Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20150616 AGENDA Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission REGULAR MEETING June 16, 2015 4:30 PM Sister Cities Meeting Room 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. SITE VISIT II. ROLL CALL III. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public IV. MINUTES A. Minutes for May 26, 2015 V. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 100 S. Spring St. - Growth Management and Commercial Design Review (continued from May 26, 2015) B. 710 & 720 E. Durant Ave. - Commercial Design Review VII. OTHER BUSINESS VIII. BOARD REPORTS IX. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: 10 Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings 1) Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda) 2) Provide proof of legaJ notice (affi d avit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications of staff 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clari fications of ap plicant 7) Public comments 8) Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments 9) Close public comment portion of bearing 10) Staff rebuttal /clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment 1 1 ) Applicant rebuttal/clarification End of fact finding. Deliberation by the commission commences. No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public 12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners. 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met o r not met. Revised April 2, 2014 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 26, 2015 Page 1 Keith Goode, Vice-Chair, called the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) meeting to order at 4:30 PM with members, Jasmine Tygre, Stan Gibbs, Skippy Mesirow, and Kelly McNicholas. Also present from City staff; Debbie Quinn, Jennifer Phelan, Sara Nadolny and Justin Barker. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS There were no comments. STAFF COMMENTS: There were no comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments. MINUTES May 19, 2015 Minutes – Ms. Tygre moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Mr. Gibbs. All in favor, motion carried. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST There were none expressed. 100 S Spring St, Growth Management and Commercial Design Review Mr. Goode asked if notice had been appropriately provided. Ms. Quinn stated she has received two affidavits of public notice, one for the publication and one for the posting and mailing. The affidavits were provided as Exhibit A. Mr. Goode opened the public hearing for the 100 S Spring St and turned the floor over to staff. Mr. Barker, Planner with the Community Development Department, reviewed the application to P&Z. The application is a Growth Management Review to relocate the existing affordable housing unit on site and a Commercial Design Review to remodel the existing structure. The application is submitted by 100 South Spring Street LLC and represented by Davis Horn, LLC. The property is located at Main and Spring Streets. It is a 3,000 sf lot with mixed use zoning. The current structures include a 3,131 sf commercial building on the property which varies from one to three stories and includes a 400 sf affordable housing rental unit. The property is currently non-conforming in regards to the north and west setbacks as well as the commercial floor area which was previously granted as a bonus by City Council to allow for the extra floor area in exchange for the on-site affordable housing unit. It is also nonconforming in regards to parking which requires three spaces which were never provided. The affordable housing unit was waived of its parking requirement in the same approval as the bonus floor area. P1 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 26, 2015 Page 2 The proposal is to remodel the commercial space, relocate the affordable housing unit from the south side of the structure to the north side facing Main St, provide compliant parking for the net leasable area, improve the public amenity space and install new materials and finishes for the building exterior. The demolition and relocation of the affordable housing unit requires a Growth Management Review. The applicant proposes to keep the unit as a rental unit. The Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) has reviewed the proposal and recommends approval as rental unit with a condition of this being forced as a for sale unit if it is out of compliance for a year. The application also requires a Commercial Design Review. The Community Development Department has authorized the application to go thru a consolidated review to combine the conceptual and final review since what is typically reviewed at the final review including the exterior materials is included in this review. In regards to the Commercial Design Review, the property is located in the central mixed use character area which is primarily two to three story residential buildings with a few commercial buildings as well. The main design objectives are identified on p 8 of the packet. The mass generally remains the same. There is some change in the height in the middle of the building with a portion going higher and portion going lower. There is also a carved out area in the back of the building for a new second floor terrace. The proposed materials are zinc and cedar. Staff is recommending to have the colors of the materials more closely match in color to appear as a one designed project instead of two separate ones linked together. They also recommend the zinc to be patinated to reduce reflective glare from the material. Staff is also recommending removal of the sliding zinc doors that would cover the glass openings on the first floor on Spring St as they may eliminate the interaction between the public and private realm and the activation of the building with the street. The public amenity space is a dramatic improvement as to what is currently available, so Staff is comfortable with the proposal. The current nonconformities may be maintained. The parking proposal is a mixture of two spaces on-site and cash-in-lieu to satisfy the remaining fraction of a space. The affordable housing parking space originally waived can be maintained as nonexistent since the building is not being demolished. For the utility and recycle/trash area, they are proposing to abandon the existing transformer and utilize one across the alley. The Utilities Department is comfortable with this proposed change. The recycle/trash area is smaller than what is required by the Environmental Health Department but they have tentatively agreed to a special review for a smaller area given the nature of the property and proposed use. Overall Staff is recommending approval of both reviews with the conditions listed in the resolutions. Mr. Barker did note the title of the second resolution on p 15 should reflect the Commercial Design Review P2 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 26, 2015 Page 3 instead of the Growth Management Review. Mr. Barker explained there will be two resolutions because the Commercial Design Review cannot be consolidated with Growth Management Review in order to comply with the code. Mr. Goode asked if there were any questions for Staff. Mr. Mesirow asked if they are eliminating outdoor park spaces. Mr. Barker stated the three to four current spaces off the alley are not compliant with code in regards to dimensions. One is actually in the right-of-way which is not permitted. The applicant is trying to bring them into compliance. Ms. McNicholas asked if the new construction is taller than the current building at any point. Mr. Barker pointed out a window on the second story will be taller, but it will not increase the height of the building. Ms. McNicholas asked if the document received via email earlier in the day would be addressed. Ms. Quinn stated the applicant representative is planning to address it. Ms. McNicholas then asked if APCHA had time to review and comment on the document at which Mr. Barker replied they have not had time yet. Mr. Mesirow wanted to clarify none of the current building is subject to historical preservation at which Mr. Barker replied no. Mr. Goode then turned the floor over to the applicant. Mr. Glenn Horn, Davis Horn Inc, represents the applicant and is joined by Mr. David Johnston of David Johnston Architects who is the local architect of record. The designers, Selldorf Architects, are out of New York and not present at the meeting. Mr. Horn stated Marianne Boesky is the owner of the building. She owns a gallery in New York and would like to open one here in Aspen. She has had a place here for years and is excited about opening a gallery in Aspen. Mr. Johnston reviewed the design of the structure which will consist of a gallery / artist space along with a residential component. He indicated on a slide demonstrating where the residential unit would be moved. Inside the building, they would be removing the second story. The project will reduce the current amount of commercial space. The project includes a two car garage on the back and there will be an extension on the back near the alley to include a deck/patio space. The upper floor will become a conference room with a bathroom and a small bar. The building has an increase in the upper middle area and a decrease in the same area for an overall wash on net area. He recognized the cabin structure near Main St. has historic components and they wanted to go back to cedar siding on the cabin in a grey tone to match the metal siding on the other portion of the building. He also felt they may not use zinc, but may use a silver or chrome painted surface that will not be shiny. They have no issue with the conditions of the approval. New York had proposed the metal doors for a thermal break at night but they have no issue to remove them. P3 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 26, 2015 Page 4 They looked at keeping a parking space on the corner by the alley but it would be in the right of way, so it will be a green space instead. One component they are adding is the public amenity patio space on the side of the building. Mr. Goode asked the commission for questions of the applicant. Mr. Gibbs asked about the use of the space on the first floor where the windows are located. Mr. Johnston stated currently there is a garden level, second floor and a third floor. They will maintain the third floor, eliminate the second floor and bring the garden level up to street level. Mr. Horn then covered the issue with the affordable housing unit. Regarding the history of the unit, he stated in 1979 Neil Ross and Brian Goodheim obtained a land use approval in a special review approving a bonus on their floor area in exchange for providing affordable housing. The unit was restricted to a moderate income unit which relates to a category two or three. The applicant is proposing to renovate the building and relocate the affordable housing unit from the alley side to the Main St side. The assessor’s record shows the miner’s cabin on Main St was built in 1888 and does not have any historic elements. The owner has offered to make the unit a category two instead of a category three which would drop the maximum income from $88,000 to $56,000 for an individual and from $1,307 to $875 for a family. This decrease would lower the rents. APCHA was uncomfortable making this a rental unit because it is harder for them to manage a single unit vs a complex of units. They would prefer single units to be a for sale unit. The Growth Management Review was triggered only because the applicant wants to move the affordable unit to the other side of the building which requires an update the deed restriction. The owner wants it to be a rental unit for an employee of the gallery and has difficulty with it possibly becoming a for sale unit. APCHA wants to make it a for sale unit if it is out of compliance for a year. A proposed change was drafted after meeting with APCHA. Currently the proposed changes states if the unit is out of compliance for 15 days, the owner may request a hearing regarding the noncompliance. If 15 days passes without a hearing or a request for a hearing, the owner will pay a fine of $500 per day until the unit is rented and compliant with the deed restriction. If it is out of compliance for a period of six months, APCHA would have the capability to place a qualified person or family in the unit that complies with the category two guidelines. There would be no for sale under this proposal. In summary, they would move the unit from one side of the building to the other, renovate the 35 year old unit and change the deed restriction from a category three to a category two. The applicant feels this type of the unit diversifies the rental stock. They understand the potential enforcement issue and hope the proposed agreement would be sufficient for noncompliance. Mr. Mesirow asked what the initial proposal from APCHA was regarding the compliance. Mr. Horn stated the initial proposal specified if the unit was out of compliance for a year, then it would become a for sale unit. Mr. Mesirow didn’t feel it should be difficult to keep the unit rented, so he asked why the owner is concerned. Mr. Horn stated the owner has philosophical objections of having a for sale under any circumstances. She stated it would be unacceptable and in lieu of is it is prepared to pay a substantial fine. Ms. Tygre asked how she would feel about having APCHA place a renter in the unit. Mr. Horn stated the owner is comfortable with that approach. Ms. Tygre asked Mr. Horn to confirm the agreement language P4 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 26, 2015 Page 5 in packet does not match what Mr. Horn provided verbally during the meeting at which he confirmed was accurate. He was providing the latest information from communications with the owner during the day. Mr. Horn submitted a letter reviewing the owner’s position as Exhibit B. His discussion in the meeting included updates to the letter provided. Mr. Goode asked Staff who would be in charge of monitoring the unit for compliance. Mr. Barker stated it would be APCHA and would be clarified in the deed restriction. Mr. Mesirow asked if the latest agreement language had been reviewed with APCHA which Mr. Horn stated they had not spoken with Staff or APCHA yet. He added they had been in discussions with the County and City attorneys. Mr. Gibbs asked Mr. Barker for the definition of ‘in compliance’. Ms. Phelan stated APCHA would specify this in the deed restriction. Ms. Quinn stated the deed restriction would require APCHA to give notice of any violation to the owner. The owner would then have 15 days to request a hearing. If the owner chose not to request a hearing or if the hearing was held and it was determined to be not in compliance, then the fines would begin at that time. Ms. McNicholas asked Staff if their recommendation would change based on the proposed changes. Mr. Barker stated it would be based on what is in the memo at this time since there has not been time to review the proposed changes. Mr. Goode then opened for public comment. There was no public comment. Mr. Goode closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Goode then opened for commissioner discussion. Ms. Tygre does not have any problems with the application itself and feels it would be an improvement except for the deed restriction which she feel the language should be reviewed by APCHA prior to making a decision. Ms. Quinn asked if she is recommending a continuance until a new recommendation from APCHA with proposed language from APCHA. Ms. Tygre concurred. Ms. Phelan added it would be helpful to hear from the commission regarding the design. Ms. Tygre stated she would not prefer the zinc doors, but does not care about the materials as long as they are not reflective. Mr. Gibbs agreed with Ms. Tygre. He feels he does not have justification to override APCHA’s policies just because someone has philosophical objections. If APCHA could review the new language and feel it was adequate, he would agree with application. Ms. McNicholas stated she was prepared to approve the application until she heard the new information. She feels the building provides more public amenity and is in line with the character area and feels it will be a benefit to the community. She is not sure how she feels about the zinc doors. She is sympathetic to the owner, but understands APCHA may have challenges with the enforcement. She would support a continuance until more details could be made available regarding APCHA’s review of the latest language. P5 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 26, 2015 Page 6 Mr. Goode loves the design, but is in agreement with the other commissioners. He feels the zinc doors may help the gallery space inside. He would also like APCHA to review the latest language. Mr. Gibbs asked if the doors would prevent light pollution. Mr. Johnston stated it was a secondary consideration. The designers stressed thermal properties first. Mr. Gibbs feels both are good issues and suggested they be part of the application. Ms. Phelan stated they have to be careful with a building that looks and acts as a commercial space. She suggested the windows could be glazed for the same purposes as presented which is typical in commercial buildings. Mr. Mesirow feels overall the design is really nice. The structure itself and the activation of the streetscape. Regarding the doors, he does not feel they need to be removed. He concurs with the other commissioners regarding the housing unit. He can’t imagine a situation where the owner could not rent the unit for a year. He is happy they are meeting the parking requirements for the project, but is not sure it is best to encourage applicants to be taking 800 sf of space out of a building for parking. Ms. Phelan suggested a continuance date of June 16 th to allow APCHA to review and discuss the proposed language changes. Mr. Horn stated he has a conflict on the 16 th so it may need to be rescheduled for a later date. Ms. Phelan stated it could be set for that date, but pushed back if necessary. Ms. Tygre motioned to continue the hearing for June 16 th , seconded by Ms. McNicholas seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Mr. Goode closed the public hearing. 601 Rio Grande Pl, Obermeyer Place Rezoning and PD Amendment Ms. Quinn stated received 2 affidavits of notice, one by publication and the other by posting and mailing and it appears notice was appropriately provided. The affidavits were submitted as Exhibit A. Mr. Goode opened the public hearing for 601 Rio Grande Pl, Obermeyer Place. Mr. Goode turned the floor over to staff. Ms. Sara Nadolny, Community Development Planner, reviewed the application requesting a rezoning and an amendment to the Planned Development (PD). She explained P&Z would be issuing an approval or denial of the application to City Council who will be the final review authority. Ms. Nadolny described the property located on north of Main St. and north of the commercial core. It is zoned as Service Commercial Industrial (SCI) with a PD overlay. There are few spaces which allow for commercial uses including a fitness center and a couple of office spaces. Ms. Nadolny stated for a few years now, Staff has been struggling with requests from business owners who are looking to locate their businesses within SCI zoned properties. The problem is that the SCI zone is very specific and limiting as to what is allowed to operate in the zone. Often the office and retail requests are prohibited from the SCI category. In 2013, City Council directed Staff to examine the areas zoned SCI to see what was and was not working. Staff held three different meetings to obtain input from P6 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 26, 2015 Page 7 the public and the property owners. The results indicated Obermeyer place was very interested in reexamining their current zoning. The property has a lot of empty spaces and wanted to allow for more variety of uses. Obermeyer Place was approved in 2003 with a PD and Special Planned Area (SPA) overlays. Since its creation, owners have struggled to find tenants who businesses fit within the acceptable list of uses resulting in many open spaces vacant for long periods of time. Obermeyer Place at its inception was created as a vibrant area of industrial activity to house the hard- to-locate services and industrial type businesses which may have been relocated down valley otherwise. More than a decade has passed now since the initial approval and currently there are fewer service commercial industrial businesses looking to locate at Obermeyer Place. Also, the types of businesses are evolving and operate a business that looks more like an office instead of an industrial space. Staff looked at the available zoning categories and identified Neighborhood Commercial (NC) as a category that most closely relates to the current and desired uses. Rezoning to NC will allow for a variety of uses such as retail and office space. It may increase the likelihood for the property to become more vibrant and active which fits the original vision of Obermeyer Place. The second part of the application requests to amend the PD. Staff suggests the PD to allow the existing SCI to be maintained in order to protect existing businesses from becoming non-conformities. Staff has reviewed the requests against the review criteria and finds all the criteria to be met. The zoning is compatible with the surrounding parcels. There are no increases required in utilities, parking or other public facilities as a result of the application. The rezoning is consistent with and compatible with the community character, pubic interest and the land use code. Staff recommends P&Z provide a recommendation of approval for the rezoning of Obermeyer Place from SCI to NC as well as a minor PD amendment to permit SCI uses to be maintained as part of the PD. Mr. Goode asked if there were any questions for Staff. Mr. Gibbs asked how many current SCI units of use are active. Ms. Nadolny suggested waiting for the applicant’s presentation that may answer the question better. She stated there is a table of uses on p 190 of the packet showing current utilization, but not a comprehensive list of available space. Mr. Gibbs asked if this SCI zone and the area down by the bike shop were the only two SCI zones left. Ms. Nadolny stated Clark’s Market and the Post Office are also in SCI zones. Ms. Phelan stated Clark’s Market is half SCI and half NC. She also added it is difficult to track the percentages. Ms. Nadolny stated the Andrews McFarland building on Mill St is also zoned SCI. Mr. Goode then turned the floor over to the applicant. Mr. Jerome Simecek represented the applicant. Mr. Wally Obermeyer, president of the Condo Association, was also present. P7 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 26, 2015 Page 8 Mr. Simecek presented a visual of the overall location of the buildings including the multiple levels in the project. He described the surrounding parks and buildings. He then showed an outline of the current uses allowed including the SCI and the nonconforming spaces identified in the original approval. Ms. Nadolny added overall the property is zoned SCI, but an ordinance allowed for nonconforming spaces on the parcel. Ms. Phelan stated this allowed the pre- existing business to continue to operate after the redevelopment. Mr. Simecek showed the defined spaces for each level of the development. He stated the below grade area currently has the largest amount of vacant units. They are typically smaller units. He then showed an at-grade map indicating the variations on the SCI approval including the recent approval to allow the Police Department and medical clinic to operate on-site. In summary, he pointed to several at-grade long standing vacant locations he feels a change to the zoning would be a powerful tool to revitalize the spaces and reach the goal for the area to be active community area. Currently, there is one space vacant at-grade and at least five below grade. Some are rented at very reduced rates as well because of the limited opportunity for tenants. Mr. Obermeyer stated the condominium association polled the owners of the SCI units including approximately 33 condominiumized units. They spoke with all but three unit owners. Everyone was in favor of the proposed change and would like to increase the foot traffic and vitality of the area. Mr. Goode asked the commission for questions of the applicant. Ms. McNicholas asked who approves or denies the tenant’s applications. Ms. Nadolny stated the Finance Department sends business applications to the Community Development Department for a zoning review. Ms. McNicholas asked if this application would change what SCI uses are allowed. Ms. Nadolny stated the first part of the application would change the zoning to NC which is more general and most all the existing businesses could fit within the NC zoning. The second part of the application is to update the PD to allow the SCI uses. Ms. McNicholas asked about potential future applicant that wanted to do an SCI use. Ms. Nadolny stated it would be allowed as part of the PD approval. She added this would open it up to both types of uses. Mr. Mesirow asked about the department’s progress for reevaluating what uses should be considered as SCI. Ms. Nadolny stated every few years they are asked to revisit and update the list which is difficult for the department to keep up with. Ms. Phelan stated a review is not scheduled to happen anytime soon. Mr. Goode asked for an explanation between going full on commercial and NC use. Ms. Nadolny stated full commercial zoning would create a lot of non-conformities. A list of permitted and conditional uses are listed on p 167 of the packet. She added with this parcel having a PD, a lot of the uses are defined by the PD. The majority of requests they receive are for office and arts uses. Mr. Mesirow asked if the initial approval of the project was contingent on the SCI zoning. Mr. Obermeyer stated prior to the redevelopment, there an old blue steel building that was the Obermeyer office and warehouse. When Obermeyer moved out to the airport business center, the building was rented. The project also involved a parcel owned by Bill Murphy and the intent was to redevelop an P8 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 26, 2015 Page 9 eyesore and ideally house the existing businesses. All the units were condominiumized and the majority were sold. The original approval included SCI space and non-conforming space that was grandfathered in the approval. The intent of having the business owners own their space has worked pretty well. It has been difficult for people to sell their units because of the SCI limitations on allowable uses. He believes by changing the zoning to NC and allowing the SCI uses will help people. He feels the application preserves the original intent but it will also provide some vitality. Mr. Gibbs asked if there is a master plan for this area. Ms. Phelan stated she was not sure if this area was discussed or not. Mr. Gibbs asked if the code allowed for permitted uses that are typically not allowed. Ms. Phelan stated yes under PD. She added the PD code was updated which repealed the SPA regulations and basically merged them because they were very similar in allowing for variations in dimensional standards, but also allowed used changes. PD allows for dimensional and use variations from the underlying zoning. Ms. Tygre asked if there was a possibility for the owners to combine the SCI small sub-grade spaces to make them more rentable. Mr. Obermeyer stated size is not the biggest constraint and feels Obermeyer Place suffers from a lack of customer parking for the businesses as compared to other SCI zoned parcels. Mr. Goode then opened for public comment. No one wanted to comment so Mr. Goode closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Goode then asked for any staff rebuttal. Ms. Nadolny wanted to clarify there are no constraints to someone combining units. Mr. Simecek added there is no prohibition of such in the association documents. Ms. McNicholas asked if the tenants have the ability to remodel at which Mr. Simecek stated the association would grant approvals but could not reasonably prevent it from happening. Ms. McNicholas stated her big concern is for future SCI uses and could they be approved. Ms. Nadolny replied they could be approved in the future. She stated the drafted resolution allows for either SCI or NC uses. Mr. Gibbs asked for confirmation of zoning requested. Ms. Nadolny stated the zoning being requested is NC with the PD overlay allowing for SCI uses. Mr. Gibbs stated he has a fundamental problem having multiple zones on one parcel. He feels the focus should be on addressing the zoning to address the needs of the uses in the zone. He doesn’t feel throwing multiple zone districts on a parcel is the answer. He does not have an issue with what the applicant is requesting. He would prefer the existing SCI uses become non-conforming with no ability to expand unless the PD is reopened for P&Z review to allow for the use. Ms. McNicholas asked staff if they agree with view of Mr. Gibbs. Ms. Nadolny stated future PD amendments wouldn’t actually go to P&Z, they would go to City Council. Mr. Gibbs stated that was fine. She added they looked at how to clean up this parcel in regards to zoning. P9 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 26, 2015 Page 10 Ms. McNicholas is concerned this change would de-incentivize a potential SCI applicant and feels there is value in having those uses in that space. Mr. Mesirow feels the historical context is important and is concerned we may be pushing out future SCI opportunities. He feels the change may not be consistent with the original intent of the redevelopment and would prefer it be maintained as SCI and have the SCI code updated. He stated technology and real estate have changed and is not properly reflected in the current SCI code. Ms. Tygre agreed with Mr. Mesirow. Mr. Gibbs wondered if there was a possibility of merging the SCI and NC zones and feels they are similar. Mr. Mesirow wanted to clarify he is not suggesting to combine the zones and feels there should be an expansion to the SCI zoning. Mr. Goode asked Staff when they may have an opportunity to review and update the SCI zoning code. Ms. Nadolny reiterated what Ms. Phelan stated earlier regarding it not being on their agenda at this time. Ms. Tygre wanted to add by making it all NC, she feels it will inflate the rents which was not what was intended. Mr. Gibbs felt Ms. Tygre and Mr. Mesirow made good points. Mr. Goode asked staff to verify whether or not P&Z approves the resolution, that it will go on to City Council at which Ms. Nadolny confirmed the application would go to City Council. Mr. Simecek agrees the SCI is dated, but the applicant is stuck with the uses. He stated the applicant is looking to add vitality which they don’t see with the restrictions under the SCI zoning. Mr. Mesirow stated he understands the applicant is trying to bring vitality, but feels he needs to look at the long term community interests which involves looking at the SCI zone. Mr. Goode wants to agree with the original intent of the project. Ms. McNicholas excused herself to attend another meeting. Mr. Gibbs feels from the community’s perspective, the demand in the community is not for SCI uses. From the applicant’s perspective, they will be more successful if NC uses are permitted. He feels approving the resolution tonight would be recognizing the reality for the area. He supports the idea of SCI but is not sure whether it has a place in our community. He supports the change to NC, but would like to the current SCI units to be grandfathered in and have the use remain an SCI use. Ms. Tygre added the applicant can then come in for a change in use. Ms. Phelan said office use and maybe retail restaurant would be allowed under the NC zoning, but would probably demand higher rents as stated earlier. Mr. Gibbs stated the concern is the loss of SCI zoned space in the community. Ms. Phelan asked if it would be agreeable to NC with no office or retail restaurant. Mr. Simecek stated the property doesn’t lend itself for a retail restaurant due to the limited parking onsite. Mr. Obermeyer stated there is one unit they had hoped would be a restaurant or coffee shop. He has spoken to a few chains with no interest. The original intent was to have a bakery, woodworking shop P10 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 26, 2015 Page 11 and offices but they are asking to have flexibility. There are spaces in the garage that could provide for SCI uses. He feels it will benefit the community if the spaces can be filled and the spaces will dictate the potential uses. Mr. Gibbs asked for a list of the categories current SCI uses. He is thinking of potential language to add to Section 1, Part B of the resolution to keep the current SCI uses. Mr. Mesirow also wants to think of the modern equivalent of SCI uses that may be considered in the future. He is concerned if the change to NC is made, then those future SCI uses will never get a foothold. Ms. Nadolny responded under NC, service commercial uses are allowed, but industrial is not. Many of the requests may be service commercial, but they look like offices, so they are not allowed. Ms. Tygre feels the new industrial types of uses would be precluded with the change to NC. Mr. Mesirow doesn’t feel the proposed solution will allow low margin production businesses to ever compete with higher margin businesses. Ms. Nadolny responded businesses that used to look industrial often look more like an office these days. Ms. Tygre feels they are being asked to give up SCI zoning on the parcel and she is not willing to do it. Mr. Mesirow added overtime the community won’t get SCI space back because they won’t be able to compete with the NC businesses. Mr. Good feels SCI needs a home, but feels we are condemning the applicant by carrying the burden right now. Without the needed code change on the radar, the owners will sit on empty spaces. If P&Z states no to the approval, at least Council will know the SCI code needs change. At the same time, he would love to see a café at Obermeyer Place. He feels the real issue is that SCI does need to change. Mr. Gibbs asked when the variances had been approved and by what mechanism. Mr. Simecek stated some of the variances, including the medical office, health club, and a ski service center were approved at the original PUD. Others such as the Police Department were more recent. Mr. Obermeyer stated most of the units are owned by the original owners. He is not sure to the degree the assumption of NC uses rubbing out SCI uses made by P&Z is valid. Based on the location of the spaces, he doesn’t feel it would be appropriate for office space. He feels it is in the public’s best interest to allow SCI uses, but allow NC as well. Mr. Gibbs asked Staff if Clark’s market is zoned by level. Ms. Phelan stated certain percentage must be zoned NC and Ace Hardware meets the SCI requirements. Mr. Gibbs asked if the basement of the Obermeyer Place could be SCI and the ground level NC and grandfather in the current uses. Mr. Obermeyer doesn’t feel this will solve the problem because most of the empty spaces are in the basement already. Mr. Simecek stated the NC zoning would provide the flexibility to the spaces. Mr. Gibbs asked if they have had requests for NC uses. Mr. Simecek state there is a list of commonly denied requests in the meeting packet including medical, chiropractor, interior design and architecture, and general retail. Ms. Nadolny stated the list of types of uses rejected is one to two years old so there have been additional requests denied since the list was compiled. Mr. Gibbs stated he is trying to understand the desire for NC use in the basement. He feels the current zoning is preventing reasonable uses of the property when there is no demand for SCI uses. Mr. Mesirow stated it is unfair to state P&Z is keeping the spaces from being utilized because the SCI code has not been updated. Ms. Tygre feels it is better to change SCI from a point of the community and the code which should be updated to reflect what we want as a community, rather than upzoning a property. P11 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 26, 2015 Page 12 Ms. Phelan and Ms. Nadolny both stated with SCI uses, it tends to be a stretch. Ms. Phelan stated there seems to be more requests for office types of uses. Mr. Goode asked the P&Z commissioners if they would agree to defining the current SCI places as permanent SCI requiring a PD if they want to change it. Ms. Nadolny stated her understanding is the intent to keep the underlying SCI, but certain units could be designated for either SCI or NC uses. Mr. Obermeyer believes the condominumization map designates the allowable uses including SCI, NC and non-conforming uses. Ms. Nadolny referred to Section 9 of the approving ordinance which essentially defines a dual zone. This ordinance was not part of the packet. She paraphrased the section states the space may house businesses in compliance with either the NC or SCI zoned district regulations as defined in the land use code. Mr. Mesirow asked Mr. Gibbs to confirm he would prefer to adopt the NC zoning and keep the existing SCI uses as non-conformities. Mr. Gibbs feels this is a great example of spot zoning which obstructs the uniformity of a property. His perspective would be to allow the property was adopted as NC with the current SCI uses allowed to persist. Mr. Mesirow agreed with moving away with multiple zoned spaces on one property. Mr. Gibbs moved to amend the proposed resolution, Section 1B to add the word “current” before the service commercial industrial, non-residential uses statement. The motion was seconded by Ms. Tygre. Mr. Goode asked if the commissioners wanted to discuss the motion. None wanted to discuss further. Roll call to vote: Mr. Mesirow, no; Mr. Gibbs, yes; Ms. Tygre, no; Mr. Goode, yes. The motion does not pass with a two to two (2-2) vote. Mr. Mesirow then motioned to draft a resolution to deny the approval and propose to City Council to review the SCI zoning code. The motion was seconded by Ms. Tygre. Roll call to vote: Mr. Mesirow, yes; Ms. Tygre, yes; Mr. Gibbs, no; Mr. Goode, yes. The motion passes with a three to one (3-1) vote. Ms. Tygre suggested P&Z could be looking at ways to provide input for redefining SCI to be somewhat more inclusive. Ms. Nadolny confirmed the draft resolution has been denied as it stands. She asks if P&Z wanted to include information in the denial to provide to Council. Mr. Mesirow stated the recommendation to Council may state P&Z understands the desire for vitality on this property, but rezoning to NC is the appropriate remedy. The appropriate remedy would be a complete and timely visit of the SCI zone. Mr. Good adjourned the meeting at 6:45. Cindy Klob City Clerk’s Office, Records Manager P12 IV.A. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director FROM: Justin Barker, Planner RE: 100 South Spring Street – Growth Management Review and Consolidated Commercial Design Review Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 & Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 Continued Public Hearing MEETING DATE: June 16, 2015 (Continued from May 26, 2015) APPLICANT /OWNER: 100 South Spring Street LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Davis Horn, Inc. LOCATION: 100 South Spring Street CURRENT ZONING Mixed Use (MU) SUMMARY: The Applicant requests of the Planning and Zoning Commission approvals for Growth Management Review to relocate an existing affordable housing unit on site and consolidated Commercial Design Review to remodel the existing structure. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Growth Management Review to relocate the existing affordable housing unit on site and approval of Commercial Design Review to remodel the existing structure. Photo of 100 South Spring Street LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The following land use approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission are being requested: • Growth Management Review – for relocation of an existing affordable housing unit, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470 (P&Z is the final review authority). • Commercial Design Review – for remodel of the existing structure, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.412 (P&Z is the final review authority). P13 VI.A. 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 2 of 6 CHANGES FROM SECOND READING ON 5/26/15 At the hearing on May 26, the applicant presented proposed amendments to the deed-restriction for the project’s affordable housing unit (Exhibit G). APCHA did not have a chance to review the proposed amendments prior to the hearing. P&Z did not feel comfortable approving the project without a recommendation from APCHA on the revisions, but otherwise approved of the proposal. P&Z also seemed indifferent toward the proposed zinc doors, and needs to determine if they are acceptable. APCHA has since reviewed the proposed amendments to the deed-restriction and has provided an updated referral (Exhibit H). APCHA is willing to accept the amendments proposed by the applicant and is recommending approval. The modified amendments can be found in the proposed Resolution. BACKGROUND: The subject site is located at the intersection of Spring Street and Main Street on the southeast corner. The property is zoned Mixed Use (MU) and is approximately 3,000 square feet (one Townsite Lot). There is an existing three-story structure on the site that has a floor area of approximately 3,131 square feet (2,439 sf net leasable), which includes a rental affordable housing unit of approximately 438 square feet floor area (400 sf net livable). The Mixed Use zone district allows 0.75:1 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for commercial uses (2,250 sf), which may be increased to 1:1 through special review. Overall allowable FAR is 2:1. The existing development was granted a floor area bonus to develop additional commercial space above the allowable in exchange for development a moderate income employee housing unit. The existing building is nonconforming in regards to commercial floor area, and the north and west setbacks. The property also does not contain any parking spaces that conform to the Code, although three were required for the commercial component. The parking requirement for the existing employee unit was waived by City Council. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to remodel the existing building and relocate the affordable housing unit from the south side of the property to the north side in the small cabin addition. The proposed commercial space will be converted from three stories to two with larger floor to THE FOLLOWING MEMO IS FROM THE 5/26/15 PACKET: P14 VI.A. ceiling heights. This reduces the commercial floor area to about 2,389 square feet (2,057 sf net leasable) and the overall structure floor area to about 2,843 square feet. The net livable of the relocated affordable housing unit is proposed to remain at 400 square feet. The applicant is also proposing the affordable housing unit remain as a rental. The applicant is proposing to convert the south side of the building into a two-car garage to satisfy two (2) of the 2.057 parking spaces required by the commercial space. The remaining 0.057 spaces are proposed to be mitigated with cash-in-lieu. The applicant is also proposing new exterior materials for the building. The affordable housing unit will be clad in cedar siding and roofing, and the commercial space will be zinc metal siding and roofing. The public amenity space is proposed along Spring Street, which will include paved area, a sculpture garden area, and bicycle parking. The applicant is requesting consolidated Commercial Design review and Growth Management review approvals. According to the Code, a proposed development may only be consolidated if it does not require growth management review and is of limited scope. The growth management review is proposed as a separate resolution for P&Z to review and decide upon prior to the commercial design review. STAFF EVALUATION: Growth Management Review (Exhibit A): Relocation of the affordable housing unit from the south side of the structure to the north side of the structure is considered demolition of affordable housing under Growth Management. The demolition of affordable housing as well as development of new affordable housing shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission, per certain review criteria. These include compliance with APCHA guidelines, fifty percent or more of the unit above grade, and deed-restriction as “for sale” units (although rental units may sometimes be accepted). Staff Response: The proposed relocation of the affordable housing unit meets the criteria located in Exhibit A. The proposed new unit will be the same size as the existing and designated as a Category 2, comparable to the “moderate income category” that the existing unit is designated. APCHA was referred on this application and has recommended approval of the proposed relocation and affordable housing unit as a rental, with conditions (See Exhibit C). If the proposed unit is found out of compliance for one year, the unit shall be required to become an ownership unit in accordance with APCHA procedures. Commercial Design Review (Exhibits B): The property is located on the edge of the Central Mixed Use Character Area. The primary design objectives of this character area are: • Reflect a transition in character between the Commercial Core and the outlying residential neighborhoods. • Maintain a sense of front yards with landscaping. • Provide a sense of human scale. • Maintain a visually interesting street edge. 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 3 of 6 P15 VI.A. • Encourage outdoor use areas. • Minimize visual impacts of parking. Staff Response: Staff finds that the proposed project generally meets the design objectives and guidelines of the Central Mixed Use Character Area. The project is mostly using the existing building form, which presents a transition between commercial and residential, and contains a mix of these uses. The existing yard between the structure and Spring Street is being enhanced to provide a more interesting street edge and create an area for outdoor use. Parking impacts are being reduced by moving parking to within the structure and off the alley/right-of-way. The massing of the building is generally remaining the same since the existing structure is being used. There are a few minor changes, which can be seen between the existing and proposed picture, shown in Figures 1 & 2. A small portion of the structure in the middle is being lowered to a one-story mass and the rest of the middle segment is raised to align with the rest of the building to the south. This allows the structure to read more as two distinct masses with a connecting element between them. Additionally a portion of the second story facing the alley is being cut out to allow for a terrace. Figure 1 - Existing Building Figure 2 - Proposed Building 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 4 of 6 P16 VI.A. 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 5 of 6 Figure 3 – Proposed Site Plan 1. Paved area 2. Sculpture area 3. Bike parking area The proposed materials are appropriate, however staff has recommended that they be similar in color to relate to each other better, and that the zinc is patinated to reduce the reflection/glare effects of a metallic siding. The proposed design includes sliding zinc doors that can be used to cover the glass openings on Spring Street. These glass openings are critical to the street level interest and interaction between the pedestrian and the building. They also reflect the commercial character that is common of a public usable space instead of a private one. Staff recommends that they are removed from the design. The proposed public amenity space, shown in Figure 3 greatly improves on the existing conditions. Currently the area facing Spring Street is just grass and does not engage or invite pedestrians. The proposed space will be paved and include an area for sculpture. The upper portion of the space incorporates bicycle parking into the plan. Nonconformities: The existing structure was granted a commercial floor area bonus in exchange for developing an employee housing unit on site. The existing floor area ratio may be maintained as long as it is not increased or demolition is not triggered on the project. The proposal actually reduces the commercial floor area and overall floor area. Existing setback nonconformities may also be maintained as long as they are not expanded or increased. The proposal does not do either of these. Parking: The proposed development requires 2.057 parking spaces for the commercial component. The applicant is proposing 2 parking spaces and a cash-in-lieu payment for the remaining 0.057 spaces. A cash-in-lieu payment is permitted by right for commercial uses within the Aspen Infill Area. The existing affordable housing unit was waived the required one parking space by City Council. This parking waiver may be maintained for the relocated unit, as demolition on the entire structure is not triggered. Therefore the relocated affordable housing unit is not required to provide a parking space. REFERRAL DEPARTMENTS: APCHA, Utilities Department, and Environmental Health were referred on this application. APCHA has recommended approval of the proposed rental affordable housing unit with 1 2 3 P17 VI.A. conditions (Exhibit C). The original utilities/trash/recycle plan was not acceptable to the Utilities and Environmental Health departments. A revised plan was submitted and has been preliminarily approved by these departments. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of consolidated Commercial Design Review and Growth Management with conditions. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution No. __, Series of 2015, approving Growth Management Review with conditions, and approve Resolution No. __, Series of 2015, approving consolidated Commercial Design Review with conditions, for 100 South Spring Street.” EXHIBITS: A. Review Criteria – Growth Management B. Review Criteria – Commercial Design Review C. APCHA Referral D. Application E. First Supplemental to Application F. Second Supplemental to Application G. Proposed Amendments to Deed-Restriction H. Updated APCHA Referral 6.8.15 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 6 of 6 P18 VI.A. RESOLUTION NO. __ (SERIES OF 2015) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 100 S. SPRING STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT A, BLOCK 28 OF THE EAST ASPEN ADDITION, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-073-33-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 100 South Spring Street LLC, represented by Davis Horn, Inc., requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission approve Growth Management Review for the property commonly known as 100 S. Spring Street, legally described as Lot A, Block 28 of the East Aspen Addition; and, WHEREAS, the property is zoned (MU) Mixed Use; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of the application; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on May 26, 2015, continued to June 16, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. __, Series of 2015, by a ____ to ____ (_ – _) vote, approving Growth Management Review; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: General Approval The Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves the demolition and relocation of the employee housing unit as a rental unit at Category 2 income level and a reduction of net leasable for the commercial space. Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 1 of 3 P19 VI.A. Section 2: Affordable Housing The project shall contain one studio unit that meets the following criteria: 1. The unit shall meet the conditions for development of affordable housing stated in the APCHA Guidelines. 2. The unit shall be classified at the Category 2 income level. 3. The unit shall contain a minimum of 400 square feet of net livable area. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Owner shall also record a new deed restriction for the unit, as approved by APCHA, inclusive of the following modifications: 1. The unit shall be rented to a qualified Category 2 employee, which the Owner may select. 2. If APCHA determines the Owner is in violation of the rental requirements for forty-five (45) days, APCHA may place a qualified person in the unit and shall send a notice of violation to the Owner. 3. If fifteen (15) days passes after notice of violation without a hearing request or a hearing the Owner of the building will pay a fine of $500 per day until the unit is rented in compliance with the deed restriction. 4. The unit will not be converted to a sale unit without the consent of the owner. No Certificate of Occupancy shall be granted for the commercial space until the deed restriction is reviewed and approved by APCHA, and a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the affordable housing unit. Owner and APCHA stipulate and agree that, in accordance with CRS 38-12- 301(1)(a) and (b), the Deed Restriction constitutes a voluntary agreement and deed restriction to limit rent on the property subject hereto and to otherwise provide affordable housing stock. Owner waives any right it may have to claim that the Deed Restriction violates CRS 38-12-301. If the owner requests the unit to become an ownership unit, the unit shall meet the same criteria as listed above and be sold through Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority lottery system. Section 3: Commercial Space A reconstruction credit of 2,439 square feet of commercial net leasable is credited toward the Project’s proposed 2,057 square feet of commercial net leasable. Existing and proposed net leasable calculations shall be verified with the Zoning Officer at time of building permit. Section 4: Parking The commercial net leasable generates 2.057 parking spaces. Two (2) off-street parking spaces shall be provided on-site. The remaining 0.057 parking spaces shall be mitigated through a cash-in-lieu payment. The cash-in-lieu payment shall be calculated at the time of building permit submission. Section 5: Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 2 of 3 P20 VI.A. All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 6: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 16th day of June, 2015. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: ______________________________ ______________________________ Debbie Quinn, Asst. City Attorney Ryan Walterscheid, Chair ATTEST: ______________________________ Cindy Klob, Records Manager Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 3 of 3 P21 VI.A. RESOLUTION NO. __ (SERIES OF 2015) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING CONSOLIDATED COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 100 S. SPRING STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT A, BLOCK 28 OF THE EAST ASPEN ADDITION, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-073-33-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 100 South Spring Street LLC, represented by Davis Horn, Inc., requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission approve consolidated Commercial Design Review for the property commonly known as 100 S. Spring Street, legally described as Lot A, Block 28 of the East Aspen Addition; and, WHEREAS, the property is zoned (MU) Mixed Use and located within the Central Mixed Use Character Area; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of the application; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on May 26, 2015, continued to June 16, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. __, Series of 2015, by a ____ to ____ (_ – _) vote, approving consolidated Commercial Design Review; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 1 of 4 P22 VI.A. Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves consolidated Commercial Design Review with the following conditions: 1. The sliding zinc doors shall be removed. 2. The zinc siding shall be patinated. 3. Applicant shall obtain special review approval from the Environmental Health Department for the reduced trash/recycle area size, prior to building permit issuance. 4. The trash/recycle area fence shall be 6’ in height. 5. Mechanical exhaust, ventilation and ductwork shall be vented through the roof and screened, or along the eastern wall. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 16th day of June, 2015. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: ______________________________ ______________________________ Debbie Quinn, Asst. City Attorney Ryan Walterscheid, Chair ATTEST: ______________________________ Cindy Klob, Records Manager Exhibits: A. Approved Site Plan B. Approved Elevations Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 2 of 4 P23 VI.A. Exhibit A Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 3 of 4 P24 VI.A. Exhibit B West Elevation South Elevation North Elevation East Elevation Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 4 of 4 P25 VI.A. EXHIBIT A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW 26.470.050.B General requirements: All development applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for growth management review based on the following generally applicable criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of development: 1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.D. Applications for multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.1 shall not be required to meet this standard. Staff Findings: There is no additional commercial development on the site. Affordable housing does not require allotments. No additional allotments are required for the development. 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 existing use on the property is commercial with an affordable housing unit. The proposed uses are the same. The proposed development is appropriate as it is located near the downtown core where commercial and affordable housing uses are encouraged. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff Findings: The existing structure is non-conforming in regards to setbacks and floor area. The application proposes to reuse the existing structure and does not trigger demolition, and therefore the non-conformities may be maintained. The proposal is reducing the overall floor area, therefore reducing the non-conformity. 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 Planned Development – Project Review approval, as applicable. Staff Findings: The applicant requested consolidated Commercial Design Review for this proposal, given the existing structure is being used and project aspects typically reviewed during Conceptual Review are remaining mostly unchanged. The Community Development Department granted consolidated review. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 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 Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 1 of 7 P26 VI.A. 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: There is no additional commercial development in this proposal. The commercial net leasable area is actually being reduced. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 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 this 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. Staff Findings: There is no additional demand on the public infrastructure with this project. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 26.470.70.4 Affordable housing. The development of affordable housing deed-restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the Board of Directors. Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 2 of 7 P27 VI.A. Staff Findings: The proposed unit complies with the APCHA Guidelines. A recommendation of approval from APCHA is included in Exhibit C. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b. Affordable housing required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of actual newly built units or buy-down units. Off-site units shall be provided within the City limits. Units outside the City limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.2. If the mitigation requirement is less than one (1) full unit, a cash-in-lieu payment may be accepted by the Planning and Zoning Commission upon a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. If the mitigation requirement is one (1) or more units, a cash-in-lieu payment shall require City Council approval, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.3. A Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit may be used to satisfy mitigation requirements by approval of the Community Development Department Director, pursuant to Section 26.540.080 Extinguishment of the Certificate. Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of these methods. Staff Findings: The proposed unit is a relocated rebuild of the existing affordable housing unit on site, which is considered the mitigation for the existing commercial space. No additional commercial space is proposed, and therefore no additional mitigation is required. Staff finds this criterion to be met. c. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent (50%) or more of the unit's net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. This dimensional requirement may be varied through Special Review, Pursuant to Chapter 26.430. Staff Findings: The proposed unit is located entirely above grade. Staff finds this criterion to be met. d. The proposed units shall be deed-restricted as "for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The owner may be entitled to select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned qualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The deed restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as defined in the Affordable Housing Guidelines established by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended. The proposed units may be rental units, including but not limited to rental units owned by an employer or nonprofit organization, if a legal instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney ensures permanent affordability of the units. The City encourages affordable housing units required for lodge development to be rental units associated with the lodge operation and contributing to the long-term viability of the lodge. Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen, Pitkin County or other similar governmental or quasi-municipal agency shall not be subject to this mandatory "for sale" provision. Staff Findings: The existing affordable housing unit on site is a rental unit. The applicant is proposing to maintain the replacement unit as a rental. APCHA has recommended approval of the unit as a rental, unless the unit is found to be out of compliance for one Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 3 of 7 P28 VI.A. year, upon which time the unit shall become an ownership unit (See Exhibit C). Staff finds this criterion to be met. e. Non-Mitigation Affordable Housing. Affordable housing units that are not required for mitigation, but meet the requirements of Section 26.470.070.4(a-d). The owner of such non-mitigation affordable housing is eligible to receive a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit pursuant to Chapter 26.540. Staff Findings: The affordable housing unit is considered the mitigation for the commercial space. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 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. Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 4 of 7 P29 VI.A. 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 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. 2. 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: Not applicable. 3. 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: The existing affordable housing unit on-site is a “moderate income” 400 square foot studio unit. The applicant proposes a 400 square foot studio unit at Category 2. APCHA has been referred on this application and recommends approval with conditions (See Exhibit C). Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. 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: Not applicable. 5. 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 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 Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 5 of 7 P30 VI.A. 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 proposed location of the replacement unit is on the same property. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. 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: This is required in the proposed resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. 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: The requirements of redevelopment are included in the proposed resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 8. 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: Not applicable. 9. 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 Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 6 of 7 P31 VI.A. 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. 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: Not applicable. Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 7 of 7 P32 VI.A. EXHIBIT B COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW 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 existing structure is already 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 Central Mixed Use Area. 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 Review Page 1 of 12 P33 VI.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. Staff Findings: The proposed amenity space allows for a variety of activities to occur, including relaxing, viewing artwork, parking bicycles and small gatherings. It is designed in such a way that the activities may change depending upon the tenants or uses of the structure. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The public amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade trees, solar access, view orientation and simple at-grade relationships with adjacent rights-of-way are encouraged. Staff Findings: The proposed amenity space includes existing aspen trees, great views toward Aspen Mountain and two simple at-grade relationships that accommodate to the natural slope of the site. No seating is proposed at this time, but it includes dedicated area for public artwork. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The public amenity and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights-of-way and uses contribute to an inviting pedestrian environment. Staff Findings: The combination of large glass sliding windows fronting the commercial space and space for public artwork allow for a free-flow environment that will invite pedestrians from the street. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls, sidewalks or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian environment. Staff Findings: The proposed amenity space does not duplicate any existing space nearby. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Any variation to the design and operational standards for public amenity, Subsection 26.575.030.F., promotes the purpose of the public amenity requirements. Staff Findings: No variation from the standards is requested. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Utility, delivery and trash service provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one (1) building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply: Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 2 of 12 P34 VI.A. 1. A trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum size and location standards established by Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, unless otherwise established according to said Chapter. Staff Findings: The applicant is proposing a trash and recycle area that is approximately 11’ x 4’4”. This is smaller than the minimum size standards of 20 linear feet. The applicant has met with the Environmental Health Department and has tentatively received Special Review approval for the reduced size. Final Special Review approval shall be obtained prior to building permit issuance. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. A utility area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum standards established by Title 25, Utilities, of the Municipal Code, the City’s Electric Distribution Standards, and the National Electric Code, unless otherwise established according to said Codes. Staff Findings: There is an existing transformer on site that the applicant intends to abandon. Service will be accessed from a transformer across the alley. The existing meters will stay in place on the east wall of the building. The Utilities Department has reviewed this proposal and tentatively approved it as long as the building does not generate more service than can be provided by the transformer across the alley. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be co-located and combined to the greatest extent practical. Staff Findings: The trash, recycle and utility services will all be located on the southeast corner of the property. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. If the property adjoins an alleyway, the utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be along and accessed from the alleyway, unless otherwise approved through Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. Staff Findings: Trash and recycle will be accessed along the alley, either through the exterior fence door or through the garage, as needed by the applicant. Utility will be accessed through the existing transformer located across the alley and the meters accessed as they are currently. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be fenced so as not to be visible from the street, unless they are entirely located on an alleyway or otherwise approved though Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. All fences shall be six (6) feet high from grade, shall be of sound construction, and shall be no less than ninety percent (90%) opaque, unless otherwise varied through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. Staff Findings: The trash and recycle service area has proposed screening of a 5’ cedar fence that is entirely opaque. The fence must be raised to 6’ to comply with this standard. The existing meters will not be screened, but are entirely hidden from street view as they are located along the southern portion of the east wall, interior to the lot. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 3 of 12 P35 VI.A. 6. Whenever utility, trash, and recycle service areas are required to be provided abutting an alley, other portions of a building may extend to the rear property line if otherwise allowed by this Title, provided that the utility, trash and recycle area is located at grade and accessible to the alley. Staff Findings: Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 7. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. Staff Findings: The existing transformer and pedestal are proposed to be abandoned. Service shall be obtained from the transformer located across the alley and already allows for service provider access. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 8. All commercial and lodging buildings shall provide a delivery area. The delivery area shall be located along the alley if an alley adjoins the property. The delivery area shall be accessible to all tenant spaces of the building in a manner that meets the requirements of the International Building Code Chapters 10 and 11 as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen. All non-ground floor commercial spaces shall have access to an elevator or dumbwaiter for delivery access. Alleyways (vehicular rights-of-way) may not be utilized as pathways (pedestrian rights-of-way) to meet the requirements of the International Building Code. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. Staff Findings: The delivery area shall be along the alley as it is currently. The second floor commercial space is part of the first floor and does not need separate delivery. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 9. All commercial tenant spaces located on the ground floor in excess of 1,500 square feet shall contain a vestibule (double set of doors) developed internal to the structure to meet the requirements of the International Energy Conservation Code as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen, or an air curtain. Staff Findings: A vestibule that meets the requirements of the IECC is provided in the design. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 10. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the street as practical. Staff Findings: Exhaust systems and venting have not been identified in the proposal. All exhaust shall be either through the roof (preferably the flat roof portion) or along the eastern wall. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 11. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 4 of 12 P36 VI.A. public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. Staff Findings: See response to criteria 10 above. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 12. The trash and recycling service area requirements may be varied pursuant to Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code. All other requirements of this subsection may be varied by special review (see Chapter 26.430.040.E, Utility and delivery service area provisions). Staff Findings: The applicant is requesting Special Review approval for reduced trash and recycle service area dimensions. Environmental Health has tentatively approved the proposed plan. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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 main entrance will be large sliding glass doors and an additional large glass entrance will be further south on the same façade. These activate pedestrians from the street and reveal activity within the commercial space. Staff finds this criterion is 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 Review Page 5 of 12 P37 VI.A. Commercial Design Guidelines – Central Mixed Used Area, Conceptual & Final Review Design Guidelines This parcel is designated as the Central Mixed Use Area in the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Objectives and Guidelines. The Central Mixed Use area primarily consists of multi-family residential buildings of two and three stories, although future development as commercial and lodge is likely as a Mixed Use zone district. Building height is residential in scale. Shallow front and side yard setbacks are typical and buildings tend to be freestanding. Buildings are articulated with varied massing and architectural details to convey a human scale. Roof forms vary while building materials are relatively urban with a predominance of brick. The design objectives for this character area are: 1. Reflect a transition in character between the Commercial Core and the outlying residential neighborhoods. 2. Maintain a sense of front yards with landscaping. 3. Provide a sense of human scale. 4. Maintain a visually interesting street edge. 5. Encourage outdoor use areas. 6. Minimize visual impacts of parking. Conceptual Review includes the following guidelines: Street & Alley System Staff Findings: The applicant has proposed upgrades to the public walkway along Spring Street to enhance the pedestrian experience. It is located at sidewalk level. The second story terrace on the alley provides a connection between the architecture and the pedestrians who use the alley as a walkway into downtown from Neale Ave. Staff finds these Guidelines are met. Staff finds the following Guideline is met: 2.2 Public walkways and through courts shall be designed to facilitate access to uses within the link and/or to the rear of the site. • Locate walkways at the sidewalk level. • Locate retail frontage along walkways. • Use architectural detailing to enhance the pedestrian experience. • Design lighting, signage and landscapes to create human scale and to enhance the pedestrian experience. Staff finds the following Guideline is not applicable: 2.1 Development on a site of two or more traditional lot widths may accommodate additional public walkways and through courts. These should: • Respect the setting of and avoid conflict with an adjacent historic building • Design the frontage of any walkways or through court with similar attention to articulation, detail and materials accorded the primary street façade(s). Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 6 of 12 P38 VI.A. Parking Staff Findings: The proposed parking is within the building in a garage that faces the alley. This is a vast improvement upon the non-conforming parking that currently is used on the site and adjacent right-of-way. The garage is built into the mass of the structure and located along the alley. The proposed materials are the same as the commercial portion of the structure. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 2.3 Parking shall not be positioned between the building and the street and visual impacts shall be minimized in one or more of the following ways: • Parking shall be placed underground wherever possible • Where surface parking must be provided, it shall be located to the rear of the interior of the property. • Surface parking shall be externally buffered with landscaping, and internally planted and landscaped. 2.4 Structured parking access shall not have a negative impact on the character of the street. The access shall be: • Located on a secondary street where feasible • Designed with the same attention to detail and materials as the primary building façade • Integrated into the building design Public Amenity Space Staff Findings: The proposed design enhances the public space along Spring Street, increasing the usable area and making it more inviting to pedestrians. The amenity space abuts and is level with the sidewalk, open to the sky, paved and directly accessible to the public. The applicant proposes to include public art in the amenity space, as the proposed use for the structure is an art gallery. The upper portion of the amenity space includes proposed bicycle parking. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 2.5 Public Amenity Space should take the form of: • Public space adjacent to the street edge • Public links through the site 2.7 A street facing amenity space shall meet all of the following requirements: • Abut the public sidewalk • Be level with the sidewalk • Be open to the sky • Be directly accessible to the public • Be paved or otherwise landscaped Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 7 of 12 P39 VI.A. 2.8 Street facing amenity space shall contain features to promote and enhance its use. These may include one or more of the following: • Street furniture • Public art • Historical / interpretive marker The detailed design of Public Amenity Space, with regard to guideline 2.8, will be a matter for approval at the Final Review Stage, although it may be discussed at the Conceptual Stage. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable: 2.6 A street facing amenity space located on a corner or within the street block may be considered. 2.9 New buildings on a site occupying more than two traditional lot widths may provide a walkway or through court within a single development or between two developments. This may also extend only part way through the parcel. 2.10 Mid-block walkways shall remain subordinate in scale to traditional lot widths. • Mid-block public walkways shall be between 8 ft. and 10 ft. in width. Building Placement Staff Findings: The existing structure is non-conforming in regards to front and side yard setbacks. The applicant proposes to reuse the existing structure and therefore may maintain the setbacks. Additionally, this property is located adjacent to the Commercial Core, where zero setbacks are common and encouraged. Existing yard around the smaller mass along Main Street will be maintained. There is little open space surrounding the existing structure, which is proposed for reuse in this application. The existing building is mostly perpendicular to the street frontages and occupies most of the lot, which is a traditional lot. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 2.11 The existing setback pattern within this area should be maintained. • A front yard should be provided. • Position a new building to be within the established range of front yard setbacks. • Side yard setbacks should frame the perimeter of a development 2.12 Maintain a sense of open space around a building. 2.13 A building should be oriented perpendicular to the street frontage within the traditional lot arrangement. Building Height, Mass & Scale Staff Findings: The proposed project converts the existing three story structure into two stories. The proposed building conforms to the maximum height of the zone district. The proposal does not step back the upper story, as the existing structure does not do this, and is proposed for Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 8 of 12 P40 VI.A. reuse. No additional height is proposed. This property is not adjacent to any historic buildings. The building occupies most of the lot, which is only one traditional lot width (30 ft.). The existing structures include a step down massing from 2 stories above grade along the alley to 1 ½ stories above grade in the middle to a one story mass attached to the front along Main Street. The proposed design cleans up the massing by creating two distinct masses, one story and two stories, with a connecting element between. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guideline is met: 2.16 Subdivide the mass into smaller “modules” that convey a human scale. Multiple modules can be connected to create a larger building. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable: 2.14 A new building or addition should reflect the existing range of two or three stories. • Refer to the zone district regulations to determine the maximum height on the subject property. • Step back upper levels to reduce the perceived scale at the street edge. • Additional height, as permitted in the zone district, may be added for one or more of the following reasons: o In order to achieve at least a two foot variation in height with an adjacent building. o The primary function of the building is civic. (i.e. the building is a Museum, Civic Building, Performance Hall, Fire Station, etc.) o 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. o To benefit the livability of Affordable Housing Units. o To make a demonstrable contribution to the building’s overall energy efficiency, for instance by providing improved daylighting. 2.15 The width of a building should convey a human scale. • A new building should step down in height next to a single story historic buildings • Maximum building width should be limited to three traditional lot widths (90ft.) Final Review includes the following guidelines: Building Design & Articulation Staff Findings: The perceived mass of the building respects the design character of the area. The combination of varied roof forms on the structure breaks up the massing and creates interest. The first story includes large sliding glass doors that front the street to enhance the interaction between pedestrians and the interior space of the building. Staff has suggested the applicant add additional windows to the first story to further enhance the human scale. The conversion from a Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 9 of 12 P41 VI.A. three story to two story structure within the same volume allows for larger floor to ceiling heights that are well above 9 feet. The proposal includes large sliding glass doors that front the street to enhance the interaction between the interior and exterior of the structure. Staff has suggested the applicant add additional windows to the first story to further enhance interest at the street level. The proposed design also includes sliding zinc doors that can be used to cover the glass openings on Spring Street. These glass openings are critical to the street level interest and interaction between the pedestrian and the building. They also reflect the commercial character that is common of a public usable space instead of a private one. Staff recommends that they are removed from the design. The entrance to the gallery is located at sidewalk level and is ADA compliant. An airlock entry is provided, although additional entry points are also located along the street when weather allows for a more free-flow of pedestrians between the interior to exterior. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 2.17 To reduce the perceived mass of a building the design should respect the design character of the area and reflect the human scale and character of the city. This shall be achieved through all of the following: • The massing of building forms • The articulation of the façade(s) through a varied roof profile • The use of a variation in architectural materials, and detailing 2.19 The first floor façade should be designed to concentrate interest at the street level, using the highest quality of design, detailing and materials 2.22 The retail entrance should be at the sidewalk level. • All entrances shall be ADA compliant. • On sloping sites the retail frontage should be as close to a level entrance as possible. 2.23 Incorporate an airlock entry into the plan for all new structures. • An airlock entry that projects forward of the primary façade at the sidewalk edge is inappropriate. • Adding temporary entries during the winter season detracts from the character of the historic district. • Using a temporary vinyl or fabric “airlock” to provide protection from winter weather is not permitted. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 10 of 12 P42 VI.A. 2.24 The roofscape should be designed with the same design attention as the secondary elevations of the building. • Group and screen mechanical units from view. • Locate mechanical equipment to the rear of the roof area. • Position, articulate and design rooftop enclosures or structures to reflect the modulation and character of the building. • Use materials which complement the design of the building facades. • Design roof garden areas to be unobtrusive from the street. • Use ‘green roof’ design best practice, where feasible. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable: 2.18 Any new buildings shall be designed to maintain a minimum of 9 feet from floor to ceiling on all floors. 2.20 A new building should be designed to maintain the stature of traditional street level retail frontage. • This should be a minimum of 11 ft. in floor to floor height on the first floor. 2.21 Minimize the appearance of a third floor. • Where a third floor’s floor to ceiling height is in excess of 10 ft., it should be set back a minimum of 15 ft. from the street façade to reduce the apparent height. • Increase the parapet height to screen the visual impact of a tall top floor. • The design of a set back third floor shall be simpler in form, more subdued in modeling, detail and color than the primary façade. Architectural Materials Staff Findings: The proposed materials are zinc for the commercial portion and cedar for the affordable housing unit. These are high quality materials. Cedar is seen historically around Aspen, and although zinc is not as common, it presents a more contemporary contrasting material that complements the cedar. Both materials are durable and weather appropriately. The initial application represented these materials as contrasting to differentiate. Staff suggested trying to relate the materials more to make this appear as a more cohesive design, and not a faux historic project. Staff suggests that the final materials be similar in color and that the zinc be patinated to reduce the reflectiveness of the material. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 2.25 High quality, durable materials should be employed. • The palette of materials proposed for all development should be specified and approved as part of the general and detailed development approvals process, including samples of materials as required. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 11 of 12 P43 VI.A. 2.26 Building materials should have these features: • Convey the quality and range of materials seen historically. • Reduce the perceived scale of the building. • Convey a human scale. • Have proven durability and weathering characteristics within this climate. Paving & Landscape Staff Findings: The enhanced public space along Spring Street will be paved and landscaped. The proposed materials are flamed granite entry pavers and grass pave blocks for the sculpture court. This is a large improvement over the currently underutilized space and creates an interaction between the proposed building and Spring Street. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 2.27 Landscaping and paving should have the following characteristics: • Enhance the street scene. • Integrate the development with its setting. • Reflect the quality of the architectural materials. 2.28 Landscaping should be provided in all projects. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 12 of 12 P44 VI.A. EXHIBIT C MEMORANDUM TO: Justin Barker, Community Development Department FROM: APCHA Board of Directors THRU: Mike Kosdrosky, Executive Director Cindy Christensen, Operations Manager DATE: April 1, 2015 RE: REDEVELOPMENT OF 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET ISSUE: The applicant is proposing to renovate the existing building into an art gallery, and replace the existing “moderate income” (using under the Category 3 designation) studio affordable housing rental unit in a different location. BACKGROUND: In 1979, Neil Ross and Brian Goodheim owned by property; it was known as the Aspen Valley Visiting Nurses Association Building (AVVNA). Ross and Goodheim received approval to develop additional commercial space by developing a “moderate” income employee housing unit. City Council approved the floor area bonus and waived the required parking space for the employee unit. The unit was restricted to “moderate income category” on July 18, 1980, at Reception No. 225474. The Guidelines today reflect that a “moderate income category” is defined as either Category 2 or Category 3. The building is proposed to look like two buildings – an art gallery on the south side linked to a small affordable housing unit on the north side. The 35-year old affordable housing unit will be relocated from the alley to the Main Street side of the property. The studio unit will be completely remodeled. The net livable area of 400 square feet shall remain the same. The current minimum square footage for Category 1 or 2 studio unit is 400 square feet; the proposed Guidelines increase the minimum square footage to 500 square feet for all studio-type units. DISCUSSION: The current building was developed with one moderate income employee unit. The unit was the product of the City’s commercial space special review for a floor area bonus. The applicant is proposing to renovate the affordable housing unit and will record a new deed restriction in the currently used form at the Category 2 price, income and occupancy guidelines. Section 26.470.070.4d, of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, states that the “proposed units shall be deed-restricted as ‘for sale’ units and transferred to qualified purchasers;” however, the Code does Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 1 P45 VI.A. allow for rental units. The applicant is seeking to maintain the unit as a rental unit. If the approval requires the unit to be a “for sale” unit, the applicant will withdraw this application. The unit is currently a Category 3; the monthly rent for a studio Category 3 is $1,307 per month. The Category 2 monthly rent for a studio unit is $875 per month. The unit meets the current minimum square footage for a Category 1 or 2 studio. The applicant plans on moving forward with the initial parking agreement – there will be no off-street parking for the employee unit. Staff would recommend that a washer/dryer be provided in the unit along with the other appliances due to the request to waive the off-street parking for the employee. Due to the plans to relocate the employee unit, staff would recommend that the conditions stated in Part VII, Information for Development of Affordable Housing, Section 14, Deed Restricting Existing Dwelling Units, of the APCHA Guidelines, are required. They are: a. The interior walls of all units must be freshly painted. b. The interior Appliances must be purchased within the last five years and be in good and working condition. c. Carpet must be less than five year old and be in good condition and repair, or be replaced. d. The exterior walls shall be freshly painted within one year of dedication. e. A general level of upgrade to yards and landscaping shall be provided. f. Windows, heating, plumbing, electrical systems, fixtures and equipment shall be in good and working order, and brought up to today’s standards. g. The roof must have a remaining useful life of at least ten (10) years. h. All units shall meet the International Building Code minimum standards, any applicable housing code or, in the absence of an adequate code, the housing code acceptable to the APCHA. RECOMMENDATION: The APCHA Board reviewed the application at their regular meeting held April 1, 2015 and recommend approval of the relocation of the employee housing unit as a rental unit at Category 2; however, at such time the unit is found to be out of compliance for one year, the unit shall become an ownership unit and listed and sold through the APCHA lottery system. The following conditions shall also apply: Rental Unit: 1. Recordation of a new deed restriction for the unit, provided by APCHA, at Category 2. 2. The unit shall be remodeled to meet the conditions a-h stated above. Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 2 P46 VI.A. 3. The appliances shall include: refrigerator/freezer, stove/oven, dishwasher, washer and dryer. 4. The deed restriction shall require that all tenants are approved PRIOR to tenancy through APCHA every two years. 5. Owner and APCHA stipulate and agree that, in accordance with CRS 38-12-301(1)(a) and (b), this Deed Restriction constitutes a voluntary agreement and deed restriction to limit rent on the property subject hereto and to otherwise provide affordable housing stock. Owner waives any right it may have to claim that the Deed Restriction violates CRS 38-12-301. 6. The rental deed restriction will be recorded with the following conditions: a. The use and occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Units shall henceforth be limited exclusively to housing for employees and their families who are employed in Pitkin County and who meet the definition of "qualified Category 2 employee for the studio unit as that term is defined by the qualification guidelines established and indexed by the Authority on an annual basis. The Owner shall have the right to lease the Employee Dwelling Unit to a "qualified employee" of their own selection. b. The Employee Dwelling Unit shall not be occupied by the Owner or members of the immediate family ("Immediate Family" shall mean a person related by blood or marriage who is a first cousin [or closer relative] and his or her children), unless the family member is a qualified employee and obtains approval by APCHA prior to occupancy. The unit shall at no time be used as a lodge unit. c. Written verification of employment of employee(s) proposed to reside in the Employee Dwelling Unit shall be completed and filed with the APCHA by the Owner of the Employee Dwelling Units prior to occupancy thereof, and such verification must be acceptable to the APCHA. d. The maximum rental rate shall not exceed the Category 2, studio rental rates as set forth in the Rental Guidelines established by the APCHA and may be adjusted annually as set forth by the Guidelines. Rent shall be verified and approved by the APCHA upon submission and approval of the lease. Employees shall be qualified by the APCHA as to employment, maximum income and asset limitations every two years. A copy of the signed lease must be provided to APCHA. f. Owner agrees to provide to APCHA upon request all information reasonably necessary to determine if there is full compliance with this Agreement. g. In the event that APCHA has reasonable cause to believe the Owner and/or tenant is violating the provisions of this Agreement, the APCHA, by its authorized representative, may inspect the Property or Affordable Housing Unit between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, after providing the Owner with no less than 24 hours’ written notice. h. The APCHA, in the event a violation of this Agreement is discovered, shall send a notice of violation to the Owner and/or tenant, as may be applicable, detailing the nature of the violation and allowing the Owner or tenant fifteen (15) days to cure. Said notice shall state that the Owner or tenant may request a quasi-judicial hearing before the APCHA Board pursuant to the Grievance Procedures of the APCHA Guidelines within fifteen (15) days to determine the merits of the allegations. If no hearing is requested and the violation is not cured within the fifteen (15) day period, the Owner or tenant shall be considered in violation of this Agreement. If a hearing is held before the APCHA Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 3 P47 VI.A. Board, the decision of the APCHA Board based on the record of such hearing shall be final for the purpose of determining if a violation has occurred and for the purpose of judicial review. i. There is hereby reserved to the parties’ hereto any and all remedies provided by law for breach of this Agreement or any of its terms. In the event the parties resort to litigation with respect to any or all provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall recover damages and costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees. j. In the event the Employee Housing Unit is leased without compliance herewith, such lease shall be wholly null and void and shall confer no title whatsoever upon the purported tenant. Each and every lease, for all purposes, shall be deemed to include and incorporate by this reference, the covenants herein contained, even without reference therein to this Agreement. k. In the event that the Owner or tenant fails to cure any breach, the APCHA may resort to any and all available legal action, including, but not limited to, specific performance of this Agreement or a mandatory injunction requiring compliance by Owner and/or tenant. l. Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement and any other related document shall be interpreted in such a manner as to be valid under applicable law; but if any such provision shall be invalid or prohibited under applicable law, such provision shall be ineffective to the extent of such invalidity or prohibition without invalidating the remaining provisions of this Agreement or other document. m. This Agreement is to be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. n. No claim of waiver, consent or acquiescence with respect to any provision of this Agreement shall be valid against any part hereto except on the basis of a written instrument executed by the parties to this agreement. However, the party for whose benefit a condition is inserted herein shall have the unilateral right to waive such condition. o. The parties to this Agreement agree that any modifications of this Agreement shall be effective only when made in writing signed by both parties and recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. p. The terms and provisions of this Deed Restriction shall constitute covenants running with the title to the Employee Housing Unit as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the Managing Agent, the Association and/or Owner, by the APCHA, the City of Aspen, Colorado, and by their respective successors and assigns, by any appropriate legal action including, but not limited to, injunction, abatement, or eviction of non-qualified tenants. q. Lease agreements executed for occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit shall provide for a rental term of not less than six (6) consecutive months. A signed and executed copy of the lease shall be provided to the APCHA by the Owner within ten (10) days of approval of employee(s) for the Employee Dwelling Unit. Upon vacancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit, the Owner is granted forty- five (45) days in which to locate a qualified employee. If an employee is not placed by the Owner, the APCHA may rent the Employee Dwelling Unit to a qualified employee. r. When the option to convert any unit to a sale unit is exercised, the owner must adopt a new deed restriction in the form adopted by APCHA that is applicable to sale units. Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 4 P48 VI.A. If the owner requests the unit to become an ownership unit, or it is found that the unit has been out of compliance for one year after notification to the owner, the unit shall become a “for-sale” unit and the following shall apply: Sales Unit: 1. The unit shall be an ownership unit and sold through Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority lottery system. 2. The unit shall be classified as Category 2 for the studio unit. 3. The condominium documents shall reflect that any common area maintenance shall be paid by the Art Gallery (commercial space) owners. If any work is associated with the deed-restricted unit, the cost will be assessed based on the actual values of the commercial space versus the deed-restricted unit. Any property management fees or other fees associated with the commercial space shall not be charged to the deed- restricted owner. The condominium documents shall be reviewed and approved by APCHA prior to Certificate of Occupancy to include language in the event the deed-restricted unit reverts to ownership. The goal is to protect the affordable housing units from excessive monthly and/or special assessments having to do with luxury items and/or expensive modifications associated with the commercial space. Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 5 P49 VI.A. EXHIBIT D P50 VI.A. P51 VI.A. P52 VI.A. P53 VI.A. P54 VI.A. P55 VI.A. P56 VI.A. P57 VI.A. P58 VI.A. P59 VI.A. P60 VI.A. P61 VI.A. P62 VI.A. P63 VI.A. P64 VI.A. P65 VI.A. P66 VI.A. P67 VI.A. P68 VI.A. P69 VI.A. P70 VI.A. P71 VI.A. P72 VI.A. P73 VI.A. P74 VI.A. P75 VI.A. P76 VI.A. P77 VI.A. P78 VI.A. P79 VI.A. P80 VI.A. P81 VI.A. P82 VI.A. P83 VI.A. P84 VI.A. P85 VI.A. P 8 6 V I . A . P87 VI.A. P88 VI.A. P89 VI.A. P 9 0 V I . A . P91 VI.A. P92 VI.A. P93 VI.A. P 9 4 V I . A . P95 VI.A. P96 VI.A. P97 VI.A. P98 VI.A. P99 VI.A. P100 VI.A. P101 VI.A. P102 VI.A. P103 VI.A. P104 VI.A. P105 VI.A. P106 VI.A. P 1 0 7 V I . A . P 1 0 8 V I . A . P 1 0 9 V I . A . P 1 1 0 V I . A . P 1 1 1 V I . A . P 1 1 2 V I . A . P 1 1 3 V I . A . P 1 1 4 V I . A . P 1 1 5 V I . A . P 1 1 6 V I . A . P 1 1 7 V I . A . P 1 1 8 V I . A . P 1 1 9 V I . A . P 1 2 0 V I . A . P 1 2 1 V I . A . P 1 2 2 V I . A . P 1 2 3 V I . A . P 1 2 4 V I . A . P 1 2 5 V I . A . P 1 2 6 V I . A . P 1 2 7 V I . A . P 1 2 8 V I . A . P129 VI.A. P130 VI.A. P131 VI.A. P132 VI.A. P133 VI.A. P134 VI.A. P135 VI.A. P136 VI.A. P137 VI.A. P138 VI.A. P139 VI.A. P140 VI.A. P141 VI.A. P142 VI.A. P143 VI.A. P144 VI.A. P145 VI.A. E X H I B I T E P 1 4 6 V I . A . P 1 4 7 V I . A . P148 VI.A. P149 VI.A. P150 VI.A. P151 VI.A. P152 VI.A. P153 VI.A. P154 VI.A. P155 VI.A. P156 VI.A. P157 VI.A. E X H I B I T F P 1 5 8 V I . A . P159 VI.A. P160 VI.A. P161 VI.A. EXHIBIT G P162 VI.A. MEMORANDUM TO: Justin Barker, Community Development Department FROM: APCHA Board of Directors THRU: Mike Kosdrosky, Executive Director Cindy Christensen, Operations Manager DATE: June 8, 2015 RE: REDEVELOPMENT OF 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET ISSUE: The applicant is proposing to renovate the existing building into an art gallery, and replace the existing “moderate income” (using under the Category 3 designation) studio affordable housing rental unit in a different location. BACKGROUND: In 1979, Neil Ross and Brian Goodheim owned by property; it was known as the Aspen Valley Visiting Nurses Association Building (AVVNA). Ross and Goodheim received approval to develop additional commercial space by developing a “moderate” income employee housing unit. City Council approved the floor area bonus and waived the required parking space for the employee unit. The unit was restricted to “moderate income category” on July 18, 1980, at Reception No. 225474. The Guidelines today reflect that a “moderate income category” is defined as either Category 2 or Category 3. The building is proposed to look like two buildings – an art gallery on the south side linked to a small affordable housing unit on the north side. The 35-year old affordable housing unit will be relocated from the alley to the Main Street side of the property. The studio unit will be completely remodeled. The net livable area of 400 square feet shall remain the same. The current minimum square footage for Category 1 or 2 studio unit is 400 square feet; the proposed Guidelines increase the minimum square footage to 500 square feet for all studio-type units. DISCUSSION: The current building was developed with one moderate income employee unit. The unit was the product of the City’s commercial space special review for a floor area bonus. The applicant is proposing to renovate the affordable housing unit and will record a new deed restriction in the currently used form at the Category 2 price, income and occupancy guidelines. Section 26.470.070.4d, of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, states that the “proposed units shall be deed-restricted as ‘for sale’ units and transferred to qualified purchasers;” however, the Code does allow for rental units. The applicant is seeking to maintain the unit as a rental unit. If the approval requires the unit to be a “for sale” unit, the applicant will withdraw this application. Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 1 P163 VI.A. The unit is currently a Category 3; the monthly rent for a studio Category 3 is $1,307 per month. The Category 2 monthly rent for a studio unit is $875 per month. The unit meets the current minimum square footage for a Category 1 or 2 studio. The applicant plans on moving forward with the initial parking agreement – there will be no off-street parking for the employee unit. Staff would recommend that a washer/dryer be provided in the unit along with the other appliances due to the request to waive the off-street parking for the employee. Due to the plans to relocate the employee unit, staff would recommend that the conditions stated in Part VII, Information for Development of Affordable Housing, Section 14, Deed Restricting Existing Dwelling Units, of the APCHA Guidelines, are required. They are: a. The interior walls of all units must be freshly painted. b. The interior Appliances must be purchased within the last five years and be in good and working condition. c. Carpet must be less than five year old and be in good condition and repair, or be replaced. d. The exterior walls shall be freshly painted within one year of dedication. e. A general level of upgrade to yards and landscaping shall be provided. f. Windows, heating, plumbing, electrical systems, fixtures and equipment shall be in good and working order, and brought up to today’s standards. g. The roof must have a remaining useful life of at least ten (10) years. h. All units shall meet the International Building Code minimum standards, any applicable housing code or, in the absence of an adequate code, the housing code acceptable to the APCHA. RECOMMENDATION: The APCHA Board reviewed the application at their regular meeting held April 1, 2015 and recommend approval of the relocation of the employee housing unit as a rental unit at Category 2; however, the following conditions shall also apply: Rental Unit: 1. Recordation of a new deed restriction for the unit, provided by APCHA, at Category 2. 2. The unit shall be remodeled to meet the conditions a-h stated above. 3. The appliances shall include: refrigerator/freezer, stove/oven, dishwasher, washer and dryer. 4. The deed restriction shall require that all tenants are approved PRIOR to tenancy through APCHA every two years. Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 2 P164 VI.A. 5. Owner and APCHA stipulate and agree that, in accordance with CRS 38-12-301(1)(a) and (b), this Deed Restriction constitutes a voluntary agreement and deed restriction to limit rent on the property subject hereto and to otherwise provide affordable housing stock. Owner waives any right it may have to claim that the Deed Restriction violates CRS 38-12-301. 6. The rental deed restriction will be recorded with the following conditions: a. The use and occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Units shall henceforth be limited exclusively to housing for employees and their families who are employed in Pitkin County and who meet the definition of "qualified” Category 2 employee for the studio unit as that term is defined by the qualification guidelines established and indexed by the Authority on an annual basis. The Owner shall have the right to lease the Employee Dwelling Unit to a "qualified employee" of their own selection. In the event the APCHA Board determines the Owner is in violation of this agreement for a period of Forty-Five (45) days or longer, APCHA may require the Owner to lease the Employee Dwelling Unit to a “qualified employee” selected by APCHA. b. The Employee Dwelling Unit shall not be occupied by the Owner or members of the immediate family ("Immediate Family" shall mean a person related by blood or marriage who is a first cousin [or closer relative] and his or her children), unless the family member is a qualified employee and obtains approval by APCHA prior to occupancy. The unit shall at no time be used as a lodge unit. c. Written verification of employment of employee(s) proposed to reside in the Employee Dwelling Unit shall be completed and filed with the APCHA by the Owner of the Employee Dwelling Units prior to occupancy thereof, and such verification must be acceptable to the APCHA. d. The maximum rental rate shall not exceed the Category 2, studio rental rates as set forth in the Rental Guidelines established by the APCHA and may be adjusted annually as set forth by the Guidelines. Rent shall be verified and approved by the APCHA upon submission and approval of the lease. Employees shall be qualified by the APCHA as to employment, maximum income and asset limitations every two years. A copy of the signed lease must be provided to APCHA. f. Owner agrees to provide to APCHA upon request all information reasonably necessary to determine if there is full compliance with this Agreement. g. In the event that APCHA has reasonable cause to believe the Owner and/or tenant is violating the provisions of this Agreement, the APCHA, by its authorized Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 3 P165 VI.A. representative, may inspect the Property or Affordable Housing Unit between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, after providing the Owner with no less than 24 hours’ written notice. h. The APCHA, in the event a violation of this Agreement is discovered, shall send a notice of violation to the Owner and/or tenant, as may be applicable, detailing the nature of the violation and allowing the Owner or tenant fifteen (15) days to cure. Said notice shall state that the Owner or tenant may request a quasi-judicial hearing before the APCHA Board pursuant to the Grievance Procedures of the APCHA Guidelines within fifteen (15) days to determine the merits of the allegations. If no hearing is requested and the violation is not cured within the fifteen (15) day period, the Owner or tenant shall be considered in violation of this Agreement. If a hearing is held before the APCHA Board, the decision of the APCHA Board based on the record of such hearing shall be final for the purpose of determining if a violation has occurred and for the purpose of judicial review. In the event the APCHA Board determines the Owner is in violation of this Agreement and the violation is not cured within fifteen (15) days or if the Owner or tenant have not requested a quasi- judicial hearing before the APCHA Board pursuant to the Grievance Procedures of the APCHA Guidelines within fifteen (15) days to determine the merits of the allegations, the Owner will pay a fine to the APCHA in the amount of five-hundred dollars ($500) per day until the unit is rented in compliance with this deed restriction. i. There is hereby reserved to the parties’ hereto any and all remedies provided by law for breach of this Agreement or any of its terms. In the event the parties resort to litigation with respect to any or all provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall recover damages and costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees. j. In the event the Employee Housing Unit is leased without compliance herewith, such lease shall be wholly null and void and shall confer no title whatsoever upon the purported tenant. Each and every lease, for all purposes, shall be deemed to include and incorporate by this reference, the covenants herein contained, even without reference therein to this Agreement. k. In the event that the Owner or tenant fails to cure any breach, the APCHA may resort to any and all available legal action, including, but not limited to, specific performance of this Agreement or a mandatory injunction requiring compliance by Owner and/or tenant. l. Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement and any other related document shall be interpreted in such a manner as to be valid under applicable law; but if any such provision shall be invalid or prohibited under applicable law, such Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 4 P166 VI.A. provision shall be ineffective to the extent of such invalidity or prohibition without invalidating the remaining provisions of this Agreement or other document. m. This Agreement is to be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. n. No claim of waiver, consent or acquiescence with respect to any provision of this Agreement shall be valid against any part hereto except on the basis of a written instrument executed by the parties to this agreement. However, the party for whose benefit a condition is inserted herein shall have the unilateral right to waive such condition. o. The parties to this Agreement agree that any modifications of this Agreement shall be effective only when made in writing signed by both parties and recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. p. The terms and provisions of this Deed Restriction shall constitute covenants running with the title to the Employee Housing Unit as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the Managing Agent, the Association and/or Owner, by the APCHA, the City of Aspen, Colorado, and by their respective successors and assigns, by any appropriate legal action including, but not limited to, injunction, abatement, or eviction of non-qualified tenants. q. Lease agreements executed for occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit shall provide for a rental term of not less than six (6) consecutive months. A signed and executed copy of the lease shall be provided to the APCHA by the Owner within ten (10) days of approval of employee(s) for the Employee Dwelling Unit. Upon vacancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit, the Owner is granted forty-five (45) days in which to locate a qualified employee. If an employee is not placed by the Owner, the APCHA may rent the Employee Dwelling Unit to a qualified employee. r. When the option to convert any unit to a sale unit is exercised, the owner must adopt a new deed restriction in the form adopted by APCHA that is applicable to sale units. s. The Employee Dwelling Unit shall not be converted to a sale unit without the consent of the Owner. If the owner requests the unit to become an ownership unit, the following shall apply: Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 5 P167 VI.A. Sales Unit: 1. The unit shall be an ownership unit and sold through Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority lottery system. 2. The unit shall be classified as Category 2 for the studio unit. 3. The condominium documents shall reflect that any common area maintenance shall be paid by the Art Gallery (commercial space) owners. If any work is associated with the deed-restricted unit, the cost will be assessed based on the actual values of the commercial space versus the deed-restricted unit. Any property management fees or other fees associated with the commercial space shall not be charged to the deed- restricted owner. The condominium documents shall be reviewed and approved by APCHA prior to Certificate of Occupancy to include language in the event the deed- restricted unit reverts to ownership. The goal is to protect the affordable housing units from excessive monthly and/or special assessments having to do with luxury items and/or expensive modifications associated with the commercial space. Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 6 P168 VI.A. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director FROM: Justin Barker, Planner RE: 710 & 720 E. Durant Avenue (Durant Mall) Consolidated Commercial Design Review Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 - Public Hearing MEETING DATE: June 16, 2015 APPLICANT /OWNER: Durant Mall Condominium Association REPRESENTATIVE: RGS Architecture LOCATION: 710 & 720 E. Durant Avenue CURRENT ZONING Neighborhood Commercial (NC) w/ Planned Development (PD) overlay SUMMARY: The Applicant requests of the Planning and Zoning Commission approval for consolidated Commercial Design Review to remodel the exterior of the two structures. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Photo of Durant Mall, as seen from E. Durant Avenue LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The following land use approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission is being requested: • Commercial Design Review – for remodel of the existing structure, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.412 (P&Z is the final review authority). P169 VI.B. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the north side of East Durant Avenue, between Spring Street and Original Street (Figure A). The lot is approximately 16,500 square feet and is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (NC) with a Planned Development (PD) Overlay. There are two existing structures on site (Figures B & C on next page) that were built at the same time in the 1970s. The buildings are each three stories tall above grade on a raised plaza, and contain a combination of commercial and residential uses. There is a parking garage located below grade that is accessed from the alley side. The buildings are heavy timber construction with wood siding and a combination of standing seam metal and flat roofs. The existing buildings vary in height but are approximately 41 ft. tall in some areas, which exceeds the height limit in the NC zone district (28 ft., increasable to 32 ft. with Commercial Design Review). This existing nonconforming height may be maintained, but not increased, as long as demolition is not triggered on the existing structure. Any new construction must conform to the zone district limitations. Figure A – Locator Map CITY MARKET 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 2 of 7 P170 VI.B. Figure B – Existing Durant View Figure C – Existing Alley View 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 3 of 7 P171 VI.B. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to replace the existing exterior timber frame and exterior materials. The overall massing of the buildings and fenestrations will remain the same. The applicant is proposing two different designs. In both designs, the timber frame will be replaced with structural steel and the existing stone covering the base will be replaced with a combination of polished and split face concrete masonry units (CMUs). In Design Option 1 (Figures D & E) the wood siding will be replaced with a combination of vertical aluminum siding and horizontal composite siding. Figure D – Design Option 1 Durant View Figure E – Design Option 1 Alley View 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 4 of 7 P172 VI.B. Design Option 1 (Figures D & E on previous page) also adds additional parapet walls on the top floor, adding height. The proposed walls would reach 32’ 4”, which exceed the height limit. This is the preferred design by the applicant. If approved by P&Z, Design Option 1 would still require a height variance from City Council. In Design Option 2 (Figures F & G) the wood siding will be replaced only with horizontal composite siding. Design Option 2 (Figures D & E on next page) also does not include additional parapet walls, therefore not requiring a height variance. Figure F – Design Option 2 Durant View Figure G – Design Option 2 Alley View 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 5 of 7 P173 VI.B. STAFF EVALUATION: Commercial Design Review (Exhibit A): The property is located in the Commercial Character Area. The primary design objectives of this character area are: 1. Strengthen the sense of relatedness with the Commercial Core Historic District. 2. Maintain a retail orientation. 3. Promote creative, contemporary design. 4. Encourage a well-defined street wall. 5. Reflect the variety in building heights seen traditionally. 6. Accommodate outdoor public spaces while establishing a clear definition to the street edge. 7. Promote variety in the street level experience. Staff Response: Staff recognizes that the preferred proposed design is intended to modernize the appearance of the building, and the parapets are an integral part of the design. This also reinforces the appearance of a flat roof, which is the dominate roof form in the city center. However, the proposed parapets do not inherently help achieve any of the Guidelines and increase the perceived mass of the building. The existing buildings create variation of height and building mass through varied roof forms and parapet edges. This variation is particularly important for a building that is already over the allowable height. Design Option 1 eliminates much of this variation by hiding the variation behind new parapets and further creating the perception of tall flat walls. There are no unique site features or constraints that would warrant a variance for this design. Staff does not support Design Option 1. The proposed exterior materials are durable modern materials, but do not convey the range and quality of materials seen traditionally which includes brick, natural stone and wood. Composite and CMU are intended to mimic wood and granite, which are natural materials that are more consistent within the Commercial Area and other nearby development. Predominate materials in the Commercial Area include high quality brick with occasional natural stone accent. Wood is often used for earlier residential buildings. The Guidelines call for continuing the combination, quality and variation that is traditionally found in these materials. Staff recommends the use of natural materials to be more consistent with the Guidelines. Additionally, the use of large amounts of metal siding in Design Option 1 – although somewhat detailed at a human scale – increases the overall perceived scale of the building, particularly with the additional parapets. The Guidelines call for building materials which reduce the perceived scale of the building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Overall, Staff is supportive of Design Option 2. Staff is concerned about the durability and quality of the proposed composite siding, but would be supportive of a composite material that has long durability and high quality. The applicant will be providing samples of the proposed materials at the meeting. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution No. __, Series of 2015, approving consolidated Commercial Design review for 710 & 720 E. Durant Avenue, with conditions.” 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 6 of 7 P174 VI.B. EXHIBITS: A. Review Criteria – Commercial Design Review B. Application C. Design Option 1 - Updated 6.11.15 D. Design Option 2 – Updated 6.11.15 E. Public Comment 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 7 of 7 P175 VI.B. RESOLUTION NO. __ (SERIES OF 2015) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING CONSOLIDATED COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 710 & 720 E. DURANT AVENUE (COMMONLY KNOWN AS DURANT MALL), LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A. Parcel IDs: 273718242006, 273718242008 –273718242016, 273718242018 – 273718242024, 273718242028 – 273718242034, 273718242038, 273718242041 –273718242060, 273718242062, 273718242070 – 273718242072, 273718242078, 273718242079, 273718242116 – 273718242130, 273718242802 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Durant Mall Condominium Association, c/o RGS Architecture, represented by RGS Architecture, requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission approve consolidated Commercial Design Review for the property located at 710 & 720 E. Durant Mall; and, WHEREAS, the property is zoned (NC) Neighborhood Commercial with a (PD) Planned Development overlay, and located within the Commercial Character Area; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of the application; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 16, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. __, Series of 2015, by a ____ to ____ (_ – _) vote, approving consolidated Commercial Design Review, with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 710 & 720 E. Durant Street Page 1 of 5 P176 VI.B. Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves consolidated Commercial Design Review as represented in Exhibit B, with the following conditions: 1. The signage represented on the drawings in Exhibit B is not approved. All signage shall comply with the requirements of the City’s Land Use Code. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 16th day of June, 2015. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: ______________________________ ______________________________ Debbie Quinn, Asst. City Attorney Ryan Walterscheid, Chair ATTEST: ______________________________ Cindy Klob, Records Manager Exhibits: A. Legal Description B. Approved Design Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 710 & 720 E. Durant Street Page 2 of 5 P177 VI.B. Exhibit A Durant Mall, (A Condominium), according to the Condominium Map thereof recorded February 6, 1976, in Plat Book 4, Page 565, as amended by Amended Condominium Map recorded October 21, 1983, in Plat Book 15, Page 48 and by Second Supplemental Condominium Map recorded June 14, 1984 in Plat Book 16, Page 10 and plat recorded March 20, 1990 in Plat Book 24 at Page 6, and the Fourth Supplemental Condominium Map recorded October 17, 2013 at reception no. 604796 and as defined and described in the Condominium Declaration for the Durant Mall, (A Condominium), recorded February 6, 1976 in Book 308, Page 518, as amended by First Amendment to Condominium Declaration recorded October 21, 1983 in Book 453, Page 848 and by Second Amendment to Condominium Declaration recorded June 14, 1984 in Book 467, Page 876 and Third Amendment Recorded December 26, 1995 in Book 803 Page 52 as reception no. 388538 and Fourth Amendment recorded October 17, 2013 at reception no. 604797, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 710 & 720 E. Durant Street Page 3 of 5 P178 VI.B. Exhibit B Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 710 & 720 E. Durant Street Page 4 of 5 P179 VI.B. Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 710 & 720 E. Durant Street Page 5 of 5 P180 VI.B. EXHIBIT A COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW DURANT MALL 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 existing structure is already 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 Character Area. Overall, Staff finds this criterion is not met in Design Option 1, but is met in Design Option 2. 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 Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 1 of 14 P181 VI.B. entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of-way or private property within commercial areas. On parcels required to provide public amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030, Public amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the method or combination of methods of providing the public amenity shall be at the option of the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, according to the procedures herein and according to the following standards: 1. The dimensions of any proposed on-site public amenity sufficiently allow for a variety of uses and activities to occur, considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses. 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 proposed development does not change the footprint of the building and therefore is exempt from the requirements of this section. Staff finds that these criteria to be not applicable. 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. Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 2 of 14 P182 VI.B. 4. If the property adjoins an alleyway, the utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be along and accessed from the alleyway, unless otherwise approved through Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. 5. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be fenced so as not to be visible from the street, unless they are entirely located on an alleyway or otherwise approved though Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. All fences shall be six (6) feet high from grade, shall be of sound construction, and shall be no less than ninety percent (90%) opaque, unless otherwise varied through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. 6. Whenever utility, trash, and recycle service areas are required to be provided abutting an alley, other portions of a building may extend to the rear property line if otherwise allowed by this Title, provided that the utility, trash and recycle area is located at grade and accessible to the alley. 7. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. 8. All commercial and lodging buildings shall provide a delivery area. The delivery area shall be located along the alley if an alley adjoins the property. The delivery area shall be accessible to all tenant spaces of the building in a manner that meets the requirements of the International Building Code Chapters 10 and 11 as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen. All non-ground floor commercial spaces shall have access to an elevator or dumbwaiter for delivery access. Alleyways (vehicular rights-of-way) may not be utilized as pathways (pedestrian rights-of-way) to meet the requirements of the International Building Code. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. 9. All commercial tenant spaces located on the ground floor in excess of 1,500 square feet shall contain a vestibule (double set of doors) developed internal to the structure to meet the requirements of the International Energy Conservation Code as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen, or an air curtain. 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 Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 3 of 14 P183 VI.B. varied by special review (see Chapter 26.430.040.E, Utility and delivery service area provisions). Staff Findings: The proposed development contains existing trash/recycle/utility areas. There is no change to the size or use of the existing operations, and therefore may maintain the existing operations for this proposal. Staff finds these criteria to be not applicable. 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 existing windows are proposed to remain the same. Many of the spaces already contain large display windows on the first floor. Staff finds this criterion is 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. Commercial Design Guidelines – Commercial Area, Conceptual & Final Review Design Guidelines This parcel is designated as the Commercial Area in the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Objectives and Guidelines. The Commercial Area is located immediately adjacent to the Commercial Core and often influenced by large lodge development in direct contrast to the smaller, predominant scale within other adjacent areas. It contains a strong grid network of streets and alleys with building height varying from one to four stories. Buildings define the street edge on the south and height and scale reduces to the north. Materials vary but are Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 4 of 14 P184 VI.B. predominantly masonry. The existing street edge is less defined that the Commercial Core with varied setbacks and more open space. The design objectives for this character area are: 1. Strengthen the sense of relatedness with the Commercial Core Historic District. 2. Maintain a retail orientation. 3. Promote creative, contemporary design. 4. Encourage a well-defined street wall. 5. Reflect the variety in building heights seen traditionally. 6. Accommodate outdoor public spaces while establishing a clear definition to the street edge. 7. Promote variety in the street level experience. Conceptual Review includes the following guidelines: Street & Alley System Staff Findings: The existing development contains multiple entrances, both facing Durant Avenue and the alley. The primary entrance faces the alley and is clearly defined with a large staircase leading directly toward the doorway. The existing network of streets and alleys will remain and are open to the sky. The existing development also contains a public through court that connects Durant Avenue to the alley. The alley façade contains as much detail as the Durant façade, if not more, using varied setbacks, balconies and building entrances. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 1.1 Orient a primary entrance toward the street. • A building should have a clearly defined primary entrance. • Providing secondary public entrances to commercial spaces is also encouraged on larger buildings. 1.2 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. 1.3 Public walkways and through courts should be designed to create access to additional commercial space. • These may be shops that face onto walkways or courtyards. • See also: Public Amenity Space design guidelines 1.4 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. Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 5 of 14 P185 VI.B. • 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. Parking Staff Findings: The existing development already contains underground parking. The entrance is located off the alley. The entrances are recessed and secondary in nature to the rest of the building. The details and materials will be improved as part of the proposal. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 1.5 The visual impacts of structured parking should be minimized. The access shall be: • Located on an alley when feasible or a secondary street, designed with the same attention to detail and materials as the primary building façade, and integrated into the building design. 1.6 Structured parking should be placed within a ‘wrap’ of commercial and/or residential uses. Public Amenity Space Staff Findings: The existing development already contains a significant amount of public amenity space. It has recently been renovated to improve drainage as well as overall design. The amenity space is located above grade, but is directly accessible from the sidewalk and alley. There are few features such as street furniture and public art currently in the amenity space, however these are in the current proposal. The mid-block walkway is much wider than 10 ft. However, it is an existing feature that is not proposed for change, and currently provides additional commercial space frontage and excellent pedestrian access. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 1.7 A street facing amenity space shall meet all of the following requirements: • Abut the public sidewalk • Be level with the sidewalk • Be open to the sky • Be directly accessible to the public • Be paved or otherwise landscaped 1.8 A street-facing public amenity space shall remain subordinate to the line of building fronts in the Commercial Area. • Any public amenity space positioned at the street edge shall respect the character of the streetscape and ensure that street corners are well defined, with buildings placed at the sidewalk edge. • Sunken spaces, which are associated with some past developments, adversely affect the street character. Where feasible, these should be replaced with sidewalk level improvements. Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 6 of 14 P186 VI.B. 1.9 Street facing amenity space shall contain features to promote and enhance its use. These may include one or more of the following: • Street furniture • Public art • Historical/interpretive marker 1.10 Mid-block walkways shall remain subordinate in scale to traditional lot widths. • Mid-block public walkways shall be between 8 ft. and 10 ft. in width. 1.11 A mid-block walkway should provide public access to the following: • Additional commercial space and frontage within the walkway • Uses located at the rear of the property that are commercial in nature. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable: 1.12 An alley side amenity space shall be designed to have these characteristics. • Direct public access to commercial space at ground or second floor levels • Maximize solar access to the alley side amenity space • Enhance the attractiveness and use of the rear alley • Minimize the adverse impacts of adjacent service and parking area 1.13 A second floor amenity space should meet all of the following criteria: • A second floor amenity space should meet all of the following criteria: • Be dedicated for public use • Provide a public overlook and/or an interpretive marker • Be identified by a marker at street level 1.14 Second level space should be oriented to maximize solar access and views to the mountains or other landmarks. 1.15 Second level space should provide public access by way of a visible and attractive public stair or elevator from public street, alley, or street level amenity space. 1.16 Second level dining may be considered. • If the use changes, the space must remain accessible to the public so long as it is to be considered meeting the Public Amenity Space requirement. 1.17 Front and side yard amenity space should be provided in the context of a historic one story residential type building. Building Placement Staff Findings: The proposed development does not affect the existing building placement. The building alignment varies for both structures, however they retain a strong street presence from both the alley and Durant Avenue with upper floors cantilevering to the property lines. The Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 7 of 14 P187 VI.B. building facades are parallel to the street network with entrances facing the streets. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 1.18 Maintain the alignment of facades at the sidewalk’s edge. • Place as much of the façade of the building at the property line as possible. • A minimum of 60% of the front façade. • Locating an entire building front behind the established storefront line is inappropriate. 1.19 A building may be set back from its side lot lines in accordance with design guidelines identified in Street & Alley System and Public Amenity Space guidelines. 1.20 Building facades shall be parallel to the facing street(s) and primary entrances shall be oriented toward the street. Staff finds the following Guideline to be not applicable: 1.21 Orient a new building to be parallel to its lot lines, similar to that of traditional building orientations. Building Height, Mass & Scale Staff Findings: Most of the existing development’s height and mass are proposed to remain the same, which already contains a high level of height and massing variation with balconies and varied setbacks. The applicant is proposing two different designs for this development. The applicant’s preferred design (Design Option 1) proposes the addition of parapet walls that face the alley and Durant Avenue on the top floor. The top of these will measure at 32’ 4”. This is considered additional development above the allowable height in this zone district (28’, increasable to 32’ with Commercial Design Review). Approval of this design would require a height variance from City Council to allow the proposed parapet walls. The other design (Design Option 2) does not include the parapets and would not require a height variance. Staff recognizes that Design Option 1 is intended to modernize the appearance of the building, and the parapets are an integral part of the design. This also reinforces the appearance of a flat roof, which is the dominate roof form in the city center. However, the proposed parapets do not inherently help achieve any of the Guidelines and increase the perceived mass of the building. There are no unique site features or constraints that would warrant a variance for this design. The existing buildings create variation of height and building mass through varied roof forms and parapet edges. Design Option 1 eliminates much of this variation by hiding the variation behind new parapets and further creating the perception of tall flat walls. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines not met for Design Option 1. Design Option 2 does not alter the form or height of the existing building and would be unreasonable to meet this portion of the Guidelines. Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 8 of 14 P188 VI.B. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not met in Design Option 1: 1.22 Height variation should be achieved using one of more of the following: • Vary the building height 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. 1.23 On 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 be varied every 60 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.) 1.24 Building on sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths shall achieve a minimum of two of the following: • 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 Staff finds the following Guidelines to be not applicable: 1.25 Building façade height shall be varied from the façade height of adjacent buildings of the same number of stories by a minimum of 2 feet. • If an existing structure is three stories and 38 ft. tall for example, then adjacent new infill may be three stories, by must vary in façade height by a minimum of 2 ft. 1.26 A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation in building height of the Commercial Area. • Refer to the zone district regulations to determine the maximum height on the subject property. • 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: o In order to achieve at least a two-foot variation in height with an adjacent building. Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 9 of 14 P189 VI.B. o The primary function of the building is civic. (i.e. the building is a Museum, Civic Building, Performance Hall, Fire station, etc.) o 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. o To benefit the livability of Affordable Housing units. o To make a demonstrable (to be verified by the Building Department) contributed to the building’s overall energy efficiency, for instance by providing improved daylighting. 1.27 A new building should step down in scale to respect the height, form and scale of a historic building within its immediate setting. 1.28 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. Final Review includes the following guidelines: Building Design & Articulation Staff Findings: Most of the existing development is remaining largely the same, including fenestration, storefronts and floor-to-floor heights. The proposed development is mostly just updating the materials. The existing development provides a good amount of articulation through clear distinction between floors, varied façade setbacks, and generous first floor storefronts. The proportions of openings and detailing are appropriate and will remain in the proposed development. The first floor is not visibly taller than the upper floors, however this is an existing condition. There are highly transparent storefronts located on the first floor that reinforce the commercial aspect of the development. The third floor is currently set back and has low sloping or flat roofs that reduce the visual impacts. Design Option 1 increases the appearance of the third floor with additional height from the proposed parapets. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines generally met, with the exception of Guideline 1.36 for Design Option 1. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 1.30 The detailed design of the building façade should reflect the traditional scale and rhythm of the block. This should be achieved using all of the following: • The fenestration grouping • The modeling of the façade • The design framework for the first floor storefront • Variation in architectural detail/or the palette of façade materials Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 10 of 14 P190 VI.B. 1.31 A building should reflect the architectural hierarchy and articulation inherent in the composition of the street façade. The following should be addressed: • The design and definition of the traditionally tall first floor • The vertical proportions of the upper level fenestration pattern and ratio of solid wall to window area. 1.32 A building should reflect the three-dimensional characteristics of the street façade in the strength and depth of modeling, fenestration and architectural detail. 1.34 Maintain the distinction between the street level and upper floors. • The first floor should be the tallest floor to floor height in the building • The first floor of the primary façade should be predominantly transparent glass • Upper floors should be perceived as being more opaque than the street level. Upper story windows should have a vertical emphasis. • Highly reflective or darkly tinted glass is inappropriate • Express the traditional distinction in floor heights between the street levels and upper levels through detailing, materials and fenestration. The presence of a belt course is an important feature in this relationship. 1.37 The first floor façade should be designed to concentrate interest on the first level, using the highest quality of design, detailing and materials. • A strong and distinctively designed retail framework for the first floor of the building • An entryway designed to use the full height of the storefront • A distinct change in the palette of materials used for the first floor design framework • The depth and strength of the modeling of elements and details 1.38 The retail entrance should be at sidewalk level. • All entrances shall be ADA compliant • On sloping sites the retail frontage should be as close to a level entrance as possible 1.40 Window area along the first floor shall be a minimum of 60% of exterior street façade area when facing a principal street(s). 1.41 Where appropriate a building shall be designed to maintain the character and transparency of the traditional street level retail frontage. 1.42 Design of the first floor storefront should include particular attention to the following: • The basic elements and proportions of storefront design • Depth and strength of modeling • The palette of materials and finishes used in both the structural framework and the storefront window • The concentration of architectural detail to ensure a rich visual experience Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 11 of 14 P191 VI.B. • The complimentary use of signage and lettering to enhance the retail and downtown character • The use of lighting to accentuate visual presence 1.43 Retail frontage facing onto side courts or rear alleys should follow similar design principles to the street frontage, adjusted for the scale of the space. • It should be designed with a similar attention to architectural articulation, detail and materials. • These should have a richness of detail that is inviting to users. 1.44 A large building should reflect the traditional lot width in form and variation of its roof. This should be achieved through the following: • A set back of the top floor from the front façade • Reflect the traditional lot width in the roof plane 1.45 The roofscape should be designed with the same design attention as the secondary elevations of the building • Group and screen mechanical units from view • Locate mechanical equipment to the rear of the roof area • Position, articulate and design rooftop enclosures or structures to reflect the modulation and character of the building • Use materials which complement the design of the building facades • Design roof garden areas to be unobtrusive from the street • Use ‘green roof’ design best practice, where feasible Staff finds the following Guideline is not met in Design Option 1 (met in Design Option 2): 1.36 Minimize the appearance of a tall third floor. • Where a third floor’s floor to ceiling height is in excess of 12 ft., it should be set back a minimum of 15 ft. from the street façade to reduce the apparent height. • Increase the parapet height to screen the visual impact of a tall top floor. • The design of a setback third floor shall be simpler in form, more subdued in modeling, detail and color than the primary façade. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable: 1.29 A new building shall reflect the traditional lot width (30 ft) as expressed by two or more of the following: • Variation in height at internal lot lines • Variation in the plane of the front façade • Street façade composition • Variation in architectural detailing and materials to emphasize the building module 1.33 Any new building shall be designed to maintain a minimum of 9 feet from floor to ceiling on all floors. Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 12 of 14 P192 VI.B. 1.35 A new building should be designed to maintain the stature of traditional street level frontage. • This should be 13-15 ft. in floor to floor height on the first floor • The minimum required first floor height must be maintained for at least the first 50 foot depth of the lot, and may only be dropped to a lower height beyond that point for areas that are devoted to storage, circulation, offices, restaurant kitchens, alley commercial spaces, or similar secondary uses. 1.39 Incorporate an airlock entry into the plan for all new structures. • An airlock entry that projects forward of the primary façade at the sidewalk is inappropriate • Adding temporary entries during the winter season detracts from the character of the historic district • Using a temporary vinyl or fabric “airlock” to provide protection from winter weather is not permitted Architectural Materials Staff Findings: The proposed new materials include structural steel columns and beams, variegated aluminum siding, composite siding and polished CMU with split face CMU accent course. These are durable modern materials, but do not convey the range and quality of materials seen traditionally which includes brick, natural stone and wood. Composite and CMU are intended to mimic wood and granite, which are natural materials that are more consistent within the Commercial Area and other nearby development. Predominate materials in the Commercial Area include high quality brick with occasional natural stone accent. Wood is often used for earlier residential buildings. The Guidelines call for continuing the combination, quality and variation that is traditionally found in these materials. Staff has concern about the durability and quality of composite siding, but would be supportive of a composite material that has long durability and high quality. As such a large building, the use of large amounts of metal siding in Design Option 1 – although somewhat detailed at a human scale – increases the overall perceived scale of the building, particularly with the additional parapets. Materials on the third floor in Design Option 1 are the same as those on the first two floors, however they will be horizontal in design and are already set back from the street facades, making them more subdued. Design Option 2 eliminates the metal siding, using composite siding only. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines to be met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 1.46 High quality, durable materials should be employed • The palette of materials should be specified, including samples of materials as required 1.47 Building materials should have these features: • Convey the quality and range of materials seen traditionally • Reduce the perceived scale of the building and enhance visual interest of the façade • Convey a human scale Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 13 of 14 P193 VI.B. 1.48 A building or addition should reflect the quality and variation in material seen traditionally. 1.49 Where contemporary materials are use they shall be: • High quality in durability and finish • Detailed to convey a human scale • Compatible with a traditional masonry palette 1.50 Materials used for the third floor accommodation set back from the street facades should be more subdued than primary facades Paving & Landscape Staff Findings: The paved public amenity area was recently updated to improve drainage and overall design quality. The update already enhances the existing development, as well as the proposed development. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines to be met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 1.51 Paving and landscaping should be designed to complement and enhance the immediate setting of the building area. Exhibit A – Commercial Design Review Page 14 of 14 P194 VI.B. E X H I B I T B P 1 9 5 V I . B . P 1 9 6 V I . B . P 1 9 7 V I . B . P 1 9 8 V I . B . P 1 9 9 V I . B . P 2 0 0 V I . B . P 2 0 1 V I . B . P 2 0 2 V I . B . P 2 0 3 V I . B . P 2 0 4 V I . B . P 2 0 5 V I . B . P 2 0 6 V I . B . P 2 0 7 V I . B . P 2 0 8 V I . B . P 2 0 9 V I . B . P 2 1 0 V I . B . P 2 1 1 V I . B . P 2 1 2 V I . B . P 2 1 3 V I . B . P 2 1 4 V I . B . P 2 1 5 V I . B . P 2 1 6 V I . B . P 2 1 7 V I . B . P 2 1 8 V I . B . P 2 1 9 V I . B . P 2 2 0 V I . B . P 2 2 1 V I . B . P 2 2 2 V I . B . P 2 2 3 V I . B . P 2 2 4 V I . B . P 2 2 5 V I . B . P 2 2 6 V I . B . P 2 2 7 V I . B . P 2 2 8 V I . B . P 2 2 9 V I . B . P 2 3 0 V I . B . P 2 3 1 V I . B . P 2 3 2 V I . B . P 2 3 3 V I . B . P 2 3 4 V I . B . P 2 3 5 V I . B . P 2 3 6 V I . B . P 2 3 7 V I . B . P 2 3 8 V I . B . P 2 3 9 V I . B . INTRODUCTION THE DURANT MALL CONDOMINIUM PUD WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED IN 1976, RECORDED AT BOOK 4, PP 565-570, WITH THE CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION APPROVED IN 1977, RECORDED IN BOOK 308, PP 518-554. THE SUBJECT PARCEL IS (NOW) ZONED NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) OVERLAY, AND CONTAINS THE CITY MARKET BUILDING AND TWO MIXED USE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, WITH SURFACE AND UNDERGROUND PARKING. THE SPECIFIC BUILDINGS ADDRESSED IN THIS APPLICATION ARE THE MIXED USE DURANT MALL CONDO ASSOCIATION (DMCA) BUILDINGS LOCATED AT 710 (ORIGINALLY CALLED THE “COUNTRYSIDE BUILDING”) AND 720 (ORIGINALLY CALLED THE “STEVENS COMMERCIAL BUILDING”) E DURANT AVENUE. BOTH BUILDINGS WERE DESIGNED BY THE ARCHITECTURE FIRM OF COPELAND, FINHOLM, HAGMAN, YAW, LTD. ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS. THE PLANS HAVE A CITY OF ASPEN PLAN CHECK APPROVAL DATE OF APRIL 4, 1975, PRE-DATING THE PUD PLAT. THE DRAWING SETS APPEAR COMPLETE AND ACCURATE INCLUDING ARCHITECTURAL PLANS, SECTIONS, ELEVATIONS, DETAILS, SCHEDULES, INTERIOR ELEVATIONS, ELECTRICAL AND LIGHTING DRAWINGS, INCLUDING STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS THAT ARE NOT STAMPED BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. ALL DRAWINGS ARE HAND DRAWN. THE PROPERTY IS THREE STORIES OVER A PLAZA LEVEL ABOVE A GARAGE. THE TOP FLOOR CONTAINS PRIVATELY OWNED RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THE SECOND FLOOR IS LEASED COMMERCIAL OFFICE SPACE AND THE MAIN (PLAZA) LEVEL IS A COMBINATION OF COMMERCIAL OFFICE, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SPACE. THERE IS A SUB-GRADE PARKING LEVEL ACCESSED FROM THE ALLEY ON THE NORTH. CONSTRUCTION THE DURANT MALL STRUCTURAL SYSTEM WAS CONSTRUCTED OF HEAVY TIMBER (HT) CONSTRUCTION CONSISTING OF GLU-LAM BEAMS AND PURLINS OVER GLU-LAM COLUMNS WITH HORIZONTAL “K” BRACED FRAMES, GIVING THE BUILDING ITS RECOGNIZABLE AESTHETIC. THESE MEMBERS ARE ATTACHED WITH EXPOSED METAL PLATES, BRACKETS AND BUCKETS THROUGH-BOLTED INTO THE WOOD STRUCTURAL MEMBERS. THE STRUCTURAL DECKING IS 3X6 T&G SPANNING BETWEEN THE STRUCTURAL BEAMS WITH A 1 ½” TOPPING CONCRETE SLAB. THE 710 BUILDING IS TYPE V, 1 HOUR RATED, SPRINKLERED. THE 720 BUILDING IS THE SAME BUT UNSPRINKLERED. THIS STRUCTURAL SYSTEM IS INFILLED WITH WOOD STUD PARTITION WALLS FORMING THE VARIOUS RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL SPACES. THE EXTERIOR SKIN IS WOOD SIDING OVER GYPSUM BOARD FORMING THE REQUIRED 1 HOUR RATED ASSEMBLY. THE ROOF IS A COMBINATION OF SLOPED STANDING SEAM METAL AND FLAT (SLOPED TO DRAIN) MEMBRANE ROOFING. THIS ALL RESTS ON TOP OF THE PLAZA (MAIN) LEVEL WHICH IS A 4” TOPPING SLAB OVER A CONCRETE “T” STRUCTURAL SYSTEM WITH SPREADER BEAMS THAT PICK UP POINT LOADS FROM ABOVE. P240 VI.B. MAINTENANCE HISTORY THE PROPERTY IS NOW 40 YEARS OLD. THIS IS AT THE OUTER LIMIT OF THE LIFE CYCLE FOR THIS TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION IF PROPERLY MAINTAINED. THAT IS TO SAY, IF THIS BUILDING WERE PROPERLY MAINTAINED WITH REGULAR AND PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE, IT WOULD BE TIME FOR A MAJOR RENOVATION. THIS BUILDING WAS MAINTAINED ONLY TO A MINIMUM STANDARD, LIMITED TO PERIODIC PAINTING OF THE STRUCTURE AND SKIN, ALONG WITH PATCHING THE PLAZA SURFACE. AS SUCH THE PROPERTY IS NOW OVERDUE FOR A MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR EFFORT. REQUIRED REPAIRS IN 2014, PHASE I REPAIRS TO THE PLAZA LEVEL CONCRETE TOPPING SLAB WERE UNDERTAKEN. THIS WAS INTENDED TO BE A SIMPLE REPLACEMENT OF A 4” NON STRUCTURAL SLAB. ALMOST IMMEDIATELY IT WAS APPARENT THAT A “SIMPLE” REPLACEMENT WAS GOING TO BE MORE COMPLICATED. THE DEMOLITION OF THE TOPPING SLAB EXPOSED DESIGN FLAWS OF THE ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION…TOO MANY TO LIST. PRIMARILY, STANDARD AND EVEN MINIMUM CODE REQUIRED WATERPROOFING, FLASHING AND OTHER WEATHERPROOFING MEASURES WERE MISSING FROM THE DESIGN OR OMITTED DURING CONSTRUCTION. THERE WAS NO WATERPROOFING AT THE PLAZA LEVEL. OVER THE PAST YEAR, REPAIRS WERE EFFECTED TO REMOVE, REPLACE AND PROPERLY INSTALL THE TOPPING SLAB WITH A FULL WATERPROOF MEMBRANE. (SEE EXHIBIT 1) THIS WORK IS COMPLETE AND WAS NOT SUBJECT TO CITY OF ASPEN REVIEW OTHER THAN A BUILDING PERMIT. THERE WERE NOT ENOUGH DRAINS AND THE TOPPING SLAB WAS NOT PROPERLY SLOPED TO THE DRAINS. DRAINS WERE ADDED AND THE SLOPES TO THESE DRAINS RECONFIGURED, SO THAT THE NEW TOPPING SLAB WILL DRAIN PROPERLY. THE EXTERIOR WALLS WERE ANCHORED DIRECTLY TO THE TOPPING SLAB. IN CONTACT WITH MOISTURE AND SUBSEQUENTLY DETERIORATED. A NEW CONCRETE CURB WAS INSTALLED TO RAISE THE WOOD FRAMING OFF THE PLAZA LEVEL PER CODE. (SEE EXHIBIT 2) THE TIMBER SUPER STRUCTURE WAS NOT FLASHED, AT ALL. THE RESULT IS THAT SIGNIFICANT PORTIONS OF THE EXTERIOR STRUCTURE IS ROTTEN AND IN NEED OF REPLACEMENT, INCLUDING COLUMNS (VERTICAL) BEAMS (HORIZONTAL) AND ESPECIALLY BRACES (DIAGONAL). TH E R E I S A N I N H E R E N T D E S I G N F L A W RELATED TO THE BRACE CONFIGURATION. WHERE THE COLUMNS, BEAMS AND BRACES COME TOGETHER FORMS A POCKET THAT RETAINS SNOW AND RAIN. THERE IS NO FLASHING OR ANY OTHER MITIGATION AGAINST MOISTURE INFILTRATION. (SEE EXHIBIT 3) FINALLY, THE BUILDINGS OUTER SKIN IS AT THE END OF IT’S LIFECYCLE AND IS DAMAGED BEYOND REPAIR FROM WEATHER AND TIME AND IS IN NEED OF COMPLETE REPLACEMENT. (SEE EXHIBIT 4) LAND USE REQUEST THIS APPLICATION IS PRIMARILY RELATED TO THE REPAIRS ARTICULATED ABOVE. THE DIRECTION FROM THE BUILDING OWNERSHIP IS, TO AVOID THIS TYPE OF REPAIR IN THE FUTURE, THAT THIS BE DESIGNED AS A “LIFE-TIME” REPLACEMENT WITH VERY LOW MAINTENANCE MATERIALS AND LIFE-CYCLE COSTING. THEREFORE, THIS PROPOSAL IS TO REPLACE THE TIMBER SUPERSTRUCTURE WITH A NEW STEEL FRAME. AT THE SAME TIME, THE OWNERSHIP WOULD LIKE TO REFRESH THE AESTHETIC OF THE BUILDING TO BRING IT TO A CONTEMPORARY STANDARD. ACCORDINGLY, THE SIDING IS PROPOSED TO BE A COMBINATION OF VARIEGATED METAL PANEL AND COMPOSITE SIDING. THE ENCLOSED DRAWINGS ILLUSTRATE IDEAS ABOUT THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE, INCLUDING COLOR, DETAIL AND MATERIALITY OF THE PROPOSED DESIGN. P241 VI.B. CODE SECTIONS THE FOLLOWING CODE SECTIONS ARE REFERENCED IN THE PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY AS RELATED TO THE REQUEST FOR MINOR AMENDMENT APPROVAL. 26.304 COMMON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES 26.304.035 NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH A. PURPOSE. IN ORDER TO FACILITATE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION EARLY IN THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS, THE CITY REQUIRES DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS TO CONDUCT NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH. THE PURPOSE OF THE OUTREACH IS TO INFORM NEIGHBORS AND INTERESTED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE PROJECT. THE APPLICANT MUST SHOW A CONCERTED EFFORT TO INFORM NEIGHBORS AND THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE APPLICATION PRIOR TO THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING. B. APPLICABILITY. A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SHALL BE REQUIRED ON ANY DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL THAT IS SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL REVIEW UNLESS THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DETERMINES AS A PART OF THE PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL IS LIMITED IN NATURE. IN ADDITION, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MAY MAKE A DETERMINATION THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH IS REQUIRE FOR SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OR HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION. C. APPROPRIATE FORMS OF PUBLIC OUTREACH. THE APPLICANT MUST CHOOSE TO DO ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING FORMS OF PUBLIC OUTREACH. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF MAY, AS PART OF THE PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE, SUGGEST CERTAIN FORMS OF NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH THAT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION. IN ADDITION, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF MAY IDENTIFY SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT OR POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED AS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH. 1. INFORMATION MEETINGS. THE APPLICANT MUST HOLD A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING TO GAIN INPUT FROM THE NEIGHBORS AND CITIZENS. THE MEETING MUST BE OPEN AND ACCESSIBLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND HELD IN A LOCATION IN PROXIMITY TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OR IN A PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE BUILDING SUCH AS CITY HALL OR THE PUBLIC LIBRARY. THE APPLICANT OR APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATIVE SHALL ATTEND THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AND BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SCHEDULING AND COORDINATING THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. RENDERINGS, MODELING OR OTHER VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PROJECT WITHIN ITS CONTEXT IS REQUIRED. THE APPLICANT MUST CONDUCT A MINIMUM LEVEL OF NOTICING, PURSUANT TO SECTION 26.304.060.E.3.C, TO ENSURE THE PUBLIC IS AWARE OF THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL NOTICING BEYOND THAT CALL FOR IN SECTION 26.304.060.E.3.C MAY BE PROVIDED. RGS ARCHITECTURE WILL HOST A NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING, ON THE PROPERTY, LIKELY THE PUBLIC PLAZA, THAT EXPLAINS THE PROPOSAL, OUTLINES THE REVIEW PROCESS, PROVIDES VISUAL RENDERINGS AND PLANS, PHYSICAL SAMPLES AND OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL DESCRIBE THE PROJECT IN LAYMAN’S TERMS. RGS ARCHITECTURE SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SCHEDULING AND COORDINATING THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. RGS ARCHITECTURE WILL CONDUCT A MINIMUM LEVEL OF NOTICING, PURSUANT TO SECTION 26.304.060.E.3.C, TO ENSURE THE PUBLIC IS AWARE OF THE MEETING. P242 VI.B. 2. ON-LINE MEETING. THE APPLICANT MUST CONDUCT AN ON-LINE MEETING TO GAIN INPUT FROM NEIGHBORS AND CITIZENS. THE MEETING MUST BE OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT OR APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATIVE SHALL ATTEND THE ON-LINE MEETING AND BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC. THE APPLICANT SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SCHEDULING AND COORDINATING THE ON-LINE FORUM. RENDERINGS, MODELING OR OTHER VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PROJECT WITHIN ITS CONTEXT IS REQUIRED. THE APPLICANT MUST CONDUCT A MINIMUM LEVEL OF NOTICING, PURSUANT TO SECTION 26.304.060.E.3.C, TO ENSURE THE PUBLIC IS AWARE FO THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL NOTICING BEYOND THAT CALL FOR IN SECTION 26.304.060.E.3.C MAY BE PROVIDED. UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AN ON LINE MEETING IS NOT PLANNED AT THIS TIME. 3. ENHANCED PUBLIC INFORMATION. THE APPLICANT MUST PROVIDE DETAILED INFORMATION ON THE PROJECT IN THE FORM OF A PROJECT WEBSITE, A DETAILED PUBLIC NOTICE MAILING, ETC. THAT EXPLAINS THE PROPOSAL, OUTLINES THE REVIEW PROCESS, PROVIDES VISUAL RENDERINGS OR MAPS, OR ANY OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL DESCRIBE THE PROJECT IN LAYMAN’S TERMS. THE APPLICANT SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING THE INFORMATION. THE APPLICANT MUST CONDUCT A MINIMUM LEVEL OF NOTICING, PURSUANT TO SECTION 26.304.060.E.3.C, TO ENSURE THE PUBLIC IS AWARE OF THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL NOTICING BEYOND THAT CALL FOR IN SECTION 26.304.060.E.3.C MAY BE PROVIDED. RGS ARCHITECTURE WILL HOST A WEBSITE THAT EXPLAINS THE PROPOSAL, OUTLINES THE REVIEW PROCESS, PROVIDES VISUAL RENDERINGS OR MAPS, AND OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL DESCRIBE THE PROJECT IN LAYMAN’S TERMS. 4. INDIVIDUAL OUTREACH. THE APPLICANT MUST CONDUCT INDIVIDUAL OR SMALL GROUP MEETINGS WITH NEIGHBORS OF THE PROJECT. THE APPLICANT SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ORGANIZING AND ATTENDING THE MEETINGS. AT THE MEETINGS, THE APPLICANT SHOULD PROVIDE A SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSAL, INCLUDING BASIC USE-TYPE INFORMATION, BUILDING HEIGHT, AND RENDERINGS. RGS ARCHITECTURE WILL BE AVAILABLE, ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS, TO MEET WITH NEIGHBORS OR CITIZENS AND PROVIDE INFORMATION THAT EXPLAINS THE PROPOSAL, OUTLINES THE REVIEW PROCESS, PROVIDES VISUAL RENDERINGS AND MAPS, AND OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL DESCRIBE THE PROJECT IN LAYMAN’S TERMS. 5. ANY OTHER FORM OF NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH THAT WILL PROVIDE NEIGHBORS A GENUINE OPPORTUNITY TO UNDERSTAND THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL AND PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE APPLICATION. UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT NO OTHER FORMS OF NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH ARE PLANNED AT THIS TIME. D. SUMMARY OF PUBLIC OUTREACH. A WRITTEN SUMMARY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH, AS WELL AS METHOD OF PUBLIC NOTIFICATION, SHALL BE PREPARED BY THE APPLICANT AND SUBMITTED AS PART OF THE OFFICIAL RECORD – EITHER AS PART OF THE INITIAL APPLICATION OR AS AN ADDENDUM TO THE APPLICATION. ANY DOCUMENTATION THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC AS PART OF THE OUTREACH SHOULD ALSO BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THE OFFICIAL RECORD. RGS ARCHITECTURE WILL KEEP A WRITTEN SUMMARY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH, A LIST OF ATTENDEES OR RESPONDENTS WITH ADDRESSES (TO THE EXTENT PARTICIPANTS WILL PROVIDE P243 VI.B. IT) AS WELL AS METHOD OF PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND WILL SUBMIT THIS AS PART OF THE OFFICIAL RECORD AS AN ADDENDUM TO THE APPLICATION. ANY DOCUMENTATION THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC AS PART OF THE OUTREACH WILL ALSO BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THE OFFICIAL RECORD. P244 VI.B. 26.412 COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW 26.412.010 PURPOSE THE PURPOSE OF THE COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW IS TO PRESERVE AND FOSTER PROPER COMMERCIAL DISTRICT SCALE AND CHARACTER AND TO ENSURE THAT THE CITY’S COMMERCIAL AREAS AND STREETSCAPES ARE PUBLIC PLACES CONDUCIVE TO WALKING. THE REVIEW STANDARDS DO NOT PRESCRIBE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE, BUT DO REQUIRE THAT CERTAIN BUILDING ELEMENTS CONTRIBUTE TO THE STREETSCAPE. THE CHARACTER OF THE CITY’S COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS LARGELY ESTABLISHED BY THE VARIETY OF USES AND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FRONT FACADES OF BUILDINGS AND THE STREETS THEY FACE. BY REQUIRING CERTAIN BUILDING ELEMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE DESIGN OF NEW AND REMODELED BUILDINGS, STOREFRONTS ARE MORE APPEALING AND CAN CONTRIBUTE TO A WELL DESIGNED, EXCITING COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. ACCOMMODATION OF THE AUTOMOBILE WITHIN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS IS IMPORTANT TO THE CONSISTENCY AND QUALITY OF PEDESTRIAN STREETSCAPES. THE STANDARDS PRESCRIBE CERTAIN METHODS OF ACCOMMODATING ON-SITE PARKING TO ACHIEVE ENVIRONMENTS CONDUCIVE TO WALKING. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE CONTEXT THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BY THE EXISTING BUILT ENVIRONMENT IS IMPORTANT TO PROTECTING THE UNIQUENESS OF THE CITY. TO ACHIEVE COMPATIBILITY, CERTAIN STANDARDS REQUIRE BUILDING ELEMENTS TO BE INFLUENCED BY ADJOINING DEVELOPMENT, VIEWS, PEDESTRIAN MALLS OR SUN ANGLES. FINALLY, ALONG WITH CREATING ARCHITECTURALLY INTERESTING AND LIVELY PRIMARY STREETS, THE PEDESTRIAN NATURE OF DOWNTOWN CAN BE FURTHER ENHANCED BY MAKING ALLEYWAYS AN ATTRACTIVE PLACE TO WALK. STORE ENTRANCES AND DISPLAY WINDOWS ALONG ALLEYWAYS ARE ENCOURAGED TO AUGMENT, WHILE NOT DETRACTING FROM, THE PEDESTRIAN INTEREST OF PRIMARY STREETS. 26.412.060 COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS THE FOLLOWING DESIGN STANDARDS, IN ADDITION TO THE COMMERCIAL, LODGING AND HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN OBJECTIVES AND GUIDELINES, SHALL APPLY TO THE COMMERCIAL, LODGING AND MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT. A. PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. CREATIVE, WELL-DESIGNED PUBLIC SPACES 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 OPERATION IMPROVEMENTS TO PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR PRIVATE PROPERTY WITHIN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS. 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 OR 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. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. HOWEVER AN EXPANSIVE PLAZA AREA WAS PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE ORIGINAL DESIGN. P245 VI.B. AS PART OF OUR REDESIGN EFFORT, WE INTEND TO ENHANCE THE PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. IN FACT, PHASE I ALREADY INCLUDED SOME RECONFIGURATION OF THE PLAZA ACCESS, WITH THE NORTH STAIR ALIGNED TO EMPHASIZE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CITY MARKET AND THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO THE 710 BUILDING. THE CURRENT TENANTS CONSIST OF JOUR DE FETE RESTAURANT, THE GROG SHOP LIQUOR STORE, AJAX PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND STASH RETAIL MARIJUANA STORE. ALL OF THESE TENANTS CURRENTLY HAVE LONG TERM LEASES AND ARE EXPECTED TO REMAIN IN THEIR SPACES FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. FUTURE TENANTS COULD INCLUDE A RANGE OF COMMERCIAL, RESTAURANT AND RETAIL USES. ALL WILL BE SERVED BY THE IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. 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. WITH FORESIGHT TO THIS CODE SECTION, PHASE I HAS ALREADY SIGNIFICANTLY ENHANCED THE STREET PRESENCE. AS PART OF THE REPAIRS, THE THREE FOOT TALL STONE CLAD WALLS FRONTING DURANT AVENUE WERE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH A SEE THROUGH STAINLESS STEEL MESH GUARDRAIL, VASTLY IMPROVING THE STREEETSCAPE VISUAL CONNECTION TO THE PLAZA, JOUR DE FETE RESTAURANT AND EVEN THE GROG SHOP. PUBLIC SEATING AT THE PLAZA AND FOR THE USE OF JOUR DE FETE ARE ILLUSTRATED IN OUR APPLICATION DRAWINGS. GENERAL PLAZA SEATING AND BICYCLE RACKS ARE ALSO PLANNED. THE VISUAL AND PHYSICAL CONNECTION TO THE ALLEY BETWEEN THE DURANT MALL AND CITY MARKET WAS SIMILARLY IMPROVED. ADDITIONAL ENHANCEMENTS ARE PLANNED IN PHASE II, CONTEMPLATED WITH THIS APPLICATION. 3. THE PUBLIC AMENITY AND THE DESIGN AND OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS OF ADJACENT STRUCTURES, RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND USES CONTRIBUTE TO AN INVITING PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT. WITH FORESIGHT TO THIS CODE SECTION, PHASE I HAS ALREADY SIGNIFICANTLY ENHANCED THE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE. THE NORTH STAIR WAS RE-ALIGNED TO COMPLEMENT THE FAÇADE OF THE CITY MARKET BUILDING, DIRECTING FOOT TRAFFIC ON AXIS WITH THE FRONT DOOR OF THE 710 BUILDING. NEW RAILINGS WERE INSTALLED TO CODE AND ENHANCED STEP LIGHTING WAS INCLUDED IN PHASE I. PHASE II WILL FURTHER ENHANCE THE PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT ALONG THE ALLEYWAY. 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. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. HOWEVER AN EXPANSIVE PLAZA AREA WAS PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE ORIGINAL DESIGN THAT MEETS OR EXCEEDS CURRENT REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. PHASE II WILL ONLY ENHANCE THE CURRENT DURANT MALL PUBLIC AMENITY PLAZA. P246 VI.B. 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. NOT APPLICABLE. NO VARIATION IS SOUGHT UNDER THIS APPLICATION. THE ORIGINAL AND EXISTING USES ARE TO REMAIN AND BE ENHANCED. B. UTILITY, DELIVERY AND TRASH SERVICE PROVISIONS. WHEN THE NECESSARY LOGISTICAL ELEMENTS OF A COMMERCIAL BUILDING ARE WELL DESIGNED, THE BUILDING CAN BETTER CONTRIBUTE TO THE OVERALL SUCCESS FO THE DISTRICT. POOR LOGISTICS OF ONE (1) BUILDING CAN DETRACT FROM THE QUALITY OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. EFFICIENT DELIVERY AND TRASH AREAS ARE IMPORTANT TO THE FUNCTION OF ALLEYWAYS. THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS SHALL APPLY: 1. A TRASH AND RECYCLE 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. THE TRASH AREA PROVIDED IS PRE-EXISTING AND MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE REQUIRED CRITERIA. 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 ELECTRICAL CODE, UNLESS OTHERWISE ESTABLISHED ACCORDING TO SAID CODES. THE UTILITY AREA PROVIDED IS PRE-EXISTING AND MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE REQUIRED MUNICIPAL AND CODE CRITERIA. 3. ALL UTILITY, TRASH AND RECYCLE SERVICE AREAS SHALL BE CO-LOCATED AND COMBINED TO THE GREATEST EXTENT PRACTICAL. THE UTILITY, TRASH AND RECYCLE SERVICES AREAS ARE CO-LOCATED DIRECTLY ADJACENT UNDER THE NORTHEAST PORTION OF THE 720 BUILDING. THERE ARE TWO (2) GENERAL FOUR (4) YARD DUMPSTERS, ONE (1) SIX (6) YARD CARDBOARD DUMPSTER AND THREE (3) WHEELED GENERAL RECYCLING RECEPTACLES. THEY ARE ALL BEAR-PROOF WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE CARDBOARD DUMPSTER. THESE SERVE ALL OCCUPANTS AND OCCUPANCIES OF THE BUILDING. 4. IF THE PROPERTY ADJOINS AN ALLEYWAY, THE UTILITY, TRASH AND RECYCLE SERVICE AREAS SHALL BE ALONG AND ACCESSED FROM THE ALLEYWAY, UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED THROUGH TITLE 12, SOLID WASTE, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, OR THROUGH CHAPTER 26.430, SPECIAL REVIEW. THE UTILITY, TRASH AND RECYCLE AREAS ARE LOCATED OFF THE ALLEYWAY BETWEEN THE DURANT MALL AND CITY MARKET. 5. ALL UTILITY, TRASH AND RECYCLE SERVICE AREAS SHALL BE FENCED SO AS NOT TO BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET, UNLESS THEY ARE CURRENTLY LOCATED ON AN ALLEYWAY OR OTHERWISE APPROVED THROUGH 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. NOT APPLICABLE. THE UTILITY, TRASH AND RECYCLE AREAS ARE LOCATED OFF THE ALLEYWAY BETWEEN THE DURANT MALL AND CITY MARKET. THE INTENT UNDER THIS APPLICATION IS HOWEVER TO SCREEN THESE AREAS TO THE CITY STANDARD. P247 VI.B. 6. WHENEVER UTILITY, TRASH AND RECYCLE SERVICE AREAS ARE REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED ABUTTING AN ALLEY, OTHER PORTIONS OF A BUILDING MAY EXTEND TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE IF OTHERWISE ALLOWED BY THIS TITLE, PROVIDED THAT THE UTILITY, TRASH AND RECYCLE AREA IS LOCATED AT GRADE AND ACCESSIBLE TO THE ALLEY. THE UTILITY, TRASH AND RECYCLE AREAS ARE LOCATED OFF THE ALLEYWAY BETWEEN THE DURANT MALL AND CITY MARKET. THEY ARE ACCESSIBLE AND AT GRADE. 7. ALL UTILITY SERVICE PEDESTALS SHALL BE LOCATED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. EASEMENTS SHALL ALLOW FOR SERVICE PROVIDER ACCESS. ENCROACHMENTS INTO THE ALLEYWAY SHALL BE MINIMIZED TO THE EXTENT PRACTICAL AND SHOULD ONLY BE NECESSARY WHEN EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS, SUCH AS HISTORIC RESOURCE, DICTATE SUCH ENCROACHMENT. ALL ENCROACHMENTS ON THE PROPERTY SHALL BE LICENSED. NOT APPLICABLE . ALL UTILITIES, INCLUDING DEDICATED ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER, GAS MAINS AND METERS, CABLE AND PHONE RISERS ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE DURANT MALL PROPERTY. NO ENCROACHMENT IS REQUIRED OR REQUESTED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. 8. ALL COMMERCIAL AND LODGING BUILDINGS SHALL PROVIDE A DELIVERY AREA. THE DELIVERY AREA SHALL BE LOCATED ALONG THE ALLEY IF AN ALLEY ADJOINS THE PROPERTY. THE DELIVERY AREA SHALL BE ACCESSIBLE TO ALL TENANTS SPACES OF THE BUILDING IN A MANNER THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE CHAPTERS 10 AND 11 AS ADOPTED 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) M A Y N O T B E U T I L I Z E D A S P A T H W A Y S (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. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR DELIVERY AREA. HOWEVER A LOADING DOCK WAS PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE ORIGINAL DESIGN . THIS CURRENTLY SERVES (EXCLUSIVELY) THE GROG SHOP. THE INTENT UNDER PHASE II IS THAT THIS AREA WILL BE RENOVATED AND ENHANCED CONCURRENT WITH THE REST OF THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. ALL OTHER COMMERCIAL SPACES ARE ACCESSIBLE BY AN AT-GRADE RAMP AT THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING OFF OF DURANT AVENUE. EXISTING ELEVATORS SERVING BOTH BUILDINGS ARE SIZED APPROPRIATELY TO ACCOMMODATE STANDARD DELIVERIES TO COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOORS. ADDITIONAL ACCESS FOR PASSENGER CARS, LIGHT TRUCKS, BUT NOT DELIVERY TRUCKS IS AVAILABLE THROUGH ELEVATORS AT THE GARAGE LEVEL. 9. ALL COMMERCIAL TENANT SPACES LOCATED ON THE GROUND FLOOR IN EXCESS OF 1,500 SQUARE FEET SHALL CONTAIN A VESTIBULE (DOUBLE SET OF DOORS) DEVELOPED INTERNAL TO THE STRUCTURE TO MEET REQUIREMENTS OF THE INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE AS ADOPTED AND AMENDED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN, OR AN AIR CURTAIN. THERE ARE EXISTING CODE COMPLIANT VESTIBULES AT BOTH THE 710 AND 720 BUILDINGS OF THE DURANT MALL. INTERNAL AESTHETIC IMPROVEMENTS TO THESE COMMON AREAS ARE PLANNED THIS SPRING AND ARE NOT SUBJECT TO REVIEW. 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 POSSIBLE. P248 VI.B. THE MECHANICAL AND EXHAUST FROM THE MECHANICAL ROOM AND VENTING FROM JOUR DE FETE VENT VERTICALLY TROUGH THE ROOF. THE GARAGE VENTILATION EXHAUSTS HORIZONTALLY FROM LARGE GRILLES. AS THIS IS AN EXISTING CONDITION, NO CHANGE IS REQUIRED OR REQUESTED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. 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 DEVISE 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. ALL MECHANICAL, VENTILATING AND DUCTING EQUIPMENT WILL COMPLY WITH THIS STANDARD UNDER PHASE II PER THIS APPLICATION. 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). NOT APPLICABLE. NO VARIATION TO REQUIRED STANDARDS IS REQUIRED OR SOUGHT UNDER THIS APPLICATION. 26.412.060 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. SI G N A G E S H O U L D B E I N T E G R A T E D W I T H T H E B U I L D I N G T O T H E E X T E N T P O S S I B L E. INTEGRATED SIGNAGE AREAS ALREADY MEETING THE CITY’S REQUIREMENTS FOR SIZE, ETC., MAY MINIMIZE NEW TENANT 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. NEW SIGNAGE AND PUBLIC WAY-FINDING IS INCLUDED IN THE RENOVATION. SOME IDEAS ARE INCLUDED IN THE 3D MODEL IMAGES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW. ALL NEW SIGNAGE AND PUBLIC WAY-FINDING WILL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF ASPEN SIGN CODE. B. DISPLAY WINDOWS. DISPLAY WINDOWS PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN INTEREST AND CAN CONTRIBUTE TO THE SUCCESS OF RETAIL SPACE. PROVIDING WINDOWS THAT REVEAL INSIDE ACTIVITY OF THE STORE CAN PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN INTEREST. THE EXISTING WINDOW LOCATION, SIZE AND CONFIGURATION IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ALTERED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION. THE CURRENT DESIGN HAS FULL LIGHT WINDOWS AT 18” ABOVE THE FINISHED FLOOR (AFF), EXTENDING TO THE UNDERSIDE OF STRUCTURE OR CEILING HEIGHT. THE CURRENT TENANTS DO NOT TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE OF THE WINDOW FRONTAGE. 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 ELEMENTS CAN PROVIDE AN INTERESTING P249 VI.B. EFFECT. SIGNIFICANT LIGHT TRESPASS SHOULD BE AVOIDED. ILLUMINATING THE ENTIRE BUILDING SHOULD BE AVOIDED. COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY’S OUTDOOR LIGHTING CODE, SECTION 26.575.150 OF THIS TITLE, IS MANDATORY. THE EXTERIOR LIGHTING FOR THE WHOLE OF THE PROPERTY IS INTENDED TO BE REVISED AND ENHANCED TO COMPLEMENT THE UPDATED AESTHETIC, SIGNAGE, PUBLIC WAY-FINDING, COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL ENHANCEMENT. P250 VI.B. 26.710.170 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) A. PURPOSE. THE PURPOSE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT IS TO PROVIDE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MIXED-USE BUILDINGS WITH COMMERCIAL USES SERVING THE DAILY OR FREQUENT FEEDS OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, THEREBY REDUCING TRAFFIC CIRCULATION AND PARKING PROBLEMS, TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR AFFORDABLE AND FREE-MARKET RESIDENTIAL DENSITY, TO SUPPORT VACATION RENTALS FOR RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, AND TO PROVIDE A TRANSITION BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL CORE AND SURROUND RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. HOWEVER, THE BUILDING EMBODIES THE PURPOSES ARTICULATED ABOVE. B. PERMITTED USES. THE FOLLOWING USES ARE PERMITTED AS OF RIGHT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT: 1. USES ALLOWED ON UPPER FLOORS: LODGING, AFFORDABLE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING, FREE MARKET MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING, HOME OCCUPATIONS AND VACATION RENTALS. THE HISTORICAL EXISTING USES ON THE UPPER FLOOR INCLUDE FREE MARKET MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING, BOTH OWNER OCCUPIED AND RENTAL. 2. USES ALLOWED ON ALL BUILDING LEVELS: RETAIL AND RESTAURANT USES, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL USES, SERVICE USES, OFFICE USES, ARTS, CULTURAL AND CIVIC USES, PUBLIC USES, RECREATIONAL USES, ACADEMIC USES, CHILD CARE CENTER, BED AND BREAKFAST, ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES, USES AND BUILDING ELEMENTS NECESSARY AND INCIDENTAL TO USES ON OTHER FLOORS INCLUDING PARKING ACCESSORY TO PERMITTED USE, STORAGE ACCESSORY TO A PERMITTED USE, FARMERS’ MARKET, PROVIDED THAT A VENDING AGREEMENT IS OBTAINED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION 15.04.350(B) USES ON THE SECOND FLOOR INCLUDE COMMERCIAL OFFICE AS ALLOWED UNDER THE NC ZONE DISTRICT. C. CONDITIONAL USES. THE FOLLOWING USES ARE PERMITTED AS CONDITIONAL USES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO THE STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES ESTABLISHED IN CHAPTER 26.425: 1. LODGING, AFFORDABLE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING, FREE MARKET MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING OR HOME OCCUPATIONS ON THE GROUND FLOOR. THE GROUND FLOOR USES ARE CURRENTLY RETAIL, RESTAURANT AND COMMERCIAL OFFICE IT IS NOT NOW, NOR CONTEMPLATED UNDER THIS APPLICATION TO BECOME A LODGING, AFFORDABLE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING, FREE MARKET MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING OR HOME OCCUPATION OCCUPANCY. 2. COMMERCIAL PARKING FACILITY, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 226.515. THE UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL IS PROVIDED FOR AND USED BY OWNERS, TENANTS AND LONG TERM LESSEES OF PARKING SPACES. IT IS NOT NOW, NOR CONTEMPLATED UNDER THIS APPLICATION TO BECOME A COMMERCIAL PARKING OPERATION. P251 VI.B. D. DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS. THE FOLLOWING DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS SHALL APPLY TO ALL PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. 1. MINIMUM GROSS LOT AREA (SQUARE FEET): NO REQUIREMENT. NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. 2. MINIMUM NET LOT AREA PER DWELLING UNIT (SQUARE FEET): NO REQUIREMENT NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. 3. MINIMUM LOT WIDTH (FEET): NO REQUIREMENT NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. 4. MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK (SQUARE FEET): FIVE (5) NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. THIS IS AN EXISTING NON CONFIRMING CONDITION. THE ACTUAL FOOTPRINT OF THE GROUND LEVEL IS COMPLIANT WITH THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, ASSUMING DURANT AVENUE IS THE “FRONT” OF THE BUILDING, BUT THE SECOND AND THIRD STORY STRUCTURE EXTENDS DOWN TO THE PLAZA LEVEL WITHIN THE SETBACK. THE NON-CONFORMITY WILL BE MAINTAINED BUT NOT EXPANDED. 5. MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK (FEET): FIVE (5) NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. THIS IS AN EXISTING NON CONFIRMING CONDITION. THE SIDE YARD TO THE EAST IS ZERO (0). THE SIDE YARD TO THE WEST IS APPROXIMATELY 4”. THE NON-CONFORMITY WILL BE MAINTAINED BUT NOT EXPANDED. 6. MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK (FEET): FIVE (5) NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. THIS IS AN EXISTING NON CONFIRMING CONDITION. THE ACTUAL FOOTPRINT OF THE GROUND LEVEL IS COMPLIANT WITH THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, ASSUMING THE ALLEYWAY IS THE “REAR” OF THE BUILDING, BUT THE SECOND AND THIRD STORY STRUCTURE EXTENDS DOWN TO THE PLAZA LEVEL WITHIN THE SETBACK. THE NON-CONFORMITY WILL BE MAINTAINED BUT NOT EXPANDED. 7. MINIMUM NET LOT AREA PER DWELLING UNIT (SQUARE FEET): PURSUANT TO SECTION 26.575.060 NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. 8. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: T W E N T Y-EIGHT (28) FEET, WHICH MAY BE INCREASED TO THIRTY-TWO (32) FEE THROUGH COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW. SEE CHAPTER 26.412. P252 VI.B. NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. THIS IS AN EXISTING NON CONFIRMING CONDITION. THE ACTUAL HEIGHT OF THE TALLEST ROOF COMPONENT IS FORTY ONE (41). THE HEIGHT STEPS WITH THE PITCHED ROOF AND IS BUFFERED BY THE TERRACES AT THE UPPER LEVEL RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT. THE NON- CONFORMITY WILL BE MAINTAINED BUT NOT EXPANDED. 9. MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS ON THE LOT (FEET): NO REQUIREMENT NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. 10. PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE: PURSUANT TO SECTION 26.575.030 NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. HOWEVER AN EXTENSIVE PUBLIC PLAZA WAS PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE ORIGINAL DESIGN THAT MEETS OR EXCEEDS CURRENT REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. 11. FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR): THE FOLLOWING FAR SCHEDULE APPLIES TO USES CUMULATIVELY UP TO A TOTAL MAXIMUM FAR OF 1.5:1. ACHIEVING THE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO IS SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE DESIGN STANDARDS, VIEW PLANE REQUIREMENTS, PUBLIC AMENITY REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS. ACCORDINGLY, THE MAXIMUM FAR IS NOT AN ENTITLEMENT AND IS NOT ACHIEVABLE IN ALL SITUATIONS. a. COMMERCIAL USES: 1:1 b. LODGING, ARTS, CULTURAL c. AFFORDABLE MULTI FAMILY HOUSING d. FREE MARKET MULTI FAMILY HOUSING .25:1, WHICH MAY BE INCREASED TO .5:1 IF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FLOOR AREA EQUAL TO 100% OF THE FREE-MARKET RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREAS IS DEVELOPED ON THE SAME PARCEL. NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. NO EXPANSION OF CURRENT FAR IS PROPOSED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. 12. MAXIMUM MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING SIZE (SQUARE FEET): ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED ( 1,500) SQUARE FEET OF NET LIVABLE AREA. A. THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY INCREASE INDIVIDUAL MULIT-FAMILY UNIT SIZE BY EXTINGUISHING HISTORIC TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT CERTIFICATES (“CERTIFICATE” OR “CERTIFICATES”), SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: 1. THE TRANSFER RATION IS 500 SQ FT OF NET LIVABLE AREA FOR EACH CERTIFICATE PURCHASED. 2. THE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE ACCRUED MAY BE APPLIED TO MULITPLE UNITS. HOWEVER THE MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL SIZE ATTAINABLE BY TRANSFERRING DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS IS 2,000 SQ FT OF NET LIVABLE AREA (I.E., NO MORE THAN 500 ADDITIONAL SQUARE FEET MAY BE APPLIED PER UNIT). 3. THIS INCENTIVE APPLIES ONLY TO INDIVIDUAL UNIT SIZE. TRANSFERRING DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS DOES NOT ALLOW AN INCREASE IN THE FLOOR AREA RATION (FAR) OF THE LOT. NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. NO EXPANSION OF CURRENT FAR IS PROPOSED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. . P253 VI.B. 13. COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL RATIO: THE TOTAL FREE-MARKET RESIDENTIAL NET LIVABLE AREA SHALL BE NO GREATER THAN THE TOTAL FLOOR AREA ASSOCIATED WITH THE USES DESCRIBED IN SUBPARAGRAPHS 26.710.170.D.11.A AND B COMBINED ON THE SAME PARCEL. NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONE DISTRICT. NO EXPANSION OF CURRENT FAR IS PROPOSED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. P254 VI.B. COMMERCIAL CHARACTER AREA ENCOMPASSING PORTIONS OF THE COMMERCIAL, COMMERCIAL LODGE, LODGE AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONE DISTRICTS DESIGN OBJECTIVES AND GUIDELINES THESE ARE KEY DESIGN OBJECTIVES FOR THE COMMERCIAL AREA. THE CITY MUST FIND THAT ANY NEW WORK WILL HELP MEET THEM: 1. STRENGTHEN THE SENSE OF RELATEDNESS WITH THE COMMERCIAL CORE HISTORIC DISTRICT STRENGTHENING THE DEFINITION OF THE STREET EDGE IN A MANNER SIMILAR TO THE COMMERCIAL CORE IS DESIRED. AT THE SAME TIME, THE COMMERCIAL AREA IS A PLACE WHERE MORE VARIETY IN DESIGN IS ENCOURAGED. IMITATING HISTORIC STYLES IS NOT AN OBJECTIVE, BUT RE-ESTABLISHING A SENSE OF STRONGER FUNDAMENTAL FRAMEWORK WILL ENHANCE THE URBAN QUALITIES OF THIS AREA AND IS A PRIORITY. THE PROPOSED DESIGN INTENDS TO RESPECT THE ORIGINAL DESIGN OF THE DURANT MALL WHICH PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE COMMERCIAL CHARACTER AREA AND RELATEDNESS TO THE COMMERCIAL CORE HISTORIC DISTRICT. THEREFORE, THE ARCHITECTURE, MATERIAL AND FINISH SELECTIONS AND DETAILING ARE INTENDED TO CONTINUE THE VARIETY OF ARCHITECTURAL STYLES ALLOWED IN THE COMMERCIAL CHARACTER AREA. 2. MAINTAIN A RETAIL ORIENTATION. GREATER RETAIL PRESENCE AT THE STREET EDGE SHOULD BE ACHIEVED TO ENSURE AN ENHANCED STREET VITALITY AND AN ENRICHED AND MORE URBAN DEFINITION OF THE COMMERCIAL STREET FRONTAGE. THE PROPOSED DESIGN ENHANCES BOTH THE VISIBILITY TO AND FROM THE RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL SPACES AS WELL AS THE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE OF APPROACHING THE PROPERTY FROM DURANT AVENUE. 3. PROMOTE CREATIVE, CONTEMPORARY DESIGN. DESIGNS SHOULD SEEK CREATIVE NEW SOLUTIONS THAT CONVEY THE COMMUNITY’S CONTINUING INTEREST IN EXPLORING INNOVATIONS. AT THE SAME TIME, THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF TRADITIONAL DESIGN MUST BE RESPECTED. THIS MEANS THAT EACH PROJECT SHOULD STRIKE A BALANCE IN THE DESIGN VARIABLES THAT ARE PRESENTED ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES. TH E P R O P O S E D D E S I G N I S I N T E N D E D A S A “BRIDGE” OF ARCHITECTURAL STYLE BETWEEN THE “CONTEMPORARY” DESIGN OF 1975 AND CREATIVE CONTEMPORARY DESIGN OF TODAY. 4. ENCOURAGE A WELL DEFINED STREET WALL. THE INTENT IS TO MORE CLEARLY ESTABLISH A STRONGLY DEFINED STREET WALL, BUT WITH SOME GREATER VARIETY THAN IN THE COMMERCIAL CORE HISTORIC DISTRICT SINCE THE HISTORIC BUILDING EDGE IS NOT AS DEFINED. A STRONGER STREET FAÇADE DEFINITION SHOULD BE ACHIEVED WHILE AT THE SAME TIME RECOGNIZING THE VALUE OF PUBLIC DINING AND LANDSCAPE SPACE. THE PROPOSED DESIGN INTENDS TO RESPECT THE ORIGINAL DESIGN OF THE DURANT MALL WHICH PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE COMMERCIAL CHARACTER AREA AND RELATEDNESS TO THE COMMERCIAL CORE HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE EXISTING STRUCTURE HAS A STRONG STREET WALL, WHICH HAS BEEN ENHANCED IN PHASE I REPAIRS AND IMPROVEMENTS, WHILE PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC SPACE AT THE PLAZA LEVEL. 5. REFLECT THE VARIETY IN BUILDING HEIGHTS SEEN TRADITIONALLY. P255 VI.B. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT A RANGE AND VARIATION IN BUILDING HEIGHT AND SCALE IN THE COMMERCIAL AREA BE RECOGNIZED IN FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS. LARGER BUILDINGS SHOULD BE VARIED IN HEIGHT AND REFLECT ORIGINAL LOT WIDTHS. THE BUILDING DESIGN PROPOSES VARIED HEIGHTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND THE INCLUSION OF LOW PARAPET WALLS THAT WILL ALLOW THE AESTHETIC OF THE EAST AND WEST BUILDINGS TO BE MORE COHESIVE. 6. ACCOMMODATE OUTDOOR PUBLIC SPACES WHILE ESTABLISHING A CLEAR DEFINITION TO THE STREET EDGE. PROVIDING SPACE IN ASSOCIATION WITH INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS REMAINS IMPORTANT, BUT SHOULD BE BALANCED WITH MUCH GREATER BUILDING STREET PRESENCE AND CORNER DEFINITION. THE EXISTING BUILDING ADDRESSES THIS SECTION IN ITS CURRENT STATE, WITH IMPROVEMENTS FROM PHASE I ALREADY IMPLEMENTED, THE STREET EDGE IS CLEARLY DEFINED BUT PHYSICALLY AND VISUALLY ACCESSIBLE TO THE OUTDOOR PUBLIC SPACES. THE EXISTING BUILDING(S) ARE MID- BLOCK, SO A CORNER DEFINITION IS NOT POSSIBLE, HOWEVER IT DOES PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS TO AND THROUGH THE PLAZA. 7. PROMOTE VARIETY IN THE STREET LEVEL EXPERIENCE. DISPLAY CASES, ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS AND LANDSCAPING ARE AMONG THE DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT SHOULD BE USED. THE STREET LEVEL EXPERIENCE IS VARIED BY THE NATURE OF THE EXISTING DESIGN AND BLEND OF TENANTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE BUILDING(S). THE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILING WILL BE ENHANCED WITH NEW FINISH MATERIALS, DESIGNED TO ENHANCE THE STREETSCAPE AND PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE. LANDSCAPING AND OTHER PUBLIC AMENITIES, INCLUDING PLAZA SEATING, BICYCLE RACKS, AND POSSIBLY PUBLIC ART ARE PROPOSED IN THIS APPLICATION. P256 VI.B. COMMERCIAL CHARACTER AREA CONCEPTUAL REVIEW DESIGN GUIDELINES 1.1 ORIENT A PRIMARY ENTRANCE TOWARD THE STREET. • A BUILDING SHOULD HAVE A CLEARLY DEFINED PRIMARY ENTRANCE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE. HOWEVER THE NORTH ENTRANCE, FACING CITY MARKET IS CONSIDERED THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE TO THE 710 BUILDING. THE REALIGNMENT OF THE STAIRS IN PHASE I, HAS FURTHER EMPHASIZED THIS AS THE MAIN ENTRANCE. NEW SIGNAGE AND WAY-FINDING WILL FURTHER EMPHASIZE THE ENTRY TO BOTH BUILDINGS. • PROVIDING SECONDARY PUBLIC ENTRANCES TO COMMERCIAL SPACES IS ALSO ENCOURAGED ON LARGER BUILDINGS. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE. HOWEVER THE COMMERCIAL, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SPACES ALL HAVE SECONDARY ENTRANCES, WELL ESTABLISHED AND KNOWN TO THE PUBLIC. 1.2 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. THE NETWORK OF STREETS AND ALLEYS ARE NOT IMPACTED BY THE EXISTING BUILDINGS OR PROPOSED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND AESTHETIC UPDATES AND WILL BE IN FACT ENHANCED. • STREETS AND ALLEYS SHOULD NOT BE ENCLOSED OR CLOSED TO PUBLIC ACCESS, AND SHOULD REMAIN OPEN TO THE SKY. THE NETWORK OF STREETS AND ALLEYS ARE NOT IMPACTED BY THE EXISTING BUILDINGS OR PROPOSED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND AESTHETIC UPDATES AND WILL BE IN FACT ENHANCED. THEY ARE AND WILL REMAIN OPEN TO THE SKY. 1.3 PUBLIC WALKWAYS AND THROUGH COURTS SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO CREATE ACCESS TO ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL SPACE. • THESE MAY BE SHOPS THAT FACE ONTO WALKWAYS OR COURTYARDS. THE EXISTING PUBLIC PLAZA AND WALKWAY THROUGH THE DURANT MALL PROVIDES ACCESS TO AND THROUGH THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL STOREFRONT EXPOSURE FOR EXISTING AND FUTURE COMMERCIAL, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SPACES. • SEE ALSO: PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE DESIGN GUIDELINES THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. HOWEVER AN EXPANSIVE PLAZA AREA WAS PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE ORIGINAL DESIGN. AS PART OF OUR REDESIGN EFFORT, WE INTEND TO ENHANCE THE PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. IN FACT, PHASE I ALREADY INCLUDED SOME RECONFIGURATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF THE PLAZA ACCESS. P257 VI.B. 1.4 DEVELOP AN ALLEY FAÇADE TO CREATE VISUAL INTEREST. • USE VARIED BUILDING SETBACKS AND CHANGES IN MATERIALS TO CREATE INTEREST AND REDUCE PERCEIVED SCALE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR VISUAL INTEREST ON THE ALLEY SIDE. HOWEVER, THE DURANT MALL UNIQUELY ADDRESSES THIS CODE SECTION WITH VARIED BUILDING HEIGHTS, SETBACKS AND OVERHANGS. THIS, ALONG WITH OUR PROPOSED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND AESTHETIC ENHANCEMENTS WILL CREATE FURTHER VISUAL INTEREST. • BALCONIES, COURT YARDS AND DECKS ARE ALSO APPROPRIATE. THERE ARE EXISTING BALCONIES, COURTYARDS, DECKS AND PUBLIC PLAZA SPACES WHICH WILL BE ENHANCED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. • 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. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE AS THE NORTH ENTRANCE, FACING CITY MARKET IS CONSIDERED THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE TO THE 710 BUILDING. THE REALIGNMENT OF THE STAIRS IN PHASE I, HAS FURTHER EMPHASIZED THIS AS THE MAIN ENTRANCE. NEW SIGNAGE AND WAY-FINDING WILL FURTHER EMPHASIZE THE ENTRY TO BOTH BUILDINGS. THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE OFF OF DURANT AVENUE HAS BEEN ENHANCED AND IS PROPOSED TO AMENITIZE THE PUBLIC PLAZA AND BUILDING ENTRIES UNDER THIS APPLICATION. 1.5 THE VISUAL IMPACTS OF STRUCTURED PARKING SHOULD BE MINIMIZED. THE ACCESS SHALL BE: • LOCATED ON AN ALLEY WHEN FEASIBLE OR A SECONDARY STREET, DESIGNED WITH THE SAME ATTENTION TO DETAIL AND MATERIALS AS THE PRIMARY BUILDING FAÇADE, AND INTEGRATED INTO THE BUILDING DESIGN. THE UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL IS ACCESS OFF THE ALLEYWAY BETWEEN THE DURANT MALL AND CITY MARKET. THIS AREA IS TO UNDERGO THE SAME REPAIRS AND AESTHETIC UPDATES AS THE REMAINDER OF THE BUILDING AND WILL SIGNIFICANTLY ENHANCE THE APPEARANCE. 1.6 STRUCTURED PARKING SHOULD BE PLACED WITHIN A ‘WRAP’ OF COMMERCIAL AND/OR RESIDENTIAL USES. THE UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL IS PROVIDED FOR AND USED BY OWNERS, TENANTS AND LONG TERM LESSEES OF PARKING SPACES. IT SERVES A WRAP OF USES AS PRESCRIBED. 1.7 A STREET FACING AMENITY SPACE SHALL MEET ALL OF THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS: • ABUT THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK P258 VI.B. THE PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE AT THE PLAZA LEVEL ABUTS THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK. • BE LEVEL WITH THE SIDEWALK THE PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE AT THE PLAZA LEVEL ABUTS THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK. AND IS LEVEL WITH THE SIDEWALK AT THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH ADA ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS. A SET OF THREE (3) STAIR RISERS SERVES THE MAIN ACCESS AND ENTRY. THIS IS AN EXISTING, NON CONFORMING CONDITION. • BE OPEN TO THE SKY THE PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE AT THE PLAZA LEVEL IS OPEN TO THE SKY AND COVERED BY PORTIONS OF THE SECOND STORY OF THE BUILDINGS. THIS PROVIDES PROTECTION FROM THE SUN AND WEATHER AND COVERED RESTAURANT SEATING CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY JOUR DE FETE. THIS AREA WILL BE ENHANCED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION. • BE DIRECTLY ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC THE PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE AT THE PLAZA LEVEL IS DIRECTLY ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC FROM BOTH DURANT AVENUE AND THE ALLEYWAY ON THE NORTH BETWEEN THE DURANT MALL AND CITY MARKET. • BE PAVED OR OTHERWISE LANDSCAPED THE PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE AT THE PLAZA LEVEL IS PAVED WITH A NEW BROOM FINISHED CONCRETE FOR SLIP RESISTANCE. IT WILL BE STAINED AND SEALED TO COMPLEMENT THE AESTHETIC PROPOSED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. 1.8 A STREET-FACING PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE SHALL REMAIN SUBORDINATE TO THE LINE OF BUILDING FRONTS IN THE COMMERCIAL AREA. • ANY PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE POSITIONED AT THE STREET EDGE SHALL RESPECT THE CHARACTER OF THE STREETSCAPE AND ENSURE THAT STREET CORNERS ARE WELL DEFINED, WITH BUILDINGS PLACED AT THE SIDEWALK EDGE. THE PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE AT THE PLAZA LEVEL IS AN EXISTING MID-BLOCK PLAZA THAT IS RESPECTFUL OF THE STREETSCAPE. • SUNKEN SPACES, WHICH ARE ASSOCIATED WITH SOME PAST DEVELOPMENTS, ADVERSELY AFFECT THE STREET CHARACTER. WHERE FEASIBLE, THESE SHOULD BE REPLACED WITH SIDEWALK LEVEL IMPROVEMENTS. THE PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE AT THE PLAZA LEVEL AT SIDEWALK/STREET LEVEL WITH GRADE TAPERING GRADUALLY TO THE WEST. ON THE NORTH SIDE, THERE IS TO BE A LOWER PLAZA, RAISED 18” OFF THE ALLEY FOR SAFETY AND A LARGE NEW STAIR ALIGNING THE CITY MARKET FAÇADE WITH THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO THE DURANT MALL 710 BUILDING. 1.9 STREET FACING AMENITY SPACE SHALL CONTAIN FEATURES TO PROMOTE AND ENHANCE ITS USE. THESE MAY INCLUDE ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: P259 VI.B. • STREET FURNITURE THE PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE AT THE PLAZA LEVEL IS TO BE FURNISHED WITH PUBLIC SEATING AREAS AS WELL AS BICYCLE RACKS, IN ADDITION TO FURNITURE SERVING JOUR DE FETE RESTAURANT. • PUBLIC ART THE PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE AT THE PLAZA LEVEL WAS DESIGNED TO INCLUDE A SEPARATE PLINTH SPACE SUITABLE FOR PUBLIC ART. • HISTORICAL/INTERPRETIVE MARKER UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, A HISTORICAL OR INTERPRETIVE MARKER IS NOT PLANNED AT THIS TIME. 1.10 MID-BLOCK WALKWAYS SHALL REMAIN SUBORDINATE IN SCALE TO TRADITIONAL LOT WIDTHS. • MID-BLOCK PUBLIC WALKWAYS SHALL BE BETWEEN 8 FT. AND 10 FT. IN WIDTH. THE EXISTING MID-BLOCK WALKWAY MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE WIDTH OF BETWEEN 8FT AND 10FT AND CONNECTS DURANT AVENUE WITH THE ALLEYWAY BETWEEN THE DURANT MALL AND CITY MARKET. A REALIGNMENT OF THE NORTH STAIRS FURTHER ENHANCED AND EMPHASIZED THIS RELATIONSHIP. 1.11 A MID-BLOCK WALKWAY SHOULD PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE FOLLOWING: • ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL SPACE AND FRONTAGE WITHIN THE WALKWAY THE EXISTING MID-BLOCK WALKWAY PROVIDES ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT FRONTAGE WITHIN THE WALKWAY. • USES LOCATED AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY THAT ARE COMMERCIAL IN NATURE. THE EXISTING MID-BLOCK WALKWAY PROVIDES PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE ENTIRE PROPERTY AND CONNECTS DURANT AVENUE WITH THE ALLEYWAY BETWEEN THE DURANT MALL AND CITY MARKET. A REALIGNMENT OF THE NORTH STAIRS FURTHER ENHANCED AND EMPHASIZED THIS RELATIONSHIP. AS A RESULT, THERE ARE EFFECTIVELY TWO (2) “MAIN ENTRANCES” TO THE PROPERTY. 1.12 AN ALLEY SIDE AMENITY SPACE SHALL BE DESIGNED TO HAVE THESE CHARACTERISTICS. • DIRECT PUBLIC ACCESS TO COMMERCIAL SPACE AT GROUND OR SECOND FLOOR LEVELS THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SECOND FLOOR. HOWEVER, THE ACCESS FROM THE ALLEYWAY IS ELEVATED AND ACCESSED FROM A LARGE STAIRWAY TO ALL COMMERCIAL, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SPACE AT THE MAIN PUBLIC PLAZA LEVEL. • MAXIMIZE SOLAR ACCESS TO THE ALLEY SIDE AMENITY SPACE THE EXISTING DESIGN MAXIMIZES SOLAR ACCESS ON THE ALLEY SIDE OF THE GRAND STAIR AND PUBLIC PLAZA. THERE ARE OTHER AREAS, COVERED BY OVERHANGS FROM THE COMMERCIAL AREA ABOVE, THAT WILL ALSO PROVIDE SHELTERED AREAS. P260 VI.B. • ENHANCE THE ATTRACTIVENESS AND USE OF THE REAR ALLEY THE ENHANCEMENT OF THE ATTRACTIVENESS AND USE OF THE REAR ALLEY IS PROPOSED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. THE EXISTING CONDITIONS FRONTING THE ALLEY ARE “UNFINISHED” FROM THE ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION. THIS AREA IS INTENDED TO BE FINISHED WITH THE SAME MATERIAL AND FINISH PALETTE AS THE REST OF THE BUILDING UNDER THIS PROPOSAL. • MINIMIZE THE ADVERSE IMPACTS OF ADJACENT SERVICE AND PARKING AREA THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR SERVICE AND PARKING AREAS. HOWEVER THE SERVICE, UTILITY, LOADING AND PARKING AREAS ARE WELL ESTABLISHED AND RECOGNIZED BY THE PUBLIC USE OVER 40 YEARS. THESE AREAS ARE TO BE ENHANCED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. 1.13 A SECOND FLOOR AMENITY SPACE SHOULD MEET ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: • BE DEDICATED FOR PUBLIC USE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SECOND FLOOR. HOWEVER, THE ACCESS FROM THE ALLEYWAY IS ELEVATED AND ACCESSED FROM A LARGE STAIRWAY TO ALL COMMERCIAL, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SPACE AT THE MAIN PUBLIC PLAZA LEVEL. • PROVIDE A PUBLIC OVERLOOK AND/OR AN INTERPRETIVE MARKER THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SECOND FLOOR. HOWEVER, THE ACCESS FROM THE ALLEYWAY IS ELEVATED AND ACCESSED FROM A LARGE STAIRWAY TO ALL COMMERCIAL, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SPACE AT THE MAIN PUBLIC PLAZA LEVEL. THIS ALSO SERVES AS A DE FACTO “OVERLOOK” TO THE NORTH APPROACH TO THE PROPERTY. • BE IDENTIFIED BY A MARKER AT STREET LEVEL NEW SIGNAGE AND PUBLIC WAY FINDING IS PROPOSED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. THIS WILL FURTHER ENHANCE THE ACCESS FROM THE ALLEYWAY TO ALL COMMERCIAL, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SPACE AT THE MAIN PUBLIC PLAZA LEVEL. 1.14 SECOND LEVEL SPACE SHOULD BE ORIENTED TO MAXIMIZE SOLAR ACCESS AND VIEWS TO THE MOUNTAINS OR OTHER LANDMARKS. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR SECOND LEVEL PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. HOWEVER AN EXPANSIVE PLAZA AREA WAS PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE ORIGINAL DESIGN AT THE MAIN LEVEL WITH SOLAR ACCESS AND VIEWS TO THE MOUNTAINS. 1.15 SECOND LEVEL SPACE SHOULD PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS BY WAY OF A VISIBLE AND ATTRACTIVE PUBLIC STAIR OR ELEVATOR FROM PUBLIC STREET, ALLEY, OR STREET LEVEL AMENITY SPACE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR SECOND LEVEL PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. HOWEVER AN EXPANSIVE PLAZA AREA WAS PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE ORIGINAL DESIGN AND THIS IS ELEVATED ABOVE THE ALLEYWAY TO THE NORTH. 1.16 SECOND LEVEL DINING MAY BE CONSIDERED. P261 VI.B. • IF THE USE CHANGES, THE SPACE MUST REMAIN ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC SO LONG AS IT IS TO BE CONSIDERED MEETING THE PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE REQUIREMENT. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR A SECOND LEVEL PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. HOWEVER AN EXPANSIVE MAIN PLAZA AREA WAS PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE ORIGINAL DESIGN PROVIDING OUTDOOR DINING AREA CURRENTLY UTILIZED BY JOUR DE FETE RESTAURANT. 1.17 FRONT AND SIDE YARD AMENITY SPACE SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN THE CONTEXT OF A HISTORIC ONE STORY RESIDENTIAL TYPE BUILDING. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR SIDE YARD PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. AND WE HAVE ZERO (0) LOT LINE SIDE YARD SETBACKS. HOWEVER AN EXPANSIVE PLAZA AREA WAS PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE ORIGINAL DESIGN. 1.18 MAINTAIN THE ALIGNMENT OF FACADES AT THE SIDEWALK’S EDGE. • PLACE AS MUCH OF THE FAÇADE OF THE BUILDING AT THE PROPERTY LINE AS POSSIBLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR FAÇADE ALIGNMENT HOWEVER, THE STRUCTURE AND SECOND FAÇADE ALIGNS AT THE EDGE OF THE SIDEWALK (PROPERTY LINE) CLEARLY DEFINING THE BUILDING ALIGNMENT. THE MAIN LEVEL FAÇADE STEPS BACK BY A VARIED AMOUNT. • A MINIMUM OF 60% OF THE FRONT FAÇADE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR FAÇADE ALIGNMENT. HOWEVER, APPROXIMATELY 60% OF THE FRONT FAÇADE ALIGNS WITH THE SIDEWALK EDGE (PROPERTY LINE) WHEN CONSIDERING THE COMBINED LENGTH OF BOTH THE 710 AND 720 BUILDINGS. • LOCATING AN ENTIRE BUILDING FRONT BEHIND THE ESTABLISHED STOREFRONT LINE IS INAPPROPRIATE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR FAÇADE ALIGNMENT. HOWEVER, THE STOREFRONT LINE SUBSTANTIALLY ALIGNS WITH THE SIDEWALK (PROPERTY LINE) STRUCTURALLY AND IN CONSIDERATION OF THE PUBLIC PLAZA AND ACCESS SETBACK. 1.19 A BUILDING MAY BE SET BACK FROM ITS SIDE LOT LINES IN ACCORDANCE WITH DESIGN GUIDELINES IDENTIFIED IN STREET & ALLEY SYSTEM AND PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE GUIDELINES. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR SIDE YARD SETBACKS. THEREFORE THE SIDE YARDS ARE APPROXIMATELY ZERO (0) TO THE EAST AND FOUR (4) INCHES TO THE WEST. 1.20 BUILDING FACADES SHALL BE PARALLEL TO THE FACING STREET(S) AND PRIMARY ENTRANCES SHALL BE ORIENTED TOWARD THE STREET. P262 VI.B. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR STREET FACING FACADES AND ENTRANCES. HOWEVER, THE BUILDINGS ARE PARALLEL TO DURANT AVENUE AND THE ALLEY WAY BETWEEN THE DMCA AND CITY MARKET. THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE TO THE 710 BUILDING IS ORIENTED TOWARDS THE NORTH (ALLEY) WITH THE STAIR RE- DESIGNED TO ALIGN AND EMPHASIZE THIS ENTRANCE. THE EXISTING MID-BLOCK WALKWAY PROVIDES PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE ENTIRE PROPERTY AND CONNECTS DURANT AVENUE WITH THE ALLEYWAY BETWEEN THE DURANT MALL AND CITY MARKET. AS A RESULT, THERE ARE EFFECTIVELY TWO (2) “MAIN ENTRANCES” TO THE PROPERTY. 1.21 ORIENT A NEW BUILDING TO BE PARALLEL TO ITS LOT LINES, SIMILAR TO THAT OF TRADITIONAL BUILDING ORIENTATIONS. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR ALIGNMENTS OF NEW BUILDINGS. HOWEVER, THE BUILDINGS ARE ALL PARALLEL TO THE RESPECTIVE LOT LINES. 1.22 BUILDING FAÇADE HEIGHT SHALL BE VARIED FROM THE FAÇADE HEIGHT OF ADJACENT BUILDINGS OF THE SAME NUMBER OF STORIES BY A MINIMUM OF 2 FEET. • IF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE IS THREE STORIES AND 38 FT. TALL FOR EXAMPLE, THEN ADJACENT NEW INFILL MAY BE THREE STORIES, BY MUST VARY IN FAÇADE HEIGHT BY A MINIMUM OF 2 FT. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT AND VARIED HEIGHT. ADDITIONALLY THE DESIGN AND AESTHETIC APPEARANCE OF THE 710 AND 720 BUILDINGS WERE INTENDED TO BE COMPLEMENTARY 1.23 A NEW BUILDING OR ADDITION SHOULD REFLECT THE RANGE AND VARIATION IN BUILDING HEIGHT OF THE COMMERCIAL AREA. • REFER TO THE ZONE DISTRICT REGULATIONS TO DETERMINE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT AND VARIED HEIGHT. THIS IS AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING CONDITION. • A MINIMUM 9 FT. FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHT IS TO BE MAINTAINED ON SECOND STORIES AND HIGHER. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHTS. THE EXISTING FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHT IN THE 710 BUILDING IS CURRENTLY EIGHT FEET FIVE INCHES, (8’-5”) AND NOT TO BE CHANGED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. THE EXISTING FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHT IN THE 720 BUILDING IS CURRENTLY NINE FEET TEN INCHES (9’-10”) IN COMPLIANCE WITH THIS STANDARD. • ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, AS PERMITTED IN THE ZONE DISTRICT, MAY BE ADDED FOR ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING REASONS: o IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE AT LEAST A TWO-FOOT VARIATION IN HEIGHT WITH AN ADJACENT BUILDING. NOT APPLICABLE. NOT REQUESTED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. P263 VI.B. o THE PRIMARY FUNCTION OF THE BUILDING IS CIVIC. (I.E. THE BUILDING IS A MUSEUM, CIVIC BUILDING, PERFORMANCE HALL, FIRE STATION, ETC.) NOT APPLICABLE. NOT REQUESTED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. o 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. NOT APPLICABLE. NOT REQUESTED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. o TO BENEFIT THE LIVABILITY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS. NOT APPLICABLE. NOT REQUESTED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. o TO MAKE A DEMONSTRABLE (TO BE VERIFIED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT) CONTRIBUTED TO THE BUILDING’S OVERALL ENERGY EFFICIENCY, FOR INSTANCE BY PROVIDING IMPROVED DAYLIGHTING. NOT APPLICABLE. NOT REQUESTED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. 1.24 HEIGHT VARIATION SHOULD BE ACHIEVED USING ONE OF MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: • VARY THE BUILDING HEIGHT IN ACCORDANCE WITH TRADITIONAL LOT WIDTH. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR VARIED HEIGHT IN ACCORDANCE WITH TRADITIONAL LOT WIDTH. THIS IS AN EXISTING NON- CONFORMING CONDITION. THE DESIGN OF THE DURANT MALL WAS CLEARLY INTENDED TO BE IDENTIFIED AS ONE BUILDING AND NOT SUBDIVIDED AESTHETICALLY TO RESPOND TO THE TRADITIONAL BLOCK WIDTH. THIS APPLICATION CONTEMPLATES THE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND MATERIAL UPDATES, BUT NOT A WHOLESALE RE-DESIGN TO COMPLY WITH THIS STANDARD. • 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. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT VARIATION. HOWEVER, THE STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND MATERIAL UPDATES WILL COMPLEMENT BUT NOT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THIS DESIGN STANDARD. • VARY THE FAÇADE (OR PARAPET) HEIGHTS AT THE FRONT. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS HEIGHT VARIATION. HOWEVER, THE STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND MATERIAL UPDATES WILL COMPLEMENT BUT NOT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THIS DESIGN STANDARD. • STEP DOWN THE REAR OF THE BUILDING TOWARDS THE ALLEY, IN CONJUNCTION WITH OTHER DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT VARIATION. HOWEVER, THE EXISTING HEIGHTS STEP DOWN TOWARDS THE NORTH ALLEYWAY AS P264 VI.B. PRESENTLY DESIGNED. THE STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND MATERIAL UPDATES WILL COMPLEMENT BUT NOT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THIS DESIGN STANDARD. 1.25 ON 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. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR VARIED HEIGHT IN ACCORDANCE WITH TRADITIONAL LOT WIDTH. THIS IS AN EXISTING NON- CONFORMING CONDITION. THE DESIGN OF THE DURANT MALL WAS CLEARLY INTENDED TO BE IDENTIFIED AS ONE BUILDING AND NOT SUBDIVIDED AESTHETICALLY TO RESPOND TO THE TRADITIONAL BLOCK WIDTH. THIS APPLICATION CONTEMPLATES THE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND MATERIAL UPDATES, BUT NOT A WHOLESALE RE-DESIGN TO COMPLY WITH THIS STANDARD. • HEIGHT SHOULD BE VARIED EVERY 60 FT. MINIMUM AND PREFERABLY EVERY 30 FT. OF LINEAR FRONTAGE IN KEEPING WITH TRADITIONAL LOT WIDTHS AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR VARIED HEIGHT IN ACCORDANCE WITH TRADITIONAL LOT WIDTH. CURRENTLY THE 710 BUILDING IS DESIGNED AS 103’-9” LONG FACING DURANT AVENUE. THIS IS AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING CONDITION. ALL OTHER FACADES ARE AT OR BELOW THE 60FT MINIMUM WIDTH. THE NORTH SIDE OF THE 710 BUILDING IS 56’-9”. THE NORTH FACE OF THE 720 BUILDING IS 59’-6” AND THE SOUTH FAÇADE FACING DURANT AVENUE IS 18’-0”, THEN STEPPING BACK FROM THE STREET FRONTAGE. WHILE THESE OTHER FACADES COMPLY WITH THE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FO THE STANDARD, THE DESIGN OF THE DURANT MALL WAS CLEARLY INTENDED TO BE IDENTIFIED AS ONE BUILDING AND NOT SUBDIVIDED AESTHETICALLY TO RESPOND TO THE TRADITIONAL BLOCK WIDTH. THIS APPLICATION CONTEMPLATES THE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND MATERIAL UPDATES, BUT NOT A WHOLESALE RE-DESIGN TO COMPLY WITH THIS STANDARD. • NO MORE THAN TWO CONSECUTIVE 30 FT. FAÇADE MODULES MAY BE THREE STORIES TALL, WITHIN AN INDIVIDUAL BUILDING. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT LIMITATION RELATIVE TO LOT WIDTH. THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE 710 BUILDING, FRONTING DURANT AVENUE IS 3 STORIES. HOWEVER, THE THIRD STORY IS STEPPED BACK FROM THE PRINCIPLE FAÇADE, BY ELEVEN FEET TEN INCHES (11’-10”). THIS IS AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING CONDITION. THIS APPLICATION CONTEMPLATES THE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND MATERIAL UPDATES, BUT NOT A WHOLESALE RE-DESIGN TO COMPLY WITH THIS STANDARD. • 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.) THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT RESTRICTION RELATIVE TO LOT WIDTH ARTICULATION. P265 VI.B. 1.26 BUILDING ON SITES COMPRISING MORE THAN TWO TRADITIONAL LOT WIDTHS SHALL ACHIEVE A MINIMUM OF TWO OF THE FOLLOWING: • VARIATION IN HEIGHT OF BUILDING MODULES ACROSS THE SITE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR LOT WIDTH ARTICULATION AND WAS CLEARLY INTENDED TO BE IDENTIFIED AS ONE BUILDING AND NOT SUBDIVIDED AESTHETICALLY TO RESPOND TO THE TRADITIONAL BLOCK WIDTH. THIS APPLICATION CONTEMPLATES THE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND MATERIAL UPDATES, BUT NOT A WHOLESALE RE-DESIGN TO COMPLY WITH THIS STANDARD. • VARIATION IN MASSING ACHIEVED THROUGH UPPER FLOOR SETBACKS, THE ROOFSCAPE FORM AND VARIATION IN UPPER FLOOR HEIGHTS THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR LOT WIDTH ARTICULATION AND WAS CLEARLY INTENDED TO BE IDENTIFIED AS ONE BUILDING AND NOT SUBDIVIDED AESTHETICALLY TO RESPOND TO THE TRADITIONAL BLOCK WIDTH. THIS APPLICATION CONTEMPLATES THE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND MATERIAL UPDATES, BUT NOT A WHOLESALE RE-DESIGN TO COMPLY WITH THIS STANDARD. • VARIATION IN BUILDING FAÇADE HEIGHTS OR CORNICE LINE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR LOT WIDTH ARTICULATION AND WAS CLEARLY INTENDED TO BE IDENTIFIED AS ONE BUILDING AND NOT SUBDIVIDED AESTHETICALLY TO RESPOND TO THE TRADITIONAL BLOCK WIDTH. THIS APPLICATION CONTEMPLATES THE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND MATERIAL UPDATES, BUT NOT A WHOLESALE RE-DESIGN TO COMPLY WITH THIS STANDARD. 1.27 A NEW BUILDING SHOULD STEP DOWN IN SCALE TO RESPECT THE HEIGHT, FORM AND SCALE OF A HISTORIC BUILDING WITHIN ITS IMMEDIATE SETTING. NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR SCALE RELATIVE TO AN ADJACENT HISTORICAL BUILDING. THERE ARE NO HISTORIC BUILDINGS WITHIN THE IMMEDIATE CONTEXT. 1.28 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. NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR LOT BUILDING HEIGHT ADJACENT TO HISTORIC STRUCTURES.. THERE ARE NO HISTORIC STRUCTURES ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY. P266 VI.B. COMMERCIAL CHARACTER AREA FINAL REVIEW DESIGN GUIDELINES 1.29 A NEW BUILDING SHALL REFLECT THE TRADITIONAL LOT WIDTH (30 FT) AS EXPRESSED BY TWO OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: • VARIATION IN HEIGHT AT INTERNAL LOT LINES • VARIATION IN THE PLANE OF THE FRONT FAÇADE • STREET FAÇADE COMPOSITION • VARIATION IN ARCHITECTURAL DETAILING AND MATERIALS TO EMPHASIZE THE BUILDING MODULE NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. 1.30 THE DETAILED DESIGN OF THE BUILDING FAÇADE SHOULD REFLECT THE TRADITIONAL SCALE AND RHYTHM OF THE BLOCK. THIS SHOULD BE ACHIEVED USING ALL OF THE FOLLOWING • THE FENESTRATION GROUPING • THE MODELING OF THE FAÇADE • THE DESIGN FRAMEWORK FOR THE FIRST FLOOR STOREFRONT • VARIATION IN ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL/OR THE PALETTE OF FAÇADE MATERIALS NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. 1.30 A BUILDING SHOULD REFLECT THE ARCHITECTURAL HIERARCHY AND ARTICULATION INHERENT IN THE COMPOSITION OF THE STREET FAÇADE. THE FOLLOWING SHOULD BE ADDRESSED: • THE DESIGN AND DEFINITION OF THE TRADITIONALLY TALL FIRST FLOOR • THE VERTICAL PROPORTIONS OF THE UPPER LEVEL FENESTRATION PATTERN AND RATIO OF SOLID WALL TO WINDOW AREA. NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. 1.31 A BUILDING SHOULD REFLECT THE THREE-DIMENSIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STREET FAÇADE IN THE STRENGTH AND DEPTH OF MODELING, FENESTRATION AND ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL. NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. 1.33 ANY NEW BUILDING SHALL BE DESIGNED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 9 FEET FROM FLOOR TO CEILING ON ALL FLOORS. NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. 1.34 MAINTAIN THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE STREET LEVEL AND UPPER FLOORS. • THE FIRST FLOOR SHOULD BE THE TALLEST FLOOR TO FLOOR HEIGHT IN THE BUILDING P267 VI.B. • THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE PRIMARY FAÇADE SHOULD BE PREDOMINANTLY TRANSPARENT GLASS • UPPER FLOORS SHOULD BE PERCEIVED AS BEING MORE OPAQUE THAN THE STREET LEVEL. UPPER STORY WINDOWS SHOULD HAVE A VERTICAL EMPHASIS. • HIGHLY REFLECTIVE OR DARKLY TINTED GLASS IS INAPPROPRIATE • EXPRESS THE TRADITIONAL DISTINCTION IN FLOOR HEIGHTS BETWEEN THE STREET LEVELS AND UPPER LEVELS THROUGH DETAILING, MATERIALS AND FENESTRATION. THE PRESENCE OF A BELT COURSE IS AN IMPORTANT FEATURE IN THIS RELATIONSHIP. NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. 1.35 A NEW BUILDING SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO MAINTAIN THE STATURE OF TRADITIONAL STREET LEVEL FRONTAGE. • THIS SHOULD BE 13-15 FT. IN FLOOR TO FLOOR HEIGHT ON THE FIRST FLOOR • THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FIRST FLOOR HEIGHT MUST BE MAINTAINED FOR AT LEAST THE FIRST 50 FOOT DEPTH OF THE LOT, AND MAY ONLY BE DROPPED TO A LOWER HEIGHT BEYOND THAT POINT FOR AREAS THAT ARE DEVOTED TO STORAGE, CIRCULATION, OFFICES, RESTAURANT KITCHENS, ALLEY COMMERCIAL SPACES, OR SIMILAR SECONDARY USES. NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. 1.36 MINIMIZE THE APPEARANCE OF A TALL THIRD FLOOR. • WHERE A THIRD FLOOR’S FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHT IS IN EXCESS OF 12 FT., IT SHOULD BE SET BACK A MINIMUM OF 15 FT. FROM THE STREET FAÇADE TO REDUCE THE APPARENT HEIGHT. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT LIMITATION RELATIVE TO SETBACK STANDARDS. HOWEVER, THE THIRD STORY IS STEPPED BACK FROM THE PRINCIPLE FAÇADE, BY ELEVEN FEET TEN INCHES (11’-10”). THIS IS AN EXISTING NON- CONFORMING CONDITION. THIS APPLICATION CONTEMPLATES THE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND MATERIAL UPDATES, BUT NOT A WHOLESALE RE-DESIGN TO COMPLY WITH THIS STANDARD. • INCREASE THE PARAPET HEIGHT TO SCREEN THE VISUAL IMPACT OF A TALL TOP FLOOR. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT LIMITATION RELATIVE TO LOT WIDTH. THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE 710 BUILDING, FRONTING DURANT AVENUE IS 3 STORIES. HOWEVER, PARAPET HEIGHTS AND RAILING DETAILS ARE ADDRESSED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. • THE DESIGN OF A SETBACK THIRD FLOOR SHALL BE SIMPLER IN FORM, MORE SUBDUED IN MODELING, DETAIL AND COLOR THAN THE PRIMARY FAÇADE NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. P268 VI.B. 1.37 THE FIRST FLOOR FAÇADE SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO CONCENTRATE INTEREST ON THE FIRST LEVEL, USING THE HIGHEST QUALITY OF DESIGN, DETAILING AND MATERIALS. • A STRONG AND DISTINCTIVELY DESIGNED RETAIL FRAMEWORK FOR THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE BUILDING • AN ENTRYWAY DESIGNED TO USE THE FULL HEIGHT OF THE STOREFRONT • A DISTINCT CHANGE IN THE PALETTE OF MATERIALS USED FOR THE FIRST FLOOR DESIGN FRAMEWORK • THE DEPTH AND STRENGTH OF THE MODELING OF ELEMENTS AND DETAILS NOT APPLICABLE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND MATERIAL UPDATE. 1.38 THE RETAILS ENTRANCE SHOULD BE AT SIDEWALK LEVEL. • ALL ENTRANCES SHALL BE ADA COMPLIANT THE SITE IS ADA ACCESSIBLE FROM THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY AT SIDEWALK LEVEL. INDIVIDUAL COMMERCIAL, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SPACES ARE ADA ACCESSIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC PLAZA AREA. • ON SLOPING SITES THE RETAIL FRONTAGE SHOULD BE AS CLOSE TO A LEVEL ENTRANCE AS POSSIBLE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. THE SITE SLOPES TO THE WEST, BUT ALL COMMERCIAL, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SPACES ARE ACCESSIBLE FROM THE (FLAT) PUBLIC PLAZA LEVEL. 1.39 INCORPORATE AN AIRLOCK ENTRY INTO THE PLAN FOR ALL NEW STRUCTURES. • AN AIRLOCK ENTRY THAT PROJECTS FORWARD OF THE PRIMARY FAÇADE AT THE SIDEWALK IS INAPPROPRIATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. HOWEVER, AN “AIRLOCK” OR VESTIBULE IS INCLUDED IN THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION AT THE MAIN ENTRANCES TO THE 710 AND 720 BUILDINGS ATTENDANT TO THE ELEVATOR LOBBIES. • ADDING TEMPORARY ENTRIES DURING THE WINTER SEASON DETRACTS FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT NOT APPLICABLE. NOT REQUIRED OR REQUESTED UNDER THIS APPLICATION • USING A TEMPORARY VINYL OR FABRIC “AIRLOCK” TO PROVIDE PROTECTION FROM WINTER WEATHER IS NOT PERMITTED NOT APPLICABLE. NOT REQUIRED OR REQUESTED UNDER THIS APPLICATION 1.40 WINDOW AREA ALONG THE FIRST FLOOR SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 60% OF EXTERIOR STREET FAÇADE AREA WHEN FACING A PRINCIPAL STREET(S). THE EXISTING WINDOW CONFIGURATION IS 72% OF THE EXTERIOR STREET FAÇADE FACING THE PRINCIPAL STREET, DURANT AVENUE AND SECONDARY ALLEY WAY FRONTAGE BETWEEN THE DURANT MALL AND CITY MARKET. P269 VI.B. 1.41 WHERE APPROPRIATE A BUILDING SHALL BE DESIGNED TO MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER AND TRANSPARENCY OF THE TRADITIONAL STREET LEVEL RETAIL FRONTAGE. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. THE EXISTING WINDOW CONFIGURATION IS 72% OF THE EXTERIOR STREET FAÇADE FACING THE PRINCIPAL STREET(S), EXCEEDING MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR TRANSPARENCY. ADDITIONALLY, THE WINDOWS EXTEND FROM STRUCTURAL COLUMN TO STRUCTURAL COLUMN (IN WIDTH) WITH NO INTERRUPTION IN BETWEEN. 1.42 DESIGN OF THE FIRST FLOOR STOREFRONT SHOULD INCLUDE PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING: • THE BASIC ELEMENTS AND PROPORTIONS OF STOREFRONT DESIGN • DEPTH AND STRENGTH OF MODELING • THE PALETTE OF MATERIALS AND FINISHES USED IN BOTH THE STRUCTURAL FRAMEWORK AND THE STOREFRONT WINDOW • THE CONCENTRATION OF ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL TO ENSURE A RICH VISUAL EXPERIENCE • THE COMPLIMENTARY USE OF SIGNAGE AND LETTERING TO ENHANCE THE RETAIL AND DOWNTOWN CHARACTER • THE USE OF LIGHTING TO ACCENTUATE VISUAL PRESENCE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. THE EXISTING WINDOW CONFIGURATION IS 72% OF THE EXTERIOR STREET FAÇADE FACING THE PRINCIPAL STREET(S), EXCEEDING MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR TRANSPARENCY. ADDITIONALLY, THE WINDOW EXTEND FROM STRUCTURAL COLUMN TO STRUCTURAL COLUMN WITH NO INTERRUPTION IN BETWEEN, BUT ARE NOT INTENDED TO CHANGE UNDER THIS APPLICATION. 1.43 RETAIL FRONTAGE FACING ONTO SIDE COURTS OR REAR ALLEYS SHOULD FOLLOW SIMILAR DESIGN PRINCIPLES TO THE STREET FRONTAGE, ADJUSTED FOR THE SCALE OF THE SPACE. • IT SHOULD BE DESIGNED WITH A SIMILAR ATTENTION TO ARCHITECTURAL ARTICULATION, DETAIL AND MATERIALS. • THESE SHOULD HAVE A RICHNESS OF DETAIL THAT IS INVITING TO USERS. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS. THIS IS NOT A NEW BUILDING PROPOSAL, BUT RATHER A REPAIR AND AESTHETIC UPDATE. THE EXISTING WINDOW CONFIGURATION IS 72% OF THE EXTERIOR STREET FAÇADE FACING THE PRINCIPAL STREET(S), EXCEEDING MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR TRANSPARENCY. ADDITIONALLY, THE WINDOW EXTEND FROM STRUCTURAL COLUMN TO STRUCTURAL COLUMN WITH NO INTERRUPTION IN BETWEEN. THE DESIGN AND DETAILS ARE EXISTING AND UNCHANGED ON THE DURANT AVENUE AND SECONDARY ALLEY WAY FRONTAGE BETWEEN THE DURANT MALL AND CITY MARKET. 1.44 A LARGE BUILDING SHOULD REFLECT THE TRADITIONAL LOT WIDTH IN FORM AND VARIATION OF ITS ROOF. THIS SHOULD BE ACHIEVED THROUGH THE FOLLOWING: • A SET BACK OF THE TOP FLOOR FROM THE FRONT FAÇADE • REFLECT THE TRADITIONAL LOT WIDTH IN THE ROOF PLANE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT LIMITATION RELATIVE TO LOT WIDTH. THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE 710 BUILDING, FRONTING DURANT AVENUE IS 3 STORIES. HOWEVER, THE THIRD STORY IS STEPPED BACK FROM THE PRINCIPLE FAÇADE, BY ELEVEN FEET TEN INCHES (11’-10”). THIS IS AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING CONDITION. THIS APPLICATION CONTEMPLATES THE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS AND MATERIAL UPDATES, BUT NOT A WHOLESALE RE-DESIGN TO COMPLY WITH THIS STANDARD. P270 VI.B. 1.45 THE ROOFSCAPE SHOULD BE DESIGNED WITH THE SAME DESIGN ATTENTION AS THE SECONDARY ELEVATIONS OF THE BUILDING • GROUP AND SCREEN MECHANICAL UNITS FROM VIEW MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT IS INTENDED TO BE CONSOLIDATED AND SCREENED TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE UNDER THIS APPLICATION. • LOCATE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO THE REAR OF THE ROOF AREA GIVEN THE PROMINENCE OF BOTH FACADES OF THE 710 BUILDING THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT IS PROPOSED TO BE CONSOLIDATED AND LOCATED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILDING ON THE FLAT ROOF PORTION, MOST EASILY ACCESSED AND SCREENED TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE UNDER THIS APPLICATION. • POSITION, ARTICULATE AND DESIGN ROOFTOP ENCLOSURES OR STRUCTURES TO REFLECT THE MODULATION AND CHARACTER OF THE BUILDING THE PRIMARY DESIGN FEATURE OF OUR REPAIR AND MATERIAL UPDATE IS RELATED TO THE ROOF, THE CURRENT SHAPE AND HOW TO ARTICULATE THIS WITH RESPECT TO THESE OTHER CODE SECTIONS. • USE MATERIALS WHICH COMPLEMENT THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING FACADES THE MATERIALS PROPOSED FOR THE ROOFTOP SCREENING COMPLEMENT THE OVERALL AESTHETIC AND MATERIAL PALETTE PROPOSED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. • DESIGN ROOF GARDEN AREAS TO BE UNOBTRUSIVE FROM THE STREET NO ROOF GARDENS ARE REQUIRED OR REQUESTED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. • USE ‘GREEN ROOF’ DESIGN BEST PRACTICE, WHERE FEASIBLE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL PRE-DATES THE PRESCRIBED STANDARDS FOR “GREEN ROOF” DESIGN AND IS NOT REQUESTED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. 1.46 HIGH QUALITY, DURABLE MATERIALS SHOULD BE EMPLOYED • THE PALETTE OF MATERIALS SHOULD BE SPECIFIED, INCLUDING SAMPLES OF MATERIALS AS REQUIRED. THE MATERIALS PROPOSED UNDER THIS APPLICATION ARE HIGH QUALITY, DURABLE MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE A “LIFETIME” REPLACEMENT WITH LOW MAINTENANCE AND LIFE-CYCLE COSTING. FULL SIZE SAMPLES WILL BE PROVIDED FOR PUBLIC VIEWING AND PRESENTED AT P+Z. THE PROPOSED MATERIALS INCLUDE: STRUCTURAL STEEL COLUMNS AND BEAMS VARIEGATED ALUMINUM SIDING (VERTICAL) COMPOSITE SIDING (HORIZONTAL) GRANITE-LOOK POLISHED CMU WITH SPLIT FACE CMU ACCENT COURSE. P271 VI.B. 1.47 BUILDING MATERIALS SHOULD HAVE THESE FEATURES: • CONVEY THE QUALITY AND RANGE OF MATERIALS SEEN TRADITIONALLY THE PROPOSED MATERIALS ARE VERY HIGH QUALITY AND DURABLE. THE PURPOSE OF THIS APPLICATION IS FOR THE ABILITY TO REPLACE THE EXISTING MATERIALS, NOT ONLY BECAUSE OF THEIR DATED AESTHETIC, BUT IN FACT PRIMARILY TO BE REPLACED WITH “LIFETIME” REPLACEMENT MATERIALS. • REDUCE THE PERCEIVED SCALE OF THE BUILDING AND ENHANCE VISUAL INTEREST OF THE FAÇADE THE PROPOSED MATERIALS ARE INTENDED TO ENHANCE THE VISUAL INTEREST OF THE FAÇADE WHILE REDUCING THE PERCEIVED SCALE OF THE BUILDING. • CONVEY A HUMAN SCALE THE DETAILING OF THE PROPOSED MATERIALS IS INTENDED TO COMPLEMENT THE SCALE QUALITIES OF THE EXISTING BUILDING THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL WILL EMPHASIZE THE ORIGINAL HUMAN SCALE OF THE BUILDING, ESPECIALLY AT THE PLAZA LEVEL. THE PROPOSED MATERIALS ARE VERY HIGH QUALITY AND DURABLE. 1.48 A NEW BUILDING OR ADDITION SHOULD REFLECT THE QUALITY AND VARIATION IN MATERIAL SEEN TRADITIONALLY. THIS APPLICATION ADDRESSES AN EXISTING BUILDING, WITHOUT PROPOSED ADDITIONS. THE EXISTING DURANT MALL BUILDINGS WERE, AT THE TIME DESIGNED, TO BE “CONTEMPORARY.” THIS APPLICATION PROPOSES TO PRESERVE THE ORIGINAL DESIGN INTENT WITH REQUIRED REPAIRS AND STRUCTURAL REPLACEMENTS AND UPDATED EXTERIOR MATERIALS. 1.49 WHERE CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS ARE USE THEY SHALL BE: • HIGH QUALITY IN DURABILITY AND FINISH THE PROPOSED MATERIALS ARE VERY HIGH QUALITY AND DURABLE. THE PURPOSE OF THIS APPLICATION IS FOR THE ABILITY TO REPLACE THE EXISTING MATERIALS, NOT ONLY BECAUSE OF THEIR DATED AESTHETIC, BUT IN FACT PRIMARILY TO BE REPLACED WITH “LIFETIME” REPLACEMENT MATERIALS. • DETAILED TO CONVEY A HUMAN SCALE THE DETAILING OF THE PROPOSED MATERIALS IS INTENDED TO COMPLEMENT THE SCALE QUALITIES OF THE EXISTING BUILDING THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL WILL EMPHASIZE THE ORIGINAL HUMAN SCALE OF THE BUILDING, ESPECIALLY AT THE PLAZA LEVEL. THE PROPOSED MATERIALS ARE VERY HIGH QUALITY AND DURABLE. • COMPATIBLE WITH A TRADITIONAL MASONRY PALETTE THE MASONRY COMPONENT AT THE BASE OF THE BUILDING, ENGAGING THE SIDEWALK AT THE STREET AND ALLEYWAY LEVEL, WERE REPLACED UNDER THE PHASE I REPAIR OF THE PLAZA SURFACE. THIS WAS NECESSITATED BECAUSE OF THE SUBSTANDARD DESIGN AND INSTALLATION OF THE EXISTING MASONRY OVER THE TOPPING SLAB WITHOUT PROPER WATERPROOFING. THE NEW MATERIALS CONSIST OF GRANITE-LOOK CONCRETE-MASONRY-UNITS WITH SPLIT FACE MASONRY UNITS ADDITION A RUSTICATION COURSE COMPATIBLE WITH A MORE TRADITIONAL MASONRY PALETTE. 1.50 MATERIALS USED FOR THE THIRD FLOOR ACCOMMODATION SET BACK FROM THE STREET FACADES SHOULD BE MORE SUBDUED THAN PRIMARY FACADES P272 VI.B. THE MATERIALS PROPOSED FOR THE THIRD FLOOR ARE INTENDED TO BE DESIGNED AND DETAILED AS HORIZONTAL INSTEAD OF VERTICAL WHICH WILL REDUCE THE VISUAL IMPACT. ADDITIONALLY, THESE MATERIALS, ARE SET BACK FROM THE MAIN FAÇADE BY ELEVEN FEET TEN INCHES (11’-10”) AND WILL RETREAT INTO THE SHADOW LINES AS A RESULT. 1.51 PAVING AND LANDSCAPING SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO COMPLEMENT AND ENHANCE THE IMMEDIATE SETTING OF THE BUILDING AREA. THE PAVING OF THE PLAZA SURFACE WAS COMPLETED IN LATE 2014 UNDER A REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT PERMIT THROUGH THE CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT. CAREFUL CONSIDERATION WAS GIVEN TO THE PLAZA SURFACE DESIGN, ARTICULATION AND LAYOUT. THE COLOR AND SEALING, TO BE COMPLETED THIS SPRING, WILL ONLY ENHANCE THE AESTHETICS INTENDED TO COMPLEMENT AND SUPPORT THIS APPLICATION. LANDSCAPE PLANTERS ARE PROPOSED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION. SEASONAL LANDSCAPING AND DECORATIONS ARE PROVIDED BY THE DMCA TO ENHANCE THE PUBLIC PLAZA AREA. P273 VI.B. SUMMARY THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DURANT MALL CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION BUILDINGS INCLUDING 710 AND 720 EAST DURANT AVENUE, PRE-DATE MANY OF THE CODE SECTIONS ADDRESSED IN THIS APPLICATION, ESPECIALLY WITH REGARD TO SCALE, VISUAL REFERENCE TO LOT WIDTH, VARYING HEIGHT AND SETBACKS. THE BUILDINGS WERE DESIGNED AND BUILT 40 YEARS AGO, WITH AN APPARENT EMPHASIS ON THE STRUCTURAL EXPRESSION, INCLUDING THE DISTINCTIVE BRACES EXPRESSED ON THE FAÇADE, BUT WITHOUT THE SENSITIVITY TO THE SCALE AND RHYTHMS OF THE COMMERCIAL CORE. OUR PROPOSAL UNDER THIS APPLICATION IS TO ADDRESS THE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL REPAIRS, UPDATING THE AESTHETIC WITH CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS, WHILE RESPECTING THE ORIGINAL DESIGN INTENT OF THE ARCHITECTS FROM 1975. P274 VI.B. 25 April 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA perspective towards City Market ASPEN, Colorado P 2 7 5 V I . B . 25 April 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA perspective from Durant avenue ASPEN, Colorado P 2 7 6 V I . B . 25 April 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA conceptual perspective of plaza at durant avenue ASPEN, Colorado P 2 7 7 V I . B . 25 April 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA conceptual perspective of plaza at durant avenue ASPEN, Colorado P 2 7 8 V I . B . 25 April 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA conceptual perspective of plaza at alley ASPEN, Colorado P 2 7 9 V I . B . 25 April 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA conceptual perspective of plaza at alley ASPEN, Colorado P 2 8 0 V I . B . 25 April 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA conceptual building elevations ASPEN, Colorado P 2 8 1 V I . B . 25 April 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA conceptual building elevations ASPEN, Colorado P 2 8 2 V I . B . Exhibit 1 – plaza deck waterproofing progress Application of necessary waterproofing membrane over plaza deck surface to prevent water intrusion to the structure and garage below. P283 VI.B. Exhibit 2 – plaza deck waterproofing progress Application of hot-applied waterproofing at perimeter of the plaza. P284 VI.B. Exhibit 3 – superstructure Existing column, beam, and diagonal support members showing signs of decay. P285 VI.B. Exhibit 4 – Existing exterior siding Typical condition of the existing horizontal siding. View from between the west and east buildings. P286 VI.B. 9 j u n e 2 0 1 5 Post of fi ce box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc.ROBERT G. SINCLAIR ARCHITECTURE, INC. DM A pe r s p e c t i v e f r o m C i t y M a r k e t ~ P a r a p e t a d d i t i o n AS P E N , C o l o r a d o EXHIBIT C P287 VI.B. 9 j u n e 2 0 1 5 Post of fi ce box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc.ROBERT G. SINCLAIR ARCHITECTURE, INC. DM A pe r s p e c t i v e f r o m D u r a n t a v e n u e ~ P a r a p e t a d d i t i o n AS P E N , C o l o r a d o P288 VI.B. 9 j u n e 2 0 1 5 Post of fi ce box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc.ROBERT G. SINCLAIR ARCHITECTURE, INC. DM A co n c e p t u a l p e r s p e c t i v e o f p l a z a a t d u r a n t a v e n u e ~ P a r a p e t a d d i t i o n AS P E N , C o l o r a d o P289 VI.B. 9 j u n e 2 0 1 5 Post of fi ce box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc.ROBERT G. SINCLAIR ARCHITECTURE, INC. DM A co n c e p t u a l p e r s p e c t i v e o f p l a z a a t d u r a n t a v e n u e ~ P a r a p e t a d d i t i o n AS P E N , C o l o r a d o P290 VI.B. 9 j u n e 2 0 1 5 Post of fi ce box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc.ROBERT G. SINCLAIR ARCHITECTURE, INC. DM A co n c e p t u a l p e r s p e c t i v e o f p l a z a a t a l l e y ~ P a r a p e t a d d i t i o n AS P E N , C o l o r a d o P291 VI.B. 9 j u n e 2 0 1 5 Post of fi ce box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc.ROBERT G. SINCLAIR ARCHITECTURE, INC. DM A co n c e p t u a l p e r s p e c t i v e o f p l a z a a t a l l e y ~ P a r a p e t a d d i t i o n AS P E N , C o l o r a d o P292 VI.B. 9 j u n e 2 0 1 5 Post of fi ce box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc.ROBERT G. SINCLAIR ARCHITECTURE, INC. DM A co n c e p t u a l b u i l d i n g e l e v a t i o n s ~ P a r a p e t a d d i t i o n AS P E N , C o l o r a d o P293 VI.B. 9 j u n e 2 0 1 5 Post of fi ce box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2014 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc.ROBERT G. SINCLAIR ARCHITECTURE, INC. DM A co n c e p t u a l b u i l d i n g e l e v a t i o n s ~ P a r a p e t a d d i t i o n AS P E N , C o l o r a d o P294 VI.B. 09 June 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2015 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA perspective from City Market ~ No parapet change ASPEN, Colorado EXHIBIT D P 2 9 5 V I . B . 09 June 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2015 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA perspective from Durant avenue ~ No parapet change ASPEN, Colorado EXHIBIT D P 2 9 6 V I . B . 09 June 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2015 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA conceptual perspective of plaza at durant avenue ~ No parapet change ASPEN, Colorado P 2 9 7 V I . B . 09 June 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2015 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA conceptual perspective of plaza at durant avenue ~ No parapet change ASPEN, Colorado P 2 9 8 V I . B . 09 June 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2015 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA conceptual perspective of plaza at alley ~ No parapet change ASPEN, Colorado P 2 9 9 V I . B . 09 June 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2015 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA conceptual perspective of plaza at alley ~ No parapet change ASPEN, Colorado P 3 0 0 V I . B . 09 June 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2015 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA conceptual building elevations ~ No parapet change ASPEN, Colorado P 3 0 1 V I . B . 09 June 2015 Post office box 8114 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 4269 p 970 925 5478 f rob@rgsarchitecture.com © 2015 Robert g. Sinclair Architecture, inc. RO B E RT G . S I N C L A I R ARCHITECTURE, INC. DMA conceptual building elevations ~ No parapet change ASPEN, Colorado P 3 0 2 V I . B . EXHIBIT E P303 VI.B.