no or minimal changes to the exterior dimensions and character of the building. Staff Findings: The proposed development does not qualify for any of the above exemptions. Staff finds these criteria to be not applicable. Exhibit C – Growth Management Page 7 of 7 P35 IV.A. EXHIBIT D MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE 26.435.050.C. Mountain view plane review standards. No development shall be permitted within a mountain view plane unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below. 1. No mountain view plane is infringed upon, except as provided below. When any mountain view plane projects at such an angle so as to reduce the maximum allowable building height otherwise provided for in this Title, development shall proceed according to the provisions of Chapter 26.445 as a Planned Development so as to provide for maximum flexibility in building design with special consideration to bulk and height, open space and pedestrian space and similarly to permit variations in lot area, lot width, yard and building height requirements and view plane height limitations. The Planning and Zoning Commission, after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Department, may exempt a development from being processed as a Planned Development when the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the proposed development has a minimal effect on the view plane. When any proposed development infringes upon a designated view plane, but is located in front of another development which already blocks the same view plane, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider whether or not the proposed development will further infringe upon the view plane and the likelihood that redevelopment of the adjacent structure will occur to re-open the view plane. In the event the proposed development does not further infringe upon the view plane and redevelopment to reopen the view plane cannot be anticipated, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall exempt the development from the requirements of this Section. Staff Findings: The Wheeler Opera House view plane intersects the approximate south one-third portion of this property. The adjacent building to the west currently already blocks this portion of the view plane, as do the buildings across the alley to the south. One of these buildings across the alley is the historic Red Onion building. The other buildings are not anticipated for redevelopment in the near future. According to the criteria, this situation qualifies for a determination of exemption. Staff recommends that HPC exempt the proposed development from the mountain view plane review. Staff finds these criteria to be met. Exhibit D – Mountain View Plane Page 1 of 1 P36 IV.A. EXHIBIT E MEMORANDUM TO: Justin Barker, Community Development Department FROM: APCHA Board of Directors THRU: Mike Kosdrosky, APCHA Executive Director Cindy Christensen, APCHA Operations Manager DATE: June 4, 2015 RE: REDEVELOPMENT OF 411 EAST HYMAN AVENUE ISSUE: The applicant is seeking approval for the development of the property known as 411 East Hyman Avenue. BACKGROUND: The application seeks Conceptual Major Development approval for the property located at 411 East Hyman. The 1,400 square foot property is on the south side of the Hyman Avenue Mall and is a mixed-use building that includes 767 square feet of ground-floor net leasable area and a 798 square foot one-bedroom apartment on the second level. The property contains no public amenity space at all, but fronts on the Hyman Avenue pedestrian mall. The Code Section 26.470.100.A.1 stipulates that ground floor commercial space in the CC zone district generates 4.7 FTE’s per 1,000 square feet of net leasable space. The current building contains 767 square feet of net leasable space, thereby generating from the commercial use 3.6 FTE’s (0.767 X 4.7). The existing residential apartment on the second floor is a nonconforming use. The one-bedroom unit houses 1.75 FTE’s under the Land Use Code and the APCHA Guidelines. The unit is planned to be demolished and no replacement is proposed. The applicant is requesting to extinguish 0.875 (50% of 1.75) Category 4 AH Credit Certificates to satisfy the mitigation requirements of Code Section 26.470.070.5. The Land Use Code specifies that the on-site unit has to be replaced on site. The applicant is asking for a waiver to satisfy the mitigation requirement with the AH Credit Certificates. The Code stipulates the unit as a for-sale unit. The current proposal is to provide a one-story building with a single commercial retail space only. The proposed development will contain 1,154 square feet of net leasable commercial area, all on the ground level. DISCUSSION: There is no residential development proposed for this property. The increase in net leasable area is less than 500 square feet, which is allowed in the Land Use Code with no additional mitigation requirement. Redevelopment of 411 East Hyman Avenue Page 1 P37 IV.A. The required replacement for mitigation purposes of the existing residential unit is proposed through the use of the AH Credit Certificate program. APCHA’s first priority is an on-site unit, followed by an off-site unit, and then the use of the AH Credit Program. The Land Use Code states that the unit has to be replaced on site and as a “for sale” unit. Section 26.470.070.5(4) states that, “… Multi-family replacement units, both free-market and affordable, shall be developed on the same site on which demolition has occurred, unless the owner shall demonstrate, and the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that replacement of the units on site would be in conflict with the parcel’s zoning or would be an appropriate solution due to the site’s physical constraints.” When either of the above circumstances result, the owner shall replace the maximum number of units on site which the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the site can accommodate and may replace the remaining units off site, at a location determined acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be considered for this standard.” RECOMMENDATION: The APCHA Board discussed the application at their regular meeting held June 3, 2015, and due to the constraints on the site as stated by the applicant’s representative, Mitch Haas, the APCHA Board recommends the applicant be allowed to mitigate for the loss of the existing unit through the Affordable Housing Credit program, but ONLY by mitigating at the 100% loss of the unit by providing Category 4 Affordable Housing Credits for the 1.75 FTE’s associated with the loss of the one-bedroom existing unit. Redevelopment of 411 East Hyman Avenue Page 2 P38 IV.A. P 3 9 I V . A . P 4 0 I V . A . P 4 1 I V . A . P 4 2 I V . A . P 4 3 I V . A . P 4 4 I V . A . P 4 5 I V . A . P 4 6 I V . A . P 4 7 I V . A . P 4 8 I V . A . P 4 9 I V . A . P 5 0 I V . A . P 5 1 I V . A . P 5 2 I V . A . P 5 3 I V . A . P 5 4 I V . A . P 5 5 I V . A . P 5 6 I V . A . P 5 7 I V . A . P 5 8 I V . A . P 5 9 I V . A . P 6 0 I V . A . P 6 1 I V . A . P 6 2 I V . A . P 6 3 I V . A . P 6 4 I V . A . P 6 5 I V . A . P 6 6 I V . A . P 6 7 I V . A . P 6 8 I V . A . P 6 9 I V . A . P 7 0 I V . A . P 7 1 I V . A . P 7 2 I V . A . DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.PF 6/10/14 TTRA9-29-14 1ISSUE FOR CITY REVIEW NU 10-27-14 2ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER CS-1COVER SHEET..411 E. HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO AS P E N , C O LO C A L J U R I S D I C T I O N : TH E C I T Y O F A S P E N 13 0 S . G A L E N A S T R E E T AS P E N , C O 8 1 6 1 1 TE L ( 9 7 0 ) 4 2 9 - 2 7 6 1 CO N T A C T : B Y D E P A R T M E N T AR C H I T E C T : CA M B U R A S & T H E O D O R E , L T D . 24 5 4 E . D E M P S T E R S T R E E T , S U I T E 2 0 2 DE S P L A I N E S , I L 6 0 0 1 6 TE L ( 8 4 7 ) 2 9 8 - 1 5 2 5 CO N T A C T : T E D J . T H E O D O R E , N C A R B , L E E D A P OR R O B A V I L A , L E E D A P OW N E R ' S R E P R E S E N T A T I V E & G E N E R A L C O N T R A C T O R : CE N T A U R 83 3 N . O R L E A N S S T . , S U I T E 3 0 0 CH I C A G O , I L 6 0 6 5 4 TE L ( 3 1 2 ) 6 4 4 - 4 4 7 0 CO N T A C T : S P I R O T S A P A R A S LA N D P L A N N E R : HA A S L A N D P L A N N I N G , L L C 42 0 E A S T M A I N S T R E E T , S T E . 1 0 - B AS P E N , C O 8 1 6 1 1 TE L ( 9 7 0 ) 9 2 5 - 7 8 1 9 CO N T A C T : M I T C H H A A S VI C I N I T Y M A P DRAWING LIST: SH E E T N U M B E R SHEET NAME CS - 1 COVER SHEET PE - 1 EXISTING PUBLIC AMENITY PE - 2 PROPOSED PUBLIC AMENITY PLANS A- 0 1 0 PROPOSED SITE PLAN FA R - 1 FLOOR PLAN - FAR CALCULATIONS NL - 1 FLOOR PLAN - NET LE ASABLE/NET LIVABLE A- 2 0 0 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AL T A EXISTING LAND SURVEY EC - 1 EXISTING CONDITION FLOOR PLANS A- 1 1 1 PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN REVISIONS NO.DATEBYDESCRIPTION P73 IV.A. C:\General CADD 12\Gxd\6165DD.gxd -- 04/22/2015 -- 11:42 AM -- Scale 1 : 120.000000 P74 I V . A . TH I S L O T D O E S N O T H A V E AN Y E X I S T I N G P U B L I C AM E N I T Y S P A C E DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.PF 6/10/14 TTRA9-29-14 1ISSUE FOR CITY REVIEW NU 10-27-14 2ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER PE-1EXISTING PUBLIC AMENITY..411 E. HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 3 / 3 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 EX I S T I N G P U B L I C A M E N I T Y CA L C U L A T I O N S REVISIONS NO.DATEBYDESCRIPTION P75 IV.A. NE T L E A S A B L E - 7 6 7 S F NE T L I V A B L E - 7 9 8 S F PA T I O - 4 1 S F DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.PF 6/10/14 TTRA9-29-14 1ISSUE FOR CITY REVIEW NU 10-27-14 2ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER EC-1EXISTING FLOOR PLAN..411 E. HYMAN AVE ASPEN, COREVISIONSNO.DATEBYDESCRIPTION P76 IV.A. HY M A N A V E M A L L AL L E Y 40 9 H Y M A N 41 3 H Y M A N EX I S T I N G CO N C R E T E RE T A I N W A L L CO N C R E T E W A L K 41 1 H Y M A N 1, 4 0 0 S Q . F T PR O P E R T Y L I N E 14 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' TH I S L O T D O E S N O T HA V E A N Y P R O P O S E D PU B L I C A M E N I T Y S P A C E 8' - 0 " H I G H WA L L CO N C R E T E P A D DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.PF 6/10/14 TTRA9-29-14 1ISSUE FOR CITY REVIEW NU 10-27-14 2ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER PE-2PROPOSED PUBLIC AMENITY..411 E. HYMAN AVE ASPEN, COREVISIONSNO.DATEBYDESCRIPTION 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 PR O P O S E D P U B L I C A M E N I T Y P77 IV.A. HY M A N A V E M A L L AL L E Y 40 9 H Y M A N 41 3 H Y M A N EX I S T I N G CO N C R E T E RE T A I N W A L L CO N C R E T E W A L K 41 1 H Y M A N 1, 4 0 0 S Q . F T PR O P E R T Y L I N E 14 . 0 0 ' 1 0 0 . 0 0 ' 8'- 0 " H I G H W A L L CO N C R E T E P A D A- 0 1 0 2 41 3 H Y M A N EX I S T I N G CO N C R E T E RE T A I N W A L L 411 HYMAN 8' - 0 " H I G H WA L L CO N C R E T E P A D 4 Y D D U M P S T E R 3 Y D D U M P S T E R 13 ' - 4 1 3 / 1 6 " 7' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 6 " 41 1 H Y M A N RE C E I V I N G DO O R DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.PF 6/10/14 TTRA9-29-14 1ISSUE FOR CITY REVIEW NU 10-27-14 2ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER A-010SITE PLAN..411 E. HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 SI T E P L A N N REVISIONS NO.DATEBYDESCRIPTION 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 EN L A R G E D S H A R E D R E C E I V I N G A R E A P78 IV.A. AL L E Y 11 5 1 S F TE N A N T S P A C E 1 12 ' - 0 " 14 ' - 0 " 1 0 0 ' - 0 " 14 ' - 0 " EX I S T I N G CO N C R E T E RE T A I N W A L L PR O P E R T Y L I N E 8'- 0 " H I G H W A L L CO N C R E T E P A D 7' - 6 " DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.PF 6/10/14 TTRA9-29-14 1ISSUE FOR CITY REVIEW NU 10-27-14 2ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER A-111FLOOR PLAN..411 E. HYMAN AVE ASPEN, COREVISIONSNO.DATEBYDESCRIPTION 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 MA I N L E V E L F L O O R P L A N P79 IV.A. AL L E Y TE N A N T S P A C E 1 12 ' - 0 " CO M M E R C I A L AR E A : 1 4 0 0 S F EX I S T I N G CO N C R E T E RE T A I N W A L L 8'- 0 " H I G H W A L L CO N C R E T E P A D DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.PF 6/10/14 TTRA9-29-14 1ISSUE FOR CITY REVIEW NU 10-27-14 2ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER FAR-1FAR CALCULATIONS..411 E. HYMAN AVE ASPEN, COREVISIONSNO.DATEBYDESCRIPTION 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 FA R C A L C U L A T I O N P L A N FLOOR AREA SUMMARY: MA I N L E V E L : 1 , 4 0 0 S F CO M M E R C I A L A R E A : 1 , 4 0 0 S F NO N - U N I T C O M M O N A R E A : 0 S F DE D U C T I O N S : 0 S F AR E A T O W A R D S F A R : 1 , 4 0 0 S F TOTAL FAR: 1,400 SF (1:1 FAR)ZONING INFORMATION & CALCULATIONS:ZONING: (CC) COMMERCIAL CORE NET LOT AREA: 1,400 SF (14'x100')ZONING ALLOWANCE (2:1): 2,800 SF (2x1,400SF)CALCULATIONS:GROSS FLOOR AREA:COMMERCIAL SPACE: 1,400 SF NON-UNIT SPACE: 0 SF EXEMPT SPACE: 0 SF EXPOSED WALL BELOW GRADE NORTH: 0 SF EXPOSED SOUTH: 0 SF EXPOSED EAST: 0 SF EXPOSED WEST: 0 SF EXPOSED BELOW GRADE WALL AREA:NORTH: 14'-0"SOUTH: 14'-0"EAST: 100'-0"WEST: 100'-0"TOTAL: 288'-0" LENGTH X 0'-0" HEIGHT 0 SF TOTAL WALL AREA 0 SF TOTAL EXPOSED WALL AREA 0 / 0 SF = 0% APPLIED BELOW GRADE FLOOR AREA 0 SF LOWER LEVEL GROSS AREA X 0% APPLIED 0 SF TOWARDS LOWER LEVEL FAR FINAL FLOOR AREA:MAIN LEVEL = 1,400 SF CUMULATIVE: 1,400 SF (1:1) P80 IV.A. AL L E Y TE N A N T S P A C E 1 12 ' - 0 " NE T LE A S A B L E AR E A : 1 1 5 1 S F EX I S T I N G CO N C R E T E RE T A I N W A L L 8'- 0 " H I G H W A L L CO N C R E T E P A D DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.PF 6/10/14 TTRA9-29-14 1ISSUE FOR CITY REVIEW NU 10-27-14 2ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER NLA-1NET LEASABLE PLAN..411 E. HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 NE T L E A S A B L E P L A N REVISIONS NO.DATEBYDESCRIPTION NE T L E A S A B L E C A L C U L A T I O N S MA I N L E V E L : RE T A I L ' A ' : 1 , 1 5 1 S F SU B - T O T A L M A I N L E V E L : 1 , 1 5 1 S F TO T A L N E T L E A S A B L E : 1 , 1 5 1 S . F . P81 IV.A. NE W H A N D M O L D E D BR I C K NE W F A B R I C C A N O P Y NE W 1 " C L E A R IN S U L A T E D G L A Z I N G , TE M P E R E D . NE W F U T U R E T E N A N T SI G N A G E NE W V E R T I C A L H A N D MO L D E D B R I C K NE W D E C O R A T I V E ME T A L C O P I N G , PA I N T E D . NE W C L E A R G L A S S E N T R Y DO O R , T E M P E R E D . NE W H A N D M O L D E D GL A Z E D B R I C K (E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G ) (E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G ) 20 ' - 7 " 8' - 1 5 / 1 6 " WH E E L E R O P E R A HO U S E V I E W P L A N E 9' - 5 1 5 / 1 6 " EL E V . 7 9 3 1 . 5 ' 10 ' - 4 3 1 / 3 2 " EL E V . 7 9 3 3 . 5 ' NEW DECORATIVE METAL COPING BEYOND.NEW C.M.U WALL,RECESSED. (E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G ) (EXISTING BUILDING)NEW METAL COPING 20 ' - 0 " NE W C M U W A L L R E C E S S E D NE W M A S O N R Y O P E N I N G NE W M E T A L D O O R P A I N T E D 20 ' - 0 " 8 ' - 0 " NE W C M U W A L L NE W M E T A L C O P I N G DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.PF 6/10/14 TTRA9-29-14 1ISSUE FOR CITY REVIEW NU 10-27-14 2ISSUE TO LAND PLANNER A-200EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS..411 E. HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 1 / 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 PR O P O S E D S O U T H E L E V A T I O N 1 / 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 PR O P O S E D N O R T H E L E V A T I O N REVISIONS NO.DATEBYDESCRIPTION 1 / 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 3 PR O P O S E D W E S T E L E V A T I O N P82 IV.A. P 8 3 I V . A . ExHiB� AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: zQs� Aspen,CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: July- /0 ,20 /S STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, (name,please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Nolorado, 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. 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 thex%y of Nu4 , 20/5-' 0/S, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A Aotograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. k 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 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, PDs that create more than one lot, and new Planned Developments are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district ma is in an z g g P Y 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. Jgp—n dat u U4e The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me thi5g of , 2(45-, by JOHN A.FORSTER WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO M mission expires: B NOTARY ID 19994005341 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MARCH 03,2019 G ry Public ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-655-1033 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 411 E.HYMAM AVE.-CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, DEMOLITION, GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND VIEWPLANE REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday,June 10, 2015, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, in Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St.,Aspen. HPC will consider an application submitted by 411 East Hyman Avenue, LLC, C/O Mark Hunt, 2001 North Halsted, Suite 304,Chicago, IL 60614, affecting the property located at 411 E. Hyman Ave., East 14 feet of Lot C, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado,Parcel ID#2737-182-16-005. The existing building is proposed to be demolished and replaced with a new one story building containing only commercial uses. The requested development approvals associated with this application may be modified by the approving body. For further information, contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St.,Aspen,CO, (970)429-2778,sara.adams@cityofaspen.com s/Willis Pember Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on May 21,2015 City of Aspen Account C 305-7 MILL STREET LLC 314 HEXAGON LLC 400 EAST HYMAN LLC 2001 NORTH HALSTED#304 119 HYSLOP RD 400 E HYMAN AVE STE#A202 CHICAGO, IL 60614 BROOKLINE, MA 02445 ASPEN,CO 81611 400 HYMAN LLC 400 HYMAN LLC 407 HYMAN LLC 6829 QUEENFERRY CIR PO BOX 351 416 MOORE DR BOCA RATON,FL 33496 RIFLE,CO 816500351 ASPEN,CO 81611 409 EAST HYMAN AVENUE LLC 413 EAST HYMAN AVENUE LLC 419 EAST HYMAN AVENUE LLC 2001 N HALSTED#304 2001 NORTH HALSTED#304 2001 NORTH HALSTED#304 CHICAGO,IL 60614 CHICAGO, IL 60614 CHICAGO, IL 60614 426 EAST HYMAN AVE LLC 434 EAST COOPER AVENUE LLC AP RT 29 LLC PO BOX 4068 2001 N HALSTED STE 304 601 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60614 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN GOLDEN HORN LLC AVH ONION VENTURES II LLC BARNETT-FYRWALD HOLDINGS INC 9420 WILSHIRE BLVD 4TH FL 601 E HYMAN AVE 2222 COTTONDALE LN#200 BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90212 ASPEN,CO 81611 LITTLE ROCK,AR 722022017 BLAU JEFF T BOUNTY LLC BPOE ASPEN LODGE#224 60 COLUMBUS CIRCLE FL 19 415 E HYMAN AVE 210 S GALENA ST#21 NEW YORK, NY 10023, ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 BRAND BUILDING LLC CARLSON BRUCE E TRUST CHARLIES COW COMPANY LLC 205 S GALENA ST PO BOX 3587 315 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 CITY OF ASPEN CM LLC COLLINS BLOCK LLC 130 S GALENA ST 230 S MILL ST 205 S GALENA ST ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS MEDIA CO COTTONWOOD VENTURES I LLC COTTONWOOD VENTURES II LLC 580 MALLORY WY 419 E HYMAN AVE 300 CRESCENT CT#850 CARSON CITY,NV 89701 ASPEN,CO 81611 DALLAS,TX 75201 COX JAMES E LIVING TRUST DCGB LLC DOLE MARGARET M 730 E DURANT AVE 610 WEST 52 ST 400 E HYMAN AVE#302 ASPEN,CO 81611 NEW YORK,NY 10019 ASPEN,CO 816111989 ELKS LODGE 224 F&M VENTURES LLC FIERCELY LOCAL 210 S GALENA ST STE 21 415 E HYMAN AVE 328 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 FOOTLOOSE MOCCASIN MAKERS INC G&K LAND CO LLC GALENA COOPER LLC 44 SILVERADO CT 0167 WILLOW LN 601 E HYMAN CANON CITY,CO 812129484 CARBONDALE,CO 81623 ASPEN,CO 81611 GORSUCH COOPER LLC GUIDOS SWISS INN LLC HALL CHARLES L 263 E GORE CREEK DR 23655 TWO RIVERS RD PO BOX 1819 VAIL,CO 81657 BASALT,CO 81621 ASPEN,CO 81612 . HINDERSTEIN FAM REV TRUST HORSE ISLAND LLC HUDSON KAREN DAY 4415 HONEYMOON BAY RD 300 CRESCENT CT STE#850 409 E COOPER AVE GREENBANK,WA 98253 DALLAS,TX 75201 ASPEN,CO 81611 HYMAN MALL COMMERCIAL CONDOS LLC KANDYCOM INC KANTZER TAYLOR M FAM TRST#1 PO BOX 1028 766 SINGING WOOD DR 216 SEVENTEENTH ST ASPEN,CO 81612 ARCADIA,CA 91006 MANHATTAN BEACH,CA 90266 KAUFMAN GIDEON I LEVY ASPEN RESIDENCE TRUST LINDNER ERIKA L REV TRUST 315 E HYMAN AVE#305 5959 COLLINS AVE 17017 SE 26TH ST ASPEN,CO 81611 MIAMI BEACH,FL 33140 BELLEVUE,WA 98008 MCDONALDS CORPORATION 05/152 MEYER BUSINESS BUILDING LLC MILL STREET PLAZA ASSOC LLC PAUL NELSON 23655 TWO RIVERS RD 602 E COOPER#202 142 TANAGER DR BASALT,CO 81621 ASPEN,CO 81611 GLENWOOD SPRINGS,CO 81601 MOTHER LODE CONDO ASSOC INC MTN ENTERPRISES 80B NH ONION VENTURES II LLC 6400 S FIDDLERS GREEN CIR#1660 PO BOX 5739 601 E HYMAN AVE GREENWOOD VLLG,CO 80111 EAGLE,CO 816315739 ASPEN,CO 81611 PARAGON PENTHOUSE LLC PEYTON MARI PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS 9950 SANTA MONICA BLVD 409 E COOPER#4 ASSOC BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90212 ASPEN,CO 81611 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 ASPEN,CO 81611 RED ONION INVESTORS LLC RG ONION VENTURES II LLC SH ONION VENTURES II LLC 420 E COOPER AVE 601 E HYMAN AVE 601 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 SILVER SLAM COMMERCIAL LLC VALLEY INVESTMENTS LLC WALL JANET REV TRUST 60 COLUMBUS CIR 602 E COOPER#202 205 S GALENA ST NEW YORK,NY 10023 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 WENDELIN ASSOC WHEELER BLOCK BUILDING LLC WHEELER SQUARE-CASPER FAMILY LLC 150 METRO PARK 211 N STADIUM BLVD STE 201 315 E HYMAN ROCHESTER,NY 14623 COLUMBIA,MO 65203 ASPEN,CO 81611 WILLIAMS DEXTER M WOODS FAMILY LP 82 W LUPINE DR PO BOX 11468 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 PUBLIC NOTIC Taco: +3C s bsj*m.cw ey Cos 3urp*": CaQ tflr"+Otiylt t'�•ra,e"�".;"'�1 _ - ,., - i f�1f�} �}IN + '� i��•i 'a 7sr W Ya'aj$itrt! � .fit to ILC. sro c"MAW.IL " � +Mow . AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE. REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: E . 14cwta i At/e. , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: AS. 20 (5— STATE 0 (S—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: 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 Commupity Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materiks�==which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches 'high, 4i dgy-which,-,','wasi�,..6on!posed ofdletters not less thanu(;4e• 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. Wailii4i notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Devclopfnent Department, which..contains the information described in Section 26:3:04 O'64(E)(2)of, h� Asperi..F.tand Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to �w pw �+rthe ;public_,:hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage '.prepaid'Ui S JImi ail to all owners of property within three hundred (3 00) feet of the property subjecti to the development application. The names and addresses of c�15C�t fir, property,owmrs,"shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they '_7i appearedtlno-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) EXHIBIT T AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060(E),ASPEN LAND USE C ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: © � ���LZ- I l�- �'i ,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: J J_P-1 .z to ,20 12 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I,^ i �- ' Hyl 19 (name,please print) being or representing afi 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. 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 Z day of , 20_L,5, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A ph tograph 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 CEIVED of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. RE (continued on next page) MAY 2 8 2015 CITY OF ASPEN cOMMltNp DFVEIQPMEN 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. Signature The fore oing"Affidavit of Notice"was ac, n wledged fore me this day of_Ilk 20 , by �y WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL KRISTIN PRIDE My commission expires: NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO ` ,l NOTARY ID#20064029379 My Commission Expires July 30,2018 of blit ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL PPLICANT CERTIFICATION OFMINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE REU 2VIRED BY C.R.S. X24-65.5-103.3 MAY 2 � CITY OF ASPEN CrAIIM!111►TV MIMI +( .w� ,y t a � f -� �y�,'t �a ,ar�,�,• �{� � ��w r,� ��.s'r }'����r +�fes,.. � tci. �� : i 1 /t� 4d r"' r I 'IL• .�!s$ "Y` i' �'xR w n �'�"'�'�'--a�}1..�""'4 yr'k �, � f,�...t�,, • d'�k',.i= ..."} ''+tip'' � (i g h, ,�Y�yi;" "4-. •i-t. C�i '?y�� }'' .s 7h .. 'ypl.�„i * <2..`.i� -+"%F <.�'.�� f•�j.i r Y�va x t#%6�%' '*. � k. k �.. ti � i�.F�• � c... I F f 11.< ��r�'t c+"� � �' 3�s�'. ; '' E,�*Z +�:a L .; .� •\ f �t � .�� l 'r � � t ,� fps �*RS'� `l;.� � s-Tf � .l if Tel l 4a r ,r• `� �, f=,.: $, ,,s � Y d.jY fD s t "�` t� `?'`+7 _` a{, k s..r.:i.:,��� - it• �'t E�aS .-•��� �.. 'moi� kt� '.F r'� '.:�� s,, ,,,�Ir � � ``T- H � H w4 �k€.r �ttn ��`� v��,� S•a., � § i I it`_; � � '�.� (�$,i x � ,! 6'�[•�.���.f�.^N t" t�4 7 f?��Q 5`r h�. ,i�lp"�` n"sYtiny ON ( vK#''�xt r. '�. '•k ,r '._�.. t. � ,.. � �°� ii �. )�9~e��t�t�� 'tri \� h 4:n (�� a, °s,""��- .9t, ���u�� �.�tnr �r; n� t; x ` . ",. ��fyj`'i: _�� �1 of t5t'�• ;' J�' y. ��J� '� z' �� ��'y���� } w -,<'�.. hd" F ar•f stir t� ;dtk. k r �j�I ,�3•,'�t� �f�Batu �i �Hyl u.i�`.+� � �'�"r5.� ',z:t '!� �'" �", Y/ti ��r � ' {7+' 4� � J n�N`` 11 t, �'+�"�4��•'c t a ... b1p,, µ y � /� ,1 '�`�s s•.t• ��I ^ate` �� t �3��d t I . � " • �. 71. It' fj j 7 ¢/I' ,. 1 of,,.I %`Nr S ' J'• ` �'hiY' 4�G yy A a: 3_ 01, Y _ yy , r.: �' ♦A r, .�.�_. t. Y g,��{'r`4.`'?�� t�j�y-xt�rl� ;��t�+q(r- _,'. ������t. ^ Y ,n Y i A. it�'n Y �+ • lir, I,y 6 .• J ^j' Qg"'hk y id ' ..s, *5 �\��1'd�,. •�fJ � a.,S� , �. F' y• wr,., `. r Sty '9 a 3F�4'TI , a .,n aq dl V�n'i �`}e it °4 '�?' rt'+R #y�. 1 ✓�,�, to � ' i.. ,�!a�V+s s w e�.�,.�� � � `�7k a1f�! tt.,Ya`.,k ,.�� Y �{a^4y t,rf j�t� "t.:l'��� „F iF.Yy�t C• " Ar.. l i '�. ��.,.f�y�°'71�g��� :.,,i .r. t '� + �j tL�tt�'1Wr pts r.=��f V'ff�t� ,�•�. s �r .�1 y`�4 � A .-'°q?fip��ti�liwJ' 4�`�' �".... PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 110 E. BLEEKER STREET-FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday,June 10, 2015, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, in Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen to consider an application submitted by Bleek House LLC, 0133 Prospector Lane, Suite 4102B, Aspen, CO 81611, affecting the property at 110 E. Bleeker Street, Lots L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, Parcel ID#2735- 124-37-006. The applicant is requesting approval to demolish an existing garage and construct a new addition behind the Victorian home, which will be restored. The requested development approvals associated with this application may be modified by the approving body. For further information, contact Amy Simon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970)429-2758, amy.simon@cityofaspen.com. s/Willis Pember Chair, Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on May 21, 2015 City of Aspen Account 00 EAST MAIN STREET LLC 120 EAST MAIN PARTNERS LLC ASPEN COMMUNITY UNITED METHODIST 33 PROSPECTOR RD#4102 120 E MAIN ST CHURCH ►SPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 200 E BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 :ITY OF ASPEN COLLINS CINDA REV TRUST CRAWFORD RANDALL&ABIGAIL 30 S GALENA ST 42 PARK LN 124 N GARMISCH ST ►SPEN, CO 81611 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416 ASPEN,CO 81611 )OMINGUE FAMILY TRUST GARCIA STEVEN J GARMISCH LODGING LLC 'O BOX 2293 120 N GARMISCH 110 W MAIN ST VINTER PARK, FL 32790 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611. 'ORMAN PATRICIA GSW FAMILY INV LP HENRY FREDERICK B TRUST 426 ROSE GLEN RD 1320 HUNSICKER RD 100 W HALLAM ST -LADWYNE, PA 19035 LANCASTER, PA 17601 ASPEN, CO 81611 LODES ALAN&DEBORAH HOGUET CONSTANCE M JOHNSON RICHARD&MONTAE IMBT 14 N ASPEN ST. 333 E 68TH ST 6820 BRADBURY ►SPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10065 DALLAS,TX 75230 CRUMM DONALD PAUL REV TRUST LANDIS CAROLYN MOUNTAIN STATE PROPERTIES LLC 'O BOX 874 128 N GARMISCH ST 715 10TH ST SOUTH ►SPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 NAPLES, FL 34102 'ARDUBA JIRI PENN PAUL E&SUSAN W RODNEY JOHN W 16 N GARMISCH ST 3830 E 79TH ST 8536 N GOLF DR ►SPEN,CO 81612 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46260-3457 PARADISE VALLEY,AZ 85253 LOSE BRANDON SARDY HOUSE NEW LLC SEGUIN WILLIAM L&MARILYN A 25 MT HOPE RD 240 CRANDON BLVD#167 PO BOX 4274 VHARTON, NJ 07885 KEY BISCAYNE, FL 33149 ASPEN, CO 816124274 ;PEARS NANCY M WOLKENMUTH EDWARD F JR&STEELE ZATS JULIE 'O BOX 2630 JULIANNE BELL REV TRUST 118 N GARMISCH ►SPEN, CO 81612 121 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: no O E. Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 1,J�_5,-2-ge- 10 , 20 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) 1,kobe,-f G✓2q o e, (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City 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 CommV,nity Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials.which was.not less than twenty-two.(?2) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high f:a'rid'�whie`l?� :composed ofaetters not less than_gr e.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 -- *,126:-304506:(Y(E)(2) o€thi. °Aspin fi!"Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage f �prepa ��USamai to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the ! , �prdperty'subject to the development application. The names and addresses of if,•1*4r" —Ts ,;; . ,property. wnoers shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they peared;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, PDs that create more than one lot, and new Planned Developments 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 � 1 The for oing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 , by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: PUBLIC NOTICE w-r RE:110 E.BLEEKER STREET-FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT Notary Public NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will held meeting to begin Wednesday,June 10,2015,ata gin at 5:00 p.m.before the Aspen KAREN REED PATTERSON Historic Preservation Commission,in Council NOTARY PUBLIC Chambers,City Hall,130 S.Galena S Aspen to STATE OF COLORADO consider an application submitted by Bleak House LLC,0133 Prospector Lane,site 41026,Aspen;E.Bleeker NOTARY ID#19964002767 Sttrreet,Lots L and ',Blthe ck property City aat nd Townsite ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABL of Aspen,Colorado,Parcel ID#2735-124-37-006..E 7 'My Commission Expires February 15,2016 The applicant is requesting approval to demolish DUBLICATION101-4 an existing garage and construct a new addition' behind the Victorian home,which will be restored.) OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) The requested development approvals associated F with this application may be modified by the ap- proving For further inforommu'contact Amy►WNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED Simon at the City of Aspen Community Develop- ment Department,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen;CO, (970)429-2756,amy.simon@cityofaspen.com. � Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission RTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE Published in the Aspen Times on May 21,2015 IB.Y C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 (11200030) — r