The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.HP.720 E Hyman Ave.0006.2012.AHPC0006.2012.AHP 720 E HYMAN AVE 2737 182 11 010 31 AASPEN ATHLETIC BLDG ' HI fox : 1.1 A- 3 2 L o . 4 5- c 8 n ". 44_--- / V \2' '\ 71Â¥ AA fâ‚¬ S c 0~ ~ c F~ i Â·, . Tr, 2, C J/-1 >:66 J 1 1 / .1, V r - jAA A 03~-nt f) L.iv v 5/-v <7* v .>CT .JU/ t)3' n.06<k -- d 1 14 1 --....-- 2~77-â€¢V -i- j 4<kiL'**I 4 1 720 East Hyman , March 7. 2012 CM Existing FAR Proposed FAR Area Description PAR Area Description FAR SUB-BASEMENT | Total Level Total Level 4,712 GSF 4,712 GSF Total sub-basement wall area 3,376 SF Total sub-basement wall area 3,376 SF Exposed wall area O SF Exposed wall area o SF Percent exposed to apply to FAR 000% Percent exposed to apply to FAR 0.00% ~Contribution to FAR 0 SF 1 ~Contibution to FAR 0 SF 1 BASEMENT | Total Level Total Level 6,364 GSF 7,184 GSF Total basement wall area 3,333 SF Total basement wall area 3,333 SF Exposed wall area 255 SF Exposed wall area 255 SF Percent exposed to apply to FAR 7.65% Percent exposed to apply to FAR 7.65% ~Contribution to FAR 487 SF ~ ~Confribution to FAR 550 SF | MAIN LEVEL | Total Level Total Level 6,065 GSF 6,065 GSF Deductions 0 SF Deductions 0 SF ~Contribution to FAR 6,065 SF ~ ~Contribution to FAR 6,065 SF | SECOND LEVEL ~ Total Level Total Level 4,191 GSF 4,173 GSF Deductions 0 SF Deductions 0 SF |Contribution to FAR 4,191 SF | ~Confribution to FAR 4,173 SF | THIRD LEVEL | Total Level Total Level I Ann C3SF 6,400 GSF Deductions for stairs and elevator 117 SF Deductions for stairs and elevator 152 SF ~Contribution to FAR 6,283 SF ~ ~Contribution to FAR 6,248 SP | - CD 00 ~ROOF LEVEL I 0 Total Level Total Level - 0 (3SF 162 GSF 0 Deductions 0 SF Deduction for stairs 162 SF -1 0 0 ~Contribution to FAR 0 SF 1 ~Contribution to FAR oSF ~ - Z o LU 0 04 0_ SUMMARY CN P- CO h. <C TOTAL EXISTING FAR 17,026 SF | |TOTAL PROPOSED FAR 17,036 SF | TOTAL ALLOWABLE FAR 18,000 SF ~ Zone District Mixed-Use (MU) Allowable FAR Ratio 2:1 Lot Area 9000 SF FLOOR AREA SUMMARY 5 AO.1 - E FAR S1031IHOhlÂ¥ 3:I:IINNAO S31hIVHO NVIAIAH 1SV3 ll'0010#!UUnO'MAAM l99*'016-026 :X'03 1 0699'966'0Z6 131 1 L 1,9~ 00 'N3dISV I '3AV NVWAH 1.973 019 '3AV NVINAH 19Â¥3 5 -5 I/2 ' 1 LINE OF EXISTING BASEMENT --:c.-~ 1 FOUNDATION BELOM . - F - Mmi Mmin i aim PMMU FF 111 ISTEPS 5'-51/2 "+67 ~- ~ ~ F h r 1 1 /1.- 0 1 1-11.P- + , 9 lf) CL ' o 1- in 1 : f=555 i : 1 -1 0 . , 1 A 5'-O" +/- --1 21Â·x AE>PEN ATHLETIC BUILDING, -~-- : ' ASPEN ATHLETIC, BUILDING Ai 8 K 1 - di PROPERTÂ¥ LINE--. J \2 - \ <C Z IIi 0-1 0 1 : 1 1 ~ 1,285 S.F. OF PUBLIC AMENITÂ¥ SPACE - (SHOMN HATCHED) ALONG BOTH 1 HYMAN AVE. AND ORIeINAL ST. 1 1 / COVERED' 1 i SPACE=~ | O OPEN I m 1.- =1171#111#1111111-17Â»117//ilil/lilr-//l///li//rlililffi-mit1--~lit. 14 N /1 ; 1 1// ///////////////////////////////l/////////////l///l/,1,/1,1,/li. ~LANTER ~~NTE~R-i r. PLANTER / -12 - LINE OF EXISTING BASEMENT go'-o" FOUNDATION BELOF4 ~ ~~ " -1 r -1 -1 -1 HÂ¥MAN AVE. HYMAN AVE. NOTE: REFER TO SURVEY FOR BUILDING PLACEMENT AND EXISTING LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS. -449 EXISTING HARDEAPE AND 4.0 EXIST I Ne Â»424 BITE PLAN NO PARKINe le PROVIDED / /4 PUBLIC AMENITÂ¥ DIAORAM /57\ ON SITE 1,1 = 161-OIl 111 = 161-Oll 2>) 29 TOTAL EXIDTINe PUBLIC, AMENITY TOTAL EXISTING LOT AREA = al,000 ef 91Â°ADE = 1285 sf OR 14.3% OF: LOT 3 Al.le Ollvcl Ollvel 91031IHONÂ¥ 3=I=IINNAO 931BVHO NVINAH 19Â¥3 0ZZ U'00'8#!UUnj'MAAM (Eâ‚¬ AMI-I) '16 1*NIâ‚¬>I~O - 10'-51/2 " +/- J\VINVÂ¥ VI/\1 1 -1-U VJ VOL = 5'-5 I /2 " 7 LINE OF EXISTING BASEMENT â„¢-r....~ -1-7 FOUNDATION BELOR I Flj 4-- -- - F-3 -- mi~~ii ]~El 111/1111 - lmSTEPS 5'-31~"+/-1- F'-- ~Ilijf -M,im'Eiff- 5-p * CM --lili It I C> O / r : 1 9 0 < 1 1 1 el - k-12 ASPEN ATHLETIC BUILDING ~ : ASPEN ATHLETIC BUILDING ./ K ,>,// 0 .;fÂ»5 0 1- 9- 6- PROPERTY LINE --. in 11 - < 1 - 0 -1 0 1 z 1 4 - 110 - 11 1 Â£Â£ 0 1,285 5.F. OF PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE - (SHOWN HATCHED) ALONG BOTH HYMAN AVE. AND ORIGINAL ST. El i Â»Â« COVEREd 1 OPEN I SPACE 0 1- Â·'irr"""t"ijoi)TfffFN//ill/l// 21 i liliff/41li ~iliti CJ X /1 1 ij '''''''''''''llllll'!'''''''''''''lll'lilllll!ll!!!l!l/!l!i. R PLANIER PLANTER /1 ~PLANTE~FE ~ Z .. 11 CO . ) 14 ~ Â» 1 / 6 - CO -1 O -1 -1 - LINE OF EXISTING BASEMENT j---~' 401-01, r 0 FOUNDATION BELOR 0 3 KO HÂ¥MAN AVE. HÂ¥MAN AVE. U) O LU uE i o LU 0 C.10- C.4 A CO N Â« NOTE: REFER TO BURVEÂ¥ FOR BUILDING PLACEMENT AND PROPOSED LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS. -349 EXISTING HARDSCAPE AND 4,0 FIR,(010(39E ID /Vo*>9 DITE PLAN NO PARKINe le PROVIDED / /1 PUBLIC AMENITY DIAORAM /7\ ON SITE 111 =lei-011 111 = 101-(PIt TOTAL PUBLIC, AMEN ITY *PACE = h Al.1 TOTAL LOT AREA = 61000 sf EXISTING 1285 2, OR 14.396 OF LOT 0 91031IHOBV 3:I=IINNAO S3-lhIVHO Lge-026-0Z6 DCÂ¢31 1 0699'9Z6'026 131 I L L919 03 'NBdSÂ¥ 1 '3AV NIVINAH 1.343 0L9 3AV NVIAIAH (Eâ‚¬ AMH) '19 1VNIÂ®INO luoo.a#!UUnO'MAMA - 10'-51/2 " +/- 1--5 U PILATES MECHANICAL 7-7 MECHANICAL ROOM ROOM ROOM Un STAIR 44 1 1 J O OFFICE OFFICE 1 1 O 0 0 0 NAUTILUS CLIMBING TRAINING CIRCUIT ROOM ROOM O 0 0 0 0 n EXISTIN(37 4044 SUB=BASEMENT PLAN 111 = lot_OIl 3 TOTAL EXISTING 61â‚¬066 AREA = 4,712 gs? (FAR = O se) TOTAL EXISTING NET LEADABLE AREA = 3 2612 nlef 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 vmw.cunniffe.com A2.le 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 1 TEL: 970.925.5590 1 FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 6- > wi'111' ill I Fi ll 11101 1> PILATES MECHANICAL MECHANICAL ROOM ROOM ROOM STAIR 72-1 4 LF -4 A__ AL 1 1 U O OFFICE OFFICE 1 0 0 0 0 NAUTILUS CLIMBING TRAINING CIRCUIT ROOM ROOM 1 0 0 0 - 3+F Â£1 PROPOSED /*9 SUB=BASEMENT PLAN 1. = 10'-O. TOTAL eROSE, AREA = 4 712 ge? (FAR = O 4) TOTAL NET LEADAB:LE AREA = 3 2612 nlef 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.1 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN. CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 6- 2 41111119[117Illl[101 . A ON - ... 1 - 0 - STEAM ID MASSAGE ~ - MEN'S LOCKERS i 1 14/1 MASSAGE \113--Eli 7 AEROBIC U ~ WOMEN'S LOCKERS EQUIPMENT WHIRLPOOL DI, D RECEPTION -- 1%/ - STAIFI'.~LL~.~, % 1 OFFICE 4 PHYSICAL THERAPY 1 - LAP POOL O FREE O 0 WEIGHTS O N 5 M B M -0- - 0 0 STAIR EXISTIND 44 BASEMENT PLAN 1. = 10'-O" 3 TOTAL EXISTING GROSS AREA = 6 364 gs? (FAR = 487 ef) TOTAL EXISTINe NET LEADABLE AREA = 5725 nlef 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.2e r..Ill 720 EAST HYMAN AVE ~ 610 EAST HYMAN AVE, I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 1 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 1 --- .3->4-3-D ~ 0 - SAUNA ID Ill 2 MEN'S LOCKERS LAUNDRY / STEAM --4** 71 STORAGE 71 1- 0 0 WHIRLPOOL WOMEN'S LOCKERS - AEROBIC 84 0 EQUIPMENT i 10 ~ STAIR 0 LAP POOL O FREE O 0 EQUIPMENT WEIGHTS B M 6- O 0 STAIR PROPOSED 44 BASEMENT PLAN 111 = 101-011 3 TOTAL 61â‚¬066 AREA = 7184 gs? (FAR = 550 ef) TOTAL NET LEASAB:LE AREA = 6,545 nlef 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www,cunniffe.com A2.2 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 6- u u U u -11Mil 4 9 2----- mui-EF z[F 11 ~&1 =612 1 0 1 I. t OFFICE 8 U WOMEN'& PUBUC \ t[3 1 1---& -== Ml '1 - T * PUBLIC~ n - ATM LOBBY ~ 1 < 4 OFFICE / BANK ~-STARI-i l GYM RECEPT-ON 1 O L V 111 LOBBY / ATRIUM ~ Efir 7 - Â° 42% DE / OFFICE - |--~~| E~1 1 1 -_Uj~*L _-- --- ' il EXISTINe *.44 MAIN LEVEL PLAN 111 = 101-OIl TOTAL EXISTING 61â‚¬069 AREA = 6,065 gef (FAR = 6 065 5 TOTAL EXISTIND NET LEADABLE AREA = 3345 nls? 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS www. cunniffe.com 2.3e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 0 1 - - Ul E-[1 111117= U d-wil=L=J ill-~ 0 j, i .. OFFICE WÂ®MEN41 P~BLIC ~< Â¤ }D Â«-1 0 .1 m 1 J~W-17 ) r-1 - ATM LOBBY 1 - OFFICE / BANK / Slk\R - y X GYM RECEPTION 17=/A 0.1 0 M r LOBBY / ATRIUM 2] , - OFFICE 1 7 Ill OFFICE n -arm /5%/ Il i -=Ji -_ .Â«i>~----ZE'~~- -- PROPOSED 44 MAIN LEVE:L PLAN 1. = 101-OIl 3 TOTAL 61â‚¬095 AREA = 6 065 gs? (FAR = 6 065 ef) TOTAL NET LEADABLE AREA = 3,345 n ls? 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS www.cunniffe.com A2.3 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 - B , f/la , 1. e P Â£1 0 0 OFFICE 117 o. DI!1 gr)) 0 0 1, UNISEX PUBLIC Â¤ DENTIST OFFICE m==mmr' 4 -- W.999/1. X STA\RA 1 0 011 /7%4 $ 0 0 0 40 7 7 41 0 1Â» B -1 9 - OFFICE -'i--li LAr FILE L /9 79 ov 3 J ILY 992 ut_ 0 Uf AF0(Ol B %21-0 4-6 1 =7 - lili 1 1 1 EXISTINe Â»4 SECOND LEVEL PLAN 111 = 101-011 TOTAL EXISTING 61â‚¬065 AREA = 41611 gs? (FAR = 4,1611 ef TOTAL EXISTIND NET LEADABLE AREA = 33-78 nls? 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS www.cunniffe.com A2.4e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 1 :&4: 1 1 11 5 . -11 0 9 P . 9 - I 0 1 0 B - BATH -- - f 1- = [-3 BEDROOM ~~ ~___ LIVING ROOM u AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT f 1 r\/ 0 1101 91 =19 1 jr C 1 UNISEX / PUBLIC / KITCHEN ~- Â¤ DENTIST OFFICE LAUNDRY , PUBLIC 31 - STAIR 1 - L C-I J - O n 77 1.-Lit 11Tv 41/ A ---*- 1 . L=k- OFFICE LAT FILE TWI, J Ul *1 .ff 1 ---- 1 2 -1 r 1 Â¢E=22/ TV 4-1 71 - V -44 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PROPOSED />4 DECOND LEVEL PLAN 1" = 10'-O" TOTAL 61â‚¬065 AREA = 4173 gef (FAR = 4173 SE) TOTAL NET LEADABLE AREA = 2 5-12 nlef TOTAL AFFORDABLE HOUSINe AREA = 825 nls? 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www,cunniffe.com A2.4 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1.-1 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Cla 1 112 1 A â€¢ 0 0 0 9 0 0 1 OFFICE GYM F . 0 a D LOCKERS U SEX 1 GYM STAFFATRONE! Amp- 1 / STAFFRATRONS 0 1 0 ,_~1 LOCKERS GYM 0 1~ V *T7 LOBBY -c STA~R Â¤ r CORRIDOR 0. 0 CO O OFFICE Â¤ â‚¬ 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXISTING 084 THIRD LEVEL PLAN 111 = 10'-O. 3 TOTAL EXISTINe GROSS AREA = 6 400 gs? (FAR = 6,283 59 TOTAL EXISTING NET LEADABLE AREA = 5,551 nls? 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.5e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1.1 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 6- - ~\ r - .......All e â€¢ 9/ a /Â¤ 0 - - i - * BATH *Ej- Lj ~ ~ BEDROOM CLOS~T ~ 1\ BEDROOM ~ \ BEDROOM BEDROOM / O\1 - 1 1 011 01, - -I E- - 1/1 0 9 14 3 ./ E -I,"i...-= , .0 BATH CLOSET CLOSET r-. BATH CLOSET | ~ 1 4 64 6---1 9 BATH Ar. 1 Â°in c - - I --%40-1 HALL =-1- : 32:1 Q 0 40 - -7 X --7 11 1.r.,7 1 *aw# *1&91 ' - -i - L-AUNDP' . 1 121 1 HALL 1 A f lili 1 LAUNDRY / U BATH ki flial aL r=f vv e - ~ CLOSET -1 TWDER --IZ a Q-Â»0 3 L CORIDOR LOBBY sTd STAIR 11 M - Â¤ - - Pjt 0 9 - fÂ« 4 - BEDROOM SIFING ~ a FREE MARKET UNIT #2 - -/ FREE MARKET UNIT #1~y Â¤ -- 41 -,1 1*- - Â£991 - JILE 1. - REF m m m 7 ~ ni . Ii, s , r Elm im =y 8 7- c.-1 10 1 ij * N~ _4 UVING ROOM ~ BATH 61 K 3 Â¤ m I @6 1 9 KITCHEN ~C-~ ll= i ---- DINING 3 - Â¤ ~~ ~ KITCHEN | | CLOSET I - 1 - 1-4 1 11 9 - 1- 3 11 1-1_ - Â°136-4 1 --- 0 1- * Fl U a 1 0 30 lot - 03 0 g 3 Â· 9====) 1= DINING 1 -CI~ - 00 t \ \ BEDROOM , GAME 3 0 GAME 0 % aduad LE \\ L ~~~ ~ ~ LIVING ROOM~ L 0 Â°< 50 tr op U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PROPOSED *044 TRIED LEVEL PLAN 1,1 - - lot-011 TOTAL 51â‚¬056 AREA = 6 400 gef (FAR = 6248 ef) TOTAL NET LIVABLE AREA = 5250 nls? 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www,cunniffe,com A2.5 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1.1 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 C.- - EXISTINe EXISTINe MECHANICAL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT EEQUIPMENT EXISTINe EXISTINe 91<Â¥LleHT SKYLIGHT 0 0 ELEVATCR OVERRUN PENTHOUSE EXISTING 3 ~LEE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT ~/EXISTING ~KYLIeHT 14 4 EXISTING EXISTING EXISTINe SKYLIGHT SKÂ¥LleHT SKYLIel-IT O 0 0 EXISTINe EXISTING MECHANICAL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT -1 ./ .1 .1 .1 .1 I. E X 1 S T 1 N e 4,&1 : LEVEL PLAN 111 = lot-011 3 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS www.cunniffe.com 2.6 e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 . - /1/4 /0/05/ sTâ€¢u' :i I eEC-ITY elle- T-I. n h n m n m n ~01 0-EMS PAT-â€¢1*7 Â« -1412Â¢,HAN]GAL - "eREEN" ROOF .///-- EQUNT 0 0.-7 0 PROPOSED PROPOSED - - PROPOSED SKÂ¥LIBHT SKYLIGHT EXISTIND 91<Â¥LIGHT ELEVATCR OVERRUN =ENTHOUSE 0,1 STAIR \MEXISTING ~SKYLIGHT PROPOSED 514Â¥LleHT .1 C 7/311- -3/ ff RESIDENTIAL ROOF DECK GLASS - eUARDRAIL -Â« PER CODE ~ "eREEN" ROOF U U U U 1-1 U U U PROPOSED 12949 ROOF LEVEL PLAN 1" = 10'-O" TOTAL DROSE AREA = 162 gef (FAR = O ef) TOTAL NET LEASABLE/LIVABLE AREA = O nlef TOTAL ROOF DECK AREA = 6-15 ef 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www. cunniffe,com A2.6 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX~ 970.920.4557 ASPENJ COLORADO 81611 6/ill 4 1 1 11 1 =l - = 1 - 0 1 1- ~ r.el, = 11 1 4 - CM: -1/%3 \ 11 1 1 / - 1 ollie. 1 1 .lijlEn- I -1 Ok %* - 1 1 1 32/ 1 -eÂ·le" 01 1-- 11 1 13 , flit 1 1$19 *9\ - 1146 2% , m. : 16 m -1 r r I ng 29 8.2 70 42 9 2 60% -19 -2. -- - -36 i 11.-0. lilli 111...I 4 4 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 - - )1& 1 - '1 1 - - = 11 I - 1 - 1. 1 .1 11 1 4 - www.cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 1 11 Il Il NO I 1*6333 EAV NVHAH / e L EV . t. 4- 4 1 -UE-1 711%11 0 . 1 1 Itl 1 \ 1 1 1 1.1 r= I. ' 11 1 1 \111~ - 1 . Vi 1 1 1 \ 1 1 1 1 =0-0 1 - = Â·' fqmll/11, \ 1 070 1 , O C = - 1 0 r il 1 1 \ 1 - = l IER S 0 1 4 11 - 1 1 / 1 - F 41 -1222.4 A 61-eli 2 1 -1 1 / - f / = 1 1 11 I-- 9-lij 0/1 -i --~I.-PL-U ... - f 1 p 02 I :8 :re 5% 5 4 % 9 ST C'Im 1 44 ; 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1.-1 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 C.- dll- SMO eNINMÂ¥ 30Â¥-gL NOI1*6333 3/,V NVINA - - ---E~n~ 21OOld -163ild -4---Uld 2~A~ . 1 rÂ» 1+ 1- + . 1 11 1 1 " 1 A- 1 . %6 1 -0 1 - 1 1 1- 2 ~ -2 6,-6" , 1 - 111 1 1 \ 1 SWT ~ 1 5-1 1-TI Â·Â· 1 - - -1 3>X / fa f / - - 7 i. 1 9 048 - 11 3> i@ 0.-4 -1 m - 1 Z - 00 0 E . - 1 - 1 OIl-eli - 1 : th - -9/1 f F 1- - ,- 0 1 - 9 / Lf - 4j 1 1 1-1 . '1.. 4...Id 41 \43 11.-0- 11 -0- ..'. 1 0 0 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 1 TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 L J Il Il 1 NOLLVAL!33 19 3*NIQI>1 GE EV 1 ~ - .R-1 -f, 11\~\ - 1 - ---F- * 11 1 =1 1 , I - I 2 11 - 1 I -0.--\ 4 11 t 1 - / I - = 1 1 / 1 7 *11 1 == g01* 5 1 1 2 1 -/1 6'-e" r 1 /1 f 1 -1\\ 1 6 L I /\ 1 1 RA \ \1 1 %19- 1 / = = 2# j \ 6 1 1 0 10 - ~3 th NO ~1 l.8 - - L.L. ; -1 -15SE'/~df i m 1 1 0 1 - 1 r- t 3% f it - 13 -- 44 1 -1 1,1 2 / 1 1- 1 @Im im 1 , 1 - 1 -mani 0 29 l 2,4 -4 1LD , I 94*1~ 11/ / 0 - 111 1 111 d. 1,1 Im rm 18 2 4 8, 41Â§ 99 M &% 1 7 1 1 5 70 10 0 m -I 1 i Z 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS www.cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 1*63-lEi 16 3*NIGING IRD FLOO E â€¢ 142'-0- C ) LL9L9 00Â¥hl0100 'N3dSV 2997-0Z6'0L6 XÂ¥3 I 0699-926'016 ;131 1 1 L9LB 03 'NBdSÂ¥ I 'BAÂ¥ NVINAH 19Â¥3 OLS '3AVNVINAH 19Â¥3 012 ll]00'GJJ! UUnS'AMAAA 91031IHOMV 3=I=IINNAO S31hlÂ¥HO NVINAH 19Â¥3 0EZ EL'60'ZO f 11 3 3- Â§i &B d *il id 2â€¢ Ve Z 1 1.. 'L j 1 1 2,_-1 2 4 4,% \\\~ /...1 \\\~ . 1 1\\I \ 11\/, \\p / H: . 46 1.1-*42 1 V \\ 1 tum.\\ 41 v\\\ d 3%44 2 43\3 1 4% 9 1 0% 72 4,- \ - I / \1 n III, \\4\\ 915 2 4% 4/\43. ne. - 03 1 aae>-.34% , : Â«*4. 4 li 6 \\\ .t# 0I \1 :a 1 7 \\\> \\\1 9\ 23 11Â» 4 \\\~ %3 \\\2 Oil 8 1 111 55:i 733 12 0 -C _ 3:121 - 0-Z = \\\ \\\ / ... I img | \ . - 11/ 3212Â»- 1 9/i, \ , 7-- 2 9- a , 1 J $ 555. - 2 4- - --3333 " III, --3 3- 4444 \\\~ . \\\ \\\~ , - ....2 1 1 ti --, --4444 4 \\V i 442 \\V -P 7/3 \\\~ 1 1 111 4 U l iWililill/ 9 443 - 3.>L Jimill. - >33/1 5 1 1 1 1 4- tilt 48 49Â»1 0 go- Ek 1.41 lf) ILI 2 0-K STAIR PEN Oll*6313 13131* , r....â€ž20-wiâ€ž'J f % - 1 Al =i L k j/1/ ~11/1/~111(214*;~hin, .. -JJjj:l'1 1\*!7 *m 1 '20 41 1 ./\ --02 %*/ - 972 l,- 1 193 L_.... / I ~\\\ = l \\ -H .\\\ \<\ .r\ :4\4 -1\\ 17\\ Â»30 -,1, - 11 11 1 1 1 - -% UNh lili 'III lili r "f 'III --/h. '!lh 'III 111 1, 'frI 1Â·": It Inx- Ef &\ / \ 1% 1 Zill : U. iii 11I lox Â·11, .11i 11[ 9,-H./ 9 70 3 13Â»4~ 21 I r ~\\\ - 1 111 - ' L ~'-e Â·Â· \\\ aul 1 1 -- " --1 ~\\\ '' \ 4 % -\ Z -g-'91 \ 9 1 ,&6 \\\ 1= = \\\ \\. X a I \\\\ 1 ..\\\ ;333 11 1 f1,f :555 \ 46>6>1\ 1.1. 11 1 i \\/\\1\\ ./ I 1 liitll Ilf 1.1'J k\\\ -\\ 99-- i<64,1 . . , 1 : /1 -U ..\ 4.-~'-6" / \ \\\ L tk: \\0~Â«- I.MIl. :4442 143: 2 24: 11:513,11]111 TI[1[ .f':#1121111 f / m=m~79= Â·'11#ff#fl 1,#i,1 ~ 1555555~* - ijillililll 1 M. ..;Uill -tll/11#i< - 'i tllih. I - 02 0~ 02 . 70 83 ?M 45 MR 7 4. 1 1 44-44 11.-0- 11.-0- 11.-' 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 1,1 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Cd- NOI=.I-VAR!33 1333* / GEEV . L \ .1- Â» 44\\4 4 'lit Ililill/llill/Nut,, 111/*TEFfizill/lt . Ijiltilltilliltll<. -. 'lli. 2% E 4 1% 4 = i.i 2% 1- 1 mi - 1 m x 3 " f 0 Uj G -*1 . 1 - \ 1 I . p 6 ); j 0-Z - - 91% U 1= = Ly f - 1 .It rn - . m f 1 4 - 0 0% 1- 21# I ..'./ -*--- 4'.- -1 - El-1.1- 0 - Z 2* 69 87 4: % 9 W2 9 1 1 w' 11.-0- 11Â·Ir It.-5 444-4 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www,cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE ~ 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970,925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 103 ra 2 : H. ~.7 V '. ,04. 8 f ~ EV 7%044 -- ':ll1ll ------------ illilillitifil/Illic ''ilifiljilliffli/lbi, .*. 111 1 0 i tu% 11.11 /111114 Â»-~{ f I frit if i 1 l - 0 3.-9 1 " 4 :m: 433 u lili, '- ililic, 52 I 1 1,11 - 4 I 2 if L :1 3~%1 1 fell 1 ~-0 91 4 I / 0 10 4 +0 2 1-3 4 3 1, 3 n 1> -\ hi;~~~//' ,//,/ ':illl, ',1ll/i L 'flf 14-,0 id,1 1. f 7 \\ m fit ~ Lt E-[1 \ 31\ 'r- < 1 4 3 4 =6 l * 'lll 4 4,ifi~Lj~~~illi 1/ 1: ifff f 9- [ 1/ 1 1 1 1, 0 Z m-, ' pni :/ 02 / P 11 1 ~ 1- i / . 9. I % 4 3 1 1 015/ i 4 LE-1--it 1 70 0> u, rn -1 â„¢5 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS www. cunniffe,com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 /62%37Â» 10-1 FC ~~11~ PENT mi THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0006.2012.AHPC PARCEL ID NUMBERS 2737 182 11 010 31 PROJECTS ADDRESS 720 E. HYMAN AVE PLANNER SARA ADAMS CASE DESCRIPTION LANDMARK DESIGNATION REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES CUNNIFFE DATE OF FINAL ACTION 10.22.12 CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 10.22.12 870+A A AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.070 AND CHAPTER 26.306 ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 1/0117 2 1 12/ 0 , Aspen, CO STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, fAit l GE IzwtÂ» AÂ·r H (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) or Section 26.306.010 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: U Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fourteen (14) days after final approval of a site specific development plan. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official Paper or a paper o f general circulation in the City of Aspen no later than fifteen (15) days after an Interpretation has been rendered. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. .39. NÂ«t, 1 464*lkedi_-2 43*ture The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this ~- day of AN (/Ch 41' , 20_liby 31**,tu id-AI& Ae, AL'ti PUBLIC NOTICE WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site-specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title My commission expires: 3-1 1 5-,~ i le 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertain- ing to the following described property: Parcel ID # 2737-182-11-008 though 2737-182-11 -031, and 2737-182-11-801, Legally described as Lots Q, R 16-un A-4 RattÂ«0~0~A _ and S, Block 104, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, by Ordinance number 17. series of 2012 Nofary Public 4, 7 of the Aspen City Council and Resolution number 12, series of 2012 of the Aspen Historic Preserva- lion Commission. The applicant received approval through the Asperâ€¢Modern prog,am to convert existing offices onihe third floor into two free market residential units in exchange for landmark designation of the building. A roof top deck that exceeds the height limit and off-site affordable ATTACHMENTS: housing mitigation is approved. The approvals are depicted in the land use application on file with the COPY OF THE PUBLICATION City of Aspen. For further information contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept., 130 S. Galena St.. Aspen, Colorado. (970) 429-2778. City of Aspen ~ Published in The Aspen Times Week/y on August 2, 2012, [8217888] DEVELOPMENT ORDER City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site-specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a seven (7) -year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the seventh anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless the change is accomplished or a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site-specific development plan as described below. Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number: CM, LLC, c/o John Martin, P.O. Box 297, Queenstown, New Zealand, 9348.011-643-442-1434. Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property: Aspen Athletic Club Condominium, Lots Q, R and S, Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. Parcel ID # PID#s 2737-182-11-008 though 2737-182-11- 031, and 2737-182-11-801. Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan: Approval for a site specific development through the AspenModern program to convert the third floor office space into 2 free market residential units and to construct a rooftop deck that exceeds the height limit. Affordable housing mitigation is approved off-site or in the form of housing credits. Approval of growth management allotments and of subdivision are granted. Seven (7) years of vested rights are granted and a one (1) year period to record the subdivision plat is granted. Land Use Approval Received and Dates: City Council Ordinance no. 17 series of 2012, approved on July 23, 2012. Historic Preservation Commission Resolution no. 12, series of 2012, approved on May 23,2012. Effective Date of Development Order: August 2,2012. (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) Expiration Date of Development Order: August 2, 2019. (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) Issued/~his 24th daÂ¢@f July 2012, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. 1%964 - l.4 Chrk hendon City of Aspen Community Development Director ORDINANCE # 17 (Series of 2012) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION, SUBDIVISION, GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW, AND BENEFITS THROUGH THE ASPENMODERN PROGRAM, AND A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 720 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUMS, LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 104, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID NUMBERS: 2737-182-11-008 through 2737-182-11-031, and 2737-182-11-801. WHEREAS, the applicant, CM, LLC, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, submitted an application, pursuant to Section 26.415.025(C), AspenModern Properties, of the Aspen Municipal Code, to voluntarily participate in the AspenModern ninety-day negotiation period for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, legally described as The Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R and S Block 104; and WHEREAS, 720 East Hyman Avenue is included on the Aspen Modern Map; and WHEREAS, the applicant submitted a letter dated March 7,2012 requesting voluntary landmark designation in exchange for specific benefits through the AspenModern negotiation; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Â§26.415.025.CO), the ninety day AspenModern negotiation commenced on March 7,2012; and WHEREAS, Â§26.415.025.C(1)(b) states that, during the negotiation period, ''the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the property. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting;" and WHEREAS, the property owners' representative met with the Historic Preservation Commission (the IIPC) on May 23,2012; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on May 23, 2012, the HPC considered the application; found that 720 East Hyman Avenue was a "best" example of Organic/Wrightian style and, found that the policy objectives for the historic preservation program stated at Â§26.415.010, Purpose and intent are met, and recommended City Council ("Council") approve Historic Landmark Designation, requested benefits and fee waivers as stated in HPC Resolution numbered 12, Series of 2012; and RECEPTION#: 590898, 07/26/2012 at 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModem negotiation 11:26:40 AM, Ordinance #17, Series of2012 1 OF 22, R $116.00 Doc Code ORDER Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO Page 1 of 11 WHEREAS, Â§26.415.025.CO)d establishes that "as part of the mutually acceptable agreement, the City Council may, at its sole discretion, approve any land use entitlement or fee waiver permitted by the Municipal Code and may award any approval that is assigned to another Board or Commission, including variations;"and WHEREAS, the property owner requests voluntary Landmark Designation - Â§26.415.030(C), AspenModern; Subdivision review - Â§26.480.040(C) Subdivisions; Growth Management review - Â§26.470.060(3), Â§26.470.070(4),and Â§26.470.080(2); Change in Use of historic landmark sites and structures; Development of Affordable Housing and New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed use project all to be consolidated with the AspenModern ninety-day negotiation process and reviewed by City Council; and WHEREAS, in addition to Ilistoric Landmark Designation, Subdivision, and Growth Management, the applicant had identified preservation incentives that are requested as part of the AspenModern negotiation process in a letter dated March 7, 2012. Those incentives requested include: the ability to construct a 2,750 square feet floor area free market residential unit; ability to increase the free market allowable floor area to 0.78:1 or 7,014 square feet of floor area; a waiver of the onsite parking requirement and a waiver of the parking cash in lieu payment; and WHEREAS, the applicant agrees that the conditions of approval for the mitigation of the impact of the development regarding affordable housing are accepted by the applicant and constitute a voluntary agreement to limit rent/sales prices on the Property and to otherwise provide affordable housing stock in accordance with the provisions of CRS 38-12-301(2)(a) and (2)(b); and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department performed an analysis of the application including Landmark Designation. Subdivision Review, and Growth Management Review and found that the review standards are met. The staff report analyzed the proposed preservation incentives and monetary value of the benefits where possible; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Approvals and Phasing: a. Approvals. Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves Historic Designation, Subdivision, Growth Management Review and a site specific development plan subject to the conditions described herein. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17. Series of 2012 Page 2 of 11 b. Project Phasing. The applicant shall be permitted to construct the approved project in two construction phases as described herein: Phase 1: one free market residential unit. Phase 2: the second free market residential unit. All impact fees stated in this Ordinance shall be due and payable at the time of issuance of a building permit for Phase 1, with the exception of the impact fees specifically related to the second free market residential unit. A building permit for Phase 2 must be submitted and determined to be complete within 1 year of receipt of a certificate of occupancy for Phase 1 0 f the construction, Building Code, Engineering and other departmental requirements stated in this Ordinance shall be met as part of Phase 1 unless directly related to the construction of Phase 2. Section 2: Historic Landmark Designation Historic landmark designation is granted for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue (the Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R, and S, Block 104). Upon the effective date of this ordinance, the City Clerk shall record with the real estate records of the Clerk and Recorder of the County, a certified copy of this ordinance, The location of the historic landmark property designated by this ordinance shall be indicated on the official maps of the City that are maintained by the Community Development Department. The existing atrium is prohibited from being significantly changed, for example by adding a ftoor or filling in the space in a way that changes the openness and historic characteristic of the feature as represented in the application without approval by the Historic Preservation Commission, Insubstantial changes to the atrium shall be reviewed administratively by the Community Development Director. Section 3: Subdivision Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council hereby approves Subdivision of the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue (the Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R and S, Block 104) for a mixed use building that contains two free market residential units, a commercial component and a rooftop deck. A final Subdivision Plat and Subdivision Agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Â§ 26.480, Subdivision, shall be recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office within 1 year of the receipt of a Development Order. Subdivision Agreement shall include at a minimum the following information: 1. An illustrative site plan of the project depicting the proposed improvement and the approved dimensional requirements. 2. Plan o f any required grading and drainage improvements. 3. Approved planting for the right of way. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 3 of 11 4. Encroachment license for the planter boxes. 5. Agreement to record a deed restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office that commits the following: 1) the commercial uses shall not be limited to prohibit uses allowed in the underlying zone district of the subject property as amended from time to time, and 2) if the property is condominiumized the residential and commercial components shall remain in separate ownership. The Aspen Athletic Club Condominium plats, Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder reception #201836 and #190688. shall be vacated upon receipt of Certificate of Occupancy for the project. Section 4: Financial Assurances Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit the Applicant shall provide to the Community Development Department the following: a. Cost Estimates. Applicant's General Contractor shall cause to be prepared, and certified as correct, cost estimates for all improvements or development for which a Building Permit is required. There are no public improvements associated with the project at this time. Any public improvements associated with the project that are discovered after the approval of this ordinance are subject to the requirements listed below. The cost estimates for the implementation and maintenance of the planting in the right of way described herein at Section 13 shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks Department. The cost estimates for all other improvements and development in the Subdivision shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Department. Cost estimates for the landscape plan (Le. the planting in the right of way) shall be shown separately from the cost estimates for all other improvements and development of the Project. Owner shall be responsible for the implementation and maintenance of the landscape plan required by this Ordinance. b. Landscaping Guarantees. Pursuant to and in conformance with the requirements of Â§ 26.480.070(C) & (D) and Â§ 26.445.070 (C)(3) & (4) of the Aspen Municipal Code; and, in order to secure the performance of the obligations of the Applicant to implement and maintain the Landscape Plan, Applicant shall provide a guarantee of no less than one hundred and twenty five percent (125%) of the estimated cost of such Landscape Plan and Public Improvements, as determined and approved in subsection (a), above. The guarantee to implement and maintain the Landscape Plan and to complete Public Improvements shall be made by depositing with the City an irrevocable letter of credit with provisions as hereinafter set forth, or by providing such other security that may be acceptable to the City attorney. If an irrevocable letter of credit is used, the irrevocable letter of credit shall be retained by the City until satisfaction of Applicant's obligations under this Section or earlier released by the City. The letter of credit shall be issued by a financial institution doing business in Aspen, Colorado, or such other bank as shall be approved by the City; shall have an expiration date no earlier than two years after its date of issue; and shall provide that it may be drawn upon from time to time by the City in such amount or amounts as the City may designate as justified, such amounts not to exceed, in the aggregate, the amount of the letter of credit. Draws under any such letter of credit 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series o f 2012 Page 4 of 11 shall be by a certificate signed by the City Manager of the City of Aspen, or his designee, stating that the City is entitled to draw the specified amount under the terms of this Section. c. Other Improvements and Development. With respect to all other improvements or development within the Project, the Applicant shall provide evidence satisfactory to the Community Development Department and the City Attorney's Office that the Applicant has in place sufficient financing to accomplish and complete all the development for which a Building Permit is sought. Such financing may include, without limitation, a construction loan from an institutional lender or lenders and equity capital investments from the Applicant or third party investors. The City Attorney shall have sole discretion in determining i f the proposed financing as advanced by the Applicant is sufficient to complete the development activity for which a Building Permit is sought. Section 5: Site Protection Fund Before any Building Permit (including demolition, access/infrastructure, and/or site preparation permits) is issued for each phase of the Project approved by this Ordinance, the Applicant shall deposit with a local title company ("Escrow Agent") the sum of $25,000 in the form of cash or wired funds (the "Escrow Funds") and will execute an Escrow Agreement and Instructions with the Escrow Agent which recites and agrees as follows: "In the event construction work on the Project shall cease for sixty (60) days or longer ('work stoppage') prior to a final inspection by the City of the work authorized by the Building Permit on the Project, then the City in its discretion may draw upon the Escrow Funds from time to time as needed for purposes of protecting and securing the Project site and improvements from damage by the elements and/or from trespass by unauthorized persons, and for purposes of improving the Project site to a safe condition such that it does not become an attractive nuisance or otherwise pose a threat to neighbors or other persons." The Escrow Funds or any remaining balance thereof shall be returned to Applicant upon completion by the City of a final inspection of the work authorized by the Foundation/Structural Frame Permit on the Project. Section 6: Cash Escrow for Site Enhancement Fund. Before the issuance of a building permit for each phase, and as a condition of such issuance, the owner shall deposit with a local title company the sum of twenty five thousand dollars and no/100ths ($25,000.00), the "Site Enhancement Escrow Funds," in the form of cash or wired funds pursuant to an Escrow Agreement made and entered into between the Owner and the City which shall provide as follows: i. In the event construction work on the development of 720 E. Hyman Ave. shall cease for ninety (90) days or longer prior to a final inspection by the City of the work authorized by a building permit on the subject property, then the City in its discretion 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 5 of 11 may draw upon the Site Enhancement Escrow Funds from time to time as needed for the purposes of improving the appearance of any construction work already completed, and for the installing of any public improvements on or adjacent to the subject property. ii. The City shall have sole discretion with respect to the manner of improving the appearance of construction work in progress as well as a determining the public improvements to be installed. iii. The Site Enhancement Escrow Funds or any remaining balance thereof shall be returned to Owner upon completion by the City of a final inspection and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the project, or when otherwise agreed to by Owner and the City. iv. The City shall be named as a third party beneficiary of the Escrow Agreement with the express right and authority to enforce the same from time to time in accordance with the tenor in terms thereof. Section 7: Approved Dimensional Requirements The building as presented in the plans dated July 9, 2012 and attached as Exhibit A to this Ordinance comply with the effective dimensional allowances and limitations of the Mixed Use (MU) zone district except as modified below. Compliance with these requirements shall be verified by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer at the time of building permit submittal. The following dimensions are approved: Maximum Height: 4 new skylights and a rooftop deck, shown in Exhibit A, are permitted to be 1 ft. in height as measured from where the feature is attached to the roof, Maximum Residential Floor Area: 0.78:1 floor area ratio, 7,019 square feet total free market residential Maximum Residential Net Livable Area: 5,250' square feet total: 2,750 square feet for Unit 1 and 2,500 square feet for Unit 2 Maximum Commercial Net Leasable Area: 16,560 square feet Maximum Commercial Floor Area: 10,017 square feet Minor adjustments to the dimensions represented above may occur upon review of a building permit as long as the resulting dimensions do not exceed those approved through this ordinance. ~ The total maximum residential net livable area requires the landing of 2 transferrable development rights in accordance with Â§26.535 Transferrable Development Rights. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 6 of 11 Section 8: Impact and Development Fees: Parks Development and Air Quality/TDM Impact Fees Pursuant to Land Use Code Â§ 26.610.030, Exemptions, development involving a property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures is exempt from the Parks Development and Air Quality/TDM Impact Fees. School Lands Dedication Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit, the Applicant shall pay a fee-in-lieu of land dedication pursuant to Chapter 26.620, School Lands Dedication. The amount of the fee shall be calculated by the Community Development Department using the calculation method and fee schedule in effect at the time the applicant submits a Building Permit. Parkiniz Pursuant to Land Use Code Â§ 26,515, Parking, new residential units are required to mitigate parking impacts either through onsite spaces or cash in lieu. The parking cash in lieu for 2 parking spaces equals $60,000 and is due at the time of building permit issuance. 2 new residential units = 2 parking spaces required 2 x $30,000/space = $60,000 Section 9: Affordable Housing The project requires affordable housing mitigation for the 2,750 square feet free market residential unit, The 2,500 square feet free market residential unit is exempt from mitigation pursuant to Â§26.470.060 Growth Management Change in Use for historic landmark sites and structures which allows historic landmarks to create one new free market residential unit without affordable housing mitigation. The affordable housing requirement is specified below: 2,750 sq. ft. of net livable area * 30% = 825 sq. ft. of net livable area required for affordable housing 825 sq. ft. / 400 sq. ft per FTE = 2.06 Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) required The project is required to mitigate for 2,06 FTEs through either: 1) Offsite Housing. A one-bedroom off-site unit, which is equal to 1.75 FTEs, that is located within city limits east of the Highway 82 roundabout. The remaining 0.31 FTEs shall be paid as cash in lieu for Category 2 according to the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit submission. The offsite unit shall meet the requirements of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines and shall be deed restricted in accordance with Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority requirements at Category 2 or lower, A Certificate of Occupancy shall be granted and a deed restriction shall be recorded for the offsite housing unit prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or a Conditional Certificate o f Occupancy fur Phase 1. -or- 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 7 of 11 2) Affordable Housing Credits. 2.0 FTEs of affordable housing credits at Category 2 level. The remaining 0.06 FTEs shall be paid as cash in lieu for Category 2 according to the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit submission. The affordable housing credits shall be extinguished prior to a Certificate of Occupancy or Conditional Certificate of Occupancy for Phase 1. Section 10: Growth Management Ouota Svstem Allotments 1 free market residential unit is herby granted an annual development allotment. Pursuant to Â§26.470.060(3) Change in Use of historic landmark sites and structures, the second free market residential unit is not deducted from the annual development allotments but is deducted from the respective development ceiling levels. Section 11: Building Permit The applicant may not submit a Building Permit Application until the requirements in Land Use Code Â§ 26.304.075.A, Building Permit Application, are fulfilled, The building permit application shall include the following: 1. A copy of the Development Order issued by the Community Development Department (see Â§ 26.304.075(A)(2), City of Aspen Municipal Code.) 2. A copy of the final City Council Ordinance and HPC Resolution. 3, The conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover page of the Building Permit set. 4. A construction management plan (CMP) and drainage report pursuant to Engineering and Building Department requirements. 5. Accessibility and ANSI requirements shall meet adopted Building Code requirements. Section 12: EnEineering The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21, Title 28, and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. A construction management plan must be submitted in conjunction with the building permit application. A completed drainage report/plan as outlined in the Urban Runoff Management Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to recordation of Final Plat. Failure to meet the standards in Title 21 and Title 28 may result in a physical change to the project and possible review by City Council and/or HPC to amend the design. An encroachment license is required for the planter boxes located in the Right-of-way. Section 13: Parks 1. The Parks Department shall review and approve the planting for the planter boxes. 2. Landscaping in the public Right-of-way shall be subject to landscaping in the Right-of- way requirements, Aspen Municipal Code Chapter 21.20. All plantings within the City Right-of-way must be approved by the City Parks Department prior to installation. 3. RightÂ·-of-way requirements necessitate adequate irrigation pressure and coverage, if a system is not in place one will need to be added that is specifically designed for the trees in the planter boxes. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 8 of 11 Section 14: Fire Mitigation Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit, the Applicant shall obtain the approval of' the Fire Marshal of'a Fire Protection Plan which shall include the following elements: 1. Compliance with all codes and requirements of the Aspen Fire Protection District 2. Sprinkler, fire alarms and carbon monoxide alarms are required. (IFC as amended Section 903 and 907). 3. Documentation that the development has sufficient volume and pressure of water for the sprinklers or other fire suppression system adequate to satisfy the District's standards for the type of structures proposed by the approved development. This requirement shall be satisfied by an analysis acceptable to the Water Department which demonstrates system delivery capacity of existing water distribution system at the Water Departments' main water to the approved development of no less than 3,000 gallons per minute, 4. An overall access plan for the site, Section 15: Sanitation District Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. Section 16: Water Department The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code in place at the time of building permit submittal, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department Section 17: Exterior Lighting All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Â§ 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Section 18: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan and a vested property right pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26,308.011 attaching to and running with the Subject Property and shall confer upon the Applicant the right to undertake and complete the site specific development plan and use of said property under the terms and conditions of the site specific development plan including any approved amendments thereto. The vesting period of these vested property rights shall be for seven (7) years which shall not begin to run until the date of the publications required to be made as set forth below. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 1 year of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Â§ 26.104.050, Void Permits. Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 9 of 11 No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to Chapter 26.308, Vested Property Rights. Pursuant to Â§ 26.304.070(A), Development Orders, such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of seven (7) years, pursuant to the I.and Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 720 East Hyman Avenue, the Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R and S, Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, by Ordinance of the City Council ofthe City of Aspen. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the Development Order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this Ordinance of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this Ordinance. The vested rights granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review. The period of time permitted by law to exercise the right of referendum to refer to the electorate this Section of this Ordinance granting vested rights; or, to seek judicial review of the grant of vested rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as set forth above. The rights of referendum described herein shall be no greater than those set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 19: 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 Historic Preservation Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 20: This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 21: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance 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. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 10 of 11 The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office o f the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 22: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 11 th day of June, 2012, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 29'h day of May, 2012. /YA #4 n-ir-â€ž Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTesrr: Kathryn Koc~0ty Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 23rd day of July, 2012. ..911 AA, 6-1 -2.Cl 1 Michael C. Ireland, Mayor 13*1â‚¬NT FLEOkÂ«*_) f**+-- Kathryn Koch, ** Clerk U APPROVED AS TO FORM: -deÂ» - C. ~~~0./'James R. True, City Attorney Exhibit A: Floor plans and elevations illustrating Section 7 of the Ordinance. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModem negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Pagellofll ~bit Ay Drkence,*11-,Sel'ilâ‚¬1011 Eli i A ,4 f : / i -- T -4-1.it 1 1 -1 13 1--B '1 r - ;-mili 9 le i F V - 1 7 1 --4- 1.-0. \\1 L.=- 1 1 - - 7 }1 1 1- - - 1 LD -0 1 070 -11=1= iii / 9%0 1---- 1 9 -I-0 -T ! .6 0 0 . L -=1-11 , 1 1//1 - !9 EI J - 11 r 4 zi f RE Lit ? F 4 8 00 0 07 09 12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS ilil w~ cuan-&.com 00 -6 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. = EAS' Hrl,â€¢â€¢AVE â€¢5 91 Co 81,Â·, 1 2 25.55,0 *-g.MT 8/ ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 NOI-LVALI-I 3/\V NVINAH / 2,1,!2 1-1 1 It 11 1 - p 3-/.' 1 \ - 1 -7 1 - 1= J.-1 8 f _/I' -i rn --0 1 >70 =~Li I ~ ~ 1 - '77.1 9 9 0 - 1 1-42 9 -4 -0 1 = n 0 -3 1 ,Â· 1,4 1 1 2 10 16 6_.-| -3/ 6 3> 11 1-1 1/IIi -1 : *111 111/1~1 ~ll IP Ali . ' i.-11#f'!1 141.Ill 25 , .1 li \ ' if 71 -LE 2, 8 4 2@ 4 Ty 99 9 11 2a P. &8 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS ilil -4.cunt,ffe.com CO N 720 EAST HYMAN AVE #WT-4 GE.<reâ€ž. equa.~go, F,23705m,657 a. ASPEN COLORADO 81611 Ittl - k- . -24-43Â»- - - 16 - -W.Â· â‚¬..1, / I 3 Ity*&:.. . i '11 1 1\ 1 1--Gs---1- ===Eli t- i 1 -1.1 =~ 13 -JEF=% IT= - 12% E %-'_ 11 1 177 - - mT \ 1 270 7Ff #76 15 - 1 070 LI -=L- 1-1 1 - - . 1 $ 9 200 'Il 91 E-:N -- p tr ---- i* -lii'i~ -n |~ 111- ---4.0\ 4 ill-01 , 1 U -4 ~ [4 - Rt 4*--3 11 . , 3 1 1 **f--1-]~71 1 - .11 1/ P. 4 2 2 1/ -4 4 4 - 7 1 * 0709.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 11 www cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 8. 510 W....AVE- i ~94 CC ils,1 1 Ta. g?t.92&539C i FAX Â£ 920 4667 APEN. COLORADO 81611 ACE A-[INe - NOUV/\III! 13-1 BEV i I 74 I Z.*.4 1 ! 11111111 1 3 1 1 16 ---I1 T -1 =-Of-~.- t 1 1 1--4 4- -- 2-1-- 8 ;i Ii.i 1 3 -2 1-L Uno - Ino ~ti~ ~ Obl -- Dig 6-4 -'h \ 1 - Â· i - '14 = 1-0 -. t- F 4 ~ 4 1 r]70 L J . f.i 9 1 O UK) 4 -1-0 ' \0 -' Fi i 1 = 49' %8 24 L r 4 0-LE ] 14 11 1 11 1 7 48 0 21 11\ ~! f 1/ M le N \19 9 j. 4 r 4 1 1 - -* 0 0 14 4* 0 .Â» 13 -0 3 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS ill] w,v*.cunniffe com 72Â¢ EAST HYMAN AVE %%.-,Aâ‚¬ .Spe.8.6,Â·11~.970926.5500 %970Â£.& 8. ASPEN COLORADO 81611 Nallt/\332 10-1 DEV r LINE Ot eXIS INe BASEHEN' -v 5Â·-51/2 " ~2- FOUNDATION BELOW 14 - --7*f--Eibl@~3333'----c=-39321 - ~ 291*m 2 -111 A 1 2- PEE' A -11 4 -9 k E 0 1 ASPEN ATHLETIC BUILDING , 1 ASPEN ATHLETIC BUILDING COPERTY LINE -~ M . 4285 5 F. OF PUBLIC AMENNY SPACE --- - BHO,â€¢IN HATCHED) ALON6 SOTH HYMAN AVE AND 0/16'NAL ST 11 / f 0 01 h 60Â·J./.0 I OPEN 6 SPACE . , -Tzir439~TT&n09~TTEk,ijritinijil/Ili//lii//li)zil//INHifI///f, 2-9 11 PLANTEÂ· / ]~ ~*+ i*hpa Â»-ma~$47&- 1-__ .J -1 L --- LINE OF EXISTIN6 BASEMENT -1-/ 90'-O FOUNDATION BELOM HYMAN AVE HÂ¥MAN AVE. NOTE, REFER TO SURVEY FOR BUILDÂ»16 PLACEMENT AND PROPOSED EXISTINe HARDZAPE AND PROPOSED f LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS. SITE PLAN ON SITE NO PARKINe 15 PROVIDCD / A PUBLIC AMENITY DIAGRAM ~ = 16'-O 1" = le'-O TOTAL PUBLIC AMINITY SPACE = TOTAL LOT AREA = 2,000 sf EXISTING 1.285 sE OR 14.33 OF LOT Ould ':..1 i*31 6- ~--.*11 hÂ·,5 3111 , 2+ 4~, . 1 2 9..1 9 + \L 1 5 U PILATES MECHANICAL ~ MECHANICAL | ROOM ROOM ROOM i 11#.==12 < 1-21-1 1 OFFICE ~ OFFICE J r I 0 O C] NAUT]LUS CUMBING TRAINING CIRCUIT ROOM ROOM 0 C 22 0 21 0 0 --11 PROPOSED 44 SUB-BASEMENT PLAN! C 10'-O. -- 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS ilil www.cunniffe.corn A2.1 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. .DEAST HY MAN AVE i ASPEN CO In 1 TEL /0 925.5590 4 FAX 970.920 4557 B. ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 . 5 .1 -211-E_> 0 Fr SAUNA ep O 3/0 0=ft== U.==. GO MEN'S LOCKERS LAUNDRY / , STEAM /4><14 STORAGE 0 WHIR.POOL WOMEN'S LOCKERS AEROBIC EQUIPMENT .Ed[ 6 f li-*-1_: B 0 i - LAP POOL O FREE ~ O EQUIPMENT WEIGHTS ept* 5 flo u PROPOSED + BASEMENT PLAN 1.= 10 -O. 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS illl m.w.cunniffe.com A2.2 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 610 EAST HY-NAVE 1 ASPEk CO 81611 1 [El:970.925.5590 1 FAX 970.920.4557 8. ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 1 lilli IT I E 1 3 111% 2 ~2 . I lilli â€¢'Ll-41.6.ull,/illlI# M / OFFICE ..El/T\14-1 0 3529 i ATM LOBBY ~ OFFICE /BANK * 1 2 IFT' i Â· O r + La LOBBY / ATRIUM 21 <OFFIÂ°F-it Ill OFFICE A~-3- A 1/1 1 il J rt'FAilt_-2 U73---TI---Z--- PROPOSED ,-th MAIN LEVEL PLAIN 1" = 10'-O' 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS ilil www.cunniffe.com A2.3 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EASTHYMANAVE I ASPERCO) 81511 I TEL 970.925.5590 1 FAKu970.9204557 8. ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 ./1 ..8 - 0 Â¤ h OFFICE 1-L 0 23 - 0 Â¤ DENTIST OFFICE - k i 0 1 0 ~===r- 1/ \; n 1 31 - 4% R F 'Mo U= 1-1 1 71 -1-'FL-1-1 - - mal 22= - ~ 7 OKFICE 4-/. LAT M| 1#4 0 Â° 0#1 3, Bl_ ?M-' WE] C 341 tV 0&-1 0 (13 111,111 J 8Â¢086ED 2>69 DEOUND' LEVEL PLAN r = 10'-0. 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 1 wviw.cunniffe.com A2.4e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610[LAST R'n~NAVE I ASPER CO 81611 1 18297(}92&.&% 1 FAL 970.9%4557 8. ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 lili li21\\1 111111--1 1 lilli 4 1 k#Jull,U 1 10 8 r oF A - L .Â«h / 12> -1 44/ ./ Fly r L) L 43 11 L LI E 7_.E B D- cd[ >U JP=r L/' L~J-~-- i~-LJ Eig Tjr -- -1 0 - -1 TUIA - r i =34 9 0 3~~ CLOGET <~ Uty =77]/\U 4/ C= 1 ; /111 -1 A Fri--, - -ml-Frll .--- T-Tr I r-- 7-SLY i 1_ _.Fr- -11 I li - -0 1 .0.00.1, aL U ,/ / L FREE MARKET UNIJ #2 C-- ~/ FREE MARKET UNIT #1 k~=59 0 It /10 L, 1 1 . 1 1 1. 1-4:Â»--1 'tille,=3k--7 r---*'*-I tll 0 4 1Â»=4 1 L Cant O ./.rl. 0 8 00 LI~ F--Â· 1 J - 7 8 2 - ES (0 0~ 5 9 L I F- I.n' 1 A IO-N b --- i n D T l , 5 --Lly l.ju L--1.- * b-db=36-3 -h=r [18 I I fl[1 0--1 -J 011 0 1Â«3 1002 A GER 3 62 12 6:2 H\\ Ll Â¤ 6 - 00 W 0 0 0 0 PROPOSED 40- TKNRIP LEVEL PLAN r-713 111 = 101-0. 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS wil www.cunniffe.com A2.5 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 010 EAST HY,- AVE I 0]Ek CO 31511 I TEL 970.9255590 ; FAX: 970 920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 B. --TUL L 11 11 1 2111 F 11 11 1 - 'GREEN' KOOF Â«71\\ 1 m UJ -0 PROPOSED PROPOSED - - PROPOSED SKYLIBHT SKYLIGHT EXISTIND SI<FLIGHT ELEVATOR OVERRUN eE-Nr4Dus~E C f ZE ! 1 9 i /EXISTINe 116HT 91<~Llet-IT 21 RESIDENTIAL ROOF DECK 61;ARPRAIL â‚¬~ BLASS /'~ PER CODE ~ - 'BREEN' FKOOF ... U U U U U PROPOSED /2---92, ROOF LEVEL PLAN 1. = 101-0. 07.09.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS www.cunniffe.com A2.6 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 E~ HYMAN AVE I ASPEN. CO 816. I TEL 570.925.5690 1 FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 aii 0 3 J i Â·Â· 1, 20 / 1- Ad Name: 7957816A ORDINANCE|~3~~LIC HEARING Customer: Aspen (LEGALS) City of first reading al the City Council meeling May 29, Ordinance #17, Series of 2012, was adopted on 2012. Thus ordinance, i f adopted, will approve AsÂ· Your account number: 1013028 pen Modern negotiation for landmark designation ana benefits tor 720 E. Hyman Avenue, the Aspen Athletic Club. The public hearing on this ordi nance is scheduled 1/ June 11 2012 81 5 PM, City hall. 130 South Galena PROOF OF PUBLICATION To see Ihe entire text. go to the cit/s legal notice website Ton A:rm, Tiwn: .a/2.1.2/12 ' Â£Â£*16.g/ENgligaai It you would like a copy FAXed or 8-mailed to you, call the city clerkÂ·S oftice, 429-2686. Published m the Aspen Times Weekfy on May 31, 2012 [79578161 STATE OF COLORADO, COUNTY OF PlTKIN 1, Jim Morgan, do solemnly swear that 1 am General Manager of the ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY, that the same weekly newspaper printed, in whole or in part and published in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, and has a general circulation therein, that said newspaper has been published continuously and uninterruptedly in said County of Pitkin for a period of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement. That the anne(ed legal notice or advertisement was published in the regular and entire issue of every number of said daily newspaper for the period of 1 consecutive insertions; and that the first publication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 5/31/2012 and that the last publication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 5/31/2012. 1n witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this 09/12/2012. 39*771041,7.-~ jim Morgan, General Manager Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the County of Garfield, State of Colorado this 09/12/2012. k)*61 9. 2 0.10Â£1mi h a.009'- Mary E. Borkenhagen, Notary Public My Commission expires September 12,2015 /1 6 DORre '% y 4. - '4 0% <140,4.. 1%\ 5% *M f 93:4 co,o~f~ff /1. 0 0 MEMORANDUM vIlla. TO: Mayor and Aspen City Council FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner~~ THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~ |AA - RE: 720 East Hyman Avenue, the Aspen Athletic Club (Block 104, Lots Q, R, and S) - Second Reading of Ordinance #17 Series of 2012 - AspenModern negotiation for Landmark Designation and benefits, Subdivision, Growth Management for the creation of a free market residential unit and for the development of affordable housing. Continued public hearing from June 11, 2012, and July 9,2012. MEETING DATE: July 23,2012 REOUEST OF COUNCIL: City Council is asked to approve Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 including an AspenModern negotiation for 720 E. Hyman Avenue, in addition to Growth Management for the creation of a new free market residential unit and Subdivision. SUMMARY: 720 E. Hyman Blim.hs-: I ''~~:~ ~IJ.,~ . 'Â·Â·"~. ~.Â·t Avenue, aka the Aspen Athletic &~ - N.Â·.. 0 ~ ~ Club, is located on the east end of '~ ' - ,#~**'1''fe Â« downtown at the corner of Hyman MN Â· - Avenue and Original Street on a .9.4 1 9,000 square feet lot in the Mixed :f q 'rg.*4~ 21Â· Use Zone District. The property 11111 4,# e -5,-1,111 is included on the Aspen Modern map. The applicant proposes to : trt- voluntarily designate the existing : , Robin Molny designed building f~ ~* * * UEFÂ·i.Â·4' Â·~' Â· : Â·j in exchange for benefits through ~ - 44:Witxid" the AspenModern program. The 0,~ . 0 - lIM~~ â€¢4 2- Â· ~ 3-,a. ...Â· applicant proposes to maintain the second floor office space and provide an affordable housing Photograph 1: 720 E. Hyman Avenue mitigation either offsite or through housing credits. The third fioor office space is proposed to be converted into two free market residential units. The majority of the changes are internal to the building; however a few minor exterior changes are proposed. A 675 square feet roof deck and stairway access is proposed in the center of the roof; the removal of 5 existing skylights and the addition of 4 new skylights on the roof; and the replacement of plywood "hoppers" with glazing. HPC reviewed these changes on May 23, 2012 and granted Minor Development approval with conditions. 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23,2012 Page 1 of 15 BACKGROUND: The Aspen Athletic Club was built in 1976 by local Aspen architect Robin Molny with Art Yuenger assisting with construction drawings and some design details. Molny is a significant local architect who was part of the local Frank Lloyd Wright trained constituent. Similar to other Wrightian trained local architects, Molny worked for Fritz Benedict when he first arrived in town. In his practice, he designed the Mason and Morse Building on Hyman Avenue (designated in 2012), the Hearthstone House on Hyman Avenue (designated in 2006), the pedestrian malls and local area residences including a home that was listed in the 1975 Architecture Record publication. The existing building is located in the Mixed Use Zone District. It comprises 5 floors with 3 floors above grade and is entirely commercial. According to the current Land Use Code the building greatly exceeds the FAR allotment for commercial uses (the maximum by-right is 6,750 square feet and the existing condition is 17,026 square feet) and it is over the height limit (maximum limit is 28 feet up to 32 feet, and the existing condition is between 33 feet 3 inches ' and 35 feet 6 inches). LIPC reviewed the project on May 23, 2012 and recommended unanimously that City Council negotiate for landmark designation. During the same meeting, HPC granted Minor Development Review for minor changes to the exterior of the building and denied the request for setback variance to accommodate a brise soleil above the street facing windows. The minutes from the HPC meeting are included as Exhibit I and the adopted HPC Resolution is included as Exhibit H. As part of the AspenModern review Council is asked to grant Subdivision Review and Growth Management Review. FOLLOW UP FROM SECOND READING ON JULY 9, 2012: During Second Reading on July 9% Council directed Staff to incorporate specific conditions into the proposed ordinance. Following are the proposed changes: Section 1: Approvals and Phasing (pg. 3 of Ord.): Additions to this section approve project phasing for the residential units. The applicant is interested in phasing the residential units in order to honor the existing leases with tenants in the building. Section 2: Historic Landmark Designation (pg. 3 of Ord.): New language is added to prohibit the atrium from being significantly altered. Any substantial changes to the openness or historic character of the atrium requires approval by HPC. Any insubstantial changes, for example adding an ATM machine for the bank, shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director. Section 3: Part 5 Subdivision (pg. 4 of Ord.): Requires recordation of a deed restriction committing that the commercial uses shall not be limited in a way that prohibits those uses allowed in the Mixed Use Zone District. This requirement addresses Council' s concerns about limiting commercial uses beyond those allowed in the zone district. 720 East Hyman Avenue Aspen-Modern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23, 2012 Page 2 of 15 To address Council's concerns about one owner purchasing the entire building in order to maintain vacant commercial spaces and use the building as a huge free market residence, Staff proposes language that requires recordation of a deed restriction to maintain the residential and commercial components in separate ownership. Section 7: Dimensional Requirements (Pg. 6 of Ord.): The onsite affordable housing unit was removed from this section. A 5 square feet increase to the floor area for the free market residential component is included in the ordinance. This is due to the removal of the offsite affordable housing unit and the related increase in non-unit (circulation) space that is attributed to the free market residential unit. Section 8: Impact and Development Fees (pg. 7 of Ord.): The removal of the affordable housing unit reduced the parking requirement from 3 spaces to 2 spaces and in turn reduced the cash in lieu fee from $90,000 to $60,000. The Ordinance requires payment of the $60,000. Section 9: Affordable Housing (pg. 7 of Ord.): Rather than provide an onsite housing unit, Council requests that the applicant mitigate through either an offsite housing unit located within city limits east of the roundabout or that the applicant purchase affordable housing credits to offset the required 2.06 full time equivalents (FTEs). Either option shall be met prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for Phase 1. The proposed language offers two options for housing mitigation. The offsite option requires a one bedroom unit which mitigates for 1.75 FTEs and cash in lieu for the remaining 0.31 FTEs. 1 The second option is affordable housing credits. On July 9th, Council specified that the requirement for affordable housing credits be 2.0 FTEs and the remaining 0.06 FTEs may be mitigated through payment of cash in lieu.2 The Code requires mitigation at Category 4 or lower. Council did not specify a Category level during the July 9th hearing. The Housing Board recommended Category 3 or 4 for the previously proposed onsite unit, and is supportive of a Category 2 offsite unit or Category 2 housing credits. Staff included a Category 2 requirement in the Ordinance as a tradeoff for the first free market residential unit that does not require mitigation due to the incentive for landmark designation. Staff recommends that Council discuss an appropriate Category level for the required mitigation. Section 18: Vested Rights (pg. 9 of Ord.): The changes include approval of 7 years of vested rights and recordation of the subdivision plat and agreement is required within 1 year of the effective date of the development order. ' A two bedroom unit mitigates for 2.25 FTEs which is more than the required 2.06 FTEs. 2 Affordable Housing Credits are divisible to 0.05 FTEs. Council could require the applicant to provide 2.05 FTEs and pay cash in lieu for 0.01 FTEs. 720 East Hyman Avenue Aspen-Modern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23, 2012 Page 3 of 15 State statute mandates a 3 year vesting period. The Land Use Code requires subdivision plats and agreements to be recorded within 180 days, which may be administratively extended by the Community Development Director. The staff memo dated Julv 9. 2012 is included at the end of this memo for reference. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the proposed landmark designation and associated land use reviews are consistent with the goals of the historic preservation program and the requirements of the Land Use Code. Ensuring that the important 1970s buildings designed by locally significant architects are preserved for residents and visitors to experience is tantamount to Aspen's story. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL IMOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No.17, Series of 2012 on second reading approving an AspenModern negotiation for landmark designation, Landmark Designation, Subdivision, and Growth Management Reviews." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT A - Landmark Designation Criteria. [included] EXHIBIT B - Integrity Score sheet. [provided on July 9, 2012] EXHIBIT C - Subdivision Review Criteria. [provided on July 9,2012] EXHIBIT D - Growth Management Review for new free market residential units within a mixed use building Review Criteria and for the development of affordable housing Review Criteria. [provided on July 9,2012] EXHIBIT E - Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority referral memo dated May 7, 2012. [included] EXHIBIT F - Application dated March 27,2012, provided on May 29,2012. [provided on May 29,2012] EXHIBIT G - AspenModern White Paper. [provided on July 9,2012] EXHIBIT H - HPC Resolution #12, Series of 2012, approving Minor Development for exterior changes and recommending in favor of negotiating for Landmark Designation to City Council. [included] 720 East Hyman Avenue Aspen-Modern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23, 2012 Page 4 of 15 EXHIBIT I - HPC meeting minutes from May 23, 2012. [provided on July 9,2012] EXHIBIT J - Supplemental information to the application dated June 29,2012. [provided on July 9,2012] EXHIBIT K - Mixed Use Zone district chart submitted by Staff during the July 9, 2012 hearing. [included] EXHIBIT L - Public notice provided on June 11,2012. [provided on June 11,2012] Exhibit M - Updated Subdivision Criteria dated July 23,2012. [included] Exhibit N - Updated Growth Management Criteria dated July 23, 2012. [included] 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23,2012 Page 5 of 15 .. PLEASE NOTE: Following is the July 9th Staff memo for reference. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Aspen City Council FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: 720 East Hyman Avenue, the Aspen Athletic Club (Block 104, Lots Q, R, and S) - Second Reading of Ordinance #17 Series of 2012 - AspenModern negotiation for Landmark Designation and benefits, Subdivision, Growth Management for the creation of a free market residential unit and for the development of affordable housing. Continued public hearing from June 11, 2012. MEETING DATE: July 9, 2012 REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City Council is asked to approve Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 including an AspenModern negotiation for 720 E. Hyman Avenue, in addition to Growth Management for the creation of a gillili~.ks: -,97Â·' ~ '. ~2 Â« 2-0.2- ,- 7 1---4.-:....1.1.7:,?f. 1- - new free market residential unit 3~ and Subdivision. .mil/.1 SUMMARY: 720 E. Hyman 14 6 i. 1,F 1.- 1. 1 :, , .,Wi. Avenue, aka the Aspen Athletic Club, is located on the east end of im. Avenue and Original Street on a r Illisilflit/:49393 9,000 square feet lot in the Mixed m : ll-hâ€¢#ArÂ«.1 ~ Use Zone District. The property ? 1 is included on the Aspen Modern - Ir--F i#.-# '.-La,A = lar/Er/4. -(/jw1.- map. The applicant proposes to -2-1- - voluntarily designate the existing Robin Molny designed building in exchange for benefits through the Photograph 1: 720 E. Hyman Avenue AspenModern program. The applicant proposes to convert a portion of the second floor office space to an affordable housing unit and to convert the third floor office space into two free market residential units. 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23, 2012 Page 6 of 15 The majority of the changes are internal to the building; however a few minor exterior changes are proposed. A 675 square feet roof deck and stairway access is proposed in the center of the roof; the removal of 5 existing skylights and the addition of 3 new skylights on the roof; and the replacement of plywood "hoppers" with glazing. HPC reviewed these changes on May 23,2012 and granted Minor Development approval with conditions. BACKGROUND: The Aspen Athletic Club was built in 1976 by local Aspen architect Robin Molny with Art Yuenger assisting with construction drawings and some design details. Molny is a significant local architect who was part of the local Frank Lloyd Wright trained constituent. Similar to other Wrightian trained local architects, Molny worked for Fritz Benedict when he first arrived in town. In his practice, he designed the Mason and Morse Building on Hyman Avenue (designated in 2012), the Hearthstone House on Hyman Avenue (designated in 2006), the pedestrian malls and local area residences including a home that was listed in the 1975 Architecture Record publication. The existing building is located in the Mixed Use Zone District. It comprises 5 floors with 3 floors above grade and is entirely commercial. According to the current Land Use Code the building greatly exceeds the FAR allotment for commercial uses (the maximum by-right is 6,750 square feet and the existing condition is 17,026 square feet) and it is over the height limit (maximum limit is 28 feet up to 32 feet, and the existing condition is between 33 feet 3 inches and 35 feet 6 inches). HPC reviewed the project on May 23, 2012 and recommended unanimously that City Council negotiate for landmark designation. During the same meeting, HPC granted Minor Development Review for minor changes to the exterior of the building and denied the request for setback variance to accommodate a brise soleil above the street facing windows. The minutes from the HPC meeting are included as Exhibit I and the adopted HPC Resolution is included as Exhibit H. As part of the AspenModern review Council is asked to grant Subdivision Review and Growth Management Review. OUESTIONS DURING FIRST READING: During First Reading Council had questions about the requested incentives, housing and impacts that the rooftop deck has on the community and the historic integrity of the building. To date this is the third AspenModern negotiation that Council has reviewed. This project is unique in that it proposes very minor exterior changes (a rooftop deck and some windows) where other projects have proposed mass and scale additions. AspenModern has been in place for 18 months. ComDev consultant Ben Gagnon has written a brief whitepaper about how AspenModern evolved from two split camps of citizens, voluntary vs. involuntary, to a case-by-case negotiation process. The recent challenging projects make it easy to overlook how much ground has been covered. The whitepaper reflects upon how we got to where we are and why we are able to have a community conversation on a case-by-case basis about these buildings. The white paper is attached as Exhibit G. 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23, 2012 Page 7 of 15 1) Does the loss of net leasable area impact the community? The loss of net leasable area in this location brings the building into closer conformance with Code requirements and better reflects the existing neighborhood context. The existing building does not meet current Code requirements- there is much more commercial than permitted in the Mixed Use Zone District (17,062 sq. ft. existing and 6,750 maximum allowable). Reducing the net leasable area of the existing building will bring it into closer conformance with the requirements of the Mixed Use Zone District. The surrounding buildings adjacent to and across the street from 720 are all residential buildings. Adding a residential component to the building reflects the purpose of the Mixed Use Zone District and better relates to the existing context of the block. This reduction lowers the building's impact on the community by providing affordable housing. It also reduces the space for businesses to locate. It is a matter ofjudgment as to the net impact on the community. 2) What is HPC's opinion on the effect of rooftop decks on historic structures? During their regular meeting on June 27% HPC discussed the effect of rooftop decks on historic structures and concluded that they generally have a positive impact by contributing to vitality and livability, and should be considered on a case by case basis. There are certain characteristics that contribute to a successful rooftop deck: a setback from the building edge makes the deck less intrusive; a taller building makes the deck less visible; the size of the deck should be proportionate to the size of the building and the roof; and the use of the deck should be considered - for example a residential deck should be more screened than a restaurant deck that could add vitality to the street. HPC voiced concern over visual impacts of accessories that are placed on decks (lights, light poles, large furnishings, etc.) and the challenge to control these items after a deck is built, which factors into whether a deck is appropriate. 3) Do rooftop decks impact Aspen's community dynamic? Staff was unable to find information in other communities on the impacts of rooftop decks on community dynamics. 4) More information regarding APCHA's opinion on onsite housing in a mixed use building. Housing Department staff plan on attending the July 9t]1 hearing to address any questions about the onsite housing. A referral memo from Housing was included in the first reading packet as Exhibit E. The referral from the APCHA Board recommended denial of the proposed affordable housing unit due to its placement in a mixed use building. The Land Use Code allows onsite affordable housing mitigation units in mixed use buildings. 5) Why allow an extra 250 square feet of net livable area? The applicant requests an additional 250 square feet of net livable area to allow one of the free market residential units to be 2,750 square feet of net livable area in size. The applicant plans to th address this question during the July 9 public hearing. 6) Why grant a parking waiver for the cash in lieu payment? The existing building is unable to accommodate onsite parking, therefore a cash in lieu payment is required. As part of the AspenModern negotiation, the applicant requests a waiver of the 720 East Hyman Avenue Aspen-Modern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23, 2012 Page 8 0 f 15 $90,000 cash in lieu payment. The applicant plans to address this question during the July gth public hearing. A representative from the Parking Department, and possibly the Transportation Department, plan to attend the July 9tll meeting. 7) Include all of the benefits that 720 E. Hyman is eligible for as a landmark, not just the benefits that are outside of Land Use Code allowances. Many of the landmark benefits in the Land Use Code are only applicable to residential development. There are 3 landmark benefits of which the proposed project is eligible. Landmark designation of 720 E. Hyman is required as part of the AspenModern negotiation. The AspenModern requests are listed after the landmark benefits in the Land Use Code. The proposed project could not without outside of the AspenModern negotiation process due to the free market residential component exceeding Code requirements. For example, the free market component would be need to be smaller. This makes it challenging to analyze the project as i f it was not participating in the AspenModern process as a potential landmark structure. a) Growth Management Exemption for up to one free market residential unit for the enlargement of a historic landmark. This is a cumulative benefit; any additional free market residential units require growth management review. The proposed project includes two free market residential units for a total of 5,250 square feet. The mitigation requirement is a total of 1,565 square feet of affordable housing - either onsite, housing credits, or cash in lieu. The applicant is providing an 825 square feet unit onsite. The remainder of 750 square feet of affordable housing is waived with the landmark status. Without this benefit, the applicant would be required to build a unit, provide 1.88 FTEs in housing credits, or pay $262,993.20 cash in lieu. b) Impact Fee Exemption for Parks Dedication Impact Fee and Transportation Demand Management/Air Oualitv Impact Fee. This exemption applies only to the historic resource. It does not apply to new structures on a historic property. Both of these fees are calculated based on new residential floor area (free market residential and affordable housing). Parks Dedication Impact Fee: $43,463.75 (7,975 sf * $5.45/ sf) This fee is used for acquisition of open space and development o f parks and recreation facilities. Historic Structures are exempt from paying this fee. Staff has notified the Parks Department about this fee. TDM/Air Quality Impact Fee: $4,864 (7,975 sf * $0.61/sf) This fee is used for the expansion of capital facilities to maintain the current level of service as it relates to traffic levels and clean air for the community. Historic Structures are exempt from paying this fee. Staff has notified the Transportation Department and Environmental Health Department about this fee. c) Parking fee waiver or reduction in requirement. HPC is authorized to reduce the parking requirement or waive the cash in lieu fee "upon a finding ...that it will enhance or 720 East Hyman Avenue Aspen-Modern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23, 2012 Page 9 of 15 mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district." Rather than piecemeal the negotiation at HPC and City Council, the requested waiver of the cash in lieu parking fee was included as part of the negotiation package that is under Council's purview. It is addressed below. ASPEN MODERN NEGOTIATION: The applicant requests the following incentives in exchange for landmark designation: 1) Grant 250 square feet of net livable area (NLA) to be added to one of the free market residential units to allow it to exceed the maximum residential unit size cap after the addition of a Transferable Development Right (TDR). There are two free market residential units (Unit A and Unit B) proposed on the third floor. The Mixed Use Zone District has a 2,000 square feet (sf) NLA cap for free market residential units with the ability to increase to 2,500 sf NLA by landing l TDR per residence. This calculation deals with net livable area (NLA) as opposed to floor area. Net livable area is the area within a building that are used for habitation and human activity. Floor area is includes a calculation of space above grade that is attributable to a specific use. For example, a stairway that is accessed by commercial and residential will be allocated as a percentage to each use as part of the floor area calculation for the use. The shared stairway is not included in the net livable calculation. The applicant proposes to purchase and land 2 TDRs - 1 per residence for each unit to meet the 2,500 sf NLA cap allowed by Code. The AspenModern request is to allow one of the units to further exceed the cap by 250 sfNLA for a total of 2,750 sf NLA. Table 1: Free Alarket Residential Units measured in Net Livable Area Free Market Maximum unit size Land 2 TDRs, one per AspenModern request for Residential Units cap ( sf NLA) residence (sf NLA) 250 sfNLA Unit A 2,000 2,500 2,750 Unit B 2,000 2,500 2,500 2) Ability to exceed the allowable floor area ratio for free market residential use. The increase in the free market residential unit sizes exceeds the maximum floor area ratio of 0.5:1 allowed in the Mixed Use Zone District. The maximum allowed free market residential floor area is 4,500 sf and the proposed floor area is 7,014 sf (0.78:1). The overall building complies with the total overall maximum allowable floor area ratio of 2:1. The uses are broken down below: 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23,2012 Page 10 of 15 Table 2: Existing Floor Area vs. Proposed Floor Area by Use Difference Amoinnt the Allowable noor between Use is over area in Mixed Existing floor Proposed noor Use Existing and the allowable Use Zone area (sf) area (sf) Proposed floor area (sf) District (sf) noor area (sf) Commercial 0.75:1 or 6,750 17,026 9,061 (7,965) 2,3113 Free Market 0.5:1 or 4,500 0 7,014 7,014 2.514 Residential Affordable No limitation 0 961 961 - Housing Overall Total 2:1 or 18,000 17,026 17,036 10 3) Waiver of $90,000 parking cash-in-lieu fee for 3 parking spaces. The Code requires one parking space per residential unit with the ability to pay cash-in-lieu for the parking spaces by right at $30,000 per space. The 3 new residential units (2 free market units and 1 affordable housing unit) require 3 spaces for a total of $90,000. The cash in lieu fee is used "solely for the construction of a parking facility, transportation demand management facilities or programs, shared automobiles or programs and similar transportation or mobility related facilities or programs as determined appropriate by the City." Transportation and Parking Departments are not in favor of waiving this fee. A representative from the Parking Department th will attend the July 9 meeting to answer any questions about how the fee relates to the department mission. 4) Slight height variance for new skylights and deck on the roof. The applicant proposes to remove 5 small skylights and add 3 small slightly convex skylights on the roof. The rounded form allows positive drainage for snow and water from the skylight. The property is already over the height limit, so the new skylight extends above the height limit. The applicant represents that the skylights will be 1 ft. in height, which is about 6" shorter than the existing 5 skylights proposed to be removed. The applicant proposes a roof deck that will be about 1 ft. above the existing roo f. The building is already over the height limit, so the proposed roof deck needs a height variance to exceed the 42 ft. height limit. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from City Council. As noted, many of the reviews below typically fall to either the P&Z or HPC for final review or a 1 The amount of existing commercial floor area is an existing non-conformity that is allowed to be maintained or reduced. The proposal is to bring the commercial component closer to compliance by removing almost 8,000 square feet of tloor area. A variance is not required for the commercial floor area. 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23,2012 Page 11 of 15 recommendation. AspenModern allows the consolidation of reviews at City Council which provides Council with the entire proposal for review. â€¢ AspenModern Ninety-Day Negotiation (Section 26.415.025(C)(1)) for preservation benefits in exchange for historic landmark designation. City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission. The ninety days expires on February 29,2012. â€¢ Designation of Historic Properties (Section 26.415.030(C) for landmark designation of the Aspen Athletic Club. City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission. â€¢ Subdivision Review (Section 26.480) this is a technical subdivision that the Land Use Code requires for mixed use properties to divide the building into separate interests. City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. AspenModern allows the consolidation of reviews at City Council; as such the P&Z has not reviewed the application for a recommendation of Subdivision. â€¢ Growth Management Review for new free market residential units within a mixed use building (Section 26.470.080(2) for the creation of a new free market residential unit. This is a Major Growth Management Review at the Planning and Zoning Commission. AspenModern allows City Council to have review authority over other Board's purview. City Council is the final review authority. â€¢ Growth Management Review for the development of affordable housing (Section 26.470.070(4) for the creation of an onsite affordable housing unit. This is a Minor Growth Management Review at the Planning and Zoning Commission. AspenModern allows City Council to have review authority over other Board's purview. City Council is the final review authority. PROJECT SUMMARY: The proposed project is mostly interior changes to the existing building that includes converting a portion of the second floor commercial space to an affordable housing unit and converting the third floor commercial space to two free market residential units. A new rooftop deck is proposed that meets the requirements of the Code regarding the height of the stair access to the roof and the height of the guardrail. The affordable housing unit meets the mitigation requirements for the 2,750 square feet net livable market residential unit. The 2,500 square feet net livable free market residential unit is exempt from affordable housing mitigation due to the building's landmark designation that is part ofthe application. The proposed changes bring the building into closer Code conformance with the allowable commercial floor area allotment; however the proposed changes exceed the allowable free market residential floor area allotment for the Mixed Use Zone District. The program is: Sub-basement level: mechanical and commercial space (gym) Basement level: commercial space (gym) First level: commercial space (office) and open atrium Second level: office and affordable housing unit 720 East Hyman Avenue Aspen-Modern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23, 2012 Page 12 0 f 15 Third level: two free market residential units Roof: a rooftop deck, access stairway, skylights and mechanical equipment Table 3: Dimensional Table MU zone district Proposed dimensional Existing dimensions requirements requirements No change, with the 33 ft. 3 in. at the front of exception of a slight height Maximum 28 ft. up to 32 ft. through the property and 35 ft. 6 in. increase of 1 ft. for the new height commercial design review at the alley rooftop skylights and 1 ft. for the rooftop deck Maximum Allowable 2:1 or 18,000 sf. 1.89:1 or 17,026 sf. 1.89:1 or 17,036 sf. Floor Area: Maximum 0.75:1 or 6,750 sf. Commercial (up to 1:1 or 9,000 sf. through 1.89:1 or 17,026 sf. 1.01:1 or 9,061 sf. Floor Area: Special Review) Maximum Net Leasable nla 21,474 sf. net leasable 15,754 st. net leasable Commercial corninercial area commercial area Area: 0.5:1 or 4,500 sf. Maximum (up to 0.75:1 ifaffordable Free Market housing equal to 100% of the 0 sf. 0.78:1 or 7,014 sf. Residential free market residential floor Floor Area: area is developed on the same parcel) 5,250sf. total: Maximum 2,750 sf. - Unit 1 (with 1 Residential 2,000 sf. net livable, up to 0 sf. TDR landed and extra 250 sf.) Net Livable 2,500 sf. with TDR and 2,500 sf. - Unit 2 (with Area: 1 TDR landed) Free Market n/a 0 2 Residential Units: Affordable Housing No limit 0 0.11: 1 or 961 sf. Allowable Floor Area Affordable Housing net No limit 0 825 sf. livable area Minimum 1 space/1,000 sf. commercial 3 new spaces required for 0 Off-Street net leasable; and 1 space per the 3 residential units. 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23, 2012 Page 13 0 f 15 Parking residential unit. Ability to Request waiver of required Spaces: pay cash in lieu payment by $90,000 cash in lieu right. payment. STAFF RESPONSE: AspenModern Negotiation and Landmark Designation: The designation criteria are stated in Exhibit A and the integrity score sheets, which evaluate the physical changes to the building over time, is included as Exhibit B. Staff is supportive of landmark designation of 720 East Hyman Avenue and finds that all of the designation criteria are met. The applicant requests 4 incentives in exchange for landmark designation, 2 of which relate to the free market residential component, 1 relating to a waiver of the parking requirement and 1 relating to a height variance for skylights. The project meets Code requirements for affordable housing mitigation. Staff sees great value in the voluntary designation. In Staff' s opinion the request to change the use of the second and third floors to accommodate residential use is more consistent with the purpose of the Mixed Use Zone District and brings the property into closer compliance with commercial floor area requirements by reducing the commercial component. The proposed changes are mostly internal to the building and do not impact the historic significance of the architecture. The size of the free market residential units does not add mass or height to the existing building, which is typically a concern on other AspenModern projects. In addition, the applicant commits to purchase TDRs to reduce the magnitude of the AspenModern requests. Although the individual allowance for free market residential floor area is being requested to increase from 0.5:1 to 0.78:1, the project is still within the overall allowable Floor Area Ratio for the site. There is no onsite parking available on the site and, considering the scope of the project, no ability to add parking without removing a portion of the building. The applicant requests a waiver o f the parking cash in lieu fee o f $90,000 which is a policy decision for Council. The height request is a policy decision for Council. The new skylight is central to the building and is so small that it will not be visible from the street. Subdivision: The Subdivision criteria are stated in Exhibit C. Staff is supportive of the technical subdivision to create separate legal interests in one parcel. Staff finds that the review criteria are met. Gro-wth Management for new free market residential units within a mixed use building and Development of Affordable Housing: The review criteria are stated in Exhibit D. As a landmark, the project is only required to mitigation for the larger of the 2 new free market residential units. All landmark properties are 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23, 2012 Page 14 0 f 15 eligible to create 1 free market unit without affordable housing mitigation. The project includes an 825 sf NLA affordable housing unit that is proposed to be a Category 4, one bedroom rental. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) recommends that the onsite housing unit be denied and that the applicant provide housing credits to fulfill the mitigation requirement. APCHA stated that if the unit is approved a Category 3 or 4 "for-sale" unit is requested. The affordable housing unit meets Land Use Code requirements as outlined in Exhibit D which promote mixed income buildings by permitting onsite housing units to fulfill mitigation requirements. Staff finds that the review criteria are met. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: The City Engineer, Fire Marshal, Water/Utilities Department, Aspen Sanitation District, Parking Department, Transportation Department, Building Department, Housing Department, Environmental Health Department and the Parks Department were notified of the application. The City Engineer, Parking Department, Transportation Department, Building Department, Parks Department and Housing Department all commented on the application. Applicable requirements have been included as conditions of approval when appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the proposed landmark designation and associated land use reviews are consistent with the goals of the historic preservation program and the requirements of the Land Use Code. Ensuring that the important 1970s buildings designed by locally significant architects are preserved for residents and visitors to experience is tantamount to Aspen's story. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No.17, Series of 2012 on second reading approving an AspenModern negotiation for landmark designation, Landmark Designation, Subdivision, and Growth Management Reviews." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 720 East Hyman Avenue Aspen-Modern Negotiation - Second Reading July 23, 2012 Page 15 of 15 ORDINANCE # 17 (Series of 2012) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION, SUBDIVISION, GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW, AND BENEFITS THROUGH THE ASPENMODERN PROGRAM, AND A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 720 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUMS, LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 104, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID NUMBERS: 2737-182-11-008 through 2737-182-11-031, and 2737-182-11-801. WHEREAS, the applicant, CM, LLC, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, submitted an application, pursuant to Section 26.415.025(C), AspenModern Properties, of the Aspen Municipal Code, to voluntarily participate in the AspenModern ninety-day negotiation period for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, legally described as The Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R and S Block 104; and WHEREAS, 720 East Hyman Avenue is included on the Aspen Modern Map; and WHEREAS, the applicant submitted a letter dated March 7,2012 requesting voluntary landmark designation in exchange for specific benefits through the AspenModern negotiation; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Â§26.415.025.CO), the ninety day AspenModern negotiation commenced on March 7, 2012; and WHEREAS, Â§26.415.025.C(1)(b) states that, during the negotiation period, "the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the property. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting;" and WHEREAS, the property owners' representative met with the Historic Preservation Commission (the HPC) on May 23,2012; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on May 23, 2012, the HPC considered the application; found that 720 East Hyman Avenue was a "best" example of Organic/Wrightian style and, found that the policy objectives for the historic preservation program stated at Â§26.415.010, Purpose and Intent are met, and recommended City Council C'Council") approve Historic Landmark Designation, requested benefits and fee waivers as stated in HPC Resolution numbered 12, Series of 2012; and 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 1 of 12 WHEREAS, Â§26.415.025.C(1)d establishes that "as part of the mutually acceptable agreement, the City Council may, at its sole discretion, approve any land use entitlement or fee waiver permitted by the Municipal Code and may award any approval that is assigned to another Board or Commission, including variations;"and WHEREAS, the property owner requests voluntary I.andmark Designation - Â§26.415.030(C), AspenModern; Subdivision review - Â§26.480.040(C) Subdivisions; Growth Management review - Â§26.470.060(3), Â§26.470.070(4), and Â§26.470.080(2); Change in Use of historic landmark sites and structures: Development of Affordable Housing and New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed use project; all to be consolidated with the AspenModern ninety-day negotiation process and reviewed by City Council; and WHEREAS, in addition to Historic Landmark Designation, Subdivision, and Growth Management, the applicant had identified preservation incentives that are requested as part of the AspenModern negotiation process in a letter dated March 7, 2012. Those incentives requested include: the ability to construct a 2,750 square feet floor area free market residential unit; ability to increase the free market allowable floor area to 0.78:1 or 7,014 square feet of floor area; a waiver ofthe onsite parking requirement and a waiver of the parking cash in lieu payment; and WHEREAS, the applicant agrees that the conditions of approval for the mitigation of the impact of the development regarding affordable housing are accepted by the applicant and constitute a voluntary agreement to limit rent/sales prices on the Property and to otherwise provide affordable housing stock in accordance with the provisions of CRS 38-12-301(2)(a) and (2)(b); and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department performed an analysis of the application including Landmark Designation, Subdivision Review, and Growth Management Review and found that the review standards are met. The staff report analyzed the proposed preservation incentives and monetary value of the benefits where possible; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Approvals and Phasing: a. Approvals. Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves Historic Designation, Subdivision. Growth Management Review and a site specific development plan subject to the conditions described herein. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 2 of 12 b. Project Phasing. The applicant shall be permitted to construct the approved project in two construction phases as described herein: Phase 1: one free market residential unit. Phase 2: the second free market residential unit. All impact fees stated in this Ordinance shall be due and payable at the time of issuance of a building permit for Phase 1, with the exception of the impact fees specifically related to the second free market residential unit. A building permit for Phase 2 must be submitted and determined to be complete within 1 year of receipt of a certificate of occupancy for Phase 1 of the construction. Building Code, Engineering and other departmental requirements stated in this Ordinance shall be met as part of Phase 1 unless directly related to the construction of Phase 2. Section 2: Historic Landmark Designation Historic landmark designation is granted for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue (the Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R, and S, Block 104). Upon the effective date of this ordinance, the City Clerk shall record with the real estate records of the Clerk and Recorder of the County, a certified copy of this ordinance. The location of the historic landmark property designated by this ordinance shall be indicated on the official maps of the City that are maintained by the Community Development Department. The existing atrium is prohibited from being significantly changed, for example by adding a floor or filling in the space in a way that changes the openness and historic characteristic of the feature as represented in the application without approval by the Historic Preservation Commission. Insubstantial changes to the atrium shall be reviewed administratively by the Community Development Director. Section 3: Subdivision Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council hereby approves Subdivision of the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue (the Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R and S. Block 104) for a mixed use building that contains two free market residential units, a commercial component and a rooftop deck. A final Subdivision Plat and Subdivision Agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Â§ 26.480, Subdivision, shall be recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office within 1 year of the receipt of a Development Order. Subdivision Agreement shall include at a minimum the following information: 1. An illustrative site plan of the project depicting the proposed improvement and the approved dimensional requirements. 2. Plan of any required grading and drainage improvements. 3. Approved planting for the right of way. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 3 of 12 4. Encroachment license for the planter boxes. 5. Agreement to record a deed restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office that commits the following: 1) the commercial uses shall not be limited to prohibit uses allowed in the underlying zone district of the subject property as amended from time to time, and 2) if the property is condominiumized the residential and commercial components shall remain in separate ownership. The Aspen Athletic Club Condominium plats, Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder reception #201836 and #190688, shall be vacated upon receipt of Certificate of Occupancy for the project. Section 4: Financial Assurances Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit the Applicant shall provide to the Community Development Department the following: a. Cost Estimates. Applicant's General Contractor shall cause to be prepared, and certified as correct, cost estimates for all improvements or development for which a Building Permit is required. There are no public improvements associated with the project at this time. Any public improvements associated with the project that are discovered after the approval of this ordinance are subject to the requirements listed below. The cost estimates for the implementation and maintenance of the planting in the right of way described herein at Section 13 shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks Department. The cost estimates for all other improvements and development in the Subdivision shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Department. Cost estimates for the landscape plan (i.e. the planting in the right of way) shall be shown separately from the cost estimates for all other improvements and development of the Project. Owner shall be responsible for the implementation and maintenance of the landscape plan required by this Ordinance. b. Landscaping Guarantees. Pursuant to and in conformance with the requirements of Â§ 26.480.070(C) & (D) and Â§ 26.445.070 (C)(3) & (4) of the Aspen Municipal Code; and, in order to secure the performance of the obligations of the Applicant to implement and maintain the Landscape Plan, Applicaht shall provide a guarantee of no less than one hundred and twenty five percent ( 125%) of the estimated cost of such Landscape Plan and Public Improvements, as determined and approved in subsection (a), above. The guarantee to implement and maintain the Landscape Plan and to complete Public Improvements shall be made by depositing with the City an irrevocable letter of credit with provisions as hereinafter set forth, or by providing such other security that may be acceptable to the City attorney. If an irrevocable letter of credit is used, the irrevocable letter of credit shall be retained by the City until satisfaction of Applicant's obligations under this Section or earlier released by the City. The letter of credit shall be issued by a financial institution doing business in Aspen, Colorado, or such other bank as shall be approved by the City; shall have an expiration date no earlier than two years after its date of issue; and shall provide that it may be drawn upon from time to time by the City in such amount or amounts as the City may designate as justified, such amounts not to exceed, in the aggregate, the amount of the letter of credit. Draws under any such letter of credit 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 4 of 11 shall be by a certificate signed by the City Manager of the City of Aspen, or his designee, stating that the City is entitled to draw the specified amount under the terms of this Section. c. Other Improvements and Development. With respect to all other improvements or development within the Project, the Applicant shall provide evidence satisfactory to the Community Development Department and the City Attorney's Office that the Applicant has in place sufficient financing to accomplish and complete all the development for which a Building Permit is sought. Such financing may include, without limitation, a construction loan from an institutional lender or lenders and equity capital investments from the Applicant or third party investors. The City Attorney shall have sole discretion in determining if the proposed financing as advanced by the Applicant is sufficient to complete the development activity for which a Building Permit is sought. Section 5: Site Protection Fund Before any Building Permit (including demolition, access/infrastructure, and/or site preparation permits) is issued for each phase of the Project approved by this Ordinance, the Applicant shall deposit with a local title company ("Escrow Agent") the sum of $25,000 in the form of cash or wired funds (the "Escrow Funds") and will execute an Escrow Agreement and Instructions with the Escrow Agent which recites and agrees as follows: "In the event construction work on the Project shall cease for sixty (60) days or longer ('work stoppage') prior to a final inspection by the City of the work authorized by the Building Permit on the Project. then the City in its discretion may draw upon the Escrow Funds from time to time as needed for purposes of protecting and securing the Project site and improvements from damage by the elements and/or from trespass by unauthorized persons, and for purposes of improving the Project site to a safe condition such that it does not become an attractive nuisance or otherwise pose a threat to neighbors or other persons." The Escrow Funds or any remaining balance thereof shall be returned to Applicant upon completion by the City of a final inspection of the work authorized by the Foundation/Structural Frame Permit on the Project. Section 6: Cash Escrow for Site Enhancement Fund. Before the issuance of a building permit for each phase, and as a condition of such issuance, the owner shall deposit with a local title company the sum of twenty five thousand dollars and no/100ths ($25,000.00), the "Site Enhancement Escrow Funds," in the form of cash or wired funds pursuant to an Escrow Agreement made and entered into between the Owner and the City which shall provide as follows: i. In the event construction work on the development of 720 E. Hyman Ave. shall cease for ninety (90) days or longer prior to a final inspection by the City of the work authorized by a building permit on the subject property, then the City in its discretion 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 5 of 12 I j may draw upon the Site Enhancement Escrow Funds from time to time as needed for the purposes of improving the appearance of any construction work already completed, and for the installing of any public improvements on or adjacent to the subject property. ii. The City shall have sole discretion with respect to the manner of improving the appearance of construction work in progress as well as a determining the public improvements to be installed. iii. The Site Enhancement Escrow Funds or any remaining balance thereof shall be returned to Owner upon completion by the City of a final inspection and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the project, or when otherwise agreed to by Owner and the City. iv. The City shall be named as a third party beneficiary of the Escrow Agreement with the express right and authority to enforce the same from time to time in accordance with the tenor in terms thereof. Section 7: Approved Dimensional Requirements The building as presented in the plans dated July 9, 2012 and attached as Exhibit A to this Ordinance comply with the effective dimensional allowances and limitations of the Mixed Use (MU) zone district except as modified below. Compliance with these requirements shall be verified by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer at the time of building permit submittal. The following dimensions are approved: Maximum Height: 4 new skylights and a rooftop deck, shown in Exhibit A, are permitted to be 1 ft. in height as measured from where the feature is attached to the roof. Maximum Residential Floor Area: 0.78:1 floor area ratio, 7,019 square feet total free market residential Maximum Residential Net Livable Area: 5,2501 square feet total: 2,750 square feet for Unit 1 and 2,500 square feet for Unit 2 Maximum Commercial Net Leasable Area: 16,560 square feet Maximum Commercial Floor Area: 10,017 square feet Minor adjustments to the dimensions represented above may occur upon review of a building permit as long as the resulting dimensions do not exceed those approved through this ordinance. 1 The total maximum residential net livable area requires the landing of 2 transferrable development rights in accordance with Â§26.535 Transferrable Development Rights. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 6 of 12 Section 8: Impact and Development Fees: P arks Development and Air Quality/TDM Impact Fees Pursuant to Land Use Code Â§ 26.610.030, Exemptions, development involving a property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures is exempt from the Parks Development and Air Quality/TDM Impact Fees. School Lands Dedication Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit, the Applicant shall pay a fee-in-lieu of land dedication pursuant to Chapter 26.620, School Lands Dedication. The amount of the fee shall be calculated by the Community Development Department using the calculation method and fee schedule in effect at the time the applicant submits a Building Permit. Parking Pursuant to Land Use Code Â§ 26.515, Parking, new residential units are required to mitigate parking impacts either through onsite spaces or cash in lieu. The parking cash in lieu for 2 parking spaces equals $60,000 and is due at the time of building permit issuance. 2 new residential units = 2 parking spaces required 2 x $30,000/space = $60,000 Section 9: Affordable Housing The project requires affordable housing mitigation for the 2,750 square feet free market residential unit. The 2,500 square feet free market residential unit is exempt from mitigation pursuant to Â§26.470.060 Growth Management Change in Use for historic landmark sites and structures which allows historic landmarks to create one new free market residential unit without affordable housing mitigation. The affordable housing requirement is specified below: 2,750 sq. ft. of net livable area * 30% = 825 sq. ft. of net livable area required for affordable housing 825 sq. ft. / 400 sq. ft per FTE = 2.06 Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) required The project is required to mitigate for 2.06 FTEs through either: 1) Offsite Housing. A one-bedroom off-site unit, which is equal to 1.75 FTEs, that is located within city limits east of the Highway 82 roundabout. The remaining 0.31 FTEs shall be paid as cash in lieu for Category 2 according to the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit submission. The offsite unit shall meet the requirements of the Aspen Pitkin County Ilousing Authority Guidelines and shall be deed restricted in accordance with Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority requirements at Category 2 or lower. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be granted and a deed restriction shall be recorded for the offsite housing unit prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or a Conditional Certificate of Occupancy for Phase 1. -or- 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 7 of 11 2) Affordable Housing Credits. 2.0 FTEs of affordable housing credits at Category 2 level. The remaining 0.06 FTEs shall be paid as cash in lieu for Category 2 according to the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit submission. The affordable housing credits shall be extinguished prior to a Certificate of Occupancy or Conditional Certificate of Occupancy for Phase 1. Section 10: Growth Management Ouota Svstem Allotments 1 free market residential unit is herby granted an annual development allotment. Pursuant to Â§26.470.060(3) Change in Use of historic landmark sites and structures, the second free market residential unit is not deducted from the annual development allotments but is deducted from the respective development ceiling levels. Section 11: Building Permit The applicant may not submit a Building Permit Application until the requirements in Land Use Code Â§ 26.304.075.A, Building Permit Application, are fulfilled. The building permit application shall include the following: 1. A copy of the Development Order issued by the Community Development Department (see Â§ 26.304.075(A)(2), City of Aspen Municipal Code.) 2. A copy of the final City Council Ordinance and HPC Resolution. 3. The conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover page of the Building Permit set. 4. A construction management plan (CMP) and drainage report pursuant to Engineering and Building Department requirements. 5. Accessibility and ANSI requirements shall meet adopted Building Code requirements. Section 12: Engineering The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21, Title 28, and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. A construction management plan must be submitted in conjunction with the building permit application. A completed drainage report/plan as outlined in the Urban Runoff Management Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to recordation of Final Plat. Failure to meet the standards in Title 21 and Title 28 may result in a physical change to the project and possible review by City Council and/or HPC to amend the design. An encroachment license is required for the planter boxes located in the Right-of-way. Section 13: Parks 1. The Parks Department shall review and approve the planting for the planter boxes. 2. Landscaping in the public Right-of-way shall be subject to landscaping in the Right-of- way requirements, Aspen Municipal Code Chapter 21.20. All plantings within the City Right-of-way must be approved by the City Parks Department prior to installation. 3. Right-o f-way requirements necessitate adequate irrigation pressure and coverage, i f a system is not in place one will need to be added that is specifically designed for the trees in the planter boxes. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 8 of 11 Section 14: Fire Mitigation Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit, the Applicant shall obtain the approval of the Fire Marshal of a Fire Protection Plan which shall include the following elements: 1. Compliance with all codes and requirements o f the Aspen Fire Protection District 2. Sprinkler, fire alarms and carbon monoxide alarms are required. (IFC as amended Section 903 and 907). 3. Documentation that the development has sufficient volume and pressure of water for the sprinklers or other fire suppression system adequate to satisfy the District's standards for the type of structures proposed by the approved development. This requirement shall be satisfied by an analysis acceptable to the Water Department which demonstrates system delivery capacity of existing water distribution system at the Water Departments' main water to the approved development of no less than 3,000 gallons per minute. 4. An overall access plan for the site. Section 15: Sanitation District Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. Section 16: Water Department The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code in place at the time of building permit submittal, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Each of the units within the mixed use building shall have individual water meters. Section 17: Exterior Lighting All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Â§ 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Section 18: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan and a vested property right pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.308.011 attaching to and running with the Subject Property and shall confer upon the Applicant the right to undertake and complete the site specific development plan and use of said property under the terms and conditions of the site specific development plan including any approved amendments thereto. The vesting period of these vested property rights shall be for seven (7) years which shall not begin to run until the date of the publications required to be made as set forth below. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 1 year of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Â§ 26.104.050, Void Permits. Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 9 of 11 No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to Chapter 26.308, Vested Property Rights. Pursuant to Â§ 26.304.070(A), Development Orders, such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of seven (7) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 720 East Hyman Avenue, the Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R and S, Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, by Ordinance ofthe City Council of the City of Aspen. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the Development Order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this Ordinance of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this Ordinance. The vested rights granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review. The period of time permitted by law to exercise the right of referendum to refer to the electorate this Section of this Ordinance granting vested rights; or, to seek judicial review of the grant of vested rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as set forth above. The rights of referendum described herein shall be no greater than those set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 19: 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 Historic Preservation Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 20: This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 21: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance 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. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 10 of 11 The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 22: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 11 th day of June, 2012, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice o f the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 2901 day of May, 2012. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2012. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: James R. True, City Attorney Exhibit A: Floor plans and elevations illustrating Section 7 of the Ordinance. 720 E. 11yman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Pagellofll Exhibit A HISTORIC DESIGNATION Â§26.415. 030. C AspenModern 1. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of AspenModern, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet at least two of the criteria a-d, and criterion e described below: a. The property is related to an event, pattern, or trend that has made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific event, pattern or trend is identified and documented in an adopted context paper; b. The property is related to people who have made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific people are identified and documented in an adopted context paper; c. The property represents a physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman, or design philosophy that is deemed important and the specific physical design, designer, or philosophy is documented in an adopted context paper; d. The property possesses such singular significance to the City, as documented by the opinions of persons educated or experienced in the fields of history, architecture, landscape architecture, archaeology or a related field, that the property's potential demolition or major alteration would substantially diminish the character and sense of place in the city as perceived by members of the community, and e. The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. STAFF FINDINGS: Staff finds that review criteria a- e are met. 720 East Hyman Ave- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit A- designation criteria Page 1 of 3 . 1 720 E. Hyman does not exemplify textbook ~ ..11 -\1-'.Ve,Flp7:1*?J."12 Wrightian architecture. Restricting the ~ .., analysis of a design profession like F 1\1 41 17Â¥ . architecture to a uniform set of criteria that . :~ I . 417' 2 qualify a building as contributing to a E. r specific style fails to recognize the artistic ,-i ,(.0,7 1.1 U 4 8 1 freedom architects like Molny exercised- r , 1 as Wright expressed to Molny, "If you Â·Â·Â·- . 14 understand the principles of my architecture, - 8 1 then your buildings need not look like mine." Applying this idea to preservation of 2% .6- 1 720 E. Hyman; while it does not replicate - the exact teachings of a master architect, it is 2 3 1 42 defined in part by Aspen's creative 17<. r Â·. 1 ' -=t.j - 741%. environment where architects, and other i L . 14Â¥F4 4;~ , 4,- j I / creative professionals, could experiment ~ - * i with modern philosophies and the built j t Fl:-6 environment iii this specific context. It is , i q ,Â» ,% f - , ./.1.-7 11 - exactly this creative adventure that produced . 530- *.4/. 2.04 interesting architecture iii Aspen- r=A architecture that communicates both a sense . - j; 1 of place (the high country and extreme - environment) and a higher level of design. 4-. ' .2 Spatial connections, relationship to the site 7- ' ..@e _~ 1 -6 and connection with nature, and utilizing the Photograph 1: example of blurring the line between the materials for both aesthetic and structural inside and outside through the use of glazing and large functions are all examples of Wrightian sliding glass doors philosophy. Molny used Wrightian design philosophy- for example: organic architecture (composing buildings with space rather than mass and scale; and creating a harmony of architecture and environment) - to create an open floor plan and an interior/exterior courtyard. Aspen was lucky to be home to many intellectuals, including modernist architects, who were starting out in the field. Molny used his foundation at Taliesen to draw upon the physical and intellectual environment of Aspen and create a building that is not a replica of Wright, but indicative of his own background, design, experiences, and client. Molny was not the only architect in Aspen whose training under Frank Lloyd Wright influenced the towns architectural character. Please refer to the white paper "Aspen's Twentieth- Century Architecture: Modernism 1945 - 1975", attached as Exhibit B, more information about this trend. Aspen was fortunate to attract a variety of highly trained architects who left a modern impression throughout the town. Among the architectural crowd was Robin Molny who trained at Taliesen under Frank Lloyd Wright for five years and in the 1950s was selected by Wright to supervise the Greenberg Residence in Dousman, Wisconsin. Wright is quoted as describing Molny as a "poet" saying "he'll be a good architect one day." Subsequently, Molny moved to Aspen, 720 East Hyman Ave- AspenModern negotiation Exliibit A- designation criteria Page 2 0 f 3 0 0 1 worked for Fritz Benedict, and opened his own architecture firm. The Hearthstone House (134 East Hyman, 1961), the Mason and Morse Building (514 East Hyman, heavily altered, 1971), and the downtown pedestrian mails (1970s) were all designed by Molny. The HPC awarded Molny two Welton Anderson Preservation Honor Awards in 1995 for the pedestrian malls and again in 1997 for significant architectural contributions to Aspen. Dick Carney, Chairman o f the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation Board, wrote a letter honoring Molny when he was presented with the Welton Anderson Preservation Honor Award in 1997. Robin Molny's architectural contributions are locally significant in their representation and communication of Aspen life in the 1960s and 1970s. As indicated through the careful orientation of the main atrium, Molny was sensitive to spatial relationships: he designed the atrium to serve as a flexible, light-filled, transition between the exterior and interior, taking advantage o f the views to the mountain, and creating interest for those inside the building. The style of the building is hard to categorize. It best represents an eclectic commercial style that Molny created using natural materials, repetition, and cutting edge building technology of the time. The elegant use of structural members to create the form, fenestration, and architectural interest, and attention to small details like bolt patterns display the craftsmanship and philosophy of a quality designer. Molny displayed his appreciation and knowledge of materials and architectural history in the construction of the Aspen Athletic Building with the use of the .Â· ---<Â· : current technology and construction techniques. The 1 L Â·, r, I-- --- ---Ill@ i# first patents for glu-lam beams were issued in ~ manufacturing standard for glu-lam was published in I ~~.1-~WilI~~~~ ~ 1963. The structural glazing (also called structural IL W, - J,Â·dy).0,4~----:,~ silicone glazing) that spans between the first and ~1-,-~~ second tloors to create the interior atrium uses .....Ill//Ill r.4 -1 late 1960s and early 1970s. 720 E. Hyman was built ~ in 1976. Photograph 2: Detail of bolt pattern Overall the physical integrity of the building is intact. Original materials have not been replaced and the form and site plan is unchanged. The plywood hoppers appear original but are no longer operable. The building scored a 17 on the integrity score sheet which qualifies it as a "best" example of organic architecture. The proposed minor changes to the exterior that HPC reviewed do not significantly impact the building's integrity score. Stafffinds that criteria a, b, c, d, and e are met. 720 East Hyman Ave- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit A- designation criteria Page 3 0 f 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Sara Adams FROM: Cindy Christensen. APCHA Operations Manager DATE: May 7,2012 RE: REDEVELOPMENT OF 720 EAST HYMAN (ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING) ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval for the redevelopment of the 720 East Hyman, the Aspen Athletic Club building. BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing the redevelopment as part of the voluntary historic designation. It will encompass full renovation of the building over several years. Section 16.415.015.C, Aspen Modern Properties, comes into play with the voluntary history designation; therefore, there is a 90-day negotiation period with City Council. The request is to provide two free-market units and one deed-restricted unit within the building. Under Section 26.470.050.B, Growth Management: General Requirements, the applicant is requesting one allotment for a free market unit and one for an affordable housing unit. A second free-market unit is being made available as a growth management benefit, under the Aspen Modern Program for Landmark Properties, without affordable housing mitigation. DISCUSSION: Section 26.470.100.A, states that 60% of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The applicant states that the total net leasable area within the building will be reduced by 5,537 square feet: thereby no affordable housing mitigation is required. Section 26.470.050.B.6, states that "the 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 30% ofthe additional free-market residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher." Under the Aspen Modern Program, Landmark Properties, the free market unit No. 1 should meet the requirements for affordable housing mitigation, and Unit No. 2 will be exempt from affordable housing mitigation. The unit size cap for both free-market units is 2,000 square feet; however, both units are proposed as 2,500 square feet and 2,750 square feet. The applicant is applying for the 500 square foot floor area bonus for designated historic properties for Unit 1. As to the additional square footage of 750 for Unit 2. the applicant is looking to mitigate with a 1DR for 500 square feet and requests that the additional 250 square feet be permitted as it is being placed within the existing building floor area. Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 1 The affordable housing unit is proposed as a one-bedroom, 825 net leasable square foot unit, to be located on the second floor. The plans for the unit are attached. Section 26.470.070.4.d, Minor Growth Management: Affordable Housing, states that 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." This paragraph also allows for APCHA or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters. The proposed unit may also be a rental unit owned by an employer or non-profit as long as a legal instrument, acceptable to the City Attorney, ensures the permanent affordability of the unit. The applicant is requesting the unit as a dedicated rental unit to be owned by the building owner and rented to an employee of the owner. Parking is an issue. Section 26.515.010 has a general requirement that all development shall be provided with off-street parking. Under Section 26.420.010.B. 1.e, the applicant is requesting a waiver for required parking on site due to the lack of available lot area to create parking spaces. If the redevelopment is approved, Staff would recommend the unit be a "for sale", Category 3 or 4 unit and that the condominium documents reflect that any common area maintenance shall be assessed based on the actual values of the free-market versus the affordable unit. RECOMMENDATION: The APCHA Board reviewed the application at their meeting held May 2,2012 and is recommending denial of the on-site deed-restricted unit as it would be a single unit in a mixed use building. Enforcement on these types of single units would place a burden on the APCHA staff and is not in the best interest of the program. The APCHA Board recommends that the mitigation for the second free-market unit be provided by the use of an Affordable Housing Credit Certificate and not an on-site or off-site unit. However, should the redevelopment be approved by the City Council, the APCHA Board would request that the unit remain a "for sale", Category 3 or 4, one-bedroom unit. If the project is approved, certain conditions should be required. Listed below are the conditions that should be required broken down into whether the unit is a "for sale' unit or a rental unit: Sales Unit: 1. The unit shall be an ownership unit and sold through the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority lottery system upon Certificate of Occupancy. 2. The unit shall be classified as Category 3 or 4. 3. The condominium documents shall reflect that any common area maintenance shall be assessed based on the actual values of the free-market homes versus the deed-restricted unit. Any property management fees or other fees associated with the commercial or free-market aspect of the building shall not be charged to the deed-restricted owner. The Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 2 condominium documents shall be reviewed and approved by APCHA prior to Certificate of Occupancy. The goal is to protect the affordable housing unit from excessive monthly and/or special assessments having to do with luxury items and/or expensive modifications. 4. The deed-restricted unit shall receive the Certificate Occupancy prior to, or in conjunction with, the free-market units. Rental Unit: 1. If the unit is allowed to be a rental unit, the deed restriction shall require that all tenants are approved PRIOR to tenancy through APCHA and must re-qualify on a YEARLY basis, the tenant shall be no higher than a Category 4, and at such time the unit is found to be out of compliance for one year, the owner will be REQUIRED to sell the unit through APCHA's lottery system. 2. The unit shall be classified no higher than Category 4. 3. A document will be required to be signed by the owner that this deed restriction is being done on a voluntary basis and that the rental control of the unit is acceptable and required and will remain in perpetuity until such time the unit is sold as stated in number 1 above. 4. The rental deed restriction will be recorded with the following conditions: a. The use and occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit 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 4 employee" 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 Category 4 employee" of his 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 guesthouse or guest facility. c. Written verification of employment of employee(s) proposed to reside in the Employee Dwelling Unit shall be completed and filed with the Authority by the Owner ofthe Employee Dwelling Unit prior to occupancy thereof, and such verification must be acceptable to the Authority. d. The Employee Dwelling Unit shall be required to be rented for periods of no less than six (6) consecutive months. 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 Authority may rent the Employee Dwelling Unit to a qualified employee. e. The maximum rental rate shall not exceed the Category 4, one-bedroom. rental rate as set forth in the Rental Guidelines established by the Authority and may be adjusted annually as set forth by the Guidelines. The maximum permitted rent for the unit on the date of execution of this deed restriction as stated in the Guidelines at the time the deed-restriction is recorded, Rent shall be verified and Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 3 approved by the Authority upon submission and approval of the lease. Employees shall be qualified by the Authority as to employment, maximum income and asset limitations on a yearly basis. The signed lease must be provided to APCHA. f. The Unit must meet minimum occupancy; i.e., one person per bedroom. g. Owner agrees to provide to APCHA upon request all information reasonably necessary to determine ifthere is full compliance with this Agreement. h. 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. i. 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, lf 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 ofjudicial review. j. 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. k. In the event an Affordable Housing Units 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. 1. 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. m. 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. n, This Agreement is to be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. o. 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. Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 4 p, 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. q. The terms and provisions of this Deed Restriction shall constitute covenants running with the title to the Affordable Housing Units as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the Managing Agent, the Association and/or Owner, by the Housing Authority, 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. r. 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 Authority by the Owner within ten (10) days of approval of employee(s) for the Employee Dwelling Unit. s. 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 this Deed Restriction violates CRS 38-12-301. t. 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. Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 5 . A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL PURSUE HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION THROUGII TIIE ASPENMODERN PROGRAM AND APPROVING MINOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 720 EAST HYMAN AVENUE,LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUM, AKA LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 104, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION # 12, SERIES OF 2012 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-11-008 through 2737-182-11-031, and 2737-182-11-801. WHEREAS, the applicant. John Martin, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects. submitted an application requesting Minor Development review and voluntarily landinark designation of the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, legally described as the Athletic Club Building Condominiums and Lots Q, R and S, Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado: and WHEREAS, 720 East llyman Avenue is included on the Aspen Modern Map; and WHEREAS, the applicant subniitted a letter dated March 7, 2012 requesting voluntary designation in exchange for specific benefits through the AspenModern negotiation. and WHEREAS, the 90 day AspenModern negotiation commenced on March 7,2012: and WHEREAS, Community Development evaluated the property pursuant to I.and Use Code Section 26.415.030.C. 1 and determined that the property meets the criteria for designation and the integrity score qualifies as the "best" category; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered. repaired. relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review:' and WHEREAS, Community Development determined that the proposed changes are exempt from Commercial Design Standard Review pursuant to Section 26.412,020.A of the Municipal Code; and WIIEREAS, at their regular meeting on May 23,2012 continued from May 9,2012 the Historic Preservation Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing, took public comment, considered the application, found that the application for Minor Development met the review: " standards with conditions and the 'City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, considered the staff memo. staff recommendation, and public comments, and found the building 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern recommendation 1 IPC Resolution # 12, Series of 2012 Page I of 2 to be consistent with the designation criteria listed in Section 26.415.030.C.1. by a vote of five to zero (5 - 0). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants Minor Development review with conditions and recommends City Council negotiate for landmark designation of the property located at 720 East I lyman Avenue, Lots Q, R and S Block 104. City and lownsite of Aspen. Colorado with the fullouing conditions: 1. HI?C finds that 720 East 1-lyman Avenue meets atl of the designation criteria. a - e. listed in Â§26.415.030.C.1 and Land Use Code Section 26.415.010 Purpose and Intent. l IPC finds that 720 East IIyman Avenue is a "best" example of Organic/Wrightian style. The brise soleil and requested variances are not approved. . The mechanical equipment on the rooftop shall be screened for review and approval by Staff and Monitor. 5. The planter beds located in the right of way are required to get an encroachment license from the Engineering Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. The applicant shall work with the Parks Department to determine appropriate planting for the planter boxes in the right of way for review by Matt and Monitor. 7. The applicant shall provide information regarding the clear scaler proposed for the planter boxes to ensure that it is appropriate for Aspen's climate and brick materials for review and approval by Staff and Monitor. 8. A repointing test patch on the planter boxes shall be reviewed and approved in the field by Staff and Monitor. 9. There shall be no changes to the approved plans without Staff and Monitor approval. 10. The applicant shall restudy the stairwell on the roof in the middle of the building for review and approval by Staff and Monitor. 11. HPC is in favor of a 1 foot height variance for the skylights. 12. The applicant shall restudy retaining the second floor false stairway. APPROVED BY THE C'OMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 23rd day of May, 2012. 02Â»Â»4<4 Ann Mullins, Chair AP~oved as to Form: , r h 1\. fjik. -4-,--- Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: r 6 i 4 0- U. 07 " 1 1 & bÂ·M t L LATd Kathy Stri~land, Chief Deputy Clerk 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern recommendation 11PC Resolution #12, Series of 2012 Page 2 of 2 La La !0 Allowable in Mixed Use Zone Existing Proposed District 0.75:1 or 6,750 Commercial Use up to 1:1 or 9,000 through 1.89:1 or 17,026 1.01:1 or 9,061 special review 0.5:1 or 4,500 Free Market Residential Use up to 0.75:1 or 6,750 if AH provided 0 0.78:1 or 7,014 that is equal to 100% of FMR Affordable No limitation 0 0.1:1 or 961 Housing Use Overall Total 2:1 or 18,000 1.89:1 or 17,026 1.89:1 17,036 FAR No change with exception of additional Height 28 ft. to 32 ft. 33 ft. 3 in. to 35 ft. 6 in. 1 ft. deck with railing and 1 ft. skylights **FMR component cannot be more than 150% of the total commercial component. 011 - 4'ex rri- \A+41 3-) Vg- (3~ 3,144 *J FAIL 1 tiA hai h F lA 1/wit- 22 Ljh'?t taâ€ž vi 'ul Y*/31Â»al 9%4 â‚¬ 2 ill,8 4 840- 3 -1 1 XT Imi EXHIBIT M UPDATED- SUBDIVISION Chapter 26.480, SUBDIVISION Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. General Requirements 1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. 3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. 4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposal supports the general policies and goals in the Aspen Area Community Plan, specifically the Historic Preservation chapter. The project is consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the area and will not adversely affect the future development of the area. The proposed subdivision to create separate legal interests is in compliance with applicable requirements of the Land Use Code. B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of fooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. Staff Finding: n/a. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding: nfa. 720 East Hyman Ave.- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit M - Subdivision Criteria Page 1 of 3 C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met: 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or the goals of the community. 2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. Staff Finding: The applicant shall comply with Aspen Municipal Code Chapter 26.580 as applicable. D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding: Affordable housing is reviewed concurrent with Subdivision pursuant to the AspenModern negotiation process. The applicant proposes to mitigate for affordable housing with either an offsite unit or affordable housing credits. E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.630. Staff Finding: The applicant agrees to comply with the School Land Dedication Standards in Chapter 26.630. Staff finds this criterion is met. F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parceks) zoned Affordable Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals if the newly created parceks) is required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44-2001, Â§ 2) 720 East Hyman Ave.- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit M - Subdivision Criteria Page 2 of 3 Staff Finding: Affordable housing is reviewed concurrent with Subdivision pursuant to the AspenModern negotiation process. The applicant proposes either offsite or affordable housing credits. 720 East Hyman Ave.- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit M - Subdivision Criteria Page 3 of 3 Staff Finding: Affordable housing is reviewed concurrent with Subdivision pursuant to the AspenModern negotiation process. The applicant proposes either offsite or affordable housing credits. 720 East Hyman Ave.- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit M - Subdivision Criteria Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT M UPDATED- SUBDIVISION Chapter 26.480, SUBDIVISION Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. General Requirements 1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. 3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. 4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposal supports the general policies and goals in the Aspen Area Community Plan, specifically the Historic Preservation chapter. The project is consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the area and will not adversely affect the future development of the area. The proposed subdivision to create separate legal interests is in compliance with applicable requirements of the Land Use Code. B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. Staff Finding: n/a. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding: n/a. 720 East Hyman Ave.- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit M - Subdivision Criteria Page 1 of 3 C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met: 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or the goals of the community. 2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. Staff Finding: The applicant shall comply with Aspen Municipal Code Chapter 26.580 as applicable. D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding: Affordable housing is reviewed concurrent with Subdivision pursuant to the AspenModern negotiation process. The applicant proposes to mitigate for affordable housing with either an offsite unit or affordable housing credits. E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.630. Staff Finding: The applicant agrees to comply with the School Land Dedication Standards in Chapter 26.630. Staff finds this criterion is met. F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44-2001, Â§ 2) 720 East Hyman Ave.- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit M - Subdivision Criteria Page 2 of 3 EXHIBIT N Updated - GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEWS Â§26.470.080.2 New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project. The development of new free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.050. See. 26.470.050.General requirements. A. Purpose: The intent of growth management is to provide for orderly development and redevelopment of the City while providing mitigation from the impacts said development and redevelopment creates. Different types of development are categorized below, as well as the necessary review process and review standards for the proposed development. A proposal may fall into multiple categories and therefore have multiple processes and standards to adhere to and meet. 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 Response: Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed free market residential unit. Staff finds that this criteria is met. 2. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Response: The project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan specifically the Historic Preservation chapter. Staff finds that this criterion is met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff Response: The project requests a variance to the allowable floor area allotted to free market residential use as part of the AspenModern negotiation for landmark designation. The commercial component of the building is an existing non-conformity, however the proposal reduces the non-conformity. 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit N - GMQS Page 1 of 4 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval, as applicable. Staff Response: The project is consistent with Historic Preservation Commission approvals. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate. (Ord. No. 6 - 2010, Â§2) Staff Response: n/a - the project reduces commercial net leasable area which does not require mitigation. 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. (Ord. No. 6- 2010, Â§2) Staff Response: Two new free market residential units are proposed. The smaller of the two units (2,500 square feet of net livable area) is exempt from affordable housing mitigation offered. As a historic landmark, it is eligible for the one time incentive for historic landmark properties that permits the creation of a free market residential unit without mitigation. The larger of the two units (2,750 square feet of net livable area) requires mitigation at 30% of the new net livable area. 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit N - GMQS Page 2 of 4 The larger free market residential unit comprises 2,750 square feet of net livable area, which requires an 825 square feet net livable area affordable housing unit. The applicant agrees to mitigate with either an off-site unit or affordable housing credits. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. (Ord. No. 14,2007, Â§1) Staff Response: The project represents minimal demand on public infrastructure. It is an existing commercial building that is being partially converted to mixed use. Staff finds this criterion to be met. See. 26.470.070.Minor Planning and Zoning Commission applications. The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section 26.470.110, Procedures for review, and the criteria for each type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications shall comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.050. Except as noted, the following types of growth management approvals shall be deducted from the respective development ceiling levels but shall not be deducted from the annual development allotments. Approvals apply cumulatively. 4. Affordable housing. The development of affordable housing deed-restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the Board of Directors. Staff Response: A referral from APCHA is included as Exhibit E. APCHA is not in favor of the proposed onsite unit due to concerns about its location in a mixed use building, and recommends Affordable Housing credits as the form of mitigation. The Land Use Code permits and incentivizes mitigation onsite to encourage diversity within the building. The ordinance has been changed to reflect the changes from the July 9, 2012 meeting. The applicant agrees to mitigate with either an offsite unit east of the roundabout or affordable housing credits. Staff and the Housing Authority propose the unit at Category 2. 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 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit N - GMQS Page 3 0 f 4 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. (Ord. No. 6 - 2010, Â§4) Staff Response: The housing unit shall be provided either offsite or in the form of housing credits. Staff finds that this criterion is met. c. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent (50%) or more of the unit's net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. This dimensional requirement may be varied through Special Review, Pursuant to Chapter 26.430. (Ord. No. 14 - 2011, Â§3) Staff Response: n/a. 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 Response: Based on the July 9, 2012 meeting, the applicant proposes to mitigate for affordable housing through either an offsite unit east of the roundabout or affordable housing credits. Staff and the Housing Authority propose that the offsite unit or credits be mitigated at Category 2. 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit N - GMQS Page 4 0 f 4 .. 6/28/2012 1 ": ... M .i ..Ty' , ./. 2|2 1,4 N . m ' 1 1.61,4 : : DA :': /3. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE 1111111 MU ASPEN HPC HEARING ~ CHAnlES CUNNil , r JULY 9, 2012 ~ MACH}TVO.-9 4./.7-=M.= .a fir:.66 .271#1*-9 4 ---4,\ . P --- L 9-15. . 7 Fe-\ 1 1% I. I . ..4,1 - ...,1 # S 7, ..:1- 1 / . 44Â»~ fÂ« i ;til~ ~ 0-~ ~3.-x qi. . . 1. '7' %~ H.- 36279 #1 ~ -coke**44(0, b := .0 #2 7Â»2 -Ct ....2- f .... % 477Â» r AERIAL IMAGE C â€¢ _ - ~9- , ~ITY MAP ...01'Im..'*#.-.....I-- ..P. al. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @a ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 1 .. 6/28/2012 a U Z -JIâ€ž,=Mli.,33=,i,cIavIâ€¢ . ,-1 -2SE-/ ..flaill ' ==p)- 18 6- AiRLJR:'.-fli:~. -- Aspen Athletic Club Building Â· Built in 1976 Â· Architect: Robin Molny an apprentice of Frank Lloyd Wright Other buildings by Molny: Mason and Morse Building Hearthstone House Â· The pedestrian mails Â· Other local homes . HISTORY 11. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING I 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 ~ C,(AFILES CUm,trlâ‚¬ Aer.,7.CT9 1-723IU1k0"- lailliwi/il/" teLUe- m/:.,f.="I'E/"-/--.-/ /6""Unifill/M - ~t SP Â£~ML~N.9~:8 -AM r ' 9*.Il-'~2.... 1 - . ./ 2 i 4 7. bl; 0 -*4- .. N ..2..4 *,4 2008 UPGRADES Â· ADA accessibility upgrades Pine tree removal rk._ 5 -4/#2â€¢ '14. Â· Removal of exterior paint :.211 1. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING I 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING tHAALES CUM!.Tr, 1 'AcHITFI;â„¢ JULY 9, 2012 2 Â·. 4 1 .. 6/28/2012 $12.L~'.m~.V'. 1 Llc-t . A-Ily-- .pw.will.....-.p-T -- -*--- - 41 AFTER BEFORE AWNING WINDOW PAINTED PLYWOOD AwATNES wriDOWS lI. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING ....St:UNNIFFE JULY 9, 2012 ~ r.Â£.-Cl .... -LEW'JILL':gltld. . .~ â€¢Â·;15; 3 9 ~ p /4 I /5 ./ i *4* 1? 4 iI H 4 e. ' , . e..9 3- m 4 L . r f i! .ASPEN ATHLETIC BUILDING , % 14 0 -- 0 â‚¬ R.D,* 1. I.~ Il///1:21 4 la.. i - 1...\# - .. . Ir A-1 0 ---1 1 11 /4-14Â« J i!, 9 L le 0 2~STÂ·B SASE<~ ......T ) 95-0. â€¢IrMA~ * AERIAL IMAGE EXISTING & PROPOSED . 1.*q. W. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE Ea ASPEN HPC HEARING - Es" JULY 9, 2012 4RCHITECTS 3 29 1664; ig 1-5 ho .. 6/28/2012 Â¤ VERTICAL CIRCULATION ~ O COMMERCIAL ' / 7,4 I '. 1,1 f In runte .- + - B'. ..0 V.=r 1 P_D 11 try= 1-3-.-::511 . 1 11.-1 ir:,7, ~ 1 8 | bOI~Z=~~~~~ 0-*~.4.4 ~ 1.=2221 k.-11-Lt. U -1 f Â©1_] 4 â‚¬244,1- 0 - l 5 04. 1 , '.14 3 114.i 2. ' XII, '' I ., . I <or-: A te.Al .-(V ..' AÂ»/t PROPOSED EXISTING -.. Il~ STREET LEVEL PLAN @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ~ 12 ASPEN HPC HEARING CHARLES CUNN1~FE JULY 9, 2012 4â€¢c'fillicTâ‚¬ Â¤ AFFORDABLE HOUSING Â¤ VERTICAL CIRCULATION ~ O COMMERCIAL ~=J --1Lj ~ -~ j L - J_j-J __3. l r 997 fe. I .* 1%=1 LET==1 - ' 4- 8-LL 1 Â· .1 - - .--5 Â·-- - 1 ~1 - . ~-4- - â€¢ t O 0 13 c *9 t , 0.0 // /1// I1 i 20' A 1 1 PROPOSED EXISTING #Millilillill'll/ki JÂ·W////'Ill'ililililli.ill'im././F:7?/rfio~4 092Â¥Â·~CE):7./D *p37% , SECOND LEVEL PLAN ......g -/........./- S. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE Ele ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 ~ CHANLES'LN~lilri, 49CMIT1C:TS 4 .. 6/28/2012 O FREE-MARKET HOUSING O VERTICAL CIRCULATION O COMMERCIAL I ' . ir â€¢ 9 1, n 6 1 .1.- 1.-1 U 4 I - fi' 1=44 L.- - L- Er ki; - 1 .- '4'j =5*-'. W4-83-1. ft i ER :il " . . t.* =11- -. ~ 21.f-- 1,3 f Â· - ''*51 L~Â»1 . . r.-p-/9-4-< 11 - ... ' 1.- I I - =r. ..... 5 ~.- Â·" O I . - g ./. - 6 ' *-4 '22:.42 4 - PROPOSED EXISTING 4 UPPER LEVEL PLAN %'. 51. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE 72 ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 ~ CHARLE'CON.Â· 1 0~H"F~~C Â¤ DECK FOR O VERTICAL CIRCULATION ~ rktt-MARKET HOUSING I .11 - : 1 co -t.r :' 1 a m 2562 1141,Â·d . 7[T-131 i.. 1 --1 ~- -11Â«*El i 1:11* 1 -41 24 Â»1 c --111 -1 71 :I ~ i\, 0 0 0 PROPOSED EXISTING . 77*RIENEFUESCIRmzÂ·w ~~ ROOF LEVEL PLAN 'y: Â· -~-~Btem~~â„¢7?Â·.Â· li. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @ra ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 ~ r'+IC' r 5 ~<*.A#m)/ -vi~C~~00. f - 6/28/2012 ~~'J'Dt.~t ~ 1 47.7, $ cy--A=. -U 11 1 1 2.-- G PROPOSED 17.1.7 6 ' r.: S F-"It 'I-- 1 ~-4 , : 0 11 111 1 11 11 --- 11 11 11 R.: 11-- U-V U U U U u 1 ...2.- 49 1 -1 {1'..Ei. 4'f' 11 -2.14Â·3-Â· I f=EZI=:7-1--1~ 11 ! 11 ~ ~1 ., i -1~ T.- J - L Â® EXISTING 7/ ~~~~~~- HYMAN AVENUE (SOUTH) ELEVATION 2.~ b.~u' a. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 ~ it#:WzrÂ¥'ll,N r - - K-&27* 1 1 .64%34 t.Â»2.) .*-. .&El i -33 1 1.:; 1 1 1 1 1_.1 -===5 thr-1- d 1 1 11 Â£ 1 -2 .= PROPOSED : ~./.-- - M-G r | *r- _ & 1 1 1 EXISTING :ORIGINAI-ffhEEHf~mATIOA I. 9.-%111. 1 01 11. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE Su ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 ~ t/ARLES).Ff i 14(-111TFC-Â© 6 .. 6/28/2012 .l -1 ....1:.4.2 $ ..1 r~'7, G -- 7 7 1 -ys r -:.,2 1?Z] ClI~ZX~ =-- cnmz= =I'l CZ=.CD C::SC~0 -Z'-I' C 1 1 223 1 2-1 ......'.3 .23 7=1==GCO .... C.- ....C=...m L PROPOSED 1 E -2-7 $ 1-,,f.9 1 14 1. 11 1 11 11:1 1 ]1 . -1=#M K , p.:07 G L - 11 .~ 1 '40> 1 L 1 .1 11 EXISTING r 3~ALLEY (NORTH) ELEVATIO .r /1. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE 112 ASPEN HPC HEARING CHAnLES CUNNU=FE JULY 9, 2012 ~ %"'T.... Â· .7 -1.Â·- I j.â€ž+-7 , 40'42 ' r=.. 6 ] Or I 53:9 742 rf--rfu 1.--~~ - ----~-1 PROPOSED -1 1 -2. -G 1 1 79* . I ~ UP--1 J 11 - - - -- - 4.2,Â·./ Ii= = 11 1 1 EXISTING r -- - ..1- ir-ly .-G kl.' NEIGHBOR'S (WEST) ELEVATION ///I~~axÂ·~33Â·Â·Â·:'{...... ~r, Â·UR@ .Â·1 - ~~~~'"4'7' dia~:.: LE. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING I 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 MARLES L' 1 ....ir< 1 .. 6/28/2012 .....7.4 g ..9 /3*15Â£51 AA ' 4 4.:9-320, k. 1 ' 34 1 , 1-- 1 tr 7. 94 1}111.1.Imm"~M...414114*1%544 1/ /-2 6141""1""Ilillul:Illial,I:Ill,Ililli-t"i~ pÂ£4046 1 15 *aT----~ 983,53*'.le. ./0/MOIN. 1 *abil. V 1 =1.,- =-31*URA 4-=il =-1...t=-- BEFORE %.=- VIEW #2 FROM ACROSS INTERSECION OF f HYMAN AVE. & ORIGINAL ST. f .....MEN.I..........Id,6,4 C4. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @9 ASPEN HPC HEARING CHAMLESCUINieÂ·. 48-H"FCT. *0% 7.Â£2#4*492/6*1"1fM'&BIFI 11 4~.0 1~- 4*' a*t' 2 . 4 Â¥*?Kik I. T E--- 1 r .t-*Sy= . 7 . 96 2,4.- tv" I - , -- - - - *-,-*IMU'Kl<86-- AFTER , VIEW #2 FROM ACROSS INTERSECTION OF HYMAN AVE. & ORIGINAL ST. @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE $163 ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 8 .. 6/28/2012 Ife. hÂ· 1 & 1,15/431 Cm# i - .â‚¬'f.,1# Al ---72-g/.-- . 10, 7,1*.- b - -1+c*F~â‚¬44- q. . -I 28"Ar,p- - 4 , .4 - B. i . 6 - BEFORE ):2|~~ VIEW #3 FROM ACROSS INTERSECTION OF HYMAN AVE & ORIGINAL ST. @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING CHAmES Cut, I Â· ~ JULY 9, 2012 ~ '~'4'~Fr M 41Â£74 ---_ h. hLLâ€¢,1 ..1 - L- ~ - ...rwte- j'{F. l :i.~, ; frrl ~ ~ - ' 4. r - 42 4. 2.un, m . . 1- AFTER :~iFWIS #25~188*1Rfle#giandud; HYMAN AVE. & ORIGINAL ST. 54. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING I 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE SU ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 9 rk .4- F..7'. 1 r:- .. 6/28/2012 2' 0 Â·.my=m=w=Ymr- 44*4<5- 4/* 4 '1 . 44 , 5 , 2 . â‚¬ h ., 4 I'f . 48 Â«Al 1.Ir , 1 , ..?*r 1 .8./.v~,LAI.' ~ > t. 91 I Bel 'ad/la 1 - BEFORE '~ VIEW #4 FROM ACROS .~: ORIGINAL SLATALLEY /4. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING I 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN HPC HEARING I. Rt.Â£:4/Uni... JULY 9, 2012 ~ -<<F 1----6~. *,1=.a;~~-, Â· *Bua/1--1 1' / ~ , ." 14=Uy:V I ./ J ' .."21 rIC==1-1.= 1 - ' 4 Â«Â»41'"P=-1 7 ..Â» r. 1 4, p :5 3 90"#4 '- 3;**656Â¢â‚¬ 4,.,Â» * - 11 Â¥.M J.'t ..: ',:: I: i.-.'*r . i - AFTER 3~VIEW #4 FROMACROSS /llilllllllllllll,E : a ORIGINAL ST. ATALLEY 11. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING I 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE fu ASPEN HPC HEARING LAn~E5O.' JULY 9. 2012 . 10 .. 6/28/2012 --- hâ€¢Â· ' 4, b Â· *pph'mer~~~i j, Fz.-':1-45.110-1).4: -6.-7 1Â·-fT 1.} ffÂ» 9"e";404'*:*4%3t i,.rig4.,:14~9.-~~~'Y.1.--y~Â¢tt. - ~1 - '0% I â€¢Â· .' : 9. ,<* 7. 9-114 . 71#yrel' Â£-Ii,1.l i; '. Â·;-222 Â·A.I Â· * IPÂ·> Â·.LÂ·'â€¢ ,/16~ 4.!'Â· #*, .-acoc/wr~~ .,2 *49~ 22:Â·2% ~7Â·12*'Â·Â· 1 ~f:fi~';Vf,#.m-.*ffi#.WA#aitvr rk-,*y 1 er. f. 1''Ill twil, r[ 1 0- b 4 k A J 7.?13:9~ . 6 . I :Â¢4â‚¬4142*44~.,4.4 4..,v FS' . t 9. I . ta;Â·.4 2 .: 4 , -,2,5 \ -- A ~FUE, 21 f I. 1 BEFORE 7- VIEW #5 FROMACR ASPEN ATHLETIC dOB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ~ ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9,2012 CHARU-9 C J F .It ~u'k.Â·. .M-Â·7':de'Â¢14 24 4 V 0 <ariguite Fs 4 4 ?'i:- . ,. -: 2-41.~bt#T1:4 F f: W.>' .Ir Â· r I / t{*39 erffir~FBER.6- ...1-â‚¬4* .3>,(jf.~....<%11.li:,109;: '.'49-Â£ M~Â·45#gwiÂ·:.--'A' ':.0* 4 b :-4.-'*2~17;:232.:jj.i e , : r.>. 1 ' 4 jf V. - /4 22:'44<W,11 51$ -1,/- 94,4 1.1 -â€¢ d . 1 AFTER i.:c '" VIEW #5 FROM ACROSS filml~ ORIGINAL ST. AT HOPKINS AVE. 3. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING I 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ~ 'Â¥!U ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 11 ),9,11~ - 6/28/2012 THANK YOU! ~8734/7:774*19,/9' ~'M ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING I 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ~ ASPEN HPC HEARING ES CUNIaFFI JULY 9, 2012 12 Sara Adams From: Cindy Christensen Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 10:10 AM To: Sara Adams 1 Subject: RE: aspen athletic club Yes. The Category 2 mitigation requirement is approved by APCHA, along with if it is an off-site unit, that it must be east of the roundabout and subject to APCHA's approval. ' Chriftengen - L -4 9 f U-92% I-:34 4> 2-Â» U From: Sara Adams Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 10:07 AM To: Cindy Christensen Subject: aspen athletic club Hi Cindy, just to confirm, Housing is supportive of mitigation through either Cat. 2 housing credits or Cat. 2 offsite housing east of the roundabout subject to approval by APCHA. Could you send me a quick email response. Thanks! sa ra Sara Adams, AICP Senior Planner City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen. CO 81611 tele. 970,429 2778 \www.aspenpitkin com 1 Sara Adams From: Brian West [brianw@Cunniffe.com] Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 10:38 AM To: Sara Adams CC: Charles Cunniffe; Janver Derrington; Ryan Hoffner Subject: 720 E Hyman: Net Leasable SF Sara, Pursuant to our phone conversation this morning, I'm sending to you in this email the new, revised square footages as a result of eliminating the affordable housing component of the building at the July 9, 2012 Council hearing. The following Net Leasable Square Footages and FAR are proposed... Proposed Commercial NLSF: 16,560 sf Proposed Free-Market Residential NLSF: 5,250 sf Proposed Affordable Housing NLSF: 0.0 sf Total Proposed Commercial FAR: 10,017 sf Total Proposed Free-Market Residential FAR: 7,019 sf Total Proposed Affordable Housing FAR: 0.0 sf Total proposed FAR: 17,036 sf The existing square footages in prior submittals are still correct. And as you can see, the overall FAR is still the same. However, you may notice the added 5 sf of free-market residential FAR, which is a direct result of eliminating the AHU. This is because the proposed AHU was enclosing existing comrnon, non-unit area, thus taking it out of the total building non-unit area. By eliminating the AHU, that sf goes back into the common pool of non-unit space and 5 sf of that is now allocated to the free-market residential. Let me know if you need anything further. Regards, Brian Brian West I Senior Project Architec: Charles Cunniffe Architects 610 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 !"el: 970.9'25.5590 Fax: 970.925.5076 Email: Lia tiv.. ' ~ 1 J nnâ€ž'5.-7 0-,rn Web: wv/w.(,4)flii'' }Com AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCI{ITECTS CO WEST 2010 FIRM OF TliE YEAR! Email secured by Check Point 1 0 Ville MEMORANDUM *flfli Faliv~ TO: Mayor and Aspen City Council FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner< 3 f\Fpr- THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~jl l/1 RE: 720 East Hyman Avenue, the Aspen Athletic Club (Block 104, Lots Q, R, and S) - Second Reading of Ordinance #17 Series of 2012 - AspenModern negotiation for Landmark Designation and benefits, Subdivision, Growth Management for the creation of a free market residential unit and for the development of affordable housing. Continued public hearing from June 11, 2012. MEETING DATE: July 9,2012 REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City Council is asked to approve Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 including an AspenModern negotiation for 720 E. Hyman Avenue, in addition to Growth Management for the creation of a new free market residential unit and Subdivision. 4=4 - - SUMMARY: 720 E. Hyman try~ ~- 1. Avenue, aka the Aspen Athletic :,~ 1#0~ - - r-- ---4...4 - 7 Club, is located on the east end of t~ 9 I downtown at the corner of Hyman ~Wlâ‚¬ r~ 44 Avenue and Original Street on a ifil~,A,jj r - 9,000 square feet lot in the Mixed ~3*r; j_~1 Use Zone District. The property , 3%1~,6. map. The applicant proposes to ..-a.e--~- - voluntarily designate the existing ~.N08.** Robin Molny designed building Al"Im"".IM:lillillillillillillillilli.Illillilli/*IllillilliZE:"Illialfilit#&: , 0 -,1 in exchange for benefits through ---mn-1-mi I////11/1.1/ fAA'Oviat/" 1%: the AspenModern program. The *i~ -5- r4 - A -20= .,1 + - applicant proposes to convert a portion of the second floor office space to an affordable housing Photograph 1: 720 E. Hyman Avenue unit and to convert the third floor office space into two free market residential units. The majority of the changes are internal to the building; however a few minor exterior changes are proposed. A 675 square feet roof deck and stairway access is proposed in the center of the roof; the removal of 5 existing skylights and the addition of 3 new skylights on the roof; and the replacement of plywood "hoppers" with glazing. HPC reviewed these changes on May 23, 2012 and granted Minor Development approval with conditions. 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 9, 2012 Page 1 of 11 BACKGROUND: The Aspen Athletic Club was built in 1976 by local Aspen architect Robin Molny with Art Yuenger assisting with construction drawings and some design details. Molny is a significant local architect who was part of the local Frank Lloyd Wright trained constituent. Similar to other Wrightian trained local architects, Molny worked for Fritz Benedict when he first arrived in town. In his practice, he designed the Mason and Morse Building on Hyman Avenue (designated in 2012), the Hearthstone House on Hyman Avenue (designated in 2006), the pedestrian mails and local area residences including a home that was listed in the 1975 Architecture Record publication. The existing building is located in the Mixed Use Zone District. It comprises 5 floors with 3 floors above grade and is entirely commercial. According to the current Land Use Code the building greatly exceeds the FAR allotment for commercial uses (the maximum by-right is 6,750 square feet and the existing condition is 17,026 square feet) and it is over the height limit (maximum limit is 28 feet up to 32 feet, and the existing condition is between 33 feet 3 inches and 35 feet 6 inches). HPC reviewed the project on May 23, 2012 and recommended unanimously that City Council negotiate for landmark designation. During the same meeting, HPC granted Minor Development Review for minor changes to the exterior of the building and denied the request for setback variance to accommodate a brise soleil above the street facing windows. The minutes from the HPC meeting are included as Exhibit I and the adopted HPC Resolution is included as Exhibit H. As part of the AspenModern review Council is asked to grant Subdivision Review and Growth Management Review. QUESTIONS DURING FIRST READING: During First Reading Council had questions about the requested incentives, housing and impacts that the rooftop deck has on the community and the historic integrity of the building. To date this is the third AspenModern negotiation that Council has reviewed. This project is unique in that it proposes very minor exterior changes (a rooftop deck and some windows) where other projects have proposed mass and scale additions. AspenModern has been in place for 18 months. ComDev consultant Ben Gagnon has written a brief whitepaper about how AspenModern evolved from two split camps of citizens, voluntary vs. involuntary, to a case-by-case negotiation process. The recent challenging projects make it easy to overlook how much ground has been covered. The whitepaper reflects upon how we got to where we are and why we are able to have a community conversation on a case-by-case basis about these buildings. The white paper is attached as Exhibit G. 1) Does the loss of net leasable area impact the community? The loss of net leasable area in this location brings the building into closer conformance with Code requirements and better reflects the existing neighborhood context. The existing building does not meet current Code requirements- there is much more commercial than permitted in the Mixed Use Zone District (17,062 sq. ft. existing and 6,750 maximum allowable). Reducing the net leasable area of the existing building will bring it into closer conformance with the 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 9, 2012 Page 2 of 1 1 requirements of the Mixed Use Zone District. The surrounding buildings adjacent to and across the street from 720 are all residential buildings. Adding a residential component to the building reflects the purpose of the Mixed Use Zone District and better relates to the existing context of the block. This reduction lowers the building's impact on the community by providing affordable housing. It also reduces the space for businesses to locate. It is a matter ofjudgment as to the net impact on the community. 2) What is HPC's opinion on the effect of rooftop decks on historic structures? During their regular meeting on June 27th, HPC discussed the effect of rooftop decks on historic structures and concluded that they generally have a positive impact by contributing to vitality and livability, and should be considered on a case by case basis. There are certain characteristics that contribute to a successful rooftop deck: a setback from the building edge makes the deck less intrusive; a taller building makes the deck less visible; the size of the deck should be proportionate to the size of the building and the roof; and the use of the deck should be considered - for example a residential deck should be more screened than a restaurant deck that could add vitality to the street. HPC voiced concern over visual impacts of accessories that are placed on decks (lights, light poles, large furnishings, etc.) and the challenge to control these items after a deck is built, which factors into whether a deck is appropriate. 3) Do rooftop decks impact Aspen's community dynamic? Staff was unable to find information in other communities on the impacts of rooftop decks on community dynamics. 4) More information regarding APCHA's opinion on onsite housing in a mixed use building. Housing Department staff plan on attending the July 9th hearing to address any questions about the onsite housing. A referral memo from Housing was included in the first reading packet as Exhibit E. The referral from the APCHA Board recommended denial of the proposed affordable housing unit due to its placement in a mixed use building. The Land Use Code allows onsite affordable housing mitigation units in mixed use buildings. 5) Why allow an extra 250 square feet of net livable area? The applicant requests an additional 250 square feet of net livable area to allow one of the free market residential units to be 2,750 square feet of net livable area in size. The applicant plans to address this question during the July 9th public hearing. 6) Why grant a parking waiver for the cash in lieu payment? The existing building is unable to accommodate onsite parking, therefore a cash in lieu payment is required. As part of the AspenModern negotiation, the applicant requests a waiver of the $90,000 cash in lieu payment. The applicant plans to address this question during the July 9th public hearing. A representative from the Parking Department, and possibly the Transportation Department, plan to attend the July 9th meeting. 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 9,2012 Page 3 of 11 7) Include all of the benefits that 720 E. Hyman is eligible for as a landmark, not just the benefits that are outside of Land Use Code allowances. Many of the landmark benefits in the Land Use Code are only applicable to residential development. There are 3 landmark benefits of which the proposed project is eligible. Landmark designation of 720 E. Hyman is required as part of the AspenModern negotiation. The AspenModern requests are listed after the landmark benefits in the Land Use Code. The proposed project could not without outside of the AspenModern negotiation process due to the free market residential component exceeding Code requirements. For example, the free market component would be need to be smaller. This makes it challenging to analyze the project as i f it was not participating in the AspenModern process as a potential landmark structure. a) Growth Management Exemption for up to one free market residential unit for the enlargement of a historic landmark. This is a cumulative benefit; any additional free market residential units require growth management review. The proposed project includes two free market residential units for a total of 5,250 square feet. The mitigation requirement is a total of 1,565 square feet of affordable housing - either onsite, housing credits, or cash in lieu. The applicant is providing an 825 square feet unit onsite. The remainder of 750 square feet of affordable housing is waived with the landmark status. Without this benefit, the applicant would be required to build a unit, provide 1.88 FTEs in housing credits, or pay $262,993.20 cash in lieu. b) Impact Fee Exemption for Parks Dedication Impact Fee and Transportation Demand Management/Air Ouality Impact Fee. This exemption applies only to the historic resource. It does not apply to new structures on a historic property. Both of these fees are calculated based on new residential floor area (free market residential and affordable housing). Parks Dedication Impact Fee: $43,463.75 (7,975 sf * $5.45/ sf) This fee is used for acquisition o f open space and development of parks and recreation facilities. Historic Structures are exempt from paying this fee. Staff has notified the Parks Department about this fee. TDM/Air Ouality Impact Fee: $4,864 (7,975 sf * $0.61/sf) This fee is used for the expansion of capital facilities to maintain the current level of service as it relates to traffic levels and clean air for the community. Historic Structures are exempt from paying this fee. Staff has notified the Transportation Department and Environmental Health Department about this fee. c) Parking fee waiver or reduction in requirement. HPC is authorized to reduce the parking requirement or waive the cash in lieu fee "upon a finding ...that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district." Rather than piecemeal the negotiation at HPC and City Council, the requested waiver of 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 9, 2012 Page 4 of 11 the cash in lieu parking fee was included as part of the negotiation package that is under Council's purview. It is addressed below. ASPEN MODERN NEGOTIATION: The applicant requests the following incentives in exchange for landmark designation: 1) Grant 250 square feet of net livable area (NLA) to be added to one of the free market residential units to allow it to exceed the maximum residential unit size cap after the addition of a Transferable Development Right (TDR). There are two free market residential units (Unit A and Unit B) proposed on the third floor. The Mixed Use Zone District has a 2,000 square feet (sf) NLA cap for free market residential units with the ability to increase to 2,500 sf NLA by landing l TDR per residence. This calculation deals with net livable area (NLA) as opposed to floor area. Net livable area is the area within a building that are used for habitation and human activity. Floor area is includes a calculation of space above grade that is attributable to a specific use. For example, a stairway that is accessed by commercial and residential will be allocated as a percentage to each use as part of the floor area calculation for the use. The shared stairway is not included in the net livable calculation. The applicant proposes to purchase and land 2 TDRs - 1 per residence for each unit to meet the 2,500 sf NLA cap allowed by Code. The AspenModern request is to allow one of the units to further exceed the cap by 250 sfNLA for a total of 2,750 sf NLA. Table 1: Free Market Residential Units measured in Net Livable Area Free Market Maximum unit size Land 2 TDRs, one per AspenModern request for Residential Units cap ( sf NLA) residence (sf NLA) 250 sfNLA Unit A 2,000 2,500 2,750 Unit B 2,000 2,500 2,500 2) Ability to exceed the allowable floor area ratio for free market residential use. The increase in the free market residential unit sizes exceeds the maximum floor area ratio of 0.5:1 allowed in the Mixed Use Zone District. The maximum allowed free market residential floor area is 4,500 sf and the proposed floor area is 7,014 sf (0.78:1). The overall building complies with the total overall maximum allowable floor area ratio of 2:1. The uses are broken down below: 720 East Hyman Avenue Aspen-Modern Negotiation - Second Reading July 9, 2012 Page 5 of 11 Table 2: Existing Floor Area vs. Proposed Floor Area by Use Difference Amount the Allowable floor between Use is over area in Mixed Existing floor Proposed floor Use Existing and the allowable Use Zone area (sf) area (sf) Proposed foor area (sf) District (st) floor area (sf) Commercial 0.75:1 or 6,750 17,026 9,061 (7,965) 2,311~ Free Market 0.5:1 or 4,500 0 7,014 7,014 2,514 Residential Affordable No limitation 0 961 961 - Housing Overall Total 2:1 or 18,000 17,026 17,036 10 3) Waiver of $90,000 parking cash-in-lieu fee for 3 parking spaces. The Code requires one parking space per residential unit with the ability to pay cash-in-lieu for the parking spaces by right at $30,000 per space. The 3 new residential units (2 free market units and 1 affordable housing unit) require 3 spaces for a total of $90,000. The cash in lieu fee is used "solely for the construction of a parking facility, transportation demand management facilities or programs, shared automobiles or programs and similar transportation or mobility related facilities or programs as determined appropriate by the City." Transportation and Parking Departments are not in fuvor of waiving this fee. A representative from the Parking Department th will attend the July 9 meeting to answer any questions about how the fee relates to the department mission. 4) Slight height variance for new skylights and deck on the roof. The applicant proposes to remove 5 small skylights and add 3 small slightly convex skylights on the roof. The rounded form allows positive drainage for snow and water from the skylight. The property is already over the height limit, so the new skylight extends above the height limit. The applicant represents that the skylights will be 1 ft. in height, which is about 6" shorter than the existing 5 skylights proposed to be removed. The applicant proposes a roof deck that will be about 1 ft. above the existing roof. The building is already over the height limit, so the proposed roof deck needs a height variance to exceed the 42 ft. height limit. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from City Council. As noted, many of the reviews below typically fall to either the P&Z or HPC for final review or a recommendation. AspenModern allows the consolidation of reviews at City Council which provides Council with the entire proposal for review. ' The amount of existing commercial floor area is an existing non-conformity that is allowed to be maintained or reduced. The proposal is to bring the commercial component closer to compliance by removing almost 8,000 square feet of floor area. A variance is not required for the commercial floor area. 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 95 2012 Page 6 of 11 â€¢ AspenModern Ninety-Day Negotiation (Section 26.415.025(C)(1)) for preservation benefits in exchange for historic landmark designation. City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission. The ninety days expires on February 29,2012. â€¢ Designation of Historic Properties (Section 26.415.030(C) for landmark designation of the Aspen Athletic Club. City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission. â€¢ Subdivision Review (Section 26.480) this is a technical subdivision that the Land Use Code requires for mixed use properties to divide the building into separate interests. City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. AspenModern allows the consolidation of reviews at City Council; as such the P&Z has not reviewed the application for a recommendation of Subdivision. â€¢ Growth Management Review for new free market residential units within a mixed use building (Section 26.470.080(2) for the creation of a new free market residential unit. This is a Major Growth Management Review at the Planning and Zoning Commission. AspenModern allows City Council to have review authority over other Board's purview. City Council is the final review authority. â€¢ Growth Management Review for the development of affordable housing (Section 26.470.070(4) for the creation of an onsite affordable housing unit. This is a Minor Growth Management Review at the Planning and Zoning Commission. AspenModern allows City Council to have review authority over other Board's purview. City Council is the final review authority. PROJECT SUMMARY: The proposed project is mostly interior changes to the existing building that includes converting a portion of the second floor commercial space to an affordable housing unit and converting the third floor commercial space to two free market residential units. A new rooftop deck is proposed that meets the requirements of the Code regarding the height of the stair access to the roof and the height of the guardrail. The affordable housing unit meets the mitigation requirements for the 2,750 square feet net livable market residential unit. The 2,500 square feet net livable free market residential unit is exempt from affordable housing mitigation due to the building's landmark designation that is part of the application. The proposed changes bring the building into closer Code conformance with the allowable commercial floor area allotment; however the proposed changes exceed the allowable free market residential floor area allotment for the Mixed Use Zone District. The program is: Sub-basement level: mechanical and commercial space (gym) Basement level: commercial space (gym) First level: commercial space (office) and open atrium Second level: office and affordable housing unit Third level: two free market residential units Roof: a rooftop deck, access stairway, skylights and mechanical equipment 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 9, 2012 Page 7 ofll Table 3: Dimensional Table MU zone district Proposed dimensional Existing dimensions requirements requirements No change, with the 33 ft. 3 in. at the front of exception of a slight height Maximum 28 ft. up to 32 ft. through the property and 35 ft. 6 in. increase of 1 ft. for the new height commercial design review at the alley rooftop skylights and 1 ft. for the rooftop deck Maximum Allowable 2:1 or 18,000 sf. 1.89:1 or 17,026 sf. 1.89:1 or 17,036 sf. Floor Area: Maximum 0.75:1 or 6,750 sf. Commercial (up to 1:1 or 9,000 sf. through 1.89:1 or 17,026 sf. 1.01:1 or 9,061 sf. Floor Area: Special Review) Maximum Net Leasable n/a 21,474 sf. net leasable 15,754 sf. net leasable Commercial commercial area commercial area Area: 0.5:1 or 4,500 sf. Maximum (up to 0.75:1 if affordable Free Market housing equal to 100% of the 0 sf. 0.78:1 or 7,014 sf. Residential free market residential floor Floor Area: area is developed on the same parcel) 5,250sf. total: Maximum 2,750 sf. - Unit 1(with 1 Residential 2,000 sf. net livable, up to 0 sf. TDR landed and extra 250 sf.) Net Livable 2,500 sÂ£ with TDR and 2,500 sf. - Unit 2 (with Area: 1 TDR landed) Free Market Residential O 0 2 Units: Affordable Housing No limit 0 0Â·11: 1 or 961 sf. Allowable Floor Area Affordable Housing net No limit 0 825 sf. livable area Minimum 1 space/1,000 sf. commercial 3 new spaces required for net leasable; and 1 space per the 3 residential units. Off-Street residential unit. Ability to 0 Request waiver o f required Parking $90,000 cash in lieu pay cash in lieu payment by Spaces: right. payment. 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 9, 2012 Page 8 of 11 STAFF RESPONSE: AspenModern Negotiation and Landmark Designation: The designation criteria are stated in Exhibit A and the integrity score sheets, which evaluate the physical changes to the building over time, is included as Exhibit B. Staff is supportive of landmark designation of 720 East Hyman Avenue and finds that all of the designation criteria are met. The applicant requests 4 incentives in exchange for landmark designation, 2 of which relate to the free market residential component, 1 relating to a waiver of the parking requirement and 1 relating to a height variance for skylights. The project meets Code requirements for affordable housing mitigation. Staff sees great value in the voluntary designation. In Staffs opinion the request to change the use of the second and third floors to accommodate residential use is more consistent with the purpose of the Mixed Use Zone District and brings the property into closer compliance with commercial floor area requirements by reducing the commercial component. The proposed changes are mostly internal to the building and do not impact the historic significance of the architecture. The size of the free market residential units does not add mass or height to the existing building, which is typically a concern on other AspenModern projects. In addition, the applicant commits to purchase TDRs to reduce the magnitude of the AspenModern requests. Although the individual allowance for free market residential floor area is being requested to increase from 0.5:1 to 0.78:1, the project is still within the overall allowable Floor Area Ratio for the site. There is no onsite parking available on the site and, considering the scope of the project, no ability to add parking without removing a portion of the building. The applicant requests a waiver of the parking cash in lieu fee of $90,000 which is a policy decision for Council. The height request is a policy decision for Council. The new skylight is central to the building and is so small that it will not be visible from the street. Subdivision: The Subdivision criteria are stated in Exhibit C. Staff is supportive of the technical subdivision to create separate legal interests in one parcel. Staff finds that the review criteria are met. Grawth Management for new free market residential units within a mixed use building and Development of Affordable Housing: The review criteria are stated in Exhibit D. As a landmark, the project is only required to mitigation for the larger of the 2 new free market residential units. All landmark properties are eligible to create 1 free market unit without affordable housing mitigation. The project includes an 825 sf NLA affordable housing unit that is proposed to be a Category 4, one bedroom rental. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) recommends that the onsite housing unit 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 9, 2012 Page 9 of 11 be denied and that the applicant provide housing credits to fulfill the mitigation requirement. APCHA stated that if the unit is approved a Category 3 or 4 "for-sale" unit is requested. The affordable housing unit meets Land Use Code requirements as outlined in Exhibit D which promote mixed income buildings by permitting onsite housing units to fulfill mitigation requirements. Staff finds that the review criteria are met. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: The City Engineer, Fire Marshal, Water/Utilities Department, Aspen Sanitation District, Parking Department, Transportation Department, Building Department, Housing Department, Environmental Health Department and the Parks Department were notified of the application. The City Engineer, Parking Department, Transportation Department, Building Department, Parks Department and Housing Department all commented on the application. Applicable , requirements have been included as conditions of approval when appropriate. RECOMiMENDATION: Staff finds that the proposed landmark designation and associated land use reviews are consistent with the goals of the historic preservation program and the requirements of the Land Use Code. Ensuring that the important 1970s buildings designed by locally significant architects are preserved for residents and visitors to experience is tantamount to Aspen's story. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2012 on second reading approving an AspenModern negotiation for landmark designation, Landmark Designation, Subdivision, and Growth Management Reviews." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT A - Landmark Designation Criteria. EXHIBIT B - Integrity Score sheet.. EXHIBIT C - Subdivision Review Criteria. EXHIBIT D - Growth Management Review for new free market residential units within a mixed use building Review Criteria and for the development of affordable housing Review Criteria. EXHIBIT E - Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority referral memo dated May 7,2012. 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading July 9, 2012 Page 10 0 f 11 EXHIBIT F - Application dated March 27,2012. ExHIBIT G - AspenModern White Paper EXHIBIT H - HPC Resolution #12, Series of 2012, approving Minor Development for exterior changes and recommending in favor of negotiating for Landmark Designation to City Council. EXHIBIT I - HPC meeting minutes from May 23, 2012. EXHIBIT J - Supplemental information to the application dated June 29,2012. 720 East Hyman Avenue Aspen-Modern Negotiation - Second Reading July 9,2012 Pagellofll ORDINANCE # 17 (Series of 2012) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION, SUBDIVISION, GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW, AND BENEFITS THROUGH THE ASPENMODERN PROGRAM, AND A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 720 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUMS, LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 104, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID NUMBERS: 2737-182-11-008 through 2737-182-11-031, and 2737-182-11-801. WHEREAS, the applicant, CM, LLC, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, submitted an application, pursuant to Section 26.415.025(C), AspenModern Properties, of the Aspen Municipal Code. to voluntarily participate in the AspenModern ninety-day negotiation period for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, legally described as The Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R and S Block 104; and WHEREAS, 720 East Hyman Avenue is included on the Aspen Modern Map; and WHEREAS, the applicant submitted a letter dated March 7,2012 requesting voluntary landmark designation in exchange for specific benefits through the AspenModern negotiation; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Â§26.415.025.CO), the ninety day AspenModern negotiation commenced on March 7,2012; and WHEREAS, Â§26.415.025.C(1)(b) states that, during the negotiation period, "the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the property. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting;" and WHEREAS, the property owners' representative met with the Historic Preservation Commission (the HPC) on May 23, 2012; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on May 23, 2012, the HPC considered the application; found that 720 East Hyman Avenue was a "best" example of Organic/Wrightian style and, found that the policy objectives for the historic preservation program stated at Â§26.415.010, Purpose and Intent are met, and recommended City Council ("Council") approve Historic Landmark Designation, requested benefits and fee waivers as stated in HPC Resolution numbered 12, Series of 2012; and 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 1 of 11 WHEREAS, Â§26.415.025.C(1)d establishes that "as part of the mutually acceptable agreement, the City Council may, at its sole discretion, approve any land use entitlement or fee waiver permitted by the Municipal Code and may award any approval that is assigned to another Board or Commission, including variations;"and WHEREAS, the property owner requests voluntary Landmark Designation - Â§26.415.030(C), AspenModern; Subdivision review - Â§26.480.040(C) Subdivisions; Growth Management review - Â§26.470.060(3), Â§26.470.070(4), and Â§26.470.080(2); Change in Use of historic landmark sites and structures; Development of Affordable Housing and New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed use project a\\ to be consolidated with the AspenModern ninety-day negotiation process and reviewed by City Council; and WHEREAS, in addition to Historic Landmark Designation, Subdivision, and Growth Management, the applicant had identified preservation incentives that are requested as part o f the AspenModern negotiation process in a letter dated March 7, 2012. Those incentives requested include: the ability to construct a 2,750 square feet floor area free market residential unit; ability to increase the free market allowable floor area to 0.78:1 or 7,014 square feet of floor area: a waiver of the onsite parking requirement and a waiver of the parking cash in lieu payment; and WHEREAS, the applicant agrees that the conditions of approval for the mitigation of the impact of the development on affordable housing are accepted by the applicant and constitute a voluntary agreement to limit rent/sales prices on the Property and to otherwise provide affordable housing stock in accordance with the provisions of CRS 38-12-301(2)(a) and (2)(b); and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department performed an analysis of the application including Landmark Designation, Subdivision Review, and Growth Management Review and found that the review standards are met. The staff report analyzed the proposed preservation incentives and monetary value o f the benefits where possible; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Approvals: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 0 f the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves Historic Designation, Subdivision, Growth Management Review and a site specific development plan subject to the conditions described herein. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 2 of 11 Section 2: Historic Landmark Designation Historic landmark designation is granted for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue (the Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R, and S, Block 104). Upon the effective date of this ordinance, the City Clerk shall record with the real estate records of the Clerk and Recorder of the County, a certified copy of this ordinance. The location of the historic landmark property designated by this ordinance shall be indicated on the official maps of the City that are maintained by the Community Development Department. Section 3: Subdivision Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council hereby approves Subdivision of the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue (the Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q. R and S, Block 104) for a mixed use building that contains two free market residential units, one affordable housing unit, a commercial component and a rooftop deck. A final Subdivision Plat and Subdivision Agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Â§ 26.480, Subdivision, shall be recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office within 180 days of the receipt of a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development by the Historic Preservation Commission. Subdivision Agreement shall include at a minimum the following information: 1. An illustrative site plan of the project depicting the proposed improvement and the approved dimensional requirements. 2. Plan of any required grading and drainage improvements. 3. Approved planting for the right of way. 4. Encroachment license for the planter boxes. Section 4: Financial Assurances Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit the Applicant shall provide to the Community Development Department the following: a. Cost Estimates. Applicant's General Contractor shall cause to be prepared, and certified as correct, cost estimates for all improvements or development for which a Building Permit is required. There are no public improvements associated with the project at this time. Any public improvements associated with the project that are discovered after the approval of this ordinance are subject to the requirements listed below. The cost estimates for the implementation and maintenance of the planting in the right of way described herein at Section 13 shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks Department. The cost estimates for all other improvements and development in the Subdivision shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Department. Cost estimates for the landscape plan (i.e. the planting in the right of way) shall be shown separately from the cost estimates for all other improvements and development of the Project. Owner shall be responsible for the implementation and maintenance of the landscape plan required by this Ordinance. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 3 of 11 b. Landscaping Guarantees. Pursuant to and in conformance with the requirements of Â§ 26.480.070(C) & (D) and Â§ 26.445.070 (C)(3) & (4) of the Aspen Municipal Code; and, in order to secure the performance of the obligations of the Applicant to implement and maintain the Landscape Plan, Applicant shall provide a guarantee of no less than one hundred and twenty five percent (125%) of the estimated cost of such Landscape Plan and Public Improvements, as determined and approved in subsection (a), above. The guarantee to implement and maintain the Landscape Plan and to complete Public Improvements shall be made by depositing with the City an irrevocable letter of credit with provisions as hereinafter set forth, or by providing such other security that may be acceptable to the City attorney. If an irrevocable letter of credit is used, the irrevocable letter of credit shall be retained by the City until satisfaction of Applicant's obligations under this Section or earlier released by the City. The letter of credit shall be issued by a financial institution doing business in Aspen, Colorado, or such other bank as shall be approved by the City; shall have an expiration date no earlier than two years after its date of issue; and shall provide that it may be drawn upon from time to time by the City in such amount or amounts as the City may designate as justified, such amounts not to exceed, in the aggregate, the amount of the letter of credit. Draws under any such letter of credit shall be by a certificate signed by the City Manager of the City of Aspen, or his designee, stating that the City is entitled to draw the specified amount under the terms of this Section. c. Other Improvements and Development. With respect to all other improvements or development within the Project, the Applicant shall provide evidence satisfactory to the Community Development Department and the City Attorney's Office that the Applicant has in place sufficient financing to accomplish and complete all the development for which a Building Permit is sought. Such financing may include, without limitation, a construction loan from an institutional lender or lenders and equity capital investments from the Applicant or third party investors. The City Attorney shall have sole discretion in determining if the proposed financing as advanced by the Applicant is sufficient to complete the development activity for which a Building Permit is sought. Section 5: Site Protection Fund The Applicant hereby commits and agrees that before any Building Permit (including demolition, access/infrastructure, and/or site preparation permits) is issued for the Project approved by this Ordinance, the Applicant shall deposit with Pitkin County Title, Inc. ("Escrow Agent") the sum of $25,000 in the form of cash or wired funds (the "Escrow Funds") and will execute an Escrow Agreement and Instructions with the Escrow Agent which recites and agrees as follows: "In the event construction work on the Project shall cease for sixty (60) days or longer ('work stoppage') prior to a final inspection by the City of the work authorized by the Building Permit on the Project, then the City in its discretion may draw upon the Escrow Funds from time to time as needed for purposes of protecting and securing the Project site and improvements from damage by the elements and/or from trespass by unauthorized 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 4 of 11 persons, and for purposes of improving the Project site to a safe condition such that it does not become an attractive nuisance or otherwise pose a threat to neighbors or other ,' persons. The Escrow Funds or any remaining balance thereof shall be returned to Applicant upon completion by the City of a final inspection of the work authorized by the Foundation/Structural Frame Permit on the Project. Section 6: Cash Escrow for Site Enhancement Fund. Before the issuance of a building permit, and as a condition of such issuance. the owner shall deposit with Stewart Title of Aspen, Inc. the sum of TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO/100THS ($25,000.00) (the "Site Enhancement Escrow Funds") in the form of cash or wired funds pursuant to an Escrow Agreement made and entered into between the Owner and the City which shall provide as follows: i. In the event construction work on the development of 720 E. Hyman Ave. shall cease for ninety (90) days or longer prior to a final inspection by the City of the work authorized by a building permit on the subject property, then the City in its discretion may draw upon the Site Enhancement Escrow Funds from time to time as needed for the purposes of improving the appearance of any construction work already completed, and for the installing of any public improvements on or adjacent to the subject property. ii. The City shall have sole discretion with respect to the manner of improving the appearance of construction work in progress as well as a determining the public improvements to be installed. iii. The Site Enhancement Escrow Funds or any remaining balance thereof shall be returned to Owner upon completion by the City of a final inspection and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the projeect, or when otherwise agreed to by Owner and the City. iv. The City shall be named as a third party beneficiary of the Escrow Agreement with the express right and authority to enforce the same from time to time in accordance with the tenor in terms thereof. Section 7: Approved Dimensional Requirements The building as presented in the plans dated April 20, 2012 and attached as Exhibit A to this Ordinance comply with the effective dimensional allowances and limitations of the Mixed Use (MU) zone district except as modified below. Compliance with these requirements shall be verified by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer at the time of building permit submittal. The following dimensions are approved: Maximum Height: 3 new skylights and a rooftop deck, shown in Exhibit A, are permitted to be 1 ft. in height as measured from where the feature is attached to the roof. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 5 of 11 Maximum Residential Floor Area: 0.78:1 floor area ratio, 7,014 square feet total free market residential Maximum Residential Net Livable Area: 5,250' square feet total: 2,750 square feet for Unit 1 and 2,500 square feet for Unit 2 Minor adjustments to the dimensions represented above may occur upon review of a building permit as long as the resulting dimensions do not exceed those approved through this ordinance. Section 8: Impact and Development Fees: P Mis Development and Air OualitÂ¥/TDM Impact Fees Pursuant to Land Use Code Â§ 26.610.030, Exemptions, development involving a property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures is exempt from the Parks Development and Air Quality/TDM Impact Fees. School Lands Dedication Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit, the Applicant shall pay a fee-in-lieu of land dedication pursuant to Chapter 26.620, School Lands Dedication. The amount of the fee shall be calculated by the Community Development Department using the calculation method and fee schedule in effect at the time the applicant submits a Building Permit. Parking Pursuant to Land Use Code Â§ 26.515, Parking, new residential units are required to mitigate parking impacts either through onsite spaces or cash in lieu. The parking cash in lieu for 3 parking spaces equaling $90,000 is hereby waived. 3 new residential units = 3 parking spaces required 3 x $30,000/space = $90,000 Section 9: Affordable Housing The project requires affordable housing mitigation for the 2,750 square feet free market residential unit. The 2,500 square feet free market residential unit is exempt from mitigation pursuant to Â§26.470.060 Growth Management Change in Use for historic landmark sites and structures which allows historic landmarks to create one new free market residential unit without affordable housing mitigation. The affordable housing requirement is specified below: 2,750 sq. ft. of net livable area * 30% = 825 sq. ft. of net livable area required for affordable housing ' The total maximum residential net livable area requires the landing of 2 transferrable development rights in accordance with Â§26.535 Transferrable Development Rights. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 6 of 11 The project includes an 825 sq. ft. net livable area rental, Category 4 or lower, affordable housing unit onsite. The unit shall meet the requirements of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) Guidelines and shall be deed restricted in accordance with Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority requirements in effect upon building permit submittal. Prior to recording the deed restriction, the Owner and APCLIA shall 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 shall waive any right it may have to claim that this Deed Restriction violates CRS 38-12-301. The unit may be "converted" to a sales unit upon the owner filing a new deed restriction in compliance with policies and procedures adopted by APCLIA applicable to sale units in effect upon conversion. The condominium documents shall comply with adopted APCHA policy intended to protect the affordable housing unit from excessive monthly and/or special assessments having to do with luxury items and/or expensive modifications. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be granted and a deed restriction shall be recorded for the housing unit prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or a Conditional Certificate of Occupancy for the free market residential units or the commercial component. Section 10: Growth Management Quota System Allotments 1 free market residential unit is herby granted an annual development allotment. Pursuant to Â§26.470.060(3) Change in Use of historic landmark sites and structures, the second free market residential unit is not deducted from the annual development allotments but is deducted from the respective development ceiling levels. Section 11: Building Permit The applicant may not submit a Building Permit Application until the requirements in Land Use Code Â§ 26.304.075.A, Building Permit Application, are fulfilled. The building permit application shall include the following: 1. A copy of the Development Order issued by the Community Development Department (see Â§ 26.304.075(A)(2), City of Aspen Municipal Code.) 2. A copy of the final City Council Ordinance and HPC Resolution. 3. The conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover page of the Building Permit set. 4. A construction management plan (CMP) and drainage report pursuant to Engineering and Building Department requirements. 5. Accessiblity and ANSI requirements shall meet adopted Building Code requirements. Section 12: Engineering The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21, Title 28, and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 7 of 11 Department. A construction management plan must be submitted in conjunction with the building permit application. A completed drainage report/plan as outlined in the Urban Runoff Management Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to recordation of Final Plat. Failure to meet the standards in Title 21 and Title 28 may result in a physical change to the project and possible review by City Council and/or HPC to amend the design. An encroachment license is required for the planter boxes located in the Right-of-way. Section 13: Parks 1. The Parks Department shall review and approve the planting for the planter boxes. 2. Landscaping in the public Right-of-way shall be subject to landscaping in the Right-of- way requirements, Aspen Municipal Code Chapter 21.20. All plantings within the City Right-of-way must be approved by the City Parks Department prior to installation. 3. Right-0 f-way requirements necessitate adequate irrigation pressure and coverage, if a system is not in place one will need to be added that is specifically designed for the trees in the planter boxes. Section 14: Fire Mitigation Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit, the Applicant shall obtain the approval of the Fire Marshal of a Fire Protection Plan which shall include the following elements: 1. Compliance with all codes and requirements ofthe Aspen Fire Protection District 2. Sprinkler, fire alarms and carbon monoxide alarms are required. (IFC as amended Section 903 and 907). 3. Documentation that the development has sufficient volume and pressure o f water for the sprinklers or other fire suppression system adequate to satis fy the District' s standards for the type of structures proposed by the approved development. This requirement shall be satisfied by an analysis acceptable to the Water Department which demonstrates system delivery capacity of existing water distribution system at the Water Departments' main water to the approved development of no less than 3,000 gallons per minute. 4. An overall access plan for the site. Section 15: Sanitation District Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. Section 16: Water Department The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code in place at the time of building permit submittal, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Each of the units within the mixed use building shall have individual water meters. Section 17: Exterior Lighting 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 8 of 1 1 All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Â§ 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Section 18: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan and a vested property right pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.308.011 attaching to and running with the Subject Property and shall confer upon the Applicant the right to undertake and complete the site specific development plan and use of said property under the terms and conditions of the site specific development plan including any approved amendments thereto. The vesting period of these vested property rights shall be for three (3) years which shall not begin to run until the date of the publications required to be made as set forth below. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Â§ 26.104.050, Void Permits. Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to Chapter 26.308, Vested Property Rights. Pursuant to Â§ 26.304.070(A), Development Orders, such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 720 East Hyman Avenue, the Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R and S, Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, by Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Aspen. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the Development Order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this Ordinance of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this Ordinance. The vested rights granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review. The period of time permitted by law to exercise the right of referendum to refer to the electorate this Section of this Ordinance granting vested rights; or, to seek judicial review of the grant of vested rights shall not begin to run until the date o f publication o f the notice of final development approval as set forth above. The rights of referendum described herein shall be no greater than those set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 9 of 11 Section 19: 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 Historic Preservation Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 20: This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 21: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance 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. The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 22: th A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 11 day of June. 2012, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 pm in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 29th day of May, 2012. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2012. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Page 10 of 11 Kathryn Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: James R. True, City Attorney 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 Pagellofll Exhibit A HISTORIC DESIGNATION Â§26.415. 030. C AspenModern 1. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of AspenModern, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet at least two of the criteria a-d, and criterion e described below: a. The property is related to an event, pattern, or trend that has made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific event, pattern or trend is identified and documented in an adopted context paper; b. The property is related to people who have made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific people are identified and documented in an adopted context paper; c. The property represents a physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman, or design philosophy that is deemed important and the specific physical design, designer, or philosophy is documented in an adopted context paper; d. The property possesses such singular significance to the City, as documented by the opinions of persons educated or experienced in the fields of history, architecture, landscape architecture, archaeology or a related field, that the property's potential demolition or major alteration would substantially diminish the character and sense of place in the city as perceived by members of the community, and e. The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. STAFF FINDINGS: Staff finds that review criteria a- e are met. 720 East Hyman Ave- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit A- designation criteria Page 1 of 3 .. 720 E. Hyman does not exemplify textbook :4'1%'ll,1.Imi.~ Wrightian architecture. Restricting the \ ...Irs":zip./.)1/1/ analysis of a design profession like architecture to a uniform set of criteria that k qualify a building as contributing to a specific style fails to recognize the artistic freedom architects like Molny exercised- Â·F 1 4. 1 + 41 \ 1,0 1Â¥. as Wright expressed to Molny, "If you i understand the principles of my architecture, then your buildings need not look like * 1 1 4 IN i h . 7 114 --rit mine." Applying this idea to preservation of 6 .1 Mit , lk. . 720 E. Hyman; while it does not replicate f the exact teachings o f a master architect, it is $ ~ .*Al.6 defined in part by Aspen's creative ' 3 47 41.4 4*-f/4 , environment where architects, and other 2 -7:.111 I. : i . creative professionals, could experiment ~ 1. 1 with modern philosophies and the built environment in this specific context. It is 0- 4 1 4 , i '7 4$49- + 1 i 't- exactly this creative adventure that produced + 9 ... interesting architecture in Aspen- architecture that communicates both a sense _ i of place (the high country and extreme - . -4 _ 1.1.1 environment) and a higher level of design. , *s 14 Spatial connections, relationship to the site e - . Â·0 ...er 0 and connection with nature, and utilizing the Photograph 1: example of blurring the line between the materials for both aesthetic and structural inside and outside through the use of glazing and large finctions are all examples of Wrightian Sliding glass doors philosophy. Molny used Wrightian design philosophy- for example: organic architecture (composing buildings with space rather than mass and scale; and creating a harmony of architecture and environment) - to create an open floor plan and an interior/exterior courtyard. Aspen was lucky to be home to many intellectuals, including modernist architects, who were starting out in the field. Molny used his foundation at Taliesen to draw upon the physical and intellectual environment of Aspen and create a building that is not a replica of Wright, but indicative of his own background, design, experiences, and client. Molny was not the only architect in Aspen whose training under Frank Lloyd Wright influenced the towns architectural character. Please refer to the white paper "Aspen's Twentieth- Century Architecture: Modernism 1945 - 1975", attached as Exhibit B, more information about this trend. Aspen was fortunate to attract a variety o f highly trained architects who left a modern impression throughout the town. Among the architectural crowd was Robin Molny who trained at Taliesen under Frank Lloyd Wright for five years and in the 1950s was selected by Wright to supervise the Greenberg Residence in Dousman, Wisconsin. Wright is quoted as describing Molny as a "poet" saying "he'll be a good architect one day." Subsequently, Molny moved to Aspen, 720 East Hyman Ave- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit A- designation criteria Page 2 of 3 .. worked for Fritz Benedict, and opened his own architecture firm. The Hearthstone House (134 East Hyman, 1961), the Mason and Morse Building (514 East Hyman, heavily altered, 1971), and the downtown pedestrian malls (1970s) were all designed by Molny. The HPC awarded Molny two Welton Anderson Preservation Honor Awards in 1995 for the pedestrian malls and again in 1997 for significant architectural contributions to Aspen. Dick Carney, Chairman of the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation Board, wrote a letter honoring Molny when he was presented with the Welton Anderson Preservation Honor Award in 1997. Robin Molny's architectural contributions are locally significant in their representation and communication of Aspen life in the 1960s and 1970s. As indicated through the careful orientation of the main atrium, Molny was sensitive to spatial relationships: he designed the atrium to serve as a flexible, light-filled, transition between the exterior and interior, taking advantage o f the views to the mountain, and creating interest for those inside the building. The style of the building is hard to categorize. It best represents an eclectic commercial style that Molny created using natural materials, repetition, and cutting edge building technology of the time. The elegant use of structural members to create the form, fenestration, and architectural interest, and attention to small details like bolt patterns display the craftsmanship and philosophy of a quality designer. Molny displayed his appreciation and knowledge of materials and architectural history in the construction of the Aspen Athletic Building with the use of the I ~ ~* , current technology and construction techniques. The 1/milb iliwil./. *22:::lillill illill first patents for glu-lam beams were issued in 41/2 .lip.,~0'll'll'lli ... Switzerland and Germany, and the first U.S. i i ./Illi . - manufacturing standard for glu-lam was published in I ~ â€ž IllILL N ~ 1963. The structural glazing (also called structural ~. silicone glazing) that spans between the first and ~ 4,;,1 i,Â·i:i'=iiiiiiiii,F"""I second floors to create the interior atrium uses I'll/'ll'll'll/1//11/'llit 1% te ' lMillillililillillill cutting edge technology that was developing in the ~ ,,rE,~ late 1960s and early 1970s. 720 E. Hyman was built ~ in 1976. Photograph 2: Detail of bolt pattern Overall the physical integrity of the building is intact. Original materials have not been replaced and the form and site plan is unchanged. The plywood hoppers appear original but are no longer operable. The building scored a 17 on the integrity score sheet which qualifies it as a "best" example of organic architecture. The proposed minor changes to the exterior that HPC reviewed do not significantly impact the building's integrity score. Stat.T.finds that criteria a, b, c, d, and e are met. 720 East Hyman Ave- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit A- designation criteria Page 3 of 3 Character Defining Features of the Wrightian/Organic Style Check box if statement 1) Low horizontal proportions, flat or low pitched hip 7) No trim isolating the glazing from the wall plane, ~ roofs I window openings are trimmed out to match adjacen)~ is true. One point per 2) Deep roof overhangs that create broad shadow ~/ structural members in a wood context, brick box. lines across the fagade, glazing is usually I openings tend to be deeply set with no trim other concentrated in these areas than the brick return 3) Materials are usually natural and hand-worked, such as rough-sawn wood timbers ~ 8) Structures are related to the environment ~ and brick, brick is generally used as a base material, wall infill, or in an anchoring through battered foundation walls, cantilevered fireplace element. wood structural systems tend more toward heavy timber or post-and floors, and/or porches, clear areas of glazing that beam than typical stud framing create visual connections between inside and 4) Structural members and construction methods are usually expressed in the building, for ~ outside, and the effect of the roof plane hovering I example, load bearing columns may be expressed inside and out; the wall plane is then I over the ground created by an infill of glass or brick 9) Decoration stems from the detailing of 5) Roof structure is often expressed below the roof sheathing ~ the primal materials and the construction ~ technique, no applied decorative elements 6) Glass is used as an infill material which expresses a void or a structural system, or it M are used is used to accentuate the surface of a wall through pattern or repetition .. 10) Color is usually related to the natural colors ~ of materials (natural brick, dark stained wood, white stucco, accent colors are used minimally and mainly to accentuate the horizontal lines of 02 ./. the structure -'....#- ..""I"* 1- A building must have 6 of the 10 character defining features, either present or clearly 21> documented through photographic of t ~ r.: 0.#it., .*--0 tf -- - --+ 0-' 41 /4 I 94* I. <$ -h-- . & --*u' ~...... physical evidence to qualify as - D- ",0 4 ~ TÂ·NFFE. J . . FA d . Wrightian/Organic Style. Restoration may l -.7 ; be required as part of the award of incentives. 31 r. If the property earned 6 or more points, 4 continue to the next page. . 6 15#* 1 flmm11"02"/1' *:A.*~ 1* 'Id:9 . 4/ 1 -~ "1 - .1 Lk- #. _ If the property earned less than 6 points, scoring ends. .r *#C/Â·4** $ 2. '(4 '~ , p *I.*jigli'.9.... Total Points, 0 - 10 ./- Akiwt 15. INTEGRITY SCORING If a statement is true, circle the number of points associated with that true statement. LOCATION OF BUILDING ON THE LOT: The building is in its original location. g-boin-ED The building has been shifted on the original parcel, but maintains its original 1 point alignment and/or proximity to the street. SETTING: The property is located within the geographical area surrounded by Castle -3 1 point ) Creek, the Roaring Fork Riverand Aspen Mountain. i-. The property is outside of the geographical area surround by Castle Creek, the 1/2 poi nt Raoring Fork Riverand Aspen Mountain. DESIGN: The form of the building (footprint, roof and wall planes) are unaltered from ~,-'---~~~~-- (leints-) the original design. a.) The form of the building has been altered but less than 25% of the original walls have been removed, OR b.) The alterations to the form all occur at the rear of the subject building, OR 2 points c.) The form of the building has been altered but the addition is less than 50% of the size of the original building, OR d.) There is a roof top addition that is less than 50% of the footprint of the roof. MATERIALS Exterior materials The original exterior materials of the building are still in place, with the (ilijit> exception of normal maintenance and repairs. 50% of the exterior materials have been replaced, butthe replacements 1 point match the original condition. Windows and doors The original windows and doors of the building are still in place, with the 2 poi nts exception of normal maintenance and repairs. 50% of the original windows and doors have been replaced, but the -Â« 4.-1.pol-nt) replacements match the original condition. Best: 15 up to 20 points Integrity Score (this page) maximum of 10 points: 1 Better: 12 up to 15 points Character Defining Features Score (first page) maxi- ~ Good: 10 up to 12 points mum of 10 points: Not Eligible:0 up to 10 points 1 HISTORIC ASSESSMENT SCORE: EXHIBIT C SUBDIVISION Chapter 26.480, SUBDIVISION Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. General Requirements 1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. 3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. 4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposal supports the general policies and goals in the Aspen Area Community Plan, specifically the Historic Preservation chapter. The project is consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the area and will not adversely affect the future development of the area. The proposed subdivision to create separate legal interests is in compliance with applicable requirements of the Land Use Code. B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. Staff Finding: n/a. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding: n/a. 720 East Hyman Ave.- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit C - Subdivision Criteria Page 1 of 3 C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met: 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or the goals of the community. 2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. Staff Finding: The applicant shall comply with Aspen Municipal Code Chapter 26.580 as applicable. D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding: Affordable housing is reviewed concurrent with Subdivision pursuant to the AspenModern negotiation process. The applicant proposes to mitigate for affordable housing with an onsite deed restricted unit. E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.630. Staff Finding: The applicant agrees to comply with the School Land Dedication Standards in Chapter 26.630. Staff finds this criterion is met. F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals if the newly created pareeks) is required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44-2001, Â§ 2) 720 East Hyman Ave.- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit C - Subdivision Criteria Page 2 of 3 Staff Finding: Affordable housing is reviewed concurrent with Subdivision pursuant to the AspenModern negotiation process. The applicant proposes onsite affordable housing mitigation in the form of a one bedroom Category 4 unit. 720 East Hyman Ave.- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit C - Subdivision Criteria Page 3 0 f 3 EXHIBIT D GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEWS Â§26.470.080.2 New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project. The development of new free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.050. Sec. 26.470.050. General requirements. A. Purpose: The intent of growth management is to provide for orderly development and redevelopment of the City while providing mitigation from the impacts said development and redevelopment creates. Different types of development are categorized below, as well as the necessary review process and review standards for the proposed development. A proposal may fall into multiple categories and therefore have multiple processes and standards to adhere to and meet. 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 Response: Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed free market residential unit. Staff finds that this criteria is met. 2. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Response: The project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan specifically the Historic Preservation chapter. Staff finds that this criterion is met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff Response: The project requests a variance to the allowable floor area allotted to free market residential use as part of the AspenModern negotiation for landmark designation. The commercial component of the building is an existing non-conformity, however the proposal reduces the non-conformity. 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit D - GMQS Page I of 5 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval, as applicable. Staff Response: The project is consistent with Historic Preservation Commission approvals. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate. (Ord. No. 6 - 2010, Â§2) Staff Response: n/a - the project reduces commercial net leasable area which does not require mitigation. 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. (Ord. No. 6 - 2010, Â§2) Staff Response: Two new free market residential units are proposed. The smaller of the two units (2,500 square feet of net livable area) is exempt from affordable housing mitigation offered. As a historic landmark, it is eligible for the one time incentive for historic landmark properties that permits the creation of a free market residential unit without mitigation. The larger of the two units (2,750 square feet of net livable area) requires mitigation at 30% of the new net livable area. 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit D - GMQS Page 2 0 f 5 7.j i.-h.\ The larger free market residential unit comprises 2,750 square feet of net livable area, which requires an 825 square feet net livable area affordable housing unit. The proposed unit is located on the second floor and is 825 square feet of net livable area. It is proposed as a one-bedroom, Category 4 rental. Further discussion of the housing unit and APCHA' s recommendation is provided below. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. (Ord. No. 14, 2007, Â§1) Staff Response: The project represents minimal demand on public infrastructure. It is an existing commercial building that is being partially converted to mixed use. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Sec. 26.470.070.Minor Planning and Zoning Commission applications. The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section 26.470.110, Procedures for review, and the criteria for each type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications shall comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.050. Except as noted, the following types of growth management approvals shall be deducted from the respective development ceiling levels but shall not be deducted from the annual development allotments. Approvals apply cumulatively. 4. Affordable housing. The development of affordable housing deed-restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the Board of Directors. Staff Response: A referral from APCHA is included as Exhibit E. APCHA is not in favor of the proposed onsite unit due to concerns about its location in a mixed use building, and recommends Affordable Housing credits as the form of mitigation. The Land Use Code permits and incentivizes mitigation onsite to encourage diversity within the building. The ordinance includes APCHA's conditions of approval for a Category 4 rental unit as requested by the applicant. 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 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit D - GMQS Page 3 of 5 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. (Ord. No. 6 - 2010, Â§4) Staff Response: The housing unit is provided onsite. Staff finds that this criterion is met. c. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent (50%) or more of the unit's net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. This dimensional requirement may be varied through Special Review, Pursuant to Chapter 26.430. (Ord. No. 14 - 2011, Â§3) Staff Response: The unit is located on the second floor of the existing building. Staff finds that this criterion is met. d. The proposed units shall be deed-restricted as "for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The owner may be entitled to select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned qualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The deed restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as defined in the Affordable Housing Guidelines established by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended. The proposed units may be rental units, including but not limited to rental units owned by an employer or nonprofit organization, if a legal instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney ensures permanent affordability of the units. The City encourages affordable housing units required for lodge development to be rental units associated with the lodge operation and contributing to the long-term viability of the lodge. Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen, Pitkin County or other similar governmental or quasi-municipal agency shall not be subject to this mandatory "for sale" provision. Staff Response: The applicant requests that the proposed unit be a Category 4 rental; however APCHA requests that the unit be a Category 3 or 4 sale unit. The Code does not specify a specific option, only that the unit is deed restricted in accordance with APCHA 720 East Hyman Ave, - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit D - GMQS Page 4 of 5 guidelines and is either sold or rented to a qualified purchaser/renter. Conditions of approval for both a rental and an ownership option are included in Exhibit E. 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit D - GMQS Page 5 of 5 AW,tte . MEMORANDUM TO: Sara Adams FROM: Cindy Christensen, APCHA Operations Manager DATE: May 7,2012 RE: REDEVELOPMENT OF 720 EAST HYMAN (ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING) ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval for the redevelopment of the 720 East Hyman, the Aspen Athletic Club building. BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing the redevelopment as part of the voluntary historic designation. It will encompass full renovation of the building over several years. Section 26.415.025.C, Aspen Modern Properties, comes into play with the voluntary history designation; therefore, there is a 90-day negotiation period with City Council. The request is to provide two free-market units and one deed-restricted unit within the building. Under Section 26.470.050.B, Growth Management: General Requirements, the applicant is requesting one allotment for a free market unit and one for an affordable housing unit. A second free-market unit is being made available as a growth management benefit, under the Aspen Modern Program for Landmark Properties, without affordable housing mitigation. DISCUSSION: Section 26.470.100.A, states that 60Â°/0 of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The applicant states that the total net leasable area within the building will be reduced by 5,537 square feet; thereby no affordable housing mitigation is required. Section 26.470.050.B.6, states that "the 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 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." Under the Aspen Modern Program, Landmark Properties, the free market unit No. 1 should meet the requirements for affordable housing mitigation, and Unit No. 2 will be exempt from affordable housing mitigation. The unit size cap for both free-market units is 2,000 square feet; however, both units are proposed as 2,500 square feet and 2,750 square feet. The applicant is applying for the 500 square foot floor area bonus for designated historic properties for Unit 1. As to the additional square footage of 750 for Unit 2, the applicant is looking to mitigate with a TDR for 500 square feet and requests that the additional 250 square feet be permitted as it is being placed within the existing building floor area. Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 1 The affordable housing unit is proposed as a one-bedroom, 825 net leasable square foot unit, to be located on the second floor. The plans for the unit are attached. Section 26.470.070.4.d, Minor Growth Management: Affordable Housing. states that 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." This paragraph also allows for APCHA or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters. The proposed unit may also be a rental unit owned by an employer or non-profit as long as a legal instrument, acceptable to the City Attorney, ensures the permanent affordability of the unit. The applicant is requesting the unit as a dedicated rental unit to be owned by the building owner and rented to an employee of the owner. Parking is an issue. Section 26.515.010 has a general requirement that all development shall be provided with off-street parking. Under Section 26.420.010.B.Le, the applicant is requesting a waiver for required parking on site due to the lack of available lot area to create parking spaces. If the redevelopment is approved, Staff would recommend the unit be a "for sale", Category 3 or 4 unit and that the condominium documents reflect that any common area maintenance shall be assessed based on the actual values of the free-market versus the affordable unit. RECOMMENDATION: The APCHA Board reviewed the application at their meeting held May 2,2012 and is recommending denial of the on-site deed-restricted unit as it would be a single unit in a mixed use building. Enforcement on these types of single units would place a burden on the APCHA staff and is not in the best interest of the program. The APCHA Board recommends that the mitigation for the second free-market unit be provided by the use of an Affordable Housing Credit Certificate and not an on-site or off-site unit. However, should the redevelopment be approved by the City Council, the APCHA Board would request that the unit remain a "for sale", Category 3 or 4, one-bedroom unit. If the project is approved, certain conditions should be required. Listed below are the conditions that should be required broken down into whether the unit is a "for sale" unit or a rental unit: Sales Unit: 1. The unit shall be an ownership unit and sold through the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority lottery system upon Certificate of Occupancy. 2. The unit shall be classified as Category 3 or 4. 3. The condominium documents shall reflect that any common area maintenance shall be assessed based on the actual values of the free-market homes versus the deed-restricted unit. Any property management fees or other fees associated with the commercial or free-market aspect of the building shall not be charged to the deed-restricted owner. The Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 2 condominium documents shall be reviewed and approved by APCHA prior to Certificate of Occupancy. The goal is to protect the affordable housing unit from excessive monthly and/or special assessments having to do with luxury items and/or expensive modifications. 4. The deed-restricted unit shall receive the Certificate Occupancy prior to, or in conjunction with, the free-market units. Rental Unit: 1. If the unit is allowed to be a rental unit, the deed restriction shall require that all tenants are approved PRIOR to tenancy through APCHA and must re-qualify on a YEARLY basis, the tenant shall be no higher than a Category 4, and at such time the unit is found to be out of compliance for one year, the owner will be REQUIRED to sell the unit through APCHA's lottery system. 2. The unit shall be classified no higher than Category 4. 3. A document will be required to be signed by the owner that this deed restriction is being done on a voluntary basis and that the rental control of the unit is acceptable and required and will remain in perpetuity until such time the unit is sold as stated in number 1 above. 4. The rental deed restriction will be recorded with the following conditions: a. The use and occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit 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 4 employee" 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 Category 4 employee" of his 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 guesthouse or guest facility. c. Written verification of employment of employee(s) proposed to reside in the Employee Dwelling Unit shall be completed and filed with the Authority by the Owner of the Employee Dwelling Unit prior to occupancy thereof, and such verification must be acceptable to the Authority. d. The Employee Dwelling Unit shall be required to be rented for periods of no less than six (6) consecutive months. 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 Authority may rent the Employee Dwelling Unit to a qualified employee. e. The maximum rental rate shall not exceed the Category 4, one-bedroom, rental rate as set forth in the Rental Guidelines established by the Authority and may be adjusted annually as set forth by the Guidelines. The maximum permitted rent for the unit on the date of execution of this deed restriction as stated in the Guidelines at the time the deed-restriction is recorded. Rent shall be verified and Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 3 approved by the Authority upon submission and approval of the lease. Employees shall be qualified by the Authority as to employment, maximum income and asset limitations on a yearly basis. The signed lease must be provided to APCHA. f. The Unit must meet minimum occupancy; i.e., one person per bedroom. g. Owner agrees to provide to APCHA upon request all information reasonably necessary to determine ifthere is full compliance with this Agreement. h. 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. i, 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 ofjudicial review. j, 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. k. In the event an Affordable Housing Units 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, 1. 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. m. 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. n. This Agreement is to be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. o. 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. Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 4 p. 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. q. The terms and provisions of this Deed Restriction shall constitute covenants running with the title to the Affordable Housing Units as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the Managing Agent, the Association and/or Owner, by the Housing Authority, 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. r. 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 Authority by the Owner within ten (10) days of approval of employee(s) for the Employee Dwelling Unit. s, 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 this Deed Restriction violates CRS 38-12-301. t. 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. . Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 5 Pyl~61 Or. AspenModern @, 18 Months A Brief Review & Evaluation While much larger cities like Minneapolis, Phoenix and Scottsdale have programs to protect Post WWII architecture, the only small municipalities on board are a few progressive resorts. The closest in size to the City of Aspen are Wildwood NJ (pop.5,200), New Canaan CT (pop. 20,000) and Palm Springs CA (pop. 50,000). For those who remember other City of Aspen innovations (Main Street Historic District in 1974, affordable housing, green building codes etc.), breaking new ground is challenging, sometimes painful and messy - and almost always controversial. It's something like bush-whacking in the wilderness with about 6,000 people, many of whom didn't really want to come along in the first place. After more than a 100 meetings o f the Historic Preservation Task Force and committees, 10 of the 21 members wrote minority reports. At 18 months, AspenModern might be described as in its "toddler" stage - a good time for taking a deep breath and a step back to explore how it's progressing. New programs mean uncertainty and unpredictability - two things that people don't always appreciate in local government. It's no doubt easier to take the path of least resistance, keep one's head down and keep raised voices to a minimum. Sometimes the City seems to take the path of most resistance; whether that's admirable or foolhardy is in the eye of the beholder. Part of the reason AspenModern is a new chapter in the land use code was a recognition that as a resort environment, Aspen needs to be able to tell its story to visitors - including the unique story o f how the resort itself developed. Part o f that story reflects the nature o f Aspen's idealistic people, including innovative architects with a deep respect for natural materials, a sense o f opening up to the outdoors and even environmental sculpture. After 18 months, the public, city staff, Historic Preservation Commission and City Council are feeling their way along. That' s only to be expected. There are certain elements of the program that make it particularly challenging and controversial: 1) Lack of popular consensus on preserving modern architecture as a community benefit. There was enough popular concern at the demolition of Post WWII structures. and enough support to create a voluntary designation program, but there are many in the community who still challenge the underlying premise. While open space, trails, affordable housing and public transit are basically accepted community benefits, AspenModern has yet to reach that level ofcommunity consensus. 2) Determining the historic value of an AspenModern building is a subjective process. One can determine how many people can live in an affbrdable housing complex, or how many people use public transit, or how many acres of parks and miles of trails the City operates - and how much it all costs. Whether a given building built in 1970 is an important part of telling Aspen's story is subject to debate and opinion. 3) Weighing one community benefit against another can be polarizing. The AspenModern program includes a wide range of possible financial incentives, some of which could have an impact on other community benefits thal have already been basically accepted - from housing to parking and pedestrian amenities. Under AspenModern, city planners use a scoring system from 0 to 20 to evaluate the physical integrity of structures, placing them in categories of "good," "better" and "best." The scoring system is an attempt to be as objective as possible - anything scoring less than 10 is ineligible. Staff separately generates a written analysis of the inherent historic value o f the structure using Context Papers and several land use code criteria. As AspenModern was being debated, some Council members understandably wanted to see a direct correlation between how well a building scored and a specified range of incentives that would be offered. But staff has found the scoring process is still somewhat subjective - it's just not specific or measurable enough to match a given property with a specific toolbox of incentives. Some wanted to see staff perform a financial analysis of each case: How much property value was the applicant losing due to historic designation versus how much they were gaining in incentives? Early indications on this approach were not encouraging - even the professional appraisers who spoke to the Task Force had widely differing opinions. When weighing all the elements that are part of an AspenModern building and site, the level of complexity defies the traditional method of using "comparables" to establish value. The young and fluctuating market for historic TDRs makes it all the more difficult. Instead, staff reports only the actual dollar value of fee waivers. As more cases go through the new program, some Council members are likely to think in terms of precedent. If a certain incentive was granted for building A, which scored "better," should we grant the same incentive for another site that also scored "better"? Again, the inherent subjectivity, grey areas and issues unique to each site make precedent-setting discussions difficult. The ongoing challenges can make it easy to overlook how much ground has been covered. The City has moved from a deeply polarizing time when one side wanted an involuntary program and the other wanted no program at all, to a place where the land use code enables a conversation to take place on a case-by-case basis. During the 30 years before AspenModern, the Historic Preservation program was largely focused on Victorian Era properties, and it tended to be involuntary with specified and limited benefits available to the property owners. In other words, the impetus for action tended to come from staff, the HPC or City Council. Because AspenModern is entirely voluntary, the impetus for action comes from the property owner, who applies for historic designation and requests a list of incentives in exchange. In order to attract property owners to voluntarily participate, the incentives are not specified or limited. Taken together, the process can be perceived negatively, as property owners shopping for a "great deal." It also creates a level of unpredictability, which is difficult for the public, boards and even other City departments. Three properties have been designated under AspenModern, with two more in the review process, indicating a certain balance in the program. I f no one had applied, it would not be effective - if dozens had applied, it could be too permissive. All o f the approximately 50 property owners that fall under AspenModern remain free to renovate, or demolish and replace. They don't have to go to the LIPC or City Council, reflecting a generally silent but contented constituency. Despite the newness of the program - and knowing they would be in the crucible of public debate - a few property owners have seen the civic-minded AspenModern alternative as worth exploring. For the few cases that have gone through City Council so far, incentives requested by applicants have included: â€¢ Reduction of affordable housing mitigation â€¢ Waiver of unit size limits â€¢ Reduced parking requirement â€¢ Waiver of parking cash in lieu â€¢ Waiver of public amenity cash in lieu â€¢ Increased FAR for free market residential â€¢ Extension of vested rights Requirements and conditions placed on designated sites have included: â€¢ Space deed-restricted as affordable restaurant â€¢ Pedestrian amenities â€¢ Physical improvements to upgrade historic integrity of building â€¢ Sterilizing future development rights â€¢ Buying historic Transferrable Development Rights (TDR) Staff for the National Trust for Historic Preservation helped the City through the process of developing the AspenModern program, and no one knew better how challenging it would be. Just finding a term to describe the historic era o f the program was di fficult; ranging from "Post WWII" to the "recent past," to the "familiar past." "Preserving our ' familiar past' is a complex and sometimes controversial undertaking, says the recently completed AspenModern educational brochure. "(The program) seeks to reacquaint Americans with their living history by reframing public perceptions about Modern and recent past architecture..." If one thing is clear about young and innovative programs, it's the need to pay attention to the growing track record; exploring why one case worked smoothly and another didn't; looking for ways to reduce uncertainty and increase reliability and confidence. The 2012 AACP boiled down the motivation for AspenModern - "Aspen's distinctive history is irreplaceable" - but the follow-through is never quite so simple. RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HI'C) APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT AND FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 720 EAST HYMAN AVE (COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING), ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB CONDOMINIUM & DUVIKE CONDOMINIUM, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 25, SERIES OF 2008 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-11010 (through 11031) & 2737-182-11800 (and 11801) WHEREAS, the applicant, CM LLC c/o Roger Marolt, represented by Lenny Oates, Oates Kenezevich, Gardenswartz, and Kelly, P,C., has requested Minor Development for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen Athletic Club Condominium & Duvike Condominium, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, the procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC reviews the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415,050 of the Aspen Municipal Code establishes the process for Designation and states that an application for listing on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall be approved if City Council, after a recommendation from HPC, determines sufficient evidence exists that the properly meets the criteria; and WHEREAS, Jason Lasser, in his staff report dated October 2,2008 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found the review standards and the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and Commercial Design Standards have been met; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 8,2007, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application for Minor Development and Historic Landmark Review met the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and the Aspen Municipal Code Historic Landmp-1 C+nnr|râ€¢-Ar. $46,1,~Ai. r'Â·1~ fer;a anA 2nnrnveri the gnolication by a vote of four to one (4 to 1). RECEPTION#: 555802, 01/16/2009 at 09:08:25 AM, 1 OF 3, R $16.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC approves the application for Landmark Designation of the property at 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen Athletic Club Condominium & Duvike Condominium, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, and approves the application for Minor Development with the following conditions; 1. The applicant will replace the ground floor exterior sliding doors and maintain their existing configuration and operation. 2. That the applicant will retain the existing planters, primarily on the Hyman side but will look at the planter configuration on Original Street and work with the new accessible needs and try to maintain as much ofthe original landscape as possible. 3. The applicant will remove the Coniferous trees in conjunction with Parks and Engineering. 4. The beige paint will be removed, 5. The applicant will apply for a right-of-way permit for all the landscaping items as stated in staff' s memo. 6. The applicant will work with parks to choose the appropriate tree species from the Arbor Guide and those plantings will be appropriately and carefully considered in size as they grow. 7. The new awning windows are approved. 8. The brise-soliel as proposed are approved but final design will be approved by staff and monitor. 9. Historic Designation is approved. 10. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested propeny right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period oftime permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 8th day of October 2008. Approved as to Form: 9 -/E-2,--- Michael Hoffman, Chairman True, Special Counsel ATTEÂ§T: 14 adi~ 9/FlaiLl Kathy Stfickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 1. The applicant will replace the ground floor exterior sliding doors and maintain their existing configuration and operation. 2. That the applicant will retain the existing planters, primarily on the Hyman side but will look at the planter configuration on Original Street and work with the new accessible needs and try to maintain as much of the original landscape as possible. 3. The applicant will remove the Coniferous trees in conjunction with Parks and Engineering. 4. The beige paint will be removed. 5. The applicant will apply for a right-of-way permit for all the landscaping items as stated in staffs memo. 6. The applicant will work with parks to choose the appropriate tree species from the Arbor Guide and those plantings will be appropriately and carefully considered in size as they grow. 7. The new awning windows are approved. 8. The brise-soliel as proposed are approved but final design will be approved by staff and monitor. 9. Historic Designation is approved. P#4- bit I. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 23,2012 Vice-chair, Ann Mullins called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Nora Berko, Willis Pember, Jay Maytin and Jamie MeLeod. Staff present: Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk Motion: Jay moved to approve the minutes of May 9, 2012; second by,Ann. All in favor, motion carried. Elizabeth Means represented the Aspen Community church. Elizabeth said they are in need of repairing the church. It is being held by tie rods on the interior. It was built in 1890 with no drainage. We are doing a capital campaign to raise 4.4 million. Since it is a community church we have raised 1.4 million. Possibly the city could get involved and maybe we can use RETT funds. Amy and Deborah said they would research some possibilities and they haven't gone through the complete analysis for options. Jay mentioned damaging by neglect. Amy said the city has a $25,000 loan which isn't much. 720 E. Hyman - AspenModern Negotiation for Voluntary Landmark Designation and Minor Development (cont'd from May 9% Mitch Haas, Haas Planning Charles Cunniffe, Cunniffe Architects & Associates Brian West, Cunniffe and Associates Public Notice - Exhibit I Sara stated that the property is on the corner of Hyman and Original and is also called the Aspen Athletic Club. It is included on the Aspen Modern map and was designed by Robin Molny in 1976. The proposal is AspenModern negotiations and HPC will need to make a recommendation on designation. There are also some issues for a minor development review. The applicant wants to convert the third floor commercial to two free market residential units. They also want to convert a portion o f the second floor 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 23, 2012 commercial to affordable housing to mitigate for the free market residential component and the rest ofthe building will remain commercial. It is located in the mixed use zone district and is currently over the allowable height and is an existing non-conformity. It also exceeds the allowable FAR ratio for commercial use. There have been very few changes since 1976. In 2008 HPC granted approval for some minor changes including stripping the . brown paint off the building and doing a stain which looks much better. They were approved to remove the evergreen trees that were obscuring the planter boxes. The brise soleil was approved but they didn't act on it so their vested rights have expired and it needs to be discussed again tonight. Staff finds that all ofthe designation criteria are met. It's representation to Molny and representation of a hybrid Wrightian Molny style. It did score 17 on the integrity scoring and staff recommends designation. HPC is asked to apply the purpose and intent o f the preservation program to this designation and the proposed project before you to help council decide and weight the benefits requested. The benefits they are look for is to allow one larger free market unit then what is currently permitted in the zone district. They also need more FAR allotted to the free market residential component than is allowed in the mixed zone district. They are making their commercial non-conformity a little bit smaller and they are asking to create a bit of a non-confobmity with their free market component. They are also asking for a waiver of the three parking spaces which is cash in lieu of $90,000. There is no space for parking in the alley. They also need a slight height variance for a skylight on the roof. It is less than one foot for the variance. Right now the building ~ conforms to the setback requirements but the brise soleil would need a variance. Minor Development: Sara said they are proposing a roof deck that would have a glass guard rail around the deck and it is about 675 square feet. They do meet the height limit for the deck and guard rail and access. They do need to provide another form of egress to the roof. Staff is in favor of,the roof deck and proposed materials because it is set back from all sides of the fa~ade and it will not make an impact to the historic characteristics of the building. For the brise soleil they are proposing all of the windows on both street facing facades and on the west faÂ¢ade. They are trying to reduce the energy consumption in the building. Staff does not support the brise soleil that it 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 234 2012 obscures certain architectural features. It will also change the reading of the building and the planes and understanding Molny's architecture. We do not think the guidelines are met specifically 10.10. Staff is in support of the skylight as you will not see it and it doesn't impact the nature of the historic building. They are proposing to replace the plywood hoppers with operable glazed windows. Staff is on support of that change and it is important to have all the windows operable again. Staff is not in support ofthe setback variances for the brise soleil and it doesn't meet the criteria for granting a variance. We are recommending that council negotiate for landmark designation. In the resolution the condition is to not approve the brise soleil and screen the mechanical equipment on the roof top for review by staff and monitor. The planters in the right-of-way need an encroachment license from Engineering and work with the parks department to determine the proper plantings since it is on city property. They are also proposing some re-pointing in the planter boxes as some of the mortar is deteriorating and we are requesting a test patch. Brian West, Cunniffe and Associates Charles said he worked with Robin Molny in 1981 and 1982 and we did some minor work inside the building for the athletic club. I personally don't think Robin would be opposed to the brise soleil with all the climate issues as we have become much warmer than in 1981. One thing that is non- Wrightian about this building is the lack of overhangs. They would be attached in a manner that you can read the building completely and they can easily be removed. We have no other issues with staffs recommendation. Brian said with the planter boxes we will have to reline them. Brian did a power point explaining the brise soleil and the elevations ofthe building including the roof top elements. On the tall windows which are h inch thick glass there is no insulation and the brise soleil will help in the summer time and moderately in the winter. The south facing fagade is the most important. There are two systems available, louvers which are extruded out of the wall and cable stays or the'second system which is a grading system with a bar screen that is projected out. They would also need the rods and cables to keep them in place. The basement is partially under the planters. The mechanical equipment will be redone on the roof and you won't see it from the street. On the first floor we are proposing no changes due to the long term lease with Timberline Bank. The top floor would have two free market units with a new stair that would go to the roof. There would also be a small 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 23,2012 roof top deck for the free market units only. The least impact second egress would be on the exterior stair in the back and we would design one more flight up to the roof. The stair in the back is presently a fire escape. On the skylights we would reduce the amount that we have which is five small ones and one large one. We would put in three in the back and none in the front at the same size. Charles said on the brise soleil we might not need it on the east side. The south and west are the most onerous. Willis asked about energy modeling on the building. Charles said once we know we can go forward we would pursue an energy modeling. We would have a mechanical engineer do the entire building. Jay asked about the snow load of the brise soleil. Brian said it is engineered for the climate and the expected loads will be applied and they are not solid. Jay said the stairway in the center of the roof seems to be 9 feet above the roof level. Maybe it doesn't have to be that big. Charles said the stair is one egress and the fire escape is the other. Charles said he can work with the shaping of the stair and lowering it. Charles said the green roof would have a ground cover and it would be alive. Nora asked about the roof deck. Charles said they would have a picnic table and a few lawn chairs. Nora said she is worried about the scale of that block and adding a summer room. Charles said it is more of a view deck. Nora commented that the upgrades have improved the building immensely. Without those trees you can really see the building. Possibly there are other solutions for the interior rather than the brise soleil. Charles said the best way to protect from heat gain is before it enters the building and before the heat comes through the glass. Once it is through the glass it is in the building and all you are doing is trapping it in a confined area which creates vast temperature changes from the surface of the window and the inside of a shade which creates its own set of problems. It also affects the sealants ofthe windows. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 23,2012 Nora said the building is a knockout building and we need to figure out how to keep it that way. Ann asked about the notched out piece in the stairwell and if it can be kept because it is an interesting piece. Brian said where the stair comes up is the entry to the free market unit. Charles said the sketches came from the owner and we can discuss it. Sara said if you are doing free market residential you could have a total of 4,500 square feet. Ifyou were doing all commercial you could have 6,750 square feet. Charles said we are basically using the space that is there. Chairperson, Ann Mullins opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Jamie said she is in favor of preserving the building and in favor of the 250 square foot bonus because you are already using existing square footage and just reallocating it. I'm in favor of exceeding the allowable FAR because you are within the existing square footage. I'm not in favor of waiving the three parking spaces in lieu of cash. The roof deck is favorable and you can't see it. I am in favor of the one foot height variance for the skylights and the fact that you are removing five skylights and adding three and you really are removing two and it won't exceed existing conditions. The second egress is favorable and the idea of sloping the roof is recommended. I am in favor of the hoppers but not the brise soleil. Ann said she agreed with Jamie with the exception of supporting the parking waiver because the architect has done a beautiful job with the building already and I would hate to have a piece thunked out for parking. You also have the city parking garage several blocks away. 1 am supportive of limiting the number of cars coming into the city. Jay said he would support the resolution with one condition to restudy the roof top stairwell. Jay said he would like to see something to help the building be more energy efficient but is not sure the brise soleil is the right 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 23, 2012 solution. Restoration should occur on the planters and the interior stairwell should be restudied. Nora said she would support landmark designation without the brise soleil. I would like to see the cash-in-lieu for parking. I would also support Jamie's comments. Willis said he supports the landmark status and the 250 additional square feet. Asking for the cash-in-lieu waiver is a little unseemly given the programmatic change that is going on. I would support the height limit and roof deck use. Adding green to the roof is adding sustainable things. When Molny believed in modernism they embraced the size ofthese solid plate glass windows and it is a way to create to the outdoors. They added the hopper windows to add fresh air to come in. I have a hard time changing the hoppers into clear story windows. If you are trying to cut down heat gain with glazing you don't do it by adding more glazing. On the east and west , vertical shading' devices perform much better. If you were to flush this out and come to us with an energy model you would find in a hurry that brise soleil on the east and west are not going to do much of anything. In terms of managing solar gain on the south you have several options. You have deciduous trees and you can look at glass technology. If Robin were here he would study that and you can look at a opaque glazing on the glass itself that cuts down a certain percentage of site line but it maintains the faGade treatment. Willis said he is opposed to the Brise soleil. Charles and the owner has been looking at the best glass possible. We are not changing the structural glass. We willlook at the glass for the hoppers. The owner is already changing the hoppers for the view. All o f the tenants want it. MOTION: Jay moved to approve resolution #12 as written with a restudy of the stairwell to the roof in the middle of the building to shrink the height and slope and to be approved by staff and monitor. We are also in favor of the one foot height variance for the skylights and we recommend a restudy of retaining the interior second floor false stair>vay. Motion second by Jamie. Vote: Jamie, yes; Jay, yes; Nora, yes; Willis, yes; Ann, yes. Motion carried 5-0. 6 @. E3 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS June 27,2012 Sara Adarns Senior Planner Cornmunity Development City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Aspen Athletic Club Building 720 East Hyrnan Avenue Aspen Modern negotiation for Landmark Designation, Minor Development and Public Hearing Dear Sara, With this letter, we will attempt to address sorne of the concerns expressed by City Council as follows: In exchange for voluntarily designating his property as historic, the Property Owner of 720 E. Hyman Ave. (aka - the Aspen Athletic Club building) wishes to receive several benefits from the City. Briefly, these benefits are the construction of skylights and a roof-top deck for the proposed residential units along with associated access and egress; waiver of the cash-in-lieu parking fees; and allowance for two free-market residential dwellings...one with the GMQS incentive for historic landmarks and the second mitigated with an on-site affordable housing unit. As a whole, the proposed developiinent is a remodel of ain existing building. Very little of the existing building exterior will be modified to accommodate the proposed renovations. Frorn Hyman Avenue and Original Street, a passer-by would likely have difficulty noticing a change to the building. This is a benefit to the proposed historic designation for the building. Additionally, the building 6wner has taken great effort to rehabilitate the building in the last few years in order to preserve its historic integrity and functionality. This is exemplified with the exterior siding being stripped of paint and re- stained and the removal of the trees that have helped damage the basement walls. The proposed renovations keep within the existing envelope of the building, except for the proposed roof deck and access. As a whole, the existing building is actually less than the allowed FAR on the site, which is 18,000 sf. However, the existing commercial use of the building far exceeds the allowable FAR for cornmercial space, which is limited to 9,000 sf. As a nonconforrning structure, the proposed changes actually bring the building closer to being in conformance by lowering the commercial FAR from 17,026 sf to 9,061 sf. By bringing the commercial FAR to near conformance, the proposed residential units end up exceeding, by 2,514 sf, the allowable FAR for residential use. Nearly 70% of this excess residential square footage is nonunit space consisting in large part of cornrnon atrium space, corridors, stairs, and elevators within the building...rnuch of which is also 610 East Hyman Avenue a Aspen, Colorado 81611 In tel: 970.925.5590 â€¢ fax: 970.925.5076 â€¢ www.cunniffe.com 1 ~ CELEBRATING UU YEARS OF AWARD WINNING ARCHITECTURE ~ CIA used by the other occupants of the building. Generally speaking, the existing building cannot be reasonably brought into compliance with FAR allowances per current code. Therefore, without dernolishing a significant portion of the building, one or more of the included uses will be nonconforming. As an incentive for historic designation, the property owner requests that the proposed free-market residential FAR be in excess of the allowable FAR for this zone district. With the building remaining largely intact and unchanged both in envelope and floor area, the tradeoff between commercial and residential has a negligible physical effect on the building and on the surroundings. The proposed changes actually bring the building closer to the zoning uses allowed in the Mixed Use zone in which it resides. To the east, the neighborhood is alrnost exclusively free-rnarket residential. For at least a block in each of the other three directions, the buildings within the area are largely residential with a little commercial included. So, the Aspen Athletic Club building as it currently stands, as 100% commercial space, is an anomaly within the immediate neighborhood and within its zone district. By introducing the residential components, the building becomes a mixed use building, as the zone district title implies, and it reduces the amount of commercial floor area immediately adjacent to residential neighborhoods. As for the allocation of uses, the entire third floor was chosen to house the free-market residential component of the building. This helps isolate the units and provides for greater security. As a result of rnaximizing the property owner's developrnent rights for the units, a residual 250 sf is left unused on the floor level. Instead of creating an odd and srnall non- residential space, the 250 sf is proposed to be included in one of the residential units. The property owner requests as an incentive for historic designation this additional square footage be allowed as net floor area in one of the units. The proposed access stair, guardrails, and mechanical enclosure on the building comply with code requirements. However, since the existing building is over the current allowable height, the proposed skylights and roof deck will, by default, be over the allowable height limit. The property owner requests that a variance be allowed to install the new skylights and the roof deck. The small skylights will be lower in height than the five existing ones being removed. The larger new skylight will be about the same height as the small skylights. All of them will bc lower than the large existing skylight that is to remain. Furthermore, almost all existing roof appurtenances cannot be seen frorn the surrounding streets and the proposed additions to the roof should also not be seen. New mechanical equipment is also proposed to be consolidated toward the rear of the building thus minimizing the rooftop units that can be seen today. The existing site is not large enough to accommodate on-site parking without demolishing a portion of the building. By potentially designating the building historic, it would seem undesirable and impractically expensive to demolish a portion of the building in order to provide for parking. Additionally, the savings from the parking fees would help facilitate the costs of further rehabilitation of the historic brick hardscaping and maintain the preservation efforts already begun on the building. The property owner requests as an incentive for historic designation a waiver of parking fee as related to the on-site parking requirement of the proposed developrnent. The property owner feels that the incentives requested are in line with the benefits to the comrnunity by preserving for the community a piece of Aspen's recent history. The Aspen Athletic Club building was designed by a local architect, Robin Molny, who studied under Frank Lloyd Wright and brings elements of his style to Aspen. Mr. Molny also 1 9-= - 1 designed three other prominent pieces of Aspen's historic fabric with the Hearthstone House, the Mason and Morse Building, and the downtown pedestrian mails. The building has been home to a community athletic facility and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. The building has become somewhat of a landmark for the community and even a monument for way finding. The historic designation in exchange for the requested benefits would help maintain these amenities as well as the character of the building for future generations to corne. Sincerely CLL.C.-.4 Charles L. Cunniffe, AIA On behalf of the Applicant. @6 1 .. 6/28/2012 ., 19* .1/,7 k lili , . - . -/4 11 1 -:1 - -9 1 . I k ./ 1.,1.4 . DA ', .ft ./ @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @u ASPEN HPC HEARING CHARLES CLINNU Â· E JULY 9, 2012 'I/H'TE/79 -MM#10*I/Â£4.~ffil:F- .74Ak' --/ 1.z)k- /--Il k - St"/Ef,0/1/6*W#ZiL,~ 4 "24/2%-4 1 , -- C -/9...im*1'llill FJ. Â»L~. RÂ·15A .1.-/â€¢C~2< , <11- .244 Â·.Â· i ~42* . /795% L . 4 #4 3 -r-TH~*044.- :7414444-,.--9 W i , *C'.l: r Â·Â· pÂ·-- E. Â· r. -. ~ 'Â· s"77-:~ 4 < .3 4 9 2 9 .-IDÂ« i ..47:fl*=342Â» ./'2 .-11 4 N . Â· 07: ; + ce/40.-fai=zo p #1 -~--j -NC:4 -I-,-~ 3731-24 f. CLÂ«, 2,1, . :' #2 AERIAL IMAGE C 1.--*TM.D-. , / U -16 L- 4 ;J. ./ t4 -- VICINITY MAP lit LE. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE 10 ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 ~ 1 .. .. 6/28/2012 Phi/.......<d#.....m2/Sull. Il'--mil! :- -r,7-- -~1.-4..AL Aspen Athletic Club Building I. 57- 7 â€¢ Built in 1976 Â· Architect: Robin Molny an apprentice of Frank Lloyd Wright Other buildings by Molny: Mason and Morse Building Hearthstone House The pedestrian mails Â· Other local homes -= ': ~,~ HISTORY â‚¬'â€¢ M. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE 1103 ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 CHARLES CUNNU ' l APOHFTFCTS 4 / 1 .iildlin 1 Lil-Ill ';ir:m~ -fieR#.45.y'-*fin/~ .. 49*290:"ga. 1 â‚¬, , - -1,454.A , tÂ·r-f~*'=Re: 444.94. - b -4. 4 9 2008 UPGRADES r: Â· ADA accessibility upgrades Â· Pine tree removal 2- E- ---7 -n Â· Removal of exterior paint *'Wâ€ž/TWE-FS. 94.1.-~ ~ prfPA~in.,'3~RY i 2.4 al. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE EU ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 2 .. 6/28/2012 I 4 , I - hEZ I 2-Lu Â»41 4 AFTER BEFORE AWNING WINDOW PAINTED PLYWOOD --,,2 AWNING WINDOWS M. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 736-i.-iirMANWO*NUE-~ @U ASPEN HPC HEARING CHARLES Cummf FE JULY 9, 2012 *)n:-4 LI~ CM E 0r.6 ieEMI T r&j.-...... ~Ul ~L all tzz-1---17%3.- N , -lit~--=.*,4,~~fflairl : 1/21 6 IX LT i *44* F l 1- 'Id 2 12 5. ~ ~-.~ ASPEN ATHLETIC B'JILDi NG ..,, Kith eD y- ~ r== 4. 9 y..CJ ~ A 3â„¢E-m~ , ~!~~2231 'I I./.c/ 1...4 .___1-1 L ..1 k 0 LNC 7 ).r,% 'AMMOW .....AT,0/ 21=>,1 4Â¥7*N q AERIAL IMAGE EXISTING & PROPOSED SITE PLAN @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING I 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING CHARLES ' ' JULY 9, 2012 ~ 48CHITFÂ· 3 rZG *WI,/ he .IIi 6/28/2012 Â¤ VERTICAL CIRCULATION ~ O COMMERCIAL 1. 1 2~Â·! Â· ~ - n 1 , . U. [17 1 . 1 13.-i.; - r.~t--- Â· a â€¢ - Th -r~1 r--ir-7 i Â·I I 1 r: 1 1!121= )-1-r---' I U -J 1 1=31=1 f. 1-4 4 -- i i, 1, h .91 P' r=-1 ~ 4 Le*251 /4â„¢W C "::...1.- . F -'- 7 1 1 ErÂ» 1 / 19 Al 1 - N 1 1 21 PROPOSED EXISTING '~STREETIEVEL PLAN @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING -HAMLESCUNNI{-i JULY 9, 2012 ~ H-/1. Fr.T' O AFFORDABLE HOUSING Â¤ VERTICAL CIRCULATION ~ O COMMERCIAL -1 1 -LI j L L:-1 -3 58- Lf ~Â»L'-il--1 r 1-lf,Â·ry--1 -~ 1, 11 3 , C lin",1 ' 4.4 L-- /7 1 i '' ...4 7 e.' 4 , 90 T 767 +0 1 1/ PROPOSED EXISTING - SECOND LEVEL PLAN S. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING CHAALEÂ·.Â·cluihi, i JULY 9, 2012 4 6/28/2012 O FREE-MARKET HOUSING O VERTICAL CIRCULATION ~ O COMMERCIAL 1 77.- 7 -1 11 . M -1 + 1 F--1-~31 * 2---{-- --1~LL -7 -- --44--J- /8 3 0 1 -AF Ej mil DA Â·33" , L . 0 '- - kr bâ€¢ 4 + ~ *-9.,4*F.7- -1-J Z -ENCÂ· i L ALL. r 41. =B--: E==a dabi._ 1 L I % /2-1 /4 7 - .E *1 - 1 1 a. . 0, 1 1 41 C.CA91 1 , 2 n.?f'73-JOI:.I--' -:i?~'-2';Â· ir. - - M ./ - 1 PROPOSED EXISTING UPPER LEVEL PLAN M. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE /3/3 ASPEN HPC HEARING CHAR~S CUNNIFFE 4,).FC. JULY 9, 2012 ~ Â¤ DECK FOR Â¤ VERTICAL CIRCULATION ~ 1-1<th-MARKET HOUSING El 11 f.*I : 1 k* .Ig F ~ ktÂ· t -3 -0 '0. Â®0-Trri -ev~'.4Â£ Â»111, 67: 24121 01]fi-~ ~ #61 -- .1' A7 7All'IN- 'CY 'CI Trf 1 PROPOSED EXISTING ROOF LEVEL PLAN 1. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDiNG 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE 01&1 ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 ~ A ./. .:n....... 2 , t.:14" 6/28/2012 1 -EA: 4 ~ 1 11, 1 1 1 1 1 11 - 1 1 1 11 i PROPOSED 1 1 1 1. Ill . JD~ G CE-~-- .I.i..~ -? 1 73 --==1 - 0 1 - --- ;=: . :'*' -0 1 " h"] Ii--a n' UVU 11 U U U U- --- .0 il ' , : '. lili 1 1 41 - EXISTING ,' HYMAN AVENUE (SOUTH) ELEVATION Il. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE I @U ASPEN HPC HEARING ~ CHAF~LES CUm.H i JULY 9. 2012 ~ ......... - - A-i... 1 ..= -w . ; 2..2 12/3 CZJC~C~ - 0 - -Cn C===] -CICED ./IZZJ C~CI~ C. - 154& ty PROPOSED L . Ny.Â· Â·G Â£ A-iÂ· i O 7Â· 1 , 1 .-r--Â· 11 r.. A nqn 111 9 8 U ll U !11 P -Â·G ... 1 .. ...._11 . r -. :-1 .111 te':=.--4 -1-,--1 - _- 4.L-u-r=-inr # Â·- 1 1 - 1 -N' 11.1-1 1.- -6 --f 1 ... * EXISTING -= * - i 7.V~ PÂ·Â· 12 Ai,r ~ .Â·DRI'C428* :Â·Â·Â· Â·Â·---l * gpga-327-92.Â· ORIGINAL STREET (EASD ELEVATION @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE alij ASPEN HPC HEARING SHANLucul!,rF{ f JULY 9, 2012 ~ â€¢Arlâ€žTI~CTS iarf"I~jU'-Il-~ .. 6/28/2012 % -~SI k-'41:Â·.7 $ -I-- ~~ 1:~~ ~ ~==( t~=12 C~~~CS Cri' FIG 1 1 -1 - --347 -8 1 A- Cot=a== -= 2=2 cl~=,9 C== c=- c==-0 ======t = L J El 1 PROPOSED 1 r z-,7. c 11 1, .11 .5:~ 11 .11 . 1 -1 277 G EXISTING 1~ *-1.' Â·i :.-):fÂ·:3*~ALLEY (NORTH) ELEVATION @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE 1,1 ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 ~ CHARLES CUNK: %FCT9 = =- 0 =2~~~2 ==*C~ C:4 1 AN G >02 9/V L <-3 PROPOSED r - I . -- ..= e 1 1 ...7 -8 1 1 I Il EXISTING - -' -1. 9 r '~Â· zg~ NEIGHBOR'S (WEST) ELEVATION 1. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE 12 ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 ~ 1 .. 6/28/2012 , 4ipit. 1 , i 1-25Â·91 1. 1 =N<,4 .'W--.Al#/9---- h rte, 9411 1,7,41'il~z.~ e 21,1.-lima,WHil.. ~-mt]*i>,__ 1 .13'. 74 1 - i,1-J -3- p7i ' iwuj~* 7 . 4 1 --- 1 4-&..~400- I 6:~31. -* 1 . 2-1-.Â¥. 4,4, Â¢49 1 : E .6 + *: ' ..7-'.-e0.a..1, '1 ill 4Â»9617- BEFORE 4 VIEW #2 FROM ACROSS INTERSECION OF I HYMAN AVE & ORIGINAL ST. 061. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE JULY 9, 2012 Â°98:143?2.-1; r, 1 Â· iÂ·,ge- ~027'9 33JaUn/ma-,9 -tk,// .LMI 1<24 -i-- 2-i.......1- i~ -7nt, 'ie 7 -Ii.6 130-~1 c 39. - AFTER ~~ VIEW #2 FROM ACROSS INTERSECTION OF HYMAN AVE. & ORIGINAL ST. _ --W 3. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVEWUE EU ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 8 .. 6/28/2012 .......+ fit?Ji. - "-'#ba/7Zl-r--- ~,~.=216-7 - G Â·I L ~--7119*.--- m 't 1. . I. 9-- &04 4 4 .:2*â€ž, 1. te .- 3 - - en ... al -r BEFORE f#,z VIEW #3 FROM ACROSS INTERSECTION OF @. 039 ASPEN HPC HEARING CHARLES CUIi:<, 0 ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HY~UAL~ A9'VE2NOU~ ~ ./CH.F.7/ .-- f. E i, G F . 7'hÂ¢ Â·05Â· 2 '& 47% 1.1-i 6%.4<4 4 --3 ..4 1 --- - I lia/.iliwi,lip/lill-=i=%&~ AU-'.Z - ~1<'=9'A<*Â·5â‚¬EsÂ·f ' Â· I----' -1.2- I trf/~9 9.-#3 2â‚¬ -.rf .. - I -1.11~.-i - HYMAN AVE. & ORIGINAL ST. - --1- .&&./.' -i./.b' - --I-IM I 1 i '' -i - rk. Ii; E- Â·~ 1 - i -43 _ =1- I.*) AFTER ---------~~EwÂ¥3 FE122%1!MR~RE~R 14 HYMAN AVE. & ORIGINAL ST. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 9 Pr. 1 .. 6/28/2012 r - 1 â€¢ -_--fliA â‚¬Â¢0*l. - -VMU.'U//"I/**I -*_..mss=-<*- [-1 *fu~ Â¥ 3~It? i ' '. f Â«t - Â·-:49 Â¢# D. V. -43..:* /1 2 a . _ 4 2. : --1.--1 --&*4 C.L_ - - 9 114219.1-~1 L 1/ m 1 t..FA 1 1, .932 j=. - -... BEFORE t; VIEW #4 ~2mxmas Ill~%, ORIGINAL ST. AT ALLEY ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING I 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE N. 12 ASPEN HPC HEARING '/4.9 'UNWÂ· r JULY 9, 2012 12.,i==.zp=rrrÂ·- \~Fwl.UI,di *4.. tki#Ellm;";-221* FL- -r<-~* , ..7 *~63351 = i-$* ~H~~-#'011-1 -Â·:4#*+ - ~- ' hT/16-_--r . .4 LM - - .*22 41". j , . -- AFTER ft,6-, ,~.~~ VIEW#4 FROM ACROSS -:13: ' 7 ORIGINAL ST. ATALLEY 1. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE 3/1 ASPEN HPC HEARING .ARLE. Cl .4 - JULY 9 2012 ~ 10 .. 6/28/2012 ME*~i I.N, 1 - 4/*-, 5'.3,&,4, 4.. 4*.'3Â»644 9.2;>"i #,~.. :.,3Â·4- ... 7 ~, s *St<.*t, *Â·. -,- 1 . -I-W.-# 8...1 *%42<Â·l, 19- rl ' I * 'L-- ,- Â· Â·Â· . Â·Â· ...Â·Â·8~1Pj!86 '.â€ž ... . ,~,b........â€¢w.,/ - L 9- -2. I *~Cr . I. 1.- V FID;22'6*V--2/ 'Â·ptÂ¥Â· If L 11 >37. - r r k irtifitfi: BEFORE 7" VIEW #5 FROM ACROSS 5---........-----.--rm,~,mx,-4: ORIGINAL ST. AT HOPKINS AVE. /3. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLOKELDINGÂ»20 E. HYMAN AVENUE ~ Clu ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 'llARLES r IiÂ· .' '1 46-~F #y~EF#Er-29#~.01Â£. -~.,~-Â·Â·f-:.:-Â·1:, 'Â·'1~?-TTO ' , J-1 - i. ...7 Lir-:mal\.';.. f I -Al-, 1 r .0 - ~- 1 C 1 - 't 7.12- ,. -:....~ itili,;44. . ' 4 4-4 : 5 1-4, 'Â·, ';':Â·1~-Â»f~b~f.'-,)-4,73Â£Â·-1- , 2,Â·:Â·~a-ittffÂ·%-1 . P /'Â·8..2-/ u a -4Â·Â·i :,I ,..:,. CM'.4:*Afft.Â·3-*5Â¥7.=tÂ·~ -< 0;~.25:i*t~J~ Il'.tiyiâ‚¬hfÂ» " - 4 92' b q . 4 9 7 4 ' c . 4 :22* ~ 01 f-99 6 ;6.*Sly .:Â·:~.Â·.,v :.Â· :z '. &:- Â£5% > -A 1614 .'C ,>-r ~prr~aL: 2, - - **r ~:~ fâ‚¬44-Â·lAy ~ ~~ 2 Of;,f~ . . r< I r 1% ..4 . 44 1 ./ ./ + 2â€¢ -7 r ...0 r f AFTER 44:. 18"""' VIEW #5 FROMACROSS ~ ORIGINAL ST. ATHOPKINSAVE. 3. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING I 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ~ ASPEN HPC HEARING JULY 9, 2012 11 .. 6/28/2012 THANK YOU! 11. @U ASPEN HPC HEARING CHAR~SCUNNUE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HY~ ~V~NO~-2 ~ I A..7. 12 Scu,B A. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 720 2 4~ /710(47 415-L , Aspen, co SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 26 1-64'*1 +,ru_ lIE 5:00#,in ,1012- (&411 1 KQâ‚¬t â€¢ STATE OF COLORADO ) County of Pitkin ) I. (name, please print) *mctn ac -1 being or representing an Applicant to the Ci4 of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) t days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 20 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) 2475=tÂ». . r ./0 ../ t, r ..99 I I . $ /4 47 rk <-SicÂ©,f â„¢CSa51525~ m E 1. 0 U 0 k m C- 11 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE (AKA THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB) ASPENMODERN 00 E NEGOTATION FOR VOLUNTARY LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND BENEFITS, SUBDIVISION, Cl, k GROWTH MANBGEMENT REVIEW NOTICE IS Â»FREBY GIVEN that a public hearing Z Â© will be held on Monday, June 11, 2012, at a regu- 4 >4 8 e H lar meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen CA A W O City Council, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. N .1 - : E- mitted by CMC, LLC do John Martin, P.O. Box Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application sub- JU 50 9 297, Queenstown, New Zealand, 9348. The appli- d 4 -0,2 W W cant is represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, UQ 610 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611. 51) C CO AX# U= 970-925-5590. The project affects the property loÂ· M E =12. cated at 720 East Hyman Avenue, legally de- M, scribed as Aspen Athletic Club Condominium, Lots 5 s 19 .5 t. ,* 0, .Glit/74 ~ ~ ~ ~ PenR ~unSt~Blf;tkin?'21%}13J;adce pl~fks a Aâ‚¬ , 2 376 = ~52 4-7 2737-182-11-801. 2737-182-11-008 though 2737-182-11-031, and 23 k GO 10 - 4. 4 %6 Aspen Athletic Club building in addition to minor %%510 ~0, â€¢ The applicant proposes to voluntarly designate the 00 exterior changes. Through the Aspen Modern ne- vert uses from commercial into two free market - gotiation the applicant requests approval to con- U C vvi addition to other benefits. The applicant requests â‚¬ 5 residential units and one affordable housing unit in UE-A - --4 . Subdivision. Growth Management Review, and re- day negotiation period to be forwarded to City . C~ . Council. For further information, contact Sara Ad â€¢ ams at the City of Aspen Community Development t w 5 g Department. 130 S. Galena St., Aspen. CO, (970) 429-2778, sara.adams@ci.asoen.co.us. 8: 85 slMichael C. Ireland 3 *C =0 Mayor â‚¬ d M @ 2 2 quested benefits aspart the AspenModern ninety O 0.8 A @4 Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on May 24, 2012,[7932790] 41 .9 0 - 31 4% .% 0 %02 3 Ft.S Scew 1 2 4,4.<< 4 4-1 h. 0 *** * Ilt[Ild GIHI jIO AdO) Rezoning or text amendment: Whenever the official zoning district map is in to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision tle, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such regulation, or otherwis the requirement o f an accurate survey m or other addresses of o rs of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be AND OFFICIAL SEAL (DI.LONI SNa i G[IVISS[ EIVMJINII posed zoning m p hal 1 be available for public siness hours for fifteen (15) days and the notice to and listing of names be made by repea e and enactment of a n :17[HVOI~IddV SV e foregoing "Affidavit of Notice' as ackno e prior to the public he a52IIaD:RI AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 11 0 E . Hu\MAO PNEAXIE , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 0-04â‚¬- \\ '200 IL STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, C . H AkLE-J C o AN c PFâ‚¬- (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: ~ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. ~ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the 1-5- day of 11Â»1 , 200 ll- , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. ~ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) PUBUC NOTICE 9kdall.-mt.2 Ilmeam ~%-clkHÂ£.1.10 Â§:925!le-- SL}*ementlevel_ Purpose: Notice. herebv civen thal a pulk__ beadfig,wiil b, held before. thg.AspgA Cit'Â¥ Council to consider an application Submitted by CM.112_ P.O Boi: RE~.94MBolown,*f_- Zealandj9348. T.~8 4Pick,t 4.*reserid by Charies Cunnifthrcfy#cts. 638-0 My;AÂ® AvioupÂ·.97B92*?90 fhe - 9 applicant p.peses to vq,uniamy ~ designate the Aspen Athielic Club PUBLIC NOTICE in addition to nunor exter,or , changes. Throug/1 tie AspenModem 0290{labon the applicant requests apprOval to a *re V. convert uses ~rom cojnme~c,el 10 2 ffee market res,dent,al uilils and 1 attordable housing unsi w addition i (o Subdivision Review. Growth f J ---- Managedle,11 Revew. La,idn,afk 6 0.:ignalion ..cl teque:' 7 1 benefdo s 8 120'(lin u.,oun:Â»n plea'e I.> i... IiÂ»r, Al ri: ,/ City,4/ I 131)6 6.,h liÂ·(LU j"1110,>' ATTAC t~ COPY OF THE PUBLIC U PHOTOGRAPH OF TH 0 LIST OF THE OWNERS BY MAIL â€¢ APPLICANT CERTIFIC AS REQUIRED BY C.R. Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses o f owners of real property in the area o f the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. aa-41--4/ Signature The foregoing "Affidavit ofNotice" was acknowledged before.me this 1 \~0|'day of Tent- , 20Ak, by curk-s C#â€¢(\Re- WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: 08~ 06 ~ 10,5-- Notary Public ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: â€¢ COPY OF THE PUBLICATION â€¢ PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) â€¢ LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL â€¢ APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. Â§24-65.5-103.3 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE AKA THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB) ASPENMODERN NEGOTATION FOR VOLUNTARY LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND BENEFITS, SUBDIVISION, GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, June 11, 2012, at a regular meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by CM, LLC, P.O. Box 297, Queenstown, New Zealand, 9348. The applicant is represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, 610 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611, 970-925-5590. The project affects the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, legally described as Aspen Athletic Club Condominium, Lots Q, R and S, Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, PID#s 2737-182-11-008 though 2737-182-11-031, and 2737-182-11-801. The applicant proposes to voluntarily designate the Aspen Athletic Club building in addition to minor exterior changes. Through the Aspen Modern negotiation the applicant requests approval to convert uses from commercial into two free market residential units and one affordable housing unit in addition to other benefits. The applicant requests Subdivision, Growth Management Review, and requested benefits as part the AspenModern ninety day negotiation period to be forwarded to City Council. For further information, contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2778, sara.adams@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Michael C. Ireland Mayor Published in the Aspen Times on May 24, 2012 City of Aspen Account 300 SPRING STREET ASPEN LLC 630 EAST HYMAN LLC 635 E HOPKINS LLC PO BOX 5000 532 E HOPKINS AVE 532 E HOPKINS SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 818 ASPEN LLC 803DKS LLC ADAM P T ANTHONY T SMITH 15280 ADDISON RD #301 PO BOX 9066 50 S LASALLE ST B2 ADDISON, TX 75001 ASPEN, CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60603 ANDERSON ANGUS A FAMILY LLLP ALEXANDER THOMAS L ANSON WESTON T & SUSAN BAILEY C/O ERIC RICHELSON 715 E HYMAN AVE #27 8030 EL PASEO GRANDE 13 EVERGREEN ROW ASPEN, CO 81611 LA JOLLA, CA 92037 ARMONK, NY 10504 ASPEN 719 HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN 835 LLC ASPEN ART MUSEUM PO BOX 11600 333 LAS OLAS \NY #2105 590 N MILL ST ASPEN, CO 81612 FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301 ASPEN, CO 81611 BARNETT JERALD M REV TRUST ASPEN ASSETS LLC AVP PROPERTIES LLC 3/3/2003 3361 MEANDER LN 630 E HYMAN AVE #25 500 PRESIDENT CLINTON BLVD #310 SAFETY HARBOR, FL 34695 ASPEN, CO 81611 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 BARTLETT KATY I BAUM ROBERT E BEAUDETTE PETER C 715 E HYMAN AVE #18 PO BOX 1518 501 E SPRINGS RD ASPEN, CO 81611-2066 STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 COLUMBIA, SC 29223 BELL MTN QUAL RES CONDO ASSOC BERGMAN ALAN M BELKOVA DASHA LLC C/O ALAN M BERGMAN 819 E HYMAN AVE #7 320 S SPRING ST 10960 WILSHIRE BLVD 1OTH FL, ASPEN, CO 81611-2092 ASPEN, CO 81611 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC BESTERFIELD LLC 65 FIRST NECK LN 944 PARK AVE 14TH FL 200 JAMES ST S STE 202 SOUTHAMPTON, NY 11968 NEW YORK, NY 10028 HAMILTON ONTARIO CANADA L8P3A9, BILCO PROPERTIES LLC BG SPRING LLC BILL FAMILY LLC CLARIDGE CONDOS #9N 300 S SPRING ST #202 2350 W LAKE OF THE ISLES PKWY 19950 BEACH RD ASPEN, CO 81611 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55405 TEQUESTA, FL 33469 BOELENS GREGORY S BUCKHORN ARMS LLC BUYERS BRADLEY M & BRUCE PO BOX 2360 730 E COOPER AVE 835 E HYMAN #K ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CALHOON THOMAS C CARVER RUTH A & MARTIN G CDP RESIDENCE TRUST 3405 CLEARVIEW DR 10 BYRON LN 601 E HYMAN AVE AUSTIN, TX 78703 MUSCATINE, IA 52761 ASPEN, CO 81611 CLARY EDGAR D IV COLBY WARD COLOSI THOMAS W 715 E HYMAN AVE #9 715 E HYMAN #20 715 E HYMAN AVE APT 6 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2099 COOPER SPRINGS LLC COORS WILLIAM SCOTT DAILY CONNIE M 393 N COLUMBIA AVE 727 E HOPKINS AVE #A 715 E HYMAN AVE #14 COLUMBUS, OH 43209 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 DANIELE ROBIN DAVIS HARRIET S & MARTIN DECK WARREN & MARCIA PO BOX 1023 835 E HYMAN AVE APT G 5363 S LAMAR ST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611-2603 LITTLETON, CO 80123 DELPHINIUM ASSOC DEVINE RALPH R DODEA NICHOLAS T 6050 RIVERVIEW\AN 715 E HYMAN #13 715 E HYMAN AVE #19 HOUSTON, TX 77057 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 DONNELLAN SHAUN K& SHEILA F DOWS PATRICE J DRESNER MILTON H REV LVG TRST 1250 W SOUTHWINDS BLVD #118 1411 9TH ST SW 28777 NORTHWESTERN HWY VERO BEACH, FL 32963 CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52404 SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 DUNN JUDITH A REV LIV TRUST EDGE OF AJAX INC EDGETTE JAMES J & PATRICIA 8051 LOCKLIN LN 201 E SILVER ST 19900 BEACH RD STE 801 COMMERCE TOWNSHIP, MI 48382 MARBLE, CO 81623 JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 ETTLIN ROSS L FAATH CARLOS M & MOLLY G FELLMAN THOMAS 715 E HYMAN AVE # 7 PO BOX 11435 809 NO 96 ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 OMAHA, NE 68114 FIGHTLIN JONATHAN D FOX HERB FRANKS ROOK 715 E HYMAN #46 PO BOX 1355 1901 PORT WEYBRIDGE PL ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 WINTER PARK, CO 80482 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 GAUBA ALENA GLAUSER STEVEN JERRY & BARBARA GOLDMAN JEROME K TRUST 715 E HYMAN AVE #21 460 ST PAUL ST PO BOX 249 ASPEN, CO 81611 DENVER, CO 80206 ASPEN, CO 81612 GOLDMAN MICHAEL VICTOR & GLORIA GRAY DALE F REV TRST 20% INT GROSFELD ASPEN PROPERTIES ANNA GRAY CHERYL W REV TRST 20% PARTNERS LLC 6919 GLENEAGLE DR 5921 SEARL TER 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD #2222 TUCSON, AZ 85718 BETHESDA, MD 20816 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 HIMAN LLC HAYLES THOMAS HEWINS SAMUEL PO BOX 6159 715 E HYMAN AVE #5 715 E HYMAN AVE #23 SWANBOURNE WA 6010 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 AUSTRALIA, HOPKINS ASSOCIATES LP HOZACKWILLIAM HUNT SARAH J C/O SHIEKMAN 2100 CYPRESS ST 715 E HYMAN AVE #22 2000 MARKET ST 10TH FL PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 ASPEN, CO 81611 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103-3291 HURST FERN K HYMAN STREET BROWNSTONES 11 LLC IDS PARTNERS LLC 1060 5TH AVE PO BOX 381 PO BOX 642 NEW YORK CITY, NY 10128 WRIGHTVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 INDY HOUSE LLC IRVINE DOUGLAS FORBES ISRAEL FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LTD 605 OCEAN BLVD 201 N MILL ST 263 OCEAN BLVD GOLDEN BEACH, FL 33160 ASPEN, CO 81611 GOLDEN BEACH, FL 33160 JOHNSON BARBARA WEAVER LIVING JENKINS ASIA JOFFE LIVING TRUST TRUST 734 E HOPKINS AVE 23820 LONG VALLEY RD PO BOX 3570 ASPEN, CO 81611 HIDDEN HILLS, CA 91302 LAS CRUCES, NM 88003 JOSHUA & CO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS KANTAS NICOLETTE KARST REBECCA LLC 715 E HYMAN AVE #15 6230 SW 44TH ST 300 S HUNTER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 MIAMI, FL 33155 ASPEN, CO 81611 KELLY SIMON P TRUST KASHINSKI MICHAEL R KNODE MICHAEL C 732 E COOPER AVE 0343 GROVE CT 2142 VISTA CASCADA CT ATTN: JOHN HOFFAMN 111 ASPEN, CO 81611 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81503 ASPEN, CO 816112061 KOUTSOUBOS LOUIS KOUTSOUBOS TED KRANS ROSEMARY PO BOX 9199 430 E HYMAN AVE #PH 298 4TH AVE #429 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94118 KRAVITZ MICHAEL C KROEGER HAROLD R & HEATHER R LANDA MICHAEL B PO BOX 11207 16 FORDYCE LN 851 S JOSEPHINE ST ASPEN, CO 81612-9630 ST LOUIS, MO 63124 DENVER, CO 80209 LANDIS JOSHUA B LANDRY ELIZABETH J LAWROM LLC 715 E HYMAN AVE #4 PO BOX 3036 533 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 LEGNAME RUDI REV TRUST LIBERATORE DOUGLAS LIEB MADELINE TRUST 202 STANFORD AVE PO BOX 1838 800 E HYMAN AVE #A MILL VALLEY, CA 94941 SARASOTA, FL 34230 ASPEN, CO 81611 LONG MONA HAYLES TRUST MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP MANNING FREDERICK J & GAIL P BOX 3849 317 SIDNEY BAKER S #400 222 W ADAMS ST #2290 ASPEN, CO 81612 KERRVILLE, TX 78028 CHICAGO, IL 60606 MASINI ALDA MARTELL BARBARA MARTIN ROBERT A MASINI ALDA TRUST 702 E HYMAN AVE 322 WEST 17TH ST #3E 830 E HOPKINS #201 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10011 ASPEN, CO 81611 MAYLE KENNETH D MCCUTCHIN GENE P MCFADDEN GORDON K 715 E HYMAN AVE #3 14833 MIDWAY #200 18519 E VALLEY RD ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ADDISON, TX 75001 KENT, WA 98032 MONTANARO JOHN & SUSAN FAMILY MICHELSON BRUCE V REV TRST MIKI TRUST 7701 FORSYTH STE 900 PO BOX 444 PO BOX 457 ST LOUIS, MO 63105-1813 ASPEN, CO 81612 MALIBU, CA 90265 NA DEVELOPMENT LLC NETHERY BRUCE NJH CENTENNIAL LLC 601 E HYMAN 715 E HYMAN AVE #25 314 S GALENA ST #300 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611 NONNIE LLC OCONNELL SARA G PACIFIC WEST INVESTMENTS LLC PO BOX 565 PO BOX 491167 320 MARTIN ST #100 ASPEN, CO 81612 MIAMI, FL 33149 BIRMINGHAM, MI 480091485 PERLMUTTER JAMES ROBERT PRICE GAIL PLATT HARLAN & MARJORIE SH UFRO SUSAN C/O ASPEN POTTERS INC 1 CHARLES ST SOUTH #5G PO BOX 11385 715 E HYMAN #10 BOSTON, MA 02116 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 QUARRY INTERESTS LTD RAYMOND KIMBERLY A RICCHIUTI JOSEPH F 9932 LAKEWAY CT 1280 S UTE AVE STE 5 558 N 23RD ST DALLAS, TX 75230 ASPEN, CO 816112259 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19130 RICHARDSON JOHN & MARK ROGER RICHARD R ROTH LEWIS 1 5 TORONTO ST #400 16251 DALLAS PKWY 6230 SW 44TH ST TORONTO ONTARIO CANADA M5C ADDISON, TX 75001 MIAMI, FL 33155 2E3, RUST TRUST RYERSON GEORGE W JR SAGARIA SABATO DOMINIC 111 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD #760 715 E HYMAN AVE #17 P.O. BOX 8376 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 SAHN KAREN R SAHR KAREN M SAKSON DREW 715 E HYMAN AVE #11 715 E HYMAN AVE #8 PO BOX 1091 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEWPORT, RI 028400999 SALET PHILIP S REV TRUST SCHULTZ REV TRUST SELBY TROY E & MAY EYNON PO BOX 4897 5110 SAN FELI PE ST UN IT 381 WEST PO BOX 8234 ASPEN, CO 81612 HOUSTON, TX 77056 ASPEN, CO 81612 SESTIC ZORAN SHAPIRO LAND LLC SHAPIRO REGINA 530 E MAIN ST LOWER LEVEL 2438 JUNIPER HILL RD 14024 MONTRACHET LN ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 TOWN & COUNTRY, MO 63017 SIMON JONATHAN H SKLAR LEONARD E SKLAR WILLIAM P 19 W 21 ST ST STE 902 PO BOX 246508 7238 MONTRICO DR NEW YORK, NY 10010 PEMBROKE PINES, FL 33024 BOCA ROTON, FL 33433 SMART EDWIN J SMITH ALICIA M SMITH JEFFREY L 2009 MARKET ST 715 E HYMAN AVE #16 851 S JOSEPHINE ST DENVER, CO 80205-2022 ASPEN, CO 81611 DENVER, CO 80209 STRIBLING DOROTHY SNOWMASS CORPORATION STEINER MICHAEL C & JENNIFER E WACHOVIA BANK NA FL0135 PO BOX 620 PO BOX 8312 PO BOX 40062 BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81612 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32203-0062 THOMPSON RICHARD P THOMPSON ROSS & LYNETTE TWO SEASONS HOLDINGS LLC RUSHING JIMMYC PO BOX 1186 191 UNIVERSITY BLVD #816 1171 BEACH BLVD CARBONDALE, CO 81623 DENVER, CO 80206 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32250 WEBB MARSHALL B ASPEN QPRT UPTON MARY E WALKER JOHN S 53 OSPREY CIR PO BOX 2360 PO BOX 11538 CALLAWASSIE ISLAND ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612-9537 OKATIE, SC 29909 WILLIAMSON CHERYL EXEMPT TRUST WILLIAMS CRAIG & LEE FAM PTNRSHP WOODS FAMILY TRUST 60% 5577 CEDAR CREEK 111 BIRDSONG WY#E103 2717 OLIVE AVE NW HOUSTON, TX 77056 HILTON HEAD, SC 29926 WASHINGTON, DC 20007 Vic i b MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Aspen City Council FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director(3A1/14 RE: 720 East Hyman Avenue, the Aspen Athletic Club (Block 104, Lots Q, R, and S) - First Reading of Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 - AspenModern negotiation for Landmark Designation and benefits, Subdivision, Growth Management for the creation of a free market residential unit and for the development of affordable housing. Second Reading is scheduled on June 11, 2012 MEETING DATE: June 11,2012 REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City Council is asked to continue the public hearing to July 9,2012. The applicant requests more time to study the egress from the rooftop deck in order to meet Building Code requirements and minimize the footprint and height as requested by the Historic Preservation Commission. First reading of Ordinance #17, Series of 2012 for an AspenModern negotiation for 720 E. Hyman Avenue, in addition to reviewing Growth Management for the creation of a new free market residential unit and Subdivision was approved on May 29,2012 by a vote of 5 - 0. A RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to continue the public hearing for Ordinance #17, Series of 2012, the AspenModern negotiation for 720 East Hyman Avenue, to July 9,2012." 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - Second Reading June 11,2012 Page 1 of 1 0 0 =Tr MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Aspen City Council FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner ~44*- THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: 720 East Hyman Avenue, the Aspen Athletic Club (Block 104, Lots Q, R, and S) - First Reading of Ordinance #11 Series of 2012 - AspenModern negotiation for Landmark Designation and benefits, Subdivision, Growth Management for the creation of a free market residential unit and for the development of affordable housing. Second Reading is scheduled for June 11, 2012. MEETING DATE: May 29,2012 REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City Council is asked to grant first reading of Ordinance # 133 Series of 2012 for an AspenModern negotiation for 720 E. Hyman Avenue, in addition to reviewing Growth Management for the creation of a new free market residential unit and Subdivision. SUMMARY: 720 E. Hyman , 5 - 73* + L,11... 9.-1 Avenue, aka the Aspen Athletic Â¥ i r Â·, Club, is located on the east end of 1% ~:' Â· *~ downtown at the corner o f Hyman Avenue and Original Street on a 4 44*.f. 9,000 square feet lot in the Mixed 4 1 - - .Ut* 12:- I~ "WÂ· 1. -â€¢*%62Â·. < 1'-1 J b.. Cf,MÂ·:â€¢Â· Â· Use Zone District. The property .Pl 1111'hit'..I.:,R.-'E,;- '.;,Â· & is included on the Aspen Modern f%*'*:Â·+12; - map. The applicant proposes to : . r...9.'ll'.- -- 1: voluntarily designate the existing Robin Molny designed building -1.14,". 9. 24 in exchange for benefits through - *40 ..7 - 1 , -%2~UNe - the AspenModern program. The i . . -U~ - tal=4~ i. . ,%*T V.4-m applicant proposes to convert a portion of the second floor office ** space to an affordable housing Photograph 1: 720 E. Hyman Avenue unit and to convert the third floor office space into two free market residential units. The majority of the changes are internal to the building; however a few minor exterior changes are proposed. A 675 square feet roof deck and stairway access is proposed in the center of the roof; a new skylight on the roof; replacement of plywood "hoppers" with glazing; and the addition of removable horizontal brise soleiel (a screen usually louvered placed on the outside of a building to shield windows from direct sunlight) above the windows. HPC reviewed these changes on May 23,2012. Staff shall provide a summary of their decision during first reading. 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - First Reading May 23,2012 Page 1 of 8 BACKGROUND: The Aspen Athletic Club was built in 1976 by local Aspen architect Robin Molny with Art Yuenger assisting with construction drawings and some design details. Molny is a significant local architect who was part of the local Frank Lloyd Wright trained constituent. Similar to other Wrightian trained local architects, Molny worked for Fritz Benedict when he first arrived in town. In his practice, he designed the Mason and Morse Building on Hyman Avenue (designated in 2012), the Hearthstone House on Hyman Avenue (designated in 2006), the pedestrian malls and local area residences including a home that was listed in the 1975 Architecture Record publication. The existing building is located in the Mixed Use Zone District. It comprises 5 floors with 3 floors above grade and is entirely commercial. According to the current Land Use Code the building greatly exceeds the FAR allotment for commercial uses (the maximum by-right is 6,750 square feet and the existing condition is 17,026 square feet) and it is over the height limit (limit is 28 feet up to 32 feet, and the existing condition is between 33 feet 3 inches and 35 feet 6 inches). HPC reviewed the project on May 23, 2012 to make a recommendation to Council regarding landmark designation and reviewed Minor Development for minor exterior alterations. On May 23rd, HPC is asked to review setback variance for the proposed brise soleil along the front and side facades. Due to the short time frame available for AspenModern projects, the Council packet is due prior to HPC's hearing. Staff shall convey HPC's determination during first reading and provide the minutes from HPC's hearing in the second reading packet. As part of the AspenModern review Council is asked to grant Subdivision Review and Growth Management Review. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from City Council. As noted, many of the reviews below typically fall to either the P&Z or HPC for final review or a recommendation. AspenModern allows the consolidation of reviews at City Council which provides Council with the entire proposal for review. â€¢ AspenModern Ninety-Day Negotiation (Section 26.415.025(C)(1)) for preservation benefits in exchange for historic landmark designation. City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission. The ninety days expires on February 29,2012. â€¢ Designation of Historic Properties (Section 26.415.030(C) for landmark designation of the Aspen Athletic Club. City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission. â€¢ Subdivision Review (Section 26.480) this is a technical subdivision that the Land Use Code requires for mixed use properties to divide the building into separate interests. City Council is the final review authority after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. AspenModern allows the consolidation of reviews at 720 East Hyman Aven ue AspenModern Negotiation - First Reading May 23,2012 Page 2 of 8 City Council; as such the P&Z has not reviewed the application for a recommendation of Subdivision. â€¢ Growth Management Review for new free market residential units within a mixed use building (Section 26.470.080(2) for the creation of a new free market residential unit. This is a Major Growth Management Review at the Planning and Zoning Commission. AspenModern allows City Council to have review authority over other Board' s purview. City Council is the final review authority. â€¢ Growth Management Review for the development of affordable housing (Section 26.470.070(4) for the creation of an onsite affordable housing unit. This is a Minor Growth Management Review at the Planning and Zoning Commission. AspenModern allows City Council to have review authority over other Board's purview. City Council is the final review authority. PROJECT SUMMARY: The proposed project is mostly interior changes to the existing building that includes converting a portion of the second floor commercial space to an affordable housing unit and converting the third floor commercial space to two free market residential units. A new rooftop deck is proposed that meets the requirements of the Code. The affordable housing unit meets the mitigation requirements for the 2,750 square feet net livable market residential unit. The 2,500 square feet net livable free market residential unit is exempt from affordable housing mitigation due to the building's landmark designation that is part of the application. The proposed changes bring the building into closer Code conformance with the allowable commercial floor area allotment; however the proposed changes exceed the allowable free market residential floor area allotment for the Mixed Use Zone District. The program is: Sub-basement level: mechanical and commercial space (gym) Basement level: commercial space (gym) First level: commercial space (office) and open atrium Second level: office and affordable housing unit Third level: two free market residential units Roof: a rooftop deck and a new skylight 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - First Reading May 23,2012 Page 3 of 8 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS: MU zone district Proposed dimensional Existing dimensions requirements requirements 33 ft. 3 in. at the front of the No change, with the Maximum 28 ft. up to 32 ft. through property and 35 ft. 6 in. at exception of a slight height height commercial design review the alley increase of less than 1 ft.for the new rooftop skylight Maximum Allowable 2:1 or 18,000 sq. ft. 1.89:1 or 17,026 sq. ft. 1:89:1 or 17,036 sq. ft. Floor Area: Maximum 0.75:1 or 6,750 sq. ft. Commercial (up to 1:1 or 9,000 sq. ft. 1.89:1 or 17,026 sq. ft. 1.01:1 or 9,061 sq. ft. Floor Area: through Special Review) Maximum Net Leasable 11/a 21,474 sq. ft. net leasable 15,754 sq. ft. net leasable Commercial commercial area comniercial area Area: - 0.5:1 or 4,500 sq. ft. Maximum (up to 0.75:1 if affordable Free Market housing equal to 100% of 0 sq. ft. 0.78:1 or 7,014 sq. ft. Residential the free market residential Floor Area: floor area is developed on the same parcel) 5,250sq. ft. total: Maximum 2,750 sq. ft.-Unit 1(with 1 Residential 2,000 sq. ft. net livable, up 0 sq. ft. TDR landed) Net Livable to 2,500 sq. ft. with TDR and 2,500 sq. ft. - Unit 2 Area: (with 1 TDR landed) Free Market Residential n/a 0 2 Units: Affordable Housing No limit 0 0Â·11: 1 or 961 sq. ft. Allowable Floor Area Affordable Housing net No limit 0 825 sq. ft. livable area 1 space/1,000 sq. ft. Minimum 3 new spaces required for the commercial net leasable; Off-Street 3 residential units. Request and 1 space per residential Parking waiver of required $90,000 unit. Ability to pay cash Spaces: cash in lieu payment. in lieu payment by right. Table 1: Dimensional Table 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - First Reading May 23, 2012 Page 4 of 8 ASPEN MoDERN NEGOTIATION: The applicant requests the following incentives in exchange for landmark designation: 1) Grant 250 square feet of net livable area (NLA) to be added to one of the free market residential units to allow it to exceed the maximum residential unit size cap after the addition of a TDR. There are two free market residential units (Unit A and Unit B) proposed on the third iloor. The Mixed Use Zone District has a 2,000 square feet (sf) NLA cap for free market residential units with the ability to increase to 2,500 sf NLA by landing l TDR per residence. The applicant proposes to purchase and land 2 transferrable development rights (TDRs) - 1 per residence for each Unit to meet the 2,500 sf NLA cap allowed by Code. The AspenModern request is to allow one of the Units to further exceed the cap by 250 sf NLA for a total of 2,750 sfNLA. Free Market Maximum unit size Land 2 TDRs, one per AspenModern request for Residential Units cap ( sf NLA) residence (sf NLA) 250 sfNLA Unit A 2,000 2,500 2,750 Unit B 2,000 2,500 2,500 Table 2: Free Market Residential Units 2) Ability to exceed the allowable floor area ratio for free market residential use. The increase in the free market residential unit sizes exceeds the maximum floor area ratio of 0.5:1 allowed in the Mixed Use Zone District. The maximum allowed free market residential floor area is 4,500 sf and the proposed floor area is 7,014 sf (0.78:1). The overall building complies with the total overall maximum allowable floor area ratio of 2:1. The uses are broken down below: 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - First Reading May 23,2012 Page 5 of 8 Difference Amount the Allowable floor between Use is over area in Mixed Existing floor Proposed floor Existing and the allowable Use Use Zone area (sf) area (sf) Proposed floor area (sf) District (sf) floor area (sf) Commercial 0.75:1 or 6,750 17,026 9,061 (7,965) 2,3111 Free Market 0.5:1 or 4,500 0 7,014 7,014 2,514 Residential Affordable No limitation 0 961 961 - Housing Overall Total 2:1 or 18,000 17,026 17,036 10 Table 3: Existing vs. Proposed Floor Area by Use 3) Waiver of $90,000 parking cash-in-lieu fee for 3 parking spaces. The Code requires one parking space per residential unit with the ability to pay cash-in- lieu for the parking spaces by right at $30,000 per space. The 3 new residential units (2 free market units and 1 affordable housing unit) require 3 spaces for a total of $90,000. The cash in lieu fee is used for parking and transportation related construction or improvements. Transportation and Parking Departments are not in favor of waiving this fee. 4) Slight height variance for a new skylight on the roof. The applicant proposes a new slightly convex skylight on the roof. The rounded form allows positive drainage for snow and water from the skylight. The property is already over the height limit, so the new skylight extends above the height limit. The applicant will provide the specific height of the skylight at the meeting - the skylight will be 1 ft. or less in height. STAFF RESPONSE: AspenModern Negotiation and Landmark Designation: The designation criteria are stated in Exhibit A and the integrity score sheets, which evaluate the physical changes to the building over time, is included as Exhibit B. Staff is supportive of landmark designation of 720 East Hyman Avenue and finds that all of the designation criteria are met. The applicant requests 4 incentives in exchange for landmark designation, 2 of which relate to the free market residential component, 1 relating to a waiver of the parking requirement and 1 1 The amount of existing commercial floor area is an existing non-conformity that is allowed to be maintained or reduced. The proposal is to bring the commercial component closer to compliance by removing almost 8,000 square feet of floor area. A variance is not required for the commercial floor area. 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - First Reading May 23, 2012 Page 6 of 8 relating to a height variance for a skylight. The project meets Code requirements for affordable housing mitigation. Staff sees great value in the voluntary designation and is supportive of the AspenModern requests. In Staff's opinion the request to change the use of the second and third tloors to accommodate residential use is more consistent with the purpose of the Mixed Use Zone District and brings the property into closer compliance with commercial floor area requirements by reducing the commercial component. The proposed changes are mostly internal to the building and do not impact the historic significance of the architecture. The size of the free market residential units does not add mass or height to the existing building, which is typically a concern on other AspenModern projects. In addition, the applicant commits to purchase TDRs to reduce the magnitude of the AspenModern requests. Although the individual allowance for free market residential floor area is being requested to increase from 0.5: 1 to 0.78:1, the project is still within the overall allowable Floor Area Ratio for the site. Staff is supportive of the waiver for the parking requirement. There is no onsite parking available on the site and, considering the scope of the project, no ability to add parking without removing a portion of the building. The applicant requests a waiver of the parking cash in lieu fee of $90,000 which is a policy decision for Council. The height request is a policy decision for Council. The new skylight is central to the building and is so small that it will not be visible from the street. Subdivisiont The Subdivision criteria are stated in Exhibit C. Staff is supportive of the technical subdivision to create separate legal interests in one parcel. Staff finds that the review criteria are met. urowth Management for new free market residential units within a mixed use building and Development of Affordable Housing: The review criteria are stated in Exhibit D. As a landmark. the project is only required to mitigation for the larger of the 2 new free market residential units. All landmark properties are eligible to create 1 free market unit without affordable housing mitigation. The project includes an 825 sf NLA affordable housing unit that is proposed to be a Category 4, one bedroom rental. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) recommends that the onsite housing unit be denied and that the applicant provide housing credits to fulfill the mitigation requirement. APCLIA stated that i f the unit is approved a Category 3 or 4 "for-sale" unit is requested. The affordable housing unit meets Land Use Code requirements as outlined in Exhibit D which promote mixed income buildings by permitting onsite housing units to fulfill mitigation requirements. Staff finds that the review criteria are met. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: The City Engineer, Fire Marshal, Water/Utilities Department, Aspen Sanitation District, Parking Department, Transportation Department, Building Department, Housing Department, 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - First Reading May 23,2012 Page 7 of 8 Environmental Health Department and the Parks Department were notified of the application. The City Engineer, Parking Department, Transportation Department, Building Department, Parks Department and Housing Department all commented on the application. Applicable requirements have been included as conditions of approval when appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the proposed AspenModern negotiation and associated land use reviews are appropriate in exchange for the landmark designation of 720 East Hyman Avenue. Ensuring that the important 1970s buildings designed by locally significant architects are preserved for residents and visitors to experience is tantamount to Aspen's story. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No.lj; Series of 2012 on first reading." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT A - Landmark Designation Criteria EXHIBIT B - Integrity Score sheet EXHIBIT C - Subdivision Review Criteria EXHIBIT D - Growth Management Review for new free market residential units within a mixed use building Review Criteria and for the development of affordable housing Review Criteria EXHIBIT E - Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority referral memo dated May 7,2012 EXHIBIT F - Application 720 East Hyman Avenue AspenModern Negotiation - First Reading May 23,2012 Page 8 of 8 ORDINANCE # 17 (Series of 2012) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION, SUBDIVISION, GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW, AND BENEFITS THROUGH THE ASPENMODERN PROGRAM, AND A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 720 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUMS, LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 104, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID NUMBERS: 2737-182-11-008 through 2737-182-11-031, and 2737-182-11-801. WHEREAS, the applicant, John Martin, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, submitted an application, pursuant to Section 26.415.025(C), AspenModern Properties, of the Aspen Municipal Code, to voluntarily participate in the AspenModern ninety-day negotiation period for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, legally described as The Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R and S Block 104); and WHEREAS, 720 East Hyman Avenue is included on the Aspen Modern Map; and WHEREAS, the applicant submitted a letter dated March 7,2012 requesting voluntary landmark designation in exchange for specific benefits through the AspenModern negotiation; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Â§26.415.025.C(1), the ninety day AspenModern negotiation commenced on March 7, 2012; and WHEREAS, Â§26.415.025.C(1)(b) states that, during the negotiation period, "the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the property. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting;" and WHEREAS, the property owners' representative met with the Historic Preservation Commission (the HPC) on May 23, 2012; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on May 23, 2012, the HPC considered the application; found that 720 East Hyman Avenue was a "best" example of Organic/Wrightian style and, found that the policy objectives for the historic preservation program stated at Â§26.415.010, Purpose and Intent are met, and recommended City Council ("Council") approve Historic Landmark Designation, requested benefits and fee waivers as stated in LIPC Resolution numbered , Series of 2012; and 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #11 Series of 20 12 Page 1 of 13 WHEREAS, Â§26.415.025.C(1)d establishes that "as part of the mutually acceptable agreement, the City Council may, at its sole discretion, approve any land use entitlement or fee waiver permitted by the Municipal Code and may award any approval that is assigned to another Board or Commission, including variations;"and WHEREAS, the property owner requests voluntary Landmark Designation - Â§26.415.030(C), AspenModern; Subdivision review - Â§26.480.040(C) Subdivisions; Growth Management review - Â§26.470.060(3), Â§26.470.070(4), and Â§26.470.080(2); Change in Use of historic landmark sites and structures; Development of Affordable Housing and New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed use project all to be consolidated with the AspenModern ninety-day negotiation process and reviewed by City Council; and WHEREAS, in addition to Historic Landmark Designation, Subdivision, and Growth Management, the applicant had identified preservation incentives that are requested as part of the AspenModern negotiation process in a letter dated March 7, 2012. Those incentives requested include: the ability to construct a 2,750 square feet floor area free market residential unit; ability to increase the free market allowable floor area to 0.78:1 or 7,014 square feet of floor area; a waiver of the onsite parking requirement and a waiver of the parking cash in lieu payment; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department performed an analysis of the application including Landmark Designation, Subdivision Review, and Growth Management Review and found that the review standards are met. The staff report analyzed the proposed preservation incentives and monetary value of the benefits where possible; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Approvals: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves Historic Designation, Subdivision, Growth Management Review and a site specific development plan subject to the conditions described herein. Section 2: Historic Landmark Designation Historic landmark designation is granted for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue (the Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R, and S, Block 104). 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #_, Series of 2012 Page 2 of 13 Upon the effective date of this ordinance, the City Clerk shall record with the real estate records of the Clerk and Recorder of the County, a certified copy of this ordinance. The location of the historic landmark property designated by this ordinance shall be indicated on the official maps of the City that are maintained by the Community Development Department. Section 3: Subdivision Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council hereby approves Subdivision of the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue (the Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R and S, Block 104) for a mixed use building that contains two free market residential units, one affordable housing unit, a commercial component and a rooftop deck. A final Subdivision Plat and Subdivision Agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Â§ 26.480, Subdivision, shall be recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder' s Office within 180 days of the receipt of a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development by the Historic Preservation Commission. Subdivision Agreement shall include at a minimum the following information: 1. An illustrative site plan of the project depicting the proposed improvement and the approved dimensional requirements. 2. Plan of any required grading and drainage improvements. 3. Approved planting for the right of way. 4. Encroachment license for the planter boxes. Section 4: Financial Assurances Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit the Applicant shall provide to the Community Development Department the following: a. Cost Estimates. Applicant's General Contractor shall cause to be prepared, and certified as correct, cost estimates for all improvements or development for which a Building Permit is required. There are no public improvements associated with the project at this time. Any public improvements associated with the project that are discovered after the approval of this ordinance are subject to the requirements listed below. The cost estimates for the implementation and maintenance of the planting in the right of way described herein at Section 13 shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks Department. The cost estimates for all other improvements and development in the Subdivision shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Department. Cost estimates for the landscape plan (i.e. the planting in the right of way) shall be shown separately from the cost estimates for all other improvements and development of the Project. Owner shall be responsible for the implementation and maintenance of the landscape plan required by this Ordinance. b. Landscaping Guarantees. Pursuant to and in conformance with the requirements of Â§ 26.480.070(C) & (D) and Â§ 26.445.070 (C)(3) & (4) of the Aspen Municipal Code; and, in order to secure the performance of the obligations of the 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #_, Series of 2012 Page 3 of 13 Applicant to implement and maintain the Landscape Plan, Applicant shall provide a guarantee of no less than one hundred and twenty five percent (125%) of the estimated cost of such Landscape Plan and Public Improvements, as determined and approved in subsection (a), above. The guarantee to implement and maintain the Landscape Plan and to complete Public Improvements shall be made by depositing with the City an irrevocable letter of credit with provisions as hereinafter set forth, or by providing such other security that may be acceptable to the City attorney. If an irrevocable letter of credit is used, the irrevocable letter of credit shall be retained by the City until satisfaction of Applicant' s obligations under this Section or earlier released by the City. The letter of credit shall be issued by a financial institution doing business in Aspen, Colorado, or such other bank as shall be approved by the City; shall have an expiration date no earlier than two years after its date of issue; and shall provide that it may be drawn upon from time to time by the City in such amount or amounts as the City may designate as justified, such amounts not to exceed, in the aggregate, the amount of the letter of credit. Draws under any such letter of credit shall be by a certificate signed by the City Manager of the City of Aspen, or his designee, stating that the City is entitled to draw the specified amount under the terms of this Section. c. Other Improvements and Development. With respect to all other improvements or development within the Project, the Applicant shall provide evidence satisfactory to the Community Development Department and the City Attorney' s Office that the Applicant has in place sufficient financing to accomplish and complete all the development for which a Building Permit is sought. Such financing may include, without limitation, a construction loan from an institutional lender or lenders and equity capital investments from the Applicant or third party investors. The City Attorney shall have sole discretion in determining if the proposed financing as advanced by the Applicant is sufficient to complete the development activity for which a Building Permit is sought. Section 5: Site Protection Fund The Applicant hereby commits and agrees that before any Building Permit (including demolition, access/infrastructure, and/or site preparation permits) is issued for the Project approved by this Ordinance, the Applicant shall deposit with Pitkin County Title, Inc. ("Escrow Agent") the sum of $25,000 in the form of cash or wired funds (the "Escrow Funds") and will execute an Escrow Agreement and Instructions with the Escrow Agent which recites and agrees as follows: "In the event construction work on the Project shall cease for sixty (60) days or longer ('work stoppage') prior to a final inspection by the City of the work authorized by the Building Permit on the Project, then the City in its discretion may draw upon the Escrow Funds from time to time as needed for purposes of protecting and securing the Project site and improvements from damage by the elements and/or from trespass by unauthorized persons, and for purposes of improving the Project site to a safe condition such that it does not become an attractive nuisance or otherwise pose a threat to neighbors or other persons." 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModem negotiation Ordinance #_, Series of 2012 Page 4 of 13 The Escrow Funds or any remaining balance thereof shall be returned to Applicant upon completion by the City of a final inspection of the work authorized by the Foundation/Structural Frame Permit on the Project. Section 6: Cash Escrow for Site Enhancement Fund. Before the issuance of a building permit, and as a condition of such issuance, the owner shall deposit with Stewart Title of Aspen, Inc. the sum of TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO/100THS ($25,000.00) (the "Site Enhancement Escrow Funds") in the form of cash or wired funds pursuant to an Escrow Agreement made and entered into between the Owner and the City which shall provide as follows: i. In the event construction work on the development of 720 E. Hyman Ave. shall cease for ninety (90) days or longer prior to a final inspection by the City of the work authorized by a building permit on the subject property, then the City in its discretion may draw upon the Site Enhancement Escrow Funds from time to time as needed for the purposes of improving the appearance of any construction work already completed, and for the installing of any public improvements on or adjacent to the subject property. ii. The City shall have sole discretion with respect to the manner of improving the appearance of construction work in progress as well as a determining the public improvements to be installed. iii. The Site Enhancement Escrow Funds or any remaining balance thereof shall be returned to Owner upon completion by the City of a final inspection and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the projeect, or when otherwise agreed to by Owner and the City. iv. The City shall be named as a third party beneficiary of the Escrow Agreement with the express right and authority to enforce the same from time to time in accordance with the tenor in terms thereof. Section 7: Approved Dimensional Requirements The building as presented in the plans dated April 20, 2012 and attached as Exhibit A to this Ordinance comply with the effective dimensional allowances and limitations of the Mixed Use (MU) zone district except as modified below. Compliance with these requirements shall be verified by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer at the time of building permit submittal. The following dimensions are approved: Maximum Height: new skylight, shown in Exhibit A, is permitted to be 1 ft. or less in height as measured from where the feature is attached to the roof. Maximum Residential Floor Area: 0.78:1 floor area ratio, 7,014 square feet total free market residential 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #_, Series of 2012 Page 5 of 13 Maximum Residential Net Livable Area: 5,2501 square feet total: 2,750 square feet for Unit 1 and 2,500 square feet for Unit 2 Minor adjustments to the dimensions represented above may occur upon review of a building permit as long as the resulting dimensions do not exceed those approved through this ordinance. Section 8: Impact and Development Fees: P arks Development and Air OualitÂ¥/TDM Impact Fees Pursuant to Land Use Code Â§ 26.610.030, Exemptions, development involving a property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures is exempt from the Parks Development and Air Quality/TDM Impact Fees. School Lands Dedication Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit, the Applicant shall pay a fee-in-lieu of land dedication pursuant to Chapter 26.620, School Lands Dedication. The amount of the fee shall be calculated by the Community Development Department using the calculation method and fee schedule in effect at the time the applicant submits a Building Permit. Parking Pursuant to Land Use Code Â§ 26.515, Parking, new residential units are required to mitigate parking impacts either through onsite spaces or cash in lieu. The parking cash in lieu for 3 parking spaces equaling $90,000 is hereby waived. 3 new residential units = 3 parking spaces required 3 x $30,000/space = $90,000 Section 9: Affordable Housing The project requires affordable housing mitigation for the 2,750 square feet free market residential unit. The 2,500 square feet free market residential unit is exempt from mitigation pursuant to Â§26.470.060 Growth Management Change in Use for historic landmark sites and structures which allows historic landmarks to create one new free market residential unit without affordable housing mitigation. The affordable housing requirement is specified below: 2,750 sq. ft. of net livable area * 30% = 825 sq. ft. of net livable area required for affordable housing The project includes an 825 sq. ft. net livable area affordable housing unit onsite. The unit shall meet the requirements of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) Guidelines and 1 The total maximum residential net livable area requires the landing of 2 transferrable development rights in accordance with Â§26.535 Transferrable Development Rights. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #_, Series of 2012 Page 6 of 13 shall be deed restricted in accordance with Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority requirements. The unit is approved as a rental unit pursuant to the following conditions: 1. The deed restriction shall require that all tenants are approved prior to tenancy through APCHA and must re-qualify on a yearly basis, the tenant shall be no higher than a Category 4, and at such time the unit is found to be out of compliance for one year, the owner will be required to sell the unit through APCHA's lottery system. 2. The unit shall be classified no higher than Category 4. 3. A document will be required to be signed by the owner that this deed restriction is being done on a voluntary basis and that the rental control of the unit is acceptable and required and will remain in perpetuity until such time the unit is sold as stated in number 1 above. 4. The rental deed restriction will be recorded with the following conditions: a. The use and occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit 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 4 employee" 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 Category 4 employee" of his 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 relativel 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 guesthouse or guest facility. c. Written verification of employment of employee(s) proposed to reside in the Employee Dwelling Unit shall be completed and filed with the Authority by the Owner of the Employee Dwelling Unit prior to occupancy thereof, and such verification must be acceptable to the Authority. d. The Employee Dwelling Unit shall be required to be rented for periods of no less than six (6) consecutive months. 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 Authority may rent the Employee Dwelling Unit to a qualified employee. e. The maximum rental rate shall not exceed the Category 4, one-bedroom, rental rate as set forth in the Rental Guidelines established by the Authority and may be adjusted annually as set forth by the Guidelines. The maximum permitted rent for the unit on the date of execution of this deed restriction as stated in the Guidelines at the time the deed-restriction is recorded. Rent shall be verified and approved by the 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #_, Series of 2012 Page 7 of 13 Authority upon submission and approval of the lease. Employees shall be qualified by the Authority as to employment, maximum income and asset limitations on a yearly basis. The signed lease must be provided to APCHA. f. The Unit must meet minimum occupancy; i.e., one person per bedroom. g. Owner agrees to provide to APCHA upon request all information reasonably necessary to determine if there is full compliance with this Agreement. h. 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 am and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, after providing the Owner with no less than 24 hours' written notice. i. 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 ofjudicial review. j. 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. k. In the event an Affordable Housing Units 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. 1. 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. m. 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; 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #_, Series of2012 Page 8 of 13 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. n. This Agreement is to be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. o. 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. p. 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. q. The terms and provisions of this Deed Restriction shall constitute covenants running with the title to the Affordable Housing Units as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the Managing Agent, the Association and/or Owner, by the Housing Authority, 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. r. 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 Authority by the Owner within ten (10) days of approval of employee(s) for the Employee Dwelling Unit. s. 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 this Deed Restriction violates CRS 3 8-12-301. t. 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. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be granted and a deed restriction shall be recorddd for the housing unit prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or a Conditional Certificate of Occupancy for the free market residential units or the commercial component. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #_, Series of 2012 Page 9 of 13 Section 10: Growth Management Ouota Svstem Allotments 1 free market residential unit is herby granted an annual development allotment. Pursuant to Â§26.470.060(3) Change in Use of historic landmark sites and structures, the second free market residential unit is not deducted from the annual development allotments but is deducted from the respective development ceiling levels. Section 11: Building Permit The applicant may not submit a Building Permit Application until the requirements in Land Use Code Â§ 26.304.075.A, Building Permit Application, are fulfilled. The building permit application shall include the following: 1. A copy of the Development Order issued by the Community Development Department (see Â§ 26.304.075(A)(2), City of Aspen Municipal Code.) 2. A copy of the final City Council Ordinance and HPC Resolution. 3. The conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover page of the Building Permit set. 4. A construction management plan (CMID and drainage report pursuant to Engineering and Building Department requirements. 5. Accessiblity and ANSI requirements shall meet adopted Building Code requirements. Section 12: Engineering The Applicant' s design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21, Title 28, and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department. A construction management plan must be submitted in conjunction with the building permit application. A completed drainage report/plan as outlined in the Urban Runoff Management Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to recordation of Final Plat. Failure to meet the standards in Title 21 and Title 28 may result in a physical change to the project and possible review by City Council and/or HPC to amend the design. An encroachment license is required for the planter boxes located in the Right-of-way. Section 13: Parks 1. The Parks Department shall review and approve the planting for the planter boxes. 2. Landscaping in the public Right-of-way shall be subject to landscaping in the Right-of- way requirements, Aspen Municipal Code Chapter 21.20. All plantings within the City Right-of-way must be approved by the City Parks Department prior to installation. 3. Right-of-way requirements necessitate adequate irrigation pressure and coverage, if a system is not in place one will need to be added that is specifically designed for the trees in the planter boxes. Section 14: Fire Mitigation Before the Applicant is issued a Building Permit, the Applicant shall obtain the approval of the Fire Marshal of a Fire Protection Plan which shall include the following elements: 1. Compliance with all codes and requirements o f the Aspen Fire Protection District 2. Sprinkler, fire alarms and carbon monoxide alarms are required. (IFC as amended Section 903 and 907). 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #_, Series of 2012 Page 10 of 13 3. Documentation that the development has sufficient volume and pressure of water for the sprinklers or other fire suppression system adequate to satisfy the District's standards for the type of structures proposed by the approved development. This requirement shall be satisfied by an analysis acceptable to the Water Department which demonstrates system delivery capacity of existing water distribution system at the Water Departments' main water to the approved development of no less than 3,000 gallons per minute. 4. An overall access plan for the site. Section 15: Sanitation District Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. Section 16: Water Department The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code in place at the time of building permit submittal, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Each of the units within the mixed use building shall have individual water meters. Section 17: Exterior Lighting All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City' s Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Â§ 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Section 18: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan and a vested property right pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.308.011 attaching to and running with the Subject Property and shall confer upon the Applicant the right to undertake and complete the site specific development plan and use of said property under the terms and conditions of the site specific development plan including any approved amendments thereto. The vesting period of these vested property rights shall be for three (3) years which shall not begin to run until the date of the publications required to be made as set forth below. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Â§ 26.104.050, Void Permits. Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. For purposes of this provision, the submission and acceptance of a building permit application for the restoration of the Benton Building as part of the enlargement of a historic landmark that is deemed complete by the Chief Building Inspector pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.304.075 shall prevent the expiration of the vested rights of the applicant and any related development orders under Land Use Code Section 26.304.070.D. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #_, Series of 2012 Page 11 of 13 No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to Chapter 26.308, Vested Property Rights. Pursuant to Â§ 26.304.070(A), Development Orders, such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 720 East Hyman Avenue, the Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R and S, Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, by Ordinance ofthe City Council ofthe City of Aspen. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the Development Order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this Ordinance of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this Ordinance. The vested rights granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review. The period of time permitted by law to exercise the right of referendum to refer to the electorate this Section of this Ordinance granting vested rights; or, to seek judicial review of the grant of vested rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as set forth above. The rights of referendum described herein shall be no greater than those set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 19: 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 Historic Preservation Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 20: This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 21: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance 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. 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #_, Series of 2012 Page 12 of 13 The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 22: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 11th day of June, 2012, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 2901 day of May, 2012. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of ,2012. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: James R. True, City Attorney 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern negotiation Ordinance #_, Series of 2012 Page 13 of 13 EXHIBIT C SUBDIVISION Chapter 26.480, SUBDIVISION Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. General Requirements 1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. 3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. 4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposal supports the general policies and goals in the Aspen Area Community Plan, specifically the Historic Preservation chapter. The project is consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the area and will not adversely affect the future development of the area. The proposed subdivision to merge the lots is in compliance with applicable requirements of the Land Use Code. B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of fooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. Staff Finding: n/a. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding: n/a. ' 720 East Hyman Ave.- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit C - Subdivision Criteria Page 1 of 3 C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met: 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or the goals of the community. 2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. Staff Finding: the applicant shall comply with Aspen Municipal Code Chapter 26.580 as applicable. D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding: Affordable housing is reviewed concurrent with Subdivision pursuant to the AspenModern negotiation process. The applicant proposes to mitigate for affordable housing with an onsite deed restricted unit. E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.630. Staff Finding: The applicant agrees to comply with the School Land Dedication Standards in Chapter 26.630. Staff finds this criterion is met. F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth management 720 East Hyman Ave.- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit C - Subdivision Criteria Page 2 of 3 approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44-2001, Â§ 2) Staff Finding: Affordable housing is reviewed concurrent with Subdivision pursuant to the AspenModern negotiation process. The applicant proposes onsite affordable housing mitigation in the form of a one bedroom Category 4 unit. 720 East Hyman Ave.- AspenModern negotiation Exhibit C - Subdivision Criteria Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT D GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEWS Â§26.470.080.2 New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project. The development of new free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.050. See. 26.470.050. General requirements. A. Purpose: The intent of growth management is to provide for orderly development and redevelopment of the City while providing mitigation from the impacts said development and redevelopment creates. Different types of development are categorized below, as well as the necessary review process and review standards for the proposed development. A proposal may fall into multiple categories and therefore have multiple processes and standards to adhere to and meet. 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 Response: Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed free market residential unit. Staff finds that this criteria is met. 2. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Response: The project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan specifically the Historic Preservation chapter. Staff finds that this criteria is met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff Response: The project requests a variance to the allowable floor area allotted to free market residential use as part of the AspenModern negotiation for landmark designation. The commercial component of the building is an existing non-conformity, however the proposal reduces the non-conformity. 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit D - GMQS Page 1 of 5 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval, as applicable. Staff Response: The project is consistent with Historic Preservation Commission approvals. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate. (Ord. No. 6 - 2010, Â§2) Staff Response: n/a - the project reduces commercial net leasable area which does not require mitigation. 6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished noor 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 Roor 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. (Ord. No. 6 - 2010, Â§2) Staff Response: Two new free market residential units are proposed. The smaller of the two units (2,500 square feet of net livable area) is eligible for the exempt from affordable housing mitigation offered as a one time incentive for historic landmark properties. The larger of the two units (2,750 square feet of net livable area) requires mitigation at 30% of the new net livable area. 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit D - GMQ S Page 2 of 5 The larger free market residential unit comprises 2,750 square feet of net livable area, which requires an 825 square feet net livable area affordable housing unit. The proposed unit is located on the second floor and is 825 square feet of net livable area. It is proposed as a one-bedroom, Category 4 rental. Further discussion of the housing unit and APCHA's recommendation is provided below. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. (Ord. No. 14, 2007, Â§1) Staff Response: The project represents minimal demand on public infrastructure. It is an existing commercial building that is being partially converted to mixed use. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Sec. 26.470.070.Minor Planning and Zoning Commission applications. The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section 26.470.110, Procedures for review, and the criteria for each type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications shall comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.050. Except as noted, the following types of growth management approvals shall be deducted from the respective development ceiling levels but shall not be deducted from the annual development allotments. Approvals apply cumulatively. 4. Affordable housing. The development of affordable housing deed-restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the Board of Directors. Staff Response: A referral from APCHA is included as Exhibit E. APCHA is not in favor of the proposed onsite unit due to concerns about its location in a mixed use building, and recommends Affordable Housing credits as the form of mitigation. The Land Use Code permits and incentivizes mitigation onsite to encourage diversity within the building. The ordinance includes APCHA's conditions of approval for a Category 4 rental unit as requested by the applicant. 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 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit D - GMQS Page 3 of 5 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. (Ord. No. 6 - 2010, Â§4) Staff Response: The housing unit is provided onsite. Staff finds that this criterion is met. c. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent (50%) or more of the unit's net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. This dimensional requirement may be varied through Special Review, Pursuant to Chapter 26.430. (Ord. No. 14 - 2011, Â§3) Staff Response: The unit is located on the second floor of the existing building. Staff finds that this criterion is met. d. The proposed units shall be deed-restricted as "for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The owner may be entitled to select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned qualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The deed restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as defined in the Affordable Housing Guidelines established by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended. The proposed units may be rental units, including but not limited to rental units owned by an employer or nonprofit organization, if a legal instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney ensures permanent affordability of the units. The City encourages affordable housing units required for lodge development to be rental units associated with the lodge operation and contributing to the long-term viability of the lodge. Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen, Pitkin County or other similar governmental or quasi-municipal agency shall not be subject to this mandatory "for sale" provision. Staff Response: The applicant requests that the proposed unit be a Category 4 rental; however APCHA requests that the unit be a Category 3 or 4 sale unit. The Code does not specify a specific option, only that the unit is deed restricted in accordance with APCHA 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit D - GMQS Page 4 of 5 guidelines and is either sold or rented to a qualified purchaser/renter. Conditions of approval for both a rental and ownership option are included in Exhibit E. 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. (Ord. No. 6 - 2010, Â§4) 720 East Hyman Ave. - Aspen Modern negotiation Exhibit D - GMQS Page 5 of 5 AW,lt 3,6 Â· MEMORANDUM TO: Sara Adams FROM: Cindy Christensen, APCHA Operations Manager DATE: May 7,2012 RE: REDEVELOPMENT OF 720 EAST HYMAN (ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING) ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval for the redevelopment of the 720 East Hyman, the Aspen Athletic Club building. BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing the redevelopment as part of the voluntary historic designation. It will encompass full renovation of the building over several years. Section 26.415.025.C, Aspen Modern Properties, comes into play with the voluntary history designation; therefore, there is a 90-day negotiation period with City Council. The request is to provide two free-market units and one deed-restricted unit within the building. Under Section 26.470.050.B, Growth Management: General Requirements, the applicant is requesting one allotment for a free market unit and one for an affordable housing unit. A second free-market unit is being made available as a growth management benefit, under the Aspen Modern Program for Landmark Properties, without affordable housing mitigation. DISCUSSION: Section 26.470.100.A, states that 60% of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The applicant states that the total net leasable area within the building will be reduced by 5,537 square feet; thereby no affordable housing mitigation is required. Section 26.470.050.B.6, states that "the 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 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." Under the Aspen Modern Program, Landmark Properties, the free market unit No. 1 should meet the requirements for affordable housing mitigation, and Unit No. 2 will be exempt from affordable housing mitigation. The unit size cap for both free-market units is 2,000 square feet; however, both units are proposed as 2,500 square feet and 2,750 square feet. The applicant is applying for the 500 square foot floor area bonus for designated historic properties for Unit 1. As to the additional square footage of 750 for Unit 2, the applicant is looking to mitigate with a TDR for 500 square feet and requests that the additional 250 square feet be permitted as it is being placed within the existing building floor area. Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 1 The affordable housing unit is proposed as a one-bedroom, 825 net leasable square foot unit, to be located on the second floor. The plans for the unit are attached. Section 26.470.070.4.d, Minor Growth Management: Affordable Housing, states that 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." This paragraph also allows for APCHA or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters. The proposed unit may also be a rental unit owned by an employer or non-profit as long as a legal instrument, acceptable to the City Attorney, ensures the permanent affordability of the unit. The applicant is requesting the unit as a dedicated rental unit to be owned by the building owner and rented to an employee of the owner. Parking is an issue. Section 26.515.010 has a general requirement that all development shall be provided with off-street parking. Under Section 26.420.010.B.1.e, the applicant is requesting a waiver for required parking on site due to the lack of available lot area to create parking spaces. If the redevelopment is approved, Staff would recommend the unit be a "for sale", Category 3 or 4 unit and that the condominium documents reflect that any common area maintenance shall be assessed based on the actual values of the free-market versus the affordable unit. RECOMMENDATION: The APCHA Board reviewed the application at their meeting held May 2,2012 and is recommending denial of the on-site deed-restricted unit as it would be a single unit in a mixed use building. Enforcement on these types of single units would place a burden on the APCHA staff and is not in the best interest of the program. The APCHA Board recommends that the mitigation for the second free-market unit be provided by the use of an Affordable Housing Credit Certificate and not an on-site or off-site unit. However, should the redevelopment be approved by the City Council, the APCHA Board would request that the unit remain a "for sale", Category 3 or 4, one-bedroom unit. If the project is approved, certain conditions should be required. Listed below are the conditions that should be required broken down into whether the unit is a "for sale" unit or a rental unit: Sales Unit: 1. The unit shall be an ownership unit and sold through the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority lottery system upon Certificate of Occupancy. 2. The unit shall be classified as Category 3 or 4. 3. The condominium documents shall reflect that any common area maintenance shall be assessed based on the actual values of the free-market homes versus the deed-restricted unit. Any property management fees or other fees associated with the commercial or free-market aspect of the building shall not be charged to the deed-restricted owner. The Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 2 condominium documents shall be reviewed and approved by APCHA prior to Certificate of Occupancy. The goal is to protect the affordable housing unit from excessive monthly and/or special assessments having to do with luxury items and/or expensive modifications. 4. The deed-restricted unit shall receive the Certificate Occupancy prior to, or in conjunction with, the free-market units. Rental Unit: 1. If the unit is allowed to be a rental unit, the deed restriction shall require that all tenants are approved PRIOR to tenancy through APCHA and must re-qualify on a YEARLY basis, the tenant shall be no higher than a Category 4, and at such time the unit is found to be out of compliance for one year, the owner will be REQUIRED to sell the unit through APCHA's lottery system. 2. The unit shall be classified no higher than Category 4. 3. A document will be required to be signed by the owner that this deed restriction is being done on a voluntary basis and that the rental control of the unit is acceptable and required and will remain in pen)etuity until such time the unit is sold as stated in number 1 above. 4. The rental deed restriction will be recorded with the following conditions: a. The use and occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit 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 4 employee" 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 Category 4 employee" of his 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 guesthouse or guest facility. c. Written verification of employment of employee(s) proposed to reside in the Employee Dwelling Unit shall be completed and filed with the Authority by the Owner of the Employee Dwelling Unit prior to occupancy thereof, and such verification must be acceptable to the Authority. d. The Employee Dwelling Unit shall be required to be rented for periods of no less than six (6) consecutive months. 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 Authority may rent the Employee Dwelling Unit to a qualified employee. e. The maximum rental rate shall not exceed the Category 4, one-bedroom, rental rate as set forth in the Rental Guidelines established by the Authority and may be adjusted annually as set forth by the Guidelines. The maximum permitted rent for the unit on the date of execution of this deed restriction as stated in the Guidelines at the time the deed-restriction is recorded. Rent shall be verified and Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 3 approved by the Authority upon submission and approval of the lease. Employees shall be qualified by the Authority as to employment, maximum income and asset limitations on a yearly basis. The signed lease must be provided to APCHA. f. The Unit must meet minimum occupancy; i.e., one person per bedroom. g. Owner agrees to provide to APCHA upon request all information reasonably necessary to determine ifthere is full compliance with this Agreement. h. 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. i. The APCHA, in the event a violation ofthis 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 ofjudicial review. j. There is hereby reserved to the parties' hereto any and all remedies provided by law for breach ofthis 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. k. In the event an Affordable Housing Units 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. 1. 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. m. 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. n. This Agreement is to be governed and construed in accordance with the laws ofthe State of Colorado. o. 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. Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 4 p. 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 P itkin County, Colorado. q. The terms and provisions of this Deed Restriction shall constitute covenants running with the title to the Affordable Housing Units as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the Managing Agent, the Association and/or Owner, by the Housing Authority, 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. r. 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 Authority by the Owner within ten (10) days of approval of employee(s) for the Employee Dwelling Unit. s. 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 this Deed Restriction violates CRS 38-12-301. t. 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. Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 5 7[ 4. MEMORANDUM ~ TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Directo]~/6 Wl FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Plannef#w RE: 720 E. Hyman Avenue- Resolution #54 Series of 2012, Extending an AspenModernNegotiation DATE: May 29, 2012 SUMMARY: 720 East Hyman Avenue is an Organic/Wrightian building that was designed by local architect Robin Molny. It was originally home to the Aspen Athletic Club. The applicant submitted an application to participate in the AspenModern program to landmark designate the property in exchange for specific incentives. The applicant proposes to change a portion of the second and the entire third floor commercial spaces into residential spaces. A roof deck is proposed. HPC will hold their first hearing on May 23rd which includes some minor exterior changes. Staff recommends that HPC approve the project with conditions. City Council is scheduled to hear first reading tonight, May 29th and second reading on June 118. The 90-day negotiation expires on June 7th. . Staff and the applicant request that the AspenModern process be extended until July 23, 2012 to allow additional time to discuss options at Council. A resolution to extend the negotiation period is attached. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve an extension of the time period to discuss voluntary historic designation and incentives with the owner of 720 E. Hyman Avenue to July 23,2012. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Resolution â‚¬6*eries of 2012." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Exhibit: Resolution #12 Series of 2012 49 Udwt ex]*NÂ¢M A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL EXTENDING THE ASPEN MODERN 90 DAY NEGOTIATION PERIOD FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND BENEFITS RELATED TO THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE, ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUMS, LOTS Q, R, AND S, BLOCK 104, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO Resolution No.32-7*cries of 2012 WHEREAS, the applicant, John Martin, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, submitted an application pursuant to Section 26.415.025.C, AspenModern Properties, of the Aspen Municipal Code, to voluntarily participate in a ninety-day negotiation period for historic landmark designation of 720 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominiums, Lots Q, R, and S, Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.415.025.C. 1, the ninety-day AspenModern negotiation commenced on March 7,2012 and will expire on June 7,2012; and WHEREAS, the project is under review by the Historic Preservation Commission and it is unlikely that a public hearing can be scheduled before City Council prior to the expiration of the negotiation period, therefore staff and the property owner are in agreement that an extension of the negotiation to July 23,2012 is appropriate to allow additional time to discuss options for the property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: The 720 E. Hyman Avenue negotiation period established by Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.025.C is hereby extended to July 23,2012. APPROVED by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on May 29,2012. Approved as to form: n ~imes R, True, City Attorney , Attest: Mayor: Â¢132-Â»j yÂ»-- Kathryn KochÂ£;City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ~~12 ~0 #~P MEMORANDUM TO: Sara Adams 43 FROM: Cindy Christensen, APCHA Operations Manager DATE: May 7, 2012 RE: REDEVELOPMENT OF 720 EAST HYMAN (ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING) ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval for the redevelopment of the 720 East Hyman, the Aspen Athletic Club building. BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing the redevelopment as part of the voluntary historic designation. It will encompass full renovation of the building over several years. Section 26.415.025.C, Aspen Modern Properties, comes into play with the voluntary history designation; therefore, there is a 90-day negotiation period with City Council. The request is to provide two free-market units and one deed-restricted unit within the building. Under Section 26.470.050.B, Growth Management: General Requirements, the applicant is requesting one allotment for a free market unit and one for an affordable housing unit. A second free-market unit is being made available as a growth management benefit, under the Aspen Modern Program for Landmark Properties, without affordable housing mitigation. DISCUSSION: Section 26.470.100.A, states that 60% of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The applicant states that the total net leasable area within the building will be reduced by 5,537 square feet; thereby no affordable housing mitigation is required. Section 26.470.050.B.6, states that "the 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 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." Under the Aspen Modern Program, Landmark Properties, the free market unit No. 1 should meet the requirements for affordable housing mitigation, and Unit No. 2 will be exempt from affordable housing mitigation. The unit size cap for both free-market units is 2,000 square feet; however, both units are proposed as 2,500 square feet and 2,750 square feet. The applicant is applying for the 500 square foot floor area bonus for designated historic properties for Unit 1. As to the additional square footage of 750 for Unit 2, the applicant is looking to mitigate with a TDR for 500 square feet and requests that the additional 250 square feet be permitted as it is being placed within the existing building floor area. Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 1 The affordable housing unit is proposed as a one-bedroom, 825 net leasable square foot unit, to be located on the second floor. The plans for the unit are attached. Section 26.470.070.4.d, Minor Growth Management: Affordable Housing, states that 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." This paragraph also allows for APCHA or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters. The proposed unit may also be a rental unit owned by an employer or non-profit as long as a legal instrument, acceptable to the City Attorney, ensures the permanent affordability of the unit. The applicant is requesting the unit as a dedicated rental unit to be owned by the building owner and rented to an employee of the owner. Parking is an issue. Section 26.515.010 has a general requirement that all development shall be provided with off-street parking. Under Section 26.420.010.B.1.e, the applicant is requesting a waiver for required parking on site due to the lack of available lot area to create parking spaces. If the redevelopment is approved, Staff would recommend the unit be a "for sale", Category 3 or ~ 4 unit and that the condominium documents reflect that any common area maintenance shall be assessed based on the actual values of the free-market versus the affordable unit. RECOMMENDATION: The APCHA Board reviewed the application at their meeting held May 2, 2012 and is recommending denial of the on-site deed-restricted unit as it would be a single unit in a mixed use building. Enforcement on these types of single units would place a burden on the APCHA staff and is not in the best interest of the program. The APCHA Board recommends that the mitigation for the second free-market unit be provided by the use of an Affordable Housing Credit Certificate and not an on-site or off-site unit. However, should the redevelopment be approved by the City Council, the APCHA Board would request that the unit remain a "for sale", Category 3 or 4, one-bedroom unit. If the project is approved, certain conditions should be required. Listed below are the conditions that should be required broken down into whether the unit is a "for sale" unit or a rental unit: Sales Unit: 1. The unit shall be an ownership unit and sold through the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority lottery system upon Certificate of Occupancy. 2. The unit shall be classified as Category 3 or 4. 3. The condominium documents shall reflect that any common area maintenance shall be assessed based on the actual values of the free-market homes versus the deed-restricted unit. Any property management fees or other fees associated with the commercial or free-market aspect of the building shall not be charged to the deed-restricted owner. The Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 2 condominium documents shall be reviewed and approved by APCHA prior to Certificate of Occupancy. The goal is to protect the affordable housing unit from excessive monthly and/or special assessments having to do with luxury items and/or expensive modifications. 4. The deed-restricted unit shall receive the Certificate Occupancy prior to, or in conjunction with, the free-market units. Rental Unit: 1. If the unit is allowed to be a rental unit, the deed restriction shall require that all tenants are approved PRIOR to tenancy through APCHA and must re-qualify on a YEARLY basis, the tenant shall be no higher than a Category 4, and at such time the unit is found to be out of compliance for one year, the owner will be REQUIRED to sell the unit through APCHA's lottery system. 2. The unit shall be classified no higher than Category 4. 3. A document will be required to be signed by the owner that this deed restriction is being done on a voluntary basis and that the rental control of the unit is acceptable and required and will remain in perpetuity until such time the unit is sold as stated in number 1 above. 4. The rental deed restriction will be recorded with the following conditions: a. The use and occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit 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 4 employee" 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 Category 4 employee" of his 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 guesthouse or guest facility. c. Written verification of employment of employee(s) proposed to reside in the Employee Dwelling Unit shall be completed and filed with the Authority by the Owner of the Employee Dwelling Unit prior to occupancy thereof, and such verification must be acceptable to the Authority. d. The Employee Dwelling Unit shall be required to be rented for periods of no less than six (6) consecutive months. 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 Authority may rent the Employee Dwelling Unit to a qualified employee. e. The maximum rental rate shall not exceed the Category 4, one-bedroom, rental rate as set forth in the Rental Guidelines established by the Authority and may be adjusted annually as set forth by the Guidelines. The maximum permitted rent for the unit on the date of execution of this deed restriction as stated in the Guidelines at the time the deed-restriction is recorded. Rent shall be verified and Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 3 approved by the Authority upon submission and approval of the lease. Employees shall be qualified by the Authority as to employment, maximum income and asset limitations on a yearly basis. The signed lease must be provided to APCHA. f. The Unit must meet minimum occupancy; i.e., one person per bedroom. g. Owner agrees to provide to APCHA upon request all information reasonably necessary to determine ifthere is full compliance with this Agreement. h. 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. i. 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 ofjudicial review. j. There is hereby reserved to the parties' hereto any and all remedies provided by law for breach ofthis 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. k. In the event an Affordable Housing Units 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. 1. 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. m. 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. n. This Agreement is to be governed and construed in accordance with the laws ofthe State of Colorado. o. 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. Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 4 p. 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. q. The terms and provisions of this Deed Restriction shall constitute covenants running with the title to the Affordable Housing Units as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the Managing Agent, the Association and/or Owner, by the Housing Authority, 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. r. 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 Authority by the Owner within ten (10) days of approval of employee(s) for the Employee Dwelling Unit. s. 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 this Deed Restriction violates CRS 38-12-301. t. 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. Aspen Athletic Building Redevelopment Page 5 Date: May 17,2012 Project: Aspen Athletic Club City of Aspen Engineering Department DRC Comments These comments are not intended to be exclusive, but an initial response to the project packet submitted for purpose of the DRC meeting. Drainage: General note: The design for the site must meet the Urban Runoff Management Plan Requirements. Staff was not able to determine whether or not the site will meet these requirements. A full review will be completed when there is enough information to review. A compliant drainage plan must be submitted prior to final plat. This includes detaining and providing water quality. Staff was unable to determine whether or not the site is able to meet the Drainage Principals: 1.Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process 2.Use the entire site when planning for stormwater quality treatment. 3.Avoid unnecessary impervious area. 4.Reduce runoff rates and volumes to more closely match natural conditions. 5.Integrate stormwater quality management and flood control. 6.Develop stormwater quality facilities that enhance the site, the community, and the environment. 7.Use a treatment train approach. 8.Design sustainable facilities that can be safely maintained. 9. Design and maintain facilities with public safety in mind. Construction Management - Engineering is concerned about the Construction Impacts of this site. Please submit a construction management plan prior to Council review. The plan must include a planned sequence of construction that minimizes construction impacts on the alley, Hyman and Orginal. The plan shall describe mitigation for: parking, staging/encroachments, and truck traffic. Fee in Lieu -This project is considered a Major project and can opt to pay the Fee in Lieu for a portion of the detention requirements. Please refer to Section 2.12.140 of the Municipal Code. Sara Adams From: Amy Guthrie Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 2:08 PM To: Sara Adams (Sara.Adams@ci.aspen.co.us) Subject: summary of hpc comments on decks Rooftop decks: There are good ones and bad ones. Should be considered case by case. It's a resort community. Vitality and livability are valued. Setback is essential and makes the deck less intrusive. The taller the building the less the deck is an issue. Require information about view angles- where can the deck be seen from the street? One of the most important considerations is the vertical elements that could be placed on the deck: lights, light poles, large furnishings. These elements are hard to control once the deck is built. If their potential impact is too large a concern in a certain case, don't allow the deck, or factor this into location on the roof. Avoid allowing a roof deck to cover too much of the roof. Should be in proportion to the building. The concerns over a roof deck might be different depending on its use. (A residential roof deck should maybe be more screened from the street than a restauranUbar roof deck, where vitality seen from street would be beneficial.) Amy Guthrie City of Aspen Historic Preservation 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 970-429-2758 www.aspenpitkin.com 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner RE: Impact of rooftop decks on historic structures DATE: June 27,2012 SUMMARY: During first reading of the Aspen Athletic Club Aspen Modern ordinance, City Council requested comments from the HPC regarding the impacts of rooftop decks on historic structures. Council is trying to get a sense for how HPC feels these features enhance, degrade or have no impact on the historic district or historic resources. It is challenging to make a blanket statement about rooftop decks since each property has its own special set of characteristics. Staff recommends that HPC discuss what elements create a positive or negative rooftop deck: 1. setback from street fagade 2. material of guardrail 3. height and mass o f building that the deck is atop Below are a few different decks throughout the historic district to help formulate some feedback for City Council: . ..26 39%%9 1.Ft#* 1901 L. ~: *%6 1 - i *41.. .4 - 4.1 ./4 .1 0 pm' Fi ~il[ 11 % 21 1 1 1 1 j) A . 45 .. 4 , '3~4 j -M' 1 : __126" Â» b I fc ' The Brand Building is a two story building - the lower height means that the roof deck is more visible to the pedestrian. There is about a 5' setback from the parapet to the railing of the deck. 1 .. The Elks Building has a roof deck. The height and mass o f the building, in addition to a setback of about 11' from the parapet to the railing, all contribute to the inability to see the deck from the street. ~9.y- allillilid.Ritili.:32# 2-Ii'll'll'lill ,R-- 74 797 .- 4-4~,~~ ,;it}*. 40* Z N Q 'I W. 1 4, 1191 A V .El-=LE,â€¢IMâ€¢ 428 E. Hyman (currently houses Quiksilver) has a roof deck that is setback about 30' and is not visible from the Hyman Pedestrian Mall. The arrow points to the third floor penthouse (the deck is in front of the penthouse) 7 4 Pit 711 %. 34 .1% I . I ....P=-1- ,% ...*I.L. *:94. 4,89# 2 .. 630 E. Hyman, the Crandall Building, has two decks: one atop the second floor (railing is about 3' setback from the edge of the building) and one atop the third floor (railing is about 30' setback from edge of building). The deck atop the third floor (shown with the arrow) is barely visible due to the significant setback and the glass guardrail. .1 H \ li~... H#-/*. . 4 447*'' - - 4 4 -' 21- 1]-64-- ' r. ; I hÂ¥. ..i f..1.- ~. 44.- 4,1.-,2:2 . ark-- 2. Ai'. . r. 1.'f '~k. Â· 'C= :b..:d: :.2 /4 4. IF ., I . ..... 44 4.; 12:-"-1 - .:31 9 Â¢ 9 .'f *MOA I ' 44/. E !.. -'ll....' ArD Connor Cabins have decks atop the second floor. The glass guardrail cause the deck to have a minimal effect on the massing of the building. 4 1/1 1.- -I;- 1 '*~.*: 0 11 . 3 Mi. 111 , ]11111 i.mÂ·. 1 -1 4 113 . 01: 1 * 4 4 . .= 1 4 . W. - I P 1 1 f . :.0 '99 . .. - .: - 13-1../ 3 j Sara Adams From: Sara Adams Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 1:24 PM To: CJ Oliver; Jannette Whitcomb Subject: Aspen Athletic Club Hi CJ and Jannette, For second reading of the Aspen Athletic Club, Council asked me to outline all of the incentives that are in our Land Use Code for historic landmarks. Historic landmark structures are exempt from TDM/ Air Quality impact fees. A new building on a landmark parcel is not exempt, but the actual historic building is exempt. The Aspen Athletic Club proposes to convert existing commercial space to new residential space (both free market and affordable housing) as part of an AspenModern negotiation in exchange for landmark designation. The conversion of uses would require a payment of $4,864 if the building was not historic. I wanted to inform you that this information is being presented to council on July 9th if you are interested in attending the meeting in case questions arise about how the fee impacts your mission. Call me if you have any questions. Sara Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen,130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 tele. 9701429.2778 fax. 9701920.5439 www.aspenpitkin.com 1 Sara Adams From: Brian Flynn Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 1:37 PM To: Sara Adams Subject: RE: aspen athletic club Thanks I will let Stephen know the possible options not much for us to do, we understand #1 - easy to accept, number two will be determined by our current fee schedule and 3 no one wins - council could waive the fees on any of these and we would accept that. Brian Firnn Open Space and Special Projects Manager ( P)970-129-2035 (1*')97 0-920-5 128 hASPEN I PARKS & RECREATION From: Sara Adams Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 1:00 PM To: Brian Flynn Subject: aspen athletic club Hi Brian, We talked about this project in the past, but it is headed to Council again on July 9th. I wanted to give you a heads up on a few calculations: 1) If the project is designated a landmark, the parks dedication fee is waived (due to landmark status) which would be $4,864.75 2) If the project is not a designated landmark through AspenModern, then it cannot happen due to Code requirements so it would be a different proposal with different Parks Dedication calculation assessed. 3) If the project is not designated a landmark, the owner may decide to do nothing, which would mean no parks dedication fee required. I wanted to let Parks know what the calculation would be if this project was realized and the alternative scenarios if the project is not approved. It is a policy discussion for Council to weigh the options. The meeting is on July 9th at 5pm. Call me if you have any questions. Thanks! Sara Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen,130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 tele, 9701429.2778 fax. 9701920,5439 www.aspenpitkin.com 1 Sara Adams From: Brian Flynn Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 4:48 PM To: Sara Adams Subject: RE: Aspen Athletic Club Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Thanks for the email, if the planter boxes are in the ROW I would like to see the plans, and speak with engineeringon possibly removingthem. However, if the planters are on their propertythen nothing more would be needed for parks except a tree permit for removals. BriaiiFhnn Open Space and Special Projects Manager (1')970-429-2035 (10970-920-5128 â€¢SASPEN I PARKS & RECREATION From: Sara Adams Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 3:46 PM To: Aaron Reed; Andy Rossello; April Long; Blake Fitch; Brian Flynn; Brian Nichols; Cindy Christensen; Claude Salter; David Hornbacher; Denis Murray; Ed Van Walraven; Jackie Lothian; Jannette Whitcomb; Jerry Nye; John Krueger; Lauren McDonell; Linda Chi; Lynn Rumbaugh; Mike McDill; Nick Thompson; Phil Overeynder; Randy Ready; Rich Ryan; Richard Pryor; Sara Adams; Shaun Rourke; Shirley Ritter; Stephen Kanipe; Steve Hunter; Tim Ware; Tom Bracewell forward; Trish Aragon Subject: Aspen Athletic Club Hi all, The Aspen Athletic Club (720 E. Hyman) is participating in the Aspen Modern 90-day negotiation program. They are proposing to voluntarily designate the existing building, to convert a portion of the second floor offices to an affordable housing unit, and to convert the third floor offices into two free market residential units. The existing building is all commercial. A small, abt. 600 sq. ft., roof deck is proposed. The only minor exterior changes include changing some plywood areas into glazing and adding exterior removable horizontal awnings. Some minor re-pointing is proposed for the planter boxes. Due to the limited scope of the project(it is all interior except the roof deck and awnings) I did not think a full DRC is necessary. I sent the project to Housing, Engineering and Building and I have a call into Parks about the planter boxes. Please let me know if you are interested in seeing the application and I will send it over. Since this is AspenModern, we are on a tight timeline. The project is before HPC at the end of this month, Council at the end of this month and the beginning of next month. Thanks! Sara 1 Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen,130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 tele. 9701429,2778 fax. 9701920.5439 www.aspenpitkin.com 2 Sara Adams From: Chris Forman Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 11:34 AM To: Sara Adams CC: Brian Flynn Subject: RE: aac site plan Sara, I think it would be appropriate to have some small to medium sized ornamental trees planted within the planting boxes. In addition, installation of supplemental irrigation specifically designed for the trees and not just overspray from adjacent irrigation heads must be constructed. I'm happy to work with the applicant to determine tree species, spacing, soil needs, and irrigation. Thanks, Chris. Chris Forman, City Forester 585 Cemetery Lane Aspen, Colorado 81611 970-920-5120 p 970-920-5128 f chrisf@ci.aspen.co.us -----Original Message----- From: Sara Adams Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 9:17 AM To: Brian Flynn; Chris Forman Subject: aac site plan Hi again, here is the site plan. They are not proposing any changes to the site plan. Some minor repointing of the brick planter boxes is proposed. I have a call in to Cunniffe about what they propose in the boxes, but I have not heard back. Thanks again, S Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen,130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 tele. 970 I429.2778 fax. 9701920.5439 www.aspenpitkin.com 1 Sara Adams From: Ed Van Walraven [ed.van@aspenfire.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 4.03 PM To: Sara Adams CC: Brian Nichols Subject: Re: Aspen Athletic Club Hi Sara, What ever the use, this project will still be required to have the approved life safety systems installed, this means fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems. Call me if you have any questions. Thank you, Ed On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Sara Adams <Sara.Adams@ci,aspen,co.us> wrote: Hi all, The Aspen Athletic Club (720 E. Hyman) is participating in the Aspen Modern 90-day negotiation program. They are proposing to voluntarily designate the existing building, to convert a portion of the second floor offices to an affordable housing unit, and to convert the third floor offices into two free market residential units. The existing building is all commercial. A small, abt. 600 sq. ft., roof deck is proposed. The only minor exterior changes include changing some plywood areas into glazing and adding exterior removable horizontal awnings. Some minor re-pointing is proposed for the planter boxes. Due to the limited scope of the project(it is all interior except the roof deck and awnings) I did not think a full DRC is necessary. I sent the project to Housing, Engineering and Building and I have a call into Parks about the planter boxes. Please let me know i f you are interested in seeing the application and I will send it over. Since this is AspenModern, we are on a tight timeline. The project is before HPC at the end of this month, Council at the end of this month and the beginning o f next month. Thanks ! Sara Sara Adams, Senior Planner 1 City of Aspen,130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 tele. 9701429.2778 fax. 9701920.5439 www.aspenpitkin.com -- Ed Van Watraven Fire Marshal Aspen Fire Protection District 420 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 970-925-2690 (Office) 970-379-1378 (Cellular) 970-920-4451 (Fax) -- Scanned by Postini -- aspenfire.com -- Email secured by Check Point 2 Sara Adams From: Jannette Whitcomb Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 4:19 PM To: Sara Adams CC: CJ Oliver Subject: RE: Aspen Athletic Club Sara, Thankyou forthe heads up. EH does not need a copy. Have a good day ! Jannette Whitcomb, RE_[-15 Environmental Health rrogram Coordinator Citij of Aspen 970-920-5069 www.aspenpitkin.com From: Sara Adams Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 3:46 PM To: Aaron Reed; Andy Rossello; April Long; Blake Fitch; Brian Flynn; Brian Nichols; Cindy Christensen; Claude Salter; David Hornbacher; Denis Murray; Ed Van Walraven; Jackie Lothian; Jannette Whitcomb; Jerry Nye; John Krueger; Lauren McDonell; Linda Chi; Lynn Rumbaugh; Mike McDill; Nick Thompson; Phil Overeynder; Randy Ready; Rich Ryan; Richard Pryor; Sara Adams; Shaun Rourke; Shirley Ritter; Stephen Kanipe; Steve Hunter; Tim Ware; Tom Bracewell forward; Trish Aragon Subject: Aspen Athletic Club Hi all, The Aspen Athletic Club (720 E. Hyman) is participating in the Aspen Modern 90-day negotiation program. They are proposing to voluntarily designate the existing building, to convert a portion of the second floor offices to an affordable housing unit, and to convert the third floor offices into two free market residential units. The existing building is all commercial. A small, abt. 600 sq. ft., roof deck is proposed. The only minor exterior changes include changing some plywood areas into glazing and adding exterior removable horizontal awnings. Some minor re-pointing is proposed for the planter boxes. Due to the limited scope of the project(it is all interior except the roof deck and awnings) I did not think a full DRC is necessary. I sent the project to Housing, Engineering and Building and I have a call into Parks about the planter boxes, Please let me know if you are interested in seeing the application and I will send it over. Since this is AspenModern, we are on a tight timeline. The project is before HPC at the end of this month, Council at the end of this month and the beginning of next month. Thanks! Sara Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen,130 South (Salena Street Aspen, CO 81611 1 tele. 9701429.2778 fax, 9701920 5439 www.aspenpitkin.com 2 Sara Adams From: Stephen Kanipe Sent: Wednesday, May 09,2012 5:41 PM To: Sara Adams CC: Denis Murray Subject: RE: Aspen Athletic Club We did a preliminary plan review - pointed out a few things but nothing that money won't fix. From: Sara Adams Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 3:46 PM To: Aaron Reed; Andy Rossello; April Long; Blake Fitch; Brian Flynn; Brian Nichols; Cindy Christensen; Claude Salter; David Hornbacher; Denis Murray; Ed Van Walraven; Jackie Lothian; Jannette Whitcomb; Jerry Nye; John Krueger; Lauren McDonell; Linda Chi; Lynn Rumbaugh; Mike McDill; Nick Thompson; Phil Overeynder; Randy Ready; Rich Ryan; Richard Pryor; Sara Adams; Shaun Rourke; Shirley Ritter; Stephen Kanipe; Steve Hunter; Tim Ware; Tom Bracewell forward; Trish Aragon Subject: Aspen Athletic Club Hi all, The Aspen Athletic Club (720 E. Hyman) is participating in the Aspen Modern 90-day negotiation program. They are proposing to voluntarily designate the existing building, to convert a portion of the second floor offices to an affordable housing unit, and to convert the third floor offices into two free market residential units. The existing building is all commercial. A small, abt. 600 sq. ft., roof deck is proposed. The only minor exterior changes include changing some plywood areas into glazing and adding exterior removable horizontal awnings. Some minor re-pointing is proposed for the planter boxes. Due to the limited scope of the project(it is all interior except the roof deck and awnings) I did not think a full DRC is necessary. I sent the project to Housing, Engineering and Building and I have a call into Parks about the planter boxes. Please let me know if you are interested in seeing the application and I will send it over. Since this is AspenModern, we are on a tight timeline. The project is before HPC at the end of this month, Council at the end of this month and the beginning of next month. Thanks! Sara Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen,130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 tele. 9701429.2778 fax. 9701920 5439 www.aspenpitkin.com 1 Sara Adams From: Tim Ware Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 10:59 AM To: Sara Adams Subject: RE: aspen athletic club again Sara, Given the upcoming expenses for the garage repair we could use the money that's for sure. Tim From: Sara Adams Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 10:58 AM To: Tim Ware Subject: aspen athletic club again Hi Tim, I forgot to mention that the 3 residential units require parking, butthere is no parking available on the site since this is an interior remodel. The code allows cashÂ·-in-lieu by right, but they are requesting a waiver of the fee ($90K) through aspen modern. I assume that Parking/Transportation is not in favor of waiving the fee. -Sara Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen,130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 tele. 9701429.2778 fax. 9701920 5439 www,aspenpitkin.com 1 4 â€¢ 421, I . /1 1.- * I *NA,Â®29 4- fi . r A- 4.1.%7% 0 9 :; R 2 1 1 , 4 I 1 111 1 1 1 lili f j. "4?. 1 - 4 '- ~42( i..~~, I 71 _. , 9 = t' Â£. - ~~.# 1 /4.0- . A . D D D @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 1 J .7 9 'ry Uk. . 4, r 1 , /7Nm=#*\ , t , ../.: j. Â·Â·,2: ~ '474*9~Wsc! 9,y,?412\ \ ~~ A~ $10 6 BLEâ‚¬,4 ST . r-*32:S./.12: ....p 1 . . - 024% CÂ«00 4. 1 - .. 0.41 - - 160 . . A â‚¬ . 1% tac) t/ , ' .f . .1 PM I . ....4 I + r f - . ,'i It / L .. x CO ' . , 4 '- -Â·bi '1 ' 62Â·' ,Â·. -1-4 B I e 1 * lt 5 . ' '~- ~R-15A'~1 + E'- - 25-Â»> 0 I .1. & -227' ititz..? 4- â‚¬ \ S 44 i i ----Â«04 1*f44 5 32- I .., , e 4 #4 C . . Al- 814 - ,42 7 -9 .â€žâ€ž,1, .4 4 - 9.' a.1 . 9* A 73 7,. 2 44, 0 /22.00* - 33 *N-,4 *APS . f A ~1 CiO -3.220Â·4 # 3 <-- # 1 I 1 4CitÂ·~ , ' . FÂ« + PRP , F 14 6 - 14~ NC ; Â»} u'lf,Â·Â·~ - rh! 0 ~.1 - . . 'Rk,- -r I. #2 - 471 7 .9 i CZE] [?a.. I. , t. U. . l -; 1. ' . 7 1 1 L *421 n**-I - P th *~4.~ Â· 4 -th,. . 1 r- . 4, . 1 1 AERIAL IMAGE -. . n . /4,781 Ews, 4 4./ Â· el t t , LKÂ·D 3 c :29Â»91 GÂ·, f..,-.- 14 -31. 446 r-207 i '-044 MTN RD ICINITY MAP @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS / 3.- 1 1 ' 4/~3; 'a Jr '*1 . 0/ tet P" 4. 4 , 5/.*1 4 r 1 . ...,n/ft . : 0,=* . i . - ' k 4 -1 - k 1/9 -' 9 .e 31 Aspen Athletic Club Building 1 . Â· Built in 1976 1291. .h r..9 1.1.7 4 ~. 4 *454. : 0 Â¢ - Â· Architect: Robin Molny an apprentice of Frank Lloyd Wright Â· Other buildings by Molny: Mason and Morse Building Â· Hearthstone House Â· The pedestrian mails Other local homes -= - -V-b*.-I %Â»ga=f;6Arbfh~a~2&~&22ieamWa*-- 1 -Sals; . 4 @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE St ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS s 1 j . J , . 4, 1 'lf $1 6 1 ieteÂ· 7 t -ein- Alâ€¢r, $ 1. =5:I~Â¥ -,A- Ill .32-9,11~ EQ961*ha.@~ - 1-1,1/. - -,/93'~-I"/39.- ~ - ZABMNA;----,z..,.1:,ej- 4 ' .ly + A :'3'Fl~me'llill' .1,"- 0%- L:~ illilliti3disi A ev . e .1â€¢521:~ - 1 th ' , . j . -Ill---ill ral#MMB"emwy 7Â· 1, 7; ff' 3 m.:4~.Al~ - 32 I.5 f ~ '4ri: . -z Aâ€¢/ I. .1- . . ~2,0 .: 1 I.Â· 42,12,4 1.. , , I ir: p 2008 UPGRADES $ Â· ADA accessibility upgrades Â· Pine tree removal Â· Removal of exterior paint - -,47N 4. 1//0,/.--i- -- --k ..46:mic,Wrill 1. 11 17,11 11, m HISTORY 03 M. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @a ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS ,- -1 4" '- r. lip.p- 55 * 6 f. 6 AFTER BEFORE AWNING WINDOW PAI NTED PLYWOOD *53 .40 AWNING WINDOWS @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @m ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS li: 64: f. 4: 1 4 4/4 ./*Â·14$ r.6 1 . . I. 'I ./ 1. =100- +/--UL-â€ž-ULU LUQ 014 6.'....... . . --, 1 1/- .3.A,379*---9 ~fr::7-7.~98~:-- -tÂ· 22.. DIE h / 0 " ..1, 1 1 ....4 1. 1., I :. . 4 9'p I 'V . Â· ' Â·..7- Â· : 5 '- Â·-' ~~t:,1 .~ - r LÂ£.11...,ojl--11=wâ€žll~-~~ti~ i , . . 0 .A- U - -1/,t~~ ,.1/ p.- 11 fr f- ' 1. r iâ€¢+ 2.Am'11:.. .,9,$ 7 .......,240,Jfâ€¢f,>0'.:Â·. . ' WALL SECTION 720 EAST HYMAN AVENUE CHARLES CUNNiFFEARCWTECTS 152::= A.,F, CO. 19.0,174,99 ..m SOUTH ELEVATION SUNSHADING STUDY - BRISE SOLE / @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 ~ CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION General Construction: A orise sole,I 6,Â·stem coinpromises the following key components - Â· Alurrwium bra<skets to lix tric system buck to tfic larude - All.minum supoor- arms wh,ch pro,ect frcm the fagaoe - Fixed alum num louvers (ger,Braly jerotot! cÂ·c>flies) which connect between the suppor arms Optional, adlustable ajurnit':im tie rods, 1.0 proÂ·Â«jo 23<j,t'orial suppoR U.ask to the curlain i.Â·Eli \ .,4 -. .& ~-- --- or budding structure -Optional front cad or fascia tc pre., de a different aes:het< to the system 1 le rod mouittlilq plate Adiustat,le be too Top :]racket 1 1 \ ' 1 \ 1 % 1 4 A 1 11 0 f._ }~* 2~0/%5:/* . ....,.-~ 0 1.- :- -- I -M- AE=9X - --~ i IM/~4........&--)- t 1-'Glure~ / ~ e,Jillf. 01 Z -1.,. Â£3 C a starÂ¢twA buse =Icil 5'r#8 , Louver Supped tim-I Exing bracket LOUVER SYSTEM @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS SCREENS #6 8Â£,Sciesfi 61'SIScreen 4:li 3Â£0: .P 13 4 *Tehazc,1.48 ke: 0 11.* 1.t~ 'c, 66 aâ€¢ad*,4 n NAW .114 1Â£41,1: 1,NLO'i Le,Gar,Scr- 11<jle â€¢ up IC 1 ddli â€¢ i.0 504 Mit< â€¢ up k 12 Len;Iii â€¢ 5 to 17 Leâ€¢:011 - 727:4 j 7:C -- Ee-C/ate ~, i 3282rS,feun A:U flkdc .p 1 3 M 54* 60> iIi I. 1, 2Â£'AthjZCfl 48> gy St)78 POWCA ,1 2.aince n J.8/ and jiJilloilitl0ppgfi . 20 Ir 4 6*,.dh Le,dia,Scr.n or:,Me . Iâ‚¬I M 12' le-Ob â€¢ 1.0 104 0,~211Â· â€¢ 1 -12 c{*crgi â€¢ ,-0 b 17 Lell:111 . |Â· 17 â€¢111-/5 2. 0 4 1 ///4/ vf244,-1 1 1 . r--r.-/ i- v: . 1 1 I -: 40 GRATING SYSTEM RISE SOLEIL - @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ~ @U ASPEN HPC HEARING ~ MAY 23, 2012 ~ CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS r " '111 4 1 , 44. ANCDIZED 1 IMA[l I il 1K5 11, /0/F/- FINISHES 1, //2*AF'& ..6Â« 11 ., /14 {/1~. .......1 1 0 1-7 Â«2 23â‚¬yâ‚¬-20,7 i. - . .7 41 9 /9<Q+~~1 :~:it3 ~ 'MEDIUM BRONZE' -/1/-1 4#2.4, 4~~ /â‚¬-224.//illill/lillill//9/11'9ip - RAL 8019 'GREY BROWN' 0244 y 2- I -937,1~ .- ..6 +0: 3/~-f Ch@"03018 - GRATE-OPTION COLOR LOUVER-OPTION COLOR COLOR @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE &153 ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS LINE OF EXISTNe BASEMENT - - FOUNDAT ION BELOA 11 - - -U-- -1 2,1 4% 1 Sltes 5'-5 1/2 " ./- lu'll"ll ilimlilli)nm - r U -- 4L%-9 1 1 4 1 p - 13 4 9 g .*~1 % 1 . 4 , I 1 60 & 1 .. 0 Â·- Â· ASPEN ATHLETIC BUILDINe ~~ 6 9/77% Cli 00. . 1,Â¥ tÂ·Â·. . PEOPERTY UNE I I . Â· Â·1 %9 i -r- . - 2 9 A meN SPACE il 9 . L 1 4 PLANTER PLANTCR || P.ANTe[R 1 [L LINE of ExISTINS BASEMENT - FOUNDATION 52-0/41 HYMAN AVE. AERIAL IMAGE EXISTING & PROPOSED ITE PLAN @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @a ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS (29 WH) 115 1Â¥N; 9-hIC Â¤ VERTICAL CIRCULATION Â¤ COMMERCIAL r 44111~, ~~1 0 1-le . illi I ~ 4,+ TIFF12 - tui !1, ,; i:illÂ·ilili~'i: :i;~!il:111 1 1 :1 111111.: 11: ,i 1 1. !1.'lilij.4 Zill'.'illi#i.li lilli :ill Ii.1 ir.u . Ii:Â·li |1 i i.,1 1~ 1!: !---f ! i'll,il':~r'!*4 111 -0 1 1 lili lilli A 1; ~ llc-1 -1=I~ %44441 i,1 '1Â· i f i 1,ili!,lill' 235*411 !1/ l' if ~ lili li~--] 11 --lilli Elli*iL.li ;Ii i Â·11!1111,1 m |~ - ATM LOBBY ~ lilli 3 1 -i-'~4/3Â·il~'11!~'i 2:, :,idgi:i, I (34141.*-- ~ *1117+~ 1~1 jill: --1 1, 1 . / 2,1 1.Pi i.!111 !ili. ." 1, FI'li'' pi.L; ~Ii|li|'ii''LÂ· Iii:Â·' 7 LIT< 6 ' M 1 t 1 1, fi 1 21 "i.,i 'mill:iii lis 'd'illi 1!11 L i !/!Ir':111' 1 1; bili li lih-i LOBBY / ATRIUM ill'illi'I; 1 1 11 111 1,1 111 LO8BY / AIRIM 0 11#Aj, 1 Â· 1 =,P #12.piti- 'l It 0~Â·c, 0,79 1 1 1 1!11 1,1 0 1,001 r gmck'l.i '!:MI t.iÂ·t 1 1 ~' +,~, ; AZE= 7%44 6/ ila :: 11 95Â»Â·44 0,16â‚¬DJ PROPOSED EXISTING STREET LEVEL PIAN @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS Â¤ AFFORDABLE HOUSING Â¤ VERTICAL CIRCULATION Â¤ COMMERCIAL MO . A _-,1 -L __-n 3- trJ 22.- OFFEE - - 2.-: .--LI. 0 15=11 -- - 0 9 DENTEr OFFICE 1 W -- ---- -- 97 2 ~~ 1 2 Miwd f 11 - 1: .~ -tj J 6 _ El - C J 713 T -- . Â· L...._ + 1 4 P. - 1- '. C, 9 - -4.r f>Â·* Â·1 OFFICE 1.. , W .1 .- - ' I 6 7 0 - '4]00 1 y C 7 1 0 .A >1 1 2, D 'f 11 1 ell , 44, 8 9-â€¢0,4, rkâ€¢Â«, *094 >C'* 5 WAV PROPOSED EXISTING SE>ND LEVEL PLAN @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS Â¤ FREE-MARKET HOUSING Â¤ VERTICAL CIRCULATION O CONTMERCIAL 1 - 7111,11114'iLL,LL I Â¤ 1 ' g 93'"q '3' & - . 0 424 LC 9 8 - ' -/ M.'; ~~ Â·Â·Â·Â· 1 ~!1%[' juÂ¢!-1-!11-4 ~ -tij.1 LI [ ..~.:.i-4'LL#-1 : 1 1 ! 1111.!+'. i t !~~.'.' 1 ITT" --- 3 1,1 - - E, 1 1 1 - Â©- 0 0 ' '-tii--19*1~zt ~ Â·:~~ D:jtgt-*Â·*42-' Â·11Jli4i*W:- ' ~-I~It-:4 '913+-till *----4-3 +Ife-1-9-1-7-1_l.1.- .'-~ 1-' Â·!Â· fÂ·-tr-,Â·1.1!j.~.. i <--1 ..1.- ~-':9544~11]-14{-__p,-0 IT-7 -- Â«M- n. E.LI fr-Â«7 1 -= Li 1--r-f . Â·:-:44Â·.U-i-4 - 1 ~1 il: I 11 '444.; t.1.-l ...1-1~~Â·,4/7 1 -- 1 J c - : Â·Â»-1 A 11 , :443~q*~*- .Ilâ€¢ 1 ...5.1... ....~i.-:----~.~.../:..i - 71,4 >CI ~! (4 11 -1 19.-,1 liLL- 2.'Ir-- 6- =Ell=t- il 1 '.X, 11 1 941, f 111,..YA-'. 14+1 Rbi -1,1*1 ---ti ''i-2, 13* 1 1 1- nâ€¢4 41 -111-k 1 1 - JJ~0- L A=:27 / 1-7 1 ' -4*I-|+4 +-L_, 1- 11 I ~ - 1 -1.- I - ..1 1 '14 R Owl 4.- 1 1 , Hit, 0 ..~ 1 - a re--1 1*1 -1 .---1 M â€¢â€¢, ' 1.iOBBY 'jq'Atr--k= .Â· ~.1--i.--C<-2.1 ~00+s.. --1*zz:4 GYM G.:- , ~ * ~. ~ FFEE MARKET IMI /2 1 . â‚¬ L.rfflf: ~'â€¢", . 1 '1- i.1.; !~..f..I -" v,|1 -ti-%9' ..22.-51.'i.... 3 1 1 li lili FREE MARKET UN T 01' . 0 . ---144.F-D.L....1- 1 COND,6082.1 - -' 1-1 919*1Â·:'Â· i Â·Â·~-1-1 -4.4.--Â·,0 Zill Lic* 1 0.-al-173 : 3 Â»rflÂ·Â·Â·f-Pill..:.~ - . - W.1 I...1,3.frzE.1~ ~ .1...5{1.1?3 *ill LS -- I : 14,%0-56 ?Mt/ . 2..1 0 J; 1. 1 1.El....di-~-[.11 .i! 2-4 - 6. -1.Â·:r 4Â·31.Uy.-2 :-1-1~-E. -..~ 11'Â£-2 : . 12-11 1 -1 â€¢ 1- ./.Â·-Â· I.â€¢â€¢Â· Â· Â·'~7-HI-Â·. Â·Â·Â·.Â·- ..4,:1.,4-:-1.1 . i.-41 -- OFFICE 1.- -1 - .'.-+11.1--1.1-.1-1,41.1 0 = :, Â· Â· . im.- E .2.1.-=. 6 -::c 0.-- .....K...:...: ....t,]44-!:IF [.ff.fr 11 J.9...LE..4.1111'rb ; ' 11112 1 1.- ' -a -*lili n ... ' E -- 1~i-.--13.-~t. I â€¢'-1 ~ 1-6- 1. 113 1-*.... ..' - .E ... -+1.- ! i ..1 ..L -12-11.~ 11 -1 "-tr -!-3-1-r't]-p -1': 1 -i i..,1-: ... ...2 . i 1.1. - 1. 11 1 1 11 1 1 .-4 .2. . , g 2 1 a ' LL_-112 1-_ 1 _ L__ _L_ L__ 1- - 0 - SOLAR SHâ€¢C>INe DEVICES ABOVE .90/141 DASHZPA PROPOSED EXISTING @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN HPC HEARING CHARLES CUNNIFFE MAY 23, 2012 ARCHITECTS Â¤ DECK FOR Â¤ VERTICAL CIRCULATION tlettuVIARKET HOUSING 1-'-fill A lili 11111111 17111111-1 1 1 .-4- -- -- -- - - *11'r ./.-%- '*RECNÂ· q<POF --- MECHANICAL Cal. PMENT \ %--- 1 1 i.* 90.,L 16+,7 5%/LES-T - 0 0 0 - 1 1 - SK/6 16.1. aE--4- * - *?Crj%|T EXISTING -i-- - 79Â·Jm SLEâ€¢/A-Cl ZLIVAIC' OVERRA OVE!2ftâ€¢â€¢ EE EE ** PE.THOUSE Â°Eâ€¢â€¢THS.13â€¢C 8./.-- 11% ] : 1 *ILIGHT -dz/li-3 147 97[ 1 1 1 -21/4 RESMEN!]AL ROOF DECK ' 1-'ll. 1 1 . 94/LI/H-T w* 90 m m -'6RZEN' ROOF -_.. 1 1 3 1 1 U... .. '' .1 - I . I . - - PROPOSED EXISTING - -ROOF LEVEL PLAN @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 144 G â‚¬e --srâ€ž 1 . SO. AR 6-AIDE DE+LE AT 36(2 =.GOR . bl â€ž u ligi "MJ" L,~ SOLAR SHADÂ·. PE'/ CE REPLACE AANI~,6 -4.- ~ _ d.. -4-2.g:A-Â·G ~1!NOD/43 - TvP 30.,R 94â€¢OC XVICâ‚¬ A- 2Â·â€¢P rLOD'R A- .SE., 1 â€¢ 11 1; 11 11 51 " 11 1, 11 11 11 11 11 11 1 1 11 . . .1 1 1 SOLAR SHAJE DEV CE â€žLee I.L. t, SO-AR EÂ·,Â·ADE GEVICE AT Gr /1-~St A- LCE,Bv ----/0--11/'7 3---9 11 ./--11 .... 201..AR SMAX DE,/ SE ~no I | 111 PROPOSED Â¤ SOLAR SHADING DEVICES k ---='21>r J---G fl 11 1 11 11 1 1 i 11 11 11 N 11 1 1 1 1 1 lilli [1 R .1 0 IM I 1 i a i 1 1 !1 - + 1 Ill 11 11 111 1/j , 1 : , r 1-1 1 F-1- 11 . / If 1 ...f ~-4.- . A EXISTING --...,1.-1Â¥ M. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN HPC HEARING I MAY 23, 2012 ~ CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS -I f&;4 17- I 1 \ 11 11101=1 1 â€ž 10101 11 1110=71 11 11 1 (ADE DEVICE 1.1 + " , 44 - REP-A= A"INIS I " I ._ L 1, 11 11 11 1. Â·-7 AINE>OAS - T-/9 *ADE DEVICE r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1----~----1---1 1 1 .....t i 2 -1 11 ;1 1, 11 -1 ADE :2[Â·,/15[ 11 r' 11 r 11 L 7 11 1 PROPOSED 1- 1 11 1 1! 1 1 1 11 11 1 L ! 11 11 1 11 11 1 1 Il 11 1. 11 I J L-IL_- 31 IL L 1 '11' S t i 1 -1 4MNATILEI C <UN ! 1 11 11 lili ; .f~ ~ 1\ I. r EXISTING / _ . @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE alm ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS --- -*-4,54*.I ----I z- 1 1 -01 =- de- - ---MAA,-0 I Orn 1 11 11 1, 1 1 11 11 r. = - ill ' | SOLAâ‚¬ SHADE XVICE 1 -t#U X 1 1 0 1 REPLACE A/'IN146 --_- - 1/pl " â€¢ .1 11 11 11 1 1 11 . 1 1 11 1 1 11 1 ,=. 14 hOO,45 - 7, 4-4 1.4- 1 Â£ 1~ -0:1*=1-1-: SOL.Al Â·3/.ACE DEVICE 14 1 - ; : 9-,; --i___i:4 -----,--i. -1-*C -1%~~1-:'1 3~-*~~*ii- BM r 1 G 11 11 1 ... [J SOLAR SHASE DEVICE i ] tr-4----rit-/-0--~ r PROPOSED 1 -:724 r-G !1 1 1 1 8 1 1 1 : â€ž :, 1 lilli ! 1 1 1/ lifT : W 1 Â· -A.inÂ·Â® Fl 11 'lii' ' 1.Eri _ " .4 -IL 1 1, 1...U U .W:*@0 'U i 1 3 P.'1 1, .* .-I-. r. i -- 6. ..7/0 , , B EXISTING - - - ' - -- - -- - -= T TEJULFÂ·-'014 441> ~ 14.f'~'4% Pl . 0 -ALLEY (NORTH) ELEVATION @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @ 53 ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS â‚¬e --4287,0-:- -P... ..,0 - . .0, 92. - 7- 60.* 64*E =Evld Al all Pli~R-L--- ; 1 LJ r,J---Ir- ~r--Ir--17-3&L i SOLAR SHADE DEVICE ' ''-. -425 G , - '- REF'.AU ArN )46 iDJ . 6991 . 11 61 1/ 11 1,2- - ANNDAS - 77/ ~ iIi. 1 SOLAR 5HAPE DEVICE ./-. locâ€¢ VIAâ€¢ Â¥19=.82(16!: 5.!ST:1*7 -li -'-'~ - -' -5~66~1639-PcvÂ·c,= ...Lri.04 ....", G 1 il 1 1 - SOLAR LIADE DEv ICE 1 i PROPOSED - 1 - - / -Ii---U6~W T-$- Â¤ SOLAR SHADING DEVICES 1,1 1 1 N 11 1 11 11 1 t 1 -1 -r- 7.G 1 11 1 1 11 11 1 lili 1 - 1 L-1 X 1 11 ! I .1 1"11 ..~ EXISTING : 1 ./......In-4149..7-* -- 1-. NEIGHBOFSYWEST) ELEVATION :.Alil'.ar'.u b 1-- -_ - 1. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS I Â·Â·54* I 22 1947/ 1 2 Â¥,4 '.4. N. 2 418.,*ft 111' 0/.L~ 4Â«11'~ Atif 4 4 .fÂ·?31. El. *,.: ~ y i# .: '1: /. -.1 2- 69,m , ry , -,2 1%â€¢./'. ,L, . tÂ·~ V :92., * 7, 'r' %*6:i.:it'p. ~:: 'Â·Ci ./:4-2 ..le. k 7#19 ' ** + , 2 C " 45 4 & 3 374/ 1 *1 ,f 7 7 4.*14 7 2% . plit/3 +01 ./Illit .- I . 79-/ i P F.. . 14* 3-4 - + + 1,2. f-, + $ - -p.' 11 --6---.- i ?'..,6*b:9 4 11,~ 44 U 9 ~4 f.> f 1 9 'Ult 2,~,Â·,/'I ~4912 4 $=1-5 11 ~4210 ~ Â· --~ 4(/FIt 1. r .5 2 .;r* ftÂ°fir~'* ..4..1144 & r.t --2 K â€¢ ... 13&4 J.- /4Ar. 1./.4 3 ./*/ 2/ Â· ju=*2-, I .4,1.4 / I. L A .9. ..lial::i,8*,3 . , / k.* ------- >L-4,;12. L. 7 .4 u*.-B~ *.*pl~ 14/ ;* i,tit. *.lilÂ» .1 f *1 . Illilitiw,/':4 441.471/4 /4 r .4.7 1-1,< 1 , *5*1; k".8 ilkitr t; dlt, ye 1 *Â£ 494, A./ *Â£.97 t.k.. 1: 1:. bw 433416 . *. 1 A 44%, . - -- * 1 >d/ju I: 1 ! 49<Azat â€¢ â€¢ ID* '<L # 4.... j Ve -ir-1-I * 1 . ' *:T,1. 1 -1///1. 11 "3Â¢ ~ ---==4 ~i12 ~OVE I.2.1â€ž~~,#44.--*2 â‚¬ * ..P'.9 - -%p-: . â€¢ 1 tmi - -eii,izill 4 w/ + ... AA F 1*Ati. p - r.. 9 .. .. A .. A A C '::' 1 A . CA .. . A. A i : - - n JÂ·4 0* 4 1 . L 22:I. 9%01 I -73 211 - tty,# t - -:1. 4 : ./ J 1. I I -- ...,15.k. < Â«e.2 4-,2. - 1 *09 Â« $ 4 .- F :. !4 , 4 -- . 'A, I , .2. t. -I r .A . I. I < T .a , 4 /4 -N , ... 0..'. 1 % t. . Â¥b, A ~Eper'. $24~3*4 -9 0 * *%*433. 1. - ;R/FI---5 92,)& %323 - r 1 Â· 7.1 0-- AFTER --- -- --:-. HYMAN AVE. @. 'i- ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @m ASPEN HPC HEARING CHARLES CUNNIFFE MAY 23, 2012 ARCHITECTS Â«aâ‚¬ a 'a, 4034* Miff-B AE Beivis,lia ... 4/4/ 3 R ifill//Amal,8/& 4' 0 , . 4 K 1lk . ...6 Â« - I 13,2 *6.Fig/imit"&9/,1. #ripÂ· tâ€¢ . 1,1 1~r ---I--1 'ir,--- 4 /<... lal.U/////4 .... -, ' 11#111/1/nimr --11 -ffijh:A : -Â«6446 + I . *14 .'#I"/N'U/./.Ill-- . *- : '. ....t .,41 3,6 23 E r ....r, T '1-4 9, 1â€¢AM h 1. 0 .'h '44 1$3......... .: -- ' y. ' 5- 1. I '4 2,-63% I 1 4.9 - 24*, I ns ..991 . 7 -149 -. le@k < I k. + ....:Â¥5 k..:~24~~.. , 2.27'....1=5 -,--4 0â‚¬ :AF*64*4- 3-:..E I 3 1~, . .+33>Â»~ 7.,Ed//I...Ukkils,-".aL.*flL -. + & 735*pgit/#3&64*26;**i'_- -*. -* -1,--&& - .dEW.L.&1.Z'h . p~.Imm// - BEFORE Â· - w. .... g '+ 04~ ~ 1. ./.0 Â·74 VIEW #2 FROM ACROSS INTERSECTION OF HYMAN AVE. & ORIGINAL @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @a ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 6. 4 q 4 , F~12't.~ 901. A. 7,44 |.- '14 ...Al*5*49234,%/imilm#/bot,tr F 4 A '1 11 M.- ..lial.-1.$.1 , ..3're-rz,ibr 4,4. *f k Ill N 2*.. 4 30, 12 5. t 1 11 ./ ; â€¢ U eA.4 i , 4. 10 --19 411 i-4 k- e'. ' r .2-Â« i: il 7 ~110.Â¥ I p - B ., m R li . 4Â·, r ~ %,42%* . b 44. . f.: A 41. - . , 9 ~'i U;' 'i~~ 6,9 . "ls...& 2 I '1. '1'U < 7.713-~1 , ./ -i.4 49 1 '54 - - . -*400/ 1 -te- I h fc ./ , 4 P. I 1- , 3 44 - . 0 , 4 24 .Â· I - 1, 2 - I ; 12. "91 .Â»atff'flt... 4. r te.Â·Aa- Â· . 4 'IC + r r I /9.:%94- + - fu [ Lr- 1 I , --C. . ..24-eL-;.,tÂ·aA.5~2Z' - AFTER VIEW #2 FROM ACROSS INTERSECTION OF AVE & ORIGI @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 342 *-~38 . F 1 *f 14& NE + 11 P 10% 1 4 Â· E 2211 1 . " 3 ~iÂ» j ' 3- i *i ..&.-'.r 1 1 1 11.11 4 -': - 44 --vi- m' - 9.9Â·.Lair..1 ..0.1....1 r . m . 4 1. I . 29 . 4 1 =Dh.04'. ~4 --7-1 f 1 0 . 94 *1;944. h, 41- " 4254 4 * 4 ' 0 41*f ~ 6 4 9*P 4, ,,0.Â·' ..â€ž*423>'.9.../'#. " ' â€¢ 4.A:-.hi#KIE-il,~ 43*Â· . 1 -- BEFORE IEW #3 FROAK*CNOSS INTERSECTION OF HYMAN AVE. & ORIGINAL ST. @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 9 4 6 . 39 f g . 1 -:442'0 - , - ./ a 1 ' Â¥ 7-4454 2. 9.' A 4 . t-< ~ 29 3. * W . ... k I r . 1-*i 2 V f. ati. . .4.*,9 *k .tpr)44 - ~ Â·22&.*VI t Â· . .~& 1__"T "4 +WN 9- I I I. ' Ct 4% flit . P-- '*A-9 ..'43@72/I-- . - - re.1~.261. i f..329?~~_pL Â«~-~ 4/ ' AFTER VIEW #3 FROM ACROSS INTERSECTION OF / HYMAN AVE. & ORIGINAL ST. @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @U ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS .' 2 *Il 6 3 lilli ' *Imilia 17'r -4 *. .11 70 's . ' 5! J F '9* . . 2 Â· 47 ' '4 ' ~' ~- t.Â·.Â·.Ci E-2-*.Â·Â·* C .:4 . J ./1 r--. 1-20 ' I 1 f.6- 2 d. 4 b 2 - I . . au: . 1, 1, >4 & . m.. ....5 I , Â·Â·,1 Â· . I .4 . : *...r - ' --3* /--& 1,1: ..4 ..r *_*---5--.:r=~-J~.*1~:~*-1 117- e i.f .... 3% :- D 41 . ge # 4 .- .... . 2 - 7 le , 43- R ,: E .. A. /21 - C I -81Â· 1Â·./ 2.39 rrmn - ' /1. ' =224 ~21 :c AN /0 . 14 , 4 *:li BEFORE VIEW #4 FROM ACROSS ORIGINAL ST. AT ALLEY @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @a ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS /2 4 m *I T - 4 4 I . 42 h .9. ,. If, ' 8 ~BÂ·i~ * Imim . 4;Â·4. t# fi *46 - * 14, It .â€¢ . , 42... tÂ¥Â¢049 ..~i ',/:.1 - e L.DÂ©,3 1 t. I . '1 t. - 1 7 1.* -1 *1.~Fielf-3* 1 li -- ..2 0 r--r:-62k1 . * r *<a Em -1 - ..11 '9'EL. r:4=.via#Frif-:-40<6.. 1 -- 4 r-~-r -?483%3 j vr . 4 ./ .Â· f. , I A. - e y,-re-Â· i. 9 2 . 4 Â¢ , 6 r *27 . U - *' p ~ mer ./.*- = */ 1, 2 ./. ,%- ai 1 ./:/.. Â¥ . P 91:4..imrÂ» E 2, A 1 li - 4 , - 14, . 4 .. ,.' ,=29â‚¬ 9'' * & 'FY, i .Â«m. AFTER ORIGLNALST. ALALLEY_ @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE @a ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS . . TA '*41.-, 40 Â· 404 - -2 Fic114*EN~*~6~.dgSiA~,~116 ~fÂ£~.~~p,~34~ - ' *r-2 , - 1$71.12~~ . e .;,1.Zly. :Twomm# mi al! 3 1.-2:~=ri,~i': . - 3/94*Evft,Â·dflit1411:Pkillvilvitillieliqztiza;*95(2$51&64~2,2..rÂ·%Â§.rbi-8,2.#~hi'#<r :mi*$46&*Jttijair#1*.1jail.:26:t:r. .:. #A#:1<~~*~glt#TF~21*&~I?IÂ·.-1.*..*I.LL+*26'.Â»:J.NÂ·:.4*:4:;f Â£Â»Â·Pâ€¢*, i. //4.0/72-i *41..,~Â¥Â·111#ihabii#,bly.4,4#Â¢~~--/: 9 / 1Ftexck#pi'guidkbpr#pbtmquaitj#eat"pal~*44&42$2&3::th: A. t. I:.Â· ~ ~~ 3: 2.<,F-~...: Lft-~-Â·~ *tâ‚¬ rÂ·~Â·U.'*4*0Â·~:i~ j. , F .43 1 -,r .- .-1 1 454 1 - 9*;.F %4*365'.0,ALFt,Je"i. .. 3 1.-fet 40 1.m.64% 3,2:5*'tt)* 4 . ric:Jiggilillillillillill'll -.... 3 t pp:.4/ke :14 -3 ~~ â€ž , 494< . ' Bmic*8249194"Mi'*0&*ter'WE# * - '' 4 ' i Wil 11 .434 M. f . 0.Â¢ e 1, r . .4 /1 r + . * . ' .U . 49'. -1 . ,4 4 k. 4- ,â€¢ . 17 F Â¥ ~ *.5,. 1,0:W.9/9.,4 ,," 1 , 21.1 . f.... 9.3 Â·Â·Â·. +3/ 111,56 4 *1 3. r ' t,r.'.-â€¢tr :49 . B k:- . 4 I I ' . ..,fyi '. I >Ce:. * 4 14 r .24-/9 & ' .Erililizi.- :0 + ./ , B.-:,r 6 . . 7. 1, 1 J . - -29 -1 14- * * A -.... ./1. - ' 4 1 BEFORE EW #5 FROM A OSS OR!*NAL ST. AT HOPKINS AVE. @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE &153 ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS / ..Vi .' 1*-*â€¢0 19.4 ..:. '' , Â·Aâ€¢ . . 221,+ -,fifp *'9Â£ Â· 1, . "mial, . A..1... llÂ¢,U f, , . c .448'bri:fetÂ·)>r~*124*8~/4-4#2 J'.W ...4.:. Â¥,f. 111%2*4#.....la *t' D -~ ~ 0~4ifitt>*or ~,~*fiLÂ»dÂ·kffÂ·Â·~rk-~-*I~~,~~- 3-Â· f 42-'~:*.0* **abl<:MÂ¢:i, 45+04.-#t' 04:.4% 6/44~81<..fp? m.*4<,41*2*::#40/~5,9*1%*t.-t... 4. p. -2 1 2 / ' :41--- b. , t..t:.1 . ~..JI.:i:i~M~pi---.. *J.au-3-1-fibtfri''A{~ 1, *1 1 .. .- ,...:,Â·:1Â·1~'4 - ~-:'- FqÂ·:.Â·ip<42<.4,~FJ~*:aN~: 4 2 ./LI ./ I -Arl *Â¢ C '4.4 : I A-< 1 rIC=ad #, -6, -:It4 Â· I I ), . , T.. - f 7#A '' 9-11*6~0#i,lM#iM(XT*ly~Ah,Ag-9*&~,,,.14.~Â£ 8 43-4 F, ./ j-f >;fÂ·,Â·ji.i?Q+M'Jrn,51*'In".2/#IA . 1./.p-/.r. * 9.8 J *452..~Ahâ‚¬A,Ai-jip/4 I - - - F. Â·r ..h .'IJ~'/ i . ..Py 'M- '.4 . Â¥ I.- I I - Â· 4.' I 2,T / , 4.d".2**L IPjazâ€¢:m,72-/- . .-Â«, 1.19.- ,â€¢' ': I /4 I. . I :kt,@ki44* Â¥ ' 7â€¢X L .f~~ Of,pf *A~. 4 -1Â«4 /0 .., y 4 t m ' t â€ž.8 +f 'P A..fi... 0 ' 4 I d ./ rEGE Â· ?Di 'AP . 1 : 3 Â« 4 '9. 6 - I . 't l I f j 2 3 'i AFTER 9 , *.*Â· r 11.- 121Â·44'4*â€¢>:y,--. VIEW #5 FROM ACROSS m OPKINS A @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS THANK YOU! @. ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING 1 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE tga ASPEN HPC HEARING MAY 23, 2012 CHARLES OUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 6 - 94'(4 4- AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE L REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE 5 - 32>1 3 ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 720 2 4-3 rn:v~ 4- , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Akd F-ta~Â¤ 94 e 6:fin , 20,Â£2- STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, 4vn.-fa G c ou----1 (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: - Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 20 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more 1}lan sixty (60) days prior to the date o f the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment: Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses o f owners o f real property in the area o f the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing "Affidavit ofNotice" was acknowledged before me this20 day of Ap A 1 , 2011 by A-Â»1â‚¬da SCOÂ·râ‚¬-,/~ WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My co I Lon Exp\Ids-. 5 ~11 ~ 30 1 11 Notary Publi& ~ f CORYJ. : GARSKE . 4. 4/8 LESSj ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: 14..*....Â·-2 * COPY OF THE PUBLICATION op (09 * PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) My Cornrii;sion Froi,oâ€¢ 03/98/201~ * LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED BY MAIL * APPLICANT CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. Â§24-65.5-103.3 3 ,>20:02. ."/:92:4 Ne--221Â§3222~18 83%~ -200.-r...d ZZ=U 830'.02 1. ......9.-0 42~ E &C--P &26 ~g --â€¢Gy 48*%22 :=:~62:,8 tele:: 9*92$t=:e ~22 -al Â§ 0 3 12 lifilitli REE,Nillim emel j#:232&i; 30Â£91~01*1,4&.i Â¥1:mM 0~ 2' i:'55 72Â£~; 02- il gelâ‚¬2,32Â·; :%:m do-O-m=,r,Â®v imah: Â£ m -25..SRNE. g E e === -1/:imilipiliag. Im , . 579976 . St! 1- 1 1 - W [LBELOGL] ELOE '6 1 ludv uo AIMeaM seut!1 uedsv alli u! P849!Iq UOISS!1.ULUOO UOUe,Jaseld ouols!H uedsv 11!840 ems '9Â£28-0 (0Â£6) 0â‚¬L 'luelupedea lualud qnlo 0!le E. HYM~ E ASPEN dsÂ¥ '8~ueA PUBL Ao eq m poued uoile!100 nIN uuÂ¥/S leAO dde is oh in,.0. Box GIV N thal a public he AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 72-0 e *ST ++M viAN AVEN U g , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Pc"1 9 t , 20Â¢1 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, LLA#*BLES CUNNIFâ‚¬e (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. 4 Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the I 6 day of A Flal L , 2042 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. 4 Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses o f owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. OLLCL. -4 Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 23"day of Fl/.,4 , 20032, by Ck-le-, L. C.â€ž4RL WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL i' TONI ROSE i i SWERSKY j My commission expires: 02 ~,4,1F 1 -72422 61 2341.- Notary Public My Commmion Expires 08/26/2015 . ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: â€¢ COPY OF THE PUBLICATION â€¢ PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) â€¢ LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL â€¢ APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. Â§24-65.5-103.3 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE (AKA THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB) ASPENMODERN NEGOTATION FOR VOLUNTARY LANDMARK DESIGNATION, CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARD REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, May 9, 2012, at a regular meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission (HPC), Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by CMC, LLC c/o John Martin, P.O. Box 297, Queenstown, New Zealand, 9348. The applicant is represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, 610 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611, 970- 925-5590. The project affects the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, legally described as Aspen Athletic Club Condominium, Lots Q, R and S, Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, PID#s 2737-182-11-008 - 2737-182-11-031, and 2737-182- 11-801. The applicant proposes to voluntarily designate the Aspen Athletic Club building in addition to minor exterior changes. Through the Aspen Modern negotiation the applicant requests approval to convert uses from commercial into two free market residential units and one affordable housing unit. The applicant requests of the HPC the following: evaluation of the voluntary landmark designation and requested benefits as part the AspenModern ninety day negotiation period to be forwarded to City Council; Minor Development review for historic landmark properties. For further information, contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2778, sara. adams@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Ann Mullins Vice Chair, Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on April 19,2012 City of Aspen Account Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A I Bend along line to i ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® 1 Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ 1 300 SPRING STREET ASPEN LLC 630 EAST HYMAN LLC 635 E HOPKINS LLC PO BOX 5000 532 E HOPKINS AVE 532 E HOPKINS SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 818 ASPEN LLC 803DKS LLC ADAM P T ANTHONY T SMITH 15280 ADDISON RD #301 PO BOX 9066 50 S LASALLE ST B2 ADDISON, TX 75001 ASPEN, CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60603 ANDERSON ANGUS A FAMILY LLLP ALEXANDER THOMAS L ANSON WESTON T & SUSAN BAILEY C/O ERIC RICHELSON 715 E HYMAN AVE #27 8030 EL PASEO GRANDE 13 EVERGREEN ROW ASPEN, CO 81611 LA JOLLA, CA 92037 ARMONK, NY 10504 ASPEN 719 HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN 835 LLC ASPEN ART MUSEUM PO BOX 11600 333 LAS OLAS WY #2105 590 N MILL ST ASPEN, CO 81612 FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301 ASPEN, CO 81611 BARNETT JERALD M REV TRUST ASPEN ASSETS LLC AVP PROPERTIES LLC 3/3/2003 3361 MEANDER LN 630 E HYMAN AVE #25 500 PRESIDENT CLINTON BLVD #310 SAFETY HARBOR, FL 34695 ASPEN, CO 81611 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 BARTLETT KATY I BAUM ROBERT E BEAUDETTE PETER C 715 E HYMAN AVE #18 PO BOX 1518 501 E SPRINGS RD ASPEN, CO 81611-2066 STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 COLUMBIA, SC 29223 BELKOVA DASHA BELL MTN QUAL RES CONDO ASSOC BERGMAN ALAN M LLC C/O ALAN M BERGMAN 819 E HYMAN AVE #7 320 S SPRING ST 10960 WILSHIRE BLVD 10TH FL ASPEN, CO 81611-2092 ASPEN, CO 81611 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC BESTERFIELD LLC 65 FIRST NECK LN 944 PARK AVE 14TH FL 200 JAMES ST S STE 202 SOUTHAMPTON, NY 11968 NEW YORK, NY 10028 HAMILTON ONTARIO CANADA L8P3A9, BILCO PROPERTIES LLC BG SPRING LLC BILL FAMILY LLC CLARIDGE CONDOS #9N 300 S SPRING ST #202 2350 W LAKE OF THE ISLES PKWY 19950 BEACH RD ASPEN, CO 81611 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55405 TEQUESTA, FL 33469 BOELENS GREGORY S BUCKHORN ARMS LLC BUYERS BRADLEY M & BRUCE PO BOX 2360 730 E COOPER AVE 835 E HYMAN #K ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ttiquettes faciles & peler 1 A Repliez & la hachure afin de ~ www.avery.com ~ Sensde i Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® chargement rdvaler le rebord Pop-Upâ„¢ 1 1-800-GO-AVERY A Easy PeelÂ® Labels ' A ~ Bend along line to | Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® 9 Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ ~ ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i A CALHOON THOMAS C CARVER RUTH A & MARTIN G CDP RESIDENCE TRUST 3405 CLEARVIEW DR 10 BYRON LN 601 E HYMAN AVE AUSTIN, TX 78703 MUSCATINE, IA 52761 ASPEN, CO 81611 CLARY EDGAR D IV COLBY WARD COLOSI THOMAS W 715 E HYMAN AVE #9 715 E HYMAN #20 715 E HYMAN AVE APT 6 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2099 COOPER SPRINGS LLC COORS WILLIAM SCOTT DAILY CONNIE M 393 N COLUMBIA AVE 727 E HOPKINS AVE #A 715 E HYMAN AVE #14 COLUMBUS, OH 43209 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 DANIELE ROBIN DAVIS HARRIET S & MARTIN DECK WARREN & MARCIA PO BOX 1023 835 E HYMAN AVE APT G 5363 S LAMAR ST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611-2603 LITTLETON, CO 80123 DELPHINIUM ASSOC DEVINE RALPH R DODEA NICHOLAS T 6050 RIVERVIEW WY 715 E HYMAN #13 715 E HYMAN AVE #19 HOUSTON, TX 77057 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 DONNELL-AN SHAUN K& SHEILA F DOWS PATRICE J DRESNER MILTON H REV LVG TRST 1250 W SOUTHWINDS BLVD #118 1411 9TH ST SW 28777 NORTHWESTERN HWY VERO BEACH, FL 32963 CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52404 SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 DUNN JUDITH A REV LIV TRUST EDGE OF AJAX INC EDGETTE JAMES J & PATRICIA 8051 LOCKLIN LN 201 E SILVER ST 19900 BEACH RD STE 801 COMMERCE TOWNSHIP, MI 48382 MARBLE, CO 81623 JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 ETTLIN ROSS L FAATH CARLOS M & MOLLY G FELLMAN THOMAS 715 E HYMAN AVE # 7 PO BOX 11435 809 NO 96 ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 OMAHA, NE 68114 FIGHTLIN JONATHAN D FOX HERB FRANKS ROOK 715 E HYMAN #46 PO BOX 1355 1901 PORTWEYBRIDGE PL ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 WINTER PARK, CO 80482 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 GAUBA ALENA GLAUSER STEVEN JERRY & BARBARA GOLDMAN JEROME K TRUST 715 E HYMAN AVE #21 460 ST PAUL ST PO BOX 249 ASPEN, CO 81611 DENVER, CO 80206 ASPEN, CO 81612 ttiquettes faciles A peler l A Repliez & la hachure afin de ~ www.avery.com ~ Sensde i Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® chargement rav@ler le rebord Pop-Upâ„¢ i 1-800-GO-AVERY A Easy PeelÂ® Labels ' A **~I Bend along line to | ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® ~ Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ A GOLDMAN MICHAEL VICTOR & GLORIA GRAY DALE F REV TRST 20% INT GROSFELD ASPEN PROPERTIES ANNA GRAY CHERYL W REV TRST 20% PARTNERS LLC 6919 GLENEAGLE DR 5921 SEARL TER 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD #2222 TUCSON, AZ 85718 BETHESDA, MD 20816 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 HIMAN LLC HAYLES THOMAS HEWINS SAMUEL PO BOX 6159 715 E HYMAN AVE #5 715 E HYMAN AVE #23 SWANBOURNE WA 6010 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 AUSTRALIA, HOPKINS ASSOCIATES LP HOZACK WILLIAM HUNT SARAH J C/O SHIEKMAN 2100 CYPRESS ST 715 E HYMAN AVE #22 2000 MARKET ST 10TH FL PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 ASPEN, CO 81611 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103-3291 HURST FERN K HYMAN STREET BROWNSTONES 11 LLC IDS PARTNERS LLC 1060 5TH AVE PO BOX 381 PO BOX 642 NEW YORK CITY, NY 10128 WRIGHTVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 INDY HOUSE LLC IRVINE DOUGLAS FORBES ISRAEL FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LTD 605 OCEAN BLVD 201 N MILL ST 263 OCEAN BLVD GOLDEN BEACH, FL 33160 ASPEN, CO 81611 GOLDEN BEACH, FL 33160 JOHNSON BARBARA WEAVER LIVING JENKINS ASIA JOFFE LIVING TRUST TRUST 734 E HOPKINS AVE 23820 LONG VALLEY RD PO BOX 3570 ASPEN, CO 81611 HIDDEN HILLS, CA 91302 LAS CRUCES, NM 88003 JOSHUA & CO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS KANTAS NICOLETTE KARST REBECCA LLC 715 E HYMAN AVE #15 6230 SW 44TH ST 300 S HUNTER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 MIAMI, FL 33155 ASPEN, CO 81611 KELLY SIMON P TRUST KASHINSKI MICHAEL R KNODE MICHAEL C 732 E COOPER AVE 0343 GROVE CT 2142 VISTA CASCADA CT ATTN: JOHN HOFFAMN 111 ASPEN, CO 81611 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81503 ASPEN, CO 816112061 KOUTSOUBOS LOUIS KOUTSOUBOS TED KRANS ROSEMARY PO BOX 9199 430 E HYMAN AVE #PH 298 4TH AVE #429 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94118 KRAVITZ MICHAEL C KROEGER HAROLD R & HEATHER R LANDA MICHAEL B PO BOX 11207 16 FORDYCE LN 851 S JOSEPHINE ST ASPEN, CO 81612-9630 ST LOUIS, MO 63124 DENVER, CO 80209 ttiquettes faciles & peler I A Repliez & la hachure afin de ~ www.avery.com 1 Sens de i Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® chargement ravaler le rebord Pop-U~TM 1 1-800-GO-AVERY 1 A Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A I Bend along line to | ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® ; Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ , A LANDIS JOSHUA B LANDRY ELIZABETH J LAWROM LLC 715 E HYMAN AVE #4 PO BOX 3036 533 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 LEGNAME RUDI REV TRUST LIBERATORE DOUGLAS LIEB MADELINE TRUST 202 STANFORD AVE PO BOX 1838 800 E HYMAN AVE #A MILL VALLEY, CA 94941 SARASOTA, FL 34230 ASPEN, CO 81611 LONG MONA HAYLES TRUST MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP MANNING FREDERICK J & GAIL P BOX 3849 317 SIDNEY BAKER S #400 222 W ADAMS ST #2290 ASPEN, CO 81612 KERRVILLE, TX 78028 CHICAGO, IL 60606 MASINI ALDA MARTELL BARBARA MARTIN ROBERT A MASINI ALDA TRUST 702 E HYMAN AVE 322 WEST 17TH ST #3E 830 E HOPKINS #201 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10011 ASPEN, CO 81611 MAYLE KENNETH D MCCUTCHIN GENE P MCFADDEN GORDON K 715 E HYMAN AVE #3 14833 MIDWAY #200 18519 E VALLEY RD ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ADDISON, TX 75001 KENT, WA 98032 MONTANARO JOHN & SUSAN FAMILY MICHELSON BRUCE V REV TRST MIKI TRUST 7701 FORSYTH STE 900 PO BOX 444 PO BOX 457 ST LOUIS, MO 63105-1813 ASPEN, CO 81612 MALIBU, CA 90265 NA DEVELOPMENT LLC NETHERY BRUCE NJH CENTENNIAL LLC 601 E HYMAN 715 E HYMAN AVE #25 314 S GALENA ST #300 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611 NONNIE LLC OCONNELL SARA G PACIFIC WEST INVESTMENTS LLC PO BOX 565 PO BOX 491167 320 MARTIN ST #100 ASPEN, CO 81612 MIAMI, FL 33149 BIRMINGHAM, MI 480091485 PERLMUTTER JAMES ROBERT PRICE GAIL PLATT HARLAN & MARJORIE SH UFRO SUSAN C/O ASPEN POTTERS INC 1 CHARLES ST SOUTH #5G PO BOX 11385 715 E HYMAN #10 BOSTON, MA 02116 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 QUARRY INTERESTS LTD RAYMOND KIMBERLY A RICCHIUTI JOSEPH F 9932 LAKEWAY CT 1280 S UTE AVE STE 5 558 N 23RD ST DALLAS, TX 75230 ASPEN, CO 816112259 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19130 ttiquettes faciles A peler ; A Repliez & la hachure afin de 1 www.avery.com 1 Sensde i Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® chargement ravaler le rebord Pop-UPTM 1 1-800-GO-AVERY A Easy PeelÂ® Labels ' A h--AMII Bend along line to ~ ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® ~ Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ 1 RICHARDSON JOHN & MARK ROGER RICHARD R ROTH LEWIS 15 TORONTO ST #400 16251 DALLAS PKWY 6230 SW 44TH ST TORONTO ONTARIO CANADA M5C ADDISON, TX 75001 MIAMI, FL 33155 2E3, RUST TRUST RYERSON GEORGE W JR SAGARIA SABATO DOMINIC 111 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD #760 715 E HYMAN AVE #17 P.O. BOX 8376 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 SAHN KAREN R SAHR KAREN M SAKSON DREW 715 E HYMAN AVE #11 715 E HYMAN AVE #8 PO BOX 1091 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEWPORT, RI 028400999 SALET PHILIP S REV TRUST SCHULTZ REV TRUST SELBY TROY E & MAY EYNON PO BOX 4897 5110 SAN FELI PE ST UNIT 381 WEST PO BOX 8234 ASPEN, CO 81612 HOUSTON, TX 77056 ASPEN, CO 81612 SESTIC ZORAN SHAPIRO LAND LLC SHAPIRO REGINA 530 E MAIN ST LOWER LEVEL 2438 JUNIPER HILL RD 14024 MONTRACHET LN ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 TOWN & COUNTRY, MO 63017 SIMON JONATHAN H SKLAR LEONARD E SKLAR WILLIAM P 19 W 21ST ST STE 902 PO BOX 246508 7238 MONTRICO DR NEW YORK, NY 10010 PEMBROKE PINES, FL 33024 BOCA ROTON, FL 33433 SMART EDWIN J SMITH ALICIA M SMITH JEFFREY L 2009 MARKET ST 715 E HYMAN AVE #16 851 S JOSEPHINE ST DENVER, CO 80205-2022 ASPEN, CO 81611 DENVER, CO 80209 STRIBLING DOROTHY SNOWMASS CORPORATION STEINER MICHAEL C & JENNIFER E WACHOVIA BANK NA FL0135 PO BOX 620 PO BOX 8312 PO BOX 40062 BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81612 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32203-0062 THOMPSON RICHARD P THOMPSON ROSS & LYNETTE TWO SEASONS HOLDINGS LLC RUSHING JIMMY C PO BOX 1186 191 UNIVERSITY BLVD #816 1171 BEACH BLVD CARBONDALE, CO 81623 DENVER, CO 80206 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32250 WEBB MARSHALL B ASPEN QPRT UPTON MARY E WALKER JOHN S 53 OSPREY CIR PO BOX 2360 PO BOX 11538 CALLAWASSIE ISLAND ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612-9537 OKATIE, SC 29909 Â£tiquettes facile A peler ; A Repliez & la hachure afin de 1 www. avery.com Sens de Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® chargement r6v6ler le rebord Pop-Upâ„¢ 1 1-800-GO-AVERY Easy PeelÂ® Labels ' A Illill Bend along line to 1 ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® 1 1 Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® 1 Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ i WILLIAMSON CHERYL EXEMPT TRUST WILLIAMS CRAIG & LEE FAM PTNRSHP WOODS FAMILY TRUST 60% 5577 CEDAR CREEK 111 BIRDSONGWY#E103 2717 OLIVE AVE NW HOUSTON, TX 77056 HILTON HEAD, SC 29926 WASHINGTON, DC 20007 Etiquettes faciles & peler 1 4 Repliez & la hachure afin de ~ www.avery.corn I Sens de i Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® chargement rdv6ler le rebord Pop-Upâ„¢1 1-800-GO-AVERY A THE CITY OF ASPEN Mailing Instructions 1. Obtain mailing text from the planner handling your application. 2. Obtain mailing labels from the GIS office, Bridgette Dolan - 920.5453. Note that the mailing labels may take a few days to obtain and that there is a fee. City code requires the list to be current within 60 days of the scheduled public hearing. 3. Photocopy the mailing labels before attaching to envelopes and attach list to affidavit form with one copy of the mailing text. 4. Mail the text to each of the property owners on the list. Additional notes, text, graphics, etc. can be included i f you desire. 5. Complete the affidavit form acknowledging the mailing. 6. Deliver the affidavit form to the planner handling your case prior to the hearing. Posting Instructions 1. Obtain public notice poster from City Planning office front desk and fill in the appropriate information. In general, please copy the text within the mailing notice onto the poster with a minimum of one inch in height for lettering. Call the planner handling your case if you need help. 2. Mount the poster on a hard board and laminate (or otherwise protect from the elements). 3. Secure the poster on-site in an obvious location. 4. Take a picture of poster and attach the picture to the affidavit form. 5. Complete the affidavit form acknowledging the posting. 6. Deliver the affidavit form to the planner handling your case prior to the hearing. 49 PUBLIC NOTICE f D~te: May 9,2012 1,1 1. Time; 5pm Place:_City_Hall,_129 S. Galena _ St.,-basementlevel__1_1_ Purpose: Nptice is hereby-given tb.at 9 P(41210_ 11*gring willbehew**m_the_Aspen Historic Pie-sewation-CommisÂ®_n_to consider_an_application submitted by - -PI-- CMC, LLC do John Martin. P.O. Box 297, Queenstown,New Zealand,9348 The applicant is represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, 610 E. Hyman Avenue, 970-925-5590. The applicant proposes to voluntarily desianate the Asoen Athletic Club 4Â£ % PUBLIC NOTICE in addition to minor exterior changes. Through the AspenModern negotiation the applicant requests approval to P... convert uses from commercial to 2 free market residential units and 1 affordable housing unit. The applicant requests of the HPC the following: recommendation of landmark designation to City Council, Minor development review for the exterior changes. For further information please contact Sara Adams at City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., 3rd floor, Aspen, CO (970) 429-2778, sara.adams@ci.aspen.co.us P .. MEMORANDUM 11FC Alywal TO: Aspen Ilistoric Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner THRU: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 720 East Hyman Avenue (Block 104, Lots Q, R, and S, aka Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominium) - AspenModern negotiation for Landmark Designation, Minor Development, Public Hearing DATE: May 23,2012 SUMMARY: 720 E. Hyman Avenue, aka the Aspen Athletic Club, is located on the east end of downtown at the northwest corner of Hyman Avenue and Original Street. The property is included on the Aspen **1. - Modern map. The applicant proposes to voluntarily designate the existing Robin Molny designed building in #pify exchange for benefits ~~- dg,Kruil.~W N,hip-,id. â‚¬ program. The applicant billillilillililillililivillillilillilimilill:::::mifill./ffll*+5* _ proposes to convert a 44mllillimilillillilill""I'll'll'Imill'll'llillirejagitaity/ - C Illifrill/$1Frilt: : ' 1 portion of the second floor 3~ ' office space to an affordable ---14/=11.-=.'f#</A,Â·i~jil housing unit and to convert I~ 4." - the third floor office space r J.-,/c,-1 -3 into two free market residential units. A roof Photograph 1: 720 E. Hyman Ave., May 2012 deck is proposed. Minor exterior changes include adding glazing to original plywood "hoppers" that allowed for ventilation above the fixed windows with glazing and the addition of removable horizontal brise soleiel (a screen usually louvered placed on the outside of a building to shield windows from direct sunlight) above the windows. HPC is asked to make a recommendation regarding the historic significance of 720 East Hyman and to make a determination regarding the exterior changes through the traditional Minor Development Review process. Setback variances for the brise soleil are requested. BACKGROUND: 720 E. Hyman was built in 1976 by local Aspen architect Robin Molny with Art Yuenger assisting with construction drawings and some design details. Molny is HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E. Hyman - Aspen Athletic Club Page 1 of 12 a significant local architect who was part of the local Frank Lloyd Wright trained constituent. Similar to other Wrightian trained architects in Aspen, Molny worked for Fritz Benedict when he first arrived in town. In his practice, he designed the Mason and Morse Building on Hyman Avenue (designated in 2012), the Hearthstone House on Hyman Avenue (designated in 2006), the pedestrian malls and local area residences including a home that was listed in the 1975 Architecture Record publication. The existing building is located in the Mixed Use Zone District. It comprises 5 floors with 3 floors above grade and 2 floors below grade. The building is entirely commercial use. According to the current Land Use Code the building greatly exceeds the FAR allotment for commercial uses (the maximum by-right is 6,750 square feet and the existing condition is 17,026 square feet) and it is over the height limit (limit is 28 feet up to 32 feet, and the existing condition is between 33 feet 3 inches and 35 feet 6 inches). There have been very few exterior changes to the building since 1976. In 2008 the building owner applied to HPC for voluntary landmark designation and minor development review with exterior changes very similar to those requested today. The 2008 HPC Resolution is attached as Exhibit C. The applicant acted on some of the approved changes: removal of exterior paint, accessibility upgrade, and removal of pine trees from the planter boxes. The applicant withdrew the landmark designation application and did not act on the HPC approvals to add brise soleil to the exterior of the building and to convert the original plywood hoppers to glazing. HISTORIC DESIGNATION Â§26.415. 030. C AspenModern 1. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of AspenModern, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet at least two of the criteria a-d, and criterion e described below: a. The property is related to an event, pattern, or trend that has made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific event, pattern or trend is identified and documented in an adopted context paper; b. The property is related to people who have made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific people are identified and documented in an adopted context paper; c. The property represents a physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E. Hyman - Aspen Athletic Club Page 2 of 12 the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman, or design philosophy that is deemed important and the specific physical design, designer, or philosophy is documented in an adopted context paper; d. The property possesses such singular significance to the City, as documented by the opinions of persons educated or experienced in the fields of history, architecture, landscape architecture, archaeology or a related field, that the property's potential demolition or major alteration would substantially diminish the character and sense of place in the city as perceived by members of the community, and e. The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. STAFF FINDINGS: Staff finds that review criteria a- e are met. 720 E. Hyman does not exemplify textbook Wrightian architecture. Restricting the analysis of a design profession like architecture to a uniform set of criteria that qualify a building as contributing to a specific style fails to recognize the artistic freedom architects like Molny exercised- as Wright expressed to Molny, "If you understand the principles of my architecture, then your buildings need not look like mine." Applying this idea to preservation of 720 East Hyman; while it does not replicate the exact teachings of a master architect, it is defined in part by Aspen' s creative environment where architects, and other creative professionals, could experiment with modern philosophies and the built environment in this specific context. It is exactly this creative adventure that produced interesting architecture in Aspen-architecture that communicates both a sense of place (the high country and extreme environment) and a higher level of design. Spatial connections, relationship to the site and connection with nature, and utilizing the materials for both aesthetic and structural functions are all examples of Wrightian philosophy. Molny used Wrightian design philosophy- for example: organic architecture (composing buildings with space rather than mass and scale; and creating a harmony of architecture and environment) - to create an open floor plan and an interior/exterior courtyard. Aspen was lucky to be home to many intellectuals, including modernist architects, who were starting out in the field. Molny used his foundation at Taliesen to draw upon the physical and intellectual environment of Aspen and create a building that is not a replica of Wright, but indicative of his own background, design, experiences, and client. Molny was not the only architect in Aspen whose training under Frank Lloyd Wright influenced the towns architectural character. Please refer to the white paper "Aspen' s Twentieth- HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E, Hyman - Aspen Athletic Club Page 3 of 12 .. Century Architecture: Modernism 1945 - 1975", attached as Exhibit B, more information about this trend. Aspen was fortunate to attract a variety of highly trained architects who left a modern impression throughout the town. Among the architectural crowd was Robin Moltiy who trained at Taliesen under Frank Lloyd Wright for five years and in the 1950s was selected by Wright to supervise the Greenberg Residence in Dousnian, Wisconsin. Wright is quoted as describing Molny as a "poet" saying "he'll be a good architect one day." Subsequently, Molny moved to Aspen, worked for Fritz Benedict, and opened his own architecture firm. The Heartlistone House (134 East Hyman, 1961), the Mason and Morse Building (514 East Hyman, heavily altered, 1971), and the downtown pedestrian malls (1970s) were all designed by Molny. The HPC awarded Molny two Welton Anderson Preservation Honor Awards iii 1995 for the pedestrian malls and again in 1997 for significant architectural contributions to Aspen. Dick Carney, Chairman of the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation Board, wrote a letter honoring Molny when lie was presented with the Welton Anderson Preservation Honor Award in 1997. Robin Molny's architectural contributions are locally significant in their representation and communication of Aspen life in the 1960s and 1970s. As indicated through the careful orientation of the main atrium, Molny was sensitive to spatial relationships: he designed the atrium to serve as a flexible, light-filled, transition between the exterior and interior, taking advantage of the views to the mountain, and creating interest for those inside the building. The style of the building is hard to categorize. ,"",11. I'll//1//6..6/milill...1/lill//Ir "ili It best represents an eclectic commercial style . -11.1.~ = that Molny created using natural materials, repetition, and cutting edge building I ---Iifi.all technology of the time. The elegant use of ~ ~ structural members to create the form. -~- attention to small details like bolt patterns -i----IMB.Mi-*- display the craftsmanship and philosophy of a ~ ~ quality designer. Molny displayed his ~ appreciation and knowledge of materials and ~ architectural history in the construction of the Photograph 2: Detail of bolt pattern Aspen Athletic Building with the use of the current technology and construction techniques. The first patents for glu-lam beams were issued in Switzerland and Germany, and the first U.S. manufacturing standard for glu-lam was published in 1963. The structural glazing (also called structural silicone glazing) that spans between the first and second floors to create the interior atrium uses cutting edge technology that was developing in the late 1960s and early 1970s. 720 E. Hyman was built in 1976. Overall the physical integrity of the building is intact. Original materials have not been replaced and the form and site plan is unchanged. The plywood hoppers appear original but are no longer operable. The applicant proposes to restore the openings to operable HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E. Hyman - Aspen Athletic Club Page 4 of 12 windows and replace the plywood with glazing, as discussed in the Minor review section of the memo. Other minor repairs are proposed to the brick planter boxes. These repairs will not significantly affect the building's integrity score. The building scored a 17 on the integrity score sheet which qualifies it as a "best" example of organic architecture. The applicant proposes metal brise soliel above the windows on the south elevation to provide shade to the interior spaces. Staff believe that an interior solution is possible, which is discussed iii the minor review section of the memo. This will change the form of the building and negatively affect the integrity score. The proposed rooftop deck and the replacement of the plywood hoppers with glazing will not significantly impact the integrity score. Stafffinds that criteria a, b, c, d, and e are met. ASPENMODERN NEGOTIATION Â§26.415.025.C.1.b. The Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, at a public meeting, regarding the proposed land use application or building permit and the nature of the property. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting. The Historic Preservation Commission, using context papers and integrity scoring sheets for the property under consideration, shall provide Council with an assessment of the property's conformance with the designation criteria of Section 26.415.030.C.1. When any benefits that are not included in Section 26.415.110 are requested by the property owner, HPC shall also evaluate how the designation, and any development that is concurrently proposed, meets the policy objectives for the historic preservation program, as stated at Section 26.415.010, Purpose and Intent. As an additional measure of the appropriateness of designation and benefits, HPC shall determine whether the subject property is a "good, better, or best" example of Aspen's 20th century historic resources, referencing the scoring sheets and matrix adopted by City Council. Staff Response: The applicant requests the following incentives in exchange for landmark designation: 1) Grant 250 square feet of net livable area (NLA) to be added to one of the free market residential units to allow it to exceed the maximum residential unit size cap after the addition of a TDR. There are two free market residential units (Unit A and Unit B) proposed on the third floor. The Mixed Use Zone District has a 2,000 square feet (sf) NLA cap for free market residential units with the ability to increase to 2,500 sf NLA by landing l TDR per residence. HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E. Hyman - Aspen Athletic Club Page 5 of 12 The applicant proposes to purchase and land 2 TDRs- 1 per residence for each Unit to meet the 2,500 sf NLA cap allowed by Code. The AspenModern request is to allow one of the Units to further exceed the cap by 250 sfNLA for a total of 2,750 sfNLA. Free Market Maximum unit size Land 2 TDRs, one per AspenModern request for Residential Units cap (sf NLA) residence ( sf NLA) 250 sfNLA Unit A 2,000 2,500 2,750 Unit B 2,000 2,500 2,500 Table I: Free Market Residential Units 2) Ability to exceed the allowable floor area ratio for free market residential use. The increase in the free market residential unit sizes exceeds the maximum floor area ratio of 0.5:1 allowed in the Mixed Use Zone District. The maximum allowed free market residential floor area is 4,500 sf and the proposed floor area is 7,014 sf (0.78:1). The overall building complies with the total overall maximum allowable tloor area ratio of 2:1. The uses are broken down below: Difference Amount the Allowable floor between Use is over area in Mixed Existing floor Proposed floor Existing and the allowable Use Use Zone area (sf) area (sf) Proposed floor area (sf) District (sf) floor area (sf) Commercial 0.75:1 or 6,750 17,026 9,061 (7,965) 2,311' Free Market 0.5:1 or 4,500 0 7,014 7,014 2,514 Residential Affordable No limitation 0 961 961 - Housing Overall Total 2:1 or 18,000 17,026 17,036 10 Table 2: Existing vs. Proposed Floor Area by Use 3) Waiver of $90,000 parking cash-in-lieu fee for 3 parking spaces. The Code requires one parking space per residential unit with the ability to pay cash-in-lieu for the parking spaces by right at $30,000 per space. The property is unable to accommodate parking onsite without demolishing a portion of the building. The 3 new residential units (2 free market units and 1 affordable housing unit) require 3 spaces for a total of $90,000. The cash in lieu fee is used for parking and transportation related construction or improvements. 1 The amount of commercial floor area in the building is an existing non-conformity that is allowed to be maintained or reduced. The proposal is to bring the commercial component closer to compliance by removing almost 8,000 square feet of floor area. A variance is not required for the commercial component. HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E. Hyman - Aspen Athletic Club Page 6 of 12 As mentioned above, lIPC is asked to use the designation criteria, adopted context papers, and scoring sheets to forward a recommendation to City Council regarding the importance of the building. The applicant requests benefits beyond those allotted to landmarks. As such, HPC is asked to use the Purpose and Intent of the Historic Preservation Chapter o f the Land Use Code, provided on page 7 0 f the memo, to evaluate the proposed landmark designation and to forward a recommendation to about how far Council should go with the negotiations. BENEFITS Because the property owner requested designation benefits that are not included in the list established in Section 26.415.110, Benefits, UPC must evaluate how the designation, and any development that is concurrently proposed, meets the policy objectives for the historic preservation program, as stated at Section 26.415.010, Purpose and Intent. UPC must also comment on whether the subject properties are "good, better, or best" examples of Aspen's postwar history, so as to inform any decisions on the granting of special benefits. Â§26.415.010. Purpose and intent. The purpose of this Chapter is to promote the public health, safety and welfare through the protection, enhancement and preservation of those properties, areas and sites, which represent the distinctive elements of Aspen's cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural history. Under the authority provided by the Home Rule Charter of the City and Section 29-20- 104(c), C.R.S., to regulate land use and preserve areas of historical, architectural, archaeological, engineering and cultural importance, this Chapter sets forth the procedures to: A. Recognize, protect and promote the retention and continued utility of the historic buildings and districts in the City; B. Promote awareness and appreciation of Aspen's unique heritage; C. Ensure the preservation of Aspen's character as an historic mining town, early ski resort and cultural center; D. Retain the historic, architectural and cultural resource attractions that support tourism and the economic welfare of the community; and E. Encourage sustainable reuse of historic structures. F. Encourage voluntary efforts to increase public information, interaction or access to historic building interiors. The City does not intend by the historic preservation program to preserve every old building, but instead to draw a reasonable balance between private property HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E. Hyman - Aspen Athletic Club Page 7 of 12 rights and the public interest in preserving the City's cultural, historic, and architectural heritage. This should be accomplished by ensuring that demolition of buildings and structures important to that heritage are carefully weighed with other alternatives. Alterations to historically significant buildings and new construction in historic areas shall respect the character of each such setting, not by imitating surrounding structures, but by being compatible with them as defined in historic preservation guidelines. STAFF RESPONSE: Staff is supportive of the proposal for voluntary landmark designation. 720 E. LIyman represents Robin Molny as an architect and is indicative of post-war commercial development in Aspen in the 1970s. Molny had many different expressions of his architectural training and it is important to recognize the role of 720 E. Hyman in his career in addition to the designated Hearthstone House and the designated Mason and Morse Building. Staff finds that historic preservation standards a-e are met with the designation ofthis building and the adaptive reuse ofthe second and third noors. MINOR DEVELOPMENT The applicant proposes minor changes to the exterior of the building including the following: 1) Addition of roof deck, railing and stairway access. 2) Addition of brise soleil above the windows on the south, east and west elevations to provide shade. The brise soleils required setback variances as noted below. 3) A new skylight on the roof. 4) Replacement o f plywood hoppers with operable glazing. STAFF RESPONSE: Roof deck: The applicant proposes a 675 square feet roof deck with a glass guardrail. Stairway access is proposed to be clad in wood to match the existing building. As mentioned above the building is over the 32' height limit. The Code allows railings to extend 5' above the height of the building and stairway enclosures are permitted to extend 10' above the maximum height limit if it is setback at least 15' from street facades. Both of the proposed features meet these requirements - the railing measures 36' 9" and the stair access measures 42'. Staff is supportive of the roof deck and proposed materials for the guardrail and the stair access, which meet Guideline 10.11 below. The deck is located in the center of the building and which will be minimally visible and meets Guideline 10.13 below. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. â€¢ The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E. Hyman - Aspen Athletic Club Page 8 of 12 .. 10.13 Set rooftop addition back from the front of the building. â€¢ This will help preserve the original profile of the historically significant building as seen from the street. Brise Soleil: The large south facing windows of the existing building create a greenhouse in the interior spaces. Large spruce trees that were previously planted in the planter boxes offered shade, but obscured the building and mountain views and have since been removed. The applicant is interested in reducing the energy consumption of the building by installing removable brise soleil above the large windows on each floor. The brise soleil on the first and third floor extend 1'8" from the building and the second floor extends 4' 4". The depth of the brise soleil is related directly to the size of the window as illustrated in the application to provide adequate shade. The building is built almost to the required setback line. so any architectural projections over 18" are required to have a setback variance as described below. The brise soleil is proposed to be horizontal slatted metal that is removable - a sample of the material will be presented at the HPC meeting. Staff is concerned about the impact of the brise soleil on significant aspects of Molny's architecture and the effect on reading the building. Staff is supportive of conserving energy by providing shade to the interior spaces but recommends an interior feature, such as blinds, which do not obstruct the architecture and comply with Guideline 10.10 below. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. â€¢ For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. Skylight on roof: A new skylight is proposed on the roof that will not be visible from the right of way. Staff is supportive of the proposed change and finds that it meets Guidelines 10.10 and 10.13 above. Replacement of plywood hoppers with operable windows: ~<40 The existing plywood hoppers located above the first, 69314 )<,31 .~ I .1 \ second and third story windows are highlighted in the *04 \11,21 photograph to the right and below. - 1 9//04*1 - k .,1 1 1 1 I V 35, 1 411114 .1 1 *4>,L ./. 4 . 1 '': 9 t \424 i . UP * .* ''ip --Ert C .....: 3 - 0,13 - 43.2'*4//1 Photograph 3: A few of the remaining operable hoppers HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E. Hyman - Aspen Athletic Club Page 9 of 12 .. 129 P.. .7 Il-..il@ # . ...1. ..t i 9 Photograph 4: Detail of the second and third level plywood hoppers The applicant proposes to replace the plywood hoppers, some of which are still operable, with operable windows. Some ofthe plywood along the Original Street favade as already replaced with glazing. Photograph 5 is the only old photograph of the building that Staff could locate. It was taken about 10 years after the building was constructed and shows the plywood hoppers. 1 . Â·c--r 'p . 101 A. I... I . - '.341 ? 1 472*jj** . . it - -- - E-- - I -- Photograph 5: Mid-1980s photograph of Aspen Athletic Club Staff is supportive of the replacement of the plywood hoppers with operable glazing. The change does not significantly alter or obstruct the important characteristics of the fa~ade. HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E. Hyman - Aspen Athletic Club Page 10 of 12 SETBACK VARIANCES 26.415.110.C. Variances. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. The proposed brise soliel on the east, south and west elevations require setback variances. Following are the required setbacks, existing condition and proposed condition. Mixed Use Zone District Existing Proposed Requirement Front yard (south) 10' 10' 5 1/2" 6' 11/2" Side yards (east and . East - 5' 5 1/2" East - 1' 1 1/2" 5. west) West - 5' West - 8" 10' not including the fire escape that is an Rear (north) 5' No change allowed projection into a setback Table 3: Existing and Proposed Setbacks STAFF RESPONSE: The brise soleil obscure important architectural features. As such, Staff finds that the review criteria are not met and recommends denial of the variance requests. ~TAFF RECOIMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC recommends that City Council negotiate for landmark designation and grant Minor Development approval with the following conditions: l. HPC finds that 720 East Hyman Avenue meets all of the designation criteria, a - e, listed in Â§26.415.030.C. 1 and Land Use Code Section 26.415.010 Purpose and Intent. 2. HPC finds that 720 East Hyman Avenue is a "best" example of Organic/Wrightian style. 3. The brise soleil and requested variances are not approved. HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E. Hyman - Aspen Athletic Club Page 11 of 12 4. The mechanical equipment on the rooftop shall be screened for review and approval by Staff and Monitor. 5. The planter beds located in the right of way are required to get an encroachment license from the Engineering Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. The applicant shall work with the Parks Department to determine appropriate planting for the planter boxes in the right of way for review by Staff and Monitor. 7. The applicant shall provide information regarding the clear sealer proposed for the planter boxes to ensure that it is appropriate for Aspen' s climate and brick materials for review and approval by Staff and Monitor. 8. A repointing test patch on the planter boxes shall be reviewed and approved in the field by Staff and Monitor. 9. There shall be no changes to the approved plans without Staff and Monitor approval. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines Exhibit B: Integrity Score Sheet. Exhibit C: Aspen's Twentieth- Century Architecture: Modernism 1945 - 1975. Exhibit D: HPC Resolution numbered 25, Series of 2008. Exhibit E: Application. HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E. Hyman - Aspen Athletic Club Page 12 of 12 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL PURSUE HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION THROUGH THE ASPENMODERN PROGRAM AND MINOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 720 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUM, AKA LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 104, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION # , SERIES OF 2012 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-11-008 through 2737-182-11-031, and 2737-182-11-801. WHEREAS, the applicant, John Martin, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, submitted an application requesting Minor Development review and voluntarily landmark designation of the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, legally described as the Athletic Club Building Condominiums and Lots Q, R and S, Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, 720 East Hyman Avenue is included on the Aspen Modern Map; and WHEREAS, the applicant submitted a letter dated March 7, 2012 requesting voluntary designation in exchange for specific benefits through the AspenModern negotiation; and WHEREAS, the 90 day AspenModern negotiation commenced on March 7,2012; and WHEREAS, Community Development evaluated the property pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.415.030.C.1(b) and determined that the property meets the criteria for designation and the integrity score qualifies as the "best" category; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, Community Development determined that the proposed changes are exempt from Commercial Design Standard Review pursuant to Section 26.412.020.A of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on May 23, 2012 continued from May 9, 2012 the Historic Preservation Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing, took public comment, considered the application, found that the application for Minor Development met the review standards and the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines," the staff memo and 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern recommendation HPC Resolution #_, Series of 2012 Page 1 of 2 recommendation, and public comments, and found the building to be consistent with the designation criteria listed in Section 26.415.030.C.1, by a vote of to . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants Minor Development review with conditions and recommends City Council negotiate for landmark designation of the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, Lots Q, R and S Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: l. HPC finds that 720 East Hyman Avenue meets all of the designation criteria, a - e, listed in Â§26.415.030.C. 1 and Land Use Code Section 26.415.010 Purpose and Intent. 2. HPC finds that 720 East Hyman Avenue is a "best" example of Organic/Wrightian style. 3. The brise soleil and requested variances are not approved. 4. The mechanical equipment on the rooftop shall be screened for review and approval by Staff and Monitor. 5. The planter beds located in the right of way are required to get an encroachment license from the Engineering Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. The applicant shall work with the Parks Department to determine appropriate planting for the planter boxes in the right of way for review by Staff and Monitor. 7. The applicant shall provide information regarding the clear sealer proposed for the planter boxes to ensure that it is appropriate for Aspen's climate and brick materials for review and approval by Staff and Monitor. 8. A repointing test patch on the planter boxes shall be reviewed and approved in the field by Staff and Monitor. 9. There shall be no changes to the approved plans without Staff and Monitor approval. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 23rd day of May, 2012. Ann Mullins, Chair Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 720 E. Hyman Avenue - AspenModern recommendation HPC Resolution #_, Series of2012 Page 2 of 2 Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines 1.16 Preserve historically significant landscape designs and features. o This includes the arrangement of trees, shrubs, plant beds, irrigation ditches and sidewalks in the public right-of-way. Preserve significant architectural features. Repair only those features that are deteriorated. Patch, piece-in, splice, consolidate or otherwise upgrade the existing material, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. o Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also may be used. o Removing a damaged feature when it can be repaired is inappropriate. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. u Flat skylights that are flush with the roof plane may be considered only in an obscure location on a historic structure. Locating a skylight or a solar panel on a front roof plane is not allowed. o A skylight or solar panel should not interrupt the plane of a historic roof. It should be positioned below the ridgeline. 7.6 When planning a rooftop addition, preserve the overall appearance of the original roof. o An addition should not interrupt the original ridgeline. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. 01 A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. u An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. u An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. o An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. u An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. o A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. o Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. Â£ On u Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. o Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. o For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be . avoided. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. o The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 10.12 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of a historic building. o An addition should not overhang the lower floors of a historic building in the front or on the side. o Dormers should be subordinate to the overall roof mass and should be in scale with historic ones on similar historic structures. o Dormers should be located below the primary structure's ridgeline, usually by at least one foot. 10.13 Set a rooftop addition back from the front of the building. o This will help preserve the original profile of the historically significant building as seen from the street. 10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic building. o If the roof of the historic building is symmetrically proportioned, the roof of the addition should be similar. o Eave lines on the addition should be similar to those of the historic building or structure. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. o The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. o All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. u Do not wash an entire building facade in light. 00 0 o Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. o Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. u Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. o Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights-of-way. 14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street. When it is feasible, screen service areas from view, especially those associated with commercial and multifamily developments. This includes locations for trash containers and loading docks. Service areas should be accessed off of the alley, if one exists. 14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way. o Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. u Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of the building itself. Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges. A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. u Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the street or alley. Also minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Use smaller satellite dishes and mount them low to the ground and away from front yards, significant building facades or highly visible roof planes. o Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds. 00 00 0 Character Defining Features of the Wrightian/Organic Style Check box if statement 1) Low horizontal proportions, flat or low pitched hip 7) No trim isolating the glazing from the wall plane, ~ roofs I window openings are trimmed out to match adjacenllgil is true. One point per 2) Deep roof overhangs that create broad shadow 0~ structural members in a wood context, brick box. lines across the fagade, glazing is usually I openings tend to be deeply set with no trim other concentrated in these areas than the brick return 3) Materials are usually natural and hand-worked, such as rough-sawn wood timbers ~ 8) Structures are related to the environment ~ and brick, brick is generally used as a base material, wall infill, or in an anchoring through battered foundation walls, cantilevered fireplace element. wood structural systems tend more toward heavy timber or post-and beam than typical stud framing floors, and/or porches, clear areas of glazing that create visual connections between inside and 4) Structural members and construction methods are usually expressed in the building, for ~ outside, and the effect of the roof plane hovering example, load bearing columns may be expressed inside and out; the wall plane is then M over the ground created by an infill of glass or brick 9) Decoration stems from the detailing of 5) Roof structure is often expressed below the roof sheathing ~ the primary materials and the construction ~ technique, no applied decorative elements 6) Glass is used as an infill material which expresses a void or a structural system, or it INII are used is used to accentuate the surface of a wall through pattern or repetition .1 10) Color is usually related to the natural colors ~ of materials (natural brick, dark stained wood, white stucco, accent colors are used minimally and mainly to accentuate the horizontal lines of 0 r ~ the structure - A building must have 6 of the 10 character F --- defining features, either present or clearly 4 1 -Ill lilli - 1 documented through photographic of ittl- 7. -9.L . physical evidence to qualify as Wrightian/Organic Style. Restoration may - be required as part of the award of - ..Illill incentives. 4, ~ If the property earned 6 or more points, continue to the next page. 8--1 1 *.r,-4 - 1 :Â£. 4 1 W %0 .- 4, i . - ~~ ~'22.2. U .- I. 8 , If the property earned less than 6 points, - 4 - . r.n, / 54&*ka ..4 scoring ends. 04"Lit-17*il:/- -==- 01*rÂ»4~#Mmaill Total Points, 0 - 10 . in' 1 *Rt b. // INTEGRITY SCORING If a statement is true, circle the number of points associated with that true statement. LOCATION OF BUILDING ON THE LOT: The building is in its original location. E 2 pointÂ») The building has been shifted on the original parcel, but maintains its original 1 point alignment and/or proximity to the street. SETTING: The property is located within the geographical area surrounded by Castle 'k. I lpoint ) Creek, the Roaring Fork Riverand Aspen Mountain. The property is outside of the geographical area surround by Castle Creek, the 1/2 point Raoring Fork River and Aspen Mountain. DESIGN: The form of the building (footprint, roof and wall planes) are unaltered from C. L._.3Poi nts ) the original design. - a.) The form of the building has been altered but less than 25% of the original walls have been removed, OR b.) The alterations to the form all occur at the rear of the subject building, OR 2 points c.) The form of the building has been altered but the addition is less than 50% of the size of the original building, OR d.) There is a roof top addition that is less than 50% of the footprint of the roof. MATERIALS Exterior materials The original exterior materials of the building are still in place, with the 4--2-22-h~~-3 exception of normal maintenance and repairs. 50% of the exteriormaterials have been replaced, butthe replacements 1 point match the original condition. Windows and doors The original windows and doors of the building are still in place, with the 2 points exception of normal maintenance and repairs. 50% of the original windows and doors have been replaced, but the -1 clpoi.2122 replacements match the original condition. Best: 15 up to 20 points Integrity Score (this page) maximum of 10 points: Better: 12 up to 15 points Character Defining Features Score (first page) maxi- Good: 10 up to 12 points mum of 10 points: Not Eligible:0 up to 10 points HISTORIC ASSESSMENT SCORE: p,6 b'.1 6.- t ' I " -,1 1 1 1 11 ..1 1/r 1 1 I~Vil 419*9 01 tul,+ 14, .1 2 1 I 12- 1. '1 lp, 1 IY E.....'............... t ~.C' 'LAGA *,Sma;,3.~7,8 . 1 1 T . .1 --%241=21 = $ 1 41 1 - . .4 I a I 1 n , -2 1 'KI. ., ..4..,9*4'. : - ' 14 1 1 4 .11 1 1 --1 il -:1 4 41 1; â€ž11- lili 11 1 1 .91*-1111* *1~ 84 Ill -di.17 i %*. . 1, r, ' #â€¢ 'll= -# ip:.*44 12 9 k'I % i..1 pr 4 ./.i~':i, ) = 1 11 1 1 1 1 â€ž +4 *t 99 + 1 1. I 1 - [.4, $ ..... Si.10 & 1 1 - 6 '4 -4 R I , 6..1/ h. 4.1. . i . 1 - ,- Mil , ASPEN,4,?4 *1 It ~r , 1 2 11 1 H-CENTI ~T. - .1.-1 , .1 1 ' i,lk<U,p'Â·w,4 4 E .4 - 1 1 1 ..1-4 .m: . 1 1 1 7 r 1 11 1 ....ERN!34 1445-1975 - 'imÂ¢l i 1 1 [1= ':1 1 ... 11 -1.1 1 7 -Ild-4,- $ . 1 11- - T 1 IJR ,/Illillim ...~. I ./ '1 11 1 -- 1 1 1 11 1- 11.1 1181 -1 -/ -k *NX. ' Â· tA73,1 4 1. . r, 1,11 ti LaM 2-~~74~% 0~%t 4 -1 - - 1 2 2 ..02,9/EN ,-' I 4 -t R 6 1.-All -1 1 -Pe r *L,1 1 9- r; 14 ,â€¢#, 1-*- '49'5 j ).1.NE-, . - EL 1 - 874; 09,4 imtâ€¢:. *. . 1 ' h, 1 1.' 4 'â€¢P~ Ii'r, 4 -P- ; 1 1.- 1 i " ' * &24Â·kil~111 '' 6-+ r' 1 -1 I 41 + 11 - 1 14 011 . 4 16-1 1 P' i, 172 i - â€¢, z.,1,I~1.i 05 &' "'1 I' - 11:-j,1,~ '311 J '46~1- 2 -Al. ..Â® M . 5 1 Â· Â· 1 4.17- i ~ 41,1. - 1, I 4..1=14/1- i K 1 Â£ 50/ ,1' |1~ , ~ ' ~ ' tes :4' 11 3- I 'bilt", 44$ f 3 -ft: ., 'ir ' , -7'. . ..1 1 .4 71,4.11 - *'4 4.- : 0.: 44Â¥.r..2/ *4 4 /1 Â¥ 7%' 9 2.4 'ZI ...!9 . 1 1 1 1. *4, ~ 'Â£1*~il' I Â»* 1 lili - .u' WA- 1*' i,Â·fi ..0 . 1 1>4~ 1 461- 1-1-+1 1 1 1/, I I 1-4 i _ -* 4rr 15- ... 4 i 41 1 1 4 3 4-1, 4 .4.... 4 1- 3 *; UU ., : 1 1.- *14,1 1 4 - 6 1 1 49,8 4.4 J 4 7, A ,- 4 acu 49 *4 -0-4.1.11 4 -1 , 44-1 .4 â€¢-1 &'-~Ak'I A *i, 21- + - .,0 ..Â·Â· K.:1 ' ' C - . f.4,1.1 PIF. 4 1 . : L -~ 31 fil- -,<22-_ -1-ki' I itÂ·' M~~-~ ~Â¢~ ~I~~ f~~~' 1:*r--1 .11>...1&,1.'. . , 11*A-,ft '41 r_~~, ~FT'~h~;~ W --4,44-494 k.f/Lk 41 4.74~13& 4[--11 44,1 70-4 -1 *1 A *t-*4 , 1,1.1 1. . 1 1.4 11Â¢4 ,""./4/i'P .+ 1 1 .4 Â· I 11 1 - t , . 484 411 I i r t..1. 0. .0 f . Bple. 1 1 -1411-LEI Im-1 9/ t:.741.73.:.R ~t ~.1.1:-- ~ ..1 - MARGARET S~j'4~Et<SMrt-H SE~ R :26 id Page 1 of 48 -:. 7*7~ -- TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 7 CHAPTER 1: THE MODERNIST MOVEMENT: WRIGHTIAN/ORGANIC AND BAUHAUS/INTERNATIONAL STYLE 8 CHAPTER 2: MODERNISM IN ASPEN 1945-1975 - THE ARCHITECTS 11 FREDERIC "FRITZ" BENEDICT AND HERBERT BAYER 12 HERBERT BAYER 14 FREDERIC "FRITZ" BENEDICT 14 GORDON CHADWICK 16 CHARLES GORDON LEE 16 SAMUEL JEFFERSON CAUDILL, JR. 16 ROBERT OLIVER "ROB" ROY 17 CHARLES PATERSON 18 ELEANOR "ELLIE" BRICKHAM 19 ROBIN MOLNY 19 CURTIS WRAY BESINGER 20 ELLEN HARLAND 20 JOHN MORRIS "JACK" WALLS 20 ROBERT"BOB"STERLING 21 GEORGE EDWARD HENEGHAN, JR. 21 THEODORE L. "TED" MULARZ 21 THOMAS WHELAN "TOM" BENTON 22 RICHARD TSENG-Yu LAI 22 ARTHUR "ART" YUENGER 22 FRANCIS REW STANTON 23 HARRY WEESE 23 VICTOR LUNDY 24 CHAPTER 3: MODERNISM IN ASPEN 1945-1975- THE BUILDINGS 25 1945-1960 ASPEN ENTERS THE SKI AND CULTURAL TOURISM INDUSTRIES 25 SKI INDUSTRY 26 L0DGING27 COMMERCIAL 27 PUBLIC 27 RESIDENTIAL 28 ASPEN INSTITUTE 28 1960-1975 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT 29 LODGING31 COMMERCIAL 31 PUBLIC 33 ASPEN INSTITUTE & GIVEN INSTITUTE 34 Page 3 of 48 RESIDENTIAL 34 SINGLE FAMILY MODERNISM 34 MODERN CHALET 35 MODERN CHALET MULTIPLIED-MULTIFAMILY 37 CONDOMINIUMIS 38 CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION 40 BIBLIOGRAPHY 41 INTERVIEWS 44 EMAIL COMMUNICATION 44 APPENDIX I: ELIGIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS 45 WRIGHTIAN/ ORGANIC DESIGN PRINCIPLES 45 BAUHAUS OR INTERNATIONAL STYLE DESIGN PRINCIPLES 45 ASPEN MODERN CHALET DESIGN PRINCPLES 46 APPENDIX 11: THE ARCHITECTS 47 APPENDIX 111: ARCHITECTS LISTED IN ASPEN PHONE DIRECTORIES 48 Page 4 of 48 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1: Looking toward Red Mountain. Courtesy Aspen Historical Society (AHS) Figure 2: Looking toward Aspen Mountain from the Wheeler Opera House. Courtesy AHS. Figure 3: Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke. Courtesy AHS. Figure 4: Creating the scraffito wall at the Aspen Institute, from left - Ellie Brickham, Masato Nakagawa, Herbert Bayer, and Fritz Benedict, Coutesty Ferenc Berko Photography. Figure 5: Aspen looking toward smuggler mountain. Courtesy AHS. Figure 6: Herbert: Bayer poster. Unkknown source. Figure 7: Fritz Benedict, top center, with fellow 10th mountain division soldiers. Courtesy AHS. Figure 8: Herbert Bayer. Source unknown. Figure 9: The Copper Kettle Restaurant. Courtesy AHS. Figure 10: Pioneer Park with Herbert Bayer paint scheme. City of Aspen files. Figure 11: Wheeler opera house interior designed by beyer. Courtesy AHS, Figure 12: Aspen Highlands Base Lodge. Courtesy AHS. Figure 13: Sundeck atop Aspen Mountain. Courtesy AHS. Figure 14: Edmundson House designed by Benedict. City of Aspen files. Figure 15: Bank of Aspen, now Wells Fargo Bank, designed by Benedict. Courtesy AHS. Figure 16: National Bank of Aspen, now US Bank, designed by Caudill. City of Aspen files. Figure 17: Stern Residence, designed by Rob Roy. Courtesy AHS. Figure 18: Boomerang Lodge, designed by Paterson. Courtesy of Sheila Babbie. Figure 19: Strandberg Residence, designed by Brickham. City of Aspen files. Figure 20: Hearthstone House, designed by Molny. Courtesy Irma Prodinger. Figure 21: Pedestrian Mails, designed by Molny. Courtesy AHS. Figure 22: Villager Townhouses, designed by Sterling and Dagg. City of Aspen files. Figure 23: Prince of Peace Chapel. Courtesy AHS. Figure 24: Berko Studio, designed by Mularz. City of Aspen files. Figure 25: Patio Building, designed by Benton. Courtesy AHS. Figure 26: 54 Shady Lane residence., designed by Yuenger. City of Aspen files. Figure 27: Christ Episcopal Church, designed by Stanton. Courtesy Denver Public Library archives. Figure 28: Given Institute, designed by Weese. City of Aspen files. Figure 29: 301 Lake Avenue, designed by Lundy. Courtesy Victor Lundy. Figure 30: Lift 1. Courtesy AHS. Figure 31: Sundeck atop Aspen Mountain, designed by Bayer and Benedict. Courtesy AHS. Figure 32: Buttermilk Base Lodge. Courtesy AHS. Figure 33: The Smuggler Lodge. Courtesy AHS. Figure 34: Red Brick School. Courtesy AHS. Figure 35: "Bonnet" house, designed by Stanton. Courtesy AHS. Figure 36: Koch Seminar Building, designed by Bayer. City of Aspen files. Figure 37: Center for Physics, designed by Bayer. City of Aspen files. Figure 38: Anderson Park, designed by Bayer. Courtesy National Trust for Historic Places. Figure 39: Base lodge at Buttermilk Mountain. Courtesy AHS. Figure 40: Aspen Square, designed by Benedict. Courtesy AHS. Figure 41: Aspen Sports, designed by Caudill. City of Aspen files. Figure 42: 300 South Spring Street, designed by Heneghan and Gale. City of Aspen files. Figure 43: Hyman Avenue Mall, designed by Molny. Courtesy AHS. Figure 44: 120 East Main Street, originally the Pitkin County Library, designed by Bayer and Benedict. City of Aspen files. Figure 45: Paepcke Auditorium, designed by Bayer. Courtesy Farewell, Mills, Gatsch Architects, Inc. Figure 46: Given Institute, designed by Weese. City of Aspen files. Figure 47: 311 West North Street, designed by Bayer. City of Aspen files. Figure 48: 625 Gillespie Avenue, designed by Benedict. City of Aspen files. Figure 49: 114 East Bleeker Street. Courtesy AHS. Figure 50: 219 South Third Street, designed by Friis. City of Aspen files. Figure 51: 1102 Waters Avenue, designed by Benedict. City of Aspen files. Figure 52: 608 West Hopkins Street, designed by Roy. City of Aspen files. Figure 53: Aspen Alps in the background, designed by Benedict. Courtesy AHS. Figure 54: 809 South Aspen Street, Shadow Mountain Condominiums, designed by Kirk. City of Aspen files. Page 5 of 48 "Restore the best of the old, but if you build, build modern." Bauhaus founder Walter Gropius, Aspen town meeting, August 29, 19451 INTRODUCTION As in much of the United States, modern architecture made its first appearance in Aspen after World War 11. While Aspen's image, to the public and perhaps to itself, largely identifies with its heyday as one of the most prosperous Victorian mining towns in Colorado, its I postwar modern architecture is significant: it represents a mother lode of the two competing camps of modernism, and it reflects :fle ...# ..... . . modern architecture's dominance in 1950s and 1960s America. f ..... .-44+ . . .1 . 4,6.. , .... .&9:.k.. Modernism's iconic monuments-Frank Lloyd Wright'sGuggenheim ClhW,,; Â·IiÂ· *1 - ~' ~'*"7 * *'-â‚¬,4-â€¢4,â€¢@~i Hic"Al W :: I '*JAA'. Â·3 Museum, Mies van der Rohe's Farnsworth House in Illinois, Eero .â€ži/&/4-kqjlillÂ·,4 -4Â£,Mt; C. * 1 Saarinen's General Motors Headquarters, and New York's Seagram 7-,v-Â·â€¢-:Â· . *Â·... Â·â€¢h. ",Â·Â» *mi~~w*â€ž.Â·...â€¢: Building and Lever House-went up in the 1940s andl950s. By the -iÂ·. -. Â· . mid-1960s, there were rumblings of a backlash. Robert Venturi's D.tA*ti.:.k ,Nbc.*. J.7:=.,..",4~<*~.. Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture (1966) signaled that Figure 1: Looking toward Red Mountain. modernism's authority was being challenged by a new generation, Courtesy Aspen Historical Society (AHS) although most architects and clients continued to value modernist m buildings through the 19705. Thus, for modernist buildings in 920 Aspen, the period of historic significance, a term that encompasses 44 1 4 '.1 4- architectural, historical, or geographical importance, is between 1945 and approximately 1975. Â· 0 . 4 1 40-4 -I .,C' Â· , . 4 W 5~tr....-1::Â·2, i.*ir.. 3 .' The paper first examines the origins of the modernist movement in .:' Â·Â·-7, ~Â· I. America and Europe. It then looks at modernist architects working f; -* Ar.1.~. Â·Â·... ** k , f I -IM in Aspen between 1945-1975 whose contributions to its built - environment continue to influence its character. Thirdly, it describes itâ€¢/-- ..Â·-'AINBA*vo-,.a,BiT-o~f Q Aspen's modernist buildings, organized by two eras: 1945-1960, tU-'Â·'' '*Â·Â·*, 't).-'1Â· 1/.W:*44&~ when Aspen entered the ski and tourist industries, and 1960-1975, ......4 :. when growth and development accelerated. Fourth, it delineates Mh~44+J ~.,rf- ,1~ 1 the characteristics that make a structure eligible for designation as ..1,&..... 1.4116 3. - . , : .....i'.m.......a Figure 2: Looking toward Aspen Mountain a modernist building that contributes to Aspen's history. from the Wheeler Opera House. Courtesy AHS. 1 Gropius quoted in James Sloan Allen, The Romance of Commerce and Culture: Capitalism, Modernism, and the Chicago-Aspen Crusade for Culture Reform (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), 135-37; Thomas J. Noel, Buildings of Colorado \n ser\es, Buildings of the United States, Society of Architectural Historians (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 488. Page 7 of 48 f j CHAPTER 1: THE MODERNIST MOVEMENT: WRIGHTIAN/ORGANIC AND BAUHAUS/INTERNATIONAL STYLE Modern architecture rejected the historic styles of the past. It began in the early 20th century, but followed two different paths: American modernism was rooted in the organic design of Louis Sullivan and Frank Lloyd Wright; and European modernism was based on the utopian socialist ideals of the French architect Le Corbusier, among others, and the teachings of the German Bauhaus (1919-1933), founded by Walter Gropius in Weimar. American modernism, also known as "organic" architecture, started around 1900 in Chicago and the Midwest, where Louis Sullivan coined the phrase "form follows function" to express his rejection of historic styles. Frank Lloyd Wright emulated Sullivan's radical rethinking of architectural form and went on to develop highly individualistic designs such as the 1902 Ward Willets House in Highland Park and the 1909 Frederick Robie House in Chicago. Wright's "Prairie" houses reflected Arts & Crafts ideas. The architect designed "in the nature of materials/' which, for Wright, could be stone or brick or steel and glass. He reconfigured the traditional "box" of a house into a series of interlocking geometric units or "modules"-90 degrees (square/rectangles), 30-60 degrees (triangles/hexagon), and circles or segments thereof-that governed both plan and elevation. Wright transformed traditional floor plans to create simplified flowing spaces and integrated the house interior with the exterior setting to redefine the suburban house. As Alan Hess, the major scholar of Organic Architecture, writes, Wright and others embraced both "contemporary machinery and ageless natural landscape."2 Buildings reflecting an organic philosophy don't necessarily look alike, but they share a notion of design as growing from a germ of an idea and particular to a specific setting. According to the Wright approach, "First, pick a good site ... a site no one wants-but pick one that has features making for character: trees, individuality, a fault of some kind in the realtor's conventional mind." Organic modernism has a complexity of line, form, structure, textures, and materials such as natural stone and woods or machine-made glass, concrete, and, later, plastic. Wright achieved such acclaim that his Robie House and other "Prairie" designs were published in an avant-garde portfolio for European audiences in 1914. Yet interest in the Midwestern architect and organic architecture declined in the 1920s. His career and design theories languished, while attention to European modernist architects, such as Gropius and Le Corbusier, increased. In the late 1930s, Wright's claim asthe original modernist regained momentum with two major projects-Fallingwater in Bear Run, Pennsylvania, which combined a European modernist use of geometric concrete forms with an organic use of natural stone quarried on the site, and the Johnson Wax Company Headquarters in Racine, Wisconsin. His postwar practice and reputation soared with the visibility of the Guggenheim Museum and other public projects; and his small-scale Usonian houses created a new standard for domestic architecture across the county. Wright had kept the American organic architecture movement going, just barely, by creating the Taliesin Fellowship in 1932. Although he was opposed to official academic institutions, the reality of Depression-era economics and his lagging practice led him to formalize his ongoing apprentices into a fellowship. He envisioned Taliesin as an ideal community where aspiring architects would pay a modest tuition and could live and work with a "master" architect. Wright proclaimed that he was not a teacher, though the fellows could learn from him. Young apprentices, such Aspen's Fritz Benedict and others, were required to engage in physical labor-in the garden and household and on construction projects-for six months before getting into the drafting room. Taliesin was to be self-sustaining, and Wright believed that "growing things" was important to an understanding of "organic architecture." The fellows also participated in the related arts of music, painting, and sculpture and ongoing maintenance of the complex. Wright and his wife Oglivanna lived a rather abundant and culturally rich life with small means supported by a large group of apprentices-some 45 in 1939, increasing after the war to 50-60, including foreign-born fellows. 2 Alan Hess, text, Alan Weintraub, photographs, Organic Architecture: The Other Modernism (Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith, Publisher, 2006), 6. Page 8 of 48 Wright's extended "family" worked and lived in two enclaves. They spent the summers in his hereditary homeplace in Spring Green, Wisconsin, and, after 1939, passed the winters in the desert camp near Phoenix, Arizona. Moving the entire operation from Wisconsin to Arizona in November and then back to Wisconsin in the spring was Wright's way of "breaking up" the routine.3 In the desert, the fellows were expected to design and build their own dwellings. As his practice revived during the 1930s and 1940s, the fellows were essential to his productivity. They worked in the drafting rooms, supervised construction projects, and aided the venerable architect in promot:ing organic architecture through publications and exhibitions. European modernism, or the International Style, also rejected the past-its technologies, its architecture, its ornament, its societal structures-and embraced modernity, industrialization, urbanization, and the machine. European architects and designers believed that, by embracing the new industrial technologies, they could improve the physical and psychological environments for the mass of people and create a new society. Its premise was that modern design could transform society by applying industrial methods to housing and creating a "total art," including buildings, furnishings, interiors, clothing, and signage. Characterized by the absence of references to past historic styles, the European modernists used industrial materials such as steel, reinforced concrete, and glass to give the buildings a sleek, mechanistic look. Notonlydidthe International Style avoid decoration or historic styles, it revolutionized interiorspace by reducing the building to metal frame and glass walls. As architectural historian Spiro Kostof wrote: "Architecture was seen primarily as volume and not mass. So the stress was on the continuous, unmodulated wall surface-long ribbon windows without frames, cut right into the wall pane, horizontally or vertically disposed; flush joints, flat roofs. Corners were not made prominent. Technically, the argument went, materials like steel and reinforced concrete had rendered conventional construction-and with it cornices, pitched roofs, and emphatic corners-obsolete. There would be no applied ornament anywhere, inside or out." Le Corbusier proclaimed in his 1923 manifesto, Towards a New Architecture: "A house is a machine made for living./4 A few European modernists arrived in the United States in the 1920s, but the major influx occurred in the late 1930s as Hitler rose to power. In 1937, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, who had succeeded Gropius at the Bauhaus, arrived in Chicago to head the School of Architecture atthe Illinois Institute of Technology; that same year, LAszlo Moholy Nagy led a reincarnation of the Bauhaus at Chicago's School of Design. In 1939, Walter Gropius took charge of the Harvard University Graduate School of Design. In 1938, Herbert Bayer, head of the typography workshop and one of three young masters under Gropius atthe Weimar Bauhaus (the others were Joseph Albers and Marcel Breuer)5 moved to New York City, where he created three exhibitions ("Bauhaus 1919-19287 "Road to Victory," and "Airways to Peace") for the Museum of Modern Art and worked as an art director designing books, exhibitions, and posters for major corporate clients and advertising agencies. American's postwar embrace of European modern architecture reflected important changes: there was no longer a cheap source of labor; modern building codes replaced the old rule-of-thumb; and new construction materials-concrete block, glass, steel, and aluminum-were increasingly available.6 Furthermore, the public's concept of architecture now included an "international" component. Americans were first introduced to the international avant-garde in 1932 by the influential Museum of Modern Art exhibition, Modern Architecture of Europe. By the 1940s and 1950s, European modernists, such as Mies, Gropius, Joseph Albers, and Eliel Saarinen, dominated architectural and design schools and professional architectural publications. Through the 1950s and 1960s, young American architects were trained in the Bauhaus curriculum and enthusiastically disseminated 3 Curtis Besinger, Working with Mr. Wright. What It Was Like (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995). 4 Spiro Kostof, A History Of Architecture: Settings and Rituals (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 701. 5 Albers and his wife Annie found refuge in 1933 at Black Mountain College near Asheville, North Carolina, thanks to MOMA curator Philip Johnson, who was also instrumental in bringing Mies to America. Breuer joined Gropius at Harvard and The Architects Collaborative (TAC), and Bayer came to Aspen. 6 Robert Frankeberger and James Garrison, "From Rustic Romanticism to Modernism and Beyond: Architecture Resources in the National Park;' Forum Journal, Journal ofthe National Trustfor Historic Preservation (Summer 2002): 8. Page 9 of 48 it in flat-roofed, austere glass and metal-framed buildings across the American landscape. Modernism gained widespread acceptance as the most appropriate architecture for the new era, especially in major metropolitan areas. The International Style appeared in office buildings, airports, corporate campuses, housing, schools, churches, shopping centers, restaurants, and lodging. In 1955, when the National Park Service launched its Mission 66 campaign to update its rustic image, it adopted modernist designs for its new type of park structure, the visitor center. In its emphasis on individuality, Wright's organic architecture lacked the broad institutional base of the International Style. Wright famously advised Oklahoman Bruce Goff, who was clearly talented in expressionistic and organic design, not to study architecture and lose his unique gift. Frank Lloyd Wright had been America's most famous modern architect fordecades, and many more Americans knew his name than those of Le Corbusier or Walter Gropius. Popular shelter magazines of the time, especially House Beautiful, promoted "American" modernism in the 1940s and 19505, as represented by Wright, Goff, and the Taliesin Fellowship. In 1953, Wright mounted a major exhibition of his work in New York City as the Guggenheim Museum was going up- characterized by one of his apprentices "as part of the present war in Architectural circles between the 'organic' and the 'international'."7 Significantly, Wright's way of thinking about a building as organic, as something that grows according to its function and is specific to its site, along with his use of natural materials, fit the postwar mentality of the individualistic architects attracted to the nascent ski community of Aspen. 7 Besinger, Working with Mr. Wright, 251. Page 10 of 48 CHAPTER 2: MODERNISM IN ASPEN 1945-1975 - THE ARCHITECTS Aspen is unique inthatthe widespread acceptanceof modernism in America coincided with its postwarreinvention as an international resort. Two significant practitionersof the competing modern approaches, Taliesin alumnus Frederic E/*1Â·901*2$Â· Il~ "Fritz" Benedict and Bauhaus master Herbert Bayer, arrived t~ immediately after the war to establish their imprint on the mountain community. Ratherquickly, otheryoung modernist Â·.. architects educated at Cornell, Colorado, Illinois, M.I.T., and Taliesin moved there. Aspen had little new construction in its I . "Quiet Years" between the 1893 Silver Crash and the end of r. ... >- World War, hence no need for architects. This status changed 'ff when Friedl Pfeifer saw the potential in developing a major h. ski resort akin to his native St. Anton and Chicago industrialist /' F Walter Paepcke envisioned the mountain town as an ideal setting for a community of intellectual engagement and cultural institutions. Figure 3: Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke. Courtesy AHS. The modernist Aspen architectural community began with a few pioneers and several prominent designers and grew rapidly, with some architects designing a single building or two, and many establishing their entire careers there. Fritz Benedict arrived in 1945, and Herbert Bayer in 1946. Gordon Chadwick and Charles Gordon Lee stopped in brieflyinthe winterof 1946-1947. Samuel Caudillfirst visited in 1947 and settled permanently in 1952. Charlie Paterson came in 1949, Ellie Brickman in 1951, and Rob Roy by 1953. Robin Molny was in town by 1955, and Jack Walls by 1957. Ellen Harland appeared in 1958, and Ted Mularz in 1959, along with George Heneghan, and Dan Gale. Richard Lai stayed from 1960 to 1965. Bob Sterling was part of the scene from 1956-1960, got his architectural degree, and returned in 1963. Tom Benton arrived in 1963. By 1969, Art Yuenger, among others, lived and worked in Aspen. Bauhaus founder Walter Gropius advised on town planning in 1945, thanks to benefactor Walter Paepcke who also had ambitious plans for a modernist architectural village, cut short by his death in 1960. Through the auspices of the Goethe Bicentennial and the Aspen Institute, Paepcke and his wife Elizabeth commissioned signature buildings by several "name" modernists, such as Eero Saarinen (Music Tent, 1949), Buckminster Fuller (Geodesic dome, 1952), and Harry Weese (Given Institute for Physics, 1973). Second home owner and Chicago architect Francis Stanton designed a residence and church (1954, 1963), and Texas (also Florida and New York) architect Victor Lundy designed and built his own elegantly , modern vacation home in the West End in 1972. 0464-45.-5=3~: A'.M--44 - Most of the pioneer architects arrived in the Â·Â·cti ' -"-':r:~914<L-- -9*li~&~4*"*"7~ ; .-i, first decade of Aspen's rebirth, 1945-1956, ..4.. , :r,Â°'. ....<* , --4 but did the majority of their work after the . 1., .f. SF:%Â¢1-â‚¬ ... - I . , mid-1950s, when growth and development # ./ 4 ,~ accelerated. Educatedatthetoparchitectural I rit ZE .,1 . -'9 programs ofthetime, they articulate either a Bauhaus/International or Wrightian/organic esthetic-frequently, a creative blending of the two. Their architecture communicates -6.93 both a distinct sense of place-the extreme Figure 4: Creating the scraffito wall at the Aspen Institute, from left - Ellie Brickham, Masato Nakagawa, Herbert Bayer, and Fritz Benedict Courtesy high country environment-and a high level Ferenc Berko Photography. of design. As a group, they were attracted to Page 11 of 48 the adventure and promise of Aspen. Most loved to ski, knew one another socially, worked in one another's offices, collaborated on projects, and immersed themselves in the community, often serving on the city planning and zoning commission and other local and regional boards involved with environmental concerns and urban issues of growth, traffic, and affordable housing. It's important to remember that Aspen, though dilapidated, was a viable town when the newcomers started arriving in 1945. Before President Grover Cleveland _. returned the United States to the gold standard in 1893, ,Â·' Â·Â· ';. ' , *4.- devaluing silver in the process, Aspen had boasted ..1 i. *. ...07 12,000 residents, six newspapers, four schools, three ; r - banks, a hospital, three theaters, an opera house, 5 sixteen hotels, a courthouse, stores and office blocks, a race course, a literary society, a glee club, two railroads, .'~.i~: ~A~-,u...~9&969'*'1: 'I'274.~* 4 ' public electricity and water, and a brothel district. Its civic 61<42*. -; i.-* 4.--28.Wk:,36..0 i leaders had erected impressive public and commercial . buildings of red sandstone and brick and laid out broad ... I tree-shaded streets in a regulargrid pattern. Prosperous Figure 5: Aspen looking toward Smuggler Mountain. merchants and mining @lite had built Second Empire Courtesy AHS, and Queen Anne houses with mansard roofs, multiple gables, wrap-around porches, and fancy ironwork; ordinary miners lived in small clapboard cottages, the better ones often decorated with bargeboard trim on the gables. Once the silver market collapsed, the town fell into decline so quickly that much of its urban fabric remained intact. Thusthe new architectsand developers worked within a Victorian townscape /~ ... with a residential district in the West End and a commercial core at the foot ;f.",5!I>,>4.45 of the mountain. Generally, postwar construction follows a geographic r pattern, with Bauhaus modernism in the West End and nearby Aspen 1 0:,->*32 Institute campus; commercial, lodging, condos, and public buildings inserted ; ~ E *--1 + ,' fir.--*4 6 near Shadow Mountain and into the downtown core; and the large Wrightian 14 , condo complexes and residential growth to the east of town. ASPEN FREDERIC "FRITZ" BENEDICT AND HERBERT BAYER , Frank Lloyd Wright disciple Frederic "Fritz" Benedict (FAA, 1914-1995) and 43--4 Vif 9 h. S.. 04 Bauhaus-trained Herbert Bayer (1900-1985) represent the first generation of postwar architects in Aspen. They arrived at about the same time, though ..... 1 1,1.11 11.1. .1 11 - Figure 6: Herbert Bayer poster. they came under circumstances that underscore their different architectural Unknown Source. traditions-one, American, anti-establishment, individualistic, organic, -------- and nature-oriented; the other, European, establishment, ~~'77'mlymFi:i~~' 3~9~~~ collaborative, corporate, and machine-oriented. Just as the _...,0.,g,~ town of Aspen was to reconcile the dynamic tension between ~ ski resort and cultural center, both men, dramatically different in .~ their training, worked well together and helped shape the town's - , ,-It~ ~ rebirth intheirdesigns fortheski, cultural, tourist, and hospitality 7.w'.1...437â„¢=..1.~i +7?31)71~ industries and the scores of people who relocated to be part of 10, , 6*Â·r '~ the new Aspen scene. -~=*- ' Benedict, thirty years old when he mustered out of the 10th Figure 7: Fritz Benedict, bottom center, with fellow 10th mountain division soldiers. Courtesy AHS. Mountain Division, was the first trained designer to arrive in Aspen after the war. Born in Medford, Wisconsin, he had earned a Page 12 of 48 Bachelor's Degree and a Master's Degree in Landscape Architecture at the University of Wisconsin in Madison before joining Wright's Taliesin in Spring Green in 1938 as head gardener. He appreciated Wright's philosophy of integrating architecture and landscape, and, along with the other apprentices, he migrated between the two Taliesins for the next three years. On one of those Arizona-to-Wisconsin drives, in 1941, he first saw Aspen. An avid skier, he stopped for the National Skiing Championships and decided that the mountain town would be a good place to settle. That first impression was later confirmed when he was stationed with the US Army's 10ti Mountain Division, an alite group of skiers, at nearby Camp Hale, north of 2'~'1 1 Leadville, and visited Aspen on the weekends. I- 4 ~ ~ 4 In 1945, Benedict purchased a 600-acre ranch on Red Mountain for $12,000, which he scraped together from his army pay, a loan from his mother, and ~44 alr. f" selling his car. A self-described "hippie," Benedict planned to live in a small cabin and operate a subsistence ranch, then a dude ranch, saying that the 1- Â·'f..110~~~~~~~ mystique of ranching appealed to him as much as skiing. Eventually he added 1 P,.3;101.1 18, , lkftrl odd-carpentry and designed one house a year, rustic houses that evoked the (â€¢ 1 4'1~ 1-.49MI organic architecture of his mentor, *41 :â€¢1 -jitÂ¢P.,i'* -- In 1946, Austrian native Bayer was forty-six years old and an internationally M'lf l~I famous designer who had been avidly recruited by Walter Paepcke and his Figure 8: Herbert Bayer. Source wife Elizabeth to help implement their vision of Aspen as a special community unknown. organized around art and culture, a Kulturstaat. An innovator in typography and graphic design, photography and exhibition design in Weimar and Berlin, Bayer designed the universal type font (1925), which was credited with "liberating typography and design in advertising and creating the very look of advertising we take for granted today."8 He moved to New York City in 1938, where he was a sought-after art director and designer. By 1946, all of his work was for Paepcke, head of the Container Corporation of America (CCA) and Robert O. Anderson, president of the Atlantic Richfield Corporation. A lover of nature and skiing, Bayer had considered returning to his native Austria after the war to open a "little ski hotel." Instead, Paepcke enticed him with the challenge of remaking the "ghost town" of Aspen, arranged for his purchase of a Victorian cottage in the West End, guaranteed annual consulting fees from both the CCA and Aspen Skiing Corporation, and provided a steady stream of design work on his numerous Aspen properties. A 1955 Rocky Mountain News article stated, "Even in competition with millionaire tycoons, best-selling novelists, and top-ranking musicians, Herbert Bayer is Aspen's most famous resident..9 Although Bayer and Benedict frequently collaborated, mr?; each made his own mark on Aspen, Bayer's was i r Bauhaus modern and sleek like a machine; Benedict's exuded Wrightian principles, naturalistic and organic, : even funky. In addit:ion to designing numerous , 1 buildings, both men served on the Aspen Zoning and L. - im .t + M,-' -.1:A.. -I'â€¢'.- 0~ Planning Commission and other local boards, their lives .2:~5,4 . ?~2#141-".IV~4 + and careers irrevocably bound with Aspen's rebirth as a ~ : . 1.......... resort town. ////////MI//W$:/lie'IM,-74.-4~~ '* .. M..1 Benedict married Fabienne, the sister of Bayer's wife ,Â·,Â· .*:Â·N:â€¢.:'K,*iÂ·:.Â·: .:Â·.:2*I* _ Joella, in 1949, and she convinced him to quit ranching '-;' 1;-2-:Â·tistrj:'' , .â€¢-7.v. k and pursue architecture. He was awarded a license in il'. ..4 1956 under a grandfather clause that allowed licensure ~tâ€¢-4 . based on experience, rather than testing. On April 1, Figure 9: The Copper Kettle Restaurant. Courtesy AHS. 8 Joanne Ditmer, "Schlosser Gallery Host to Major Bayer Show/Sale," Denver Post, October 1, 1997. 9 Robert L. Perkin, "Herbert Bayer Changing the Town's Face," Rocky Mountain News, September 27, 1955. Page 13 of 48 1960, Bayer, who had no formal training in architecture, also received a license to practice in Colorado, without examination. ..=. 1- 4/Â¥/5 9 .*X Â·: - %45 ' . . -021162, HERBERT BAYER ~f.. I Bayer's architectural work spans approximately two decades, from /44 4,41-~fr-,~~ r. Ii-i:.Â· -1 1946-1965. Hisclientswereprimarilythe Aspen Skiing Corporation, the 4.- 1.i. .*..,~;tif.~ Â¥ . -11 4 Aspen Company (Paepcke's real estate firm), and the Aspen Institute for **~3.-j,0-11 /////~~~&~. Humanistic Studies, where he, with Frederic Benedict as the associated !16-44L architect through the 1950s, designed the Seminar Hall and its sgraffito mural (1953, the first building on the campus), Aspen Meadows Guest E:- -3:.. - -*Lcau. ~29[ 1-1 Â¢ Chalets (1954, since demolished and reconstructed), Central Building W. 2--t-- i which housed the Copper Kettle restaurant (1954), the Health Center Figdre 10: Pioneer Parkwith Herbert Bayer (1955), Grass Mound (1955, which predatesthe "earthwork" movement paint scheme. City of Aspen files. by ten years and was one of the first environmental sculptures in the ~ country), Marble Sculpture Garden (1955), Walter Paepcke Memorial ~ Building (1962), Institute for Theoretical Physics Building (1962, since ,~ demolished), Concert Tent (1964, removed in 2000), and Anderson =IM,#1*66'*Ef~ Park (1970). .... - 44 ~ Bayer also spearheaded Paepcke's restoration of Victorian buildings ~ ~' '* 2 .. .-E. tun" *511 in town, including the Wheeler Opera House and Hotel Jerome, and selected the paint colors for certain Victorians that Paepcke's Aspen ~ .. I - 311~ ........." " -... a Company decided should be restored in the 1940s. A strong blue, ......~ -0 0 + known locally as "Bayer Blue" has persevered for some fifty years, Figure 11: Wheele~ Opera House interior but is disappearing. His choice of a bright pink for the Paepcke's designed by Bayer. Courtesy AHS. West End residence, Pioneer Park (442 W Bleeker Street) and a bold paint scheme for the Hotel Jerome are local legends. In his twenty-eight years in Aspen, Bayer lived at 234 W Francis Street, a Victorian house in the West End, and an apartment in a downtown commercial building (501 E. Cooper Avenue). He then moved to Red Mountain where he built his studio and home (1950 [Gordon Chadwick, architect] and 1959, demolished). He designed other modernist residences (1957, 240 Lake Avenue; 1963, 311 North Street) in the West End, located adjacent to the Aspen Institute campus. After his productive career in Aspen, Bayer moved to Santa Barbara, California, where he died in 1985. Influenced by Bauhaus and International Style principles, Bayer's architectural designs have simple rectilinear shapes, generally fiat roofs, expanses of glass, cantilevered balconies, basicgeometricshapes, industrial materials such as steel frames and cinder blocks, and use primary colors, whites, and grays. Bayer believed in the Bauhaus concept of designing the total human environment, that art should be incorporated into all areas of life, and he designed logos and posters as well as landscapes and rr L//EA. buildings that brought high modernism to Aspen. 21- FREDERIC "FRITZ" BENEDICT 1980s. His earliest projects were residences, such as a cabin at 835 W Main (1947); a private dwelling for novelist MA#FifraiR/All/al~â€ž/j, John Marquand (1950, demolished) on Lake Avenue in jililiplictimill'lliltitilidi*firiligill1,3//*Ill/ZI'lle':62 the West End overlooking Hallam Lake; modern chalets liz~ ~ at 625 and 615 Gillespie (1957, demolished); and the W;5 1.-Â· 10 -: ~ â€ž .-** Edmundson House (1960, demolished), also known as ,#.'- _ -. - -- -,0 - Â· 14,~ , ...k 1 4, the Waterfall House, after Wright's famous Fallingwater. Figure 12: Aspen Highlands Base Lodge. Courtesy AHS. In 1967, Benedict created Ski magazine's first "ski home of Page 14 of 48 the month," in what was intended to be a regular feature on F. :, , 1 . r.- 4 affordable well-designed vacation homes. One ofhis modest 'Â·~ + r 47 t. 1 "Hillside Home" designs, built at 1102 Waters Avenue by Bill ./ : 11â€¢;4' ... Geary, still remains in the Geary family. - Ve. 1 . 14 As Aspen's economy revived, Benedict also designed r â€¢ numerous commercial and public buildings. In addition to -,1. 9SlY~F- early Aspen Institute buildings through the 19505, he and ~iÂ· F:32%*:t.,-2. .-,-â‚¬FÂ·â‚¬31Â·Â·. -65. _-2 demolished). Benedict also designed the Bank of Aspen 20=.4.r.. 1'.,.,24*9'4~'9...11[20~~h~1~~ (1956,119 S. Mill Street), Bidwell Building (1965, E. Cooper), 2-; It fls"l ,-ti3Â·..â‚¬.27*2%7.4.ibill#HI the original Pitkin County Library (1966, 120 E. Main Street), Figure 13: Sundeck atop Aspen Mountain, designed by Benedict Building(1976, 1280 Ute Ave),andthe Pitkin County Benedict. Courtesy AHS. Bank (1978, 534 E. Hyman Avenue). He designed the base lodge at Aspen Highlands (1958, demolished) and planned the entire ski area at nearby Snowmass (1967) as well consulting at Vail (1962) and Breckenridge (1971). In the 19605, he greatly influenced Aspen's condominium development and residential shift from downtown to the east, 9 ..~. P 4~ designingthe Aspen Alps (1963); Aspen's first large-scale urban +1 - 0.*~ condo, Aspen Square on Durant and Cooper Avenues (1967); Aspen's largest condo complex, the Gant (1972); and the __~.a...r;Â·r, Crystal Lake condos (1976), at Aspen Club. In total, Benedict ' -Ii=pimÂ· i-U~ designed and renovated more than 200 buildings in Aspen and Cy>,F~ The prolific architect was known for setting buildings into the r..,; .â€ž2 Â¥l landscape in a harmonious way, which reflects his landscape ~ 4,7. f ~ training and Wright's influence. At Taliesin East, he had been in Figure 14: Edmundson House designed by Benedict. City of Aspen files. charge of the gardens, while, at the Arizona camp, he worked with the natural desert landscape, even moving cactuses. He pioneered in passive solar and earth shelter design, exemplified in the Marquand house (1950) and his own solar and sod-roofed residence at Stillwater Ranch (1958). His masterwork, the Edmundson Waterfall House, an homage to Wright's Fallingwater, shared many of the characteristics of Wrightian design-dramatic cantilevered structure, massive chimney as the anchor, strong horizontal emphasis, low-pitched roof with deep overhangs, mitred windows in the corners, and, above all, an intimate and specific relation to its site. Benedict's office played a critical role in Aspen's emerging architectural scene, launching Ellie Brickham, Jack Walls, Robin Molny, Ellen Harland, Theodore Mularz, George Heneghan, Dan Gale, John Rosolack, Robert Sterling, Janver Derrington, Dick Fallin, Dierter Zenker, Tom Duesterberg, Bruce Sutherland, Arthur Yuenger, and Harry Teague, among others. Molny set up his own office in the late 1950sand later hired Yuenger. Mularz opened his practice in 1963 (employing Aspen's third woman architect, Jean Wolaver-Green), leaving on such good terms that his wedding reception (to Bayer's secretary, Ruth) was in the Benedict greenhouse. Walls and Sterling became partners in 1968. Heneghan and Gale were partners from 1966-1969. In the 1960s, when Benedict took on large-scale ski resort planning and design, his firm increased to thirty-five.11 Benedictalso embraced the traditions of the Taliesin Fellowship; both his home and workplace welcomed young architects. In 1946-1947, Taliesin fellows George Gordon Lee and Gordon Chadwick lived and worked with him on his Red Mountain ranch, and Chadwick, a licensed architect, designed several Aspen residences and Bayer's Red Mountain studio (1950) with him in the late 1940s. Curtis Besinger returned to sojourn with the Benedicts 10 Mary Eshbaugh Hayes, Dedication plague on "The Benedict Suite," Little Nell Hotel, Aspen, Colorado. 11 Brian Clark, "Ski Country Style," Ski Area Management 25 (March 1986): 55-57, 78-81. Page 15 of 48 7 regularly each summer, starting in 1956. After his years at Taliesin (1949- c. 1954), Robin Molny started his Aspen career in Benedict's office, then set up his own practice. Benedict I~---,O.baill.~~Â£;piffr-,4 I encouraged Boomerang Lodge- owner Charles Paterson to ~3!?ki:frukil}C=t,I spend three summers in Spring Green (1958-1960),Des Plaines, ~ Illinois, architects Donald Erickson and Arthur Stevens, who ,/140...li i#kÂ· i?Â» 14#Ovir'Wt/%1144 designed the North of Nell (1968), were both Taliesin alumni of ~~F'*~~.7 !'3*< Â·'77#1~1EFER*4=u .' 1'~eÂ·-44.0--ill the early 1950s. ~ -r ty Â¥ --- ..2.4 " Aside from his architectural contributions, Benedict influenced - "-'-:Â·*1, ..:fY.P.~IA~ -'*331.5...P !'< E ~ .,NY'?a,E:+44!th 147-M i t3 the Aspen environment in other ways. He served as the Figure 15: Bank of Aspen, now Wells Fargo Bank, first chairman of Aspen's Planning and Zoning Commission, designed by Benedict. Courtesy AHS. developing height and density controls, open space and preservation policies, a City parks system, a sign code, and ban on billboards. He played a significant role in the founding of the Aspen Institute and the International Design Conference and served on the board of the Music Associates of Aspen for 35 years. He was the father of the 10th Mountain Hut System, established in 1980, and he and his wife donated more than 250 acres of land within Pitkin County for open space. Benedictand Bayer received innumerablehonors fortheircontributions to Aspen. In 1995, Bob Maynard, former head of both the Aspen Ski Company and the Aspen Institute, stated: "Aspen was fortunate fifty years ago to be wakened from her sleep by visionaries. The trio of Benedict, Bayer, and Paepcke combined dreams and hope and reality uniquely to restore a community ravaged by mining, trapped in poverty-yet willing to follow the dreamers. /*12 GORDON CHADWICK Princeton graduate (1938) and Taliesin fellow (1938-1942), New Jersey-born Chadwick (1916-1980) spent part of the winter of 1946-1947 in Aspen with Benedict where he designed several houses, most notably, Bayer's studio on Red Mountain (1950). Before the war, Chadwick supervised the construction of the Fellowship's Loren Pope house (1939-1940)in Falls Church, Virginia, and, after the war, the residences of Arnold Friedman, Pecos, New Mexico (1946) and David Wright, Phoenix, Arizona (1951-52). During World War Il, Chadwick served in the US Army monuments, architecture, and fine arts section. Afterwards, he designed at Colonial Williamsburg and was the partner of famed industrial designer George Nelson. CHARLES GORDON LEE Penn grad (1940) and Taliesin fellow (1940-1941 [Taliesin East]; 1947-1948 [Taliesin West]), Kansas-born Lee (1918-1966) spent part of the 1946-1947 winter in Aspen with Chadwick and Benedict, although it is unclear exactly what he may have designed. He served in the US Air Force as a Captain from June 1942 to January 1946, returned to service frdfn May 1951 to September 1952. At Taliesin, he worked on drawings for a Pittsfield, Massachusetts, housing project and a Pittsburgh civic project. Briefly in partnership with former apprentice Kelly Oliver in Denver, he later was the Taliesin representative for the Rocky Mountain National Park Administration Office, a role Oliver assumed when Lee died in 1966. His papers are in the Western History Collection, The Denver Public Library. SAMUEL JEFFERSON CAUDILL, JR. Oklahoma-born, Kentucky-bred,Cornell-educated, Sam Caudill (FAIA, 1922-2007) wasworking forDenverarchitect Tom Moore in January 1947 when he skied the newly opened Aspen (Ajax) Mountain. Five years later, in 1952, attracted by Aspen's potential and his future wife, Joy Maxwell, Caudill moved there permanently, married, and started his own architectural firm. He had interrupted college to serve in the Army's Office of Strategic Services, graduating in 1946 from Cornell, the only Ivy-League school to offer a bachelor's degree in architecture. Caudill 12 Robert A. Maynard, Remarks Given at Fritz Benedict's Memorial Service. Page 16 of 48 has the distinction of being Aspen's first licensed architect to establish a practice (Benedict and Bayer were r - p j licensed by grandfathering, and Gordon Chadwick moved on). * Although he started as a single practitioner, Rob Roy worked , with him in the early years. Richard Lai joined Caudill's firm ... -A..f..I*I from 1960-1965, when he left Aspen to teach architecture and planning at the University of Texas. ..- ~ Ls! An avid outdoorsman and environmentalist, Caudill said ~'1 that his designs were "usually inspired by the outdoors" and â€¢,9- 9- ,Â·r-/ 2,219':A reflected the "same elements as the mountains which frame ) the valley," as in the curving brick walls of his Aspen High 1 + Â· ........ '*14':Â·4 4,1 0, . . A , I , . Â· Â·, School.13 His first job in Aspen was adding a gymnasium and .Â«11Â» ..44 three classrooms to the Red Brick School in 1949-1951 when Figure 16: National Bank of Aspen, now US Bank, he was working for Moore. designed by Caudill. City of Aspen files. Caudill and his various firms designed a number of modern buildings in the city's downtown core that exhibit strong geometric shapes, dramatic massing, planar emphasis and consummate use of brick, as in his 1954 First National Bank of Aspen at 420 E. Main Street. Aspen Sports (1970) at 408 E. Cooper, a yellow brick cube, has a dramatic oversized arched entrance on the ground floor that evokes the Midwestern banks of Louis Sullivan. In addition to his modern designs, Caudill gave a nod to Aspen's ski culture with traditional "chalet" details in the Viking Lodge (1963) on 832 E. Cooper Avenue. He also designed many of the retrofitted and new facilities at Snowmass, includingthe plaza, conference center, and Silvertree Lodge. In 1986, with his firm Caudill, Gustafson, Ross, and Associates, he undertook another restoration (after Bayer's) of the Jerome Hotel and combined historic adaptation and modern design at the Aspen Art Museum, 590 N. Mill Street (1987). In 1991, they designed the new Pitkin County Library on the corner of Mill and Main Streets. Caudill led the successful campaign to force the state to build a more environmentally friendly highway project limiting the amount of asphalt through Glenwood Canyon. ROBER-r OLIVER "ROB" ROY In the 1955 Aspen telephone directory, Rob Roy er:vrm,---Â·-5...= -+Â¥ir- - -- g{: w' -.- GYÂ¥â‚¬~ f. tgy.2: f. ' 4 (1926-1992) and Samuel Caudill are the only two .Affw'-Â·:-: -'1 + ' . .... 1. -=, . - RÂ¥ fe . - h .â‚¬ 4 architects listed (Benedict and Bayer, neither yet .i:=<11.-4-- I --.i'L, '- -<'6 1- -Â·- ",f~Â·-,4 - -1,8. .' -Â¥.- h.. :- I -4 licensed, list themselves as designers). Roy was the -3 1.t. 36--Â· .,- 4 1 641. f - second licensed architect in Aspen, after Caudill. .Â· =-;.Â·... ' Â·- ...: 1 -- . --i.-4 1'2...r - .; Â·--~: Receiving his degree in architecture from the : - Â·- ~ -- 1 ..54 . -1 t 4 University of Illinois in 1947, he spent a brief time in --.. ~.~4,~ c -~ __ â€ž 4 - ,-,r-*0<~.2.'k"-:a ,_12. Boulder, andthen Grand Junction, where he interned .2-: Adli~'I- --4.-f~F~-- Ae#'14 2.~' 1;~~.~r~~Â·~~~~-4~~ to get his license. Once he and his wife saw Aspen, 27-5 r .--Â·: -- they loved it, and moved there, prior to 1953. As Â¢ 11? TZ.1,-1-,7 ~. ./4 4't &15/:~.Â¥...70~.- -- Cindy Roy remembers, "Mom and Dad were both I.,Fk' $'If~~ ---7 eccentric, and Aspen was a perfect place for young, ~~ ,; ~-" ~i->1. ir,:~- ~ N,-;;Aâ€¢~- ">-th~ -~ bright adults." Roy learned to ski well and in the ~4 - -r 1.- 7 ..%427.:Â»3'li ~.J,~~~3~~':~~~J,~ winters, when architectural work was scarce, taught - . 6- - Figure 17: Stern Residence, designed by Roy. Courtesy AHS. skiing at Buttermilk. He worked as an independent architect from 1956, generally from home. He was also associated with Caudill and Benedict, although it is not clear exactly how. Roy loved the design process, appreciated Buckminster Fuller and Frank Lloyd Wright, and attended the summer international design conferences at the Aspen Institute. Bob Sterling, who quit school to ski bum for a while, remembers working as a drafter for Roy and then Jack Walls between 1956 and 1960 before going back to school. Roy's Aspen work dates from the 1950s into the 1970s, and he moved to Paonia, Colorado, 13 Jennifer Davoren, "A Presidential Honor for Coondog," Aspen Times, May 26-27, 2001. Page 17 of 48 around 1975. A number of Aspen landmarks are associated with Roy, including the Mountain Chalet, Snowmass Mountain Chalet, Prospector Lodge, the Heatherbed, and Cortina Lodge, and residences for Friedl Pfeiffer and Edgar and Polly Stern, the latter structure universally admired. He designed his family's house on Castle Creek, later owned by Jack Lord, and then Barbara Walters and Merv Adelson. Roy designed the multi-family modern chalet at 608 W Hopkins Avenue (1962), the modern chalet for Pietro and Dorothy Danieli at 232 McSkimming Road (1963), and the shake-shingled, dramatically mansarded multi-family at 700 W. Hopkins Avenue (1968). CHARLES PATERSON Charles Paterson represents another aspect of Aspen modern architecture. In 1949, Paterson (b. 1929), born Karl Schnazer in Austria, arrived in Aspen ~Â·* after a dramatic escape from the Nazis with ~ his sister through Czechoslovakia, France, and Portugal. They were finally adopted in ~ started engineering studies in New York ~ -----:--Â·----- Â·. .Â·. City. Disappointed with eastern skiing, ~''IÂ· .3-.....'-~./'/-/. he moved, first to Denver, then to Aspen, i where he landed a job as a bellhop at the . . 1 4 k.1.-- Hotel Jerome and became, in his words, "a '..t ski bum." Within a month of his arrival, he b..14Â· -Â·Â· Â·Â·*126*' ..Â·~Â·':115.* '*61-_':..=le:9--b.;.1,-Â·Â·eÂ·Â·-* . Â· ..i Figure 18: Boomerang Lodge, designed by Paterson. Courtesy of Sheila purchased three lots on W Hopkins Avenue, Babbie. shortly followed by another three that comprised a half block between Fifth and Sixth Streets. There, he built a one-room cabin from left-over lumber. Paterson followed a circuitous path from that initial construction project that eventually led to Taliesin and his Wrightian lodge in downtown Aspen. He returned to New York for two years to resume his studies at City College, then moved back to Aspen, became a ski instructor, and began expanding his cabin. After a stint in the mid-19505 with the 10th Mountain Division (Camp Hale's "Second Generation"), he added more units to his cabin and, in 1956, opened the Boomerang Lodge (recalling the Australian "boomerang," he hoped guests would return). Fritz Benedict encouraged him to study architecture, and Paterson spent three summers, from 1958-1960, at Taliesin East, the Gl Bill paying his tuition. He started out gardening, like the other apprentices, but discovered he was good at plastering and became the "official plasterer." Surprised at the quality of the plasterwork, Wright thought the Fellowship had hired a professional plasterer. Although Wright died on April 9, 1959, before Paterson returned for his second summer, he went back that summer and the next. Through the years, he maintained strong ties to his Taliesin colleagues. In addition to Aspen locals Benedict and Molny, he encouraged other apprentices to stay at the Boomerang Lodge on their twice yearly trips between the two Taliesins. At Taliesin the fellows were encouraged to work on their own plans, after hours, in the evenings, and during breaks, and Paterson drew the plans forthe Boomerang Lodge as itexists today. Itcontinuedtoevolveorganically. Twelve rooms, a lounge, and a pool were added in 1960. The novel underwater window, featured in a 1960s Life magazine, allows guests in the lounge to look into the pool. Other expansions took place in 1965 and 1970. Paterson described its Wrightian features-walls and fireplace of "concrete battered blocks, windows with 'corners ofglass'... sort ofa Frank Lloyd Wright signature." Though Paterson designed otherstructures, he never listed himself as an architect in the Aspen directory. The Boomerang Lodge is his life's work. Its distinctive fagade with windows organized into a horizontal band just under the extended eaves provides a direct connection to Taliesin that inspired much Aspen design. Page 18 of 48 ELEANOR "ELLIE" BRICKHAM ib .- 4, Ellie Brickham (1923-2008) moved to Aspen in 1951 #4 2- after attending the University of Colorado's School 14 ..1Â¢.9> 2.,6~ of Architecture from 1941-1944. Construction was b, a family business, and her motivation to become a ' 1 ,-' '11&42/25'/ )'i-1E'f'Il"pil.Â£3/1..- designer began as a child. She was attracted by the h2> skiing, but found herself the only female architect %2@I Â·~ ..iÂ· Â·.. *Â·5-Â·Â·"LWk =BWA-I'â‚¬-54,;....~ in town until Ellen Harland arrived in 1958. Ill/*Rk.: f : Early in her career, Brickham worked in Fritz 9~14/*li, _@k --~~~"-'~'"~~'~~- Benedict's office and collaborated on projects with - . both Benedict and Bayer, participating in work : ...09 14 , 0 ... =4 + 41/ . i .. + . ...i.U.-..111.4. --. going on at the Aspen Institute. Like Benedict, she ~ had a strong interest in passive solar techniques. Figure 19: Strandberg Residence, designed by Brickham. City of During her time in that office and, later, in her own Aspen files. practice out of her home, she designed a number of residences and commercial buildings in town, including houses for several Music Festival artists in Aspen Grove, the elegantly simple brick Strandberg Residence (1973,433 Bleeker Street-demolished) and the Patricia Moore Building (1963, 610 E. Hyman Avenue). In Pitkin County, she designed numerous homes in Pitkin Green and Starwood, on Red Mountain, including her own house (1955), with south and west walls made completely of glass. Her works, which total at least sixty in the Aspen area, are generally characterized by spare, simple forms and minimal detailing. Brickham's projects focus on an "impeccable sense of proportion and feeling of lightness. "14 ROBIN MOLNY Robin Molny (1928-1997) apprenticed at Taliesin for some five years, from 1949 to c. 1954, before moving to Aspen in the mid-1950s. While passing through Aspen on trips back and forth between Wisconsin and Arizona, he met Benedict, who later called and offered him work in Aspen. Molny worked for him for a year and half, then became a registered architect, and started his own practice. Born in Cleveland, Ohio, Molny attended the Carnegie Institute of Technology in Pittsburgh before Taliesin. His Taliesin years were pivotal, coinciding with the postwar resurgence of Wright's architectural practice and planning for the construction of the Guggenheim Museum. In September 1953, Molny was one of three apprentices who f~'1Fr':Â·EFf .'.t ~,tMB:â€¢i~,4....19"..9..u'.I.I.vi.= traveled to New York City in the Fellowship station wagon to . -: 7#Y#I help to set up "Sixty Years of Living Architecture," an exhibition 1 - , of Wright's architectural drawings and models. The exhibit ' had traveled to many cities worldwide and was going up in a temporary pavilion on the site of the new museum-sort of --A.Ab.AASâ€¢----- -, **~ Wright's shot across the bow to signal New Yorkers that he was F - - in charge of constructing the Fellowship-designed Usonian ~ 0 houses, greatly in demand; and Molny supervised the Maurice . , ,<0'~==-'*~ Â·1 - -1. 4* Greenberg residence in Dousman, Wisconsin, and was working L...,,.. with another Taliesin apprentice in Park Ridge, Illinois, when b. ' 5 ..f . . ./ . ..1- he left for Aspen. Despite Wright's appreciation for Molny, he 11.1 and Mrs. Wright did not get along, and he left Taliesin with Figure 20: Hearthstone House, designed by Molny. some hard feelings. Courtesy Irma Prodinger. 14 Bill Rollins, "Brickham: Simplicity, Lightness, and a Sense of Proportion/' Aspen Times, December 22, 1977. Page 19 of 48 I . . â‚¬- , ./. . - In Aspen, Molny designed several notable buildings, including "*10 :(i- *47*.~; 4:--11â€žt: .'z..Â»S---- the Hearthstone House (1961, enlarged 1963, 134 E. Hyman ~ .-*j:,Â©,1.-t:j-#j~ Avenue) and the Aspen Athletic Club (1976, 720 E. Hyman -Ii""-4/8*1~,2--i ..5,4 >52 (-MA:/l/ki/ Avenue, with Art Yuenger). He designed area residences, ~ includingthe W. Ford Schumann House, an Architectural Record house of 1975-a geometrically complex composition of -i/-0./.*,-, : Â·t.,..;?I;' '71.: stucco-battered wallsthat stepped upthe sideof the mountain. ,.Â·#,7'tt~, 4.v,. --4/:iES Wright told Molny, "If you understand the principles of my -1'4~. ...25.-Â·i...9it-;it, 7 .17Â· %_-h architecture, then your buildings need not look like mine. /' 15 Â·<13 Â·> 1-33 11?kil.b-Â·~Â·,1:16,1~ Molny's best known contribution to Aspen's "townscape" - is the transformation of Cooper and Hyman Avenues into a ..0 . 60" . ' 4~ pedestrian mall (1976) on which he collaborated with veteran Figure 21: Pedestrian Mails, designed by Molny. Taliesin fellow Curtis Besinger. Courtesy AHS. CURTIS WRAY BESINGER Besinger (1914-1999) received his B. Arch degree from the University of Kansas in 1936 and joined the Taliesin Fellowship in the summer of 1939. He was to stay for 16 years, from 1939-1955. A conscientious objector, he took a break from 1943-1946 to undertake "work of national importance under civilian direction." After leaving Taliesin, with some angst and misgivings, he taught architecture at KU for 29 years, served as dean, and retired in 1984. From 1956 on, Besinger spent hissummers in Aspen with Fabi and Fritz Benedict, working with theirarchitectural practice. Although he undoubtedly worked on many projects, he is specifically associated with the design of the Aspen Music School and Cooper-Hyman pedestrian mall. He was also connected to House Beautiful magazine, which wasstronglypro-Wright. In hisaccountof his yea rs at Taliesin, Working with Mr. Wright (1995), he mentions architects associated with Aspen-Lee, Chadwick, Benedict, and Molny. He notes that Benedict organized ski trips for the Taliesin fellows when they were in Arizona in the winter of 1941-1942. ELLEN HARLAND After graduating in 1956 from the M.I.T. School of Architecture, Ellen (n@e Dirba) Harland (b. 1934) worked for Denverarchitect C. Francis Pillsbury. On May 1, 1958, she moved to Aspen toaccepta job with Benedict, and Robin Molny was the only other architect in the office. Though not a skier, she loved the town of Aspen. She worked as a drafter and designer for Benedict for twenty years, taking time off when she married and her children were young. She worked on Benedict projects, such as the Pitkin County Library, from her home, and then returned to the office full-time when her children got older. Harland chose architecture as her career "because it seemed like a good profession for a woman-sort of an any-mathematical thing. .16 Even as a sixteen-year old, she knew she wanted to combine a career and family-architecture proved a good fit for her talents and goals. Harland and her husband Irwin left the valley in 1977 for Santa Fe, which reminded them of Aspen in the 1950s, and she established a practice. Eventually she moved to Washington, D. C., where she drafted guidelines for the Americans with Disabilities Act for the Department of Justice. An impeccably trained modernist, she designed several Aspen houses, including a residence for herself and her family. She designed the sleek, one-story, flat- roofed residence defined by its simple rectilinear form and copious use of glazing for Benedict controller Pat Maddalone at 1411 Crystal Lake Road in Aspen Club in 1976. JOHN MORRIS "JACK" WALLS Born in Oklahoma (b. 1925) and educated at the University of Oklahoma (B. Arch '53), Jack Walls' schooling 15 Bruce Berger, "Robin Molny and the Taliesin Fellowship," unpub., und , 16 Joan Lane, "Aspen's Women Architects Aid Building Boom in Town," Grand Junction Sentinal, January 16, 1965. Page 20 of 48 would have overlapped with Bruce Goff's tenure as chair of Oklahoma's architecture school (1947-1955). After working briefly in Oklahoma City, he moved to Aspen because he liked the town and felt it sympathetic to his organic approach to architecture. He learned to ski after moving there. In 1957, only three architects were listed in the Aspen directory-Roy, Caudill, and Walls. Walls had a single practice from 1957 until 1968, when he became partners with Robert Sterling, a colleague in Benedict's office who had also worked as a drafter for him in the late 1950s. In 1958, Walls designed Buttermilk's dramatic glass and plywood base lodge. In 1970, Walls & Sterling (partners, 1968-1975) designed Aspen's first modernist gas station (435 E. Main Street), among other buildings. After leaving Aspen, Walls and his wife traveled and served in the Peace Corps in Honduras. He currently resides in Durango. ROBERT "BOB" STERLING ......iRL"ll .it, 9 ' Â·4. 7'74 - f-,Â·p'.j6* In 1956, when Ohio-born Sterling (b. :IllilillillicMlilÂ·i?ililly 10/<5./.r 1/**4,W 1933)arrived in Aspenafterdropping out ~ - rÂ¢ 2 94:3*ilm- of the University of Colorado to ski bum ~1 .... . 1 *,t- for a while, Benedict, Bayer, Caudill, Roy, and Walls were the architects in town , . 1., Ii Ill *ill/~Ti who had studios. Between 1956 and 1:48 -1.%41*k-m//Mil'lu~//1.4= . 1960, he worked as a drafter for Rob Roy, ili.#4 /lili and then for Jack Walls before returning + %*h y. ' ,4*~@40* ;Â»AUÂ»" r.r.' I./1/Il...... to school. He grad uated with a BFA ( 1962) F[Bre 22:*Villager TAnhoules, designed by fierling aRd -bagg. City or Aspen and B. Arch (1963) from Utah. Returning files. to Aspen, he worked three years with Benedict, who was then designing the Mountain Plaza, the Gant, and Snowmass lodges. In 1965, Sterling and a fellow Benedict employee, Bob Dagg, designed and developed a condo project, the Villager Townhouses (1001 E. Cooper). He and partner Wall (1968-1975) designed the Conoco station (435 E. Main Street, 1970), and Courthouse Plaza Building, among other buildings. As a single practitioner, he designed numerous residences and the original layout for the Roaring Fork Club in Basalt. Currently Sterling lives in Glenwood Springs and is involved with disaster housing in Kenya and Haiti. GEORGE EDWARD HENEGHAN, JR. Missouri native Heneghan (b. 1934) received his B. Arch from Washington University in 1957. He worked in Â·7 Benedict's office where he met Daniel Gale, his partner from 1966-1969. The last yearof their partnership, 1969, *6 was busy: they designed the Hannah Dustin commercial -4.. 14.... building (300 S. Spring), the Aspen Interfaith Chapel . of the Prince of Peace on Meadowood Drive, and the .--*.2â€¢Â·.Â·' 4/" *'~~ Cottonwoods Condominium, as well as residences for ~2;- V 'F274 4 the Guggenheim and Horowitz families. Heneghan left ---1,. Â·Â· I.LA MIMI, . Aspen and Colorado to establish his practice in Hawaii. ~146t.01. . --r -f-,14 *Bl*ILâ€¢ - - . I ...11.4/. .. Figure 23: Prince of Peace Chapel. Courtesy AHS. THEODORE L. "TE D" M U LARZ Born in Chicago, Illinois, Mularz (FAIA, b. 1933) served in the Coast Guard (1953-1955) and graduated with a B. Arch from the University of Illinois in 1959. He and Molny had worked together in Park Ridge, Illinois, and after Molny moved to Aspen and started working for Benedict, he called and said they needed help for the summer. At that point, Mularz didn't have his degree and didn't know where Aspen was. He spent the summer of 1958 working in Benedict's office for $1.75 an hour, went home to complete his undergraduate program and a semester of graduate work, and then returned for a permanent position in June 1959, starting at $2.00 an hour. Mularz remembers working on projects for Bayer, whose office was around the corner, when things were slow in Page 21 of 48 the Benedict office. Though not a skier when he came to Aspen, he became an avid skier afterward. . was briefly associated with Benedict in a corporate firm as - Benedict-Mularz Associates, Architects, from 1978-1981. I'll"'ll'Ili~~Fief.*f.AW:~4'. Among his designs are the modern studio adjacent to the West End cottage of Aspen photographer Ferenc Berko (1964); the Manor Vail and Lord Gore Club (1965), Fasching ~-4- 1 ~ Haus Condominium (747 S. Galena, 1966), and the Scott ~13:11 -_:A~ Building (400 W Hopkins, date) and numerous residences. . Active in the community, he chaired the Historic Resources Committee in the 1960s, and he and his wife were founding - 4: r membersoftheAspen Historical Society. In 1990, Mularz left Figure 24: Berko Studio, designed by Mularz. City of Aspen for another attractive, culturally oriented community, Aspen files. Ashland, Oregon. THOMAS WHELAN "TOM" BENTON Almost twenty years after Bayer and Benedict, Tom Benton (1930-2007) arrived in Aspen in 1963, as the ski town's growth and popularity were shifting into high gear. Serving in the Navy during the Korean War, Benton used the Gl Bill to study architecture at the University of Southern California (B. Arch, 1960) and worked in southern California for a time. Though trained as an architect, he -~_p'~1-F~F---,m' - ., ..9!41 +*-,5J I. really wanted to be a "working artist." A ski trip to Aspen convinced .al Â· , Â· t )'Â· t ,~ 9 - ': $ him that it was where he should be. Bringing a California sensibility ...Al that fit well with Aspen's growing image as a counter-culture mecca, ~7'~ Benton designed his studio and gallery-"unique, a clean and sharp *00 i ' 1 + blend of wood and cinder block" (heavily altered today) -at 421 E. ~ Hyman Avenue. Hecollaborated with Hunter Thompson and others :49*1 ~: ,., i . **:75~ p# i Ii.Idid'~:2: IN f 1 tocreate "imagesthat helpedto define Aspen'stempestuous political and social upheavals" in the late 1960s. More interested in graphic 1 EN Â·Â·. art than in architecture, he still designed the occasional building, 11.WIT# including a residence for actress Jill St. John. His funky, organic, ..0 5â€¢!f~pril~ki Â·7 4 - J ; ./ , .... -1 California esthetic was in sync with Aspen's Wrightian tradition. His '' ~"ulm.....~ - %4' -.L*%: Â· -Â·Â· .14 *- , designs, such as the Patio Building (1969), a flat-roofed commercial -*1.--Â·Â·.,-40. 12 '*. 4,46:.&.IMA + --D building at 630 E. Hyman (1969), exhibit a similar interest in natural .. I . e b t Figure 25: Patio Building, designed by materials, simple geometric shapes, deep overhangs, horizontal Benton. Courtesy AHS. emphasis, and orienting the building to frame views toward the mountains. RICHARD TSENG-YU LAI Born in 1937 in Beijing, China, Lai garnered several prestigious awards from Princeton University and received two degrees, a B. Arch (magna cum laude) in 1958, and an MFA. Arch in 1960. In 1960, he moved to Aspen, where he worked for five years for Samuel Caudill. In 1965, he left to join the faculty at the University of Texas to teach architecture and planning. During his Aspen years, he chaired Aspen's Committee for Experimental Pedestrian Mall (1960) and served on the City Planning and Zoning Comission (1963-1965). After more than 40 years, Joy Caudill remembers Lai as a key person in her husband's architecture practice. ARTHUR "ART" YUENGER After receiving his B. Arch. from Illinois in 1962, Yuenger (b. 1939) worked first for his father's Long Island, New York, architectural woodworking company and then interned with Paul Rudolph, Ulrich Franzen, and Victor Lundy in New York City, obtaining his New York license in 1968. During the 1960s, he skied in Vermont, but he Page 22 of 48 decided that he had to master the sport and so moved to Aspen. He arrived in 1969 and worked with Benedict and Molny (Aspen Athletic Club, 1976) 49' 4 ' . > -7 . before establishing his own practice. He designed a number of residences, ,Z +92,Â·4>..I ~ 0% r, - including the striking concrete block house at 54 Shady Lane adjacent (d. ..4. , .. ' -14. 4 to Hunter Creek (1971). Living in Fairfield, Iowa, since 1999, Yuenger :'46Â·' 2 8: t ..4.1 . . participates in World Peace Assemblies, an important aspect of his career, f -: : 74: but continues to design houses in Colorado and Aspen. f 1:M IC.'2?~1 In addition to local architects with practices embedded in the community, ~fiJ -1.4 r out-of-state architects and second-home-owners Francis Rew Stanton, 1, -2*111 - -Â·'-: - - t. Harry Weese, and Victor Lundy also added to Aspen's modernist legacy. -,7 11 FRANCIS REW STANTON C ' ~ In November 1950, Paeckpe's Aspen Company sold an historic West End house to Chicago brothers Edgar and Francis Stanton and their wives, Rose Figure 26: 54 Shady Lane residence., and Louise, all four of whom would contribute significantly to Aspen's designed by Yuenger. City of Aspen files. economic and cultural life. Later, Edgar sold his half interest to his brother and in 1954 moved to a modern house designed by Francis on Red Mountain (0223 Placer Lane). Architect Stanton (1910-1995) also designed Christ Episcopal Church in the West End in 1963. Both of his Aspen structures had distinctive parabolic ... 06- arched shapes. From 1948-1964, he was a partner in Stanton and Rockwell of Chicago and then practiced - .. ,~- -.--. independently until his retirement in 1989. He had a Yale [19 J *4,0 3. r -- 1.-I. ; BFA in Architecture (1935) and spent two summers at the Ecole des Beaux Arts Americaine at Fontainebleau, France. pl & . 4*.,3 . 'i*h. Me , From 1948-1954, he served with Eero Saarinen, Joseph Albers, George Nelson and other on the Yale University .. .1 ... ' . Figure 27: Christ Episcopal Church, designed by Stanton. Subcommittee on Architecture, Painting, and Sculpture to Courtesy Denver Public Library archives. update the three departments' curriculum. HARRY WEESE The distinguished Chicago modernist Harry Weese (FAIA, 1915-1998) of Harry Weese and Associates designed the Given Institute for Pathobiology for the University of Colorado in 1972 on 100 E. Francis Street (located in Elizabeth Paepcke's garden, with supervision by Aspen's William Lipsey). The concrete block building has been described as "one 1*4'r, -7 f of Aspen's finest modernist works [which] gives a playful rigorto 3.- Â·, 6 :.. K !..ri>= F ~" - 9, 243 4 a simple circle with angular extensions. "17 Weese was educated at . 4 - - 1 1 - Yale (1936-1937), M.I.T. (B. Arch, 1938)and the Cranbrook Institute ..-- 4% f of Art (1938-1939) with Eliel and Eero Saarinen before working at 2 Â· 44 Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill, He establishing his own firm in ~ ~ 1947. Renowned for a number of significant projects throughout the United States and the design of the Washington D. C. Metro - System (1976), Weese had a home in the West End for many years ~ ' and also designed vacation houses at Vail and Snowmass. Figure 28: Given Institute, designed by Weese. City of Aspen files. 17 Noel, Buildings Of Colorado, 493. Page 23 of 48 VICTOR LUNDY Victor Lundy(FAIA, b. 1923) wasa renowned modernist architect at the time he built a second home for his Â¢ f .M.... - i i-r- V I' T- 11 -4 family on 301 Lake Avenue in the West End in 1972. 3 " T 'I 1 A Harvard-educated (B. Arch, M. Arch) World War II 11 veteran, Lundy had a successful career designing * ,,4 r 4- -r- t, f -1 1411 notable government, commercial, and educational , buildings in Sarastota, Florida; New York City; and ~-219 1- #*FIT *IR L?IL "t: 4 4111 h L i 1 I k 41 ": .' 2 1 114111 - till!- 1 41'..~itL i+.'.1 , . I'li ' Houston and Dallas, Texas. At Harvard, he studied f 1 11, 59. f/ 1 1 1 111 under Gropius and Breuer, with whom Bayer was also 41 ~ 11 41 -~ 111 1- 1 1 11111 11. 1;11 11 1 11 1 1111 1 1 111 4 associated in 1920s Germany. The Lundy family was ' 7 L -11 - - 11 -D- 111 in Aspen in the late 1950s but left and then returned. 1 1 1 1 14 - 1 Lundy's vacation home is located next door to a -ip'!2 1 1 1, 1 -11 1 0 ...1112 11 *4 ..1!~ L 4*6.:'~A.4%hz~~ *Â· ~ ~-.-2'3 Bayer design (1963, 311 North Street). Known for his Figure 29: 301 Lake Avenue, designed by Lundy. Courtesy dramatic roofs, Lundy cantilevered the roof to extend Victor Lundy. over the floor-to-ceiling windows that frame the 20'- high great room. Other out-of-town architects designing modernist buildings in Aspen include Wheeler and Lewis of Denver (The Yellow Brick School, 1950s), Texan Donald W Kirk (Shadow Mountain Condominiums, 809 S. Aspen, 1965), Eric Friis of Eagle River, Wisconsin (Tom Cleary family modern chalet, 219 S. Third Street, 1965), Brown Brokaw Bowen of Boulder (Coors family modern chalet, 1960s), and Erickson and Stevens of Des Plaines, Illinois (North of Nell, 1968). Page 24 of 48 CHAPTER 3: MODERNISM IN ASPEN 1945-1975 - THE BUILDINGS A significant amount of Aspen's postwar architecture represents either a Bauhaus Modern or Wrightian Modern esthetic, reflecting the training of the young architects moving to town, the taste of the clients, and the general acceptance that modern architecture is appropriate for modern times. Aspen's modern architecture shows a range of building types that articulate its three pronged identity-mountain resort, county seat for the Roaring Fork Valley, and cultural enclave. Examples will be organized by type, location, and chronology-downtown core, West End, east. During the years the resort town emerged, 1945-1960, relatively few new buildings went up; after 1960, the amount and scale of new construction increased dramatically. 1945-1960 ASPEN ENTERS THE SKI AND CULTURAL TOURISM INDUS-rRIES Aspen saw little new construction in the period between the 1893 Silver Crash and World War Il, known as the "Quiet Years." In the early 1940s, no architects or contractors/builders were listed in the telephone directory. Many of the town's Victorian structures had become dilapidated or vacant and were available for modest sums or back taxes. Still intact were such major public buildings as the Hotel Jerome and Wheeler Opera House, numerous businesses and residences, and a streetgrid that dictated the orderly placement of buildings between Ajax Mountain to the south and Red Mountain to the north. In 1945, the lives and livelihoods of Aspen's 600 inhabitants revolved around one working mine and scattered ranches. Those years of inactivity caused economic hardship et ..""p *=r- -z~~ .- . / '--... - i .rer.- but also enabled the area's natural environment, ~-*2 -'-:~-,A~,_,Â·,11*9~------ degraded by mining operations, to recuperate. It ~,%421-v-Â·i/'-lfk~ attracted Friedl Pfeifer and other 10th Mt. Division .~..... . veterans eager to create a ski resort and Walter and 91:#MI#rm.,ir.fAVF'flie~ ... - -44 Elizabeth Paepcke, hopingtocreateanidealcommunity Iligildillilizilgillillirilillilillillirph//i--14%: 14&1%/*-,1=_: of cultural, spiritual, and intellectual renewal. In her l*SMI/~id121*jllglg~)*-M~&~64*581~~~~4~26~ history of Aspen, "Re-creation through Recreation," ~/-~~--â‚¬~j'-t ~;~.3~,11~itsv,ma~m. historian Annie Gilbert writes, "As with other ski areas ,,42Â¥SFZ,>-â‚¬F~ 4,-/g//m/"/ when ski enthusiasts teamed up with willing investors ZLE~_t~ i.:-~~fel~.~ to build a ski area that would attract destination skiers Figure 30: Lift 1. Courtesy AHS. (through staying for a week or more) as well as local skiers and competitors." Paepcke's ambitious plans for Aspen's rebirth as a cultural center, Pfeifer's dream of creating a ski resort equal to St. Anton, and the hopes of 10th Mt. Division veterans like Fritz Benedict to create new lives where they could continue to ski and make money doing so-were facilitated by the extraordinary resource of Aspen's existing urban fabric. Local residents, for the most part, adapted to the new tourist economy and formed a connection between Aspen's mining past and tourism future. Paepcke wanted to encourage particular sorts of people to come to Aspen. "We want writers and scientists and artists and businessmen and we want them to be [permanent] citizens of Aspen, not seasonal visitors." He acted quickly, buying up properties from the summer of 1945 and convincing Bauhaus master Herbert Bayer, who shared his views of the inextricable and important connection between modern design and consumer culture, to relocate to Aspen in 1946. Bayer, Paepcke, Paepcke's Chicago architect Walter Frazier, and other intellectual, artistic, and business 6 lite renovated Victorian houses in the West End near the campus where the Bayer- and Benedict-designed modern buildings of the Aspen Inst:itute would take shape over the years. In 1950, Bayer spearheaded the establishment of the International Design Conference, which further linked high design and high mindedness in Aspen. The "Aspen I dea", combining mind, body, and soul, began to take shape. The skiers wanted their new ski resort in the Rocky Mountainsto attract as broad a clientele and accommodate as Page 25 of 48 many people as possible. On December 14, 1946, two lifts opened unofficially for business on Aspen Mountain, with No. 1 lift ending at the Sundeck, Aspen's first new building in years. In January 1947, the mountain opened officially. It was slow going, but by 1956, the stalwart Hotel Jerome was joined by new lodges, the Prospector, the Boomerang, and three or four other places, competing for the skiers' dollar. Still, according to Fritz Benedict, Aspen "was so dead and starting to be a resort so slowly that there wasn't much to do in way of design.... Everybody who lived here was just eking out a living." "They just loved the place and didn't want to leave. â€ž18 Bythe early 1950s, Aspen wasenteringthetourist business full-time, year-round, resulting in agrowingeconomy, new residents, and "a general feeling of optimism."19 From 1950 to 1960, Pitkin County increased its population by 44 percent. Bayer and Benedict had arrived in the mid-194Os; by 1955, Elli Brickham, Sam Caudill, and Rob Roy brought the number of architects in town to five; and by 1962, some ten architects and designers provided architectural services. In 1955, there were two contractors and two lumberyards; by 1957, a third contractor was listed. By 1960, 55 lodges and motels (2500 beds) had been erected, many with alpine motifs reflecting Aspen's emerging ski town identity-Swiss Alps being more identified with skiing than the Rocky Mountains-in a style that Elizabeth Paepcke, who preferred either the look of the Victorian mining era or Bauhaus modern, dismissively termed "bastard Tyrolean. "20 SKI INDUSTRY In December 1946, the Sundeck warming hut opened on Aspen Mountain. Designed by Bayer and Benedict, the wood and glass lunch restaurant was sited at 11,300 feet, a hundred yards from where the new lift ended. Combining Wrightian and Bauhaus innovation, the hut had 7"+ : 'SÂ·f ~-- .7 4"'1~ ' --1/F:* -- p an inverted roof that slanted toward the center so the central e, 6.. , 1 fireplace would melt the snow and the run-off drain to tanks ?r in the basement to provide water. Offering a 360-degree T panorama of the surrounding mountains, the octagonal .... . '/~'1'J....p~/~.7.t: irr~.~~.A- restaurant provided shelter and conviviality. It also signified * ./ 1.â€¢,41 4/gmil Aspen's challenge to Sun Valley's new Roundhouse facility- - 1 1 m Aspen would beaplayerinthegrowing Coloradoandnational ' . ,& h ~.1.-1 ,:4 . 4 '. '' '.2.2>..Â£~.1~1 ski industry! Lon.liÂ¢614.17 4.*-9 -' * < .11.. Some 10 years later, in 1958, two new ski areas, Aspen Figure 31: Sundeck atop Aspen Mountair< designed Highlandsand Buttermilk Mountain,opened nearAspen. Both by Bayer and Benedict. Courtesy AHS. featured spectacular modernist base lodges (demolished). A'Â· '~ . Â° , Â· /2 Friedl Pfeifer's Buttermilk Mountain, geared toward novice- 3' 7/6 I k '~- intermediate skiers, had a dramatic base lodge with a *.2 ,.. E...- i * ..' 0 .T. :... 00 '*' sweeping hyperbolic paraboloid roof cantilevered over a 1,~.- ~-pA "~b~27 '-/1.' -14,2~49 glazed base. As architect Jack Walls remembers, he placed a ~ 44-"1* -469. large glass square oriented to the mountain to spotlight the ./81/eme~*_W-/1- downhill skiers and spanned the entire interior space with ~ , -=1~@ltr//IT/'VTT C-14 two buttresses at the end points. Whipple Van Ness "Whip" -22 A.R.-Ill Jones's Aspen Highlands, offered a challenging mountain b similar to Aspen Mountain but with new terrain, ski school Figure 32: Buttermilk Base Lodge. Courtesy AHS. directors Stein Erickson and Fred Iselin, and lower rates. Benedict developed a theme of multiple and overlapping A-frame shapes for Aspen Highland's wood and glass base lodge and created a roofline that he compared to "an interpretation of an unusual nearby mountain called the Maroon Bells. //21 18 Adele Dusenbury, "When the Architect Arrived after the War," Aspen Times, July 31, 1975, 1-B. 19 Annie Gilbert, Re-creation through Recreation, Aspen Historical Society, 1995. 20 Elizabeth Paepcke quoted in Annie Gilbert Coleman, 5ki Style: Sport and Culture in the Rockies (Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 2004), 250, fn. 21. 21 Benedict quoted in Noel, Buildings Of Colorado, 487. Page 26 of 48 LODGING To provide lodging for ski-tourists, Aspen quickly erected a number of lodges-in alpine, pan-abode, rustic, 4- 41. ..si.. .4 V ,& A-:r h. /V ' Figure 33 : The Smuggler Lodge. Courtesy AHS. and make-do styles. The Boomerang Lodge (500 W Hopkins Avenue), which opened in 1956, was true Wright Modern. The Smuggler Lodge (c. 1960, demolished), a two-story, flat-roofed lodge with a continuous balcony cantilevered over the ground floor and dramatic diagonal details, was a project by developer Hans Kantrup that brought a "Googie", or playful, modernism to Aspen's mountain setting. COMMERCIAL As Aspen's economy began to revive in the late 1940s and 1950s, so did the need for financial institutions. Two modernist bank buildings appeared in the mid-1950s among the Victorian commercial structures that had defined Aspen's downtown. In 1954, Sam Caudill designed the First National Bank of Aspen on 420 E. Main Street, a striking modernist essay in brick with strong curved and rectilinear shapes, dramatic massing, and planar emphasis. Two years later, in 1956, Fritz Benedict designed the Bank of Aspen (119 S. Mill Street), an one-story, flat-roofed structure of salvaged brick that evokes Wright's influences in its rectilinear massing of the chimney, walls, and piers, horizontal emphasis, and the dramatic cantilevering of the roof over the porch. .:1 PUBLIC -- Aspen's economic revival alsoencompassed the construction of public '41 2, and private education institutions. In the 19405, a red brick school t. 1 building using brick salvaged from the Victorian-era Lincoln Street f "4 (where the Yellow Brick School nowstands) went up at 110 E. Hallam 4 f N 41 Street. Sam Caudill's wife Joy remembers that his first job in Aspen 3 7 M I. was designing an additional gymnasium and three classrooms for the J i school. Now reconfigured as the Red Brick Arts Center, it features the ~AN - ~~i~.I~~'.-~,1.L.' ~t-~pfi3:irE original steel easement windows and later additions at the east end. 444 4.,1,:." ..,*~2Â· 4.C 4... '-j j,i~,1 In 1951, Benedictadapted 1880s mining-era buildingson Castle Creek Road in Pitkin County to create the Aspen Music School. Besinger has - -1 -11 **3.1- 'f' 2:72>0 .... t..1.~~~:~ ~Â» . .'-0.1... .1.1~ been cited as a collaborator, though he was immersed in the Taliesin Figu22 34: Red Brick School. Courtesy AHS. Fellowship until 1956, when he did begin regular summer stints in Aspen. The simple frame and shake-shingled buildings got low-pitched roofs and balconies overlooking the creek to give the campus "a Japanese tranquility prized by both Bauhaus and Wrightian schools. "22 In 1960, the yellow brick school at 215 Garmisch Street was designed by the Denver firm of Wheeler & Lewis. A typical postwar school building-long, low, and horizontal, as in Miesian architecture-the classrooms have extensive bands of glazing and direct access to the outside. Caudill remodeled the structure in the mid-19605. 22 Noel, Buildings of Colorado, 498. Page 27 of 48 RESIDENTIAL Only a few modernist residences were built in Aspen between 1945 - and 1960. Paepcke encouraged his friends to purchase and restore old houses in the Victorian West End and led off with his restoration of Pioneer Park (1885), home of former mayor Henry Webber. Chicago architects Walter Frazier and Francis Stanton and their wives, Western f Afam#:Ark novelist Luke Short, and designer Herbert Bayer all moved into the .,2~ ~0,~-- ;#0~~' ' ~ existing West End cottages. 11 11, f 1 lilli 1 1 1 4.-- 111*Ww \ 1. "id J 0 4 WA"vq" By 1950, modernist residences, Wright- and Bauhaus-inspired, began $ 1 -- - 1 l 'It w . - .1 1 -liall toappearon Aspen's streetsand Red Mountain. Flat roofsand white 0 3~ -' 44,- ,1 4'~1 -12'L:*111. stucco walls signified the 1920s Bauhaus style and the 19305 and w.,0 1940s International Style. After 1950, the American adaptation of the Â·d~* "~ '~ .=.,+14 *tÂ¢~ International Style held to flat roofsand minimal decoration but usually j 1. , Figure 35: "Bonnet" house, designed by replaced the stark white stucco surfaces with various combinations of Stanton. Courtesy AHS. wood, stone, brick, or concrete block, the latter a favorite of Herbert Bayer. Attracting an artistic and literary clientele, many of these avant garde structures-such as Benedict's Hallam Lake residence for novelist John Marquand, and his "Waterfall" house for D. V. Edmundson on Castle Creek Road-have been demolished. In 1950, Bayer designed, with Benedict and architect Gordon Chadwick, his own Bauhaus-inspired studio of cinder block, wood, and glass on Red Mountain and, in 1959, a simple and economical two-bedroom pavilion nearby which he and his wife Joella decided to use as their permanent home (both demolished). Other Red Mountain modernist houses include Ellie Brickham's residence, its south and west prospects of glass (1955); and the house known locally as the "bonnet" house because of the parabolic shape of its roof, designed by Chicago architect and Aspen homeowner Francis Stanton in 1954 for his brother and sister-in-law, Edgar and Rose, two stalwart Aspen benefactors. Starting in the late 1950s, West End Bauhaus modernist houses appeared, their compact rectangular shapes in keeping with the scale of its modest Victorian cottages. In 1957, Bayer designed a sleek one-story, L-shaped, flat-roofed, cinder block (now stuccoed) residence at 240 Lake Avenue, overlooking Lake Hallam. Not far away, a modest board-and-batten vacation home with modernist features, such as a fiat shed roof, over-hanging eaves, and simple square windows, went up at 434 Pearl Court for a physicist affiliated with the nearby Aspen Center for Physics. At the base of Shadow Mountain, a Wrightian structure of warm wood siding, expansive prow-like roof, overhanging eaves, expanse of glass, and tiled fireplace was built on 322 W Hyman Avenue in 1953. The four-family abode, or quadraplex, signaled another audience for modern housing in Aspen-skiers. ASPEN INSTITUTE Spread acrossa meadow not far fromthe West End, nearthetrackwherelocal plutocrats racedtheirthoroughbreds in the town's heyday, is the distinctly modern campus of the AilS. Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies-German Bauhaus Alm.â€ž 1-Â·-,-rÂ· design transplanted to the Colorado Rockies. The institute I ~ ,"||'*.j|'|''~4 was an outgrowth of Walter Paepcke's Goethe Bicentennial; th:ZE- EA#~~1 11 1 f -,1 ~ celebratethe historic, deep, and abiding philosophicaltiesthat 41 ,#,~' 4 c ,â€ž, 04 1 intelligentsia and dlite traveled to Aspen in June 1949 to k'.', America and the rest of the world had with Germany, despite ~~:24 the aberration of Hitler and the Second World War, and to ,. ,,..;; .p.. hear concerts, lectures, and, best of all, Albert Schweitzer. Its 4,"1 'i ,% "''iâ€¢Â·'Â· architectural centerpiece was the Big Tent, designed by famed ./&69*6.Z- modernist Eero Saarinen, which epitomized the festive but Figure 36: Koch Seminar Building, designed by Bayer. City of Aspen files. modern nature of the august gathering. Page 28 of 48 Everyone agreed that Aspen's mountain setting had much to do with the festival's success. The following June, the Aspen Institute opened the first of its summer seminars, where - - businessmen and intellectuals gathered to listen to such thinkers and doers as Mortimer Adler and Adlai Stevenson .... - -4.. and to ponder universal ideas similar to those of Paepcke's i --Â· .- Lkwk: . 1. *' -Â· "Great Ideas" advertising campaign. lE 214 -=42**2++g*.4+ The Aspen Institute campus was designed without a master at-:-'m:.4 plan but loosely organized in three main areas-housing for 92;'*:-g- -1,% ,~<.-~51*6 4' #~ ir-9.' *~ :--~i guests. institute administration and activities, and affiliated institutes. The first permanent building was the 1953 Seminar Figure 37: Center for Physics, designed by Bayer, City Building, designed by Bayer with Benedict as the associate of Aspen files. architect, a pattern that held through the 1950s. Constructed 4 of steel frame and cinder blocks, it had a sgraffito mural on its ,.0 t.,41'.~~:'i?*.A h. iti~ ,.3~ exterior and two hexagon-shaped interior spaces designed to 14,4~ A. Â¥:Â£'L,U ' Â·2Â·;9"'Ip'.7 facilitate discussions around a central table, a large room with *iWIM-<-w f-"*'.MIbl-â€ž,~,,..~+.'.~~p~~4~, "star-like folded planes" on the ceiling and gray walls, and a --'*'-0,4-10' -0- smaller room with colorful walls. '- . ' In 1954, Bayer and Benedict designed two more institute buildings. The Aspen Meadows Guest Chalets, three flat- C -% r '~Â¥1 ' 6,- roofed, two-story buildings, each with colorful balcony â€¢ i â€¢ . - ../ dividers of blue, red, and yellow, respectively, were loosely grouped around a central building that housed a restaurant . ....,.441 (known as the Copper Kettle), lounges, and offices. The Central Figure 38: Anderson Park, designed by Bayer. Building-flat-roofed, two-story, clerestory-lit-combines Courtesy National Trust for Historic Places. cinder blocks and local moss stone, creating a distinctive structure at once Wright and Bauhaus. A year later, the pair's 1955 Health Center forthe Physical Therapy Program of the Aspen Institute, with the structural expertise of Otto Buehner, used pre-stressed and prefab concrete and open ends glazed for clerestory light. Sited at the junction of the Roaring Fork River and Castle Creek, the modern complex had a gymnasium; massage, sauna and steam rooms; a plunge pool; and library/sitting room. Bayer also created environmental sculptures, the 1954 Green Mound and 1955 Marble Garden, which predated the "earthwork" and environmental sculpture movement by at least ten years. In a sense, the rigorous Bauhaus modernist environment of the Aspen Institute mirrored the high-minded thinking within its boundaries as well as effectively separating it from Victorian mining-era Aspen, ski-town Alpine, rustic eclecticism, and organic Wrightian modernism. 1960-1975 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT Aspen's growth and development as tourist town, ski resort, and cultural center accelerated in the 1960s and 1970s. After 1958, visitors could ski on three mountains. Skier visits at Aspen Mountain rose from 93,000 in 1958-1959, to 174,000 in 1964-1965, and Buttermilk and Aspen Highlands saw similar growth. In 1967, nearby Snowmass-at Aspen opened, a huge year-round destination resort, in development since 1961, the creation of California land and real estate developer William Janss. In its first year, it attracted twice as many visitors as planned and more than Aspen Mountain itself. It also sparked the disdain of a local writer who felt that it "exemplified qualities that Aspen itself eschewed-large-scale, efficiency, group think, and a no-nonsense Page 29 of 48 cost-profit ratio. â€ž23 Yet as Annie Gilbert writes in her 4, history of Aspen, "Promoters of Colorado's economy i 41 1 0.- saw ski industry growth as only positive: investments r.. , L and expansions by the ski industry led to more investments by skiers as they came to the state for â€ž24 ,Ageet=31*i IN. What this meant for the community of Aspen was 4 .1*24-"1161' a ..,. Tyâ€¢. 1 more visitors, more residents, and more architects i.%,~ '1 and builders to respond to the demand for lodges, â€ž restaurants, bars, shops, housing, and the everyday 4'. goods and services expected of civic and commercial Figure 39: Base lodge at Buttermilk Mountain. Courtesy centers. Architect Bob Sterling remembers attending AHS. the FIS races in February 1950, which "sealed the deal" for him-he wanted to live in Aspen. "At that time Aspen was just awakening from post-war blues and an exciting variety of US and foreign types were moving to town."25 Sterling quit college and "went to Aspen to ski bum for a while." From 1956-1960 he worked asa lodge caretaker, waiter, and drafter for Rob Royandthen Jack Walls. After going back to school and getting his architecture degree in 1963, he returned to Aspen and worked in Benedict's office for three years. In the five years between 1960 to 1965, Aspen's population increased 40 percent, with ski bums and movie stars, political *lite and counter-culture gurus, and increasingly affluent, ordinary people adding to the mix of old-timers (some of whom found themselves priced out of their hometown and moved down valley), 10th Mountain Division veterans, ski enthusiasts, and cultural mavens. In 1964, the building boom reached $3 million. Vic Goodhard, the owner of a local garbage company, recalled that "the changing of Aspen was kind of gradual until the 1960s, and then it really started popping." Serving both Aspen and Snowmass, Goodhard constantly had to buy new garbage trucks: "All of a sudden there were new places, bigger places that demanded more service, more people..16 By 1965, Benedict and others-including Ted Mularz, who chaired the Aspen Historical Society's Historic Buildings Committee, and Richard Lai, who chaired the Committee for Experimental Pedestrian Mall and served on Aspen's City Planning and Zoning Commission from 1963-1965--grew concerned about unchecked growth and destruction of the natural landscape and historic resources, and urged the city to adopt an Aspen Master Plan (1966). City leaders recognized that the need to provide not only a "growth" plan but affordable housing for the teachers, policeman, and others who provided essential services for what had become a resort town with very high property values geared toward the affluent visitor. In the autumn of 1962, Der Berghof, a new kind of tourist accommodation appeared at 100 E. Cooper Avenue- Aspen's first condominium. That year, Colorado passed a law permitting condominiums, which would have a profound effect on Aspen's civic character and economic base. Condominiums, in which each townhouse or apartment in a multiple-unit building is owned by an individual, was a new concept in America. Touted as an economical alternative to buying a single family vacation home, condo development soon became a hallmark of resort communities everywhere. Jumpstarted by California real estate magnate William Janss, who developed Sun Valley and Snowmass, ski condominiums became as indispensable to new ski area growth in the West as lofty mountains, powder snow, and airplane packages. Along with other established ski towns, Aspen embraced condominiums. They transformed local real estate marketsandtownscapes byconcentrating large numbers of people in smallerspaces but larger-scaled structures. After-Der-Ber@hof, other condo apartments quickly appeared, including the Aspen Alps, Mittendorf, Alpenblick, 23 Peggy Clifford and John M. Smith, Aspen Dreams and Dilemmas: Love Letters to a Small Town (Chicago: Swallow Press, 1970), 97. 24 Gilbert, Re-creation through Recreation. 25 Bob Sterling, email to the author, 4 June 2010. 26 Gilbert, Re-creation through Recreation. Page 30 of 48 Fifth Avenue, Little Nell, and Aspen Square. Condos provided a far higher return on land than individual houses or dormitories, leaving the young "ski bums" who worked at menial jobs for the opportunity to ski scrambling for places to live. Architect ~~,r. .*-*r.*1-T 2- - . Ellen Harland sees the condo boom as largely responsible for ..,- - A"P;' a change in Aspen's civic character; it allowed developers to Â· c finance a project through pre-selling, accelerating the pace of .*49@fli:ZI~t .4 3//4.- & :44 change and exacerbating the shift to newcomers who could ,~40 4 more easily get into the real estate market.27 By 1972, Aspen Ft...il ./ had more than 2000 condo units. As the Fifth Avenue condo ~ . condominium was something you shook on your steak. Now ~ Â· 1~ that's all over. The sort of Ed's Beds days are gone. ,/28 -,~. 9 .,. ,. . , - , I --Al fr.3 ..2&/0< Concurrent with 1960s growth and development, the ~ A architecture and building community expanded. The number Figure 40: Aspen Square, designed by Benedict. of local builders and contractors grew to twenty in 1968, with Courtesy AHS. down valley builders increasing as well. Pioneer architects were joined by others, many of whom got their start in the Benedict office, such as Art Yuenger, Ted Mularz, Bob Sterling, George Henegahn, and Dan Gale. Recent Princeton graduate Richard Lai joined Caudill's firm in 1960. Snowmass was a boon: Benedict designed the master plan, and he, Caudill, and others designed all types of buildings for the new resort complex as well as for Aspen's commercial, residential, and tourist needs. Tom Benton, perhaps a harbinger of Aspen's shift toward anti-establishment counter-culture, arrived from southern California in 1963, his tactile wood buildings in sync with Aspen's Wrightian esthetic. In the early 1970s, two renowned modernists, Henry Weese and Victor Lundy, each designed a distinctive buildingthat continued Aspen's Bauhaus modern traditions. By the 1970s, Aspen's success threatened to diminish the quality of life that drew people. The town tried to accommodate tourists and townspeople, workers and visitors, traffic and parking, shopping and entertainment by transforming Cooper and Hyman into a pedestrian mall and creating Rubey Park to facilitate public transportation. LODGING Just prior to the condominium explosion, two lodges went up in downtown Aspen to provide short-term accommodations for skiers. Robin Molny designed Aspen's second Wrightian lodge, the Hearthstone. Built in 1961 and enlarged in 1963, the handsome wood structure is set deep into its site on the corner of Hyman and Aspen and has two angled wings and a sheltering shingled roof. In 1963, Caudill designed a chalet-style building, originally called the Viking Lodge, at 832 E. Cooper Avenue. The two-story, gable-roofed building has a simple L-shaped layout, with wood and stucco exterior and a balcony defining the front facades. More typically a modernist, Caudill created this ski lodge in a picturesque alpine style that was important to Aspen's ski-town imagery at the time. COMMERCIAL Between 1960 and 1975, Aspen's downtown commercial core reflected the economic boom, with new office, retail, recreational, and service buildings inserting new functions and a modernist presence among the extant Victorians. Two striking brick structures, dated 1960 and 1970, feature oversized entrance arches that recall the urbane commercial architecture of Louis Sullivan and Frank Lloyd Wright. At 307 S. Mill Street, the red brick building has a large arched entrance with five receding brick moldings and an off-center low parapet and pier 27 Ellen Harland, telephone interview with the author, 26 May 2010. 28 Burton Hersh, "Economy is a Luxury Condominium," Ski 37 (August 1972):68-70; Burton Kaplan, "Condominiums-To Buy or Not to Buy," 5kiing 25 (November 1972):110-13, 161-63. Page 31 of 48 w.rÂ· (1960). Though the architect is unknown, the Mill Street 'â€¢-E-14 â€¢6 Â· 4 6 ...,zage ,-8%*51~ building anticipates Caudill's 1970 impeccable yellow brick I11'47.7%,kr-3-1--LAil/b-~41 Aspen Sports on 408 East Cooper, a cube with a dramatic 0,â€¢ *0,*e' -E'-t. central arch, low parapets flanking the central entrance, *ANI , '.' ~ anda large horizontal window set into the second-fioor ~41.- 1 - a . .!P . .- Â£ - - I -I. r, 4 .. * 9~ The E. Hyman Street area attracted several new 4 -10 commercial buildings in the 1960s, two of them by r . ..... 1 ------ 1 -AD~"1.2.9 527-% ~4-- Aspen's first female architect, Ellie Brickham. Her two- story, flat-roofed, concrete block structure at the corner . of Hunter and Hyman (606 E. Hyman Avenue, 1960) has the simple geometry, minimal decoration, ribbon Figure 41: Aspen Sports, designed by Caudill. City of windows, and cantilevered second floor associated with Aspen files. Bauhaus design, reminiscent of her work at the Aspen Institute with Bayer and Benedict. Next door, 610 E. Hyman Avenue (1963), described as "a most unusual shop" for client Patricia Moore had shops and offices on the ground floor and the owner's apartment on the second floor.29 Oriented to the street, the fa,ade has six attenuated brick piers that extend from the base to the eaves and stucco arched spandrels fora more "decorated" lookthat reflected the 1960s evolution of modernist design, as in Phillip Johnson's Lincoln Center in New York. In the same block is the Patio Building (630 E. Hyman Avenue), designed in 1969 by Tom Benton, a local icon known for his printmaking flair and personality. This flat-roofed building feels both Wrightian and Californian in its exploration of, and delight in, the nature of the materials-wood, concrete blocks and glass; use of geometric forms, such as the large-scale horizontal second story cantilevered over the open first floor and the prominent round central window on the Hyman Avenue fagade; and its attention to its corner location, with the Spring Street fagade reiterating themes and materials of the Hyman Street front. In the next block, at 720 E. Hyman Avenue, is Robin Molny's Aspen Athletic Club of 1976, his only unaltered commercialbuilding. Amassivecubewiththreestoriesofofficesabovegradeandanathleticclubinthebasement, it shares with Benton's Patio Building a Wrightian sense of materials, prominent flat roof, and massive capstone floor cantilevered over a glazed lower floor. The heavy timber construction with glue-laminated wood beams and columns contrasts with the glass atrium in the lobby, the open floor plan, and interior/exterior courtyard. Cattycorner from Benton's building, on 300 S. Spring #1 -Sh / ,>y:- 1 Street, is the Hannah-Dustin Building, designed in 1969 by George Heneghan and Dan Gale, both of whom 302-3- s , 42: ,3.1 -' &63-: 1 101~ Â£7?4 11,/~ ?. ,-t had worked for Benedict. The flat-roofed, multistory -Â·16di,67.. --1., %il it,~11':T~Â· :;,F*,4. .:-1~ 'll~ building minimizes its scale by the artful use of planar + Lij brick panels extending above the eaves, set-back .1-*4*5*i /'11'lli- ~'Imsl stuccospandrels, cantilevered roof and balconies, and Â¢ 4 tk. ' 4 ~|l use of natural materials such as brick, wood, and tile. .4.-*. r ....... 9 09- 1- . Â·~:I /990. On the corner of Galena and Main Street is Aspen's ~ first modernist gas station (435 E. Main Street), built Â§:....._ in 1970, across the street from Caudill's pristine 1954 Figure 42: 300 South Spring Street, designed by Heneghan National Bank of Aspen. Designed by Jack Walls and and Gale. City of Aspen files. Bob Sterling, who had both worked in Benedict's office, the award-winning gas station was commissioned by the president of Conoco Oil, who wanted a signature station in Aspen-as Walls remembers, it was just about the 19 Lane, "Aspen's Women Architects Aid Building Boom in Town." Page 32 of 48 first filling station in town. The elegant rectilinear brick station is divided into two parts, a higher office/service bay/car wash and the lower gas pump area, both topped by cantilevered flat roofs. The smooth brick surfaces and rounded corners created a modern structure set back from the street with a flow around the building and unobstructed views of the station's pumps and service bays. In the 1970s, when pedestrian mails became a popular urban concept, and Colorado laws were enacted that facilitated their construction, Aspen attempted to , r. resolve some of its traffic and parking problems by ~~~~â€¢;~,~* 5 ~~S~.i 5. transforming five blocks of two major commercial . + .*1/2-E 1'10;,2 -*f 1 avenues, Cooper and Hyman. The concept of a 1-1.19 pedestrian mall for Aspen dated back to the 1960s, â‚¬ with architects, such as Ellie Brickham and Richard Lai, participating on citizen committees wrestling with the issue. In 1976, Molny collaborated with Besinger, who later consulted for Boulder, Colorado, to create Aspen's automobile-free commercialspace. The Cooper-Hyman pedestrian mall maintains the town's traditional urban Figure 43: Hyrnan Avenue IVIall, designed by IVIolny Courtesy grid but eliminates automobile traffic so pedestrians AHS. can shop and socialize in an updated tourist-friendly environment "enlivened by native trees, sculpture, grass-water-courses, and playground. " 30 The newerbuildingsemulate, inscaleand material,theolderones, some of which are Aspen's most significant, such as the Cowenhoven Block (1890) and the Red Onion, formerly the Brick Saloon (1892). The mall's proximity to Rubey Park and the newly constructed bus station facilitated public access to downtown for both tourists at Snowmass and other places and workers, who lived down valley. Along with his Bidwell Building at 434 E. Cooper Avenue in 1965, Benedict designed other commercial projects. In 1976, he moved his architectural office from the downtown Victorian-era Bowman Building to his newly designed Benedict Building on 1280 Ute Avenue, east of Aspen's commercial core. According to the Society of Architectural Historian Guide to Colorado Architecture, it conforms to the "'Aspen style,' exemplified by well- sited, low-slung Modernist structures of indigenous materials, notably wooden beams that often seem to fade into the aspen grove. /~31 In 1978, Benedict designed the Pitkin County Bank at 534 E. Hyman. PUBLIC While accommodating tourist and commercial demands, ~ Aspen modern architecture also served community needs. *'tZÂ¢ Accordingtoa 1961 Aspen Timesarticle, Benedictand Bayer 5 - were selected to design a new Pitkin County Library, and , 444# - :,1*.Â·2~1 2--SLV//J~.4 . , . . 4?]9. 19194(14 , "b2/de Benedict drafter Ellen Harland remembers working on the 6~~.* Â·Â·4~~ ~~~~~~ - - design. In 1966, the library at 120 E. Main Street opened, .....Biu,WI,8/: -~,2.:~.2 + an auspicious occasion, with CBS news anchormanWalter Illillilibr~lritillillililli:. ...=-- I - cmrzL~~Ti~~1~; J[~~igt~lic~~ti~1 ~~~al~~~~~~~:~: ~:.7 . ef .23:. , 1966 red brick Wrightian library had a low-pitched hip roof, ., .Â· 7 ; .1 ..,-:'. . 44,94''ht, t'.1. 4 : 6.1 overhanging eaves, horizontal emphasis, and a clerestorY Figure 44: 120 East Main Street, originally the Pitkin band of windows. County Library, designed by Bayer and Benedict. City of Aspen files. 30 Noel, Buildings of Colorado, 495. 31 Ibid., 498. Page 33 of 48 Two very different churches contribute to Aspen's modernist legacy. Christ Episcopal Church at 536 W North Street in the West End was designed by Francis Stanton of the Chicago firm Stanton & Rockwell. Built in 1963, it has a parabolic arched roof that reflects the modern design technology of World War 11-era Quonset huts and Eero Saarinen's St. Louis Gateway Arch as well as the esthetic of the Red Mountain "bonnet" house Stanton designed in 1954 for his brother. Still visible in a recent renovation, the arched roof is a distinctive feature of the church. In 1969, George Heneghan and Dan Gale designed the Aspen Interfaith Chapel of the Prince of Peace, 70 Meadowood Drive, on the road that enters Aspen. Said to be inspired by "wayfa rer's chapels in the Alps," it is a "happy wedding '132 of wood, stained glass, and local "moss stone," a distinctive feature of many of Aspen's Wrightian buildings. (Evidently builders gathered moss rock for free on Independence Pass, which may explain its frequent appearance in 1960s Aspen structures.33) ASPEN INSTITUTE & GIVEN INSTITUTE , Walter Paepcke died in 1960, and one of the ambitious plans that 6%.: died with him was his 1950s scheme to build an architectural village IL- on the outskirts of the Aspen Institute, featuring seventeen of the ,/1-18*min"-natil-rl~ world most notable architects. Walter Gropius, Marcel Breuer, 1. 6;- ., .90*Well./............ were among those who accepted his offerto design and build houses. ~~ Eventually Henry Luce and Time magazine agreed to put up a million ~ dollars for the "living architectural museum." Groundbreaking was Figure 45: Paepcke Auditorium, designed set for April 1960, but Paepcke died on April 13, and plans for the by Bayer. Courtesy Farewell, Mills, Gatsch Architects, Inc. village were never realized.34 mty*- Yet the Aspen Institute continued to play a vital role in Aspen's 4 cultural and intellectual life and to carry on the International Style ...t re. =-'II~I- of modern architecture. In 1962, Bayer, with H. Ellenzweig as - *4â€¢tÂ·*.rt@ assistant architect, designed the Aspen Institute for Theoretical Fi....t.--- _--.-....,-- 1' *'0~ Physics (700 W Gillespie Street, demolished), a one-story, terne- ~'~;~T 1 7'4~~~ =~=~=~: roofed structure ofcinderblockandredwood, with offices for the ~ *â€¢2 1 theoretical physicists and a walled patio for social gatherings. An Il.h..=..., ... :.:,re.Â·Â· .4...., â€ž- *9~ even more elaborate multi-functional structure of concrete and .,4 , .~i ... ,Â·~.Â·.C-y ....Â·.: Â·tiÂ·6: Â·. ' -Â·Â¢Â· *~" ,~Â·* Â· 0 1 2..: Â· cinder blocks with a neoprene roof, the Walter Paepcke Memorial ..i. 4 .â€¢ - - Building also went up in 1962, Bayer was the head architect, with Figure 46: Given Institute, designed by Weese. assistance from F. Bates and Ellenzweig, and structural engineering City of Aspen files. by Bierbach and Horton. In 1964, Bayer designed the Concert Tent, which was demolished in 2000 and replaced by Harry Teague's design. Some ten years later, Elizabeth Paepcke commissioned "one of Aspen's finest modernist works, "35 the Given Institute of Pathobiology at 100 E. Francis Street, that was dedicated in August 1972. Designed by famed Chicago modernist Harry Weese, the concrete block building on a its compact site is a simple but striking example of "High Modern" design. RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY MODERNISM Between 1960 and 1975, International Style single-family houses with flat roofs, planar walls, rectilinear shapes, and glass walls continued to be built in various neighborhoods scattered throughout Aspen. Such modernist houses can be found in the urban neighborhoods of the West End as well as on spectacular sites along the 32 Ibid., 497. 33 Local contractor. 34 Aspen Institute website. 35 Noel, Buildings Of Colorado, 493. Page 34 of 48 Roaring Fork River as it meanders east-to-west through Aspen. Occupying a small footprint compared with today's houses, these classic modernist homes are scarce. fy 1 2: i i Bayerdesigned three residences still standing, at 311 North '/ '-> Â¥ ,:-4 Street (1963), 240 Lake Avenue (1957), and 850 Roaring :.,4.,*'21* 40.~90 - Fork Road (1965), which may be a remodeling rather than &24~~81 -:' g , . - an original Bayer design. Next door to the North Street #f'i'- - residence is the truly elegant vacation home (301 Lake Avenue) designed in 1972 by Texas modernist Victor Lundy . V for himself and his artist wife Anstis. A studio as well as a m,114 vacation home, the roof is cantilevered to extend over the fir Â· 11 - 114, floor-to-ceiling wall of windows that frames the 20'-high 111-1 1,1 11 1.1 1 great room. The proximity of Bayer's and Lundy's modernist . 1 1 14 111 41 111 ..1 11 1,1 111 1 1 1 . " A.4.7.14 1111"PAIL .11 1 ... 1 1 masterpieces makes the West End corner of Lake and North . ....411 104 1 4", 3 ' i...6, 4 4 i ' i ' .*%1.75: 41.11.11,1 1, 1. 1.1 111 1 1 1,1 1,1...1 '11 an important convergence of early and late Bauhaus design. Figure 47: 311 West North Street, designed by Bayer. CityofAspenfiles. Three classic modernist houses are bytwo of Aspen's pioneer women architects. In 1971, Ellie Brickham designed a straightforward modernist house at 592 McSkimming Road. Closed to the road, but open to the views below, the house sits dramatically halfway up the hillside. Another Brickham design, 433 West Bleeker Street (1973) in the West End (demolished) was a simple brick cube. Ellen Harland designed a sleek, one-story, flat-roofed residence for Benedict controller Pat Maddalone (1411 Crystal Lake Road in Aspen Club) in 1976. Its rectilinear form and copious use of glazing make the most of its site along the Roaring Fork River. At the base of Red Mountain on a spectacular site overlooking Hunter Creek, Art Yuenger designed a striking concrete block house-both muscular and elegant-in 1971. Located at 54 Shady Lane, the flat-roofed house, with blue trim and unusual clerestory windows, consists of three distinct cubes, sensitively integrated into the forested landscape. Further east but also oriented to the river is 258 Roaring Fork Drive. Although the architect is unknown, the 1974 residence has normative modernist features such as overall rectilinear massing of the L- shaped plan, flat roof, and sheer treatment of the concrete block walls. MODERN CHALE-r A distinctive postwar housingtype in Aspen is locallytermed a modern chalet. With its moderately pitched gable roof oriented to the front, it recalls traditional chalets associated with ski country, but in its expansive glass and minimal decoration, it also seems classically modernist, as if the architect and client liked the chalet idea for Aspen's emerging ski identity, but updated it and made it modern to fit the community's avant-garde tastes. Characteristically, modern chalets have low-to-moderately pitched roofs based on a 3:12 ratio; broad fagades organized in rectilinear solid or glass panels; overhanging eaves, frequently with exposed roof beams; glass often extending to the eaves; minimal decoration; and sometimes stone or brick piers. The symmetrical modern chalets generally have a tripartite organization: a large central glazed area flanked by wood or masonry piers. Predominantly built between the late 1950s and late 1960s, these compact buildings were custom-designed for clients as well as erected by speculative builders. They have a rectangular footprint and fit well on the gridded streets of the older West End and Shadow Mountain neighborhoods. For the most part, their sizable window walls are oriented to Aspen Mountain. Although some modernchalets, suchas 500 E. Durant Street, served commercial purposes, most extantexamples are residential. They encompass a range of options, from single family to duplexes and even quadriplexes. While evoking such contemporaneous hybrid modernist homes as Eichler in California, Honn in Oklahoma, Keck in Chicago, and Koch (Tech Built) in the East, when compared side-by-side, the Aspen modern chalets not only look different, but arise out of different circumstances. Eichler and the others were meeting the postwar demand for suburban homes that fit the American Dream of home ownership, up-to-date while still affordable. The Aspen Page 35 of 48 real estate market was geared toward affluent vacation home owners who might be attracted to Aspen for a variety of reasons-the culture of the Aspen Institute, the skiing of Aspen Mountain, the charm of an authentic western town, or the cachet of owning property in such a desirable place. Many of Aspen's modern chalets were built in the West End, close to the Aspen Institute and its intellectual and cultural offerings. Urban lots in this established neighborhood fitted the compact modern chalets well, yet they still offered mountain views. The modern chalets added to the West End's rich building mix, including Victorian cottages and Second Empire and Queen Anne mansions as well as postwar traditional gabled chalets and classic flat-roofed modernist houses. Often two- and multiple-family structures, they also represent a shift in Aspen's evolution as a vacation destination serving both winter and summer tourists. ai $1, f=*'~1~~~ t.1 .14'9 In 1957, Benedict designed two free-standing early .e~~_ 7 - modern chalets side-by-side on separate lots, at 625 & ~"SAj'lle.Â«4, r<3.~////~A~/~~~~/ 615 Gillespie Avenue (demolished). Identical, the one- story structures had a horizontal base of board-and- . I . battensiding punctuated bytwo vertical windowsdefining . 1,Â¢' the ground floor and glazing in the upper gabled section E' Â· below the low-pitched roof. Simple and straightforward, 1 4 they were topped by overhanging eaves and an extensive 11Â» , . . ...:.1. & roof that encompassed a car port.36 Â· c. r f#% -, Figure 48: 625 Gillespie Avenue, designed by Benedict. City of Aspen files. Five other West End modern chalets date from 1962 to 1965 and show the range of variations within this simple vacation house. Many modern chalets have glass to the eaves and flanking brick piers. Projecting balconies cantilevered across the front, injecting a three-dimensional rectilinear base that hover just above the ground are also common characteristics. Not far from the Aspen Institute campus is 621 W Francis (1965) a two-story chalet with a steeper pitched roof-not as steep as an A-frame, but not as broad as the typical Â· modern chalet. The balconies on all three Francis r#.- Street houses, in their overall horizontality and .. use of simple balusters, maintain the rectilinearity associated with modern design. In 1965, two identical two-story multi-family modern chalets tl;T. 6=?A~-difluli-.1-i:I -imp., were built at 114 and 118 East Bleeker Street, also je. I-i.. -- 344:=4,r-s.~391...T t~ inthe West End, butone blockoff Main Street. The I. ---14- --~.=7Â·~i:~---3-i,-'- truly dramatic overhang of the low gable roof, the 4 - ~.wletÂ« tin-rÂ·r 1....0.3-'I~~~= - exposed rafters, pilotis, usable deep balconies, and .f ~~>- ~-Â»26Â£:=*-~1.-LL.,11Â£1 ~2~i!,L central expanse ofglass reflecta hybrid modernism r - â€ž.2---- similar to that of tract homes, but the decorative i .4 -*4* - ..,4 4-0- -c - motifs on the balconies emphasize the continuing Figure 49: 114 East Bleeker Street. Courtesy AHS. appeal of chalet imagery in ski-town Aspen, while the massive chimneys and piers flanking the ground floor (on 114) use a favorite Aspen building material-moss stone. Two other West End modern chalets deserve mention. A dramatic one-story duplex at 500 W. Smuggler went up in 1970, four blocks from 949 W Smuggler, Aspen's first postwar chalet, built in 1946. With two massive chimneys of moss rock projecting from the glazed fagade and punctuating the roof, the later vacation home is 36 Cliff May's design of the Eichler Ranch House in Potrola Valley, California, 1958, is a similar board- and-batten, low-gable-roofed modern house. Paul Adamson and Marty Arbunich, Eichler/Modernism Rebuilds the American Dream. (Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith Publisher, 2002), 28. Page 36 of 48 an intriguing modern contrast to its traditional neighbo. On 407 N. Third Street, the Coors family of Golden built a single-family modern chalet of wood and stone, now hidden from view by vegetation. Designed by Brown Brokaw Bowen Architects of Boulder, this residence suggests that a vacation home of this scale and style suited alite Colorado patrons in the mid-1960s. ..'.531.7 .3 0 7 ) t '* r * &. f., 4 . , Â·. v ,.. .. ,Â· A striking 1965 modern chalet sits near the base of Shadow ': 'Â· I.i:~,-11~41;4i;#'Al.,Ed.*.4,4 'k'r. Mountain and original ski lift No. 1 at 219 S. Third Street. The Â¢:.1 Â·,. I â€¢ P I large duplex was designed as a second home for a Wisconsin *1Â£4':z"-- L..1~11:,Se family by a "hometown"architect Eric Fri is (b. 1916, Copenhagen, Denmark; practiced in Eagle River, Wisconsin). It has a low- ~ pitched, gabled roof that sweeps down to encompass flanking liall)ililillillililliqisii.LA.mill'lill'll'HF..r:./.:.24 car ports, a fagade of rectilinear glass panels and board-and- *r.:-- . batten, and a deck oriented to the mountain. Fl,all< 6- 1, - 4.- On Aspen's east side, in the neighborhood near Glory Hole Figure 50: 219 South Third Street, designed by Friis. City of Aspen files. park, 1005 Waters Avenue is a modern chalet designed in 1959 (later enlarged in 1964) by Ellen Harland. The M.I.T.-trained architect planned it for herself and her husband, vt local builder Irwin Harland, when they married. Close to the Â·Â·1 ./- 2 ground, with a low-pitched roof, it had a glazed fagade (now Â£34*4345*.- ,-*full/6,L . 1%,3':15 altered) that extended up to the eaves. Harland remembers 1*1&4***f Â£ ,,. Â·36~ designing such structures in Benedict's office-always "a ratio ~ ~ of 3 to 12"-for a "seamless" roof of tar and gravel that also 4 shed snow.37 On the same street (1102 Waters Avenue) is the vacation home built for the Geary Family of Denver following Benedict's specifications for an "affordable" ski home based on Frank Lloyd Wright principles that was featured in Ski magazine 4 t... (Spring, 1967). 3, Figure 51: 1102 Waters Avenue, designed by AtBenedict. City of Aspen files. the bottom of McSkimming Road, which was developed by Fabi and Fritz Benedict, and zigzags up the mountain off Highway 82, is No. 24, built in 1960. Although the architect is unknown, the residence is similar to the West End modern chalets in its low roof, minimal decoration, and windows on the upper floor that carry through the gable end. A variation of a modern chalet is No. 232, designed by pioneer architect Rob Roy for the Danieli family in 1962. Located further up the mountain, it has typical features, but the roof projects like a ship's prow and the balcony extends outward to enclose the carport in a dynamic thrust. t . .. . 9 MODERN CHALET MULTIPLIED-MULTIFAMILY As Aspen accommodated ever more tourists in the 19604 110,1. architects created multi-family versions of the modern : L 10 r . ... 1 I ..4 chalet. In 1962, Rob Roy designed the Madsen Chalets on -gic ...,-- Â· 608 W Hopkins Street. The handsome wooden complex "124.kilÂ·:4 Ute,~ t,: is characterized by a low-pitched roof, deep overhangs, .*t â€¢rn-, u balconies, simple rectangular forms of glass and wood, with Ie< 3., glazing in the gables, and oriented toward the mountain. In MÂ®Mi . .1 1 11'.-...... 11 11.11,1 1 /11,4.11- , 1965, at 1001 E. Cooper, Benedict-employees Bob Sterling and ~ Bob Dagg designed and developed the two-story, multi-family Villager Townhouses. Inspired by Swiss chalets and their Figure 52: 608 West Hopkins Street, designed by modernist training, they set two chalets side-by-side to create Roy. City of Aspen files. 37 Ellen Harland, telephone interview with the author, 26 May 2010. Page 37 of 48 an extended horizontal, reinforced by the second-floor balcony that extends the entire width of the building. The project had two other partners, Gordon Forbes and Bill Dashner, and each of the four partners bought a unit when they were finished and later sold them. CONDOMINIUMS Undoubtedly the major influence on Aspen's economy, built environment, and quality of life between 1960 and 1975, condominiums changed the scale of its townscape, attracted outside money and developers, and allowed even more people to own propertyand settle. The footprints of those built within the downtown proper adhered to Aspen's urban grid, and city zoning restricted the height to three stories. Condos frequently were "mixed use" properties, with retail and restaurants on the ground floor and apartments above. This concept was later used by "total" resorts like Snowmass, Vail, Beaver Creek, and Whistler Blackcomb, which lacked Aspen's intrinsic street life and tried to inject it a resort environment. Aspen's condo-mania started in the western neighborhood of Lift No. 1, with Der Berghof, which had twelve units and appeared on 100 E. Cooper Avenue in the fall of 1962. The two-story, concrete block, rectilinear building evokes both the Bauhaus-inspired Aspen Meadows Guest Chalets (1954) of the Aspen Institute and a more vernacular "motel modern" represented by the Holiday Inns of the era. Rather quickly, rustic- and alpine- themed Mittendorf, Alpenblick, Fasching House, Fifth Avenue, and Little Nell condos followed. Benedict contributed to the transformation by designing condominiums in the 1960s and 1970s, for which he was both praised and criticized. He designed four of Aspen's largest condo projects and spearheaded the residential shift ever more eastward. In 1964, he designed what are usually touted as Aspen's first luxury condominiums, the Aspen Alps, on 700 Ute Avenue. Now consisting of eight Wrightian buildings (not all by Benedict) that flank the east side of Aspen Mountain, the complex demonstrates Benedict's skill in integrating L., 41, 11â‚¬1 7%' * -k his building harmoniously into the landscape-what he ;9,ii *.*4'~ ~~ 't tÂ·"~42Â¥Â·t-â€¢441'~ffiE;t~&~ had done earlier with single family dwellings, he now did 1,,~1~~4.,t?, ~>i't~'i~3:Â·. - - ~ -vio.. 0 tA: -1,>4;2 with the multi-family structures. The three-story wood .g.. structures havemoderatelypitched roofs, with local stone ~'(:5~'~ ~~.: ~4* ~/.~tr,4.~ 16-1,I.A..3, '~w used toemphasizechimneys, corners, and, inmanycases, 4'31'' 1~T~*,~19'i ?; ,< ; 44444 D--1/â€¢ the sides, in a way somewhat similar to the encasing of '. ./ , .-7.il- .- local rock in concrete at Taliesin West. The large Aspen Square condominium of 1967 (617 E. Cooper) occupies 3,3- '-0'.i:'~i,i,f: 3-2? ~:;2'~ the entire block defined by Durant, Hunter, Cooper and AR 0 Spring, with an interior landscaped courtyard. Benedict =.- dit-~ t.Â·39*'0'fed'll'll-I-';-- skillfully accommodated the urban setting by breaking ..Cl-*L ,Â·, 7-Â·-- --4 n.-c. . , ... I m . ' .. " 3/./.-..,..., :My .... up the Durant Street fagade into five segments of two Figure 53: Aspen Alps in the background, designed by units each, using alternating setbacks to mininlize the Benedict. Courtesy AHS, building's impact. The Hunter, Cooper and Spring Street fa,ades have commercial activity on the ground floor. Typical Wrightian devices include its overall rectilinearity, flat roofs, emphatic brick corners and piers, overhanging eaves, cantilevered balconies, and consummate use of materials. Even so, one ski writer compared Aspen Square to "a big city apartment house, "38 and it was strongly criticized because its scale seemed out of place in Aspen. In 1972, Benedict continued his eastward movement, with The Gant, Aspen's largest condominium, at 610 West End Avenue. Its multilevel areas, staggered buildings, and use of wood break up its scale so that the complex fits naturally into its setting. Even further east, Benedict's design for 1411 Crystal Lake Condos at the Aspen Club in 1976 also incorporated site planning. With the use of stucco, broken-up wall surfaces, and numerous cantilevered balconies, these condos suggest Benedict's design work in the late-1960s on the Snowmass condos, 38 M. L. (Morten Lund), "When Biggest is Best," Ski 36 (August 1971): 64-66,68. Page 38 of 48 mall, and town center. A reiteration of Aspen Square can be seen catty-corner across Durant Street in the 1968 North of Nell (555 E. Durant). Occupying a prime location at the base of Aspen Mountain and adjacent to the ticketing and lift facilities, the large modernist condo complex has shops and eateries on the ground level and lodging above. Designed by award-winning architects Erickson and Stevens of Des Plaines, Illinois-both Taliesin fellows in the 1950s-the multi-gabled roofline extends the length of its Durant Street VV*V V. 4 -tti . l;;fÂ·'~~ IK>tu#' fagade and echoes its mountain location. A 1965 project that also respondsto its setting is Shadow Mountain Condominiums, - located at the top of Aspen Street (809 S. Aspen) near Lift No. 4. -6 - 1, the original skiers' portal to Aspen Mountain. Designed by 5 'ar- - - -, Fort Worth, Texas, consulting engineer Donald W Kirk for a . IÂ¢ 1, Fort Worth client, Charles Haws of Haws & Garrett General - .* 1.9 .4 Contractors, Inc., the complex combines traditional chalet and modern variations. The buildings step up the mountain, - W .2.*gry'~ ... 4: .4 the many gable roofs stacked like traditional chalets in alpine , -,1.2. _ -1 F_ *4 , U. ... Switzerland. Though the Aspen Times referred to Shadow Figure 54: 809 South Aspen Street, Shadow Mountain Condominiums, designed by Kirk. City of Mountainasan "instant Chinatown, 'Â°dthedesigner remembers Aspen files. that he was thinking aboutthe Swiss chaletsthatcharacterized resort Aspen. Other, slightly smaller-scaled, multi-family complexes also appeared in Aspen at this time, often in established neighborhoods with single-family housing. A striking "Mansard Modern" at 700 W. Hopkins, with shake shingles extending to the ground, was designed in 1968 by Rob Roy. Nearby, at 720 W Hopkins, the Skandia Townhomes (1971) feature wood and stucco siding, ground-level garages, cantilevered balconies, and a series of gables subtly defining each unit. 39 Aspen Times, date. Page 39 of 48 CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION Although modernism has likely changed the course of architecture forever, the style in its purest form began to wane-nationally in the mid 1960s and into the early 1970s in Aspen. Its iconic monuments went up in the 1940s and1950s. By the mid-1960s, there was a growing unease with some of the ways it had reshaped cities and the sense that flat-roofed, austere, glass and metal-framed buildings looked too uniform. Robert Venturi's Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture (1966) signaled that a new generation was challenging modernism's dominance. Thus, the period of historic significance for buildings of this style in Aspen is between 1945 and approximately 1975. Aspen has been fortunate in attracting the top talents in many professional fields since the end of World War 11. The architects and buildings described in this paper have made important contributions to Aspen's built environment, which continue to influence its character. While many towns in Colorado have retained some of the character of their 19 th- century mining heritage, few are as enriched with excellent modernist buildings as Aspen. Page 40 of 48 BIBLIOGRAPHY Adamson, Paul, and Marty Arbunich. Eichler: Modernism Rebuilds the American Dream. Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith Publisher, 2002, Allen, James SIoan. The Romance of Commerce and Culture: Capitalism, Modernism, and the Chicago-Aspen Crusade for Cultural Reform. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983. Bancroft, Caroline. Famous Aspen: Its Fabulous Past-Its Lively Present. 8~ ed. Boulder: Johnson Publishing Co., 1975. Bayer, Herbert Herbert Bayer: Painter, Designer, Architect. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corp.; and London: Studio Vista, 1967. Benedict, Frederic. "SKI Home of the Month," SK/ 31 (Spring 1967):65-67. Berger, Bruce. "Robin Molny and the Taliesin Fellowship," unpub. Und. Besinger, Curtis. Working with Mr. Wright: What It Was Like. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Bowker, R. R. American Architects Directory, 1956, 1962, 1970. TheHistorical Dictionary of American Architects, Chanzit, Gwen Finkel. Herbert Bayer and Modernist Design in America. Ann Arbor and London: UMI Research Press, 1987. . "Herbert Bayer and Aspen," Exhibition Notes, Adelson Gallery/Paepcke Building, Aspen Institute, Aspen, Colorado, December 1999-December 2000. Clark, Brian. "Ski Country Style," Ski Area Management 25 (March 1986):55-57, 78-81. Clifford, Peggy, and John M. Smith. Aspen Dreams and Dilemmas: Love Letters to a Small Town. Chicago: Swallow Press, 1970. Cohen, Arthur A. Herbert Bayer: The Complete Work. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1984. Coleman, Annie Gilbert. Ski Style: Sport and Culture in the Rockies. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 2004. Davoren, Jennifer. "A Presidential Honor for Coondog." Aspen Times, May 26-27, 2001. Dial, Scott, "The Boomerang Lodge: The Lodge that Charlie Built, and Built, and Built." Destination Magazine. Ditmer, Joanne. "Schlosser Gallery Host to Major Beyer Show/Sale. Denver Post. October 1, 1997. Dunlop, Beth. "Bauhaus' Influence Exceeds Its Life." Denver Post, April 20, 1986. Page 41 of 48 Dusenbury, Adele. "When the Architect Arrived After the War." Aspen Times, July 31, 1975. Frankeberger, Robert and James Garrison. "From Rustic Romanticism to Modernism, and Beyond: Architectural Resources in the National Parks." Forum Journal, Journal Of the National Trust for Historic Preservation (Summer 2002). "Fritz Benedict." Colorado Ski Museum and Ski Hall of Fame. http://va ilsoft.com/m useu m/index. htm I. "Fritz Benedict Honored by Peer Group of Architects." Aspen Times, June 20, 1985. Fritz Benedict Memorial Service Program, July 25, 1995. Gilbert, Anne. Re-creation through Recreation: Aspen Skiing from 1870 to 1970. Aspen: Aspen Historical Society, 1995. Goldberger, Paul. "The Modernist Manifesto: Why buildings from our recent past are in peril and why saving them is so crucial." Preservation (May/June 2008):30-35. "Harry (Mohr) Weese." Artnet, AG. www.artnet.com. Hayes, Mary Eshbaugh. "Benedict's House in the Hill." Aspen Times, March 11, 1982. . Dedication plague on "The Benedict Suite," Little Nell Hotel, Aspen, Colorado. "Fritz Benedict, 1914-1995, The Passing of a Local Legend." Aspen Times, July 15 and 16, 1995. Henning, Randolph C. "At Taliesin": Newspaper Columns by Frank Lloyd Wright and the Taliesin Fellowship 1934-1937. Carbondale & Edwardsville, 111.: Southern Illinois University Press, 1992. Hersh, Burton. Condominiums-To Buy or Not to Buy," Skiing 15 (November 1972): 110-13, 161-63. . "Economy is a Luxury Condominium," Ski 37 (August 1972): 68-70. Hess, Alan, text, Alan Weintraub, photographs. Organic Architecture: The Other Modernism. Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith, Publisher, 2006. "Is It Time for the Preservation of Modernism?" The Architecture Issue. The New York Times Magazine (May 15, 2005), Kostof, Spiro. A History of Architecture: Settings and Rituals. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985. Page 42 of 48 Lane, Joan. "Aspen's Women Architects Aid Building Boom in Town." Grand Junction Sentinel, January 16, 1965. Laverty, Rob. "50 Years of Benedict: A Forefather of Modern Aspen Looks at What Has Been Wrought." High Country Real Estate, Aspen Daily News, February 6-12, 1999. Lund, Morten. "When Biggest is Best," 5ki 36 (August 1971): 64-66, 68. Marty, Myron A. Communities Of Frank Lloyd Wright: Taliesin and Beyond. Dekalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2009. , and Shirley L. Marty. Frank Lloyd Wright's Taliesin Fellowship. Kirksville, Mo.: Truman State University Press, 1999. Noel, Thomas J. Buildings of Colorado. New York and Oxford: Society of Architectural Historian Series, Buildings of the United States, and Oxford University Press, 1997. "Noted Designer Herbert Bayer Dies." Aspen Times, October 3, 1985. O'Rear, John and Frankie O'Rear. The Aspen Story. New York: A. S. Barnes, 1966. Perkin, Robert L. "Aspen Reborn: Herbert Bayer Changing the Town's Face' Rocky M ountai n News, September 27, 1955. Pfeifer, Friedl, and Morten Lund. Nice Goin': My Life on Skis. Missoula: Pictorial Histories Publishing Company, 1993. Prudon, Theodore H. Preservation of Modern Architecture. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2008. Randi, Chad. A-frame. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2004. Rollins, Bill. "Brickham: Simplicity, Lightness, and a Sense of Proportion." Aspen Times, December 22, 1977. Rothman, Hal K. Devil's Bargains: Tourism in the Twentieth Century American West. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1998. "Transitions: Robin Molny Changed Aspen- and Made His Friends Laugh," Aspen Times, January 10-11, 1998. Urquhart, Janet. "History Ricochets Through the Boomerang." Aspen Times November 16 and 17, 1996 Page 43 of 48 INTERVIEWS Caudill, Joy. Telephone interview with the author, 8 June 2010. Conrad, Chris. Interview with the author, 17 August 2000. Harland, Ellen. Telephone interview with the author, 26 May 2010. Kirk, Donald W Telephone interview with Amy Guthrie, July 2010. Maddalone, Pat. Interview with the author, 18 August 2000. McBride, John. Telephone interview with the author, 8 June 2010. Paterson, Charles. Telephone interview with the author, 15 June 2010. Walls, Jack. Telephone interview with the author, 4 August 2010. Wright, Geri. Interview with the author, 17 August 2000. EMAILCOMMUNICATION Mularz, Theodore L., Email communication with the author, 19 July 2010. Roy, Cindy, with input by Rob Roy, Barbara A. Roy, and Doug Roy. Email communication with the author, 16-18 July 2010 Sterling, Robert. Email communication with the author, 4 June 2010, 18 June 2010, Yuenger, Arthur. Email communication with the author, 18 July 2010 Page 44 of 48 APPENDIX I: ELIGIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS WRIGHTIAN/ ORGANIC DESIGN PRINCIPLES If influenced by Wrightian/Organic design principles, a property must possess specific physical features to be considered historically significant. Aspen's examples of modernist buildings should exhibit the following distinctive characteristics: â€¢ Low horizontal proportions, flat- or low-pitched hip roofs. â€¢ Deep roof overhangs that create broad shadow lines across the fagade. Glazing is usually concentrated in these areas. â€¢ Horizontal emphasis on the composition of the wall planes that accentuates the floating effect of the roof form. â€¢ Materials are usually natural and hand-worked, such as rough-sawn wood timbers and brick. Brick is generally used as a base material, wall infill, or in an anchoring fireplace element. Wood structural systems tend more toward heavy timber or post- and-beam than typical stud framing. â€¢ Structural members and construction methods are usually expressed in the building. For example, load-bearing columns may be expressed inside and out; the wall plane is then created by an infill of glass or brick. â€¢ Roof structure is often expressed below the roof sheathing â€¢ Glass is used as an infill material which expresses a void or a structural system, or it is used to accentuate the surface of a wall through pattern or repetition. â€¢ There is typically no trim isolating the glazing from the wall plane. Window openings are trimmed out to match adjacent structural members in a wood context. Brick openings tend to be deeply set with no trim other than the brick return. â€¢ Structures are related to the environment through battered foundation walls, cantilevered floors and/or porches, clear areas of glazing that create visual connections between outside and inside, and the effect of the roof plane hovering over the ground. â€¢ Decoration stems from the detailing of the primary materials and the construction techniques. No applied decorative elements are used. â€¢ Color is usually related to the natural colors of materials for most structures: natural brick, dark stained wood, and white stucco. Accent colors are used minimally and mainly to accentuate the horizontal lines of the structure. BAUHAUS OR INTERNATIONAL STYLE DESIGN PRINCIPLES If influenced by Bauhaus or International Style design principles, a property must possess specific physical features to be considered historically significant. Aspen's examples of modernist buildings should exhibit the following distinctive characteristics: â€¢ Simple geometric forms, both in plan and elevation. â€¢ Flat roofs, usually single story, otherwise proportions are long and low, horizontal lines are emphasized. â€¢ Asymmetrical arrangement of elements. â€¢ Windows are treated as slots in the wall surface, either vertically or horizontally. Window divisions are based on the overall idea of the building. â€¢ Detailing is reduced to the composition of elements rather than decorative effects. No decorative elements are used. â€¢ Design is focused on rationality, reduction, and composition. It is meant to separate itself from style and sentimentality. â€¢ Materials are generally manufactured and standardized. The "hand" is removed from the visual outcome of construction. Surfaces are smooth, with minimal or no detail at window jambs, grade, and roof edge. Page 45 of 48 â€¢ Entry is generally marked by a void in the wall, a cantilevered screen element, or other architectural clue that directs one into the composition. â€¢ Buildings are connected to nature through the use of courtyards, wall elements that extend into the landscape, and areas of glazing that allow a visual connection to the natural environment. This style relies on the contrast between the machine-made structure and the natural landscape to heighten the experience of both elements. â€¢ Schemes are monochromatic, using neutral colors, generally grays. Secondary color is used to reinforce a formal idea. In this case color, or lack there of, is significant to the reading of the architectural idea. ASPEN MODERN CHALET DESIGN PRINCPLES If representative of Aspen modern chalet design principles, a property must possess specific physical features to be considered historically significant. Aspen's examples of modern chalets buildings should exhibit the following distinctive characteristics: â€¢ Rectilinear footprints, classic chalet orientation to the street and/or mountain view â€¢ Broad gabled facades organized in rectilinear solid or glass panels, generally in a tripartite organization â€¢ Low to moderate pitched roofs based on a 3:12 ratio â€¢ Overhanging eaves, frequently with exposed roof beams â€¢ Glass often extending to the eaves â€¢ Large central glazed area, flanked by brick or stone piers â€¢ Minimal decoration Page 46 of 48 APPENDIX 11: THE ARCHITECTS Herbert Bayer (1900-1985) Bauhaus, Weimar '21 Dessau'25-'28 Frederic Allen "Fritz" Benedict (1914-1995) Wisconsin '38/Taliesin '38-'41 Gordon Chadwick (1916-1980) Princeton '38/Taliesin '38-'42 Charles Gordon Lee (1918-1966) University of Pennsylvania '40/Taliesin'40-'41/47-'48 Samuel Jefferson "Sam" Caudill, Jr. (1922-2007) Cornell '46 Robert Oliver "Rob" Roy (1926-1992) Illinois '47 Charles "Charlie" Paterson (b. 1929) Taliesin '58-'60 Eleanor "Ellie" Brickham (1923-2008) Colorado '41-'44 Robin Molny (1928-1997) Carnegie Institute of Technology/Taliesin '49-c.'54 Curtis Wray Besinger (1914-1999) Kansas '36/Taliesin '39-'55 Ellen Harland (b. 1934) Massachusetts Institute of Technology '56 John Morris "Jack" Walls (b. 1925) Oklahoma '53 Robert "Bob" Sterling (b. 1933) Utah '63 George Edward Heneghan, Jr. (b. 1934) Washington U. '57 Daniel Gale Theodore L. "Ted" Mularz (b. 1933) Illinois '59 Thomas Whelan "Tom" Benton (1930-2007) University of Southern California '60 Richard Tseng-Yu Lai (b. 1937, Beijing, China) Princeton'58, '60 Arthur "Art" Yuenger (b. 1939) Illinois '62 Francis Rew Stanton (1910-1995) Yale '35, Ecole des Beaux Arts Americaine '31,'34 Victor Lundy (b. 1923) Harvard Graduate School of Design '47, '48 Harry Weese (1915-1998) Massachusetts Institute of Technology'38, Cranbrook '38-'39 Donald Edward Erickson (b. 1929) Illinois '48/Taliesin '51 Arthur Dennis Stevens (b. 1930) Purdue '55/Taliesin '52 Jean Wolaver-Green-Oklahoma '52 Wheeler & Lewis Brown Brokaw Bowen Donald Kirk Eric Frils (b. 1916, Copenhagen, Denmark) Acad of Art, Copenhagen '43 Page 47 of 48 APPENDIX 111: ARCHITECTS LISTED IN ASPEN PHONE DIRECTORIES 1942- none 1949 Herbert Bayer in white pages Frederic Benedict in white pages 1951 Herbert Bayer in white pages Frederic Benedict in white pages 1955 Bayer & Benedict listed as "designers" in yellow pages Sam Caudill, architect in yellow pages Rob Roy t, 1957 Bayer & Benedict listed as "designers" Sam Caudill, architect Rob Roy 1, Jack Walls Wallace Oakes (no info) " (Elli Brickham in white pages) 1962 Bayer & Benedict listed as "designers" Butler-Bartosek " (no info) Robin Molny ' I Jack Walls Sam Caudill, architect Rob Roy I Jack Walls (Elli Brickham in white pages) 1963 Bayer & Benedict listed as "architects" Sam Caudill, architect Robin Molny ' Ted Mularz " Rob Roy Butler-Bartosek listed as designer (no info) Jack Walls 1965 Bayer , architect Benedict " (inc,Rosolack, Sterling, and Heneghan in his office) 1968 Benedict, architect Caudill Heneghan &Gale Molny Mularz Roy Walls & Sterling Page 48 of 48 *614- p. RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (TIPC) APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT AND FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 720 EAST HYMAN AVE (COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING), ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB CONDOMINIUM & DUVIKE CONDOMINIUM, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 25, SERIES OF 2008 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-11010 (through 11031) & 2737-182-11800 (and 11801) WHEREAS, the applicant, CM LLC c/o Roger Marolt, represented by Lenny Oates, Oates Kenezevich, Gardenswartz, and Kelly, P.C., has requested Minor Development for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen Athletic Club Condominium & Duvike Condominium, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, the procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC reviews the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415,050 of the Aspen Municipal Code establishes the process for Designation and states that an application for listing on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall be approved if City Council, after a recommendation from HPC, determines sufficient evidence exists that the property meets the criteria; and WHEREAS, Jason Lasser, in his staff report dated October 2,2008 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found the review standards and the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and Commercial Design Standards have been met; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 8,2007, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application for Minor Development and Historic Landmark Review met the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and the Aspen Municipal Code Historic Landmp-1, Cin-Arâ€¢-Ar. ,Â·a,i:an, r~r; teri C. Inr~ Annrnverl the Anolication by a vote of four to one (4 to 1). RECEPTION#: 555802, 01/16/2009 at 09:08:25 AM, 1 OF 3, R $16.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC approves the application for Landmark Designation of the property at 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen Athletic Club Condominium & Duvike Condominium, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, and approves the application for Minor Development with the following conditions; 1. The applicant will replace the ground floor exterior sliding doors and maintain their existing configuration and operation. 2. That the applicant will retain the existing planters, primarily on the Hyman side but will look at the pIanter configuration on Original Street and work with the new accessible needs and try to maintain as much ofthe original landscape as possible. 3. The applicant will remove the Coniferous trees in conjunction with Parks and Engineering. 4. The beige paint will be removed, 5. The applicant will apply for a right-of-way permit for all the landscaping items as stated in staffs memo. 6. The applicant will work with parks to choose the appropriate tree species from the Arbor Guide and those plantings will be appropriately and carefully considered in size as they grow. 7. The new awning windows are approved. 8. The brise-soliel as proposed are approved but final design will be approved by staff and monitor. 9. Historic Designation is approved. 10. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days o f the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26,104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation o f a vested propeny right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the Sth day of October 2008. Approved as to Form: q-.UL-- Michael Hoffman, Chairman True, Special Counsel ATTE5T: 1424-~5*Ut_L~ Kathy Stfickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 1. The applicant will replace the ground floor exterior sliding doors and maintain their existing configuration and operation. 2. That the applicant will retain the existing planters, primarily on the Hyman side but will look at the planter configuration on Original Street and work with the new accessible needs and try to maintain as much of the original landscape as possible. 3. The applicant will remove the Coniferous trees in conjunction with Parks and Engineering. 4. The beige paint will be removed. 5. The applicant will apply for a right-of-way permit for all the landscaping items as stated in staffs memo. 6, The applicant will work with parks to choose the appropriate tree species from the Arbor Guide and those plantings will be appropriately and carefully considered in size as they grow. 7. The new awning windows are approved. 8. The brise-soliel as proposed are approved but final design will be approved by staff and monitor. 9. Historic Designation is approved. 720 East Hyman M. April 13, 2012 @U Floor Area Tabulations CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS Existing FAR Proposed FAR Area Description FAR Area Description FAR SUB-BASEMENT SUB-BASEAAENT Total Level Total Level 4,712 GSF 4,712 GSF O Total sub-basement wall area 3,376 SF Total sub-basement wall area 3,376 SF Exposed wall area O SF Exposed wall area O SF Percent exposed to apply to FAR 0.00% Percent exposed to apply to FAR 0.00% ~Contribution to FAR o SF ~ ~Contribution to FAR 0 SF By Use By Use 3,292 NLSF Commercial 0 3,292 NLSF Commercial 0 1,420 GSF Non-unit (specific to commercial) 0 1,420 GSF Non-unit (specific to commercial) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (common to bldg) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (common to bldg) 0 BASEMENT BASEMENT Total Level Total Level 6,364 GSF 7,184 GS~ Total basement wall area 3.333 SF Total basement wall area 3,333 SF Exposed wall area 255 SF Exposed wall area 255 SF Percent exposed to apply to FAR 7.65% Percent exposed to apply to FAR 7.65% ~Contribution to FAR 487 SF | ~Contribution to FAR 550 SF By Use By Use 5,908 NLSF Commercial 487 6,545 NLSF Commercial 550 456 GSF Non-unit (specific to commercial) 0 639 GSF Non-unit (specific to commercial) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (common to bldg) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (common to bldg) 0 MAIN LEVEL MAIN LEVEL Total Level Total Level 6,065 GSF 6,065 GSF 0 Deductions 0 SF Deductions 0 SF ~Contribution to FAR 6,065 SF ~ ~Contribution to FAR 6,065 SF By Use By Use 3.345 NLSF Commercial 3,345 3,345 NLSF Commercial 3,345 0 GSF Non-unit (specific to commercial) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (specific to commercial) 0 2,720 GSF Non-unit (common to bldg) 2,720 2,720 GSF Non-unit (common to bldg) 2,720 SECOND LEVEL SECOND LEVEL Total Level Total Level 4,191 GSF 4,173 GSF ~ Deductions 0 SF Deductions 0 SF ~Contribution to FAR 4,191 SF | ~Contribution to FAR 4,173 SF By Use By Use 3,378 NLSF Commercial 3,378 2,572 NLSF Commercial 2,572 0 NLSF Residential (Affordable) 0 825 NLSF Residential (Affordable) 825 0 GSF Non-unit (specific to commercial) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (specific to commercial) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (specific to affordable) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (specific to affordable) 0 813 GSF Non-unit (common to bldg) 813 776 GSF Non-unit (common to bldg) 776 336 GSF Deck over 30" above grade 336 336 GSF Deck over 30" above grade 336 THIRD LEVEL THIRD LEVEL Total Level Total Level 6,400 GSF 6,400 GSF O Deductions for stairs and elevator 117 SF Deductions for stairs and elevator 152 SF ~Contribution to FAR 6,283 SF ~ ~Contribution to FAR 6,248 SF By Use By Use 5,551 NLSF Commercial 5,551 0 NLSF Commercial 0 0 NLSF Residential (Free-Market) 5,250 NLSF Residential (Free-Market) 5,250 0 GSF Non-unit (specific to commercial) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (specific to commercial) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (specific to free-market) 0 899 GSF Non-unit (specific to free-market) 899 849 GSF Non-unit (common to bldg) 849 99 GSF Non-unit (common to bldg) 99 274 GSF Deck over 30" above grade 274 274 GSF Deck over 30" above grade 274 ROOF LEVEL o t ROOF LEVEL , p#Â·9- TotaILevel Total Level 0 GSF 162 GSF ~ Deductions 0 SF Deduction for stairs 162 SF Contribution to FAR 0 SF Contribution to FAR 0 SF By Use By Use 0 NLSF Commercial 0 0 NLSF Commercial 0 0 GSF Non-unit (specific to commercial) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (specific to commercial) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (specific to free-market) 0 210 GSF Non-unit (specific to free-market) 0 0 GSF Non-unit (common to bldg) 0 162 GSF Non-unit (common to bldg) 0 0 GSF Deck over 30" above grade 0 675 GSF Deck over 30" above grade 675 4 \01'h AfilÂ£- aljv_Waywâ‚¬, SUMMARY , Â·19*1 SUMMARY \ 623*49â‚¬ a *4>/ LO# r TOTAL EXISTING FAR f 17,026 SF 1 |TOTAL PROPOSED FAR 17,036 SF TOTAL EXISTING COMMERCIAL FAR TOTAL PROPOSED COMMERCIAL FAR 6/leo 9,061 TOTAL PROPOSED FREE-MARKET FAR 4 800 7,014 ivt#* TOTAL PROPOSED AFFORDABLE FAR 961 TOTAL GROSS SF 27,732 TOTAL GROSS SF 28,696 TOTAL SF by Use 21,474 TOTAL SF by Use 21,829 Breakdown by Use Breakdown by Use Commercial 21,474 NLSF 100.00% Commercial 15,754 NLSF 72.17% Free-Market Residential 0 NLSF 0.00% Free-Market Residential 5,250 NLSF 24.05% Affordable Housing 0 NLSF 0.00% Affordable Housing 825 NLSF 3.78% Deck over 30" above grade 610 SF Deck over 30" above grade 1,285 SF Non-unit FAR(specific to commercial) 0 SF Non-unit FAR(specific to commercial) 0 SF Non-unit FAR(specific to free-market) 0 SF Non-unit FAR(specific to free-market) 899 SF Non-unit FAR(specific to affordable) 0 SF Non-unit FAR(specific to affordable) 0 SF Non-unit FAR(common to bldg) 4,382 SF Non-unit FAR(common to bldg) 3,595 SF ALLOWABLE FAR ALLOWABLE FAR 1 Zone District Mixed-Use (MU) Zone District Mixed-Use (MU) Total Allowable FAR 2:1 18,000 SF â€¢ Total Allowable FAR 2:1 18,000 SF Commercial Allowable FAR 19 9,000 SF Commercial Allowable FAR '1/1:1 1]nM; 9.000 SF Affordable Housing FAR No Limit No Limit Attordable Housing FAR / No LimitÂ¥#u" No Limit Free-Market Housing FAR 0.5:1 4,500 SF Free-Market Housing FAR f 0.5:1 4,500 SF Lot Area 9000 SF Lot Area 9000 SF 104: 1 (,150 @. E3 LAND USE DEVELOPMENT RESPONSES CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS DATE: March 27,2012 PROJECT NAME: 720 East Hyman - (Aspen Athletic Club Building) PROJECT NUMBER: 1210 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen CO 81611 Parcel I.D. No.: 2737 1821 1801 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This land use development application is part of a voluntary historic designation for the Aspen Athletic Club building. It encompasses a full renovation of the building over the course of several years. This phasing is required to allow existing tenants to remain in the building during the renovation work. We are looking at the total plan as a series of individual 'projects' that will have to be planned and phased around existing leases, leases soon to expire, seasonal construction considerations...etc. NARRATIVE ON PERTINENT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS: 26.304 - Common Development Review Procedures B. Application - A pre-application conference was held at the community development department on February 27!h. 2012. This included Sara Adams, Charles Cunniffe, Brian West, Scott Smith, and John Martin. We have included all the requested application materials as listed on the pre-application summary dated March 5, 2012, and this section of the Land Use Code. 26.415.025.C - Aspen Modern Properties 1. Ninety-Day Negotiation Period. A 16tter from the property owner indicating an understanding of this ninety-day negotiation period is included with this application. 26.415.030.C - Designation of historic properties: Aspen Modern 1. Criteria. To be elibible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of Aspen Modern, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet at least two of the criteria a-d, and criterion described below: c. The property represents a physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman, or design philosophy that is deemed important and the specific physical design, designer, or philosophy is documented in an adopted context paper; Response: This building was designed by notable local architect, Robin Moiny, in 1972. /t is representative of Aspen's post-war architecture trends and is worthy of historic designation. d. The property possesses such singular significance to the City, as documented by the opinions of persons educated or experienced in the fields of history, architecture, landscap architecture, archaeology or a related field, that the property's potential demolition or major alteration would substantially diminish the character and sense of place in the city as perceived by members of the community; 1 610 East Hyman Avenue â€¢ Aspen, Colorado 81611 â€¢ tel: 970.925.5590 m fax: 970.925.5076 â€¢ www.cunniffe.com ~ CELEBRATING JU YEARS OF AWARD WINNING ARCHITECTURE J CIA Response: This building known as the Aspen Ath/etic C/ub, is /isted on the Aspen Modem map by the Aspen historic p/anning staff for reasons set forth above. The potential demolition or major alteration would substantially diminish its character and sense of place in the city, as perceived by members of the community. e. The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. Response: The appropriateness of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association of this bui/ding are well-known in the Aspen community. 2. Application: All of the documentation required for this application under Section 26.304.030.B.1.,2.,3., and 4., are included. The owner has designated Charles Cunniffe Architects, P.C. to act on his behalf. The attached letter dated March 7, 2012 sets forth the historic preservation benefits requested to be awarded at the time of historic designation. 26.415.070.C - Certificate of Appropriateness for a Minor Development 1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for minor development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a minor development. Minor development work includes: a. Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase of the floor area of the structure is two hundred and fifty (250) square feet or less, or b. Alterations to a building fagade, windows, doors, roof planes or material, exterior wall materials, dormer, porch, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim when three (3) or fewer elements are affected and the work does not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect, or c. Erection or installation of a combination or multiples of awning, canopies, mechanical equipment, fencing, signs, accessory features and other attachments to designatied properties such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect or; Response: The proposed interior remodeling will involve an increase in the floor area of less than 250 sq. ft. A/terations inc/ude rep/acement of existing p/ywood and sing/e g/azed awning vents with thermal g/azed awning windows and adding horizonta/ solar shading devices above the /age window areas on the south and west facades. 26.470.050.B. - Growth Management: General Requirements "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 managernent 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." Response: This app/ication requests the allotment of one ( 1) free market unit and one ( 1) affordab/e housing unit. A second free market unit is avai/ab/e as a growth management benefit, under the Aspen Modem Program for Landmark Properties, without affordable housing mitigation. 2 1@. MU 1 "2. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan." Response: We be/ieve that our vo/untary historic designation for the Aspen Ath/etic C/ub bui/ding is very much in support of the Aspen Area Community P/an. Ongoing exterior repairs to ensure an extended life to the building are also in keeping the the AACP. "3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district." Response: The proposed development will conform in genera/ to the requirements and /imitations of the Mixed Use Zone District. Please refer to our responses to 26.575.020 - Calculations and Measurement and 26.710.180.D - Mixed Use Zone District. "4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval..." Response: Our previous meetings and reviews have already received the support of the Historic Preservation Commission. "5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional cornmercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing..." Response: Per Land Use Code Section 26.470.070, if the Net Leasab/e area of the bui/ding increases substantia//y, then Affordable Housing mitigation is required. The tota/ net leasable area within the building will be reduced by 5,537 sq ft., therefore Affordable Housing mitigation is not required based on the Net Leasab/e ca/culation. "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." Response: Under the Aspen Modern Program, Landmark Properties are eligible for a growth management benefit that a//ows for the creation of one Free Market Residentia/ Unit without affordable housing mitigation. Since this proposa/ includes an Affordable Housing Unit, the Applicant proposes that Free Market Unit No. 1 will meet the requirements for Affordable Housing mitigation and Unit No. 2 will apply the exemption for Affordable Housing mitigation. The addition of the second Free Market Unit is subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Since the proposed net /ivab/e floor area of Free Market Unit No. 1 is 2,500 sq. ft. and the unit size cap for this zone district is 2,000 sq. ft., the Applicant wishes to apply for the 500 sq. ft. floor area bonus for designated historic properties. We be/ieve this is appropriate, since the bui/ding facade wi// retain the historic character with only minor modifications. Please refer to the attached e/evation drawings. The proposed Free Market Unit No. 2 has a net livable area of 2.750 sq. ft. Since the unit size cap is 2,000 sq. ft., the Applicant proposes to /and a TDR of 500 sq. ft. and requests that the remaining 250 sq. ft. be permitted as it is being p/aced within the existing building floor area. This may require a GMQS allocation, in which case, the Applicant requests that City Council conduct the GMQS review, rather than compete for a//otments on August 15, 2012. 3 "7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project..." Response: With the tota/ improvements to the Aspen Ath/etic C/ub bui/ding in p/ace, the demand on public infrastructure will decrease. Most evident will be the reduction in the use of electricity and water as more efficient HVAC and p/umbing systems are installed. 26.470.060.3 - Administrative Growth Management: Change-in-Use of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. 3. Change-in-Use of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. The change of use, between the Development Categories identified in Section 26.470.020, of a property, structure, or portion of a structure designated as a Historic Landmark shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Community Development Director if no more than one free-market residence is created. If more than one free-market residence is created, the additional units shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 26.470.080.2. The change in amount of development and number of units shall be added and deducted from the respective Development Ceiling Levels established pursuant to Section 26.470.030, but shall not be added or deducted from the respective Annual Development Allotments. Response: The request for one (1) additional free market unit is documented under 26.470.050.8.6 above. 26.470.070.4 - Minor Growth Management: Affordable Housing "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." Response: The proposed affordab/e housing unit wi// be comp/iant with the APCHA Guide/ines. "b. Affordable housing required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of actual newly built units or buy-down units..." Response: The proposed affordab/e housing unit wi# be in a remode/ed area of the existing bui/ding, bui/t entirely of new materials, equipment. appliances. etc. "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." Response: We propose to include 800 square feet of Category 4 affordable housing on the second floor of the Aspen Athletic Club Building. "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 4 @a 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." Response: The app/icant proposes that the affordab/e housing unit wi// be a dedicated renta/ unit owned by the bui/ding owner and rented to an emp/oyee of the owner. The required legaTinstrument, ensuring permanent affordability, will be provided to the City Attorney prior to construction of the unit. 26.470.080.2 - Major Growth Management: New Free Market Residential Units within a Multi-Family or Mixed Use Project "2. New free-market residentia/ units within a multi-fami/y or mixed-use project. The deve/opment of new free-market residential units within a mu/ti-fami/y or mixed-use project sha// be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.050 above." - Refer to our responses to Section 26.470.050 above. 26.470.110 - Growth Management Review Procedures "A. General." " 1. Number of development applications. No more than one (1) application for growth management allotments on any one (1) parcel shall be considered concurrently. To submit a new application, any active growth management application for the same property must be vacated." Response: This application is the only app/ication for the parce/ under consideration. "4. HPC conceptual approval required. Whenever Historic Preservation Commission approval is needed for a proposed project, the Historic Preservation Commission's conceptual approval must be secured prior to submitting an application for a growth management allotment. Conceptual HPC applications may not be combined with growth management review." Response: Our previous meetings and reviews have already received the support of the Historic Preservation Commission. "6. Conceptual commercial Design review required. Commercial, lodging and mixed-use projects shall obtain conceptual commercial design review approval, pursuant to Chapter 26.412, prior to submitting an application for growth management allotment. Conceptual commercial design review applications may not be combined with growth management review." "Section 26.412.020: Applicability: Applications for commercial development may be exempted from the provisions of this Chapter by the Community Development Director if the development is: A. An addition or remodel of an existing structure that either does not change the exterior of the building or, as determined by the Community Development Director, changes the exterior in such a minimal manner as to not justify this review. 5 ra.1 1 Response: The proposed exterior changes do not significant/y a/ter the appearance of the exterior of the building and shou/d, therefore, exempt this application from conceptual commercial design review. "7. Subdivision and other required land use reviews. Subdivision approval and other land use review approvals, as applicable, shall be required and may be reviewed concurrently with review for growth management, pursuant to Paragraph 26.304.060.B.1." Response: Refer to our responses to Section 26.480 be/ow. 26.480 - Subdivision 26.480.020 - Applicability and Prohibitions. This chapter shall apply to the subdivision of all land in the City of Aspen, unless it is exempted pursuant to section 26.480.030. A. General prohibitions. It shall be unlawful for any person to develop, lease, or sell any parcel of land, including any separate interest in a parcel of land (including leasehold interest or condominium interest) in the City of Aspen until it has been subdivided and a plat recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder pursuant to the terms of this chapter. Response: The current bui/ding owner owns a# subdivided interests current/y in p/ace at the Aspen Ath/etic C/ub Building and will retain ownership of all interests. Per the direction of Community Development we propose to enter into a subdivision agreement and submit an updated subdivision p/at for the record. We do not be/ieve a subdivision application is required as part of this application. 26.515 - Off-street Parking 26.515.010 "A. General requirements. All development shall be provided with off-street parking as provided in this Chapter." Response: Pursuant to Section 26.420.020.B. 1.e - Development Benefits (Parking Waiver) we are requesting a waiver for required parking on site due to the lack of avai/ab/e /ot area to create parking spaces. 26.575.020 - Calculations and Measurements "A. Floor area. The proposed FAR Floor Area for this project is 17.036 sq. ft. This is 10 sq. ft more than the existing building, and well below the allowable FAR Floor Area of 18,000 sq. ft. (2:1) for a 9,000 sq. ft. lot in the Mixed-Use Zone District) where commercial use allowed is 1:1, Free-Market Housing use is .5:1 and Affordable Housing and general circulation is unlimited up to the maximum FAR for the lot." "B. Building Height. The maximum height in the Mixed-Use Zone District is 32 ft. through Commercial Design Review. The existing building is 33'-3" high at the street level along Hyman Avenue and 35'-6" high at the alley. The applicant is requesting a variance." "D. Site Coverage. There is no site coverage requirement in the Mixed-Use Zone District." 26.610 - Impact Fees 26.610.030 - Exemptions. This Chapter does not apply to: "A. Development involving a property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. This expemption is solely for a historic structure and its accessory structures. Development on a historic landmark property involving a non-historic or new building shall not be exempt. 6 Response: Upon being designated as an historic landmark, this building wi# qua/ify for exemption from impact fees. 26.620 - School Land Dedication "B. Cash-in-lieu payment. Payment of cash-in-lieu of a land dedication shall be made to the City prior to and on a proportional basis to the issuance of any building permits for the residential dwelling units. (Ord. No. 33,2006, Â§2)" Response: A cash-in-/ieu payment will be made by the App/icant to the City of Apen upon notification of the correct amount. 26.710.180.D - Mixed Use Zone District "D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Mixed-Use (MU) Zone District:" Response: As noted ear/ier, no significant exterior changes are a part of this application and existing dimensional conditions will remain as they are currently. The existing bui/ding height is 33'- 3" above the street /eve/ a/ong Hyman Avenue, and 35'-6" above sidewa/k level at the alley on Original Street. Since the required height /imit for the Alixed Use Zone is 32 ft., the Applicant is requesting a variance from the HPC. The existing building setback for the front yard (Hyman Avenue) is 10 ft.; secondary front yard (Original Street) is 5.5 fts side yard is 5 ft. and the rear yard Calley) is 10 ft. The fire escape stairway encroaches into this setback 8.5 ft. This will require a variancefrom the HPC forthe ]Oft. required setback. The public amenity space along Hyman Avenue and Original Streetis 1.615 sq. ft., which is 17.9% of the property area of 9,000 sq. ft. Existing bui/dings app/ying for redeve/opment are a//owed a minimum of 10%. Please a/so refer to 26.575.020 - Ca/cu/ations and A/leasurements above. 7 @. RECEIVED C Il CHARLES CUNNIFFE APR 2 0 2012 ARCHITECTS CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT March 7, 2012 Sara Adams Senior Planner Aspen Community Development 130 S Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Historic Preservation Commission Conceptual Review for Minor Development Aspen Athletic Club Building 720 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, Colorado Dear Sara: , - - We are herewith applying for Historic Landmark Designation in exchange for benefits through the Aspen Modern Program. This existing building was designed by a notable local Architect, Robin Molny, in 1972 and exemplifies Aspen's post-war architecture trends. It is listed on the Aspen Modern map. The Applicant proposes to convert the northeast segment of the second floor from Office use to an Affordable Housing Unit of 825 sq. ft. net livable floor area. The third level is proposed to convert the existing commercial space to two Free Market Residential Units. Unit No. 1 will have three bedrooms and utilize 2,500 sq. ft. of net livable floor area. Unit No. 2 will also have three bedrooms and utilize 2,750 sq. ft. of net livable floor area. The roof will have a terrace and green roof areas accessed by a new stairway. The Applicant is applying for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a Minor Development under Section 26.415.070.C of the Aspen Land Use Code. This existing building was built prior to the adoption of the Growth Management Quota System. However, the total FAR floor area is 17,036 sq. ft., which is within the allowable FAR floor area of 2:1 for the Mixed Use District for this 9,000 sq. ft. property. The property is within downtown Aspen and will pose no additional demand on existing infrastructure. Under the Aspen Modern Program, Landmark Properties are eligible for a growth management benefit that allows for the creation of one Free Market Residential Unit without affordable housing mitigation. Since this proposal includes an Affordable Housing Unit, the Applicant proposes that Unit No. 1 will meet the requirement for Affordable Housing mitigation and Unit No. 2 will apply the exemption for Affordable Housing mitigation. The addition of the second Free Market Unit is subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 610 East Hyman Avenue â€¢ Aspen, Colorado 81611 . tel: 970.925.5590 m fax: 970.925.5076 â€¢ www, cunn iffe .com ~ ~ CELEBRATING OU YEARS OF AWARD WINNING ARCHITECTURE ~ CIA Since the proposed net livable floor area of Free Market Unit No. 1 is 2,500 sq. ft. and the unit size cap for this zone district is 2,000 sq. ft., the Applicant wishes to apply for the 500 sq. ft. floor area bonus for designated historic properties. We believe this is appropriate, since the building fagade will retain the historic character with only minor modifications, such as the addition of horizontal solar shading elements, replacing existing Rin-gle pane glass and solid awning vents with thermal glazed awning vents. Please refer to the attached elevation drawings. If the 500 sq. ft. bonus for designated historic properties is not available, then the applicant proposes to land a TDR of 500 sq. ft. instead. The proposed Free Market Unit No. 2 has a net livable floor area of 2,750 sq. ft. Since the unit size cap is 2,000 sq. ft., the Applicant proposes to land a TDR of 500 sq. ft. and requests that the remaining 250 sq. ft. be permitted as it is being placed within the existing building floor area. This may require a GMQS allocation, in which case, the Applicant requests that City Council conduct the GMQS review, rather than compete for allotments on August 15, 2012. The requirement of one parking space for each dwelling unit in this proposed redevelopment application cannot be met, since the existing building allows for no space available on the property. Accordingly, the Applicant requests waivers of payment-in-lieu for three parking spaces from the HPC under the Aspen Modern Program. The existing building height is 33'-3" above the street level along Hyman Avenue, and 35'-6" above sidewalk level at the alley on Original Street. Since the required height limit for the Mixed Use Zone is 32 ft., the Applicant is requesting a variance from the HPC. The building setback for the front yard (Hyman Avenue) is 10 ft; secondary front yard (Original Street) is 5.5 ft.; side yard is 5 ft. and the rear yard (alley) is 10 ft. The fire escape stairway encroaches into this setback, this will require a variance from the HPC for the 5 ft. required setback. The public amenity space along Hyman Avenue and Original Street is 1,285 sq. ft., which is 14.3% of the property area of 9,000 sq. ft. Existing buildings applying for redevelopment are allowed a minimum of 10%. The Impact Fees and School Lands Dedication Fees will be determined by the Aspen Zoning Officer upon the issuance of a Development Order and application for a Building Permit. To the best of our knowledge, this letter addresses the requested Aspen Modern Program benefits and compliance with the review standards for Conceptual Review by the HPC. The Applicant has acknowledged his understanding of the required 90-day negotiation period with the Community Development Director. Please notify us if any additional documentation is required for this review. Best regards, 6 LLC--4 Charles L. Cunniffe, AIA Principal attachments RECEIVED APR 2 0 2012 CITY OF: A6FtN ARCHITECTS CHARLES CUNNIFFE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMFN April 17, 2012 Re: 720 East Hyman Avenue Historic Preservation Commission Aspen Modern Conceptual Review HPC & Commercial Design Review Guidelines Following are our responses to specific relevant sections of the following chapter of the City of Aspen Land Use Code: Chapter 26.480 Subdivision: 26.480.020 Applicability and prohibitions. A. General prohibitions. 1. It shall be unlawful for any person to develop, lease or sell any parcel of land, including any separate interest in a parcel of land (including leasehold interest of condominium interest) in the City of Aspen until it has been subdivided and a plat recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder pursuant to the terms of this chapter. Response: This project is primari/y an interior remode/ing of the existing space p/an to convert some of the commercia/ space to two (2) free market residential units and one ( 13 affordable housing unit. A condominium map of the existing commercia/ spaces has been recorded at Book 6. pages 74 through 82. AN of the spaces remain under the sing/e ownership of the App#cant. For the purpose of this application, a draft subdivision p/at is being provided. The App/icant intends to retain Ownership of a// commercial and residentia/ spaces subsequent to completion of the proposed redeve/opment. B. Development allotment. No development order for a subdivision shall be approved pursuant to the provisions of this chapter unless the applicant has been awarded a development allotment or has obtained a GMQS exemption pursuant to Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System... Response: Under the Aspen Modern Program, Landmark Properties are eligible for a growth management benefit that allows for the creation of one (1) Free Market Residential Unit without affordab/e housing mitigation. The second Free Market Unit meets the requirement for affordab/e housing mitigation. However, it wi// require either to be awarded a 500 sq. ft. HPC bonus or landing a 500 sq. ft. TDR. /n addition, the App#cant is requesting a QMQS_glotment.of 250 sq. ft. to be awarded upon review by City Council. 1 610 East Hyman Avenue â€¢ Aspen, Colorado 81611 m tel: 970.925.5590 g fax: 970.925.5076 â€¢ www.cunniffe.corn t. . 26.480.040 Procedures for review. C. Subdivisions. Approval of a development order for a subdivision shall require review and recommendation for approval, approval with conditions or disapproval by the Planning and Zoning Commission followed by a review and approval, or approval with conditions by the City Council. This application may be consolidated with a development application for conditional use, special review, ESA review, GMQS allotment, code amendment and/or rezoning. Response: This app/ication is anticipating review by the P&Z subsequent to review by the HPC. The Applicant has requested a GMQS allotment to be conso/idated with the review of the Free Market unit outlined above. 26.480.050 Review Standards. A development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and requirements: A. General requirements. 1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Response: This proposed subdivision in the Mixed Use Zone District is compatible with the AACP. 2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. Response: This proposed subdivision is in an area that has condominium townhomes, mu/ti-family residentia/ units and commercial/office uses. 3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Response: This proposed subdivision is within a building that has been in existence for 40 years. Therefore, it will not adversely affect future deve/opment of surrounding areas. 4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. Response: This proposed subdivision wi// be in compliance with a// applicable requirements of this Tit/e. B. Suitability of land for subdivision. 1. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. Response: This property is /ocated in the downtown area of Aspen, where none of the environmenta/ hazards listed above are present. | 9 ..:.FÂ· FE | L ~~ _J ,. C. n/a D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Response: The provision of affordab/e housing has been addressed under Section 26.470.070.4. E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.620. Response: This has been addressed under Section 26.620.060.8. F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Response: This application invo/ves approval of a GMQS allotment, which will qualify the project for subdivision approval. 26.480.070 Subdivision agreement. E. Recordation. The subdivision agreement and plat shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the plat within a period of one hundred eighty (180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid. The Community Development Director may extend the recordation deadline if the request is within the vesting timeline and if there is a community interest for providing such an extension. The Community Development Director may forward the extension request to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The subdivision plat shall also be submitted in a digital format acceptable to the Community Development Department, for incorporation into the city/county GIS system. The one hundred eighty (180) day recordation requirement contained herein shall not apply to the recording of condominium maps, or declarations or any other documents required to be recorded to accomplish a condominiumization of in the City of Aspen. (Ord. No. 9- 2002 paragraph 10, 2002). Response: A draft subdivision p/at has been submitted with this application. Upon receiving the required language from planning staff, a fu/ly executed my/ar wi// be recorded as required. 3 5 TR. 1 1- MEI --1 - 26.480.090 Condominiumization. A. General. Where a proposed development is to include a condominium form of ownership, or if an existing development is to be converted to a condominium form of ownership, in whole or in part, a condominium subdivision plat reflecting all condominiumized units, or that portion of the development to be condominiumized, shall be submitted to the Community Development Director for review and approval as a subdivision pursuant to the terms and provisions of this section. Response: The fina/ form of ownership for this redeve/opment project has not been determined by the Applicant at this time. /f condominiumization is chosen, then the documentation and recordation required in this section of the /and use code wi// be provided. 4 ral. RECEIVED APR 2 0 2012 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT April 10, 2012 Re: 720 East Hyman Avenue Historic Preservation Commission Aspen Modern Conceptual Review HPC & Commercial Design Review Guidelines Following are our responses to specific relevant guidelines: Commercial Guidelines 2.24: The roofscape shall be designed with the same design intention as the secondary elevations of the building: â€¢ Group and screen mechanical units from view. Response: A# existing rooftop mechanica/ units that are visib/e from the street wi// be re/ocated and conso/idated with new mechanica/ units in an upgrade of the HVAC system. â€¢ Locate mechanical equipment to the rear of the roof area. Response: AN rooftop mechanical equipment wi# be grouped toward the rear of the building and ERET.Rflglely, screened. Â£wruSWK,% Jâ€¢ Position, articulate and design rooftop enclosure or structures to reflect the ,Â®F i, modulation and character of the building. BAA1/#YU/Â¥u- Response: The rooftop enc/osure wi// have horizontal siding of the same type and 1/"- finish co/or as the main facades of the building. â€¢ Use materials which complement the design of the building facades. Response: See response above. â€¢ Design roof garden areas to be unobtrusive from the street. Response: No decision has been made at this time if a roof garden will be installed. if so. it will be kept back from the edges of the roof and made to be unobtrusive. â€¢ Use "green roof" best practice, where feasible. Response: Best practice wi// be used for any "green roof" design. 610 East Hyman Avenue â€¢ Aspen, Colorado 81611 â€¢ tel: 970.925.5590 m fax: 970.925.5076 0 www.cunniffe.com 1 ITIAI Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Chapter 1 Streetscape and Lot Features Retainina Walls 1.7 Preserve original retaining walls â€¢ Any replacement materials should match the original color, texture, size and finish. Response: Deteriorated bricks in the planter retaining wal/s in the pub#c amenity wi// be rep/aced with matching bricks and mortar. â€¢ Painting a historic masonry retaining wall or covering it with stucco or other cementitious coatings is not allowed. Response: The brick retaining wa//s wi/l be maintained without any covering. 1.8 Maintaining the historic height of a retaining wall. â€¢ Increasing the height of a wall to create a privacy screen is inappropriate. Response: The height of the existing retaining walls will be maintained as-is. Streetscape 1.16 Preserve historically significant landscape design and features. â€¢ This includes the arrangement of trees, shrubs, plant beds, irrigation ditches and sidewalks in the public right-of-way. Response: The existing brick wa//ed p/anters and brick wa/kways in the pub/ic amenity area will be preserved and maintained as well as trees, shrubs and grass areas. Chapter 2 Historic Building Materials Treatment of Materials 2.1 Preserve original building materials â€¢ Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. Response: The skiing on this building has been well maintained and shou/d not require any repair or replacement. â€¢ Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. Response: The brick retaining walls and patio walls along the public amenity wi// be preserved. 2.2 Protect wood features from deterioration â€¢ Maintain protective coatings to retard drying and ultraviolet damage. Response: The bui/ding maintenance program has maintained periodic protective coating placement. 2.4 Brick or stone that was not painted historically should not be painted. â€¢ Masonry naturally has a water protective layer, or patina, to protect it from the elements. Response: The existing natura/ brick wi// not be painted. Once deteriorated bricks have been replaced, _gibrickwork_will-recgive a c/earsealer to protect it ~ ~ from the e/ements. , , Repair of Materials 2.5 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. â€¢ Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized, or fixed using consolidants. Response: Only deteriorated bricks and deteriorated mortarjoints will be rep/aced with matching materia/s. 2.6 Maintain masonry walls in good condition â€¢ Original mortar that is in good condition should be preserved in place. Response: it shall be. â€¢ Repoint only those mortar joints where there is evidence of a moisture problem or when mortar is missing. Response: On/y mortar joints that are missing or visibly loosened wi# be repointed. â€¢ Duplicate the original mortar in strength, composition, color, texture, joint width and profile. Response: Care will be taken to match the existing mortarjoints. â€¢ Mortar joints should be cleared with hand tools using electric saws and hammers to remove mortar can seriously damage the adjacent bricks. Response: Care wi// be taken to protect the adjacent brickwork. â€¢ Do not use mortar with high portland cement content. Response: Mortar content will be compatible with the density of brick. Chapter 3 Windows Treatment of Windows 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. â€¢ Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows. Response: The g/azing of this 1972 building does not have omate window sash or Mm. /t is predominantly /age fixed panes of c/ear glass, which is the intended <~~PM modem character. This will be preserved. The proposed replacement of the p/ywood venti/ators above the /age glass panes with therma//y g/azed awning Â¥9 CA GVHYd- windows wi// maintain the repetitive rhythm of the fenestration. â€¢ Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. Response: All existing windows will be preserved in place. i (5444 1 Chapter 14 General Guidelines Awnings â€¢ Projecting elements help to provide visual interest to a building and can influence its perceived scale. These features should be compatible in size, shape and type with those found on historic buildings and should be treated as an integral part of the building design. Response: The proposed horizontal slatted metal solar shading elements will be ./C compatible with the modern character of the bui/ding and be perceived as an integra/ part of the overa// design. Their contribution to the HVAC system by providing shade to the large g/ass areas is obvious. Accessibility 14.1 These standards should not prevent or inhibit compliance will accessibility laws. â€¢ All new construction should comply completely with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Response: This is an existing building; however. the street /eve/ is ADA comp/iant and all levels are accessible by elevator. Lighting 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. Response: No exterior lighting is proposed at this time. If any lighting is proposed j# at final review, it will comply with the City Lighting Code. On-going Maintenance of Historic Properties 14.10 Repair deteriorating primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. Response: This has already been addressed in Chapter 2. Signs 14.25 Locate signs to be subordinate to the building design. â€¢ Free-standing signs should not be so large as to obscure the patterns of front facades and yards. Response: No new signs are proposed with this application. There are two existing free-standing building signs, one at the corner of Hyman and Original Streets and the other at the southwest end of the Hyman Avenue facade public amenity. These will be maintained and preserved. L. 720 East Hyman , March 7,2012 CE Exisling FAR Proposed FAR Rea Description FAR Area Description FAR SUB-BASEMENT | Total Level Total Level 4,712 GSF 4,712 GSF Total sub-basement wall area 3.376 SF Total sub-basement wall area 3,376 SF Exposed wall area O SF Exposed wall area 0 SF Percent exposed to apply to FAR 0.00% Percent exposed to apply to FAR 0400% ~Contribution to FAR oSF ~ ~Conkibution to FAR 0 SF 1 BASEMENT | Total Level Total Level 6.364 GSF 7.184 GSF Total basement wall area 3.333 SF Total basement wall area 3,333 SF E 1 Exposed wall area 255 SF Exposed wall area 255 SF 8 Percent exposed to apply to FAR 7.65% Percent exposed to apply to FAR 7 65% ~ -E ~Contribution to FAR 487 SF | ~Contribution to FAR 550 SE I C g MAIN LEVEL | 1 Total Level Total Level 6.065 GSF 6,065 GSF Deductions 0 SF Deductions 0 SF ' ~Contribution to FAR 6,065 SF ~ ~Contribution to FAR 6.065 SF | SECOND LEVEL | Total Level Total Level 4,191 GSF 4,173 GSF Deductions 0 SF Deductions 0 SF ~Contribution to FAR 4,191 SF ~ ~Contribution to FAR 4,173 SF | THIRD LEVEL | Total Level Total Level 6,400 GSF 6,400 GSF Deductions for stairs and elevator 117 SF Deductions for stairs and elevator 152 SF ~Contribution to FAR 6,283 SF ~ ~Contribution to FAR 6.248 SF | ROOF LEVEL | Total Level Total Level 0 GSF 162 GSF Deductions 0 SF Deduction for stairs 1 62 SF ~Contribution to FAR OSF ~ ~Contribution to FAR OSF ~ :52 1 o LU C\1 O. SUMMARY 1 r- 22 TOTAL EXISTING FAR 17.026 SF ~ ~TOTAL PROPOSED FAR 17,036 SF | TOTAL ALLOWABLE FAR 18,000 SF | Zone District Mixed-Use (MU) Allowable FAR Ratio 2 1 Lot Area 9000 SF FLOOR AREA SUMMARY F AO.1 a FAR 91031IHOMÂ¥ 3=I=IINNAO 931hIVHO NVINAH 19Â¥3 032 L99*'0Z6'026 XÂ¥3 1 0699'9Z6'026 7131 1 L L9W 00 'N3dISV I '3AV NWIAH 1.SÂ¥3 0K9 LEL~iBi'if '3AÂ¥ ' lIt 6 + Â» 10.-5 1/2 11 +/- 11/// J = 0 m -0 f 4 3< 4 (p r 3 Eli (-5 -0 ji m 9 -0 U ni 9 P 1 7 4 + E Ib -1 z -0 L . 11 < [-11 1 z m --11 EE-L Fit O ozrmem z O>*Cm Ul m B o Z E> 08 Â· . i,j = o W k W I =4 01 94 ~44 U m Z 7 1 03-0711 1 Z Sdrn-10 0 0 'tx B gzA>70 -070 x Refz >m< -0 m 70 Ozm Z M Lm -1 â‚¬\ /r--9 g 'K PATIO PATIO \\ STEPS Y ORIGINAL ST. (HAÂ¥ 52) Â» io'-5 9,2 1, 4% -- - .r 4- -0 m ET 52 5~ I FE )< CD = al 1- 03 80 -0 \ 1 En 1 ? 31 - -11 O Ul 11 Ell 02 1. grlismmat . E Eli Z U' 7 >IFF' a >0 <,0 kill m~-11 1 K -1 0 03 3 & J ed i Utz m I , Mic Z (Jah â‚¬ 3 21 4 OR I 1- . 11 =Z Â£ R I 17 -11 Â· IEE.1- m o 0 0 Ul C 1- U 92 > 7 Ul -1 & 44 1% 0 r K iE 0 -1 441. 41%443*321 PATIO aff] PATIO 4933~ -r . n.\\\ -------_LI-8-'~~1-12--__~~ ' 4 1 \3 100'-O" O ORIBINAL ST. (HAÂ¥ 82) 03.07.12 ~ 2 4 2 33 r720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS www.cunniffe.com 00 -1 -in N r 90; Al ~ CD 21 9 *0 1,1 1 m -) ~T1 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. . 610 EASTHYMANAVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX: 970.9204557 dz ~SPEN, COLORADO 81611 9- PROPERTÂ¥ LINE -; ds 000 b = VEWV 10-1 @Nllâ‚¬IXE 3*101 STEPS 5'-5 1/2 " +/- H eNUGI NVIAH i =-igna -- ZOVcIS ALINZIH 5 -5 1/2 1 % ...I./.IFFTTTI911,1 1111111'li 71...IrrTTW1l1Ili . ~STEPS 5'-51/2 " +/- Vagct /111111 . 1 f f.. = 5-A f Ca 4 1 Ul). 1 0 1 4 1 + 0 3 1 - I A - dj ---- - 1.2 ASPEN ATHLETIC BUILD IND ~ : ASPEN ATHLETIC BUILDING 4 K 0 0 L--1 - 1 0 7.L- PROPERTY LINE Â·; 11 'r, 1 1 1 1 . J 1 Z a< 1 0 i o Lijo 62 : /9 1 1,285 9.F. OF PUBLIC AMENITÂ¥ SPACE -. (SHORN HATCHED) ALONG BOTH HYMAN AVE. AND ORIGINAL ST. 0 1- COVERED OPEN If / SPACE - - 2~<-z//fi//////////filrN77-/nfl-//7/iNTUTUTI+NuMNuid//c//i \ /i -2 / 1 .55/1/0 V -* filini/;/'/////////l///////////////////1////i///i/l////////////h. 1~ , PLANTER PLANTER ~ PLANTER 7 2Â¥ j j 7 r -7 CL 7 1 :1 7 L go,-oIl /7 /1 O d HÂ¥MAN AVE. HÂ¥MAN AVE. 0 M 6140 Z- 1 0111 ) O- 4 4" #hale (0' \ " ial#,ac REuEIVED ~ NOTE: REFER TO SURVEÂ¥ FOR BUILDING PLACEMENT AND PROPOSED LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS. --349 -40*4 APR 2 0 2012 EXISTING HARDSCAPE AND 40 91â‚¬0 PO EE D BITE PLAIN NO PARKING E PROVIDED ~ /7 PUBLIC AMENITY DIAGRAMI AL ON SITE C \\\. 1 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DP./FI OPMFN- 1. = 161-0,1 . f.\ 1 1. = 161-01' TOTAL PUBLE AMENITÂ¥ SPACE = - TOTAL LOT AREA = 2,000 sf EXISTINE 4285 Â« OR 14.390 OF LOT A1 -1 CO 0 1 ~2~~ STEPS ' ~~<~~~~8 Oliva S1031IHOhIV 3=I=IINNAO S3-Ik:IVHO NVINAH 19Â¥3 OZZ (Ce AMH) '19 1*NICIEIO U.100.8#!UUnO'AVMA L99*'026'0Z6 :XÂ¥3 0699'9Z6'0Z6 :131 i L L9:8 00 'N3dSV: '3AV NVINAH 573 019 3AV NVINAH 1SV3 f- 10'-5 1/2 " +/- L L9 LBOOVE 1 3 RE ESCA 9 h U PILATES MECHANICAL V--7 MECHANICAL ROOM ROOM ROOM Lln STAIR 7 1 1 21 0 OFFICE OFFICE 1 0 0 0 NAUTILUS CLIMBING TRAINING CIRCUIT ROOM ROOM 0 0 -1 0 - 0 0 a EXISTINe w.*4 SUB=BASEMENT PLAN 1" = 10'-O" TOTAL EXISTIN16 61â‚¬055 AREA = 4 712 gs? (FAR = O ef) TOTAL EXISTING NET LEADABLE AREA = 3 242 nisf 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.le 7- 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 : TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 / 1 R ES A C1 h U PILATES MECHANICAL 7-7 MECHANICAL ROOM ROOM ROOM STAIR <77 1 1 -A /L J OFFICE OFFICE 0 0 0 0 NAUTILUS CLIMBING TRAINING CIRCUIT ROOM ROOM 0 0 0 0 0 PROPOSED 4094 SUB=BASEMENT PLAN 111 = 101-Oil TOTAL 61â‚¬056 AREA = 4 7 12 gs? (FAIR = O ef) TOTAL NET LEADABLE AREA = 3 2q 2 n ISP 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www,cunniffe,com A2.1 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970,920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 6- __ ]~11LIJ 111 2 ~42\1 f- 4 - DIe /1 . FIRE ESCAPE - - STEAM - ~ 0 Il--1 (- -- /0 MASSAGE ~ - MEN'S LOCKERS Ilt rel . MASSAGE~7 1 / 0. ~rmi v AEROBIC ~ WOMEN'S LOCKERS EQUIPMENT 0 WHIRLPOOL D 1-14 1. RECEPTION ../.Ii.Il //I'll"I ha- STAIR OFFICE 41 L - 4 PHYSICAL THERAPY 1 --il-- LAP POOL O FREE O 0 WEIGHTS f O N B M B M -0- - 0 0 STAIR EXISTINe #*+ BASEMENT PLAN 111 = 101-Oil TOTAL EXISTINS GROSE AREA = 6364 gef (FAR = 487 50 TOTAL EXISTINS NET LEADABLE AREA = 5725 nls? 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.2e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 9- r 4-1 -MEIX-D FIRE ESCAPE D ~ O ---1 SAUNA Crt/ ato MEN'S LOCKERS LAUNDRY / STEAM Ij&A [r/.1 STORAGE b CI 0 0 6 WHIRLPOOL - WOMEN'S LOCKERS AEROBIC j-r f ~ _1-- cOE EQUIPMENT 0 STAIR 1 1 0 LAP POOL O FREE Cl~ O EQUIPMENT WEIGHTS Be - -0- - 0 0 STAIR PROPOSED 4Â°94 BASEMENT PLAN 1" = 10'-O" TOTAL 6RODE AREA = 1184 gef (FAR - 550 2) TOTAL NET LEADABLE AREA = 6 545 nlsf 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970,925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 C..Ill 9 - 1-[ 1 1'[1-ITI 117.17 1,1 . FIRE ESCAPE 11 - OFFICE 13=== *1MEN'* *Sh-:1 -1=14 0 i . Â¤ putÂ«u I . F n'92>/ ) r-1 .0070=â„¢Â®NeÂ»44*%*= 00*MMC~ 2%9~ 4<p n Mul><. - ATM LOBBY ~ 11' 9 OFFICE / BANK GYM 2 42/ 4 RECEPTON li , n - 0 L - - 4 LOBBY / ATHUM 11-1- 0 7pF~ Elk ./ 1 1 c;â‚¬*L_ 977-I- _ c[1 EXISTIND ~*4 MAIN LEVEL PLAN 1,1 = 101-0. TOTAL EXISTING 6ROSS AREA = 6065 gs? (FAR = 6065 s?) TOTAL EXISTING NET LEADABLE AREA = 3345 nlef 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.3e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 6- . 1 7 - ul E l m 11-7 FIRE ESCAPE /L--1 - OFFICE 1,1 U PUBUC \\ a H..11 C A ..1.I:~ 0 29 - 11 I F MEN'SI / t fluâ‚¬ac ~ 1 [-1 -049 49 ~ : - ATM LOBBY ~ 1 - OFFICE / BANK STNR GYM RECEPTIONI ~ El LU I I lD i 0 2*1 001 4I I lf) LOBBY / ATRIUM {2 5 1 IL 340 7 1 1 47 / / OFFICE ,- --1F--1 1 / / E #G- L mi 11 ---__ c.0 1 P SOLAR SHADING DEVICES ABOVE (SHORN DASHED) PROPOSED *.*74 MAIN LEVEL PLAN r = 101-011 TOTAL 61â‚¬056 AREA = 6,065 gs? (FAR = 6 065 ef) TOTAL NET LEADABLE AREA = 3 345 n le? 03.07,12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.3 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 9- 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FN<: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 DEVICES ABOVE ' 1/1/V0W) TY 4 1 L\\~ FIRE ESCAPE 1: C 11-1 - i a 0 4 OFFICE 2/47 F\ 0 0 1 EDI 62 0 C UNISEX PUBLIC a DENTIST OFFICE - UNISEX 1 PUBLIC ~ - i n /74 + 0 If--7 0 40 7Â» 11 rv [9 n - i\>01--1 ~ 1- - 4 OFFICE 1 LAT FILE . 0 2 Bi Z 4Z 11 1 i TV V O,01 0 4 111'll EXISTINe 44 SECOND LEVEL PLAN 1" = 10'-O" TOTAL EXISTING GROSS AREA = 4,121 gs? (FAR = 4,12 1 50 TOTAL EXISTING NET LEASABLE AREA = 33-72 nls? 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe,com A2.4e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 ; FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 $ 4 7 5 1 17--- FIRE ESCAPE --qI ),i~ .~l' _~ n 0 0 - BATH --â€¢- *CO af f fo - f BEDROOM\~ ~ L' 1 1 1 LIVING ROOM 1 |CLOSET Â· 1 t.~L~=~FFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT FOYER 2Â¤ 2-1 &4 0~ 1:81 000 0 4-02 0---/45 UNISEX 413 PUBUC KITCHEN DENTIST OFFICE Lf -- 1 10 371 - IN 1 1 "li' 1%1 1\ till l 4 40 IX I UNISEX 1 /\ M / \ : PUBLIC 7 1 -4 / 1 .E.7 - 1 1 1{:1Â·44Â·54 i ma '.>x Q ,3.kekS:t:k'.Â·~ .:2:'~wv:6*9&24,2 .! I- 01 . STAIR L 0 - i r /79 + 0 0 (00 U / m A .TV lu 1\ 1 - 9 Z TV OFFICE *- gli - LAT FILE - W B k 0'' :Ild I 71 U ix r \BA 4-<1 1 <f 1 -3, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SOLAR SHADING DEVICES ABOVE (SHORN DASHED) PROPOSED 293 SECOND LEVEL PLAN 1" = 10 '-O " TOTAL 6ROED AREA = 41-13 gs:F (FAR = 4373 se) 1 TOTAL NET LEASABLE AREA = 2/572 n ls? 1 TOTAL AFFORDABLE HOUSINS AREA = 825 nlsf 0 03.07.12 90 > 220 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 -O 3 3 0 10 0 www.cunniffe.com A2.4 @2 6 m ~.3 00 - ..%00 . .-1 O -0 E f.- "u m N .4720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL: 970.925.5590 FAX 970.920.4557 MA 0 ----- -- - --- 8 JSPEN, COLORADO 81611 Ed- GES ABOVE * 1 1 - - FIRE ESCAPE Â¤ , 1/4 a a Â¤ 0 OFFICE GYM Â¤ LOCKERS UK)ISEX I GYM STAFFATRONSI - A[-2 1*QQ f -LINISEX / STAFFWATRONS El Â¤ 0 ~__~1 LOCKERS ~. GYM 1 ~ / UNISEX =-1 0 ~ ~ *# PUBLIC / LOBBY go a D CORRIDOR 7 - . A M Â¤ D 0 0 0 OFFICE a D â‚¬ 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXISTINe Â»4 THIRD LEVEL PLAN 1. = 101-Oil 3 TOTAL EXISTINS 61â‚¬099 AIREA = 6 400 gs? (FAR = 6 285 59 TOTAL EXISTINe NET LEASABLE AREA = 5551 nls? 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.5e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 6- ./ FIRE ESCAPE 4 0 0 4 ZO 2 0 571 0 -1[/1 3 - fti 1 11/ - VO - ~DROOM CLO+T E \ BEDROOM BATH BEDROOM 01 a BEDROOM /~~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~~ TrE- - A 9 3 1-2 L CLOSET ]D <Ojt . ArTH BATH CLOSET r (01 /1 11 LEl -' 1-7 , 0 1 CLOSE| I .1 7--7 / HALL 93 *JTr U - -r(%TEr| - - LAUNDAY /><\11 HALL ~ BATH I A 1 -U 1,(11 Liu- TwDER u-1 CORIDOR UJBBY , Irr STAIR 20 0.2-1* 'flj O ~ _ _21-QGET _ _ P\\\\ r AJ U 1~Â«~i - SITTING ~ n BEDROOM ~ ~ - FREE MARKET UNIT #2 ~ - FREE MARKET UNIT #1~ 0 621- 11.11 I L lf)1 â‚¬1 - --NEIL-7 u -*il - REF 1~ 0 - 4 00/ p#5 2 - ~13 gg /f----\\ . BATH ~~1 ~- KITCHEN ,)EL P 0 LIV~-lill 6 KITCHEN CLOSET Â£ DINING 3 n -0 f 11 ----- 2 3 Irt_ 1102 I - 40306 lf) I --I ff m aae 3 - | DINING ~ - ~ ~ Â· -- 0 00 0 1 I \ BEDROOM Ed U U (91 - GAME/ 3 lilli I I LIVING ROOM .%. 00 - - 111-1 - I .1 9 0 0- /6 Un- - 0 L _ _~_ __M_ __ 1_JL_ -C _fL_JL___1 SOLAR SHADING DEVICES ABOVE (SHOMN DASHED) PROPOSED 4094 THIRD LEVEL PLAN 1. = 10'-O. TOTAL 61â‚¬056 AREA = 6,400 gef (FAR = 6248 se) TOTAL NET LIVABLE AREA = 5250 nisf 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.5 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 6- 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 i FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 ~ U LOO DEVICES ABOVE - MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT 0 0 1 ELEVATCR OVERRUN Â°ENTHOUSE 31 9 ~jy#Â£Â¥LIGHT 44 \11 1 SKYLIGHT SKYLIeHT SKYLISHT 0 0 0 1 i 1 -1 .1 .1 .1 .. .1 ./ EXISTINe 2*74 ROOF LEVEL PLAN 111 = lot-011 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.6e 7- 720 EAST HYMANAVE, ~ 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 1 rl r--1 rl n rl rl n 1-1 J --- MECHANICAL <- "eREEN" ROOF EQUIPMENT 91<Â¥LIGHT 919Â¥LIGHT SKYLIGHT 2 10 0 C - 1 EXISTINe ELEVATCR OVERRUN Â°ENTHOUSE STAIR C ] " ~9'6<IsTINe /YKYLIGHT SKYLIeHT C c RESIDENTIAL ROOF DECK 1 - "GREEN" ROOF GLASS - GUARDRAIL T* C 3 44 7 PER CODE ~ 2 +2 C ] U U U 1-1 U U U U 0-, Jâ‚¬ 3 % PROPOSED 44 ROOF LEVEL PLAN 1" = 10'-O" TOTAL 61â‚¬069 AREA = 162 gef (FAR = O ef) TOTAL NET LEASABLE/LIVABLE AREA = O nlef TOTAL ROOF DECK AREA = 6-15 sf 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.6 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 1.-1 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 i TEL: 970.925.5590 5 FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Ed.'ll \24\L L [9[900Â¥30100 'N3dSV L99*'026'026 XV: I 0699'916'0Z6 131 ! L [919 00 'NBdSÂ¥ I 'BAV NVINAH 19Â¥3 Ol.9 '3AV NVINAH 19Â¥3 OZZ 00 91031IHOMÂ¥ 3:I:IINNfO S3-IhlÂ¥HO NVINAH 19Â¥3 OZZ ll.100'8#!UUnO'MAAM EL'ZO'Â£0 f .0-1. -" R Z Ai Â§2 8 0 -1 h B? Z. - j &1 k Ed *d U. U.1 1 ~1 -1 A A 1 % 11--]t 1 ' Ill 113 = 1 = 4 - 1, 1 11 Z = ..111 1<r. 1 / = 1 - 0-I Zx = - 1 E- I b 11 = -11 9% 4 1 X O W = | ~ ~3 ~ L 2 = 1 1 1 \ 1 1, 1 1 \ / = 1- 1 - 40/ - 1- 2 f E- 1 1 1 . GLE;V - I -Ill.li 1 11 11 CE Â©N LAN f<0Â° 4121J1k, STAIR PENTHOUSE A|~ EL â€¢ 142'-O- C T----1,- STAIR STAtm 212992 STAIR.ZE!012:*~ X12LKE PINTHOUSE BE,OND M#*Ze _ - 6UARDRAIL A EL â€¢ 136Â·-4Â·7 3----â„¢- WARORAIL GLASS -t BEÂ¥Oâ€¢40 ROOF DECK ./' 1 ----EL, 133'-39 P~~~~~ - - SOLAR SHADE-DEVICE AT BRD FLOOR ~ 1---lr--Ir---[ r=--Ir-'-1 r---11:711:1 , c L i r---lr-=Ir--1 r---Ir--9 1-~-71:-717~ g~~ SOLAR SHADE DEVICE ~ ~ REPLACE ARNING < 11-2 - -/ I-=Il -.I-- Il----il----- --~- 9- - -- =3~ MINDOMS - TÂ¥P Nx 130(AR SHADE DEVICE AT 2ND FLOOR *LAR SHADE DEVICE AT 2ND =LOOR *T LOBBY EL â€¢ 122Â·-02) â„¢IRD FLOOR d|.~ f 4* 1 ". I.. 6 I i %". *"- -,i- .Ir--rT--rir-F- AL .6 . 6 . ".. F . 111 . 5 - SOLAR SHADE DEVICE --~\ ) Â»~Â«- ________ ____________11 SECOND FLOOR ~K 6*AR SHADE DEVICE AT IST FLOgR SOLAR SHADE DEVICE AT IST FLOOR AT LOBEY EL â€¢ 111'-0~ T )--â„¢- 1 3 . 11/ . 11/ . 11. . 11/ .1: Â«C - SOLAR SHADE DEVICE i \ il 1 1 / 11 FIRST FLOOR ~h, EL ./00Â·.9 /7---FIT PROPOSED SOUTH / HYMAN AVE ELEVATION 1" = 10'-O. 1 A3.1 91031IHONÂ¥ 3=I=IINNAO S31hlÂ¥HO NVINAH 19Â¥3 OEL WOO.0#!UUnO'MAAM -1 / \ V I I V ~ ' / '\I I -6 C V ..1 VWL 1 --4,-taj I. 1 1,1 %1 1 1 1 '1 1 1 1 - 1 11= 1 1 1 im 1 / = 11 1 1 - / 1 1 -m m : \ 1 - - , 1 9 X 1 1 10- 9 l.,8 G -' 9 -1 --11 : Z 1 - - 1- 1 --Z ZI 00 0 - C 00 1 1 /1 1 1 1 - 1 1 1 11 1 1 ~'--44- ': 1% re 9 44 82 ~2 4 4 - 1 11.-0- lilli 11.-5 i1i 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com r.'ll 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 1 1 11 11 1 J 11 1 1 11 11 NOIJ-V/%313 19 3*NIGIF EL â€¢ 132'-O-( ) THIRD FLOOR LL9L8 00Â¥80100 'N3dSV 299,-(6'&61Â¥=1 1 0699-9Z6'026 731 I L 1919 03 'NadSÂ¥ I -3AÂ¥ NÂ¥0IAH 19Â¥3 019 '3AV NVINAH 19Â¥30ZZ ll]00.e#!UunO'MAAM 91031IHONÂ¥ 3=I=IINN[10 S31hIVHO NVINAH 19Â¥3 OEL EL'ZO'Â£0 Z o. Z >- K 1- <0 JO bZ DC K 1 L 1. Li Â§12 12 1- t ./ SM mlifk Â§1* 22 Id 1\ -E 1 1 / f Â«Â«49~ 9944964~ 1 31 Un lit - 1 / t = f I-~ 17 99 4 4 4 1 1 1 0 - f\ - 4 1 = 1 / 1- 1 1 fil 11- 80 = = 1~ 1 01 1 0-4 6 E 1 - . OE) 8 1 1 / \ 1/ \ fl <C 11 I . 11 = 1 1-2 L 1 1 1 i 1 \ ~L==11- 11 = 1 \ 1 = 1.40 ~ \ 1 / 4> 353 = 1 = 1 1 un \ ~i - 1 / - 1 / 1 1 2 1 2\ / 1 li - 1 = 1 4 \1 - l 1 - 1 W y= -- 1 'tr r 'i l, 1.1-.'-I 0 Ill 0 0 > LU W 0 0 10 11-1 0 0 <f â‚¬ I I 0 0 ix H 4 < 2 -1 0 0 m e E.EV STAIR PENTKISE EL â€¢ 142'-09 ) NOI=LVAL!33 19 1*NEIN - 30IAE]C ElaVHS hIV-109 =4 3 ft -- -3 9-9 f =I .-- Trf- j ET 444 4.-F 2 = 1 1 \ Z m fox. 43%\ :t: 2 -, 2-41-= i- 42.4 9 70* 1 1 334-7 Elli ''.\ It \14 \ 43 GN 6 4Â« .// L 444i 2 35 55 A 2 5553 jA 9 54 55/Â»A \ \<Â°i / 1 1i Nlill/Ull //L. .fr:1'11//Ili --40/0,- :3 P &6 93 42 In -41 I I dll i j '19 -99 611R W 62 1 11.-O- 11... 11.-S A u 44* 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 2 www.cunniffe.com CO CO CD 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1.1 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 C..Ill lzE /5/5 / f~ 01941 ////1.....\ 1 -1 .11 11 11 11 Il Il 1 1 I 1 -' Il '1 1.-' 1 Nall*6333 1333* / ELIN 231 .. 1 70 -m 0> 1O LD m t> -1 1 i Z 0 -.#-Ir J 1 1 Â»t - t' Il L of t IF"/ = 1% 1 2 4\\. ~\\\ -1 t ~\\\ 1 1\ -- . / 0 a Of fi- " a.\ - ... 111 / / UNÂ« = ng -4 2/:ill- . a\/ /// 111 :Â»> * 1 ULL__ 1 - ifil t 11& ,I,1 '31&, 7/ & "t Ill - \\\ 7-0 X\\\ 9%94 97 174*r 9*2: - 'fll 1 0 )0 444Â« i A~~A-- 1 1 //// . 821 \ 5 31 O ./\\ 1 itt?%*1 4-- 1.\\ \\\\ 1XX\ , .... I * 0 -1 -0 4%44- 1% . AR IO Â» :<1 -..... -.... l Â«141Â»11 144 I -\\\ '777 - 13 'Ff' -'1/6 fÂ» â€¢fII -- 1 355 1 1 , . 0 9% 'Irf 'lif \\\ I ':Ill<,1, \ I \\ .94 z\\X 1 /1 ' 4 = 9* ./ 44*4 ~. i Â«555. A \ \\<xxx, =,iniffeit-1 - 4 \\\\ - '-1 I . /\ ' \\1 / . 1 4 ~\\\ .24\A---- / aL= -- * M ~\\\ 144:42 -..... il 1 --~\\. . -= Â«449 1 , 10 1 .\\\ \\ ",11,1,11'll 'f .... 8 '#'#'Jillit Â·f'll'Jitilfljjll 3t. 8- 1,,I, 11'llÂ¢ - -- :liffill lili -11 'll.,fIJ 111 .,I,1111 / PE LD -8 re 02 8 0 8. r -10 + '1* Â·11- X] 4. 44 LD I U Cl 0 FTI 0 ril 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www,cunniffe,com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 6- NOI1*A3-13 1331* /0 :ip 7, ..5 11....... 21'Unrh*- E]OIAE]a ElaVHG hlÂ¥109 -Â·.,~~hk~: ~ =~k SOLAR SHADE DEVICE E.EV ROOF PECKE ~\ EL â€¢ 139'-3- f 3-----~ 1 L-li it Eff ffÂ«*4443 Â«04 4%444493 39Â« filittte 4% THIRD FLOOR ~|Â·, EL â€¢ 122Â·-0- C 3------~- t SECOND FLOOR ~3 1 EL â€¢111'-0~ f )-- ~~~p~Â»tu~ FIRST FLOOR ~ "" H " n H li G 1 Z -Â«40 6 9 I EL/,00'-6;(1~1/ M L.U 0 ird EXISTIND INEST / AIXI LOT ELEVATION 1 "= 10'-O. C\J % A3.4e 91031IHOMÂ¥ 33:IINNAO S3-IBVHO lu00.8#!UUnS'NAVA L99*'026'Om :XÂ¥=1 1 0699'926'0Z6:131 I N919 00 'NEdSÂ¥ I 'BAÂ¥ NVINAH 19Â¥3 019 1*441'1*3-05 .. Ea STAIR PENTIÂ©USE A|~ 3// --------------- EL â€¢ 142'-09 3--1~- 4,#594/ STAIR PENTHOUSE -2/818 BEYOND PEMIN,Nk-hy/e'ldht&4- - 1 61.ASS WARDRAIL GUARDRAIL ~ BEYOND EL . 196'-49 T---X,- - SOLAR SHADE DEVICE AT 3RD Ft OOR 'i/Jilit//i// / 17 M ~-lrl-11:-:1 7-71-9 ~-:11::11:-:1 r-71:--7 .1 p./4/-74 SOLAR SHADE DEVICE â„¢1120 FLO~____~- SOLAR SHADE DEVICE AT INC FLOOR EL â€¢ 122'-O- c )~~~~ 0 - REPLACE ARNINe C~i L - im- I 17--'118--, T--,r-1,--, r--lr--, 1, 11, 11. i CG1----~------ PNINDOMS - 1-Â¥P ~$~AR SHADE DEVICE %4Â»44~7Â«Â»9* Ile/LAAAJAhy ~~~~~~~.-Â» 1/L/4,~Am'.2-1/ SECOND FLOOR d~ EL â€¢ 111Â·-O- 7- )--~- SPLAR SHADE DEVICE AT 19- FLOOR 99LAR DIADE DEVICE AT IST FLOO 5 1 liT-=Ir-ar--"7-71 . T \F T7*tr--7--rll- Â£ 11/ - F /Â« 94 .>10./.4 1-11 Z SOLAR SHADE DEVICE < > FIRST Floet ~1 I EL â€¢ 100'-07 )-~ k- CO LU 0 A CO A <C PROPOSED 1/NEST / ADJ LOT ELEVATION 1" = 10'-O" A3.4 91031IHOMÂ¥ 3=I=IINNAO S31hIVHO www. cunniffe.com L99*'066'026 XY: 1 0699'926'026 131 I L L919 00 'N3dSÂ¥ 1 3AV NVINAH 1-SÂ¥3019 3AV NVINAH 19Â¥3 OE L Lm9 00Â¥30100 'N3d EL'ZO'CO - 1 0 1 34%/ .94~ 1 gf / 1 Â· A #. , // // // /49/ /, i. ~'/~430* v i 3<Â·22.Â·. <9/32.Â· 3*ff-*-~<23<L / u:Â·rtÂ·pe-;t~%r#â‚¬4Â·--,- , R~Â·- .- 1#zfAC)37::Â·-<4Â·;Â· .- *4:4k9 Â· /VE~*#PS*, 2 / 2,0 - '9Â© . i ./. #"6&#AP'../, I ... . i . i./kieÂ£91+:~Â«'>ie:2:i'*.Evf:. ..~ I . . 0. -4:59Â·tti.N:.Â·,. :4 Â·Â·;.:.Â·;,1,:?.Py'~.;7-fpix-e-u:. ~Â·< . 0- Â·Â·.Â·.i ':Â·' Cl:.. 7Â»Â·.Â» 5,Â·2:..:LÂ·:'rÂ·F ,Â·,~~St*Z. '. FIS:t:~44 0 . 1*/E /~ -.- --2/r. *- .49 ' ' /,S. //#BAAW.c~~r'-9*62Â£Â·ta , '' rt-L=1Â£92**&22-ky. ' * 1, ./.0, , 1~ ~ . tal e Â· ..1, - - 1 111 4 -1.1 ' . * ~r . ' ~,i j.1 - . ... 1 1 411 r , Â·*Â· # Â·. =-Â£==.1..Â·.-Li UPÂ·_ â‚¬ fl""I"*--F-,w-*9'"'eari J---7.----1 , 1, 281 - . 4 Â¥. ,/ f/A '44 41 ~ Â»~t~~ t . '. , - 7-a -- - 41 ''' i \ . I 7 I :. .. .", 6. - I 4...... ' 7%1 -,4 - . C phiag , AA .7 .le.90- -*.,â€ž,Â·4>4-37'~~1~**'' -* 0&'t'*2;: ./,*-0.4-44-2,f' Â»'*'.hÂ·'~"t:,$9* .1 1-ilf,<<vfper*Ati- , <J, . 0 -I. f . .. 1. -VI 4 'ic_ * . .241 .,=.W.... . - .-0 \ 14 e.1 B#:. p ,i 1 1.% 1 ; 02;i~~~ ~~ ift:TER;%5~~ tip - -,~... - W>4 7 ... 1 -/ 5%#155*: ./ . . .. 3>:41~Â·~.- th' . #93'k-6 1,Â·. -::Â·- ' ,400&5#51. 7~:~201**terhe.}PGJMWAqe##AH##:;6:.17#Egt%*#~~#MUbJyL,i~-2..tE@94#~4$~rPWyjAM;WANB5ht ' i :/41:42,~4 pi-<r-.â€ž-Â·ey,.44# 4~749;Cf~~-*,&:i~914*$,44-6-kf##fte,- . r -AA *24-1/%0<fit*.04#89~5/jqifikÂ£Â£, I. 1 # ''' 42'-' ~ ~~ re#K#to*.(7(**MA:difk*kS .99 I. I. 4 - - r. . , 11 1 ~ Ch'.11. ...A . + -71'Plk- I. Y ' -=' ' P W.414<2 - A U /054 .tre 9 Â· L.;it:. f . r. %.-A...: Il // / blrf.'.1 '00.- - /4-07, -: :'ll, : , / I - - I *f, I /\ ./ / 1â€¢*+. - -' */.1 +4&.1 .~*.# /2,2#,Me J-4/* i \ 1 1 Ir. - I .S l \ .,4, I...ErÂ«,24â‚¬7*9Â¢*.53:t~~. J - ' 1 1 Â»Ar 0.-.4. '1. ..44=47:*452% 31$ -.-2... I -Â· .. /'-.'~ .Â·5:,- -J~At~'4.' > .64â€¢,::f ~'+4~-44$97.' .f.. :. ..6~11'iNG-:.-4-;4~~~T-; ~~i:Â· ... . ..Â£â€¢:,. ,...Â»'Ewf.0Â·Â»*~ Â·A / 1 *2. - A ' .:Ck: I / n 1'-8 %CO.''k /Lf' 4 â€ž I I , 5-e r . - - Â·Â·Â·.- T /1.- -=J 1 *6/ h ... ~4 1 -,4 %~ - -I-. / â€¢ i / 2,1., . .4 1 F , *f Â· 1 ... â€¢â€¢ r ~ 11 1 - WALL SECTION 720 EAST HYMAN AVENUE CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 610 EAST HYMAN. ASPEN CO, (970) 925-5590 SOUTH ELEVATION SUNSHADING STUDY www cunniffe com ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Application hi PROJECT: CIT' Mt "Â· U u Â£,Â· Liz DVEN Name: cyyl , l...Acw COMMUNITY JEVELOPMEW[ Location: -320 EAST HyMAH ANE., 43>eaH g-0. 8161i A>ftrl Att Let ic. a-*04 t.11>IÂ·Â·1120:AnqioiA :~DUv'litE Oatan}Nlum (Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel ID# (REQUIRED) -#737 -1 8-2 - 11010 - .3 1 4 +2737 - 1 82- 84â‚¬>00 - aol APPLICANT: Name: DA/1, l-l-,6 94 Joki N MA FC-1-I N Address: fietec~<6 1197 4)DEENeTZNÂ£)Â£4,,NU) -241.ALAMP 934- 2> Phone #: O//-649-Â·442--/43+ Fax#: E-mail:jobrl,ny,:lih #%6/,Ze/).5*46/72 42 Â«*Gfra.. co. n'B REPRESENTATIVE: Name: 6MARZ-DS CUMN I FFE ~ARcH17'E.C.IrS Address: (271Â£7 E:AsT 14>/nlAN AVE . Phone #: 470-9 35 -148>929 Fax#: 970-110- Eâ‚¬:76 E-mail: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): [2 Historic Designation U Relocation (temporary, on U Certificate of No Negative Effect U or off-site) E[ Certificate of Appropriateness ~ Demolition (total demolition) -Minor Historic Development El Historic Landmark Lot Split -Major Historic Development -Conceptual Historic Development -Final Historic Development -Substantial Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) rAV i.Ii~~ - LEWU- 0Â¥Ft,(LEÂ· Â¥501143\1Â·# +ATHLer ~ic Cl-UE> PROPOSAL: (description ofproposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) m IKE:13_ 0Â£Â£-SUit-PI Ne iNa-DDI NGN OFFI CES ,84:Na/AT:ED AT+-t LEET-(C. OU>-SÂ»;p /.musiwer (*REE=- mAN<Er + AFORÂ©BELÂ« ExÂ¥â‚¬Al,OK i,00131<Â· 1Na-UPES SUNSHAPES, ICâ‚¬-PLAC/KEr Fil->/luaoID> -T RANSOM F> -Â·23-0â€ž REplACLE- 2.oup-rop f-1 VALL , AND NEW [4:a~lzof> PEGEL 6 Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29,2007 Â®Â®UN General Information Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This information will help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that may be involved. YES NO 0 0 Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions, new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration? C] Does the work you are planning include interior work; including remodeling, rehabilitation, or restoration? 8 Ff Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time? El 0 In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits? D If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in conjunction with this.project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential properties are not.) C U If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Historical Preservation? Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use: U Rehabilitation Loan Fund 0 Conservation Easement Program Â¥Dimensional Variances U Increased Density U Historic Landmark Lot Split â‚¬Waiver of Park Dedication Fees El Conditional Uses [2'Exemption from Growth Management Quota System El Tax Credits Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29,2007 ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form (Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.) Project: Tle BLAST Hyn,1,414 AVE . 01.5Â¢38;N Al*MLE-Eld- Â£0Â£00-U 2,-~) Applicant: OAA, LLC 'C,/4. JOWN MART/N Proj ect Location: 720 -egry*yte.AN AJE- . j ASPEN , CO . Zone District: M i XEL,7 i./58> Lot Size: OlD t X 1 430 2 Lot Area: 96>06> 9-P (For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing:11,414 Proposed: 15 71 54- Number ofresidential units: Existing: 0 Proposed: 9 Number ofbedrooms: Existing: 0 Proposed: 1 Proposed % of demolition: 1-Â·622>--~-~+~N â‚¬> 7 DIMENSIONS: (write rda where no requirement exists in the zone district) Floor Area: Existing: 17,Dlib Allowable: 16,00(3 Proposed: 1 7 )030 Height 12 --4 To Principal Bldg.: Existing:27544' Allowable: 2720~ Proposed,Â· ND 61-il),1*i3E:.~*-<A&FT erTAIA Accessory Bldg.: Existing: 14/A Allowable: N/>t Proposed: N./04Â· a,va-osuse,~ On-Site parking: Existing: O Required: 0 Proposed: 0 % Site coverage: Existing: 11 >4 Required: N/A- Proposed: ND NE=LU ./ % Open Space: Existing: 23 /, Required: B /A- Proposed: Mb NE40 Front Setback:(%00-0t) Existing: /Â£9 ' Required. /'d' ' Proposed.Â· No Optri,1(*L Rear Setback (8014-+~ Existing: 1 ' Required: 6 0 Proposed: N D CHANâ‚¬E- Combined Front/Rear: Indicate N, S. E. W Existing: N/A Required: N/>4 Proposed: No 0+1614(RES . - *14 Side Setback<AAST) Existing: 5 -U Required: 6 ' Proposed: /43 C.,40?149E râ€¢ Side Setback: ~facs~ Existing: 0 Required: EV Proposed: 110 04:ANâ‚¬E, Combined Sides: Exisfing: N <A Required: N /29 Proposed: 610 C.HAN<&2_ Distance between -Existing: N/>3- Required.N /A proposed.Â· 14/A- buildings: Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued: M/A- Variations requpsted (identify the exact variances needed): N/A i . Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29,2007 4. 9 4(#l 144vlks &(f FFU Od. i * I1 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT AND FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 720 EAST HYMAN AVE (COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING), ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB CONDOMINIUM & DUVIKE CONDOMINIUM, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 25, SERIES OF 2008 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-11010 (through 11031) & 2737-182-11800 (and 11801) WHEREAS, the applicant, CM LLC c/o Roger Marolt, represented by Lenny Oates, Oates Kenezevich, Gardenswartz, and Kelly, P.C., has requested Minor Development for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen Athletic Club Condominium & Duvike Condominium, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, the procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC reviews the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.050 of the Aspen Municipal Code establishes the process for Designation and states that an application for listing on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall be approved if City Council, after a recommendation from HPC, determines sufficient evidence exists that the property meets the criteria; and WHEREAS, Jason Lasser, in his staff report dated October 2,2008 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found the review standards and the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and Commercial Design Standards have been met; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 8,2007, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application for Minor Development and Historic Landmark Review met the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and the Aspen Municipal Code Historic Landmp-1. 06â€ž,An-,10 .al':C.,1, .r; ter: 9 unA Annrnveri the anolication by a vote of four to one (4 to 1). RECEPTION#: 555802, 01/16/2009 at 09:08:25 AM, 1 OF 3, R $16.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO F'Aut 11 0014 10(5~ . AM*- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC approves the application for Landmark Designation of the property at 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen Athletic Club Condominium & Duvike Condominium, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, and approves the application for Minor Development with the following conditions; 1. The applicant will replace the ground floor exterior sliding doors and maintain their existing configuration and operation. 2. That the applicant will retain the existing planters, primarily on the Hyman side but will look at the planter configuration on Original Street and work with the new accessible needs and try to maintain as much ofthe original landscape as possible. 3. The applicant will remove the Coniferous trees in conjunction with Parks and Engineering. 4. The beige paint will be removed, 5. The applicant will apply for a right-of-way permit for all the landscaping items as stated in staff s memo. 6. The applicant will work with parks to choose the appropriate tree species from the Arbor Guide and those plantings will be appropriately and carefully considered in size as they grow. 7. The new awning windows are approved. 8. The brise-soliel as proposed are approved but final design will be approved by staff and monitor. 9. Historic Designation is approved. 10. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days o f the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shal 1 not result in the creation o f a vested properly right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen, Colorado. 1 Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the Sth day of October 2008. Approved as to Form: Michael Hoffman, Chairman / Jim True, Special Counsel ATTE#T: K addl~ 90-14-iÂ«-1 Kathy Stfickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 1. The applicant will replace the ground floor exterior sliding doors and maintain their existing configuration and operation. 2. That the applicant will retain the existing planters, primarily on the Hyman side but will look at the planter configuration on Original Street and work with the new accessible needs and try to maintain as much of the original landscape as possible. 3. The applicant will remove the Coni ferous trees in conjunction with Parks and Engineering. 4. The beige paint will be removed. 5. The applicant will apply for a right-of-way permit for all the landscaping items as stated in staff's memo. 6. The applicant will work with parks to choose the appropriate tree species from the Arbor Guide and those plantings will be appropriately and carefully considered in size as they grow. 7. The new awning windows are approved. 8. The brise-soliel as proposed are approved but final design will be approved by staffand monitor. 9. Historic Designation is approved. ' Toni Swersky - From: Philippa Kay <philippa.kay@optusnet.com.au> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 6:16 PM To: Toni Swersky Subject: John Martin document Attached is the signed letter of acknowledgement. John Martin No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg. coni Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4959 - Release Date: 04/25/12 1 , April 10. 2012 Sara Adams Senior Planner Aspen Community Development 130 S Gateno Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: 720 East Hyman Avenue Development Application Dear Sora: This letter acknowledges that I understand the 90-day negotiation petiod (section 26.415.025.C.11 of ihe Land Use Code J which is related lo the Aspen Modern Properties designation. Fughepnore# I apree to on exiension of this negotiation period as necessary to accommgdfale ble plt,n~ng staff schedule. 1 1/ 1 Sincerely, < ,r /' / / il CM, LLC it 4/'; L By John Martih, Managing Member March 7, 2012 Sara Adams Senior Planner Aspen Community Development 130 S Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Sara: Charles Cunniffe Architects, P.C. is hereby authorized to act as the designated and approved representative with respect to my Land Use Application for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen, Colorado. Sincerely, ARD ~. LNJU LL-- CM, LLC By John Martin, Managing Member March 7, 2012 Sara Adams Senior Planner Aspen Community Development 130 S Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: 720 East Hyman Avenue Development Application Dear Sara: This letter acknowledges that I understand the 90-day negotiation period (section 26.415.025.C.1) of the Land Use Code) which is related to the Aspen Modern Properties designation. Sincerely, 1 CM, LLC By John Martin, Managing Member RECEIVED . ' MAR 0 9 2012 Agreement to Pay Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENI An agreement between the City of Aspen ("City") and property CM, 66<L Phone No.:OIl 64-3 44-2 14-34- Owner 0"): 1 L Email:johnmart:/1.quaail-~W/1 2.%44 . CO,,1 1 Corin pAA rlÂ·-2 0 Address of -73-0 E. \-1 YARn Ave. Billing Address: 130 s. 14/\; 11 51.-. ),2-(14 Ficor Property: (subject of Aspen 160 81611 (send bills A~Pen, C-0 81611 here) application) c-/0 -Roqer Marol +.,C-PA L) I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. , Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and the payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $ 1,260 flat fee for Housing $ flat fee for $ flat fee for . $ flat fee for For deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review, and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for non-payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render an application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $7,560 deposit for 24 hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $315 per hour. $265 deposit for 1 hour of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $265 per hour. City of Aspen: Prmeky pwner: Chris Bendon Community Development Director Name: '*ah 4 /11 4/ 6 -4 Title: 0 -1 A rfn-er C /9 C LC_ g City Use: Fees Due: $_9,085 _ Received: $ Page 5 . Land Use Review Fee Policy The City of Aspen has established a review fee policy for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted. A flat fee is collected by Community Development for applications which normally take a minimal and predictable amount of staff time to process. Review fees for other City departments reviewing the application (referral departments) will also be collected when necessary. Flat fees are cumulative - meaning an application with multiple flat fees must pay the sum of those flat fees. Flat fees are not refundable. A review fee deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff review is required. Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Various City staff may also charge their time spent on the case in addition to the case planner. Deposit amounts may be reduced if, in the opinion of the Community Development Director, the project is expected to take significantly less time to process than the deposit indicates. A determination on the deposit amount shall be made during the pre-application conference by the case planner. Hourly billing shall still apply. All applications must include an Agreement to Pav Application Fees. One payment including the deposit for Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the City of Aspen. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required application fee. The Community Development Department shall keep an accurate record of the actual time required for the processing of a land use application requiring a deposit. The City can provide a summary report of fees due at the applicant's request. The applicant will be billed for the additional costs incurred by the City when the processing of an application by the Community Development Department takes more time or expense than is covered by the deposit. Any direct costs attributable to a project review shall be billed to the applicant with no additional administrative charge. In the event the processing of an application takes less time than provided for by the deposit, the department shall refund the unused portion of the deposited fee to the applicant. Fees shall be due regardless of whether an applicant receives approval. Unless otherwise combined by the Director for simplicity of billing, all applications for conceptual, final, and recordation of approval documents shall be handled as individual cases for the purposes of billing. Upon conceptual approval all billing shall be reconciled and all past due invoices shall be paid prior to the Director accepting an application for final review. Final review shall require a new deposit at the rate in effect at the time of final application submission. Upon final approval all billing shall again be reconciled prior to the Director accepting an application for review of technical documents for recordation. The Community Development Director may cease processing of a land use application for which an unpaid invoice is 30 or more days past due. Unpaid invoices of 90 or more days past due may be assessed a late fee of 1.75% per month. An unpaid invoice of 120 days or more may be subject to additional actions as may be assigned by the Municipal Court Judge. All payment information is public domain. All invoices shall be paid prior to issuance of a Development Order or recordation of development agreements and plats. The City will not accept a building permit for a property until all invoices are paid in full. For permits already accepted, an unpaid invoice of 90 or more days may result in cessation of building permit processing or issuance of a stop work order until full payment is made. The property owner of record is the party responsible for payment of all costs associated with a land use application for the property. Any secondary agreement between a property owner and an applicant representing the owner (e.g. a contract purchaser) regardihg payment of fees is solely between those private parties. Page 4 ..A. 1~<.*.c 1*",-, Insurance@poration i ..4Â·â€¢t.l.'Â»:1.14-k iÂ«:4!7:it:t ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance American Land Title Association (1966) AUTHORIZED AGENT: PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPKINS AVE. 3KDFLOOR ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 970-925-1766-PHONE 970-925-6527-FAX 877-217-3158-TOLL FREE E-MAIL ADDRESS: TITLE MATTERS: CLOSING MATTERS: Vince Higens-vince@sopris.net TJ Davis-tjd@sopris.net Brandi Jepson-brandi@sopris.net Joy Higens-j oy@sopris.net (Closing & Title Assistance) Issued By [Â£111)yerditie Insurance Giporatign ,"0 Home Office: 101 Gateway Centre Parkway, Gateway One Richmond, Virginia 23235-5153 1-800-446-7086 B 1004-268 .u-/1 i. 2 FIJ COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: July 24, 2006 at 8:00 AM Case No. PCT20668L5 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a) ALTA Owner's Policy-Form 1992 Amount$ 6,900,000.00 Premium$ 10,848.00 Proposed Insured: Rate: Standard CM LLC (b) ALTA Loan Policy-Form 1992 Amount$ 2,000,000.00 Premium$ 200.00 Proposed Insured: Rate: Companion ALPINE BANK, ITS SUCCESSORS AND/OR ASSIGNS ((c) ALTA Loan Policy-Form 1992 Amount$2,750,000.00 Premium$100.00 Proposed Insured: Rate: Companion ALPINE BANK, ITS SUCCESSORS AND/OR ASSIGNS (d) ALTA Loan Policy-Form 1992 Amount$ Premium$ Proposed Insured: Rate: Companion 3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested in: NELIGH C. COATES, JR., AS TO PARCEL 1 CM, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AS TO PARCEL 2 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is described as follows: See Attached Exhibit "A" PITKIN COUN'rY TITLE, INC. Schedule A-PG.1 601 E HOPKINS, ASPEN, CO. 81611 This Commitment is invalid 970-925-1766 Phone/970-925-6527 Fax unless the Insuring 877-217-3158 To[1 Free Provisions and Schedules A and B are attached. AUTHORIZED AGENT Countersigned: L EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCELI: ALL UNITS IN THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUM, according to the Map thereof recorded January 3, 1976 in Plat Book 5 at Page 45, and according to the Amended Map thereof recorded February 13, 1978 in Plat Book 6 at Page 74, and as defined and described in the Condominium Declaration thereof recorded January 3, 1976 in Book 322 at Page 370 and the Amended Condominium Deciaration recorded February 13,1978 in Book 343 at Page 402. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB UNIT, according to the Map thereof recorded January 3,1976 in Plat Book 5 at Page 45, and according to the Amended Map thereof recorded February 13,1978 in Plat Book 6 at Page 74, and as defined and described In the Condominium Declaration thereof recorded January 3,1976 in Book 322 at Page 370 and the Amended Condominium Declaration recorded February 13, 1978 in Book 343 at Page 402. PARCEL 11: Units 101, 201,202, 203,301, 302, 303 and 304, DUVIKE CONDOMINIUM, according to the Condominium Map thereof recorded June 4,1981 in Plat Book 11 at Page 61 as Reception No. 233278, and as defined and described in the Condominium Declaration for Duvike Condominium recorded June 4, 1981 in Book 409 at Page 355 as Reception No. 233277. TOGETHER with non-exclusive, perpetual access as set forth in Agreement recorded May 20,2003 as Reception No. 483036. SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: ITEM (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. ITEM (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record to-wit: 1. Release by the Public Trustee of the, Deed of Trust from : NELIGH C. COATES JR. to the Public Trustee of the County of for the use of : ALPINE BANK ASPEN original amount : $2,000,000.00 dated : October 23, 1998 recorded : December 11, 1998 reception no. :425400 Modification Agreement changing various terms of the Deed of Trust above was recorded January 31, 2002 as Reception No. 463439. Modification Agreement changing various terms of the Deed of Trust above was recorded May 17, 2004 as Reception No. 497645. 2. Duly executed and acknowledged Deed, Frorn : NELIGH C. COATES JR. and CM LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABIJTY CO To : CM LLC 3. Copy of the Registration duly stamped by the Secretary of State of the State of COLORADO evidencing registration of CM LLC and Statement of Authority and a copy of the Operating Agreement of CM LLC evidencing the names and addresses of the Members and/or Managers authorized to act on behalf of said Limited Liability Company. 4. Deed of Trust from : CM LLC to the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin for the use of : THE LENDER TO BE INSURED HEREUNDER to secure : $2,000,000.00 5. Deed of Trust from : CM LLC to the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin for the use of : THE LENDER TO BE INSURED HEREUNDER to secure : $2,750,000.00 (Continued) SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS - Continued 6. Duly acknowledged certificate of the authorized Managing Agent or Board of Directors of ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION certifying that there are no assessments for common expenses which remain unpaid or otherwise constitute a lien on the subject property. 7. Evidence satisfactory to the Company that the Real Estate Transfer Tax as established by Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979) and Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990) has been paid or exempted. 8. Certificate of nonforeign status executed by the transferor(s). (This instrument is not required to be recorded) 9. Evidence satisfactory to the Company that the Declaration of Sale, Notice to County Assessor as required by H.B. 1288 has been complied with. (This instrument is not required to be recorded, but must be delivered to and retained by the Assessors Office in the County in which the property is situated) SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. (EXCEPTIONS NUMBERED 1 thru 6 ABOVE AFFECT PARCEL I AND Il) 7. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deed from the City of Aspen recorded in Book 189 at Page 343 providing as follows: "That no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws" 8. Terms and conditions as set forth in Encroachment Agreement by and between Theodore Koutsoubos, Demtra Koutsoubos and Neligh C. Coates, Jr., recorded in Book 308 at Page 919 and re-recorded in Book 309 at Page 97. 9. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations, easements, restrictions and assessments as set forth in the Condominium Declaration for Aspen Athletic Club recorded January 3,1976 in Book 322 at Page 370,and Amended Condominium Declaration recorded February 13,1978 in Book 343 at P'age 402, deleting therefrom any restrictions indicating preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin. 10. Easements, rights of way and all matters as disclosed on Plat of subject property recorded January 3, 1976 in Plat Book 5 at Page 45 and Amended Plat recorded February 13, 1978 in Plat Book 6 at Page 74. 11. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Revocable Encroachment License recorded July 18, 2001 as Reception No. 456622. 12. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in License Agreement recorded June 22,2005 as Reception No. 511554. 13. Existing leases and tenancies. (EXCEPTIONS NUMBERED 7 thru 13 ABOVE AFFECT PARCEL I) (Continued) SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS - (Continued) 14. Exceptions and reservations as set forth in the Act authorizing the issuance of the Patent for the City and Townsite of Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Page 31. 15. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Resolution No. 6 (Series of 1973) recorded April 3, 1973 in Book 274 at Page 217. 16. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Statement of Exemption from Subdivision Regulation recorded June 4,1981 in Book 409 at Page 353. 17. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Condominium Declaration for Duvike Condominium recorded June 4, 1981 in Book 409 at Page 355. 18. Easements, rights of way and all matters as disclosed on Plat of subject property recorded June 4,1981 in Plat Book 11 at Page 61. 19. Terrns, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Agreement between Walter Birk, Frank J. Woods 111, Wlater Hampel, Jr., Larry Ferguson and Loma Alto Corporation, a Texas corporation and William R. Dunaway, Albert Kern and George Vicenzi recorded May 20,2003 as Reception No. 483036. 20. Deed of Trust from: CM LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY To the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin For the use of : ALPINE BANK Original Amount : $1,500,000.00 Dated : April 21,2006 Recorded : May 30,2006 Reception No. : 524601 21. Deed of Trust from: CM LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY To the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin For the use of : ALPINE BANK Original Amount : $986,343.55 Dated : April 21, 2006 Recorded : May 30,2006 Reception No. : 524602 (EXCEPTIONS NUMBERED 14 Thru 21 ABOVE AFFECT PARCEL Il) ENDORSEMENT SCHEDULE FOR OWNERS POLICY ATTACHED TO AND BECOMING A PART OF CASE NO: PCT20668L5 SELLER: NELIGH C. COATES JR. and CM LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY CO BUYER: CM LLC The following endorsements will be issued in connection with the Policy to be issued hereunder as referenced above: ENDORSEMENTS: NONE REQUESTED For a fee of: $ For a fee of: $ For a fee of: $ For a fee of: $ For a fee of: $ Exceptions Numbered 1, 2, 3 and 4 will be deleted from the final Title Policy, upon compliance with the requirements set foitli below. Exception Number 5 is automatically deleted upon recordation of the documents called for on the requirement page of this commitment. THE FEE FOR DELETING EXCEPTIONS 1 THRU 4 OR ANY PREPRINTED EXCEPTION IS: $50.00 Exception Number 6 will be amended to read: Taxes for the current year not yet due or payable, upon evidence satisfactory that the Taxes for the prior year(s) have been paid. NOTE: A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanic's and materialmens liens, executed by the seller and any additional parties deemed necessary by the Company. The company hereby reserves the right to make additional requirements as may be deemed necessary in the event additional facts regarding development, construction or other building or work are disclosed to the company that may fall within any lien period as defined in the Statues of the State of Colorado, and may result in additional premiums and/or fees for such coverage. NOTE: A current survey, certified by a Registered Colorado Land Surveyor must be delivered to, approved and retained by the Company for Deletion of Printed Exception No. 3. (NOT REQUIRED FOR CONDOMINIUM OR TOWNHOME UNITS) ENDORSEMENT SCHEDULE FOR LENDERS POLICY FILE NO: PCT20668L5 BORROWER: CM LLC The following endorsements will be issued in connection with the Policy to be issued hereunder as referenced above: Form: NONE REQUESTED $ Form: $ Form: $ Form: $ Form: $ Exceptions Numbered 1, 2,3 and 4 will be deleted from the final Title Policy, upon compliance with the requirements set forth below. Exception Number 5 will be deleted upon recordation of the documents called for on the Requirement Page. Exception Number 6 will be amended to read: Taxes for the current year not yet due or payable, upon evidence satisfactory that the Taxes for prior years have been paid in full. NOTE: A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanic's and materialmens liens, executed by the borrower and any additional parties deemed necessary by the Company. The company hereby reserves the right to make additional requirements as may be deemed necessary in the event additional facts regarding development, construction or other building or work are disclosed to the company that may fall within any lien period as defined in the Statues of the State of Colorado, and may result in additional premiums and/or fees for such coverage. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DISCLOSURES The Owner's Policy to be issued, if any shall contain the following items in addition to the ones set forth above: (1) The Deed of Trust, if any, required under Schedule B-Section 1. (2) Water rights, claims or title to water. (NOTE: THIS EXCEPTION WILL APPEAR ON THE OWNER'S AND MORTGAGE POLICY TO BE ISSUED HEREUNDER) Pursuant to Insurance Regulation 89-2 NOTE: Each title entity shall notify in writing every prospective insured in an owner's title insurance policy for a single family residence (including a condominium or townhouse unit) (i) of that title entity's general requirements for the deletion of an exception or exclusion to coverage relating to unfiled mechanics or materialmens liens, except when said coverage or insurance is extended to the insured under the terms of the policy. A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanics' and/or Materialmen's Liens executed by the persons indicated in the attached copy of said affidavit must be furnished to the Company. Upon receipt of these items and any others requirements to be specified by the Company upon request, Pre-printed Item Number 4 may be deleted from the Owners policy when issued. Please contact the Company for further information, Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained in this Paragraph shall be deemed to impose any requirement upon any title insurer to provide mechanics or materialmens lien coverage. NOTE: if the Company conducts the owners or loan closing under circumstances where it is responsible for the recording or filing of legal documents from said transaction, the Company will be deemed to have provided "Gap Coverage". Pursuantto Senate Bill 91-14 (CRS 10-11-122) (a) The Subject Real Property may be located in a Special Taxing District; (b) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction may be obtained form the County treasurer of the County Treasurer's Authorized Agent; (c) Information regarding Special Districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: A tax Certificate or other appropriate research will be ordered from the County Treasurer by the Company and the costs thereof charged to the proposed insured unless written instruction to the contrary are received by the company prior to the issuance of the Title Policy anticipated by this Commitment. Pursuant to House Bill 01-1088 (CRS 10-11-123) If Schedule B of your commitment for an Owner's Title Policy reflects an exception for mineral interests or leases, pursuant to CRS 10-11-123 (HB 01-1088), this is to advise: (a) There is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals or geothermal energy in the property and (b) That such mineral estate may include the Mght to enter and use the property without the surface owners' permission. This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B-Section 2 the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT20668L5 A and B are attached. PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPKINS, THIRD FLOOR ASPEN, CO 81611 970-925-1766/970-925-6527 FAX TOLL FREE 877-217-3158 WIRING INSTRUCTIONS FOR ALL TRANSACTIONS REGARDING THE CLOSING OF THIS FILE ARE AS FOLLOWS: ALPINE BANK-ASPEN 600 E. HOPKINS AVE. ASPEN, CO. 81611 ABA ROUTING NO. 102103407 FOR CREDIT TO: PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., ESCROW ACCOUNT ACCOUNT NO. 2020065129 REFERENCE:PCT20668L5/CM LLC ~ LAN DAME,IlICA Dear LandAmerica Customer: The Financial Services Modernization Act recently enacted by Congress has brought many changes to the financial services industry, which includes insurance companies and their agents. One of the changes is that we are now required to explain to our customers the ways in which we collect and use customer information. The statement attached to or on the reverse side of this letter is the privacy policy of the LandAmerica family of companies. The three largest members of the family - Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company, Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation, and Transnation Title Insurance Compan.y - may issue policies and handle real estate closings in virtually every part of the country. A number of other companies in the family provide other real estate services, and some operate more locally. You may review a list of LandAmerica companies on our website (www.landam.com). You may also visit our website for an explanation of our privacy practices relating to electronic communication. Our concern with the protection of your information has been a part of our business since 1876, when the company that is now Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company issued its first policy, We will continue to protect the privacy, accuracy, and security of customer information given to us. No response to this notice is required, but if you have questions, please write to us: LandAmerica Privacy P.O. Box 27567 Richmond, VA 23261-7567. LandAmerica Companies Title Insurance Companies: Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company, Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company of New Jersey, Industrial Valley Title Insurance Company, Land Title Insurance Company. Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation, Title Insurance Company of America, Transnation Title Insurance Company, Transnation Title Insurance Company of New York Relocation and Mortgages: Commonwealth Relocation Services, CRS Financial Services, Inc., LandAmerica Account Servicing, Inc. Title AgentsÂ·. Austin Title Company, ATACO, Inc., Albuquerque Title Company, Atlantic Title & Abstract Company, Brighton Title Services Company, Capitol City Title Services, Inc., CFS Title Insurance Agency, Charleston Title Agency; Charter Title Company of Fort Bend, Galveston, and Sugarland; Commercial Settlements, Inc., Commonwealth Land Title Company; Commonwealth Land Title Company of Austin, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Washington, Congress Abstract Corp., Cornerstone Residential Title, Cumberland Title Company, First Title & Escrow, Inc., Gulf Atlantic, Harbour Title, HL Title Agency, Lawyers Title Company; Lawyers Title of Arizona, El Paso, Galveston, Nevada, Pueblo, San Antonio, Lawyers Title Settlement Company, Lion Abstract, Longworth Insured, Louisville Title Agency of Central Ohio, Lorain County Title Company, M/1 Title Agency, NIA,/ Lawyers Title Agency, Oregon Title, Park Title, Partners Title Company, Pikes Peak Title Services, RE/Affirm Title Agency, Rainier Title Company, Residential Abstract, Residential Title, Rio Rancho Title, Texas Title Company, Title Transfer Service, Inc., TransOhio Residential Title Agency, Transnation Title & Escrow, Union Title Agency, University Title Services, Wilson Title Company Appraisals and Ancillary Services: LandAmerica OneStop, Inc. Form 3391-6 (May 2001) LANDAMERICA PRIVACY POLICY What kinds of information we collect. Most of LandAmerica's business is title insurance, but there are companies in our family that provide other real estate services to consumers. We collect information about you, (for instance, your name, address, telephone number), and information about your transaction, including the identity of the real property that you are buying or financing. We obtain a copy of any deeds, notes, or mortgages that are involved in the transaction. We may get this information from you or from the lender, attorney, or real estate broker that you have chosen. Our title insurance companies then obtain information from the public records about the property so that we ca n prepare a title insurance policy. When we provide closing, escrow, or settlement services, mortgage lending, or mortgage loan servicing, we may get your social security number, and we may receive additional information from third parties including appraisals, credit reports, land surveys, escrow account balances, and sometimes bank account numbers to facilitate the transaction. If you are concerned about the information we have collected, please write to us. How we use this information. The company giving or specifically adopting this notice does not share your information with marketers outside its own family. There's no need to tell us to keep your information to ourselves because we share your information only to provide the service requested by you or your lender, or in other ways permitted by law. The privacy laws permit some sharing without your approval. We may share internally and with nonaffiliated third parties in order to carry out and service your transaction, to protect against fraud or unauthorized transactions, for institutional risk control, and to provide information to government and law enforcement agencies. Companies within a family may share certain information among themselves in order to identify and market their own products that they think may be useful to you. Credit information about you is shared only to facilitate your transaction or for some other purpose permitted by law. How we protect your information. \Ne restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need the information to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with law to guard your nonpublic personal information. We reinforce the company's privacy policy with our employees. Agents that may be covered by this policy. Often, your transaction goes through a title insurance agent. Agents that are part of the LandAmerica family are covered by this policy. Agents that are not part of the LandAmerica family may specifically, in writing, adopt our policy statement. Form 3391-6 (May 2001) Pitkin County Title, Inc. Privacy Policy We collect nonpublic information about you from the following sources: Â· Information we receive from you, such as your name, address, telephone number, or social security number; â€¢ Information about your transactions with us, our affiliates, or others. We receive this information from your lender, attorney, real estate broker, etc.; and Information from public records We do not disclose any nonpublic personal information about our customers or former customers to anyone, except as permitted by law. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information to provide the products or services requested by you or your lender. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that company with appropriate federal and state regulations. . ISSUED BY COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE IdwyersT#le Insumnce @poration LAWYERS Title Insurance CORPORATION, a Virginia corporation, herein called the company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor: all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and tile amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six (6) months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers, the Commitment to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company. LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION /42*14 /235*-2,224*4. d Â£ li i h (il msâ‚¬*11}31 ~ ~,61-,1 W U.*-4 L. /1 A 0 1 f. 4 f i :'2/ '1 $,~4\ 1925 /#j Attest: /-7 6, 1- .'- . ... .. '. Secretary 4~ Â·Â·2< ,~.,6 2 By: / 6 President U 94 084;Ii.68/ If Conditions and Stipulations 1. The term "mortgage," when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security Instrument. J 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or f damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such : knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual I knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 1 3, Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under , the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in under : taking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to ~ acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. !n no event shall such liability exceed i the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and , Conditions and Stipulations and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the 1 proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the . 1 status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on 5 and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. ' ALTA Commitment - 1966 Cover Page Form 1004-268 ORIGINAL 1 Documentary Fee $ 690.00 -1'1-:i'70:-i*AFG*394**24.Â·Â· 1; WnRRANTY DEED THIS DEED, made August 31,2006, lillili llill Illl'11111 1111111 lilli i~11 111 111'li 528089 Between NEUGH C. COATES JR. JANICE K VQS CAUDILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 16.00 D 690.00 Page: 1 of 3 08/31/2006 01: of the County of PITKIN, State of CO, GRANTOR, AND CM LLC, GRANTEE whose legaladdressis :230 S. MILL ST.,ASPEN, CO, 81611 of the County of PITKIN, State of CO WITNESSETH, That for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the grantor has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey and confirm unto the grantee, its heirs and assigns forever, all the real property together with improvements, if any, situate and lying and being in the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO, described as follows: ALL UNITS IN THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUM, according to the Map thereof recorded January 3, 1976 in Plat Book 5 at Page 45, and according to the Amended Map thereof recorded February 13, 1978 in Plat Book 6 at Page 74, and as defined and described in the Condominium Declaration thereof recorded January 3, 1976 in Book 322 at Page 370 and the Amended Condominium Declaration recorded February 13, 1978 in Book 343 at Page 402. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB UNIT, according to the Map thereof recorded January 3, 1976 in Plat Book 5 at Page 45, and according to the Amended Map thereof recorded February 13, 1978 in Plat Book 6 at Page 74, and as defined and described in the Condominium Declaration thereof recorded January 3, 1976 in Book 322 at Page 370 and the Amended Condominium Declaration recorded February 13, 1978 in Book 343 at Page 402. TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the grantee, its heirs and assigns forever. And the Grantor, for his, his heirs and assigns, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the Grantee, its heirs and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents, his is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except those matters as set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee, its heirs and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the grantor has executed this deed. SIGNATURES ON PAGE 2 Return to: DATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ 533 E. HOPKINS ASPEN, CO 81611 528089 TRANSFER DECLARATION RECEIVED 08/31/2006 cy-\*.. /3 62 SIGNATURE rAGE TO WARRANTY DEED PAGE 2 144- NELION-0. COATES JR. STATE OF 0,0.\ChÂ«Cto ) / SS COUNTY OF r A Jun ) bi The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 6 ~ day of AUGUST, 2006, by NELIGH C. COATES JR.. WITNESS my hand and official seal L--~ di Â£ i c.Â·-3 - bny n my commission expires: NYÂ¥ry Public ~ tj ''U i.3 ---7 ~FJOY S. HIGENS ~ NOTARY PUBLIC 440... H, ~LiTATYÂ· Qf_C CGOR Ang-11 .7 U. . k p.ly Commission Expires 05/02/2010 8 i ..'.%J .j PCT20668L5 - T.17 -Â©' r 1 illill ilill illill lill illill illil Ull'Ill lilli lill lill 08/31/2006 01:141 528089 Page: 2 of 3 JANICE K YOS CAUDILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 16,00 D 690.00 Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A I Bend along line to i ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i Ust AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® ~ Ied Paper expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ i 300 SPRING STREET ASPEN LLC 630 EAST HYMAN LLC 635 E HOPKINS LLC PO BOX 5000 532 E HOPKINS AVE 532 E HOPKINS SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 818 ASPEN LLC 803DKS LLC ADAM P T ANTHONY T SMITH 15280 ADDISON RD #301 PO BOX 9066 50 S LASALLE ST B2 ADDISON, TX 75001 ASPEN, CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60603 ANDERSON ANGUS A FAMILY LLLP ALEXANDER THOMAS L ANSON WESTON T & SUSAN BAILEY C/O ERIC RICHELSON 715 E HYMAN AVE #27 8030 EL PASEO GRANDE 13 EVERGREEN ROW ASPEN, CO 81611 LA JOLLA, CA 92037 ARMONK, NY 10504 ASPEN 719 HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN 835 LLC ASPEN ART MUSEUM PO BOX 11600 333 LAS OLAS WY #2105 590 N MILL ST ASPEN, CO 81612 FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301 ASPEN, CO 81611 BARNETT JERALD M REV TRUST ASPEN ASSETS LLC AVP PROPERTIES LLC 3/3/2003 3361 MEANDER LN 630 E HYMAN AVE #25 500 PRESIDENT CLINTON BLVD #310 SAFETY HARBOR, FL 34695 ASPEN, CO 81611 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 BARTLETT KATY I BAUM ROBERT E BEAUDETTE PETER C 715 E HYMAN AVE #18 PO BOX 1518 501 E SPRINGS RD ASPEN, CO 81611-2066 STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 COLUMBIA, SC 29223 BELL MTN QUAL RES CONDO ASSOC BERGMAN ALAN M BELKOVA DASHA LLC C/O ALAN M BERGMAN 819 E HYMAN AVE #7 320 S SPRING ST 10960 WILSHIRE BLVD 10TH FL ASPEN, CO 81611-2092 ASPEN, CO 81611 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC BESTERFIELD LLC 65 FIRST NECK LN 944 PARK AVE 14TH FL 200 JAMES ST S STE 202 SOUTHAMPTON, NY 11968 NEW YORK, NY 10028 HAMILTON ONTARIO CANADA L8P3A9, BILCO PROPERTIES LLC BG SPRING LLC BILL FAMILY LLC CLARIDGE CONDOS #9N 300 S SPRING ST #202 2350 W LAKE OF THE ISLES PKWY 19950 BEACH RD ASPEN, CO 81611 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55405 TEQUESTA, FL 33469 BOELENS GREGORY S BUCKHORN ARMS LLC BUYERS BRADLEY M & BRUCE PO BOX 2360 730 E COOPER AVE 835 E HYMAN #K ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 Etiquettes faciles A peler A Repliez & la hachure afin de ~ www. avery. com Sens de Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® chargement ravaler le rebord Pop-Upâ„¢ 1 1-800-GO-AVERY A Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A ~ Bend along line to 1 Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® ,ed Paper - expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ 1 ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i A CALHOON THOMAS C CARVER RUTH A & MARTIN G CDP RESIDENCE TRUST 3405 CLEARVIEW DR 10 BYRON LN 601 E HYMAN AVE AUSTIN, TX 78703 MUSCATINE, IA 52761 ASPEN, CO 81611 CLARY EDGAR D IV COLBY WARD COLOSI THOMAS W 715 E HYMAN AVE #9 715 E HYMAN #20 715 E HYMAN AVE APT 6 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2099 COOPER SPRINGS LLC COORS WILLIAM SCOTT DAILY CONNIE M 393 N COLUMBIA AVE 727 E HOPKINS AVE #A 715 E HYMAN AVE #14 COLUMBUS, OH 43209 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 DANIELE ROBIN DAVIS HARRIET S & MARTIN DECK WARREN & MARCIA PO BOX 1023 835 E HYMAN AVE APT G 5363 S LAMAR ST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611-2603 LITTLETON, CO 80123 DELPHINIUM ASSOC DEVINE RALPH R DODEA NICHOLAS T 6050 RIVERVIEW WY 715 E HYMAN #13 715 E HYMAN AVE #19 HOUSTON, TX 77057 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 DONNELL-AN SHAUN K & SHEILA F DOWS PATRICE J DRESNER MILTON H REV LVG TRST 1250 W SOUTHWINDS BLVD #118 1411 9TH ST SW 28777 NORTHWESTERN HWY VERO BEACH, FL 32963 CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52404 SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 DUNN JUDITH A REV LIV TRUST EDGE OF AJAX INC EDGETTE JAMES J & PATRICIA 8051 LOCKLIN LN 201 E SILVER ST 19900 BEACH RD STE 801 COMMERCE TOWNSHIP, MI 48382 MARBLE, CO 81623 JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 ETTLIN ROSS L FAATH CARLOS M & MOLLY G FELLMAN THOMAS 715 E HYMAN AVE # 7 PO BOX 11435 809 NO 96 ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 OMAHA, NE 68114 FIGHTLIN JONATHAN D FOX HERB FRANKS ROOK 715 E HYMAN #46 PO BOX 1355 1901 PORTWEYBRIDGE PL ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 WINTER PARK, CO 80482 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 GAUBA ALENA GLAUSER STEVEN JERRY & BARBARA GOLDMAN JEROME K TRUST 715 E HYMAN AVE #21 460 ST PAUL ST PO BOX 249 ASPEN, CO 81611 DENVER, CO 80206 ASPEN, CO 81612 ttiquettes faciles & peler 1 Repliez & la hachure afin de 1 www.avery.com I Sens de Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® chargement ravaler le rebord Pop-Upâ„¢ i 1-800-GO-AVERY 1 Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A ****04 Bend along line to ~ Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® Bed Paper ~ expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ 1 ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i A GOLDMAN MICHAEL VICTOR & GLORIA GRAY DALE F REV TRST 20% INT GROSFELD ASPEN PROPERTIES ANNA GRAY CHERYL W REV TRST 20% PARTNERS LLC 6919 GLENEAGLE DR 5921 SEARL TER 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD #2222 TUCSON, AZ 85718 BETHESDA, MD 20816 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 HIMAN LLC HAYLES THOMAS HEWINS SAMUEL PO BOX 6159 715 E HYMAN AVE #5 715 E HYMAN AVE #23 SWANBOURNE WA 6010 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 AUSTRALIA, HOPKINS ASSOCIATES LP HOZACKWILLIAM HUNT SARAH J CO SHIEKMAN 2100 CYPRESS ST 715 E HYMAN AVE #22 2000 MARKET ST 10TH FL PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 ASPEN, CO 81611 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103-3291 HURST FERN K HYMAN STREET BROWNSTONES 11 LLC IDS PARTNERS LLC 1060 5TH AVE PO BOX 381 PO BOX 642 NEW YORK CITY, NY 10128 WRIGHTVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 INDY HOUSE LLC IRVINE DOUGLAS FORBES ISRAEL FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LTD 605 OCEAN BLVD 201 N MILL ST 263 OCEAN BLVD GOLDEN BEACH, FL 33160 ASPEN, CO 81611 GOLDEN BEACH, FL 33160 JOHNSON BARBARA WEAVER LIVING JENKINSASIA JOFFE LIVING TRUST TRUST 734 E HOPKINS AVE 23820 LONG VALLEY RD PO BOX 3570 ASPEN, CO 81611 HIDDEN HILLS, CA 91302 LAS CRUCES, NM 88003 JOSHUA & CO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS KANTAS NICOLETTE KARST REBECCA LLC 715 E HYMAN AVE #15 6230 SW 44TH ST 300 S HUNTER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 MIAMI, FL 33155 ASPEN, CO 81611 KELLY SIMON P TRUST KASHINSKI MICHAEL R KNODE MICHAEL C 732 E COOPER AVE 0343 GROVE CT 2142 VISTA CASCADA CT ATTN: JOHN HOFFAMN 111 ASPEN, CO 81611 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81503 ASPEN, CO 816112061 KOUTSOUBOS LOUIS KOUTSOUBOS TED KRANS ROSEMARY PO BOX 9199 430 E HYMAN AVE #PH 298 4TH AVE #429 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94118 KRAVITZ MICHAEL C KROEGER HAROLD R & HEATHER R LANDA MICHAEL B PO BOX 11207 16 FORDYCE LN 851 S JOSEPHINE ST ASPEN, CO 81612-9630 ST LOUIS, MO 63124 DENVER, CO 80209 ttiquettes faciles & peter 1 A Repliez & la hachure afin de ~ www.avery.com I Sens de Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® rdv*ler le rebord Pop-UpTM 1 1-800-GO-AVERY Â· 1 chargement , 1 Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A Bend along line to i Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® Eed Paper - expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ ~ ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® i A LANDIS JOSHUA B LANDRY ELIZABETH J LAWROM LLC 715 E HYMAN AVE #4 PO BOX 3036 533 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 LEGNAME RUDI REV TRUST LIBERATORE DOUGLAS LIEB MADELINE TRUST 202 STANFORD AVE PO BOX 1838 800 E HYMAN AVE #A MILL VALLEY, CA 94941 SARASOTA, FL 34230 ASPEN, CO 81611 LONG MONA HAYLES TRUST MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP MANNING FREDERICK J & GAIL P BOX 3849 317 SIDNEY BAKER S #400 222 W ADAMS ST #2290 ASPEN, CO 81612 KERRVILLE, TX 78028 CHICAGO, IL 60606 MASINI ALDA MARTELL BARBARA MARTIN ROBERT A MASINI ALDA TRUST 702 E HYMAN AVE 322 WEST 17TH ST #3E 830 E HOPKINS #201 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10011 ASPEN, CO 81611 MAYLE KENNETH D MCCUTCHIN GENE P MCFADDEN GORDON K 715 E HYMAN AVE #3 14833 MIDWAY #200 18519 E VALLEY RD ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ADDISON, TX 75001 KENT, WA 98032 MONTANARO JOHN & SUSAN FAMILY MICHELSON BRUCE V REV TRST MIKI TRUST 7701 FORSYTH STE 900 PO BOX 444 PO BOX 457 ST LOUIS, MO 63105-1813 ASPEN, CO 81612 MALIBU, CA 90265 NA DEVELOPMENT LLC NETHERY BRUCE NJH CENTENNIAL LLC 601 E HYMAN 715 E HYMAN AVE #25 314 S GALENA ST #300 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611 NONNIE LLC OCONNELL SARA G PACIFIC WEST INVESTMENTS LLC PO BOX 565 PO BOX 491167 320 MARTIN ST #100 ASPEN, CO 81612 MIAMI, FL 33149 BIRMINGHAM, MI 480091485 PERLMUTTER JAMES ROBERT PRICE GAIL PLATT HARLAN & MARJORIE SH UFRO SUSAN CO ASPEN POTTERS INC 1 CHARLES ST SOUTH #5G PO BOX 11385 715 E HYMAN #10 BOSTON, MA 02116 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 QUARRY INTERESTS LTD RAYMOND KIMBERLY A RICCHIUTI JOSEPH F 9932 LAKEWAY CT 1280 S UTE AVE STE 5 558 N 23RD ST DALLAS, TX 75230 ASPEN, CO 816112259 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19130 ttiquettes faciles A peler i A Repliez & la hachure afin de 1 www.avery.com ~ Sensde i Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® chargement r6v*ler le rebord Pop-lJ!)TM I 1-800-GO-AVERY A A Easy PeelÂ® Labels i A I Bend along line to i Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® ~ !ed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeTM ~ ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® 1 RICHARDSON JOHN & MARK ROGER RICHARD R ROTH LEWIS 15 TORONTO ST #400 16251 DALLAS PKWY 6230 SW 44TH ST TORONTO ONTARIO CANADA M5C ADDISON, TX 75001 MIAMI, FL 33155 2E3, RUST TRUST RYERSON GEORGE W JR SAGARIA SABATO DOMINIC 111 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD #760 715 E HYMAN AVE #17 P.O. BOX 8376 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 SAHN KAREN R SAHR KAREN M SAKSON DREW 715 E HYMAN AVE #11 715 E HYMAN AVE #8 PO BOX 1091 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEWPORT, RI 028400999 SALET PHILIP S REV TRUST SCHULTZ REV TRUST SELBY TROY E & MAY EYNON PO BOX 4897 5110 SAN FELI PE ST UNIT 381 WEST PO BOX 8234 ASPEN, CO 81612 HOUSTON, TX 77056 ASPEN, CO 81612 SESTIC ZORAN SHAPIRO LAND LLC SHAPIRO REGINA 530 E MAIN ST LOWER LEVEL 2438 JUNIPER HILL RD 14024 MONTRACHET LN ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 TOWN & COUNTRY, MO 63017 SIMON JONATHAN H SKLAR LEONARD E SKLAR WILLIAM P 19 W 21ST ST STE 902 PO BOX 246508 7238 MONTRICO DR NEW YORK, NY 10010 PEMBROKE PINES, FL 33024 BOCA ROTON, FL 33433 SMART EDWIN J SMITH ALICIA M SMITH JEFFREY L 2009 MARKET ST 715 E HYMAN AVE #16 851 S JOSEPHINE ST DENVER, CO 80205-2022 ASPEN, CO 81611 DENVER, CO 80209 STRIBLING DOROTHY SNOWMASS CORPORATION STEINER MICHAEL C & JENNIFER E WACHOVIA BANK NA FL0135 PO BOX 620 PO BOX 8312 PO BOX 40062 BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81612 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32203-0062 THOMPSON RICHARD P THOMPSON ROSS & LYNETTE TWO SEASONS HOLDINGS LLC RUSHING JIMMY C PO BOX 1186 191 UNIVERSITY BLVD #816 1171 BEACH BLVD CARBONDALE, CO 81623 DENVER, CO 80206 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32250 WEBB MARSHALL B ASPEN QPRT UPTON MARY E WALKER JOHN S 53 OSPREY CIR PO BOX 2360 PO BOX 11538 CALLAWASSIE ISLAND ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612-9537 OKATIE, SC 29909 ttiquettes faciles A peler 1 A Repliez & la hachure afin de 1 www.avery.com j Sens de Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® chargement ravaler le rebord Pop-U~TM 1 1-800-GO-AVERY 1 Eary PeelÂ® Labels ' A I Bend along line to 1 ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® ~ Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® eed Paper - expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ i WILLIAMSON CHERYL EXEMPT TRUST WILLIAMS CRAIG & LEE FAM PTNRSHP WOODS FAMILY TRUST 60% 5577 CEDAR CREEK 111 BIRDSONG WY #E103 2717 OLIVE AVE NW HOUSTON, TX 77056 HILTON HEAD, SC 29926 WASHINGTON, DC 20007 ttiquettes faciles & peler I Repliez & la hachure afin de 1 www.avery.com 1 Sens de Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® chargement rdvdler le rebord Pop-Upâ„¢ 1 1-800-GO-AVERY 1 1 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Sara Adams (429-2778) DATE: 03.05.2012 PROJECT: 720 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen Athletic Club REPRESENTATIVE: Charles Cunniffe Architects - Scott Smith and Charles Cunniffe (925-5590) TYPE OF APPLICATION: Aspen Modern Negotiation, Historic Designation, Minor HPC Review, GMQS Review for Affordable Housing, GMQS for New Free-market residential units within a mixed use project and Subdivision DESCRIPTION: The applicant is interested in applying for landmark designation in exchange for benefits through the AspenModern program. The subject property, the Aspen Athletic Club, is listed on the AspenModern map because of its association with local architect Robin Molny and its connection to Aspen's post-War architecture trends. The applicant is interested in converting some of the commercial space on the second floor to an affordable housing unit and converting the third floor commercial space into two free market residential units. With the exception of a roof deck and some minor fa,ade changes (sun shades and window changes); the changes are internal to the existing building. The minimal changes to the exterior of the building are exempt from Commercial Design Review. The property is in the Mixed Use Zone District which assigns a cumulative FAR of 2:1 that is broken down into 1:1 for commercial use, 0.5:1 for free market residential use, and no limit for affordable housing use. The subject lot is 9,000 square feet in size, so the resulting maximum allowable floor area for each use is as follows: 9,000 square feet of floor area for commercial, 4,500 square feet of floor area for free market residential, and unlimited for affordable housing. A per unit size cap of 2,000 square feet of net livable with the ability to land a TDR to increase the unit to 2,500 square feet of net livable is permitted. i Landmark properties are eligible for a growth management benefit that allows the , creation of one free market residential unit without affordable housing mitigation. More than one unit requires affordable housing mitigation which is a Major Growth Management Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Major i Growth Management applications are only accepted on February 15th and August 158 of each year. The applications are scored based on the community scoring i criteria and have to compete for annual growth management allotments. Residential units are required to have 1 parking space per unit. The Land Use Code allows a by-right cash in lieu payment of $30,000/space for this area of town. i Subdivision Review is required for the creation of a mixed use building which is reviewed by City Council. AspenModern is a 90-day negotiation period that allows the applicant to request specific benefits in exchange for landmark designation. The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) evaluates the historic importance of the building and forwards a recommendation to City Council. City Council is the final review authority regarding the negotiation for landmark designation. As part of AspenModern, the applicant may request that Council grant reviews that are assigned to another Board or Commission (for example, the applicant may request that Council conduct GMQS review rather than compete for allotments on August 15th). Following is a proposed schedule for review: Step l: HPC for minor development review for the roof deck/ exterior changes and AspenModern recommendation regarding historic importance of building. Step 2: City Council for AspenModern negotiation, Subdivision and Major Growth Management Review (this is possible by requesting that Council review Growth Management forthe P&Z). Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.415.025.C AspenModern Properties 26.415.030.C Designation of historic properties: AspenModern 26.415.070.C Certificate of appropriateness for a minor development 26.470.050.B Growth Management: General Requirements 26.470.060.3 Administrative Growth Management: Change in use of historic landmark sites 26.470.070.4 Minor Growth Management; Affordable Housing 26.470.080.2 Major Growth Management: new free market residential units within mixed use project 26.470.110 Growth Management Review Procedures 26.480.040.C Subdivision 26.515 Off-street Parking 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.610 Impact Fees 26.620 School Lands Dedication 26.710.180 Mixed Use Zone District Review by: Staff for complete application Referral agencies for technical considerations Historic Preservation Commission City Council Public Hearing: Yes at HPC and City Council. Planning Fees: $7,560 Deposit for 24 hours of stafftime (additional stafftime required is billed at $315 per hour) Referral Fees: Housing ($1260), Engineering ($265/hr) Page 2 6 Total Deposit: $3,152 Total Number of Application Copies: HPC: 10 Copies Council: 10 Copies To apply, submit the following information: 1. Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed bythe applicant statingthe name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 3. Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listingthe names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstratingthe owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 4. Completed Land Use Application. 5. Signed fee agreement (see page 4 and 5 of this pre-application summary). 6. Pre-application Conference Summary. 7. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcels within the City of Aspen. 8. Proof of ownership. 9. Letter from property owner indicating an understanding of the 90-day negotiation period (See requirement in Section 26.415.025.C.1 of the Land Use Code) 10. Letter outliningthe specific requested benefits underthe AspenModern program. 11. Existing and proposed site plan, landscaping plan, and parking plan. 12. Existing and proposed site plan, parking plan, landscape plan, floor plans and elevation drawings that include proposed dimensional requirements, floor area calculations and net leasable/net livable calculations. 13. A site improvement survey that includes all existing natural and man-made site features. 12. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 14. All other materials required pursuant to the specific submittal requirements. 15. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearing. The GIS department can provide this list on mailing labels for a small fee. 920.5453 16. Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text and a .pdf of the elevations and floor plans on a CD. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. Page 3 4 al'/B /4 m. * i . -â€¢5.9--=1=W-Â¥Sta- - - . . *#%4 - Â·Mâ„¢ L,~~21-i~ ~~d'- Fill'*Ill:'ll'll/"dillilli"li -10. , .id/4-,1..'K*/i./ m ' ta -m 1 : - 2-- , . -* 1 , ...1 2. I . 14~ ..fl i '417...."...."T,- 27 57-1â‚¬2-1 /0/0 -31 CÂ»C]6 -2012.Atfc_ 918 Edt REd @Â¥424 Fum Reprt Formt It t~ 1.juj,3.-4: ~ 110000Â®5 |Fs 'F"im,i,t: ~*6 .Attachment|Rou**ry Ifidim Arch/BE |(Â£51(mreld~ Subbrmt :PicÂ¢ ~ ~ Pumitype ab~o 'ASM[i listort Lan(| Use ~ Per,1 1 Â»00620]2AHK 1'1 1 k 120 E INMAN AVE Aptliute CLUB State'33 Ip 81811 1 r,r U Â¥ 1 -1 i'111 11111110,11]0:1 ~ MAr penlt Rout@*08 8Â§901 Appied '3~92012 | Prowd 526$ pending 1 4004 '1 2, DesÂ®[bn APR[ATION FORIFC MULTI LEVEL USE BUILDING INCLUDING OFFICES 1 Isjued I RENOVATED ATHLETIC QUB AND HOUSING Â·IfC DESIGNATION, CERTFICATE OF APPROPRATENESS,MINORHKDEYELOPMENT,CONCETUALIPC~FNALHEDEY 002/ 7 Submited MAN'AEST 910 925 5590 O& 0i| Dars U Emies OMBIB | Slbmltedo OWIE [5tname CM, LLC , FirÂ¢ Mme JOHN MARTN 2306. L ST 3,DFLOOR 1 Address ASPEN CA,81611 Appkit ~ OWIE Â£ ap|lÂ¢ddi O Coritiadoi i: app~Cadl LMt name CM, LLC 8[st ntme JOHN MARTIN 236. MILL ST I - 21'0 FLOOR ' pholE()- (ist # 331 Addres ASPEN CA 81611 ' lender ' La 0882 | ~ Frst name ~ Phone ~-- Address I 1 *hpehtlendef: add~es, . AspenGoldiltenal *r ////toll ck,=ttze Â·a j R~,wvt 4 1 019 do -&11 9#. 3>buAÂ¢+J EUS 3 660 -00 Â»91Â« Amy Guthrie From: Amy Guthrie Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 4:13 PM To: 'brianw@cunniffe.com'; Sara Adams (Sara.Adams@ci.aspen.co.us) Subject: 720 e hyman Hi Brian- I have finally had a chance to look over the 720 E. Hyman application to get a handle on what is complete and what isn't. First, a few details. This application falls into the AspenModern process. Ideally, review is supposed to occur within 90 days. We are so busy at the moment that I cannot make that happen. The date we have available to start the process with the Historic Preservation Commission is May 23rd. The 90 days expires June 7th, sowe would need your client to agree to an extension to give us enough time to get through HPC and on to City Council. I think an extension to August 1St would be advisable, since there is a lot to talk about with Council re: benefits. Could you please contact your client and ask if he is agreeable to that, or if not, what length of time is he agreeable to? Thanks. We would need his acceptance of an extension in writing. Apologies that we just can move faster right now. Re: the application itself, it is in order except that there is no written response to any of the relevant HPC or Commercial design review guidelines, or the review standards in any of the code sections that Sara listed in her pre-app. Could you please provide that by Monday, April 16th,p We are not sure yet whether I will be the staff person handling this case or Sara. Just trying to get you on track and communicate about the review timeframe. I am out next week, but if you could do a reply to all back, that would be great. Sara will be in and can answer questions about the missing info if needed. Amy Guthrie City of Aspen Historic Preservation 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 970-429-2758 www.aspenpitkin.com 1 THE CITY OF ASPEN Land Use Application Determination of Completeness Date: April 4, 2012 Dear City of Aspen Land Use Review Applicant, We have received your land use application for 720 E. Hyman Avenue and reviewed it for completeness. The case number and name assigned to this property is 0006.2012.ahpe. The planners assigned to this case are Amy Guthrie and Sara Adams. Your Land Use Application is complete for HPC review, however the following additional information is needed: The information submitted this week addresses land use review criteria, but we have not received a written response to any of the relevant HPC or Commercial design review guidelines that will be used in reviewingthe proposed exterior changes. Guideline 2.24 is the only relevant part of the Commercial Mixed Use guidelines: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/Comdev/CommÂ°M,20Desgnoh,20Stnds/ Commercial%20Design%20Guidelines Central%20Mixed'>620Use%20Character%20 Area.pdf See Chapters 1, 2, 3, and 14 of the Historic Preservation guidelines to identify which guidelines relate to your scope of work: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Historic- Preservation/Historic-Properties/ The application includes a gross floor area calculation, but please provide floor area calculations by use (commercial, free market and affordable). Include allocation of non-unit space. There is significant lobby space and common circulation in the building. The floor area of these elements must be proportionately allocated to the residential and commercial uses. See Section 26.575.020.D.14. Please submit a diagram showing the dimensions of existing and proposed public amenity space. Please submit a letter from the property owner agreeing to an extension of the 90 day review period. We can begin the process without this, but we will not be able to get to City Council before the initial 90 day period expires on June 7th. Please submit the aforementioned missing submission items so that we may begin reviewing your application. No review hearings will be scheduled until all of the submission contents listed above have been submitted and are to the satisfaction of the City of Aspen planner . reviewing the land use application. Other submission items may be requested throughout the review process as deemed necessary by the Community Development Department. Please contact me at 429-2758 if you have any questions. Thank You, fÂ» Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer City of Aspen, Community Development Department @. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL @/3 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS To: Amy Guthrie From: Brian West Company: City of Aspen Date: April 2, 2012 Telephone: 970.429.2778 Job No. #1210 Address: 130 South Galena St. Project: 720 E. Hyman / Aspen Athletic Bldg. Aspen, CO 81611 REGARDING: HPC Submittal for 720 E. Hyman WE ARE SENDING YOU: 0 Attached via Drop Off @ City Community Development Dept. Â¤ Via: the following items: Â¤ Shop drawings Â¤ Prints Â¤ Originals 0 Samples Â¤ Specifications E Copy of Letter Â¤ Change order Â¤ Computer Disc (s) 3 Other: DESCRIPTION: - (10) sets of the Land Use Development Responses THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: 0 For approval Â¤ Approved as submitted O Resubmit copies for approval O For your use Â¤ Approved as noted 0 Submit copies for distribution Â¤ As requested Â¤ Returned for corrections O Return corrected prints 0 Review & comment Â¤ Prints returned after loan to us 3 Other REMARKS: As requested, attached are the (10) ten copies of the Land Use Development Responses letter in order to make the 720 E. Hyman application complete. Please contact me with any questions. Regards, Brian 610 East Hyman Avenue e Aspen. Co orado 81611 6 tel 970 925.5590 % fax: 970.925.5076 0 www Eunniffc com ~ fu. @. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL M /3 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS To: Sara Adams From: Brian West Company: City of Aspen Date: April 26,2012 Telephone: 970.429.2778 Job No. #1210 Address: 130 South Galena St. Project: 720 E. Hyman / Aspen Athletic Bldg. Aspen, CO 81611 REGARDING: HPC Submittal for 720 E. Hyman WE ARE SENDING YOU: 2 Attached via Drop Off @ City Community Development Dept. 0 Via: the following items: RECEIVED APR 2 5 2012 Â¤ Shop drawings Â¤ Prints O Originals Â¤ Samples 0 Specifications E Copy of Letter CITY OF ASPEN 0 Change order Â¤ Computer Discis) 0 Other: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION: - (10) copies of a letter from the Owner agreeing to extend the 90-day review period for the Aspen Modern process. THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: E For approval 1 Approved as submitted 0 Resubmit copies for approval Â¤ For your use O Approved as noted Â¤ Submit copies for distribution E As requested O Returned for corrections D Return corrected prints 91 Review & comment Â¤ Prints returned after loan to us O Other REMARKS: Sara, Attached is the above described item in order to make the 720 E. Hyman application complete. Unless notified otherwise, we believe that this will complete all of the required and/or requested documents for this submittal. Please contact us with any questions or comments. Regards, Brian 610 East Hyman Avenue â€¢ Asten, Colorado 81611 let: 970.925.5590 â€¢ tax 970 925 5076 . www.cunniffe com ~ @. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL @U CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS To: Sara Adams From: Brian West Company: City of Aspen Date: April 25, 2012 Telephone: 970.429.2778 Job No. #1210 Address: 130 South Galena St. Project: 720 E. Hyman / Aspen Athletic Bldg. Aspen, CO 81611 REGARDING: HPC Submittal for 720 E. Hyman WE ARE SENDING YOU: 0 Attached via Drop Off @ City Community Development Dept. Â¤ Via: the following items: Â¤ Shop drawings 0 Prints m Originals Â¤ Samples Â¤ Specifications 0 Copy of Letter Â¤ Change order Â¤ Computer Disc(s) Â¤ Other: DESCRIPTION: - (10) copies of Re-Subdivision Plat of the Aspen Athletic Club Bldg. Condominium THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: 0 For approval O Approved as submitted O Resubmit copies for approval Â¤ For your use Â¤ Approved as noted 0 Submit copies for distribution E As requested Â¤ Returned for corrections Â¤ Return corrected prints E Review & comment 0 Prints returned after loan to us 3 Other REMARKS: Sara, Attached are the above described items in order to make the 720 E. Hyman application complete. We are still intending to follow up with a letter from the Owner requesting an extension to the Aspen Modern 90- day review period, as requested by Staff. It continues to be our understanding that this last item will not prevent the application from being complete. Please contact us with any questions or comments. Regards, Brian RECEIVED APR 2 5 2012 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 610 East Hyman Avenue â€¢ Asuen. Co oÂ·ado 81611 m tel: 970 925.5590 ; fax. 970.925.5076 1 www cunniffe com ~ 07 @. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL @ /3 CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS To: Sara Adams From: Brian West Company: City of Aspen Date: April 20, 2012 Telephone: 970.429.2778 Job No. #1210 Address: 130 South Galena St. Project: 720 E. Hyman / Aspen Athletic Bldg. Aspen, CO 81611 REGARDING: HPC Submittal for 720 E. Hyman WE ARE SENDING YOU: E Attached via Drop Off @ City Community Development Dept. O Via: the following items: RECEIVED Â¤ Shop drawings 0 Prints O Originals APR 2 0 2012 0 Samples 0 Specifications 0 Copy of Letter CITY OF ASPEN O Change order 0 Computer Disc(s) O Other: FAR Tabulations COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION: - (10) copies of updated letter describing project with information on historic designation, free- market unit size, TDRs, parking, and building height. - (10) copies of the letter responses to Historic Guidelines, and Code. - (10) copies of the letter responses to the Subdivision Review Criteria. - (10) copies of existing site plan sheet Al.le updated to show public amenity diagram. - (10) copies of proposed site plan sheet Al.1 updated to show public amenity diagram. - (10) copies of proposed second floor plan sheet A2.4 updated to show enlarged AHU. - (1) copy of FAR tabulations breaking down building sq. ft. and allocating non-unit space. - (1) Updated CD-ROM with drawings on it. THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: E For approval Â¤ Approved as submitted 0 Resubmit copies for approval Â¤ For your use Â¤ Approved as noted 0 Submit copies for distribution 0 As requested Il Returned for corrections Â¤ Return corrected prints 0 Review & comment m Prints returned after loan to us O Other REMARKS: Sara, As requested, attached are the above described items in order to make the 720 E. Hyman application complete. We have revised and/or updated the information and drawings in response to your letter of completeness dated April 4, 2012. We intend to follow up with the draft subdivision plat and with a letter from the Owner requesting an extension to the Aspen Modern 90-day review period, as requested by Staff. It is our understanding that these last two items will not prevent the application from being complete. Please contact us with any questions or comments. Regards, Brian ~ 610 East Hyman Avenue a Asaer. Co orado 81611 , tel: 970.925-5590 4 fax 970 925.5076 , www.cunniffe com ~ LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL @U CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS To: Sara Adams, Senior Planner From: Charles Cunniffe Company: City of Aspen Date: March 9, 2012 Telephone: 970.429.2778 Job No. #1210 Address: 130 South Galena St. Project: 720 E. Hyman / Aspen Athletic Bldg. Aspen, CO 81611 REGARDING: HPC Submittal for 720 E. Hyman ,~>.A A .,17 + A WE ARE SENDING YOU: 0 Attached via Drop Off @ City Community Development DepfÂ¢*, 24 0 - O Via: the following items: 4*PUL-34 O Shop drawings 0 Prints O Originals Â·1~ O Samples Â¤ Specifications 0 Copy of Letter Â¤ Change order E Computer Disc(s) 0 Other: DESCRIPTION: ~ (10) sets of HPC submittal documents, including HPC application, pre-application conference summary, fee agreement letter, letter of authorization, 90-understanding letter, project description letter, warranty deed, title documents, neighboring property owner list, vicinity map, survey, and project drawings. - (1) CD-ROM with drawings on it. - (1) Check for submittal payment. THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: 0 For approval Â¤ Approved as submitted Â¤ Resubmit copies for approval O For your use Â¤ Approved as noted Â¤ Submit copies for distribution Â¤ As requested Â¤ Returned for corrections O Return corrected prints E Review & comment Â¤ Prints returned after loan to us Â¤ Other REMARKS: Please contact me with any questions. Best, Charles 610 East Hyman Avenue â€¢ Aspen. Colorado 81611 , lealÂ· 970.925.5590 â€¢ *a> 970 925.5076 , www-cunniffe com ~ /4,4> e 720 East Hyman March 7.2012 < Exisling FAR Proposed FAR Area Description FAR Area Description SUB-BASEMENT .i Total Level Total Level 4.712 GSF 4.712 GSF Total sub-basement w all area 3,376 SF Total sub-basement wall arg/ 3,376 SF Exposed wall area O SF Exposed wall areal ~ O SF Percent exposed to apply to FAR 0.00% Percent exposed to,af5ply to FAR 0.00% ~Contribution to FAR OSF ~ ~Contribution to OSF ~ BASEMENT Total Level Total Level 6,364 GSF 7,18 n Total basement wall area 3333 SE ' Total basement wall area 3,333 SF Exposed wall area ~/-2~F Exposed wall area 255 SF Percent exposed to al:*ly to FAR ~ 7.65% ~ Percent exposed to apply to FAR 7.65% ~Contribution to FAR â€¢1 487 SF | ~Confribution to FAR 550 SP | MAIN LEVEL | Total Level Total Level 6,065 GSF 6,065 GSF Deductio& 0 SF Deductions 0 SF i , ~Contribution'~ld 6.065j11 ~Confribution to FAR 6,065 SF | SECOND LEVEL | Total Level -~ ~ hh Total Level --2< / 4,191 GSF 4,173 GSF L --1 Deductions Deductions 0 SF V |CqpWIEution to tAR 4,191 SF ~ ~Contribution to FAR 4.173 SF | THIRD LE\9/ 1 Total,~6' el Total Level - 6,400 GSF 6,400 GSF Deductions forÂ·~*Â·s and elevator 117 SF Deductions for stairs and elevator 152 SF ~Contribution to FAR 6,283 SF | ~Contribution to FAR 6.248 SF | ROOF LEVEL ~ Total Level Total Level 0 GSF 162 GSF -h Deductions 0 SE \- Deduction for stairs 162 SF ~Contribution to FAR OSF ~ ~Confribution to FAR 0 SF 1 SUMMARY | TOTAL EXISTING FAR 17,026 SF ~ |TOTAL PROPOSED FAR 17,036 SF l A)0 0 TOTAL ALLOWABLE FAR 18,000 SF ~ Zone District Mixed-Use (MU) Allowable FAR Ratio 2:1 Lot Area 9000 SF FLOOR AREA SUMMARY F AO.1 3 FAR 91031IHOMÂ¥ 3=I=IINNAO 931hIVHO NVINAH 19Â¥3 OZZ ll.100'8#!UUnS'MMM .. 0 ..16 * 4 .. . 4 1 r ' i M .i -* U. *.1 4 .It 0*1 . . NOTE: REFER TO SURVEÂ¥ FOR BUILDINe PLACEMENT AND EXISTINe HARDSCAPE AND -- - 88 r--7 -Em- 5 4 1 LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS. STEPS 5'-5 1/2 " +/- 1 NO PARKING 19 PROVIDED ON SITE -4 . 1 > + 1 9 W 0- 1 O LU 1 - *9 */ : 41 W Z 1 2 1 1 1 I1 1-4 ASPEN ATHLETIC, BUILDING PROPERTY LINE - 7 -- 1 1 9 1 -l1 1 COVERED i OPEN 1 SPACE 1 Z PLANTER PLANTER // PLANTER < - CO 00 -7 r -1 O I 0 1- 4 CO 3 0 0 HYMAN AVE. LU i O LU O NO_ CN N CO r.- ./ EXISTIND Lf-fs:L* BITE PLAN 1" = 16'-O" CNI TOTAL EXISTING LOT AREA = q,000 ef % Al.le CD 91031IHOMÂ¥ 3:I=IINNAO S31hlÂ¥HO WOO.e#!UUnO'NAVA 299'0Z6'0Z6 XVI I 0699'926'026 131 1 L 1919 03 'NEdISÂ¥ I '3AV NVINAH 19Â¥3 0l9 gâ‚¬ AMH)19 1*NIâ‚¬IhIO 331Nyld 10'-51/2 " +/- 3AÂ¥ NVINAH 19Â¥3 NOTE: REFER TO SURVEY FOR BUILDING PLACEMENT AND EXISTING HARDSCAPE AND LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS. 1 NO PARKING IS PROVIDED ON SITE. STEPS 5'-5 1/2 " 4- 1 NO NER LANDSCAPING IS -t, (19 INTENDED. ZÂ»4> + O >9 1 1 LY ' 1 1 Mil X-1 1 113 0-1 rN di 11_J AÂ©PEN ATHLETIC BUILDIN(3 He,1 - K PROPERTÂ¥ LINE-- I -- G Z 6 U.10- DC 11 0 1 1 1 + g: COVERED , OPEN SPACE 1 -- ExleT EXIST EXIST P-6-6NTER - - PLAN-TER 4 PLANTgR -- 1-11 r -7 HÂ¥MAN AVE. PROPOSED 44 DITE PLAN 1 " = 16'-O" TOTAL EXISTING LOT AREA = 4 000 ef /1. C IRE CA 9 X U PILATES MECHANICAL - MECHANICAL ROOM ROOM ROOM STAIR 444 7 11 0 0 OFFICE OFFICE 0 0 0 0 NAUTILUS CLIMBING TRAINING CIRCUIT ROOM ROOM 0 0 -1 0 0 0 EXIST I Ne #9+ SUB=BASEMENT PLAN 1. = 101-OIl TOTAL EXISTING 61â‚¬069 AREA = 4 712 gs? (FAR = O se) TOTAL EXISTING NET LEADABLE AREA = 3 2612 nls? 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www,cunniffe,com A2.le 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 9- IR- E CA 9 X -3 U PILATES MECHANICAL MECHANICAL ROOM ROOM ROOM STAIR e< r i-- It J O OFFICE OFFICE 0 0 0 0 NAUTILUS CLIMBING TRAINING CIRCUIT ROOM ROOM 0 0 r' 0 - 0 0 - Â»1 PROPOSED 44 SUB=BASEMENT PLAN 1. = lo'-oIl 3 TOTAL 61KOES AREA = 47 12 gs? (FAIR = O *9 TOTAL NET LEADABLE AREA = 3 222 nlef 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.1 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 6- 2 4 1 D 0 ~ FIRE ESCAPE - 1 JED - STEAM Â© - 007 -0 00 MASSAGE -Â« MEN'S LOCKERS 11>, 11,4 [Ti MASSAGE~7 \3'm-El ., 0 AEROBIC U U WOMEN'S LOCKERS EQUIPMENT CID) 1 - .A@= 0 WHIRLPOOL 1 1, D ' RECEPTION Ll -- 1 7 - STAIR OFFICE 4 PHYSICAL THERAPY LAP POOL O FREE O\~ O WEIGHTS O N B M ef-REI E-- 0 0 ff STAIR EXISTIND +04* BASEMENT PLAN 11' = 10'-OIl TOTAL EXISTIN16 61â‚¬096 AREA = 6 364 gef (FAR = 43-7 se) TOTAL EXISTINS NET LEADABLE AREA = 5725 nls? 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www,cunniffe,com A2.2e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 E- A â€¢ 41 -XEX-D > O ~ . FIRE ESCAPE --~ 1 D \ 1 ==El SAUNA p-Â« O CF'/ =- 000 MEN'S LOCKERS LAUNDRY / STEAM -lr- ~in [r,i STORAGE At > '11 7 il O 0 CE WHIRLPOOL WOMEN'S LOCKERS CI AEROBIC EQUIPMENT 0 STAIR 19-4- 0 -1 LAP POOL O FREE Cl~ O EQUIPMENT WEIGHTS ple' -0-- 0 0 ff STAIR PROPOSED /0.-2249 BASEMENT PLAN 1. = 10'-O. TOTAL 61â‚¬099 AREA = 7184 gs? (FAR = 550 50 TOTAL NET LEASABLE AREA = 6 545 n lef 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www,cunniffe.com A2.2 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. i ASPEN, CO 81611 [ TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 0 - lfI [1-[1 1-11 iV-[r 11. . FIRE ESCAPE - OFFICE 1 d' 1 .1 F wiNE~ PUBLIC K j 071* 0 OlA biÂ» 1 . 11 1-1 1 HMENSI / Jugx. 1 ) f-1 2%~7 ' 1 - ATM LOBBY <j /. OFFICE / BANK ~__- ST AIR -~~ GYM RECEPTON 0 L Tr 1 LOBBY / ATRIUM -7<-.7 0 M 1 - OFFICE -f- il/ / OFFICE - ML.. / 0 1 1 __ __- micj EXISTIND Â»4 MAIN LEVEL PLAN 1. = 101-0. TOTAL EXISTINS 61â‚¬066 AREA = 6 065 gs? (FAR = 6 065 5 TOTAL EXISTING NET LEADABLE AREA = 3,345 niaf 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS www.cunniffe.com A2.3e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 i TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 461 m 1-1- 11-1-1-1 mT]IE .1 -U=L 1 -a l. 11 XI,111. 9 FIRE ESCAPE n 1 /kill 11 OFFICE W~ME~~ ~~= PÂ©IC+ ) Â¤ . 1 IVT <- 7â‚¬- 9 kMENS| / , 4\3823,1 ) [-1 i 9%94(Pn 1/\1. - ATM LOBBY . r OFFICE / BANK STAIR 21 GYM RECEPTON 0 -T t' LOBBY / ATRIUM 77/ MI OFFICE - in f./ f // OFFICE n /Â» Hi . D / 1/ 1 192Â« 1 17327-1-7~~/ /!IM T SOLAR SHADING DEVICES ABOVE (SHOWN DASHED) PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLAN 1. = 101-OIl TOTAL 61ROED AREA = 6 065 gs? (FAIR = 6 065 59 TOTAL NET LEASABLE AREA = 3345 n lef 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www. cu n niffe. com A2.3 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. i ASPEN, CO 81611 1 TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPENJ COLORADO 81611 E.'ll SOLAR SHA DEVICES ABOVE (SHORN DAPHIP 1~ 11 FIRE ESCAPE --1/6 a 4 p it 7,Â·ra a OFFICE LL 1--\ 0 Oil Icll OLL mi UNISEX PUBLIC Â¤ DENTIST OFFICE ~L//-2 V f PUBLIC ~ Â¤ /7%4 9 * 0:\ W hy 0-f -- 0 - 8 -1 Y --1 3= 79 n I 11 I -1 -' TV ~V OFFICE LAT FILE 0 0 4~ 0 ~ 6 11 C OIl 7 ..1-- 0 to --41 TV Â¥ willl'll EXIST I Ne *op* SECOND LEVEL PLAN 1" = 10'-O. TOTAL EXISTINe 6ROSE AREA = 41qI gs? (FAR = 41qI ef TOTAL EXISTINe NET LEADABLE AREA = 3,3-73 nisf 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS www.cunniffe.com A2.4e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 11 E f FIRE ESCAPE -qu a * P Gl :Of 0 -00 0 h - BATH -- D - BEDBOOM\ ~ 2 - \U L E LIVING ROOM 12/2 0.0 u AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT ~ 12Â©YER Ral 000 l - 1 '1 2 1 .'CD,1 1/ DINING W:' C 0 0- 0 1 1 UNISEX / PUBUC KITCHEN ~- Â¤ DENTIST OFFICE i IL-1 1-4 Vt{FF ~ LAUNDRY 1 Ult UNISEX PUBLIC A ~ Xi - 1Â¤ U STAIR 0 0 1 0 Â£ /74 0 0 0 e Â«\ ID) 01 681 1-LI 0 O tu 1 -A-I f I 1 W< 1 Tv - n 2- IL OZ N '*> Z-<91 ~V OFFICE 00 L-//* <I - 2 1 N ~ -- vt-.r 02 8 24- -310 Ut- Tv -,EE'" Cle 1 Url - 0 05 a J 6 2----UL-----__-_--1 SOLAR SHADING DEVICES ABOVE (SHOWN DASHED) PROPOSED 44 SECOND LEVEL PLAN 1. = 101-011 TOTAL 61â‚¬056 AREA = 4373 gef (FAR = 4~173 90 TOTAL NET LEADABLE AREA = 2 572 nls? TOTAL AFFOIRDABLE HOUSINe AREA = BOO n Isf 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.4 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 64//I SOLAR SH -A~ FIRE ESCAPE 0 0 9 0 0 0 L 1 76 OFFICE .* GYM i/ 11 m . 0 Â¤ LOCKERS UNISEX I GYM STAFFATRONE! 7 Are- F - lizey '6. ~NISEX STAFF/PATRONS 6- 0 ~__j LOCKERS .~ GYM Ivy= 1 9 17~ LOBBY ~ O_ , STAIR 07 -0 CORRIDOR 1 Â¤ 0 0 OFFICE â‚¬ 50 0 0 0 0 0 EXISTINe 44 THIRD LEVEL PLAN 1" = 10'-O" 3 TOTAL EXISTING GROSS AREA = 6,400 gef (FAR = 6 233 50 TOTAL EXISTINS NET LEADABLE AREA = 5551 nls? 03.07,12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.5e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970,920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 6- / I - FIRE ESCAPE ~ ~ 0 0 94/. 0 0 4 3 0 579 0 4 V -4 - 01 E 4 - 00 -di - 78 BATH ~- - ~ ~ < BEDROOM ~CLOE~T B \\ 3 \ BEDROOM 2 \lit = 0%4 BEDROOM -BEDROOM ~~= 3 LE ,/741 - BATH I Lf LO-1 /1 [1 9 7-' 10 CLOSET CLOSET Lf 1 43 11 ----113 D i ______ - BATH la:# \ CLOSET I 1 1 1 - Ill D---1 01 BATH 97--7 /A HALL X U . -<1 \ U--11 4-9 - EL- CLAW EL HALL LAUNDRY L___11 ~ 1 + 1 112 2.4 212 BATH ~ 1 r .:- 1)<j' Lau. 0 IJ % CLOSET -1 1 --S) 036Â£=11 i v i 1 / CORIDOR LOBBY - STA n 2 0 LIJ r.~1 MI- 1111 BEDROOM 41 4,1 n SITTING ~ FREE MARKET UNIT #2 /----- - FREE MARKET UNIT #142 0 1161 - O IU I 4 - J lit_ _ 44 11,2~h - Ji IL - REF ~ - 1-1.- Imm -1 WIN . 11, \ . E **'H .._ = 11 /9--h ZI 1 1 K I e==9 1 -4- IL~ P i 0 -3 - Ch 13Â» 1 --- I1 1 BATH P i - ~ D'NII 3 WTCHEN ~ ~J LIVING ROOM ~ ~ 0 +4 4 1 1 - ----- 2 3 KITCHEN | | CLOSET | 1 nn AL 0 1 1 11 ~ = ja \AL - D 42-~IMU I ----- 1 F, 02 Fi 3 - 41 1- 0 00 '-' O 31\ BEDROOM, 0 0 1 - 0 ~NING 0 0 -~ GAMEÂ° : ~ U E-9 U 3 11 - - ~ - Â° 1 I lillil I LIVING ROOM I T 32 A ==1 - 0 0 43>=1 L__1_L__ -3_11_1__1- SOLAR SHADING DEVICES ABOVE (SHORN DASHED) PROPOSED *.94 THIRD LEVEL PLAN 1 "= 10'-O " TOTAL SROSE AREA = 6*400 gs? (FAR = 6,248 se) TOTAL NET LIVABLE AREA = 5 250 niaf 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www,cunniffe.com A2.5 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 6- 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.9255590 1 FAX 970,920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 ' U L_JU SOLAR SHADINe DEVI - .1 ./ ./ - - MECHANICAL EGUIPMENT SKYLIeHT SKYLIeHT 0 0 i 1 ELEVATCR OVERRUN =ENTHOUDE 34 &2 1~kYLIGHT I 1 17<,7 r 1 SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT SKÂ¥LleHT 0 0 0 I 1 -1 - .1 ./ .. - EXISTING ri~0 ROOF LEVEL PLAN 1. = 101-oil 42 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.6e 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 C..Ill .. m n 1-1 m n - MECHANICAL - -- "GREEN" ROOF ~/ EQUIPMENT J 91<Â¥LIGHT 91<Â¥LIGHT SKYLIGHT 0 0- 0 C ] EXIE>TINe ELEVATOR OVERRUN PENTHOUSE STAIR -4 4 C ] \/EXISTINe ~\*41Â¥LleHT SKÂ¥LleHT C -: 1 2_ c RESIDENTIAL ROOF DECK 1 "SREEN" ROOF - eLASS 6UARDRAIL h [ PER COPE ~ C ] U LI U 1-1 U U U U PROPOSED *Â°*4 ROOF LEVEL PLAN 1" = 10'-011 TOTAL SROSS AREA = 1 62 gs? (FAR = O ef) TOTAL NET LEADABLE/LIVABLE AREA = O nls? TOTAL ROOF DECK AREA = 675 se 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com A2.6 720 EAST HYMAN AVE, 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 9- . .-1- ; LIZE] 1 11 , L- = == 1 A 11 1 1 - / \ 1 1 - 1 \ 1 1 1 \ 01-n _ 1 O X 1 1 0 C Wi = 11 / 1 1 Z 0 1 - 6 n I 'll 1 1 41 1 11 1 1 m I : 16 4% re 1 - .1 11 6 4,Â§ 40 -2 %-1 lilli 11.-7 11.-3 4 4 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Cla 11 1 -1 11 1 1.1 11 11 11 11 L J 11 1...1 11 11 NOLLV/1333 36* NVINAH / e~'= DSE , 4 GL.EV . Z g 0 I l.D -1 -0 Â«XE-; -D F-1 14 1 F 2 O 1% 1 -1 kj 7 0 511 11 mi 1 r I--"0 0 0-2-31 It I /1 \ 1 1 1.1 ' h / 11 1 1 / 1 91 1\1 1/ / Il V , - 2 1-- - I V / .I 0 7 0-0 1 - )0 0 1 070 1 5~F 01 QUO 1 pl F 211 + W 6 7 3 - 01 0 < 01 0 XII L Al 11 fre S W -1 -1 QI / 0 -70 2 i i /1 40 1 1 L .L 0 U 1Z F 1 / 1 1 ,5 j 1 11 - -' 3 21= 0 $ 1 1 r,1 1 1 1 - , --9 1235â€¢ 1 - 1 2 1 -\ - 1 1 1 - 91 1 - - - 0 l< 1 PE : *1 .m g 4 w 7 - P 1 1 03.07,12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Cd.'ll - 30IAE]a E]CIVHS h!Â¥109 301Ama aCIVHS 3Â¥109 eNINMV 30Â¥ld33 BOLAR SHADE DEVICE y~-# 1SI 1V 391A3a 30Â¥HS bly-109 16 1 39IA L -Il. . Il. 1 I % Il. 1 ,) - It - It - 1 9 - 10 . 1 .1/ SOLAR SHADE DEVICE AT 2N NOI1*6333 36* NVIAI EL ~Nu n--4- - '1 1 1 . 11- 1 1 - - 11 1 1 - -11 1 1 - / 1 1 \ mm 1 1 >>< \/ 1 1 1 - 9 (-DED - 11 1 \1 - 0 -1 -4 -l % - 00 - 1 1 "- 1 1 - ff . %p = liilc % = 11% r % 1 - 11 1 - 1 fil- F. m . 02 im r~ r~ as 29 89 - 3 9 9 11.-0- - 3 â€žÂ·..- 1 4 4 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 C.- ---- 1 1 11 11 1.1 11 1] 11 11 en10 3113}41Â¥ N3dSV NOI.=1*63331 16 3*NIelhl 88 . EV Ir . 1 1 --- - 1 7 I T,\f I 1 1 1 - 1 \ I- Il = 1 \-#-t 1 / 1 1 / - 11 1 4 1 / il 1 .1 .4\1 1 = 1 - 1 ~111 1 -4 - i 1 1 1 /1 -1 li 11 \ 1 \ 1 1 1 mi - = 1 - 1 1 1 3>90 \1 0 0 1 1 7 6 --1 1 1 - 1 - 11 1 - 1 / 1 ~027 - rT-li If = 0 1 1 - = = 32 - = t / /1 il I M LI /1 1 1 P. 1 1 44"17 - f // 1 1 1 8 11 1,1 d. 1 4 01% 1 3 3 11% D 41% 9 410 k> '7 4 4% 4: 6 1 1 1 1 ~ Z 0 0 3 -0 03,07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 00 www.cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 I TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 C..Ill - 301/\Ela 3aVHG hiv-103 1%%- 3OIA]a JaVHS 31Â¥109 SOLAR SHADE DEVICE OPOSED NOI1*6333 19 3*NIGINO / STAIR Re FLOOR eNINMV NOV-IdE]hl LL9L9 00Â¥hl0100 'N3dSV Zg*(6-026 1Â¥31 1 0699'9Z6'0Z6 131 It tgLy 03 'N369Â¥ I -3IAÂ¥ NVINAH 19Â¥3 0~ 3AV NVIAIAH 19Â¥3 OEZ 00 91031IHONÂ¥ 3=I:IINNAO S3-lk:IVHO NVINAH 19Â¥3 0EZ LUOO.0#!uuno'MAAM ELLOTO 1- Of V 0, 89 Ek Em :R I h 21 RE Ed - 11~~i - "115//1fth 2< Â·,qug~//j/ll/li~- I 93 ~ 333 233. 91 _ All / , 23~ : rip ll.**44.--IL- Wi,\1 V 11 NEN\N - :illy 5,6 6 p I. . ... /// - r< 34 f .AF Z , 1,9 , -T - -TPAL 4 P- 0 Â» 443- 9 il- 6 1 - k\% 444 6-46*61 X Oâ€ž LUZ= 44\\\ = -' I-, Â».==Â»=1+-e... - ' - 1- Mr UN =/1 - 14 jil 1 E-- f -- 0 - IiI 4 44 -1 f R .2- r. - ---- . J 38 E3Â¥ NO 11*6333 1333* / 1 1 - 33~ 170 g3 0> l0 0m -' 1 i Z 42 \9 4 - -1 073 \ 1 144 f *_t \i ' 1 F V 9, f - *ilififillillitilic '44. 0% -1 1 . 111 **Rk;6*82* mr--- *47 UH - 1 1 12 1 , // 7 \\\1; ~2- - d.. ' = :Nk-.1 / 1\\\ 11, , , 11 ! 1 LILL_- _ 1 = 355 0 'I 11 %2 1 3!,J 1 7 0Â«3Â»- --/& \\/ 1 .\\\ 244<044.Nii1.\ F 1 070 461 24399?~ 4 7.7 1 RIA: 11:34:4~ 1 . 1555 6\VA\\\\ .\\ . / 2 1,11 9 310 :44 *r U :2: 1 - jp - . 1 #14 0 -44 - U -a\\ 1U 1 Â« 1 23- = 1 a.. I Â«\X ''l \ 5333 - 1 1 1 I 31 - w = f> %33*00; 555 2, ~ . 55/5 0 1 0 500 \\\ ' UZ= ..11' 0 4 Ntly 3 L 1 * L 354 - 1 'ljilill, .1 1\. 6 Â§9% -/0 / .. L \43?/-3 21 7 1 A \6155>ZÂ·. 14:555. 1/ 1 I .\\\ / IN Â«H \ \X. -1.her . _ / ~\\\ anÂ«Â«09 = - \ a\\\\\\\0. -\1 .- . Id 1 :414>03~ 48 'f I 32 fil"J 1 1 , 1 , if ''/1: 1, 1 /111 - 1,36. 8 4 4 7 1 $~/0.:an f. _6 /1 m 1 0/ .11 Ple :2 2. 21 *1 1 -0 1 0 8. 0 4: 63 > r * 1,2 X) LD I 0 m m 0 0 m m < I - 0 0 m m 03.07.12 720 EAST HYMAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS www.cunniffe.com 720 EAST HYMAN AVE. 610 EAST HYMAN AVE. I ASPEN, CO 81611 1 TEL: 970.925.5590 I FAX: 970.920.4557 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 STAR PEN V EM A *O#-3/ ..L/-- NOI-LVA333 1333* Â»>/ JOIANC 3aVHG 3*10(3--~~ik= ill UW ~.Â«~t~~f~~~~i~~~~9~~~~~. ROOF DEC* Ah .....'........./........./.../.../...//. , '11 ;- .............. ,wi/I/5/~7777777/7~~V~%0000,\40 t\\\veâ€¢ EL â€¢ 133'-39 7--77F 1 L -1 11 11 1-1 11 1-1 11 11 11 11 1.-1 11 11 1 -L-2 t THIRD FLOOR ~|1 EL â€¢ 122'-09 )-7- u .7Â«Â« Â«AÂ»dinfiN~Lil Il Il I. 1 0 1.1 Il Il I..I Il I..I Il Il 1.1_[. 1 4 4 SECOND FLOOR b .///////////\\...1.1- \\.h' ~ EL â€¢111.-0. T)-----76'F 11 11 11 4-291 f 1111 f ~~-- 2 Z LU FIRST FLOOR A|~ < I Z CO 36 tz~ < Ill ~ el hc CNI C < h EXISTING 1/NEST / ADJ LOT ELEVATION 111 = lot-Oil Chi 4 A3.4e 91031IHOMÂ¥ 3:IBINNAO S3-lhIVHO ll!00'0#!UUnO'AAMAA 299*'016'026 :XY=l I 0699'986'0Z6 :131 I W9&9 00 'NadSÂ¥ , 3AV NVINAH 19Â¥3 039 1, 1, J k Ovul L.Et STAIR PENTHOUSE Ah, -----------I-- EL â€¢ 142'-OU 7----7- STAIR PENâ„¢OUSE f-% &INE PENT~E VIEâ€¢L.&!*LL 8137-OND ---------- ~ PENIt~EM~ - - - 1------------- GUARDRAIL 0 el-ASS SUARGRAIL 7 ecrofo ROC+ DECK AK )'11%1%11/(t'11,1,1, ../..////...//..../. .//'.../....M/.././..././.../.......//.. EL . 133'-39 T--79F - SOLAR SHACE DEVICE AT 3RD FtOOR - --- :, â€ž - , f--Ir--I T---W--lf---1 0 1 - ~ ~Â«-SOLAR SHADE DEVICE 111111']1.1...lili THIRD FLODAÂ« SOLAR SHADE DEVICE AT INC FLOOR I EL . 122 -09 7=UEIX, f ___--9- REPLACE AMNING MINDOPE - TYP \\\\\\ Â»Â»Â»Non 11 1 1---11--11'-'1 1 - 1 0/4 1--Ir-Ir--1 I . ~Â«--dOLAR SHADE DEVICE / SECOND FLOOR ~|1 \\\\1\\\/1/"IKI ///////////////////5/\\\\/\\/\\\\\\\\\4/ ...../. ....../................. \...\\...//////. ............'........... .............. .///////////\...h/\%billi 11111 EL . lili-0. T )--V- SOLAR SHADE DEVICE AT IS- FLOOR S~LAR SIADE DEVICE AT IST FLOG 5 - -ftÂ»~ ---ir-=lr-- li i 11/ 1 ~zSOLAR SHADE DEVICE 4:32/ 4244~~~~-~j/ 4Â»Â»1 - FIRST FL-Oe â€¢1'~ EL â€¢ 100'-O. f ) ..I. PROPOSED INEST / ADJ LOT ELEVATION 1 " = 10'-O. C\1 9 A3.4 91031IHOMÂ¥ 3:HINNAO S31hlÂ¥HO NVINAH 19Â¥3 OZZ ll!00'8#!UUnO'NAVA ...1, 1Â¥ 11~1 9 0 1 4 1 +52 37 /v 1 i 44 / -- '' - ./ I trÂ·40 ...Il--i--=---=---I-=--- - _I . -f. . ' 'br#,f'.p-:-6- .*.. ur.: 534,3 i.17Â»12.7.:fme - / i 3 : ~i*%3' I .~00Â·Â·=*12;Â·RA'Â·42:inyÂ· .1. i.:tÂ·. rt ~ '~Â·Â·5.irrm<bue*.1"04 : :- i ..~0>4f:4,%<-3,Â·:= . 0.'31>~ .744#Atjf~ 4*.#WB#i~~ A. Y.q.Â¢4264*- I i I. ... 1/ 1.-B' , \. 1 1 -1 t. I W'' - .. --- . . 1~ 4. + . i.~l 4 N ..I r I . â€ž.1 '' 9/8 J - # I - 6 1 41 \ 9 3% 6 - , Â·14 . C ,-Â·<7.~,1tjlf'ttt~17*21/'/ .9$. .:,4 9>,Â«6*.7 .~:0~~j..::.* ':1;.4-' / - I-S -29t,Apt : / / -' ..: J..... : . . .3,/V' ../5/37/,* - -9 -7 ./ 42Â·â€¢y-â‚¬ .'Â· .-Â·-0406Â»-4â‚¬9Â·- I C 2...., , -'. ... 33 'r:':1.,DAPÂ·r Â·... 4 v ./.t â‚¬8 .. -- Ak *%93 - .4,-, , .*.ce I ' iÂ· I 1, , . 1-6 7,2,9.24>4:1.3,42. . ' F. 1 , 15#/ --4 1 1 1*Q & 15 fry- ' /0. 1 -Upl -;.4-.Â·r,~uwk, yÂ· / / ~ , 0. e . dil ~:-~1*7440.Â· *-41 .4/ltz-:R{I~~63'.1.'Â·;.';â‚¬~.:.-1:~.44.~~.~4~~&$ 0%\':.gl, M -1.- 2934464-4913 *Ixi~*>Â·-~-Â·~ -tu. . ,..,t . .. I. 40. I....:*Â¥â€¢Fip ~ u .,44'... . I -f#g#vili*, r 3 I 44#449Â»92 - 1 i C.â€¢* 4Â·"ed -- - I - ..r:-7*.-:*P 3-Â·Â¥3Â·fid,~~Td,~6Â·:. ~.Â·Â· ...164.~.*(4.5*I~<*R#t 462Â·:.1AO.D..,tÂ·.'-44.?'6'cgi.~-~c :-4 '1 - 7 V . - ,Â·.-.+2_Â· fri.:.1.; g;."i:92~24: ..3#.,+4,2Â§41*gu.Â·: . 1 6 .. 0 /1 : #46.~\.. r,-Â·Â¢,1~12-.*iC#Y#gz~felkÂ¢.:.'..374:::44...1Â·.Ir~155%2.1%7rA14~44*40.1.':144â‚¬: 2441.84*4~*3'4,: 3.'~0.15Â¥ - I *...~....syc--*,zu-reÂ»PicÂ· f ~.t:Â·-2.,9/19?-fÂ·D~%~~*.I<&MbOU:**De#81*KÂ·L<'4-'~'~1Â·63 '~Â·:~~~Â·~OVÂ·Â·:43' i T...461R919&.32#$gVL,Flipl~kE . 42 - 4 A .11 . 1 1 - i r-1 /Tr'-râ€ž ..'.1, ru,T.Â· ,,,.r'r -..;' /1.~~KI' . " +13 71 9.94Â·Â·*Â· - P le .... U .54 t ' gr' .9 ' '1 fle '' * i,44Â£2 3 0.9>1 0 - . I. / ~94*i .- ' / 45*Wn-"*-Â· ., '' 22Â¢ ..ell, . ..1 , I 1 I . /\ I I 4-.-4.; ./. ~. . 3. t' / / Rk / 1 \ \ - . 1 ..41,492+W'Ne'WA&*fblmt#P:rfe.-6..~~ 3.-T Â·lrÂ·,2&'3@**3:--:Leck'EutÂ»f-%' I '0- '21 - I k . 1 .1.- 1 . . / .CrlÂ·<7,Â» ped< A*'409*â‚¬?:Â·t.er.Â·1> ' EffLAE-phi, iÂ·.- 1 n 1-8 v :4331, 14 < . ' 4 1 i , j.... S m . ./.1 1 -112' 36 T '91'...r * 7'le ' râ‚¬19 'Il.--I-~-Ilili~ 6, ig.-'Int 46 ni-J.. A .. / Â« 4. 7 t I 27 . 13 f.'4 ?e e k $,32 ./ . Â·Â· 7 g Â» * / ' I / .....:I# I. /':Â· I.,41 Â· i. . . ../i . 0, 'i'5~~#â„¢P'42Â« r. - ,-A I-/I+'I-... . I '' . 1, . Â· :â€¢ . -/ 1 0 1 .... 3, N. I 0 , .1 WALL SECTION 720 EAST HYMAN AVENUE CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 610 EAST HYMAN, ASPEN CO. (970) 925-5590 SOUTH ELEVATION SUNSHADING STUDY www. cum#e corn 1 -+ 4..9 2 A A RE-SUBDIVISION PLAT OF THE ASPEN ATHLET I[ C CLUB BU JI LDI[NG CONDOM lr N )I UM CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP AND DEDICATION A RE-SUBDIVISION OF COMPANY, BEING THE RECORD OWNER OF ALL UNITS IN THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT CM, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY LOTS 0. R, AND S BLOCK 104 BUILDING CONDOMINIUM. ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF RECORDED JANUARY 3, CITY AND TOWNS I TE OF ASPEN 1976 IN PLAT BOOK 5 AT PAGE 45, AS AMENDED BY THE AMENDED MAP THEREOF COUNTY OF PITKIN DESCRIBED IN THE CONDOMIN:UM DECLARATION THEREOF RECORDED JANUARY 3, 1976 RECORDED FEBRUARY 13, 1978 IN PLAT BOOK 6 AT PAGE 74, AND AS DEFINED AND STATE OF COLORADO IN BOOK 322 AT PAGE 370 AS AMENDED BY THE AMENDED CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED AREA. 0 207 ACRES Â·/- 19,000 S F Â·/-) FEBRUARY 13, 1978 IN BOOK 343 AT PAGE 402, ALL OF THE ABOVE SITUATED ON LOTS A THIS RE-SUBDIVISION PLAT SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED TO PRESENTLY AMEND, VACATE OR TERMINATE THE AMENDED CONDOM INIUM 0. R AND S BLOCK 104, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. DECLARATION FOR THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING RECORDED IN BOOK 343 AT PAGE 402 AS RECEPTION NO. 20!837 PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN ORDINANCE â€¢17 (SERIES OF 2012) (AMENDING THE OR IGi NAL CONDOMINI UM DECLARAT ION THEREFOR RECORDED i N BOOK 322 AT PAGE 3701 OR THE AMENDED DOES HEREBY PLAT AND SUBDIVIDE SAID REAL PROPERTY INTO THE SUBDIVISION PLAT CONDOMINIUM MAP OF THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 6 AT PAGE 74 AS RECEPTION NO OF ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUM INCIDENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT 1--10 201836. (AMENDING THE ORIGINAL CONDOMINIUM MAP THEREFOR RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 5 AT PAGE 45) THE VACATION OF THEREON OF A MIXED USE CONDOMINIUM PROJECT AND DO HEREBY DEDICATE TO THE THOSE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE VACATED AMENDED AND RESTATED AT THE TIME REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE â€¢17 (SERIES OF 2012) APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANIES FOR THE NON-EXCLUSIVE USE THEREOF AND ALL PUBLIC 0 10 20 .-79,9 2 RECORDED UPON SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT. UTILITY EASEMENTS THAT MAY BE SHOWN AND NOTED ON THE CONDOMINIUM MAP TO BE EXECUTED THIS - DAY OF , 2012 CM, LLC BY NAME TITLE STATE OF COLORADO ) 1 55 COUNTY OF PITKIN ) - 7920 THE FOREGOING CERTIFICATION OF WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS Â« DAY OF , 2012, BY AS OF CM, LLC. NEWER -6046 - MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: PAVEMENT WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. 79'9 9 NOTARY PUBLIC A L ZEF- - ---- -7920 VICINITY MAP 920 5 0 SURVEYOR S CERTIFICATE S. f -9919.3 20 2-Â£0 C<~ - - - - 1, JOHN HOWORTH, A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR HEREBY CERTIFY THAT IN APRIL, I cONC ~~'PHONE BOX 2012 A SURVEY OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPEATY WAS PERFORMED UNDER MY ,... . 0 43. i .6 . 1 RIO.R., PAVED 104 ---- CONC CONC /STA~RS *â€ž* THE UNDERSIGNED, A DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF P I TKIN COUNTY TITLE, STATUTES'973, TITLE 38, ARTICLE 51, AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME AND THAT THIS SUPERVISION AND DIRECTION, IN ACCORDANCE WITH COLORADO REVISED ALLEY LOADING D K 6 ff/ 10'DL 09Â·/~. - ERROR OF CLOSURE IS LESS THAN 1:15,000. RECORDED EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY 14-D 4 75â€¢ RE-SUBDIVISION PLAT ACCURATELY AND SUBSTANTIALLY DEPICTS SAID SU&VEY, THE 0 11 - AND RESTRICTIONS ARE THOSE SET FORTH IN SECTION 2 OF SCHEDULE BOF THE TITLE 90.00 + 2 - COMMITMENT ISSUED BY PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC AS CASE NO PCT 20668L 5 0 - MN - 920 0 "14~ - SIGNED: 12*D - JOHN HOWORTH PLS 25947 DATE 6'DL CONC. Â® c / - TITLE CERTIFICATE 919.6 8 TRASH UTILITIES 4 5 0 INC. REGISTERED TO DO BUSINESS IN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, DOES HEREBY g 93-0 | Met, 14- EXCEPT FOR THE LIENS OF THE MORTGAGEE NAMED HEREON. ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE UTILTIES CERTIFY THAT THE PERSON LISTED AS OWNER ON THIS PLAT DOES HOLD FEE SIMPLE ' 8*DL TITLE TO THE WITHIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY, FREE AND CLEAR OF ALL LIENS ~ THE FACTS STATED ON THIS PLAT ARE TRUE, THIS CERTIFICATE IS NOT TO BE BR/CK K , 9. 14. L i i i -il- ....44. CONSTRUED AS AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, NOR AN OPINION OF TITLE NOR A GUARANTEE OF TITLE, AND IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT PITKIN COUN1-Y TITLE, INC. 4 3 1; */ 7920 5, NEITHER ASSUMES NOR WILL BE CHARGED WITH ANY FINANCIAL OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY WHATSOEVER ON ANY STATEMENT CONTAINED HEREIN. PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 6 2 601 E. HOPKINS ASPEN, CO 8\6\\ BY: 4Â·0 NAME TITLE r O 10*DL RICK WALL TYP 4'Q ASNEN ATHLETIC 13LUB DATE: , 2012 STATE OF COLORADO ) BU~LDING CONDOM~INIUM COUNTY OF PITKIN ) BUILDING FOOT PRINT: 6,170 S.F. â€¢/- N THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF 2012 BY AS , OF P I tK IN COUNTY T I TLE, 1 NC, 2 ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT < WITNESS MY HAND AND OFF ICIAL SEAL. 4 BOOK 309 PAGE 97 6 FLOOR 9 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 1 1 0 NOTARY PUBLIC LOT 7922.3 1 m m / 2-/ 41 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL Q' THIS RE-SUBDIVISION PLAT OF ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUM WAS 13*D j o' REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 7'DL -720- fy DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, THIS DAY OF 2012. Plo Q CHRIS BENDON C#D % 1 1 , Vt MORTGAGEE CONSENT 15 D -I 7 DL ~ -3 Qk < RECEPTION NOS.586011 MODIFYING 528092, 586012 MODIFYING 538869, 586013 MODIFYING 528090 4 THE UNDERSIGNED, BEING THE HOLDER OF MODIFIED DEEDS OF TRUST RECORDED 1/19/12 AS 2 2 AND 586014 MODIFYING 531869, PITKIN COUNTY COLORADO ENCUMBERING THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PAOPERTY m %* DOES HEREBY CONSENT TO AND APPROVE OF THE AECORDING OF THIS RE-SUBDIVISION PLAT AND 1 1 40 THE MATTERS SET FORTH HEREIN. S 75' C' C DATED THIS DAY OF 2012. 09 0,,. ---------------- t 7922 -4 / /7922 h..4 3 ALPINE BANK 6 270,00' 0 BY: & NAME 2 RICK WAL â„¢. / 3.0 0 2 ITS: < TITLE 60 2 / / 2.4-D < STATE OF COLORADO ) 11 8 7922. ) 88 8'DL A CONC COVERED ENTRY ~ 2â€¢4*D COUNTY OF PITKIN ) WALK 3 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 8'DL b ROOF 7955.9-\ / THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS DAY LEGEND AND NOTES ' O oF , 2012 BY , AS S 75'09 ' OF AL#INE BANK. 11..E -40 7920. 4 90.00. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. O SET SURVEY MONUMENT LS 25947 0 MANHOLE ~ CITY ENGINEER'S APPROVAL 7920.35-/ NOTARY PUBLIC 4 SURVEY CONTROL Cua TE? BRICK WALK TITLE INFORMATION FURNISHED BY: 10-F BRICK LANDSCAPE THIS RE-SUBDIVISION PLAT OF THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUM 9'DL PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. ENCROACHMENT LICENSE EAST 7922.0 TRICIA ARAGON, CITY ENGINEER WALL TYPICAL WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, THIS NO. PCT20668L5 RECEPTION NO. 456622 DAY OF 2012. BACK OF DATED: JULY 24, 2006 0 0 FENCE - - CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL 8744 AT O STREET LIGHT - - 74 80 AV ENUE SEE AMENDED CONDOMINIUM MAP FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION R.0.1, NDICAP Â· A CESS - THIS RE-SUBDIVISION PLAT OF THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUM 4.3 SLANTED TEXT DENOTES BUILDING TIE S WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN BY ORDINANCE NO. 68. 17, SERIES OF 2012 ADOPTED ON JULY 23, 2012 AND RECORDED ON ELEVATION BASED ON ASPEN GPS MONUMENT NO.5: ELEVATION 7910.748 14Â· JULY 26, 2012 AS RtiCEPTION NO. 590898, PITKIN COUNTY COLORADO. 1929 NGVD {SEA LEVEL DATUM) 56.6 THIS RE-SUBDIVISION PLAT OF THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB 6UILDING CONDOMINIUM WAS 0 - 7922. 388 REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN THIS , TREE, WITH CALIPER IN INCHES: F-CONIFER, D-DECIDUOUS, DL-DRIP LINE IN FEET u, .15 DAY OF , 2012. . ' WATER LINE G.C.E. - GENERAL COMMON ELEMENT (SEE CONDO. PLAT) -I BY: - - CITY OF ASPEN MICHAEL C. IRELAND, MAYOR L.C.E. - LIMITED COMMON ELEMENT (SEE CONDO. PLAT) Â· NO 4 ATTEST: GPS MONUMENT POSTED ADDRESS: -720 -hi) ~ KATHRYN KOCH, CITY CLERK m FIRE HYDRANT CLERK AND RECORDER CERTIFICATE WATER VALVE Â· O S THIS RE-SUBDIVISION PLAT OF THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUM THIS PROPERTY IS SITUATED IN ZONE -X- (AREAS ' WAS ACCEPTED FOR FILING IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF PITKIN DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE 500-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN) AS ' U COUNTY, COLORADO AT O'CLOCK -. M., AT THIS DAY OF SHOWN ON FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP PREPARED BY 1 + 2012 AND WAS DULY RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK AT F.E.M.A., FOR PITKIN COUNTY COLORADO COMMUNITY- PAGE AS RtÂ·CEPTION NO. PANEL NUMBER O8O97CO2O4 C, 6FFECTI VE 6ATE: JUNE 4, 1987 CLERK AND RECORDER THIS PROPERTY LIES ENTIRELY INSIDE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUDFLOW HAZARD AREA AS DEFINED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN MASTER DRA[NAGE PLAN, PROJECT NUMBER 1963, FIGURE ES-15. PREPARED BY BEARINGS BASED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCKS 94 AND 99, GPS MONUMENT CITY OF ASPEN BOTH YELLOW CAPS LS 9184, N 75'09'11-W NO. i ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC. 210 SOUTH GALENA STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL PHONE/FAX (970) 925-3816 ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT ON THIS PLAT WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS PLAT BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN DATE JOB YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. THE 7/12 38183A CERTIFICATION IS VOID IF NOT WET STAMPED WITH THE SEAL OF THE SURVEYOR. /t 000(}02& 1-IOS Idll,O--ZAGEnE/,LO- PillEeteâ‚¬'P'90#00Â¥O1uwl\J LEGEND AND NOTES 20 0 SET SURVEY MONUMENT LS 25947 t MANHOL,E + SURVEY CONTROL TITLE INFORMATION FURNISHED BY: PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. --7919.2 110. PCT20668L5 CONC. LOADING D 9-11-W DATED: JULY 24, 2006 c o FENCE VICINITY MAP - 0 STREE LIGHT *-0 SEE CONDOMINIUM MAP FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 1--400 ---- *- -44Gc.. 4.3 SLANTED TEXT DENOTES BU ILDING TIE - ELEVA-ION BASED ON ASPEN GPS MONUMENT NO.5: ELEVATION 7910.748 7920.0-. 1929 NGVD (SEA LEVEL DATUM) TREE, WITH CALIPER IN INCHES: F=CON:FER, D-DECIDUOUS, DL-DRIP LINE IN FEET -44*- G.C.E - GENERAL COMMON ELEMENT (SEE CONDO. PLAT) C:36 044.0== k--j,McrY<ZZIi L.C.E. - LIMITED COMMON ELEMENT C SEE CONDO. PLAT; .,(*i#t 4Â£Â£-2-Y--- --r 7920 7919.9 POSTED ADDRESS: -720- ~2--t,UECIhk-2-~~ 9 7920.5 Â® WATER VALVE . 9 FIRE HYDRANT 1 Ch...1.<-7 A .- f~~11L- 5.1 20.90 ~t-j~'d~~J ,0 . %-~. - j - DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE 500-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN) AS CONC. ALLEY - SHOWN ON FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP PREPARED BY ~'PHONE BOX CONC./STAIRS 1 ..,, PAVED 1 0 4 ---- THIS WOPERTY IS SITUATED FN ZONE -X- (AREAS wfa. 421Crn k 14oD N 75 F.E.M.A. FOR PITKIN COUNTY COLORADO COMMUNITY- 10'DL 2 90.00, - PANEL NUMBER 08007C0204 C, 6FFECTIVE OATE: JUNE 4, lip429 4~i' *10~ 1987 2 -- --* METAL STAIRS 244 7920.0 FAL-- FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN DATED NOVEMBER 2001 b -- --I THIS DROPERTY LIES INSIDE THE SURFACE DRAiNAGE MASTER PLAN 0- - *4% 12*D -Â® CONC. 7919.6 ~ 6'DL BEARINGS BASED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCKS 94 AND 99, -1 1- - - BOTH fELLOW CAPS LS 9184,: N 7909-111 ..rr-i) 90... --,e.,122 -4 i him (29-119 - *FMR PAVE,ENr AU IL227=~i dâ‚¬#kilv~Fi.iU 11,~'1 -:m--- UTILITIES , 79.S 8 UTILTIES /1/22 lzE:affi t- - ~ijam (,1-7rit 8*DL MEC4, 13-0 14. 84/or Effh Ah*Rl teÂ· ' 1,490 19â‚¬~ % 1 7(21 r' 1 1-4-1//ferizifi'lElialialitilifiti~~.E~il1% (EMEMEr:Wrf12i6lizjr:m W- 6940 -1 - l 7920 3 3 #44/*954-9 i A i.f. 4-D 1 / RICK WALL TYP 4 4 ASI~EN ATHLETIC iLUB BUILDING CONDOM~INIUM go 1 4 BUILDING FOOT PRINT: 6,170 S.F. ./- 2 0 1 1 ' 2 l FLOOR 6,4 - 7922.3 - Â£% ~\. < gq CERT I,- i CAT ION 8 THE UNDERSIGNED STATES THAT THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREON WAS FIELD SURVEYED 13-0 ~ SHOWN AND THAT THERE *RE NO DISCREPANCIES OF RECORD BOUNDARY Li NE CONFL ICTS, DURING . 2008 AND AS ACCURATE BASED ON THE FSELD EVIDENCE AS 7'DL l A - ENCROACHMENTS EASEMENTS OR R! GHTS OF WAY iN FIELD EÂ¢ 1 DENCE OR KNOWN TO ME l C~, EXCEPT AS HE*ON SHOWN. UNDERGROUND UT iLITIES W?TH NO ABOVEGROUND APPURTENANCES . & AND DOCUMENTS OF RECORD NOT SUPPLIED To THE SURVEYOR ARE EXCEPTED. THIS SURVEY ' IS VOID UNLESS WET STAMPED WITH THE SEAL OF THE SURVEYOR BELOW. SURVEY PRECISION 15'0 ~~ Ch GREATER THAN 1Â·10.000. 5 4 I 7'DL jo * i za DATED: - kNk 2 e JOHN M. HOWORTH, P.L.S. 25947 Cb 40 1 07 S 75 / :& 5 CD *09'll-E 270.00 7922. -- r SEC. COR 2 RICK WALL TYP. I 12 ~ 7 N 80*2542-W 1902.42' CALC. TIE 13\18 ~ 60.2 l 4.4.0 8'DL 7922. WALK CONC. COVERED ENTRY ~ 4â€¢4-0 8'DL 4-0 ROOF 7955,9-1 ~ 6'DL ek 9.F - , 8'DL 7920. 90.00- 7920.34 5-F 5'DL BRICK WALK 10*F 9-DL WALL TYPICAL BRICK LANDSCAPE EAST CURB 84CK OP IMPROVEMENT SURVEY 4 Â¥44 N 9 7922.0 OF ALL UNITS IN THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOM;Ni UM 74.80 42 ENDE ACCESS ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF RECORDED JANUARY 3 1 976 1 N F'LAT HANDICAP R.O.W. BOOK 5 AT PAGE 45 AND ACCORDING TO THE AMENDED' MAP THEREOF RECORDED FEBRUARY'13 1978 i N PLAT BOOK 6 AT PAGE 74. AND AS DEFINED AND DESCR I BEO EN THE CONDOMINIUM DECLARATIONTHEREOF RECORDED JANUARY 3 1976 IN BOOK 322 AT PAGE 370 AND THE AMENDED CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED FEBRUARY 13 i 978 IN BOOK 343 7922.1 ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF RECORDED JANUARY 3 1976 IN PLAT ' AT PA.GE 402. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB UNIT BOOK 5 AT PAGE 45 AND ACCORDI NG TO THE AMENDED'MAP THEREOF WATER LINE -. - RECORDED FEBRUARY'13 1978 IN PLAT BOOK 6 AT PAGE 74 AND AS DEF I NED AND DESCRI BED i N THE CONDOMENi UM DECLARAT ION'THEREOF RECORDED JANUARY 3 1976 i N BOOK 322 AT PAGE 370 AND THE AMENDED CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED FEBRUARY 13, 1978 EN BOOK 343 AT PAGE 402 SITUATED ON LOTS Q R AND S BLOCK i 04 CITY AMD TOWNS fTE OF ASPEN CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO AREA: 0.207 ACRES â€¢/- (9 000 S.F. ./-) PREPARED BY L \ 11 ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC. 210 SOUTH GALENA STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 ING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION 61%76* ANY OFICT ON â„¢18 PLAT WITHIN THRIE YEARS PHONE/FAX (970) 925-3816 Elm =611:IRITJA:8?V9 1:i, M:*c~ ~~,~â€ž~NT MAY~ Om,ON 1 JOB DATE .Be#Pirly#'VUNÂ¥2 #MARk 'M 7/08 38183 - 2 09 HinOS 9.9