Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.hpc.20240724
AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION July 24, 2024 4:30 PM, City Council Chambers - 3rd Floor 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 I.SITE VISIT II.ROLL CALL III.MINUTES IV.PUBLIC COMMENTS V.COMMISSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS VI.DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VII.PROJECT MONITORING VIII.STAFF COMMENTS IX.CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ISSUED X.CALL UP REPORTS XI.SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS XII.SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT XIII.OLD BUSINESS XIV.NEW BUSINESS XIV.A 120 E. Main St. - AspenModern Historic Designation and Benefits, Conceptual Major Development, Transferable Development Rights (TDRs), Major Subdivision, Planned Development, Special Review, and Growth Management Review - PUBLIC HEARING Site Visit - 420 East Cooper Ave. - 12:00pm 1 1 XV.ADJOURN XVI.NEXT RESOLUTION NUMBER Staff Memo.120 E Main St.LPA-23-096.pdf Draft Resolution No. XX, Series 2024 - Staff Recommendation.pdf Draft Resolution No. XX, Series 2024 - Applicants Proposal.pdf Exhibit A - Designation Criteria Staff Findings.pdf Exhibit B - HP Design Guidelines Staff Findings.pdf Exhibit C - Transferrable Development Rights Staff Findings.pdf Exhibit D - Planned Development Project Review Staff Findings.pdf Exhibit E - Growth Management Staff Findings.pdf Exhibit F - Referral Comments.pdf Exhibit G - Application.pdf Exhibit H - Supplement to Application.pdf TYPICAL PROCEEDING FORMAT FOR ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS (1 Hour, 15 Minutes for each Major Agenda Item) 1. Declaration of Conflicts of Interest (at beginning of agenda) 2. Presentation of proof of legal notice (at beginning of agenda) 3. Applicant presentation (10 minutes for minor development; 20 minutes for major development) 4. Board questions and clarifications of applicant (5 minutes) 5. Staff presentation (5 minutes for minor development; 10 minutes for major development) 6. Board questions and clarifications of staff (5 minutes) 7. Public comments (5 minutes total, or 3 minutes/ person or as determined by the Chair) 8. Close public comment portion of hearing 9. Applicant rebuttal/clarification (5 minutes) 10. Staff rebuttal/clarification (5 minutes) End of fact finding. Chairperson identifies the issues to be discussed. 11. Deliberation by the commission and findings based on criteria commences. No further input from applicant or staff unless invited by the Chair. Staff may ask to be recognized if there is a factual error to be corrected. If the item is to be continued, the Chair may provide a summary of areas to be restudied at their discretion, but the applicant is not to re-start discussion of the case or the board’s direction. (20 minutes) 12. Motion. Prior to vote the chair will allow for call for clarification for the proposed resolution. Please note that staff and/or the applicant must vacate the dais during the opposite presentation and board question and clarification session. Both staff and applicant team will vacate the dais during HPC deliberation unless invited by the chair to return. Updated: March 7, 2024 2 2 Page | 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Stuart Hayden, Interim Historic Principal Planner Kevin Rayes, Principal Planner THRU: Ben Anderson, Community Development Director RE: 120 E. Main Street | Public Hearing AspenModern Historic Designation and Benefits | Conceptual Major Development | Transferrable Development Rights (TDRs) | Major Subdivision | Planned Development | Special Review | Growth Management Review MEETING DATE: July 24, 2024 Applicant/Owner: 120 East Main Street Partners, LLC. Representative: Jessica Garrow, C/O Design Workshop Inc. Location: 120 East Main Street – AKA the Old Pitkin County Library Building Current Zoning: Mixed-Use (MU) Summary: The Applicant has offered voluntary AspenModern historic designation of the existing building located at 120 E. Main Street and requests Conceptual Major Development, Planned Development, Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs), Major Subdivision, Growth Management Review, Special Review and other preservation benefits. The project involved preserving the existing resource and the development of two multi-family residential units at the rear of the property. Staff Recommendation: Staff supports AspenModern designation of the existing building. With that said, Staff believes the scope of benefits requested by the Applicant should be paired down. While certain benefits requested in the application are certainly appropriate and supported by Staff, many are inconsistent with existing code standards, and contrary to underlying zoning. Staff’s responses are nuanced and tailored to the unique nature of the application in the spirit of securing designation of the property without undermining community values. Figure 1: Subject building proposed for designation 3 Page | 2 REQUEST OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION: The Applicant is requesting the following recommendations of approval from the Historic Preservation Commission: • Voluntary AspenModern Landmark Designation (Code Section 26.415.030) The subject building is identified on the AspenModern eligibility map and is an example of Wrightian Style architecture. The Applicant is proposing to voluntarily designate the property in exchange for certain preservation benefits/incentives. • Conceptual Major Development (Code Section 26.415.070.D) While the proposal creates significant changes to site planning and adds new structure fully detached from the resource, minimal alternations to the proposed resource are anticipated. • Transferrable Development Rights (Code Section 26.535) As an incentive for voluntary designation, the Applicant seeks to establish ten TDRs, severing 2,500 sq. ft. of development rights from the site. • Major Subdivision (Code Section 26.480.070) The subject site consists of two lots. 120 E. Main Street is located to the south (the lot is improved with the building that qualifies for designation). Across the alley to the north is a small vacant lot that accommodates off-street parking for the building. The Applicant is interested in merging the two lots, which triggers a Major Subdivision review. • Planned Development (Code Section 26.445) The Applicant proposed to develop two free-market residential dwellings behind the existing development. New free-market residential development is no longer allowed within the Mixed- Use zone district. Overlaying the property with a Planned Development allows the Applicant to request a use variation beyond those allowed pursuant to underlying zoning. The Applicant also requests to memorialize a building envelope that differs from underlying zoning. The proposed building envelope would allow development to encroach into the rear and side yard setbacks as prescribed pursuant to underlying zoning. Lastly, as part of the PD overlay, a narrower vehicular right-of way is requested to access the commercial and residential spaces and a stacked parking configuration is requested to accommodate four off-street spaces. • Growth Management Review (Code Section 26.470.080.D & Code Section 26.470.100) Growth Management Review is triggered for two reasons- (1) because of the subdivision request and (2) because of the request to meet mitigation requirements via fee-in-lieu. The Growth Management Quota System allows for 13 new residential dwelling units resulting from subdivision. In this instance, a subdivision is proposed and two free-market dwelling units are proposed. The City’s Growth Management Quota System regulations require affordable housing mitigation of free-market residential development. Development that generates less than 0.1 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) may mitigate via fee-in-lieu by right. Projects that generate more than 0.1 FTEs generally should mitigate via certificates of affordable housing credit or by physically developing affordable housing units (or buying down existing units) within City limits. This application seeks to mitigate via cash-in-lieu for 1.38 FTEs generated from the free- market residential development which requires review and approval from HPC and Council. 4 Page | 3 BACKGROUND: 120 E. Main is located within the Mixed-Use (MU) zone district and within the Main Street Historic District. The property is improved with a 1965 Wrightian-style commercial building, approximately 4,560 sq. ft. in size. The building was designed by Fritz Benedict, Herbert Bayer, and Ellen Harland (one of Aspen’s earliest female architects) to serve as the Pitkin County library. In 1966 Walter Cronkite participated in the opening/dedication of the library. True to its Wrightian heritage, the building emphasizes a horizontal composition and incorporates a low- pitched hip roof, overhanging eaves, and a clerestory band of windows. In 1992, the current owner, 120 East Main Partners, LLC., purchased the property, allowing the County to develop a larger facility on North Mill Street. Shortly thereafter, 120 East Main Partners, LLC also purchased the adjacent lot to the north (Lot 2) to accommodate parking for the various commercial uses in the building1. Both lots remain under the ownership of 120 East Main Partners, LLC. Figure 3: Subject Site Location 120 E. Main Lot 2 Figure 2: Walter Cronkite Participating in Opening of Library 5 Page | 4 Today, the building at 120 East Main remains essentially unaltered and has retained its original design integrity. The site has no landmark protection in place and has long been identified as a priority for preservation through AspenModern. The Applicant is voluntarily designating the property and seeks various benefits/incentives in exchange for doing so. Submittal of an AspenModern application triggers a 90-day negotiation period, during which the Applicant and City attempt to find agreement and passage of a designation ordinance within three months. Pending a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission, a Final Decision is needed from City Council. It is also important to note that Lot 1 and Lot 2 were both part of the now, no longer existent Office Zone District. That zone eventually became the Mixed-Use Zone District. Due to the complex land use history of Lot 2, it appears on the City of Aspen’s Zone District Map as being located in the R-6 Zone District. Staff and the applicant believe the current mapping to be incorrect and both parcels are zoned Mixed Use (MU). Following the approval of the subdivision, staff would correct the map within the City’s GIS zoning layer. PROJECT SUMMARY: In the proposal, the former library and now commercial building would be maintained in its current state on the exterior. As part of the proposal however, Lots 1 and 2 would be merged, and 2, new resdential units and parking spaces would be built on Lot 2, separated from the proposed resource by an existing alley/access way. Additional, but minimal site planning changes are also proposed. As a voluntary designation, the Applicant may request certain benefits. For clarity, Staff has broken down the proposed requests into the following categories. Identfying the dimensions on the property including the proposed new development at the rear of the property is an important element of the Planned Development Review. Generate Ten Transferrable Development Rights: The Applicant seeks to generate ten TDRs, severring a total of 2,500 sq. ft. of development rights from the site. The following methodology was used to determine the number of TDRs proposed. Gross Parcel Size Vacated Alley Net Parcel Size Lot 1 8,800 sq. ft. 800 sq. ft. 8,000 sq. ft. Lot 2 2,520 sq. ft. 900 sq. ft. 1,620 sq. ft. Combined Lots 11,320 sq. ft. 1,700 sq. ft. 9,620 sq. ft. A FAR of 1:1 is allowed by-right within the Mixed-Use zone district. Pending approval of Major Subdivision (combining Lots 1 and 2), a total of 9,620 sq. ft. is allowed on the resulting parcel. The Applicant subtracted the floor area associated with existing and proposed development to determine the number of TDRs proposed. Allowable Floor Area 9,620 sq. ft. Existing Building 4,522 sq. ft . New Residential Floor Area 2,481 sq. ft. Proposed Trash Enclosure Floor Area 96 sq. ft. TDRs (10 at 250 sq. ft. each) 2,500 Total Unused Development Rights 21 sq. ft. 6 Page | 5 Develop Two Free-Market Residential Dwelling Units: As previously mentioned, the vacant lot located to the north of 120 E. Main – Lot 2 –currently provides offstreet parking to the commercial uses within the subject building. The Applicant is interested in merging Lot 2 with 120 E. Main via Major Subdivision and developing two free-market residential dwellings on the north side of the resulting parcel. One unit is 2-bedrooms, and the other unit is 1-bedroom. As depicted in Figure 4, the new development is detached from the existing building and accessed through the alley located between the two structures. Because new free-market residential dwellings are not allowed within the Mixed- Use zone district, the application seeks to overlay the property with a Planned Development (PD). Memorializing a PD allows the Applicant to request a variance from underlying zoning via a site-specific approval. As part of the PD overlay, the Applicant also seeks to memorialize a building envelope three ft. from the rear (north) lot line, and zero ft. from the side (east) lot line where a minimum setback of five ft. is typically required on each side. Requests Related to Vehicular Access and Parking The Applicant intends to meet minimum parking standards. The code requires a minimum of nine off-street parking spaces; nine spaces are now proposed. Two spaces are for the residential dwellings and the remaining eight spaces are reserved for the commercial space. Six spaces are accommodated in the carport underneath the new residential dwellings. The remaining four spaces are located adjacent to the existing commercial building in a tandem configuration (AKA ‘stacked’). Tandem parking is typically not allowed for properties containing commercial/mixed-uses. Furthermore, Engineering standards prescribe a two-way drive aisle of at least 24-ft. in width. The proposed drive-aisle is 20 ft. which falls short of meeting Engineering requirements. Accommodating a tandem parking configuration and a drive-aisle that is narrower than Engineering standards requires site-specific approval as part of the PD overlay process. Land Use Code Section 26.515.070.e, Detached and Duplex Residential Dwelling Parking, allows tandem parking for single-family and duplex development. “Off-street parking provided for detached residential dwellings and duplex dwellings is not required to have unobstructed access of emergency apparatus to the property or to structures located on the property. This allows for ‘stacking’ of vehicles where a vehicle is parked directly behind another.” In this instance, a tandem parking configuration is proposed for a commercial building, which is not contemplated in the Special Review section of the land use code. Figure 4: Proposed Site Plan Existing Building Proposed Addition Alley between buildings 7 Page | 6 Miscellaneous Requests Affordable Housing Mitigation The Applicant seeks a guarantee that affordable housing mitigation requirements are met for the existing commercial building. Additionally, the Applicant seeks confirmation that mitigation associated with the development of the free market residential dwellings will not exceed 1.3 FTEs (approximately $563,622). Lastly, the Applicant asks to meet mitigation requirements via cash-in-lieu over a prolonged time period based on the sale of TDRs. Approximately $56,366 would be paid at each installment. • Waiver of Fees The application requests a waiver of plan review fees, including land use review fees, building permit fees, tree removal mitigation fees, Parks fees, and Air Quality (TDM) fees for new development proposed on the property. • Approval of a Restaurant Tenant The application requests approval of a restaurant tenant with the necessary exterior modifications to allow for IBC required ventilation and venting for a commercial kitchen. Additionally, the application requests approval that the exterior patio space is permitted for outdoor food/beverage service. • Ten Years of Vested Rights Ten years of vested rights are requested following issuance of a development order. • Six-Month Rescission Period The application requests a resission period of six months for AspenModern Designation to allow sufficient time for the owners to confirm that the conditions of approval are acceptable for the property. The approval shall mean the conceptual project approval, building modifications, and subdivision approval. REQUESTED REVIEWS & STAFF DISCUSSION: Staff certainly supports voluntary designation of the subject building. As previously mentioned, it is essentially unaltered and has retained its original design integrity. While Staff’s recommendations are nuanced and tailored in response to the unique benefits requested by the Applicant, differences of opinion are likely to remain. Staff aims to facilitate a productive conversation before HPC and Council and hopes a compromise might be realized in pursuit of AspenModern designation. TDRs and Free-Market Residential Development Given the unique and anomalous nature of this application, it is challenging to recommend the appropriate number of TDRs without also considering the request for free-market residential development rights – both of which should be considered in tandem. As previously mentioned, The application seeks to maximize residential development rights through the generation of TDRs and the development of free-market residential dwellings- neither of which are allowed within the Mixed-Use (MU) zone district. Staff acknowledges the value and community interest of designating the subject building. However, each of these requests alone are big asks. The number of TDRs proposed by the Applicant is based on the remaining development rights of the property after accounting for existing/proposed development. Typically, Staff would support such a request based on these calculations. However, pursuant to Land Use Code 8 Page | 7 Section 26.535.030, TDRs- Applicability and Prohibitions, the “sending” and “receiving” of TDRs is limited to properties where residential uses are allowed by-right: Sending sites shall include all properties within the City of Aspen designated as Historic Landmark, those properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, and those properties identified on the AspenModern Map, in which the development of a single-family or duplex home is a permitted use… Transferring development rights from a property where only affordable housing and commercial-based uses are allowed (i.e., office, lodging, restaurants, etc.), to increase the development rights of free-market residential properties, is inconsistent with the land use code and incongruent with the purpose of the TDR program. Furthermore, the extreme delta between the value of residential vs. commercial real estate would result in a disproportional benefit to the Applicant when compared to similar requests. Although zoning is problematic, the concept of generating TDRs on the subject property is justified by Code when adopted through a Final PUD Development Plan. Staff can support the generation of TDRs but believes the appropriate number should be paired down from the ten requested in the application. Developing free-market residential dwellings on the subject property also presents challenges. While it is true that residential uses have historically existed along Main Street, the development of new residential and the continuous conversion from commercial to residential has led to a “hollowing out” of commercial vitality along Main Street over time. In response to this, City Council prohibited the establishement of new, free-market residences in the Mixed- Use Zone District, ehich inlcuded the Main Stree Histroical District. While the PD process does allow for use variations, the development of new free-market residential establishes a precedent that is fundamentally at odds with the land use code and is a request that Staff cannot support. Staff proposes “meeting halfway” and supports approval for up to five TDRs, with the condition that no new free-market residential is developed on the subject property. If the Applicant is interested in pursuing some form of residential development, Staff supports deed-restricting the units and issuing affordable housing credits accordingly. The land use code will likely be amended in the future so that resident occupied dwelling units are eligible for affordable housing credits. If the Applicant is interested in developing RO units, Staff can even support approval to issue credits retroactively (pending a code change) upon the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. . Affordable Housing Mitigation Developing deed-restricted housing (instead of free-market) eliminates the need to assess affordable housing mitigation and thus the request to pay via fee-in-lieu over an unspecified time period is no longer an issue. This is the path that Staff recommends, but if HPC and Council decide to approve the free market dwellings, Staff supports mitigating via fee-in-lieu but opposes payment over a prolonged time period. Mitigation rates are updated on an annual basis and reflect a multitude of factors. Locking in todays mitigation rate while paying over an unspecified time period undermines these updates and reduces the purchasing power of the funds collected. Vehicular Access & Parking The proposed parking configuration and alignment between the existing structure and proposed addition is tight. As previously mentioned, Engineering Standards require a minimum two-way drive aisle of 24 ft. The application represents a drive aisle of 20 ft. Considering that the subject property is located at the terminus of a vehicular accessway, driving speed is likely 9 Page | 8 reduced when compared to a typical throughway. With this in mind, the Engineering Department supports the tighter alignment, with the condition that vehicular movements/turns are modeled and provided to Staff for review prior to the Council hearing. Tandem/stacked parking for a commercial space presents obvious challenges; how does a car parked in the front space exit when a stranger’s car is parked behind it? Staff has included a condition of approval requiring that a parking plan be recorded with the final planned development approval. Community Development Staff, Engineering and the Applicant team will work through the details of the parking plan to accommodate the tandem spaces. Miscellaneous Requests • Waiver of Fees Staff supports waiving all fees associated with the restoration of the existing building, and any development associated with affordable housing, including land use, building permit, tree removal, Parks, and Air Quality (TDM). Staff does not support the waiver of fees (apart from land use which is already waived) for development associated with the proposed free market residential units. • Approval of a Restaurant Tenant Logistical/technical details associated with restaurant operations still need to be clarified and more than likely modified between now and building permit review. For instance, as previously mentioned, the Applicant seeks to install a trash enclosure that is significantly smaller than the dimensional requirements prescribed by Environmental Health. Approving a restaurant at this point in the process without certainty around basic building-code requirements is premature and not practical. Instead of approving a restaurant use now – during the land use entitlement process – Staff recommends the Applicant team work with the appropriate City departments at the time of building permit so technical details associated with a restaurant use can be properly vetted. The Mixed-Use zone district allows restaurant uses by-right, so opening a restaurant in the future is a non-issue as far as zoning/allowed uses are concerned. Ten Years of Vested Rights Under Title 26 of the Land Use Code, projects are typically granted three years of vested rights. The idea of vesting the development of two free-market residential dwellings (in a zone district that no longer allows them) for ten years and locking in affordable housing mitigation at todays rate, not only conflicts with the land use code, but it does little to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development. Staff can support the request for ten years of vested rights, if new development is limited to affordable housing. Six-Month Rescission Period The application requests a rescission period of six months for AspenModern Designation to allow sufficient time for the owners to confirm that the conditions of approval are acceptable for the property. The approval shall mean the conceptual project approval, building modifications, and subdivision approval. Staff supports this request if the Applicant is willing to modify the free-market development to deed- restricted affordable housing. Short of that, it is not in the City’s interest to accommodate a rescission period for any length of time. 10 Page | 9 RECOMMENDATION Staff’s recommendation is broken down below: TDRs: • The Applicant seeks 10 TDRs in exchange for designation. • Staff recommends approval of no more than 5 TDRs. Residential Development: • The Applicant seeks to develop two free-market residential dwellings. • Staff recommends approval of two deed-restricted (at any level chosen by the applicant) residential dwellings and issuance of the commensurate Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits. If RO units are developed, Staff recommends memorializing the ability to retroactively issue Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits pending the appropriate code update. Affordable Housing Mitigation: • The Applicant seeks confirmation that no additional affordable housing mitigation is required for the existing building. The Applicant also requests to meet mitigation requirements for the new development via fee-in-lieu and to pay mitigation via installments as the TDRs are sold. • Staff supports waiving any outstanding mitigation associated with the existing building and confirming that mitigation is met. As for mitigation required for new development – Staff prefers to see deed-restricted housing developed on the property (instead of free-market) which eliminates the need for mitigation. If HPC & Council approve the proposed free-market residential dwellings, Staff recommends that mitigation be paid up front as a lump sum. Waiver of Fees • The Applicant seeks a waiver of all mitigation, permit, land use and other applicable fees. • Staff supports waiving fees if new development is limited to affordable housing. If free-market housing is approved, Staff supports waiving fees associated with the existing building but not the new development. Restaurant Tenant • The Applicant seeks a guarantee that a restaurant tenant can occupy the existing building. • Staff recommends against “pre-approving” a restaurant tenant at this juncture and suggests the Applicant continue working with applicable City departments to meet building code requirements so that a restaurant can be successful in the space. Vested Rights and Rescission Period • The Applicant requests ten years of vested rights pending approval and a rescission period of six months. • Staff supports ten years of vesting and a six-month rescission period if the new development is limited to deed-restricted housing. Staff does not support more than three years of vesting if free-market residential dwellings are developed. Planned Development • There are three elements to the proposal that would require the flexibility allowed by a Planned Development: 1. The variance for setbacks related to the new residential development 2. The issuance of TDRs from a commercial development. 11 Page | 10 3. The establishment of free-market residences in a zone district where new market rate residences are prohibited. As previously discussed, staff supports the proposed setbacks and issuance of a reduced number of TDRs from the applicant’s proposal. Staff does not support the establishment of the residential units as Free-market. Subdivision • Due to the complex history of Lot 2, the land use pattern has been confusing, allowed uses uncertain, and relationship to the former alley and to Lot 1 muddled. The Lot Merger, while creating a lot that is not consistent with the neighborhood pattern or townsite configuration, does bring certainty to this proposal and the future use of the property. It additionally creates a conforming lot in terms of minimum lot size and other dimensional limitations. Parking/Transportation – Special Review • With the conditions as stated in the Resolution, staff supports the proposed parking configuration. ATTACHMENTS: Two resolutions are included. Option 1 reflects the Applicant’s request and Option 2 reflects Staff’s recommendation: Option 1: The Applicant’s Request | Resolution #___, Series of 2024 Option 2: Staff’s Recommendation | Resolution #___, Series of 2024 Exhibits: A. AspenModern Historic Designation | Staff Findings B. Conceptual Major Development | Staff Findings C. Transferrable Development Rights | Staff Findings D. Planned Development – Project Review | Staff Findings E. Growth Management Review | Staff Findings F. Subdivision Review | Staff Findings G. Referral Comments H. Application I. Supplement to Application Note: Supplement addresses technical changes to architecture and site planning in response to development review committee comments. 12 Option 2: Reflects Staff’s Recommendation Page 1 of 4 HPC Resolution #XX, Series 2024 RESOLUTION #XX (SERIES OF 2024) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ASPENMODERN HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND BENEFITS, CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, TRANSFERRABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, MAJOR SUBDIVISION, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT- PROJECT REVIEW, SPECIAL REVIEW AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 120 E. MAIN STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE EASTERLY 20 FEET OF LOT M, ALL OF LOTS N AND O, BLOCK 66 AND THE SOUTHERLY 10 FEET OF THE VACATED ALLEY THROUGH THE BLOCK ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO SAID LOTS N AND O AND THE EASTERLY 20 FEET OF LOT M, BLOCK 66, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; AND PARCEL B, LOT 2, US WEST SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED JULY 13, 1993 IN PLAT BOOK 32 AT PAGE 11, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-38-002 & 2735-124-70-002 WHEREAS, the Applicant, 120 East Main Street Partners LLC, 1390 Lawrence Street, Denver, CO 80204 has requested approval for AspenModern historic designation for the property located at 120 E. Main Street and Parcel B, Lot 2 of the US West Subdivision; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.415.025.C.1, a ninety-day timeframe within which the Applicant and City Council agree to evaluate the proposed designation commenced on May 6, 2024, and will expire on August 4, 2024; and, WHEREAS, City Council at a regular meeting on July 23, 2024, passed Resolution #087, Series of 2024 via the Consent Agenda extending the negotiation period to August 27, 2024. WHEREAS, the AspenModern designation process is described at Section 26.415.025 and Section 26.415.030 of the Municipal Code and allows for City Council approval of site specific benefits to secure voluntary historic designation following a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC); and, WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Voluntary AspenModern Landmark Designation, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.030; and, WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Conceptual Major Development, the HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.070, Development Involving Designated Historic Property or Property within a Historic District; and, WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Transferrable Development Rights, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.535.070, Transferable Development Rights; and 13 Option 2: Reflects Staff’s Recommendation Page 2 of 4 HPC Resolution #XX, Series 2024 WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Major Subdivision, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.480.070, Major Subdivision; and, WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Planned Development – Project Review, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.445, Planned Development); and, WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Growth Management, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.470.080 and 26.470.100, Planning and Zoning Commission Growth Management review; and, WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Special Review, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.515.080, Parking & Transportation; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Director recommended approval of certain benefits, subject to conditions; and, WHEREAS, on July 24, 2024, HPC considered the application, the staff memo and public comment under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, HPC found the proposal consistent with the review standards and supports the voluntary designation of this property as one of the best and most intact examples of a Wrightian Architecture in Aspen and recommends approval of the request by a vote of X to X, (X-X) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION: Section 1: Voluntary AspenModern Landmark Designation and Benefits: HPC recommends approval of AspenModern Landmark Designation, and certain benefits as requested in the application and described herein, subject to the following conditions: 1. Pending approval of Major Subdivision (combining Lots 1 and 2), the resulting parcel shall be designated. Section 2: Transferrable Development Rights: HPC recommends approval of five TDRs subject to the following conditions: 2. A conservation easement shall be recorded, sterilizing/preserving 1,250 sq. ft. of the property from future development. Section 3: Major Subdivision: HPC recommends approval of Major Subdivision to combine Lots 1 and 2, subject to the following conditions: 1. Parks, Engineering, Utilities, Streets and other applicable standards related to stormwater runoff, vehicular access, tree care, and utility placement shall be met in accordance with 14 Option 2: Reflects Staff’s Recommendation Page 3 of 4 HPC Resolution #XX, Series 2024 City requirements. These details shall be worked out at the time of building permit. 2. The right-of-way between the designated building and the rear addition shall be at least 20- ft. in width. Section 4: Planned Development- Project Review: HPC recommends approval of Planned Development- Project review and the site plan proposed by the Applicant, subject to the following conditions: 1. A subsequent application for Detailed Review shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within one year of Council approval. 2. A site plan, plat, floor plans, elevations, architectural drawings, a parking plan/subdivision development agreement, and other documents required pursuant to Title 26 shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within 180 days of approval of Detailed Review. 3. A three-foot setback along the north (rear) property line and a zero-foot setback along the east (side yard) property line shall be memorialized as part of the building envelope and included in the plat submitted by the Applicant. Remaining setbacks shall meet underlying zoning and shall also be included as part of the building envelope. 4. Two deed-restricted residential dwellings with a cumulative maximum floor area of 2,481 sq. ft. may be developed on the property consistent with the drawings represented in the application. Minor changes of a technical nature may be approved administratively at the discretion of the Community Development Director. a. The dwellings may be deed restricted at the category determined by the Applicant. b. Affordable Housing Certificates may be issued commensurate with the category of designation. c. If the units are deed restricted to Residential Occupied (RO), the Applicant shall be issued certificates of affordable housing credit pending an applicable code change. In this circumstance, the credits shall be issued retroactively with no additional land use review required. 5. HPC supports the proposed parking plan as represented in the application, subject to the following conditions: a. A total of nine off-street parking spaces shall be provided. b. Four of the spaces shall be tandem “stacked.” It is recommended that these spaces be reserved for employees of the commercial space and not for customers. The parking plan that is required shall dictate the use of these spaces and clarify such details. c. At least one covered parking space (under the rear addition) shall meet minimum ADA standards. Section 5: Growth Management Review: HPC recommends approval of Growth Management review and supports a guarantee that any remaining affordable housing mitigation required for the commercial building has been met. Section 6: Miscellaneous Benefits: HPC recommends approval of the following miscellaneous benefits requested by the Applicant, subject to conditions: 1. HPC supports waiving planning fees, including land use review frees, building permit fees, 15 Option 2: Reflects Staff’s Recommendation Page 4 of 4 HPC Resolution #XX, Series 2024 tree removal mitigation fees, parks fees, and Air Quality (TDM) fees for the new development. 2. HPC supports ten years of vested rights. 3. HPC supports a six-month rescission period to allow the owners time to confirm the conditions of approval are acceptable for the property. Section 7: Material Representations All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 8: Existing Litigation: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 9: Severability: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on July 24, 2024. APPROVED AS TO FORM: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION: ______________________________ ________________________________ Katharine Johnson, Kara Thompson, Assistant City Attorney HPC Chair ATTEST: ______________________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk 16 Option 1: Reflects the Applicant’s Proposal Page 1 of 4 HPC Resolution #XX, Series 2024 RESOLUTION #XX (SERIES OF 2024) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ASPENMODERN HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND BENEFITS, CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, TRANSFERRABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, MAJOR SUBDIVISION, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT- PROJECT REVIEW, SPECIAL REVIEW AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 120 E. MAIN STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE EASTERLY 20 FEET OF LOT M, ALL OF LOTS N AND O, BLOCK 66 AND THE SOUTHERLY 10 FEET OF THE VACATED ALLEY THROUGH THE BLOCK ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO SAID LOTS N AND O AND THE EASTERLY 20 FEET OF LOT M, BLOCK 66, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; AND PARCEL B, LOT 2, US WEST SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED JULY 13, 1993 IN PLAT BOOK 32 AT PAGE 11, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-38-002 & 2735-124-70-002 WHEREAS, the Applicant, 120 East Main Street Partners LLC, 1390 Lawrence Street, Denver, CO 80204 has requested approval for AspenModern historic designation for the property located at 120 E. Main Street and Parcel B, Lot 2 of the US West Subdivision; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.415.025.C.1, a ninety-day timeframe within which the Applicant and City Council agree to evaluate the proposed designation commenced on May 6, 2024, and will expire on August 4, 2024; and, WHEREAS, City Council at a regular meeting on July 23, 2024, passed Resolution #087, Series of 2024 via the Consent Agenda extending the negotiation period to August 27, 2024; and, WHEREAS, the AspenModern designation process is described at Section 26.415.025 and Section 26.415.030 of the Municipal Code and allows for City Council approval of site specific benefits to secure voluntary historic designation following a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC); and, WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Voluntary AspenModern Landmark Designation, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.030; and, WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Conceptual Major Development, the HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.070, Development Involving Designated Historic Property or Property within a Historic District; and, WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Transferrable Development Rights, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.535.070, Transferable Development Rights; and 17 Option 1: Reflects the Applicant’s Proposal Page 2 of 4 HPC Resolution #XX, Series 2024 WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Major Subdivision, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.480.070, Major Subdivision; and, WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Planned Development – Project Review, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.445, Planned Development); and, WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Growth Management, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.470.080 and 26.470.100, Planning and Zoning Commission Growth Management review; and, WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Special Review, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.515.080, Parking & Transportation; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Director recommended approval of certain benefits, subject to conditions; and, WHEREAS, on July 24, 2024, HPC considered the application, the staff memo and public comment under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, HPC found the proposal consistent with the review standards and supports the voluntary designation of this property as one of the best and most intact examples of a Wrightian Architecture in Aspen and recommends approval of the request by a vote of X to X, (X-X) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION: Section 1: Voluntary AspenModern Landmark Designation and Benefits: HPC recommends approval of AspenModern Landmark Designation, and the associated benefits as requested in the application and described herein, subject to the following conditions: 1. Pending approval of Major Subdivision (combining Lots 1 and 2), the resulting parcel shall be designated. Section 2: Transferrable Development Rights: HPC recommends approval of ten TDRs subject to the following conditions: 2. A conservation easement shall be recorded, sterilizing/preserving 2,500 sq. ft. of the property from future development. Section 3: Major Subdivision: HPC recommends approval of Major Subdivision to combine Lots 1 and 2, subject to the following conditions: 1. Parks, Engineering, Utilities, Streets and other applicable standards related to stormwater runoff, vehicular access, tree care, and utility placement shall be met in accordance with 18 Option 1: Reflects the Applicant’s Proposal Page 3 of 4 HPC Resolution #XX, Series 2024 City requirements. These details shall be worked out at the time of building permit. 2. The right-of-way between the designated building and the rear addition shall be at least 20- ft. in width. Section 4: Planned Development- Project Review: HPC recommends approval of Planned Development- Project review and the site plan proposed by the Applicant, subject to the following conditions: 1. A subsequent application for Detailed Review shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within one year of Council approval. 2. A site plan, plat, floor plans, elevations, architectural drawings, a parking plan/subdivision development agreement, and other documents required pursuant to Title 26 shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within 180 days of approval of Detailed Review. 3. A three-foot setback along the north (rear) property line and a zero-foot setback along the east (side yard) property line shall be memorialized as part of the building envelope and included in the plat submitted by the Applicant. Remaining setbacks shall meet underlying zoning and shall also be included as part of the building envelope. 4. Two free-market residential dwellings with a cumulative maximum floor area of 2,481 sq. ft. may be developed on the property consistent with the drawings represented in the application. Minor changes of a technical nature may be approved administratively at the discretion of the Community Development Director. 5. HPC supports the proposed parking plan as represented in the application, subject to the following conditions: a. A total of nine off-street parking spaces shall be provided. b. Four of the spaces shall be tandem “stacked.” It is recommended that these spaces be reserved for employees of the commercial space and not for customers. The parking plan that is required (per Section 4 of this approval) shall dictate the use of these spaces and clarify such details. c. At least one covered parking space (under the rear addition) shall meet minimum ADA standards. Section 5: Growth Management Review: HPC recommends approval of Growth Management review subject to the following conditions: 1. Consistent with the approved floor area for the residential dwellings, the Applicant shall mitigate for 1.38 FTEs at the current Category 2 rate as prescribed by the land use code. • Mitigation may be paid by-right via cash-in-lieu. No additional land use reviews are needed. • The Applicant may pay mitigation over an extended period of time and shall meet all mitigation requirements within ten years from the date of approval for Detailed Review. 2. HPC supports a guarantee that affordable housing mitigation requirements are met for the existing commercial building. No additional mitigation is required for the commercial building. 19 Option 1: Reflects the Applicant’s Proposal Page 4 of 4 HPC Resolution #XX, Series 2024 Section 7: Miscellaneous Benefits: HPC recommends approval of the following miscellaneous benefits requested by the Applicant, subject to conditions: 1. HPC supports waiving planning fees, including land use review frees, building permit fees, tree removal mitigation fees, parks fees, and Air Quality (TDM) fees for the new development. 2. HPC supports ten years of vested rights. 3. HPC supports a six-month rescission period to allow the owners time to confirm the conditions of approval are acceptable for the property. 4. HPC supports approval of a restaurant tenant in the commercial building with the condition that all Building, Environmental Health and other applicable requirements are met. Section 8: Material Representations All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 9: Existing Litigation: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 10: Severability: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on July 24, 2024. APPROVED AS TO FORM: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION: ______________________________ ________________________________ Katharine Johnson, Kara Thompson, Assistant City Attorney HPC Chair ATTEST: ______________________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk 20 Page 1 of 3 Exhibit A Historic Designation and Benefits Criteria Staff Findings Sec. 26.415.030. - Designation of Historic Properties. The designation of properties to an official list, that is known as the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures which is maintained by the City, is intended to provide a systematic public process to determine what buildings, areas and features of the historic built environment are of value to the community. Designation provides a means of deciding and communicating, in advance of specific issues or conflicts, what properties are in the public interest to protect. (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 (2) 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. 21 Page 2 of 3 AspenModern Designation Criteria Review The application requests the designation of 120 E. Main St. to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures to be formally recognized as having special significance to the United States, Colorado or Aspen history, architecture, archaeology, engineering or culture. To be eligible for designation as an example of AspenModern, an individual building, site, structure or object must have a demonstrated quality of significance, evaluated according to criteria described below: Finding 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; Not Met 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; Not Met 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; Met 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 Not Met 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. Met Staff Findings: Where it need meet only one criterion to qualify for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, 120 E. Main St. satisfies two criteria as represented in the application. Although the written description of how the property meets the criteria for designation does not reference these criteria by name, it sufficiently demonstrates that the property meets Criteria C and E. In satisfaction of Criteria C, 120 E. Main St. “represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman, or design philosophy that is deemed important.” As documented in Aspen’s Twentieth-Century Architecture: Modernism 1945-1975 Fritz Benedict, Herbert Bayer, and Ellen Harland designed and drafted the original Pitkin County 22 Page 3 of 3 Library at 120 E. Main St. in 1966. With its simple form, horizontality, low-pitched hip roof with deep overhangs, natural materials, lack of applied decoration, ribbon windows, and close connection to/integration with the environment/landscape, this building embodies the Wrightian/Organic design philosophy for which Benedict, a pupil of Frank Lloyd Wright’s, is well known. The application also demonstrates that 120 E. Main St. meets Criterion E. According to the Integrity Scorecard, the property possesses the highest degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. Effectively, 120 E. Main St. has been altered very little in its 58-year history. Staff Recommendation: Approval to recommend to City Council the designation of 120 E. Main St. 23 Page 1 of 6 Exhibit B Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.070(d) – Certificate of appropriateness for major development. (1) The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for major development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a major development. A major development includes one or more of the following activities: a. The construction of a new structure within a historic district; and/or b. Alterations to more than three (3) elements of a building façade including its windows, doors, roof planes or materials, exterior wall material, dormers, porches, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim; and/or c. The expansion of a building increasing the floor area by more than two hundred and fifty (250) square feet; and/or d. Any new development that has not been determined to be minor development. 24 Page 2 of 6 Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines & Findings The applicant requests a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development at 120 E. Main St. for the purposes of constructing a three-story-tall, two-unit dwelling at the rear of the parcel; and adding fenestration, replacing a non-historic wooden stair with a metal ladder, installing rooftop mechanical equipment screening, and replacing damaged soffit and facia of on historic resource. Chapter 1: Site Planning and Landscape Finding 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. • Building footprint and location should reinforce the traditional patterns of the neighborhood. • Allow for some porosity on a site. In a residential project, setback to setback development is typically uncharacteristic of the historic context. Do not design a project which leaves no useful open space visible from the street. Not Met 1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. When HPC input is requested, the following bullet points may be applicable. • Retain and preserve the variety and character found in historic alleys, including retaining historic ancillary buildings or constructing new ones. • Retain and preserve the simple character of historic ditches. Do not plant flowers or add landscape. • Abandoning or re-routing a street in a historic area is generally discouraged. • Consider the value of unpaved alleys in residential areas. • Opening a platted right of way which was abandoned or never graded may be encouraged on a case by case basis. Met/Not Met Chapter 2: Building Materials Finding 2.1 Preserve original building materials. • Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. • Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. • Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place. Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. • Original AspenModern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy. Not Met 25 Page 3 of 6 Chapter 3: Windows Finding 3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. • A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window’s casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. • The historic profile on AspenModern properties is typically minimal. Met 3.7 Adding new openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed. • Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear or secondary walls. • New windows should be similar in scale to the historic openings on the building, but should in some way be distinguishable as new, through the use of somewhat different detailing, etc. • Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a façade. • Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character defining façade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. Met/Not Met Chapter 6: Architectural Details Finding 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. • Repair only those features that are deteriorated. • Patch, piece-in, splice, or consolidate to repair the existing materials, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. • On AspenModern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to preserve the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily deteriorated material. Not Met Chapter 7: Roofs Finding 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. • Skylights and solar panels are generally not allowed on a historic structure. These elements may be appropriate on an addition. Not Met 7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color. • Direct vents for fireplaces are generally not permitted to be added on historic structures. • Locate vents on non-street facing façades. • Use historic chimneys as chases for new flues when possible. Not Met 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. • Reconstruct a missing chimney when documentation exists. Met 26 Page 4 of 6 Chapter 11: New Buildings on Landmarked Properties Finding 11.1 Orient the new building to the street. • Aspen Victorian buildings should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern. • AspenModern alignments shall be handled case-by-case. • Generally, do not set the new structure forward of the historic resource. Alignment of their front setbacks is preferred. An exception may be made on a corner lot or where a recessed siting for the new structure is a better preservation outcome. Not Met 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic buildings on a parcel. • Subdivide larger masses into smaller “modules” that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. • Reflect the heights and proportions that characterize the historic resource. Not Met 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. • The primary plane of the front shall not appear taller than the historic structure. Not Met 11.6 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its time. • Consider these three aspects of a new building; form, materials, and fenestration. A project must relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response. • When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the historic resource. • When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site and use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. • When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic resource. Not Met 11.7 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. • This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. • Overall, details shall be modest in character. Met/Not Met 27 Page 5 of 6 Chapter 12: Accessibility, Architectural lighting, Mechanical Equipment, Service Areas, and Signage Finding 12.4 Minimize the visual impacts of utilitarian areas, such as mechanical equipment and trash storage. • Place mechanical equipment on the ground where it can be screened. • Mechanical equipment may only be mounted on a building on an alley façade. • Rooftop mechanical equipment or vents must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, it may be appropriate to provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of the building itself. Use the smallest, low profile units available for the purpose. • Window air conditioning units are not allowed. • Minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Group them in a discrete location. Use pedestals when possible, rather than mounting on a historic building. • Paint mechanical equipment in a neutral color to minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds. • In general, mechanical equipment should be vented through the roof, rather than a wall, in a manner that has the least visual impact possible. • Avoid surface mounted conduit on historic structures. Not Met Staff Findings: New Construction As proposed, the three-story-tall, two-unit dwelling at the rear of the parcel does not meet Guidelines 1.1 or 1.2. Siting residential development between an adjacent parking lot and alley opposite a commercial building is unlike the historic development pattern and context of the block. As illustrated in the 1893 Sanborn map included in the application, the proposed footprint and location of the building eschews the traditional pattern of the neighborhood. If any, this development reinforces the more recent pattern established by the property to its east, further upsetting the historic system and character of the alley. The proposed building may provide variety to the alley, but is not sufficiently ancillary to the historic resource. By lacking a clear orientation to a street, this proposed multi-unit dwelling also falls short of meeting Guideline 11.1. Given its height and massing relative to that of the historic resource, the proposed new development also fails to suffice Guidelines 11.3 and 11.4. The building is neither subdivided into smaller “modules,” nor reflects the heights and proportions that characterize the historic resource. The new building has no discernable front façade, but has no plane that appears to be similar in scale to the historic building. The new structure is recognized as a product of its time pursuant to Guideline 11.6, yet in no way strongly relates to the historic resource. The form, materials, and fenestration of the new building diverge from those of the historic resource. By referencing the ribbon windows and tall, narrow 28 Page 6 of 6 fixed windows on the historic resource the new fenestration comes the closest to satisfying this guideline. The introduction of several other types of windows, however, muddles the clarity of this potential connection. The new building does not imitate older historic styles, nor risk blurring the distinction between old and new buildings, and thereby suffices Guideline 11.7. Given the characteristic simplicity of the historic resource, however, the design of the new building warrants restraint. Fenestration Pursuant to Guideline 3.7, adding a new window openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed. Because it is proposed to be located on the rear of a secondary wall, does not significantly increase the amount of glass on a character defining façade, and is similar in scale to the historic openings, however, the new window proposed for the northeast corner of the historic resource is unlikely to negatively affect the overall integrity of the building. Rooftop Mechanical Equipment Considering that no vents or rooftop mechanical equipment are yet proposed, installing rooftop screening of any size is premature, speculative, and antithetical to Guideline 7.4. As suggested therein, using the historic chimney as a chase for new flues is preferred. Relocating extant mechanical equipment to the proposed rooftop location, however, would help satisfy Guidelines 12.4. The mechanical equipment enclosure on the southwest corner of the historic resource is much more visually impactful than would be the proposed rooftop location. Although placing the mechanical equipment on the ground at the alley would be ideal, relocating to any location away from the front façade ought to be considered going forward. The rear slope of the hip roof is also a preferable location for rooftop mechanical equipment for which screening may or may not be necessary. Facia and Soffit Wholesale replacement of damaged facia and soffit does not meet Guideline 2.1 and 6.1 unless the damage is irreparable in place. Patching, consolidating and splicing using recognized preservation methods are preferable pursuant to Guideline 6.1. 29 Page 1 of 3 Exhibit C Transferable Development Rights Criteria Staff Findings Section 26.535.070 A historic TDR certificate may be established by the Mayor if the City Council, pursuant to adoption of an ordinance, finds all the following standards met: A. The sending site is a historic landmark on which the development of a single-family or duplex residence is a permitted use, pursuant to Chapter 26.710, Zone Districts. Properties on which such development is a conditional use shall not be eligible. Staff Findings: 120 E. Main is located in the Mixed-Use (MU) zone district and is improved with a building containing commercial uses. The zone district no longer allows residential development, apart from affordable housing. Transferring development rights from a property where only affordable housing and commercial-based uses are allowed (i.e., office, lodging, restaurants, etc.), to increase the development rights of free-market residential properties, is inconsistent with the land use code and incongruent with the purpose of the TDR program. Furthermore, the extreme delta between the value of residential vs. commercial real estate would result in a disproportional benefit to the Applicant when compared to similar requests. Staff finds this criterion to be not met. B. It is demonstrated that the sending site has permitted unbuilt development rights, for either a single-family or duplex home, equaling or exceeding two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates requested. Staff Findings: Although the Applicant has determined the remaining development rights of the resulting parcel (pending approval of Major Subdivision to combine Lots 1 and 2), the calculations are based on a property that does not allow free-market residential development. Staff finds this criterion to be not met. C. It is demonstrated that the establishment of TDR certificates will not create a nonconformity. In cases where a nonconformity already exists, the action shall not increase the specific nonconformity. Staff Findings: As mentioned previously, the Applicant seeks a commensurate number of TDRs based on the remaining development rights of the subject property. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D. The analysis of unbuilt development right shall only include the actual built development, any approved development order, the allowable development right prescribed by zoning for a single-family or duplex residence, and shall not include the potential of the sending site to gain floor area bonuses, exemptions or similar potential development incentives. 30 Page 2 of 3 Properties in the MU Zone District which do not currently contain a single-family home or duplex established prior to the adoption of Ordinance #7, Series of 2005, shall be permitted to base the calculation of TDRs on 100% of the allowable floor area on an equivalent-sized lot in the R-6 zone district. This is only for the purpose of creating TDRs and does not permit the on-site development of 100% of the allowable floor area on an equivalent-sized lot in the R-6 zone district. If the additional 20% of allowable floor area exceeds 500 square feet, the applicant may not request a floor area bonus from HPC at any time in the future. Any development order to develop floor area, beyond that remaining legally connected to the property after establishment of TDR Certificates, shall be considered null and void. Staff Findings: This criterion was written prior to E. The proposed deed restriction permanently restricts the maximum development of the property (the sending site) to an allowable floor area not exceeding the allowance for a single-family or duplex residence minus two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates established. For properties with multiple or unlimited floor areas for certain types of allowed uses, the maximum development of the property, independent of the established property use, shall be the floor area of a single-family or duplex residence (whichever is permitted) minus two hundred fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplies by the number of historic TDR certificates established. The deed restriction shall not stipulate an absolute floor area, but shall stipulate a square footage reduction from the allowable floor area for a single-family or duplex residence, as may be amended from time to time. The sending site shall remain eligible for certain floor area incentives and/or exemptions as may be authorized by the City Land Use Code, as may be amended from time to time. The form of the deed restriction shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. Staff Findings: Pending approval of TDRs for the property, the Applicant will be required to file a deed restriction that will permanently reduce the allowable floor area on the subject property by the commensurate number of TDRS issued. The Applicant may obtain a template for the deed restriction from staff when needed. All documents shall be reviewed by the City Attorney prior to execution. Staff finds this criterion to be met. F. A real estate closing has been scheduled at which, upon satisfaction of all relevant requirements, the City shall execute and deliver the applicable number of historic TDR certificates to the sending site property owner and that property owner shall execute and deliver a deed restriction lessening the available development right of the subject property 31 Page 3 of 3 together with the appropriate fee for recording the deed restriction with the County Clerk and Recorder's office. Staff Findings: This is a mandatory process that the applicant must pursue. Staff finds this criterion to be met. G. It shall be the responsibility of the sending site property owner to provide building plans and a zoning analysis of the sending site to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Certain review fees may be required for the confirmation of built floor area. Staff Findings: Pending approval of TDRs, the Applicant will be required to submit a plat to the City representing the amount of Floor Area that has been severed from the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met. H. The sale, assignment, conveyance or other transfer or change in ownership of transferable development rights certificates shall be recorded in the real estate records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder and must be reported by the grantor to the City of Aspen Community Development Department within five (5) days of such transfer. The report of such transfer shall disclose the certificate number, the grantor, the grantee and the total value of the consideration paid for the certificate. Failure to timely or accurately report such transfer shall not render the transferable development right certificate void. Staff Findings: This is a mandatory process that the applicant must pursue. Staff finds this criterion to be met. I. TDR certificates may be issued at the pace preferred by the property owner. Staff Findings: Pending approval of TDRs, Staff will issue the TDRs as requested by the property owner. Staff finds this criterion to be met. J. City Council may find that the creation of TDRs is not the best preservation solution for the affected historic resource and deny the application to create TDRs. HPC shall provide Council with a recommendation. Staff Findings: Staff proposes “meeting halfway” and supports approval for up to five TDRs, with the condition that no new free-market residential is developed on the subject property. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 32 Page | 1 Exhibit D Planned Development – Project Review Criteria Staff Findings The Project Review shall focus on the general concept for the development and shall outline any dimensional requirements that vary from those allowed in the underlying zone district. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this Title. The underlying zone district designation shall be used as a guide, but not an absolute limitation, to the dimensions which may be considered during the development review process. Any dimensional variations allowed shall be specified in the ordinance granting Project Approval. In the review of a development application for a Project Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, and City Council shall consider the following: A. Compliance with Adopted Regulatory Plans. The proposed development complies with applicable adopted regulatory plans. Staff Response: The request to voluntarily designate the subject building has been a goal of the City since at least 2000, when Staff attempted to work with the owner to designate it. The structure is listed on the Aspen Modern website and identified as a prime example of Wrightian architecture. The concept of building free-market residential behind the building and overlaying the property with a PD is not contemplated in previous plans. It’s worth noting that the PD language generally requires lots to be a minimum of 15,000 sq. ft. to be eligible for a PD overlay. Pending approval of the subdivision, the resulting parcel will be less than 15,000 sq. ft. With that said, Staff finds the benefit of overlaying the property with a PD to accommodate the proposed development is a benefit worth approving (with conditions). Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Development Suitability. The proposed Planned Development prohibits development on land unsuitable for development because of natural or man-made hazards affecting the property, including flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snow slide areas, slopes in excess of 30%, and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Affected areas may be accepted as suitable for development if adequate mitigation techniques acceptable to the City Engineer are proposed in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards. Conceptual plans for mitigation techniques may be accepted for this standard. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Response: The subject property is not located in an environmentally sensitive area and is relatively flat. Staff has no concerns about the development suitability of Lot 2 (the rear lot that is currently undeveloped). Staff finds this criterion to be met. 33 Page | 2 Site Planning. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The site plan responds to the site’s natural characteristics and physical constraints such as steep slopes, vegetation, waterways, and any natural or man-made hazards and allows development to blend in with or enhance said features. Staff Response: There are relatively few natural characteristics apart from some trees and open space. There are no steep slopes, waterways or manmade hazards on the subject property. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The project preserves important geologic features, mature vegetation, and structures or features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual, or ecological importance or contribute to the identity of the town. Staff Response: There are no important geological features or mature vegetation on the site. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 3. Buildings are oriented to public streets and are sited to reflect the neighborhood context. Buildings and access ways are arranged to allow effective emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. Staff Response: The existing building is oriented towards Main Street and reflects traditional neighborhood character and context. There are no plans to relocated or move the existing building. The rear addition is setback 20 ft. from the front building where an access easement is located between the two. A condition of approval is included in the resolution requiring vehicular modeling that demonstrates access for emergency and maintenance vehicles is feasible. Also, a stacked parking configuration is proposed adjacent to the existing commercial building. A parking plan is required to be recorded to clarify the use of these spaces to minimize conflict. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Dimensions. All dimensions, including density, mass, and height shall be established during the Project Review. A development application may request variations to any dimensional requirement of this Title. In meeting this standard, consideration shall be given to the following criteria: 1. There exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such variations. 2. The proposed dimensions represent a character suitable for and indicative of the primary uses of the project. 3. The project is compatible with or enhances the cohesiveness or distinctive identity of the neighborhood and surrounding development patterns, including the scale and massing of nearby historical or cultural resources. 4. The number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the probable number of cars to be operated by those using the proposed development and the nature of the proposed uses. The availability of public 34 Page | 3 transit and other transportation facilities, including those pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development, and the potential for joint use of common parking may be considered when establishing a parking requirement. 5. The Project Review approval, at City Council’s discretion, may include specific allowances for dimensional flexibility between Project Review and Detailed Review. Changes shall be subject to the amendment procedures of Section 26.445.110 – Amendments. Staff Response: The Applicant seeks two dimensional variations both of which are related to setbacks. The first variation is to memorialize a 3-ft. rear yard setback (where 5-ft. is required per underlying zoning). The second variation is to memorialize a 0-ft. setback along the east side yard setback (where 5-ft. is required per underlying zoning). The remaining lot lines will meet the minimum setback standards. The proposed free-market development is based on the amount of development rights available after accounting for TDRs, the existing building, and the trash enclosure (although some adjustment might be required if ten TDRs are to be issued). There is a variation requested related to use- which in this case is the development of two free-market residential dwelling units. The Mixed-Use zone district no longer allows new free-market residential dwelling units. The impetus for this change was years in the making as commercial businesses were converted to residential, town has witnessed a “hallowing out” of commercial vitality along Main Street. Staff cannot support a variation from use given that it is at fundamental odds with the MU zone district and contradicts the reason why the prohibition on new free-market development was originally adopted. Staff can certainly support a deed-restricted concept and the setback variations if the Applicant desires to develop a residential component. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D. Design Standards. The design of the proposed development is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The design complies with applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. Staff findings: Although the Applicant proposes free-market residential development, RDS standards are not applicable because of the mixed-use nature of the property. The work associated with the existing building is limited to restoration and meets Commercial Design Standards as well as Historic Preservation Standards/Guidelines. Staff finds this criterion to be met. . 35 Page | 4 2. The proposed materials are compatible with those called for in any applicable design standards, as well as those typically seen in the immediate vicinity. Exterior materials are finalized during Detailed Review, but review boards may set forth certain expectations or conditions related to architectural character and exterior materials during Project Review. Staff Responses: The proposed addition is made of materials that are compatible with the existing building and more thoroughly discussed in the Conceptual Review Criteria. Staff finds this criterion to be met. E. Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and improvements. Any vehicular access points, or curb cuts, minimize impacts on existing or proposed pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. The City may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Response: The property currently contains an easement that accommodates the existing RFTA bus stop (the Paepke Park bus stop). The Applicant also proposes some additional bike parking and will likely need to work with Engineering at the time of building permit to meet all provision of the TIA. Staff finds this criterion to be met. F. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the project to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Response: The Applicant will work with the Engineering Department at the time of building permit to meet the Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan. At this point in the review, the Engineering Department has not identified any preliminary concerns related to drainage. Staff finds this criterion to be met. G. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Response: The Applicant is responsible for upgrading all infrastructure and related facilities needed to serve the project. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 36 Page | 5 H. Access and Circulation. The proposed development shall have perpetual unobstructed legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed Planned Development shall not eliminate or obstruct legal access from a public way to an adjacent property. All streets in a Planned Development retained under private ownership shall be dedicated to public use to ensure adequate public and emergency access. Security/privacy gates across access points and driveways are prohibited. Staff Response: The alley located between the existing building and the propose addition provides legal vehicular access to the subject property. The alley shall be no narrower than 20-ft. in width. The applicant is required to provide drawings depicting vehicular turning movements prior to Council review to confirm that emergency and maintenance vehicles have sufficient space. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 37 Exhibit E Growth Management Criteria Staff Findings 26.470.080. General Review Standards. All Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards. A. Sufficient Allotments: Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.040.B. Applications for multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.110.A shall be required to meet this standard for the growth management years from which the allotments are requested. Staff Finding: The Growth Management Quota System allows for 13 new residential dwelling units resulting from subdivision. No dwelling units have been approved in 2024 resulting from a subdivision. Staff finds this review criterion to be met. B. Development Conformance: The proposed development conforms to the requirements and limitations of this Title, of the zone district or a site specific development plan, any adopted regulatory master plan, as well as any previous approvals, including the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Planned Development – Project Review approval, as applicable. Staff Finding: The development is being reviewed for conformance with the Municipal Code and is seeking Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval. While the free-market residential component of the development does not meet underlying zoning of the Mixed-Use zone district, the Applicant seeks to overlay the property with a Planned Development which creates the path by which a variation from underlying zoning can be be approved. Staff finds this review criterion to be met. C. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. Staff Finding: Considering the scope of work proposed, improvements to utilities, the alleyway drainage, solid waste disposal and parking are all required. The Applicant shall be responsible for these upgrades. Staff finds this review criterion to be met. 38 D. Affordable Housing Mitigation. 1) For commercial development, sixty-five percent (65%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial net leasable space, according to Section 26.470.050.B, Employee generation rates, shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. 2) For lodge development, sixty-five percent (65%) of the employees generated by the additional lodge pillows, according to Section 26.470.050.B, Employee generation rates, shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. For the redevelopment or expansion of existing lodge uses, see section 26.470.100.G. 3) For the redevelopment of existing commercial net leasable space that did not previously mitigate (see Section 26.470.070.F), the mitigation requirements for affordable housing shall be phased at 15% beginning in 2017, and by 3% each year thereafter until 65% is reached, as follows. [Not included here]. 4) Staff findings: The application requests a guarantee that no outstanding affordable housing mitigation is required for the existing commercial building. The application does not propose to enlarge the building. Staff is supportive of this request with the condition that any residential development proposed at the rear of the property be deed-restricted. Staff finds this criterion to be met with the condition that any residential development on the property be deed- restricted. 5) Unless otherwise exempted in this chapter, when a change in use between development categories is proposed, the employee mitigation shall be based on the use the development is converting to. For instance, if a commercial space is being converted to lodge units, the mitigation shall be based on the requirements for lodge space, outlined in subsection 2, above. Conversely, if lodge units are being converted to commercial space, the mitigation shall be based on the requirements for commercial space, outlined in subsections 1 and 3, above. Staff findings: A change in use is not requested as part of this review. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 6) For free-market residential development, affordable housing net livable area shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net livable area. Staff findings: The application proposes to develop two free-market residential dwellings. The net livable area of these dwellings comes to approximately 1,840 39 sq. ft. At a mitigation rate of 30 percent 552 sq. ft. requires mitigation. Using the conversation rate prescribed in the code – 1 FTE is equal to 400 sq. ft. which means 1.38 FTEs are requires for mitigation. The Applicant seeks to mitigate via cash-in-lieu. At the category 2 rate ($408,362), a total of $563,662 is required for mitigation. While Staff does not support the development of free-market residential dwellings on the subject parcel, Staff does acknowledge that the mitigation rate prescribed from the code does apply if HPC and Council approve the free-market dwellings. However, Staff does not support the Applicant’s request to pay mitigation over an unspecified period of time (or over any extended period of time for that matter). It’s understood that the sale of each TDR will raise the funds needed to meet mitigation requirements. But the idea of locking in todays mitigation rate and paying in a piecemeal fashion will do very little to provide meaningful mitigation. Staff only supports the request to pay mitigation if it is paid as a lump sum, up front at the time of building permit. Staff finds this criterion to be met if mitigation is paid as a lump sum at the time of building permit. 7) For essential public facility development, mitigation shall be determined based on Section 26.470.110.D. Staff findings: This application does not include an essential public facility. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 8) For all affordable housing units that are being provided as mitigation pursuant to this chapter or for the creation of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit pursuant to Chapter 26.540, or for any other reason: a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended. b. Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of methods outlined in this chapter, including newly built units, buy down units, certificates of affordable housing credit, or cash-in-lieu. c. Affordable housing that is in the form of newly built units or buy-down units shall be located on the same parcel as the proposed development or located off-site within the City limits. Units outside the City limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.110.B. When off-site units within City limits are proposed, all requisite approvals shall be obtained prior to approval of the growth management application. d. Affordable housing mitigation in the form of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, shall be extinguished pursuant to Section 26.540.120, Extinguishment and Re-Issuance of a Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section 26.470.050.F, Employee/Square Footage Conversion. e. If the total mitigation requirement for a project is less than 0.1 FTEs, a cash-in-lieu payment may be made by right. If the total mitigation requirement for a project is 40 0.1 or more FTEs, a cash-in-lieu payment shall require City Council approval, pursuant to Section 26.470.110.C. f. Affordable housing units shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.100.D, 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. g. 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 9) Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied (RO). Staff Findings: As previously stated, Staff supports and encourages the Applicant to reconsider the request to develop free-market residential dwellings and tweak the request to develop deed-restricted affordable housing. If a guarantee is provided that the existing commercial building has already met mitigation requirements, then the affordable housing will generate credits. This is an outcome that will benefit the Applicant team and the community. 41 Memorandum TO: Kevin Reyes, kevin.reyes@aspen.gov Community Development Department FROM: Kyla Smits, kyla.smits@aspen.gov Engineering Department DATE: June 14, 2024 SUBJECT: Engineering Department Referral Comments PROJECT: LPA-23-096, 120 E Main St, Aspen Modern Conceptual Review COMMENTS: These comments are not intended to be exhaustive, but an initial response to the project conceptual packet submitted for the purpose of the Historical Preservation Committee meeting. Other requirements may be requested at time of permit. Land Use: Survey 1.Tie survey to two City of Aspen Monuments. 2.Dimension all easements on the survey. Show the extents of the RFTA easement more clearly. 3.Label the Public Utility Easement that is in the northern portion of the property on the survey and list the recordation number or book and page. 4.Label the 10ft dimension on Lot 2. It is unclear if it is a setback or something else. Draft Plat 1.Show all easements. There appears to be a missing easement in the northern portion of the subject property. 2.Dimension the RFTA Easement. 3.Tie to two City of Aspen Monuments. Site Plans 1.All easements should be shown on the site plans. 2.A minimum functional area equaling 30% of the paved area shall be provided contiguous to the paved area and designed to accommodate snow storage (unheated areas). For heated areas, the functional area can be reduced to 10%. Fire hydrant areas and associated easements shall not be used toward the functional area described above. 3.Show the provided 10 parking spaces on a site plan. Provide a turning radius diagram that shows that cars can still maneuver with the reduced drive aisle width. Show provided ADA parking if any. Wheel or bumper guards or other approved barriers shall be located so that no part of any vehicle shall extend beyond the boundary lines of the parking area, intrude on pedestrian ways, or come in contact with walls, fences, or plantings. Exhibit F | Referral Comments 42 TIA 1. Two new measures need to be provided for trip mitigation. The new bike rack satisfies one of these measures. Permit 1. An easement for the electric transformer will need to be recorded prior to Certificate of Occupancy. All necessary clearance distances must be maintained. Utility easement(s) for service lines not related to this property may need to be granted if the re-routed lines cannot be contained within existing easements. Exhibit F | Referral Comments 43 To: Kevin Rayes Planner Community Development Department From: Joseph Pewitt Permit Coordinator Parks & Open Space Department Date: June 17, 2024 Subject: Parks Department Referral Comments Project: LPA-23-096, Voluntary Landmark Application and Conceptual Land Use Application for 120 E Main Street Comments: These comments are not intended to be exhaustive, but an initial response to the project conceptual packet submitted for the request of a conceptual major review and other requirements may be requested at time of permit submittal. Advisory Comments: 1. The Parks and Open Space Department supports the applicant’s requested benefit for plan review fee waivers to include Tree Removal Mitigation fees and Parks Impact fees. 2. The Parks and Open Space Department finds the application’s responses to Historic Preservation Guidelines Chapter 1: Site Planning & Landscape Design #11 and #27 appropriate. a. Tree Removal Permit applications based on tree health or other related factors may be submitted to the Parks and Open Space Department for review at any time. Conditions of Approval: 1. Applicant shall provide a comprehensive landscape plan to be reviewed by the Parks and Open Space Department at building permit. 2. Applicant shall provide a site plan at building permit illustrating the following: a. Location of proposed driveways and other planned areas or structures on the site; b. Location of all trees four (4) inches or over identified by trunk diameter and species; c. Designation of all diseased trees and any trees endangering any roadway pavement or structures and trees endangering utility service lines; d. Designation of any trees proposed to be removed, retained and relocated and areas which will remain undisturbed; e. Any proposed grade changed which may adversely impact any trees on the site. Exhibit F | Referral Comments 44 120 E. Main | Building Department Comments Plan review comments 1) Building to comply with Ord.1 series 2023 2) Building appears to be 2’6” fire separation distance to north property line. Openings are not permitted on this wall. 3) The north wall is required to be one hour fire rated. 4) The ceiling of the car port is required to be one hour. 5) Provide a van accessible parking space. 6) Trash enclosure required to comply with 2021 IFC section 304. The location 7) Main building is required to provide an accessible route per 2021 IEBC section 306. 8) A restaurant will be required to meet the trash and recycling requirements for space. Plan shows 76 sq ft with 300 sq ft required. Exhibit F | Referral Comments 45 1 Voluntary Landmark Application and Conceptual Land Use Application for 120 East Main Street Also known as the Old Pitkin County Library Building Property Owner and Applicant 120 East Main Street Partners, LLC. 1390 Lawrence Street Denver, CO 80204 970-710-9539 Authorized Representative Design Workshop, Inc Jessica Garrow, FAICP Principal 22860 Two Rivers Road, Basalt, Colorado 81621 (970)925-8354 Project Team Planner and Landscape Architects: Design Workshop, Inc 22860 Two Rivers Road Basalt, CO 81621 970-925-8354 Space Planning and Conceptual Design: Red Room Design 1001 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 646 -303-3144 Surveying: Peak Surveying, Inc PO Box 1746 Rifle, CO 81650 970-625-1954 Civil Engineers: Roaring Fork Engineering 592 SH-133 Carbondale, CO 81623 970-340-4130 Exhibit G | Application 46 2 Table of Contents Section 1.0 General Requirements ............................................................................................................... 5 Section 2.0 Voluntary AspenModern Landmark Designation ....................................................................... 6 1. Character Defining Associations and Historic Context ................................................................. 6 2. Architectural Design and Setting ................................................................................................ 10 3. Historic Integrity Score ................................................................................................................ 11 4. Requested Benefits of AspenModern Designation ..................................................................... 13 5. Residential Use in the Main Street Area ..................................................................................... 14 1. Review Criteria for Historic Designation ..................................................................................... 16 2. Effect of Designation – Special Consideration including the Requested Benefits ...................... 17 3. Review Criteria for Historic TDRs ................................................................................................ 20 4. Review Criteria for General Subdivision Review Standards ......................................................... 22 5. Review Criteria for Major Subdivision ......................................................................................... 23 6. Review Criteria for Planned Development ................................................................................. 25 Section 4.0 Verification of Existing Floor Area and Net Leasable Area ...................................................... 30 1. Existing Floor Area ...................................................................................................................... 30 2. Measurement of Existing Net Leasable ...................................................................................... 30 Section 5.0 Historic Design Review ............................................................................................................. 30 1. Modifications and Historic Rehabilitation .................................................................................. 30 2. Specific Design Review for Rehabilitation ................................................................................... 31 Section 6.0 Major Subdivision Amendment ............................................................................................... 40 1. Proposed Amendment ................................................................................................................ 40 2. Access to the Property ................................................................................................................ 40 3. Net Lot Area Calculation After Subdivision Amendment and Lot Merger .................................. 40 Section 7.0 Proposed Development and Associated Reviews .................................................................... 41 1. Proposed Residential Development ............................................................................................ 41 2. Review of Historic Preservation Guidelines for New Buildings on Landmark Properties ........... 43 3. Special Review of the Parking Plan ............................................................................................. 46 4. Growth Management and Mitigation for Proposed Development ............................................ 46 5. Proposed Floor Area Calculation ................................................................................................ 47 Section 8.0 Development Standards and Stormwater Management ......................................................... 47 1. Utilities ........................................................................................................................................ 47 2. Stormwater Management .......................................................................................................... 47 Exhibit G | Application 47 3 3. Trash and Recycling ..................................................................................................................... 47 4. Landscape and Patio Space ......................................................................................................... 48 5. Transportation Impact Analysis .................................................................................................. 48 6. Engineering Review of Hazards ................................................................................................... 48 7. School Dedication ....................................................................................................................... 48 Appendix of Documents A. Land Use Application and Fee Agreement B. Title Policy C. Legal Description D. List of Adjacent Property Owners E. Authorization to Represent F. Homeowners Association Compliance Policy G. Pre-Application Checklist H. Vicinity Map I. Plan Set a. Existing Conditions Survey b. Existing Lots and Easements c. Proposed Site Plan d. Proposed Site Plan Overlay on Existing Conditions e. Map of Area to be Designated f. Modifications to Exterior of the Existing Building g. Architectural Floor Plans h. Architectural Elevations i. Verification of Existing Floor Area j. Sketches of the Proposed Project k. Proposed Materials l. Draft Subdivision Plat J. Engineers Report including Hazards and Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan K. Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) L. Affidavit of Owner Concerning the Deed Restriction Exhibit G | Application 48 4 December 19, 2023 Ms. Amy Simon Planning Director City of Aspen 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Land Use Application for Historic Preservation – Voluntary Landmark Designation, Major Development, Planned Development, Major Subdivision Amendment, Variations, Historic Design Approval, Growth Management, and Special Review for Parcel ID:273512438002 and Parcel 2735124470002 Dear Ms. Simon: The owners of the property located at 120 East Main Street, Aspen are seeking voluntary AspenModern designation for their property and other land use reviews associated with the development of the property as noted above. While the project touches on the listed Land Use Code Sections, the summary of the intent is stated below: The Old Pitkin County Library Building will be placed under Voluntary Landmark Designation for benefits associated with Historic Preservation, including Transfer of Development Rights (TDR’s) and the approval for two small multi-family residential units at the rear of the property. Historic rehabilitation and minor exterior modifications to the existing building are requested to accommodate tenants’ uses as permitted in the mixed-use zone. The existing building is proposed to continue to be used as a commercial building, with a small, detached building proposed behind. The new proposed use accommodates a total of 1,840.4 s.f. of net livable square feet in two units. The residential units are ideally located adjacent to transit, parks and playgrounds, childcare facilities, and within walking distance to the grocery store, post office, trails and open space, community services and employment opportunities. The two existing lots will be merged into a single lot, with the intent of designating the entire property a Historic Landmark. Modeling the plan on the neighborhood compatibility and the example of the adjacent residences, it represents a sound vision for neighborhood use and historic preservation. The benefits incorporated as incentives to the applicant for designation will make the goal of preserving the best example of Aspen’s Modern era on this prominent Main Street property possible. Exhibit G | Application 49 5 Section 1.0 General Requirements All materials defined as required in the Pre-Application sheet are attached as Appendix G. Other required documents, including the Plan Package, can be found in Appendix A-P. Other documents attached include the following: fee agreement, property survey, legal description, title policy confirming ownership and access, letter of representation allowing Design Workshop to be authorized to act on behalf of 120 East Main Street Partners. 120 E. Main Street is located between South Aspen Street and Garmisch Street, on the north side of Main Street. Immediately adjacent properties include: 100 E Main Street (a mixed-use building that includes medical offices and residential use), the Victorians at Bleeker, CenturyLink (a parking lot and an operations building), and 128 E. Main Street-also known as the Sardy House- (a historic landmarked building that includes a detached carriage house on the north end of the property). See below for the vicinity map. Exhibit G | Application 50 6 Section 2.0 Voluntary AspenModern Landmark Designation The building is located on the AspenModern eligibility map and is a superior example of the Wrightian Style. Support for the landmark designation and historic context is included in this section. 1. Character Defining Associations and Historic Context The historical significance of this property is well documented. According to a 1961 Aspen Times article, Fritz Benedict and Herbert Bayer were selected to design a new Pitkin County Library. Benedict and Bayer were assisted by Ellen Harland, one of Aspen’s earliest female architects. In 1966, the library opened with CBS news anchorman Walter Cronkite participating in the dedication. In 1992, 120 East Main Partners, LLC purchased the property from Pitkin County, making it possible for the County to build a larger facility on North Mill Street. Since the change of ownership occurred, the 1966 red brick Wrightian-style building has retained its original design integrity. Having served in the 10th Mountain Division during World War II, Fritz Benedict was the first trained designer to arrive in Aspen after the war. Born in Medford, Wisconsin, he earned both a bachelor’s and a master’s degree in landscape architecture from the University of Wisconsin in Madison. In 1938, he joined Frank Lloyd Wright’s Taliesin in Spring Green as head gardener. A student of Wright’s philosophy of integrating architecture and landscape, he, along with the other apprentices, migrated between the two Taliesins for the next three years. A prolific architect in his own right, Benedict’s architectural style merged architecture and landscape, a direct reflection of his training as a landscape architect and Wright’s overarching influence. Benedict’s contributions were significant in the Aspen community as an influential citizen and many positive contributions exists today because of his energy, ideas and community spirt. Fritz Benedict was a true Aspen pioneer, architect, philosopher, and community leader. Herbert Bayer, an artistic polymath, was one of Bauhaus’s most influential students, teachers, and adherents, advocating throughout his long career for the integration of all arts. From 1921 to 1923 he attended the Bauhaus in Weimar, studying mural painting with Vasily Kandinsky. He created the Universal alphabet, a typeface consisting of only lowercase letters that would become the signature font of the Bauhaus. Bayer returned to the Bauhaus from 1925 to 1928, working as a teacher of advertising, design, and typography, integrating photographs into graphic compositions. In 1938 Bayer emigrated to the United States, and in 1946, Walter Paepcke invited Bayer and his wife Joella (the sister of Fritz Benedict wife, Fabi) to move to Aspen to begin work on the design of the Aspen Institute campus. Until his departure from Aspen in 1975, Bayer was a prominent visionary and hyper-engaged citizen, leading Aspen’s postwar revitalization and mid-century development.“ An artist or designer functions in society, not as a decorator, but as a vital participant,” he wrote in “Herbert Bayer Visual Communication, Fritz Benedict, photography credit AspenModern, City of Aspen Herbert Bayer, photography credit AspenModern, City of Aspen Exhibit G | Application 51 7 Architecture, Painting.” He helped found the local historical society, advised town government on historic preservation, and chaired the planning and zoning commission for five years. For a presentation on community planning in the 1950s, he highlighted community, housing, transportation, and places of work as key elements for a fully functioning municipality. Seventy years later, the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) carries on these same principles. Bayer’s legacy, including his contributions to art, design, and architecture, is now preserved at the Resnick Center for Herbert Bayer Studies, located on the Aspen Institute campus. More than any other building in Aspen, 120 E. Main St. exemplifies the combined design talent of Herbert Bayer and Fritz Benedict. Benedict’s influence is evident in the building’s horizontal profile, its shallow hipped roof lines, rows of windows, overhanging eaves and bands of brick while Bayer’s uniquely graphic eye is reflected in the front door details and the articulated interior light shelf. When it was first built, its distinctly Wrightian style was a radical departure from the Victorian homes (such as the Sardy House) that surrounded it on Main Street. As a civic structure, however, the building was uniquely suited for what was a predominantly residential neighborhood. 120 E Main Interior, Aspen Public Library, at the dedication of the building, photography credit Aspen Historical Society Exhibit G | Application 52 8 In 1992, the ownership transitioned to 120 East Main Street Partners, LLC, a partnership consisting of the founding partners of Design Workshop, Inc. Pitkin County needed a new library, and its construction was contingent on the sale of the property to finance the new construction. Pitkin County’s efforts to sell the building were stymied by the site’s lack of parking to support any re-use of the building. Design Workshop was willing to purchase the building, retrofitting it as an office for the 35 people who had been working at the firm’s original location at 710 E. Durant Street. As the new owners, Design Workshop has made sensitive repairs to the building over its thirty years of occupancy, including the repair and partial reconstruction of the tapered brick wall, visible from Main Street. Portions of the wall were repaired, and the brick materials were matched to the original. On the building’s north side, an organized parking plan was approved by the Planning and Zoning commission and two basement windows there installed for additional light into the workspaces on the north and east facing elevations. Exterior and interior details have remained as they were initially designed and installed. Design Workshop established a planning and landscape architectural practice in Aspen that completed projects in every state and 20 foreign countries from its office at 120 E. Main Street. The intellectual energy and innovative ideas that emanated from the City of Aspen’s community focus on land use, created a platform upon which Design Workshop was able to build. Sharing and expanding thoughtful community planning principles into other locations around the nation and the world became a central focus of the business’s expansion. 120 E Main Exterior, Aspen Public Library, photography credit Aspen Historical Society Exhibit G | Application 53 9 Joe Porter and Don Ensign relocated Design Workshop to Aspen in 1972, and as 1970’s advocate planners, completed the Woody Creek Community Plan and the Pitkin County Airport Master Plan which were both embroiled in public controversy. Design Workshop Staff (2005), photography credit Design Workshop Design Workshop Staff (2022), photography credit Design Workshop Exhibit G | Application 54 10 The first office Design Workshop occupied in Aspen in 1972 was a space shared with Fritz Benedict. Our professional relationship and personal friendship, including many lunches at the Weinerstube Restaurant, make for us, continuation of a legacy, even more compelling. To this day, the building resonates with residents of Aspen, old and new. Occasionally, books appear in the book drop with notes of apology attached for being long overdue. 2. Architectural Design and Setting The library’s design shows the evolution of modern architecture in Aspen with distinctly Wrightian characteristics. The sloping planter wall, visible from Main Street, wide overhanging eaves, and the low- pitched hip roof exemplify Benedict’s desire to integrate buildings into the surrounding landscape. Oversized doors and strong window proportions provide a regularly spaced vertical counter point to the horizontal design format. South-facing windows above the tapered planter wall provide views to Aspen Mountain, Paepcke Park, and Main Street. The building’s exterior is characterized by red brick, with redwood trim at the eave and facia. Inside, redwood is also used to delineate the light shelves. A distinctive material in the overall design, wood is not exposed to the elements which avoids the negative effects of weathering. Other materials include stucco, located below the windows and as a watermark element where the walls join the soffit. The roof Exhibit G | Application 55 11 is built-up membrane with pea gravel and maintains a low angle pitch of 3.5:12. The 6’-6’’ overhang extends around the entire building perimeter, its depth providing summer solar protection on the south- facing window panels. A regular pattern of narrow vertical windows punctuates the brick walls on the east, north, and west building facades. More than any other building in Aspen, 120 E. Main St. exemplifies the combined design ideals of Modernist and Wrightian architecture. Aspen’s evolution as a ski resort destination began only twenty years prior to the construction of the Pitkin County Library; its highly visible presence on Main Street is evidence of the community’s developing stability during that period. With a strong sense of civic purpose wrapped in a forward-thinking design, the library was truly a symbol of community optimism for the future. 3. Historic Integrity Score The Historic Integrity Score is a method to visualize the historic value of a structure prior to designation and to evaluate the benefits the applicant is seeking. The score for 120 E. Main St. is extremely high for the Historic Integrity of the building, which is due in part to the fact that there have been only two owners of the building since its construction. Likely, this building’s integrity score is one of the highest in the city. Exhibit G | Application 56 12 Exhibit G | Application 57 13 4. Requested Benefits of AspenModern Designation The AspenModern designation is a challenging commitment for property owners because it limits future potential changes to a building’s exterior and expansion. Of particular significance for 120 E. Main St. is the amount of floor area that a designation will remove from the property. Currently, the existing building has a floor area of 4,563.6 s.f. The property has a floor area potential of 12,025 s.f., leaving 6,347.1 s.f. of remaining development potential. The Main Street Mixed-Use Zone District allows floor area of 1.25:1 through a Special Review. Many owners would see the benefits of expansion or redevelopment of the building in order to maximize the square footage available. The AspenModern designation provides an alternative solution with the provision of certain benefits to an owner. This is a single-story building, which is a key characteristic of the design. Through the designation process, the owners seek to maintain the integrity of this key feature by proposing development in a detached structure, rather than as an addition to the existing building. In seeking AspenModern designation, the applicant requests these benefits concurrently with designation under Section 26. 415.010: • Approval for modifications to the exterior of the building. Changes include: o the addition of a window on the northeast corner (facing the Sardy House) at grade level to match existing windows and provide light and egress from the basement, o an allowance for rooftop mechanical equipment to enable the building to be used in the future as a restaurant, o re-design of the non-historic north-facing wooden deck, o rehabilitation of the exterior and interior of the building, including the addition of heat tape to minimize ice damning that occurs in the winter and damages the historic decorative fascia and soffit, o an exception to the IBC related to the addition of an elevator to the basement level in order to retain the character of the single-story building, and o the reconstruction of egress on the north side of the building as a fire escape. • Waiver of plan review fees including land use review fees, building permit fees, tree removal mitigation fees, Parks fees, and Air Quality (TDM) impact fees for new development proposed on the property. • Granting of ten (10) Historic transfer of development rights (TDR’s) of 250 s.f. each to be utilized in the City of Aspen on receiving sites. • Approval for two free market residential units not to exceed a total of approximately 1,840.4 s.f. of net livable square feet of new development. • Confirmation that all deed restricted affordable housing requirements have been met related to the existing commercial building, and confirmation that the owner is only obligated to provide mitigation for the free market residential development generating approximately 1.3 FTEs. Approval that mitigation may be a cash in lieu payment. Confirmation that the residential units are approved for GMQS residential allocation and that affordable housing requirements when triggered with a Certificate of Occupancy, can be timed in increments of 10 equal payments following the sale of each TDR. Exhibit G | Application 58 14 • Approval of the planned development with a variance allowing a reduction of two feet of the setback along the northern property line and allowance of multifamily residential use. The roof overhang will be consistent with Section 26.575.020(g) for the eaves in the setback. • Confirmation that all parking requirements are met by the proposed site plan including the number, use, configuration, and dimensions. Parking spaces will be managed by a parking agreement defined through the AspenModern designation and approved by special review. • Approval for a restaurant tenant with the necessary exterior modifications to allow for IBC required ventilation and venting for a commercial kitchen. Approval that the exterior patio space is permitted for outdoor food/beverage service. • Vesting of developments rights for a period of 10 years following issuance of a development order. • A rescission period of six months for AspenModern Designation to allow sufficient time for the owners to confirm that the conditions of approval are acceptable for the property. The approval shall mean the conceptual project approval, building modifications, and the subdivision approval. • Approval by special review of the trash and recycling area sizing and location as shown on the site plan. • Approval of the proposed Subdivision Amendment merging two lots into a single lot of 11,320 s.f. • Approval that Condominium Common Interest, as is permitted by the State Statue, is an acceptable method of ownership for the building and property. The designated and development scenario proposed by this application and benefit requested in exchange for the designation is one unified proposal. It has been carefully and thoughtfully considered for both the community and applicant and defines the long-desired preservation of a Main Street icon with benefit incentives to make this a reality. 5. Residential Use in the Main Street Area The history of land use in town is shown on Sandborn maps, which originally were used as Insurance records, but also document land use. The 1893 Sanborn map shows the old library site and the entire block as residential with alley access to garages or sheds lining the rear of the lots. Looking further, the entire blocks on either side of the 100 E Main block are residential in the same pattern. The primary use all along Main Street was residential. Consequently, the qualities of good residential neighborhoods are deeply rooted in the historic pattern and the advantages of living there now are even more improved. The early neighborhood development pattern with the addition of modern transportation programs such as RFTA, creates a transit-oriented neighborhood context for this project.1 1 The owners of the property granted an easement for the RFTA stop to allow for the recent improvements. Exhibit G | Application 59 15 This 1893 Sanborn map demonstrates the neighborhood structure of residential use. To this day this structure supports the appropriateness of residential use along Main Street and with the addition of transportation, is a transit-oriented neighborhood. Objections to large single family residential buildings in which a single owner dominates the floor area have led to land use code changes. However, there is still predominately residential use that is intrinsic to the area of this specific block and the immediately surrounding city blocks. The proposal defined in this application includes two new free market residential as a benefit of designation. This is a mixed use project, of which only 24% of the potential floor area of the site is residential and no commercial space is lost. The modestly small residential units serve a residential niche that has been missing, is compatible with the historic pattern and adjacent buildings, and results in the preservation of the best example of Aspen’s Modern period. The residential use proposed, and requested as a benefit of preservation, is far different than a primary building of large residential square footage. While there are older buildings that Aspen’s preservation program has saved, it would be difficult to name another resource that is more important to community life and associations than the Old Pitkin County Library. Historically, residential use has been the primary use for the block and all surrounding blocks as demonstrated by these existing buildings to the east and west of 120 E Main. Exhibit G | Application 60 16 Section 3.0 Review Criteria 1. Review Criteria for Historic Designation Section 26.415.030.c outlines the requirements for AspenModern designation. These criteria are described below followed by the applicant’s response: 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 demonstr ated 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 (2) 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 dee med 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 de molition 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 sh all be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. Response to Criteria Locally, it was a significant effort to design and construct the Pitkin County Library. As documented on the AspenModern website and discussed earlier in this application, 120 E. Main St. is an example of the Wrightian / Organic Style. This style was brought to Aspen by Frank Loyd Wright disciple Fritz Benedict and Bauhaus-trained architect Herbert Bayer. Both were instrumental in the development and design of this building, originally built as the Pitkin County Library and dedicated by Walter Cronkite. The Wrightian design is well executed, unified in its approach, and the aesthetic composition is far reaching. The bold execution of the ideas sustains the building’s importance. The building is important for its role in Aspen’s public life as the library, the dedication on the world stage by Walter Cronkite and the influence of key modernist architects Herbert Bayer and Fritz Exhibit G | Application 61 17 Benedict. The team has completed the required Historic Inventory Scoring sheet, and the building scores 19 out of a possible 20 points, making it an exemplary example of Aspen Modern architecture. The site’s prominence on Main Street and across from Paepcke Park is a critical community place and achieves a sense of place that defines brilliantly, the joining of the Main Street district and Aspen’s downtown. The historic value and integrity are remarkably intact since there have only been two owners of the building. Maintenance and repair have been carefully completed. The Old Pitkin County Library is recognized as exceptional for the time it was completed, the leading design philosophy, the community purpose the was so successfully accommodated and the community gathering place it became. 2. Effect of Designation – Special Consideration including the Requested Benefits Section 26.415.060 identifies the effect of designation, including subsection c that identifies special considerations. These contemplate the ability to grant benefits, as outlined in section 26.415.110, as well as grants latitude to City Council to preserve, maintain, and enhance the historic character of the building and city. This allows the applicant to forego the otherwise permitted development and square footage of the property and instead propose a desirable land use proposal that is based on a beneficial program, site plan, and historic preservation of the best example of AspenModern. The Special Consideration standards are listed below, followed by a summary of the proposed benefits for this AspenModern designation: (1) To preserve and maintain the historic and architectural character of designated properties, the HPC or City Council may approve variations from the dimensional requirements set forth in the Land Use Code and may make recommendations to the Chief Building Official who has the authority to grant certain exceptions from the International Building Code (UBC) through the provisions of the International Existing Building Code (IEBC). These modifications may not change the applicable safety and permit requirements and must also follow the procedures provided for modifications set forth in the IEB. (2) Designated historic properties are eligible for and have priority to participate in City programs related to financial, developmental, or technical assistance that will serve to preserve, maintain or enhance their historic and architectural character. (3) All City authorities, including City Council, are authorized to grant economic and developmental benefits to designated historic properties or grant these benefits conditional upon the subsequent designation of the property. Response to the Criteria: The benefits defined in this application have been carefully considered related to the financial feasibility of preservation when compared with an addition or demolition. As allowed under the criteria, the owners are requesting the following specific benefits in exchange for the voluntary designation of the building: • Approval for modifications to the exterior of the building. Changes include: o the addition of a window on the northeast corner (facing the Sardy House) at grade level to match existing windows and provide light and egress from the basement, Exhibit G | Application 62 18 o an allowance for rooftop mechanical equipment to enable the building to be used in the future as a restaurant, o re-design of the non-historic north-facing wooden deck egress, o rehabilitation of the exterior and interior of the building, including the addition of heat tape to minimize ice damning that occurs in the winter and damages the historic decorative fascia and soffit, o an exception to the IBC related to the addition of a limited use elevator to the basement level in order to retain the character of the single-story building, and o the reconstruction of egress on the north side of the building as a fire escape. • Waiver of plan review fees including: all land use review fees, building permit fees, tree removal mitigation fees, Parks fees, and Air Quality (TDM) impact fees for new development proposed on the property. o The city provides a review of historic designation for no fee. The applicant requests confirmation that all associated reviews will also include no fee. o Building permit fees are not known at this time. o Tree Removal mitigation fees are estimated at $24,410.00(3 trees with a total 38”) o TDM/Air Quality Impact Fee is estimated at $1,434.66 (2,351.9 sq ft proposed multiplied by $0.61 per sq ft). o The Parks Impact Fee is estimated at $12,817.85 (2,351.9 sq ft proposed multiplied by $5.45 per sq ft). • Granting of ten (10) Historic transfer of development rights (TDR’s) of 250 s.f. each to be utilized in the City of Aspen on code eligible receiving sites. This would remove 2,500 sq ft of development from the property. • Approval for two free market residential units not to exceed a total of approximately 1,840.4 sq. ft. of net livable square feet (2,481.9 sq ft floor area) of new development. • An agreement to provide required affordable housing mitigation through a cash in lieu payment, tied to the sale of the requested TDRs. o Pursuant to section 26.470.100.f, housing mitigation for new free-market residential units requires housing equal to 30% of the net livable area. This is converted to 1.39 FTEs and a required Cash-in-Lieu payment of $567,623.18. The calculation is as follows: Housing Mitigation Calculation Total New Free-Market Net Livable Area 1,840.4 sq ft 30% mitigation 552.12 sq ft Conversion to FTEs at 1 FTE per 400 sq ft 1.38 FTEs Cash-in-Lieu for Category 2 $408,362 Total Cash-in-Lieu payment due $563,662 Exhibit G | Application 63 19 • Based on the request for ten (10) TDRs, this would result in a cash payment to the city of $56,366.20 when the affordable housing requirements are triggered. Payments are timed in increments of 10 equal payments following the sale of each TDR beginning with the mitigation need for housing. • Approval of the site plan with a variance allowing reduction of two feet on the setback along the northern property line. This would result in a setback of 3 foot along the north property line to ensure adequately sized drive lanes to access the parking area. The roof overhang for the new detached building will be consistent with Section 26.575.020(g) for the eaves in the setback. • Confirmation that all parking requirements are met by the proposed site plan including the number, use, configuration, and dimensions. The proposed parking area includes 6 spaces in a carport, one of which is ADA accessible, and 4 surface spaces. A minimum accessway of 20 feet in width is proposed at the narrowest point. Parking would be managed by a parking agreement. • Approval for a restaurant tenant with the necessary exterior modifications to allow for IBC required ventilation and venting for a commercial kitchen. Additionally, a request for exemption to second tier space requirements should a future tenant convert the building to a restaurant. • Approval that the existing exterior patio space is permitted for outdoor food/beverage service. • Approval of the proposed TIA, which includes the provision of formalized bike parking. A total of 1.6 trips are estimated to be generated, and the proposed mitigation measures are calculated in the city’s tool as mitigating 5 trips. As a building that is located immediately adjacent to the Paepcke Park bus stop, the owners have previously granted a permanent easement to the city and RFTA to utilize the property to improve the bus stop. Given these past commitments, the owners request the provision of the MMLOS strategy of bike parking as the complete commitment and requirement for this code requirement. • Approval by special review of the trash and recycling area sizing and location as shown on the site plan. The proposed trash area includes an enclosure of 96 square feet, and an overall size of 12 feet by 8 feet. • Approval of the proposed Subdivision Amendment merging two lots into a single lot of 11,320 gross square feet. • Approval that Condominium Common Interest, as is permitted by the State Statue, is an acceptable method of ownership for the building and property. • A rescission period of six months for AspenModern Designation to allow sufficient time for the owners to confirm that the conditions of approval are acceptable for the property. The approval shall mean the conceptual project approval, building modifications, and the subdivision approval. • Vesting of developments rights for a period of 10 years following issuance of a development order. Exhibit G | Application 64 20 Proposed modifications to the building exterior that relate to the accommodation of permitted uses in the mixed-use zone district are included as a part of this voluntary designation. These modifications would be completed with Historic Design Review and are shown in the plan package. The benefits defined are a package of specific preservation methods. They are vetted with the historic setting and are a solution that fully benefits the community. 3. Review Criteria for Historic TDRs Criteria for granting historic TDR’s, outlined in section 26.535.070 of the Code, are described below followed by the applicant’s response: (a) The sending site is a historic landmark on which the development of a single-family or duplex residence is permitted use, pursuant to Chapter 26.710, Zone Districts. Properties on which such development is a conditional use shall not be eligible. (b) It is demonstrated that the sending site has permitted unbuilt development rights, for either a single-family or duplex home, equaling or exceeding two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates requested. (c) It is demonstrated that the establishment of TDR certificates will not create a nonconformity. In cases where a nonconformity already exists, the action shall not increase the specific nonconformity. (d) The analysis of unbuilt development right shall only include the actual built development, any approved development order, the allowable development right prescribed by zoning for a single- family or duplex residence and shall not include the potential of the sending site to gain floor area bonuses, exemptions or similar potential development incentives. Properties in the MU Zone District which do not currently contain a single-family home or duplex established prior to the adoption of Ordinance #7, Series of 2005, shall be permitted to base the calculation of TDRs on one hundred percent (100%) of the allowable floor area on an equivalent-sized lot in the R-6 zone district. This is only for the purpose of creating TDRs and does not permit the on-site development of one hundred percent (100%) of the allowable floor area on an equivalent-sized lot in the R-6 zone district. If the additional twenty percent (20%) of allowable floor area exceeds five hundred (500) square feet, the applicant may not request a floor area bonus from HPC at any time in the future. Any development order to develop floor area, beyond that remaining legally connected to the property after establishment of TDR Certificates, shall be considered null and void. (e) The proposed deed restriction permanently restricts the maximum development of the property (the sending site) to an allowable floor area not exceeding the allowance for a single-family or duplex residence minus two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates established. 1) For properties with multiple or unlimited floor areas for certain types of allowed uses, the maximum development of the property, independent of the established property use, shall be the floor area of a single-family or duplex residence (whichever is permitted) minus two hundred fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplies by the number of historic TDR certificates established. The deed restriction shall not stipulate an absolute floor area but shall stipulate a square footage reduction from the allowable floor area for a single-family or duplex residence, as may be amended from time to time. The sending site shall remain eligible for certain floor area incentives and/or exemptions as may be authorized by the City Land Use Code, as may be Exhibit G | Application 65 21 amended from time to time. The form of the deed restriction shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. (f) A real estate closing has been scheduled at which, upon satisfaction of all relevant requirements, the City shall execute and deliver the applicable number of historic TDR certificates to the sending site property owner and that property owner shall execute and deliver a deed restriction lessening the available development right of the subject property together with the appropriate fee for recording the deed restriction with the County Clerk and Recorder's office. (g) It shall be the responsibility of the sending site property owner to provide building plans and a zoning analysis of the sending site to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Certain review fees may be required for the confirmation of built floor area. (h) The sale, assignment, conveyance or other transfer or change in ownership of transferable development rights certificates shall be recorded in the real estate records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder and must be reported by the grantor to the City of Aspen Community Development Department within five (5) days of such transfer. The report of such transfer shall disclose the certificate number, the grantor, the grantee and the total value of the consideration paid for the certificate. Failure to timely or accurately report such transfer shall not render the transferable development right certificate void. (i) TDR certificates may be issued at the pace preferred by the property owner. (j) City Council may find that the creation of TDRs is not the best preservation solution for the affected historic resource and deny the application to create TDRs. HPC shall provide the Council with a recommendation. Discussion of the Criteria: The land use code provides sufficient latitude for granting TDRs in exchange for a Landmark designation. Section 26.415.060.c expressly grants City Council the right to grant any economic and developmental benefit they deem appropriate in exchange for the voluntary designation. The established method of creating TDRs has proved a useful tool in the past and is credited with successfully preserving culturally, historically, and visually significant buildings. Any potential development on the site will render the 120 E. Main St. vulnerable to major modifications and under some circumstances, demolition. As examples, several adjacent sites within the Main Street Historic District (on both sides of Garmisch and Main Street) have been fully demolished and redeveloped. The property warrants preservation via a TDR and other benefits suggested as essential for preservation. As part of the request to designate the building, the owners request that the TDR calculation be based on the allowed floor area in the MU zone district. A total of ten (10) TDRs are proposed in exchange for the designation, totaling 2,500 sq ft of development that would permanently be severed from the site. The calculations for the TDRs are below. First, the total net parcel area (gross minus vacated ROWs) must be determined. For the combined lots this is 9.620 sq ft: Exhibit G | Application 66 22 Gross Parcel Size Vacated Alley Net Parcel Size Lot 1 8,800 sq ft 800 sq ft 8,000 sq ft Lot 2 2,520 sq ft 900 sq ft 1,620 sq ft Combined Lots 11,320 sq ft 1,700 sq ft 9,620 sq ft Next, the total allowed Floor Area must be determined. The MU zone district includes a base allowed FAR of 1:1 and an FAR of up to 1.25:1 through Special Review. Both are shown below, but the owners are using the 1:1 calculation for the TDR request. Ratio Lot Allowance Allowed Floor Area (MU) 1:1 9,620 sq ft Allowed Floor Area with Special Review (MU) 1.25:1 12,025 sq ft Finally, the amount of remaining floor area needs to be determined. This is calculated by subtracting the total of the proposed 10 TDRs, the existing building, the proposed residential building, and the proposed trash enclosure from the allowed FAR in the MU zone. Proposed Development Existing Building 4,563.6 sq ft New Residential Floor Area 2,481.9 sq ft Proposed Trash Enclosure Floor Area 96 sq ft TDRs (10 at 250 sq ft each) 2,500 sq ft Total Unused Development Rights (1:1) 75 sq ft Total Unused Development Rights (1.25:1) 2,383.5 sq ft The granting of TDR’s will not create issues of non-conformity as there is floor area on the property that remains. Additionally, the merger by Subdivision Amendment of Lots 1 and 2 will eliminate the existing legal non-conforming lot and combine the allocation of floor area from both lots. The deed restriction proposed will permanently reduce the floor area converted to TDR’s. The applicant understands the real estate and development deed restrictions occurring with designation and granting of TDR’s. 4. Review Criteria for General Subdivision Review Standards Section 26.480.040. outlines the requirements for general subdivision review standards. These criteria are described below followed by the applicant’s response: Criteria: All subdivisions shall be required to conform to the following general standards and limitations in addition to the specific standards applicable to each type of subdivision: (a) Guaranteed Access to a Public Way. All subdivided lots must have perpetual unobstructed legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed subdivision shall not eliminate or obstruct legal vehicular access from a public way to an adjacent property. All streets in a Subdivision retained under private ownership shall be dedicated to public use to ensure adequate public Exhibit G | Application 67 23 and emergency access. Security/privacy gates across access points and driveways are prohibited. (b) Alignment with Original Townsite Plat. The proposed lot lines shall approximate, to the extent practical, the platting of the Original Aspen Townsite, and additions thereto, as applicable to the subject land. Minor deviations from the original platting lines to accommodate significant features of the site may be approved. (c) Zoning Conformance. All new lots shall conform to the requirements of the zone district in which the property is situated, including variations and variances approved pursuant to this Title. A single lot shall not be located in more than one zone district unless unique circumstances dictate. A rezoning application may be considered concurrently with subdivision review. (d) Existing Structures, Uses, and Non-Conformities. A subdivision shall not create or increase the non-conformity of a use, structure or parcel. A rezoning application or other mechanism to correct the non-conforming nature of a use, structure, or parcel may be considered concurrently. In the case where an existing structure or use occupies a site eligible for subdivision, the structure need not be demolished and the use need not be discontinued prior to application for subdivision. If approval of a subdivision creates a non-conforming structure or use, including a structure spanning a parcel boundary, such structure or use may continue until recordation of the subdivision plat. Alternatively, the City may accept certain assurance that the non-conformities will be remedied after recordation of the subdivision plat. Such assurances shall be reflected in a development agreement or other legal mechanism acceptable to the City Attorney and may be time-bound or secured with a financial surety. Response to the Criteria: The proposal adheres to the criteria set forth in the general subdivision review standards, described in Section 6.0 Major Subdivision Amendment of this Land Use Application. Access to the property is established through an existing access easement from Garmisch Street which satisfies the subdivision access to a public way requirement. The proposed draft plat amendment, described in Appendix I, aligns with the Original Townsite Plat and includes originally platted townsite lots. The proposal will create a lot that is more consistent with the traditional lot pattern of town. The proposed subdivision aligns with the platted lots and will conform to this criterion. The subdivision modification as proposed will remain in a single zoning district and the existing structure will not become non-conforming as proposed. The Old Pitkin County Library structure on Lot 1 will be designated as AspenModern and preserved as a benefit to the community, reflective of the heritage of design and architecture within Aspen. 5. Review Criteria for Major Subdivision Section 26.480.070. outlines the requirements for major subdivisions. These criteria are described below followed by the applicant’s response: Exhibit G | Application 68 24 Criteria: The following subdivisions shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council, after receiving a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Major subdivisions are subject to Section 26.480.030—Procedures for Review, the standards and limitations of Section 26.480.040—General Subdivision Review Standards, and the standards and limitations of each type of subdivision, described below. All subdivisions not defined as administrative or minor subdivisions shall be considered major subdivisions. (a) Land Subdivision. The division or aggregation of land for the purpose of creating individual lots or parcels shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied according to the following standards: (1) The proposed subdivision complies with the requirements of Section 26.480.040—General Subdivision Review Standards. (2) The proposed subdivision enables an efficient pattern of development that optimizes the use of the limited amount of land available for development. (3) The proposed subdivision preserves important geologic features, mature vegetation, and structures or features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual, or ecological importance or contribute to the identity of the town. (4) The proposed subdivision prohibits development on land unsuitable for development because of natural or man-made hazards affecting the property, including flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snow slide areas, slopes in excess of thirty percent (30%), and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Affected areas may be accepted as suitable for development if adequate mitigation techniques acceptable to the City Engineer are proposed in compliance with Title 29—Engineering Design Standards. Conceptual plans for mitigation techniques may be accepted with specific design details and timing of implementation addressed through a Development Agreement pursuant to Chapter 26.490—Approval Documents. (5) There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the proposed subdivision to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 - Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined and documented within a Development Agreement. (6) The proposed subdivision shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the subdivision. Improvements shall be at the sole cost of the developer. (7) The proposed subdivision is exempt from or has been granted all growth management approvals pursuant to Chapter 26.470—Growth Management Quota System, including compliance with all affordable housing requirements for new and replacement development as applicable. Exhibit G | Application 69 25 (8) The proposed subdivision meets the School Land Dedication requirements of Chapter 26.620 and any land proposed for dedication meets the criteria for land acceptance pursuant to said Chapter. (9) A Subdivision Plat shall be reviewed and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, pursuant to Chapter 26.490—Approval Documents. (10) A Development Agreement shall be reviewed and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, pursuant to Chapter 26.490—Approval Documents. Response to the Criteria: The proposed development is contingent on the amendment of the US West Subdivision, to merge the property for the 120 E Main Street office building and Lot 2 of the US West/ Design Workshop Subdivision. The project complies with the criteria of Section 26.480.040 General Subdivision Review Standards. The proposed residential development, described in Section 7.0, Proposed Development and Associated Reviews, outlines the ability to develop residential units above a current parking lot while not limiting the existing commercial operations of the 120 E Main Street building. This provides compliance with the criterion of efficient development by re-purposing the space above the parking lot for use. There are no specific hazards on the property, as outlined in more detail in Section 8.0, Development Standards and Stormwater Management, and Appendix J, Engineers Report which includes Hazards and Preliminary Stormwater Management. There are no geological hazards or ecological conditions found on the site that prevent development or mitigation under Title 29. A mature spruce tree is proposed to be removed but would be mitigated, as required by code. Historic and cultural features of the property would be preserved which clearly contribute to the identity of the town. Included is a design plan to retain the standards of the Urban Run-off Management Plan. There is public infrastructure located at the site and there is available capacity for needed services. The developers of the property will, at their own expense, connect to the services and if needed up-grade to provide adequate service. Bike racks are proposed as part of the residential development to support non-vehicular travel in and around Aspen. Additionally, the owners of 120 E Main Street previously granted a permanent easement to the City and RFTA to utilize the property and improve the Paepcke Park bus stop. The Growth Management requirements will be met, with a request for Cash-in-Lieu payment for affordable housing requirements based on the residential development proposed. The project owners are committed to providing Cash-in-Lieu payment for the school dedication requirements generated by the development, as required by code. A draft subdivision plat is provided for review in Appendix I, and the subdivision documentation required under 26.490 will be followed as is appropriate to the final subdivision. 6. Review Criteria for Planned Development A Planned Development is requested for the parcel to provide flexibility for the development of the site to enable a small amount of development on the rear of the site and preserve the existing structure in its entirety. The PD process helps accomplish community goals that otherwise would not be possible Exhibit G | Application 70 26 with the application of zoning district standards. The following addresses the Planned Development Review Standards. Sec. 26.445.050. - Project Review Standards. The Project Review shall focus on the general concept for the development and shall outline any dimensional requirements that vary from those allowed in the underlying zone district. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this Title. The underlying zone district designation shall be used as a guide, but not an absolute limitation, to the dimensions which may be considered during the development review process. Any dimensional variations allowed shall be specified in the ordinance granting Project Approval. In the review of a development application for a Project Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, and City Council shall consider the following: (a) Compliance with Adopted Regulatory Plans. The proposed development complies with applicable adopted regulatory plans. (b) Development Suitability. The proposed Planned Development prohibits development on land unsuitable for development because of natural or man-made hazards affecting the property, including flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snow slide areas, slopes in excess of thirty percent (30%), and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Affected areas may be accepted as suitable for development if adequate mitigation techniques acceptable to the City Engineer are proposed in compliance with Title 29—Engineering Design Standards. Conceptual plans for mitigation techniques may be accepted for this standard. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. (c) Site Planning. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used:(1)The site plan responds to the site's natural characteristics and physical constraints such as steep slopes, vegetation, waterways, and any natural or man-made hazards and allows development to blend in with or enhance said features.(2)The project preserves important geologic features, mature vegetation, and structures or features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual, or ecological importance or contribute to the identity of the town.(3)Buildings are oriented to public streets and are sited to reflect the neighborhood context. Buildings and access ways are arranged to allow effective emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. (d) Dimensions. All dimensions, including density, mass, and height shall be established during the Project Review. A development application may request variations to any dimensional requirement of this Title. In meeting this standard, consideration shall be given to the following criteria: (1) There exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such variations. (2) The proposed dimensions represent a character suitable for and indicative of the primary uses of the project. (3) The project is compatible with or enhances the cohesiveness or distinctive identity of the neighborhood and surrounding development patterns, including the scale and massing of nearby historical or cultural resources. (4) The number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the probable number of cars to be operated by those using the proposed development and the nature of the proposed uses. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive Exhibit G | Application 71 27 techniques in the proposed development, and the potential for joint use of common parking may be considered when establishing a parking requirement. (5) The Project Review approval, at City Council's discretion, may include specific allowances for dimensional flexibility between Project Review and Detailed Review. Changes shall be subject to the amendment procedures of Section 26.445.110—Amendments. (e) Design Standards. The design of the proposed development is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: (1) The design complies with applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. (2) The proposed materials are compatible with those called for in any applicable design standards, as well as those typically seen in the immediate vicinity. Exterior materials are finalized during Detailed Review, but review boards may set forth certain expectations or conditions related to architectural character and exterior materials during Project Review. (f) Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and improvements. Any vehicular access points, or curb cuts, minimize impacts on existing or proposed pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. The City may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. (g) Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the project to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29—Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. (h) Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. (i) Access and Circulation. The proposed development shall have perpetual unobstructed legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed Planned Development shall not eliminate or obstruct legal access from a public way to an adjacent property. All streets in a Planned Development retained under private ownership shall be dedicated to public use to ensure adequate public and emergency access. Security/privacy gates across access points and driveways are prohibited. Response to the Review Criteria There are no regulatory plans that are applicable to this project. The Aspen Area Community Plan identifies key considerations for historic preservation. While not a regulatory plan, the AACP provides important guidance for the city and community. The AACP’s Historic Preservation Policy II.3 states, “II.3. Encourage the use of the City’s Historic Transferable Development Right (TDR) program as a method of preserving the historic integrity of designated structures." The proposal includes the use of TDRs as the main benefit to preserve the historic integrity of 120 E Main. Historic Preservation Policy VI.1 states “Vi.1. All historic landmark properties should be maintained in a manner that improves energy efficiency Exhibit G | Application 72 28 while maintaining architectural integrity.” The proposal includes a request to maintain critical heat tape in order to preserve the character-defining wood soffit detailing throughout the building, while allowing interior updates that would improve energy efficiency. As the plan states on page 55, “Historic preservation is also aligned with our environmental ethic. The preservation and maintenance of historically designated buildings is environmentally responsible. Energy is saved by retaining existing structures and making them more energy efficient rather than demolishing the structure and building anew.” The land use code provides for the flexibility and incentives associated with the preservation of outstanding examples of the historic and cultural resources within the city and specifically for the preservation by private owners. The Planned Development provisions of the Land Use Code seek to allow the flexibility to best complete this goal. The site characteristics are documented in this application (see engineering report in Appendix) and does not include any natural hazards or characteristics that would make it unsuitable for the proposed development. There are no identifiable geological features on the site and is typical of the glacial fluvial outwash that most Aspen is built on. The site plan responds to the developed nature of the neighborhood and site. The “carriage house style development” in the rear of a main building is a historic form that can be seen on the property to the east (the Sardy House). The main building faces Main Street, with vehicular access to the rear off of N Garmisch St through an access easement where there was previously a platted alley. Emergency access, parking access and maintenance use this easement for the service needs of the development. This has provided services for the existing building since its construction in 1965. A shared parking plan is proposed between the site’s users. This will include a total of 10 spaces, which is within the minimum/ maximum number required by the Land Use Code for the existing commercial uses and proposed residential use. One of the spaces is ADA accessible and is located under the new structure, as required by the IBC. Architecture is intended to be high quality design and includes materials and construction features that are encouraged by the Historic Guidelines. Architectural materials proposed are shown on the material board, found in the appendix. These are intended to be compatible with the context and the site-specific conditions. The architecture is a modern building and doesn’t mimic historic styles. Modernism in Aspen is seen in the existing structure and the building is notable for those design principles. The review of the historic guidelines is included in the application and the design satisfies the parameters adopted by Guidelines. The building entry prevents snow and ice build-up at entries with roof covering and recessed doors. The forms of the architecture are un-complicated, direct and acknowledge the features of the setting. The facades of the building provide an interesting pattern without applied decoration. The carport covers more than 60% of the parking spaces, which will not require snow management. The common areas will be maintained with appropriate agreements. The site is very convenient to public transit and incorporates an RFTA station immediately adjacent to the property allowing residents to travel almost to any destination via transit. The addition of bicycle parking to further reduce the dependence on cars is included in the project. Engineering design standards have been followed, with the exception for the back-up aisle for several parking spaces. This has been mitigated with wider parking spaces and a request for an exception to this standard is included in the application. It is important to note that this is the condition today with the current approved parking plan. Public services and infrastructure improvements will be made at the cost of the developer. This site is well served in its current condition, which will continue following designation and the development of the proposed residential use. Exhibit G | Application 73 29 Sec. 26.445.060. - Use Variation Standards. A development application may request variations in the allowed uses permitted in the zone district. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the request and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this Title. The permitted and conditional uses allowed on the property according to its zoning shall be used as a guide, but not an absolute limitation, to the land uses which may be considered during the review. Any use variation allowed shall be specified in the ordinance granting Project Review approval. In the review of a development application for a Project Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, and City Council shall consider the following standards related to Use Variations: (a) The proposed use variation is compatible with the character of existing and planned land uses in the project and surrounding area. In meeting this standard, consideration shall be given to the existence of similar uses in the immediate vicinity, as well as how the proposed uses may enhance the project or immediate vicinity. (b) The proposed use variation is effectively incorporated into the project's overall mix of uses. In meeting this standard, consideration shall be given to how the proposed uses within a project will interact and support one another. (c) The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use variation minimizes adverse effects on the neighborhood and surrounding properties. (d) The proposed use variation complies with applicable adopted regulatory plans. Response to the Review Standards The requested use variation is to allow multi-family residential use in the mixed-use district site in order to create an AspenModern designation on the property. Residential use is found on many sites adjacent to this property and throughout the Main Street Historic District. The characteristics of the property are described in Section 7.0 related to the residential attributes at this location. The variation for use is in the spirit of functional mixed use, with small residential units proposed for a portion of the parcel development. The proposed inclusion of the rear lot in the Main Street Historic district will bring a high level of design control to the development that currently doesn’t exist today since this parcel is not within the Historic District. The surrounding uses all have residential use, either as a stand-alone use or in a mixed-use building. The Historic integrity of the main building will be intact since the site identified for residential development is not part of the original Pitkin County Public Library. Proposed changes to the historic structure only include minor exterior adaptation and rehabilitation to meet current IBC requirements and to support continued functionality as a commercial use. The addition of residential units on the separate rear parcel, immediately adjacent to parcels with existing residential uses is appropriate for the neighborhood and will not negatively impact the historic integrity of the current building. Residential use is the predominate existing use in the neighborhood and neighborhood compatibility is substantially satisfied with the proposal. The variation of the use will decrease the intensive commercial use permitted to a less intensive residential use, diminishing the neighborhood impact, particularly from the spillover of parking into the neighborhood. The mix of uses is a balance of commercial and residential, in which the residential fills a niche of modest sized residential units that currently do not exist in the city. The planning and design ideas for the project are in alignment to the program and structures which created the neighborhood. Exhibit G | Application 74 30 Section 4.0 Verification of Existing Floor Area and Net Leasable Area 1. Existing Floor Area The existing floor area of the existing building is calculated as 4,563.6 s.f. based on the above and below grade measurements and other measurements including the mechanical space and stairs, as outlined in Section 26.575.060(d). This was completed utilizing digital scans of the building, individual measurements for specific dimensions, and existing architectural plans. The exposed sub-grade space in the building is included in the calculation of floor area. Stairs are counted on the lowest level and mechanical room space is not included in the floor area, but the vertical chases are. The gross square footage is 8,070.8 square feet as measured per the methods outlined in Section 26.575.020. The plan of floor area is included in Appendix I. 2. Measurement of Existing Net Leasable The net leasable square footage is 6,428.20 s.f. based on the measurement method outlined in Section 26.575.020(h). Net leasable s.f. is used to calculate the parking requirements. Documentation of the existing floor area is found in Appendix I. Section 5.0 Historic Design Review 1. Modifications and Historic Rehabilitation The requested modifications to the building are described below. 1. Adding an additional near grade window to match the existing condition on the east side will improve the amount of natural light throughout the lower level. The existing grade accommodates the installation of the window. 2. The addition of roof-top mechanical equipment on the northwest portion of the roof (away from Main Street) is proposed for a restaurant tenant. This equipment is screened by a wood screen which conceals the mechanical equipment. The approximate size is 11.5 feet by 5 feet. The height of the mechanical equipment is determined by the mechanical code and is 4 feet above the roof. This improvement would allow adaptive re-use for a new tenant. 3. The wooden deck, located on the building’s north side adjacent to an exit door, would be re- constructed as a metal ladder located at the eastern side of the landing. The deck and wooden stairs that currently exist were a more recent addition to the building and their removal is part of the rehabilitation and may require relief from the IBC. 4. The northern soffit was damaged by a delivery truck and the replacement of the redwood soffit boards and facia to match existing material finish would be included in the rehabilitation. Exhibit G | Application 75 31 5. The roof design incorporated interior drains pitched back from the edge of the eave. These need to be repaired and a heat tape solution added to prevent icing and icicle build-up. This design was unique but unfortunately, ice damming requires heat tape and an exemption from the energy code is requested to allow this historic design to function. 6. The original drywells located around the structure will remain as part of the surface water management design with the additional relocation of the existing dry well at the northern part of the site and a second drywell installation. 7. The landscape patio will be adjusted to accommodate storm water infiltration as part of the drainage plan. 8. Interior access to existing commercial space is being requested as an exemption from the IBC, as an elevator addition will negatively impact the roof form and will require a more significant remodel than is contemplated. 2. Specific Design Review for Rehabilitation Historic Preservation Guidelines apply to the existing building and the newly proposed development as the entire parcel would be designated. The Guidelines include design review criteria that are to be used to determine whether the application is appropriate. Chapter 1: Site Planning & Landscape Design 1. All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. The proposed development is organized on the block and grid pattern of Main Street. As a highly visible central corridor, Main Street is home to residential, retail, restaurant, office, and civic land uses. Some historic buildings along Main Street, such as 128 East Main, maintain carriage houses or other small buildings along the alleys, located at the back of the properties. 2. Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. The original alley for the block was vacated in 1961 in favor of an easement accessed from Garmisch Street. No ditches exist within this block. No adjustment to the existing character of the streets or alleys would occur. 3. Remove driveways or parking areas accessed directly from the street if they were not part of the original development of the site. Access from Garmisch Street will remain as it was the original access. 4. Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. The visual impact of the parking area will be diminished due to the reduction in the number of parking spaces and the covered portions of the parking program. 5. Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. The original building on the property establishes the historic qualities of the project, and the proposed development in the rear, which was originally on a separate lot, is designed in a way to not interrupt the sequence of space on the site. The detachment of the buildings completely separates the historic from the newly proposed uses. Exhibit G | Application 76 32 6. Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. The walkway from Main Street to the entry will include the path to the courtyard to the west side of the existing building. The entry to the proposed residential development will be a new sidewalk along the west side of the existing building. 7. Provide positive open space within a project site. The open space on the project is contained within the courtyard to the west and the mature trees that exist on the site. In addition, the open space provided by decks for each new unit will be south facing with views to the west and east, respectively. 8. Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. The stormwater narrative is included. A few improvements are needed including minor grading to direct water into drywells. 9. Landscape development on AspenModern landmarks shall be addressed on a case by case basis. The landscape areas on the site will remain intact with additional replacement planting. 10. Built-in furnishings, such as water features, fire pits, grills, and hot tubs, that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. No features will block the view of the historic building. 11. Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. Several large spruce trees exist on the property. The tree adjacent to the front door will remain unless it is found to be diseased. A second tree, located in the parking lot, will be removed with new development. The cluster of aspens along the front walkway will be thinned as necessary, and those with canker will be removed in accordance with an arborist review. 12. Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. The context for historic structures is the adjacent buildings which have been respected with modifications and new development. The urban pattern of the Main Street Historic District has improved since Lot 2(northern most lot) was previously not included in the Historic District and now would be with designation. 13. Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. No additional planting is proposed on the front side of the building facing Main Street. Aspen trees, located along the walkway, will be thinned as appropriate as they mature or are found to be diseased. 14. Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting. Exterior lighting within the existing building’s soffit are recessed cans. A vertical bollard light exists in the courtyard. These will remain and no additional lighting is proposed except on the new building, which will be porch lighting and if the patio space is used for food and beverage, will meet the lighting standards of the city. 15. Preserve original fences. Exhibit G | Application 77 33 There are no fences on the property. The fence along the property’s east side is located on the adjacent property. 16. When possible, replicate a missing historic fence based on photographic evidence. There was no fence on the property. 17. No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution. There was never any evidence of a fence in the front yard, and none is proposed. 18. When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type and style. Not applicable. 19. A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street. Not applicable. 20. Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of important features of a designated building. Not applicable. 21. Preserve original retaining walls. The only feature that might be considered a wall is the front planter wall which will not be changed. 22. When a new retaining wall is necessary, its height and visibility should be minimized. Not applicable. 23. Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Only small, isolated grading is proposed. 24. Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations. The large flagstone patio will remain as is. Its layout was modified in 1993 to facilitate circulation, but the same material was re-installed. 25. New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its built features. The new development is in a parking lot that was never considered a landscaped area. The existing building footprint will not be expanded. 26. Preserve the historic circulation system. The walkways and the driveway access remain the same as the historic use and design. 27. Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site. The large spruce tree at the entry will be preserved. The front area includes a manicured grass area which will not be altered. Chapter 2: Building Materials Exhibit G | Application 78 34 1. Preserve original building materials. The original materials on the building will be retained. Several small areas of the building will be rehabilitated to match the construction and materials. 2. The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. No change in the finish of existing materials is proposed. 3. Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. Where rehabilitation is to occur, best efforts will be made to match the material finishes. 4. Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials. Not applicable. 5. Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate. Not applicable. 6. Remove layers that cover the original material. Not applicable. Chapter 3: Windows 1. Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. Existing windows will remain. One new window is proposed to allow light into the lower level on the eastern side. This window will be near grade and match existing windows installed in 1996. 2. Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. The windows will not change. One additional light well window on the eastern side is proposed. 3. Match a replacement window to the original in its design. The proposed additional window will match existing windows. 4. When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original. This window will match the existing windows. 5. Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. No existing windows are proposed for modification. 6. Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. The new window will match the existing adjacent window. 7. Adding new openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed. The window proposed is near below and would be the companion to the existing adjacent window. 8. Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than replace a historic window. Not applicable. Exhibit G | Application 79 35 Chapter 4: Doors 1. Preserve historically significant doors. No change to the doors is proposed. 2. Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. No change to the size of the door or opening is proposed. 3. When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. Not applicable. 4. When replacing a door or screen door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the building. Not applicable. 5. Adding new doors on a historic building is generally not allowed. No new doors are proposed for the structure. 6. If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, use a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry door. Not applicable. 7. Preserve historic hardware. No change to hardware is proposed. Chapter 5: Porches & Balconies 1. Preserve an original porch or balcony. The rear deck and stairs were not included in the original design of the building and are proposed for removal. They will be replaced by a much smaller and less intrusive stair with 7.75” risers and 10” treads. The deck portion will remain as it covers the basement stairway. 2. Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details. The exterior covering of the building is not proposed to be changed. The rear deck was not original. 3. Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate. Not applicable. 4. If reconstruction is necessary, match the original in form, character, and detail. The re-construction of several damaged portions is included in the rehabilitation portion of the application. These will match the existing materials and finish. 5. If new steps are to be added, construct them out of the same primary materials used on the original, and design them to be in scale with the porch or balcony. Exhibit G | Application 80 36 The wooden stairs at the rear exit will be re-built. This is not an original part of the building and will be converted from wood to a metal stair to minimize the size and visual appearance of the stair. 6. Avoid adding handrails or guardrails where they did not exist historically, particularly where visible from the street. The wooden handrail at the rear steps will be replaced with a metal rail associated with the ladder steps. This is not visible from the street. Chapter 6: Architectural Details 1. Preserve significant architectural features. The building exterior will be retained except for the features identified in the plan set, in Appendix I. These features include rehabilitation, repair, and modification for at grade windows, the rear wooden deck, and the roof top mechanical screen. 2. When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. The areas to be repaired will use the same material to complete the rehabilitation. 3. Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. Minor repair is proposed for the soffit detail. 4. Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original designs. The original design intent will be honored in any replacement. 5. Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts. The integrity of the building is intact; therefore, no guessing is required. The replacement of any elements will be consistent with the original design. Chapter 7: Roofs 1. Preserve the original form of a roof. Not applicable. 2. Preserve the original eave depth. Not applicable. 3. Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. Mechanical equipment is proposed for the back portion of the roof. This will be screened and will be located on the northeast slope of the roof, away from Main Street. 4. New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color. The equipment on the roof will be painted a dark color and will be enclosed in a wooden visual screen. Exhibit G | Application 81 37 5. Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. Not applicable. 6. A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. Not applicable. 7. Preserve original roof materials. Not applicable and no change is proposed. 7. New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original. A new roof will be needed at some time in the future and when replaced, it will match the existing roof. 8. Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. Not applicable. 9. Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent possible The gutter system is designed to be internal to the eave. The original rainwater conveyance will be retained, but due to the icing of this system, heat tape will need to be included in the rehabilitation of the building. Exception to the energy code is requested for heat tape. Chapter 8: Secondary Structures 1. If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved. Not Applicable as there is no secondary structure. 2. Preserve a historic secondary building as a detached structure. Not applicable. 3. Do not add detailing or features to a secondary structure that are conjectural and not in keeping with its original character as a utilitarian structure. Not applicable 4. When adding on to a secondary structure, distinguish the addition as new construction and minimize removal of historic fabric. Not applicable. 5. Preserve the original building materials, or match in kind when necessary. Not applicable. 6. Preserve original door and window openings and minimize new openings. Not applicable. 7. If a new garage door is added, it must be compatible with the character of the historic structure. Not applicable. 8. Adaptation of an obsolete secondary structure to a functional use is encouraged. Exhibit G | Application 82 38 Not applicable. Chapter 9: Excavation, Building Relocation, & Foundations 1. Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place may help to preserve the historic fabric. Not applicable since not proposed. 2. Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Not applicable. 3. Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. Not applicable. 4. Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade. Not applicable. 5. A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. Not applicable. 6. Minimize the visual impact of lightwells. The proposed light well will be on the least visible corner of the building and will be below grade. The light well will be treated as a natural grade to the additional window. 7. All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in moving historic buildings or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such buildings. Not applicable. 8. Proposals to relocate a building to a new site are highly discouraged. Not applicable. Chapter 10: Building Additions 1. Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. Not applicable since there is no addition proposed. 2. A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. Not applicable. 3. Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. Not applicable. 4. The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. Not applicable. Exhibit G | Application 83 39 5. On a corner lot, no portion of an addition to a one story historic resource may be more than one story tall, directly behind that resource, unless completely detached above grade by a distance of at least 10 feet. Not applicable. 6. Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. Not applicable. 7. When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the street. Not applicable. 8. Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. Not applicable. 9. If the addition is taller than a historic building, set it back from significant façades and use a “connector” to link it to the historic building. Not applicable. The proposed new building is separate from the historic building. 10. Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. Not applicable. The proposed new building is separate from the historic building. 11. Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building. Not applicable. 12. Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. Not applicable. 13. When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of the historic building. Not applicable. 14. Set a rooftop addition back from the street facing façades to preserve the original profile of the historic resource. Not applicable. 15. The roof form of a rooftop addition must be in character with the historic building. Not applicable. End of the Historic guidelines for the existing building. Exhibit G | Application 84 40 Section 6.0 Major Subdivision Amendment 1. Proposed Amendment In 1993, the U.S. West Subdivision was created and included two lots. Lot 1 is the operations building and parking lot serving U.S. West. Lot 2 (2,520 s.f.) of the US West Subdivision is now owned by 120 E Main Street Partners, LLC and is used for parking. Because it is smaller than the minimum 3,000 s.f. lot size, it is a legal non-conforming lot. The existing Library Lot (8,800 s.f.) is made up of original Townsite lots M( eastern 20 feet), Lots N and O, and including ½ of the vacated alley. The proposal is to merge lot 2 and Library lot into a single lot by amending the existing subdivision. Upon completion, the new lot size will be 11,320 gross square feet. A draft Plat Amendment is included in Appendix I. Lot 1 is in the mixed-use zone while Lot 2 appears on the City’s official zoning map as being in R-6 zone. In the past, the property has been zoned as R-6, Public, Office, and Mixed Use. Zoning has been ambiguous because of the current mapping of the Mixed-Use zone boundary. Lot 2 has never been in the Main Street Historic District, but Lot 1 has been since the adoption of the 1976 ordnance. 2. Access to the Property Access to the property occurs via an access easement coming from Garmisch Street to the west property line. This was granted via quit claim deed by Pitkin County to 120 E Main Street Partners, LLC in 1996. This will continue to be used to access the property. Currently it is shared by two other properties and that condition is expected to remain. 3. Net Lot Area Calculation After Subdivision Amendment and Lot Merger The rear 10 feet area of Lot 1 and a 10-foot-wide strip of Lot 2 were part of the alley that was vacated in 1961 though the block. These are removed for the purpose of completing the Net Lot Area calculation. The calculation is as follows: 11,320 s.f. of gross lot area less vacated alley of 800 s.f. (from lot 1) less 900 s.f. (from Lot 2) = 9,620 s.f. of Net Lot Area. Exhibit G | Application 85 41 Section 7.0 Proposed Development and Associated Reviews 1. Proposed Residential Development The proposed residential program includes one 2- bedroom residential unit and one 1-bedroom unit on the property. One parking space per unit is provided for each residence in a carport configuration. The proposed building would include parking at a grade level, with the residential units located above. The design is almost identical to the adjacent 3-story carriage house, located to the east at 128 East Main (Sardy House). To the northwest, the Victorians at Bleeker, offers the same three- story configuration, with parking below and access from the access easement. Immediately to the west is 100 E Main St with a two-story mix of residential and medical offices. To the north is the operations building for Quest Communications with its parking area. Each unit would have a separate entry and deck space. The units are modestly sized and fulfill the objective of incorporating housing diversity in the neighborhood. As a detached building, they do not impact the historic values of the primary building. Main Street and the specific lots proposed for development have been in residential use for many decades, (see above photo of Main Street). Prior to the Library’s construction, residential buildings existed on the properties that eventually became the site of the old library. The City of Aspen has valued the creation of balanced neighborhoods and a sense of commonality between residents. The proposed residential development is consistent with this idea. At one point, as illustrated on the Sanborn maps, Main Street was a completely residential neighborhood, including the site upon which the Pitkin County Library was built. Even though some residential use has been converted to commercial use along Main Street, residential continues to front Main Street and also exist behind principal buildings on the street. Main Street has always contained residential as a primary use beginning in the earliest days of Aspen. Photography Credit Aspen Historical Society Exhibit G | Application 86 42 View of the preserved Old Pitkin County Library with the proposed residential building on the north side. Both lots were be merged and historic district boundary extended to the north to include all proposed development. The property sits adjacent to a highly used RFTA transit stop, downtown, childcare facilities, grocery stores, shops, parks, and the post office are within walking distance of the property. Future residents can expect to walk or take public transportation to almost any destination. A setback variance of 2-feet is requested on the north side of the property. This is a variance from the 5- foot rear yard setback. It is worth noting that six modular residential units, designed by Herbert Bayer, existed on the U.S. West parcel. They were later moved to the Boomerang Lodge to make up one of its three wings.2 The proposed development is a contemporary design, completely detached and located to the rear of the existing structure. It will feature metal standing seam roofing, various siding types and generous south facing windows. Materials are intentionally differentiated from existing and adjacent buildings. Materials are noted on the Plan Set, Appendix I. Architectural forms are consistent with the existing neighborhood. A single gable roof and unpretentious exterior fit the design guidelines. Exterior details include stained wood, painted composite siding, soffits with wood finish (as seen on the existing building), and thin frame windows. Covered stairways and porches add protection from wind, snow, and ice. Decks are proposed at either end of the building and have southern exposure. The decks are very suitable spaces for outdoor living. Entries to the units also include the mechanical equipment space at the ground level for each unit. A trash enclosure is located on the east side, servicing the existing building and the residential units. The calculation of the proposed net livable floor area is: 2 This account is from a conversation with Fonda Patterson, former owner of the Boomerang Lodge. (October 2023) Exhibit G | Application 87 43 Proposed Net Livable Floor Area Calculation Unit 1 1,114.9 s.f. of floor area Unit 2 725.5 s.f. of floor area Total Net Livable Floor Area 1,840.4 s.f. of floor area The residential units span parking that accommodates residential and commercial use. The roof is a simple gable form with modern materials and entrances which face Main Street. 2. Review of Historic Preservation Guidelines for New Buildings on Landmark Properties Chapter 11: New Buildings on Landmarked Properties 11.1 Orient the new building to the street. The detached new development is oriented to the street and remains consistent with the orientation of the original alley, Main Street, and Bleeker Street from the original Townsite Plan. The street orientation is via a courtyard that forms around the entry of the building, facing the street. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. Exhibit G | Application 88 44 Entry to Unit 1 includes the street facing door under the building overhang. The entry is visible from Main Street. The front porch of Unit 2 is located at the top of the entry stairs but due to mature trees, is not visible from Main Street. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic buildings on a parcel. The new development is proposed on lot 2 that is currently not designated as Landmark and not located within the Main Street Historic District. The idea is derived from adjacent historic carriage house forms found in the neighborhood. The building in the rear is one-third the size of the existing building. The proportion of the existing building is Wrightian style, characterized by horizontal lines with cantilevered broad eaves and a shallow pitched roof. In deference to the historic nature of the existing building, the proposed building is purposely different in character as a reflection of the time in which it will be constructed. However, the proportions and scale are similar: the building’s height, sloped roof, multiple vertical windows, and orientation to the south are derived from the existing building. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. The front elevation maintains a similar height and mass apart from a carport located on the ground level. The addition of a carport is advantageous because it provides covered, and partially hidden parking, and re-uses of space that does not contribute to the vitality of the neighborhood. 11.5 The intent of the historic landmark lot split is to remove most of the development potential from the historic resource and place it in the new structure(s). A historic lot split is not proposed. 11.6 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its time. In deference to the historic nature of the existing building, the proposed building is purposely different in character as a reflection of the current time. The new building will be of simple design and constructed of durable materials. 11.7 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. In deference to the historic nature of the existing building, the proposed building is purposely different in character. The proposed building pays homage to the existing building as the architectural ‘gem’ on Main Street. As such, it is meant to be less visible and a more neutral style. Chapter 12: Accessibility, Architectural Lighting, Mechanical Equipment, Service Areas, & Signage 12.1 Address accessibility compliance requirements while preserving character defining features of historic buildings and districts. Several accessibility variances have been requested in rehabilitation of the existing building. Existing multi-level are a challenge to provide access to second tier tenant spaces. On the Exhibit G | Application 89 45 walkway, leveling of the existing stone walkway will occur. The new development will comply with applicable codes. 12.2 Original light fixtures must be maintained. When there is evidence as to the appearance of original fixtures that are no longer present, a replication is appropriate. There are no changes to the original lighting design or fixtures. Replication of the lighting is not required. As a potential outdoor gathering/eating area, the courtyard would require additional lighting consisting of low-level site fixtures. 12.3 Exterior light fixtures should be simple in character. Any new patio lighting would be consistent in design and unobtrusive to the patio space. On the newly proposed residential building, there would be porch lighting and wall-mounted down- lighting fixtures for deck areas. In the carports, ceiling mounted fixtures would allow for minimal illumination. 12.4 Minimize the visual impacts of utilitarian areas, such as mechanical equipment and trash storage. The proposed trash enclosure is at the rear and is serviced from the access easement. An enclosure will match the existing adjacent fence design. Mechanical equipment will be located on the roof. The best location for the two 4’x4’ exhaust units is on top of the northeast facing roof, a location that is not visible from Main Street. A visual screen to hide the equipment is proposed. The equipment will be painted a dark grey color. See Appendix I. 2.4 Awnings must be functional. No awnings are proposed. 2.5 Signs should not obscure or damage historic building fabric. A small sign exists on the building that would remain. A free-standing commercial sign to identify tenants is proposed on the Main Street portion of the patio area. The lettering and logo will not exceed 12” and 18” respectively. The signage standards will be followed for the sign as noted above. See 12.6, 12.7 and 12.8 below. 2.6 Sign lighting must be subtle and concealed. Lighting proposed for the free-standing sign will be concealed, will not produce glare, and will not exceed 0.3 footcandles of brightness on the sign per 26.510.070. 12.7 Locate signs to be subordinate to the building design. A building identification sign is proposed in the landscape. The new sign would not exceed 6 s.f. of surface area and would not be more than 6 feet in height per signage section 26.510.060. The sign material would be wood, glass, metal, or stone. 12.8 Preserve historic signs. The sign, which consists of 6” metal mounted letters, will remain on the front of the building. Exhibit G | Application 90 46 3. Special Review of the Parking Plan The parking plan for the building was approved in 1993 and included 14 spaces plus a cash-in-lieu payment. The existing approved parking plan (P and Z approval 1993) acknowledges that the dimensional standards of several spaces do not meet the standards, but the plan was workable for the use. Parking on site prevented cars from spilling over into the adjacent residential neighborhood and the plan has functioned reasonably well for the past thirty years. Accommodating parking on site to reduce the parking in surrounding neighborhoods remains true today. A total of ten parking spaces are proposed on the property. Two of the spaces are for residential units and the remaining eight spaces serve the existing commercial use, one of which is an ADA space. Two of the spaces for commercial use are tandem. The calculation of parking need is as follows: Parking Requirements Minimum Maximum Commercial 1 space per 1,000 sq ft of net leasable space 1.25 space per 1,000 sq ft of net leasable space Free-Market Residential 1 space per unit 1.25 space per unit Proposed Parking Minimum Maximum 6,428.20 sq ft commercial net leasable 6.4 spaces 8.0 spaces 2 residential units 2 spaces 2.5 Spaces Total Required 8.4 spaces 10.5 spaces Total Proposed 10 spaces This portion of the application requests Special Review of the parking configuration as proposed on the site plan with the total of ten parking spaces, of which two are tandem spaces. Two of the proposed parking spaces do not meet a 24-foot-wide two-way driving aisle. Due to the existence of lower-level stairs, a total of twenty feet is available to accommodate these two parking stalls. Since this isn’t a flow though parking aisle, the need for the standard backup space is not pressing as cars can maneuver at a slower pace than in standard parking lots. The standards require 8.5-foot X 18-foot space with a 24-foot backup aisle (Engineering standards Title 29, Section 4.4.1.). Spaces that meet this standard are proposed along with a 20-24’ back up aisle. Retaining these existing spaces is essential for the owner’s willingness to designate the property. 4. Growth Management and Mitigation for Proposed Development The net livable area of the proposed free market units is 1,840.4 sf. Pursuant to section 26.470.100.f, the housing mitigation required would be1.38 FTEs, and a required Cash-in-Lieu payment of $563,662. The calculation is as follows: Exhibit G | Application 91 47 Housing Mitigation Calculation Total New Free-Market Net Livable Area 1,840.4 sq ft 30% mitigation 552.12 sq ft Conversion to FTEs at 1 FTE per 400 sq ft 1.38 FTEs Cash-in-Lieu for Category 2 $408,362 Total Cash-in-Lieu payment due $563,662 The owners propose the Cash-in-Lieu payment be made based on the sale of the ten TDRs. This would result in a cash payment to the city of $56,366 beginning when the housing is triggered by the construction of the residential units, and tied to the TDRs when they are sold over time. The payments will be installments linked to the pace of the TDRs sales. 5. Proposed Floor Area Calculation As proposed, the following new floor area calculation would apply: Proposed Development Existing Building 4,563.6 sq ft New Residential Floor Area 2,481.9 sq ft Proposed Trash Enclosure Floor Area 96 sq ft TDRs (10 at 250 sq ft each) 2,500 sq ft Total Unused Development Rights (1:1) 75 sq ft Total Unused Development Rights (1.25:1) 2,383.5 sq ft Section 8.0 Development Standards and Stormwater Management 1. Utilities The public utilities corridor in the former alley (now access easement/driveway) contains underground electrical, communications services. The utilities generally route to the transformer that is in the easement, which then serves the surrounding properties. In 2022, the transformer was upgraded to a larger size. Service lines to the Victorians at Blecker are located at the northern property boundary edge. They are not in an easement and will need to be relocated for the proposed residential use. The electrical service line to the 120 E. Main building is routed though the proposed development site and will also be relocated. 2. Stormwater Management Storm water management calculations and plan are in Appendix J. The only new impervious coverage proposed is located at the eastern edge of the proposed building since the site was paved for parking. The main method to manage drainage is to direct water into drywells. The area of disturbance is approximately 2,200 s.f. of surface area, which is less than 25% of the property. 3. Trash and Recycling A wooden fence will enclose a trash and recycling area that is accessible from Garmisch Street. This will require a special review since there is no alley for the property. The enclosure will hold two 3-cubic-yard Exhibit G | Application 92 48 dumpsters which will be rolled into the parking aisle and recycling bins. These bins will serve both the existing building and the proposed new development. 4. Landscape and Patio Space The patio will remain as is but may be used for outdoor dining with a restaurant tenant. The sidewalk leading to the front door will remain, constructed with the original sandstone slabs. One tree spruce tree will be removed for the residential development and 2 others for tree health. Other trees on the parcel may also need to be removed for insect control. A mitigation fee waiver is requested as a benefit. 5. Transportation Impact Analysis The city requires transportation impacts be mitigated through the Transportation Impact Analysis process. The completed TIA is in the Appendix and the scoring for reduction of trips is calculated. To mitigate these trips, new bike racks are proposed as an MMLOS measure. Given the uses on the lot, no TDM measures are proposed at this time. A total of 1.6 trips are estimated to be generated by the new residential units, and the proposed mitigation measures are calculated in the city’s tool as mitigating 5 trips. As a building that is located immediately adjacent to the Paepcke Park bus stop, the owners have previously granted a permanent easement to the city and RFTA to utilize the property to improve the bus stop. Given these past commitments, the owners request the provision of the MMLOS strategy of bike parking as the complete commitment and requirement for this code requirement. See Appendix M. 6. Engineering Review of Hazards Roaring Fork Engineering completed an assessment of the site for hazards as required by the Code. In summary, there was no evidence of flooding, unstable or steep slopes, faults, avalanches, or other hazards. The assessment narrative is included in Appendix J. 7. School Dedication Under section 26.620.060, there is a school dedication calculated by the number of students that are generated by the development. The applicant has calculated the school land dedication which is: 1,200 s.f. of floor area x .000064 =.0768 students 1,281.9 s.f. of floor area x.000404 =0.518 students Total …. 0.5948 students generated by development .5948 students x standard of land of $896 s.f. x $400 per s.f. of land x 33% fee factor = $70,348.19. Cash in Lieu payment. The compilation of this application has thoroughly considered the historical significance of the neighborhood within the larger community, the true value of the building as an iconic representation of AspenModern on Main Street, and the possibility for its’ preservation. In addition, the owners have considered the future of the property if voluntary designation is not completed. While demolition of the existing building in favor of a large re-development project utilizing the available floor area is certainly possible, we know the vision of a development that is compatible with the neighborhood, combined Exhibit G | Application 93 49 with Landmark Designation to protect a historically significant architectural icon on Main Street, is a preferred alternative. It is our sincere hope that this application brings forward the value and historic character of the property, its location, and immediacy to act in favor of its preservation. We look forward to reviewing the application with Community Development Staff, Planning and Zoning, and the City Council. Best Regards, Design Workshop, Inc Jessica Garrow, FAICP (970) 925-8354 Richard Shaw and Kurt Culbertson Managers 120 East Main Street Partners (970)-710-9539 Exhibit G | Application 94 50 Appendix of Documents A. Land Use Application and Fee Agreement B. Title Policy C. Legal Description D. List of Adjacent Property Owners E. Authorization to Represent F. Homeowners Association Compliance Policy G. Pre-Application Checklist H. Vicinity Map I. Plan Set a. Existing Conditions Survey b. Existing Lots and Easements c. Proposed Site Plan d. Proposed Site Plan Overlay on Existing Conditions e. Map of Area to be Designated f. Modifications to Exterior of the Existing Building g. Architectural Floor Plans h. Architectural Elevations i. Verification of Existing Floor Area j. Sketches of the Proposed Project k. Proposed Materials l. Draft Subdivision Plat J. Engineers Report including Hazards and Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan K. Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) L. Affidavit of Owner Concerning the Deed Restriction Exhibit G | Application 95 Exhibit G | Application 96 Exhibit G | Application 97 Exhibit G | Application 98 Exhibit G | Application 99 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part I (Requirements) Order Number: ABS62013660-4 All of the following Requirements must be met: This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. 1. RELEASE OF DEED OF TRUST DATED JUNE 01, 2017 FROM 120 E. MAIN PARTNERS LTD. LIABILITY CO., A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AKA 120 EAST MAIN PARTNERS, LTD. LIABILITY CO., A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TO THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF PITKIN COUNTY FOR THE USE OF ALPINE BANK, A COLORADO BANKING CORPORATION TO SECURE THE SUM OF $2,650,000.00 RECORDED JULY 12, 2017, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 639841. SAID DEED OF TRUST WAS FURTHER SECURED BY ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS RECORDED JULY 12, 2017, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 639842. 2. A FULL COPY OF THE FULLY EXECUTED OPERATING AGREEMENT AND ANY AND ALL AMENDMENTS THERETO FOR 120 E. MAIN PARTNERS, LTD. LIABILITY CO., A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY MUST BE FURNISHED TO LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY. SAID AGREEMENT MUST DISCLOSE WHO MAY CONVEY, ACQUIRE, ENCUMBER, LEASE OR OTHERWISE DEAL WITH INTERESTS IN REAL PROPERTY FOR SAID ENTITY. NOTE: ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS MAY BE NECESSARY UPON REVIEW OF THIS DOCUMENTATION. 3. DULY EXECUTED AND ACKNOWLEDGED STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY SETTING FORTH THE NAME OF 120 E. MAIN PARTNERS, LTD. LIABILITY CO., A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AS A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY. THE STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY MUST STATE UNDER WHICH LAWS THE ENTITY WAS CREATED, THE MAILING ADDRESS OF THE ENTITY, AND THE NAME AND POSITION OF THE PERSON(S) AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE INSTRUMENTS CONVEYING, ENCUMBERING, OR OTHERWISE AFFECTING TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY ON BEHALF OF THE ENTITY AND OTHERWISE COMPLYING WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 38-30-172, CRS. NOTE: THE STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY MUST BE RECORDED WITH THE CLERK AND RECORDER. Exhibit G | Application 100 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part I (Requirements) Order Number: ABS62013660-4 All of the following Requirements must be met: 4. WARRANTY DEED FROM 120 E. MAIN PARTNERS LTD. LIABILITY CO., A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AKA 120 EAST MAIN PARTNERS, LTD. LIABILITY CO., A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TO A BUYER TO BE DETERMINED CONVEYING SUBJECT PROPERTY. NOTE: ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS OR EXCEPTIONS MAY BE NECESSARY WHEN THE BUYERS NAMES ARE ADDED TO THIS COMMITMENT. COVERAGES AND/OR CHARGES REFLECTED HEREIN, IF ANY, ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE UPON RECEIPT OF THE CONTRACT TO BUY AND SELL REAL ESTATE AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: ABS62013660-4 This commitment does not republish any covenants, condition, restriction, or limitation contained in any document referred to in this commitment to the extent that the specific covenant, conditions, restriction, or limitation violates state or federal law based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 1. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 2. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 3. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and 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. Exhibit G | Application 101 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 of the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 7. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water. 8. EXISTING LEASES AND TENANCIES, IF ANY. (AFFECTS BOTH PARCELS) 9. RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE DEEDS FROM THE CITY OF ASPEN RECORDED IN BOOK 23 AT PAGE 20, BOOK 23 AT PAGE 105 AND IN BOOK 59 AT PAGE 14, 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. 10. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 2, SERIES OF 1961 RECORDED MAY 1, 1961 IN BOOK 194 AT PAGE 7. 11. TERMS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS OF EASEMENTS AND RIGHT OF WAY AS SET FORTH IN DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 202 AT PAGE 429 AND DEED RECORDED APRIL 25, 1996 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 392094. 12. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 88-6 RECORDED MAY 30, 1989 IN BOOK 593 AT PAGE 529. 13. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE 60, SERIES OF 1976 RECORDED DECEMBER 9, 1976 IN BOOK 321 AT PAGE 51. 14. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 15, SERIES OF 1990 RECORDED DECEMBER 11, 1990 IN BOOK 635 AT PAGE 806. 15. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED JUNE 05, 1991 IN BOOK 647 AT PAGE 767 AND SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT RECORDED MAY 12, 1992 IN BOOK 677 AT PAGE 530. 16. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 12, SERIES OF 1992 RECORDED AUGUST 31, 1992 IN BOOK 687 AT PAGE 468. Exhibit G | Application 102 17. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 82, SERIES OF 1992 RECORDED JANUARY 27, 1993 IN BOOK 702 AT PAGE 123. 18. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF EASEMENT RECORDED NOVEMBER 19, 1996 AT RECEPTION NO. 399186. (ITEMS 9-17 AFFECT PARCEL A) 19. RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE DEED FROM THE CITY OF ASPEN RECORDED IN BOOK 59 AT PAGE 14 AND BOOK 55 AT PAGE 550, 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. 20. TERMS AND POWER AND SEWER EASEMENTS OF DEED RECORDED JANUARY 31, 1961 IN BOOK 193 AT PAGE 89. 21. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 2, SERIES OF 1961 RECORDED MAY 1, 1961 IN BOOK 194 AT PAGE 7. 22. EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY AND OTHER MATTERS AS SET FORTH IN MAP OF SUBJECT PROPERTY RECORDED ON JULY 12, 1993 IN PLAT BOOK 32 AT PAGE 11. 23. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE NO.82, SERIES OF 1992 RECORDED JANUARY 27, 1993 IN BOOK 702 AT PAGE 123. 24. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT RECORDED JULY 13, 1993 IN BOOK 717 AT PAGE 485. (ITEMS 19-24 AFFECT PARCEL B) Land Title Guarantee Company Disclosure Statements Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: 1. The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district. 2. A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in which the real property is located or that county treasurer's authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides written instructions to the Exhibit G | Application 103 contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real property). 3. The 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: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that, the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or filing information at the top margin of the document. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: 1. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. 2. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. 3. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and material-men's liens. 4. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. 5. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owner's policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface estate, in Schedule B-2. Exhibit G | Application 104 1. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and 2. That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of Regulatory Agencies. Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction. Note: Pursuant to CRS 24-21-514.5, Colorado notaries may remotely notarize real estate deeds and other documents using real-time audio-video communication technology. You may choose not to use remote notarization for any document. Joint Notice of Privacy Policy of Land Title Guarantee Company Land Title Guarantee Company of Summit County Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurancy Company This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company as agent for Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized access to your non-public personal information ("Personal Information"). In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from: Exhibit G | Application 105 • applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web-based transaction management system; • your transactions with, or from the services being performed by us, our affiliates, or others; • a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction; and • The public records maintained by governmental entities that we obtain either directly from those entities, or from our affiliates and non-affiliates. Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows: • We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products and services to you. • We may share your Personal Information with affiliated contractors or service providers who provide services in the course of our business, but only to the extent necessary for these providers to perform their services and to provide these services to you as may be required by your transaction. • We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. • Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action. • We regularly assess security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal Information. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT STATED ABOVE OR PERMITTED BY LAW. Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. Commitment For Title Insurance Issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company NOTICE IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. Exhibit G | Application 106 THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. . COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, a Minnesota corporation (the “Company”), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS 1. “Knowledge” or “Known”: Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records. 2. “Land”: The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term “Land” does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. 3. “Mortgage”: A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law. 4. “Policy”: Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. 5. “Proposed Insured”: Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. 6. “Proposed Policy Amount”: Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. 7. “Public Records”: Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. 8. “Title”: The estate or interest described in Schedule A. 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. 3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: 1. the Notice; 2. the Commitment to Issue Policy; 3. the Commitment Conditions; 4. Schedule A; 5. Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and 6. Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and 7. a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. 4. COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of Exhibit G | Application 107 the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY 1. The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured’s good faith reliance to: i. comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; ii. eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or iii. acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. 2. The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. 3. The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. 4. The Company’s liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. 5. The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any. 6. In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. 7. In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy. 6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT 1. Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment. 2. Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. 3. Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. 4. The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. 5. Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company. 6. When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy. 7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8. PRO-FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9. ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/arbitration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Land Title Insurance Corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A to be valid when countersigned by a validating officer or other authorized signatory. Exhibit G | Application 108 Issued by: Land Title Guarantee Company 3033 East First Avenue Suite 600 Denver, Colorado 80206 303-321-1880 Craig B. Rants, Senior Vice President This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Prevent fraud -Please call a member of our closing team for wire transfer instructions or to initiate a wire transfer. Note that our wiring instructions will never change. Exhibit G | Application 109 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The legal description for this parcel is: PARCEL A: THE EASTERLY 20 FEET OF LOT M, ALL OF LOTS OF N AND O, BLOCK 66 AND THE SOUTHERLY 10 FEET OF THE VACATED ALLEY THROUGH THE BLOCK ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO SAID LOTS N AND O AND THE EASTERLY 20 FEET OF LOT M, BLOCK 66, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. The legal description for this parcel is: PARCEL B: LOT 2, US WEST SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED JULY 13, 1993 IN PLAT BOOK 32 AT PAGE 11. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. Exhibit G | Application 110 Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. The information maintained by the County may not be complete as to mineral estate ownership and that information should be determined by separate legal and property analysis. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. From Parcel: 273512438002 on 12/18/2023 Instructions: Disclaimer: http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com Exhibit G | Application 111 100 EAST MAIN STREET CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 100 E MAIN ST 114 EAST BLEEKER STREET ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 114 E BLEEKER ST 120 EAST MAIN PARTNERS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 120 E MAIN ST 134 E BLEEKER LLC ASPEN , CO 81611 415 LACET LN 1543 LLC DENVER, CO 80202 1543 WAZEE ST #400 201 EAST MAIN STREET LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 625 E MAIN ST UNIT 102B #401 202 E MAIN ST LLC NASHVILLE, TN 37204 1138 BROOKMEADE DR 208 MAIN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 312 AABC #D 208 MAIN STREET CONDO OWNERS ASSOCIATION ASPEN, CO 81611 208 E MAIN ST #102 209 EAST BLEEKER LLC PACIFIC PALISADES, CA 90272 1600 SAN REMO DR ASPEN COMM UNITED METHODIST CHURCH ASPEN, CO 81611 200 E BLEEKER ST ASPEN CORNER OFFICE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 200 E MAIN ST B G & N ASPEN LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 1045 BTRSARDY LLC PALO ALTO , CA 94306 PO BOX 61239 CARVER RUTH A REV TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 116 S ASPEN ST CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 427 RIO GRANDE PL CRAWFORD RANDALL & ABIGAIL ASPEN, CO 81611 124 N GARMISCH ST DIRE WOLF LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 100 E MAIN ST # 1 DOMINGUE FAMILY TRUST WINTER PARK, FL 32790 PO BOX 2293 EGGHEAD LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 180 HEATHER LN ELLERMAN JEFFREY S & PAMELA C DALLAS, TX 75205 4012 MIRAMAR AVE FLEMING KIMBERLY PAIGE ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 2869 GARCIA STEVEN J ASPEN, CO 81611 120 N GARMISCH GSW FAMILY INV LP LANCASTER, PA 17601 1320 HUNSICKER RD HANOVER ASPEN LLC WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 PO BOX 481 HAYMAX LODGING LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 HERRON LLC HOUSTON, TX 77006 1627 SOUTH BLVD HODES ALAN & DEBORAH AVENTURA , FL 33180 19951 NE 39TH PLACE HOGUET CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 118 E BLEEKER ST HOGUET CONSTANCE M NEW YORK, NY 10065 333 E 68TH ST Exhibit G | Application 112 KELLY BRIAN ASPEN, CO 81611 105 E BLEEKER ST LORENZ KATHERINE ASPEN, CO 81611 101 BLEEKER ST #A OVERFLOW PAD THREE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 101 S MILL ST #200 PARDUBA JIRI ASPEN, CO 81612 116 N GARMISCH ST PEARCE BERNARD D ASPEN, CO 81611 216 E MAIN ST PEARCE RICHARD B ASPEN, CO 81611 216 E MAIN ST RODNEY JOHN W BASALT , CO 81621 20 RIVER OAKS LANE RYAN DAWN ASPEN, CO 81611 215 N GARMISCH ST TARADA LLC VIENNA , VA 221822737 8045 LEESBURG PIKE #230 TARVER CHARLES ASPEN, CO 81611 128 N GARMISCH TIRPAK BRADLEY ASPEN, CO 81611 101 BLEEKER ST #A VICTORIANS AT BLEEKER CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 101 E BLEEKER ST Exhibit G | Application 113 AUTHORIZATION TO REPRESENT As applicant, 120 E Main Street Partners LLC, designates Design Workshop to represent us in this City of Aspen Land Use process. By: Date: December 18, 2023 Title: Principal Exhibit G | Application 114 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. Exhibit G | Application 115 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. APPLICATION CHECKLIST: Below is a list of submittal requirements. Please email the entire application as one pdf to kirsten.armstrong@aspen.gov. The fee will be requested after the application is determined to be complete. Completed Land Use Application and signed Fee Agreement Pre-application Conference Summary (this document). Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application. Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. HOA Compliance form (attached). List of adjacent property owners within 300’ for public hearing. An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. Site improvement survey (no more than 1 year old) showing all existing conditions including topography and vegetation, certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. A written description of the proposal (scope of work) and written explanation of how the proposed development complies with the review standards and design guidelines relevant to the application. A proposed site plan showing setbacks and property boundaries. Scaled drawings of existing and proposed structure(s) or addition(s) depicting their form, including their height, massing, scale, proportions and roof plan; and the primary features of all elevations. Existing and proposed elevations should clearly show areas of change. Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding the designated historic property including photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location and extent of proposed work. The net livable square footage of each residential unit in the development. If applicable, the conditions under which reductions from net minimum livable square footage requirements are requested according to APCHA guidelines. Proposed Category Designation of sale or rental restriction for each unit in the development. Proposed employees housed by the affordable housing unit in increments of no less than one one-hundredth (0.01) according to according to Section 26.470.050(d) (Table 4, FTEs Housed). A mobility plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 26.515 of the Aspen Municipal Code. For Voluntary Landmark Designation the following items will need to be submitted in addition to the items listed above: A map indicating the boundaries of the historic designation. Historic property description, including narrative text, photographs and/or other graphic materials that document its physical characteristics. Written description of how the property meets the criteria for designation. Written description of historic preservation benefits which the property owner request be awarded at the time of designation, and relationship to Section 26.415.010, Purpose and Intent of the historic preservation program. For Major Subdivision Amendment the following items will need to be submitted in addition to the items listed above: A draft plat meeting the plat requirements of Chapter 26.490—Approval Documents. A statement prepared by a Colorado registered Professional Engineer, and depiction or mapping as necessary, regarding the presence of natural or man-made hazards affecting the property, including flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snow slide areas, slopes in Exhibit G | Application 116 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. excess of thirty percent (30%), and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Areas with slopes in excess of thirty percent (30%) shall require a slope stability study reviewed by the Colorado Geologic Survey. Also see Chapter 29—Engineering Design Standards regarding identification and mitigation of natural hazards. A narrative prepared by a Colorado registered Professional Engineer, and depiction or mapping as necessary, describing the potential infrastructure upgrades, alignment, design, and mitigation techniques that may be necessary for development of the site to be served by public infrastructure, achieve compliance with Municipal Code Title 29—Engineering Design Standards, and achieve compliance with the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The information shall be of sufficient detail to determine the acceptable location(s) and extent of development and to understand the necessary upgrades and the possible alignments, designs, or mitigation techniques that may be required. Specific engineered solutions and design details do not need to be submitted for land use review. An applicant may be required to submit specific design solutions prior to or in conjunction with recordation of a subdivision plat and development agreement, pursuant to Chapter 26.490—Approval Documents. A statement regarding School Land Dedication requirements of Section 26.620.060 and a description of any lands to be dedicated to meet the standard. An analysis of the new proposed, merged lot – depicting net lot area, allowable floor area per underlying zoning For Conceptual the following items will need to be submitted in addition to the items listed above: Graphics identifying preliminary selection of primary exterior building materials. A preliminary stormwater design. For Final the following items will need to be submitted in addition to the items listed above: Drawings of the street facing facades must be provided at ¼” scale. Final selection of all exterior materials and sample or clearly illustrated photographs. A lighting plan and landscape plan, including any visible stormwater mitigation features. Exhibit G | Application 117 120 E MAIN STREET | VICINITY MAP E Main Stre e t N Aspen StreetN Garmisch StreetPaepcke Pa r kProject LocationExhibit G | Application 118 Exhibit G | Application119 X X XXDD120 EAST MAINSINGLE STORY BRICKWITH BASEMENT8800 S.F.±FLAGSTONE WALKAND PATIOASPHALT DRIVEWAYAND PARKINGCONCRETE WALKWOODDECKRIP-RAPRIP-RAPWINDOW WELL48.90'80.90'48.90'80.90'N 75°09'11" W 80.00'S 14°5 0 ' 4 9 " W 1 1 0 . 0 0 'S 75°09'11" E 80.00'N 14°50'49" E 110.00'128 EAST MAINBTRSARDY LLCW 10' LOT MLOT 2 US WEST SUB.PER PLAT BOOK 32 PAGE 112520 S.F.±BASI S O F B E A R I N G SCONCRETERINGPLANTERX ASPHALTX X X X X X X X XACACFENCE MECHANICALENCLOSUREDDDXXXXXGUARD RAIL DILAPIDATEDCONCRETECONCRETEPAD WITH UTILITYMANHOLESMAIN STREET ASPHALT100' RIGHT OF WAYCONCRETE CURB AND GUTTERCONCRETE WALKDRAIN GRATERIM = 7896.44'COCOBBBBBOLLARD(TYPICAL)CLEANOUT(TYPICAL)#5 REBAR &YELLOW PLASTICCAP PLS#2376FOUND .20'BELOW GROUND1.34' WITNESSPK & SHINERPLS 25947FOUND FLUSHTBM EL=7896.49'#5 REBARAND PLASTIC CAPILLEGIBLE FOUND.10' BELOW GROUND#5 REBAR ANDPLASTIC CAPPLS #28643 1 'WITNESS CORNERFOUND .15' ABOVE GROUNDCABLEPEDESTAL(TYPICAL)CABLE TVPEDESTALELECTRICTRANSFORMERFENC E ( T Y P I C A L )LIGHTPOLEELECTRICPEDESTALADJOINERBUILDINGN 75°09'11" W 90.00'N 14° 5 0 ' 4 9 " E 2 8 . 0 0 'S 14°50'49" W28.00'#5 REBARAND YELLOW PLASTICCAP PLS# 37935TO BE SET#5 REBARAND YELLOW PLASTICCAP PLS# 37935TO BE SET#5 REBARAND YELLOW PLASTICCAP PLS# 37935TO BE SETPK AND SHINERPLS# 37935TO BE SETE 20' LOT MLOT NLOT O ADJOINERBUILDINGWINDOWWELL13.9'9.8'15.2'21.2'LOT KLOT L 10'5'5'10' LOT P LOT CLOT DLOT ELOT F VICTORIANS ATBLEEKER PLATBK 43 PG 16ACCESS, UTILITY AND EMERGENCYEASEMENTPER BK 202 PG 429BK 647 PG 767WVPPWATER VALVELOT 1 US WEST SUBDIVISIONPER PLAT BK 32 PG 11ADJOINERBUILDING10' FRONT SETBACK5' SID E S E T B A C K 5' SIDE SETBACK 5' REAR SETBACK100 EAST MAINSTREET CONDOSPLAT BK 120 PG 7BRICK WALLSTEPSAPPROX. LOCATIONOF RFTA 5'X3'EASEMENTPER BK 593 PG 529EASEMENT PERREC. NO. 399186PERMANENT POWER &SEWER EASEMENT PERBK 193 PG 8910.00'DDRAIN GRATERIM = 7895.25'NO PARKINGAND BUS STOPSIGN (TYPICAL)WWWWWWWWCTVCTV CTV W W WWW CTVCTVCTVCTV CTV CTV CTVCTV CTVCTVCTVCTVSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UECTV CTV CTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX- U E EX- U E EX-UE TTEX-UE EX-UE EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UET T TTTTTTTT TTTTTTTTTTT TTTTTTT TTTTEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UETTTTTT TTTTTGDSTORM MANHOLERIM = 7894.71'DRAIN GRATERIM = 7896.60'TELEPHONEPEDESTAL(TYPICAL)UNDERGROUNDELECTRIC (TYP.)UNDERGROUNDTELEPHONE (TYP.)UNDERGROUNDCABLE TV (TYP.)UNDERGROUNDGAS (TYP.)UNDERGROUNDSEWER (TYP.)UNDERGROUNDWATER (TYP.)COCLEANOUTRIDGEEL = 7915.77'CHIMNEYEL = 7918.88'STONE PATHSTONE PATH BRICK PAVERPARKINGCONCRETEBORDEREGELECTRICMETERGASMETERLOWER LEVEL LANDINGEL = 7890.75'WOOD DECKABOVESTAIRWELLT1T2T3T4T5T7T6T8T9T10T11T12T13T14T15T17T18T19T20T21T22T23T24T25T26T27T16T28T29T30T31T32T33T34T35T36T37PLANTERPLAN T E RDYHWALL MOUNTFIRE HYDRANTCONCRETE WALKBUIL D I N G O V E R H A N G BUILDING OVERHANG BUILDING OVERHANGBUILDINGOVERHANGBRICKPLANTERUNIT GPARKINGSPACE PERVICTORIANSAT BLEEKERPLAT BK 43PG 16T38BENCH7896.947897.56'7896.32'7896.08'7896.75'7896.60'7896.48'7897.02'7896.65'7896.63'7896.97'7896.86'7896.80'7896.93'7896.70'7896.34'7895.05'7900.1'7900.1'7900.5'SS7895789679007897 78967897NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTIONBASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRSTDISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT INTHIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THECERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.ByNO.DateProject NO.RevisionDrawn By:Checked By:Date:Computer File:P.O. Box 1746Rifle, CO 81650Phone (970) 625-1954Fax (970) 579-7150www.peaksurveyinginc.comSNWEPeak Surveying, Inc.Est. 2007211531 OF 1120 E. MAIN PARTNERS LTD.CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADOIMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT120 E. MAIN/LOT2 US WEST SUB.120 EAST MAIN STREET - ASPENSFJRNDEC. 20, 2021153 DWG1 12/29/22UPDATE SURVEYJRN211/01/2023UPDATE SURVEY, ADD TOPO & UTILITIESSMSIMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYA PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN LOTS M, N AND O AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE ALLEY, BLOCK 66 OF THE ORIGINAL TOWNSITE OF ASPEN AND LOT 2, US WEST SUBDIVISIONRECORDED JULY26, 1993 IN PLAT BOOK 32 PAGE 11CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADONESW0306090120150180210240270300330P e ak S urveying, Inc.0101020405PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONPARCEL A: THE EASTERLY 20 FEET OF LOT M, ALL OF LOTS N AND O,BLOCK 66 AND THE SOUTHERLY 10 FEET OF THE VACATED ALLEYTHROUGH THE BLOCK ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO SAID LOTS NAND O AND THE EASTERLY 20 FEET OF LOT , BLOCK 66, COUNTY OFPITKIN COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADOPARCEL B: LOT 2, US WEST SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLATTHEREOF RECORDED JULY 13, 1993 IN PLAT BOOK 32 AT PAGE 11 COUNTYOF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADONOTES:1) THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS, BUILDINGSETBACKS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD, OR IN PLACE AND EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE SHOWN INTHE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, ORDER NO.ABS62014831, DATED EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 23, 2022.2) THE DATE OF THIS SURVEY WAS DECEMBER 08, 2021, DECEMBER 13, 2022, AND OCTOBER 24,2023.3) BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF S14°50'49"W BETWEEN THE 1'WITNESS CORNER TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT O , A #5 REBAR AND PLASTIC CAP PLS#28643 FOUND IN PLACE AND THE 1.34' WITNESS CORNER TO THE SOUTHERLY ANGLE POINT OFLOT1 US WEST SUB. , A #5 REBAR AND YELLOW PLASTIC CAP PLS# 2376 FOUND IN PLACE.4) UNITS OF MEASURE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON IS U.S. SURVEY FEET.5) THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON THE US WEST SUBDIVISION RECORDED JULY 13, 1993 IN PLATBOOK 32 PAGE 11, THE VICTORIANS AT BLEEKER CONDO MAP RECORDED JULY 07, 1997 IN PLATBOOK 43 AT PAGE 16 AND THE 100 EAST MAIN STREET CONDO MAP RECORDED AUGUST 23, 2017IN PLAT BOOK 120 AT PAGE 7 IN THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE ANDCORNERS FOUND IN PLACE.6) LOT 2 IN THE US WEST SUBDIVISION IS ZONED R-6 WITH 10' SETBACKS FRONT AND REAR, AND5' SIDE SETBACKS.7) LOTS M,N, AND O ARE ZONED MIXED-USE WITH 5' SETBACKS FOR SIDES AND REAR, AND 10'FRONT, WHICH CAN BE REDUCED TO 5' PURSUANT TO SPECIAL REVIEW.8) ACCORDING TO ORDINANCE NO. 60, SERIES OF 1976 RECORDED IN BOOK 321 AT PAGE 51, THESUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICT.9) ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON A GPS OBSERVATION UTILIZING THE WESTERN COLORADORTVRN GPS NETWORK (NAVD 88 DATUM) YIELDING AN ONSITE ELEVATION OF 7896.49' ASSHOWN. CONTOUR INTERVAL EQUALS 1 FOOT.10) ERROR IN CLOSURE FOR THIS SURVEY IS LESS THAN 1:15,000.IMPROVEMENT SURVEY STATEMENTI, JASON R. NEIL, HEREBY CERTIFY TO 120 E. MAIN PARTNERS LLC., A COLORADO LIMITEDLIABILITY COMPANY, AS TO PARCEL A, 120 EAST MAIN PARTNERS, LLC., A COLORADO LIMITEDLIABILITY COMPANY AS TO PARCEL B, THAT I AM A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORLICENSED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF COLORADO; THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEYPLAT IS TRUE, CORRECT AND COMPLETE BASED ON MY KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION ANDBELIEF AS LAID OUT AND SHOWN HEREON; THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT WASMADE BY ME FROM AN ACCURATE SURVEY OF THE REAL PROPERTY PERFORMED BY ME ORUNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION ON DECEMBER 08, 2021, DECEMBER 13, 2022, AND OCTOBER 24,2023; THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT IS NOT A GUARANTY OR WARRANTY, EITHEREXPRESSED OR IMPLIED; THAT, IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT, IRELIED UPON THE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY,ORDER NO. ABS62014831, DATED EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 23, 2022; THAT THE LOCATION ANDDIMENSIONS OF ALL BUILDINGS, IMPROVEMENTS, EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY IN EVIDENCEOR KNOWN TO ME AND ENCROACHMENTS BY OR ON THE REAL PROPERTY AND MATTERSREFERENCED IN SAID TITLE COMMITMENT CAPABLE OF BEING SHOWN ARE ACCURATELYSHOWN, AND THAT THIS PLAT IS IN ACCORDANCE OF AN IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT AS SETFORTH IN C.R.S. §38-51-102(9). DATED: NOVEMBER 01, 2023 BY:___________________________________ JASON R. NEIL, P.L.S. NO. 37935 FOR AND ON BEHALF OF PEAK SURVEYING, INC.COL O R ADO LICENSEDPROFESSIONAL LAND S U RVEYOR JAS O N R. NEIL37935TREE CHARTSUBJECTPROPERTYVICINITY MAPSCALE: 1" = 2000'Exhibit G | Application120 120 EAST MAIN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN MAIN STREETPROPERTY BOUNDARYSIDE SETBACKFRONT SETBACK SIDE SETBACKROOF OVERHANG5'-0"5'-0" REAR SETBACK 7896.94 7 8 9 5 7896 7900 7897 7896 7897C DATE#DESCRIPTION ISSUE DATE: SHEET NUMBER REVIEWED: PROJECT NUMBER: DRAWN: 1 REVISIONS 7632 2 3 4 5 6 7 A B C D E 12O E MAIN STREET PARTNERS120 E MAIN STREET, ASPEN, COC O P Y R I G H T D E S I G N W O R K S H O P, I N C. F 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 W W W . D E S I G N W O R K S H O P . C O M Mar 08, 2024 - 11:56amF:\PROJECTS_A-L\7632-120 E Main Improvements\D-CAD\02. Sheets\dw-7632-Site Plan_.dwgDESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning Urban Design · Tourism Planning Aspen · Austin · Chicago · Denver · Houston Lake Tahoe · Los Angeles · Raleigh 120 East Main Street (970) 925-8354 (970) 920-1387 Aspen, Colorado 81611 LS RWS DECEMBER 18, 2023120 E MAIN STREETIMPROVEMENTSL-02 LAND USE APPLICATION EXISTING LOTS AND EASEMENTS NORTH 0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 4 8 16 1/8"=1'-0"25'-0"PERMANENT POWER AND SEWER EASEMENTLOT 1 OF THE US WEST/DESIGN WORKSHOP SUBDIVISION Lot Area 8,800 SF LOT 2 OF THE US WEST/DESIGN WORKSHOP SUBDIVISION Lot Area 2,520 SF EASEMENT FOR US WEST ACCESS, UTILITY AND EMERGENCY EASEMENT 18'-534"PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTAPPROXIMATE AREA OF RFTA 5'X3' EASEMENT Exhibit G | Application 121 Exhibit G | Application 122 120 EAST MAIN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN MAIN STREETPROPERTY BOUNDARYSIDE SETBACKFRONT SETBACK SIDE SETBACKROOF OVERHANG5'-0"5'-0"10'-0"REAR SETBACK XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XX X X X X X X B B B B W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W CTV CTV CTVCTVCTVCTVCTVWWWWWWWWWWWCTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS GGG G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G EX-U E EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UEEX-UEEX- U E EX- U E EX- U E EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE CTVCTVCTVCTVCTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE E X - U E EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX- U E EX- U E TTT T T EX- U EEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE E X - U E EX-UETTTTTTTTTTT T T T T T T T T TTT T T T T T T T T T T T TT T TTT T T TTTT T T T T T T T T T T T TTTTT T T T T T T EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-U E EX-U E EX- U E EX- U E EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE T T T T T T T T T TTTT T T T T T T T T T GGG7896.94SSSS 7 8 9 5 7896 7900 7897 7896 7897C DATE#DESCRIPTION ISSUE DATE: SHEET NUMBER REVIEWED: PROJECT NUMBER: DRAWN: 1 REVISIONS 7632 2 3 4 5 6 7 A B C D E 12O E MAIN STREET PARTNERS120 E MAIN STREET, ASPEN, COC O P Y R I G H T D E S I G N W O R K S H O P, I N C. F 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 W W W . D E S I G N W O R K S H O P . C O M Mar 08, 2024 - 11:57amF:\PROJECTS_A-L\7632-120 E Main Improvements\D-CAD\02. Sheets\dw-7632-Site Plan_.dwgDESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning Urban Design · Tourism Planning Aspen · Austin · Chicago · Denver · Houston Lake Tahoe · Los Angeles · Raleigh 120 East Main Street (970) 925-8354 (970) 920-1387 Aspen, Colorado 81611 LS RWS DECEMBER 18, 2023120 E MAIN STREETIMPROVEMENTSL-04 LAND USE APPLICATION EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY NORTH 0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 4 8 16 1/8"=1'-0" CONCRETE SIDEWALK TOP OF PLANTER CONCRETE WALK FLAGSTONE WALK AND PATIO ADJOINING BUILDING WINDOW WELL BRICK PAVER PARKING STONE PATH BENCH BRICK WALL WINDOW WELL FENCE, TYP. PLANTER CONCRETE RING RIP RAP, TYP. ASPHALT DRIVEWAY AND PARKING AREA WOOD DECKLOWER LEVEL ACCESS ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER TELEPHONE PEDESTAL, TYP. CONCRETE PORCH 6 SURFACE LEVEL PARKING SPACES BELOW BUILDING DECKDECK BIKE RACK Exhibit G | Application 123 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IE-1 EXISTING BUILDING CONDITION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 4 3 2 1 T.O. PLY LOWER LEVEL90'-4" T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL 93'-11" T.O. PLY MAIN LEVEL99'-11" (Project 100) T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL103'-41/2" T.O. CONC. BEAM111'-11/2" T.O. RIDGE 117'-13/8" BRICK STUCCO GRAVEL OVER MEMBERANE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND STEEL BEAM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1West Elevation 0 2'4'8' Exhibit G | Application 124 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IE-1 EXISTING BUILDING ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 4 3 2 1 T.O. PLY LOWER LEVEL90'-4" T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL 93'-11" T.O. PLY MAIN LEVEL99'-11" (Project 100) T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL103'-41/2" T.O. CONC. BEAM111'-11/2" T.O. RIDGE 117'-13/8" PROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUST W/ HORIZONTAL WOOD RAIN SCREEN ENCLOSURE BRICK STUCCO GRAVEL OVER MEMBERANE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND STEEL BEAM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1West Elevation 0 2'4'8' Exhibit G | Application 125 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IE-2 EXISTING BUILDING CONDITION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 A T.O. RIDGE 117'-13/8" T.O. CONC. BEAM111'-11/2" T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL103'-41/2" T.O. PLY MAIN LEVEL99'-11" (Project 100) T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL93'-11" T.O. PLY LOWER LEVEL90'-4" BRICK STUCCO GRAVEL OVER MEMBERANE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND STEEL BEAM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1South Elevation 0 2'4'8' Exhibit G | Application 126 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IE-2 EXISTING BUILDING ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 A T.O. RIDGE 117'-13/8" T.O. CONC. BEAM111'-11/2" T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL103'-41/2" T.O. PLY MAIN LEVEL99'-11" (Project 100) T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL93'-11" T.O. PLY LOWER LEVEL90'-4" PROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUST BRICK STUCCO GRAVEL OVER MEMBERANE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND STEEL BEAM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1South Elevation 0 2'4'8' Exhibit G | Application 127 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IE-3 EXISTING BUILDING CONDITION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 1 2 3 4 T.O. RIDGE117'-13/8" T.O. CONC. BEAM111'-11/2" T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL103'-41/2" T.O. PLY MAIN LEVEL99'-11" (Project 100) T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL93'-11" T.O. PLY LOWER LEVEL90'-4" STEEL BEAM BRICK STUCCO GRAVEL OVER MEMBERANE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND STEEL BEAM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1East Elevation 0 2'4'8' Exhibit G | Application 128 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IE-3 EXISTING BUILDING ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 1 2 3 4 T.O. RIDGE117'-13/8" T.O. CONC. BEAM111'-11/2" T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL103'-41/2" T.O. PLY MAIN LEVEL99'-11" (Project 100) T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL93'-11" T.O. PLY LOWER LEVEL90'-4" PROPOSED WINDOW TO MATCH EXISTING WINDOW TO THE SOUTH PROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUST STEEL BEAM BRICK STUCCO GRAVEL OVER MEMBERANE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND STEEL BEAM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1East Elevation 0 2'4'8' Exhibit G | Application 129 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IE-4 EXISTING BUILDING CONDITION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 D C B A T.O. RIDGE 117'-13/8" T.O. CONC. BEAM111'-11/2" T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL103'-41/2" T.O. PLY MAIN LEVEL99'-11" (Project 100) T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL93'-11" T.O. PLY LOWER LEVEL90'-4" STEAL BEAM BRICK STUCCO GRAVEL OVER MEMBERANE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND STEEL BEAM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1North Elevation 0 2'4'8' Exhibit G | Application 130 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IE-4 EXISTING BUILDING ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 D C B A T.O. RIDGE 117'-13/8" T.O. CONC. BEAM111'-11/2" T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL103'-41/2" T.O. PLY MAIN LEVEL99'-11" (Project 100) T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL93'-11" T.O. PLY LOWER LEVEL90'-4" PROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUST PROPOSED EXIT MODIFICATIONSTEAL BEAM BRICK STUCCO GRAVEL OVER MEMBERANE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND STEEL BEAM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1North Elevation 0 2'4'8' Exhibit G | Application 131 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IF-1 PROPOSED BUILDING PLANS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 UP DOWN 12345678UP 12345678UPA A A D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C 15'2'-11"8'-11"3'-7"37'-11/2"7'-3"16'-11/2"2'15'8'-11"3'-7"51/2"2'-61/2"51/2"6'-11"1'-8"51/2"2'-113/4"51/2" 5'-8"51/2" 2'-8"2'-21/4" 51/2"61/4"1'-10"4'-6"51/2"51/2"2'51/2"6'-4"3'-9"7'-41/2"3'-93/4"6'-81/2" 10'-113/4"4'-41/2"51/2" 3'-1"7'-53/8"3'-5"51/2" 51/2" 13'-113/8" 51/2"37'-11/2"7'-3"16'-11/2"2'-11"51/2"11'-7"51/2"51/2"6'-4"51/2"51/2"2'51/2"11'-23/4"3'-3"51/2" 1 IG-1 2 IG-1 1 IG-2 2 IG-2 #DrgID #LayID PROPOSED SHIPS LADDER FOR EGRESS REVERSE DOOR SWING ON EXISTING DOOR ROOF OVERHANG ABOVE 6 PARKING SPACES, SEE SITE PLAN 4 PARKING SPACES, SEE SITE PLAN EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING BUILDING 6 PARKING SPACES, SEE SITE PLAN 2 PARKING SPACES, SEE SITE PLAN ROOF OVERHANG MECH. SKI LOCKER SKI LOCKER SKI LOCKER SKI LOCKER UNIT 1 MUD MECH. UP DOWNUPDOWN12345678910111213UPA A D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C WW 1 IG-1 2 IG-1 1 IG-2 2 IG-2 #DrgID #LayID 14'-415/16" 14'-415/16" 15'8'-11"3'-7"37'-11/2"7'-3"16'-11/2"2'-11"51/2"5'-57/16"51/2"3'-315/16"13'-6"3'12'-11/8"6'4'-8"17'-3"3'3'-3"51/2"51/2" 13'-113/8"51/2"8'-11"3'-7"37'-11/2"7'-3"16'-11/2"2'-11"3'-1"51/2"10'-9"2'-10"2'-10"41'-2"14'-5"51/2"11'2'-77/8"9'-5"8'-65/8"8'-11"5'-11/4" 3'-9"4'-41/8"10'-2"3'-4"10'-6"5'-13/4"13'-113/8"7'-2"11'-2"5'8'-77/8"12'2'-77/8"11'8'-111/4"5'-1"3'3'-5" 10'-27/8" OPEN TO BELOW ROOF OF EXISTING BUILDING BELOW ROOF OVERHANG BEDROOM 1 BATH 2 BEDROOM BATH LAUNDRY/MUD CLT BEDROOM 2 CLT BATH 1 UNIT 1 CLT CLT UNIT 2 NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED BUILDING MAIN LEVEL 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2PROPOSED BUILDING LEVEL 1 0 2'4'8' Exhibit G | Application 132 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IF-2 PROPOSED BUILDING PLANS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024UPDOWNDOWN1234567891011121314UPAA D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C F F1 IG-1 2 IG-1 1 IG-2 2 IG-2 #DrgID #LayID 8'-11"3'-7"37'-11/2"7'-3"12'-101/2"3'-3"2'-11"51/2"3'-4"8'8'7'-7"5'3'3'4'-8"7'4'4'2'-4"51/2"15' 51/2" 2'-5"4'-6"7'-03/8"51/2" 15' 51/2" 2'-9"4'5'-3"1'-113/8"51/2"51/2"15'-7"5'29'4'4'2'-4"51/2"8'-11"3'-7"37'-11/2"7'-3"12'-101/2"3'-3"2'-11"5'-7"8'-07/8"30'-11"24'-13/4"OPEN TO BELOW ROOF OF EXISTING BUILDING BELOW ROOF OVERHANG DECK DECK LIVING KITCHEN LIVING GAS FIREPLACE BAR UP TO ROOF DOWNA A D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C 1 IG-1 2 IG-1 1 IG-2 2 IG-2 #DrgID #LayID 8'-11"3'-7"37'-11/2"7'-3"12'-101/2"3'-3"2'-11"15'8'-11"3'-7"37'-11/2"7'-3"12'-101/2"3'-3"2'-11"15' OPEN TO BELOW ROOF OF EXISTING BUILDING BELOW ROOF DECK DECK BELOW DECK BELOW FUTURE SOLAR PANELS SLOPE 6:12 SLOPE 6:12 SLOPE 6:12 SLOPE 6:12 FUTURE SOLAR PANELS STAIRS TO ROOF DECK STAIR BULKHEAD NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED BUILDING LEVEL 2 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2PROPOSED BUILDING ROOF 0 2'4'8' Exhibit G | Application 133 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IG-1 PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 A D F EBEGC LEVEL 2 - 17'.0" MID POINT ROOF - 28'.0" LEVEL 1 - 8'.0" 2 1 LEVEL 1 - 8'.0" LEVLE 2 - 17'.0" MID POINTROOF - 28'.0" SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED BUILDING SOUTH ELEVATION 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2PROPOSED BUILDING WEST ELEVATION 0 2'4'8' Exhibit G | Application 134 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IG-2 PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 E F D AGECB LEVEL 1 - 8'.0" LEVEL 2 - 17'.0" MID POINT ROOF - 28'.0" 1 2 MAIN LEVEL - 0.0 (Project 100) LEVEL 1 - 8'.0" LEVLE 2 - 17'.0" MID POINTROOF - 28'.0" SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED BUILDING NORTH ELEVATION 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2PROPOSED BUILDING EAST ELEVATION 0 2'4'8' Exhibit G | Application 135 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IJ-1 EXISTING BUILDING GROSS AREA CALCS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 UP DOWNDOWN 123456UP345678910D D 2 2 4 4 B B 1 1 3 3 A A C CFWALL HEIGHT = 4'-8" PROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUSTPROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUSTEXISTING MECH. Main Level Area A: 3,927.1 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UP DOWNUPDOWN789101112131412345678910UPD D 2 2 4 4 B B 1 1 3 3 A A C C HVAC HVAC HVAC PROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUSTPROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUST PROPOSED NEW WINDOW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Lower Level Area A: 3,759.2 sq ft Mechanical Area A: 384.5 sq ft GROSS AREA EXISTING BUILDING 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 LOWER LEVEL 4,143.7 MAIN LEVEL 3,927.1 TOTAL GROSS AREA 8,070.8 NSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1Main Level 0 4'8'16' SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2Lower Level 0 4'8'16' Exhibit G | Application 136 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IJ-2 EXISTING BUILDING FAR CALCS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UP DOWNUPDOWN789101112131412345678910UPD D 2 2 4 4 B B 1 1 3 3 A A C C HVAC HVAC HVAC PROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUSTPROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUST PROPOSED NEW WINDOW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Lower Level Area A: 3,759.2 sq ft Mechanical Area A: 384.5 sq ft UP DOWNDOWN 123456UP345678910D D 2 2 4 4 B B 1 1 3 3 A A C CFWALL HEIGHT = 4'-8" PROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUSTPROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUSTEXISTING MECH. Main Level Area A: 3,859.2 sq ft SUBGRADE WALL AREA 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 LOWER LEVEL WALL ELEVATIONS TOTAL WALL AREA (SQFT) EXPOSED WALL AREA (SQFT) UNEXPOSED WALL AREA (SQFT) 1 470.3 83.1 387.2 2 341.8 166.5 175.3 3 546.9 80.4 466.5 4 280.9 280.9 5 46 46 6 160.9 160.9 7 144.7 144.7 8 44.3 44.3 OVERALL TOTAL WALL AREA 2,035.80 EXPOSED WALL AREA 330 % OF EXPOSED WALL (EXPOSED/TOTAL)16% UNEXPOSED WALL AREA 1,705.80 % OF UNEXPOSED WALL (UNEXPOSED/TOTAL)84% 83.1 sq ft 470.3 sq ft T.O CONC. SPLIT - LEVEL 1 T.O CONC. SPLIT - LEVEL 2 B.O STRUCT. - MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY - MAIN LEVEL B.O. STRUCT. SPLIT - LEVEL 3 T.O. PLY SPLIT - LEVEL 3 B.O. CONC. BEAM T.O. CONC BEAM 1 91.4 sq ft 83.9 sq ft 166.5 sq ft 2 80.4 sq ft 546.9 sq ft 3 FINISH GRADE NATURAL GRADE 280.9 sq ft46.0 sq ft160.9 sq ft144.7 sq ft44.3 sq ft 45678 MECHANICAL ROOM FAR CALCULATIONS EXISTING BUILDING 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 ALLOWABLE FAR = 11,320 SF FLOOR AREA SF APPLICABLE SUBGRADE % COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA LOWER LEVEL 4,143.70 16%662.992 MAIN LEVEL 3,859.20 100%3,859.20 TOTAL FAR 4,522.19 NSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2Lower Level 0 4'8'16' SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1Main Level 0 4'8'16' WEST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION Exhibit G | Application 137 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IJ-3 EXISTING BUILDING NET LEASABLE CALCS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 UP DOWNDOWN 123456UP345678910D D 2 2 4 4 B B 1 1 3 3 A A C CFWALL HEIGHT = 4'-8" EXISTING MECH. M-9 Mech & Exempt Area A: 10.8 sq ft M-5 Mech & Exempt Area A: 5.4 sq ft C-1 Common Area A: 225.9 sq ft A-1 Leasable Area A: 3,370.5 sq ft M-8 Mech & Exempt Area A: 18.1 sq ft M-7 Mech & Exempt Area A: 18.1 sq ft M-2 Mech & Exempt Area A: 1.8 sq ft M-4 Mech & Exempt Area A: 6.6 sq ft M-3 Mech & Exempt Area A: 5.7 sq ft M-1 Mech & Exempt Area A: 39.4 sq ft M-6 Mech & Exempt Area A: 28.2 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UP DOWNUPDOWN789101112131412345678910UPD D 2 2 4 4 B B 1 1 3 3 A A C C PROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUST ABOVE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUST ABOVE PROPOSED NEW WINDOWM-11 Mech & Exempt Area A: 9.9 sq ft M-13 Mech & Exempt Area A: 4.5 sq ft C-2 Common Area A: 259.6 sq ft M-10 Mech & Exempt Area A: 341.6 sq ft M-12 Mech & Exempt Area A: 12.5 sq ft C-3 Common Area A: 50.3 sq ft A-2 Leasable Area A: 959.4 sq ft M-14 Mech & Exempt Area A: 4.2 sq ft A-3 Leasable Area A: 1,381.3 sq ft A-4 Leasable Area A: 415.2 sq ft A-5 Leasable Area A: 301.8 sq ft LEASABLE AREA COMMON AREA MECHANICAL & EXEMPT AREA NET LEASABLE LEGEND UNIT 1 UNIT 2 FAR AREA LEGEND UNIT 1 CARPORT UNIT 2 CARPORT NET LEASABLE AREA EXISTING BUILDING 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 LEASABLE AREA SF A-1 3,370.50 A-2 959.40 A-3 1,381.30 A-4 415.20 A-5 301.80 TOTAL 6,428.20 COMMON AREA C-1 225.90 C-2 259.60 C-3 50.30 TOTAL 535.80 MECHANICAL & EXEMPT AREA M-1 39.40 M-2 1.80 M-3 5.70 M-4 6.60 M-5 5.40 M-6 28.20 M-7 18.10 M-8 18.10 M-9 10.80 M-10 341.60 M-11 9.90 M-12 12.50 M-13 4.50 M-14 4.20 TOTAL 506.80 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1Main Level Net Leasable 0 4'8'16' SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2Lower Level Net Leasable 0 4'8'16' Exhibit G | Application 138 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IJ-4 PROPOSED BUILDING GROSS AREA CALCS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 12345678UP 12345678UPA A D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C UNIT 1 Main Level Area A: 45.8 sq ft Mechanical Area A: 78.9 sq ft UNIT 1 Main Level Area A: 82.6 sq ft UNIT 2 Level 1 Area A: 54.4 sq ft Mechanical Area A: 28.2 sq ft UP DOWNUPDOWN12345678910111213UPA A D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C WW UNIT 2 Level 1 Area A: 444.5 sq ft UNIT 1 Level 1 Area A: 633.7 sq ft UPDOWNDOWN1234567891011121314UPA A D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C F FDECK DECK UNIT 2 Level 2 Area A: 373.4 sq ft UNIT 1 Level 2 Area A: 541.2 sq ft SPIRAL STAIR FP UNIT 1 UNIT 2 MECHANICAL AREA GROSS AREA LEGEND GROSS AREA PROPOSED BUILDING 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 UNIT 1 MAIN LEVEL 156.6 LEVEL 1 633.7 LEVEL 2 541.2 SUBTOTAL 1,331.50 UNIT 2 MAIN LEVEL 133.3 LEVEL 1 444.5 LEVEL 2 373.4 SUBTOTAL 951.2 TOTAL 2,282.70 SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1MAIN LEVEL RESIDENCE GROSS 0 4'8'12'SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2LEVEL 1 RESIDENCE GROSS 0 4'8'12'SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"3LEVEL 2 RESIDENCE GROSS 0 4'8'12'SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"5North Elevation 0 1/2''1''2'' Exhibit G | Application 139 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IJ-5 PROPOSED BUILDING FAR CALCS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 12345678UP 12345678UPA A D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C UNIT 1 Main Level Area A: 43.4 sq ft Mechanical Area A: 77.5 sq ft UNIT 2 CARPORT AREA A: 432.0 sq ft UNIT 1 CARPORT AREA A: 287.8 sq ft UNIT 1 Main Level Area A: 80.4 sq ft UNIT 1 CARPORT AREA A: 234.0 sq ft UNIT 2 Main Level Area A: 52.8 sq ft Mechanical Area A: 27.4 sq ft UP DOWNUPDOWN12345678910111213UPA A D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C WW OPEN TOBELOW UNIT 2 Level 1 Area A: 439.5 sq ft UNIT 1 Level 1 Area A: 626.7 sq ft UPDOWNDOWN1234567891011121314UPA A D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C F FDECK DECK UNIT 1 Level 2 Area A: 478.7 sq ft UNIT 2 Level 2 Area A: 315.4 sq ft Deck Area Exempt (MU Zone) A: 87.9 sq ft Deck Area Exempt (MU Zone) A: 133.0 sq ft SPIRAL STAIR FPDOWNA D F E 1 1 2 2 B E G C DECK BELOW DECK BELOW Deck Area Exempt (MU Zone) A: 127.6 sq ft FUTURE SOLAR PANELS SLOPE 6:12 SLOPE 6:12 SLOPE 6:12 SLOPE 6:12 FUTURE SOLAR PANELS STAIRS TO ROOF DECK STAIR BULKHEAD UNIT 1 UNIT 2 MECHANICAL & EXEMPT AREA FAR AREA LEGEND UNIT 1 GROSS AREA LEGEND DECK UNIT 1 CARPORT UNIT 2 CARPORT FAR CALCULATIONS PROPOSED BUILDING 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 FLOOR AREA SF COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA DECK UNIT 1 MECH.27.40 27.4 CARPORT 287.8+234=521.8- 250=271.8- 21.8=250/2=125 +21.8=146.8 146.8 MAIN LEVEL 123.8 123.8 LEVEL 1 626.7 626.7 LEVEL 2 478.7 478.7 87.9 ROOF DECK 127.6 SUBTOTAL 1,403.40 215.5 UNIT 2 MECH.77.5 77.5 CARPORT 432- 250=182/2=91 193.3 MAIN LEVEL 52.8 52.8 LEVEL 1 439.5 439.5 LEVEL 2 315.4 315.4 133 ROOF DECK 0 SUBTOTAL 1,078.50 133 TOTAL 2,481.90 348.50 SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1MAIN LEVEL RESIDENCE FAR 0 4'8'12'SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2LEVEL 1 RESIDENCE FAR 0 4'8'12'SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"3LEVEL 2 RESIDENCE FAR 0 4'8'12'SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"4ROOF RESIDENCE FAR 0 4'8'12' Exhibit G | Application 140 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IJ-6 PROPOSED BUILDING NET LIVABLE CALCS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 12345678UP 12345678UPA A D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C Unit 2 Mech & Exempt Area A: 62.6 sq ft Unit 1 Livable Area A: 26.2 sq ft Unit 1 Livable Area A: 67.4 sq ft Unit 2 Livable Area A: 41.2 sq ft Unit 1 Mech & Exempt Area A: 21.0 sq ft UP DOWNUPDOWN12345678910111213UPA A D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C WW Unit 1 Livable Area A: 583.1 sq ft Unit 2 Livable Area A: 401.7 sq ft UPDOWNDOWN1234567891011121314UPA A D D F F E E 1 1 2 2 B B E E G G C C F FDECK DECK Unit 1 Livable Area A: 438.2 sq ft Unit 2 Livable Area A: 282.6 sq ft SPIRAL STAIR FP UNIT 1 LIVABLE AREA UNIT 1 MECHANICAL AREA NET LIVABLE LEGEND UNIT 2 MECHANICAL AREA UNIT 2 LIVABLE AREA NET LIVABLE AREA PRPOSED BUILDING 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 UNIT 1 UNIT 2 LIVABLE AREA SF LIVABLE AREA SF Main Level 93.60 Main Level 41.20 Level 1 583.10 Level 1 401.70 Level 2 438.20 Level 2 282.60 TOTAL 1,114.90 TOTAL 725.50 MECHANICAL & EXEMPT AREA MECHANICAL & EXEMPT AREA Main Level 21.00 Main Level 62.60 Level 1 0.00 Level 1 0.00 Level 2 0.00 Level 2 0.00 TOTAL 21.00 TOTAL 62.60 SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1MAIN LEVEL NET LIVABLE 0 4'8'12'SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2LEVEL 1 NET LIVABLE 0 4'8'12'SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"3LEVEL 2 NET LIVEABLE 0 4'8'12'SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"5North Elevation 0 1/2''1''2'' Exhibit G | Application 141 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IJ-7 ZONING CALCULATION SUMMARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 GROSS AREA EXISTING BUILDING 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 LOWER LEVEL 4,143.7 MAIN LEVEL 3,927.1 TOTAL GROSS AREA 8,070.8 NET LEASABLE AREA EXISTING BUILDING 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 LEASABLE AREA SF A-1 3,370.50 A-2 959.40 A-3 1,381.30 A-4 415.20 A-5 301.80 TOTAL 6,428.20 COMMON AREA C-1 225.90 C-2 259.60 C-3 50.30 TOTAL 535.80 MECHANICAL & EXEMPT AREA M-1 39.40 M-2 1.80 M-3 5.70 M-4 6.60 M-5 5.40 M-6 28.20 M-7 18.10 M-8 18.10 M-9 10.80 M-10 341.60 M-11 9.90 M-12 12.50 M-13 4.50 M-14 4.20 TOTAL 506.80 FAR CALCULATIONS PROPOSED BUILDING 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 FLOOR AREA SF COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA DECK UNIT 1 MECH.27.40 27.4 CARPORT 287.8+234=521.8- 250=271.8- 21.8=250/2=125 +21.8=146.8 146.8 MAIN LEVEL 123.8 123.8 LEVEL 1 626.7 626.7 LEVEL 2 478.7 478.7 87.9 ROOF DECK 127.6 SUBTOTAL 1,403.40 215.5 UNIT 2 MECH.77.5 77.5 CARPORT 432- 250=182/2=91 193.3 MAIN LEVEL 52.8 52.8 LEVEL 1 439.5 439.5 LEVEL 2 315.4 315.4 133 ROOF DECK 0 SUBTOTAL 1,078.50 133 TOTAL 2,481.90 348.50 SUBGRADE WALL AREA 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 LOWER LEVEL WALL ELEVATIONS TOTAL WALL AREA (SQFT) EXPOSED WALL AREA (SQFT) UNEXPOSED WALL AREA (SQFT) 1 470.3 83.1 387.2 2 341.8 166.5 175.3 3 546.9 80.4 466.5 4 280.9 280.9 5 46 46 6 160.9 160.9 7 144.7 144.7 8 44.3 44.3 OVERALL TOTAL WALL AREA 2,035.80 EXPOSED WALL AREA 330 % OF EXPOSED WALL (EXPOSED/TOTAL)16% UNEXPOSED WALL AREA 1,705.80 % OF UNEXPOSED WALL (UNEXPOSED/TOTAL)84% FAR CALCULATIONS EXISTING BUILDING 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 ALLOWABLE FAR = 11,320 SF FLOOR AREA SF APPLICABLE SUBGRADE % COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA LOWER LEVEL 4,143.70 16%662.992 MAIN LEVEL 3,859.20 100%3,859.20 TOTAL FAR 4,522.19 GROSS AREA PROPOSED BUILDING 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 UNIT 1 MAIN LEVEL 156.6 LEVEL 1 633.7 LEVEL 2 541.2 SUBTOTAL 1,331.50 UNIT 2 MAIN LEVEL 133.3 LEVEL 1 444.5 LEVEL 2 373.4 SUBTOTAL 951.2 TOTAL 2,282.70 NET LIVABLE AREA PRPOSED BUILDING 120 EAST MAIN, ASPEN CO 81611 UNIT 1 UNIT 2 LIVABLE AREA SF LIVABLE AREA SF Main Level 93.60 Main Level 41.20 Level 1 583.10 Level 1 401.70 Level 2 438.20 Level 2 282.60 TOTAL 1,114.90 TOTAL 725.50 MECHANICAL & EXEMPT AREA MECHANICAL & EXEMPT AREA Main Level 21.00 Main Level 62.60 Level 1 0.00 Level 1 0.00 Level 2 0.00 Level 2 0.00 TOTAL 21.00 TOTAL 62.60 Exhibit G | Application 142 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IE-1 EXISTING BUILDING ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 12/13/2023 4 3 2 1 T.O. PLY LOWER LEVEL 90'-4" T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL 93'-11" T.O. PLY MAIN LEVEL 99'-11" (Project 100) T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL 103'-41/2" T.O. CONC. BEAM 111'-11/2" T.O. RIDGE 117'-13/8" PROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUST W/ HORIZONTAL WOOD RAIN SCREEN ENCLOSURE BRICK STUCCO GRAVEL OVER MEMBERANE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND STEEL BEAM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1West Elevation 0 2' 4'8' Proposed Building Perspective Exhibit G | Application 143 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IE-1 EXISTING BUILDING ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 12/13/2023 4 3 2 1 T.O. PLY LOWER LEVEL 90'-4" T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL 93'-11" T.O. PLY MAIN LEVEL 99'-11" (Project 100) T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL 103'-41/2" T.O. CONC. BEAM 111'-11/2" T.O. RIDGE 117'-13/8" PROPOSED COMMERCIAL KITCHEN EXHAUST W/ HORIZONTAL WOOD RAIN SCREEN ENCLOSURE BRICK STUCCO GRAVEL OVER MEMBERANE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND STEEL BEAM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1West Elevation 0 2' 4'8' Proposed Building Perspective Exhibit G | Application 144 STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF 1X4 WOOD STAIN SIDING MATERIALS 120 E MAIN ST. COMPOSITE SIDING RAIN SCREEN SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IH-1 3D SKETCHES NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103Glenwood SpringsCO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 12/13/2023 SIDEWALK LOOKING NORTH PATIO LOOKING NORTH PARKING LOOKING NORTH EAST DECK LOOKING AT ASPEN MOUNTAIN 1 2 3 Exhibit G | Application 145 PARCEL A 11,320 SF +- 128 EAST MAIN BTRSARDY LLC W 10' LOT M BASIS OF BEARINGSMAIN STREET 100' RIGHT OF WAY #5 REBAR & YELLOW PLASTIC CAP PLS#2376 FOUND .20' BELOW GROUND 1.34' WITNESS PK & SHINER PLS 25947 FOUND FLUSH TBM EL=7896.49' #5 REBAR AND PLASTIC CAP ILLEGIBLE FOUND .10' BELOW GROUND #5 REBAR AND PLASTIC CAP PLS #28643 1 ' WITNESS CORNER FOUND .15' ABOVE GROUND #5 REBAR AND YELLOW PLASTIC CAP PLS# 37935 TO BE SET #5 REBAR AND YELLOW PLASTIC CAP PLS# 37935 TO BE SET #5 REBAR AND YELLOW PLASTIC CAP PLS# 37935 TO BE SET PK AND SHINER PLS# 37935 TO BE SET E 20' L O T M LOT NLOT OLOT KLOT LLOT PLOT C LOT D LOT E LOT FVICTORIANS AT BLEEKER PLAT BK 43 PG 16 ACCESS, UTILITY AND EMERGENCY EASEMENT PER BK 202 PG 429 BK 647 PG 767 LOT 1 US WEST SUBDIVISION PER PLAT BK 32 PG 11 10' FR O N T S E T B A C K 5' SIDE SETBACK5' SIDE SETBACK3' RE A R S E T B A C K 100 EAST MAIN STREET CONDOS PLAT BK 120 PG 7 APPROX. LOCATION OF RFTA 5'X3' EASEMENT PER BK 593 PG 529 EASEMENT PER REC. NO. 399186 PERMANENT POWER & SEWER EASEMENT PER BK 193 PG 89 N 75° 0 9 ' 1 1 " 1 0 . 0 0 ' UNIT G PARK I N G SPAC E P E R VICT O R I A N S AT BL E E K E R PLAT B K 4 3 P G 16 S 14°50'49" W 138.00'N 14°50'49" E 110.00'N 75° 0 9 ' 1 1 " W 80.00'N 14°50'49" E 28.00'S 75° 0 9 ' 1 1 " E 90.00' DRAFT P L A T O N L Y GRAPHI C D E PI C TI O N OF COM BI N E D L O T S A SUBDIVISION MERGING LOT 2 OF U S WEST SUBDIVISION WITH THE EASTERNLY 20 FEET OF ORIGINAL TOWNSITE LOT M, LOT N, AND LOT O, AND THE VACATED ALLEY OF BLOCK 66 CITY OF ASPEN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO VICINITY MAP Scale: 1"=2000' SITE PLAT NOTES TITLE COMPANY CERTIFICATE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE CLERK AND RECORDER'S ACCEPTANCE OWNER'S CERTIFICATE THE UNDERSIGNED, A DULY-AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, REGISTERED TO DO BUSINESS IN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, DOES HEREBY CERTIFY, PURSUANT TO SECTION 20-15(J) OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, THAT 120 EAST MAIN STREET PARTNERS, LLC DOES HOLD FEE SIMPLE TITLE TO THE REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN AND IS FREE AND CLEAR OF ALL LIENS AND ENCUMBRANCES EXCEPT THOSE LISTED ON THE TITLE COMMITMENT ISSUED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY UNDER ORDER NO. ABS62013660-4. ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE THE FACTS STATED ON THIS PLAT ARE TRUE, THIS CERTIFICATE IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, NOR AN OPINION OF TITLE, NOR A GUARANTY OF TITLE, AND IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, NEITHER ASSUMES NOR WILL BE CHARGED WITH ANY FINANCIAL OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY WHATEVER ON ANY STATEMENT CONTAINED HEREIN. BY:_________________________________DATE______________ ____________________, TITLE OFFICER ADDRESS: _____________________ _____________________________ STATE OF COLORADO ) )SS. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) THE TITLE CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS __________ DAY OF ____________________, 2024, BY _____________________ AS TITLE OFFICER OF LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL __________________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: _______________________. MY ADDRESS IS: _______________________________. THIS FINAL PLAT OF THE AMENDED SUBDIVISION WAS APPROVED PURSUANT TO __________________________, RECORDED ___________________ AS RECEPTION NO. __________ AND THE CITY OF ASPEN HEREBY APPROVES THIS SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT. ______________________________________________________ TORRE, MAYOR DATE ATTEST: _____________________________ CITY CLERK THIS FINAL PLAT OF U S WEST AMENDED SUBDIVISION WAS REVIEWED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OF THE CITY OF ASPEN THIS ______ DAY OF ______________________, 2024. _______________________________ DIRECTOR I, _______________________, A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR LICENSED IN THE STATE OF COLORADO, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT IN ______________, A SURVEY OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY WAS PERFORMED UNDER MY SUPERVISION AND DIRECTION, IN ACCORDANCE WITH COLORADO REVISED STATUTES 1973, TITLE 38, ARTICLE 51, AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME, AND THAT THIS FINAL PLAT OF U S WEST AMENDED SUBDIVISION ACCURATELY AND SUBSTANTIALLY DEPICTS SAID SURVEY. THE CONTROL SURVEY PRECISION IS GREATER THAN 1/15,000. RECORDED EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND RESTRICTIONS ARE THOSE SET FORTH IN THE TITLE COMMITMENT REFERENCED IN SURVEY NOTE 5 HEREON. ______________________________________________ THIS FINAL PLAT OF U S WEST AMENDED SUBDIVISION IS ACCEPTED FOR FILING IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO THIS ______ DAY OF _______________, 2024 IN PLAT BOOK _____ AT PAGE _____ , AS RECEPTION NO.________________. _______________________________________ PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE THIS FINAL PLAT OF U S WEST AMENDED SUBDIVISION WAS REVIEWED FOR THE DEPICTION OF THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT SURVEY REQUIREMENTS THIS _________ DAY OF_________________ , 2024. ________________________________ CITY ENGINEER MORTGAGEE'S CERTIFICATE THE UNDERSIGNED, BEING ALL MORTGAGEES OF THE PROPERTIES SHOWN HEREON, HEREBY CONSENT AND APPROVE OF THE MAKING AND RECORDING OF THIS MAP OF THE U S WEST AMENDED SUBDIVISION. BY_______________________ STATE OF COLORADO ) )SS. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) THE FOREGOING CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS ________ DAY OF ______________ , 2024, BY _________________. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: ______________________________ WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL: ________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC 1) THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS, BUILDING SETBACKS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD, OR IN PLACE AND EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE SHOWN IN THE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, ORDER NO. ABS62014831, DATED EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 23, 2022. 2) THE DATE OF THIS SURVEY WAS DECEMBER 08, 2021 AND DECEMBER 13, 2022. 3) BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF S14°50'49"W BETWEEN THE 1' WITNESS CORNER TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT O , A #5 REBAR AND PLASTIC CAP PLS# 28643 FOUND IN PLACE AND THE 1.34' WITNESS CORNER TO THE SOUTHERLY ANGLE POINT OF LOT1 US WEST SUB. , A #5 REBAR AND YELLOW PLASTIC CAP PLS# 2376 FOUND IN PLACE. 4) UNITS OF MEASURE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON IS U.S. SURVEY FEET. 5) THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON THE US WEST SUBDIVISION RECORDED JULY 13, 1993 IN PLAT BOOK 32 PAGE 11, THE VICTORIANS AT BLEEKER CONDO MAP RECORDED JULY 07, 1997 IN PLAT BOOK 43 AT PAGE 16 AND THE 100 EAST MAIN STREET CONDO MAP RECORDED AUGUST 23, 2017 IN PLAT BOOK 120 AT PAGE 7 IN THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE AND CORNERS FOUND IN PLACE. 6) ACCORDING TO ORDINANCE NO. 60, SERIES OF 1976 RECORDED IN BOOK 321 AT PAGE 51, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICT. LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A: THE EASTERLY 20 FEET OF LOT M, ALL OF LOTS N AND O, BLOCK 66 AND THE SOUTHERLY 10 FEET OF THE VACATED ALLEY THROUGH THE BLOCK ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO SAID LOTS N AND O AND THE EASTERLY 20 FEET OF LOT , BLOCK 66, COUNTY OF PITKIN COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO. MERGED WITH LOT 2 US WEST SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED JULY 13, 1993 IN PLAT BOOK 32 AT PAGE 11 COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. TO BE KNOWN AS LOT 1 AND INCLUDE 11,320 SF +-. WE, 120 EAST MAIN STREET PARTNERS, LLC AS OWNERS OF THE LAND INCLUDED IN THIS AMENDED PLAT AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: EXECUTED THIS _______ DAY OF _________ , 2024. ____________________ AS ATTORNEY IN FACT. STATE OF COLORADO ) CITY OF _______ )SS COUNTY OF _______ ) THE FOREGOING CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS ________ DAY OF ______________, 2023, BY __________________________, A ________________ CORPORATION, ON BEHALF OF THE CORPORATION. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES __________________________. WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL: _________________________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC FINAL LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHALL BE COMPLETED FOR FINAL PLAT REVISED LEGAL DESCRIPTION TO BE COMPLETED FOR FINAL PLAT Exhibit G | Application 146 1Cover SheetPROPERTY DESCRIPTIONLOCATION:120 E MAIN STREET, ASPEN, COOWNER:120 E MAIN PARTNERS LLCPARCEL NUMBER: 273512470002AREA:2,520 SQUARE FEETLEGAL DESCRIPTION: SUBDIVISION: US WEST LOT:2ZONING:MIXED USE (MU) & MEDIUMDENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-6)120 E MAIN STREETASPEN, COCHECKED BY:#DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWN BYCONSTRUCTION DRAWN BY:JOB #:2023-56NOT FORROARING FORK ENGINEERING 592 HIGHWAY 133 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 RFENG.BIZ | (970) 340-4130AWAJAKPROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 120 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COOf 51 LAND USE SUBMITTAL 12.18.23 JAK 2 LAND USE COMMENT RESPONSE 03.07.24 JAKLAND USEExhibit G | Application147 COCOBBBBPPCOCHECKED BY:#DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWN BYCONSTRUCTION DRAWN BY:JOB #:2023-56NOT FORROARING FORK ENGINEERING 592 HIGHWAY 133 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 RFENG.BIZ | (970) 340-4130AWAJAKPROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 120 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COOf 51 LAND USE SUBMITTAL 12.18.23 JAK 2 LAND USE COMMENT RESPONSE 03.07.24 JAK 2Site PlanExhibit G | Application148 COCOBBBBPPCOCHECKED BY:#DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWN BYCONSTRUCTION DRAWN BY:JOB #:2023-56NOT FORROARING FORK ENGINEERING 592 HIGHWAY 133 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 RFENG.BIZ | (970) 340-4130AWAJAKPROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 120 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COOf 51 LAND USE SUBMITTAL 12.18.23 JAK 2 LAND USE COMMENT RESPONSE 03.07.24 JAK 3Utility PlanExhibit G | Application149 COCOBBBBPPCOCHECKED BY:#DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWN BYCONSTRUCTION DRAWN BY:JOB #:2023-56NOT FORROARING FORK ENGINEERING 592 HIGHWAY 133 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 RFENG.BIZ | (970) 340-4130AWAJAKPROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 120 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COOf 51 LAND USE SUBMITTAL 12.18.23 JAK 2 LAND USE COMMENT RESPONSE 03.07.24 JAK 4Grading & Drainage PlanExhibit G | Application150 COCOBBBBPPCOCHECKED BY:#DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWN BYCONSTRUCTION DRAWN BY:JOB #:2023-56NOT FORROARING FORK ENGINEERING 592 HIGHWAY 133 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 RFENG.BIZ | (970) 340-4130AWAJAKPROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 120 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COOf 51 LAND USE SUBMITTAL 12.18.23 JAK 2 LAND USE COMMENT RESPONSE 03.07.24 JAK 5Impervious AreasExhibit G | Application151 Preliminary Engineering Report 120 East Main Partners LLC 120 East Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 Prepared by: Roaring Fork Engineering 592 Hwy 133 Carbondale, CO 81623 March 2024 Exhibit G | Application 152 Preliminary Engineering Report March 2024 i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Site Location, Access, & Hazards .................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Grading and Drainage ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Geotechnical .................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Proposed Conditions ..................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Grading and Drainage ...................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Roads, Driveway, and Right-of-way ................................................................................................. 2 3.0 Utilities ............................................................................................................................................ 3 3.1 Water ................................................................................................................................................ 3 3.1.1 Existing ......................................................................................................................... 3 3.1.2 Proposed ...................................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Sanitary Sewer ................................................................................................................................. 3 3.2.1 Existing ......................................................................................................................... 3 3.2.2 Proposed ...................................................................................................................... 3 3.3 Electric.............................................................................................................................................. 3 3.3.1 Existing ......................................................................................................................... 3 3.3.2 Proposed ...................................................................................................................... 3 3.4 Communications .............................................................................................................................. 3 3.4.1 Existing ......................................................................................................................... 3 3.4.2 Proposed ...................................................................................................................... 4 3.5 Gas ................................................................................................................................................... 4 3.5.1 Existing ......................................................................................................................... 4 3.5.2 Proposed ...................................................................................................................... 4 FIGURES Figure 1: Pitkin County GIS Vicinity View ..................................................................................................... 1 APPENDICES Appendix A Project Location, Classification & Hazards Appendix B Stormwater Estimates, Rainfall Data, & Web Soil Survey Exhibit G | Application 153 Preliminary Engineering Report March 2024 1 1.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 1.1 SITE LOCATION, ACCESS, & HAZARDS The property addressed at 120 East Main Street is in downtown Aspen on a 2,520 square foot lot and documented as parcel ID number 273512470002. It currently is an asphalt paved parking area. There is an existing tree on the west side of the parking spaces and several utility pedestals and an electric transformer on the east side of the parcel. To the west is Victorians at Bleeker Condo Association, to the north is a parking lot attached to the Radio Free Aspen building, to the east is the Historic Sardy House, and to the south is the alley right of way with the rest of the 120 E Main Street property further south, currently occupied by Aspen Reprographics. There currently exists no known hazards for this site and there are no steep slopes (>30%) on the site. The site is not at risk for potential geologic hazards, flood due to 100-year event, or mudflow based on the November 1, 2001, Surface Drainage Master Plan for the City of Aspen and can be seen in the Appendix. The site is not located near or adjacent to any Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) special flood hazard areas. The site is located within Zone X and can be seen in the Appendix. Figure 1: Pitkin County GIS Vicinity View 1.2 GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site is relatively flat, with less than 2 feet of grade change across the site sloping to the north. There is an existing storm system onsite as indicated by a drain grate and full infiltration drywell in the central north area of the north parking spaces. This drywell is known to be functioning based on the lack of local erosion and ice damming during winter thaw freeze periods. 1.3 GEOTECHNICAL The Geotechnical report has not been completed at this time. Once Roaring Fork Engineering receives the report, the civil design will be updated accordingly. Exhibit G | Application 154 Preliminary Engineering Report March 2024 2 2.0 PROPOSED CONDITIONS The proposed project will be a development of the northern portion of the site. The asphalt parking will be replaced with a two-unit residential building being built above improved parking spaces. The small two- story residential building will be located along the west and north property lines, providing parking spaces below the proposed residential building and protecting the utility pedestals and electric transformer to the east. 2.1 GRADING AND DRAINAGE The civil design for the site will meet the requirements of the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan and is classified as a Major Project that is disturbing more than 1,000 square feet of the site but less than 25% of the entire site. The stormwater requirements for this classification of a project are to provide water quality treatment for the new impervious. Given that the site is so flat, the grading of the site will not vary much from existing. All roof area runoff will be collected by gutters and downspouts and directed to full infiltration drywells. An existing drywell is presently treating the existing runoff but is located too close to the property line and will conflict with the proposed development. This drywell will be relocated and used in conjunction with the other proposed drywell to treat all storm runoff from the proposed building and the impervious hardscape in the immediate area. Both drywells will be full infiltration and treat the runoff for water quality. A websoil survey indicates well draining soil and a percolation test will be performed prior to building permit to ensure the validity of this approach. Preliminary calculations are shown in the appendix for water quality treatment utilizing the full infiltration drywells. Existing drainage patterns will remain. 2.2 ROADS, DRIVEWAY, AND RIGHT-OF-WAY The proposed residential building and parking spaces will be accessed through the alley from the east side of North Garmisch Street. The alley dead ends and there is no exit to the east. Any disturbance to the alley will be replaced per City of Aspen Engineering Design Standards. No other improvements to the alley are proposed. Exhibit G | Application 155 Preliminary Engineering Report March 2024 3 3.0 UTILITIES All utility connections, routing, and installation will adhere to City of Aspen Engineering Design Standards, City of Aspen Electric Standards, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, and other utility owner’s standards. 3.1 WATER 3.1.1 EXISTING There presently is no known water service in the area and no known water service in North Garmisch Street to the west. 3.1.2 PROPOSED The proposed residential building will rely on a water service connecting to the 6” cast iron pipe water main in North Garmisch Street. The size of the proposed service is currently unknown but will comply with City of Aspen Engineering standards. 3.2 SANITARY SEWER 3.2.1 EXISTING Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District has a sewer main within the alleyway, but no known service line is extended to the proposed residential building. 3.2.2 PROPOSED A new sewer service will be utilized for the proposed residential building. It is assumed that the grades for the sewer main are adequate and that there are no known issues with gravity draining. 3.3 ELECTRIC 3.3.1 EXISTING There is one existing transformer located on the east side of the parcel. From the survey, the neighboring properties use the transformer and the capacity in the transformer will be verified with City of Aspen Electric. An existing underground electrical line routes underneath the west side of the proposed residential building. This underground line will need to be relocated outside of the proposed residential building and adhere to City of Aspen Engineering and City of Aspen Electric Standards. 3.3.2 PROPOSED Should there be inadequate capacity, a new transformer will be proposed to replace the existing in the same location, meeting City of Aspen Engineering Design Standards. The service for the proposed design will be trenched down the alley connecting to the residential building while adhering to City of Aspen Engineering and City of Aspen Electric Standards. 3.4 COMMUNICATIONS 3.4.1 EXISTING There is existing communication lines and a pedestal in the northeast corner of the site. Exhibit G | Application 156 Preliminary Engineering Report March 2024 4 3.4.2 PROPOSED Communication lines will be routed from the existing pedestal to the proposed residential building where appropriate. 3.5 GAS 3.5.1 EXISTING There is no known gas service extended to the site, but a gas main is located within the alley. 3.5.2 PROPOSED A gas service is not anticipated to be installed for the proposed building. Exhibit G | Application 157 APPENDIX A Project Location, Classification & Hazards Exhibit G | Application 158 Report Created: 12/6/2023 2:38:42 PM Parcel ID: 273512470002Pitkin County Parcel Report Upper Roaring Fork River Main Street Historic District No Zoning Overlay on this parcel AACP Not within a Caucus Area Watershed Subbasin Watershed Drainage Historic District Zone District Overlays Master Plan Area Caucus Boundaries Pitkin County Library Aspen School District No. 1 (RE) Aspen Fire Protection District City of Aspen Water Service Area Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Library District School District Fire District Water District Sewer System Services Land Use Category Improvements Assessor's Information Township, Range, Section 2221.56 Sq. Feet 120 E MAIN ST Aspen GIS Parcel Size Address (Assessor's Records) Jurisdiction Property Information 0200: Vacant Land-Commercial Lot Roaring Fork River above Aspen 120 E MAIN 120 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 R015722 120 EAST MAIN PARTNERS LLCOwner Account Owner Address T:10, R:85, S:12 Subdivision: US WEST Lot: 2Legal Description Refer to local regulationsZone District Exhibit G | Application 159 2 4 U.S. House of Representatives District Board of County Commissioners District(s) State Senate District State House District Voting Precinct Voting Information 3 5 57 Center Lode Mining Claim, Little Cloud, Millionaire Millsite, Little Cloud Park, Prockter, Barbee, Jenny Adair Park, Armstrong AKA Crash Point, Reeder, Rubey Lot 7, Mill Street Parcel, Rubey Lot 6/ Williams Woods Red Mountain Rd, Recycle Center, Oklahoma Flats, Courthouse, Alps, W Hopkins Ave, E Hallam St, Puppy Smith, W Hopkins Path, Post Office, Trueman, Red Brick, S Seventh St, Rio Grande, Summit St Cutoff , John Denver Sanctuary, Trueman , Little Cloud, Scotties, Midland Trail , Ajax, Midland - 3rd St, Aspen Mountain Rd, W Hallam St, Lower Hunter Creek, Hunter Creek Extension, Ajax - Little Cloud connector, Top of Mill Crossover, Lone Pine, E Hopkins Ave, No Problem Joe, Rio Grande Park, Music Tent Paepcke Park, Yellow Brick School Park, Wagner Park, Pioneer Park, Hillyard Park, Triangle Park, Koch Lumber Park, Wheeler Park, Conner Memorial Park, Clapper Park, Francis Whitaker Park, Veterans Park, Willoughby ParK, Library Plaza, Lift One A Park, Aspen Alps Park, Rio Grande Park, John Denver Sanctuary, Herron Park, Newbury Park, Cooper Park, Hyman Park, Fox Crossing Park, Mary B Open Spaces Nearby (1/2 Mile) Trails Nearby (1/2 Mile) Parks Nearby (1/2 Mile) Public Amenities Watershed Subbasin Watershed Drainage Tax Information Address Retired Parcel Documents Parcel 273512470002 None Found Roaring Fork River above Aspen PITKIN COUNTY TV & FM TRA PITKIN COUNTY HUMAN SERVI ASPEN CONSOLIDATED SANITA ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL COLORADO MTN COLLEGE Total PITKIN COUNTY ROAD & BRID ASPEN HISTORIC PARK & REC COLORADO RIVER WATER CONS PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY DIS PITKIN COUNTY OPEN SPACE PITKIN HEALTHY COMMUNITY ROARING FORK TRANSP AUTH ASPEN FIRE PROTECTION ASPEN AMBULANCE DISTRICT ASPEN SCHOOL DISTRICT PITKIN COUNTY GENERAL FUN CITY OF ASPEN 2.334 0.300 5.004 1.411 1.100 8.916 1.010 2.405 3.750 0.187 2.568 0.087 0.289 4.085 2.650 0.065 0.501 611.74 179.44 380.75 48.94 14.19 418.92 47.14 164.76 392.32 230.18 30.51 10.6 666.39 816.3 1454.47 81.73 432.3 AmountAuthorityMill Levy 36.662 $5,980.68 None Found Exhibit G | Application 160 Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this report as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in the report is accurate, but the accuracy may change. The information maintained by the County may not be complete as to mineral estate ownership and that information should be determined by separate legal and property analysis. http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. Disclaimer Data is presented in WGS 1984 Web Mercator. Size, shape, measurement and overlay of features may be distorted. In some cases, multiple results could be valid; for example, Zoning. In other cases, a parcel may cross over the boundary of more than one data area, for example, multiple Precincts. Visit the Pitkin County GIS Department at Exhibit G | Application 161 MUnot zoned CC R/MF RR CL OS C AH R-15A A NC R-15BR-30 PUB R-6 L R/MFA C-1 SCI WPR-15 P PD PD PD PD PD GCS PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD DRAINAGE PDLP PD PD PD PDPDPD PD LP LPLP PD LP PD PDLPLPLP PD PDLP PD LP DRAIN/TRANSLP PD PD LP PD PDLP PD LP PD PD PDLP PD PDLP LP PD PD LP PD PDPD PD PD PD LP PD LP L PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PDPD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PDPD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD LP PD PD LP PD PD LP PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD L PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PYRAM I DRDSORIGINALSTTRUSC O TTPL TEALCT OAK L NHIDEAWAYLN TWINRIDG ED R CA S CADE LN A A B C 1 00LACETLNB E NNETTBENCHRD S M U G GLERMTNRDOWL CREE K R D HARMONY R DUTE AVEWORLDCUPCTNMILLSTN 6TH STRI O GRA N DE PL STILLWATERLNCRYSTALLAKERDBRENDEN CTSESAME STTHUN D E R B OWL LNHW Y 8 2 S TA GE RD MIDLANDAVEROCH PL NGARMISCHSTS7TH S T N 7TH STN8THSTS1STSTS GALENASTS HUNTER STN4THSTN 1ST STN3RDSTS 4TH STN 5TH STSMONARCHSTSASPENSTN2NDSTSGARMISCHSTSHADYLNSMILLSTS5THSTHWY 8 2EXHIBITIONLNS WILLOW CTC H A NCECTSMILLSTW BLE E K E R S T PR O S P E C T O R RDBUNNY CT NSPRIN G ST BAY S T W O O D DUCKLNP O W D E R B O W L TRLUTE C T L ONEPINERD MTNLAURELDRMTNO AKSPL P A R K C I RALICE LNRIDGE PL R O A R ING FORK DR MUSICSCHOOLRDDALE AVE E HYM A N A V E ALTA VI S T A D R W NORTHST FRED LNNE A LEAVESILVERLODEDRMOLLY CTAABC 200 C A S T LE C R E EKRDPOWE RPLANTRDS SPRING STPITKIN W A Y W SMUGGLERST GI B SON AVECHATFIELDRD MAYFLOW E R C T HWY 82STAGERD LUPINE DRS P RUCE S T SAW M I L L C T MEADO W SR D B U S B A RNLNM OORE D RPEARL CT PF I S T E R D RGILLESPIE ST A V S C RDSTAGE C T W HYMANAVE W FRA N C I S S T NORTHWAYDRE DUR A N T A V E WINTER WAY E MAI N S T WILLIAMSWAY W HAL L A M S T W MAINST E BLE E K E R S T E HOPKINSAVELAK E A V E GILB E R T S T MA G NIFICORD W HO P K I N S A V E C LUB CIR OREGO N TRL DEAN S T N WIL L O WCTARDMOREDRPARKAVESAGE CTMI NERS T R A IL R D SALVAT I O N CI RWOODWARDLN S IE V E RS CIRS IE R R A VISTAD R LA URE L LN QUE E N S TMAROONCTC L U B S I D E DR SHAVANODRMAROON CREE K RD BLACK B IRCHDRE BU T TERM I LK RDFIVET R E E S L N ACCES S L O O P MT NL A URELLNM TN L AURELCTSPRUCE CT E COO P E R A V EMEADOWSTRUSTEE ASPEN MTN RD WALNUT STTIE H A C K RDSIL V E R K I N G D R CEMETERYLNP F E I F E R P LB L U E B O NNETTRLSMEADOWLN RI V E R S I D E D R A R D M O RECTCINNAM O N C T F O RGERDOVERLOOKDRKINGSTCOTTO N WO O D L N GLEND E E R DASP E NMTNCUTOF F R D AJA X A V EHIG HSCH OOLRDRIDGE RD RACES T STILLWATERDRLI TT LE CL O U D T R LPASSGOLN CA STLE R IDGERDHUNTERCREEKT O LLRDM E A D O W OODDRP R IM R O S E PAT H DOOLIT TLEDRFAB IL OOPPUPPY SM I THS T SRIVERSIDEAVEB O N IT A D R S K I M M INGLNM A ROONDRV IN E STPITKINMESADR B O O M E R A N G R DPLA CERL NMAP L E L N UTE PLGLEN G A R R Y D R WLUPINE DR S ABI NDRMTN VIEW DR W ESTVIEW DR DRAW DR SNOWBUNNY LNHERRONHOLLOW RD HUNTE R C R E E K RDNE LLE RICKS O NRD CAS TLECREEKDRSNEAKYLNMININGSTOCKPKWYGLENEAGLESDRE LUPINEDR WATER S AVEMCLAINFLATSRD R E D BUTTEDR REDMTN RD HO M E S T A K E D R W B U T T E R MI L KRDMAROLTP LWT I E HACK RD FA L C O N R D A M E RICAN L N H EATHE R LN R O A R IN G FOR KRDJALAND A LN LARKS P UR LN RANCHR D REL AYRDS M U GGLER CUTOFFRD EASTW OOD DRISABELHAYRDEAIRPORTRDCOACH R D W REDS RD M C S K I MMIN G RD E REDS RD W RIGHTS RDPAEP C KEDRWILLOUGHBYWAY Date: 7/13/2022 City of Aspen Geographic Information Systems Planning & Zoning This map/drawing/image is a graphical representation of the features depicted and is not a legal representation. The accuracy may change depending on the enlargement or reduction. Copyright 2022 City of Aspen GIS 0 1,450 2,900725 Feet 1 inch = 1,450 feet When printed at 11"x17" 4 CITY OF ASPEN ZONE DISTRICTS This map is a representation of ordinances and actions taken by the Aspen City Council. It may or may not accurately identify the zoning of a parcel with the City of Aspen. Please refer to the ordinances that relate to a property to determine its correct zoning, or any approved special uses. This map does NOT depict properties that are designated historic, within historic districts, or near mountain viewplanes. Separate maps for each of these areas are available. P P P PUB PUB MU R-6 MU R-6 MU MU CC R-15 PUB P CC R-6 MU PUB MU P R/MF P R-15 R-6 R-15 P AH R/MF CL CL NC AH R-6 P R/MF R-15 L PAH R-15 AH AH NC P SCI AH C R-6 R/MF L L CL CC C P L L R/MF R-6 P R-15 R-15 R-15 R/MFR-15A R-6 R/MFA R/MFAR-6 R-3 R-15 P C-1 R/MF R-6 SCI R-15 A PUB R-30 R-15 C P L C R-15 P L L PUB DRAINAGE PD PD PD LP PD LP LP LP PD PD LP LP LP PD PD LP PD LP DRAIN/TRANSLP PD PD LP PD PD LP LP PD LP PD PD LP DRAIN/TRANS LP PD PD LP PD PD PD PD PD LP PD L PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD LP PD PD LP PD PD LP PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD PD L PD PD LP PD LP PD LP PD PD PD PD PDS 4TH STN 4TH STSOUTH A V E N 2ND STS HUNTER STS 1ST STS 2ND STS GALENA STS ASPEN STS MILL STS 3RD STN 1S T STBAY ST PARK AVE E JUANITA ST E SNARK ST UTECTE FRANCI S S T E BLEEKER ST S SPRING STW MAIN ST SASPENSTNRIVERSIDEAVENEALEAVEAJAXAV E SUMMIT ST E HALLAM ST E COOPER AVE W SMUGGLER ST E HYMAN AVE E HOPKINS AVE W FRANCIS ST W BLEEKER ST E HOPKINS AVE E HYMAN AVE DEAN STDEAN ST E MAIN STW MAIN ST E COOPER AVE W HYMAN AVE W HALLAM ST W HOPKINS AVE E BLEEKER ST E DURANT AVE SORIGINALSTS MONARCH STJUAN ST U TE PL GIBSONAVE QUE E N STEMAINST E COOPER AVEN MILL STE DURANT AVE OAKLN RIOGRANDE P L KING ST C OTTON W OODLN S MILL STLIT TLE CLO U D T R L SALP SRDASPE N M T N RD GIBS ON AVE PU P P Y S MITH ST MA P L E L N N SPRINGST S G A LENASTW ATERS AVE Zone District Designation L LodgeAH Affordable Housing R/MF Residential /Multi-Family R/MFA Residential /Multi-Family R-3 High Density Residential R-30 Low Density Residential R-6 Medium Density Residential R-15 Moderate Density Residential R-15-A Moderate Density Residential R-15B Moderate Density Residential RR Rural Residential MU Mixed Use SKI Ski Area Base C Conservation OS Open Space P Park A Academic PUB Public NC Neighborhood Commercial CL Commercial Lodge CC Commercial Core C-1 Commercial WP Wildlife Preservation SCI Service Commercial Industrial Zone District Overlay Drainage Planned Development Lodge + Planned Development Lodge Preservation Drainage + Transportation Environmentaly Sensitive Area Golf Course Support + Planned Development Lodge Preservation + Planned Development Legend Roads City of AspenGreenline 8040 Exhibit G | Application 162 City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan Chapter 1 – Policy and Permit Requirements 1-3 Rev 11/2014 Table 1.1 General Requirements for Minor and Major Projects Project Type* Area added OR disturbed Project Classification General Requirements Disturbing less than 200 sq ft < 200 square feet -------- No requirements Landscaping or grading only, and No hardscape, and no change to drainage pattern 200 – 1000 square feet --------- No requirements Landscaping or grading only that might include hardscape or change in grade or drainage pattern, small additions, small scrape and replace 200 – 1000 square feet Minor • WQCV or drain to green space for the impervious (hardscape) area • CMP Refinishing a driveway only (retaining or decreasing impervious area square footage) Limited to the exact footprint of the existing driveway Minor • CMP if greater than 1000 square feet • WQCV or drain to green space for the impervious (hardscape) area Interior work only < 50% demolished Minor CMP if greater than 400 square feet of work Interior work only, Pre-project lot coverage of 0-50% > 75% demolished (< 75% is still a minor) Major • CMP • WQCV for the entire area • Conveyance of major flows • Detention to the historic undeveloped rate or FIL for the entire area, unless discharging directly to the City’s stormwater system depicted in Figure 1.1. • Requires Professional Engineer Exhibit G | Application 163 City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan Chapter 1 – Policy and Permit Requirements 1-4 Rev 11/2014 Notes: 1 Special Circumstances: Any work, regardless of amount or size, performed on historic properties, in environmentally sensitive areas, geologic hazard areas, in jurisdictional or non-jurisdictional floodplains, or work that impacts trees may be required to submit information for permit review and may be required to provide a more detailed drainage analysis and design than suggested in the table above. 2 The de minimis threshold for minor projects applies only to a single addition on a given piece of property. If cumulative additions on a property over a three-year period after the CO is issued increase the impervious area by more than 1000 square feet, “major” project requirements and evaluations will apply to all impervious areas that are in addition to the “baseline” imperviousness determined from the 2008 aerial photography. 3 Pre-project lot coverage is determined by dividing the total hardscape footprint on the lot (house, driveway, patios, sidewalks, etc.) by the total lot area. Interior demolition is measured by the square footage of the room renovated/modified divided by the total square footage of the structure. Interior work only, Pre-project lot coverage of 50-100% > 50% demolished Major • CMP • WQCV for the entire area • Conveyance of major flows • Detention to the historic undeveloped rate or FIL for the entire area, unless discharging directly to the City’s stormwater system depicted in Figure 1.1. • Requires Professional Engineer Landscaping, grading, installing or disturbing hardscapes, additions to structures, etc. > 1000 square feet and < 25% of the entire site Major • CMP • WQCV for the new impervious area • Conveyance of major flows • Detention to the historic undeveloped rate or FIL for the disturbed or added area, unless discharging directly to the City’s stormwater system depicted in Figure 1.1. • Requires Professional Engineer Landscaping, grading, installing or disturbing hardscapes, additions to structures, scrape and replace, interior remodel combined with exterior work, etc. > 1000 square feet and > 25% of the entire site Major • CMP • WQCV for the entire area • Conveyance of major flows • Detention to the historic undeveloped rate or FIL for the entire area, unless discharging directly to the City’s stormwater system depicted in Figure 1.1. • Requires Professional Engineer Exhibit G | Application 164 City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan Chapter 1 – Policy and Permit Requirements 1-5 Rev 11/2014 Figure 1.1 – City of Aspen Stormwater System Carrying the 10-year Flow Exhibit G | Application 165 Exhibit G | Application166 Exhibit G | Application167 Exhibit G | Application168 National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250 Feet Ü SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE) Zone A, V, A99 With BFE or DepthZone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR Regulatory Floodway 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas of 1% annual chance flood with average depth less than one foot or with drainage areas of less than one square mileZone X Future Conditions 1% Annual Chance Flood HazardZone X Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to Levee. See Notes.Zone X Area with Flood Risk due to LeveeZone D NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X Area of Undetermined Flood HazardZone D Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer Levee, Dike, or Floodwall Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance 17.5 Water Surface Elevation Coastal Transect Coastal Transect Baseline Profile Baseline Hydrographic Feature Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) Effective LOMRs Limit of Study Jurisdiction Boundary Digital Data Available No Digital Data Available Unmapped This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps if it is not void as described below. The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap accuracy standards The flood hazard information is derived directly from the authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map was exported on 12/6/2023 at 3:40 PM and does not reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and time. The NFHL and effective information may change or become superseded by new data over time. This map image is void if the one or more of the following map elements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels, legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers, FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for regulatory purposes. Legend OTHER AREAS OF FLOOD HAZARD OTHER AREAS GENERAL STRUCTURES OTHER FEATURES MAP PANELS 8 B 20.2 The pin displayed on the map is an approximate point selected by the user and does not represent an authoritative property location. 1:6,000 106°49'39"W 39°11'43"N 106°49'1"W 39°11'15"N Basemap Imagery Source: USGS National Map 2023 Exhibit G | Application 169 APPENDIX B Stormwater Estimates, Rainfall Data, & Web Soil Survey Exhibit G | Application 170 InputCalculationBasinBasin NameTotal AreaImp. Area Imperv-iousnessReq'd WQCV (depth) Req'd WQCV (vol.)Decid. Area Conif. AreaPerv. Paver AreaGrass Buffer AreaDrywell Vol.Perv. Paver RatioGrass Buffer RatioCanopy CreditPerv. Paver CreditGrass Buffer CreditEff. Imp. AreaEff. Imperv-iousnessEff. WQCV (depth)Net WQCV (#)(sq. ft.)(sq. ft.)(%)(in)(cu. ft.)(sq. ft.)(sq. ft.)(sq. ft.)(sq. ft.)(cu. ft.)(sq. ft.)(sq. ft.)(sq. ft.)(sq. ft.)(%)(in)(cu. ft.)SiteSite94169416100%0.256200.50.00.000.00393210009416100%0.26-192.2Total 94169416100%0.256200.500003930009416100%0.26-192.2LegendExhibit G | Application171 Duration (min.) Rainfall Intensity (in/hr) Inflow Volume (ft3) Outflow Volume (ft3) Storage Volume (ft3) Condition Developed Historic 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Area / ft^2 9416 9416 1.00 8.77 102.71 145.92 -43.21 Aimp / ft^2 9416 188 2.00 8.00 187.45 159.02 28.44 Soil Type B B 3.00 7.35 258.47 172.12 86.36 Lo / ft 25 25 4.00 6.80 318.78 185.22 133.57 So / ft/ft 0.02 0.06 5.00 6.33 370.58 198.31 172.27 Lf / ft 25 25 6.00 5.91 415.51 211.41 204.09 Sf / ft/ft 0.02 0.02 7.00 5.54 454.81 224.51 230.29 K 10 10 8.00 5.22 489.44 237.61 251.83 9.00 4.93 520.18 250.71 269.47 % Imp 100.00%2.00%10.00 4.67 547.62 263.81 283.80 C5 0.86 0.01 11.00 4.44 572.24 276.91 295.33 C10 0.87 0.07 12.00 4.23 594.45 290.01 304.43 C100 0.90 0.44 13.00 4.03 614.56 303.11 311.45 To /min 1.72 5.44 14.00 3.86 632.86 316.21 316.65 Vf /ft/sec 1.41 1.41 15.00 3.70 649.56 329.31 320.25 Tf /min 0.29 0.29 16.00 3.55 664.86 342.41 322.45 Tc,i /min 5.00 5.73 17.00 3.41 678.91 355.51 323.40 TR / min 5.00 10.14 18.00 3.28 691.87 368.61 323.26 Td / min 5.00 10.14 `19.00 3.16 703.84 381.71 322.12 I10 / in/hr 3.96 2.90 20.00 3.05 714.92 394.81 320.11 I100 / in/hr 6.33 4.64 21.00 2.95 725.22 407.91 317.31 Q10 / cfs 0.74 0.05 22.00 2.85 734.79 421.01 313.78 Q100 / cfs 1.23 0.44 23.00 2.76 743.72 434.11 309.61 24.00 2.67 752.07 447.21 304.86 25.00 2.59 759.87 460.31 299.56 Return Period P1 / in/hr 26.00 2.52 767.19 473.41 293.78 2-yr 0.47 27.00 2.45 774.06 486.51 287.55 5-yr 0.64 28.00 2.38 780.52 499.61 280.92 10-r 0.77 25-yr 0.95 Target Volume by FAA Method # 50-yr 1.09 100-yr 1.23 IDF for Aspen, CO Site From Table 2.2 of COA URMP (page 2-2), Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) in Aspen, CO Exhibit G | Application 172 12/6/23, 2:23 PM Precipitation Frequency Data Server https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=39.1915&lon=-106.8222&data=intensity&units=english&series=pds 1/4 NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2 Location name: Aspen, Colorado, USA* Latitude: 39.1915°, Longitude: -106.8222° Elevation: 7901 ft** * source: ESRI Maps ** source: USGS POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES Sanja Perica, Deborah Martin, Sandra Pavlovic, Ishani Roy, Michael St. Laurent, Carl Trypaluk, Dale Unruh, Michael Yekta, Geoffery Bonnin NOAA, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland PF_tabular | PF_graphical | Maps_&_aerials PF tabular PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches/hour)1 Duration Average recurrence interval (years) 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000 5-min 1.51 (1.30‑1.81) 2.08 (1.78‑2.48) 2.99 (2.54‑3.60) 3.74 (3.16‑4.54) 4.78 (3.80‑6.06) 5.57 (4.30‑7.22) 6.36 (4.67‑8.56) 7.16 (4.96‑10.0) 8.22 (5.38‑12.0) 9.01 (5.70‑13.4) 10-min 1.11 (0.948‑1.33) 1.52 (1.30‑1.82) 2.18 (1.86‑2.63) 2.74 (2.31‑3.32) 3.50 (2.78‑4.44) 4.07 (3.15‑5.29) 4.66 (3.42‑6.26) 5.24 (3.62‑7.33) 6.01 (3.94‑8.75) 6.59 (4.18‑9.82) 15-min 0.900 (0.772‑1.08) 1.24 (1.06‑1.48) 1.78 (1.51‑2.14) 2.23 (1.88‑2.70) 2.84 (2.26‑3.61) 3.32 (2.56‑4.30) 3.78 (2.78‑5.09) 4.26 (2.95‑5.96) 4.89 (3.20‑7.11) 5.36 (3.39‑7.99) 30-min 0.566 (0.484‑0.678) 0.770 (0.658‑0.924) 1.10 (0.934‑1.32) 1.36 (1.15‑1.65) 1.72 (1.37‑2.18) 1.99 (1.53‑2.57) 2.25 (1.65‑3.02) 2.51 (1.74‑3.50) 2.85 (1.86‑4.13) 3.10 (1.96‑4.61) 60-min 0.369 (0.315‑0.442) 0.473 (0.404‑0.567) 0.640 (0.544‑0.771) 0.777 (0.655‑0.942) 0.961 (0.766‑1.22) 1.10 (0.850‑1.42) 1.24 (0.909‑1.66) 1.37 (0.949‑1.92) 1.55 (1.01‑2.25) 1.68 (1.06‑2.50) 2-hr 0.227 (0.195‑0.270) 0.280 (0.241‑0.334) 0.366 (0.313‑0.437) 0.436 (0.370‑0.524) 0.531 (0.426‑0.666) 0.603 (0.469‑0.772) 0.674 (0.499‑0.894) 0.744 (0.520‑1.03) 0.836 (0.553‑1.20) 0.905 (0.578‑1.33) 3-hr 0.180 (0.155‑0.213) 0.211 (0.182‑0.251) 0.263 (0.226‑0.313) 0.306 (0.260‑0.366) 0.365 (0.296‑0.457) 0.411 (0.323‑0.525) 0.457 (0.341‑0.605) 0.505 (0.355‑0.693) 0.567 (0.378‑0.810) 0.615 (0.395‑0.898) 6-hr 0.121 (0.105‑0.142) 0.135 (0.117‑0.159) 0.159 (0.137‑0.188) 0.180 (0.154‑0.214) 0.212 (0.174‑0.265) 0.237 (0.189‑0.303) 0.265 (0.200‑0.349) 0.294 (0.209‑0.402) 0.335 (0.226‑0.475) 0.367 (0.238‑0.530) 12-hr 0.078 (0.068‑0.091) 0.087 (0.076‑0.101) 0.102 (0.089‑0.120) 0.117 (0.101‑0.138) 0.138 (0.115‑0.172) 0.157 (0.126‑0.199) 0.177 (0.135‑0.231) 0.198 (0.143‑0.269) 0.229 (0.156‑0.322) 0.254 (0.167‑0.362) 24-hr 0.049 (0.043‑0.057) 0.055 (0.048‑0.064) 0.066 (0.058‑0.078) 0.077 (0.067‑0.090) 0.092 (0.077‑0.114) 0.106 (0.085‑0.133) 0.120 (0.092‑0.155) 0.135 (0.098‑0.181) 0.156 (0.108‑0.217) 0.174 (0.115‑0.244) 2-day 0.029 (0.026‑0.034) 0.034 (0.030‑0.039) 0.041 (0.036‑0.048) 0.048 (0.042‑0.056) 0.058 (0.049‑0.071) 0.067 (0.054‑0.083) 0.075 (0.058‑0.096) 0.085 (0.062‑0.112) 0.098 (0.068‑0.134) 0.108 (0.072‑0.150) 3-day 0.022 (0.019‑0.025) 0.025 (0.022‑0.029) 0.031 (0.027‑0.035) 0.036 (0.031‑0.041) 0.043 (0.036‑0.052) 0.049 (0.040‑0.060) 0.055 (0.043‑0.070) 0.062 (0.046‑0.082) 0.071 (0.050‑0.097) 0.079 (0.053‑0.109) 4-day 0.018 (0.016‑0.021) 0.020 (0.018‑0.023) 0.025 (0.022‑0.029) 0.029 (0.025‑0.033) 0.034 (0.029‑0.042) 0.039 (0.032‑0.048) 0.044 (0.034‑0.056) 0.049 (0.036‑0.064) 0.056 (0.040‑0.076) 0.062 (0.042‑0.085) 7-day 0.012 (0.011‑0.014) 0.014 (0.012‑0.016) 0.017 (0.015‑0.019) 0.019 (0.017‑0.022) 0.023 (0.019‑0.027) 0.025 (0.021‑0.031) 0.028 (0.022‑0.036) 0.031 (0.023‑0.041) 0.036 (0.025‑0.048) 0.039 (0.027‑0.053) 10-day 0.010 (0.009‑0.011) 0.011 (0.010‑0.013) 0.013 (0.012‑0.015) 0.015 (0.013‑0.017) 0.018 (0.015‑0.021) 0.020 (0.016‑0.024) 0.022 (0.017‑0.027) 0.024 (0.018‑0.031) 0.027 (0.019‑0.036) 0.029 (0.020‑0.040) 20-day 0.007 (0.006‑0.008) 0.008 (0.007‑0.009) 0.009 (0.008‑0.010) 0.010 (0.009‑0.011) 0.011 (0.010‑0.013) 0.012 (0.010‑0.015) 0.014 (0.011‑0.017) 0.015 (0.011‑0.019) 0.016 (0.012‑0.022) 0.018 (0.012‑0.024) 30-day 0.005 (0.005‑0.006) 0.006 (0.005‑0.007) 0.007 (0.006‑0.008) 0.008 (0.007‑0.009) 0.009 (0.008‑0.011) 0.010 (0.008‑0.012) 0.011 (0.009‑0.013) 0.012 (0.009‑0.015) 0.013 (0.009‑0.017) 0.014 (0.009‑0.018) 45-day 0.004 (0.004‑0.005) 0.005 (0.005‑0.006) 0.006 (0.005‑0.007) 0.007 (0.006‑0.007) 0.007 (0.006‑0.009) 0.008 (0.007‑0.010) 0.009 (0.007‑0.011) 0.009 (0.007‑0.012) 0.010 (0.007‑0.013) 0.011 (0.007‑0.014) 60-day 0.004 (0.003‑0.004) 0.004 (0.004‑0.005) 0.005 (0.005‑0.006) 0.006 (0.005‑0.007) 0.007 (0.006‑0.008) 0.007 (0.006‑0.008) 0.008 (0.006‑0.009) 0.008 (0.006‑0.010) 0.009 (0.006‑0.011) 0.009 (0.006‑0.012) 1 Precipitation frequency (PF) estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series (PDS). Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90% confidence interval. The probability that precipitation frequency estimates (for a given duration and average recurrence interval) will be greater than the upper bound (or less than the lower bound) is 5%. Estimates at upper bounds are not checked against probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values. Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information. Back to Top PF graphical Exhibit G | Application 173 12/6/23, 2:23 PM Precipitation Frequency Data Server https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=39.1915&lon=-106.8222&data=intensity&units=english&series=pds 2/4 Back to Top Maps & aerials Small scale terrain Exhibit G | Application 174 12/6/23, 2:23 PM Precipitation Frequency Data Server https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=39.1915&lon=-106.8222&data=intensity&units=english&series=pds 3/4 Large scale terrain Large scale map Large scale aerial + – 3km 2mi + – 100km 60mi + – 100km 60mi Exhibit G | Application 175 12/6/23, 2:23 PM Precipitation Frequency Data Server https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=39.1915&lon=-106.8222&data=intensity&units=english&series=pds 4/4 Back to Top US Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Weather Service National Water Center 1325 East West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 Questions?: HDSC.Questions@noaa.gov Disclaimer + – 100km 60mi Exhibit G | Application 176 United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties Natural Resources Conservation Service December 6, 2023 Exhibit G | Application 177 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 Exhibit G | Application 178 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Exhibit G | Application 179 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map..................................................................................................................8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................12 Map Unit Descriptions........................................................................................12 Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties...................................................................................................14 107—Uracca, moist-Mergel complex, 1 to 6 percent slopes, extremely s..14 References............................................................................................................16 4 Exhibit G | Application 180 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 Exhibit G | Application 181 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report 6 Exhibit G | Application 182 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 Exhibit G | Application 183 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 Exhibit G | Application 184 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 43396014339608433961543396224339629433963643396434339650433959443396014339608433961543396224339629433963643396434339650342623 342630 342637 342644 342651 342658 342616 342623 342630 342637 342644 342651 342658 39° 11' 30'' N 106° 49' 20'' W39° 11' 30'' N106° 49' 18'' W39° 11' 28'' N 106° 49' 20'' W39° 11' 28'' N 106° 49' 18'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 0 10 20 40 60 Feet 0 4 8 16 24 Meters Map Scale: 1:279 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Exhibit G | Application 185 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties Survey Area Data: Version 14, Aug 23, 2023 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Sep 5, 2021—Sep 7, 2021 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background Custom Soil Resource Report 10 Exhibit G | Application 186 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 11 Exhibit G | Application 187 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 107 Uracca, moist-Mergel complex, 1 to 6 percent slopes, extremely s 0.3 100.0% Totals for Area of Interest 0.3 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, Custom Soil Resource Report 12 Exhibit G | Application 188 onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Custom Soil Resource Report 13 Exhibit G | Application 189 Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties 107—Uracca, moist-Mergel complex, 1 to 6 percent slopes, extremely s Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jq4g Elevation: 6,800 to 8,400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 16 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 40 to 43 degrees F Frost-free period: 75 to 95 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Uracca, moist, and similar soils:50 percent Mergel and similar soils:40 percent Minor components:10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Uracca, Moist Setting Landform:Structural benches, valley sides, alluvial fans Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Mixed alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 8 inches: cobbly sandy loam H2 - 8 to 15 inches: very cobbly sandy clay loam H3 - 15 to 60 inches: extremely cobbly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope:1 to 6 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:10 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R048AY237CO - Stony Loam Other vegetative classification: Stony Loam (null_82) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 14 Exhibit G | Application 190 Description of Mergel Setting Landform:Alluvial fans, structural benches, valley sides Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Glacial outwash Typical profile H1 - 0 to 8 inches: cobbly loam H2 - 8 to 20 inches: very cobbly sandy loam H3 - 20 to 60 inches: extremely stony sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope:1 to 6 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.60 to 6.00 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:10 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: R048AY237CO - Stony Loam Other vegetative classification: Stony Loam (null_82) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Other soils Percent of map unit:10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 15 Exhibit G | Application 191 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 16 Exhibit G | Application 192 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report 17 Exhibit G | Application 193 = input= calculationDATE:PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION:NAME, COMPANY, ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAILMinor Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total Commercial (sf)0.0 sf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Free-Market Housing (Units)2 Units 0.39 0.95 1.34 0.92 0.72 1.64Affordable Housing (Units)0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Lodging (Units)0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Essential Public Facility (sf)0.0 sf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.95 1.34 0.92 0.72 1.64 Land Use Trip Rate %Entering %Exiting Trip Rate %Entering %Exiting Commercial 2.27 0.69 0.31 4.14 0.4 0.6 Free-Market Housing 0.67 0.29 0.71 0.82 0.56 0.44 Affordable Housing 0.75 0.48 0.52 0.89 0.55 0.45 Lodging 0.25 0.57 0.43 0.31 0.52 0.48 Essential Public Facility 0.86 0.62 0.38 1.66 0.4 0.6 Net New Units/Square Feet of the Proposed ProjectProposed Land Use *For mixed-use (at least two of the established land uses) sites, a 4% reduction for AM Peak-Hour and a 14% reduction for PM Peak-Hour is applied to the trip generation. 120 E Main Street Partners, LLC. 1390 Lawrence Street Denver, CO 80204 970-710-9539rshaw@designworkshop.comTrip Generation 12/15/2023AM Peak Average PM Peak AverageTrips Generated AM Peak-Hour PM Peak-Hour TOTAL NEW TRIPS ASSUMPTIONS ASPEN TRIP GENERATIONIs this a major or minor project?120 E Main StOld Pitkin County Library Historic DesignationInstructions: IMPORTANT: Turn on Macros: In order for code to run correctly the security settings need to be altered. Click "File" and then click "Excel Options." In the "Trust Center" category, click "Trust Center Settings", and then click the "Macro Settings" category. Beneath "Macro Settings" select "Enable all Macros." Sheet 1. Trip Generation: Enter the project's square footage and/or unit counts under Proposed Land Use. The numbers should reflect the net change in land use between existing and proposed conditions. If a landuse is to be reduced put a negative number of units or square feet. Sheet 2. MMLOS: Answer Yes, No, or Not Applicable under each of the Pedestrian, Bike and Transit sections. Points are only awarded for proposed (not existing) and confirmed aspects of the project. Sheet 3. TDM: Choose the mitigation measures that are appropriate for your project.Sheet 4. Summary and Narrative: Review the summary of the project's mitigated trips and provide a narrative which explains the measures selected for the project. Click on "Generate Narrative" and individually explain each measure that was chosen and how it enhances the site or mitigates vehicle traffic. Ensure each selected measure make sense Minor Development - Inside the Roundabout Major Development - Outside the RoundaboutHelpful Hints: 1. Refer to the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines for information on the use of this tool.2. Refer to TIA Frequently Asked Questions for a quick overview. 2. Hover over red corner tags for additional information on individual measures. 3. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should be new and/or an improvement of existing conditions. A project will not receive credit for measures already in place. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should also make sense in the context of project location and future use.Transportation Impact Analysis TIA Frequently Asked QuestionsExhibit G | Application 194 = input= calculation5CategorySub.Measure NumberQuestionAnswerPoints1Does the project propose a detached sidewalk where an attached sidewalk currently exists? Does the proposed sidewalk and buffer meet standard minimum widths? No 02Is the proposed effective sidewalk width greater than the standard minimum width?No 03Does the project propose a landscape buffer greater than the standard minimum width?No 004Does the project propose a detached sidewalk on an adjacent block? Does the proposed sidewalk and buffer meet standard minimum widths? No 05Is the proposed effective sidewalk width on an adjacent block greater than the standard minimum width?No 06Is the proposed landscape buffer on an adjacent block greater than the standard minimum width?No 007Are slopes between back of curb and sidewalk equal to or less than 5%?Yes 08Are curbs equal to (or less than) 6 inches?Yes 09Is new large-scale landscaping proposed that improves the pedestrian experience? Properties within the Core do not have ample area to provide the level of landscaping required to receive credit in this category. No 010Does the project propose an improved crosswalk? This measure must get City approval before receiving credit. No 0011Are existing driveways removed from the street?No 012Is pedestrian and/or vehicle visibility unchanged by new structure or column?Yes 013Is the grade (where pedestrians cross) on cross-slope of driveway 2% or less?Yes 014Does the project propose enhanced pedestrian access points from the ROW? This includes improvements to ADA ramps or creating new access points which prevent pedestrians from crossing a street. No 015Does the project propose enhanced pedestrian or bicyclist interaction with vehicles at driveway areas?No 0016Is the project's pedestrian directness factor less than 1.5?Yes 017Does the project propose new improvements which reduce the pedestrian directness factor to less than 1.2? A site which has an existing pedestrian directness factor less than 1.2 cannot receive credit in this category. No 018Is the project proposing an off site improvement that results in a pedestrian directness factor below 1.2?* No 019Are traffic calming features proposed that are part of an approved plan (speed humps, rapid flash)?*No 0020Are additional minor improvements proposed which benefit the pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff? No 021Are additional major improvements proposed which benefit the pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff? No 000PedestriansSubtotalAdditional Proposed ImprovementsTOTAL NUMBER OF TRIPS MITIGATED:Pedestrian RoutesTraffic Calming and Pedestrian NetworkDriveways, Parking, and Access ConsiderationsMMLOS Input PageSubtotalSubtotalSidewalk Condition on Adjacent BlocksSidewalk Condition on Project FrontageSubtotalInstructions: Answer Yes, No, or Not Applicable to each measure under the Pedestrian, Bike and Transit sections. SubtotalSubtotalPedestrian Total*Exhibit G | Application 195 CategorySub.Measure NumberQuestionAnswerPoints22Is a new bicycle path being implemented with City approved design? No 023Do new bike paths allow access without crossing a street or driveway?No 024Is there proposed landscaping, striping, or signage improvements to an existing bicycle path?No 025Does the project propose additional minor bicycle improvements which have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff?No 026Does the project propose additional major bicycle improvements which have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff?No 00Bicycle Parking27Is the project providing bicycle parking?Yes 555CategorySub.Measure NumberQuestionAnswerPoints28Is seating/bench proposed?No 029Is a trash receptacle proposed?No 030Is transit system information (signage) proposed?No 031Is shelter/shade proposed?No 032Is enhanced pedestrian-scale lighting proposed?No 033Is real-time transit information proposed?No 034Is bicycle parking/storage proposed specifically for bus stop use? No 035Are ADA improvements proposed?No 0036Is a bus pull-out proposed at an existing stop?No 037Is relocation of a bus stop to improve transit accessibility or roadway operations proposed?No 038Is a new bus stop proposed (with minimum of two basic amenities)? No 000TransitBasic AmenitiesSubtotalSubtotalEnhanced AmenitiesSubtotalSubtotalBicycles Total*Transit Total*BicyclesModifications to Existing Bicycle PathsExhibit G | Application 196 CategoryMeasure NumberSub. QuestionAnswer Strategy VMT ReductionsWill an onsite ammenities strategy be implemented?NoWhich onsite ammenities will be implemented?Will a shared shuttle service strategy be implemented?NAWhat is the degree of implementation? What is the company size? What percentage of customers are eligible?3Nonmotorized Zones Will a nonmotorized zones strategy be implemented?No0.00%0.00%CategoryMeasure NumberSub. QuestionAnswer Strategy VMT ReductionsWill a network expansion stragtegy be implemented?NoWhat is the percentage increase of transit network coverage? What is the existing transit mode share as a % of total daily trips? Will a service frequency/speed strategy be implemented?NoWhat is the percentage reduction in headways (increase in frequency)? What is the existing transit mode share as a % of total daily trips?What is the level of implementation?Will a transit access improvement strategy be implemented?NoWhat is the extent of access improvements? 7Intercept Lot Will an intercept lot strategy be implemented?No0.00%0.00%CategoryMeasure NumberSub. QuestionAnswer Strategy VMT ReductionsWill there be participation in TOP?NAWhat percentage of employees are eligible? Is a transit fare subsidy strategy implemented?NoWhat percentage of employees are eligible? What is the amount of transit subsidy per passenger (daily equivalent)? Is an employee parking cash-out strategy being implemented?NoWhat percentage of employees are eligible? Is a workplace parking pricing strategy implemented?NoWhat is the daily parking charge? What percentage of employees are subject to priced parking? Is a compressed work weeks strategy implemented?NoWhat percentage of employees are participating? What is the workweek schedule? Is an employer sponsered shuttle program implemented?NoWhat is the employer size? What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a carpool matching strategy implemented?NoWhat percentage of employees are eligble? Is carshare participation being implemented?NoHow many employee memberships have been purchased? What percentage of employees are eligble? Is participation in the bikeshare program WE-cycle being implemented?NoHow many memberships have been purchased? What percentage of employees/guests are eligble? Is an end of trip facilities strategy being implemented?NoWhat is the degree of implementation? What is the employer size? Is a self-funded emergency ride home strategy being implemented?NoWhat percentage of employees are eligible? Is a carpool/vanpool priority parking strategy being implemented?NoWhat is the employer size? What number of parking spots are available for the program? Is a private employer shuttle strategy being implemented?NoWhat is the employer size? What percentage of employees are eligible? Is a trip reduction marketing/incentive program implemented?NoWhat percentage of employees/guests are eligible?0.00%0.00%0.00%1. 22% work trips represents a mixed-used site (SF Bay Area Travel Survey). See Assumptions Tab for more detail.2116171819201112131415Participation in TOP Transit Fare Subsidy Employee Parking Cash-Out Workplace Parking Pricing Compressed Work Weeks Employer Sponsored Vanpool Carpool Matching Carshare Program Self-funded Emergency Ride Home Carpool/Vanpool Priority Parking Private Employer Shuttle Trip Reduction Marketing/Incentive Program End of Trip FacilitiesCross Category Maximum Reduction, Neighborhood and Transit Global Maximum VMT ReductionsTDM Input Page0.00%0.00%0.00%Commute Trip Reduction Programs StrategiesOnsite Servicing Shared Shuttle Service Neighborhood/Site Enhancements Strategies0.00%0.00%Network Expansion Service Frequency/Speed Transit Access ImprovementMaximum Reduction Allowed in Category0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%Bikeshare Program0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%Maximum Reduction Allowed in CategoryMaximum Reduction Allowed in CategoryTransit System Improvements Strategies124568910InstructionsTDM: Choose the mitigation measures that are appropriate for your project. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should be new and/or an improvement of existing conditions. A project will not receive credit for measures already in place. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should also make sense in the context of project location and future use. Exhibit G | Application 197 DATE: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION: NAME, COMPANY, ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL Peak Hour Max Trips Generated MMLOS TDM Total Trips Mitigated PM 1.6 5 0.00 5.00 0.00 A minimum of two TDM measures must be utilized for minor projects. Please return to Sheet "3. TDM" and select a minimum of two measures. Include the following on a site plan. Clearly call out and label each measure. Attach the site plan to the TIA submittal. Slopes Between Back of Curb and Sidewalk 2% Slope at Pedestrian Driveway Crossings Pedestrian Directness Factor (See callout number 9 on the MMLOS sheet for an example) Bicycle Parking A new bike rack is proposed to ensure residents and commercial business emplpyees and visitors can easily bike to the property, in addition to the high quality transit access that currently exists on the property. It is important to note that the owners previously granted a permenant easment to the City and RFTA in order to complete recent upgrades to that bus stop. TDM Include any additional information that pertains to the TDM plan in the space provided below. As a benefit to historic designation, and in consideration of the provision of past and current MMLOS benefits, the owners request a waiver of these requirements. MMLOS Site Plan Requirements Project Description In the space below provide a description of the proposed project. The project proposes the historic designation of 120 E Main Street. This will not change the commercial space configuration. Two new free- market residential units are proposed as one of the benefits requested as part of the designation. MMLOS Include any additional information that pertains to the MMLOS plan in the space provided below. Click on the "Generate Narrative" Button to the right. Respond to each of the prompts in the space provided. Each response should cover the following: 1. Explain the selected measure. 2. Call out where the measure is located. 3. Demonstrate how the selected measure is appropriate to enhance the project site and reduce traffic impacts. 4. Explain the Enforcement and Financing Plan for the selected measure. 5. Explain the scheduling and implementation responsibility of the mitigation measure. 6. Attach any additional information and a site map to the narrative report. 120 E Main Street Partners, LLC. 1390 Lawrence Street Denver, CO 80204 970-710-9539 rshaw@designworkshop.com Summary and Narrative: Narrative: 12/15/2023 Old Pitkin County Library Historic Designation 120 E Main St Trip Generation SUMMARY Trip Mitigation NET TRIPS TO BE MITIGATED Exhibit G | Application 198 The owners will install new bike racks at the time the historic designation takes effect, ensuring immediate positive impact to the transportation system in the area. Monitoring and Reporting Provide a monitoring and reporting plan. Refer to page 17 in the Transportation Analysis Guidelines for a list of monitoring plan requirements. Components of a Monitoring and Reporting Plan should include (1) Assessment of compliance with guidelines, (2) Results and effectiveness of implemented measures, (3) Identification of additional strategies, and (4) Surveys and other supporting data. As a minor development, the owners are required to report the status of the transportation improvmeents for three years. A survey of commercial tenants and residential owners will be complted related to the use of the bike racks. We anticipate that adjacent commercial and residential tenants and owners will use the bike racks as well. We will seek to include data from these users as well. The survey will ask the frequency of use for the bike racks and how often they bike versus using other forms of transportation. Enforcement and Financing Provide an overview of the Enforcement and Financing plan for the proposed transportation mitigation measures. The owners propose that long term maintenance and upkeep of the bike racks be included in the development agreement. Scheduling and Implementation Responsibility of Mitigation Measures Provide an overview of the scheduling and implementation responsibility for the proposed transportation mitigation measures. Exhibit G | Application 199 Exhibit G | Application 200 Mr. Kevin Rayes Principal Planner, Community Development City of Aspen 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81621 RE: Comments from the DRC meeting regarding Voluntary Aspen Modern Designation 120 E Main Street Application LPA -23-096 Send via email: kevin.rayes@aspen.gov Dear Kevin, Following the staff comments and discussions, we are submitting materials to clarify the site plan and limited portions of the architecture elevations and plans. These revisions below generally fulfill the accessible parking requirement, trash and recycling space, development floor area and the vehicle movements. The following on the site plan has been changed: 1.The total number of parking spaces has been reduced from 10 spaces to 9 spaces. There is one space that is a van accessible space under the new building which is 16 feet wide. (See Illustrative Site Plan) 2.The trash special review is anticipated, and the site plan shows a new trash/recycling room below the building and a free-standing trash/recycling enclosure along the eastern side. This area is enclosed with a screen fence. The capacity of these features has been increased in size, but the expectation is that the special review of the solid waste would occur at the permit level. A benefit requested from the voluntary designation is that trash area on the eastern side would be allowed partially in the setback. (Illustrative Site Plan) 3.The architecture has been adjusted to raise the garage height to the 8’-2” required for a van clearance space. The overall height limit is still 28 feet which the proposed structure meets at the mid-point of the sloped roof. (See Architectural Plan, I-G-1) 4.The difference of floor area calculation for the residential and existing building is revised. The chart on page 22 mis-stated the existing building floor area vs the measurement on the architectural sheet. The correct number is 4,522 sf instead of 4563 sf as stated in the chart. Therefore, the floor area method does support the 10 TDR’s. (See Architectural Plan, I-G-1) 5.The included vehicle tracking diagrams show the movements are acceptable into the parking spaces. (See Vehicular Tracking Plan) We appreciate the review of the staff to date and hope these adjustments help move the application forward. If any of these comments require clarification, please let us know. Best, Richard Shaw as manager 120 East Main Street, LLC. Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 201 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 202 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IE-1 EXISTING BUILDING CONDITION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 4 3 2 1 T.O. PLY LOWER LEVEL 90'-4" T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL 93'-11" T.O. PLY MAIN LEVEL 99'-11" (Project 100) T.O. PLY SPLIT LEVEL 103'-41/2" T.O. CONC. BEAM 111'-11/2" T.O. RIDGE 117'-13/8" BRICK STUCCO GRAVEL OVER MEMBERANE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND STEEL BEAM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1West Elevation 0 2'4'8' IG-1 A D F EBEGC LEVEL 2 - 18'.2" MID POINT ROOF - 28'.0" LEVEL 1 - 9'.2" 2 1 LEVEL 1 - 9'.2" LEVEL 2 - 18'.2" MID POINTROOF - 28'.0" SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE IG-1 PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ASPEN MODERN 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 120 East Main. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2023 120 East Main 120 East Main Aspen CO 81611 3/8/2024 A D F EBEGC LEVEL 2 - 17'.0" MID POINT ROOF - 28'.0" LEVEL 1 - 8'.0" 2 1 LEVEL 1 - 8'.0" LEVLE 2 - 17'.0" MID POINT ROOF - 28'.0" SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED BUILDING SOUTH ELEVATION 0 2' 4'8' SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2PROPOSED BUILDING WEST ELEVATION 0 2' 4'8' Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 203 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 48.90'80.90'48.90'80.90'XXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XX X X X X X X B B B B 13.9'9.8'15.2'21.2' W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W CTV CTV CTVCTVCTVCTVCTVWWWWWWWWWWWCTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTVCTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS GGG G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G EX-U E EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UEEX-UEEX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UEEX-UEEX- U E EX- U E EX- U E EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE CTVCTVCTVCTVCTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV CTV EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE E X - U E EX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX- U E EX- U E TTT T T EX- U EEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UEEX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE E X - U E EX-UETTTTTTTTTTT T T T T T T T T TTT T T T T T T T T T T T TT T TTT T T TTTT T T T T T T T T T T T TTTTT T T T T T T EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-U E EX-U E EX- U E EX- U E EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE EX-UE T T T T T T T T T TTTT T T T T T T T T T GGGT1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T7 T6 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12T13 T14 T15 T17 T18 T19 T20 T21 T22 T23 T24 T25 T26 T27 T16 T28 T29 T30 T31 T32 T33 T34 T35 T36 T37 T38 7896.94SSSS 7 8 9 5 7896 7900 7897 7896 7897120 EAST MAIN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN MAIN STREETPROPERTY BOUNDARYSIDE SETBACKFRONT SETBACK SIDE SETBACKROOF OVERHANG5'-0"5'-0"10'-0"REAR SETBACK C DATE#DESCRIPTION ISSUE DATE: SHEET NUMBER REVIEWED: PROJECT NUMBER: DRAWN: 1 REVISIONS 7632 2 3 4 5 6 7 A B C D E 12O E MAIN STREET PARTNERS120 E MAIN STREET, ASPEN, COC O P Y R I G H T D E S I G N W O R K S H O P, I N C. F 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 W W W . D E S I G N W O R K S H O P . C O M Jul 18, 2024 - 11:30amF:\PROJECTS_A-L\7632-120 E Main Improvements\D-CAD\02. Sheets\dw-7632-Site Plan.dwgDESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning Urban Design · Tourism Planning Aspen · Austin · Chicago · Denver · Houston Lake Tahoe · Los Angeles · Raleigh 120 East Main Street (970) 925-8354 (970) 920-1387 Aspen, Colorado 81611 LS RWS DECEMBER 18, 2023120 E MAIN STREETIMPROVEMENTSL-04 LAND USE APPLICATION EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY NORTH 0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 4 8 16 1/8"=1'-0" 8'-6"8'-6"7'-0"9'-3"9'-3"11'-0"3'-0" RECYCLE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE 304, 3, 4 IN NON-COMBUSTABLE CONTAINERS EXISTING TRANSFORMER CONCRETE SIDEWALK IBC 304, 3, 3 DUMPSTER @ 1.5 OR GREATER, 121 SFTRASH ROOM ROOF OVERHANG EXISTING BUILDING PROPOSED BIKE RACK CONCRETE WALKWAY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ADA VAN PARKING SPACE ACCESS, UTILITY AND EMERGENCY EASEMENT PER BK 202 PG 429 BK 647 PG 767 1800 SF OF PAVED ZONE GENERAL NOTES 1. Original drawing modified 7/17/2024 by Design Workshop to accommodate the addition of the ADA Van dimensions and clearance. The modifications were part of a submission package to City of Aspen Community Development. APPROX. LOCATION OF RFTA 5'X3' EASEMENT PER BK 593 PG 529 EASEMENT PER REC. NO. 39918612'-0"PERMANENT POWER & SEWER EASEMENT PER BK 193 PG 89 16'-0" Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 204 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 205 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897P - Passenger Car120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 206 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 207 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897P - Passenger Car120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 208 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 209 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897P - Passenger Car120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 210 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 211 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897P - Passenger Car120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 212 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 213 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897P - Passenger Car120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 214 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 215 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897P - Passenger Car120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 216 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 217 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897P - Passenger Car120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 218 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 219 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897P - Passenger Car120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 220 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 221 48.90'XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B B B B 9.8'15.2'7896.94 7897 7896 7897P - Passenger Car120 E MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS ASPEN, COLORADO 120 E MAIN PARTNERS VEHICLE TRACKING STUDY JULY 2024NORTH0 ORIGINAL SCALE: 2 4 8 1"=4' DESIGN WORKSHOP Landscape Architecture · Land Planning · Urban Design · Tourism Planning 120 East Main Street · Aspen, Colorado 81611 · 970-925-8354 Facsimile 970-920-1387 Exhibit H | Supplement to Application 222